It seems that many Catholic are forced into following the reforms of Vatican Council II and therefore because Catholic clergy are expected to follow their bishops there is no other way but for the Catholic Church to update itself. Why not, perhaps this is for its own good?
Scribe:
Pharisee:
As far as I can see, the traditionalist are trying to resist the changes brought about by the Vatican II in any way they can. However, they have no moral ascendency to this because even these few bishops and priests are duty bound to obey their superiors as representative of Christ in the apostolic succession. Their possible disobedience are envisaged as a diabolical stance against the Pope. The Vicar of Christ on earth and the college of cardinals and the duly designated bishops who comprise apostolic sucession.
It’s quite hard to understand the stance of these so-called traditionalists because the Catholic Church needed updating already since Trent in the middle ages. Of course with newly found truths in the sciences as well as the reality of changes in modern human experience, it is only natural that the Catholic church become more responsive and relevant to the true human religious experience. Therefore, it is only punctual and necessary that John XXIII should call for a council that will listen to the spiritual needs of the world rather than isolate the church further by reflecting upon itself with irrelevance, unresponsiveness and the back of historicity. La consonance with this need, Giovanni Montini later Paul VI led the council into needed reforms with the able help of Augustin Cardinal Bea who worked on Ecumenism and Annibale Cardinal Bugnini who updated the Liturgy. Consequently, the Paul VI Novos Ordo Missal became wildly available as the new mass that would unite all Catholics and allow those even outside the church to understand it more.
Saducee:
It is sad to see that there is too much resistance even for a positive change to take place. In fact, we have seen the cry for change in the very core of the church itself. Consider the fact, that many of these who sought for change are even religious such as the Jesuits Karl Rahner, Henri de Lubac and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Marie-Dominique Chenu and Edward Schillebeeckx who are Dominicans. Moreover, so many things have changed already. Consider psychiatry, there was a time when being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transsexual were considered mental health problems. In the new light of behavioral science, these so-called aberrations are now simply considered lifestyles.
Moreover, in the light of existential philosophy men’s yearning for power and pleasure, watered down before as a singular search for truth is emphasized such that unpleasurable and unnecessary feeling of guilt are set aside in modern guidance counseling knowledgeable of the fact that the counselee should find support in the counselor. It is therefore not surprising that the modern priest is no longer at the altar for an irrelevant sacrifice. He is now there as a president of a friendly gathering, ready to make things easier and more pleasant as a facilitator and when not saying mass even a counselor for those with anxieties, and even one of the boys to bring about camaraderie.
Herodian:
Zealot:
The Catholic laity should therefore hasten to listen to the updated bishops whose main intention is harmony and unity within the church! Yes, it is called the Church militant but why should we quarrel among ourselves when there are rules already clearly defined.
Only the anarchist type and those who thrive in chaos as radical minds would still want to disobey their bishops. Indeed, if the faithful insist on this impertinent behavior, they may be declared as schematic and are liable for excommunication. They have already heard bishops who insists on tradition, especially the Latin Mass of the Middle Ages, treated this way and so, therefore the laity better abide.
But rather we say, the stand of the hardliner traditionalists is correct and especially those by their bishops who are defending the good, true and beautiful being true successors of the apostles. For the church magisterium since Trent could not be changed by the so-called need for updating nor the outcry even by the religious for relevant reforms. Have you forgotten that He is the way, whether goes your pastoral detour? Have you forgotten that HE is the Truth, why then should you change what is True. Even the ancient law of Opposites of Plato dictates; if you change the True, it could only become False.
All the changes instituted by the Herodians no matter how great are simply irrelevant. The Faith of the people is unaffected by these superfluous handworks, and all the offices given to the Novos Ordo priest are irrelevant to his true calling as a priest. A priest is one who makes a Sacrifice to God as a mediator between God and men. If one ordained as a priest does not make the Perpetual Sacrifice, he has set aside his priesthood simply to become a social worker. Worst, if he acts as a counselor taking sinful aberrations and permissions as simple lifestyles then he is helping the devil making the person erode his consciousness so that the sacrament of penance is no longer necessary. But woe to those who have removed all respect to His Real Presence, I am sure the King will remember you for your disrespect and irreverence.
But since the college of cardinals and the chancery of the Bishop seem to be the determinants of this clash, may we offer a more determining factor, the Throne of the Vicar of Christ, the Seat of the Papacy. Let me then state the reasons why we do not have to follow the Pope especially when he is culpable or in errors.
