Last Wednesday, Francis continued his “catechesis” on the Mass by addressing the Gloria and the Collect, with a particular focus on the necessity of silence.
This topic has been all the rage among conservatives for some time now.
In his book Spirit of the Liturgy, Cardinal Ratzinger stated:
We are realizing more and more clearly that silence is part of the liturgy. We respond, by singing and praying, to the God Who addresses us, but the greater mystery, surpassing all words, summons us to silence. It must, of course, be a silence with content, not just the absence of speech and action. We should expect the liturgy to give us a positive stillness that will restore us.
How can it be that, as Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in the year 2000, “we” were just then realizing more and more clearly that silence is part of the liturgy?
Was not the contemplative aspect of the sacred liturgy so entirely obvious to Roman Catholics of previous centuries that it simply went without say?
Of course it was, but Cardinal Ratzinger was not referring to the Traditional Roman Rite, which for more than a millennia-and-a-half has been providing the faithful with ample opportunities to enter into sacred contemplation.
Rather, he had in mind the “banal on the spot production” that was thrust upon the unsuspecting faithful by the soon to be “canonized” Pope Paul VI.
As such, Ratzinger had a point: After suffering for more than three decades under the weight of the hyperactive, manmade, man-centered Novus Ordo Missae, even the most poorly formed and undernourished laity couldn’t help but come to the realization that something is missing.
Insisting upon silence in the bastard rite, however, isn’t the answer; in fact, it’s really little more than a dash of lipstick on a Protestant pig.
Be that as it may, Cardinal Ratzinger went on to say:
Silence cannot be simply “made,” organized as if it were one activity among many.
And yet, in the Novus Ordo, that is precisely what it is; forced and full of pretense.
I remember well the days of my conservative adolescence…
After delivering an earthbound homily on some social justice topic or another, the priest-presider would often take his seat and silently bow his head (as if to contemplate the wisdom of his own words); leaving the faithful to shift about in the pews for a roughly sixty second period that always felt like an eternity.
Cardinal Robert Sarah, another “hero” of the neo-conservatives (and even some self-identified “traditionalists”), has been speaking of the need for silence quite a bit lately as well, most notably in his recent book, The Power of Silence.
In January of 2016, Cardinal Sarah penned an essay on the topic of liturgical silence that was published in L‘Osservatore Romano. In it, he stated:
Many Catholics rightly complain about the absence of silence in some forms of the celebration of our Roman liturgy.
Elsewhere in the text, he pointed out, “The Latin Mass has always included times of complete silence.” In other words, “the absence of silence” in some forms refers to the so-called (all too) “ordinary” one.
Most noteworthy, however, is the following from Cardinal Sarah:
Of course the Eastern rites plan no times of silence during the Divine Liturgy. Indeed, when the priest himself does not chant … we can note that the deacon, the choirs, or else the faithful chant without interruption. Nevertheless, they are intensely aware of the apophatic dimension of their prayer, which is expressed by all sorts of adjectives and adverbs describing the Supreme Master of the Universe and Savior of our souls.
To illustrate the point, he continued:
For example, the “preface” of the Byzantine rite says this: “You are God—ineffable, inconceivable, invisible, incomprehensible….” Moreover, in its essentials, the Divine Liturgy is something of a plunge into the “Mystery,” which means, concretely, that it is celebrated behind the iconostas, and the priest, who stands at the altar of Sacrifice, often prays in silence.
Get that? The Divine Liturgy – the very rite itself, even apart from silence – plunges those present into Mystery and makes them intensely aware of the unspeakably Holy presence of God.
The point is apparently lost on Cardina Sarah and many others:
The issue at hand with the Novus Ordo isn’t the absence of silence; it’s the absence of the sacred! In other words, the rite itself is deficient!
Even so, Francis stressed the necessity of silence in the new Mass, saying:
The priest says “Let us pray”, and then comes a moment of silence, and each one thinks of the things of which he is in need, what he wishes to ask for in prayer. The silence isn’t reduced to the absence of words, rather it disposes oneself to listen to other voices: that of our heart and, especially, the voice of the Holy Spirit.
I suspect that many will find this exhortation unobjectionable, but note the subtleties:
Here, Francis is suggesting that silence during the liturgy is a suitable time to think and to listen to our own hearts.
This sounds an awful lot like an invitation to interior chatter to me; the antithesis of silence. What’s more, it raises a question:
How is one to discern between the voice of one’s heart and the voice of the Holy Spirit?
Let me guess: If one should hear, Go ahead, take Communion, as it can no longer simply be said that fornicators and adulterers are guilty of mortal sin, (cf AL 31) it must be the God of surprises!
Yes, Francis does say that one is to listen for the voice of the Holy Spirit “especially,” but just a few sentences later he states:
Here then is the importance of listening to our soul and then opening it to the Lord.
In other words, we must first listen to ourselves!
But how often does the seductive sound of our own voice drown out the voice of God?
If nothing else, Francis is consistent. After all, this is the same guy who stressed the primacy of conscience in Amoris Laetitia writing:
We find it hard to make room for the consciences of the faithful, who very often respond as best they can to the Gospel amid their limitations, and are capable of carrying out their own discernment in complex situations. (AL 37)
Francis went on to clarify that “as best they can” really means falling short of the demands of the Divine Law, as if it is just too difficult for some to keep.
He also stated that the civilly remarried are “sometimes subjectively certain in conscience that their previous and irreparably broken marriage had never been valid” (AL 298)
How convenient; a self-administered annulment courtesy of the voice of one’s heart!
He even said that “conscience” can “recognize with sincerity and honesty” that persistence in adultery “is what God himself is asking amid the concrete complexity of one’s limits.” (cf AL 303)
With all of this in mind, while some are applauding Francis’ call for silence in the Mass as if it is one of his rare “Catholic” moments, it’s nothing of the kind.
At the end of the day, it’s just one more way of disguising the profane and fooling the faithful; ultimately confirming man’s place in the very center of the Novus Ordo Missae.
Francis is fully infused with the dread spirit of diabolical cleverness. This is yet another example.
The Novus Ordo is irrelevant. The entity in Rome is irrelevant. It is easy to see that this apostate sect does not possess the 4 Marks of the Church. One obvious point is that it has 2 forms of “worship”: the “Extraordinary Form” (is it so to Christ?) and the Novus Ordo “mass”. Therefore it lacks both unity and universality.
Any discussion of the Novus Ordo or the apostate wolves in sheep’s clothing in Rome and occupying the buildings worldwide is just flat out irrelevant and a waste of time. Keep praying and searching for the horrifying Truth about where we are in history during the last 60 years, and how one needs to respond in order to be Catholic and not an heretic or apostate, i.e. outside the Church.
There is an infinitely more worrisome ‘silence’ I have read about:
“…(Marco) Tosatti reports that a possible “solution” being proposed is that the words of Consecration be replaced by silence. It would mean that after the Sanctus, at the moment in which normally during the Mass the priest would say the words: “Father, you are holy indeed…” the different celebrants would keep silent, everyone mentally repeating “his own” formula.
The silence is broken in the congregation with the recitation of the Our Father. It is still not clear how the lines for Communion would be formed…”
There’s ‘silence’ for you!
https://veritas-vincit-international.org/2017/06/20/vatican-reportedly-working-on-ecumenical-rite-of-mass-for-joint-worship-with-protestants/
A Simple Beggar–Your comment is perfect. The Novus Ordo sect is irrelevant and trying to fix it is a waste of time. It is quite obvious that we must work out our own salvation by being as (aka)Catholic as possible in a world turned upside down. The Novus Ordo sect is NOT holy. Pray for Divine Intervention.
I have been saying for years, most vehemently in the last four, that what most think or qw the Church is really unfaithful, often heretical, men who do nothing more than occupy traditionally Catholic real estate. WE–the remnant–are the continuation of the Church as it has always been. Therefore, it is, frankly, silly to be rending our garments over how to “save” or “fix” the Church. It’s doing just fine if true Catholics would only look for it where it resides. For the most part, it isn’t in all those “catholic” buildings…and hierarchy.
Wholeheartedly and prayerfully agreed !
“Pope Francis with his leftist activism is not an isolated phenomenon, but simply the culmination of this maleficent penetration of the Church. It is crucial to understand that the Church we see today—wimpy and liberal—is emphatically not the Church of old. That Church is long gone, but a remnant perpetuates the old no-nonsense, masculine traditions. The SSPX is that remnant, along with patches of conservatism here and there in the New Church.”
-Karl Nemmersdorf, “An Appraisal of the SSPX from the Viewpoint of White Advocacy” http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/01/16/an-appraisal-of-the-sspx-from-the-viewpoint-of-white-nationalism/#more-155647
Silence and recollection:
Recollection, as understood in respect to the spiritual life, means attention to the presence of God in the soul. It includes the withdrawal of the mind from external and earthly affairs in order to attend to God and Divine things. It is the same as interior solitude in which the soul is alone with God.
——————————
This recollection is twofold:
* Active recollection may be acquired by our own efforts aided by the ordinary grace of God. Thus any devout soul can acquire the habit of thinking of God’s presence and of fixing attention upon Him and his Divine perfections.
* Passive recollection does not depend upon our own efforts, but is an extraordinary grace infused by God, by which He summons together the faculties of the soul and manifests His presence and His perfections; this kind of recollection is classed by mystical writiers as the first degree of infused contemplation.
The first kind of recollection belongs to ascetical devotion and practice. It is necessary for all who wish to attain Christian perfection. Without it, it is most difficult to make progress in virtue. Therefore, it is necessary to observe the means by which it may be acquired.
These are:
* silence and solitude, according to our state of life, keeping in mind, at the same time, that one may be recollected amidst the duties of an active life;
* the avoidance of distracting and dissipating occupations not dictated by reason or required by necessity. Multiplicity of occupations is an obstacle to recollection. Father Faber says that the man who undertakes too much is a foolish man, if not a guilty one.
* The frequent exercise of the presence of God. As recollection is itself an application of the mind to the Divine presence within us, it is evident that the shortest way to its acquisition is frequently to call to mind that our souls are the temples of God.
Catholic Encyclopedia
Thank you for sharing this, Ever mindful. It explains why the Novus Ordo “mass” and the casual social environment created in N.O. churches is so distracting. It is almost impossible to pray. I don’t think this was an accident. Like everything else, it was planned to manipulate the Faithful. Do you agree?
You can’t polish rat sh*t.
Let’s not act like this diabolical disjunct between appearance and reality is easy to deal with. It’s perfectly understandable that people would be rending their garments over this situation. Get off your high horse.
Yet more deflective quietism from the ever-virtue-signaling Ever mindful. Will it ever end?
Ha! Too true.
If a Pope can approve a defective rite – one which above all else, denies the essential propitiatory nature of the Mass – then how do you know St. Pius V didn’t also mess up in 1570?
The answer is that St. Pius V was not a heretic, and thus remained Pope; John Montini, aka Pope Paul VI, was a heretic, and either lost the pontificate at some point, or never attained it.
There is therefore no reason to trust that his new rites of holy orders of 1968 are either safe or valid.
Thus, there is no objective reason to presume that the local diocesan novus ordo presbyter is validly ordained. Even if he says a “Latin Mass”, there is also no objective reason to presume that it is actually a valid one.
Does any poster on this site still visit a vatican 2 house of worship (that would include the FSSP) on Sunday anymore? Just curious.
Yes. The Oratory founded by St Philip Neri. I long ago gave up on the average NO mass and the Oratorians have a Liturgical tradition which is God centered. Increasingly they use the EF as well as the NO with at least some Latin. Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament and opportunity for frequent confessions. The rosary.
I have attended SSPX chapels and found the full Faith of my Fathers there. In my experience parishes run by communities such as the Oratorians, FFSP serve as a bridge for NO Catholics to Tradition.
I would imagine that many folks will take a “bridge” first, but then realize that these locations are still administered by Vatican II religionists. My “bridge” was a diocesan TLM with a priest I thought was “traditional” when in reality he was not. Needless to say, I never set foot in another Novus Ordo establishment again.
Dear 2Vermont–It never sat right with me that a priest who celebrates the TLM also “presided” over the N.O. “mess” on the same day. If the roof of the “church” belongs to Modernist Rome, you are sitting in the wrong pew. Bridges go both ways. Could a traditional minded Catholic grow to respect this priest so much that attending his N.O. “mess” must be OK? Does this priest have the spunk to speak out against Vatican 2 or comment on the antics of Pope Francis? And, if so, what is he doing there? Is his vocation just a job? St. Bernard–every N.O. “mess” is average even with a little Latin. It’s not about the Latin. It’s about the theology. Lately, SSPX priests have become very benign in their sermons. Does anyone have a different experience at this time? I hope so.
You have just identified the elephant in the room. This subject is basically ignored by all semi trads. The new Rite of Episcopal Ordination is quite vague and should create serious doubt for the faithful. So much doubt in fact, that prudence would require complete avoidance of NO sacraments.
my2cents, I’m aware of the theology of the Mass and with the Orotarians at least, they’re using Latin is a confirmation that they see the Mass as an re-enactment of the Sacrifice of Calvary. Of course you need to know the priests quite well to reach this conclusion. Bi-ritual priests are very aware of the difference in theology and I’ve heard some say in private that the NO is not Catholic. I’ve also heard them from the pulpit denounce Francis particularly since Amoris Latitiae and also Vatican II as out of line with previous Councils. I have no doubt that if it comes to a formal schism some at least of these Communities will take a firm stand against Francis. At heart they are with Pope Benedict.
St Bernard, I too live very close to a St. Philip Neri Oratory. I have also come from there as an NO and went to our local TLM and then to the SSPX. I do not attend to the Sacraments there but I do go to Eucharistic Adoration. I have struggled even with this as one can never be sure if the Sacrament is truly confected in any NO “rite” but all my research and study over the last 3-4 years (I learned much from Fr. Hesse) along with consulting with my SSPX pastor lead me to continue attending adoration there. I don’t know if I am right or wrong and I can say that the more I read and the more I learn the more confused I become. It is difficult not to become discouraged. Sometimes I think I can make myself believe just about anything I want! Talk about diabolical disorientation! Coming from a liberal, charismatic, apostate NO upbringing makes it all so difficult. But for the time being, I have to go with the “most correct” guidance I have for the moment, which is my Pastor at my local SSPX church.
my2cents I am with you on your point. We don’t get the clarity that is needed in our homilies. They are very good homilies, but they really don’t address the issues that we are facing today. Not sure if it’s out of conformity with a shift in the theology or out of an apprehension to speak out? Right now all I can do is the best that I know how and pray to our Lady that she save me and my family from the wicked snares of the devil. God Bless!
Mum and I don’t have any nearby SSPX Chapels – our nearest Traditional Rite Mass is 35km and is celebrated by the Institute of Christ the King Priests so we attend that.
I read on the St Robert Bellarmine chat page that the ICRSP was founded by Disciples of Cardinal Siri – and that all the Priestly ordinations of that society originate from himself. Shouldn’t they be valid? On the same page – someone commented that an ICRSP Priest had been heard calling Siri “Pope Siri”
http://strobertbellarmine.net/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=563&start=360
Tell that to the Saints that came before us. We should ALL be on our high horses when it comes to the Truth and God’s interests. People are only confused because they rely on their own worthless opinions instead of Christ and His infallible Church to guide them.
Just checking in on the “petri dish” of Aka Catholic. I can see that nothing has changed. The same sedevacantist bottom dwellers going over and over the same tired ground.
The new “rite” of Consecration and Ordinarion also omits the power to forgive sins. And for “trads”, can a bishop “consecrated” using the new rite even confer what he doesn’t himself possess?
The reality of 2 Thess Ch 2 is more horrifying than we could ever imagine.
Participation in and/adherence to the Novus Ordo sect constitutes apostasy and places one outside the Church. According to actual Church Law, one needs to make an Abjuration of Heresy, make a general Confession to a VALID priest, and have censures removed by a VALID Pope to be received back into the Church. This is another fact that has been diabolically omitted and suppressed by the Counter Church of Satan.
For example, converts to the Novus Ordo Sect are never required to abjure their heresy, however, it doesn’t matter anyway as they’re still in heresy and not Catholic. Touché, Satan.
Has anyone done a simple search for the heresies of Benedict? He’s an heretic, too, and so on back…
St. Bernard–Priests who “celebrate” the NO knowing it is not Catholic are guilty of grave sin. They should take a firm stand against Francis NOW in stead of waiting for a formal schism. They are a big part of the problem. They are useless.
Bosco49 – I couldn’t agree more. I’ve been posting this for a while now on different sites but there was never any response!What terrifies me is that when – not if but when] this abomination happens and the once Catholic Church is finally acceptable to Francis’ protestant friends – the Consecration will be gone , therefore the Mass will be gone too.
Finally Francis can open the doors to the Anglicans, Lutherans , old Uncle Tom Cobley and all to the NEW, improved Protestant church.
As foretold, the True Catholics will be driven underground as were the early Christians. If we can’t find an underground Mass we will rely on what the Irish [during the persecution by Cromwell and the English Protestants] called the “Dry Mass” ie the Holy Rosary. We also have the Brown Scapula, the Miraculous Medal, Holy water [in advance]. And without confessions we need to perfect the Perfect Act Of Contrition.
Linda: follow the advise of your SSPX pastor. And keep praying to Our Lady. We are in diabolical disorientation and only She can help us.
Alphonsus you are right.
The reason good people are justifiably confused and “rending their garments” is precisely what Our Blessed Lady of Fatima meant when she warned of the Diabolical Disorientation which we are now experiencing courtesy of the false pope and his cabal of Apostates and heretics.
It’s not that true Catholics only have ‘worthless, uneducated, opinions as stated by A Simple Beggar – it is because we are up against the satanic cleverness and guile of the master and father of lies and confusion. Our strongest weapons are unceasing prayers to the Holy Spirit for the gift of discernment and the Holy Rosary. By the way – the Saints who came before us suffered and died. They weren’t on their ‘high horses’ since they forgot themselves and lived and died faithfully, humbly and courageously for Christ.
“it is because we are up against the satanic cleverness and guile of the master and father of lies and confusion”
BINGO. I trust no one who makes light of this, including those–such as rabid sedevacantists–who smugly act as if they have it all figured out and thus dismiss the mystery of iniquity.
Even though ICK and FSSP priestly ordinations may be according to the traditional rite, the fact is the bishop who conducts the ordinations was most likely ordained using the vague 1968 Rite of Episcopal Ordination.
There is no such thing as an SSPX Pastor. The SSPX has no juridical authority to act as Pastor or set up parishes or dioceses. That is why they call them mass centers or chapels or districts. While the SSPX has done the Church a huge necessary service by preserving the priesthood, we must remember that they do so without official authority. They administer the sacraments for the good of souls but they are not the appointed pastors of any flock.
The overbearing didactic element. The always staticky or too loud mic’d up priest. The business memo language spoken in monotone as the priest addressed the mysterious sky god, eyes gazing out into blank space or looking down at the altar. The incessant announcments of “please stand, sit, open this, turn to that” like the congregation was composed of Forrest Gumps… Yep great memories. I cant understand why my generation lost the faith….
Rush as charitable and filled with wisdom as usual.
I do. I take virtue’s ‘middle path’ of TLM only even if at the local diocese. I dont always receive communion, the dioceses and priests are not all equal. I have no personal infallible means of ascertaining the valdity of one’s ordination so that is the best I can do. My preference is SSPX.
Yes, if they know it is NOT Catholic and still celebrate it, then they might as well go to their local Episcopalian church and preside over their non-Catholic service.
Don’t you have something to post over at the National Catholic Reporter, a site where you would obviously feel more at home?
Opinions ARE worthless. The answers are not found BY ourselves nor WITHIN ourselves, but within the teachings of HOLY Mother Church Herself.
And Alphonsus is making a false assumption that I am a member of the Sede sect: I am not.
When you say “true Catholics”, according to the true teachings of Holy Mother Cburch, most who believe themselves to be are in fact, not such. Therein lies the horror and ultimate diabolic disorientation. As for me, all I have is Faith and Hope that I am one. Our Lady of LaSalette did state that one day that would be all we would have.
Through research and most importantly incessant prayer asking to be led onto the right path, I was led to the only information which matters (the teachings of Holy Mother Church) which uncovered the lies of the Sede and Trad sects as well. They are heretical sects, just as the Novus Ordo is an heretical sect. I don’t care where the Truth lies or what it costs, I want to save my soul.
I have posted this fact several times and find it interesting (but not surprising) that it is always ignored.
It’s very inconvenient and frightening, the Truth, but it depends how badly you want it. It all goes back to 2 Thess ch 2: most do not want the Truth so God sent a lie as punishment.
Ah yes, you bear the heavy double burden of being both an unacknowledged genius and prophet. I feel your pain. But few indeed can match your unparalleled love of truth, justice, and the holy way. Go easy on us.
Yes I do sometimes
That’s the best one can do in these dark times – keep receiving valid sacraments from real priests, and for me, that’s the SSPX, although I wish they would tighten up a bit on some of those loose ends.
You do have an infallible means of ascertaining at least whether a sacrament is doubtful. It’s called your intellect. God gave it to you so you could work things out. It’s really cool! We’re not mystics. We’re not esoterics. We’re Catholics. Plain and simple. Visible and external. That’s all we know regarding the Sacraments. That’s all the Church knows.
One cannot tell if a priest is a priest just by looking at him, or by whether he is holy, or if he likes Latin, or discourages communion in the hand, or is reverent, or whatever.
Grace is invisible. We can’t see it. We can only see the outward sign, or Sacrament, instituted by Christ, which transmits that Grace.
We go to the Church, and listen to what she has taught on the Sacraments, and learn at her feet.
When we look at Holy Orders, in documents such as Sacramentum Ordinis, 1947, or Apostolicae Curae, 1896, we learn what is essential for validity. It’s settled. It’s clear. It’s irrevocable.
Then we go and look at the new rites of Holy Orders (?) that Paul VI invented in 1968. We can make an infallible cognitive judgement in seeing that the new rites do not appear to have what the Church teaches is necessary for validity in the traditional rites. They just don’t.
Like I said above, we can’t see Grace; we can only see the outward sign, and make a cognitive judgement on that. Now, the novus ordo geniuses who fiddled about with the most sacred treasures of the Church as if they were child’s toys, might have fluked it, and perhaps the new rites still somehow transmit the Grace of Orders, but I can’t see how that would be possible.
If you held a gun to my head, I would say “invalid”, but since things are not set up that way, I simply say “gravely and positively doubtful”, and stay the hell away from novus ordained clergy and their doubtful sacraments and masses.
I don’t agree with the SSPX position regarding the current claimant to the Chair of Peter, but they are validly ordained and I know that the Mass and the Sacraments are valid.
So, don’t just “prefer” the SSPX, as if this is a cafe, but thank God that Archbishop Lefebvre preserved the Mass and the Sacraments, and look more deeply into the issue for yourself. You’re quite capable of understanding these things!
When I heard Fr Hesse say that he knows he’s validly ordained, because he “feels” it, I stopped listening to him. That’s simply appalling theology. He was ordained in the new rite by a Bishop consecrated in the old rite. His Bishop was therefore a real Bishop, but as far as I can tell, there is a doubt regarding the altered sacramental form that Paul VI wrecked in his new rite, and there is also a doubt regarding the necessary manifest intention which the surrounding ceremonial rite is meant to make manifest in the minister of the sacrament. Two grave and positive doubts.
They are not my objections; they are the Church’s own objections, which she has already infallibly taught upon from long ago.
He’s terrible! I don’t know why this doesn’t get more attention.
Dear St Bernard, you should read Apostolicae Curae, by Leo XIII in 1896, on the invalidity of the Anglican rite of Orders.
He goes through the principles which govern all the sacraments, then applies these principles to the Anglican rite of Orders, and declares them invalid. But the principles he uses are the Church’s own. The intention to do what the Church does is necessary for validity. This intention must be externally and visibly expressed. The correct intention must be manifest.
“How is this intention made manifest?”, I hear you ask. Pope Leo XIII answers that in Apostolicae Curae.He doesn’t say, “listen to the guy’s sermon”, or “is he reverent?”, or “has he written a book on the Mass as the renewal of Calvary?”. No, not one of these methods are given for us to know the intention of the minister.
The intention of the minister is made manifest by the surrounding ceremonial rite. That’s it.
The Novus Ordo, being without an Offertory, and without any explicit reference to Transubstantiation or the Mass as a Propitiatory Sacrifice, is not capable of causing the minister to manifest the intention to do what the Church does, and is to be considered at best gravely doubtful, or simply invalid.
I would not go there, even if it’s reverent. Actually, I would especially not go there because it’s reverent. Dressing up an abomination like the Novus Ordo in clouds of reverence, Latin, chant etc, is even more deceptive than the garden variety, suburban novus ordo, because it makes the Novus Ordo look like it comes from Apostolic tradition, when nothing could be further from the truth. I haven’t even started on the doubtful nature of the novus ordo clergy. It’s in other posts by me around here if you’re interested. May God bless you!
The difference between you and me is that when I read something like I stated above, I say to myself I had better at least look into that because my salvation could possibly depend on it.
A snarky attitude toward me while ignoring the elephant in the room is only hurting yourself. You’re not hurting my feelings and you’re rash judging which theologically, by the way, has consequences.
“When I heard Fr Hesse say that he knows he’s validly ordained, because he “feels” it, I stopped listening to him. ”
Yes, this was one of the reasons why I stopped listening to him.
The suspension of the sacrifice of grain, leads to……