This is from a comment on a post called Kevin’s Substack. You can read the full article about accepting Vatican II, HERE.
Here’s the comment by Steve Kraut. Too clever, no?
Rescue Vatican II
based on The Ballad of Jed Clampett (Paul Henning)
Lyrics by Mr. Steve (Some adapted from Paul)
verse 1:
Come and listen to my story bout, a man named John,
the poor lonely pope who thought, the Church’s spark was gone.
But then one day, he thought; “we shall not despair,”
let’s open up the windows and, let in some fresh air.
verse 2:
Well, the bishops missed the boat, cuz they wuz all asleep,
forgot to read the fine print, and watch it slowly creep.
Signed-off on all the documents, 2000 votes to four,
and Mr. Stinky’s smoke slips through, a crack in the floor.
chorus:
Well heck, now t’aint no joke.
the Council didn’t speak what it spoke.
We got to put the foot in the other shoe,
and rescue Va-ti-can 2.
verse 3:
Marcel and Ottaviani said “Watch out what you sow!“
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, this is what we know,
but Boo-nini holding all the cards, he was mighty sly,
he gave Saint Pope the bait-and-switch and hung him out to dry.
verse 4:
So now we swim-in-a-swamp of e-cu-meni-ical-ism,
We cannuh preach Nu-la-sal-us, Captain, just any old what-ever-ism.
Our poorly-formed consciences say don’t dare share the Good News,
Ohhh, God forbid that we’d upset the Muslims and the Jews!
chorus:
Well heck, now whadda we gonna do?
They’ve watered down what we knew was true.
We got-ta put-ta foot-ta in the other shoe,
and rescue Va-ti-can 2.
verse 5:
So now we’re in the Church of, Syn-no-dal-ity,
We’ve gotta stop the TLM, for the sake of unity!
Us lousy, backward, ridge-ed Trads, are giving him a fit,
so, in your pipe and smoke it, cuz ain’t not gonna quit!
chorus:
hey now, whaddaya say?
They wanna bless you, cuz you are gay,
It’s time we PUT OUR FOOT DOWN on the other shoooooooo …
and cancel Va-ti-can 2. (come on, what is it?)
and cancel Va-ti-can. (don’t you mean revisit?)
Nahhhh, CANCEL VA-TI-CAN 2!
27 comments:
LOL - Nails it!
Pope Leo XIV..."I would like us to renew together today our complete commitment to the path that the universal Church has now followed for decades in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Francis masterfully and concretely set it forth in the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium,..."
=======
Good luck attempting to sway Pope Leo XIV against the Council.
His Holiness has committed his Pontificate to Vatican II.
In particular, His Holiness has cemented himself to Pope Francis' (requiescat in pace) interpretation and implementation of Vatican II.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT continues to reliably demonstrate exactly what the articles posted here are talking about. Kevin’s piece is “trying to sway Leo against the Council” in the same way someone wanting a definition of negligence is undermining the legal system.
Nick
Nick, I never read MT Suit’s comments any more. Just cut and paste bilge
Thanks for sharing this gem, Father! It is both hilarious but (unfortunately) also fairly accurate! The saying “ Many a true word is spoken in jest” , which goes as far back as Shakespeare and even to Chaucer, applies here!!!! It’s definitely a keeper!
I hink a pope is always growing and can convert his attitude concerning Vatican II, Islam, or homosexuality.
"but Boo-nini holding all the cards, he was mighty sly, he gave Saint Pope the bait-and-switch and hung him out to dry."
Boo-nini did not hold any cards. He did not bait-and-switch any Pope.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
He lied to the Pope, telling him the Consilium demanded x; he lied to the Consilium and said the Pope demanded x; lo and behold, he forced the issue to go his way. But no, no bait and switch… good grief. It doesn’t do the Council or Pope Paul any good to deny verifiable historical events.
Nick
Nick, you’re are communicating with an extra thick brick wall. The lay equivalent of the All Highest K!
Father McDonald,
This is a great article as to why TC should be abrogated.
https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2025/12/end-dont-mend-traditionis-custodes.html#disqus_thread
Here is the comment I posted there:
The Novus Ordo is the very embodiment of Dis-Unity with its myriad of options, such that the Novus Ordo is experienced very differently from priest to priest, parish to parish, diocese to diocese. Unless the various options are suppressed, there is no unity of experience. It is also a huge failure regarding the principle of "noble simplicity" as articulated in the Conciliar Documents, e.g., the myriad of options, hardly promotes noble simplicity. TC was grounded in malice, but can be suppressed in the interest of charity.
Boo-nini did not trick our Popes. Our Popes, guided by the Holy Ghost, have long been in control. "Boo-nini" had z-e-r-o authority over Rome.
Pope Saint John Paul II declared:
"With a view to the practical implementation of the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium on the Liturgy, Pope Paul VI instituted a Consilium later the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship and they carried out the task entrusted to them with generosity, competence and promptness."
"The reform of the rites and the liturgical books was undertaken immediately after the promulgation of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium and was brought to an effective conclusion in a few years thanks to the considerable and selfless work of a large number of experts and bishops from all parts of the world.
"This work was undertaken in accordance with the conciliar principles of fidelity to tradition and openness to legitimate development; and so it is possible to say that the reform of the Liturgy is strictly traditional and in accordance with “the ancient usage of the holy Fathers”.
=======
The Council...liturgical reform...all in line with Tradition.
The True Faith is alive.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Y’know, MT is right. To put it more accurately, the liturgical Hannibal didn’t trick Pope Paul VI; he bureaucratically defrauded him to create, in the words of John Paul II’s right-hand man and successor, a banal, on-the-spot product.
The Church is helped by neither denying fact nor pretending popes are inerrantly guided by the Holy Spirit.
(And TJM, yes I know. My comments aren’t for MT’s benefit as he has made himself impervious to anything that would disabuse him of what amounts to delusional beliefs about the popes. They’re meant to keep otherwise well-meaning readers from taking on such a distorted, ahistorical, and un-Catholic view of papal authority amounting to Mormon- or Muhammad- style voluntarism.)
Nick
Nick, Je comprends!
The right-hand man did not denounce the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Pau VI. The banal product was that which liturgical terrorists had rendered of the Holy Mass.
The right-hand man had celebrated the reformed Mass countless times.
He said 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.
"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."
"...it is clearly seen that the new Missal will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite,..."
If the Mass is a banal, on-the-spot product, then the right-hand man was confused to his core for having insisted that said Mass "will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite,..."
He was confused for having taught 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."
Confused as he insisted that "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."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The Church has given Her children a supposed banal, on-the-spot, manufactured Mass?
Pope Leo XIV, in line with each Pope since Saint Paul VI, has continued to foist upon us a supposed banal, on-the-spot, manufactured Mass. Why does he feed us supposed liturgical poison?
No wonder various "traditional" Catholics have refused to worship via the reformed "banal" Mass in question.
If the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI is spiritual poison, then there is z-e-r-o chance that Pope Leo XIV will renew the Church.
If the reformed Mass is a banal, manufactured product, then Pope Leo XIV is an appalling Pope as he has maintained said Mass as the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
MT, it is great to see that you disagree with a pope, in this case Pope Benedict XVI, a great liturgist. But that is modern Catholicism for you, reeds blowing in the papal winds. But, but, but, keep in mind, in many places in Europe less than 5 percent of Catholics attend Mass regularly. Of that 5% may 4% like the Modern Mass as it is celebrated, with abuses and all. In the USA, maybe in the northeat 12% of Catholics attend Mass regularly. Of that percentage, maybe 10% love the Modern Mass as is, abuses and all. Attendance in the south and other parts of the USA might be up to 20% of Catholics. Of that 20% maybe 10% love the Modern Mass as is, abuses and all.
Father McDonald, you used to use the phrase “coloring book Catholicism.” You could revive that and apply it to MT Suit.
Father, either the Holy Mass had been reformed in line with Holy Tradition/sound principles, as the Church teaches, or the Church has foisted upon us supposed banal, on-the-spot, manufactured liturgical poison.
If the reformed Mass is liturgical poison, then why, of all Popes, did Benedict XVI insist that "new Missal will certainly remain the ordinary Form of the Roman Rite..."?
Why did he claim that there "is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal."
If the liturgical reform veered off course, then why did Pope Benedict XVI declare that "in the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture."?
If the Holy Mass of Saint Paul VI is so miserable, then why did Pope Benedict XVI declare "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."
Why does Pope Leo XIV continue to foist upon us such a flawed Mass?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
The fact that millions of Latin Catholics have walked away from the Church/refuse to assist at Mass does not prove that the Mass is flawed.
Millions of Catholics, for example, reject Pope Leo XIV's teachings related to abortion...marriage...immigration...
Does that mean that said teachings are flawed?
=======
We agree that liturgy celebrated poorly has turn away countless Catholics. But that is on priests who have wrecked the Mass.
The Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI is holy. Infinite graces flow from the Mass.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Good celebrations foster and nourish faith. Poor celebrations may weaken and destroy it” – this statement is from Music in Catholic Worship of the USCCB
In fact, Pope Francis pushed away many Catholics who discovered the TLM and marginalized them thus tempting them to go to SSPX Masses or worse Sedevacantist TLMs. Pope Francis believed that the TLM is harmful to the Church, the exact opposite of what you just wrote and what Benedict XVI taught.
In regard to Pope Francis (requiescat in pace) "tempting them to go to SSPX Masses..."
Pope Francis enjoyed a wonderful relationship with the SSPX. He declared "A final consideration concerns those faithful who for various reasons choose to attend churches officiated by priests of the Fraternity of St. Pius X. This Jubilee Year of Mercy excludes no one."
"From various quarters, several Brother Bishops have told me of their good faith and sacramental practice..."
It was Pope Benedict XVI who declared "the Society of Saint Pius X does not possess a canonical status in the Church...As long as the Society does not have a canonical status in the Church, its ministers do not exercise legitimate ministries in the Church."
Such men as Cardinals Burke, as well Müller, have insisted that the SSPX is schismatic...a danger to the Faith.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald said..."Pope Francis believed that the TLM is harmful to the Church..."
He said that?
Or, did he view the folks who had weaponized the TLM as the problem?
It is strange that he believed supposedly that the "TLM is harmful to the Church..." as he supported Catholics who attended SSPX chapels.
Strange as Pope Francis insisted that the FSSP, as well as ICK, offer the TLM.
Strange as Pope Francis, following Traditionis Custodes' promulgation, continue to approve requests from bishops to offer the TLM.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Countless Catholics have walked away from Church teaching related to Humanae Vitae. Said folks do not want anything to do with said teaching.
Does that mean that Humanae Vitae, an extremely unpopular document, is the problem?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Fr. AJM, well said—MT finally disagrees with a pope!
Nick
The cognitive dissonance on display here is simply astounding.
Nick
The fact that Francis thought the TLM was harmful to the Church just shows how messed up his thinking was.
I've wondered at times if what you call cognitive dissonance coupled with a idiosyncratic writing style is symptomatic of autism. If that be the case, I'm willing to cut some slack, in charity.
Post a Comment