.jpg)
A few days ago, I posted about an article in the National Catholic Reporter, and concluded that the battle lines were being drawn around the Liturgy.
Today, I had the dubious pleasure, here, of downloading the podcast of an interview from a site hosted by the Catholic Communications Network of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales.
It is an interview with Archbishop Marini, who recently launched his book "A Challenging Reform" on the reform of the Liturgy at Westminster, hosted by Cardinal Murphy O'Connor. The interview is dire: I only lasted nine of the fifteen minutes. The Archbishop does not know how to use an interpreter and talks and talks, leaving the poor man to try to catch up. The history of liturgical change is dealt with outlandishly: Pius X changed the Liturgy, Pius XII changed the Liturgy, so Vatican II did so as well, to make it relevant to our time.
However, it suddenly struck me: why, if the Archbishop cannot speak English, has the book been launched in English, and in Westminster first, and the US next? Who is actually responsible for it? Could it be that Archbishop Bugnini's right hand man is being used as a link to the "glorious days" of the Consilium? And by whom?
The obvious answer is that the battle is already joined. Sacramentum Caritatis was the first shot to be fired, not Summorum Pontificum. This book has been in preparation for a while, quite possibly since the 2005 Synod of Bishops, in response to which the Pope issued Sacramentum Caritatis. The anti-Ratzinger Bishops have combined to maintain the status quo ante.
This Pope's mission seems to me to be ever clearer. God Bless him!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I have reported on another Forum that I went to hear Bishop Fellay of the SSPX last Saturday. He spoke for two and a quarter hours and the seats were very uncomfortable benches so it was a bit of an effort.
Amongst the whole gamut of topics that he raised was the position of the Pope and the deliberate attempts by the bishops in Germany, France and Brtiain to undermine him.
The two instances of this attempt which he raised were:-
1) the attempt to ignore his call for the changing of the words of Consecration of the Chalice from "for all" to "for many". The Congregation for the Liturgy asked the bishops around the world to comment on this proposed change and they overwhelmingly came back with wanting to keep "for all". Benedict went against the lot of them and required them to change to "for many". They have steadfastly ignored his directive and even petitioned individually for an indult excusing their individual dioceses from making the change.
2) The release of Summorum Pontificum was well publicised in advaance and once again the same chorus of bishops was against its publication. The post publication result has been very much resisted by the same clique.
As Bishop Fellay says, unless Benedict really comes out strongly against these opponents then "bang" goes his authority. The Pope will be reduced to being one among equals. Bishop Fellay said that we really do have to pray for the Pope right now. He is very much in need of our prayers because of these attempts by the various Bishops' Conferences to destabilise him.
JARay
Who is responsible?
It is pretty obvious. Remember the Abp of Westminster spoke of "THEY electeds him" immediately after the Conclave. It is that little group of Cardinals from Conclave who thought and think the election of Benedict XVI a disaster.
This group are already planning for the next Conclave. Cormac M-O'C has been building up a power-base of likeminded Liberals ever since, this group consists not only of Churchmen, but also intellectuals, politicians, journalists. Part of this is the reception of Blair, who most Cardinal's would not have received.
Being Cormac he always shoots himself in the foot whilst doing it.
Post a Comment