Pope Leo XIII beautiful pectoral cross on Pope Leo XIV’s official photo:
And bombshell interview with Archbishop Cordilione who would make a great Cardinal Prefect for the Dicastery of Divine Worship!
Pope Leo XIII beautiful pectoral cross on Pope Leo XIV’s official photo:
And bombshell interview with Archbishop Cordilione who would make a great Cardinal Prefect for the Dicastery of Divine Worship!
26 comments:
Nice portrait.
There is something so likeable about him - I'm not gravitating towards papolatry - he just seems like a warm person, and a regular guy - relatable.
Note: Leo has also worn a Byzantine priest's pectoral cross. The one photographed, a reproduction to my understanding, is very nice as well.
"Archbishop Cordilione who would make a great Cardinal Prefect for the Dicastery of Divine Worship!"
Agree. Another regular kind of guy that seems relatable and like me, knows when its time to get "down to business".
ByzRus,
You and I are on the same page about both men!!
Over the years I came to distrust Pope Francis. My intuitive impression of Pope Leo is a man of integrity and someone who is trustworthy. He won’t cancel Francis, he will be trustworthy and purify Francis’ duplicity and gaslighting.
I know it is unkind to say, but the adjectives that come to mind with regard to Francis are "oily or sleazy." God forgive me.
Just as far as "official" portraits go, especially of monarchs, "smile for the camera/watch the birdie" really does not work for me....not neccesarily a stern look, perhaps a slight upturn to show a smile would come readily, but yet a serious appearance, rather than warm and inviting look of an advertising campaign. Monarchs DO often need make serious, weighty and even harsh decisions, and their portrait should reflect this...and yes, same for any earlier smiling papal portraits...Bergoglio a great example of a friendly portrait being an advertising campaign falsehood, and not a portrait, but a fiction.
Archbishop Cordileone is certain to enrage many "traditionalists."
He has noted that the TLM Movement contains several dangerous currents that leads to schism. He has confirmed the claims of numerous trads that beginning with Pope Benedict XVI
Sorry, I had clicked "publish" too early.
T
To pick things up...
Archbishop Cordileone has confirmed that which numerous trads have long claimed. That is, beginning with Pope Benedict XVI, the plan was to lure trads, via the TLM, into submission to Church authority. That would buy time to establish a hybrid Mass designed, in part, to eliminate the TLM.
Archbishop Cordileone has expressed concern that dangerous currents, which lead to schism, exist with the TLM Movement.
=======
-- Archbishop Cordileone: The Novus Ordo will "enrich" the "Traditionalists":
"Traditionalists": The Novus Ordo is a banal rite, manufactured on-the-spot...concocted with the aid of six Protestants...is pew-emptying, spiritual poison.
=======
-- Archbishop Cordileone: "I think it was Pope Benedict's vision that we need to eventually get back to having one form."
=======
-- Archbishop Cordileone: Trads must "integrate"...
"When people who love the traditional Mass ask me what they can do to promote this, I say, open up a diner for people on the street, work at a homeless shelter, support a crisis pregnancy clinic. Put your faith into action to show that you're an integrated Catholic."
"I think many of them are good at living it out in their personal vocation...But also to live it out in terms of service to the poor and the needy."
=======
Dangerous currents...potential for schism...within the TLM Movement.
-- Archbishop Cordileone: "The traditional Mass...does have the characteristics of a movement. These ecclesial movements have the potential of renewing and revitalizing the Church if they're kept in communion with the Church.
"Movements have this tendency to easily kind of move away and see themselves as the only real Catholics. So the authority needs to properly guide and direct them.
"That’s what I think we need to do with the traditional Mass. We need to bring them into a greater sense of communion.
"And maybe there do need to be some restrictions or some guidance, to make sure that it's not going off to be a parallel church."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
What bishops have said the things you attribute to traditionalists in a derogatory sense. You are mixing apples and oranges. I am sure in Archbishop Cordilione’s Archdiocese of San Francisco that there are those who say that LGBTQ+++ Catholics should be sacramentally married in the Church, any chosen sex should be ordained and there should be no prohibition of any type of sexual expressions privately or publicly. Is that the same as the Archbishop saying the same thing.
And then you have the German Bishops, many of whom are tittering on schism, given all kinds of leeway with their schismatic leadership and not one has been removed as a bishop by Pope Francis. Can you explain this?
Pope Benedict XVI's liturgical peace plan failed to produce the peace that he, in gallant fashion, had attempted to forge within the Church. Would Pope Leo XIV return to said plan? Should he do so, why would Summorum Pontificum prove successful the second time around?
Prominent trads within the TLM Movement had waged war against Summorum Pontificum the first time around. Would that cease the second time around?
=======
Peter A. Kwasniewski had declared:
"I think it is fair to say right from the start that Summorum Pontificum was useful to our movement in the way that an enormous booster rocket is useful for launching a spaceship into orbit: it has a lot of raw power, but it can only do so much, and when it’s empty, it falls away.
"Summorum Pontificum is destined to be one of the great papal interventions in all of history, but it is no more than damage control; it is not a pillar, much less a foundation, of a permanent structure.
"And those who lean on it too much will find themselves crushed by its incoherences.
"My goal in this presentation will be to walk through Summorum Pontificum and identify its principal flaws, the elements in it that act as weights pulling us down, so that we can resolutely go beyond it to retrieve the fullness of the Tridentine heritage that constitutes the authentic Roman rite."
=======
Father Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X:
"With Summorum Pontificum, the Tridentine Mass was then granted a much wider right. This allowed a certain number of priests to discover it; and by celebrating it – it must be acknowledged – many priests began to question their priesthood, and to question the Council and the New Mass
"However, the perspective of this motu proprio, which remained flawed, was based on an error: two forms of the same rite of Mass, and above all, I would like to add, the illusion of improving something in the current crisis without discussing the causes of the crisis.
"This was the error of Pope Benedict XVI and the limitations of this motu proprio: it just could not work. It could work for a while, but sooner or later it would lead to what has happened.
"We have the experiment of Pope Benedict XVI and it cannot work: to put truth next to error; to put the two Masses next to each other, so that one can “fertilize” the other; to have “a reform of the reform through continuity”… it is a total illusion."
=======
Does Pope Leo XIV wish to restore a document that various trads had categorized as muddled, flawed, and unsustainable?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT, PLEASE! Peter Kwasnieski is a layman not a bishop. The SSPX are in an irregular relationship with the pope and the bishops in union with him, but not a full blown schism with the pope as Pope Francis acknowledges their Sacramental Marriages and allows any Catholic to go to Confession to an SSPX priest. It is the bishop, not PK, not a local priest who governs a diocese. Let the bishop deal with the problems of local parishes and there are many especially in progressive parishes that allow all kinds of schismatic ways to celebrate Mass and the other sacraments and to bless couples or polygamists in sexual unions that are disordered.
Based on the “logic” of Traditiones Custodes the Novus Ordo should be severely restricted since so many of its attendees are heterodox, commit liturgical abuses and defy Rome
Exactly!
It may be that Pope Leo XIV, should he wish to restore even a "refined" version of Summorum Pontificum, will have to accept the following: The TLM Movement is riddled with major problems/flaws...radtrads.
The TLM Movement is riddled with daily in attacks against the Council, as well as Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI. The belief that "traditionalists" are free to trample the Magisterium is a major problem within the TLM Movement.
The belief that God has tasked "traditionalists" with the above has, in frightening fashion, proved popular throughout the TLM Movement.
=======
Pope Francis for years maintained Summorum Pontificum despite the above,.
Such folks as Mike Lewis insisted that Pope Francis had been too lenient with "traditionalists." Pope Francis had been criticized for not having acted sooner in his attempt offer merciful correction to the TLM Movement.
=======
There are certainly solid Catholics within the TLM Movement. To tend to their spiritual needs, it may be that Pope Leo XIV will accept that more than a few radtrads populate said movement. We can hope and pray that at least here and there, we will find miracle conversions of radtrads who embrace, rather than resist, the Pope.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mike Lewis, as you MT, are my optic and obsessed with traditionalist laity. The bishop is the primary liturgists of his diocese and heterodoxy on the left or right is the bishop’s responsibility to correct. The greater problem with the liturgy are heterodox left priests and the liturgical abuse they have instituted in their parishes. The laity gladly follow. But it isn’t yours, Mike Lewis or me to correct them, but the local bishop. But left leaning bishops like Cupich., McElroy and Tobin ignore liturgical abuse in their parishes Modern Rite and Chicago is a prime example with one certain notorious priest, clearly schismatic tending.
MT Suit,
You never disappoint. You are always off base displaying no sense, logic or charity towards traditional (true) Catholics. You come here and espouse things which clearly are at odds with the positions of our genial host. Grow up!
Father McDonald, I had stated: "Prominent trads within the TLM Movement had waged war against Summorum Pontificum the first time around. Would that cease the second time around?"
To support my above declaration, I had cited Peter A. Kwasniewski, as well as Father Davide Pagliarani, Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X, as prominent "traditionalists" who have waged war against Summorum Pontificum.
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
And again and again I say, who cares they aren’t bishops. As for the SSPX bishops, they are in an irregular situation with the pope. I don’t believe PK’s bishop is and it is his bishop, not you or me, of even the pope, who should deal with him.
Father McDonald, I am not obsessed remotely with traditionalist laity. I love the TLM. I have been blessed by our local FSSP parish.
Thank you.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mike Lewis, MT, and others talk themselves in circles with the goal of denigrating “trads” as monolithic advocates of, at various points, heretical, anti-Catholic, and anti-papal views. Unfortunately, these circles force them to ignore that similar reasons for suppressing TLM communities—allegedly, asserting their own views as Catholic, denying Vatican II, ignoring Church teaching—also apply to many “mainstream” parishes.
Moreover, somehow, the problems with trads are not just associated with trads. E.g., American bishops not sufficiently aligning with the pope’s initiatives. This sloppy thinking somehow means that the TLM is responsible for a bunch of problems outside of TLM circles, too.
And lastly, the sample size on which these assumptions are made is woefully small. It amounts to chronically-online “madtrads” who need to log off of Twitter and some ex-trads who may or may not have bones to pick or their own personal views that skew their representation of the truth of the matter. The vast majority of trads I know ignore twitter arguments and are too busy putting their shoulders to the plow of the Christian vocation to get their attention, unfortunately. Related note: one big issue is a few prominent “radtrad” laymen, whom other trads are somehow supposed to “police.” Never have I seen the Mike Lewis types give one whit of an idea how to do so, just that it needs to be done.
It’s all so much rickety reasoning and assignment of collective blame dissociated from addressing the problems presented that makes Traditionis Custodes an obvious example of pastoral malpractice.
Nick
TJM, practice that which you have just preached.
That is, on numerous occasions you have espoused things which have been at odds with Father McDonald, who is indeed "our genial host."
You have mocked the Holy Mass as the "Novus Bogus." You have treated Pope Francis in vile fashion. You often rejected Pope Francis Magisterial authority over you.
In turn, Father McDonald has noted that via the above, as well as additional instances, that you have displayed a Protestant mentality.
Father McDonald has informed you that your disgraceful attacks against, in your words, the "Novus Bogus," has served to turn Churchmen against traditionalism.
You have trampled Father McDonald's numerous requests to at least try somewhat to stick to the topic of a given thread. You have been keen to have turned threads immediately into pro-President Tyour to . You are acut-and-paste lways off base displaying no sense, logic or charity towards traditional (true) Catholics. You come here and espouse things which clearly are at odds with the positions of our genial host. Grow up!
e regard to you and "never disappoint. You are always off base displaying no sense, logic or charity towards traditional (true) Catholics. You come here and espouse things which clearly are at odds with the positions of our genial host. Grow up!
into pro-President Trump commercials via your cut-and-paste non sequiturs.
TJM, Father McDonald has requested that you cease to insult folks here. Father McDonald has requested that you cease your obsession with Father Kavanaugh political leanings.
By the way, as there have been times that Father McDonald had not bowed to your wishes, you, in a huff, had quit his blog supposedly. Example: You had wanted Father to ban Father Kavanaugh, and I, from this blog.
What happened to your "I quit this blog" tantrums?
=======
Anyway, I wish you, and your family, peace, as well as good health.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT Suit,
You really can’t read the room. You have conveniently overlooked several of the commenters here who have issues with the non sequiturs and drivel you post. You sound like you’re 16 (John Nolan asked you that once!)
MT,
Pull the speck from your own eye. You still haven’t explained or withdrawn your recent bizarre attacks on me.
Nick
Nick,
MT Suit never takes responsibility nor addresses inconvenient facts!
Post a Comment