A TIP OF THE HAT TO MARK THOMAS FOR SHOWING THE WAY TO THE CARDINALS SYMPATHETIC TO THE GREAT “DOCTOR OF THE CHURCH” POPE BENEDICT’S HERMENEUTIC OF PROMOTING THE TLM

 I think it was providential that the cardinals decided not to discuss the liturgy at their recent consistory, more than likely due to the lack of time and the weighty discussions on the two topics they did choose. 

The problem wasn’t with the four topics but that Pope Leo had four topics but didn’t ask the cardinals for a longer meeting that would be necessary.

But, by Providence, the less that weighty document of Cardinal Roche given to the cardinals to reflect upon before the next consistory, shows clearly how weak that document is when compared to the Magisterium of Pope Benedict XVI. Will the cardinals not see who weak Cardinal Roche’s apologetics are compared to the Supreme Pontiff, now deceased, and his explanations about how the TLM was never abrogated and that there can be two forms of the one Roman Rite?

Who should the cardinals and Pope Leo listen to? A lightweight like Cardinal Roche, who is quite rigid, maybe due to his English background, or the the Doctor of the Church, Pope Benedict XVI?

Thanks be to God, that sound-cardinal theologians can mount a far better apologetic for Summorum Ponticum’s return at the June Consistory compared to the flimsy apologetic of Cardinal Roche!

Here is Mark Thomas’ apologetic against Cardinal Roche’s weak ideology:

Reporter's question (to Pope Benedict): "What do you say to those who, in France, fear that the "Motu proprio' Summorum Pontificum signals a step backwards from the great insights of the Second Vatican Council? How can you reassure them?"

Pope Benedict XVI: "Their fear is unfounded, for this "Motu Proprio' is merely an act of tolerance, with a pastoral aim, for those people who were brought up with this liturgy, who love it, are familiar with it and want to live with this liturgy. 

"They form a small group...There is no opposition between the liturgy renewed by the Second Vatican Council and this liturgy."

=======

"Summorum Pontificum is merely an act of tolerance...There is no opposition between the liturgy renewed by the Second Vatican Council and this liturgy."

My final comment: We know that Cardinal Ratzinger and also after he became Pope Benedict XVI was very concerned about the fabrication that the Bugnini Mass is and how it disordered the order of the TLM, made up a new order in other words. 

He was also concerned about the liturgical abuses that are so common in the fabricated Mass of Bugnini. 

But as cardinal, Pope Benedict knew that if the Bugnini Mass was celebrated in Latin/Greek, ad orientem and with Kneeling to receive Holy Communion, that most lay Catholics wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. But he acknowleded that the disorders of the Bugnini Mass had led to its celebrations being different from priest to priest, parish to parish and diocese to diocese. 

We know that Cardinal Ratzinger celebrated publicly the TLM and more than likely celebrated it privately as pope in his own chapel which was widely circulated during his papacy.

• Private Celebration: reports regarding private celebrations:
  • Bishop Bernard Fellay, then-head of the SSPX, claimed in 2010 that Benedict privately celebrated the Tridentine Mass.
  • Archbishop Georg Gänswein, Benedict’s personal secretary, reportedly stated that both he and the Pope celebrated the old rite in private.

We also know that as Pope, Pope Benedict publicly modeled celebrating the Bugnini Mass ad orientem and distributed Holy Communion to communicants kneeling for whom he provided a kneeler to assist them.