If this orange-robed, seated liturgy is allowed, then priests should just celebrate the Traditional Latin Mass as the “indigenous Western Mediterranean peoples rite” and stop asking for special insults. Just be more “culturally accommodating” and “pro-ancient indigenous ritual.”
London🇬🇧!
Sure would be handy to have a map where it is allowed to pray in your head, and where not.
I do pray regularly in my head, e.g. rosary.
Don't want to accidently break any laws 😉
Maturing is realising that absolutely nothing of substance is happening here.
A false pressure valve is being released, to reset public anger so as to buy additional years of time to implement an agenda that was decided long ago, elsewhere. The frontman is utterly expendable.
@MrAustinPredict He’s been a historically bad performer in the elections the last few cycles. I hope that with an endorsement the republican party can rally behind someone. I’m not felon good, Michigan is a few years away from being a hard blue state if we have another democrat governor.
A Lahore court has cleared Nadeem Masih, a blind Catholic who spent nearly 10 months in jail on a blasphemy charge that carries a mandatory death penalty, citing insufficient evidence.
https://t.co/ywPwOJKOVI
@SteveSkojec@BishopBarron@grok How has nobody taken a bucket of paint to that thing yet, maybe they have. I need to get out of work so I can be on a computer to look this stuff up
So close to home.
In India, some Latin and Eastern rite monasteries in full communion with the Holy See are permitted to celebrate bizarre Indianized forms of the Mass.
Yet there is not a single parish, monastery, or religious house in full communion with the Holy See dedicated to the regular celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass.
We are constantly told there is room for legitimate liturgical diversity. Apparently that principle has its limits.
Listening to NPR where a guy is talking about his mother who he helped kill herself in California under MAID. A throwaway line was that he refused to take her in to his home for end of life care because he lived on the fourth floor of a building. The callousness and disregard for even people’s own families in the United States is shocking. The whole interview was trying to spin it in a positive light. Devoted son my ass. What a disgrace. @NPR
@BishopBarron On another note, it’s good to have Bishops discuss the direction of the Church in public. We need fearless leaders of the faith to handle disagreements and heresies by public letter just like the Church Fathers in their commentaries.
@BishopBarron Very strong statement, will the Vatican do something? Modernism and relativism are destroying culture worldwide and nobody seems to be waking up to it.
In a recent interview, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, former grand chancellor of the John Paul II Institute on Marriage and Family Life, confirmed the worst suspicions that many of us had.
He admitted that the changes he made at the Institute during the Pope Francis years were designed to initiate a "very profound" reform of the idea of the natural law.
Instead of absolute moral norms grounded in a keen understanding of the basic goods, he and his colleagues were proposing a moral theory rooted in historical discernment of subjective and cultural experience--not an "armchair theology" but one operating "within history and within people's lives."
This, of course, is the language of trendy postmodernism, and it is dangerous indeed.
Allow me to illustrate the principle with one example. Is slavery wrong?
Intrinsically wrong? Wrong no matter what public opinion polls say about it, no matter what the current consensus on it might be? I imagine any decent person would say yes.
But that yes is predicated upon precisely what the tradition calls the natural law and the basic goods. There are some values so fundamental that acts repugnant to them are by their very nature wicked.
If you want a highly articulate presentation of this idea, go to St. John Paul II's Veritatis Splendor.
If we say that this is just "armchair theologizing" and that morality is a function of ever-shifting cultural and experiential data, then why couldn't slavery be justified?
One of the very smartest persons that ever lived, the philosopher Aristotle, thought it was; extremely bright and morally upright persons in our country, well into the 19th century, thought it was permissible.
Who is to say whether the consensus might shift back again? Who is to say that "lived experience" might come to justify it?
What any truly coherent moral program requires is the very thing that Archbishop Paglia and his colleagues were endeavoring to eliminate, namely, absolute moral norms.
Ridding ourselves of these in the name of freedom or pastoral sensitivity actually renders moral discourse dysfunctional, just as relativizing the basic principle of logic would render any rational conversation impossible.
The Archbishop's interview, frankly, reminded me of the discussions I had at the Synod on Synodality with some of my German colleagues. Under the rubric of the development of doctrine, they were eager to relativize or radically change the principles undergirding classical morality. If this was and is truly the game, we have ventured onto perilous seas.
Link to the article below.