Certainly, His Holiness had Cardinal Marx of Germany and the German Church in mind:
Certainly the Holy Father did not intend to include this form of the Mass as being used for ideological purposes. He would never be so brazenly incoherent or blinded by what the real ideology is and which Mass is used for ideological purposes. I trust the pope that he knows this:
10 comments:
A as in “A”, MEN as in “MEN”, Fr. McDonald!
Thank you for that. 😄
Father McDonald, with your permission:
Presentations & Addresses by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
http://popebenedictxvi.blogspot.com/2008/08/presentations-addresses-by-cardinal.html
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Our holy Popes, from Saint Paul VI, to Francis, have found it difficult to have curtailed the nonsense that more than a few priests have inflicted upon the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
In 1988 A.D., then-Cardinal Ratzinger had declared:
"After the council there were many priests who deliberately raised "desacralization" to the level of a program...they put aside the sacred vestments; they have despoiled the churches as much as they could of that splendor which brings to mind the sacred; and they have reduced the liturgy to the language and the gestures of ordinary life..."
-- Said priests had operated openly during Pope Saint Paul VI's reign.
-- Said priests had operated openly during Pope Blessed John Paul I's reign.
-- Said priests had operated openly during Pope Saint John Paul II's reign.
-- Said priests had operated openly during Pope Benedict XVI's reign.
====================================================================================
On Good Friday, 2005 A.D, then-Cardinal Ratzinger declared:
"How much filth there is in the Church, and even among those who, in the priesthood, ought to belong entirely to him!"
At that point, Pope Saint John Paul II had reigned for nearly 27 years...then-Cardinal Ratzinger had served 23 years as prefect of the CDF.
However, they were unable to halt the desacralization, and despoilment, that many priests had inflicted upon the Church/Roman Liturgy.
"Traditionalists" have long complained that priests who had practiced desacralization, and despoilment, had done so openly. Conversely, our Vatican II Era Popes had "clamped down" upon "traditional" priests, according to the narrative advanced by many "traditionalists."
Example: Many priests had despoiled the Church/Mass openly, while our Popes (except Pope Francis) had "clamped down" supposedly upon such "traditional" priests as Archbishop Lefebvre/priests of the SSPX.
The bad news: The Church/Roman Liturgy despoilers remain with us. The good news: I believe that their presence has decreased during Pope Francis' reign.
That has been the work of the Holy Ghost having led more and more priests to offer the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI in holy, reverent fashion.
That is also the result of — in line with insights offered by Pope Benedict XVI — the authentic Vatican Council having begun to push past the fake Council...the authentic Council will launch the long-awaited tremendous renewal of the Church.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
Well, I can cut and paste too. Here are some salient comments Pope Benedict made about the disaster that is the Novus Ordo:
"In part it is simply a fact that the Council was pushed aside. For instance, it had said that the language of the Latin Rite was to remain Latin, although suitable scope might be given to the vernacular. Today we might ask: Is there a Latin Rite at all any more? Certainly there is no awareness of it. (p. 84)"
"The problem of the new Missal lies in its abandonment of a historical process that was always continual, before and after St. Pius V, and in the creation of a completely new book, although it was compiled of old material, the publication of which was accompanied by a prohibition of all that came before it, which, besides, is unheard of in the history of both law and liturgy. And I can say with certainty, based on my knowledge of the conciliar debates and my repeated reading of the speeches made by the Council Fathers, that this does not correspond to the intentions of the Second Vatican Council. (Wolfgang Waldstein, “Zum motuproprio Summorum Pontificum”, in Una Voce Korrespondenz 38/3 [2008], 201–214)"
"The liturgical reform, in its concrete execution, has moved further and further away from this origin [in the best of the Liturgical Movement]. The result has not been reinvigoration but devastation…. [I]n place of the liturgy that had developed, one has put a liturgy that has been made. One has de-serted the vital process of growth and becoming in order to substitute a fabrication. One no longer wanted to continue the organic developing and maturing of that which has been living through the centuries, but instead, one replaced it, in the manner of technical production, with a fabrication, the banal product of the moment. (Commentary in Simandron—Der Wachklopfer. Gedenkschrift für Klaus Gamber (1919-1989), ed. Wilhelm Nyssen [Cologne: Luthe-Verlag, 1989], 13–15, cited in Theologisches, 20.2 (Feb. 1990), 103–4; translation mine.)"
In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture. 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. It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place. (source)"
So there you have it. In his owns words Benedict is rejecting your view of Liturgy. Your obsession with PF is disturbing as is your obsession with Vatican II and the Novus Ordo. You are the person Pope Francis should be calling "rigid" and supportive of "backwardness."
TJM,
Mark Thomas was dismissive of Commenter Paul excerpted as follows, wherein he also mentioning you.
As he has pledged to refrain from "wasting time and energy" on comments that do not interest him, I suggest we do the same. Certainly, I will be as I refuse to fight my way though all those quotes, some lacking sufficient context, to get to an "original" thought.
Mark Thomas said, May 6, 2023 @ 12:52 PM
https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=7846189835239594160&postID=4774380686241393293
"In regard to "TJM pointed this out; but you simply ignored TJM too."
I have ignored him for a very long time.
Other than that, I will refrain from wasting time and energy on comments that do not interest me."
Priests who have "desacralized," as well as "despoiled" (then-Cardinal Ratzinger's words) the Church/Roman Liturgy have gone hand-in-hand with the following:
That is, the tremendous difficulty that our holy Popes have faced in their gallant attempts to have implemented the authentic Council.
At the end of his Pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI declared that there were, in effect, two Councils:
The true Council, and the false Council (the "Council of the media," as termed by Pope Benedict XVI).
Pope Benedict XVI declared: "We know that this Council of the media was accessible to everyone. Therefore, this was the dominant one, the more effective one, and it created so many disasters, so many problems, so much suffering: seminaries closed, convents closed, banal liturgy … and the real Council had difficulty establishing itself and taking shape; the virtual Council was stronger than the real Council."
"...banal liturgy..."
The folks who had misrepresented Vatican II...who had foisted upon us the fake "Council of the media," had also trafficked in "banal liturgy."
Said folks, in particular, priests who had "desacralized," and "despoiled" the Church/Roman Liturgy, had proved more effective than our holy Popes, who had tried in gallant fashion to implement the Council.
The Holy People of God were on board with the authentic Council/liturgical reform.
Unfortunately, in far too many cases, the folks who had desacralized and despoiled the Church had foisted their collective will upon the Faithful.
In 2013 A.D., Pope Benedict XVI had noted that "slowly but surely," the real Council had begun to break through...
Throughout Pope Francis' Pontificate, I believe that there has been a reduction in the amount of priests who had numbered among the despoilers.
The process may be slow, but in line with Pope Benedict XVI's (as well as Pope Francis') unshakable defense, as well as promotion of the authentic Vatican II/liturgical reform, the New Springtime, in all its holy, powerful force, will establish itself to bless us.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
Why not respond directly to the points I made? Perhaps you can’t because they demolish your position. Dumping more non sequiturs does not work with the sentient
ByzRus,
What Mark Thomas is really saying is that he lacks basic intellectual honesty and prefers to be a drone. I could see him fitting nicely in the Third Reich where thinking was not allowed
ByzRus,
Notice how MT runs away from the truth? Dump and run!
TJM,
With many, truth becomes whatever, whomever, wishes it to be.
Post a Comment