"The great Father Zed, Archiblogopoios"
-
Fr. John Hunwicke
"Some 2 bit novus ordo cleric"
- Anonymous
"Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a traditionalist blogger who has never shied from picking fights with priests, bishops or cardinals when liturgical abuses are concerned."
- Kractivism
"Father John Zuhlsdorf is a crank"
"Father Zuhlsdorf drives me crazy"
"the hate-filled Father John Zuhlsford" [sic]
"Father John Zuhlsdorf, the right wing priest who has a penchant for referring to NCR as the 'fishwrap'"
"Zuhlsdorf is an eccentric with no real consequences" -
HERE
- Michael Sean Winters
"Fr Z is a true phenomenon of the information age: a power blogger and a priest."
- Anna Arco
“Given that Rorate Coeli and Shea are mad at Fr. Z, I think it proves Fr. Z knows what he is doing and he is right.”
- Comment
"Let me be clear. Fr. Z is a shock jock, mostly. His readership is vast and touchy. They like to be provoked and react with speed and fury."
- Sam Rocha
"Father Z’s Blog is a bright star on a cloudy night."
- Comment
"A cross between Kung Fu Panda and Wolverine."
- Anonymous
Fr. Z is officially a hybrid of Gandalf and Obi-Wan XD
- Comment
Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a scrappy blogger popular with the Catholic right.
- America Magazine
RC integralist who prays like an evangelical fundamentalist.
-Austen Ivereigh on
Twitter
[T]he even more mainline Catholic Fr. Z. blog.
-
Deus Ex Machina
“For me the saddest thing about Father Z’s blog is how cruel it is.... It’s astonishing to me that a priest could traffic in such cruelty and hatred.”
- Jesuit homosexualist James Martin to BuzzFeed
"Fr. Z's is one of the more cheerful blogs out there and he is careful about keeping the crazies out of his commboxes"
- Paul in comment at
1 Peter 5
"I am a Roman Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
I am a TLM-going Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
And I am in a state of grace today, in no small part, because of your blog."
- Tom in
comment
"Thank you for the delightful and edifying omnibus that is your blog."-
Reader comment.
"Fr. Z disgraces his priesthood as a grifter, a liar, and a bully. -
- Mark Shea
Loading ...
I’m worried that pope Francis realizes outright rescinding summorum pontificum would create huge blowback and would be difficult while Benedict is still living, so he is quietly urging bishops like rockford’s to pull stunts like this and hope it spreads to bigger dioceses.
“Reform” by stealth, dishonesty in keeping with the theme
As is the case with many (if not most) directives of Vatican II and afterward, there are just enough loopholes in Summorum that unfriendly prelates can more or less ignore its positive instructions. But faithful Catholics cannot allow themselves to be distracted while doctors of the law will bandy interpretations of “spontaneously” and “requirements of law.” Unless “never abrogated” means what it says, the whole document is a dead letter, so the faithful should act accordingly by soldiering on and preparing contingency plans for when the liturgy Stasi come a-calling.
Si ille ad huiusmodi celebrationem providere non vult [previously non potest] res ad Pontificiam Commissionem “Ecclesia Dei” referatur.
Exactly correct, if the bishop (sadly) does not want to provide for those groups who request the old Rite, he DOES NOT have to provide it. He simply needs to refer the matter to the Commission.
We may not like this law, but it is the law. Thank you, Father, for making this clear, as I tried to do in an earlier common on a previous post.
[You sidestepped the most important words.]
Are the laity allowed to address the Pontifical Commission on behalf of the Diocese of Rockford, since it is the Bishop himself making these statements?
The laity are always free to submit requests, inquiries, complaints to the PCED in their own name, and even in the name of a coetus in the parish. (Remember well, there is no minimum specified size for a coetus fidelium)
For my part, I would encourage as many as are willing to write the PCED. Flood them with mail on this matter. But always remember Fr. Z’s rules when considering the tone and content of your letters.
hagan lio!
Only the bishop or his representatives could address the commission on behalf of the Diocese.
Fr Augustine,
Exactly correct, if the bishop (sadly) does not want to provide for those groups who request the old Rite, he DOES NOT have to provide it. He simply needs to refer the matter to the Commission.
The text is passive: res referatur. In so far as the bishop would have declined the request, it can hardly mean that he would refer the matter. It must, therefore, refer to those who made th e request,
I am sure there are those in the modern church who would love it if all the traditional types would just go over to the SSPX. But then there’s the issue of the collection plate. It cannot be easy being a Bishop trying to juggle the theology and the balance sheet all at once.