Interview with Cardinal Roche From 10:18 to 11:00.
- “The theology of the Church has changed; whereas before the priest represented, at a distance, all the people, they were channeled through this person who alone was celebrating the Mass: it is not only the priest who celebrates the liturgy but also those who are baptized with him, and that is an enormous statement to make.”
First of all, let’s turn to the “commemoration for the living” from the Roman Canon of the Traditional Latin Mass:
In a quick personal translation of this paragraph from the Traditional Latin Mass:
- “Remember, Lord, your sons and daughters N. and N. and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. For them, we offer you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are theirs, for the redemption of their souls, in hope of health and well-being, and offering their devotion to you, the eternal God, living and true.”
Let’s see… here’s the official translation of the relevant paragraph from the New Order of Mass:
- “Remember, Lord, your servants N. and N. and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. For them, we offer you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are dear to them, for the redemption of their souls, in hope of health and well-being, and paying their homage to you, the eternal God, living and true.”
Wait… What? That sounds quite familiar. Let’s see… what’s the Latin for the New Order of Mass?
- “Meménto, Dómine, famulórum famularúmque tuarum N. et N. et ómnium circumstántium, quórum tibi fides cógnita est et nota devótio, pro quibus tibi offérimus: vel qui tibi ófferunt hoc sacrifícium laudis, pro se suísque ómnibus: pro redemptióne animárum suárum, pro spe salútis et incolumitátis suæ: tibíque reddunt vota sua ætérno Deo, vivo et vero.”
Hahahahahahaha! Those words from the New Order of Mass are absolutely verbatim, to the letter, with the words of the Traditional Latin Mass of the 1962 Roman Missal. So, does that mean that Cardinal Roche is, like, misrepresenting the facts? Maybe he’s having a diabetic episode and isn’t thinking straight.
Even though this is a poor example for him to say that the New Order of Mass and the Traditional Latin Mass have entirely different theologies, his overarching idea is mistaken, that the theology (read doctrine) underlying the Traditional Latin Mass is entirely different from the theology (read doctrine) of the New Order of Mass and, therefore, the Traditional Latin Mass with all of its concomitant theology must be flipped away by the spinning hands of the clock of history.
He’s trying to say that because he and Pope Francis are trashing the Traditional Latin Mass, it is therefore legitimate for he and Pope Francis to trash all the theology (read doctrine) of the Church in Judeo-Catholic religion, from Adam until today and onward.
Truth is One. Truth is Living: Jesus Christ, the Eternal Word of the Father. That Word of the Father is not a lie, a mistake. The Father doesn’t change His mind one fine day in eternity and say that he’s mistaken in speaking that One Word expressing Himself in the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity and must now speak an entirely different Word. No.
Jesus laying down Himself in Sacrifice for us, fulfilling His own justice to have mercy on us, taking our place, Innocent for the guilty, taking on the punishment we deserve so that He can command the Father: Father! Forgive them! is not now worthless and to be tossed away because we say – because we’re better because we live today – that there is no sin, and that therefore no repentance is needed, no forgiveness needs to be provided, and therefore that the Son of the Living God who will come to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire is therefore a fool for having been tortured to death for us. “That’s all passé. We’re the ones, the only ones! Change the Mass! Change the theology! Change the truth! All is a lie!”
What’s Roche trying to say, that the ordained have no sacramental character different from that of the laity? I mean, who knows what he’s thinking. What I do know is that he thinks and says that the Traditional Latin Mass, you know, the Sacrifice of the Son of the Living God, has nothing to do with the life of the parish community. He’s hitting people over the head with that like any mafioso beating their own to death with a baseball bats. This is way to violent to watch, but truth be told, the insult these guys provide to Jesus’ being tortured to death for all of us is so very much worse:
If anyone is channeling anyone, it’s Cardinal Roche channeling himself. How ugly. How disgusting. How filthy.
In answer to Cardinal Roche’s charge, which is actually about the priest having his back to the people (which is rubrically correct in the New Order of Mass, btw), well, that “back to the people” thing isn’t the case at all. Quite the other way around. The priest is just like everyone else. All are facing the Sacrifice together. The priest and Christ’s faithful. As the Apocalypse says, we will all look on Him whom we have all pierced through. When the priest is simply taking his place with everyone else facing the Sacrifice, his importance disappears. He’s ordained to get himself the hell out of the way of Jesus the One High Priest. When the priest faces the people it is then that he himself becomes important. It all becomes a clown Mass overnight.
So, what kind of narcissism is really going on here?
Oh, and that mention of Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel? Here’s the modus operandi of Cardinal Roche and Pope Francis, why they think that with the passing of time the theology of the Church (read doctrine) changes like any dialectical materialism that has nothing to do with God:
But instead, Verbum Domini manet in aeternum. The Word of the Lord remains for ever.
2 responses to “Does Cardinal Roche channel New Age in New Mass with Hegelian “theology of the Church has changed””
Is the “good” cardinal saying that there is no need for Holy Orders? That the anointed Priesthood is a free-for-all? It appears that Jesus’s good plans for His Church are inadequate for the present time. Who does He think He is, God or something?
Seems so, like Lucifer perhaps, who leads the way in yearning to be his own version of God.