Despite the sense of belonging to a previous era, the conference was nevertheless upbeat about the future of the Latin Mass even under a pope who has openly questioned why any young person would seek out the old rite and disparaged traditionalists as rigid and insecure navel-gazers.*
Under a what who has openly questioned, etc? No, I don't think Bergoglio is the Pope.
Both 2007 and 2017, I was outside the community of "Extra-Ordinary Form". In 2007, I was Romanian Orthodox, now I am "Bawdenite" or Orthopapist accepting the claim of Pope Michael (civil name David Bawden). Neither of which would recognise the new liturgy as ordinary form of liturgy of the Church of Christ.
In 2007, while I thought, from the outside, it was a good and promising step, I would now agree that it is too little.
The new liturgy is a "stepmother" and would be an "illegitimate wife" to the "Pope" - if he were so. Credits to Rev. Puga for the comparison. Recognition as Extra-Ordinary form does not cut it with me.
While it is too little to me, it seems to be somewhat too much to the successor in non-papacy, Bergoglio.
The current pope, though, let his thoughts known during a recent speech to an Italian liturgical society. He said there was no need to rethink the decisions that led to the liturgy reforms from the Second Vatican Council, the 1962-65 meetings that modernized the Catholic Church.
"We can affirm with security and magisterial authority that the liturgical reforms are irreversible," he said in one of his longest and most articulate speeches to date on the liturgy. It made no mention, in either the text or the footnotes, of Benedict's liturgical decree on the Latin Mass.
"Current pope" is obviously code for Bergoglio.
The new liturgy as such was not decided directly on Vatican II. It was introduced in a later step, 1969-70.
In 1994, there was a further step, the indications about Our Lord born 5199 after Creation and 2957 after Flood have been replaced (in the "Ordinary form" or new liturgy) by "unknown ages" and "several thousand years". I am not sure if Eastern rite Uniates had 5199 or 5509, 2957 or 3367. I am not sure if they kept what they had, or also replaced it.
Even the first step was bad, it involves a new offertory. A Catholic priest (as I thought I recalled him) or layman or not the parish priest (as he was saying on the occasion was saying it was not Cain's lack of wheat which made his sacrifice invalid. Of course not, but my point is, using some other "fruit of the earth" than wheat would now make the Eucharistic sacrifice invalid. And Cain back then most probably did try a burnt offering of some other thing than wheat.
According to this study here:
Cain Did Not Sacrifice Wheat
http://creavsevolu.blogspot.com/2018/01/cain-did-not-sacrifice-wheat.html
Based on this study here, of recent archaeological evidence:
Origin of Wheat?
http://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2018/01/origin-of-wheat.html
Which in turn is archaeological evidence presented by BBC, here:
BBC Documentary : Göbekli Tepe
fromturkland | 8 June 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JdAJpo6Lxk
So, it could be, Cain's sacrifice has prefigured the priests who have tried to consecrate maize bread and who have thereby committed sacrilege, in the very decade when the new liturgy was proclaimed.
That is why I stand by the liturgy which also was defended by the Council of Trent, and for the changing of which to the very recent "new liturgy", Protestants, representing a theology and most notably "eucharistology" condemned by Trent, were invited as observers.
So, to some this makes me a "rigid and insecure navel-gazer" ... wonder if that one is already in "Pope Francis Book of Insults"? Hmmmm .... "intellectual aristocrat" apparently is. Whyever that would be an insult. Also, funny the link was to a page having changed link. It redirects to the main page of a Vatican news source.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. Ignatius of Antioch
1.II.2018
* Latin Mass fans celebrate 10-year anniversary _ without pope
https://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/5513862-latin-mass-fans-celebrate-10-year-anniversary-_-wi.html
No comments:
Post a Comment