26 April 2019

The latest liturgical innovation

The Blessing Urbi et Orbi by the Bishop Of Rome, this year, took the following (gracious, merciful and humble) form:

Benedictio Dei Omnipotentis, Patris, et Filius, et Spiritus Sanctus, descendat super vos et maneat semper.

Listen to it on Vatican TV if you don't believe me. And he had an enormous white book held open in front of him by some poor sweating flunkey.

For five years, PF's cronies have been assuring us that his every word and deed is by inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Is he now claiming the infallible and Magisterial right to change, not only the Catechism of the Catholic Church, not only Denziger, but even Kennedy's Latin Primer?

Or does this highly sophisticated form of blessing somehow mysteriously imply tritheism?

Does a public manifestation of Trinitarian heterodoxy mean that he has finally lost the munus Petrinum?

Father Ceckada will know. I'll ask him next time we get together for a pint and a giggle at the King's Arms.


Mormons are tritheists. Is PF a Mormon? Who are we to judge?

Episcopus nunc vocandus Civitatis prope Lacum Salinarum? Dierum Ultimorum Sanctus?

Scio bene quid vos omnes utpote qui curiosiores sitis cognoscere cupiatis: quot habet uxores?

7 comments:

Colin Spinks said...

As you have astutely explained in the past Father, for something to properly heretical it needs to propounded in precise formal terms. (eg "Credo in multos deos"); simply getting grammar wrong and speaking gobbledegook can't qualify. Obviously it needs to be put right, but surely as long he *intended* to bless the city and the world then it is blessed. Similarly pronouncing a mistyped consecration (eg. hoc est corporis meum) wouldn't invalidate the Mass. I remember getting rather wound up at a baptism a few years ago when the priest baptised "in the name of the Father, in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Spirit". As he seemed unaware of the subtle difference in meaning of this formula from the correct one, there was clearly no doubt that his intention was to baptise the child in the same way the Church always has, and that the child was, and indeed is, baptised.

bedwere said...

This is the kind of Latin you find on Reddit from people who want a tattoo. Maybe that is what the Holy Father is planning, to be closer to the young. Yet the people or Reddit are asking for corrections, which doesn't seem the case with His Holiness. Quis sum ego ut judicem?

John F. Kennedy said...

Colin,

If you are correct then the words have no meaning or purpose, ONLY the INTENT is important. Surely they DO have meaning and ARE important. There are many instances where the intent and the actual action conflict. "My intention was to LAND the plane, not crash it." Etc. The correct words AND the intent are required.

The formula you cited references three gods not one God with three persons. I also have to question WHY the Priest change it? He no doubt heard it correctly 1000's of times.

Unknown said...

Nonne his diebus ultimis melius est interrogare quot habeat maritos? Matrimonium apud Sanctos Dierum Ultimorum mihi iam videtur ‘Christianius’ quam apud nostros episcopos sacerdotesque semicaelibes. Illi feminas saltem in matrimonium ducunt, hi saepius pueros vel iuvenes.

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

Perhaps the Bishop of Rome was confused about where he was and what he was doing. Maybe he thought he was in Nashville, Tennessee at the NFL Draft and that he was selecting three Deacons from Wake Forest University.

Leo Bass said...

Mormons are not tritheists - they are henotheists. The three gods they worship are only three among the uncountable numbers of gods that they believe to exist.

Fr John Hunwicke said...

... erm .... I meant this piece to be manifestly, er, frivolous .... erm ....