One wonder’s how much the progressivists (aka libs) despise the people who desire traditional sacred worship.
Prediction: “synod” will be turned into a verb.
At LifeSite we find this. This is truly crazy stuff, from the Bishop of Pilsen in the Czech Republic, a Francis bishop. My emphases and comments.
The bishop of the Diocese of Pilsen in the Czech Republic stated in a recent article that the Synodal Church needs an adequate liturgy that can “only” be the Novus Ordo Missae.
Tomáš Holub, a heterodox bishop who has endorsed Amoris Laetitia and announced that he would give Holy Communion to the divorced and remarried, shared his vision of synodality on the blog of the liturgist and professor Andrea Grillo. [Mr. Cricket! The worst of the worst.]
According to the Polish outlet Polonia Christiana, Holub argued that modern evangelization needs “current theology.” [Not that old theology, which concerns itself with outmoded topics like eschatology.] Synodality, which is “rooted” in Vatican II changes, must be a tool of evangelization. And this modern Church needs “an adequate liturgy” that “can only be (the) Novus Ordo Missae.” [This is truly wacky stuff.]
Holub claimed that “old tools” of evangelization “do not meet the needs of today’s people,” and in order to fill this gap, he convened a synod.
He suggested that the synod fundamentally changed the role of laypeople in the Church. [Just how scrambled is this guy’s notions? It’s as if he didn’t know of the existence of Lumen gentium. No. I take that back. He and others want to rewrite Lumen gentium. But if you can do that, you can rewrite other conciliar documents.]
The people of God “became the protagonist, not just the recipient of the services; a people composed of clergy and laymen, men and women, united without distinction in common baptism,” [Without distinction?!?] Holub said. According to the prelate, synodality “is not just a communication technique but a way of living by faith.”
“It is not about convening a synod but about becoming a synod to imitate Jesus and become His disciples,” he added. [So the Apostles are on par with the Lord and as they were “walking together” they were synodalizing. But there’s more. This is leaning hard into the “priesthood of all believers”. Right?]
He went on to articulate a heterodox conception of the liturgy, claiming that the “synodal mentality” shows that liturgical activities do not concern the individual and are not an end in themselves but are the source and the peak of unity, as if “unity” was the purpose of the Mass. [One would not be blamed for wondering if there isn’t a touch of sycophantic toadying to a certain person who keeps talking about “unity”.] The Mass is ordered primarily toward God as the unbloody sacrifice and offering of Christ to God the Father.
“The Eucharistic celebration must be the culmination of local church life, a celebration expressing all the dynamism and unity of the assembled people,” [Right! With everyone except the priest doing the priestly things. There should be lots of hug red beach balls being bounced around and maybe some body surfing for the offertory procession.] Holub said. According to the bishop,[NB] it is the Novus Ordo that allows the integration of synodality in the liturgy, whereas the synodal experience of Catholicism would be “very difficult” during the Traditional Latin Mass. [What the heck is a “synodal experience”? I think it means “becoming Protestant”.]
The Latin Mass “no longer meets today’s needs,” he added. [… he added… with no proof whatsoever.]
He went on to stress the importance of Vatican II to the “synodal” liturgy and seemed to endorse an inversion of the hierarchical structure of the Church by claiming Vatican II’s vision was of a Church founded on the laity, not priests. [I remind the readership that the TLM was the Mass of the Council. There was no Novus Ordo. And there, again, is that priesthood of all believers claptrap.]
“The strand connecting synodality and liturgical action is precisely the vision of the Church promoted by the Second Vatican Council, the Church based on the congregation, not on the clergy, the Church of ministries, the community Church, which testifies to its unity and celebrates it,” Holub wrote. [The Council, in a certain respect, grew out of the TLM, not out of the Novus Ordo. One would think that if the Council and synodalizing are so closely bound together than the liturgy of synodalizing would be the … TLM. No?]
Catholics who attend the Traditional Latin Mass, on the other hand, “convince themselves of the correctness of the ecclesiological vision proposed by these rites,” continued Holub, as if the Church must repudiate the ecclesiology it has held for centuries.
The old Mass, according to Holub, “causes cracks,” leads to suspicions of the “reform” and results in “distrust of the Church.” A “benevolent and at the same time firm attitude” should be expressed toward such Catholics through the “implementation of the process of accompaniment, formation and synodal support.” [ROFL! You who want the TLM, etc., are going to be “accompanied”, “formed”, “synodaly supported”. This sounds like communist reeducation, doesn’t it? Perhaps you have “sluggish schizophrenia” as the Soviets called it. Maybe they will form a special camp for people who want the TLM.]
It should begin with “the undisputed common theological platform, the Second Vatican Council, as an expression of the true Magisterium,” Holub asserted. [This elevation of the Vatican II is getting unhinged, getting more and more extreme.] His description of Vatican II as an “undisputed common theological platform” is at odds with the council’s marked controversy, elicited by passages that orthodox Catholics criticize for giving the impression of error.
Holub was appointed bishop of Pilsen in February 2016 by Pope Francis and ordained two months later. He previously served as the Secretary General of the Czech Bishop Conference.
Does it feel to you as if something is building to an explosive point?
Motus in finem velocior.
Something is coming to a head. But may be like a big painful pimple that just won’t pop.
The SSPX consecrations have certainly torn the mask off some people. The lack of mercy from even what I would consider good conservative bishops is astounding.
The devil doesn’t like the light.
Ironically, the Novus Ordo was supposed to be more like the Early Church, as opposed to the Medieval one. Remember when the Early Church used to be talked about a great deal? Now, Vatican II is year zero.
To be read in nasal tones, to the harmonica’s dulcet buzz:
“Come gather round people,
In communion with Rome,
And admit that the age
Of the 60’s is gone
Accept that your tye-dye
Is faded and worn
Your springtime is radidly fading
You better learn Latin or you’ll be all alone!
Oh the times, they are, a-changin.'”
Replace Synodal, with synoodle and it all makes way more sense: Synoodle, synoodling, synoodalizing. Well maybe not sense, but it does make it comical
I think the answer to your question is no unless more or at least some bishops begin openly supporting the true faith unambiguously.
Couple this with the recent statement from Roche and it’s reasonable to assume this is the PR prep work being done in support of something dreadful just around the bend . . . I wonder if they’re going to release something on the Feast of the Assumption? They seem to relish in using Our Lady’s feast days as occasions upon which to hurl more rocks at the Church and the Faithful.
And BZ to TheCavalierHatherly. I can hear that nasal voice singing it. You nailed it.
A while back, maybe about five years ago, it began to occur to me that maybe the goings on in the Church, (the abdication of Benedict, the goings on under Francis, and now, this really rapid push toward synodality, along with intolerant pressure to crush and cast out Catholics holding onto the Apostolic Faith (because their problem isn’t just with the Mass)), is not a conflict between different factions within the Church, but is being dictated and orchestrated by agents outside the Church; by the same globalist entity or entities that seems to have control of world governments; and that there is something called Agenda 2030, which is a series of world goals to be met by 2030.
And although the defanging and neutralizing of the Catholic Church might not be a line item explicitly included in the documents of that plan, it seems to be a behind the scenes goal that must be met for the New World Order to be accomplished. Hence I think all we have been seeing of this dismantling of the Catholic Church as it was until 1963, is a part of this plan, orchestrated by globalists and implemented by their agents within the clergy, who were either planted there, or were recruited into their plan from among ordained men, and all events are accelerating because the hard deadline set by the outside overlords is looming in just under 3 1/2 years, and there is still so much to do.
Thinking this way makes it much easier to figure out who must be obeyed and what must be obeyed, because anyone saying the Apostolic Magisterium of 1963 years has been replaced by the Second Vatican Council is in fact anathema.
They are really putting on the full court press now and the lunacy of their claims, as pointed out by Fr. Z in this post, are becoming evident. They are creating storms of confusion. But I’m comforted by the fact that Jesus built His Church upon a rock, and as He said, “…The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.” Matt, 7:25-27
I don’t think their house, built on sand, is going to stand.
Taken to its logical conclusion, I have a few questions for this bishop:
1. Is there any point to having an ordained priesthood?
2. If there is no point to the ordained priesthood, does that include bishops?
3. If there no point to bishops, why is he in charge of the diocese?
4. Finally, shouldn’t the leader of the diocese come from the local, synodal community rather than from Rome?
The inevitable conclusion is that the Eastern Orthodox had the right idea about the Pope’s role in the Church: first among equals, a symbol of unity, having no universal jurisdiction over the…Oops! Was that not your intention? That’s not what you want? Too late now, Protestant here we come!
The heterodoxy of this bishop must be countered immediately!
Unfortunately, Francis lit the fire, and Leo seems to be fiddling while the Church burns.
Pray for the Church that it survives the current pontificate.
I was in the Czech Republic a couple weeks ago. So the TLM doesn’t meet today’s needs? Well then neither does the Novus Ordo, apparently. I visited multiple Catholic churches in Czechia. Churches were sadly empty, and mass attendance completely abysmal. The Novus Ordo is by no means thriving in Czechia, I can assure everyone of that fact. In fact, I’d be willing to wager that on any given Sunday there are more Catholics attending TLMs in France or in the U.S. than there are Czechs in the pews at the N.O.
Surely it has been said before, but how can such clerics of any rank articulate such views which eradicate the ecclesiology of centuries — essentially saying the Church has been wrong in its understanding of the truth, of itself, of its calling and claim simultaneously that they have the wisdom and authority to alter it and expect to be believed?
If you’ve been wrong for two thousand years why would anyone provide you credence now? What else is the Church wrong about?
These characters are men without any faith.
They remind me of the Jesuit educated Fauci, who regards himself as “Science.”
They are the one’s without credence.
The perennial Magisterium stands.
He PROTESTS too much. We don’t like this… we don’t like that… Just go and officially join the Calvinists already!
Adoramus te Christi, et benedicimus tibi, quia per Sanctam Crucem tuam, redemisti mundum.
As best as I can tell, the Diocese of Pilsen has had four new priests during the current bishop’s decade-long tenure. This is a notable drop from the (already somewhat low) 25-30 priests apparently ordained 1993-2016.
Maybe he’s pushing for a church that doesn’t need priests because his diocese is going to run out of them before long.
@WVC,
Regrettably, I suspect you’re on to something.
What is the difference between ‘Maranatha’ and ‘Anathema’?
How ironic that not too long after you posted this, Roche’s interview with the Tablet was released, expressing similar sentiments.
He was born in 1967, so the people of Pilsen have to endure this man for another sixteen years, or so it seems.
@EAW,
Barring a grace-driven conversion, ouch.
I know that not all of Francis’s appointments were awful, but just how many were this bad.
Being desperate for some good news, I’m wondering if this type of rubbish against the Traditional Mass, uttered by a prelate who is clearly in la-la land, is actually the best endorsement for Tradition (not to mention the best endorsement against synodality).
The “protagonist” of the Mass is Jesus Christ, Our Lord. Everybody else is just an assistant, in various degrees, although being God’s assistant is enough glory for anyone.
Surely the bishop misspoke.
@NickD:
I deliberately left room for that.
Just like with communism there has to be a continual revolution. Ongoing reform removes anything concrete. There is nothing to build on.
Just like the ongoing revolutions in the Soviet Union, the eastern block and Albania, this on going revolution, I suspect, will not end with an explosion but with a fizzling out.
The Church will resemble Cuba. Complacent subjects living in the worst conditions with “leadership” dragging the whole thing down because they (“leadership”)won’t accept the fact the system they’ve created is built on something other than the Will of God.
I’d like to suggest to the good Bishop Paprocki of Springfield, IL that he read Holub’s observations if he’s looking to find protestantism and not the SSPX.