Translate

Tuesday, May 23, 2023

GROWTH IN ONE’S CATHOLICISM FROM IMMATURITY TO MATURITY—JOSEPH RATZINGER IS OUR MODEL


Joseph Ratzinger during the Council and immediately afterward was the darling of progressives in the Church. He seem to canonize the Second Vatican Council, although its scope was not doctrinal or dogmatic, but pastoral and thus limited in scope. 

By 1968, Joseph Ratzinger passed his adolescent stage as a theologian and began to realize that the adolescents pushing a progressive, heterodox agenda in the Church, were precisely that-- adolescents--or they were in arrested development as it concerned the dogmatizing of the “new and improved” over the “ancient and supposedly stale”. 

The post above this where Cardinal Ratzinger writes the Chilean bishops about Vatican II and the liturgy in general, shows the growth into maturity of the good Cardinal. He puts Vatican II in its proper place, as he will do during his magnificent papacy. And he makes clear and should have declared infallibly that what previous generations considered sacred could not then be considered not so by subsequent generations. This was specifically geared toward the Mass of the Ages, the Traditional Latin Mass and giving this form of the Mass pride of place. 

He also knew that if one could critique and dismiss the TLM so too could one do the same for the Mass of Pope Paul VI which was contrived by progressives in the pope’s papal court. 

Ratzinger as a theologian, as a bishop, cardinal and then pope never dismissed Vatican II but acknowledged not all of its documents carried equal weight and some of them were time-constrained by facets of life prior to and during the Council. None of the documents break new dogma or doctrine or anathematize errors of the Tridentine period. 

As it concerns the Liturgy, I think Pope Benedict would have preferred the conservative, modest proposals of the Council Fathers rather than the committee that hijacked the Council’s desires for the Liturgy. But he knew that one could critique the errors of the reformed Mass and the reasons why the small group of reformers wanted them and dogmatized them. 

Pope Francis never matured past 1968 and embraces all that Pope Benedict called out!

This is what Cardinal and later Pope Ratzinger would have desired and could have affected or is it effected:

1. The Order of the Mass would not have changed.

2. The useless repetition of the double Confiteor and absolutions for the priest and servers could have been combined in to one set for both. The same for the Rite of Holy Communion for the priest and then again for the laity. Psalm 42 should not have been eliminated except during Passiontide as the Council wanted more Scripture not less!

3. Gregorian Chant for the Sung and Solemn Sung Mass for the Propers should have remained and not changed or made optional

4. Latin for the fixed parts of the Mass should have been maintained.Vernacular as an option for the other parts.

5. None of the private devotional prayers of the priest should have been eliminated and should have allowed for optional vernacular.

6. The Roman Calendar should have not be radically revised nor the Lectionary. The TLM lectionary in the vernacular should have been maintained as Year A and two additional Years, B and C modeled on A but with more use of the Old Testament and readings not in the TLM lectionary. Vernacular for the Readings as an option. A good revision of the daily Mass lectionary according to the Paul VI lectionary is advisable.

7. No need for additional Eucharistic Prayers but more Prefaces with the option of the vernacular, since these are changing. 

8. No change to Holy Communion practices in terms of manner of receiving and the fast (three hours before Mass).

What I have highlighted above is what Vatican II desired, no if’s, and’s, or’s about it!


12 comments:

TJM said...

A friend of mine was a peritus at the Council and said the Novus Ordo was NOT what the Council Fathers envisioned yet like good little branch managers went along with it

Anonymous said...

Pope Benedict XVI, via interviews that he had granted to Peter Seewald, insisted that he had not altered his progressive stance in regard to the reforms that he had promoted at the Council.

Peter Seewald, Pope Benedict XVI's definitive biographer, is among many folks who dismissed the claim that there had been two Joseph Ratzingers — the pre-1968 A.D. radical, versus, the post-1968 A.D. conservative Joseph Ratzinger.

National Catholic Register, May 28, 2020 A.D.

Edward Pentin: "You’ve known Benedict for many years, but when you wrote this book and from the interviews you had with the pope emeritus, what did you learn about him that you did not know before?"

Peter Seewald: "Oh, countless things. The life of Joseph Ratzinger is the biography of a century."

"Pure legend, however, is the story of his “trauma” during the student revolt in Tübingen [in 1968], or the story of his turn from revolutionary to reactionary brakeman."

=================================================================================

Father Hans Urs von Balthasar, Joseph Ratzinger's great friend: Interview with Angelo Scola, 30 Giorni, November 1985, p. 16.

Angelo Scola had offered that then-Cardinal Ratzinger had changed from a progressive to conservative.

Father Hans von Balthasar:

"I have known him for a long time, since he was a professor, and I can assure you that he did not change. Everyone says the opposite, that there are two Ratzingers: one before he came to Rome, and a different one later. To the contrary, he has always remained the same!"

Pax.

Mark Thomas

TJM said...

Barf, barf

Anonymous said...

Prior to 1968 A.D., Father Joseph Ratzinger was an "immature" "adolescent" theologian?"

Father Joseph Ratzinger, for example, during the late 1950s to 1968 A.D. was not a brilliant theologian? It was not until 1968 A.D. that he had "matured" in his theology?

If that is correct, then in regard to Vatican II, the Church is in deep trouble. Vatican II is the horrific, destructive Council that one "traditionalist" after another has long proclaimed.

Archbishop Lefebvre's claim that the Council is filled with destructive texts...spiritual poison...is valid.

The reason is that Father Joseph Ratzinger, the supposed immature theologian prior to 1968 A.D., had played a major role in having formulated Vatican II.

Father McDonald, the other day you had promoted George Weigel's book in regard to Vatican II. George Weigel declared that "Ratzinger was a man of the Council; in fact, the young Bavarian theologian had been one of the three most influential theological advisers to the conciliar bishops."

The bottom line is that in major fashion, Vatican II reflects the thinking of the supposed pre-1968 "immature," progressive thinking of Father Joseph Ratzinger.

Therefore, to view in bad light pre-1968 A.D. Joseph Ratzinger's progressive theology is, in turn, to view the Council in bad light.

There is not any way to remove from the Council's documents Joseph Ratzinger's tremendous progressive influence.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald, we differ on certain points that you have offered here in regard to Father Joseph Ratzinger...in particular, his supposed differences pre-and-post 1968 A.D.

However, Father McDonald, I share with you overall great love and respect for Father Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI.

I view him as a great progressive pre-1968 theologian.

Beyond that, he was very much a holy, and great, man of God, as well as Holy Mother Church.

Father McDonald, once again, thank you for the privilege to post my comments to your great blog.

You have initiated here a very interesting thread.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Paul said...

Mark T,

If you were to start and create your own Catholic blog or website what would you call it - what title would it have 😉?

TJM said...

Father McDonald,

This is HUGE! Over at Father Z’s he has posted a letter from A Democrat Alderman in Chicago to Cupich adking him to re-open the Institute of Christ the King’s Shrine closed because of the evil and uncharitable Motu Proprio, Traditiones Custodes! The Alderman makes the practical point what a benefit the Shrine was to this African-American neighborhood. If he does not, the Cardinal may have to deal with the taint of racism and hypocrisy allowing St. Sabina’s, a heretical parish under “Father” Plfeger to remain open. Pop the popcorn!

Anonymous said...

Father McDonald said..."...the Mass of Pope Paul VI which was contrived by progressives in the pope’s papal court."

"As it concerns the Liturgy, I think Pope Benedict would have preferred the conservative, modest proposals of the Council Fathers rather than the committee that hijacked the Council’s desires for the Liturgy."

==============================================================================

Father McDonald, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to the above.

Let us say that the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI "was contrived by progressives in the pope’s papal court....the committee that hijacked the Council’s desires for the Liturgy."

Said folks had done a tremendous job in having "contrived" the reformed Mass, as well as "hijacked the Council’s desires for the Liturgy," as...

-- Pope Benedict XVI/Archbishop/Cardinal had, for decades, offered said "contrived"
Mass repeatedly.

-- Pope Benedict XVI insisted that the "contrived" Mass could "enrich" the TLM.

-- Pope Benedict XVI declared that there "is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture."

-- Pope Benedict XVI recognized the "value" and "holiness" of the supposed "contrived" Mass as he declared:

"Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books.

"The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness."

====================================================================================

Then-Cardinal Ratzinger:

-- "Lest there be any misunderstanding, let me add that as far as its content is concerned (apart from a few criticisms), I am very grateful for the new Missal, for the way it has enriched the treasure of prayers and prefaces, for the new EPs and the increased number of texts for use on weekdays, etc., quite apart from the availability of the vernacular."

-- The Missal of Pope Saint Paul is "nothing other than a renewed form of that same Missal to which Pius X, Urban VIII, Pius V and their predecessors have contributed, right from the Church’s earliest history."

Pax.

Mark Thomas

rcg said...

The difference in the “old” and “new” Ratzinger is in the nuance and sophistication of interpreting the same statements. Many took librty to the point of fiction with what Vatican II addressed in the Liturgy. Showing those errors was a change in that it clarified what could be easily, or purposefully, misinterpreted.

Anonymous said...

Paul, thank you for your question.

If I had a blog, or website, I would follow Vatican II's teaching in regard to the proper use of media. That is, I would do my best to uplift the Body of Christ.

Unfortunately, my many sins are a drag to the Body of Christ. I am certain that any blog, or website, of mine would flop.

I am thankful that Father McDonald allows me to post comments to his great blog.

Paul, I am certain that you have the talent to run a successful blog, or website.

Conversely, I am certain that I lack such talent.

Pax.

Mark Thomas

ByzRus said...

I've never understood how saying the confiteor twice was "useless repetition". Think about that, asking for God's forgiveness more than once is both useless and repetitive. I know I need forgiving, maybe others not so much.

TJM said...

Mark Thomas,

Your talent is posting endless non sequiturs. Pertinet ad rem