Tuesday, February 27, 2018

POVERTY, CHASTITY AND OBEDIENCE--WHICH IS THE MOST DIFFICULT? OBEDIENCE! AND HOW DO MODERN "SPIRIT OF VATICAN II" CATHOLICS OBSERVE OBEDIENCE?



Monday is my day off and I had the TV on to my favorite cable station, Turner Classic Movies. There was a little segment on between movies about nuns in movies. They spoke of two in particular, Audrey Hepburn in "The Nun's Story" my most favorite nun's movie and The Bells of Saint Mary's" with Ingrid Bergman.

The two hosts, both males and I am not sure if they were Catholic, made the point about the Nun's Story that the most difficult vow for Audrey Hepburn's character was obedience, not poverty or chastity. Her inability to suppress her pride and be obedient to her religious order's commands will lead her out of the convent and back to the world.

This brings me to a truth about our Catholic Faith, which so many here don't seem to understand.

An ecumenical council of the Catholic Church, even a pastoral one like Vatican II, requires our assent to what the pope and the bishops of the Church say we must do in implementing any council. In other words it requires the obedience of clergy and laity alike.

While we might not like the leadership of some popes and how Sacrosanctum Concilium was implemented or the idea of "noble simplicity" in the liturgy, we are required as Catholics to obey and suck it up, to quell our pride and be obedient or we might become like Sister Audrey Hepburn and find ourselves choosing pride over docility and exiting the Church not just a religious order.

Every pope since Vatican II has modeled the liturgy for us and the obedience required. No pope, including Pope Francis, has tinkered with the words of the Mass once it was promulgated and their personalities do not shine forth in an obtrusive way whatsoever. In fact, apart from liturgical dress tastes, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict and Francis are almost identical in how they celebrate the OF Mass in terms of quelling their own personalities.

Obedience also requires our openness now to the return of the Extraordinary Form of the Mass and obeying the Magisterium if and when this form of the Mass leads to authentic changes to the OF Mass to reflect better the renewal of the Mass envisioned by the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council--renewal in continuity.

5 comments:

Victor said...

It looks like millions upon millions did not want to be obedient to the Church when their Latin Mass, the way they had worshiped and loved God was taken away from them. They left the Church when the old Latin Mass was suppressed, almost overnight, in favour of something that was contrived and had little sacredness to it. It opened their eyes to how they had been deceived by the Church all along when centuries upon centuries of positive organic evolution could be taken away form them by intellectual elites in the hierarchy, and they had no say. It was good-bye fake Church because they were betrayed by the very people who were meant to be pastoral to them, that is to say, lead them to heaven in the way that spoke to them, not in some farcical hootenany Masses and so forth.

Anonymous said...

Oooooh, but we don't have to be obedient to "Bergolio!" You see, he's a plant by the Illuminati - or was it the Bilderberg Group, I forget - who was inserted into the papacy even though a behind-the-scenes deal took place that has resulted in his latae sententiae excommunication and that of the cardinals (I use the term loosely) who conspired with him. (See Universi Dominici Gregis 87)

Aaaannnndddd, since "Bergolio" isn't legitimately pope - since the Curia forced Pope Benedict's resignation - since they were under pressure from the Vatican Gay Mafia - since they were really in control of the Vatican Bank and were using it as their personal slush fund - we don't have to obey him.

AAAANNNNNDDDDDDD, since this "Bergolio" has entered into formal heresy he has, de jure, forfeited the Archbishopric of Rome and, therefore, the Chair of St. Peter, and, therefore, the role of Pontifex Maximus, and, therefore, the office as supreme ruler of The Vatican City-State, and, therefore, wait, where was this going...?

Oh well, you get my drift.



Catholic Mission said...

Obedient to which interpretation of Vatican Council II? Not the common one which is the Spirit of Vatican Council II.


FEBRUARY 27, 2018
Bishop Fellay says the SSPX believes in nothing heretical but he still does not know that he interprets Vatican Council II with the for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) method : it is irrational


He (Bishop Bernard Fellay) mentioned the doctrinal talks of 2009-2011, which showed Rome that the SSPX believes nothing heretical and that modern Catholic teaching on certain points stands in stark contrast to the traditional doctrine of the Church.1

news-header-image
Bishop Fellay says that the SSPX believes in nothing heretical but still does not know that the SSPX interprets Vatican Council II with the for and against extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) method.So there is a rupture with the dogma EENS and the past ecclesiology of the Church.The fault lies with the SSPX and not Vatican Council II.
Also he interprets invisible- for- us baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) as being visible exceptions to the dogma EENS. So there is a rupture with EENS , the past ecclesiology and the Syllabus of Errors.
I do not use this irrationality to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS and so my conclusion is different from Bishop Fellay.There is no rupture with Tradition.
The SSPX, like Rome, is using an irrational premise(invisible cases of BOD are visible) and conclusion( BOD excludes the baptism of water and is an exception to EENS and there is known salvation outside the Church).
Now please note I am not denying BOD,BOB and I.I but pointing out that with visible or invisible BOD,BOB and I.I there are two different interpretations which have two different conclusions.
Also when the for and against method is used to interpret Vatican Council II, the conclusion will be a rupture with Tradition.Since the against passages are inferred to be visible and known people saved outside the Church, when there are no such people.
-Lionel Andrades


1.


http://fsspx.news/en/news-events/news/bishop-fellay-gives-lecture-michigan-usa-state-society-35572?utm_source=Society+of+Saint+Pius+X+%7C+Newsletter&utm_campaign=f9e1d70c4f-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_02_27&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8c13eb2341-f9e1d70c4f-203949361

Henry said...

"Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, Benedict and Francis are almost identical in how they celebrate the OF Mass in terms of quelling their own personalities."

Can anyone cite a more improbable claim made by anyone at this blog since its inception in 2009? I've been here since then, and don't recall one offhand.

Thanks to "noble simplicity" of the Novus Ordo--that is, the absence of ceremonial and silence to hide the person of the celebrant--it's been submerged in the personality of virtually everyone who's ever celebrated it.

TJM said...

The Nun's Story is perhaps Audrey Hepburn's finest movie, This movie is one of my favorites and she is one of my favorite actresses. I am not sure we should necessarily conclude Gabrielle wasn't obedient to the Church, she just discovered that she could not conform to religious life as it was practiced at the time. I don't think the story had one believe that the former nun left the Church. As an historical irony, my own aunt was a religious for over 30 years but left in the early 1970s because of the disastrous reforms which occurred in her order. She continued to go to daily Mass and lived a very Catholic lifestyle, far more so than many of her fellow sisters who remained in her order. One even stopped going to Mass because it was "too patriarchal"