Rorate Caeli

Pope stresses "need for a radical change in priestly formation" - Jesuit General

From UCAN:

"Think globally", says top Jesuit.



The superior general of the Society of Jesus has urged Jesuits in South Asia to undertake new works at the international level.

Transcend the narrow understanding of the Jesuit province and share the resources at regional and global levels, Father Adolfo Nicolas told 18 provincials and two regional superiors in South Asia during their meeting March 1-6 in Bangalore.

Father Nicolas is in India from February 26 to March 12 mainly to participate in the assembly of The Jesuit Conference of South Asia held in Bangalore. He will also visit Jesuits and their works in Bangalore, Mangalore, Calicut and Kolkata.

Father Nicholas told the provincials that the Vatican has also entrusted to the Jesuits several formation institutes to teach theology. The Jesuit superior general said Pope Benedict XVI sought the help of the Society of Jesus for the integrated formation of priests and stressed the need for a radical change in priestly formation, during a “one-on-one” meeting he had with the Pope.

Some 18,500 Jesuits (18,516 at the end 2008 according to the Italian wikipedia article on the Jesuits; by the end of 2009 the Jesuits were down to 18,266 -Pascal) work in 113 countries through communities and apostolic works organized by “provinces” which belong to one of 10 “assistancies” or regions around the world. South Asia, with more than 4,000 members, is the largest of the Jesuit assistancies. It includes Afghanistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

Source: www.ucanews.com

65 comments:

David Werling said...

How about a radical transformation of the Jesuits into what they were prior to the 20th Century?

How about a radical transformation of the Jesuits into a religious order that...say... a St. Ignatius of Loyola might recognize?

Really? The pope is going to treat the splinter and ignore that the limb is hanging?

I for one think we've had enough of the global initiatives of these modernist turn coats masquerading as sons of Loyola. It's high time they just go away.

Arthur said...

Seriously? We are now looking to the Jesuits for tips on priestly formation?!?

Giovanni A. Cattaneo said...

The Jesuits in the global south, the ones talked about in the story are the Jesuits that St. Ignatius would recognize.

I know that for most of us Jesuit is another word for heretic now a days but there are those that are still doing the Lord's work.

Anonymous said...

Let us hope and pray they can set their own house in order first.

Anonymous said...

The Jesuit Order, now down below 18,000 with less than 12,000 priests is dying out rapidly, especially in all of Europe and the USA.
Before the disaster of Vatican II (and it was the greatest disaster the Church has ever witnessed save for the period of "The Enlightenment" during the late 18th and early 19th centuries when revolutions and secularist governments wiped out thousands of communities of monks, nuns, and other religious Orders), the Jesuits had, in 1964 about 36,200 members, of which 30,000 were priests.
The Franciscans had close to 29,000 members with over 20,000+ priests, and the Dominicans had 10,200 members. Even the strict clositered Trappists had 5,500 members and were flourishing.
The Jesuits are today, for all intents and purposes, wiped out in Western Europe, with a median age of over 70. Same in the USA.
The Franciscans, with less than 10,000 priests stand a good chance of being down to less than 1,000 within the next 20 years. Unthinkable perhaps, but true.

This Pope has done nothing to restore the Roman Catholic Church, let alone the priesthood and priestly formation. The corruption, rot, and "Spirit of Vatican II" mentality of the 26+ years of John paul II's reign will take 50 or more years to recover from. Blessed John Paul II ?, Saint John Paul II? Hardly!

Unless the Roman Catholic Church, and the presthood recovers both the Tridentine Latin Mass, and all the traditions and disiplines (including those of pre-Vatican II priestly formation), then all this is talk, and totally worthless.
If they keep holding up Vatican II as the model, we might as well say goodby to the Jesuits, Franciscans, nearly all religious Orders of both men and women, and the diosecean priesthood as well.
Not to mention Catholic parish schools, parishes, etc.
IN a word, goodby to it all.

Anonymous said...

You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it!
-Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ

I'd rather trust a pope, a successor of the same Peter, even if he endorses Vatican II, even if he allegedly does not do anything for tradition (he does. Just look at one Vatican Liturgy.), even if he says the Jesuits are models for priests, for my salvation, rather than an obscure schismatic sect. Are you saying Jesus is lying there, Anonymous 3? :)

Yes, it takes some time to repair the damage done by the false interpretation of VII, but disobedience to the pope and this I-know-better-than-the-successor-of-Saint-Peter attitude does not help. at all.

Cheers,
SoG

Anonymous said...

This made me laugh, sorry... Jesuits? really? I am from South America. It is simply shameful how the Jesuits became border-line marxists / extreme modernists in all of our countries. They have been introducing the most bizarre and extravagant "theologies" since I was a child and assisted to NO mass in my local parish (a Jesuit parish, since in South America they are many times in charge of parishes). Now away from that, I heard from my friends they perform "zen" courses and have been combining it with "ignatian prayer"...
And by the way, most of all are already seniors...
God bless the SSPX in Buenos Aires, where I can assist to the True Mass.

Anonymous said...

Great, he asks the Jesuits!

Anonymous said...

A radical change in priestly formation with the Jesuits in charge?!?!? Talk about the fox guarding the hen-house. Please, can we have some logic and sensus catholicus to such matters!

Anonymous said...

Dear Readers of Rorate Caeli,
It saddens me that many responders to this blog quickly degenerate into hateful "speech" about our holy Fathers and Vatican II. Just remember - our Lord Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would be with Peter and the Church - not individual members, whether they hate the Church for their perception of not going far enough or going too far.

Many of you admire Cardinal Burke (which is good) and some post their hope to see him pope. However, I know him personally and he would be appalled to read the terrible comments of these popes whom he loves so dearly. Take his example and learn to love the Church. Quit calling Vatican II a disaster just because some have misinterpreted the documents. Thank you.

Respectfully submitted,

V. Double

Anonymous said...

Benedict XVI must really be delusional to ask the Jesuits (of all people) for help in priestly formation. LOL !!!

That;s like asking a bunch of Baptists, Episcopalians, or Presbyterians to help the Catholic Church restore the priesthood!!

The Jesuits (for the most part), are as Catholic as that....which is to say not at all!! : )

Anonymous said...

Dear V. Double, I might agree with you on many points, however the problem is that not just "some" misintepreted the VII documents. The problem is, that absolute majority. Moreover, it became the only permissible ideology of those, who used to do church policy. Hopefully, the winds are changing. And we should really pray for Peter. My hope is that Giovanni A. Cattaneo words (about the Jesuits in the global south, that they are the ones that St. Ignatius would recognize) are really true. In this case, it is a right choice, otherwise, God help us. oremus pro pontifice nostro Benedicto! Jonvilas

ToS said...

Sog wrote:

Yes, it takes some time to repair the damage done by the false interpretation of VII, but disobedience to the pope and this I-know-better-than-the-successor-of-Saint-Peter attitude does not help. at all.

The “Pope is impeccable” type of thinking does not help either. If someone disagrees with the Pope he is not automatically a dissident schismatic as the neo-cons like to bemoan. “The gates of hell shall not prevail” does not prevent the Pope from kissing the Qur’an or not knowing what action to take regarding the Jesuits.

It is madness to simultaneously see the entire Jesuit order as a problem but trust the Pope by not criticizing him in not tackling the real problem. There is no logic or reason to this.

Also “false Vatican II interpretations” were for the most part not handled by the Popes correctly; therefore you indirectly criticize the office of Pope and fall under your “I-know-better-than-the-successor-of-Saint-Peter” condemnation because you are also claiming you know better in regards to not letting these false interpretations thrive unlike the modern Popes.

thomas tucker said...

Well said, V. Double.
The disaster for the Church was not Vatican II, but the torrential changes in society in the 1960's, and the devastation after WWII.
TO blame everything on Vatican II is beyond simplistic.
In fact, I suspect without Vatican II, that the drops in church attendance, numbers entering seminaries, numbers leaving the priesthood, etc., would all have been worse, not better!

Anonymous said...

"Quit calling Vatican II a disaster just because some have misinterpreted the documents."

What should we call it? The documents were ambiguously written in order that they might be "misinterpreted," were they not? That is pre-meditated. The results speak for themselves. Empty seminaries, convents, and pews. Heretic Jesuits running amok.

The "windows were opened to the world" and the putrid stench of modernism drafted right in.

Nicholas said...

"In fact, I suspect without Vatican II, that the drops in church attendance, numbers entering seminaries, numbers leaving the priesthood, etc., would all have been worse, not better!"

This is one of the most appallingly obtuse comments I have ever read on this blog.

Anonymous said...

I'm not clear why all the references to misinterpretation of Second Vatican documents.

I'm not anguished by misinterpretation that rules the roost for a while. What does gravely concern me is that aspects of these documents do not allow for any possible, viable, sound interpretation that is congruent with Holy Tradition.

That does constitute a critical crisis.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if the pope ever read Malachi Martin's bestseller "The Jesuits."

If he did, he would have supressed the order by now.

Oliver said...

It makes one wonder whether there is anything worth salvaging from the Roman institution after a reign of 'demolition popes'. Prelates are saying that the Church is finished and appear to be operating a smooth closing-down system merging the faithful with the secular mainstream. Such a convergence exercise will transfer the Church into the hands of government bureaucrats, cultural agencies and museum curators for a decent burial.

Jeremiah Methuselah said...

Sorry to be pernickety, but cannot these “Anonymous” contributors exercise their brains a little and accord themselves each a distinctive name ? It would add to the value of the postings, IMNSHO.The comments cannot, surely, all be from the same source ?

It is just about impossible to discern one from another/all the others. Think about it. Or am I missing something else ?

Thank you.

Poimier

LeonG said...

"Think globally"

Yes, that is about the best they can come up with. If modernist thought produced positive results there would be no ecclesiastical crisis at present.

Anonymous said...

"Well said, V. Double.
The disaster for the Church was not Vatican II, but the torrential changes in society in the 1960's, and the devastation after WWII.
TO blame everything on Vatican II is beyond simplistic.
In fact, I suspect without Vatican II, that the drops in church attendance, numbers entering seminaries, numbers leaving the priesthood, etc., would all have been worse, not better!"

Absolutely a violation of valid judgement, and atypical of what a neo-con, pro-Vatican II Catholic would say.

Look at the stats of the Catholic Church across the board at the time of the death of Pius XII (priestly vocations, nuns, religious Orders, Mass attendance, missions, conversions, building projects etc.), and look at the stats now....where Mass attendance in most of Europe is below 20% ( in some places as low as 5%) and the USA where it's appraching the same. Look at the literally thousands of closed monasteries, convents, schools, seminaries, parishes since Vatican II.

If after all that, you still think the same, then I'd have to say you're living in a dream world , Bud.

Mr. Ortiz said...

"This Pope has done nothing to restore the Roman Catholic Church, let alone the priesthood and priestly formation."

Such negativity is not at all in the spirit of Lent.

Anonymous said...

I am not surprised by how the documents were ambiguously written so that they may be misinterpreted. Nor does it surprise me that the modernist and liberals took advantage of the ambiguity. What surprises and saddens me is the fact that nothing or close to nothing was done to correct and if needed punish those who took advantage of those ambiguous documents so as to prevent the chaos we see in the church today.
TradCarlos

Stephen said...

anonymous at 14:50

You can stick your head back in the sand now...

Anonymous said...

Gosh is it serious ?

The pope would seek any "help" from the Neo-modernist in chief, the General of the Arrupist neo-jesuits ?

If this is true, Catholic priesthood would be dead soon.

Please saint Ignatius deliver us from the present neo-"jesuits" ! They are a devastating "spiritual" (materialist) tsunami.

Alsaticus

Anonymous said...

The ideas of three of the most influential Jesuits: De Lubac, Rahner, Balthasar (the latter left later on to form a lay institute but remained a Jesuit in his outlook) form the basis of most seminary formation today and will do so for years to come. Their attack against the perennial philosophy was so fierce and comprehensive that their ideas have to all intents and purposes eliminated any real move to renew it. What many have not noticed is that such antipathy has had its effects on priests everywhere so much so that most have little interest in reading the TLM.

All three Jesuits were admired and their ideas were adopted by the previous pope and also the present one. These men's ideas were 'radical' back before V2 so one can only wonder what 'radical' might mean to the present pope given his admiration of their ideas. I'd like in an ideal world to think 'radical transformation' might involve a return to the perennial philosophy. However, being realistic HH is no supporter of the perennial philosophy, in fact he goes out of his way to use terms other than traditional nomenclature.

So radical transformation clearly implies something along the lines of the nouvelle theologie, the ressourcement so beloved of HH.

The only Jesuit who comes anywhere near presenting a rigourous program for renewal along perennial philosophical / theological lines is Bernard Lonergan. However, he has only a select following and his ideas are certainly not very widespread among Jesuits let alone the wider range of clerge in other orders and among diocesan.

Anonymous said...

A global oriented (catholic) priest goes against the dogma of inculturation established by the II Vatican Council. And the Jesuits are the champions of inculturation(in faith and morals).

thomas tucker said...

Anonymous and NIcholas, I am sure you are familiar with the fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc. Your analysis of the changes that occured after Vatican II are a good example of that.
There is no way that the Catholic edifice just prior to Vatican II was solid and stable, only to crumle within a few short years after Vatican II. That beggars the imagination. Sorry guys, the rot was already present prior to Vatican II, and was both broad and deep.

Brian said...

Pope Benedict XVI sought the help of the Society of Jesus for the integrated formation of priests and stressed the need for a radical change in priestly formation

Forgive me for being slow, but what exactly is meant by "the integrated formation of priests" and "a radical change in priestly formation"?

One meaning of "radical change" would be change that effects fundamental or revolutionary change in current practices.

Does the term here mean a radical re-orientation toward and integration with Tradition in opposition to the hermeneutic of rupture, or does it mean a radical break with Traditional priestly formation, or does it mean some kind of revolutionary change in priestly formation that somehow, at the same time, is in perfect continuity with Tradition?

Mr. Ortiz said...

None of you guys get diplomacy.

At all.

Jordanes551 said...

Sure we do. Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie," while reaching for a stick.

Pascendi said...

Who are all these little popes pronouncing on Popes, Councils etc., etc.? Can they not show at least a little decency like Luther and leave the Church?

Anonymous said...

thomas tucker, yes but Vatican II reinforced what was rotten in the Church, it heightened the process. The council gave it citizenship status.

Anonymous said...

Yes, implement Veterum Sapientia, and add to that TLM formation and that radical change in the formation of Priests will be well on its' way. The rest will follow naturally. Pray for our Priests, Seminarians and for Bishops. Bishops need the extra prayers as there hearts are so often hardened, even against their own Priests.

Anonymous said...

How can people continue to deny that Vatican II was in large part the reason for the decline in the Church? Priests, lay people and others did not just one day up and leave without reason or stating it? Millions worldwide say it, and almost wear it as some external mark fo freedom. "I left the Church after the CHANGES from Vat II"... Period..Millions...wake up people..They say it..

M. A. said...

The disaster for the Church was not Vatican II, but the torrential changes in society in the 1960's, and the devastation after WWII.
____________________

I don't think so.

If salt loses its' flavor, what good is it? It's been said that as the Church - the salt - goes, so goes the world. After VII, one no longer referred to her as the Church militant, but rather the wimpy pilgrim Church.

Pascal said...

"The Jesuits in the global south, the ones talked about in the story are the Jesuits that St. Ignatius would recognize."

Ummm, no. Jesuits in South Asia tend to bury themselves deep in religious syncretism.

o said...

Children, you despair so easily.

Did not Jesus say He uses the weakest - and what is the weakest order?

Does not a man act like a child until he is given a son, a significant responsibility - and then he starts behaving like a responsible adult? Is that not why God blesses some irresponsible "couples" with pregnancy?

The Pope knows why he is asking the Jesuits. Pray for them! Like we pray for the pregnant couples heading in for an abortion! God wants the weakest to come through. God wants you to pray for them!

RipK said...

Speaking of formation, a very interesting article posted at Catholic Herald:

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2011/03/14/are-our-seminarians-being-taught-about-the-extraordinary-rite-and-if-not-why-not/

Anonymous said...

Pascendi:

St. Bridget of Sweden referred to Pope Urban V as, "a murderer of souls, more unjust than Pilate and more cruel than Judas."

When the tone of discourse sinks this level by those here who are concerned about the recent drift of this particular papacy, please return to lecture us.

Vobiscumator said...

Very well, Pascendi, if you think a number of us are out of line, I'll take you up on your challenge.

Please explain to me exactly what level of assent to the documents of Second Vatican and subsequent authoritative papal pronouncements such as JPII's Ut Unum Sint I am required to give to be a Catholic in good standing who doesn't have to leave the Church.

Taking Unitatis Redintegratio as a good, key example, please explain to me how the teaching in UR is compatible with 1,900 years of previous thought and teaching, including the consensus of Church leaders during the first millenium, Boniface VIII's Unam Sanctum, Pius IX's Quanto Conficiamur, Leo XIII's Satis Cognitum and Pius XI's Moritalium Animos.

Or if you concede that there is rupture in teaching and thought introduced by UR, then what should I be doing with that and why.

Pascendi said...

11:50

It is you who are lecturing, not I. St. Bridget was a saint who delivered private messages to the Pope. She was not a strident "little pope" ...

Anonymous said...

Pascendi,
Sad comment. It means the only way to stay in the Church is to be mute? blind obedience? brainless Catholics? Critical thinking means Lutheranism?
M.M.

Alice said...

From St.Ignatius' "Spiritual Exercises"

Rules for Thinking, Judging, and Feeling with the Church:

The First Rule. With all judgment of our own put aside, we ought to keep our minds disposed and ready to be obedient in everything to the true Spouse of Christ our Lord, which is our Holy Mother, the hierarchical Church.
[...]
The Ninth Rule. Lastly, we should praise all the precepts of the Church, while keeping our mind ready to look for reasons for defending them and not for attacking them in any way.
[...]
The Tenth Rule. We ought to be more inclined to approve and praise the decrees, recommendations, and conduct of our superiors than to speak against them. For although some of these acts are not or were not praiseworthy, to speak against them either by preaching in public or by conversing among the ordinary people would cause more murmuring and scandal than profit. And through this the people would become angry at their officials, whether civil or spiritual. However, just as it does harm to speak evil about officials among the ordinary people while they are absent, so it can be profitable to speak of their bad conduct to persons who can bring about a remedy.
[...]
The Thirteenth Rule. To keep ourselves right in all things, we ought to hold fast to this principle: What I see as white, I will believe to be black if the hierarchical Church thus determines it. For we believe that between Christ our Lord, the Bridegroom, and the Church, his Spouse, there is the one same Spirit who governs and guides us for the salvation of our souls. For it is by the same Spirit and Lord of ours who gave the ten commandments that our holy Mother Church is guided and governed.

Anonymous said...

o wrote:

"God wants the weakest to come through. God wants you to pray for them."

Well said. Our Lady also has said, through the approved apparitions at Fatima and Akita, that we are to pray much for sinners, especially clergy (Akita).

Our Lady has never said that we are to criticize and publically expose bad deeds. No, she said that we are to pray for sinners, and do penance, which isn't nearly as much fun, or as easy, as criticizing them.

When a Catholic prays much for others, they no longer want to spend time criticizing others.

Also, has anyone seen the original document that states that the pope really said that he wanted the Jesuits to train priests? There may be more (or maybe less) to the story than what the Asian Catholic newsource has stated.

Anonymous said...

Anon 14:59

Praying for others does not exclude offering legitimate criticism in a public forum. The discussion, in fact, revolves around the legitimacy of the criticism.

Anonymous said...

"It means the only way to stay in the Church is to be mute? blind obedience? brainless Catholics? Critical thinking means Lutheranism?"

Correct!


Delphina

Pascendi said...

Stop constructing a straw man. I'm not talking about blind obedience nor VII being argued as a dogmatic Council. I am suggesting that there is a problem with
claiming this or that rite of Mass as the "true" Mass; this or that blessed or saint declared by the Church to be dismissed out of hand; private laymen deciding if there is or is not a rupture ...

Anonymous said...

Dear Stephen,
I am not "anonymous 14:50" I have signed my name each time: V. Double.

And, I do not have my head in the sand. I, too, have lived before and after Vatican II. I, too, have studied the documents of Vatican II as well as other church documents.

It is a teaching of the Church, whom we claim to love and believe in that the Pope speaks infallibly when he speaks "ex cathedra" as well as at a legitimately called Council. If not, then it is only rational to claim that the Council of Trent was a farce. I don't think you nor I intend to claim that, do we?

By the way, Stephen, what is your last name?

Note the Name: V. Double.

Vobiscumator said...

Pascendi,

I'm not talking about straw men, beatifications, canonizations, forms of liturgical worship or any claim that Second Vatican has any doctrinal material that is 'dogmatic' in the sense of the infallible Extraordinary Magisterium being at work.

I am talking about the fact that it is generally considered that Second Vatican doctrinal content has a non-infallible authority of the Authentic Magisterium associated with it, and am asking you how I am to address that and what I have to affirm or not affirm and with what manner of assent to be a Catholic in good standing who doesn't have to be shown the door, particularly when I see some glaring inconsistencies with the past. I don't think that's unreasonable in light of your original post on this thread.

Father Joseph said...

I do hope that people do not judge the Society by a few who have gone over the edge.

We are a large Society of men with a great deal of diversity and talents.

Our lives are dedicated to the greater honor and Glory of God. That has not changed. The large number of our members attempt to live the life that Ignatius left for us, the life of the Gospel and teachings of the Church.

Mot all of us agree with some of the articles written by our men in America; nor do we agree with some of the license that some of our Universities have given into regarding Social matters.

I do believe our superior general will appoint some sound men in the Society to help in this "so called radical change in priestly formation.

I have yet to see the recommended changes .. let us pray they are healthy changes recommended and in line with the teachings of the Gospel message and Church teachings.

Father Joseph, SJ
Houston, Texas

LeonG said...

Whenever we hear the modern church call for "radical change" beware.

Anonymous said...

Father, with all due respect. I absolutely disagree that are "just a few who have gone over the edge"...
M.M.

Pascendi said...

18:38,

Your posts are certainly well taken. I too realize that the Council is Pastoral; though it has been not applied - distorted. Did not Ab. Lefebvre himself concede that his seminaries were one of the few that actually followed the recommendations of the Council in seminary education?

However, there are sadly Catholics who over-reach themselves and stray into a form of protestantism. One only has to read various comments... it might well be that these same persons have imbibed protestantism, having grown up in a protestant country (I here refer to those writers who come from the United States). Great care has to be taken to adhere to a truly integral Catholic culture and avoid the errors of protestant individualism.

Joan said...

In the rather large Jesuit Province where I am (in USA) there are 3 seminarians. One is openly gay and participated in pro-gay organizations in college. The other two I cannot say as I've only seen photos, but one had an earring in each ear (looked like a pirate), and the other had a hairstyle and clothing somewhat akin to a rock star. We can't judge by superficials, but they must mean to make some statement by these bizarre images, and it does not strike me as a holy one.

benjoyce said...

http://www.youtube.com/user/RealCatholicTV?feature=mhum#p/a/u/0/j-kRwoZKjPk

Follow this link to "Real Catholic TV". Michael Vorris reports that the soon to be released "revised" Moto Prop or SP from the Pope will back the strength of the Latin Mass and enhance it avaliability. This is up beat compared to earlier posts that were so negative concerning Bp. Wuerls actions in D.C.

Anonymous said...

It is evident that there is great feeling of unhappiness among the readers of this blog and many blogs which discuss the collapse of the church.

Some don't see it as a collapse...yet.

But many have already lost their churches. Their children have lost their faith. Their art has been destoyed. Their sanctuary is a 3 ring circus.

So, if people seem at times harsh, or uncharitable, there may be a good reason.

Remember Jesus lashed out at the money changers in the temple--so for those of you who may ask "what would Jesus do?" What would he do if his father's house were being desecrated week after week.

And yet, when there are small glimmers of hope, like Summorum Pontificum, those glimmers quickly fade when the politics of the church take over.

The church as many new it is gone. The church as has been preserved through history is being torn down brick by brick.

How else should the faithful respond?

Popule meus, quid feci tibi? Aut in quo constristavi te? Responde mihi.

Miserabilis

Anonymous said...

Miserabilis,

"Commune periculum concordiam parit."

I guess not all Latin wisdom is accurate.

Giles

benjoyce said...

I'm hopeful for this "revised" edition of the SP. After listening to Michael Voris see above video, I think B16 will give the liturgical liberals a good beating. This pope has spent a huge time in the Vatican as JPII right hand man, and consequently he's a master administrator. He knows what he can and cannot do and one thing he will do is keep the door open for the Holy Spirit, through the liturgy. Based on private revelation through the Blessed Mother, the faith will come back but during and after much tribulation. As the Catholic faith returns the lay people will increasingly demand the Latin Mass. Many of whom will be repeating what is said in the Great State of Maine. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"

Anonymous said...

Benjoyce wrote:

"Based on private revelation through the Blessed Mother, the faith will come back..."

_____

Based on private revelation?? What do you mean??
M.M.

John McFarland said...

Pascendi,

As I recall the anecdote, the then head of the dicastery responsible for seminaries enjoined Abp. Lefebvre to follow the official guidelines for priestly formation.

His response was: Eminence, I believe that I'm the only one who does.

LeonG said...

Nothing would be more radical than returning priests to their Sacramental role and relieving them of the post-conciliar social welfare burden; the unwitting agent of radical liberal modernist ecumenism and making them excellent cathechists of the sole faith that can lead us to salvation - Roman Catholicism. Restoring The Holy Mass in latin to its former unique liturgical position in the western Latin Rite Church would assist this inestimably. WE woulkd probably see full churches several times a day Sunday; long queues for Confession and Catholics behaving in public and private like Catholics.

Tom the Milkman said...

Restoring The Holy Mass in latin to its former unique liturgical position in the western Latin Rite Church would assist this inestimably.

Indeed, reharboring the Roman Faith among Catholics is quite literally impossible with any other than the ancient Roman Mass. When the mass was thieved and hidden, innocent though it was of every fault, whole worlds were lost. It is a mystery of iniquity that curses the whimpering decades that continue on without the glory of That Sacrifice dominating our sanctuaries and ruling our lives. The thieves replaced it with the psychological terrorism of mediocrity, and called it liturgy. God save us.

xavier rynne said...

If you could all just understand how much smarter the jesuits are than everyone else..... they do