"IRREVERSIBLE"? UPDATED

Author: 
Date: 
Sunday, August 27, 2017 - 23:00
Article link: 

 

 

 

guidetto said...

I absolutely agree with Bergoglio: the Novus Ordo is not only irreversible - it is also irreformable and irrecuperable

...
Leila said...

What's panic-inducing is not the content of the statement, which is either rather pointless (yes, historical change is irreversible) or rises only to the category of "thoughts while shaving" ("you can't change change!) or is logically impossible (he's trying to bind future popes in a way that he doesn't feel bound).
No, it's the unsettling sudden and unnecessary charge into rigid authoritarianism:"with Magisterial authority", something that apparently can't be invoked for the 6th Commandment?
But confusion is his hallmark.

...

Claudio Salvucci said...

Leila, you are 100% right.

Why are we simply assuming that future scholars and legislators will be bound by the changes of the 1960s simply because they were made? The neoGallican liturgies were entrenched in major French sees for over a century and were still overturned. The Quignonez Breviary was optional, yes, but still massively popular for a time. Then it was scrapped.

And remember how Quo Primum abolished uses that were less than 200 years old? That's a century and a half older than the Novus Ordo is now.

The liturgical progressive has set himself on perilous ground and he knows it, hence this desperate scrambling for an irreversible superauthority.

...

Konstantin said...

I'm not worried that much. After all, the last century should go by the nickname "just wait a couple of decades". Changing the Good Friday prayers for the Jews? Pius XI said no. Just wait a couple of decades. John XXIII said yes. St. Joseph in the Canon? Just wait a couple of decades etc. Most things that happened after Vatican II were unthinkable in the early 20th century.

So why wouldn't some future pope simply overturn the Mass of Paul VI?

...

Woody said...

It might be good to explore the example of the French Community of Saint Martin which I gather celebrates the Novus Ordo Liturgy and Office but in Latin with Gregorian chant. As shown in their videos the altar at their seminary church appears to be arranged for ad orientem celebration. They wear the soutane and are one of the few growing communities in France.

marty said...

Just a few thoughts. God has always demanded SACRIFICE. In fact the first murder was committed over Sacrifice. One good and one not so much? Cardinals of the Second Vatican Council all took the Oath Against Modernism. To Whom did they take the Oath? In the dictionary the words 'modern' and 'new' are interchangeable? Novus Ordo - New Order? Like I said, just thoughts.

 

...

Rick said...

Before the Novus Ordo was imposed on the Church, the idea that a pope and his experts could simply deconstruct the ancient Mass and make up a new one was unthinkable. It clearly would never have occurred to the Council fathers that SC would be implement in this way.

In The Spirit of the Liturgy, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote: "The pope’s authority is bound to the Tradition of faith, and that also applies to the liturgy. It is not “manufactured” by the authorities. Even the pope can only be a humble servant of its lawful development and abiding integrity and identity. . .

Liturgy “manufactured” in this way is based on human words and opinions. It is a house built on sand and remains totally empty, however much human artistry may adorn it."

I understand this to mean that even a pope does not have the authority to simply make up ("manufacture") a new mass, almost ex nihilo.

If the Novus Ordo is of God, nothing can stop it from prospering and spreading. If it is not, it will die out under the weight of its (to me) obvious failure. I don't think it matters what Pope Bergolio says or does.

...

Rose Marie said...

I agree that Summorum Pontificum is irreversible because it confirms the truth that the Ancient Rite cannot be abrogated and remains great for us. But that doesn't mean that some misguided pontiff won't try to abolish it or confine it to weirdo groups of scattered Traddies. Pope Benedict XVI might have enabled what he predicted almost 50 years ago: the Church will survive as isolated communities. And I predict that those communities will mostly be celebrating the Ancient Rite, because most other Catholics have been so long deprived of catechesis, liturgy, and culture that they are Catholic no more and have been picked off by the dominant culture. There won't even be a fight.

 

Own comment: 

I would have to agree with Rick that the Novus Ordo is a sinking ship, no matter what Bergoglian machinations are used to prop it up.

Before the Novus Ordo was imposed on the Church, the idea that a pope and his experts could simply deconstruct the ancient Mass and make up a new one was unthinkable. It clearly would never have occurred to the Council fathers that SC would be implement in this way.

In The Spirit of the Liturgy, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote: "The pope’s authority is bound to the Tradition of faith, and that also applies to the liturgy. It is not “manufactured” by the authorities. Even the pope can only be a humble servant of its lawful development and abiding integrity and identity. . .

Liturgy “manufactured” in this way is based on human words and opinions. It is a house built on sand and remains totally empty, however much human artistry may adorn it."

I understand this to mean that even a pope does not have the authority to simply make up ("manufacture") a new mass, almost ex nihilo.

If the Novus Ordo is of God, nothing can stop it from prospering and spreading. If it is not, it will die out under the weight of its (to me) obvious failure. I don't think it matters what Pope Bergolio says or does.

It deserves no respect whatsoever as there is nothing authentically Catholic in it, and I predict that upon the return of an authentically Catholic pope, one who recognises Vatican II as the satanic revolution in the Church it really was, will do away with it and return the Tridentine Mass to its rightful place of worship.

The Mass is simply not a pope's plaything, a sandcastle, to tinkle with it, demolish and rebuilt it as he wills. He is the custodian, not the creator, and he certainly has no right to abolish a Mass passed to us from the ages - which Paul VI didn't, fortunately, although he made it seem that way - or create a new one and expect Catholics to cherish it.