The Problem of a Heretical Pope: a Reply to John Lamont
Dr Lamont raises a more fundamental objection.
Dr Lamont raises a more fundamental objection.
These petitions seem to have contributed to a change of attitude in the Holy See.
Like the petitioners of the Agatha Christie petition back in 1971, many are non-Catholic.
I would suggest that Traditional Catholics adopt the following as a non-negotiable principle.
A constitutional monarch’s delegation of executive power does not diminish, but rather underlines, his role as a symbol of God’s rule.
Many of these individuals are not even Catholics; some were quite out of sympathy with the Church.
To make a pilgrimage in post-Christian England is to reassert our country’s sacred geography.
Even small children can unite themselves to the action of the Mass, in ways they could not articulate, when they glimpse the dignity of an activity clearly not directed to anything merely human.
This idea is echoed by the Memoriale Domini, the 1969 Instruction forbidding (with the inevitable exceptions) the reception of Holy Communion in the Hand.
I find myself, here, and not for the first time, defending the words of the Second Vatican Council against an interpretation which would impute to them theological novelties incompatible with the perennial teaching of the Church.
We have now heard from the Holy See in unambiguous terms that the integration into parish life of Catholics attached to the older Missal is a thoroughly bad thing. The ones with a schismatic mentality, whatever that was supposed to mean, are the good ones: or at least the less bad ones.