Search This Blog

Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Deja Vu: Did the Ambiguity of Vatican II Lead to Amoris Laetitia?

I'm reading the short book on the Ottaviani Intervention which was published in 1969 before the Novus Ordo was officially sanctioned. In his letter sent to Pope Paul VI, Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani wrote:
…the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent… [my emphasis, et ad infra]

…It is evident that the Novus Ordo has no intention of presenting the Faith as taught by the Council of Trent, to which, nonetheless, the Catholic conscience is bound forever.
The intervention was not the work of Cardinal Ottaviani alone, but of theologians and other members of the hierarchy concerned about the changes in the Mass that downplayed the elements of sacrifice and even the doctrine of Transubstantiation.

The 1992 book on the intervention gives a history that shows the deliberate effort to downplay and change in the Mass those elements that would make it specifically Catholic and a roadblock to ecumenism. So the priest became the "president" of the "assembly" or presider. And the Mass itself became the meal rather than the sacrifice. The Mass-wreckers claimed they weren't changing anything and threw in some traditional language they claimed meant the same as their watered down language, but after the Council the liberals made it clear they did not interpret the changes in the light of Trent -- just as Cardinal Ottaviani said.

As I'm reading the work, I can't help thinking of Amoris Laetitia which seems to be deliberately ambiguous.

Amoris Laetitia: Year One

Once again a handful of courageous cardinals are challenging a pope's actions and the ambiguity that is threatening the faith. As Fr. Murray writes:

They wrote in their April 25, 2017 letter: “Despite the fact that the Prefect of the Doctrine of the Faith has repeatedly declared that the doctrine of the Church has not changed, numerous statements have appeared from individual Bishops, Cardinals, and even Episcopal Conferences, approving what the Magisterium of the Church has never approved. Not only access to the Holy Eucharist for those who objectively and publicly live in a situation of grave sin, and intend to remain in it, but also a conception of moral conscience contrary to the Tradition of the Church.....The escalation of the crisis in the intervening months is clear. The Cardinals note in their second letter that it is no longer simply “theologians and scholars” but now “Bishops, Cardinals and even Episcopal Conferences” that are saying things that contradict the Magisterium of the Church, and this despite the repeated statements by Pope Francis’ own Prefect of the Congregation of the Faith, Cardinal Müller, that the doctrine of the Church has not changed.
With Ottaviani's Intervention, the liberals responded to whitewash the concerns of the cardinals and try to make them disappear. Today, the response is silence while the wreckage ensues.

What will happen in all this? It is certainly a time for prayer!

When the Lord returns will there be any faith on the earth?


TLM said...

You absolutely hit the nail on the head with this one!! If you really think about it, without Vat ll, we would ( I don't think) EVER have had to endure a blasphemous document as the likes of A.L. As far as I'm concerned the entire document should be burned at the stake. The modernists since Vat ll and even before that have been trying to abolish the real Church incrementally, so as to not raise so much concern among the faithful (The frog in the pot of heating water comes to mind). The last vestiges of real truth seem to lie in the morality of true Church teaching, especially sexual morality. The reason that A.L. has garnished so much attention and set off so many alarm bells. (thanks to the Dear Lord!) When the sexual moral theology of our faith is so openly attacked by the very leaders and teachers of the faith, people are sitting up and taking notice. It seems to me that the apostates at the highest level are in all actuality overplaying their hand. I really don't think they expected the push back they are now getting from the faithful. In a certain way, it is a real blessing because A.L. has been the strong coffee the faithful are now waking up and smelling.

Oh and BTW, I don't think A.L. has as much to do with 'irregular' marriages as it has to do with 'regularizing' gay unions in the Church. I think THAT is the real goal. The faithful have always been able to seek annulments and annulments haven't been that difficult to obtain in past years, and the people who don't care about 'regularizing' their 2nd marriages within the Church, don't really care about being part of the Church. Besides that, Francis has made it easier than EVER to obtain an annulment. I really think that 'irregular' marriages is just a straw man, and the REAL GOAL is 'gay marriages, and unions' and even people of other faiths to receive. It seems to me their real 'goal' is to destroy the sacrament of the Eucharist. Destroy the Eucharist and you will destroy the entire Church. What is going on in the Church since the 'Francis Papacy' is absolutely and completely DIABOLICAL. No doubt about it. (sorry for the long rant:)

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

Dear MAK. A typically good post by you and to which ABS would like to respond.

We can't let these matters depress us for it is by the permissive will of Our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ,that these things are happening; and ABS is not saying that you are depressed as it seems clear you are not.

Many will become angry with what is happening and try to "do" something about it but there is really nothing the layman can do other than to become a Saint.

Jesus Christ established His One True Holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church for two reasons:


and a soul will be distracted from what he must do to attain unto both if he thinks he can substitute for the Hierarchy which has the responsibility to reform and restore Tradition in all of its splendor and beauty.

Will the Hierarchy do what it is supposed to be doing? Prolly not in our lifetimes but one can still have (and should have) the peace of Christ even in this execrable epic epoch in which we are burdened with epicene ecclesiastics who were taught to adopt an anthropocentric weltanschauung.

Well, they have not been able to have a destabilising effect on ABS and his understanding of the Faith once delivered and so he continues to live his life fully content with his lot in life and fully confident and in love with His Creator, Redeemer, Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

What else can one do? It is the will of Our Lord Jesus Christ that we be alive during this time and there is a ton of joy still be to derived from being alive and being His faithful witness while maintaining the Bonds of Unity in Worship, Doctrine, and Authority.

As a side note, it is to be wished that more and more women begin to act like y'all do at this Blog.

M. Prodigal said...

The many choices for the words of the Mass is bothersome in a way. Sometimes there are just so very many words telling God what to do it seems. We are all gathered but the purpose of the Mass is not the gathering is it? The bread offered becomes the Body of Christ and while one could say the 'bread of life', what does that mean for the vast majority of pewsitters? Or what does 'spiritual drink' mean? Isn't the grape juice at the Fellowship 'church' a spiritual drink? We have the very Body and Blood of Christ! And yet this message is watered down. And then with the Real Presence on the Altar we have to turn to our neighbors for glad handing, hugs, kisses and so on with the focus on the gathered ones and not on the worship of the Lord. Pretty much the whole community tramps up for communion in the hand and what does it mean to most? The foisting of a new 'mass' (based on the Anglican liturgy) has been a disaster and instead of having more protestants enter the Church, it has worked the other way around. And still this seems not to be enough for the modernist Church which, if what I read is true, is trying to come up with an 'ecumenical' liturgy. To whom shall we go, Lord? There seems to be so very few true shepherds these days.

Chriss Rainey said...

Thank you for this brilliant comparison, Mary Ann. How many Catholics today would tell you how wonderful Vatican II was because they believe it did 2 things only? 1. Mass said in ones own language. 2. Priest no longer has his back to the "audience."

It never occurs to them to do a word for word study of the original mass vs. the corrupted mass by which they could see what all was lost.
And they allow themselves to believe a supper is just as good as a sacrifice. No wonder so many have opted out of the ark and now park themselves in Protestant toe tapping Baptist churches, where you get the supper and a whole lot of socializing to boot.

Mary Ann Kreitzer said...

Thanks to all for your insightful comments. And a special thanks to Brain Surgeon for your kind compliment to Les Femmes. There are lots of us and, like you, we are full of joy despite the challenging times. To do God's will is to rejoice in the peace that passes understanding.

For anyone who would like to do a side-by-side comparison of the old and new versions of the sacraments, I suggest Dan Graham's book, Lex Orandi ( While I haven't read the full book, I have read excerpts and Dan is an excellent writer whose language is very accessible for a modern audience. No fear of getting lost in the weeds.

It's interesting that some priests say the new rite of exorcism is much less effective than the old. Here is an article that explains why.

Let's face it, many in the Catholic Church clergy, even in the hierarchy, no longer believe. They go through the motions, but they are men of the world. When Fr. James Martin, S.J. said if he could canonize someone he would choose notorious feminist nun and co-founder of New Ways Ministry Sr. Jeannine Gramick, he showed himself to no longer hold the faith. Gramick is pro-abortion, pro-contraception, pro-gay "marriage", etc. ad nauseum. To hold a disobedient, rabidly anti-life religious as fit for canonization is to announce your own disbelief in the faith.

And that is where we are today with Martin raised to a position in the communications office at the Vatican. What will he be communicating? Certainly not the faith of our fathers.

Anonymous said...

Both faithful and unfaithful catholics generally know with certainty what their church teaches in relation to the 6th commandment.
Now, due to a major failure within the papacy itself they no longer have that certainty.

This catastrophic failure has occurred because of the "resignation" of Pope Benedict and the presentation to the world by the catholic church of the untrustworthy jesuit priest Jorge Bergoglio as the "pope", whose confused and heterodox ramblings seriously undermine the very office he claims to hold.