Summorum Pontificum And Bishop Francis


In the present situation, it is more than understandable that the fans of the Better Mass be worried about the effect this devastating, utterly disgraceful Pontificate will have on Summorum Pontificum.

Whilst I have forgotten my crystal ball at home again, I think a couple of reasonable assumptions can be made:

1) Bishop Francis will not dare to openly go against Summorum Pontificum: not whilst the Pontiff Emeritus is alive, not after he has died. A man clearly driven by vanity, the Bishop of Rome will not dare to take initiatives that would procure him a very vocal, very persistent and very painful opposition. Look at his actions, and realise the man accurately avoid every stance that would cause widespread opposition to the new born cult of Bishop Francis. Too many are the friends of the Tridentine Mass, for him to go and pick this particular fight. It must also be said that the Bishop lives in a liturgical and theological glasshouse, and certainly understands if he starts to throw stones at people who understand Liturgy and Theology he will be hurt, badly.

2) This does not mean the Bishop, being a 1a liturgical Philistine, will not do whatever he can to damage the cause of sound liturgy whilst avoiding the flak. I can well imagine that he will take care bishops of TLM dioceses are replaced, when the usual time comes, with other liturgical philistines, certain to provide an hostile environment for the TLM; with the obvious exception of those dioceses where a SSPX is within driving distance.

I cannot see the Bishop of Rome doing anything that makes him obviously unpopular, but I do believe he will do whatever he can to hush the effects of SP if he can do so without open confrontation.

The biggest safety for SP lies, if you ask me, in the robust presence of the SSPX. As long as they are strong and expanding, the enemies of the Tridentine Mass will have to be very careful, and Bishop Jorge's cult of Bishop Jorge will do the rest.

I might be wrong, of course. Time will tell.

Mundabor

 

About these ads

Posted on July 18, 2013, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, FSSPX, Traditional Catholicism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. 22 Comments.

  1. I couldn’t agree with you more, Mundabor!
    Only yesterday I was speaking with a brother priest, much older, wiser, and more experience than I, he told me that we: “Need to be VERY cautious. We are back to square one, i.e. before the 1988 indult!”
    I pray this is not the case, but….

    • I hope this is not the case. I also don’t thing the situation could be reversed so easily, this would be a huge boost for the SSPX.

      I doubt the Vatican will make such a poor chess move.

      M

  2. And yet we have a new article from the editors of the National Catholic Register–WYD and the Trayvon Tragedy–that includes the words, “In the person of Pope Francis, these youth and others across the globe see a model of masculinity worth emulating…” Aside from their myopic view of the Zimmerman trial–and the sidebar ad bragging about their having captured the attention of the Library of Congress for their coverage of Pope Benedict XVI’s retirement–where do they get the idea that Pope Francis is a model of masculinity worth emulating when he hasn’t risked his popularity by speaking out against the sodomite laws passing all around him.
    I wonder if he’ll have anything to say about the new pro-abortion law in Brazil (or the bill soon to become law). Or will he be as silent as the Brazilian bishops have been?

    • Bishop Bergoglio is not my orgoglio.

      I think in Brazil he will say something very generic, good-sounding, and noncommittal, on the line of “let us joyously celebrate the unborn life”.

      Those who are easily pleased will be pleased, and those whom he does not want to anger will not be angered.

      M

  3. Mundabor, In my humble opinion Summorum Pontificum was a bad idea. Firstly, to have apparently ‘two’ coexisting rites within the Church at the same time seems odd. But if we understand that Summorum Pontificum is Only a mere concession granted by B16 and may be resinded at any time or amended as maybe to depend upon the explicit permission of the local Ordinary may be on the ‘cards’ for the future. The ‘Old Mass’, one must remember is still ONLY ‘ an extraordinary form’ and is NOT the Ordinary Rite of Holy Mass of the Roman Catholic Church.The Mass cannot be a medieval crystalisation as the sspx would have us believe.
    Unfortunately, the ‘old rite’ or the ‘TLM’ as they call it is used as part of the ‘hidden agenda’ of the sspx who hide behide the ‘old rite’ to make their attacks against the Magisterium of the Church which includes a substantial part of Vatican II, no matter what they say was indeed a dogmatic Council and more representative of the Church even than Trent. One need onlu examine its dognatic definitions like the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church ‘Lumen Gentium.’

    • But of course it wasn’t a dogmatic council, merely a pastoral one. I have read Lumen Gentium and neither LG nor an angel coming from heaven could ever change anything in what is infallible teaching of the Church. LG itself is a tragic mish-mash or tradition and innovation, and isn’t worth much.

      Still, even if Pope Benedict felt he had to act because he had the pain in the neck of the SSPX, this goes to show the SSPX have the right agenda.

      If you search this forum for “SSPX”, you will see where I am in the matter. Please forgive my lack of inclination in wanting to repeat the same things again and again.

      M

  4. Mundabor, seems as though this time you are going to be ‘proved’ wrong!

    See: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350567?eng=y

  5. Mundabor, Surely, you of all people don’t need a ‘Crystal ball’! It means the abrogation of Summorum Pontificum, piece by piece by piece……..

    • We will cross that bridge when we come to it.

      I thought he would rather try to undermine SP, but every month reveals a new dimension in this man’s subversive behaviour.

      He clearly wants to be the Church’s Revolutionary In Chief.

      M

  6. Mundabor, Summorum Pontificum is a motu próprio and can easily be undone with the ‘stoke of the pen’ by Pope Francis. As easy as that!

  7. “We will cross that bridge when we come to it.” Mundabor, there will simply be no bridge to cross ! LOL’s In effect the motu próprio, Summorum Pontificum’ has already been abrogated and NO appeal to a Higher Court of the Holy See is possible.

  8. Mundabor, stop being naive! When a certain man invaded Poland they thought that would be the end of it. But was it! NO, it was the ‘testing ground’ for something bigger.

    Not much you can do about it but be obedient and docile to the expression. of the Magisterium of the Church as voiced by H. H. Pope Francis. Certainly ‘counting’ rosaries are not going to help! Are they! For me and many others ‘two rites’ of Mass existing in the Church seem inconsistente anyway and the TLM is largely used by those with a certain ‘hidden agenda’ and use it soley as a pretext of a complete rejection of the Second Vatican Council, which was a Dogmatic Council and more expressive than any other in Church History (I know you will disagree with this). I cannot understand why the sspx accept Vatican I, yet reject Vatican II ! Seems inconsistent to me to say the least!

    • Dom, you are the one who is being naive.

      Francis still has to show he has Hitler’s guts, and I would say doubts are more than justified for the time being. Of course, he might try to move with the steamroller, but then again it might backfire. He wants to be popular, remember.

      As to the Magisterium, it being ordinary Magisterium it is certainly fallible, as this disgraceful Bishop of Rome has already shown several times in these short months. It being fallible, no obedience is given to it inasmuch as it is in contrast with the ordinary and universal Magisterium. It’s not complicated.

      The other very stupid thing that you say is that Vatican II was a dogmatic council. V II was merely a pastoral council, but as the Church cannot change her own essence – not more than God could change His Being – to say that the V II was a dogmatic council brings nowhere anyway. To call the mess of V II the most “expressive” council in history shows, again, that you have a lot to learn.

      Not having done your homework, you do not understand why the SSPX accepts Vatican I and not Vatican II. Because V I is full in harmony with 2000 years of Church teaching, and V II is in full disharmony with it, obviously…

      M

  9. He IS popular! Did you see the streets of Rio! More than three million people! Whatever He says the faithful will believe Him, they not only believe Him but believe in Him! You say that He (Pope Francis) “may try to move the steamroller.” I agree, Mundabor, but remember POPE FRANCIS IS THE STEAMROLLER, and knows very well how to drive!

    While I agree Vatican I was also in harmony with 2000 years of Church teaching, it was not without its problems too, quite a number of bishops were contrary to the definition of Papal Infallibilty which also caused a ‘schism’ of the ‘old catholics’ of sorts, albeit for different reasons like the ssxp schism ! But I believe that Vatican II was more representational of the Church, far more bishops attended and contributed and the Church had access to the modern media too that Vatican I did not have!

    • Er, no.

      His fickle popularity is the popularity of the TV star. It might not resist a serious stress. It is the superficial attention given to him to people who don’t even know the ten Commandments, and for whom the visit to the Pope is a way to get a bit of excitement.

      Yes, they might believe whatever crap he says (they aren’t instructed, as we all know), but this does not mean they will follow him when he becomes “divisive” instead of being the “look how good we all are” kind of chap.

      As to the steamroller, unless I see it moving my suggestion is: keep dreaming. I might be wrong, mind; but I won;t change my mind until this man dares to be controversial.

      In which case, of course – if he dares the conflict with the Traditionalist, but not with the abortionists and the perverts, of whom he is obviously a friend and protector – I will consider him even more of a fifth column.

      As to vatican I, you make the usual mistake of those who see half a tree here and half a bush there and say “oh, but the forest wasn’t so healthy even in those times”. Vatican I was *obviously* in perfect harmony with 2000 years of Catholic teaching, which is why only a couple of cranks defected, and we know how they ended. Compare with the SSPX, which grows and prosper like bergoglio’s Church can only dream of.

      The “representation” argument doesn’t work, because the Church is not a democracy. What count, by the Church, is the adherence to Truth. If an angel comes down from heaven and start preaching a gospel that all bishops believe but one, the one is right, and all others are wrong.

      M

      M

  10. Pope Francis will NOT be made to look ‘divisive’ but the others who oppose Him will! Who has the best PR network in the world!

    • Frankly, to rely on PR outs you as so V II.

      But again, Francis’ alleged popularity is a paper tiger. The man is addicted to popularity. He is the god of himself. He won’t risk his position so lightly.

      M

  11. Mundabor, You said ” I won;t change my mind until this man dares to be controversial.”

    This is exactly the purpose of your blog ! LOL’s

    • Of course this blog is controversial, Dom.
      This is exactly the reason why you are here. To give a useful contribution, one hope, instead of trolling around.

      If we had good clergy, this blog wouldn’t even exist.

      M

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,962 other followers

%d bloggers like this: