First, an amuse bouche, something light to work into something seriously wrong.
Here is an oldie but goody. We had this tacked up on the bulletin board in the rectory at St. Agnes in St. Paul for years.
This iteration is from NLM: a Jesuit reworking of the Roman Breviary.
“A very brief rite of reciting the Breviary. First Pater and Ave are said, then
a. b. c. d. (etc.)
V. By this complete alphabet, alleluia.
R. The complete Breviary is composed, alleluia.
Let us pray. O God, who from the twenty-four letters didst will that all the Sacred Scripture and this Breviary be composed, join, loose, make, dispose and receive from this twenty-four letters Matins with Lauds, Prime, (Terce?), Sext, None, Vespers and Compline. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.”
I’m sure that the Alleluia was omitted at Septuagesima. Or… who knows… Jesuits just probably omitted it all year.
Jesuits are legendary in their seeming lack of interest in liturgical prayer. An old phrase to describe someone who is clueless is “As lost as a Jesuit in Holy Week”.
And now you see what Jesuits are doing to the Church’s doctrine on the ordination of women. Jesuits run the publication La Civiltà Cattolica, a semi-official publication of the Holy See, reviewed by the Secretariat of State before publication.
Magister explains HERE
A real gem from the piece:
In the judgment of “La Civiltà Cattolica,” therefore, not only should the infallibility and definitiveness of John Paul II’s “no” to women priests be brought into doubt, but more important than this “no” are the “developments that the presence of woman in the family and society has undergone in the 21st century.”
Unreal. They will leave not a single thing standing in their wake. Apply this principle what we will have left will be only smoking, salted ruins where there was once a serious Church, with clear doctrine.
Lord, have mercy on us.
Loading ...
God is taking care of the Jesuit problem. How? They have no vocations that’s how.
“I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.”
I don’t see much room to doubt the infallibility of this statement.
Setting aside the infallibility of that statement, how do they get past the clear dictates of scripture on the subject? Or does scripture not matter to a Jesuit?
And when we few remaining faithful look forlornly upon the smoking ruins of Mater Ecclesiae, we may be petrified by the medusae and basilisks which still haunt Her holy grounds.
Am I right in thinking “evidentemente” in the last sentence of the original has only the primary, strong sense of “evidently” in English – “In a way that is clearly seen or understood; obviously”- and not the more recent sense of “It would seem that” (Oxford Dictionary online)? Is Sandro Magister correct in understanding this is how the editorial procedure of “La Civiltà Cattolica” works? (Pani = Papa?!)
On 1Feb17 Father Hunwicke had a few words on this- http://liturgicalnotes.blogspot.com/2017/02/feminine-priesthood.html
“…on why the latter are as incapaces of Ministerial Priesthood as the former are of Motherhood.”
And it gets better.
Even more appalling is this, from the same source:
“‘One cannot always resort to the past, as if only in the past are there indications of the Spirit. Today as well the Spirit is guiding the Church and suggesting the courageous assumption of new perspectives.’
And Francis is the first ‘not to limit himself to what is already known, but wants to delve into a complex and relevant field, so that it may be the Spirit who guides the Church,’ concludes ‘La Civiltà Cattolica,’ evidently with the pope’s imprimatur. ”
I am pretty unflappable, but this has me nearly undone. Pray, fast, then pray some more. My Jesus, Mercy!
If Pope St John Paul II could be wrong, (not) then so could Pope Francis.
That light-hearted piece in principio made me think of a bishop writing the Greek & Latin alphabets in ash with his Croiser on the floor of a newly consecrated church.
Can’t find anything explaining the history or symbolism of that… Might be worthy of a future post
the EGO it takes to claim the right to change doctrine, tradition, and discipline!!!
Yet, those who love Tradition are disparaged as being “full of themselves.”
I’ve had just about enough of all this.
What does it say about their notion of Christ that they would essentially argue that he didn’t foresee the evolution of the role of women when He chose only men for the priestly ministry?
…and it’s not like priestesses were unheard of when Christ made that choice.
Just as we ought to pray for the conversion of the Fishwrap (or its destruction), so too must we pray for the conversion of the Jesuits. I owe them a lot. My baptismal patron is a Jesuit. The first real systematic treatment of the faith I ever read was by a Jesuit, namely the late, great Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J. I weep for what they have become.
The “alleluia” is part of the versicle; alleluias in that place are only said Easter to Pentecost.
But an Alleluia is added outside pre-Lent and Lent after the “Amen” of the Ave to take the place of the Alleluia after hymns which is always said.
Oh, and it doesn’t go that short. So, after the Ave (but before the Alleluia I just mentioned), Credo in Deum has to be said; of course the Terce must be mentioned in the prayer, as our reverend host says; and afterwards there still follows
V: Benedicamus Domino.
R: Deo gratias. Et animae fidelium defunctorum per misericordiam Dei requiesant in pace.
What more than a Jesuit could “sift like wheat” the soul of the Church?
No doubt testing the waters for the upcoiming vocations synod
Jesuits being Jesuits.
I hear they love changing things so much that at their masses there’s only two things that have never changed.
Are Spirit and conscience the same thing now?
They are so sexist. It’s as if women will not have dignity until they are ordained.
This doesn’t even rise to the level of dissenting theology. It is elementary school logic on par with broken crayons and scribbles outside of the lines. In fact, comparing this to the crayon scrawls of children may be an insult to said children.
Invoke Canon 750. (and maybe the Bux Protocol for good measure!)
Canon 750 – § 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.
§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.
Why don’t these modernists just leave our religion alone? What we need is to market our heritage already proven THAT ACTUALLY WORKED, not the failed attempts at reigniting the jetsetting neopagan trends of the 1970’s and ’80s that were a disaster to our participation rates.
The ‘half ruined city’ is the Church itself, both physical and spiritual. The Fatima vision becomes more clear.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
JMJ
I presume that this is part of the Pope’s response to the Dubia! Ordination of women is the next on his agenda. As is mentioned above, if the infallible teaching of St. John Paul II on the impossibility of the Church to ordain women, can be questioned; then so can the proposition that those in irregular partnerships having the possibility of receiving Holy Communion, as suggested in Amoris Laetitia, be questioned.
It’s not just the Jesuits that have had issues, Maryknoll, the Vincentians, and the Marianists (I am a late 1980s graduate of a Marianist institution) have dwindled in part due to “feel good pop psychology”, moral relativism, and infrequent use of the Sacrament of Confession (believe me, at a Marianist school I saw confessionals relegated to utility closets). Some of these orders (some provinces IMHO may have fared better, depending on the formation), but some had problems with homosexuality.
By the way, I do recall some good Marianist priests and brothers, but I do remember a good one who after nearly 30 years in religious life left the priesthood to marry. I also know that some good Jesuits (like Fr. Mitch Pacwa) exists, but it’s disappointing that good Jesuits often have to find assignments outside of the order.
More important than the “no” are the “developments that the presence of woman in the family and society has undergone in the 21st century.”??
What have I missed in the first sixteen years of the 21st century? Is “woman” more present in the family than she used to be? Less present? In society? What can that possibly even mean?
Good grief.
Vatican Resurrects Pro-Abort Paul Ehrlich
So much, so quickly, as if the time is short in which to do the damage.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
JMJ