1. Welcome to Mother of God Forums - A place dedicated to the Mother of God. Please feel free to join us in prayer and sharing. Please Register to start posting.
    Dismiss Notice

CONFIRMED: The “Ecumenical Mass” has arrived

Discussion in 'Church Critique' started by BrianK, Nov 6, 2017.

  1. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member

    https://akacatholic.com/confirmed-the-ecumenical-mass-has-arrived/

    CONFIRMED: The “Ecumenical Mass” has arrived
    Louie
    CONFIRMED: The “Ecumenical Mass” has arrived
    [​IMG]It has long been rumored that a secret Vatican commission has been assigned the task of creating a so-called “Ecumenical Mass;” a rite recently described by Italian journalist Marco Tossati as “a liturgy designed to unite Catholics and Protestants around the Holy Table.”

    Well, akaCatholic is now able to report that a high-ranking curial official (a cardinal who I hope to be able to identify by name soon) has unequivocally confirmed, in writing, not only that the committee was actually created, but that its work has been completed, and what’s more, the “Mass” it produced is as bad, or worse, than imagined.

    As will become clear, there can be no doubt that Francis is very pleased with the results.

    Following are some excerpts taken from the Cardinal’s somewhat lengthy missive (written in Italian and translated into English) wherein His Eminence severely criticized the newly created Mass.

    After carefully reviewing the text produced by the committee, His Eminence stated that the new rite has “every possibility of satisfying the most modernistic of Protestants.”

    He went on to reveal that it is being presented in the “Instruction” that accompanies it, as:

    “A sacred meeting or assembly of the People of God … to celebrate the memorial of the Lord. Thus the promise of Christ, ‘where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them,” is eminently true of the local community.’” [NOTE: Here, His Eminence is providing a direct quote taken from the “Instruction” for the Mass]

    His Eminence went on to observe:

    This promise [“Where two or three are gathered…”], which refers only to the spiritual presence of Christ with His grace, is thus put on the same qualitative plane, save for the greater intensity, as the substantial and physical reality of the Sacramental Eucharistic Presence. [Emphasis in original]

    Just as one may have expected, a considerable effort was made to downplay those things in the Mass that Protestants find objectionable.

    For instance, the Cardinal writes:

    As is only too evident, the emphasis is obsessively placed upon the supper and the memorial instead of upon the unbloody renewal of the Sacrifice of Calvary.

    Getting to the heart of the matter, His Eminence observed that the rite not only obscures, but even amounts to a denial of certain dogmatic truths. He writes:

    It does not, in a word, imply any of the essential dogmatic values of the Mass which together provide its true definition. Here the deliberate omission of these dogmatic values amounts to their having been superseded and therefore, at least in practice, to their denial. [Emphasis in original]

    The Cardinal even went so far as to say that “faith in the dogma of the Real Presence is implicitly repudiated.”

    In other words, it’s not Catholic!

    Again, we cannot be surprised to find that this is the case. The only question was how the committee would go about denying the “intrinsic value of the Eucharistic Sacrifice.” Now we know.

    His Eminence tells us that the new rite:

    “…changes the nature of the offering, turning it into a sort or exchange of gifts between man and God: man brings the bread, and God turns it into the ‘bread of life’; man brings the wine, and God turns it into a ‘spiritual drink.’ … By suppressing the continual reference to God in the Eucharistic prayers, there is no longer any clear distinction between divine and human sacrifice.” [Emphasis in original]

    As we have long noted in this space, Francis is focused almost exclusively on earth bound activities; most notably, so-called “social justice” and service to the poor.

    The Cardinal observed that the rite makes these man-centered priorities evident:

    There is a danger that the uniqueness of this offering will become blurred, so that participation in the immolation of the Victim comes to resemble a philanthropical meeting, or a charity banquet.

    His Eminence further observed that the rite is designed in such a way as to strip the priest of his unique identity (surprise, surprise). He writes:

    The priest’s position is minimized, changed and falsified. Firstly in relation to the people for whom he is, for the most part, a mere president, or brother, instead of the consecrated minister celebrating in persona Christi … Not a word do we now find as to the priest’s power to sacrifice, or about his act of consecration, the bringing about through him of the Eucharistic Presence. He now appears as nothing more than a Protestant minister.

    The Cardinal suggested that his criticism, severe as it is, only scratches the surface:

    A complete evaluation of all the pitfalls, the dangers, the spiritually and psychologically destructive elements contained in the document—whether in text, rubrics or instructions—would be a vast undertaking.

    Even so, the courageous Cardinal did not hesitate to conclude:

    By way of compensation, the new Liturgy will be the delight of the various groups who, hovering on the verge of apostasy, are wreaking havoc in the Church of God, poisoning her organism and undermining her unity of doctrine, worship, morals and discipline in a spiritual crisis without precedent.

    If all that has been said thus far isn’t disturbing enough, the truly terrible news is that the “Mass” described by the Cardinal as having “every possibility of satisfying the most modernistic of Protestants” isn’t just coming to a parish near you; rather, it has been celebrated daily all over the Catholic world for nearly half-a-century!

    As some readers have already discerned, the high-ranking curial official quoted in this article is none other than Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani and the BRIEF CRITICAL STUDY OF THE NOVUS ORDO MISSAE (otherwise known as the “Ottaviani Intervention”) that he produced along with Antonio Cardinal Bacci, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, and a group of Roman Theologians.

    NB: This article is much more than just a parody.

    So-called “conservative” Catholics are rightly horrified at the idea that a “liturgy designed to unite Catholics and Protestants around the Holy Table” is in the offing. Many, I suspect, cannot even bring themselves to acknowledge that such a thing could ever possibly be dispensed by the hand of a pope.

    And yet, if Cardinal Ottaviani and his collaborators have even come close to providing an accurate snapshot of the Novus Ordo Missae, it is clear that an “Ecumenical Mass” – one created with the deliberate intent of making Protestants comfortable – already exists in the so-called “Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite.”

    Who can possibly deny that in Catholic parishes all over the world, militant homosexuals, abortion rights advocates, and notorious public heretics of various stripes have been waltzing up for Holy Communion, Sunday in and Sunday out, for decades on end?

    In other words, persons who are quite obviously Protestant (in spite of pretending to remain Catholic) have long been openly invited to gather ‘round “the Holy Table.”

    What’s more, it has long been reported, and in L’Osservatore Romano no less, that both John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger gave Communion even to those who openly identify as Protestant.

    More recently, in November 2015, Francis publicly counseled a Lutheran woman in such a way as to grant her (and every other heretic paying attention) a license to receive Holy Communion at Mass.

    So, what are we to make of these rumors about another “Ecumenical Mass” being in the offing; the motives for this one being more explicitly stated?

    Once again, I’m having trouble finding cause for concern.

    On the contrary, I say bring it on!

    If nothing else, the introduction of such an abomination may serve to open the eyes of those who presently fail to understand that simply because the Novus Ordo was promulgated by Paul VI, this does not mean that it was dispensed to the faithful by Holy Mother Church. As such, it may not necessarily be good, and may even be harmful.

    With this in mind, even if the rumored “Ecumenical Mass” never comes to fruition, I am grateful for the rumor itself since it may have created enough concern among certain of the rank and file that they are willing to at least consider, for the first time in their lives, the dangers associated with the Novus Ordo as identified by Cardinal Ottaviani and his collaborators.

    As such, please consider passing this article along to any “concerned conservatives” in your circle of influence.
     
    sparrow, Mac and AED like this.
  2. padraig

    padraig New Member

    https://www.romancatholicman.com/th...-the-end-prophecy-of-archbishop-fulton-sheen/

    [​IMG]

    Things Accelerate Toward the End – Prophecy of Archbishop Fulton Sheen

    “The final battle between the Lord and the reign of Satan will be about marriage and the family. Don’t be afraid … because anyone who operates for the sanctity of marriage and the family will always be contended and opposed in every way, because this is the decisive issue … however, Our Lady has already crushed its head” (Sister Lucia, one of the seers of Fatima)

    The Latin phrase, motus in fine velocior, is commonly used to indicate the faster passing of the time at the end of an historical period. I’ve heard it said that it means, “Things accelerate toward the end.” We are living through an historical hour which is not necessarily the end of times, but certainly could be marked as the end of an era. I wrote about the potential significance of the 100 years since Fatima, which could be the “100 years of Satan.” That 100 years concludes in 2017.

    With the Supreme Court decision to redefine marriage (Which I’ve been calling our “Genesis 19 Moment“), along with many other events happening in the world, many wonder what kind of evil has been unleashed upon the world. Many of these events correspond to approved prophecies, most of which have been given in the past two centuries. Up until recent years, I was completely unaware of this prophecy attributed to Our Lady of Good Success, but many years prior to that, I had been saying that “something happened … something erupted in the 1960s …”

    “Thus I make it known to you that from the end of the 19th century and shortly after the middle of the 20th century…the passions will erupt and there will be a total corruption of morals… As for the Sacrament of Matrimony, which symbolizes the union of Christ with His Church, it will be attacked and deeply profaned. Freemasonry, which will then be in power, will enact iniquitous laws with the aim of doing away with this Sacrament, making it easy for everyone to live in sin and encouraging procreation of illegitimate children born without the blessing of the Church … In this supreme moment of need for the Church, the one who should speak will fall silent.” -Our Lady of Good Success

    “Shortly after the middle of the 20th century” … most certainly points to the infamous anti-authority, pro-hedonism 1960s, that ushered in unparalleled self-indulgence (the essence of the demonic) into our world. In the midst of this, our Church has not only suffered unprecedented losses in the sheer number of souls, but we are witnessing an epidemic of liturgical abuse and rampant sacrilege. In an article that speaks to this, I called this a “Stealth Arianism.” Many claim we very well could be in the throes of what is termed, “The Great Apostasy.”

    Did Archbishop Fulton Sheen prophesy about the condition of (many parts of) our Church today?

    “[Satan] will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the [Catholic] Church … It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content.”



    We are living in the days of the Apocalypse, the last days of our era. The two great forces – the Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical Body of the anti-Christ – are beginning to draw battle lines for the catastrophic contest.



    The False prophet will have a religion without a cross. A religion without a world to come. A religion to destroy religions. There will be a counterfeit Church.



    Christ’s Church the Catholic Church will be one; and the false Prophet will create the other.



    The False Church will be worldly, ecumenical, and global. It will be a loose federation of churches and religions, forming some type of global association.



    A world parliament of Churches. It will be emptied of all Divine content, it will be the mystical body of the anti-christ. The Mystical Body on earth today will have its Judas Iscariot, and he will be the false prophet. Satan will recruit him from our Bishops.



    The Antichrist will not be so called; otherwise he would have no followers. He will not wear red tights, nor vomit sulphur, nor carry a trident nor wave an arrowed tail as Mephistopheles in Faust. This masquerade has helped the Devil convince men that he does not exist. When no man recognizes, the more power he exercises. God has defined Himself as “I am Who am,” and the Devil as “I am who am not.”



    Nowhere in Sacred Scripture do we find warrant for the popular myth of the Devil as a buffoon who is dressed like the first “red.” Rather is he described as an angel fallen from heaven, as “the Prince of this world,” whose business it is to tell us that there is no other world. His logic is simple: if there is no heaven there is no hell; if there is no hell, then there is no sin; if there is no sin, then there is no judge, and if there is no judgment then evil is good and good is evil. But above all these descriptions, Our Lord tells us that he will be so much like Himself that he would deceive even the elect–and certainly no devil ever seen in picture books could deceive even the elect. How will he come in this new age to win followers to his religion?



    The pre-Communist Russian belief is that he will come disguised as the Great Humanitarian; he will talk peace, prosperity and plenty not as means to lead us to God, but as ends in themselves …



    The third temptation in which Satan asked Christ to adore him and all the kingdoms of the world would be His, will become the temptation to have a new religion without a Cross, a liturgy without a world to come, a religion to destroy a religion, or a politics which is a religion–one that renders unto Caesar even the things that are God’s.



    In the midst of all his seeming love for humanity and his glib talk of freedom and equality, he will have one great secret which he will tell to no one: he will not believe in God. Because his religion will be brotherhood without the fatherhood of God, he will deceive even the elect. He will set up a counterchurch which will be the ape of the Church, because he, the Devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the Antichrist that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ …



    But the twentieth century will join the counterchurch because it claims to be infallible when its visible head speaks ex cathedra from Moscow on the subject of economics and politics, and as chief shepherd of world communism.



    (Fulton J. Sheen, Communism and the Conscience of the West [Bobbs-Merril Company, Indianapolis, 1948], pp. 24-25)

    [​IMG]

     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  3. garabandal

    garabandal Powers

  4. Dolours

    Dolours Powers

    Is this as utterly false as Amoris Laetitia introducing Catholic divorce? If so, we can expect the development of doctrine to produce a new, enlightened "Celebration of the Lord's Table" introduced in Germany and copied in various other dioceses. All at the behest of the Pope's personal Holy Spirit of course. It won't be called Mass but only rigourist pharisees would cling to the notion of crucifying Christ every Sunday. We'll still have Mass until no priests can remember all that old-fashioned pre-Pope Francis liturgy stuff.
     
    AED likes this.
  5. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member

    “The Vatican has strongly denied reports that a commission has been established examining the possibility of a setting up an “ecumenical Mass” which would allow Catholics and Protestants to celebrate a shared Eucharist.”​

    So...it’s NOT a “Vatican Commission.”

    Just like the group studying Humanae Vitae looking for the loopholes ain't a "Vatican Commission" either. But it is now known to exist, but only as a “study group.”

    Plausible deniability at its best.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  6. Luan Ribeiro

    Luan Ribeiro New Member

    I believe that in the period that the church will be without a Pope(exile), each parish will celebrate the Mass in any way it chooses, including changes in the liturgy
     
  7. HeavenlyHosts

    HeavenlyHosts Archangels

    And Cardinal Sarah was not informed/invited. THAT speaks volumes.
     
  8. HeavenlyHosts

    HeavenlyHosts Archangels

    I was too young to really appreciate Bishop Sheen during his life. He was way ahead of his time. What a holy priest.
     
    sparrow and Carol55 like this.
  9. padraig

    padraig New Member

    A saint
     
  10. BrianK

    BrianK Resident Kook, Crank, Curmudgeon - & Mod Staff Member

    This was denied till it couldn’t credibly be denied any more.


    https://www.lifesitenews.com/opinion/the-vatican-plan-to-reinterpret-anti-contraception-encyclical-is-real?

    The Vatican plan to ‘reinterpret’ anti-contraception encyclical is real
    Roberto de Mattei
    [​IMG]
    Monsignor Gilfredo Marengo
    June 16, 2017 (Lepanto Foundation) — Monsignor Gilfredo Marengo, professor at John Paul II Pontifical Institute, will be the coordinator of the commission nominated by Pope Francis to "reinterpret" the encyclical Humanæ Vitæ by Pope Paul VI, in the light of Amoris laetitia, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the former's promulgation, which falls next year. The initial rumors of the existence of this commission, still secret but reported by Vatican correspondent Marco Tosatti, were of a sound source.

    We can confirm that there is a commission, made up of Monsignor Pierangelo Sequeri, Head of the John Paul II Pontifical Institute; Professor Philippe Chenaux, lecturer in Church History at the Lateran Pontifical University; and Monsignor Angel Maffeis, head of the Paul VI Institute in Brescia. The coordinator is Marengo, lecturer in Theological Anthropology at the John Paul II Institute and member of the Steering Committee of the review CVII-Centro Vaticano II Studi e ricerche.

    The commission nominated by Pope Francis has the task of procuring from the Vatican Archives, the documentation related to the preparatory work on Humanæ Vitæ, which took place over a period of three years, during and after the Second Vatican Council. The first study group on the matter "of regulating births" was constituted by John XXIII in March 1963 and grew to 75 members under Paul VI. In 1966, the "experts" delivered their conclusions to Pope Montini and suggested opening the doors to artificial contraception.

    In April 1967, the document reserved for the commission – the one from which the "re-visitation of the encyclical" should start – appeared contemporarily in France in Le Monde, in the U.K. in The Tablet and in the U.S. in the National Catholic Reporter. Paul VI, however, after two years of wavering, published the encyclical Humanæ Vitæ on July 25 1968, wherein he affirmed the traditional position of the Church, which has always forbidden the artificial limitation of births. It was, as the philosopher Romano Amerio said, the most important act of his pontificate.

    Humanæ Vitæ became the object of unprecedented contestation, not only from theologians and priests, but also from some episcopates, beginning with the Belgian, headed by the primate Cardinal Leo Suenens, who, at the Council, had exclaimed in vehement tones: "Let us follow the progress of science. I beseech you Brothers. Let us avoid a new Galilei trial. One is enough for the Church." Cardinal Michele Pellegrino, Archbishop of Turin, defined the encyclical as "one of the tragedies of papal history."

    In 1969, nine Dutch bishops, among whom was Cardinal Alfrink, voted on the so-called Declaration of Independence, which invited the faithful to reject the teaching of Humanæ Vitæ. On the same occasion, the Dutch Pastoral Council with the abstention of bishops, took the side of the New Catechism, rejecting the corrections suggested by Rome and asking the Church to stay open to "new radical approaches" on moral issues not cited in the final motion but which emerged in the work of the Council: premarital relationships, homosexual unions, abortion and euthanasia. "In 1968 - Cardinal Francis J. Stafford recalls - something terrible happened in the Church. Within the priestly ministry, among friends, splits occurred everywhere, which would never ever again be repaired; those wounds continue to afflict the entire Church" (1968, l'anno della prova, in L'Osservatore Romano, 25th July 2008).

    On the subject of contraception, Paul VI expressed himself in Humanæ Vitæ, in a manner which theologians judge as infallible and thus unmodifiable, not because the document in itself had the requisites of infallibility, but because it reaffirms a doctrine always proposed by the perennial Magisterium of the Church. The Jesuit theologians, Marcelino Zalba, John Ford and Gerald Kelly, the philosophers Arnaldo Xavier da Silveira and Germain Grisez, and many other authors explain how the doctrine of Humanæ Vitæ needs to be considered infallible, not in virtue of the act of its promulgation, but because it confirms the ordinary, universal Magisterium of Popes and the Bishops of the world.

    Monsignor Marengo, the prelate Pope Francis has entrusted with the task of re-reading Humanæ Vitæ, belongs, on the other hand, to the category of prelates who are convinced they are able to reconcile the irreconcilable. In September 2015, commenting in Vatican Insider on the work of the Synod on the Family, suggested "abandoning a conception of the doctrinal patrimony of the Church as a closed system, impermeable to questions and provocations of the here and now, in which the Christian community is called to justify its faith, through its proclamation and testimony."

    In a more recent article in the same newspaper (Vatican Insider, March 23, 2017) with the significant title, Humanæ Vitæ and Amoris laetitia, Monsignor Marengo asks if "the polemical game – the pill yes – the pill no, like today's — Communion to the divorced yes – Communion to the divorced no — is only an appearance of discomfort and strain, [which is] much more descisive in the fabric of ecclesial life." In fact, "every time the Christian community falls into error and proposes models of life derived from too abstract and artificially constructed theological ideals, it conceives its pastoral action as the schematic application of a doctrinal paradigm." "A certain way of defending and acknowledging the teaching of Paul VI – he adds – was, probably one of the factors for which – he cites Pope Francis at this point – we have presented a too abstract theological ideal on marriage, almost artificially constructed, far from the concrete situation and the effective possibilities of families as they really are. This excessive idealization, above all when we have reawakened trust in grace, has not made marriage more attractive and desirable, but quite the opposite."(Francis).

    However, if the antithesis "the pill yes – the pill no – like today's "Communion to the divorced yes – Communion to the divorced no" is only a polemical game, the same principle could be applied to all of the great themes of the Faith and Morality: "abortion yes – abortion no", but also "the Resurrection yes – the Resurrection no" "original sin yes – original sin no," and so on. The very contraposition between truth and error and good and evil becomes at this point "a polemical game".

    It should be noted that Monsignor Marengo does not propose to read Amoris laetitia along the lines of the hermeneutic of continuity. He does not deny the existence of a contradiction between the two documents: He admits that Amoris laetitia authorizes what Humanæ Vitæ prohibits. But he retains that every theological and doctrinal antithesis should be relativized and superseded in a synthesis that is able to reconcile opposites. The true dichotomy is that between the abstract and the concrete, between truth and life. What counts, for Monsignor Marengo, is to immerse oneself in pastoral praxis, without bending to "too abstract and artificially constructed theological ideals."

    It will be praxis and not doctrine that indicates the line of action. Behavior, in short, is born of behavior. And no behavior can be subject to abstract theological and moral valuations. "Models for life" do not exist, there is only the flow of life, which accepts everything, justifies everything, sanctifies everything. The principle of immanence, struck down by St. Pius X in the encyclical Pascendi (1907), has been re-proposed in an exemplary manner.

    Will there be any priests or theologians faced with this program of the "reinterpretation" of Humanæ Vitæ who have the courage to utter the word "heresy?"

    Reprinted with permission from the Lepanto Foundation.
     

Share This Page