Flashback: Why do some Traditionalists pretend John Paul II and Benedict are Total Relativists like Francis?
He cannot say the novus ordo mass have it not affect your faith for the worse
The Ottaviani Intervention
One of the most important critiques ever made of the Novus Ordo Missae.
Background to the study
On September 25, 1969, Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, prefect-emeritus of the Sacred Congregation for the Faith, sent a letter to Pope Paul VI. Accompanying the letter was a theological “Study of the New Order of the Mass” (Novus Ordo Missae), written by a group of Roman theologians. Cardinal Ottaviani’s letter was a plea to His Holiness “not to deprive us of the possibility of continuing to have recourse to the fruitful integrity of that Missale Romanum of St. Pius V so highly praised by Your Holiness and so deeply loved and venerated by the whole Catholic world.” It was apparently in response to the Ottaviani Intervention that Pope Paul subsequently ordered a delay of two years in the deadline for mandatory implementation of the new Ordo.
A little known fact about the creation of this study was that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre chaired the working committee that drafted it. Historical details about this important event can be found in Marcel Lefebvre: The Biography by Bishop Bernard Tissier de Mallerais.
As briefly related by Fr. Ramon Angles in his transcribed conference, “A Short History of the Society of St. Pius X”:
On April 3, 1969, the apostolic constitution Missale Romanum presented a new order of the Mass. Archbishop Lefebvre gathered together a group of 12 theologians who wrote under his direction, "A Short Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae" often called the "Ottaviani Intervention". Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci wrote indeed an introduction and presented the study to Paul VI. Since no response came from the Vatican, the archbishop announces to his small group of seminarians, June 10, 1971, that he refuses to accept this new protestantized liturgy: 'How can I agree to abandon the Mass of All Time or to admit to place it at the same level as the Novus Ordo, created by Annibal Bugnini, with the participation of Protestants to make of it an equivocal supper that eliminates totally the Offertory, and touches the very words of the Consecration.'"
The document and accompanying letter which Cardinal Ottaviani submitted to the Holy Father, which has also been submitted to the bishops of Italy, is printed in the following pages. It is the work of a group of theologians and liturgists in Rome, of different nationalities and differing tendencies.
Because the document was submitted as evidence in support of points made in the cardinal’s letter, the Italian original has been faithfully translated, which explains why it is not entirely suited to the English language. It does however, raise so many questions of such profound importance, some of considerable complexity, that it would be wrong to depart from the Italian text.
The evidence is cumulative and does not stand or fall on any single part. A brief summary is however provided to direct the attention of the reader to what may be of particular interest to him.
Unless corrected the Church is on its way to paganism and atheism, becoming a tool of the New World Order. We must pray that this intolerable situation is soon made known to all by God.
He new the The Syllabus Of Errors
Pope BI. Pius IX - 1864
So did BXVI no excuse they sold us out
You sugar coat all you want we been played as a Church
by their fruits you know them
Remember Aquikantists, specifically Rahner, have totally influenced all liberal theologians and many, maybe most, conservative ones.
Rahner's influence even reached to the papacy of Pope John Paul II who believed in the Eucharist and objective morality unlike Francis who apparently may not believe in the Eucharist or objective morality.
John Paul because of philosophical inadequacies had a relativist inter-religious dialogue blindspot such as in the Assisi scandalous episode unlike Pope Benedict XVI. Scholar Fr. John Coleman S. J. wrote:
"John Hick's pluralist model is based on a Kantian epistemology that undermines, at the outset, any notion of a normative revelation of God in history... In Danielou's theology, the grace of Christ may mysteriously touch individuals outside Christianity but the other religions, their scriptures and rituals, remain purely human customs... Rahner did not make such a strict distinction... John Paul was closer to Rahner... Whereas Ratzinger had warned of the dangers of relativism in inter-religious dialogue." (Inter-Religious Dialogue: Urgent Challenge and Theological Land-Mine, PFD Australian Catholic University>au)
Rahner's influence has effected Francis as well as his inner circle, Catholic colleges, schools and children as well as youth catechism teaching books and their teachers who prepare them for the Sacraments.
Since all liberal Catholics and many conservative ones, knowingly or unknowingly, have been deeply influenced by Rahner's Kantian "theology," is it possible that the crisis in the Church, in large extent, is due to their unconscious and in some cases conscious disbelief in objective reality as well as objective "normative" revelation which leads to disbelief in the Eucharist and God.
Does this explain Francis's panicked reaction against Cardinal Robert Sarah's call for reverence at the Mass and the Holy Eucharist and his desire to explain away and in many cases openly reject God's Ten Commandments?
It appears that Francis isn't just a moral relativist, but apparently may not believe in the Eucharist.
Why do some traditionalists, recently, want to pretend that the Amoris laetitia total relativist Francis is exactly the same as Benedict and John Paul who both believed in the Eucharist and objective morality despite both having major philosophical inadequacies?
Is Francis a total relativist?
In my opinion, the evidence points to Francis being an apparent total relativist. Please read the following posts:
Pray an Our Father now in reparation for the sins of Francis's Amoris Laetitia.
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church as well as the Triumph of the Kingdom of the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He wants you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost - Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.
- "If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html
- "Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html
- Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden" [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]
- Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times "Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003": http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html
Arguably, on the personal level and in their overall public stances they promoted such. However, neither did anything markedly decisive institutionally to promote and inculcate this profound truth.
Moreover, the ambivalences within the papacies of these two figures, however, are troubling.
Your reference to Fr. Coleman's essay reminded me that he was contacted by a Dr. David Schütz, who insisted on the following, and Coleman fully accepted what is said below.
"I think you would have gained a far more accurate idea of Ratzinger’s personal position if you had actually referred to his personal writings on the matter (which, not incidentally, are more clearly reflected in BXVI’s magisterium than is Dominus Iesus). I am thinking of the essays included in the collections “Truth and Tolerance” (published 2003), “Many religions, One Covenant” (pub 1999), and in particular his 1998 essay “Interreligious Dialogue and Jewish-Christian Relations” (published in Communio in 1998). The latter especially, I think, shows Ratzinger to be much more open to interreligious dialogue than you portray him to be by taking Dominus Iesus as representative of his theology. The influence of Danielou, take note, is still very strong in these writings – yet Ratzinger goes much further than Danielou in the final analysis towards an acceptance of the value of Interreligious dialogue. In particular, I think Ratzinger would share with you the need to value dialogue in itself, and a desire to go beyond “overarching theories” based on soteriology. His discussion of the two major ways of being “religious” (mystical and theistic) is much more “pluralist” than Danielou’s theology."
Both John Paul ii and Benedict xvi, in their theological reflections and pastoral actions, obscured clarity of judgement (hence, markedly emphatic articulation of propositional certitudes)that one would typically have found in thinkers committed to, and inspired by, St. Thomas Aquinas.
At this stage of the game, it is distressing to face the fact that Bergoglio is almost certainly an anti-pope, due not only to likely violations of the conclave that elected him, but also due to unresolved ambiguities of Benedict's formal resignation. Finally, Bergoglio assuredly is an utterly shallow, and verifiably heterodox person.
But one wonders whether, even if it were and is possible to attain firm recognition of Benedict xvi as still being the Pope, would this alleviate our extreme difficulties and the current implosion of the Church's institutions?
After all, in spite of his comparative superiority, he is also the bearer of many nebulous and ambivalent tendencies.
Our situation is dire and seemingly unprecedented in history.