Rorate Caeli
We acknowledge the ongoing rumor regarding a possible appointment of Archbishop M. Ranjith, the current Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, to a major diocese in his native Sri Lanka. Nonetheless, we also notice that it is an ancient and recurring rumor - we first reported it last April ("Motu Proprio wars in the Roman Curia: Ranjith off to Sri Lanka?").

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

Lets hope not ,hes a voice of sanity in Rome

Der Tommissar said...

A major diocese in Sri Lanka? Is that like the tallest building in Omaha?

Anonymous said...

Abp Ranjith would be sent back to his country. This would be the triumph of the Litnik lobby in Rome and all over the world.

Already, when secretary of another Roman Congregation, under John Paul II, Abp Ranjith was demoted and sent as Apostolic nuncio into a ... Muslim country. He had already at the time, made several statements that infuriated the Litnik lobby.

Even with a red hat, sending him back to Sri Lanka would be public surrender for Benedict XVI in the liturgical field : the equivalent of Waterloo ... for the French or a Liturgical Pearl Harbor (from the US side).
It's hard to see coherent move with this recurrent rumor and the recent decisions in Rome (new appointments of Ratzingerian liturgists) and the papal visit in France, where the pope supported Abp Ranjith's statements on communion on the tongue.

But the website presenting this as good news for TLM is ... completely silly. The explanation of the Pope sending pro-TLMers in Sri Lanka to strengthen his case is the most stupid line I've recently read.
We have here a case of mental disease : when trads are trying by any mean to make any possible decision from Rome being good and "traditional".
We can like this Pope very much, we can be reverent with the Papal authority without becoming brainless !

Alsaticus

Anonymous said...

"...sending him back to Sri Lanka would be public surrender for Benedict XVI in the liturgical field : the equivalent of Waterloo ... for the French or a Liturgical Pearl Harbor (from the US side)."

Talk about hyperbole. Things are getting better everyday in the church; reactionary statements over a simple rumor concerning the appointment of a particular cardinal are not helpful. Unfavorable news, rumor or otherwise, should be balanced with the correct perspective that those who love and have fought for that which is sacred have the momentum and are growing in power in the church, while the libs are losing power and credability everyday. Lets pray that whatever position Archbishop Ranjith holds, it is one most suited to his gifts and one in which he can have the most impact on giving glory to God and on the salvation of souls.

John Mastai said...

Well said on the previous comments. Even if he becomes a cardinal, in Sri Lanka it will end up being: "Cardinal Who?". I pray that this will not be a sad mistake and blemish on this papacy; otherwise a very fruitful and meaningful papacy where so much has already been accomplished.

I can't help but think of how the late John Paul II's papacy accomplished so much stabilization but in matters such as, for example, altar girls an opportunity was missed and all other good [liturgical] developments and enterprises were compromised and nullified.

The stakes are very high and we must pray.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps we need a new perspective. The reform is useless if it stays in the Vatican; it needs to penetrate the dioceses, and this can only happen if there are major prelates in key areas of the world leading by example. The future of the Church is in Asia and Africa, not Europe and certainly not America; the standard bearers may have to leave the Vatican and return to the local churches, leaving the Pope to bring in new faithful soldiers to the Vatican.

Let us rejoice whatever the Holy Father decides under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We have a great saint and mystic in Benedict; let us truct his judgement.

Anonymous said...

a) For anonymous n°1 and his/her so-called "perspective"...

"Things are getting better everyday in the church; reactionary statements over a simple rumor concerning the appointment of a particular cardinal are not helpful. Unfavorable news, rumor or otherwise, should be balanced with the correct perspective".
Gosh where are you living ? Not an earth obviously.

The only "perspective" is, following the present rythm, that Benedict XVI will need to live up to the age of 150yo, at least, for things to get truly better.
Question is to Mr Perspective : can you explain how removing the most prominent fighter for your (and mine) perspective could help getting things truly better tomorrow ? (not in anno Domini 2150)

nb. before talking of "hyperbole", you should read a post entirely, that would prevent you to distort its meaning. Thanks.

b) For anonymous 2, who has an (unconscious) sense of humor :
- "The reform is useless if it stays in the Vatican; it needs to penetrate the dioceses, and this can only happen if there are major prelates in key areas of the world leading by example."

Right but tell me, since when "reform" is in the Vatican ? ... because Abp Ranjith was appointed secretary of CDW. So removing Abp Ranjith would be reducing the already tiny presence of "reform" in the Vatican.
I guess like anonymous 1 you don't live on earth and you don't speak of the same "Vatican" as everybody.

I suggest for your last paragraph this version and you'll see how funny (peculiar) your statement is looking. I am just changing a name :
"Let us rejoice whatever the Holy Father decides under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. We have a great saint and mystic in Paul VI; let us trust his judgement."

No dear Anonymous 2, sometimes there is no reason to "rejoice whatever the Holy Father decides" : it's exactly the silly mentality of blind obedience as if the pope was some sort of Duce or Führer of Great Leader. This is certainly not the Catholic faith to confuse the Christ with the Pope : he is the Vicar of Christ, "vicar", and according to a more traditional title "servant of the servants of God" servus servorum Dei. Papal infallibility is not coextensive to any papal hickup... please, try to be serious.

I suggest you to read again Summorum Pontificum where a pope is contesting the decision of another pope (Paul VI) who forbade a legitimate rite abusively. I certainly rejoice for Pope Benedict's decision and I certainly contest the abuse of Pope Paul VI to call a cat ... a cat.

Alsaticus

Anonymous said...

Dear Alsaticus

May the peace of Jesus be yours.

Somehow or other there is the mystery of the divine will of God in the pilgrimage of the Church, and this can only be glimpsed with the eyes of faith. Our brothers in the SSPX are known to say that it was the will of God that we lost the "old Mass", the reason being we did not love it. It is love of it and hunger for it, which will restore it, and it is love and hunger for the Mass which will reform the New Mass to bring it firmly within the continuity of the tradition.

When I see the cross, I do not run away and see defeat, but our liberation. The Church is continually being transformed, the apostates on all sides are leaving, having no solid ground, and people are finding faith, slowly but surely.

I ask you to study the history of the people of God, and you will see the hand of God, but above all, I ask you to put on your shoes and travel, and you will see the transformation God is working; look in your dark corners and you will see only darkness; go where Christ is and you will see ... Christ.

Anonymous 2

Jordanes said...

If Archbishop Ranjith is sent to Sri Lanka, it would not be a good thing.

The key word here is "if."

But the website presenting this as good news for TLM is ... completely silly.

Which website presented this rumor as good news? Certainly not Rorate Caeli.

Jon K said...

"The future of the Church is in Asia and Africa, not Europe and certainly not America"

That is a very odd thing to say. The Pope is bishop of Rome, which I belive is still in Europe. The Church without Europe... who can even imagine it? The Pope has often said that Christianity is intrinsically linked to its history and its classical heritage.

Besides, you are sounding like the chief executive of some big multinational company.

Last, you ought to see the state of liturgy in Asia and Africa. Terrifying... In Europe, Pop Church is dying. Not so in Asia and Africa...

Jordanes said...

Note for Charles: Please cease posting that comment in these various commentboxes. We will not be continuing our previous exchange. Kindly respect the administrator's decision to close comments. Thanks!

Anonymous said...

To Jordanes:

I accept to end our exchange according to your decision. It was also my intention to call it quits before you did, but I would like to submit a final commentary, that you don’t have to respond or make public, as some sort of summary of my thinking regarding VII. I would like however an acknowledgement of receipt from you.

In the final analysis what VII documents say is totally irrelevant to the average catholic layman.
If you make an enquiry among catholic faithful you may be surprised to find out that close to 95% or upwards have not read VII documents, the papal encyclicals or the Regional Latin American Conferences various documents, and I think they cannot be blamed. These last documents are ecclesiastical bureaucratic meetings that make a series of recommendations that none of them are going to comply with.
With respect to VII documents they are heavy reading, full of pompous ecclesiastical language and self complimentary remarks by the bishops, that tend to turn off the reader. I myself have had trouble reading them, and have only browsed them over to find the objectionable paragraphs, but have easily been turned off by the circuitous wording, tautological remarks and numerous roundabouts about the subject of a given chapter.
The legacy of VII, that is, the fruits of the Council, is what matters, and I will try to make a list that is non exhaustive, of the baneful effects of this event in the life of the Church, caused by the immediate implementation of the Council accords, as if the bishops were in a hurry to remake the Church.
1- The first and foremost damage made by this wretched event is the desacralization of the Mass. The Tridentine Mass was de facto abolished after the Council without taking into account the faithful, as if we did not exist, or were not “the people of God”. What we found all of a sudden is that they turned around the altars, eliminated Latin, and changed the text of the Mass.
With the familiarity of the use of the common or vulgar language (vulgus=people), the informal use of celebrating Mass, the permission to receive communion standing and the elimination of railings to separate the presbiterium from the faithful, the sense of sacrality was lost and now people que up for communion without confession, because a number of them think it is a memorial meal and not the body and blood of our Lord.
2- Secondly, the laicization of the clergy and religious orders, in order to “update” them according to the “signs of the times”.
This originated a massive exodus first of the clergy followed shortly by the laity, and the hemorrhage still continues.
3-The laxity of Church discipline resulted in an ambient of permissiveness that led to experimentation with profane customs and mores. This led to infiltration of homosexuality (or an increase of it) into the clergy to the point that nowadays it is estimated that the percentage of homosexuals inside the Church, particularly AmChurch, is upwards of 50%. A derivative of this phenomenon is the abominable aberration of pederasty.
4-Last and not least is the loss of authority of the Pope, as a consequence of the concept of Collegiality contemplated in LG, and the independence of the particular Episcopal Conferences, that manage their respective churches as separate entities of the Catholic Church, going as far as to defy the Holy See if its directives do not suit them.

The present situation of the Catholic Church saddens me and it causes me grief to contemplate what is left of its former beauty. As I yearn to discern a sign of change in the downward path that it experiments nowadays, I am turned off by attitudes from Church authorities, including the Pope. That is why I react harshly and express my feelings openly in frustration.
I think that the future of the Church lies in the Traditional Movement, that seeks to restore She to her former splendor.
The SSPX fraternity, although in a de facto schism (because it has not been declared officially so), has been a stalwart of the Traditional Movement.
When the EDPC gave in to its exigency of celebrating exclusively the Tridentine Rite, they made and additional requisite: that SSPX recognize the VII documents.
Bishop Fellay accepted, provided that those were interpreted in the light of Tradition. Of course, they refused to comply because the word Tradition is anathema in the Roman Curia.
Contrary to what you expressed in past exchanges, SSPX is not treated charitably by its counterparts in the French Church, neither in other countries; they are hated openly, as if they were the scum of the earth.
I expect that in spite of the harshness of past exchanges (from both parts) there remains no animosity on your part, as there remains none on me.
Best regards,
Charles