MICHAEL SEAN WINTERS OF THE "NATIONAL cATHOLIC REPORTER" ACKNOWLEGES THE FOLLEY OF HETERODOX CATHOLICISM!

The money byte I have below the title is the most common sense thing I have ever read from Sean Michael Winters and ever to be seen in the National catholic Reporter!!!!!! 

 Press the title for the NcR commentary from Michael Sean Winters:

What a new survey of US Catholic priests does, and does not, tell us

Here's the most important thing from Winters:

Most of all, conservative families still encourage and produce vocations to the priesthood. The Catholic left has failed by comparison to produce vocations, and some live in a fantasy world that thought fewer vocations would lead to a greater push for ordaining women. If the ordination of women is desired by the Holy Spirit, having fewer priests, and thus fewer opportunities for the unique grace the Eucharist provides, is not likely to help the Spirit achieve anything.

Something else is at work, however, with these younger priests, and I wish the survey had dug more deeply into it. I find that younger clergy are more focused on the other worldly promises of the Gospel than on its implications for social justice. Some are stridently political but the majority view their role as apolitical and see the church as a refuge from a culture that they find abhorrent in its excessive vice and luxury. They aspire to a simpler life and there is nothing wrong with that.

One of the more striking findings of the survey is that 88% of priests ordained after 2000 identified Eucharistic devotion as a pastoral priority, compared to 66% of clergy ordained between 1980 and 1999, and 57% of those ordained before 1980. Is there something inherently "conservative" about Eucharistic adoration? Eucharistic adoration is not a proxy for otherworldiness but it might be an antidote for excessive worldliness. There is certainly a case to be made that the Catholic left collapsed the eschaton into a variety of social causes, some with a tenuous relationship to the revelation of God in Christ contained in the Gospel. The Gospel is many things but it is not a story of sexual liberation.

POPE LEO TO JESUITS: REMAIN WITH (JESUS IN) ADORATION OF THE BLESSED SACRAMENT!

 

Pope Leo met with a number major superiors of Jesuits at the Vatican. They all seem to be dressed in some form of clerics for this meeting, which is good to see. If I am not mistaken, it seems that Pope Leo is requiring proper dress at the Vatican of priests and prelates and those meeting with him. Perhaps sloppiness in the Vatican is being vanquished and Pope Leo is returning to Pope Benedict's more formal expectations? 

 His Holiness had much to say, but what I print below is a bombshell, specifically for Jesuits longing for the 1970's to return and living as though the 1970's have never passed:

The urgency to proclaim the Gospel today is as great as in the time of Saint Ignatius. The Lord says through the prophet Isaiah: “I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not see it?” (Isa 43:19) Your mission, dear brothers, is to help the world perceive this newness — to sow hope where despair seems dominant, to bring light where darkness reigns.

To accomplish this, I encourage you to remain close to Jesus. As the Gospel tells us, the first disciples stayed with him “the whole day” (cf. Jn 1). Remain with him through private prayer, the celebration of the Sacraments, devotion to his Sacred Heart and adoration of the Blessed Sacrament. In a different yet still powerful way, remain with him by recognizing his presence in community life. From this rootedness, you will have the courage to walk anywhere: to speak truth, to reconcile, to heal, to labor for justice, to set captives free. No frontier will be beyond your reach if you walk with Christ.

 

LITURGICAL ABUSE ON STEROIDS AT HOLY FAMILY CATHOLIC CHURCH (NOT ON HILTON HEAD ISLAND) BUT IN THE ARCHDIOCESE OF CHICAGO WITH BLASE CARDINAL CUPICH AS ARCHBISHOP….

 

I just watched more of the Mass at Holy Family Church in Chicago and I can’t believe what I am hearing and seeing. Press the red HERE for the Mass:

HERE !

Why in the name of God and all that is holy, are bishops implementing Traditionis Custodis in the most rigid and unpastoral way possible and completely ignoring liturgical abuse in the St. Paul VI Mass which happens in every diocese and bishops do it too or they ignore it! What’s up with that?

It is preposterous to say that the greatest threat to Church unity is the TLM! Just watch as much of this as you can take. And I fear that this is just the tip of the iceberg, melting or not, of liturgical abuse in this Archdiocese and dioceses throughout the world. 

Let me name a few of the abuses that I can remember from watching this video and yes, I feel so defiled by this that I need to go to confession!

1. The slovenly dressed interpreter for the deaf next to the priest for the entire Mass signing the Mass—put her somewhere else and put an alb on her for the love of God!!!!

2. The Introductory Rite turned into an announcement and homily prior to getting to the Penitential Act

3. The Collect not the Collect for this past Sunday but something made up! That’s a no no!

4. The homily incorporates a scene from the cartoon Shrek which is seen on screens. 

5. Glass is used as the chalices and ciboriums. 

6. This Mass is geared to children thus a children’s Eucharistic Prayer is used but a lot and I mean a lot of improvisation.

7. At the Agnus Dei the priest distributes Holy Communion to all the Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion (two of whom talk to each other during the Agnus Dei!). When the priest receives his Host the EMCs do also with him! But after the Agnus Dei, but prior to the “Behold the Lamb of God” the priest invites everyone to say a prayer composed by Pope Francis. Then the priest makes an announcement about Holy Communion that everyone should tell the minister of Holy Communion their first name because this makes Holy Communion more sacred! Yes! He said that!

9. No kneeling at all by the laity

10. The priest makes up his own rubrics for the Mass—he has a grand platform to be the star of the show—it is narcissism on steroids and truly a spectacle!

If I hear one more complaint about the TLM communities being the major liturgical problem for Pope Leo I am going to commit a mortal sin against the seamless pro-life teachings of the Church and commit suicide because if this Mass is a foretaste of heaven, hell can’t be that bad!

Please, Cardinal Cupich, do not lecture us about how wonderful the Post-Vatican II Mass is compared to what preceded it! Please don’t insult us!

GLORIOUS IN MAJESTY AS LITURGY SHOULD AND MUST BE, CARDINAL CUPICH NOTWITHSTANDING…

PLEASE NOTE THE HOOD ON THE PAPAL MOZZETTA—SINCE THE KING IS NOT CATHOLIC, THE POPE DOES NOT WEAR THE PAPAL STOLE TO MEET WITH THE KING BUT WEARS IT LATER FOR THE MIDDAY PRAYER LITURGY OF THE HOURS. BUT BACK TO THE HOOD, IS THIS NEW FOR POPE LEO TO WEAR THE MOZZETTA WITH THE HOOD???

I am not sure, in fact I am puzzled, why Vatican News called this Catholic/Anglican Midday Liturgy of the Hours an Ecumenical Prayer for Care of Creation.If you watch the video below, there isn’t a melting iceberg or a felt and burlap banner with a climate change thermometer. It is simply Solemn Sung (and beautifully so) Midday Prayer!

Ecumenical Prayer for the Care of Creation presided over by His Holiness Pope Leo XIV

I am fascinated by the papal throne, not used for Midday Prayer, and especially the two tapestries on either side of the throne. I can’t make out what these are, although the one to the left of the throne from the camera’s vantage point, seems to be the barque of Peter???? 

Why is the throne there with the tapestries????????

HERE IS THE VIDEO OF THE MIDDAY PRAYER:

I BELIEVE THE “ARCHBISHOP” OF CANTERBURY WOULD HAVE PRESIDED WITH POPE LEO BUT SHE HAS NOT BEEN FORMALLY INSTALLED AS SUCH SO ANOTHER ANGLICAN “ARCHBISHOP” CO-PRESIDED. I WONDER IF POPE LEO BREATHED A SIGH OF RELIEF!

ECUMENICAL LITURGY OF THE HOURS WITH HIS HOLINESS, POPE LEO XIV AND HIS MAJESTY, KING CHARLES II

NOTHING IMPOVERISHED HERE! GLORIOUS IN MAJESTY!!!!

The music is simply magnificent with Gregorian Chant for the Psalms and Anglican Chant, both choirs splendid and majestic, nothing impoverished here!

If I am not mistaken, an Anglican Lay Woman read the Scripture and I think it was the King James Version with archaic English. Splendid though.

Question, while it is not being used, please note the second photo below. There is a papal throne there that I have not seen there before. Does anyone know why it is there. It looks like a grand restoration!  

More on this later with more photos!

Oh what a relief it is to have a pope looking refined in majesty!!!!

THIS CHICAGO MASS EXPLAINS WHY SO MANY WANT THE TLM!

 

If you want reason 666,666,666 for the generous allowance of the TLM look at this Chicago parish’s video from Sunday.  HERE !

And Cardinals CUPICH wants this impoverished liturgy for the impoverished!

LET US PRAY TO GOD THAT POPE LEO XIV WILL HAVE THE COMMON SENSE LITURGICAL SENSIBILITIES OF POPE BENEDICT XVI AND NOT THE PURITANICAL VIEWS OF BLASE CARDINAL CUPICH—PLEASE GOD! PLEASE GOD! OH! PLEASE GOD!

 

This is an Artificial Intelligence overview of Pope Benedict XVI’s  Post-Vatican II liturgical genius!

AI Overview

Pope Benedict XVI saw the modern mass (the Novus Ordo) as a continuation of the Church's liturgical tradition, not a rupture, but he was critical of how it was sometimes implemented, particularly when it devolved into what he saw as a show or was performed with a "liturgical arbitrariness". He sought to preserve the beauty of the older Mass in order to foster liturgical unity and spiritual growth, asserting that "there is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal" and what was once sacred remains sacred.  

Views on the modern Mass (Novus Ordo)

• As a continuation: 

  He viewed the revised Mass as a renewed form of the same missal that has developed throughout the Church's history. 
• Critical of some implementations: 

  He lamented that the "concrete realization" of the liturgical reform had, in some cases, degenerated into a "show" or a source of sadness, and was often influenced by arbitrary choices by parishes or priests. 
• A need for spiritual impulse: 

  He believed a new spiritual impulse was needed to restore the liturgy as a communal activity and remove it from the "arbitrariness of parish priests and their liturgy committees". 
• In favor of its potential: 

  He was receptive to the Novus Ordo when celebrated with respect and solemnity, and believed it enriched the treasury of prayers and prefaces. 

Views on the traditional Mass

• No opposition to tradition: 

  He did not see the modern Mass as being in opposition to the older form, stating, "what earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful". 
• A call for greater accessibility: 

  He allowed for the wider use of the 1962 Missal through the 2007 document Summorum Pontificum to bridge the gap between different liturgical outlooks, arguing against a "total exclusion of the new rite" and for the "total exclusion of the old rite". 
• Critique of past handling: 

  He was critical of the earlier suppression of the traditional liturgy, calling it a "despising and proscribing the Church's whole past". 

HOW THE 1964/65 ROMAN MISSAL FULFILLED WHAT SACROSANCTUM CONCILICUM RECOMMENDED FOR THE REFORM/REVISION/REFINEMENT OF THE 1962 ROMAN MISSAL USED DURING VATICAN II…

I have a copy of the 1964 Roman Missal:

In every way it fulfilled the sober/ conservative recommendations of the Council Father’s for the reform of the Mass. The only thing lacking was the expansion of the Lectionary. What could have been done, rather easily, would have been to keep the original TLM lectionary as “Year A” and create two other cycles, Years B and C to include Scriptures not in the original lectionary. 

The 1964 Missal allowed the vernacular for all of the laity’s parts although Latin was in the margin for these parts to make clear that Latin could still be used.  What was required in Latin were the quiet prayers of the priest to include the Roman Canon.

It modified the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar. I think wrongly. It eliminated Psalm 42 only. I would have liked to see the double Confiteor’s and absolutions eliminated and combined into one set recited simultaneously by the servers and priest. 

The rubrics indicate that the Mass be unified, meaning priest at a sung Mass does not have to say the Gloria, Creed, Sanctus and Agnus Dei as well as the Propers, when these are sung by the choir/congregation. He joins the choir/congregation in singing these parts. 

The Last Gospel was eliminated. 

Certain ceremonies were simplified especially for Palm Sunday, Candlemas and a few others. 

SHOULD CATHOLICS IN A STATE OF PUBLIC MORTAL SIN RECEIVE HOLY COMMUNION SO AS NOT TO FEEL EXCLUDED IN THE EUCHARISTIC ASSEMBLY?

Willem Jacobus Cardinal Eijk, Metropolitan Archbishop of Utrecht gives a very cogent argument, based on Catholic morality and Canon Law, about who may or may not receive Holy Communion. You can read a commentary on what His Eminence said in the Silere non possum article I copy and paste below.

But, I would like to make a suggestion. In the ancient Mass of the one Roman Rite, only priests can distribute Holy Communion. And the rubric for distributing Holy Communion indicates that as the priest gives Holy Communion to the communicant, he makes a small “Sign of the Cross” with the Host over the person receiving the Precious Host. 

In preparation for Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion to be utilized, the Modern Mass rubric for the distribution of Holy Communion not only truncated the formula to be said by the “Minister” of Holy Communion to “The body of Christ” but also the removal of the rubric to make a small “Sign of the Cross” with the Precious Host over the communicant. Why remove the “Benediction” with the Precious Host? So that Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion can distribute Holy Communion as only priests and deacons can give a blessing in the formal way and a Benediction with the Precious Host. 

Now comes my point: Cardina Eijk likes that Catholics who may not receive Holy Communion may come forward to receive a blessing instead of Holy Communion, a kind of “Spiritual Communion” at the time of Holy Communion. Of course, Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion cannot bless communicants with a hand gesture, but they can say “May God bless you.” 

But if only priests and deacons are allowed to distribute Holy Communion, the Benediction with the Host prior to the communicant receiving Holy Communion could be restored and those who come forward for only a blessing, could receive an individual “Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament”. HOW MUCH MORE INCLUSIVE WOULD THAT BE! AND NON CATHOLICS COULD RECEIVE THAT BENEDICTION TOO! HOW ECUMENICAL WOULD THAT BE!!!!!

From Silere non Possum:

Cardinal Eijk: “Divorced and remarried persons may receive Communion only if they live in chastity.”

Rome – “Civilly remarried divorced couples in a second union may receive Communion in church only if they do not engage in sexual relations.” With this clear and unambiguous statement, Cardinal Willem Jacobus Eijk,Metropolitan Archbishop of Utrecht, answered journalists’ questions during the presentation of his book El vínculo del amor. Matrimonio y ética sexual, held this afternoon at the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum.

The prelate addressed with precision what he called “a difficulty often debated today”: the issue of divorced and remarried persons and their possibility of accessing the Eucharist. “In paragraph 84 of Familiaris Consortio by Saint John Paul II, it is said that in such cases one should live without sexual relations,” Eijk recalled.

“Why? Because a civil marriage is not a regular bond, it is not a valid marriage if the bond of the first sacramental marriage is still valid. That is the issue,” he explained, referring to the Magisterium of John Paul II and to the Catholic doctrine on the indissoluble sacramental bond.

The cardinal then highlighted the theological dimension of the topic, which cannot be reduced to a merely disciplinary or pastoral matter. “There are people who live in this situation but go to church and also want to receive the sacraments. This, of course, is difficult. Christ gives Himself totally to us in the sacrament of the Eucharist, and on our part, there must also be a total self-giving to Him. And if this is lacking in marriage, Communion cannot be received,” he stated, reaffirming the profound link between the Eucharist and the sacrament of marriage.

While reaffirming the need for sacramental coherence, the cardinal made it clear that the Church does not exclude those who find themselves in such situations.

“Of course, people living in such relationships are very welcome in the Church, absolutely. They can take part in our liturgies and also in our charitable activities. But they cannot receive Communion for the reason I have explained,” he declared, emphasizing that welcome does not mean an absolute right to receive a sacrament.

Eijk also described the pastoral practice adopted in his particular Church: “In the Netherlands, we do this: these people may also come to the priest during the Eucharistic celebration, but with their arms crossed over their chest, and they may receive a blessing. I must say that, in many cases, this works. It helps soothe the sense of exclusion; it seems to be a satisfying solution: we too can approach the priest, we can come forward during the Eucharist like the others, we don’t have to remain seated, but we can come and receive a blessing.”

The cardinal stressed that this practice is not new, but is rooted in the tradition of the Church: “We have always blessed sinners in the Church. This would be my solution,” concluded the Archbishop of Utrecht, revealing a balance between doctrinal rigor and pastoral sensitivity.

With this intervention, Cardinal Eijk reaffirmed a line of theological clarity which—while avoiding any form of sterile rigidity—seeks to remain faithful to the sacramental coherence indicated by the Popes and by the constant Magisterium of the Church.

d.G.T.
Silere non possum