HTTPS://i0.wp.com/isoladipatmos.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/jorge1-150.jpg?fit=150,150&ssl=1 150 150 Jorge Facio Lynx HTTPS://isoladipatmos.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/logo724c.png Jorge Facio Lynx2021-07-16 15:28:222021-07-16 23:13:21Eventually it was discovered. The ghost-writer of the Supreme Pontiff Francis is Father Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo who held one a year ago “Lectio” for which he infuriated the improperly sayings “traditionalists”, calling for the abolition of Benedict XVI's Motu Proprio on “The old rite of the Mass”
Eventually it was discovered. The ghost-writer of the Supreme Pontiff Francis is Father Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo who held one a year ago “Lectio” for which he infuriated the improperly sayings “traditionalists”, calling for the abolition of Benedict XVI's Motu Proprio on “The old rite of the Mass”
Latest posts by Jorge Facio Lynx (see all)
- The Sacrament of Marriage by Father Gabriele Giordano M. Scardocci in Santa Maria Novella in Florence. You are invited: we are waiting for you! - 13 May 2023
- «Digressions of a liberal priest». The new book by Ariel S. Levi di Gualdo in the name of politically incorrect, but above all of knowing the truth that will make us free - 20 April 2023
- The book of «Gattoloqui satirici» by Ipazia Gatta Romana is being distributed - 6 March 2023
The last of Pope Francis:
"The commandments are not an absolute bond ...."
Of course, by definition it can't be
The Church that with Bergoglio and the Bergogliani is taking shape as it progresses is losing [CENSORED]
There are a myriad of conspiratorial and so-called antibergoglian sites and blogs in which you can give your best in fantasy-theological rants and insults, this is not the place where some of his nonsense can be accommodated, so you aim elsewhere.
I have lived in South America for years : Catholics are flocking en masse to charismatic Protestant churches ....
In my city there is a community of the Greek Orthodox rite.
I, Bergoglio, cannot see him as the Supreme Guide .... I just can't.
A little thought is coming to me ...
Even the charismatic Protestants do not see the Roman Pontiff as the supreme leader of the Church, then he could join them.
If it will, I assure you of my blessings, it will be more serene and perhaps even more coherent, after breaking free, like Luther, of Roman popery.
Forget the Orthodox, behind the patina of suggestive rites and touching liturgies, they have always had much greater and much more serious problems than we Catholics, beyond the apparent gold that glitters on the surface.
You are absolutely right about the wrong behavior of many who follow the Mass in the Tridentine Rite and this repels me too. I have 20 years and I have always followed the Mass in the Modern Rite, except once I followed the one in VO (I tell you this to make it clear that I am not part of any group of self-styled traditionalists). It goes without saying that I believe that the NO Mass is valid (otherwise, because God would have stirred up Eucharistic miracles within this Mass?). I fully agree with you when you say that many followers of the Ancient Rite are ideologized. But why remove the Tridentine Rite from everyone indiscriminately to punish these groups? Following this reasoning, one could also remove the NO to all given the widespread abuses and given that many who participate in these Masses despise 1950 years of Church history. Obviously, if the pope says so we cannot do differently, however no one detracts from that in the future, this or another pope, can return to the previous provisions or to others even more permissive regarding the VO (maybe correcting some “mistake” such as allowing readings in the local language). Thank you for a possible reply.
P.S. I happened to meet a priest on the internet who celebrates in an ancient rite (Mr. Alberto Secci – youtube channel and website : rooted in faith) and listening to his homilies it seems to me that he is not ideologized at all e, rather, also know how to recognize the mistakes of many “traditionalists” and also recognize when something modern has been done right.
the Mass of old order it has not been removed, restrictive rules have been put in place to avoid ideologizations and to avoid, as unfortunately happened, what groups constituted, anything but rare and sparse of people, used as a pretext a missal to reject an entire council of the Church and the liturgical reform from which the Missale new order.
To avoid these things, the Holy Father ordered that the use of the Missal of St. Pius V be allowed within the dioceses under the control of the bishop, whose task is to avoid the formation of churches within the Church and antagonistic groups.
A few days ago, the Metropolitan Archbishop of Bologna, he confirmed, for instance, the use of Missale old order in his archdiocese, so have several other bishops.
https://infovaticana.com/2021/08/05/celebran-una-misa-por-el-orgullo-gay-en-alemania/ the mass for gay pride ,and ,Latin Mass ,no,
With logic … “Yes, but the other is worst” you don't go very far, indeed, we are not going anywhere.
Mi tip, she who apparently sighs so much for Latin, he would feel like translating me in front of three Latinists, with extreme precision, a preface taken from the Missal of St. Pius V?
She is able to understand, word for word what I say, if I celebrate Holy Mass with the Missal of St. Pius V, assuming I know both the Latin and that missal?
Reverend Father ARIEL stop being a know-it-all ,maybe she thinks she is GOD?
Go on with Maria
Don Minutella's last homily
Please, next time you send us the link of a porn movie, is less vulgar than the madness and diabolical wickedness of this poor minded excommunicated priest.
Speaking of diabolical manifestations (true or presumed)
As a fine theologian, explain to us the real demon called Pachamamma carried in procession to the Holy See ( less and less Santa to tell the truth ...) where the bones of the first Pope Peter reside ... carried on the shoulders in procession in a canoe dancing and singing with scents of shamanic fumes (because of this it was) and with a Supreme Pontiff (true or presumed ...)smiling , radiant and blessing and of the friars and nuns who prostrated themselves with their heads on the ground and their asses in the air in front of the unclean artefact of Pachamamma and a little man with erect genitals ... always in the presence of a smiling and blessing Supreme Pontiff.
Because you know ... I common believer who does not know a fife of theology then reading some phrases from the New Testament ... you know ... forgive me for ignorance ... but I get confused ...
Always for the same reasons as a fine theologian, explain to me why those German priests who blessed gay couples were not excommunicated ... with the same speed as the excommunication of the diabolical Sicilian priest (Why 2 and at the same time without canonical process ... one was not enough? And why one more than Luther… paradoxically rehabilitated to Don Bernasconi
But the list is long ... being very ignorant and with only the eighth grade I need to understand ...
If instead of mocking me you give me a convincing explanation, I remain in the Church that I am about to leave ... (I am not a Minutellian ... because there are aspects of the latter that leave me very perplexed and not just as much as Bergoglio's way of proceeding)..
His are not questions but free provocations behind which are hidden beliefs that you have already formed, however he asks for enlightenment – rhetorically – to get his message across, that I let them pass.
So I only answer your last question:
"If instead of making fun of me you give me a convincing explanation, I stay in the Church I'm about to leave".
Well, abandon the Church. She will win it and the People of God will win it. Neither the Church nor the People of God know what to do with emotional spineless people like her who collapse like autumn leaves under the test of faith in the first light gust of wind.
You are a living insult to all the Holy Martyrs in the history of the Church, than in the face of much more serious tests of faith, paid for their blood, they did not clamor like maidens of 12/13 years affected by the first menstruation, as does her.
Leave the Church, it's best for her and it's best for us.
Dear father Ariel,
I think I understand their position: the Mass of old order it is an archeology that today has no reason to exist. I also understand his position on the Popes: his difficulty in understanding Benedict XVI's theory of a single Roman rite in two “form” of celebration, it's incomprehensible even to me. Above all because it is a rite promulgated for the universal Church (not for a particular community, like the Coptic rite, Byzantine, Ambrosian, etc.).
How can two coexist “form” of a ritual with pretensions, both of universality?
Then I get to the point: you understand that the pastoral decision of Benedict XVI in 2007 created a bigger problem than it was intended to solve e, indeed, tensions between so-called traditionalists and progressives have intensified.
My question is: it does not seem to you that the same pastoral error of Benedict XVI in allowing an impossible (the harmonious coexistence between two forms of a universal rite) is what Pope Saint Paul VI committed, beginning to grant them indults to celebrate Mass with the old Missal?
It does not seem to you then that even St. John Paul II was pastorally wrong with his pardons and with the commission of Ecclesia Dei? Admitting those errors of Saints Paul VI and John Paul II easily leads to his position: recognize the error (pastoral, but only pastoral?) of Benedict XVI in his motu proprio the 2007, that must be corrected? (difficult to say) as established by Pope Francis on 16 July 2021.
I sincerely believe that all the Supreme Pontiffs you have appointed have sought in different ways, in different historical and pastoral situations that occupy a period of half a century, to lend a hand to certain groups of people, to go out to meet them and bring them back to unity.
For instance, the Supreme Pontiff Francis, to the followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, he made concessions during the Jubilee of Mercy that John Paul II and Benedict XVI would never have made and granted to him. For example, John Paul II and Benedict XVI made it clear that the Sacraments they administered were valid but illicit, while Francis I granted him the recognition of the lawfulness of the administered sacraments, which, as you well understand, was a thing of no small importance.
These people have always responded by biting the hand that was offered to them and above all obstinately denying the validity of an entire Council of the Church..
I therefore believe that certain errors arise from the goodness and perhaps from the certainty that these Popes had, that is, to receive on the other hand an attitude of devout gratitude.
Unfortunately this was not the case and, in the end, the Supreme Pontiff Francis had to acknowledge this and act accordingly.
Sorry I messed up and sent 2 post in an uncoordinated way I don't know if they appear one behind the other in order
comments were broken into several parts, with missing sentences at the end and impossible to stick together.
I recommend that you write the text again and submit it.
Good morning Father Ariel,
I honestly do not agree with the choice of the Holy Father, personally, I am more concerned about this choice to abolish the motu proprio of Benedict XVI and not to intervene with a firm hand on the abuses that occur in the celebration of masses in certain parishes. Unfortunately in this context I cannot post a photo that summarizes in a striking way what I have just said, it would give a very good idea of what is happening inside the Church. Personally, I continue to have the feeling that the current Pontiff is more committed to crushing any attempt to restore tradition and at the same time favoring the modernist drift. Pope Francis in fact in my opinion but not only, seems to be a modernist.
it's not that I don't want to answer you, is that I should just repeat myself for the third time.
If, in fact, the answers I have given to various readers who have intervened are flowing, you will see that I have already answered some questions similar to this one.
Then I make a copy / paste from another of these answers already given:
«[…] some people have long since forgotten that the Church is not a democratic parliament in which one can request proactive or abrogative referendums against the decisions of Peter and the Apostles who have received their power by Christ God himself ".
At this point, on the reigning Pontiff, they hear of all colors. Know that the Holy Pontiff Pius X defined Modernism as the synthesis of all heresies. She, giving the light heart of the modernist to the Supreme Pontiff Francis, it is saying in concrete facts that it is a receptacle for all the worst heresies.
Is this, he should figure it out for himself, it is not acceptable, because none of us has a power and a grace of state superior to that conferred on the Successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter to review and judge him up to these levels.
Think about it carefully, because she is in grave error.
Good morning Father Ariel.
Reading the just and worried comments on the objectively critical situation of our Church, sometimes I make the parallel on what one of the many people who followed Jesus and his people might have thought
after “disaster” objective that occurred starting from the evening of Our Lord's arrest.. I imagine the scene.. the guards arriving, Jesus who surrenders himself to an authority that today we would rightly define illegitimate e “undemocratic” without resistance, with blatantly false accusations, some tumult, and then when one expected a call to arms to deliver Jesus.. and instead nothing. Pietro (between the act of his best friend) who disown him several times in public, the apostles fleeing and hiding, and then? After a process that today we would define “farce”, with the betrayal of HIS people (even the Roman authority seems astonished). And finally his death sentence. In short, I believe that humanly (me first) a “follower” after these facts, maybe he will have returned home embittered, disillusioned and maybe even a little pissed off because he thinks he has been made fun of by this Jesus.. After two millennia we are still here watching the havoc they are doing to the Bride of Christ, humanly disappointed worried scared and pissed off. But our ways are not the ways that the Lord has chosen, and this time too (like always) we will have to trust Him
Bergoglio is a progressive / modernist
It is not an opinion ... it is an objective fact .
And to say that , as he is Pontiff , it must not be said that it is not ( even if in fact it is ) it seems to me a great hypocrisy .
Indeed an incomprehensible poke .
You say you are a theologian . All the more reason ...
I don't know if he was legitimately elected or not ( there are many clues in the negative : but we do not want to deepen ... and the doubt remains and is legitimate given the behavior of the Supreme Pontiff, true or presumed to be )
If it is legitimate I would like to know where the Holy Spirit was with His special assistance in numerous “papal situations (?)bergogliani ”net of Pachamamma , Abu Dabhi , etc., etc
If it is not legitimate, then everything is clear
But you feel confirmed in the faith by Bergoglio ... ?
Blessed are you…..
I and many Catholics ordinary people, even if we try hard, we do not feel confirmed but rather very, very confused ...( but I understand that there are so many ... too many ... even in the clergy ...)
It seems to me that the essence of Catholic Christianity is undermining it with a pickaxe….(you know very well too)
Blessed are you who are theologian ....
… no "lucky you who are theologian", lucky she is an idiot!
I share some statements from both Andrea and Anita
The basic discourse of what you want to say more or less I agree ( and believe me, there are so many who think so… inside and outside the Church )
The way you expressed it by addressing Father Ariel ( she who claims to be theologian / blessed are you who are theologian ..) it is very questionable , knowing then the temperament of Father Ariel what do you want me to send you a flower ??? The "titulo" of idiot was the least .... forgive me .
It is true that the Catholic Church is not a democracy ... but what is glimpsed and is increasingly taking shape is so serious it is incomprehensible that (by secular) there is a desire to self-suspend and no longer follow the hierarchy starting with the current Pontiff ... on which slowly, too, I am also beginning to doubt that it is an imposture ( I said doubt… not certainty )
Said this: from here to follow the Sicilian priest it takes some: the falsetto voices make me horrified.
The last: the famous miraculous water that is muddy and not drinkable.
The other day I watched a video where an archangel spoke through him who said that that water was made muddy by Satan ... and that God allowed it due to lack of faith.
If I find the video I post the link
What to say? Enough and advance to distance yourself.
Other: I don't think he's mentally disturbed. Between Bergoglio's Pachamamma (forgive me if I allow myself ... whether I am Supreme Pontiff or not ..) and the strange little voices of Minutella ... I don't know who is the worst.
Good evening Father Ariel,
regarding the Motu Proprio in question, this afternoon on the net I listened to a part of the broadcast of a pro-traditionalist Catholic site where the host of the Friars of the Immaculate Conception invited listeners to avoid blatant forms of rebellion by implementing a form of peaceful resistance against those Bishops unwilling to grant the old Rite. But this form of resistance is not already disobedience to the Bishop of Rome ?
Thank you in advance
this “pious” brother, if he expressed himself as you have illustrated – and so it will be expressed, because when she writes she reports things as they are – he can run the risk that the resistance he invokes will be made by the bishops when his superiors have friars to be ordained as priests. In fact, I doubt they agree to consecrate the priests of the fratacchioni formed for this kind of resistance after having solemnly professed the vow of obedience.
In fact, one resists sin, to the evil instincts of the heart, to the worst calls of our flesh, but we certainly do not resist what was established and ordered by the Supreme Ecclesiastical Authority.
In any case, it is not surprising, we are talking about a young and problematic religious congregation whose members dared to proclaim … motu them the dogma of Maria Coredemptrix, writing books on it, by giving lectures and above all by starting a cult of Maria Corredentrice never approved by the Church which until now has always refused to discuss the mere possibility of proclaiming that Marian dogma.
I think with this I have told you everything.
I understand that Clement V (Bertrand de Got) both lived between 1264 and the 1314, during the suppression of the Templars wanted by Philip the Beautiful, and not, as you say, In the 1600.
Father Ariel and Nobilissi Confreres and lay traveling companions,
I fear this subject will cause hordes of desperate housewives to unleash; those all house and church, than after struggling with the bra over the years 70, and pro il monokini in the years 80, now embody the true bulwarks in curlers of the Faith. Backed by fascinating “speakers”, from the very disciplined and fervent novices Father Ralph De Bricassar in turn dressed in a Talare “what does it do”, and by journalists / professors who flounder among the homophobe, the xenophobe, and the neurasthenic ciabattano making proselytes through the slogan I defend the Tradition, I said? That from today it will be very difficult for the ladies to restrain themselves from the indomitable mystifying mystical delirium that they will have for everyone.
The Pope will have to arm himself with every Holy Armor, and maybe even garlic and chilli. I foresee and already see Il Livore who is from the catechist's dining room denoaltri overflows from the web to our table, while accomplices and complacent Priests give stage and megaphone to the hormonal changes of the climacteric of the dear ladies, no longer needed, but master.
The grotesque and the caricatures in the Things of God, Dearest Father Ariel and Dearest Brothers and Companions, they make me contemplate and desire more and more to see the Most Holy Tremendous Face of the Judge unveiled.
on behalf of the Fathers de The Island of Patmos thank you for your comment, in which through that acute irony that comes from the wisdom gift of divine grace, he painted the tragic reality that all of us who intend to face and overcome this great test of faith are experiencing, before which hordes of screamers and screamers collapsed instantly, except to feel the most Catholic among Catholics.
A sincere thanks
The Holy Father showed, if proof were needed, who knows how to be extremely effective in repressing ecclesial realities that he believes “deviant”. According to her, because the same efficacy is not used to correct the famous Germanic synodal path and the like? We must think that this represents in his eyes a positive force for the Church?
I am not aware that he approved certain drifts of the German episcopate but rather that he recalled it several times even in the person of the president of the national episcopal conference.
However, I would like to tell you that often, when a parent decides to recall or punish a child, it happens that he pretends to be right and to come out clean from his mistakes by stating that his brother has made bigger mistakes and that therefore he is worse than him.
A me, sincerely, to a certain extent it is of interest to people in general, or whether of priests in particular, they commit sins worse and graver than mine – assuming that this happens – because I am too busy dealing with my sins and asking God for forgiveness, instead of comforting me by saying that others sin more and worse than me.
They are two weights and two measures as unfortunately very often happens. Gives 70 years now i “Progressives” are tolerated, when not explicitly supported. There are references to the German synodal journey, but then everything proceeds as before. The VO faithful are instead condemned to extinction. The neocats are recalled, but then in the end everything goes as usual (rather, it seems that someone wants to raise Hernandez to the honor of the altars). The Franciscans of the Immaculate (regarding which I agree with the observations of Father Ariel) they come instead “exterminated”. Two weights and two measures: it's obvious.
However more days go by, the more I am convinced that this motu proprio is not a happy choice and move. It would be if a serious Reform of the Reformation followed, but that probably won't happen. So this act will remain only as an attempt to eliminate an unwelcome component within the Church, characterized by a certain lack of charity and above all by a lack of will to solve a huge problem that has gripped us for more than 50 year old.
E’ it was a mnemonic mistake of mine, as I replied to the reader Daouda
It is a fact that, if a father punishes a son with a slap, and then puts it in the corner, and to the other he addresses a simple reproach seasoned with encouragement, another member of the family can only say that the faults of the first are far greater than those of the second.
Nothing to say.
But, anyone who questioned the authority of the father, will always make a major mistake.
I have known an army of parents who have been wrong with their children in many ways, but I never dreamed of emitting a single sigh. If I did, de facto removing the father of authority, I would have made a much worse mistake than hers, creating problems much worse than those created by the father.
You are really happy that Bergoglio is making life difficult for those who want the usual Holy Mass? Really forget that the Bulla “Where First” it is unreformable and that no one has the power to prevent the celebration of the Holy Mass according to the Latin rite?
See. Where First IV: “Therefore, so that everyone and everywhere adopt and observe the traditions of the holy Roman Church, Mother and Teacher of the other Churches, we order that in the churches of all the provinces of the Christian world (…) where according to law or custom it is celebrated according to the rite of the Roman Church, in the future and without time limits, the Mass, both the Conventual Cantata present the choir, is the one simply read in a low voice, it cannot be sung or recited in any other way than that prescribed by the order of the Missal published by Us; and that, although the aforementioned Churches, however exempt, benefited from a special indult of the Apostolic See, of a legitimate custom, of a privilege based on a sworn declaration and confirmed by the Apostolic Authority, and any other faculty.”
Si legga però anche Quo Prime XII:
“Nobody therefore, and in no way, with rash daring, allow yourself to violate and transgress this document of ours: faculty, statute, sorting, mandate, precept, concession, pardon, declaration, will, decree and inhibition. That if someone has the audacity to attack you, know that he will incur the indignation of almighty God and his blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
That Missal was given in 1570, while previously, For centuries, there have been dozens of missals and particular rites of the Holy Mass, that did not just change from congregation to monastic congregation, but even from monastery to monastery of the same congregation.
I believe no one, reasonably, can think that that earthenware head of a Galilean fisherman, such was Simon son of Jonah called Peter, came dressed in sacred vestments, from the cloak, escorted by cardinal-presbyters and cardinal-deacons dressed in copes and damask dalmatics, up under the seven steps of the altar while reciting: «Introibo altar Gods …».
You mention in your message two texts that unfortunately you are not really able to read and understand in their ecclesiastical-canonical lexicon, therefore he confuses them for dogmas of faith, perhaps placing them on the same level, if not above, of Christological dogmas.
The ecclesiastical-doctrinal-canonical lexicon of certain documents is full of expressions of the type … “And if anyone changes this rule, let him be anathema!».
But I fear you are unaware that the most holy missal of the most holy “always mass”, starting with the successor of St. Pius V, Gregory XIII, has been changed in total for 18 times. The Supreme Pontiff Urban VIII, just half a century after the promulgation of the Most Holy Missal of the Most Holy “always mass”, radically modified the rubrics and imposed a change in the celebrant's gestures during the Eucharistic Prayer. And come on by saying to follow …
In short, My dear, I'm afraid you are copying / pasting pieces of documents collected around the blogs, and then post them in his comments without understanding not only their meaning, but the history of the Church and liturgical reforms, which have been continuous and which have always gone hand in hand, in centuries, with pastoral needs.
it seems to me rather than with the subject of abuses in the context of the celebration of the ancient rite (that I don't know, but you obviously do) col, is throwing the baby along with the bathwater!
But then… what are Bergoglio and the modernists afraid of? What a nuisance that Holy Mass can give? But what a nuisance this gives you personally?
Dear Luca Guido,
let's start with a little’ of style, especially if you want to be faithful to the true and ancient Catholic tradition.
"Bergoglio" ceased to exist as such after he said "I acceptAnd made his name as Roman Pontiff known to the Cardinals: Francesco. Then we turn to him calling him Supreme Pontiff, Roman Pontiff, holy Father.
We will return to him as Jorge Mario Bergoglio on the occasion of his funeral services, to imply in this way that the pontificate is not an indelible and eternal sacrament like the priesthood or the fullness of the apostolic priesthood, it is a supreme office which ceases with death.
First of all, I have never argued and invoked the end of Popes for liturgical abuses, which have always existed and which will always exist in any form of rite, because they depend on man and his negative will, from his wrong relationship with the sacred thing. I just said and explained to some surreal romantics, convinced that first everything was spiritual, Mystic, adoring, sacral … that also with the most holy missal of the most holy “Mass of All Time” such serious abuses occurred that the Supreme Pontiffs sent letters of fire with severe reprimands to the clergy, while the diocesan bishops came to threaten to suspend to divinis the priests for the most serious cases. And this is a historical fact, without turning the words as I never said and expressed them.
We don't shoot then, please, around the topic, because if as I suppose she lives on earth, he should know well that in the circles that have made use of the granted faculty to celebrate with the The old rite of the Mass according to the provisions given in 2007 by the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, these painful and spiteful speeches have been heard for years:
1. I go to the real Mass which is only there “Mass of All Time”,
2. the Mass The old order it is the only valid Mass;
3. that of Paul VI is a Protestant missal that killed the sacredness of the Mass;
4. the liturgical reform destroyed the sense of the sacred;
5. all problems arise from the Second Vatican Council, called by many in these circles “the council”;
6. the reformed missal of Paul VI is a diabolical work of that Freemason of Annibale Bugnini;
7. etc… etc …
E, as she, all these people always and punctually referred to Modernism and the Modernists. Subjects who, among other things, I remember them, they were not born after the Second Vatican Council, but in the early twentieth century, precisely when it was celebrated and sanctified with the Missal of St. Pius V throughout the Orbe catholica.
All the speeches reported in the points above were not made by some loose dogs nor do they constitute isolated cases, quite the opposite: have constituted almost the practice in these circles that as soon as they had the use of that Missal in their hands they used it as a weapon against the liturgical reform and an entire Council of the Church.
Whenever you are priests, anything but of ultra-progressivism or, worse, modernism, they tried to scold them, I even, inviting them to ecclesial communion, not to insult an entire council and all the Supreme Pontiffs who have succeeded each other from after Pius XII to, they have always responded with arrogant confidence that “the usual Mass” it could not be removed. Of the series: now we can say what we want.
When many of my confreres, I even, they told him that concession, how it was done could be legitimately removed, they didn't listen. And this is not one, two or three isolated cases, but many, too many.
In 2012 the bishop of a diocese, knowing that I knew first of all the Latin and the historical-liturgical-theological structure of the ancient rite, he asked me if once a week I could celebrate for a group of faithful who had requested this celebration, also giving him an adequate catechetical formation over time on the meaning and profound sense of that venerable rite. After three weeks I returned to that bishop and told him that I refused to celebrate Holy Mass for a group of people who participated in that rite full of ideological malice towards the Church and its magisterium starting from 1965 following. A quel point – and only at that point – the bishop confided to me that before me he had commissioned two eighty-year-old priests, born and ordained priests with that rite with which they had celebrated until 1969, who, like me, had gone to him with a refusal to continue because of the attitudes of this group of people who, against the other, they neither accepted nor teachings nor corrections.
You can tell me back if you want as much as you want, but it is I who am a priest and it is I who have had to deal with this kind of human material, as happened to many bishops and many of my confreres who, departed with all the best intentions in 2007, they soon refused to celebrate with the The old rite of the Mass for groups of people who accused an entire council of the Church and all the popes as a modernist heresy, from John XXIII included, they had succeeded.
What I have told you is the world of reality.
When in full pandemic there was the first big one lockdown, people who cannot move to reach the place where it was celebrated “the usual Mass” they refused to go to the Holy Mass around the corner of the house, because it was not celebrated there “the usual Mass” which is the one and only valid, but the "Protestant Mass of Paul VI conceived by the Freemason Annibale Bugnini and by the modernists of the council", sadly they turned out to be very high in number.
So no bother, nor towards the The old rite of the Mass nor towards the Missal of St. Pius V, but if a large number of people meant, as they have shown, make use of a Missal and a Mass to despise the "modernist Church" and the "conciliar source of all evil", that Missal had to be taken from him. They did it later 14 year old. In my opinion too late, they should have done it sooner.
And anyone who wants to argue, do it on the merits, because faith is not built on emotional aesthetics, worse on blind ideologies.
She is right, father ariel, I too often got bored repeating that clause “Nobody dares to change…” is the clause of Sanctio, present in all papal documents, but which obviously is valid as long as another Pope does not decide to intervene. All this is studied in the Pontifical Diplomatics (not to be confused with diplomacy!).
Once in Gorizia almost twenty years ago I passed into a church where the old rite was celebrated and I stopped waiting for mass. The church was full of people, but waiting for the start of the mass that all these people were doing? He chatted as if in a theater while waiting for the show. No silence, no recollection. I'm going to Trieste. It seems to be a legacy of “very Catholic” Austria dei “very Catholic” Habsburg, which with Trieste left us one of the most secularized cities in Italy as early as the late nineteenth century. So let's stop fantasizing about sacred empires. And also – excuse me, father ariel! – by blaming the Savoy (who, if anything, were affected by the widespread mentality among anti-clerical nineteenth-twentieth-century politicians).
Thus, the rhetoric on the Good Times is removed, However, I remain of the opinion that the interventions needed today are very different and in different directions.
What a nice comment!
The amendment he mentions, Don Ariel, I believe it is that of Clement VIII in 1604 which he confused with the “If there is any” of Urban VIII of 1634.
Now…On balance, to be honest, understood that the modernist revolution of Pius X on the Roman Breviary of 1911 it had to entail the rewriting of part of the rubrics ( without forgetting the innovations in sacred music and the diatribe on “Gregorian question” revived in his pontificate ) that already distorted it, if we consider the suppressions of Pius XII of 1955 ( leaving out Holy Week ) , the pickaxe of the ancient Roman rite was already as good as it had happened.
All to say that the missal of the 1962 , otremodo, based on a code of the rubrics completely rewritten and revised in 1960, it is neither ancient nor obviously Tridentine!
Virtually all traditionalists are self-contradicting clumsily being innovators since the rite of 1962 it's more “ancient” than that of Paul VI just 7 year old.
Power of aestheticism and ideologism.
I believe that this passage from the holy Gospel of Matthew fits them well (23,29-32) in which the Lord said: “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!, who build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the tombs of the righteous, and say: -If we had lived in the time of our fathers, we would not have been accomplices in shedding the blood of the prophets…So you testify, against yourself, to be children of those who killed the prophets. Well, you fill the measure of your fathers!”
And, that's it, it was my mnemonic slip.
Don Ariel as a law I do not agree with you regarding the Pauline rite which in my opinion is meaningless, like that of 62 of course, which should lead us to discuss what reform is and what is invention ( which often proves to be also archeological and not just innovative ) but that does not mean that you are not right in cutting down on traditionalists in their various approaches and errors that you have expressed, and for which I sincerely thank, in defending these rituals in their sacramental efficacy and in demonstrating the reforms that took place in the Roman rite, on which I agree if only because it is reality.
It was clear that he was confused!
as I explained in my video lesson, the Missal of the Holy Pontiff Paul VI, hence the structure of the rite, it can be the subject of serene and legitimate critical discussions on the theological-liturgical and also on the pastoral level.
I am the first to reiterate in all respects that a liturgical reform was necessary and that it was initiated by the Venerable Pontiff Pius XII. But, on whether this reform, in the turbulent post-council season, has only ever produced good fruit, this is nothing short of a must to discuss, but above all to doubt the proof of the facts. And I tell you this as a presbyter and as a celebrant: before certain liturgical celebrations – sometimes bordering on real sacrilege – I've always been embarrassed to say the least.
Unfortunately, however, it is not the laity who go crazy from one blog to another who can make a necessary reform of the reform that I am convinced that we urgently need.
There are in fact two different kinds of dangerous ideologies: that of those who attempted to turn St. Pius V's Missal into a battlefield, that of those who consider the Missal of St. Paul VI to be perfect and untouchable, especially in the face of a crisis of faith with no historical precedent, given that this crisis strikes first of all the clergy and therefore the Church at its most profound interior.
However, those who think they can resolve this state of terrible decay by moving the hands of the clock to before the Second Vatican Council, they are truly guilty of pure idiocy. In fact, it would be like getting out of the car to go back to traveling on horseback.
They talk a lot about hiding, but if one day a holy mass were to be celebrated in such a condition, I doubt that even then they would appreciate such a bare and essential celebration. Bah.
A good evening!
well, perhaps it would have been more urgent to worry about the application of Sacramentum, rather than beat the followers of the old rite, erasing it as a sign of scandal. In fact, the omelette can very well be overturned: whether to restore the old rite is a sign of fracture, abolishing the old rite was also a breach. It follows that it does not make much sense to accuse only the “weathermessalists” to break the unity of the Church, which is not made only by the living faithful but also by those in the Hereafter.
Nor does it seem to me that Pope Francis cares much about rites: just look at how he reduced the pontifical masses, with parish songs! Unlikely to intervene against the abuses of the Ordo.
I am from 1973, so I only followed masses Novus WordO, but I have never understood what sense there is to demonize the past. If for centuries fine saints have sanctified themselves with that rite, I don't see what sense there is in believing that only with the new rite things will go magnificently. It seems to me only cheap progressivism. Of course, before, people often did not attend mass, many stood near the church door ready to run out at the first opportunity etc.. But there were also many simple people who followed her. E’ to them that you have to look, not to the Plinian pseudo-elites like Princess Pallavicini and company.
I gloss over that for many – you see Peace of Christ or many vaguely Christians – the Eucharist today is just a banquet in which anyone could participate, based on the axiom: we also invite others to participate so we celebrate together.
In the end, I find it pathetic to recall the letter from Pope Francis on the alleged failure to implement the Second Vatican Council. That council ended in 1965, today we are in 2021: to believe that it is current is pathetic. It is also the fruit of time, of a period of superficial optimistic progressivism then shipwrecked already in the seventies between violence and mass hedonism and in the self-demolition of the Catholic world.
Today's problems must be faced with a new spirit and mentality, not with the remnants of the Sixties in a rahnerian-Jesuit sauce (the melloniana).
Dear father Ariel, until a nice discussion with the Idol Melloni? Then yes we would see thunder and lightning. Unless you respect Melloni because he too criticizes Father Livio of Radio Maria ... ?
I have a booklet with the mass in Italian, printed in the late 1960s!
It seems like another mass if we refer to today's Italian mass!
From change to change there will be nothing left…
I have a text which contains the Mass that was celebrated in the 9th and 10th centuries in the Carolingian age. E’ one of the many missals, because every diocese, each abbey, each monastery had its own missal and rite.
These rites looked like just another Mass, with respect to the unitary Missal given to the whole Church in 1570 da San Pio V.
You listened to my video lesson?
I'm afraid not, because in it I explain, with rigor and historical criteria that cannot be denied, the most holy Missal of the most holy “always mass” unchanging for ever and ever, given in the sixteenth century by San Pio V, it has been changed over the centuries for well 18 times, starting with the Successor of Saint Pius V.
Perhaps even at the time someone will have said that "from change to change there will be nothing left"
I also make another consideration.
In my opinion, the basic problem is not Latin or Italian, but the total lack of training, instruction, knowledge e, after all, faith.
the, for many years, I heard the priest repeat “pray brothers and sisters so that this sacrifice of mine and yours is pleasing to God….” Good. Although this sentence was in Italian, I assure you that I have never understood it. I heard it uttered by the priest, and I answered “may the Lord receive this sacrifice from your hands…” But if anyone asked me, what it means? I would have answered, I do not know. No one has ever explained it to me. If I was asking anyone around me, he replied “bo, it is said so because it has always been said so”. This is. Not to mention the creed. “God from God, light from light, True God from true God”. Good. Sentence in Italian. But what does it mean? Bo. For years and years I have repeated it without absolutely understanding what it meant. This is.
I am grateful to you for your comment, she understood everything and summarized it all in a few lines.
I can only answer that in any case the faithful are perpetually complaining, unblemished, sin and responsibility, they already go into a rage on Sunday if the homily exceeds 7/8 minutes, imagine if one invites them – as has been done, repeatedly and many times – to participate in catecheses where the meaning of the words of the Holy Mass is explained, there is the risk of meeting the parish priest's mother and the sacristan as the audience.
The faithfuls – I repeat without blemish, sin and responsibility – they are too busy complaining about the Church and the priests.
Here you go 40 minutes of lecture in which I explain only the concept of «Light from light, True God from true God ".
I cannot do more than this. I can only tell you that though, the cathedrals, with the bishops seated complacently in the front row, were filled when a notorious heretic of the caliber of Enzo Bianchi was invited and went up on the pulpits to enunciate the most absurd heresies of return.
Andrea, “For years and years I have repeated it without absolutely understanding what it meant”. But then he understood it, and if he has understood it, it is because he already knew it in his heart. Like the drop that digs the stone, those repeated words slowly brought back to the heart (to remember) eternal wisdom. Without that hard core of faith not even a theoretical physicist would have been able to understand. Our grandparents with at most the third grade, maybe they didn't know how to repeat it, but they knew everything about God (or at least enough), even without knowing it. But think of those who never went to mass.
I feel the same sense of bitterness as Attilio and Antonello. father ariel, you know why I liked the S so much more. Mass in the ancient Roman rite of the Novus Ordo? Because, after a long time, I have heard homilies that spoke of an unearthly destiny and exhorted to aspire to Heaven. Also I was able to hear some beautiful songs that I had never heard: per es. the Kyrie of the angels e “I'll go see her one day”. Do you think a parish priest of mine, Years ago, he talked about the price of oil and tomatoes in relation to the problem of underpaid work. However, I changed my mind when I saw an S. Novus Ordo Mass celebrated by a Trappist monk: simple, essential and with an appropriate homily
I too noticed the ignorance of certain traditional priests, who missed one accent after another, also because they read at the speed of light (I never understood why).
We hope that the reform of the reform advocated by Benedict XVI will bear better results.
Excuse the long outburst and thanks.
thank you too for this nice comment.
I want to say, to you and to the other Readers, that I too feel bitterness, certainly more than you, because I experience certain situations from the inside, as a presbyter, in a very close relationship with the other confreres, but above all with the bishops, of which we are close collaborators subjected in the communion of obedience to solemn promises.
In short, other than oil and tomatoes, I know parish priests who, when the warm weather arrives, I move to the sea to sunbathe, rowing and so on, showing up in their parishes on Sundays, arriving two minutes before Mass and escaping two minutes later to return the following week.
I know priests who speak of ecology and respect for nature – thing in and of itself right – after having forgotten, however, that the pollution against which we must fight is sin, being we doctors set up for the salvation of souls.
When every now and then stay in south-eastern Sicily, where before becoming a priest I bought myself a place to stay, I happen to be the object of jokes – obviously behind, is intende, certain things if they said them to my face they would start slapping them instantly! – from the disastrous local clergy who mock me because with the heat of the high temperatures I wear the white cassock, instead of being ashamed of themselves and their indecent sloppiness, when certain priests show up in church with knee-length shorts, flip-flops and a colorful T-shirt, if not even with the tank top. In these sea areas no one has ever seen me, I don't mean sunbathing or bathing among people, but no one has ever seen me even with a short-sleeved shirt. And if every now and then I want to take a bath, together with my collaborator we go to some very isolated place where there is no one and where I take the liberty of taking a bath without anyone seeing me.
This lifestyle and many other things, they are due to the formation that I received at the time from holy priests, in addition to the fact that my priesthood was born from a radical choice of life in adulthood, having become a forty-year-old priest. Something very different from the baby boy released in 25 years priest from a seminary with the conviction: “… now I am a priest and I do what I want”.
These are just a few examples to say that everything starts, has climbed, from the formation of priests, not a few of which have been lost, through their fault or bad training received, the sense of the sacred and of the decorum, but above all the solidity of the doctrine. So here it is, Consequently, priests who transform the liturgy into show, in their personal shows, where narcissism and the “creativity” of the celebrant often ranges between the grotesque and sacrilege.
Faced with this reality, that I have never hidden and that in fact I have always criticized and condemned making me ill-tempered by confreres and bishops completely devoid of balls and unable to manage certain situations with decisive authority, I understand the reaction of many faithful who in the face of a silent one, decent and participatory Holy Mass celebrated with the The old rite of the Mass, they feel reborn.
In good conscience, however, I can assure you that since 2010, at the time I was serving in an ancient Roman basilica, several people who were used to participate in the Missa Old Ordo and who participated in my celebration of the feria in the early morning – celebration that never lasted less than 40/45 minutes – one by one they came to tell me that they understood that the Italian or Latin language did not matter, or the Missal of St. Pius V or St. Paul VI, but the sacred devotion with which the priest celebrated Mass.
Recalled repeatedly by the rector of the basilica according to which a mass of the feria could not last more than 15 minutes maximum, I was finally called by the prelate secretary of the Vicariate, who asked me with clerical and unctuous irony: «How long do you take to celebrate the Mass of the feria?». I replied: "I answer you in the same way as Padre Pio of Pietrelcina answered to an apostolic visitor who asked him the same question complaining about its length: “I did not know that they had put the clock on Mount Calvary!”».
I know where the problems come from and where they arise.
Unfortunately often – as many comments from certain readers also demonstrate – people who experience certain hardships find nothing better to do than assume aggressive and critical-destructive attitudes towards presbyters like me, aware of the serious defects and decadence that now envelops the clergy. These subjects refuse to bow to any invitation to reason, they rise to teachers and judges, they act out of pure emotional impulses e, when you try to make them think by making them understand how things really are and how they should react and act correctly, in response, tankers of shit are thrown on you.
To really be a priest, how the priest should be done, today more faith and courage are required than was required during the most bloody persecutions, place today, our worst persecutors, they are certain committed and militant Roman Catholic apostolic laicons, than what they said “I think that … in my opinion …” with that they said it all, with all that disastrous that follows.
Un bel colpo mortal al Sovereign Pontiffs. And then problem solved? I do not think so, because in the majority of the churches we will continue to attend imaginative Eucharistic celebrations if not “gruesome”, with embarrassing and faithful songs more and more confused and badly educated by the bad example of certain pastors. On this serious problem (apart from a brief mention in the letter of Pope Francis' motu proprio) I do not think there is the will to put a hand with one “reform of the reform” of the liturgy that also recovers the lost preciousness of the old liturgy, including Gregorian. This motu proprio produced only two effects: to make ultra-progressists happy and nasty “traditionalists”. As I said I would have understood if it had been accompanied by a reform of the N.O liturgy. But none of this on the horizon, at least for now (in a hundred years?).
Ps. It would have been nice to see the same harshness and severity used by the pope also towards the “synodal journey” German or to certain James Martin-style priests who sow confusion in Christ's flock, but maybe there we would go to the area “untouchable”…
if he reads the different answers given to the other Readers, he will also find you answers to these questions of his.
Good morning Father Ariel,
with a lot of sympathy, reading his interventions, and her answers often come to me from comparing her to the character of Don Camillo created by Guareschi.
Even now rereading those books in which it tells of a “small world” that is no longer there (if it ever really existed) I feel a sense of envy for when things were in their complexity “simple”. Black was black, white white, the presbyters were presbyters and not sociologists, psychologists, economists, environmentalists and the faithful did not teach biblical exegesis from the virtual pulpit of the gods social network.
The reason for this parallel with fiction and cinematography is easy to say: I may or may not share some of your views (when it comes to questionable things), it makes me smile for the many colorful expressions used (Don Camillo used his hands as shovels) ma, just as I would never attempt to challenge a theoretical physicist when he talks about quantum mechanics, I can only have an attitude of listening when he makes his own Lectio. Perhaps it is because we are in an era in which the thought of crowds of idiots is given the same value as the Philosophical and Theological thought of two thousand years of Christian history… Ma …
keep it up Father Ariel, force us to read, reflect and reason, maybe even to get angry, but always with a smile.
not everyone is able to grasp my innate sense of paternity which is part of the sacrament of grace of the priestly consecration received. In fact, the precept of the Decalogue which imposes "honor the father and the mother" should be applied to priests.. And sometimes, the parents, they must of necessity also be strict.
Especially when I'm dealing with young and very young people, I try to make them feel the paternity of a parent who dispenses their life through the sacraments of grace. If in fact the parents gave them life, we have given them our life first of all with Holy Baptism.
Some of my confreres are wrong when they do – as she says – in sociology, psychologists, economists, environmentalists … Wrong to do i “companions” of the there are children.
I who am not yet decrepit (I accomplish 58 years next month) and that I became a teenager in the mid-seventies, I always remember the venerable and sacred image of certain priests and parish priests, at the time between 55 e i 70 year old, who looked after their oratories and their young people like the most precious pearls of their pastoral and priestly casket. And the priests did it, not the companions of the there are children.
If the boys from the parish went to the pizzeria on Saturday night, the parish priest certainly did not come with us. Less than ever – unthinkable! – he went with the boys and girls to bathe and sunbathe at the sea between jokes and jokes. But, Sunday morning, he was in church waiting for us. During the week he gathered the young people, he gave us catechesis, with the nuns he instructed us in singing, to liturgical decorum and sacred respect during sacred celebrations.
I remember, for instance, when as children the nuns took us to the summer camp in July. And I remember in those situations the visit of the parish priest. We are not in prehistory, but over the years 1970/1971, when I had 7/8 year old. Indelible and unforgettable is the image of the parish priest who arrived on the beach under the sun dressed in his black cassock.
And I, who suffer from the heat, know what it means to wear a black cassock in the sun at certain temperatures, to well consider that I always carry it, contrary to those confreres who, to wear one, they are waiting for them to be given a red gift, otherwise they never wear it, the black one. Of course, in particularly hot places, when during the summer I stay in areas of our country ranging from Naples down to the extreme tip of Sicily, I wear the white robe.
These priests of my youth, who had total care for the children, of the very young and the young, they have never given any sign of a worldly spirit. Always available from morning to evening, but always in their place. Always available in the parish, always available for confessions, for spiritual direction, for an interview. And they went to bring Holy Communion to the sick, not the pious woman, with all respect for pious women. And when the parish priest passed on the street with the surplice and the stole over the cassock and his hands crossed on his chest where he carried the case with the Blessed Sacrament, even those who were sitting in front of the club of the Italian Communist Recreational Association got up from their chairs and took off their hats with the excuse of greeting the parish priest. Others, On the road, they made the sign of the cross and bowed.
Today, not a few priests, they go to the clubs with the there are children or to the sea to swim, sometimes even in discos. But, if you look for them for a confession they tell you to make an appointment, if you need to talk to them they tell you they don't have time. They do not go to bring Viaticum to the sick because they are overburdened with unspecified pastoral commitments, there are so many pious women … or they tell you they are busy preparing lectures, seminars, in short, very intellectual things.
When I became a priest, from the time of my formation I had very clear many models of priestly life to inspire me, or to the memories of which to honor as much as possible with my priestly life.
But if today, to one of these several aLLEGED trendy you admonish him by saying that it is pathetic of him to be the companion of the over forty year olds there are children, or if you explain that if i there are children they want brigade and party mates, certainly not if they choose them from among the priests, or to finish that, with some of his attitudes as an immature priest, he really broke my balls, at that point he screams scandal because you swear and are vulgar. He who goes out with a group of young people at two in the morning from a nightclub no, he is not vulgar, it is absolutely right, indeed, he has just finished a demanding and exhausting pastoral activity. And if after having seen the photos of the Reverend Mr. Parish published on social media , with him on the beach playing a fool in a tight bathing suit, or doing the little train in the water with the boys and girls, someone like me takes it and intimates it: «… great dickhead, you are a disgrace of the Sacred Priestly College!». At that point he goes to whine to his bishop for an attack of treason and begins to shout to send my bishop a letter of protest, claiming my head served on a plate like that of the Baptist, placed among other things that unfortunately, not a few of these priests, more than Herods, they are menstruating Herodias, mother of that little look of Salome. And the bishop of such a priest, confirming himself more deficient than his priest, instead of making it black from head to toe for the trains on the beach with the tight-fitting swimsuit, or for posting shirtless on social while he was biting into lobsters, please go along with him and send the requested letter, fulfilling the dickhead I mentioned earlier with courtly ecclesiastical language that is very curial and refined.
My faith will survive even death, while inside the coffin I wish to be placed with my cassock, dressed in red liturgical vestments, sign of my passion for Christ and his Church. And to the earth, together with my corruptible body, my balls will also be entrusted, those who have served me all my life to be a priest these days. Because that's the problem: seminarians are made to take admission tests to the seminary with psychologists – and it is not clear why mainly with psychologists – but no one bothered to make him do a thorough urological examination, many are precisely the balls needed to be a priest today, nowadays, in this society and in a world that seems to be marching towards disaster.
E’ really necessary to swear? Of course not, but first of all it is necessary to evaluate how and why they are said. I have also long ago discovered that certain phrasebooks are the best way to bring out the modern Pharisees and to make the High Priest tear his clothes in anger within the Great Sanhedrin.
Better not think about it, otherwise it might be tempting to say: the Word became incarnate, two thousand years have passed, but we haven't changed in a single sigh. And if all goes well, on the day of doomsday, he will find us as he left us after his death, resurrection and ascension to heaven.
Dear Father Ariel,
I think you are too optimistic, humanity compared to 2000 years ago it got worse, I dare not imagine when the Parousia will come, if it is not really close…
I greet with affection
Gent.mo p. Ariel,
let me say in the introduction that my speech has no provocative intent, but it is only a request for help in my understanding, which I find myself forced to doubt.
As I mentioned in my first comment on this post, the Motu Proprio is presented as an act of abrogation of the Missal of 1962. I drew this conviction from the apodictic and absolute affirmation of Article 1 that "The liturgical books promulgated by the Holy Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in accordance with the decrees of the Second Vatican Council, are the only expression of the law of prayer of the Roman Rite ". In this perspective, disciplinary reasons in relation to conduct contrary to the unity of the Church would therefore not be relevant, since here we are not faced with a simple ban on the use of the old Missale, nor an indefinite suspension of the Popes, what would make the celebration in the The old order only illegal, ma, of an act that would render it invalid, because it no longer conforms to the profession of faith of the Church of Rome; and this even in conformity with the decrees of the Council (that, in parentheses, not only do I struggle to identify, but also to imagine that they may have implicitly sanctioned such a dramatic discontinuity between the pre and post Council).
Basically the Motu Proprio it would state that with the Council there is no longer the Church as before, a new one was born. You share my fear?
Good will be Don Ariel, I always try to read his articles to learn something.
Regarding this fact of the Messa vetus ordo I bear my testimony.
I was born in 1981 and I have never seen mass in that rite except in old movies or in my poor grandmother's missal until Pope Benedict put it back into effect, so I'm not a nostalgic in the proper sense.
But since I have seen and attended Mass in the old form I have discovered a treasure of unspeakable preciousness’ and this regardless of whether it is celebrated with baroque ornaments, to follow it well in the end it is enough to have a bilingual missal. I understand your objections to the needs in mission land, but it was not enough to translate the prayers and readings into national languages, leaving unchanged that venerable ritual that makes us feel so close to God and his majesty’ and that it evangelizes by itself more’ of any speech? If one compares the two rites, realizes very well that they are not supported by the same mentality and therefore it is clear that they cannot be considered two forms of the same rite. Here in my opinion lies the drama and the breaking point between the two ways of understanding worship. I have no doubts that the same Sacrifice of Christ is celebrated in the two rites, but throwing away the old use I'm not convinced is a good thing. Maybe I say stupid things and if it were I apologize.
I greet you and the other Reverend Fathers, wishing you all the best.
it is not always easy to make people understand the difference between an aesthetic-emotional attraction, which may be legitimate, and an authentic and profound experience of faith.
When during the First World War (1915-1918) the Missal of St. Pius V was in effect, it happened that the chaplain, before the start of a battle, celebrated Holy Mass inside the trench, of necessity quickly, with a stole thrown over her dusty, mud-stained camouflage suit. And shortly after, many of those soldiers, especially young people, they were no longer in this world, several lay corpses on the ground. There were no sumptuous vestments, decorous solemnity, poignant Gregorian chants and so on to follow. There was a desire to be able to acquire the salvation of the soul.
What we have noticed over the years with the use of the Missal of St. Pius V granted by Benedict XVI, especially in the young and the very young, is that towards this ancient rite there was an aesthetic-emotional attraction.
I'm not saying that's his case, be clear, nor can I say it because I don't know her, of course.
And in the face of these things it was necessary to run for cover, because it is certainly not with the aesthetic-emotional sense that we can oppose the bongos and guitars of the rowdy Neocatechumenals or the spectacle priests who transform the Holy Mass of their show personal.
Rev., he is right in this. While writing my comment I was thinking of the chaplains who celebrated in the trenches as they could and this is precisely what I was thinking when I said that that venerable rite has its own sublimity’ even without a sumptuous surround decor.
With this I am not saying that the new rite is not solemn and mystical in its own way, as you rightly say it would be enough to start celebrating it with such awareness, and there are certainly priests who do. Only in fact, ordinarily we all see how often he chooses, how to sing and how to stay in church including myself. Let's say that the vetus ordo is celebrated serenely, without fans and without rancor, it could certainly have been an excellent school, especially for us laymen. At least for me it is and maybe this could be there’ intent of Pope Benedict. What then in fact there’ having put the old rite back into use has been transformed into what you describe well is certainly true and the crawl space that stands up when talking about this topic proves it.
Let me father one of mine “I think” and he will forgive me if I express it: sometimes I had the opportunity to participate in the new mass, which for me is the mass I know best, celebrated on the altars of the previous form. I don't know if it's d’ agreement with me, but this already greatly changes the perception that one has of the rite that gains in meditation both in the celebrant and in the faithful. But certainly the heart counts more in the eyes of God than the external forms when these are lived with an ill-disposed soul.
Maybe I'm wrong, anyway thanks for the’ Attention.
No, dear Giordano, he is not wrong at all.
I'll tell you this with an exhaustive example: once, invited to celebrate Holy Mass in a parish, I found myself with a desk not even placed in front of the old altar, but in the center of the church. This desk would have been the altar (!?).
I told the parish priest: “Or you make me celebrate at the old altar, or I'm leaving. Because on a desk placed in the center of the church I don't celebrate Holy Mass.
And I celebrated at the old altar.
The objective limit of Benedict XVI was to put back in “free use” the old missal without caring decisively and, if necessary, with severe authority, to order the bishops to put in line the priests who transformed the Holy Masses into theaters.
And so, rather than solving the problem of liturgical sloppiness and abuses that they know well, Benedict XVI has created two parties in bitter conflict with each other, all precisely on the liturgy which is the center of the unity of the Church. And this turned out to be a mistake not because I say so, but because the facts prove it. Starting with the worst fact ever: a lot of – I am not saying a few but many – in an arrogant and violent way they used the Missal of St. Pius V against a Council of the Church, the liturgical reform and the papacy.
And this is a fact, linked to cases that are anything but isolated.
I invite you to carefully read both the motu proprio be the letter with which the Supreme Pontiff presents him to the bishops, because it explains in a precise and severe way the intolerable abuses that are made with the Missal of St. Paul VI.
From this we can deduce that shortly, after this motu proprio, will certainly take cover as regards the liturgical abuses made with the universal Missal in use since 1970. By now knowing the way of acting of the subject in question, personally I am almost certain.
All very clear. I find it true that there are emotional exaggerations in both “factions” we all have emotions, it is enough to know how to put a stop to them when they are too excessive and here it is sometimes difficult. However, I believe that, exaggerations aside, the road to follow is still the one indicated by Pope Benedict: a recovery of elements that are essentially inherent to tradition: l’ orientation of liturgical prayer for example. I see too much difference between the way of celebrating in the old rite compared to the new one, a change of forms too great and I fear that this has done more harm than good, also exacerbating the contrasts. L’ the example you offered only confirms this distancing: the sacral function of space is no longer understood, so much so that l’ altar can also stand in the nave or in any case outside the presbytery which would not be its place, as Cranmer did in his time in England. And these similarities are also found in the fact of using not stone altars but profane tables, abuses certainly but that have passed a clear message: from now on we distance ourselves from what we did before to welcome other ways of doing things that are better than the old ones.
These are well-known things.
We hope for good and for peace in the Church of God that things will be set right as soon as possible by recovering, I believe necessarily, at least the traditional elements that connote the most genuine tradition of the Latin church.
Thanks for the replies.
for years I have hoped that as soon as possible they will have the determination and the courage to put their hand to what Benedict XVI indicated as a necessary reform of the reform.
In my video lesson proposed here I explain in no uncertain terms the limits of the liturgical reform born of Holy Council.
Unfortunately, by not a few bishops and priests, the real ideology took over and in the course of his pontificate, the meek and weak Benedict XVI, he did not dare to act of authority, knowing to irritate a good slice of the episcopate and the clergy.
In certain situations, however, it is necessary to act with authority, holding up and undergoing all the consequences. Characteristically, Benedict XVI was unable to handle everything, I believe his Successor does, Why, if it takes a road, do not give up. And if someone opposes it in a more or less open or devious way, is able to blow his head off from evening to morning.
Paradoxically, the Supreme Pontiff Francis who does not shine in his art celebration and which often demanded that the pontifical apparition almost border on sloppiness in the purely external apparatus, might be the one suitable for making one reform of the reform, the series: so do you, and that's.
but basically to be honest, may be that “the priests to be lined up” and which transformed the Holy Masses into “theaters” came after Vatican II.
I ask the question without controversy. However, I notice a certain difference between the faithful and priests from the SSPX and SSP on the one hand and the sloppiness of the modernists on the other.
Then… but you really want to defend the 60s′ e 70′ with all the confusion brought both in scope let's say “mundane” that “religious”?
And I, without controversy, I reply that you seem to have launched to comment on the comments without having bothered to listen to my video lesson which lasts 58 minutes and in which I make an articulated exposition. For this I would sincerely ask you: but what are we talking about, comments to comments?
In my video lesson I explain, with historical rigor, ecclesiastical acts and documents, including threats of suspension to divinis for priests, than at the time in which for some, with the most holy missal of the “always mass”, everything was mystical, spiritual, adoring … there were priests – and not a few! – that in 7/8 minutes they celebrated the Mass of the feria skipping whole parts of the most holy missal of the “Mass of All Time”. There were priests who, with the Missal of St. Pius V, they made liturgical abuses to make the most rowdy Neocatechumenals of the early Eighties pale.
But since she didn't listen to my video lesson, as you can tell from the questions he is asking, he launches into the comments to the comments by asking questions to which I answered in my articulated exposition.
I am not a follower of the S.. Mass celebrated with the Missal of 1962, however argue that: “But nevertheless I am saddened by an instrumental use of the Missale Romanum del 1962, more and more characterized by a growing rejection not only of the liturgical reform, but of the Second Vatican Council, with the unfounded and unsustainable claim that he betrayed Tradition and the "true Church",
it seems to me a stretch aimed at making a bundle of all the grass in order to obtain results that appear to me more ideological than liturgical.
to these questions, I replied under other comments to which I refer you, otherwise I would have to repeat in vain what I have already written to other readers in response.
I apologize but I read them later; I must say that, albeit with some reservations perhaps due to a bad understanding on my part, I share them.
However, what arouses death perplexity in me is the sentence that precedes the one I have reported: “I am equally saddened by the abuses of one side and the other in the celebration of the liturgy. Like Benedict XVI, I too stigmatize that "in many places the prescriptions of the new Missal are not faithfully celebrated, but it is even understood as an authorization or even as an obligation to creativity, which often leads to deformations to the limit of the bearable "”.
Worse are those who used the VO against the CEVII or those who used the CEVII and the NO to give free rein to their creativity?
After a night of painful reflections I would like to ask you three questions:
1. If gross limitations are placed on the VO for the abuse of some,
because the same is not done with the NO due to the abuse of others?
2. If the problem is Latin, why not celebrate the VO in Italian (or other local language)?
3. You are absolutely sure that the aversion to the VO is not due to the ideological aversion to the Holy Mass as a memorial of the saving sacrifice of the Son for the redemption of humanity?
I answer by order:
1. for decades the Holy See and many diocesan bishops have called priests to be faithful and adherent to the Roman Missal without adding or removing anything in an arbitrary way and avoiding abuses that "make the liturgy, living center of the unity of the Church, personalistic and unstable ". Under the pontificate of St. John Paul II an Instruction was promulgated which still exists today, not a few priests, continue to disregard. I refer to the Sacramentum.
2. I don't think Latin is, or that it has never been a problem, given that it continues to be the official language of the Church today. Language used – and you must make use of it – when Masses are celebrated with priests who concelebrate and come from different countries and languages, with faithful of the most diverse nationalities and languages participating in the sacred celebration. Not to mention the official documents of the Church, which have always been written, all ’ today, in Latin and then translated into various languages. The problem – and I tell you this from very direct experience – are those faithful, alas not a few, who consider Latin a kind of magical language able to make the Mass more Mass, except not being able to translate even a line of the Missal.
3. No, no aversion. To affirm this would mean not knowing exactly the text of the Missal translated into the various languages, where the term “sacrifice” which indicates the foundation of the Holy Mass, it is repeated several times in the Eucharistic Prayers, just take the Missal and read it, to see how the accent is placed, in a clear and precise, on the sacrificial-saving element.
1. I agree, but I have the impression that, to the ears of some, the reference to “Sacramentum” sounds almost like an attack on ecumenism and freedom of conscience (consecration done together with some women priests… “I don't say the Creed because I don't really believe in it”… a similar Our Father on the notes of “Sound of Silence” in place of the Our Father of the Missal… )
2. That Latin is considered by some to be a magical language is indisputable.
3. Discussing with Fr P. Muroni (one of the editors of the new Missal), I found it in agreement with the fact that too many S. Masses NO seem more like a convivial meeting than the Memorial of the Sacrifice of our salvation; an example for everyone: the sign of Peace after the consecration understood as a reconciliation between the faithful and not the public proclamation that our true and only Peace is present on the Altar under the species of bread and wine.
I agree with Attilio.
It is not a joyful day today. The beauty of the ancient rite dominates the new. Today the Church has again lost something precious. However, the debate on the liturgy must continue because it does not work as it stands. Also too many things got lost in the transition from The old order al Ordo. A reform done quickly and not having a transcendental feeling, but following the fashions of the moment.
I understand that the of the chief priests it has often been used to fuel controversy over the illegitimacy of the NO and the unreliability of conciliar documents. So it's okay to practically ban the VO. But the debate and the search for a refinement of the NO must continue. In the meantime, why not reduce the Eucharistic prayers? What is the need to have so many? On the contrary, I propose that we return to a single Eucharistic prayer: the first.
What I have written does not exclude the fact that the Novus Ordo cannot be as beautiful, sacral, deep, touching.
I wish you to attend a Mass celebrated by Fr Vincenzo Nuara OP and it happens what I'm talking about.
I do not doubt it, also because I myself know how to celebrate with that Missal and I do well what he means. But, as already I said, the sacred liturgy is also an instrument of evangelization and salvation. So we cannot reason and inter-act as if in 2021, the church, was always an eminently European phenomenon with faithful coming from all countries of Latin stock and culture. There are peoples belonging to cultures and languages to which, Latin as a liturgical and prayer language, it is unthinkable. As if we were to participate in liturgies celebrated in Chinese or Indian languages, then pray in those languages.
Dear Father Ariel, I am ignorant on the subject but behind the motivation of the Summorum Pontificum there can simply be no other than the ‘ love of Pope Benedict xvi for the ancient rite, respect for communities of the faithful who
they loved the’ ancient rite and that were derided, mocked, I would dare to say hated by the overwhelming majority of the faithful and above all by the hierarchy. I believe that the Pope really thought that there was room for everyone in the Church. The failure of this initiative and now Pope Francis' decision to effectively eliminate l ‘ the ancient rite once more sanctioned that the Church is more divided and fragmented than ever. I read some comments on the web and how c’ it was to be expected many rejoice over the decision , perhaps taking advantage to make a veiled mockery of Pope Benedict, others are furious and even more consider Pope Francis an arrogant tyrant if not an impostor, (c) ‘ it is the one who then accepts the decision but with enormous suffering, but wondering how a Pope can eliminate a rite thanks to which, according to them, generations of faithful had sanctified themselves, all, however, while they survive eg i “riti neocatecumenali”, some of the latter affirmed with pain that he will no longer go to church…I do not know, Father Ariel seems to me that even this story will end up deepening the division in the Church, other than heal it,I fear that it will end as with the dialogue towards the lbgtq with invitations to the leaders to even give conferences, appointment of members close to them as consultors not to mention the’ Agreement with the…
I know very well that it is hard to abandon the «in my opinion … I think that … I read that …», to follow the teachings and directives given by the Church through the supreme authority of Peter.
But the real tests of faith are these. Even if some do not even realize it, they are so busy taking refuge in the emotional and personalistic: "I think that … in my opinion … I read that …».
Ever since I became a priest, I have always done the opposite of what I thought or imagined I could do, because the Church has asked me for completely different services from those I assumed I could perform.
And I never said no.
“Butter” lay faithful, on the other hand, live with no on your lips, expressed in a more or less polite way: «…I think that … in my opinion … I read that …».
I too have read. To be exact, I read an Apostolic Letter given in the form of motu proprio, what does it mean “of their own authority”.
And before a provision given by the Roman Pontiff of his own authority, I who am a man of true and profound faith, a devoted Catholic and a priest of Christ, I would never dare utter a sigh, because I have only one duty: obey the authority of Peter.
Instead we have to attend yet another theater of: «…I think that … in my opinion … I read that …».
And some call it as well “authentic Catholic faith”. E’ this is where the real paradox lies.
Just to know: there is no 'Neocatechumenal rite', the Eucharist which is celebrated on the first Sunday Vespers, it is completely NO
I have already partially replied to her after Attilio Sacco's comment, with whom I see that it shares wise balance and profoundly Christian expressions.
As I explain in my video lesson, the liturgy reform did not succeed particularly well because the Holy Council it is a document that draws general lines in order to then implement a liturgical reform. And in the after, that is, in the implementation, many things have gone wrong, with the consequences that we have under our eyes today: if we take 10 priests we will find that they celebrate the Holy Mass in 10 different ways. This is definitely terrible, unacceptable.
Honestly, I have always believed that Benedict XVI was blatantly wrong in this, victim of his inborn weakness and poor governance. He shouldn't have, indeed, put the Missal of St. Pius V back into circulation, but rather to proceed with a reform of the liturgical reform, if anything, taking back several newborns thrown away in a hurry – during the great euphoria of the seventies – together with water that is anything but dirty.
Since he did not have the character and government strength to stand up to certain consortiums that, technically, we could call “progressive” O “ultra progressive”, did, in my humble opinion, the most wrong choice, putting two missals in the hands of subjects who have changed the The old rite of the Mass in an intolerable state of perennial conflict.
The results that the Motu Proprio Benedict XVI's produced over the years have been bad, beyond the will of the great theologian pontiff who in a naive way to say the least tried to harmonize and make opposites and opposites coexist together without entering into conflict.
If it weren't for the objectively disastrous results, if not, the reigning Pontiff, his predecessor is still alive, he would never have given the Apostolic Letter published today.
Regarding the Eucharistic Prayers, I can tell you that I have never used the II. I use the III, which contains, among other things, a beautiful prayer of suffrage for the dead, or I (or Roman canon). When there are young people or children in church and a precise preface is not required, I use the IV, which has its own preface and which is an authentic catechesis that starts from the creation of the world up to the incarnation of the Word, his sacrifice on the cross, death, resurrection and ascension to heaven.
Very often I celebrate in private, present only one person, not having parochial duties and having always been engaged in other activities at the service of the Church. In that case, that means 7 times up 10, I use the typical edition of the Latin Missal of St. Paul VI, where there are not all the blunders that appear in the one in Italian, to which I think the prize goes, among the missals translated into the most diverse languages, of the worst translation ever.
I concur by saying that my perplexity regarding the various Eucharistic prayers was a provocation. Certainly prayer II which echoes Hippolytus's anaphora, it is perhaps the least successful. Unfortunately it is also the most used.
… and, it is the most used because it is the shortest and some priests always seem to be in a hurry, when they celebrate Holy Mass.
It happened to me, celebrating on Sunday in some parish, that I found myself in front of the faithful who were pleasantly impressed by the Roman Canon (the First Eucharistic Prayer), because they had never heard of it, simply because their pastor used only the 2nd Prayer a … breakfast, lunch and dinner, if anything by doing 40 minutes of Sunday homiletic rant and then reciting the Second Eucharistic Prayer in less than a minute.
Lord have mercy!
My comment from the 17 July hours 00,38 starting with "Concludo", it was actually the latest in a series of 3 very articulate comments. I don't see the first two published, I deduce that he did not consider it appropriate to publish them or did not receive them ...
they haven't really arrived.
If you always have them, send them, or put them all together from first to last and send them to us by email
Dear Father Ariel,
I did not condemn the Pope's decision, also because I have never attended a Vetus Ordo Mass, I only expressed my doubts regarding the Pope's thought to heal the divisions, I fear that by now this story as well as many others sanctions the most total division, on the other hand, Pope Francis himself said that he does not rule out that he will be the Pope under whom there will be the greatest schism in history, which in my opinion actually already exists.
You have repeatedly stated that the Church is in such a degraded state that it is no longer possible “heal it” and once again I wonder if this is the final crisis, the apostasy mentioned in the Apocalypse?
We must therefore expect the Parousia as now very close?
"As for that day or hour, nobody knows them, not even the angels in the sky, nor the Son, but only the Father " (MC 13, 32).
E’ vero, Lucia's way, I wrote, explained and reiterated what you say, referring to the forfeiture which becomes irreversible when the threshold of no return. I also gave the example of launching from the plane without a parachute, to clarify to those romantics they say “but so much the Church belongs to Christ … he'll take care of it … the Holy Spirit will take care of it …” that neither Christ nor the Holy Spirit, before the exercise of human freedom and free will, intervene by subverting all the laws of physics to bring back on the plane someone who has launched without a parachute and is falling to the ground, where inexorably you will have to crash and that's it.
I also reiterated that today we are facing a great test of faith, that we must overcome, with pain, wisdom and balance, for the supreme good of the health of our souls.
The Supreme Pontiff Francis – I have explained in other writings – it is like that fellow who arrives in a restaurant where as soon as he approaches the entrance he is attacked by the managers who demanded payment of all the bills of those who ate there before him, without paying the due.
In this situation and on this journey characterized by a great and painful test of faith, we have no choice but to follow Peter, to which Christ gave the power to hold up, lead and govern the Church.
Many are in no way willing to understand this and believe they can move forward with “trade union protests” based on their opinions and emotions. They demand that total obedience be given to what they believe, they think and feel right, but they are not willing to obey the authority of the Church in any way, who contest in an often violent way, aggressive and irreverent every time he expresses himself and gives pastoral and disciplinary directives to the clergy and the faithful.
This I meant.
And mind you, they are speeches addressed to everyone, not to you personally.
I have always been in agreement with his diagnosis and I have always experienced the nonsense about it with discomfort Heretical council It is on Modernist pope.
Unfortunately, however, that liturgical form has given me so much and I do not consider this day as a day of celebration.
I accept the will of the Pope, well aware that from now on no one will authorize the Mass The old order. Pietro follows, there can be no ambiguity about this but with a little bit’ of bitterness because the beauty of that ritual is and remains truly extraordinary for me.
With sincere esteem
I am obliged to use myself as an example – which I would very gladly avoid doing – because I don't know what other realistic examples to resort to by making impersonal use of other subjects.
Over the years I have deepened my studies and research on dogmatics, sacramental dogmatics and the history of dogma. Be one, a me, priest and theologian trained in a certain way, puts in his hand the Missal of St. Pius V, I am able to analyze it from the first to the last line on the theological level, liturgical and pastoral, chronicling its entire evolution from San Pio V to San Giovanni XXIII.
I tell you this to assure you that an average of 8 threatens the 10, born twenty years after the liturgical reform and who in an exotic way began to strut with that Missal, they do not even know its basic structure. A high percentage did not have a thorough knowledge of Latin, this thing that was immediately grasped by reading, with the wrong accents. But, made that ritual very exotic.
The damage that this army of ignorant and unprepared priests, followed by faithful in search of emotions, equally ignorant and unprepared, they finally produced what they produced.
Add to this that for years, traditionalists goatee and lace, they attacked the Second Vatican Council and the liturgical reform, accusing both of them of modernist drift and of having slipped into Protestantism.
I also assure you that any reference to reason has never had any effect on these people, if not to make them even more aggressive.
He understands well that a Missal cannot be used, an aggressive-ideological way, against the Church itself and the papacy.
There is no question about the beauty of the rite, but the liturgy is not just subjective emotions or aesthetic beauty, which are also completely understandable things, but also an instrument of evangelization and salvation. Let me explain: to populations to be evangelized, or just evangelized, someone, he really assumed that he could offer the liturgy of the word in Latin rather than in their national languages? And certain peoples of non-Latin lineage, what enormous difficulties they would have had in understanding and praying in a language incomprehensible to them?
The sacred liturgy is not emotional spiritualism, but a vehicle of salvation and evangelization. And the venerable Missal of St. Pius V was no longer suitable for a Church that was no longer an almost wholly European phenomenon., but scattered in all corners of the world.
Try to understand me if you can: I am a lover of the Latin language and I love Latin, having to choose between a love and a personal pleasure, more or less emotional spiritual and evangelization and the salvation of souls, I choose the salvation of souls. Unless – I repeat – someone does not pretend to read the epistles, the psalms and the Holy Gospels in Latin to African populations, Indian and Oriental, making them pray in a language that many would not even be able to pronounce, as well as not understanding.
Thank you for your comment so full of Christian wisdom and balance.
But because you Father really thinks that if they had translated the gospels from Latin into the local language if they did, the recipients would have really understood something of the salvific proposal "offered" to them.?
Stateless peoples have practically disappeared today, killed by lead of different origins or in any case forcibly assimilated by hegemonic cultures (see the Ainu in Japan, in this way we avoid controversies that may be interested) but once, before being colonized, they were numerically far more than the miserable contemporary remains
And she thinks that those who had practically no private property, social hierarchies, feeble and plural marriage ties, absence of money and often also total linguistic absence of the concept of war – yet they "thrived" for centuries (see Trobiand inhabitants) – they could have understood the Johannine (more or less) "Struggle of the children of light against the children of darkness", the parable of the talents, the unfaithful vinedressers, giving to Caesar what is Caesar's, the bread of salvation, totally ignoring the bread and the wine and all the rest?
Translating sacred texts into other languages is pathetic, painful when it comes to communicating content that pertains to three levels: literal moral and spiritual, a fig leaf to save face, expressed the failure of stubbornly wanting to reduce an anthropological multiplicity to a universal one. (end of first part)
Aside from Saphir-Whorf's fascinating language hypothesis of how language and language structures were so ingrained in the speaker it gives a broad sense of "The interdependence between thought and language makes it clear that languages are not so much a means of expressing a truth that has already been established, as a means of discovering a truth that was previously unknown. Their diversity is not a diversity of sound and signs, BUT WAYS TO LOOK AT THE WORLD. "
So he wants to communicate to the other without destroying his identity?
Here I think the whole theme and the problem is here, in the way of looking at the world that, evidently, it is not the same for a Dominican as for a Tupì Guarani. After all, these two passages that I propose to attention seem to me to reflect this condition of communicative impermeability "This is that relational dystopia, centered on the sovereignty of the analysand, already denounced by Claude Levi-Strauss with the following “merciless” words: “Human sciences are only sciences aimed at a self-flattering deception. They collide with an insurmountable limit since the realities they aspire to understand have the same order of complexity as the intellectual tools they deploy.. Therefore they are unable, and they never will be, to get to know their object of study in depth " (cit in Jeremy Narby The cosmic serpent pag. 16).” (second part )
To these we want to add the words of the well-known ethnopsychiatrist Piero Coppo: "It is very difficult for Europeans or Westerners if we want to use this term, really manage to enter other cultural systems. We must have been born there, you have to have a tradition in there, from an early age, having read the world and understood the world that way, to really be there in the same way that cultures are, who have experienced this forever, they have carried it forward in history " (cit. of Emilia de Simoni: The flight of the shaman pag. 172)
We must take note, at least for what are the contemporary native testimonies, that when certain peoples speak of their unfortunate contemporary condition , of the progressive marginalization that concerns them and invests them as subordinate cultures, they do so not knowing or unwilling to distinguish the identity of those who "got off the boat", were they settlers or missionaries since they came together and therefore jointly attribute them to their apocalypse (without revelation)
Much more could be written, indeed very much but it is appropriate that I stop here. Third part END)
Let me add (as an external observer) than the ancient rite (like any rite in the religious world) it is not made up only of "words", which also have their specific vibration in a sacred or liturgical language (we say power which is better, because vibration tastes of new age), words that should be pronounced with the right voice but of silence ( it is the pause along with the tone that makes the music), specific geometries and anthropometries and also "odors"
It seems to me that everything, as it is no longer understood, it was all thrown overboard like the wise labyrinths of cathedrals, explanted because they "distracted" the faithful from their function and were not rather them, somehow, the function".
Bravo Antonio Bonifacio. Finally a noteworthy comment, even if it is difficult to understand for a modern priest who is the albeit solicitous and in many respects meritorious (cf.. his worthy battle against the whims of the Neocatechumenals) father ariel.
Dear father Ariel,
I have some doubts on some points, which I list below. I would like to have your answer.
1) If today there are several priests who do not adequately know the Latin language and who do not have adequate theological training, he does not believe that even those who should preside over their formation have any responsibility?
2) Years ago I remember the case of Don Luca De Pero, Catholic priest who at the end of a mass celebrated with Ordo, he communicated to the faithful that he wanted to leave the Catholic Church to join the Evangelical Church. He would have done the same thing with a mass celebrated with the old rite?
I have the impression that Protestants have no problem using the new rite, because unfortunately they consider it suitable to give an interpretation in which the real presence is excluded, while they would never agree to celebrate theirs “holy dinner” with the Tridentine rite.
3) That there are those who use the ancient Missal for purposes other than the salvation of souls is true, but why generalize? Liturgical abuses committed within it have been tolerated for some time Ordo, the Neocatechumenals freely practice their extravagances in the churches, fewer and fewer baptized declare themselves believers, the Churches are increasingly empty and those who attend them are moving more and more towards Protestant positions and the problem for the unity of the Church would be that very small percentage of faithful who benefited from the Popes by Benedict XVI?
Thanking you for your attention, Regards.
I answer your questions in order:
1) that formation in seminaries and, worse, theological in ecclesiastical universities, is almost to disaster, as far as I'm concerned I say it, I write it, I have been explaining and demonstrating it for years;
2) cases of priests who have betrayed their vocation and rejected the Holy Catholic Church itself, they have always existed, it is not a question of ritual nor does it certainly depend on Old O Novus Ordo Mass. It is not true that the old rite enhances the real presence and the new one has diminished or even reduced it “abolished” as some say, seriously wrong and stating false things, it would be enough just to read the Missal of St. Paul VI, where there are references to the sacrificial element in all Eucharistic Prayers;
3) all the problems you mention in this last point have no connection with the Novus Ordo Mass, it is certainly not the Missal of the Holy Pontiff Paul VI which has produced a crisis of faith and a distancing of people from the life of the Church. And I'll tell you more: a lot of – and I mean many and not a few – of those who today tear their clothes for the just limitations given on the use of The old rite of the Mass, they are the same and the same ones that in the seventies marched for the sexual liberation and who were the first to rush to the polls to vote in favor of abortion. And I say this because I know them, and in addition to knowing them, I also know that they have never regretted this, they just turned the page carelessly, passing, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, with extreme ease, from the fundamentalism of the Radical Left to Catholic integralism, remaining as they are the same, they just changed flag and integralist relief valve.
After answering your questions I add: the old rite now so regretted by people born twenty years later that it was no longer in use, in a society by now completely changed and with completely new pastoral needs, such was that of the late sixties, it had created a strong and detached disinterest in the sacred especially on the part of young people, this was fully perceived by the Venerable Pontiff Pius XII who, for his part, made a whole series of first liturgical reforms in the 1950s and gave life to commissions that studied an adequate liturgical reform.
If the first document of the Second Vatican Council was precisely that on the liturgical reform, this was because that document was already ready at the opening of the Council.
Finally, allow me to say that I just do not understand the desire that some people have to go back to the times when the celebrant whispered incomprehensible words in a low voice and who announced the Gospel reading it in Latin while the grandmothers and mothers recited the rosary on their own during the celebration of the Holy Mass, with the men standing at the back of the church and going in and out to smoke the cigar, especially when the priest began the homily.
He really wants to go back to those times, or to paraphrase the title of a book written by Mario Capanna in the early 1980s … "Formidable those years"? But you are really convinced that the Church has “destroyed” something that was fine to replace it with a Mass that goes very badly and that, for certain, it would be the source of all troubles?
For case, certain degenerations of '68, of sexual liberation, of terrorism and the Years of Lead, the subsequent de-Christianization of Europe and so on, they are the fault of the Missal of Paul VI? Or perhaps he believes that all this with the Missal of Pius V would never really have happened?
Dear father Ariel,
thank you for your answer which for me represents a useful source of reflection.
However, I would like to clarify some issues.
I have never argued that the phenomenon of apostate priests is due to Novus Ordo Mass. I only pointed out that the presbyter I mentioned had announced his intention to leave the Catholic Church after having celebrated a Mass with the new rite.. This fact should make us think, certainly not to question the validity and catholicity of the rite, as to take note of the fact that it may be subject to a double interpretation, so much so that many Protestant communities use it without problems (obviously omitting to pronounce the words “in union with our pope…”). It would not be desirable to remove this ambiguity? To achieve this, it is not necessary to go back to the ancient rite, it would be enough to simply have a new one but it bothers you, theologically speaking, to Protestants. The problem has long been many priests and bishops, formally Catholic, in fact they profess in one of its forms, the Protestant heresy and that is why many faithful, although not part of groups linked to the celebration of the Tridentine Mass, they see this battle waged against the Popes. In fact, it does not appear that other abuses have been launched with the same rigor. Perhaps the Neocatechumenals were prevented from forming new groups and new seminaries?
when it is necessary to start a “cut” O “put in line”, those who support will never fail – more or less legitimately – that it started on the wrong side and had to start elsewhere.
Regarding, for example the Neocatechumenals, I remind you that the Holy Father, before publishing the motu proprio in question, it has given a strong cut to certain lay movements by establishing that their lay leaders cannot remain in office for more than 10 years and that the founders, to stay in office longer, they must have the authorization of the Holy See. Obviously this will not apply to Kiko Arguello who for half a century said and repeated with the late Carmen that he was not a “founder but a “initiator”.
We'll see …
That Paul VI's Missal is similar to the Protestant one is a dying urban legend, although not true.
First of all, there is no “protestant rite” because Protestantism is by no means a unitary phenomenon but fragmented in the internal organization of the communities, in the doctrine, in morality and in the liturgy. So people talk about a “protestant rite” that does not exist, being many the rites of those aggregations.
E’ also an urban legend, it lasts or perhaps impossible to die and has been repeated for years and years from blog to blog by completely incompetent theologically and liturgically people, that the “new mass” is an Italian copy of the “Protestant mass”, also because one “Protestant mass” it just doesn't exist. The Catholic and Protestant liturgical texts are totally different in the theological and liturgical structure.
If unfortunately today we have to refer to certain Protestant scholars and theologians, especially as regards the biblical sciences, it's not because you mimic them, but because when the just and holy battle towards Modernism turned years later into forms of real obsession, the Protestants deepened certain studies, while we were fossilized in four formulas of decadent neo-scholasticism for fear of being accused of modernism. The result was therefore that the most beautiful exegetical comment, a Protestant theologian made it theological and pastoral to the Letters to the Romans, Karl Barth, whether or not it pleases certain defenders of the true Catholic tradition today.
If you really want to see a celebration more in keeping with the Tridentine rite than the Missal of the Holy Pontiff Paul VI, including vestments, accessories and celebratory style, in that case he must attend a celebration of the English Anglicans, or some of their communities in North America, where they are known as the Episcopal Community.
Another aggregation that celebrated until the end of the Eighties with a rite much more similar to the Missal of the Holy Pontiff Pius V, with respect to the Missal of the Holy Pontiff Paul VI, it was the old Catholics, schismatic segment born in rejection of the dogma on papal infallibility in matters of doctrine and faith sanctioned by the First Vatican Council. Then at the end of the nineties they underwent a radical change, and today they have “bishops” openly gay who ordain openly lesbian women priests.
I suggest you, amiably, not to listen to what some bloggers write, they are totally unreliable from a historical point of view, theological, liturgical and socio-ecclesial, but above all they are poisoned and sectarian.
Gent.mo p. Ariel,
I cannot answer you on the merits because you know more than I do, but in the method, yes, I think with good reason that I can point out to you one of the logical fallacies that you often use in your reasoning. Say that “the most beautiful exegetical comment, a Protestant theologian made it theological and pastoral to the Letters to the Romans, Karl Barth” it is true and it makes sense as long as it is possible to express this judgment as Catholics, not by Protestants (obviously). But since, the merits, the overrun problem it is first of all establishing how to remain Catholic, his argument reaches the ear as specious, but certainly without intention.
how to remain Catholic is very simple and we have always known this: follow the teachings of the Holy Church of Christ and his Apostles, it is no coincidence that we are called the Apostolic Catholic Church.
Also because I am not aware that Christ has instituted a higher authority that can review the work of Peter, which can only be judged by Christ God.
A lift, this, that some people have long since forgotten, thinking that the Church is a democratic parliament and that propositive or abrogative referendums can be requested against the decisions of Peter and the Apostles who have received their power by Christ God himself.
His thoughts usually contradict mine, but on this comment I agree entirely.
Here are some statements by the Pope on the Motu Proprio: "I am saddened by the abuses of both sides in the celebration of the liturgy. I too, as BXVI, stigmatize that in many places the prescriptions of the new Missal are not celebrated faithfully, but that it is even understood as an authorization for creativity, which often leads to deformations to the limit of the bearable ". “Nonetheless I am saddened by an instrumental use of the Missale Romanum del 1962, more and more characterized by a growing rejection not only of the liturgical reform, but of the Second Vatican Council ". This possibility “was used to increase distances, build contrasts, exposing the Church to the risk of divisions ".
However, I observe that the Pope's pain for liturgical abuses seems at least not very sincere because the Motu Proprio has only abrogated the Missale Romanum, leaving intact all the abuses and that "creativity" that, thanks to him, in the pachamama affair, to es, it has reached very high peaks.
With a surreal logic, the Pope seems to be saying: “Liturgical abuses are perpetrated in one part of the Church, while in the other the liturgical reform that is used to justify any abuse is rejected; this is the cause of contradictions, so I decided to punish this minority part of the faithful by depriving them of the possibility of celebrating without abuses in the VO. Is flawless, because in this way I reduce the divisions; and if this decision will instead have the effect of exacerbating them, so much the better. I can not say it, but we must encourage the spontaneous escape of those who are not there ".
"However, I observe that the Pope's pain for liturgical abuses seems at least not very sincere because the Motu Proprio has only abrogated the Missale Romanum, leaving intact all the abuses and that" creativity "that, thanks to him, in the pachamama affair, to es, has reached very high peaks ".
It is she who defends the the old order and the “most holy” of the Latins, to prove its correct and uncorrupted catholicity, it judges a person's deep and intimate conscience?
In short, on the one hand he stands as the defender of a language “most holy” and a ritual, on the other hand, he ignores the foundations of Catholic doctrine to such an extent that he does not know that God alone can read and judge the intimate and profound conscience of people? Of all people, from the Roman Pontiff to the last baptized on earth.
But what a desolation!
I begged her to avoid ad hominem attacks, but it was useless; but the point that worries me most is whether I really have such serious difficulties in expression that I always get misunderstood, why me – even rereading myself – I did not want to judge the Pope's conscience (what does it has to do with it?), but the logical coherence of the quotes of his declarations, so much so that I even doubted that they were really pronounced, and not simply assembled with copy-paste by his communication staff. This is defending the latinorum, or she has some kind of prevention towards me? Then know, if you have the goodness to believe me, that I have never attended a Tridentine Mass in my life and that I go to the parish every Sunday. So, if anything, we are in good company, because she too has a problem with judging consciences.
I repeat it, articulating it well so that it is understood: I think it is unlikely, O, if you pass me the expression, the reasons given by the Pope or his staff are not very credible – does not matter – to justify the repeal of the Missale Romanum of 1962, unless it itself is judged as a liturgical abuse. It is then quite clear that this repeal leaves the situation unchanged with regard to all the others (data) Abuse, and that if we had only wanted to ban its use, it was enough to return to the status quo ante of the Summorum Pontificum. So it is not a question of judging consciences, but to consider certain non-exhaustive statements on a factual basis, consequently deducing that there is something unspoken about which it is legitimate to speculate.
I try to answer her by telegraph.
Motu proprio It means “of his Supreme Authority”.
The Successor of the Blessed Apostle Peter gave a precise directive and arranged what must be done and what must not be done.
It is clear to you?
If you are truly a Catholic, you have only one duty: obey.
His views are irrelevant and his bad moods expressed completely out of place.
The Church is not a parliamentary democratic republic based on free elections by the faithful or on the use of the referendum to propose or repeal laws.
Now I have been clear, or we want to continue playing at misunderstanding?
Obeying does not mean turning off the brain. If not, why keep the comments open? And you too have been critical of Summorum Pontificum, hoping for its withdrawal well in advance without considering it – I guess – that his opinions were irrelevant and his moods out of place.
You are incorrigible and lacking in the basic rudiments of Catholic doctrine. One answers her on the merits and she replies with illogical and insipid reasons.
Do you think maybe me, when kneeling in the presbytery before the High Priest and a 92 concelebrated presbyters, I solemnly promised the Bishop that he consecrated filial respect and devout obedience to him and to all his successors, have maybe “off the brain”?
Please, for his sake and to avoid us wasting time with whom – as she – has the firm will not to reason and not to accept corrections: stop sending us comments of this kind. She wastes time and makes us waste time unnecessarily.
Keep your reasons and continue to live a surreal dreamlike Catholicism with all the obstinacy that characterizes it.
He sees that the demon of misunderstanding has intervened between us? I had just finished saying that one can be obedient without turning off the brain and she appropriately reiterated that by turning off the brain one cannot even obey.…
Obedience in faith necessarily arises from man's freedom and from the full and lucid exercise of his free will. Before the freedom of man, even the grace of God stops, that offers itself and proposes itself, but it does not impose itself on anyone, because every action of grace requires free acceptance on the part of man.
The exercise of criticism is not only recognized by the very laws of the Church and by the apostolic tradition, but even favorite, especially in the theological and pastoral fields.
But I'm afraid she misses a step, on which I have already insisted several times: if the Roman Pontiff promulgates a motu proprio, his act is not subject to criticism, neither to union nor to “… but in my opinion … I think that …”.
I thought I was clear by saying and explaining that, in this case, you just have to obey and that's it.
Thank you for your calm reply and for the advice, which I will stick to.
First of all, the missal of 1962 it is innovative and was already a reform.
The pseudo-traditionalists who believe they are preserving the Roman apostolic rite in this way are as naïve as naïve are those who recite the plain or later breviary instead of the pre-1911 one., given the revolutions of Pius X.
Evidently these radical changes are fine, while Paul VI would be a degenerate inept …
Furthermore it would be necessary to reflect on what could be a reform in itself given that in 1900, l’hubris papal and subversive did not find limits in creating from nothing rather than reviewing certain accumulated distortions.
In fact, the serious problem is the relationship between liturgy and canon law, this is most condensed in the pope's jurisdictional authority.
In any case, one must reflect that one of the fears of the opponents of the Second Vatican Council was that synodalism would become a sort of conciliarism. From this point of view, they can rest easy.
Art. 1. The liturgical books promulgated by the Holy Pontiffs Paul VI and John Paul II, in accordance with the decrees of the Second Vatican Council, they are the only expression of the lex orandi of the Roman Rite.
Written like this – in Italian – I understand that the Missale Romanum del 1962 has been repealed. But then, immediately below:
Art. 2. (…) Therefore, it is its exclusive competence (of the Bishop, ed) authorize the use of the Missale Romanum of 1962 in the diocese, following the guidelines of the Apostolic See.
Ma, I say: And what rite it would be, since it is no longer the Roman Rite? Whose will this lex orandi ever be? Then, since it is no longer the liturgical prayer of the Church of Rome, how could the Bishops in communion with Rome, even only on a formal level, authorize it in their Dioceses? An outlaw is not authorized to transgress the law; on the other hand, not even the outlaw needs authorization to break the law.
Obviously, all this “In the wake of the initiative of my Venerable Predecessor Benedict XVI”, that it is not clear whether it is involuntary humor or a voluntary contempt for the predecessor. I stop here.
I agree that we cannot go back to the past and I agree even more that a reform of the liturgical reform is urgent. Indeed very urgent, because the current reform (Paul VI) it is disastrous.
Meanwhile, we hope that the same measure used here to ensure unity, it is also used with regard to the Neocatechumenal "rites".
the Catholic tradition frightens those in charge of the church, because those who rediscover it understand that with the Vatican Council 2 the revolution took place that changed everything, the new mass, a new religion.
When answering does not serve to scratch people who are rooted in mistaken beliefs because they are based on the unreal, need to shut up in religious silence and pray for them. This is how my holy teachers and formators taught me.
Perhaps it is time for him to descend from the pedestal which becomes higher and higher making it difficult to return to the bare earth with its many "Ignorant" inhabitants.
.. but she is a poet!
It goes without saying Father, know, however, that the books you have published I bought and read and in these days I am rereading with keen interest and pleasure: "And satan became triune"……