Could you imagine the TLM being instrumentalized in such a way? This could only happen with the Modern Mass and the various ideologies, ideological groups, add to it.
This is the development of liturgical style that many believe the Vatican II Fathers and even those who concocted the new Liturgy never dreamt of. I might be wrong though.
Inculturation has been pushed biggly since Vatican II and thus we have these fruits of it!
But let’s pretend this group, visiting Rome and its Gesu Basilica, had only the TLM as an option to attend. Would it have in any way looked like the Facebook video I post. View it at your own spiritual risk. I take no responsibility for the enormous spiritual abuse this will bring to your liturgical sensitivities:
21 comments:
This is all happening because the one person who could stop it is allowing it to happen.
I'll say no more than that...you'll probably want to get all excited about him muttering a prayer in Latin or wearing some obscure vestment for the first time in 20 years.
Jerome is correct. Our church is not a democracy. It is an Autocracy and there is only one person at the top who has TOTAL AUTHORITY to stop this. He is Francis 2.0 no matter the vestments and Latin. The LGBTQ+++++!!!??? procession and presentation in St Peters is scandalous! Leo can and could have can stopped it...even with his affected Peruvian/English accent. I'm totally disgusted.
Diane Montagna: "Athanasius Schneider has spoken out forcefully against the recent Vatican-sanctioned “LGBTQ+” Jubilee pilgrimage, denouncing it as a “desecration” of the Holy Door & a “mockery” of God."
=======
Diane Montagna: "This event was planned before Pope Leo XIV’s election. Some have argued that it could have and would have been worse had Pope Francis still been alive. They point out that Pope Leo did not receive a delegation from the LGBT+ group at his general Jubilee audience in St Peter’s Square earlier on Saturday, nor did he send the group a message."
Bishop Schneider: "These arguments are unconvincing. The fact that Pope Leo XIV did not cause such scandal in no way justifies his de facto consent to this event.
"Indeed, one cannot reasonably presume naivety on his part, for it was entirely foreseeable that a pro-LGBTQ+ organization, or at least some of its members, would exploit the Holy Door and St. Peter’s Basilica as a platform to promote an ideology that openly scorns and rejects God’s explicit will as expressed in His holy Commandment."
=======
Diane Montagna: "Fr. James Martin circulated photos of an audience he had with Pope Leo several days before the event. Did popes prior to Pope Francis meet with such figures in this way? What is your view of this and other recent audiences, such as that with the controversial Dominican Sister Lucia Caram, who reportedly supports “gay marriage”?
Bishop Schneider: "Before the pontificate of Pope Francis, the successors of Peter neither received officially nor posed for photographs with those who, by word or deed, openly rejected the doctrinal and moral teaching of the Church.
"Through these official meetings and photographs, Pope Leo de facto sent a message to the world that he does not distance himself from their heterodox and scandalous teaching and behavior — particularly since the Holy See offered no clarification afterward and did not correct Fr. James Martin’s triumphant messages circulated on social media."
=======
Pax.
Mark Thomas
https://praytellblog.com/index.php/2022/07/08/renovated-sanctuary-at-the-church-of-the-gesu/
Not sure I like the gesu reordering / renovation. For one thing the altar’s too small.
you mean "pray sniff" an idiotic blog for lefties devoid of intellectual honesty? They suppress any comment that does not fit their narrative.
Isn’t the TLM instrumentalised by the far right and others within the church seeking to undermine the theological developments of V2?
I am sure it is all sooooo imaginative and innovative at the time: but watch the 'video' , it is so then and derivative of what.....the world ? It hardly raises one's heart and mind. I hope whoever thought about the pathetic, multicoloured sticks tied together never leaves their accommodation again.
https://thecatholicherald.com/article/exclusive-inside-pope-leo-xivs-residence-names-and-nationalities-of-augustinian-friars-confirmed
Careful criticising V2 or you’ll be suspended and referred to the CDF for investigation !
https://thecatholicherald.com/article/italian-priest-suspended-after-youtube-broadcast-criticising-vatican-ii-2
You won’t like Leo’s most recent appointment of a LGBT friendly woman - very controversial !
https://zenit.org/2025/09/09/pope-leo-xiv-appoints-controversial-woman-as-president-of-the-pontifical-academy-of-fine-arts-and-letters/
I can’t find the relevant post now but Opus Dei have been implicated in human trafficking and various dubious practices…
https://www.wwno.org/npr-news/2025-06-09/will-pope-leo-call-for-opus-dei-to-reform-why-some-want-change-inside-the-catholic-organization
Sounds like reform is very much needed!
Yawn 🥱
I don’t like imposing modern features in an ancient church that is either Romanesque or gothic. That’s what happened at Gesu and Notre Dame. The cubicle altar and its design at Gesu. Clashes with everything else in there. The cereal bowel altar and other new furnishings clash with everything else in Notre Dame. But with that said, I like the three platforms for the altar/ambo/ chair. Marble rather than wood, would have complemented what is there already and more traditional altar/ambo/chair. I could see elevated places in the same configuration around the Papal altar at St. Peter’s, but permanent in in marble and matching the high altar and baldachin. That’s would get the papal chair away from the front of the altar and give it a permanent liturgical place.
Yep, definitely MT levels of drivel.
Nick
Hey K, one of your "civil and tolerant" Dems just got fired for her outrageous comments about the late Charlie Kirk. Why are Dems so hateful and prone to violence?
https://www.wsmv.com/2025/09/11/mtsu-assistant-dean-fired-over-callous-comments-charlie-kirks-death/
TJM:
Assuming the reporting of what she said is accurate, it is difficult to believe that any credible and honorable university employee would say such a thing, let alone an Assistant Dean of Students. I am not surprised she was summarily fired.
But your question addresses only one side of the equation. The missing other side is: “Why are some, and I emphasize some (as you did not), MAGA supporters so hateful and violent?” Or better yet: “Why has our politics become so hateful and violent?” President Trump rightly condemned demonization of political opponents in yesterday evening’s Oval Office address. But he wrongly singled out “leftist radicals” and made no mention of “hard right radicals” (you know, those who demonize by calling their political opponents communists and traitors). This is hardly presidential but looks more like more political opportunism.
Here is an account of the deplorable situation in which we now find ourselves:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/09/11/political-violence-charlie-kirk/
And lest you forget, here is an extract from the article that also recounts sometimes deadly attacks on Democrats:
“Honestly, the first thing that came to my mind was a sense of ‘Not again! What’s next?’ and asking myself, ‘How do we arrest this cycle of political violence?’” said Sen. Tina Smith (D-Minnesota). “It is a human reaction to just turn away in horror when you see these kinds of things happen, but it’s just relentless. I’m almost speechless with despair at how often it’s happening.”
When Democratic Minnesota state Rep. Melissa Hortman and her husband were killed over the summer — allegedly by a man who posed as a police officer and also shot another state legislator and his wife — Smith’s name was found on a hit list in the suspect’s car.
The motivation and identity of Kirk’s killer were not clear late Wednesday. But the drumbeat of violence against political figures has been growing louder for years, including the deadly attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters on Jan. 6, 2021.
In October 2022, an assailant looking for then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-California) attacked her husband with a hammer in their home. Last December, UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was fatally shot on a Manhattan sidewalk, allegedly by a man angry about health care policy. Earlier this year, a man was charged with arson attacks on a Tesla showroom and the New Mexico Republican headquarters. In April, an arsonist targeted the home of Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, setting his residence on fire hours after a Passover seder.
That followed other disturbing events. Rep. Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) was shot and badly wounded at a congressional baseball practice in 2017. Three years later, a group of men sought to kidnap Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. In both cases, political rage was apparently the motivating factor.”
Even though I am no supporter of MAGA or of Charlie Kirk, I was moved to tears by yesterday’s tragic events. How could anyone with a heart not be moved when a child of God is struck down in such a horrible way, leaving other innocent children of God—Kirk’s wife and two small children—without a husband and a father.
It is beyond time that we take our country back from the evil forces that have divided us.
Mark J.
TJM:
I hope you answer the following question but suspect you will ignore it:
“Unlike President Trump who this morning bordered on excusing them, will you state clearly that you condemn killings by right wing extremists as much as you condemn killings by left-wing extremists?”
One reason I suspect you won’t answer is the overwhelming evidence that most politically motivated killings are apparently committed by various types of right-wing extremists. See, e.g.,:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/09/kirk-assassination-trump-response/684175/
https://www.adl.org/resources/report/murder-and-extremism-united-states-2022
Please prove me wrong by answering the question.
And for more on Trump’s hypocrisy and political opportunism yesterday and this morning (it is itself a huge mark of disrespect to Charlie Kirk and his family to use his tragic death in this way), see:
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-doubles-blaming-radical-left-after-vow-after/story?id=125509965
Mark J.
President Trump rightly condemned demonization of political opponents in yesterday evening’s Oval Office address.
I don’t know how he managed to make that statement while keeping a straight face. Talk about pot kettle black!
Big Benny,
It’s worse than that. Yes, he did condemn demonization of political opponents in the Oval Office address posted on Truth Social, as I conceded in my comment yesterday. But I went on the say, accurately, that “But he wrongly singled out “leftist radicals” and made no mention of “hard right radicals” (you know, those who demonize by calling their political opponents communists and traitors). This is hardly presidential but looks more like more political opportunism.” And he has continued in the same vein today.
Mark J.
Totally agree. Trump has fostered this intolerant climate and stirred people up to act in such ways then seeks to benefit from it politically. Not much different from the nazis burning down the Reichstag.
BB, perhaps you did not hear the governor of Utah praising Utah citizens who are MAGA or republicans for holding prayer vigils instead after Charlie Kirk’s assassination, rardicalized by the left’s Nazi and fascist talk, which you also now engage during this raw time in the USA, instead of resorting to riots, fires and stealing. Every time something similar happens to the left, there are major riots, fires, burning down of major blocks of cities with looting and the like. Apart from the small number (of a very much larger crowd that remained civil) that entered the Capitol of Washington on January 6 of Trump’s first term, doing some minor damage but leaving a few dead in the chaos, the right does not act as violently to unexpected tragic political events as does the left.
Post a Comment