Wednesday, March 24, 2021
WOW, PROFESSOR FAGGIOLI, BEANS IN ENGLISH, IS INTERVIEWED BY AMERICA MAGAZINE, A JESUIT PUBLICATION, AND SPILLS THE FAGGIOLI, I MEAN THE MEANS.
WOW, JUST WOW! Is progressive lay theologian, Dr. Massimo Faggioli, beans in English, OPENLY ADMITING that the Novus Ordo is incompatible with traditional Catholicism??? I post video, you decide.
Of course, Massimo would more than likely endorse women priests or any variety of the LGBTQ descriptions of a person's sexuality. More than likely, he would endorse the bessing of LBGTQetc sexual unions. More than likely he would endorse the repeal of Humanae Vitae.
Yet a small minority of Catholics who prefer the EF Mass is a threat to all of this. The absurity of it is palpable.
What is Massimo and those who think like him afraid of?
And he says Pope Benedict reevaluated his endorsement of Vatican II in an uncritical way, especially the liturgical reforms. I wonder why? Could it be because of the other chaos in the Church now on steroids? Could it be that only 10% of Catholics in progressive countries, states and cities, and sometimes much less, only attend Mass? Could it have been that Massimo, I mean, Beans???????
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
He may not be right about much, but he would be right about that.
And this is why, I must respectfully admit that the entire "hermeneutic of continuity" is untenable. It is a nice-sounding idea, but it doesn't hold up. Pope Paul VI himself said that Vatican II was a pastoral, non-binding council, which issued no dogmas or anathemas. However, as Catholics, we are obliged to accept the full deposit of the faith as revealed by the Church, especially from the councils that DID define dogmas and declare anathemas. Most especially, the Council of Trent, which provided us with the most comprehensive infallible catechism the Church has ever provided. It needs no revision because it reflects the eternal truths of God who is the same, yesterday, today and forever. We are also bound to accept the denunciation of modernism that St. Pius X provided. That "synthesis of all heresies" now dominates our Church. From the denials of the inerrancy of Scripture, to the twisting of social justice into accepting Marxism , to the foul homosexual agenda of so many disordered priests and bishops, we are in a battle for our souls. Only the immutable, unchanging truths of the Church can deliver us. Only the immutable, ancient liturgy can provide us the complete picture of what our lives as Catholics MUST be. And this is why so many "respectable" priest, bishops, lay leaders, pastors, and other various "professional Catholics" despise this Mass.
Faggioli has revealed the truth in spite of himself.
The Devil always overplays his hand.
I hope more Catholics will start paying attention.
Well done, Tom, you said a lot there, you covered a lot; you said what needed to be said. You are very articulate. Yet, a lot of what you wrote about is really, as is said in this nation, “the bloody obvious”.......yet the various “bloody obvious” you write of is VERY rarely stated so succinctly and with such clarity and honesty.
Did Pope Benedict reevaluate the reforms of Vatican 2, or did he evaluate how the reforms were implemented and conclude the implementation of the reforms were contrary to Vatican 2? I was under the impression Pope Benedict wanted to correct the errors in the way Vatican 2 was being implemented.
There are no "reforms" in Vatican II!
Vatican II was not a reform Council. Trent was.
In fact, a LOT (although not enough) of Vatican II reaffirms what the Church already taught.
Please read Sacrosanctum Concilium. IT DOESN'T MANDATE A NEW LITURGY. It provides for some revisions IF NECESSARY (and it makes no conclusion that is is necessary).
"Reforms of Vatican II" is manipulative mediaspeak for low-information Catholics. It makes about as much sense as hearing "expert" commentators at a conclave speculate about what country a new pope will be selected from to appeal to what sector of Catholics. New popes are selected by Cardinals because they think the new pope will do what they want done in the Church, not to pacify the public in a PR campaign. The entire "reform" allegation repeated by lying Catholic leaders is just a manipulation.
Our thinking has been so misinformed by bad actors in the Church and their media toadies that one needs a shovel to get through the B.S..
Reforms my _ss!
Faggioli's claim, that the EF is inextricably tied to 16th century theology and therefore a new Mass was required, is spurious. One only has to think of the Benedictines, Dom Odo Casel and Dom Theodore Wesseling (the latter a populariser of Casel's theology in England during the second quarter of the 20th Century). Wesseling was against tinkering with the Mass as it then existed. Casel's theology has been challenged by theologians, but he was never censured by ecclesiastical authority. Whether one likes or not, the EF can legitimately read through more than one theological lens.
Casel's theology is clearly different from that of the 16th Century. https://sarumuse.org/2012/01/21/odo-casel-and-liturgical-theology/
Overheard in the halls of Casa Santa Marta:
“Will no one rid me of this meddlesome Mass?”
Post a Comment