Vatican Cardinal says "Theology of the Church has changed"

[romishpopishorganist]

Bergoglio is not teaching the Faith or defending the Faith, and he's certainly not refuting any error. He is destroying the Faith and spreading error and heresy. He is trying to snuff out the last remaining vestiges of any Catholicism that is left in his Novus Ordo religion.

A high-ranking Vatican Cardinal, Arthur Roche – who leads the Vatican’s Congregation Dicastery for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, and who was appointed to his current position by your fake apostate "pope", Jorge Bergoglio, has said out loud what traditionalists have been saying for decades.

He acknowledged that Vatican II changed the theology of the Catholic Church and that the Traditional Latin Mass does not correspond to this new theology and teaching of the Novus Ordo sect in regard to the Novus Ordo Missae.

There is an axiom in the Catholic Church, which is Lex orandi, lex credendi, which is "the law of praying is the law of believing." This means that prayer and belief are integral to each other, and that liturgy is not distinct from theology. It refers to the relationship between worship and belief. You believe as you pray. The two cannot be separated.

The Novus Ordo Missae is an illegitimate, intrinsically defective, Protestantized rite that departs from Catholic belief and tradition and, as such, it is a danger to the faith.

In 1969, after the introduction of the Novus Ordo "mass", Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, along with several other Catholic theologians, created a document that came to be known as the "Ottaviani Intervention." They presented this document to Montini (Paul VI). This document stated, in part, that the Novus Ordo Missae: "represents both as a whole, and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent".

This statement was in reference to the purest version of the Novus Ordo "mass", without any guitars or balloons or clowns or liturgical dancing girls or lady eucharistic ministers or altar girls or lay lectors or LGBT masses or any other of the endless novelties that you may see at any given Novus Ordo "mass."

I truly hope that your fake "pope", Mr. Bergoglio, is successful in his quest to totally rid his Novus Ordo religion of the Traditional Latin Mass. I completely agree with "Cardinal" Roche that the Traditional Latin Mass does not correspond to the new theology of the new religion of Vatican II and doesn't belong there.

I will agree that Pope Francis has been a disaster as pope. I agree that Pope Francis is no theologian. But Pope Francis has not been the only pope in history who was a total disaster, nor the only pope in history who was not the sharpest knife in the drawer theologically speaking.

But I believe you commit idolatry of form. You miss the forest for the trees. You seem to think the purpose of high Church Roman ceremony----is------an end itself rather than a means to an end. You seem to think that the Church does not have the authority to change the form of Sacramental celebrations as needs arise.

Did you know that in some of the Eastern Rite liturgies, there is no institution narrative in the consecration? Despite this, the Church has declared those prayers in full accord with Tradition. Why? Because what matters is whether the prayers reflect the Tradition. Our celebrations are not magic. It isn't the recitation of magic words that is the point. The point is whether the prayers accurately hand on the Faith and reflect the Faith the Church professes.

The Vatican II Mass accurately reflects what the Church believes and professes. It may not be to your personal liturgical tastes, but it is the Mass. It isn't Latin and high Church Roman ceremony that make the Mass. You seem to think the more Latin, the more ceremony, the more chant---the holier and more superior the Mass is.

Let me be clear: I have no problem with the rad trads wanting to have the Tridentine Mass. I have a problem with rad trads who want to force the Tridentine mass on ME. We both agree that what Pope Francis has done in restricting the celebration of the Rite is bad. But rad trads need to grapple with the fact that one of the reasons he did that was precisely because they developed a spiritual arrogance around the rite, acting as if they are superior Catholics because they attend what they see as the "real" Mass.

 

[Atemi]

Our celebrations are not magic. It isn't the recitation of magic words that is the point.

Wrong. That is EXACTLY what your sect teaches.

 

[Lutheranian]

Except for the all important meaning of the blessing of the bread and wine. In the previous chapter of his First Apology (Ch 66), Justin Martyr explains...

And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

Sounds like another Early Church Lutheran

 

[Nondenom40]

Except for the all important meaning of the blessing of the bread and wine. In the previous chapter of his First Apology (Ch 66), Justin Martyr explains...

And this food is called among us Εὐχαριστία [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.

I have Justin's works as well. Here is the footnote regarding this section;

"This passage is claimed alike by Calvinists, Lutherans, and Romanists; and, indeed, the language is so inexact, that each party may plausibly maintain that their own opinion is advocated by it."

We believe that the bread and drink are not common either. Once you take something common and set it aside for something solemn or holy it becomes uncommon.

 

[Mysterium Fidei]

I will agree that Pope Francis has been a disaster as pope. I agree that Pope Francis is no theologian. But Pope Francis has not been the only pope in history who was a total disaster, nor the only pope in history who was not the sharpest knife in the drawer theologically speaking.

Bergoglio has not been a disaster as pope because he is not a true pope. He is merely acting in conformity with all the ecumenical principles of Vatican II. He is an irreligious promoter of perversions of the most disgusting and despicable kind and his sect is completely adopting the LGBT sodomite/transgender agenda.

But I believe you commit idolatry of form. You miss the forest for the trees. You seem to think the purpose of high Church Roman ceremony----is------an end itself rather than a means to an end. You seem to think that the Church does not have the authority to change the form of Sacramental celebrations as needs arise.

As I've told you a million times, the new mass is just one element of the new religion of Vatican II, but you dishonestly want to reduce the objections down to externals. Vatican II promulgated doctrines and teachings that had been condemned by the infallible magisterium of the Catholic Church. Even if the FSSP had a validly ordained priesthood (they don't) and perfectly said the Traditional Latin Mass, I would never attend because it is still part of the rotten, perverse, heretical Novus Ordo sect.

Did you know that in some of the Eastern Rite liturgies, there is no institution narrative in the consecration? Despite this, the Church has declared those prayers in full accord with Tradition. Why? Because what matters is whether the prayers reflect the Tradition. Our celebrations are not magic. It isn't the recitation of magic words that is the point. The point is whether the prayers accurately hand on the Faith and reflect the Faith the Church professes.

The Catholic Church did not declare "masses" with no institution narrative as valid. Obviously, they are invalid. I believe it was the heretic Wojtyła who declared them valid.

The Vatican II Mass accurately reflects what the Church believes and professes.

Yes, it does reflect the beliefs of the new religion. It is a banal, man centered supper service, stripped of Catholic theology and any sacred nature.

It may not be to your personal liturgical tastes, but it is the Mass. It isn't Latin and high Church Roman ceremony that make the Mass. You seem to think the more Latin, the more ceremony, the more chant---the holier and more superior the Mass is.

Why did Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, along with several other Catholic theologians write an objection to the Novus Ordo Missae, which stated that the new "mass": "represents both as a whole, and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent"?

Let me be clear: I have no problem with the rad trads wanting to have the Tridentine Mass. I have a problem with rad trads who want to force the Tridentine mass on ME. We both agree that what Pope Francis has done in restricting the celebration of the Rite is bad. But rad trads need to grapple with the fact that one of the reasons he did that was precisely because they developed a spiritual arrogance around the rite, acting as if they are superior Catholics because they attend what they see as the "real" Mass.

Do you even read my posts before you respond? I could care less if you go to a Latin Mass or not. I know you hate it and prefer the Protestant "mass" as you are Protestant at heart. I'm not trying to force anything on you.

I don't agree that what Bergoglio has done in restricting the Traditional Latin Mass is bad. I am 100% with Bergoglio in his quest to eliminate any vestige of Catholicism from his heretical perverted Novus Ordo religion. I hope that Bergoglio is completely successful in eliminating every last Traditional Latin Mass from every church in his Novus Ordo religion.

 

[Stella1000]

Bergoglio has not been a disaster as pope because he is not a true pope. He is merely acting in conformity with all the ecumenical principles of Vatican II. He is an irreligious promoter of perversions of the most disgusting and despicable kind and his sect is completely adopting the LGBT sodomite/transgender agenda.

As I've told you a million times, the new mass is just one element of the new religion of Vatican II, but you dishonestly want to reduce the objections down to externals. Vatican II promulgated doctrines and teachings that had been condemned by the infallible magisterium of the Catholic Church. Even if the FSSP had a validly ordained priesthood (they don't) and perfectly said the Traditional Latin Mass, I would never attend because it is still part of the rotten, perverse, heretical Novus Ordo sect.

The Catholic Church did not declare "masses" with no institution narrative as valid. Obviously, they are invalid. I believe it was the heretic Wojtyła who declared them valid.


Yes, it does reflect the beliefs of the new religion. It is a banal, man centered supper service, stripped of Catholic theology and any sacred nature.


Why did Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci, along with several other Catholic theologians write an objection to the Novus Ordo Missae, which stated that the new "mass": "represents both as a whole, and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent"?


Do you even read my posts before you respond? I could care less if you go to a Latin Mass or not. I know you hate it and prefer the Protestant "mass" as you are Protestant at heart. I'm not trying to force anything on you.

I don't agree that what Bergoglio has done in restricting the Traditional Latin Mass is bad. I am 100% with Bergoglio in his quest to eliminate any vestige of Catholicism from his heretical perverted Novus Ordo religion. I hope that Bergoglio is completely successful in eliminating every last Traditional Latin Mass from every church in his Novus Ordo religion.

I would have thought that participating in a permanently leaderless group is more like Protestantism than a papally decreed new form of the Mass?

 

[balshan]

I would have thought that participating in a permanently leaderless group is more like Protestantism than a papally decreed new form of the Mass?

Oh the unity among RCs, it is so heart warming (sacrasm).

 

[Stella1000]

I have Justin's works as well. Here is the footnote regarding this section;

"This passage is claimed alike by Calvinists, Lutherans, and Romanists; and, indeed, the language is so inexact, that each party may plausibly maintain that their own opinion is advocated by it."

We believe that the bread and drink are not common either. Once you take something common and set it aside for something solemn or holy it becomes uncommon.

The disagreement is probably concerning is the blessed bread 'uncommon' by human decree or 'uncommon' by the miracle of God.

 

[Nondenom40]

The disagreement is probably concerning is the blessed bread 'uncommon' by human decree or 'uncommon' by the miracle of God.

There wasn't a miracle at the last supper, there isn't one now. Its a remembrance just like the passover. God said remember me this way in the o.t. He says remember me this way in the new. One points forward to the cross. One points backward to the cross. Its a simple concept.

 

[Nondenom40]

Oh the unity among RCs, it is so heart warming (sacrasm).

It is interesting to see 'one true church' argue with another 'one true church'.

 

[Stella1000]

There wasn't a miracle at the last supper, there isn't one now. Its a remembrance just like the passover. God said remember me this way in the o.t. He says remember me this way in the new. One points forward to the cross. One points backward to the cross. Its a simple concept.

How do you sit with the Jewish belief of zachor ie. making the past present?

Zahor.

 

[balshan]

How do you sit with the Jewish belief of zachor ie. making the past present?

Zahor.

RCs say the OT commandments (613) don't apply then they refer to it as it it is gospel. What RC has brought back their eldest son from God? That is a Jewish belief.

Pity RCs do not remember all the evil things its institution has done throughout the centuries.

 

[Nondenom40]

How do you sit with the Jewish belief of zachor ie. making the past present?

Zahor.

They observed the Passover as directed by God. After the first Passover all subsequent Passovers were done in the home as prescribed by God. We remember Jesus' death and resurrection but it doesn't mean we are actually there.

 

[Atemi]

How do you sit with the Jewish belief of zachor ie. making the past present?

Zahor.

Sorry, Stella.

No time machines there either.

 

[Stella1000]

They observed the Passover as directed by God. After the first Passover all subsequent Passovers were done in the home as prescribed by God. We remember Jesus' death and resurrection but it doesn't mean we are actually there.

Both the Jews and Greco Romans were familiar with the spiritual power of the ritual communal meal. Catholicism has preserved what Jesus initiated in the Eucharist to continue until He comes again.

 

[balshan]

Both the Jews and Greco Romans were familiar with the spiritual power of the ritual communal meal. Catholicism has preserved what Jesus initiated in the Eucharist to continue until He comes again.

It is nothing like what Jesus did at all. There was a meal at the Last Supper and the early church partook of communion at agape feasts. Keep believing false claims. You continue nothing at all. The difference between Passover and the Greco Romans is it is scriptural and theirs weren't. You are amazing at covering up the false doctrines, teachings and practices of your false church.

 

[romishpopishorganist]

Sorry, Stella.

No time machines there either.

We do not need DeLorean's with Flux Capacitors that we have to make sure to get the DeLorean up to 88 MPH to generate the necessarily 1.21 Jiggawatts of power to go back in time.

We have a God who is timeless. We have a God who owns time. We have a God who can and does sacramentally make past realties present to us in the Mass.

 

[Southsider071]

Let me be clear: I have no problem with the rad trads wanting to have the Tridentine Mass. I have a problem with rad trads who want to force the Tridentine mass on ME. We both agree that what Pope Francis has done in restricting the celebration of the Rite is bad. But rad trads need to grapple with the fact that one of the reasons he did that was precisely because they developed a spiritual arrogance around the rite, acting as if they are superior Catholics because they attend what they see as the "real" Mass.

No one is forcing any mass- Latin or English- on you. The rules about mandatory mass attendance are just man-made rules and can be changed at the drop of a hat.

 

[1Thess521]

The disagreement is probably concerning is the blessed bread 'uncommon' by human decree or 'uncommon' by the miracle of God.

"Now it is evident, that in this prophecy[allusion is made] to the bread which our Christ gave us to eat, in remembrance of His being made flesh for the sake of His believers, for whom also He suffered; and to the cup which He gave us to drink, in remembrance of His own blood, with giving of thanks.”
chapter 70

Justin explicitly stated that bread (not the flesh) is given by Christ in remembrance of His flesh, and that the cup is in remembrance of – not is – His own blood. If Justin believed in transubstantiation i.e. the real presence, he would have certainly stated it here, instead he refutes it.

 

[Nondenom40]

Both the Jews and Greco Romans were familiar with the spiritual power of the ritual communal meal. Catholicism has preserved what Jesus initiated in the Eucharist to continue until He comes again.

So you take your spiritual queues from Jews and greco romans? I'll take mine from scripture thank you.

Thayer: ἀνάμνησις, ἀναμνησεως, ἡ (ἀναμιμνῄσκω), a remembering, recollection: εἰς τήν ἐμήν ἀνάμνησιν to call me (affectionately) to remembrance, Luk 22:19 (WH reject the passage); 1Co 11:24f, ἐν αὐταῖς (namely, θυσίαις) ἀνάμνησις ἁμαρτιῶν in offering sacrifices there is a remembrance of sins, i.e. the memory of sins committed is revived by the sacrifices, Heb 10:3.

BDAG 3rd ED pp 68 Reminder, remembrance of something...in remembrance (memory) of me 1 Cor 11:24ff ; Lk 22:19

Sorry no time machine there either as Atemi likes to put it.

Even Augustine says "...and that we should retain a sweet and profitable memory of the fact that His flesh was wounded and crucified for us."

Thats in reference to Jn 6 but the sentiment is the same.