Pope Benedict XVI has had a book of essays published posthumously in which he defends the unique character of the Mass and the Catholic priesthood and attacks rising intolerance in the increasingly atheistic West.
In the book, which is called What Christianity Is, the German pope, who died aged 95 on New Year’s Eve, warned Catholics in particular of the danger of a “radical manipulation of human beings” and “the distortion of the sexes by gender ideology”.
He wrote that although the intolerance of modernity towards the Christian faith “has not yet turned into open persecution … it manifests itself in an increasingly authoritarian way with the aim of achieving, by appropriate legislation, the eradication of what is essentially Christian”.
There are 16 essays in the book, four of which are previously unpublished. Benedict dated a preface May 1, 2022, and told Elio Guerriero, an assistant who helped him to compile the essays, that he did not wish the book to be published until his death.
“I do not want to publish anything else in my life,” Guerriero said Benedict told him, according to news reports. “The fury of the circles opposed to me in Germany is so strong that the appearance of any word from me immediately provokes a murderous clamour on their part. I want to spare myself and Christendom this.”
His anxiety may in part have arisen from the backlash he expected from his insistence in the book that the Mass is a radically different from services held in Protestant churches, thereby carrying implications for ecumenical dialogue and intercommunion.
Benedict wrote that the differences “are not superficial and casual but indicate a fundamental difference in understanding the mandate of Christ” when ordered his disciples to “do this in memory of me”.
“It is quite clear that the [Protestant] Last Supper and the Mass are two fundamentally different, mutually exclusive forms of worship,” Benedict wrote. “Let those who preach intercommunion today remember this.”
He said that in some of the liturgical reforms that followed the Second Vatican Council, the theses of German Protestant reformer Martin Luther played “a certain tacit role, so that certain circles could claim that the decree of the Council of Trent on the sacrifice of the Mass had been tacitly abolished”.
Much of the opposition to the Traditional Latin Mass, he claimed, was discomfort with its emphasis on sacrifice and expiation.
In his book, Benedict also defended the Catholic priesthood and priestly celibacy, which he describes as the most appropriate expression of self-sacrifice to God and a condition for ritual purity in keeping with the tradition of the Israelite priesthood.
He said the 16th century Protestant reinterpretation of the priesthood remained “a wound that is felt today and which, in my opinion, must be addressed in an open and fundamental way”.
The late pontiff also repeated his long-held concerns of flourishing gay subcultures operating in Catholic seminaries – especially those in North America – along with the acceptance of the use of pornography by some seminarians, rectors and priests.
The vocational training of the next generation of priests is on the verge of “collapse”, he said in one essay.
“In several seminaries, homosexual clubs operate more or less openly,” Pope Benedict complained.
During his own papacy, Benedict made the screening of actively gay men as candidates for the priesthood a key plank of his efforts to combat clerical abuse in the light of data revealing that the overwhelming majority of victims were males.
Full story in Catholic Herald.
I started attending the TLM after Summorum Pontificum. TLDR: I got sucked into a trad cult that cost me my friendships and close relationships with family who weren’t trad. I got out of it years later, but not before a lot of damage had been done in my life. Anyone here in the TLM trad cult, I hope and pray you get out of it soon. What pope Francis wrote about why he was stopping the TLM made so much sense to me based on my personal, first-hand experience.
Totally agree with “ex-trad’s” comment. Thank you for sharing your story. It is not the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass itself that is bad, wrong, deficient. The misuse of that Mass by certain people (think of the beloved SSPX, think of the beloved ex-Ecclesia Dei communities) that want to separate themselves from the Body of Christ is what is bad, wrong, and evil. Pope Francis is very correct in calling for the regulation of the TLM by the bishops of the Church.
No. Pope Benedict never meant for any abuses to occur, with his “Summorum Pontificum.” This case, of “ex trad,” appears to be an unusual situation of irresponsible abuse, by cultish young “radicals,” probably born long after Vatican II, who recently “discovered” the ancient, almost two millenia-old Tridentine Latin Mass– and didn’t grow up with it. There are also a great many abuses daily found, in the nearly 54-year-old, 1969 Vatican II Mass. Many Church leaders say that the Pope has irrational, uninformed, highly biased, wrongful personal prejudices, with restricting the use of the beautiful, ancient Tridentine Latin Mass. There is nothing “wrong” with this 1500+years-old Mass! It is a great historical treasure of our Church, and should NEVER be ignorantly scorned! Our Archbishop is broadening the use of this Mass, in our Archdiocese. He has instructed many priests in the old Latin Tridentine Mass– and also has a large pre-Vatican II rite Confirmation class, planned for this Spring, for interested Catholic parents. No doubt, many of their sons may be inspired to become priests. We deserve the whole of our ancient, beautiful, holy Catholic traditions and history– and so do our children. A “ban” on all of this is ignorant and unnecessary. A “new” Church was not suddenly “created” in the mid-1960s, at Vatican II.
An interview on my phone featured a gentleman who was commenting on Pope Francis’ new instructions limiting the use of the Latin Mass. He said, “I prefer the English Mass, but we have to respect the Latin Mass because it is 1,500 years old.” I know he was not a historian, because Pope St. Pius V promulgated the Tridentine Mass in 1570 which is only 451 years ago.
This made me think that many Catholics and others do not know the history of the Roman Catholic Mass. I would like to submit a brief history of the Mass.
Read more at https://bayoucatholic.org/news/history-of-the-mass-part-one
Before the Council of Trent, and as early as the 3rd century, there were various forms of the Mass celebrated by Catholics patterned after the liturgy described by St. Paul in scripture and in the writings of the Fathers of the Church.
There were, for example, the Mozarabic rite in Spain, Braga rite in the old UK territories, Ambrosian in Milan, Gallican in France, etc., not to mention the liturgies of contemplative and mendicant orders, such as the Dominican rite, the Franciscan rite, etc. Among these old forms of the Mass was the Roman rite (celebrated in Rome) which was originally in Greek.
Pope Pius V after or during the Council of Trent codified the Mass into the Roman rite. Codification and promulgation of the Roman/Latin rite do not mean it started only in the reign of Pius V. It’s as old as the rest of them, starting with what St. Paul wrote and through the 3rd century. It means the Roman rite, too, is thousands of years old.
I read in your website that the Last Supper of the Lord Jesus was a Passover (seder) family meal of the Jews. It was not. The Gospel of St. John was clear about this. The Last Supper was held on the DAY OF PREPARATION for the Passover. The Last Supper was not the Passover meal. It was ahead of the Passover meal. There is an important difference.
During Passover meal, entire families were present, including women. If it had been the Last Supper, the women would have been included in the priestly ordination when the Lord said, “Do this in remembrance of me.” But they were not. Only the all-male apostles were present and were ordained as the first priests/bishops.
Notice, too, that the Lord Himself washed the feet of the apostles/disciples. That action had something to do with priestly ordination. Of course, there were washing of guests’ feet, too, during Passover, mainly by servants before family and guests sat at table. But the Lord’s washing the feet of His apostles was a ritual heretofore unknown to the Jews.
Thus, the Last Supper was held on the day of preparation. Passover was on the Friday evening after Jesus had been crucified, died, and was buried. He was/is the true Lamb of God, slaughtered during Passover.
Pope St. Gregory the Great codified the Mass in the 6th century A.D. the Tridentine Mass of 1570 had revisions of some things in this Mass, but it was basically all the same. The Novus Ordo Mass of 1969 was a completely different type of Mass. Up until the Novus Ordo Mass, the Catholic Mass of nearly 2,000 years was essentially the same thing.
The modernized, vernacular Novus Ordo Missae of 1969 does not emphasize the sacrificial aspect, unlike the original forms of the Mass– that point is quite noticeable, among other things. A very different type of Mass.
“Reply” is totally wrong. There is a lot in the Missal of Pope Paul VI that emphasizes the Sacrifice of Our Lord. I mean it’s everywhere. Those who say otherwise are not paying attention during Mass. One can argue that the word “sacrifice” is uttered more in the Ordinary Form. For example, just take the “Pray brethren” (“Orate fratres”), the priest does not stop short at “fratres” but continues on to say aloud “that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God…” Then the people respond back, also mentioning aloud the word “sacrifice.” You don’t have that exchange with the word “sacrifice” in the TLM, people. Additionally, the Preface to the second Eucharistic Prayer (which you people hate) explicitly mentions Our Lord’s Sacrifice on the Cross: “he stretched out His Hands as He endured His Passion…” Moreover, in the third Eucharistic Prayer, the priest at least twice mentions the word “sacrifice” (“a pure sacrifice may be offered to Your Name” and “May this Sacrifice of our reconciliation…”). But the concept of “sacrifice” is alluded to more than once in that Eucharistic Prayer. Also, the Prayer Over the Gift at this past Sunday’s Mass alludes to sacrifice (“we bring to Your altar the offerings of our service..” I heard it as the priest said it aloud last Sunday. And people, there are other words and synonyms for “sacrifice” that are often said in the Mass: “oblation,” “offering,” and even the word “gift” alludes to Our Lord’s sacrifice as in He gives Himself as “gift” (Sacrifice) to the Father. Just because you didn’t hear the word “sacrifice” doesn’t mean it is not being emphasized. I can go on and on with more examples, people. Lastly, it is not Catholic and reverent to be saying falsehoods about the Mass. The Ordinary Form and the TLM is the SAME Mass, not a different one. “Reply” is corrected.
jon, you really don’t know the text of the New Mass, nor understand it, nor do you know the long history of the Mass, all through the ages– you are really clueless. Mindless words, is what all of this is to you, until you decide to get some good training. Being defensive and emotional about your interests is very poor– better to have a good background, and see things objectively.
On whether the Last Supper was a Seder
Just for the record: “Reply” again is wrong. I actually quoted from the Missal of Pope Paul VI to prove my point that there is a good amount of reference in the Ordinary Form for the concept of the Paschal Sacrifice. “Reply” needs to prove her point this time. Go ahead “Reply” prove to us that the Ordinary Form is deficient in its emphasis on sacrifice. Prove your point.
Let’s put this another way. The Novus Ordo Missae is VERY WEAK in emphasis on the Holy Sacrifice of Christ in propitiation for our sins. Many very good theologians have explained all of this well.
“Reply” is wrong. The Ordinary Form is NOT very weak in emphasizing the Sacrifice of Our Lord. That’s Bunk. At every Ordinary Form Mass the people aloud respond to the priest “May the Lord accept the Sacrifice at your hands….” When in the TLM do the people even utter the word “sacrifice”? Nada. Zilch. I am not demeaning the TLM here folks, as I am devoted to it myself. But you do no good service to the Church by putting down the Ordinary Form. And “Reply” has not proven her point with evidence. I have just demonstrated through specific quotes from the Missal some of the instances that “sacrifice” is mentioned in the Ordinary Form. And there are more, “Reply.” More. Lastly, which “very good theologians” have explained your point, “Reply”? I would guess that the “theologians” you mean are biased in favor of the TLM and against the Ordinary Form like Peter Kwasniewski.
jon, you seem a lot like a rebellious student who refused to go to Math class— and learn a simple, basic, logical truth– like “2+2=4.” So, as a result– you have nothing to work with, except personal biases, defensive, knee-jerk reactions, and nonsense! By the way– although the New Mass is “modernistic, ” not full of heavily “Thomistic” Catholic concepts, and is very weak regarding the traditional focus on the Sacrificial aspect, for the propitiation of sin— it is still a valid Mass! The priest faces the people, not God, his “personality” wrongly shines and “entertains,” in some cases, there is a lot of emphasis on the “community,” more lay involvenent, lots of “horizontal,” “social” emphasis– etc. etc. “Elevating the common man, and his worldly, vernacular language, and worldly, local customs (instead of a sacred language and customs of worship, for the Mass), celebrating his humanity…” blah, blah, blah…you know how it goes… So, go to your favorite Mass. jon! BOTH forms of the Mass are valid!
Ecclesiastical Latin, or Church Latin– is still the official language of the Roman Catholic Church.
“Both” is wrong because “Both” is self-contradictory. She says both forms are valid, yet proceeds to thrash the Ordinary Form. “Both,” the Mass of Pope Paul VI when celebrated as it should be is just as strongly focused on the Sacrifice of Our Lord and is just as “Thomistic” as the Extraordinary Form. “Both” is biased because she just continues to spew the usual talking-points from the haters of the Ordinary Form (like the beloved SSPX and the people from the ex-Ecclesia Dei communities): that the “New Mass is “horizontal”, “elevating the community,” “social,” “entertaining.” That may be how some parishes sadly offer the Mass, but again, when the Missal of Paul VI is celebrated in the classic way, it is just as focused on the Paschal Sacrifice as the Extraordinary Form.
“Both” take the advice of Cardinal Sarah: “I vehemently refuse therefore to waste our time pitting one liturgy against another, or the Missal of St. Pius V against that of Blessed Paul VI.” (Address to the Colloquium “The Source of the Future” delivered April 1, 2017 at Herzogenrath, near Aachen, Germany).
Both’s arguments are ad hominem and straw man.
How terribly and uncharitably judgmental this comment from “Abuses” is. First she attacked “young” people, then attacked the Pope by referring to “many Church leaders” (who knows who she means by them), then calling the Pope’s pastoral decision “ignorant and unnecessary.”
And “Abuses” please don’t throw shade at “ex-trads” sharing of his life-experience. Explaining it away by saying “it’s just the young people” doing it, is most disrespectful.
jon, all you do is “pontificate” with erroneous statements based on your personal, highly prejudiced feelings– not facts. Most mature Catholic men– laymen, priests and prelates– are very proud of their Church and its beautiful, sacred traditions and history. There is something terribly wrong with a Catholic layman, cleric or pope, who claims to “despise” his Church’s beautiful, sacred traditions and history.
On the contrary, my above comments about the misuse of the TLM by the beloved SSPX and other beloved ex-Ecclesia Dei communities is on the mark. It is essentially what Pope Francis wrote in “Traditiones custodes.” Are you saying you’re more knowledgeable about this than the Holy Father? If so, then it is you who are “pontificating.” Just sayin.
jon, you need a bigger and more accurate understanding of the 2,000+ years-old Catholic Church. It did not start with Vatican II in the mid-1960s A.D. Also, the ideas laid out in the Council’s document on liturgical reforms, “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” were totally ignored, after the Council ended. The current Pope also totally ignores this excellent document. Ridiculous.
You either have not read it or you do not go to a Catholic Mass.
Be honest. Have you read SC? Obviously, since the Extraordinary Form Missal is from before SC so it does not follow the reforms. I suspect you are referring to the part on the use of Latin but only the first sentence.
Rather, “Reply” must realize that the Church did not start in 1570 A.D. with the Missal of Pius V and the Council of Trent during the Middle Ages. In fact, the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council endeavored to restore the ancient aspects of the liturgy by re-incorporating the offering of gifts, the prayers of the faithful, and the sign of peace among other things–all of which, according to early records—were part of the ancient liturgical practices at the Mass in the ancient Church. Plus, saying that the Pope ignores the documents of Vatican II is false. Very false.
You didn’t read or understand what I said. Here it is, again: Clearly, what is laid out in the document, “Sacrosanctum Concilium,” has been ignored, since the beginning of the Novus Ordo Mass. Scholars have commented on this.
Reply to, which paragraphs have been ignored?
and if you want conformity to SC, then you won’t find it in the Mass that it was intended to reform.
The SSPX did not want to “separate” themselves from the Body of Christ, rather they were rendered non-canonical in status by Pope Benedict XVI (therefore they have no legal ministry within the Church) even after lifting the excommunication of four of their bishops. (Except, of course, when Pope Francis granted their priests faculty to hear confession during the Year of Mercy, but that’s another story.)
As to the “Ecclesia Dei” communities (do they even exist now?), there are no official documents that can point to their wanting to separate themselves from the rest of the Church. After Summorum Pontificum, Ecclesia Dei communities have pretty much been absorbed into the official TLM (Summorum Pontificum) communities.
Diocesan and most religious order traditional Masses operate within the Body of the Church; they recognize the Novus Ordo as the Ordinary Form of the Latin Mass and theirs, the Extraordinary Form. Both are legit and valid. Diocesan Vetus Ordo’s are celebrated in parish churches just as the Novus Ordo’s, although not as frequently. (I, for one, go to the OF in my own parish on weekdays and to the EF in another parish on Sundays, being that my own parish has no EF. But that’s my choice, and I don’t get offended if anybody refers to me as “trad” or “semi-trad.” Be my guest.)
I don’t really understand what “ex-trad” is complaining about. Maybe it’s the “sedes” that offend him? Neither do I understand why Pope Francis is trying to restrain celebration of the traditional Mass.
This is all wrong.
No. This is all historically accurate. The poster, Margarita, simply stated actual facts.
It was just somebody spitballing and they got it wrong.
Don’t insult our intelligence.
“Spit-baller”— Do not use such vulgar terms in regard to a poster’s good comments about the Holy Mass.
Oh reply to, you must know something about the word that I do not know. So sorry to offend.
Don’t you know– that to insinuate “spitting” at others– is not nice?? Such a “two-year-old” style is horrible! Why did this Catholic website print your comment, anyway? Unworthy.
You think spitballing is spitting at people?
But you are right, it is not nice to spit at others.
“Margarita’s” comment should be corrected. The beloved SSPX has had no canonical status in the Church way before Pope Benedict’s time. Soon after Lefebvre was excommunicated latae sententiae for ordaining four bishops without permission from Pope John Paul II (1988), the beloved SSPX has not been in-communion with the rest of the Roman Catholic Church. Lefebvre’s disobedience was “a schismatic act” as clearly stated by the saintly John Paul II. As for the ex-Ecclesia Dei communities, there is no such thing as “Summorum Pontificum” communities. That motu propio has been abrogated, for one thing. Also, though these communities will not explicitly say so, their avoidance of the Missal of Pope Paul VI and the rest of the sacraments in the Ordinary Form is a very telling sign. Why do you think Cupich removed the beloved Institute from Chicago? That entire incident tells us that they’d rather be removed from active ministry within the Church than offer the Ordinary Form. Telling.
Jon, we’ll there was also that issue at that parish in Chicago about the founding priest’s sex abuse allegations.
On 6 May 1975, with the approval of the cardinals, Bishop Mamie withdrew the SSPX’s pia unio status. Lefebvre instructed his lawyer to lodge appeals, and he ultimately petitioned the Holy See’s supreme court, the Apostolic Signatura, which turned down the appeal. From this point onward, the SSPX was no longer recognised as a canonical organization.
You have dictionaries, encyclopedias, the Bible, the Catechism, tons of Church documents, wikipedia, SSPX website, Vatican websites, etc in the palm of your hand.
Don’t be so lazy.
Look things up before you post.
I strongly suspect this poster (ex-trad) and “jon” are one and the same person.
“Hermione” is wrong, which is typical. But the cultish and exclusivist behavior of many who go to the TLM (I know because I go to the TLM myself, and to the OF) is something I have seen and witnessed. So, I can sympathize with “ex-trad” over there. Anytime you set yourself against the Bishop of Rome and the rest of the Church, you are venturing into dark territory, people. No one who has challenged the Vicar of the Christ and the Bride of Christ has been victorious. No one. Ask Napoleon Bonaparte.
jon – we can’t ask Napoleon Bonaparte — because he’s dead.
There are many who post here who have thought of themselves as contenders of the Pope, who have a “Napoleon complex.” You might very well be one of them. Go ask yourself.
There are only two forces in the world, the sword and the spirit. In the long run the sword will always be conquered by the spirit.
Nope. Not the same.
Yes– “jon” has a “Napoleon comphex”– nobody knows, yet, about “ion”…
Don’t you know by now that “ion” is a fraud? A fake? Presenting an unconvincing caricature of my comments in order to make fun?
These should have been left unpublished.
It just confirms what a frightened, deficient leader that he was.
Rest his soul, but this is embarrassing.
Frank, until we get to read these essays once made available, we are in no poosition to say that they should have been left unpublished. Be specific about what you think is enbarrassing.Your words echo what many thought about Jesus after his crucifixion..until the rest of the story came out
” so that certain circles could claim that the decree of the Council of Trent on the sacrifice of the Mass had been tacitly abolished”. I have often wondered about this. Is the objection to the TLM (which I have never visited, so the question is real, and not just rhetorical) over its emphasis on the Mass as Sacrifice or is the objection on its lack of emphasis on laity participation? If the first objection is really of no account, then why don’t we hear of this emphasis in the prayers and the preaching? If the first objection carries weight, how is it possible for something so fundamentally believed for so long now jettisoned as if it were never believed at all?
It was not jettisoned. The Ordinary Form of the Mass is the same rite.
Thank you “still.” You’re right that it is the same one Roman Rite, but in a different form, as taught by Pope Benedict. Nothing that is in harmony with Tradition, Scripture, and the teachings of the Magisterium was taken away from the Mass. There is much in the Missal of Pope Paul VI that bespeaks of the Sacrifice of Our Lord, in spite of the erroneous and misleading words of some people out there. However, the ancient liturgical traditions of the Church that was set aside in the Middle Ages, but which the Magisterium now wants to emphasize again, was re-incorporated into the new Missal: the Offertory, the prayers of the faithful, the sign of peace.
We really have to see what the book says because this quote makes little sense.
It is from a 2015 essay. I think this quote is taken out of context.
Dan, the Missal changed. Not the Mass.
Bless you, Dan! On the first day of the Novus Ordo Mass in 1969, many people at my parish church said, “is this actually a Mass? Is the Eucharist authentic? The Catholic elements seem to have been deliberately stripped– possibly for ecumenical reasons, for unity with the Protestants?? They are dishonest with us…” But it was actually a valid Mass, according to the Vatican– although parts of it were in scandalous contradiction to the teachings of the Council of Trent, the previous “Catholic Gold Standard.” The text for the New Mass was actually written up quickly by a team under Abp. Annibale Bugnini, which included six Protestant theologians, who were “observers” at Vatican II. Several of these six Protestant theologian observers later actually decided to convert to the Catholic Faith! I think what is badly needed in today’s Vatican II era, is Church discipline, and to stick to it– no matter what is said in books, in the Catechism, in Canon Law, in important Papal writings and speeches– stick to the Faith, and be truthful and honest. Kick out immoral and heretical clerics, nuns, and laymen. Run your Catholic schools and seminaries right– no “baloney.” Kids are tragically the ones who will suffer most, from a Church that is not safe, is irresponsible, undependable and corrupt in leadership– and allows heretics and immoral “LGBT” perverts to teach the Catholic Faith wrong. I can’t believe the duplicitous “baloney” about the horrific, latest case of clerical sex abuse, of the evil, filthy nun-rapist– Jesuit “Fr.” Rupnik! Lack of Church discipline, to me, is the biggest problem.
This denigration of the Sacraments in the Ordinary Form from “Reply” is totally heretical, evil and wrong. There is nothing in the Missal of Pope Paul VI that contradicts Trent. That’s a lie. That the Missal of Paul VI was “quickly written up” with a bunch of Protestant observers is also a lie that has been going around for decades; a lie perpetrated by the likes of the beloved SSPX, sedevacantists, other enemies of the Church, and those who would love to believe such lies. “Reply” says we badly need sticking to the “Church disciplines” yet regardless of what the Catechism, Papal teachings, Canon Law actually say. Did you catch that, folks? That’s a classic talking-point from these sedevacantists and the beloved SSPX. That is totally wrong, and is antithetical to genuine Roman Catholicism. Lastly, notice how “Reply” typically ends by dredging up and exploiting clerical abuse scandals in order to support disobedience to the Church’s teachings and liturgical disciples. That’s typical.
Without good and decent Church discipline, a church is crippled and cannot function correctly, for Christ. Such a Church, riddled with corruption, sin and evil, is irresponsible and very dangerous– especially for your kids! And a Church that fails to discipline heretical and false “teachers” of our Faith, ends up allowing the spread of lies and misinformation, worldwide. You can’t send your kids to most Catholic schools and universities, anymore– and seminaries are a big worry, too! How many more evil “Uncle Ted McCarricks” and filthy “Fr. Rupniks” raping even nuns, are lurking, in our corrupt Church, today?? How many more top Vatican departments and institutes are being ruined by heresy and immorality– such as the total ruin of the Pope St. John Paul Institute for Studies on Marriage and Fsmily– headed by gay sex pervert, Abp. Paglia? And no Vatican supervision and discipline, to answer to?? Plus– a Pope that’s all talk and no guts to discipline, for love of Christ? Cancel the Mass– cleanse this rotten Church from top to bottom!! Then, those few faithful, holy clerics left, will be the only ones truly worthy to worship God– and say Mass!
“Reply” writes “cleanse this rotten Church.” “Reply” must start this “cleansing” process within herself, because “Reply” talks about the need for “discipline” yet she accuses Paglia of being a “gay sex pervert”? That’s calumny. She talks of “rotten Church” yet she falsely describes the Holy Father as “all talk and no guts.” That too is calumny and is abhorrent and distasteful for anyone to do, especially for a Catholic. And “Reply”, we do not need the clerics of the beloved SSPX, nor do we need clerics who only offer the TLM. Those people must be cleansed (even disciplined) first because we need holy clerics who want to serve the entire Church, not just those who go to the TLM.
Cancel the Mass? Really, reply to?
Better to face the truth. And you had better watch out for your kids, if you send them to Catholic school.
Face the truth “Reply” that obedience to the Church in matters of faith and morals (and liturgical discipline) is called for, regardless of the “faults” you see in the Church.
There is almost no discipline, jon, In today’s Church. If you refuse to see this dangerous truth — well, you have a big problem, then!
I know. There is indeed no “discipline” among those who would rather pick-and-choose which “tradition” they want to observe. I mean, look at the beloved SSPX. They have no “discipline.” Look at the beloved ex-Ecclesia Dei communities who’d rather follow the path of the beloved SSPX. And there are many commentators here who do not recognize and respect the legitimate authority of the Magisterium which is the sole legitimate entity that passes on the Tradition and traditions of the Church. There is no “discipline” indeed.
It strikes me that The Good Pope must have had a pretty low opinion of himself, and that on the other hand, he has nothing to complain about. From 1981 until 2022, a remarkable and historic 40+ years, he was either the most powerful man in the Church, or seated right next to him. And before that he was giving them advice through the Council process. If seminary education is as pathetic today as he wrote that it is, it can be in no small measure due to his efforts or the failure of his efforts. Who is he complaining to? Who did he think was in charge and supposed to do something about it? The poor devout nuns who sweep his floor and worship under his feet?
Cardinal Ratzinger/ Pope Benedict XVI was never in the Congregation for Catholic Education.
Pope Benedict was a great Pope who gave us many beautiful works. Old age brings about great frailty and illness. Have you ever seen an aging parent or relative in a Nursing home, almost totally bedridden, in diapers, who caanot speak well, may become easily confused and frightened, may need help eating (and may need to be fed), can barely walk, and must use a wheelchair? The elderly, especially those aged 90+, need protection from the terrible evils of the world. Young people today, who misjudge poor, frail, elderly Pope Benedict, need to understand this. A very great religious leader, who is also a great intellectual– who is also very aged, ill and infirm– may seem confusing to younger people, who expect much more from them. It is necessary to realistically see and understand the truth of this situation.
I had a very shocking experience, when young, while working part-time one summer, at a Nursing facility near the University hospital, at a university I attended. I saw many patients who were elderly or very sick, who were just ordinary people. But also, there were elderly and very sick former great professors at the University, even famous ones, who had written notable books in their fields! The first patient I saw in this category, was a famous scientist– lying in a hospital bed, with I.V. tubes attached, asleep, with his sheet pulled back– wearing only diapers! I wanted badly to close his door, or cover him up– but couldn’t. I worried about the dignity of this great scientist! Among the saddest cases, were those suffering from dementia. I thought of the poor father of St. Therese of Lisieux, Louis Martin, (her parents both becane Saints) who suffered two paralyzing strokes, followed by cerebral arteriosclerosis, and then, had dementia, and was hospitalized for several years, near life’s end. In the end, we are all poor, suffering human beings, all the same, before Almighty God– Who loves each of us, and comes for each of our souls, at His appointed hour. One may achieve greatness, fame, or even holiness, on earth– yet in the end, we all must give up everything, and are called to God. All is in His loving hands.
“The Good Pope must have had a pretty low opinion of himself,” No, he might have feared the wolves, and/or felt he was getting too old for the job, but I can find nothing in his writings that warrant your comment. If you know something otherwise, do tell.
” he has nothing to complain about. ” Benedict has every right to comment about Francis’ destroying Summorum Pontificum and other matters dear to Benedict’s heart.
“. If seminary education is as pathetic today as he wrote that it is, it can be in no small measure due to his efforts or the failure of his efforts.” Benedict sought to keep homosexuals out of seminary formation. Better to say the failure of his efforts to do so. But he tried.
“Who is he complaining to?” Complaining might be the wrong word, but I would say the Church at large, and more particularly to the next conclave, so that his mind might be known regarding the course of the Church is taking under Francis.
“The poor devout nuns who sweep his floor and worship under his feet?” ??!!?? jon, sic’em.
Apparently you disagree with me Dan. If you had provided a reason for disagreement, I might have had an opportunity to adjust my thinking. But you just stated disagreement without cause. Not a great logical piece, sorry to say.
Dear never, Benedict was in charge of the seminaries because he was in charge of the Church. What does it matter if he was on the Congregation for Catholic Education? He was over the Congregation. If he thought keeping homosexuals out would have solved the problems he w.ould have gotten them out. He was wrong both in his causal analysis and his methods. So in deathbed regrets, he warns the entire seminary system is about to collapse. Do or do not. There is no try, especially when you are in charge for 40 years.
Back to Dan….what makes him think “the next conclave” will have a better solution than he had? Nothing. Thus his low opinion of himself. Back to where we started.
YFC, the Vatican does not run seminaries.
They are run by diocese and religious orders. There is a seminary in the Diocese of Rome.
The Congregation for Catholic Education is the Vatican entity that deals with that.
“Back to Dan….what makes him think “the next conclave” will have a better solution than he had? Nothing. Thus his low opinion of himself. Back to where we started.”
This sentence makes no sense at all.
Benedict never contemplated a better solution than that for which he had lobbied for during his pontificate, the eradication of homosexuals from seminary priestly formation. (If you have evidence to the contrary, do tell) Consequently, he could not have thought the next conclave would have a better solution precisely because of his firm conviction that his solution was the correct one. Now please help the reader understand why you conclude Benedict thereby had a low opinion of himself. For sticking to his convictions? What?
“Apparently you disagree with me Dan. If you had provided a reason for disagreement, I might have had an opportunity to adjust my thinking. But you just stated disagreement without cause. Not a great logical piece, sorry to say.” I did provide reasons for objecting to your claims; you may have missed them For example, “but I can find nothing in his writings that warrant your comment” is a reason to doubt your evaluation of Benedict. True, due to limitations of space, none of my replies was comprehensive, but mostly just suggestive. Finally you missed that I agreed with you on point 3. Benedict could not drain the swamp. Nor could JP II.
In various seminaries homosexual cliques were established, which acted more or less openly and significantly changed the climate in the seminaries. In one seminary in southern Germany, candidates for the priesthood and candidates for the lay ministry of the pastoral specialist [Pastoralreferent] lived together. At the common meals, seminarians and pastoral specialists ate together, the married among the laymen sometimes accompanied by their wives and children, and on occasion by their girlfriends. The climate in this seminary could not provide support for preparation to the priestly vocation. The Holy See knew of such problems, without being informed precisely. As a first step, an Apostolic Visitation was arranged of seminaries in the United States.
From the 2019 essay now published in the book What Is Christianity
You can read it here https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/41013/full-text-of-benedict-xvi-essay-the-church-and-the-scandal-of-sexual-abuse
it is my hope that Pope Benedict XVI and his friends left many more exquisitely timed statements that will help deflect the incoming asteroid of the next conclave
God is unchanging.
The book is also being discussed because of reports that the late German pope only wanted the essays to be published after his death, because of the “murderous clamor” that surrounded the publication of other works after his resignation in 2013.
Media attention has focused as well on Benedict’s reference to “homosexual cliques” in seminaries, in an essay on the clerical abuse crisis, which was previously published in 2019.
What does the new book say? And how original are its contents? The Pillar takes a look.
“The fury of the circles opposed to me…is so strong that the appearance of any word from me immediately provokes a murderous clamour on their part.” Oh I know the feeling very well, Pope Benedict. Just the appearance of any word from me in this blog provokes so much irrational and unjust clamor from the commentariat here, that they just go ga-ga for no reason, other than the fact that they’re hearing the truth unvarnished. Even when I am not commenting on an article, I was told that they mention my name anyway. One of them even attempts to imitate me. I know what you mean, Holy Father. RIP.
jon, you should never act like a prideful, ignorant “Napoleon,” and compare yourself to a great and holy pope, like Pope Benedict. That is a very shameful and ridiculous thing to do, publicly. Pope Benedict may even become a Saint.
No, my comments are not ridiculous nor shameful. However, the constant, incessant, non-stop thrashing of the Church in your comments is what is shameful.
jon, you really ought to talk to a good priest about what it really means to become a true Christian– and how to
become a truly good, practicing Catholic. You are really on the wrong track.
For those who live in an upside-down world, for those most-likely brainwashed by anti-Catholic, anti-Francis blogs out there, for those who do not recognize the sacredness of the sacraments of the Church in the Ordinary Form, and for those who despise Vatican II, I will always be “on the wrong track.” And I would gladly stay on that track. This is because if these brainwashed folks think I am “on the wrong track,” then the reality is that I am truly on the right course, because the right course is Jesus Christ who is the Way; and He is inseparable from His Bride, the Church. You despise the Church and those who run her, you despise Our Lord. Straight up.
Our Church badly needs good moral and theological discipline. Today’s Church, has too many corrupt leaders. The corrupt clerical leaders are the heretics and anti-Catholics. You need a good dose of realistic thinking and honesty. Lies and corruption do NOT lead people to Christ nor to Salvation.
Our Church has good moral and theological discipline. Read the Bible, the Catechism, the documents from the popes and Vatican. If you know of corruption, report it. Do not gossip or listen to gossip. That drives people away.
No, you are totally wrong! It is a big responsibility to report corruption and crime in the Catholic Church– and announce it to everyone, to STAY SAFE!! Many innocent people– including children— may be seriously harmed! Do not confuse this responsibility with babyish “gossip.” Ridiculous! Our Church today, has almost ZERO moral and theological discipline! Inform yourself– keep yourself and your family SAFE!!
straw man again
Right. Keep yourself and your family safe from the dissent and disobedience of the beloved SSPX (and their supporters), the sedevacantists, and other enemies of the Church. Be Safe as you read comments here.
Oh I am thinking realistically alright, “Reply.” But (and I write this will all respect, people) the Church doesn’t need “Reply’s” kind of “Church disciple” because as “Reply” wrote earlier it means throwing away the Catechism, Canon Law, and important Magisterial papal teachings. Remember writing that, “Reply”? Check what you wrote up there. It is not me who needs a “good dose of realistic thinking and honesty.”
jon has put himself on par with Benedict XVI and wonders why we mocked him.
Oh I don’t “wonder” why “bohemond” mocks me. In a previous comment “bohemond” has alluded to inflicting violence against a priest (Fr. Reese). If he can think about doing that to a cleric, I shudder to think what he is capable of thinking about doing with lay people. Beware.
jon– you should not wrongly defend heretical, bad Catholics, especially those in powerful positions. Fr. Reese is a bad Catholic Jesuit, who resigned from “America” magazine, after being rightly reprimanded by Pope Benedict.
Suggesting physical violence upon someone, anyone, regardless of his theology, philosophy, background, occupation, whatever, which is what your friend “bohemond” did, is dead-wrong. “Don’t” is severely reprimanded.
It is ok to defend anyone from physical, verbal, emotional abuse and violence.
You do not defend heresy.
Moreover, “bohemond”, yes I am definitely drawing a connection between the German bishops’ unjust and irrational treatment of Pope Benedict with the unjust and irrational responses to the truth of the teachings of the Church which I write about here. You people are the German bishops to my Pope Benedict.
Are we certain that Pope Benedict XVI even wrote this book? He released it after his death because he was a coward. As head of the CDF he had no difficulty in making “controversial “ theologians explain their views and answer questions, yet he does not want to have to do the same? Inexcusable!
The good Pope Benedict was not a coward. He was a great former Catholic pope (emeritus) and a very public figure, prone to vicious attacks– and he was very elderly and extremely frail, near death, and needed peace– you must respect that. He may someday become a Saint. You are not in that category.
Fr. Jacques, only 4 of the essays were unpublished. He did not really write the book. Someone complied essays written by him after he resigned the papacy. He asked them to wait until he died to do that.
“He released it after his death because he was a coward.” Oh really good Father? Are you sure? Do you have a window into his soul that none of the rest of us have? If so tell us how you acquired it.
Dear Holy Father Benedict,
We, like many other trad catholic faithfuls,since long have shared your concerns about the dangerous path the Church and peculiarly the german Church have chosen to take. We have to regret that your predecessors in the papacy and even yourself didn’t dare to take the strong and painful disciplinary actions to unroot the dissenting, often heretical and sometimes blasphemous voices that began to shake and threaten the boat of St Peter in the very times it was yet possible to drown them out, just before and after the Council. Instead the popes have chosen to display mercy and compromises thus only helping to strengthen them like everyone is obliged to acknowledge nowadays.
We are worrying about the hard times that are ahead of our beloved Holy Mother the Church, but we are confident that, like this already happened in the past, She will undergo a strong renewal in Her martyr’s blood and recover the Faith of Her early times
We don’t need no more jonsplaining in these parts.
Can’t seem to give thumb’s down on most of Jon’s posts, but consider this as such. Between Jon and Fr.Jacques, there is nothing of value to be read. I suggest to wait until the book is printed in English and decide for yourself. I believe the late Benedict XVI to have been a good and holy man, who sought to preserve and support the beautiful tradition and history of our Faith. We deserve that as Catholics. May be rest in peace.
“Joyce” is mistaken. I can’t answer for “Fr. Jacques” but I revere and admire Pope Benedict and I have read many of his books. I have mentioned before that my heart went out to Pope Benedict on July 16, 2021 after reading the motu proprio “Traditiones custodes” of Pope Francis, because that motu propio explained that the abrogation of “Summorum Pontificum” (written by Benedict) and the regulation of the TLM is because there are not-very-good people out there who are misusing the TLM in order to divide the Church. Using the sacred Sacraments of the Church in order to divide the Church is most evil and most demonic. Only Satan could have thought of that. Honestly. And so my heart went out to Benedict because I knew he must have felt sad and disappointment that his gracious motu propio and the beautiful TLM were being abused. Yes, those who are the TLM’s most ardent supporters, specifically the divisive ones, may have caused the greatest disappointment in Pope Benedict’s life.
I disagree with Joyce about Jon’s comments. He had just debunked the notion that the idea of sacrifice is not emphasized in the Novus Ordo. That’s not without value.
Reply to “Reply to Mass…” I give you that Pope St. Gregory the Great codified the Roman rite (mainly the Canon) earlier than Pope St. Pius V did the whole Mass after Trent. My point is, “History” was wrong in his website to say the Roman rite has been around only for less than 500 years. It’s not. It’s been around since the 3rd century, along with the other ancient rites, albeit in Greek.
As to the SSPX being rendered by Pope Benedict XVI as having no canonical status in the Church, you are correct in saying even as early as the time of Pope St. JPII, SSPX did not have canonical status. But it was Benedict XVI that gave the official, final word on the issue.
As to whether the Tridentine and the Novus Ordo forms of the Mass are the same Roman Rite – yes! they are. Pope Benedict XVI says so in Summorum Pontificum. The changes may not have been simply cosmetic, but they were not substantial as to make them into completely different rites. The Novus Ordo is the same unbloody Sacrifice of Our Lord on the Cross as the Tridentine that redeems us and makes us His own.
“Pray, brethren, that my SACRIFICE and yours maybe acceptable to God, the almighty Father,” exhorts the priest in the NO Orate Fratres. Same difference as to the Vetus Ordo.
From the rc spirituality website explaining the “Pray, Brethren”:
“Together the assembly prays that their sacrifice be pleasing to God and they exercise their baptismal priesthood by offering not just bread and wine, but all their sacrifices since the last celebration of the Eucharist. Whether it’s been a day or a week since our last participation in the Eucharist, this is the moment when we turn the ups and downs of daily life, those little acts of kindness, those great sacrifices for the sake of others, and all our efforts to grow in holiness and virtue into spiritual sacrifices that we hope are pleasing to Our Father, alongside the perfect and pleasing sacrifice of His Son.”
It is, therefore, false to say the Novus Ordo does not have the spirit of sacrifice in its celebration. Such attacks do not do the Body of Christ any good.
He said that the Tridentine Mass (the TLM) was promulgated less than 500 years ago.
I posted more links to the next 3 parts of the History of the Mass.
Point: Sorry, it was not History’s website I was replying to, but this here, his own post:
” Mass history January 29, 2023 at 9:03 pm – Reply
An interview on my phone featured a gentleman who was commenting on Pope Francis’ new instructions limiting the use of the Latin Mass. He said, ‘I prefer the English Mass, but we have to respect the Latin Mass because it is 1,500 years old.’ I know he was not a historian, because Pope St. Pius V promulgated the Tridentine Mass in 1570 which is only 451 years ago.”
Perhaps I should also have pointed out that the “Latin” Mass and the “English Mass” are the same Roman rite, in two forms.
That’s the beginning of the first part and explains why the priest wrote the short history of the Mass.
Oh, but the trads get apoplectic talking about how the Novus Ordo doesn’t have the prayers at the foot of the altar, as if that’s some big deal.
Thast’s right because we are being proven right about everything. While your side stands by while the Church goes into auto destruct mode in the name of radical inclusion
“bohemond” is wrong, and shows his need for more faith. The Church is not going into “auto destruct” mode, albeit there are some people who’d want that to be the case like the sedevacantists and even the beloved SSPX, and other enemies of the Church. Our Lord said of the Church “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
Big deal: Mainly because of Psalm 42 in the Prayer at the Foot of the Altar. For those who seldom pray the scriptures, the traditional Latin Mass is a chance to emerge oneself into that passage in the bible, which has been excised in the Novus Ordo.
Also, I’m a very old woman and the more I pray it, the more I feel in my heart the words, ” I will go in to the altar of God: to God who giveth joy to my youth.” For God DID give joy to my youth, and He continues to do so in my old age and decrepitude.
But you’re right. Perhaps it’s no big deal. Perhaps it’s just nostalgia.
What I miss most, though in the Novus Ordo is the Last Gospel of the Tridentine, which is the Prologue of Gospel of St. John: “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” This reminder of the great mystery of the Incarnation is truly humbling and something to go back and back to each day of the coming week. “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. And we saw his glory, glory as the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.”
Jon: I still would like to know what “cult” and cultish practices “ex-trad” was complaining about among TLM attendees. It seems to be a very serious issue him that it alienated him from his family and peers.
I’m in Vallejo, at the cusp of three dioceses, plus our own. I go to my own parish for the OF daily Mass but prefer to go to the EF on Sundays. I have a choice of several churches in the other dioceses to go to, usually depending on the convenient time for me to go, which varies from Sunday to Sunday. And I have NEVER experienced the kind of divisiveness and cultish atmosphere ex-trad was complaining about. Since you agreed with him, could you explain exactly what they were/are?
FYI, here are the churches that offer the EF near me:
St. Mary’s Church, Vacaville – Sacramento diocese
St. Margaret Mary’s, Oakland – Oakland diocese
Holy Rosary Chapel, St. Vincent, San Rafael – SF archdiocese
St. Stephen First Martyr, Sacramento – Sacramento diocese
Immaculate Heart of Mary, Brentwood – Oakland diocese
Mater Dolorosa, South San Francisco – SF archdioces
St. Eugene Cathedral, Santa Rosa – Santa Rosa diocese.
My son, who comes with me to these Masses, says it always feels like a pilgrimage. I feel blessed! There are two other places I haven’t checked out: Immaculate Heart of Mary in Belmont, and St. Joseph’s in Modesto. I am so happy that the archbishop/bishops of these dioceses are continuing to offer the old Mass to those of us who like it. I feel blessed.
My point “Margarita” is that exclusively going to the TLM, may cause someone to distance himself from the Church.
Jon, I don’t go exclusively to the Extraordinary Form. I go much more often to the Ordinary Form.
So Margarita, to answer your question, when did you last go to the Ordinary Form? If you haven’t been to the Ordinary Form, that’s rather cultic. That disunites you from the rest of the Church.
And Margarita, if you do not go to the Ordinary Form on a regular basis, why? Is there something wrong with the Ordinary Form? Do you think it’s deficient in some way? The type of music and the rubrics do not matter, as long as the Real Presence of Christ is there. Do you revere Pope Francis? Or do you criticize him publicly or unjustly online? The College of Bishops? Do you not feel blessed in the Ordinary Form, though the same Real Presence of Our Lord is there too? Do you believe receiving on the hand is a sin? This is allowed by the Church, which is therefore not sinful. There are more tell-tale signs of cultic behavior, Margarita.
Gingerbread person article said that this is micro-aggression.
Jon, I go to the Ordinary Form (NO) everyday, the last one being yesterday, and I’ll be in one again in about two hours. On Sundays, I go to the Extraordinary Form (Tridentine.) But I gather it’s not the Ordinary Form that ex-trad was complaining about, but the Extraordinary Form. I’d like to know exactly what was he/she complaining about.
Successful NFL kicker, Harrison Butker, of the Kansas City Chiefs, who helped send his team to the Superbowl– is a devout Catholic, and lover of the Tridentine Latin Mass. He serves this Mass regularly, at his parish. He said, “All glory be to God!” after helping win his team’s recent victory, in the playoffs, Sun. night, with a 45-yard field goal that sent them to the Superbowl. Butker is an outspoken Pro Life advocate, and is also outspoken against “Traditionis Custodes,” persecuting good Catholics who love the Tridentine Latin Mass. Harrison Butker is a really good, very normal, wholesome, solid, devout Catholic young man– not a young, activist “freak,” with some sort of “weird agenda,” regarding this beautiful Mass, unnecessarily restricted by the uninformed, extremely biased, Modernist Pope. Butker has a lovely wife and child. Butker is a far better practicing Catholic — and a much more solid and normal young man!– than the older, immoral and heretical, gay-promoting, Papal circle of fraudulent, phony clerics, such as Jesuit Fr. Martin, Cdl. Hollerich, Abp. Paglia, Cdl. Cupich, Cdl. McElroy, etc. etc. What a laugh they all are– “Judas wolves” in sheep’s clothing!! They are NOT of the True Church established by Christ, the beloved Bride for whom He gave His very life.
Alright, heretic, stop promoting mortal sin.
It can both be true that Mr. Butker is a fine Catholic and that the TLM should be suppressed. Both are indeed true. Mr. Butker can be just as good a Catholic, even a better one, by attending a Mass celebrated according to the Missal of Paul VI. Better because he’ll be in union with the Vatican II Church instead of stuck in 1962.
Do you think that the Bible, and Our Lord Jesus, and His Blessed Mother, are likewise “stuck” in ancient worlds that once existed, eons ago– but have no value, for today’s Godless modern world? Great world treasures– and great treasures of the Church– like the Holy Bible, the Holy Rosary, the beautiful Latin Tridentine Mass, and much more– are beautiful, ageless and timeless– and truly belong to God! The Tridentine Latin Mass is a beautiful, ageless, and timeless liturgical masterpiece. It belongs to God. You are not blessed by God to understand nor appreciate it. So be it.
Here is an excellent article on Harrison Butker. He has a lovely wife, two children, is a proud member of the Knights of Columbus, and is very active in his parish. He recently gave an excellent speech at a Knights of Columbus meeting. He is a fine young man, an outstanding athlete, and a great Catholic husband, father, and all-around wonderful, young Catholic Men’s Role Model!
Jon, The daily Novus Ordo Mass in my parish that I go to is not cultic. The celebrant priest observes the rubrics, starting with the Entrance Antiphon through the final blessing. Only the priest distributes Holy Communion,(no EMHCs); no girl altar-boys. Solid preaching of the homily. Even as I review the GIRM for the Novus Ordo, I don’t find any traces of “cult” in the Novus Ordo. So, if you do find “cult” in it, please tell me where and what they are. .
So why do I go to the Vetus Ordo on Sundays? Aside from the reasons I stated above, I happen to like Gregorian chant. Cheers.
Which one is your assigned parish?
I think there are graces that you miss by not sticking to one parish.
But I think your son is very astute saying that it is like a pilgrimage every Mass.
Dear Alright, Oh, poppycock and balderdash!
I go to my parish on weekdays for the Novus Ordo, and to the Vetus Ordo in other parishes that offer it on Sundays. Both forms of Masses are legit and valid. I like all the beautiful and good things that Mother Church offers in both forms of the Mass and it’s a joy to experience them.
Boy there is a straw man.
Not to mention the disregarding of someone’s bad experience because you have not had a bad experience.
Please remember, most parishioners of the sexually abusive priests did not have bad experiences, just a few.
Alright, I am not discounting other people’s bad experiences in going to the Traditional Latin Mass. I am just asking what those experiences might be, since I haven’t had such encounters. Especially concerning was “ex-trad’s” complaint that Traditional Mass goers seemed to have treated him badly that the experience traumatized him and alienated him from family and friends. Sadly, “ex-trad” failed to elaborate on that.
It’s easy to say bad things do happen – or that I’m missing the grace of Holy Mass if I go to another parish not my own for the Latin Mass. But you’re not going to convince me unless you explain how and why you say so.
Not that you are missing the grace of Holy Mass. I did not say that.
I said some graces, and your parish is losing out on your prayers.
It is just another example of self-will.
I am sure that God is glad to see you and appreciates that you come to pray everyday.
Oops fell for the straw man, didn’t I?
Alright, Our Church is ONE (holy, Catholic, apostolic) church. I can go to any number of churches anywhere and still find Jesus there, because they are all ONE. My parish and all other churches benefit from my prayers (and yours) and beyond. As the Prayer of St. Francis goes:
“I adore Thee, O Christ, and I bless Thee here and in all the tabernacles of the world. Because by Thy holy cross Thou hast redeemed the world.”
However, I’m registered in my parish under the Sacramento diocese, so I give it preference as to whatever other services I could give, such as attending the weekday Masses, giving to the collection, going to eucharistic adoration, teaching RCIA, participating in the 40 Days for Life, praying at wakes and funerals, etc. I pray more in my own parish than elsewhere.
Whatever made you think one’s prayers are somehow diluted in one’s parish if one hears the Latin Mass in another parish? What a ridiculous thing to say. Glad you are NOT infallible.
Margarita, sorry you got so bullied by ignorant, unChristian, aggressive, insensitive, mean-spirited, “Napoleon jon,” and others like this “character,” jon– on this website. No RESPECT, nor support nor appreciation, for good, practicing Catholics, expressing their views, regarding the Catholic Faith. Very little intelligent, thoughtful, and sensitive religious exchange of ideas, on news articles, by truly good, devout, practicing Catholics. It may be a waste of your time!! The invention of the Internet seems to attract the worst of humanity, at times. Maybe it’s best to just ignore them all, they really are a waste of your time!
There is nothing insensitive or mean spirited about Jon’s comments. He’s more entertaining than most posters, but he defends the Church. If you attack the Church, you might get a comment from him on your post.
JON – we know it’s you posting retorts under assumed user names to congratulate yourself. And no, you’re not entertaining, just full of your own importance and as mean-spirited as it gets.
Correction– if you criticize heretical and immoral clerics in high positions in the Catholic Church– the “character” jon will bully you, to defend the bad cleric– even if he is a criminal. “Napoleon jon” does not distinguish between the cleric and his title, he confuses good or bad clerics and their titles of fame, with the real Church. Jon would highly praise “Judas,” the betrayer of Christ– simply because Judas happened to be an Apostle. We have had good popes and bad popes, good clerics and bad ones, all through history. Watch out– do not support and praise a wicked, filthy, dangerous “Uncle Ted McCarrick,” simply because he was wrongfully chosen for the famed titles of “Archbishop” and “Cardinal” of Washington, D.C.! And jon also would favor an immoral, heretical, dangerous, pro-gay “Rainbow Jesuit”– like Fr. James Martin, S.J.– a terrible danger to your Catholic kids– simply because the Pope favors him. The Pope also favors many other terribly immoral, heretical, dangerous clerics— Maradiaga, Hollerich, many clerics of the German Synodal Way, Rupnik, Radcliffe, Paglia, Cupich, McElroy, etc. etc. Jon is an ignorant bully.
“O Really” makes the same mistake that “Hermione” made who wrote that the commenter “ex-trad” and I were the same. Both are wrong. And folks contrary to what “Reply to ‘Reply to Margarita'” wrote, I am not here to amuse nor to entertain you people. My comments here have been either to correct (falsehoods against the Church) or to defend (the Church). Seldom have I praised comments here, because very few merit my praise. Most comments here have been disobedient towards the Church and irreverent towards the Holy Father and the Magisterium.
Sorry– my post to “O Really” was meant for “Reply to Reply to Margarita!” Big mistake! Here it is again: Correction– if you criticize heretical and immoral clerics in high positions in the Catholic Church– the “character” jon will bully you, to defend the bad cleric– even if he is a criminal. “Napoleon jon” does not distinguish between the cleric and his title, he confuses good or bad clerics and their titles of fame, with the real Church. Jon would highly praise “Judas,” the betrayer of Christ– simply because Judas happened to be an Apostle. We have had good popes and bad popes, good clerics and bad ones, all through history. Watch out– do not support and praise a wicked, filthy, dangerous “Uncle Ted McCarrick,” simply because he was wrongfully chosen for the famed titles of “Archbishop” and “Cardinal” of Washington, D.C.! And jon also would favor an immoral, heretical, dangerous, pro-gay “Rainbow Jesuit”– like Fr. James Martin, S.J.– a terrible danger to your Catholic kids– simply because the Pope favors him. The Pope also favors many other terribly immoral, heretical, dangerous clerics— Maradiaga, Hollerich, many clerics of the German Synodal Way, Rupnik, Radcliffe, Paglia, Cupich, McElroy, etc. etc. Jon is an ignorant bully.
Dear Reply: It’s all right. All I was asking Jon was what “ex trad” was complaining about the TLM to which Jon agreed. But Jon failed to answer what I was asking for. Instead, he dished out a barrage of questions, leading to his wrong belief that if one goes exclusively to the TLM, one gets involved in a cult. That’s ridiculous. Anyway, it’s uncalled for, because i don’t go to the TLM exclusively. Apparently, Jon hasn’t read Summorum Pontificum, where Pope Benedict declared both forms of Mass valid and legit.
Jon also tried to engage me in the age-old liturgical war between the EF and OF connoisseurs, but I’m not biting. Two can play that game, I just wouldn’t know which side to take, since I love both forms of the Mass.
Then Jon started to ask my thoughts and feelings about Pope Francis, if I’d ever criticized him, etc. I don’t see how he got to this point at all, since that was not the topic of our discussion. I don’t criticize Pope Francis because I don’t understand everything he says or does, and I trust the Pope knows his own mind. I simply stick to what I believe about the Catholic faith – the Church’s teachings that never change.
When “Alright” started to barge in, I realized I was being bullied. It’s all right. It does not hurt one bit. Thank you, Reply for your kind words. God bless you.
“Reply” is very wrong. The issue has never been about my alleged “bullying” because anyone can read my comments above and can see that such an allegation is bunk. Bunk! That’s “Reply’s” smokescreen concealing the real issue. The real issue is the dissent, the disobedience, the irreverence (to the Pope), and even the heresy of many comments here. That’s the real issue folks. To aid such dissenters in their narrative, they dredge up, non-stop, past litigations of misconduct (such as McCarrick’s) and they relish to bring up misdeeds of clerics as a pretext and justification to disobey the Second Vatican Council, to thrash the Ordinary Form, and to harm the reputation of Pope Francis. As very sad and very dismaying these new clerical misdeeds are, (and these new cases should be litigated don’t get me wrong), but they’re not the vast majority of what is going on the Church globally. And these misdeeds, as sad as they are, are not a justification to disobey the Church in matters of faith, morals, and discipline.
Hi, Reply, It’s all right. All I was asking was to explain what “ex-trad” was complaining about. He could not come up with the answer, so he started arguing ad feminem. He copped out.
“Margarita” is wrong. She was provided with an explanation of possible cultic behavior in the form of the list of questions, which were NOT meant for her to answer personally, but rather were meant to provide examples of such behavior. These cultic behaviors (as pointed out by the questions) include: exclusively going only to the TLM which can lead one to distance himself from the rest of the Church (which has been pointed out at least once by no less than an official from Ecclesia Dei), suspicion and animosity against the hierarchy of the Church particularly the Pope, denigrating the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, denigrating the Missal of Pope Paul VI, disobeying the liturgical disciplines of the Church as well as matters of faith and morals. And there are more examples, but you find the above behavior reflected in the comments of people here. “ex-trad” will have to provide you with his/her own experiences.
JON – You have no idea about the number of posters on this site who are neither Trad nor Novus Ordo progressives. You need to dial down your criticisms and personal attacks on all the faithful Catholics who comment here. I do hope that you are not in a position of authority in Catholic education.
Ignore “Napoleon jon.” He is not a licensed Catholic theologian. Pope Benedict would laugh at him! Margarita, I attend both forms of the Mass, too. Long ago, I enjoyed reading the “Ratzinger Report.” Loved his excellent works, and appreciated his superb “Summorum Pontificum.” He may become a Saint! But certainly not Pope Francis. Pope Benedict is the only Pope I ever met– when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger– bless him!
Reply to Reply, Thank you for your kind words. Pope Benedict XVI was an intellectual of the highest caliber. I did enjoy his “Ratzinger Report” and “The Spirit of Liturgy.” Another book of his you might want to read is “The Feast of Faith,” about the history and theology of the Mass. I think he will be remembered most on his motu proprio, “Summorum Pontificum.”
Glad to know you attend both the OF and EF forms of the Mass.
God bless you.
Margarita, I don’t think “ex-trad” ever posted here again.
Some people come here who are not regular posters.
jon is not ex-trad because he attends the Latin Mass.
I would like to hear the details as well but it is wrong to ask an abused person to justify their statements.
This is a comment section, not a court of law.
jon has strongly agreed to what ex-trad said, so I thought he knew what he was agreeing to. What ex-trad was complaining about, how and why. I know this is not a court of law, but if you say something with conviction, you’ve got to explain it. People don’t automatically accept “pronouncements.” They need an explanation. It turned out jon did not know what ex-trad was talking about. For someone who’s got the loudest voice in this thread, that’s not very smart. Well, so much for Napoleon.
Reply to Reply. Rrrright! So, Jon is entertaining.
Vatican II was not a dogmatic Council, it was a pastoral Council. It reaffirmed Church dogmas of over two millenia. It has been deemed both confusing and controversial, by many Catholic experts. Sadly, over 100,000 priests (and some prelates) and thousands of nuns left their vocations, during the first decade, right after the Council ended– and there remains a serious vocations shortage, especially of priests, today. Many traditional religious orders have also ended. A time of great crisis in the Catholic Church! Plus, there has been a crisis of no discipline of immoral, heretical, even criminal Catholic clerics– such as the famed gay sex predator, Theodore McCarrick. Catholics in many traditionally-Catholic countries in Europe and Latin America, have stopped practicing their Faith– or have left the Church. The ancient, traditional Catholic Mass, very holy, reverent, and awe-inspiring—- the centerpiece and focal point of Catholic life and worship– along with many timeless, sacred Catholic traditions and customs– have been ridiculed, tossed out, unwanted by top Catholic leaders. The Catholic Church has closed many of its parishes and schools, and many seminaries, worldwide, since the Council ended. Many religious orders– especially of nuns– no longer exist. The few traditional orders existing today, are very popular, with lots of vocations– but are unwanted by the Vatican and current Pope. A great many Catholic schools and seminaries today, no longer teach or uphold the Faith at all– and many promote highly immoral, unChristian secular ideologies. It is laughable to try to state that the Second Vatican Council was a “great success,” for the Catholic Church– although there have been some good points, too. But most of the top Catholic leaders are not interested in concepts of “success” — they are only interested in their own ideologies of modernist Church reforms, which mainly please only one small Catholic group– the top clerics in charge, at the Vatican. Their iron-handed, insensitive style of leadership, has caused countless complaints, all through the centuries.
Regardless of any Church Council, or current popes and prelates with strange, liberal, “modernist” beliefs and agendas — and regardless of good or bad popes and prelates, all through history– I believe in Christ and His original teachings, of 2,000+ years ago, and I believe in all of His promises for the believer, that they are all actually true. I believe in the Bible and the Catechism, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and that His teachings are for all peoples, of all eras, all cultures, all through human earthly history– and beyond, to Eternal Life– in Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory. I believe that Christian people of all cultures and all ages, can and must adapt their ways of life, to Christ’s teachings– no excuses. The baptized Christian is a child of God, and adapts his/her ways to God’s ways. He/she must leave everything behind, that is offensive to God– and must walk alone, courageously, with his/her God. The ancient Jews of the Biblical eras, of thousands of years ago, said the same thing.
You sound like a Protestant.
Ignore “Napoleon jon.” He is not a licensed Catholic theologian. Pope Benedict would laugh at him! Margarita, I attend both forms of the Mass, too. Long ago, I enjoyed reading the “Ratzinger Report.” Loved his excellent works, and appreciated his superb “Summorum Pontificum.” He may become a Saint! But certainly not Pope Francis. Pope Benedict is the only Pope I ever met– when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger– bless him!
Pope Benedict would appreciate jon’s efforts. He has been defending the Faith here for well over a decade.
Correction on my rant to Jon:
You tried to divert the conversation to the subject of Pope Francis, etc. (Pope Francis, not “St. Francis”.)
Alright even threw a straw man…(straw man, not “straw men”)
Sorry for the typos, but you get the idea.