RU-486 (aka The Bitter Pill aka The Tablet) has an piece by – what could go wrong with this? – a papalatrous ensign of the New catholic Red Guards (aka Lambchop – biretta tip Eccles o{]:¬) ) sort of with and about Archbp. Roche, former and not-so-successful head of ICEL, now head of the CDW.
It is not an interview. Lamb quotes Roach on and off.
Some lowlights.
No… there are too many for one post.
It is a sad fact that when people say outrageous things, it takes ten times the number of words to refute them. That is the case here. Hence, I will limit myself in this post to just one of many. It was hard to pick the first one, since so many deserve the drill.
Mind you, the piece is a stewy mix of Lamb and Roach. It is hard to tell where the editorializing of one leaves off and the notions of the other begin. Let’s assume that they are in a kind of Vulcan mind meld. No… better… let’s assume that they are both tuned to that special call sign on a radio frequency, 1968MHz, which only they and their circle can hear, let’s call it GNØSTC. My emphases and comments:
[…]
It’s not uncommon for newly-ordained priests coming out of seminaries in the Western world to almost immediately start celebrating the Tridentine Mass. [Of course. That’s because they want to give thanks to God in a more perfect way and also to complete their priestly formation.] Roche’s congregation is calling on seminaries to teach the “richness of the liturgical reform called for by the Second Vatican Council”, [Oh boy. See below.] and any newly-ordained priest wishing to celebrate the Mass using the pre-Vatican II liturgical books will need permission to do so from the Holy See. [Good luck with THAT!] “The Holy Father is concerned about formation,” Roche says, and two years ago he asked the members of his congregation, [See the list HERE – talk about the Lost Boys of Neverland] who include bishops and cardinals from across the world, to discuss the issue. “All of them [Uh huh!] thought that formation was pretty inadequate within seminaries in general as well as within the life of the Church,” and as a result a document is being prepared that Roche says will address the issue.
[…]
There is little question that formation is “inadequate” in seminaries “in general”. By definition it is limited and priesthood is huge, and a lifetime follows.
However, who thinks that the formation in seminaries in general ignores or runs down Vatican II?
On the other hand, who thinks that formation in seminaries in general goes on and on about Vatican II?
I suspect that seminarians hear “Vatican II” so often that they are a little too saturated with it. They have been formed by it and… they are choosing to say the Vetus Ordo “almost immediately”.
Do you see the disconnect?
The libs have had their way with seminaries for decades. There was a bit of an overhaul of seminaries back in the direction of the Catholic Church, but even then the formation of seminarians had a great emphases on Vatican II, it’s just that when the adults were in charge again, they gave seminarians the good stuff about Vatican II, they had them read documents. And now, the seminarians choose almost immediately to say the TLM. It’s not that they don’t know about Vatican II: they know it all too well. I dare say they may have a better perspective on it than Roche, since he is locked into a certain generation.
Let me put it this way.
The seminarians learned all about Vatican II. If they celebrate the Vetus Ordo and the Novus Ordo, they must think that the Vetus Ordo is not out of harmony with Vatican II. Perhaps it even expresses certain aspects of Vatican II better than the Novus Ordo. That said, perhaps they have merely put Vatican II into perspective: just one more Council and, perhaps, not as important as the previous two generations thought.
That said, you can imagine the outrage that will erupt from the Keepers of the Spirit huddled jibbering to their official Synod-approved authentic replica Pachamama figurines.
“NoooooOOOO! You have it all WRONG! **wrongwrongwrongwrongwrongwrong** WEEEE get to say what Vatican II means…..ggggrrrrr…..HEEEEEE HEE HEEEEE!“
For example… get a load of this from Beans from his profound simmering Villanovan crockpot. Beans is referring to the famous, important address of Pope Benedict XVI to the Roman Curia in Dec. 2005, in which he spoke of interpretations of the Council. It was, in fact, a long speech also against Rahner.
So… no one but Beans and few others know what that speech really said. As a matter of fact, not even Cardinal Ratzinger/Benedict XVI knows what it means! Bean & Co. will no doubt be telling us that rupture with the past instead of being rupture with the past, is really continuity with the past.
Mind you, that B as in B, S as in S from Beans reflects another notion of his, namely, that the Council is an interpretive lens (hermeneutic) through which all of previous Cult, Code and Creed, must not just be interpreted, but reinterpreted. Hence, for Beans et al., the Council becomes the measure of continuity over and above everything that comes to us via Tradition. This is one reason why the egg-heads are attacking the TLM… no… the people who want the TLM so viciously.
If you can unmoor Cult, Code and Creed from the past and Tradition, you can reduce the supernatural to the nature without oppositions, make the Church into an globalist NGO, and secure statements of approval for all manner of activity, including sodomy.
Loading ...
It looks like that first comment under Massimo’s post is from Urban Hannon. It’s probably quite good, though I have sworn off the bird site until at least Easter.
So, if even B16 didn’t understand a speech that he himself gave, why should we CARE about what he said? If the guy was raving, then his words are just trash to be put in the trash can, and it doesn’t need “interpretation” at all. Nor application, nor anything else.
No, Beans doesn’t know beans about Catholicism. He needs to have his mandate to teach (and his degree) retracted. But that’s true of most professors at most “catholic” universities, ’cause they aren’t teaching Catholicism anymore.
We know a young man in his late 20’s who will be ordained priest this summer. Although he was reared on the Novus Ordo and its abysmal music, he is a very prayerful and sensible young man. He is starting to ask himself questions about the obvious validity of the Old Rite and the nonsensical strictures against it… And his bishop is particularly nasty against it, a dedicated liberal before liberals were named… Please pray for him. If he mentions it to me, I shall counsel him to learn the Vetus Ordo, and celebrate it strictly in private for the time being.
Oh, to parse the Council,
Now that Beans is there,
And the pope fled to Gandolfo
Remains blissfully unaware
That his status as peritus and professor’s rather weak
For the Spirit of the Council is sniffed out by Beans’ beak
And the dryads and the druids and the synods warble on
In Roma — anon!!
And after Beans says what it means,
And Bergoglio builds, and the college careens,
Hark, where that infernal tree was planted,
Peter’s walls with lights supplanted
Pachamama, unrecanted,
Peter’s relics quick abandoned:
Lest you think the Council beyond recapture,
Beans repeats his careless rapture!
Yet though the field hospital is rough-hewed,
And will be gay, all things are renewed
The hermeneutic, skeleton key,
Restored by Our Lady.
“It’s not uncommon for newly-ordained priests coming out of seminaries in the Western world to almost immediately start celebrating the Tridentine Mass.”
True – I know some of those young priests. One reason why I believe that TC is a last-ditch effort, and soon to be a dead letter.
! “misinterpreted by its author” ! — And these people expect to have their maundering taken seriously !!
It went from, “Let’s listen to the young people. We love the input of young people. Let the youth have a say. They are the future…blah…blah…blah.”
Now all the gray haired, professional, ecclesiastical boomer class are saying, “The young people know nothing. They’re rigid and always looking back in the past instead of forward. Don’t include their input until they’ve been educated on the amazing doctrine of everything 1960’s.”
Quite the about-face.
St. Charles Borromeo was chosen as a cardinal by the pope because he was trustworthy and a kinda normal guy, and a relative even, who could do Curia fixing and reform in Rome.
But the more fixing he did, the more he understood that his diocese, Milan, needed him more as a good bishop than his pope needed him as a Curia helper. And the more he reformed things in Milan and set a good example, the more he realized that he had to do reform and education on all levels and with all people, not just clergy or religious.
And the more his people responded to that, either with enthusiasm or with bitter resistance. (And some assassination attempts.)
The more each of us works to be better Catholics, and the more we spend time on our knees and at Mass and doing good, the more help God will send us. And the more we will find unexpected friends and alliances. If we fight for what is right, God will fight with us. But there is bound to be bitter resistance too.
Did nobody else hear Tom Jones all of a sudden?
“It’s not unusual to say Mass in Latin.
It’s not unusual to see the pews all sat in.
But when the Pope now says liturgy must flatten,
It’s not unusual to now decry
That bogus lie.”
“…calling on seminaries to teach the richness of the liturgical reform called for by the Second Vatican Council”. Oh you mean like using Latin, giving Gregorian Chant pride of place and using the organ? Sounds good to me.
that is why deconstructionism is so useful- not only did the author NOT mean what he said-the author doesn’t even know what he meant. Only the enlightened Prof Beans knows what the meaning really is…so listen up (& shut up)…..
Two thoughts.
Firstly, dear Father, please don’t insult good Italian food by comparing it to heretics!
Secondly, MF here takes the typical attitude of the leftcath or excath: that they are so certain the traditional Christian is wrong, that they are actually somehow better at the very thing they disagree with or reject. I don’t believe in the virtue X, which you believe in, I believe it ought to be Y or even Not X, and by Not following X I am therefore more X-uous than you who actually try to follow X. I’m not sure exactly how one gets such delusions but it seems particularly dishonest and insecure; normal people, when they decide not to try to be X, just say either that they don’t believe in it or even that they do believe in it and merely struggle with sin like anyone.
Roche clip? One would need a turbocharged anti-gravity bong to risk inhaling this stuff! How does anyone who has NOT been inhaling for far too long put such a mendacious mediocrity in charge of anything larger than a diocesan dog hospital? As Reagan famously said, “it’s not so much that they’re ignorant, it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so!”
How tone deaf is this poor, benighted Yorkshireman? “ To stand against Peter is an astonishing act, full of hubris”… except, apparently when this Peter opposes one predecessor who lives yet, and another whom he has himself raised to the altars! Why doesn’t some journalistic coyote in lambcloth ask this Monty Python (arch)bishop how he accounts for the actual FACT that “things
willDID change under [this] new pontificate”? This is indeed a gigantic, overflowing wagonload of BS… but many of the sheep will happily swallow it.Suburbanbanshee: good comment, most especially your last para.
The organisers of the Chartres Pilgrimage just sent out a call to all the “foreign Chapters” to come on the Pilgrimage this year, which will be its 40th anniversary. “Venez nombreux”, as they say. In those early days, let’s remember, they weren’t even allowed into Notre Dame de Chartres for the concluding Pentecost Monday Mass – it was held outside. Things slowly improved, especially after 2007, and typically in latter years, up to 2019, when there were about 10,000, we couldn’t all fit in anyway – a huge number were outside, rain (a lot) or sun (sometimes very hot) notwithstanding. And there’s a lot of haaard gravel to kneel on outside that Cathedral – penitential, to put it mildly! But the spirit… aaaah!
We’re trying to organise our Chapter (we had 45 from Ireland in 2019, at least 75% under 30, avant la deluge), and I’m sure the UK will be there also. But please, if any of you in the US can, COME!
Isn’t the hermeneutic of rupture kind of like the snake eating its own tail (ouroboros)? I’ve read that the snake eating its own tail is associated with Gnosticism, which you talk about in the article.
I think that when the seminaries started getting better(relative to the preceeding 3 decades), the better seminaries were presenting something akin to Benedict’s vision of a “hermeneutic of continuity “. Still, the seminaries that weren’t out and out heterodox were still presenting Vatican II as the best thing since sliced bread. I would imagine that juxtaposition would create a real tension for any seminarian that wanted to investigate if and how a rupture with tradition took place. The cognitive dissonance would drive anyone with a modicum of intellectual curiosity to investigate the back-story. Benedict’s Summorum Pontificum highlighted the fact that there was no good rationale for abrogating the TLM. There was an open invitation for any seminarian that wanted more spiritual nourishment to explore the traditional liturgy, with a papal endorsement no less. Now these shameless know-it-alls, instead of addressing whatever actual “divisiveness” might be present in some “groups”, have undermined the current Pope’s immediate predecessor, totally diminishing whatever plausibility the “hermeneutic of continuity ” narrative had. Now it’s clearly just a “might makes right” view of papal authority.
Pingback: TVESDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit