I did some thinkng on the upcoming tyalks and Vatican II, and came up with an idea.

Fortunately, calling for a synod, or opening windows, does not fall under the infallibility of the pope. And Vatican II was supposed to be a pastoral exercise, so again, it did not propose infallible teaching.

The problem is that the wind blew through the open windows and blew off not only the curtains, but destroyed most of the furniture!

True, the newly refurnished building will be, must be different, than the old one. But the work of the synod hasn’t been completed! There is still an important loose end: the interpretation of the deliberately ambiguously worded texts. It will be done when the discussion with the SSPX will be concluded and the Holy Father will say the final word on the interpretation.

John XXIII was influenced by the modernist faction in the Church, hoping, that they will decisevely defeat the conservatives and turn the Church inside out, or, if you prefer, upside down.. But the cons stood their ground, and forced a compromise: ambiguous statements. The confrontation still continues, See the comments on this web. Benedict, it seems, finally forces the two sides to come to a reasonable, and acceptable compromise and implement the changes in the traditional Catholic spirit, according to the old maxim, Catolice dicitur, Catolice intelligitur. This assumes, of course, that it was Catolice dicitur.

Both sides might be surprised, and partially vindicated, by the final outcome.

Sandor

I wrote this 2 yers ago, and hope this is the door opening:

Some Thoughts on Benedict XVI’s motu propio: Summorum Pontificum, The Chinese, and the SSPX

To Winston especially: I used to also think that it was off-putting to have the mass in Latin, since understanding is key to everything–I thought. In fact, I wrote a nice piece on it that was bought and published by the Pittsburgh diocesan paper, which I would give anything to take back now. Because, that’s a wrong understanding of the mass. It is not there for our ‘understanding,’ and our ‘understanding’ is not the key to either our spirituality or to worship. Those are modern ideas in which man is the center of the act of worship. Mass is for God. If it were in gibberish, it would be fine, as long as that’s what He wanted. And Latin is what God wants–so many popes, so many saints have attested to it. And even Vatican II recognizes it.

That said, given that every missal has a translation, given that having the mass in Latin in common does away with the ghettos we’ve made of every language community given that the mass isn’t very long, given that the sermon and the readings are done in the vernacular (if you don’t speak that particular vernacular, you can easily have a missal in your language that gives the readings and other propers, so all you miss is the sermon until you learn the lingua franca of your region), what’s not to understand? And the music that was composed for the Latin is — one has no words to describe it. You must experience it. And besides all that, it’s just fun to pray in an ancient language, a language free from all the garbage we hang on to words and phrases. All that is not to mention the benefits to many, many generations of students having familiarity with Latin, and thus a key to so many of the world’s languages, and not to mention, either, the benefit of keeping our faith in a language ‘bank’ given the very rapid changes languages currently undergo. But none of these benefits should overshadow the one truth: the mass is not for us. The mass is for God. We do not go there to make friends or to grow in understanding in the human sense.

To Mr. Andrades: you may quote sections of Vatican II that say one thing, and someone else may quote sections of Vatican II that say something else. That’s the way it was written,to say one thing in one section, another in another, with some diabolical purpose to keep us from expelling the new liberal, teaching. You simply cannot deny that the Council did away with genuine missionary work (substituting social service activities for teaching the faith) and in its place put overdone and false “respect” for other faiths and “dialogue” with other faiths (ad nauseum!!)as if we do not possess the Truth, the whole Truth, the only Truth. Oh how it plagues us today, with witchcraft on the dangerous rise throughout Africa, with ‘dialogue’ with Protestantism resolving down to their further distance from the Faith, with their destruction, through support for abortion and homosexuality, of society. It is this that must be purged, and pray God, it will be purged, and only the original understanding of the role of the Church remains.

Winston– Good observations– just take it slow. Get a copy of ” They Have Un Crowned Him ” and ” I accuse the Council “, both by Abp Lefebvre. They provide excellent background– without which you will be lost. Also, Fr Wathens excellent book on the changes detroying the Mass– you should find it on the internet and get it quick. Destroys the arguments these changes were just for greater participation–they attacked the reality of the Mass !
The essential problem in Rome has not changed. The Freemasons vowed to destroy the Catholic Church back in 1700’s. They spawned the French Revolution , primarily, because the Monarchy’s were protecting the altars of Christ !
That falied to destroy the Church. The Masonic order then vowed, in the Alta Vendita, of which the Arbp spoke often, to work tirelessly within the church until they had finally assembled a Council that would give them a Pope that they could control. Angelo Rancali, Annable Bugnini, and Montini were all leftists and members of the Free masonic orders, totally contrary to 200 years condemnation by 8 different popes ! Montini had been ” banished ” to Milan,and denied the red hat because of his heresies. Rancalli, the very first act he did after installation, was bring the leftist Montini in as a Cardinal. ( he had been banished after working secretly for the Communists over throw of European Countries ) These men hated the Catholic Church.
The Mass is the center of the Church, it is the primary public adoration to Almighty God– It had to be destroyed, to pave the way for the hedonistic, protestantistic, humanistic new religion. Until the trus beliefs change, and the hearts of the romans are converted again, the talks are minefields– designed to draw in the unsuspecting sheep. dol659 at hotmail.com

Part of a scheme to create a disturbance/break within SSPX, Mr. Henegan? Readmitted? Some precision please!

What part of the word Protestant do these folk not understand? What I do not understand is the reversal of their excommunications, what could it possibly mean to SSPX?

And on the point of that name… Why should they have picked on that gentle peace loving saint who codified Catholic doctrines to inspire conformity in the church and who, though he may have rejected modernism and whose encyclical Ad Diem Illum expresses his desire through Mary to renew all things in Christ.

These folk must decide conclusively whether or not they are Catholics, and if not then they must not lay claim to any part of that word in naming their collective and accept their protestant status.

Vatican Council II actually says that Judaism, Islam and the other religions are not paths to salvation. (Ad Gentes 7) Their followers need Catholic Faith and Baptism in general, to avoid Hell (Lumen Gentium 14).

The Holy Office in a Letter (1949) on Father Leonard Feeney said that Baptism was needed for all in general–with exceptions. Jews convert! (Jn: 3:5, Mk.16:15-16, CCC1257, Dominus Iesus 3, 20). It affirmed the ‘dogma’, the ‘infallible’ teaching.

Vatican Council II acknowledged the exceptions to the general rule (Lumen Gentium 16).

The ordinary means of salvation is the Catholic Church (Redemptoris Mission 55).Though Hindus and Buddhists could be saved in the extraordinary way, the exceptions to the rule. The ordinary way of salvation is not non-Catholic religions as Fr. Jacques Dupuis S.J believed. (Notification, Dupuis, CDF, Vatican 2001).

‘Therefore, all must be converted to Him as He is made known by the Church’s preaching. All must be incorporated into Him by baptism, and into the Church which is His body. For Christ Himself explicit terms affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism (cf.Mk.16:16; Jn.3:5) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ would refuse to enter her or to remain in her could not be saved. - Decree on the Missionary activity of the Church, Ad Gentes # 7, Vatican Council II

‘This sacred Synod turns its attention first to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon sacred Scripture and tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. For Christ, made present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique Way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism (cf.Mk.16:16; Jn.3:5) and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by God through Jesus Christ, would refuse to enter her or to remain in her could not be saved.’- Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium #1Vatican Council II.