Does it feel to you as if something is building to an explosive point?

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”.]

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.