Diaconal-Cardinalatial news.

TwitterI saw a notice on VIS that two worthy old cardinals will take possession of their titular churches in Rome.  These are diaconal titles and the worthies are Cardinal Deacons.  Both of them were at least 80 when made cardinals.

CARDINALS TO TAKE POSSESSION OF DIACONATE CHURCHES

VATICAN CITY, 2 MAR 2011 (VIS) – A note published today by the Office of Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff announces details of forthcoming ceremonies in which two cardinals will take possession of their diaconate churches:

At 10.30 a.m. on Sunday 6 March, Cardinal Walter Brandmuller, former president of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, will take possession of the diaconate of St. Julian of the Flemish, in Via del Sudario 40, Rome.  [This little church is right around the corner from the door of my old seminary.]

At 5 p.m. on Saturday 12 March, Cardinal Elio Sgreccia, former president of the Pontifical Academy for Life, will take possession of the diaconate of St. Angelo in Pescheria, in della Tribuna di Campitelli 6, Rome.  [This tiny place is in the Ghetto.  You can spy the door when looking through the Portico of Octavia.]

Posted in Just Too Cool | Tagged , , ,
3 Comments

REVIEW: Some thoughts about the Pope’s new book – part I

I have been reading the new, second volume of Benedict XVI’s book, Jesus of Nazareth.  A preview copy was sent to me by the publisher.

I have been circling back over various passages which impedes my forward progress.  I am circling back not because it is difficult to read, but because I want to remember it well.  Also, I have been taking it to my evening visits to the Blessed Sacrament. The book is about Jesus, after all.  Why not read it with Him?  That has been helpful, though it slows my progress.  So… I hold myself in check even as I strain forward.

The new book will be released worldwide for Lent 2011, with a date of 10 March.  Just buy it.

KindleYou can click HERE or the image above to go to amazon (USA) and buy the book at a significant discount before its official release.  The USA KINDLE edition is available HERE for even less than the hardback.  If you don’t have a Kindle – I am really starting to like using this great tool – you can get a USA version HERE.  It will work anywhere, globally.  If you are in the UK or Europe, use THIS LINK for the Pope’s hardback and THIS for a Kindle, which will work everywhere.  I haven’t found a link for the UK Kindle version of the Pope’s new book.  BTW… you can also read the stuff you get for Kindle on your iPhone, iPad, laptop, etc., and they all synchronize.

This second volume looks at the period the Lord’s life from the entrance into Jerusalem to His resurrection. In other words – Holy Week.

There has been an embargo on using the text.  Today, however, the publishers said we could use content from three sections.

Chapter 3, Section 4: “The Mystery of the Betrayer”
Chapter 5, Section 1: “The Dating of the Last Supper”
Chapter 7, Section 3: “Jesus Before Pilate”

I’ll share some observations about the book in the next few days, beginning with this general statement and then looking at somethings in “The Mystery of the Betrayer”.

As Pope, it is hard for Joseph Ratzinger to react publicly to things.  He can’t just be an old man with experience of life, or a theologian or priest.  As Pope, he is under many constraints.  He cannot simply say what he thinks or – and this is the dangerous part for him – what he is thinking about.  If you are smart, you mull over hard question, chew slowly, digest, chew more, consider, weigh.  You think things through.  In a conversation you may say what you think about something and you are expressing something about where you are with the question right now, not necessary meaning that you aren’t going to keep working on the problem.  We saw what happened when the Pope in that interview book – O Lord, let there never be another – said something about condoms.

Papa Ratzinger has been thinking about Jesus for his whole life.  He doesn’t consider Jesus to be static, or a subject, or a thing to be pondered.  Jesus is a who, in whose image we are made.  Years ago I heard Card. Ratzinger answer a question about some of Fr. Karl Rahner’s notions about God.  After a brilliant exposition, Ratzinger concluded, “”What Fr. Rahner forgets is that you cannot pray to an Existenz-Modus!”

Throughout the book, the Holy Father continues in the vein he exposed in his first volume where, in the indispensable preface, he explains where the “technicians” (my word, not his) of Scripture go wrong in reading Scripture.  You cannot simply apply tools of modern scholarship, such as the historical-critical method, form criticism, etc., without also concerning yourself with the who behind each word.  What Papa Ratzinger is doing is showing us how to reconnect with Scripture in a way closer to that the of early Fathers of the Church.

I have been convinced that the Fathers are of growing importance precisely because they reconnect us with a way of reading Scripture.  That’s one degree why I have a degree in Patristic Theology.  At the same time as we can make great use of the tools of scholarship we have, and the Holy Father does use them extensively, we never lose sight of that other way of reading and listening.  This is the Pope’s working method throughout.

Back to my contention that Pope’s are constrained.  I have the sense in reading this book that the Pope is not simply writing about Jesus, but is also making subtle – sometimes not too subtle – allusions to questions or controversies in our day or even giving us us explanations about things he is doing as Pope.  For example, his thoughts in the book about the Jews will both create controversies and also answer some questions about why he has done certain things.  Have you ever wondered why the Holy Father made a change in the 1962 Missale Romanum to the Good Friday petition prayer about the Jews?  What was he thinking when he inserted that new prayer?  Pages 41 ff. provide some food for our chewing.

But I digress…

In one of the sections we who have the book are allowed – as of today – to write about, Chapter 3, Section 4: “The Mystery of the Betrayer”, the Holy Father writes about Judas.   In his description, based on solid modern scholarship, of how people reclined to eat, so as to get at the Lord’s explanation of who would betray Him, the Holy Father pretty much guts the idiocy in the DaVinci Code, as well as some saccharine art wherein the the “beloved disciple” is depicted as resting against Jesus bosom.  But that is lana caprina.

Fairly often while reading, I circle back over a text and wonder if the Pope isn’t giving his opinion on some issue without directly saying that that is what he is doing.  Given my constant writing about the liturgical translations, I was struck by his section on the Last Supper about the Lord’s institution of the Eucharist and the words – and meaning of the words – when speaking about His own Precious Blood.  WDTPRS readers will read some familiar things in those pages.  But I digress.

In the section on Christ’s betrayer, the Pope also gives us a couple striking paragraphs useful for anyone who may consider receiving Holy Communion in the state of sin.  That is not what he says he is doing.  I am making that application.  But I can’t help but think as I read that the Holy Father may have had something like that in mind.

I quote now in part, to give you a taste.  The verse of the psalm Jesus uttered, to which the Pope is referring is “He who ate my bread has lifted his heel against me” (cf. Ps 41:9; Ps 55:13):

John gives a new depth to the psalm verse with which Jesus spoke prophetically of what lay ahead, since instead of the expression given in the Greek Bible for “eating”, he chooses the verb trôgein, the word used by Jesus in the great “bread of life” discourse for “eating” his flesh and blood, that is, receiving the sacrament of the Eucharist ( Jn 6:54–58). So the psalm verse casts a prophetic shadow over the Church of the evangelist’s own day, in which the Eucharist was celebrated, and indeed over the Church of all times: Judas’ betrayal was not the last breach of fidelity that Jesus would suffer. “Even my bosom friend, in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted his heel against me” (Ps 41:9). The breach of friendship extends into the sacramental community of the Church, where people continue to take “his bread” and to betray him.
Jesus’ agony, his struggle against death, continues until the end of the world, as Blaise Pascal said on the basis of similar considerations (cf. Pensées VII, 553). We could also put it the other way around: at this hour, Jesus took upon himself the betrayal of all ages, the pain caused by betrayal in every era, and he endured the anguish of history to the bitter end.  (pp. 68-9)

In speaking about Judas, the Holy Father delves into something about which I wrote yesterday, blasphemy and final impenitence.

I must say I found the section on Judas disturbing.  In many ways we can see ourselves in the figure of Judas.  Throughout, the Holy Father is showing us what Jesus does for us in the incessant struggle between light and darkness.  We are not exempted from the struggle for HE was in the struggle definitively.  If we are HIS, we are in the battle.

And for anyone thinking about leaving Mass early after Communion for no better reason than personal convenience, here is how this now unembargoed section concludes:

John concludes the passage about Judas with these dramatic words: “After receiving the morsel, he immediately went out; and it was night” (13:30). Judas goes out—in a deeper sense. He goes into the night; he moves out of light into darkness: the “power of darkness” has taken hold of him (cf. Jn 3:19; Lk 22:53).

I will write more about other sections in the days to come.

The second volume may be “pre-ordered” at a reduced price through amazon.com. Click HEREIf you are in the UK or Europe, use THIS LINK.

Directly from Ignatius Press (without amazon) for US buyers HERE.
I believe Catholic Truth Society is the publisher for England and Wales.

The first volume is HERE.

Finally, do you want better sermons from your priests?  These books would be good gifts to priests, useful for their preaching.  Both volumes would be useful for your Lenten reflections.

Posted in Just Too Cool, REVIEWS, The Drill | Tagged , ,
25 Comments

Pakistan: Catholic critic of blasphemy law shot dead

From the Catholic Herald.  Say a prayer for the repose of the soul of Shahbaz Bhatti.

Catholic critic of blasphemy law is shot dead in Pakistan

By Ed West

Pakistan’s leading Catholic politician has been murdered in the capital Islamabad.

Minorities minister Shahbaz Bhatti died this morning after gunmen opened fire on his car while travelling to work through a residential district.

Mr Bhatti, 42, a leader of the ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), had just left his home when at least two gunmen ambushed his car, police official Mohammad Iqbal said. He was rushed to the nearby Shifa hospital, but was dead on arrival.

Mr Bhatti had received numerous death threats after calling for changes to the country’s controversial blasphemy law. The blasphemy law carries a death sentence for anyone who insults Islam, and critics say it has been used to persecute minority faiths. In January, Punjab Governor Salman Taseer, who had also opposed the law, was murdered by one of his bodyguards.

The first Christian to hold a cabinet post in Pakistan, Mr Bhatti spoke about the threat facing him last month, during a visit to Canada to raise awareness about his country’s blasphemy laws. He said: “I have been told by pro-Taliban religious extremists that if I will continue to speak against the blasphemy law, I will be beheaded.”

However, he said: “As a Christian, I believe Jesus is my strength. He has given me a power and wisdom and motivation to serve suffering humanity. I follow the principles of my conscience, and I am ready to die and sacrifice my life for the principles I believe.”

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack, but leaflets issued by Tehrik-i-Taliban Punjab, a branch of the Taliban in Pakistan’s most populous province, were found at the ambush site, according to the private TV channel Express 24/7.

A government spokesman condemned the assassination. Farahnaz Ispahani, an aide to President Asif Ali Zardari, said: “This is concerted campaign to slaughter every liberal, progressive and humanist voice in Pakistan.

“The time has come for the federal government and provincial governments to speak out and to take a strong stand against these murderers to save the very essence of Pakistan.”

John Pontifex of Aid to the Church in Need said this morning: “I had the pleasure of meeting Shahbaz Bhatti on a trip to Pakistan with Aid to the Church in Need a few years ago. He was a very kind and thoughtful guide to the region with a deep commitment to improving the lot of the disadvantaged, especially those suffering persecution and oppression on account of their faith.

“Shahbaz Bhatti had the courage to speak out against the suffering that has its root in the country’s blasphemy laws, and we at ACN will be praying for his soul following his murder.

“Despite having received death threats for his stance Mr Bhatti continued to stand up heroically for Christians and other religious minorities who have been victims of mob violence after they were accused of blasphemy.”

Damian Thompson has a piece today entitled: Pakistan’s only Christian minister killed. Copts massacred. Afghan convert sentenced to death. When will Britain wake up to Islam’s persecution of Christians?

Saints Nunilo and Alodia, pray for us.

Posted in The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , ,
21 Comments

Help the blog. Vote today.

You can vote daily for WDTPRS in the Best Blog category and the Best Podcast category at the Reader’s Choice Awards.

It takes but a moment and I would be grateful for the token of appreciation.

Because of award page layout, it is not immediately apparent where you vote.

You can vote in every category once per day.  Let’s play fair and square.

Click HERE for Best Blog category and the HERE for Best Podcast.

There are other worthy categories as well.  I am especially interested in the newspaper category.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
Comments Off on Help the blog. Vote today.

Lent begins in one week!

For Latin Church Catholics the beginning of Lent comes in one week with Ash Wednesday.

Are you ready?  Do you have a plan for your Lent?

Be prudent as you plan and don’t bite off too much at the beginning.  You can always add things – or omit them, if you get my drift.  If you not too disciplined, don’t try to much and then get frustrated if you fall down.  Baby steps.

Posted in Our Catholic Identity | Tagged ,
21 Comments

QUAERITUR: Bishop consecrating chalice, vestments during Mass

Sacred vessels are important.  They are consecrated (like the hands of priests) to touch the Body and Blood of the Lord.

I had this in my email:

I am trying to locate the rite (prayers and rubrics) for the consecration for a Chalice / Paten and Vestments. There is a local bishop who is willing to do this for the gifts that I will receive when I will be ordained a priest this summer. Can you help me find the resources that I need. I have the Roman Ritual (1962) but it seems that I also need the Roman Pontifical for more of the prayers and instructions. Can all of this be done within a mass that the Bishop celebrates (e.g. after the homily?).

First, I am delighted that the bishop will do that!  Second, I hope he knows you mean the older rite!  Do all in your power to keep the bishop, and all Christians, away from the horrific De benedictionibus.  (Ad flammas!)

Can you do this during Mass?  If it is in the Novus Ordo…. [crickets]… sure!  Why not! You can do anything in the Novus Ordo at homily time, it seems. No?

If a bishop can impose a video, which is actually forbidden by the Church’s liturgical law, then, yes, he can consecrate a chalice.  There can be the administration of sacraments after sermons (e.g., baptism, matrimony, etc.).  There can be videos about fund raising.  Why not the consecration of a chalice, which is sort of in between?

VOTE FOR WDTPRSIn the older form of Mass… wellllllllll…… maybe.  But it really isn’t “foreseen”.

I, because of course bishops ask me stuff all the time, would say to a bishop, “Should Your Excellency desire to consecrate this stuff over here in this box, a great teaching mo, would Your Excellency announce it and teach about it during the sermon, and invite the people to remain to watch Your Excellency do it after Mass?”

In the meantime, for vestments in the older form, you can find those blessings in the back of the Missale Romanum.  You might find chalices and patens there also.

For the chalices and patens, (I have written about that HERE) you could use the Pontificale Romanum.  Look for it online.  For example, HERE, where you can find the whole Pontificale.

VERY COOL prayers.

Also, in the rite, the bishop refers to “fratres carissimi”.  Therefore, I think it would be great to have a big audience!

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged , , ,
6 Comments

QUAERITUR: Of blasphemy and sacrilege during Mass

From a reader:

The pastor at a local parish has used a “super-soaker” water gun during the sprinkling rite at Mass on several occasions. In a conversation with a parishioner from the parish, I incorrectly described the act as “blasphemous.” I have two questions: (i) Do my remarks constitute grave sin?; and (ii) ought I to contact the other person and amend my description?

Super-soaker?  What is this? A kiddie party?  Did also he wear big red shoes and jump around like an idiot? Was there a cake?

Let’s not even mention damage to clothing, the parishes books, anger of the congregants, etc.

I am not entirely sure you have to correct your remarks.

Blasphemy involves words or gestures, also thoughts, which show contempt for God or dishonor God regardless of whether the person intends that contempt or dishonor or not.  Blasphemy is against the virtue of religion and a mortal sin.  Blasphemy is direct when it is aimed at God.  It is indirect when aimed at Holy Church or the saints or any sacred thing or person or place.  It seems to me that what that priest did, whether he intended it or not, by the mere fact of doing it, was a kind of indirect blasphemy.  He detracted from God’s honor indirectly by debasing the rite and the people.

As an aside: a deadly sort of blasphemy concerns the Holy Spirit (cf. Matthew 12, 31-32).  This  ghastly sin attributes God’s works to the Enemy and which also concerns the denial of the Holy Spirit the power or will to purify and forgive leading to final impenitence and hardness of heart.  That sort of sin cannot be forgiven because the person rejects forgiveness.  But that sort of blasphemy has nothing to do with what the questioner described.  I hope.

Sacrilege, also a sin against the virtue of religion, is the improper or irreverent treatment of something sacred (persons, places, things, etc.).  Sacrilege can take various forms including acts of violence, or vandalism, or purposeful harm, such as using something sacred for a sinful purpose or monetary gain.

Our Blessed Lord purified the sacred space of the Temple when he found improper things within and improper conduct.  I think there is a touch of both of blasphemy and of sacrilege in the ordained priest, alter Christus, head of the Eucharistic assembly, using a “super-soaker” in church during the sacred action of Holy Church’s liturgical worship among the congregation of baptized members of Christ’s Mystical Body.  The blasphemy would come from the gestures which would detract from the honor due to God, and the holy rites of the Church as well in an important matter.  The sacrilege would lie in the mistreatment of the sacred rites of the church and the insulting, condescension with which he treated God’s holy people gathered within a sacred space.  Beyond that, it was beneath everyone’s dignity.

Keep in mind that some single actions can result in more than one sin.  This is important for your examination of conscience before confession.  And there should be an app for that.

For example, if you belt a priest in the chops, and he is not at the moment physically attacking you, you commit the sin of unjustifiable violence against your neighbor, but also the sin of sacrilege.  If someone else is present, you may have scandalized the person.  If you do it during Mass, it is even worse.

Remember that when you are watching especially stupid and insulting liturgical abuses such using a super-soaker during Mass.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , , , ,
73 Comments

WDTPRS POLL: SSPXers and CATHOLIC TRADITIONALISTS ONLY!

VOTE FOR WDTPRSA discussion under a different entry prompts me to post a poll.

I ask the help of “trad” blogs to get the word out and get a larger sample.

I have rarely met anyone who is firmly attached, even fanatically attached, to the older, traditional liturgical worship in  the Roman Rite who will say openly that the Novus Ordo of Paul VI is “invalid”.

I stress “invalid”.  They will say many other uncomplimentary things about the Pauline Rite, or Ordinary Form, call it what you will, but they generally won’t say it is invalid.

I am curious.

Here is a poll only for SSPXers and for traditionalists who might be reasonably considered hard-core.

You don’t have to be registered to vote.

There will be NO discussion in the combox.  Vote what you really think.

If you are not an SSPX or otherwise hardcore traditionalist (Sedevacantist, etc. let us not nitpick) then DON’T BUTT IN.

This is an honor thing.  Cheat and you are nothing but a scrub.

I am follower of the SSPX or another traditionalist group and...

View Results

UPDATE 2 March 01:16 GMT:

From an SSPX priest (edited):

In our SSPX circles the question of the validity of the Novus Ordo divides us from Sedevacantists.  It is THE most visible dividing question.

If someone tells me they think the Novus Ordo is invalid, I immediately know I’m dealing with a sedevacantist type of mind.

You can’t maintain that the Novus Ordo is invalid and that the Pope who promulgated it is still Pope, can you?

No, Father, you can’t.  Thanks for that!

Posted in POLLS | Tagged , , ,
Comments Off on WDTPRS POLL: SSPXers and CATHOLIC TRADITIONALISTS ONLY!

England: Martyrs’ relics escape blaze at Marian Shrine

I believe that you can still get a discounted subscription to the online, digital full version of the Catholic Herald for a mere “tenner”, £10.  Right now about $16.27.

LadyewellAnd speaking of the UK’s best Catholic weekly, the lovely and persistent feature-writer Anna Arco posted this piece in the last issue.

I don’t think you can see this article on the Catholic Herald website without the subscription.

Martyrs’ relics
escape blaze at Marian shrine

A collection of relics belonging Reformation martyrs have survived a fire at the Marian shrine of Ladyewell in Lancashire, which left the chapel burned out.
The Burgess altar at which St Edmund Campion, St Edmund Arrowsmith and Blessed John Woodcock celebrated Mass, and other relics of the Reformation, were rescued from the flames of a small fire which broke out at the Shrine of Our Lady of Fernyhalgh, near Preston, last week.
Fr Tom Hoole, the director of the Ladyewell Shrine and parish priest of St Mary’s Fernyhalgh, discovered the fire in the chapel in the morning at Ladyewell House and called the fire brigade.
The rescue team was able to save the Blessed Sacrament at the priest’s instructions, as well as the relics and other religious artefacts. These have suffered from smoke damage. The fire remained contained in the chapel and the shop below it thanks to closed doors. The rest of the house is intact although it has been heavily smoke damaged. The shop and the chapel are almost completely destroyed.
The fire service has said that it is currently discounting arson as the cause for the fire, but  is investigating the cause.
Fr Robert Billing, the Bishop of Lancaster’s secretary, said that Fr Hoole and the volunteers at the Shrine were determined to continue as normally as possible and that they would hold Masses at the larger St Mary’s Fernyhalgh, “just down the lane” from the damaged shrine. He said the shrine was not just a popular destination for Roman Rite pilgrims but was also visited by members of the Syro-Malabar Rite and Hindus.
Bishop Michael Campbell of Lancaster went to inspect the damage on the afternoon of the fire.
He said: “Obviously, at this time, our support and prayers are with Fr Tom Hoole and his dedicated team. Ladyewell Shrine, along with the local area, has suffered from much turbulence over the centuries and survived and flourished. It will do so again.”
The Ladyewell Shrine has been the site of devotion since the 11th century, which became a devotion to Our Lady Queen of the Martyrs’ after the Reformation. The reliquary holds relics and memorabilia belonging to the English Martyrs. The shrine was kept open during penal times, with only a short five year gap, and was the site for pilgrimages despite not having had an apparition. St Mary’s Fernyhalgh was built much later than the shrine in the 18th century.

I was unaware of this shrine.  Their website is HERE.

Posted in Saints: Stories & Symbols | Tagged , ,
7 Comments

Wm. Oddie on the Holy See/SSPX talks.

William Oddie, columnist for the UK’s best Catholic weekly, the Catholic Herald, opines about the SSPX.

I have made my own comments about the talks between the Holy See and SSPX, saying that it was no surprise that a first round of talks should not produce unity.  More is need on both sides.

My emphases and comments.

The current Catholic Herald debate on the collapse of the doctrinal discussions between the Vatican and the SSPX is getting a substantial response, and has been noticed elsewhere in the blogosphere. The whole debate, according to one blog, The Sensible Bond, [A sensible blog, by the way.  I recommend it.] was predictable: “On the one side, high-minded papal loyalists cannot say enough about how disobedient the SSPX is, or how proud. On the other side, SSPX tub thumpers jeer about the hierarchy’s tendency to wink at all rebellions apart from the SSPX’s, and the busted flush of Benedict’s papacy which has seen him gravitate from liturgical traditionalist to Assisi tribute act in a mere four years”.

Well, I can’t say I’m neutral between the two points of view, definitely tending towards being a “papal loyalist” (despite some discomfort over Assisi, I think it’s just about defensible), though how high-minded you need to be to hold such views I’m not sure: it seems to me it’s a perfectly normal for a mainstream Catholic to be loyal to the pope. [That sounds about right.]

The real question is whether there was ever any realistic prospect that there might be any kind of rapprochement. Rome’s view is that the SSPX can be as critical as it likes about the distortions of Vatican II – what Pope Benedict calls “the hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture” – but in the end it has to accept the essential Catholicity of the Council itself. This seems to me entirely reasonable. SSPX actually demands that Rome should repudiate the Council and accept that the Mass of Paul VI is invalid, even Protestant. [I don’t think many SSPXers think that the Novus Ordo is “invalid”.  Am I wrong?  That would be, well, kooky.  Most of them think that it is valid but not spiritually adequate.  Any number of them refer to Protestant influences behind its genesis.]

VOTE FOR WDTPRSThis is grotesquely unreasonable. It is inconceivable that the Vatican would simply turn against an ecumenical council of all the world’s bishops. SSPX must have known this: so it has been playing an elaborate game whose outcome was probably clearly foreseen by Bishop Fellay. [What would that imply about Fellay? That he was not being sincere from the onset?  That he was desperate?  That … what?] The Pope, on the contrary, clearly had hopes that the schism [That is not the word the Holy See uses.  It is perfectly normal to be guided by the Holy Father in this regard.] might be overcome. Well, he has done everything he could to explore every avenue towards reconcilation. Now it is over. [Who, exactly, says its over?]

The issues involved, however, will be with us for some time, and still have to be faced, since the casual acceptance of some supposedly “traditionalist” views has done considerable damage. One of these was summed up by one participant in the ongoing Herald debate: his view is essentially that the Novus Ordo is an invalid rite:

[…]

The rest of Mr. Oddie’s article includes a defense of validity of the Novus Ordo.  You can read the rest over there.

In the meantime, I haven’t seen a formal declaration from the Holy See confirming that the SSPX is in schism.  I haven’t seen any statement from the SSPX that they are no longer going to talk with official of the Holy See or delegated theologians.

But I am sure there are people on both sides who would prefer that the status quo be maintained.  Some of them are kooky, too, and they get too much attention.

Posted in Pope of Christian Unity |
82 Comments