Pro-LGBT Cardinal Cupich is asserting that Saint Pope John Paul II would have supported Francis's crackdown on the Traditional Latin Mass. See here.
What to make of this load of bovine scatology?
The facts:
In his Apostolic Letter Ecclesia Dei, Pope John Paul II said that, "Respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition."
And, in his book "Salt of the Earth," Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger said, "I am of the opinion, to be sure, that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It's impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it suddenly declares that what until now was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent."
To be sure, Vatican II called for an extended use of the vernacular. But nowhere did Vatican II call for the Latin language to be abolished from the liturgy. And anyone who claims otherwise is either ignorant of the facts or a liar. The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) No. 36 states clearly that, "Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites."
Number 54 of this same Vatican II document teaches that, "In Masses which are celebrated with the people, a suitable place may be allotted to their mother tongue. This is to apply in the first place to the readings and "the common prayer," but also, as local conditions may warrant, to those parts which pertain to the people, according to the norm laid down in Art. 36 of this Constitution.
Nevertheless steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them."
This is the teaching of Vatican II and the mind of the Church on the use of Latin and the attitude Catholics should have toward those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition. While we should thank God for those positive developments in the liturgy over the past 40 years (and contrary to what some "traditionalists" would have you believe there have been many), still, we must not foster an atmosphere of hostility toward those who prefer the Latin Mass. As Pope Benedict XVI has been teaching for so many years now, there is no "pre-Vatican II Church" and "Post-Vatican II Church." There is one Church with a continued Tradition and a richness of expression.
I am one of those Catholics who has always hoped and prayed for a "Reform of the Reform." As one of the few Catholics who has spent a considerable amount of time actually reading and studying the 16 documents of Vatican II, I look forward to that day when the teaching of the Council is actually followed. In both letter and spirit.
Is Francis showing respect for "the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition...for the use of the Roman Missal according to the 1962 edition"?
The answer is obvious. Cardinal Cupich, you are a liar.
3 comments:
Modernists within the Church want to outlaw the same Mass which was our highest and holiest treasure and which created most of the Church's saints such as Padre Pio, Theresa of Lisieux, Francis of Assisi etc...demonic!
These men are not Catholic. Catholics didn't ask to be in this position, but here we are. I can only speak for ourselves. These men are not Catholic, why, WHY, would we follow them. If anyone can look at Francis and say he operates in continuity with Catholicism, then I don't know what to say about that. Plainly, he does not. Christ told us we would know the master's voice, the voice of the good shepherd. Does Bergoglio speak with the voice of the good shepherd? He does not. We were told that if anyone comes teaching a gospel different than the gospel we taught you, let him be anathema. Does Beroglio et al come teaching a different gospel? Of course he does, and they do. Our responsibility is to Jesus Christ and the church he founded. It is to the truth that we were taught as children, not this reformed over mess. I do not believe Christ intended for us to pull our hair out over Vatican II. I don't care about Vatican II and how it's implemented. I see the fruit of it, that's enough. I want nothing to do with it or the men who are doing all they can to lead souls to hell.
Deeply troubling times Kathleen. But Mr. Melanson's point is that Vatican II was not the problem so much as its modernist interpretation and implementation and that Saint John Paul II, a champion of what Vatican II actually taught (as opposed to the asinine "spirit of Vatican II" espoused by modernist hacks like Bergoglio) defended the devotion to the 1962 Missal.
Post a Comment