Author Topic: Francis laments "rigidity" of youth who prefer Latin Mass (Read 1767 times)

Geremia · « **on:** November 11, 2016, 02:10:30 PM »

Quote from: Crux

Asked about the liturgy, Pope Francis insisted the Mass reformed after the Second Vatican Council is here to stay and “to speak of a ‘reform of the reform’ is an error.”

In authorizing regular use of the older Mass, now referred to as the “extraordinary form,” now-retired Pope Benedict XVI was “magnanimous” toward those attached to the old liturgy, he said. “But it is an exception.”

Pope Francis told Father Spadaro he wonders why some young people, who were not raised with the old Latin Mass, nevertheless prefer it.

“And I ask myself: Why so much rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”

(source)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #1 on:** November 11, 2016, 02:35:52 PM »

Geremia · « **Reply #2 on:** November 11, 2016, 02:43:53 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

It seems he's saying: "Ask Freud for why trads are rigid."

Barry · « **Reply #3 on:** November 11, 2016, 02:57:35 PM »

Connect the dots. Those who prefer the Latin Mass are rigid, and are not love. The SSPX (supposing) prefers the Latin Mass, so it is against love. Therefore the so-called Holy Father will need to do something to this SSPX that is against love. Q.E.D.

Geremia · « **Reply #4 on:** November 11, 2016, 04:34:07 PM »

He also said (from this translation):

Quote from: Francis

To speak of a 'reform of the reform' is an error."

and quoted the Saint Vincent of Lérins from his breviary:

Quote from: St. Vincent of Lerins

'Ita etiam christianae religionis dogma sequatur has decet profectuum leges, ut annis scilicet consolidetur, dilatetur tempore, sublimetur aetate' (Also the dogma of the Christian religion must follow these laws. It progresses, consolidating with the years, developing with time, deepening with the age.)"

Alexandria · « **Reply #5 on:** November 11, 2016, 06:24:07 PM »

The man is a disgrace.

I stopped paying attention to much of what he says or does unless I happen to read it on here or it is crazy enough to make a big splash. In Francis' case, that is often.

Charlemagne · « **Reply #6 on:** November 11, 2016, 10:06:27 PM »

Nothing Bergoglio says is relevant. Nothing. :heretic:

poche · « **Reply #7 on:** November 11, 2016, 11:48:05 PM »

The older people are always complaining about the younger generation. What else is new?

Maria Auxiliadora · « **Reply #8 on:** November 12, 2016, 07:50:46 AM »

Quote from: Charlemagne

Nothing Bergoglio says is relevant. Nothing. :heretic:

It should be a warning to all E.D. groups regulated by Summorum Pontificuм (and soon the SSPX) and their supporters. They have insisted on the 1962 missal which was ONLY a transitional missal lasting 2 1/2 years before the 1965...to the Novus Ordo. Having broken away from tradition, this missal (1962) has become the object of every indult of which S.P. is the most restrictive because now you have to accept the rule (N.O.) to have the "exception".

The SSPX have insisted on this missal because of ABL agreement with Rome to always use this missal.

It is time the "resistance" move on to the pre- '62 missal because Francis will be the one (in agreement with Benedict, of course) to put an end to the 1962 and through S.P. push the N.O. on all the communities regulated by it. At best, they will be forced to do the two missals at every location.

To be sure, Summorum Pontificuм has always been the funeral car to to give the 1962 missal it's proper burial.It is a tragedy that the SSPX could not see it.

Matto · « **Reply #9 on:** November 12, 2016, 10:58:28 AM »

To me the traditional Latin Mass is so superior to the Novus Ordo I do not see why so many people prefer the Novus Ordo. And I go to a low Mass with no singing, no incense, where I can barely hear what the prest is saying and I don't know what he is saying for most of the Mass either because I do not know Latin and I never use a missal. But it is so obviously superior to me that I do not understand why anyone would prefer the Novus Ordo. But they all do. I mean even if I was a Satanist who held black Masses it would always be a traditional latin black Mass and never a Novus Ordo black Mass. It is so obviously superior to me. Call me "rigid" then. That is funny to me because to me because "rigid" is the word they call young people who do not masturbate or fornicate because they follow the laws of God.

Kephapaulos · « **Reply #10 on:** November 12, 2016, 11:12:48 AM »

I for one am disheartened by Francis' RIGIDITY in modernism.

Alexandria · « **Reply #11 on:** November 12, 2016, 11:23:44 AM »

Quote from: Maria Auxiliadora

Quote from: Charlemagne
Nothing Bergoglio says is relevant. Nothing. :heretic:

It should be a warning to all E.D. groups regulated by Summorum Pontificuм (and soon the SSPX) and their supporters. They have insisted on the 1962 missal which was ONLY a transitional missal lasting 2 1/2 years before the 1965...to the Novus Ordo. Having broken away from tradition, this missal (1962) has become the object of every indult of which S.P. is the most restrictive because now you have to accept the rule (N.O.) to have the "exception".

The SSPX have insisted on this missal because of ABL agreement with Rome to always use this missal.

It is time the "resistance" move on to the pre- '62 missal because Francis will be the one (in agreement with Benedict, of course) to put an end to the 1962 and through S.P. push the N.O. on all the communities regulated by it. At best, they will be forced to do the two missals at every location.

To be sure, Summorum Pontificuм has always been the funeral car to to give the 1962 missal it's proper burial.It is a tragedy that the SSPX could not see it.

Any ED group should start packing up. It's a matter of time before their pope gives them the heave-ho.

Cera · « **Reply #12 on:** November 12, 2016, 01:04:20 PM »

Quote from: Charlemagne

Nothing Bergoglio says is relevant. Nothing. :heretic:

It is relevant in that it's exhibit A for the plans of the enemy.