11 September 2022

CONFUSION? IGNORANCE? or DELIBERATE SUGGESTIO FALSI? (1)

An erudite correspondent has made very interesting points. Having mulled over them, I am concluding that they mostly arise from statements in the current "Magisterium" which confuse (at least) two different things.

(1) The guidance explicitly given in Sacrosanctum Concilium about changes which the consensus patrum  required.

(2) The changes which in fact subsequently emerged from the post-conciliar deliberations.

Confusion beteween these two things is natural enough.

Human beings change their minds. Academic fashions do not remain immutable.

But those who compose "magisterial" documents ought to be at least minimally capable of distinguishing between the two.

Unless it suits them not to do so. 

And, at the moment, it clearly suits some quite important people not to make any such distinctions. Accordingly, they play up the status of the pronouncements of an Ecumenical Council (vide 1 supra) and then imply that the same sort of obsequium  applies to 2 supra.

This enables them to rubbish any criticisms made of (2) as  being 'rejections of the Council.'

Roche did this again just a few days ago.

Yet such folk, when it suits them, ignore the plain, explicit 'decrees' of 'the Council'.

Slippery folk with double standards.

But naughty fibs are always naughty fibs. 

One example of this will suffice.

The Council required that all clerics say their Office in Latin. (Where this would create real problems for clergy, the Ordinary could dispense from this requirement, but could only do so in individual cases.)

You all know as well as I do that this Conciliar Instruction  is completely ignored.

An additional, related, matter: Recent "legislation" also requires traddies not to exclude the "Magisterium of Roman Pontiffs". Well, what about the Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia of S John XXIII? It requires all seminary teaching to be done in Latin, and the sacking of professors unable to teach in Latin

What price that in the lecture rooms of the Grilli and the Grilloids?

To be concluded.

6 comments:

Zephyrinus said...

Obfuscation is a tactic well-known to Military personnel. And, also, personnel in other disciplines.

By their Actions shall they be known.

It's very easy, and convenient, for so-called “Experts”, and “High-Ranking Officials”, and “Slippery Folk”, to sneer and snidely give their reactions to perfectly reasonable questions and requests for clarifications. Let's see them sneer, at The Pearly Gates, when they are required to give an explanation of their Stewardship to a Much Higher Authority than themselves.

“Let those who have ears, hear, and those with eyes, see”.

Linus XXXVIII said...

If:
(A) An additional, related, matter: Recent "legislation" also requires traddies not to exclude the "Magisterium of Roman Pontiffs". Well, what about the Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia of S John XXIII? It requires all seminary teaching to be done in Latin, and the sacking of professors unable to teach in Latin.

Other than cases of traumatic brain injury, what would qualify as "real problems for clergy" as in:
(B) The Council required that all clerics say their Office in Latin. (Where this would create real problems for clergy, the Ordinary could dispense from this requirement, but could only do so in individual cases.)

Prayerful said...

NLM shared an example of the then Card. Montini speaking up at V2 for the conservative middle road of translated propers (and perhaps Pater noster too), yet allowed as Pope for the Roman liturgy and its sense of our sinfulness to be swept away despite his own regrets as recorded by his Master of Ceremonies Card. Noe (https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2018/04/paul-vis-dislike-of-liturgical-reform.html#.Yx7w3nbMI2w). A barbarian has no sense of history. There only the present and history is just in its service, for to modify the words of Humpty Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland, 'When I mention V2," Humpty Dumpty Roche said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

Paul in Melbourne, Australia said...

I love Prayful's observation.

Grant Milburn said...

How do you say "Liar, liar, pants on fire" in Latin?

John the Mad said...

GM: Here goes. "Mendax mendax braccae in ignem."

(From an online translator. Alas, I failed Latin 50 years ago at St Patrick's College High School here in Ottawa and had to repeat the year. I'm gradually working through my bitterness with wine and cheese therapy. Dominus vobiscum.)