Read the Pillar article:
SYRO-MALABAR CHURCH
‘Are you with the pope or against him?’: Papal delegate’s ultimatum to Syro-Malabar protestors
Archbishop Cyril Vasil’, SJ, has warned liturgical protestors they are refusing papal authority and "God's will"
21 comments:
Father McDonald, speaking about liturgy, as well as The Pillar...and with your permission:
Here is an interesting article from Ed Condon, published by The Pillar, that discusses Traditionis Custodes. The article, in many ways, is favorable toward Pope Francis.
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/how-traditionis-custodes-brought
The notion that Traditionis Custodes is a hateful, cruel document, is absent from Ed Condon's article in question. Ed Condon demonstrated the ways in which Traditionis Custodes is in line with Pope Saint John Paul II's approach to the TLM.
Excerpts:
"If we are seeing again the problems identified by St. John Paul II, it could be that the same solutions will find purchase. If this is the case, Traditionis could be read in line with the 1984 indult Quattuor abhinc annos, though it is worth noting that John Paul II did not limit his attention to one side of the emerging divide."
Ed Condon stated that in regard to "the often-assumed intention of Pope Francis in Traditionis — to shut down TLM Masses and communities":
"Yet this presumption doesn’t seem entirely in line with Francis’ own statements on the subject..."
"Francis himself has said he sees Traditionis as “simply a constructive reordering” of liturgical practice, rather than a wholesale suppression of extraordinary form celebration."
"And most Church watchers would agree that, had the pope wanted to ban the TLM outright, he has the legal power to do so, even if it would have been deeply unpopular with some communities."
====================================================
Ed Condon:
"When St. John Paul II authorized the 1984 indult for the celebration of the extraordinary form of the Mass in certain restricted circumstances, he included the specific provision “That it be made publicly clear beyond all ambiguity that such priests and their respective faithful in no way share the positions of those who call in question the legitimacy and doctrinal exactitude of the Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI in 1970.”
“Those” people in the 1980s were the followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who definitively broke communion with the Church in 1988, when he was excommunicated for the illicit consecration of several bishops intended to sustain the community he led and which rejected both the liturgical changes which followed Vatican II and the legitimacy of the council itself."
It is a very interesting article that, in moderate fashion, moves beyond untenable misrepresentations of Traditionis Custodes as a supposed vicious, cruel document.
Radtrads, of course, will dismiss Ed Condon's moderate article in question.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT, Pope Francis entire papacy goes backwards. You finally get it! Thanks for confirming the obvious. But you fail to highlight that TC,0’s ultimate goal is to vanquish the TLM as bishops accompany traditional Catholics to the new Synodal Catholic Church.
I am all for facing east during the celebration of Holy Mass, and would love to see this as a universal norm within the Church. However, lateley when I hear "God's Will" coming from certain people it makes me cringe.
Fortunately, most bishops are ignoring that evil and ultra vires decree. The actions of a dictator. PF is to the Church what Biden is to the US
Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...MT, Pope Francis entire papacy goes backwards...the new Synodal Catholic Church."
My diocese, nor parish, is going backwards. How about your diocese (or dioceses that you serve)?
Father McDonald, in regard to Pope Francis:
I am at complete peace. I hope that that is your outlook as Holy Mother Church has guaranteed that Pope Francis has promoted the True Religion. He is under divine protection as Pope. His faith cannot fail. The Apostolic See will always preserve the Catholic Religion immaculate.
In addition, none other than holy and wonderful Pope Benedict XVI testified that Pope Francis is a holy man, profound theologian, and wonderful Pope. Pope Benedict XVI, from the day of Pope Francis' election, to the end of his (Pope Benedict XVI's) earthly life, had rendered unto Pope Francis "unconditional reverence and obedience."
Father McDonald, I am at peace with you, as well our Vicar of Christ, Pope Francis. Total serenity is mine. Deo gratias!
Father McDonald, thank you. Have a blessed day.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT, I am glad to hear that your diocese and parish continue the old rite as Benedict allowed which was an expansion of JPII’s permission. Your diocese has chosen not to go backward to Francis’ copying of JPII’s permission. Wonderful. I can’t say that for my diocese or former parish.
Yes, we have a wonderful FSSP parish.
Our great bishop is advancing our diocese in continuity with Pope Francis.
In complete union with Pope Benedict XVI, our bishop, as well as holy priests, have preached, as well as demonstrated via their actions, that we are to render to Pope Francis "unconditional reverence and obedience."
I have never heard our bishop, clergy, religious, or seminarians, speak, or act, against His Holiness.
Our Catholic youth have spoken well of Pope Francis. Our converts, as well as those exploring the Faith, have praised Pope Francis. In regard to Traditionis Custodes, or any Church-related matter, our bishop/diocese moves in line with Pope Francis.
Among Pope Benedict XVI's greatest contributions to the Church and world is his tremendous example that we are called to grant to Pope Francis our "unconditional reverence and obedience."
Again, our bishop, clergy, and religious, in line with Pope Benedict XVI, have instilled that beautiful example into us.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."TC,0’s ultimate goal is to vanquish the TLM..."
Father McDonald, in regard to that:
Ed Condon, via his article in The Pillar, noted:
"And most Church watchers would agree that, had the pope wanted to ban the TLM outright, he has the legal power to do so, even if it would have been deeply unpopular with some communities."
Beyond that, Pope Benedict XVI demonstrated via Summorum Pontificum, as well as his overthrow of the ancient, traditional, Good Friday prayer for Jews, the Roman Pontiff's awesome authority over the Roman Liturgy.
Pope Venerable Pius XII's radical liturgical reforms demonstrated, as well, the above.
Pope Venerable Pius XII, Encyclical Mediator Dei:
#58. "It follows from this that the Sovereign Pontiff alone enjoys the right to recognize and establish any practice touching the worship of God, to introduce and approve new rites, as also to modify those he judges to require modification."
In turn, God has commanded that we are required to submit to the Pope's God-given authority to teach, goven, and sanctify us.
I will do so in happy, thankful fashion.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark writes: In complete union with Pope Benedict XVI, our bishop, as well as holy priests, have preached, as well as demonstrated via their actions, that we are to render to Pope Francis "unconditional reverence and obedience."
Mark, I gather you don't realize that unconditional obedience is NOT part of the Catholic faith.
Yvonne said..."Mark, I gather you don't realize that unconditional obedience is NOT part of the Catholic faith."
Yvonne, I appreciate your response. I am open in serene fashion to explore your above claim.
Yvonne, are you able to cite Church teaching in contradiction to Pope Benedict XVI's declaration in question?
I am able, via countless citations, to support Pope Benedict XVI's declaration in question.
To begin: Pope Benedict XVI's declaration is in line with the following:
Pope Saint Pius X:
"The Pope is the guardian of dogma and of morals...in order to demonstrate our love for the Pope, it is necessary to obey him..."
"Therefore, when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go..."
"...whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope."
Yvonne, I have many additional citations in line with the above declarations by Popes Benedict XVI, as well as Saint Pius X. But if you like, I will wait for you to offer citations that oppose that which the above Popes offered.
Yvonne, thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark,
Obedience and unconditional obedience are not the same, and no where does the Church claim that unconditional obedience is required of the faithful. To state that it is would require proof from you, and none of your quotes do that. You mention Pope Benedict but no citation is given. Perhaps you could provide one?
We are to love the Pope in a volitional not necessarily emotional manner, but that does not mean we have to be unconditionally obedient to him. When he errs, which can and does occur outside of specific situations, we must not be obedient to him in his error. In fact, to love the Pope would be to correct him so he no longer errs.
Related to the Pope Benedict quote, it is one thing to selectively quote someone but it is another thing to understand what the person is saying. Context is very important. Regarding "...whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope." I think the proper understanding of that is when a Pope teaches in line with the Catholic faith, one who loves Christ and His Church (and is striving towards holiness) will be obedient to the Pope, since the Church teaches what Christ would have her teach. To love Christ is to love His teachings. However, this is my best guess outside of having the proper context for the statement.
Please note that this idea of unconditional obedience is one of the reasons why the Church is in the mess She is in with regards to the abuse scandals. Unfortunately, this type of obedience has been used in the past by unscrupulous people to allow for all manner of sinful behavior.
Thank you for your time.
Yvonne
Ed Condon has offered the following in regard to the notion that bishops have stuck it to "Bergoglio" supposedly by having ignored/outmaneuvered Pope Francis/Traditionis Custodes.
Ed Condon stated that bishops "have taken to allocating for TLM use of former parish churches left over after the merging of several parish communities in the process of wider diocesan restructuring programs — a provision within the norms of Traditionis."
"Those moves have been widely portrayed as cunning (or sinister, depending on the commentator) circumventions of the often-assumed intention of Pope Francis in Traditionis — to shut down TLM Masses and communities."
"Yet this presumption doesn’t seem entirely in line with Francis’ own statements on the subject, nor does the portrayal of bishops using the norms of Traditionis as somehow “outmaneuvering” the pope appear to extend far beyond the politics of the Church in America."
"Francis himself has said he sees Traditionis as “simply a constructive reordering” of liturgical practice, rather than a wholesale suppression of extraordinary form celebration."
"And most Church watchers would agree that, had the pope wanted to ban the TLM outright, he has the legal power to do so, even if it would have been deeply unpopular with some communities."
"Similarly, dioceses like Springfield, Illinois, and Cleveland have come under fire online for being supposedly “anti-Francis” by designating non-parish churches for TLM use."
"But that view of things has not, apparently, made it as far as the pope’s own Diocese of Rome, which designated five churches at which the extraordinary form could be celebrated every day apart from the Easter Triduum, or to the Diocese of Bologna, where the pope’s personal peace ambassador and president of the Italian bishops’ conference, Cardinal Matteo Zuppi, both allowed TLM liturgies to continue in designated non-parish churches, and even dispensed from Traditionis to allow it to continue in a parish church until an alternate venue could be identified."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
To add one thing to Yvonne's claim: "Yvonne said..."Mark, I gather you don't realize that unconditional obedience is NOT part of the Catholic faith."
The following applies should we accept Yvonne's claim as valid:
Pope Benedict XVI made an horrific mistake when he declared his unconditional obedience to his successor.
-- Pope Benedict XVI's approach to obedience granted to the Roman Pontiff is not in line with the Faith.
-- Pope Benedict XVI injected tremendous authority into the Papacy to which the Roman Pontiff is not entitled supposedly — a level of authority that some may insist is dangerous.
-- Pope Benedict XVI's example has misled those who have followed his lead.
-- Pope Benedict XVI enabled those who have followed his lead to cite, as well as pit him, against anybody who, in line with supposed Church teaching, has dismissed the idea of rendering unconditional obedience to the Pope.
Again, if Yvonne is correct, then Pope Benedict XVI harmed the Church in numerous ways.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The drivel from the papalator continues. Does ObozoCare cover mental health issues? You and Father K could benefit!
The history of the Catholic Church proves that the idea of "unconditional obedience" to popes is false.
Pope Formosus was elected to the papacy in AD 891 after having been at one time excommunicated and reduced to the lay state.
Pope Stephen VI (VII) was elected in AD 896 and declared Formosus to be an antipope and declared all his acts null and void, dug up his body, et cetera.
Stephen required all clergy ordained or consecrated by Antipope Formosus to renounce their orders as null and void. Many disobeyed, and rightfully so.
Theodore II, John IX, Benedict IV, and Leo V contradicted Stephen and declared Formosus a true pope.
Later, Sergius III proclaimed Stephen correct and the others wrong and proclaimed not only Formosus an antipope but John, Benedict, Leo, and Christopher.
The French priest Auxilius publicly disputed Sergius.
"Unconditional obedience" should never have been given to Stephen or Sergius, and it wasn't.
Those are the facts of Catholic papal history.
Yvonne said..."I think the proper understanding of that is when a Pope teaches in line with the Catholic faith, one who loves Christ and His Church...will be obedient to the Pope..."
Yvonne, thank you for your replies today. We have disagreed with each other today, but in charitable fashion. I appreciate that.
Yvonne, in regard to: "...when a Pope teaches in line with the Catholic faith, one who loves Christ and His Church...will be obedient to the Pope..."
Yvonne, that is the only manner in which a Pope is able to teach. Thanks to the promise of Jesus Christ, the Pope is unable to teach error. The Papal Magisterium has been, and will remain always, unfailing.
To not render unconditional obedience means that our obedience to him is conditional. That means that each of us is free to determine when Papal Teaching is worthy of belief/worthy of our submission to the Magisterium.
That constitutes chaos, as well as the Church's destruction.
You reject teaching "X." Half your diocese rejects teaching "X." The other half submits to teaching "X." A bishop accepts teaching "X." His auxiliary bishop rejects teaching "X."
The above is the result of the rejection of unconditional obedience to the Pope. Each person serves as his, or her, Pope. Each person determines orthodoxy as he, or she, pleases.
That is not the Holy Catholic Church. Rather, that is conditional obedience. That is the destruction of Holy Mother Church.
Yvonne, again, we disagree with each other. But we have done so in charitable fashion.
Thank you. Peace and good health to you and your family.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark,
I am not so sure we are actually in disagreement. I think we are looking at the same coin but with a different emphasis on certain aspects of the coin.
A Pope is infallible only under very narrow circumstances. At any other time a Pope can state something which is incorrect and, thus, not in line with Church teaching. To automatically assume that something that comes out of the Pope's mouth is true, simply because he is the Pope, is incorrect. If a Pope makes a statement that contradicts the authentic teachings of the Church, it is to be disregarded. At the same time, to constantly disagree with something the Pope says simply because we do not like it (or him) and not because he is in err, would be a mistake as well.
Perhaps you are confusing unconditional obedience with our level of submission to Church teachings?
May I recommend the following article by Catholic Answers? It is written to defend Papal Infallibility against fundamentalist attacks on this doctrine. The last two paragraphs above the header "Peter Not Infallible?" I think are most pertitent to our discussion.
https://www.catholic.com/tract/papal-infallibility
Also, have you read "True Obedience in the Church" by Peter Kwasniewski? I have not completed it as of yet, but what I have read I have found to be very informative and balanced.
Yvonne
Mark,
My apologies, as I should have added this at the bottom of my last reply:
Thank you and peace and good health to you and your family as well.
Yvonne
Yvonne said..."Mark, My apologies, as I should have added this at the bottom of my last reply: Thank you and peace and good health to you and your family as well."
Yvonne, thank you.
We may disagree upon this or that. But as we are brother and sister in Jesus Christ, we remain charitable toward, as well as in communion with, each other.
Yvonne, have a blessed day.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark, the question doesn't involve merely "disagree[ing] on this or that."
The question is whether your position that unconditional obedience is due to the Roman pontiff is true.
It is an undeniable fact, demonstrated by our sacred history, that the answer is no. And that can be proven merely by reference to what has happened in the past.
When Pope Stephen VI (VII) demanded that all the priests and bishops that were ordained/consecrated by Pope Formosus produce letters renouncing their orders as invalid, they owed him zero obedience on that issue. Zero.
Many disobeyed. They were right; Stephen was wrong. It's just that simple.
Unconditional obedience is not a Catholic concept.
DJR,
Unconditional obedience is the mantra of totalitarians: Nazis, Fascists and Communists. MT fits right in with that crowd. Faith and Reason have no place.
Post a Comment