Synodality, Papal Oaths and Dogma from Denzinger's which militate against any new Synodal doctrine (5)

 https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09215c.htm

https://www.virgosacrata.com/papal-coronation-oath.html

https://www.liquisearch.com/papal_oath

https://www.fisheaters.com/papaloath.html

https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/380639?ysclid=m4bylt0fug973110343

Father Gregory Hesse on The Papal Oath at a Fatima Conference - Catholic Family News is the source

I said the Pope is bound to what his predecessors teach and define. Why? In Part One, I mentioned the fact that every single Pope has sworn an oath of incoronation. I am talking about every single Pope up to and including Paul VI. This oath of incoronation, in Latin called Papal Oath

'Pope Saint Agatho wrote down this text in a collection of Papal texts, privileges and decrees called Liber Diurinus Romanorum Pontificum, the “daily book [of the Roman Pontiff]”. That means – and I talked about this to the Prefect of the Vatican Library just last Monday – that by the time Pope Saint Agatho wrote down the text, this text was probably already a couple of centuries old.

We are looking back at something that every single Pope has sworn to for more than sixteen hundred years. The present Pope says in a different context that the heritage of this size cannot be a formality or an historical incident. It is an explicit expression of the will of Christ. Now let us hear what this explicit expression of the will of Christ means and is.

The Pope swears, he says first “I” (not the traditional Papal expression, “We”). He said, “I swear to God Almighty and the Savior Jesus Christ that I will keep whatever has been revealed through Christ and His Successors and whatever the first councils and my predecessors have defined and declared.” And then he swears that he “will keep without sacrifice to itself the discipline and the rite of the Church”.

The Pope swears he will keep this just the way he found it and as it has been transmitted to him by his holy predecessors; and he swears that he will keep the things of the Church without any loss, and that he will guard and he will make sure that everybody else does so. He swears that he will make sure that nothing of what is in the Tradition coming from his predecessors will either be diminished or changed or he will make sure that nothing whatsoever new can be added to it.

Towards the end of this page-long text, the Supreme Pontiff swears and signs that he will put outside the Church whoever dares to go against this oath, saying explicitly, “whoever dares to go against this oath, may it be somebody else or I”.

So you see, the Pope makes it explicit that he has to firmly adhere to what has been given to him by his predecessors. He has to faithfully conserve everything that has been transmitted and he has to make sure that nobody else touches it.

"I vow to change nothing of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof I have found before me guarded by my God-pleasing predecessors, to encroach upon, to alter, or to permit any innovation therein; 

   To the contrary: with glowing affection as her truly faithful student and successor, to safeguard reverently the passed-on good, with my whole strength and utmost effort; 

   To cleanse all that is in contradiction to the canonical order, should such appear; to guard the Holy Canons and Decrees of our Popes as if they were the divine ordinance of Heaven, because I am conscious of Thee, whose place I take through the Grace of God, whose Vicarship I possess with Thy support, being subject to severest accounting before Thy Divine Tribunal over all that I shall confess; 

   I swear to God Almighty and the Savior Jesus Christ that I will keep whatever has been revealed through Christ and His Successors and whatever the first councils and my predecessors have defined and declared. 

   I will keep without sacrifice to itself the discipline and the rite of the Church. I will put outside the Church whoever dares to go against this oath, may it be somebody else or I. 

   If I should undertake to act in anything of contrary sense, or should permit that it will be executed, Thou willst not be merciful to me on the dreadful Day of Divine Justice. 

   Accordingly, without exclusion, We subject to severest excommunication anyone -- be it Ourselves or be it another -- who would dare to undertake anything new in contradiction to this constituted evangelic Tradition and the purity of the orthodox Faith and the Christian religion, or would seek to change anything by his opposing efforts, or would agree with those who undertake such a blasphemous venture."

I have tried to find the putative Papal Coronation Oath but I have failed, although, if these entries from Denzinger's were part of  the putative Papal Coronation Oath would fit right in with such an oath.

ST. SIMPLICIUS 468-483


The Necessity of Guarding the Faith Which Has Been Handed Down *

[From the epistle "Quantum presbyterorum" to Acacius,

Bishop of Constantinople, January 9, 476]

159 (2) Because, according to the extant doctrine of our predecessors of sacred memory, against which it is wrong to argue, whoever seems to understand rightly, does not desire to be taught by new assertions, but all [matters] in which either he who has been deceived by heretics can be instructed, or he who is about to be planted in the vineyard of the Lord can be trained, are clear and perfect; after imploring trust in your most merciful leader, have the request for calling a synod refused. (3) I urge (therefore), dearest brother, that by every means resistance be offered to the efforts of the perverse to call a synod, which has not always been enjoined in other cases, unless something new arose in distorted minds or something ambiguous in a pronouncement so that, if there were any obscurity, the authority of sacerdotal deliberation might illumine those who were treating the ambiguous pronouncement in common, just as first the impiety of Arius and then that of Nestorius, lastly that of Dioscorus and also of Eutyches caused this to be done. And --may the mercy of Christ our God (and) Savior avert this--it must be made known, abominable [as it is], that [the purpose is] to restore [to their former positions] in opposition to the opinions of the priests of the Lord of the whole world and of the principal rulers of both [scil., worlds] those who have been condemned. . . .


The Unchangeableness of Christian Doctrine *

[From the epistle "Cuperem quidem" to Basiliscus

Augustus January 10, 476]


160 Those genuine and clear [truths] which flow from the very pure fountains of the Scriptures cannot be disturbed by any arguments of misty subtlety. For this same norm of apostolic doctrine endures in the successors of him upon whom the Lord imposed the care of the whole sheepfold [John 21:15 ff.], whom [He promised] He would not fail even to the end of the world [Matt. 28:20], against whom He promised that the gates of hell would never prevail, by whose judgment He testified that what was bound on earth could not be loosed in heaven [Matt. 16:18 ff.]. (6). . . Let whoever, as the Apostle proclaimed, attempts to disseminate something other, than what we have received, be anathema[ Gal. 1:8 f.]. Let no approach to your ears be thrown open to the pernicious plans of undermining, let no pledge of revising any of the old definitions be granted, because, as it must be repeated very often, what has deserved to be cut away with the sharp edge of the evangelical pruninghook by apostolic hands with the approval of the universal Church, cannot acquire the strength for a rebirth nor is it able to return to the fruitful shoot of the master's vine, because it is evident that it has been destined to eternal fire. Thus, finally, the machinations of all heresies laid down by decrees of the Church are never allowed to renew the struggles of their crushed attack.

COUNCIL OF CONSTANTINOPLE II 553

Ecumenical V (concerning the three Chapters)

Ecclesiastical Tradition *

212 We confess that (we) hold and declare the faith given from the beginning by the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ to the Holy Apostles, and preached by them in the whole world; which the sacred Fathers both confessed and explained, and handed down to the holy churches, and especially [those Fathers] who assembled in the four sacred Synods, whom we follow and accept through all things and in all things . . . judging as at odds with piety all things, indeed, which are not in accord with what has been defined as right faith by the same four holy Councils, we condemn and anathematize them. 

St. Boniface 1 418-422

110 (2) . . . To the Synod [of Corinth]. . . . . we have directed such writings that all the brethren may know. . . . . that there must be no withdrawal from our judgment. For it has never been allowed that that be discussed again which has once been decided by the Apostolic See.

Council of Nicea:

308 If anyone rejects all ecclesiastical tradition either written or not written . . . let him be anathema. 

GREGORY IX 1227-1241

The Necessity of Preserving Theological Terminology and Tradition *

 [From the letter “Ab Aegyptiis” to the theologians of Paris, July 7, 1228]

442 “Touched inwardly with sorrow of heart” [Gen. 6:6], “we are filled with the bitterness of wormwood” [cf. Lam. 3:15], because as it has been brought to our attention, certain ones among you, distended like a skin by the spirit of vanity, are working with profane novelty to pass beyond the boundaries which thy fathers have set [cf. Prov. 22:28], the understanding of the heavenly page limited by the fixed boundaries of expositions in the studies of the Holy Fathers by inclining toward the philosophical doctrine of natural things, which it is not only rash but even profane to transgress; (they are doing this) for a show of knowledge, not for any profit to their hearers; so that they seem to be not taught of God or speakers of God, but rather revealed as God. For, although they ought to explain theology according to the approved traditions of the saints and not with carnal weapons, “yet with (weapons) powerful for God to destroy every height exalting itself against the knowledge of God and to lead back into captivity every understanding unto the obedience of Christ” [cf. 2 Cor. 10:4 f.], they themselves “led away by various and strange doctrines” [cf. Heb. 13:9] reduce the “head to the tail” [cf. Deut. 28:13, 44] and they force the queen to be servant to the handmaid, that is, by earthly documents attributing the heavenly, which is of grace, to nature. Indeed relying on the knowledge of natural things more than they ought, returning “to the weak and needy elements” of the world, which they served while they were “little” and “serving them again” [ Gal. 4:9] as foolish in Christ they feed on “milk and not solid food” [ Heb. 5:12 f.], and they seem by no means to have established “the heart in grace” [cf. Heb. 13:9]; and so despoiled of their rewards “plundered and wounded by their natural possessions * they do not reduce to memory that (saying) of the Apostle which we believe they have already frequently read: “Avoiding the profane novelties of words, and the oppositions of knowledge falsely so called, which some seeking have erred concerning the faith” [cf.1 Tim. 6:20 f.]. “O foolish and slow of heart in all things” which the protectors of divine grace, namely “the prophets” the evangelists and the apostles “have spoken” [cf. Luke 24:25], since nature in itself cannot (work) anything for salvation unless it is helped by grace [see n. 105, 138]. Let presumers of this kind speak, who embracing the doctrine of natural things offer the leaves and not the fruit of words to their hearers, whose minds as if fed with husks remain empty and vacant; and their soul cannot be “delighted in fatness” [ Is. 55:2], because thirsty and dry it cannot drink “from the waters of Siloe running with silence” [cf. Is. 8:6] but rather from those which are drawn from the philosophical torrents, of which it is said: “The more they are drunk, the more the waters are thirsted for, because they do not bring satiety, but rather anxiety and labor. And while by extorted, nay rather distorted, expositions they turn the sacred words divinely inspired to the sense of the doctrine of philosophers who are ignorant of God, “do they not place the ark of the covenant by Dagon” [ 1 Samuel 5:2], and set up the image of Antiochus to be adored in the temple of the Lord? And while they try to add to faith by natural reason more than they ought, do they not render it in a certain way useless and empty since “faith does not have merit for one to whom human reason furnishes proof?” * Finally, nature believes what is understood, but faith by its freely given power comprehends what is believed by the intelligence, and bold and daring it penetrates where natural intellect is not able to reach. Will such followers of the things of nature, in whose eyes grace seems to be proscribed, say that “the Word which was in the beginning with God, was made flesh, and dwelt in us” [John 1] is of grace or of nature? As for the rest, God forbid that a “most beautiful woman” [ Song. 5:9], with “eyes painted with stiblic” [ 2 Kings 9:30] by presumers, be adorned with false colors, and that she who “girded with clothes” [ Ps. 44:10] and “adorned with jewels” [ Is. 61:10 ] proceeds splendid as a queen, be clothed with stitched semi-girdles of philosophers, sordid apparel. God forbid that “cows ill favored” and consumed with leanness, which “give no mark of being full would devour the beautiful” [Gen. 41:18 ff.] and consume the fat.

 

443 Therefore, lest a rash and perverse dogma of this kind “as a canker spreads” [ 2 Tim. 2:17], and infects many and makes it necessary that “Rachel bewail her lost sons” [Jer. 31:15], we order and strictly command by the authority of those present that, entirely forsaking the poison mentioned above, without the leaven of worldly knowledge, that you teach theological purity, not “adulterating the word of God” [2 Cor. 2:17] by the creations of philosophers, lest around the altar of God you seem to wish to plant a grove contrary to the teaching of the Lord, and by a commingling of honey to cause the sacrifice of doctrine to ferment which is to be presented “with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth” [ 1 Cor. 5:8]. But content with the terminology established by the Fathers, you should feed the minds of your listeners with the fruit of heavenly words, so that after the leaves of the words have been removed, “they may draw from the fountains of the Savior” [ Is. 12:3 ]; the clear and limpid waters which tend principally to this, that they may build up faith or fashion morals, and refreshed by these they may be delighted with internal richness. *

Benedict XIV 1740-1758;

1471  Likewise, (I profess) that the apostolic and ecclesiastical traditions must be accepted and revered; also, that power of granting indulgences has been left to the Church of Christ, and that their use is very salutary for Christian people.

friday Fun

 

When one asks a fellow American, where were you and what were you doing during Operation Urgent Fury, the October 1983 American led invasion of Grenada?- most respond with an expression on their face that makes one think they had just been whacked in the back of the head with an invisible sack of frozen Cod Loins: Wait, what? We invaded Grenada? T’Hell?

Not many Americans remember the last of The POTUS Ronald Reagan’s great military successes and while few remember what they were doing during those first tense ten minutes of that invasion when many American troops were asking themselves, Why are we doing this? and  Man, did you think it’d be this humid?  ABS is sure they will remember what they were doing and thinking when they look back at V V Day (Victory over Corona Virus Day) and, unless ABS is mistaken (unlikely) they will have emotions as mixed as the numerous cocktails they have been consuming daily.

Perhaps what the American Government has been doing during this manufactured panic will remind them of Mr. Sam Francis and his explanation of how the American government works to a visiting contingent of Russian officials:   In America there are two political parties.  The Republicans are the Stupid Party and The Democrats are the Evil Party and every once in a while they get together and do something really stupid and evil. We call that Bipartisanship.

Anticipating the inevitable America victory over virus, ABS knows that Americans will not be able to look back triumphantly to the photos of the virus singing a Treaty of Unconditional Surrender aboard The USNS Comfort and so he has taken it upon his own self to memorialise the pending victory by rewriting The Pledge of Allegiance so future American public school students will remember VV Day.

I pledge allegiance to The Fauci of the Locked Psychiatric Ward that is America and to the epidemiological models upon which he stands, one virus, Uber Alles, under fear, with rebarbative restrictions and suspected criminality for all.

Blessing a sin. Synodality as permanent revolution (4)

 https://www.ncronline.org/vatican/vatican-news/news/pope-signals-openness-blessings-gay-couples-study-womens-ordination

https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/muller-fiducia-supplicans-is-self

https://www.ncregister.com/interview/cardinal-mueller-efforts-to-explain-fiducia-supplicans-add-to-confusion-over-document

Why have the last two Popes met with Fr James Martin so frequently and given the impression they approve of his blessing sodomite couples?

https://outreach.faith/2023/12/as-a-married-gay-catholic-just-blessed-by-a-catholic-priest-i-welcome-the-churchs-openness/

Nobody is fooled when each Pope has named to the Synod both priests and laity who approve of sodomy and women priests. Are we supposed to think they are not in favor of eventually normalising these evils actions and ideas?

Synodality as permanent revolution (3) Do Popes have the authority to change what Jesus established?

No; not on the level of reality but in the minds of Popes Francis and Leo XIV?

Apparently, yes.

The change is being implemented and what can a faithful Catholic man do?

Keep the Faith once delivered; act manfully and wait on The Lord.

Read it and weep Catholics; these revolutionaries are not only coming for our Church; they already control it.

Written by Claudio Iván Remeseira

Francis’s Critics, Vatican II, and the Theology of the People

For all the accusations of doctrinal confusion—and even hints of heresy—it’s important to remember that Pope Francis’s magisterium was firmly rooted in the Second Vatican Council, and more specifically in its distinctly Argentine reception, known as the theology of the People. This theological current was developed by the theological experts or periti of the Episcopal Commission of Pastoral Ministry (COEPAL, by its Spanish acronym), a synodal task force of bishops, priests, and lay advisors convened by the Argentine bishops’ conference in the wake of Vatican II. Its purpose was to implement the Council’s conclusions in the Argentine context. COEPAL’s most influential periti were two diocesan priests, Lucio Gera and Rafael Tello—arguably the most important Argentine theologians of the 20th century.

At the time, Jorge Mario Bergoglio was still completing his formation as a Jesuit and had little direct contact with COEPAL. But years later—especially after becoming auxiliary bishop and later archbishop of Buenos Aires in the 1990s—he fully embraced this theological tradition. More than any other influence, it shaped both his pastoral approach and theological worldview. As pope, his closest theological advisors came from this school: Fr. Carlos Galli, a disciple of Gera and a member of the International Theological Commission, and Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith. Their collaboration with Francis dates back to 2007, when then-Archbishop Bergoglio led the commission drafting the final document of the Fifth Latin American Episcopal Conference in Aparecida, Brazil. Galli and Fernández (Cardinal Víctor Manuel Fernández, Prefect of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith) authored the final draft and would go on to contribute to all major documents of Francis’s pontificate.

Interestingly, the architects of the theology of the People never used that name. They called it “popular pastoral theology.” Its core concepts were summarized in a 1974 book titled ¿Qué es la pastoral popular? (“What Is Popular Pastoral Theology?”), published one year after COEPAL was disbanded. While attributed to Jesuit Fernando Boasso, the book is really a synthesis of years of conversations among COEPAL’s team of theologians and religious sociologists in Buenos Aires from 1968 to 1973. These discussions built upon their reading of Vatican II documents—especially Lumen Gentium and Gaudium et Spes. The two central concepts of popular pastoral theology—“people” and “popular culture”—emerged directly from these two conciliar texts.

Prior to Vatican II, the dominant image of the Church was a hierarchical structure in which clerics—by virtue of their ordination—occupied a superior role to the laity. At the top stood the pope, and the Church was governed according to what became known as the “Roman model,” formalized during the papacy of Pius IX. This clericalist vision understood the Church as a strict chain of command, with the pope as absolute monarch. Many integralist Catholics sought to extend this authoritarian model to civil society as well, treating it as a bulwark of order and stability.

Lumen Gentium replaced this vertical image with a more horizontal one: the Church as the People of God, composed of all the baptized—clergy and laity alike. This shift was symbolically reinforced in the document itself, where the chapter on the People of God precedes the chapter on the hierarchical structure of the Church. While this did not change the canonical role of bishops as successors to the apostles (a point contested by some radical reformers in the postconciliar era), it did challenge the clericalist model. When Pope Francis decried clericalism as a distortion of the Church, he was simply reiterating the vision of Vatican II.

Gaudium et Spes, for its part, recognized the legitimate autonomy of the secular world and encouraged Christians to engage with it, rather than attempt to impose their beliefs, as had often been the case in preconciliar days. The document adopted the “see, judge, act” method of the Young Christian Workers movement and called on Catholics to read the signs of the times and work to transform society in light of the Gospel.

(Tradition has always taught there are three enemies of the Catholic Faithful; The world, the flesh and the devil; in that order.  When claims are made that Vatican Two recognised the world as a legitimate autonomy, why did it not warn that it remains an enemy of the Catholic Church and its faithful members?)

COEPAL’s periti rooted these teachings in the particularities of Argentine life, especially the experiences of the poor and working class. Years before “the preferential option for the poor” became a global catchphrase, these theologians saw the Church’s mission as one of solidarity with the marginalized. Many of them had served as chaplains to the Argentine Young Christian Workers in the 1950s and were shaped by its pastoral obrera (worker pastoral ministry), a direct antecedent to the theology of the People.

This historical setting also helps explain the movement’s relationship with Peronism, the populist political movement founded by Juan Domingo Perón in the 1940s. For decades, Argentina’s working class has overwhelmingly identified with Peronism. Pastoral closeness to the working class inevitably meant engagement with their political loyalties, despite Peronism’s authoritarian tendencies. After a military coup deposed Perón in 1955—with the support of many middle- and upper-class Catholics—his movement was banned for nearly two decades. In the 1960s, another military dictatorship ruled the country, and the struggle to lift the ban on Peronism became intertwined with the broader movement for the return of democracy. The periti’s theology reflected this environment: they denounced U.S. imperialism and Argentina’s economic dependency as structural causes of poverty. At the same time, their embrace of a national-populist ideology was also a conscious alternative to the Marxist ideologies that drew in many progressive Catholics during this era, including some who joined guerrilla movements inspired by the Cuban Revolution.

The theology of the People has often been labeled the Argentine version of liberation theology. But that’s a mischaracterization. In fact, during the 1980s, when John Paul II launched a crackdown on liberation theology, the theology of the People—then often referred to as a theology of culture—was seen in Rome as a preferable alternative. Many progressive Catholics dismissed it as regressive, largely because of its embrace of popular piety, which they viewed as complicit in the structures of oppression. By contrast, the theology of the People interpreted popular Catholicism as a genuine expression of the sensus fidei, the Spirit-given intuition of faith that lives in the people, especially the poor. Bergoglio’s reputation as a “conservative” stemmed in large part from his defense of this view.

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of revolutionary utopias softened this rift between Latin America’s theological currents. Over time, both branches turned their attention to shared priorities—especially concern for the poor. The cordial exchange between Francis and Leonardo Boff at the beginning of Francis’s pontificate symbolized this convergence.

Two other areas of Francis’s magisterium that drew intense criticism were also deeply rooted in Vatican II. In Traditionis Custodes, Francis upheld the liturgical vision of Sacrosanctum Concilium against those nostalgic for the Tridentine Mass. Likewise, his pastoral outreach to divorced and remarried Catholics, as well as LGBTQ Catholics, stems from both the Council’s pastoral orientation and its emphasis on human dignity, moral discernment, and the centrality of love and mercy.

Ultimately, opposition to Pope Francis’s teachings often amounts to a rejection of Vatican II itself—sometimes overtly, sometimes cloaked in calls for a “correct” interpretation of the Council. In Benedict XVI’s famous distinction between a hermeneutic of continuity and one of rupture, Francis clearly embodied the reforming continuity the Council envisioned, shaped by his own experience in the “existential peripheries” of Buenos Aires and a deep awareness of the “throwaway culture” spreading through Latin America and the Global South.

By electing Cardinal Robert Prevost as Pope Leo XIV, the conclave affirmed the direction set by Francis over the past twelve years. And in his early actions and statements, Pope Leo has made it clear that he intends to continue that trajectory—especially with respect to synodality and popular piety. At the same time, some of his early gestures appear to extend an olive branch to more traditionalist Catholics. Time will tell whether that will be enough to appease Francis’s critics, or if the resistance to Vatican II will persist—and perhaps even grow—under Leo’s pontificate.

I found this online after seeing it linked to at some online blog. Maybe it is from Where Peter is

If it is it deserves credit for posting it.

Theology; Catholic Dictionary

THEOLOGY

Literally "the science of God," used by the Stoics in the third century B.C. to describe a reasoned analysis of the deity. Earlier uses were more naturalistic. Thus, Plato in the Republic and Aristotle in his Metaphysics called Homer, Hesiod, and Orpheus theologians because they first determined the genealogies and attributes of the gods. 

With the advent of Christianity, theology came to mean what its etymolgy suggested, and was defined by St. Augustine as "reasoning or discourse about the divinity." Through the patristic age to the period of The Schoolmen, this remained the acceptable generic meaning. Peter Abelard (1079-1142) is credited with first having used the term in its modern connotation. St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) defended theology as a science because it investigates the contents of belief by means of reason enlightened by faith (fides quaerens intellectum), in order to acquire a deeper understanding or revelation. He also distinguished theology proper from "natural theology" or what Gottfried Leibniz later called "theolodicy," which studies God as knowable by reason alone and independent of divine authority. Since the thirteenth century the term has been applied to the whole study of revealed truth and gradually replaced its rival synonyms. (Etym. Latin theologia; from Greek: theo, God + -logia, knowledge.)

In the theology of the people discussed above People does not appear to include all people - Saints,  Drs of the Church, Past Pontiffs, Teaching of ecumenical councils - but the poor people of South America.

Ours is a Faith of Divine Revelation not a product of the human experience of poor people in South America.

Is our faith going to be willingly surrendered to the reasoning or discourse about the revealed truth of the Catholic faith as mediated by the poor people of South America?

Over my dead body...

All righty then...

Synodality as permanent revolution (2)

 At Vatican Two, Ratzinger lamented that only the Pope could call a synod but he was pleased when Pope Paul VI created the permanent Synod of Bishops, because, in his words;

If we may say that the synod is a permanent council - its composition as well as its name justifies this - then its institution under these circumstances guarantees that the Council will continue after its official end; it will from now be part of the everyday life of the Church. It will be no more mere transitory episode. but will be able to mature what was sown in the often stormy days of the sessions.

I use the word revolution is the sense that an existing order is changed and a new order is put in its place.

What member of the Faithful does not yet understand that V2 was a revolution that overturned the then existing order; literally everything was changed from The Holy Holocaust, to The Sacraments, To Religious Orders, to a new Raccolta, a new Code of Canon Law, to a new Catechism that falsely accused Jesus of twice causing scandal,  to a new Book of Blessings etc etc etc.

Ratzinger and his modernist ilk (the progressive periti) successfully seized control of the Church and they are not about to willingly surrender their control of it; thus, a permanent progressive council via Synodalism.

The permanent revolution is on the path marked out for it by the progressive periti , a path that leads to the quicksand of modernism and indifference and still invisibilium within the Prelature is that cleric whose puissant possession of Tradition is such that it could be applied as a force against our Inertia into Indifferentism.

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=11057

https://x.com/dianemontagna/status/1710308280029905288

The Synod of Bishops As a layman with no expertise in ecclesiastical matters I will say what I think is necessary to say in opposition to this "new way of being church"

  This will be the first in a series of posts about the new way of being church as though man could improve upon what Jesus established once and for all  - a perfect visible society with all of the means at its disposal to carry out all of its necessary functions.

This series will include more than a few citations from Denzinger's "The Sources of Catholic Dogma" which, at least to this layman, seem opposed to this new way after nearly two thousand years.

It seems fair to begin with Pope Paul's moto proprio establishing this permanent structure.

PAUL VI  

APOSTOLIC LETTER ISSUED MOTU PROPRIO

APOSTOLICA SOLLICITUDO

ESTABLISHING THE SYNOD OF BISHOPS
FOR THE UNIVERSAL CHURCH

 

The Apostolic concern leading Us to carefully survey the signs of the times and to make every effort to adapt the means and methods of the holy apostolate to the changing circumstances and need of our day, impels Us to establish even closer ties with the bishops in order to strengthen Our union with them "whom the Holy Spirit has placed [...] to rule the Church of God" (Acts 20:28). We are led to this not merely by the reverence, esteem and sense of gratitude that We rightly feel towards all Our Venerable Brothers in the episcopate, but also by the very heavy responsibility that has been laid upon Us as universal Shepherd, a responsibility that obliges Us to lead the People of God to eternal pastures. For daily experience has taught Us how helpful this kind of union will be in carrying out Our apostolic Office in this age that is so upset and full of division and yet so open to the salutary inspiration of God's grace; We intend to use every means available to Us to promote and foster it. "Thus," as We have said elsewhere, "We will not lack the consolation of their presence, the help of their wisdom and experience, the support of their counsel, and the voice of their authority" (Discourse to the Council Fathers, III session; AAS 56 (1965) 1011).

Hence it is only fitting, especially during the celebration of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, that this conviction has taken firm root in Us concerning the necessity and importance of making every greater use of the bishops' assistance in providing for the good of the universal Church. It was also the Ecumenical Council that gave Us the idea of permanently establishing a special Council of bishops, with the aim of providing for a continuance after the Council of the great abundance of benefits that We have been so happy to see flow to the Christian people during the time of the Council as a result of Our close collaboration with the bishops.

Now that the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican is drawing to a close, We feel the time has come to put this decision, long since made, into effect; and We are all the more happy to do so because of Our certain knowledge that the bishops of the Catholic world are in favor of this step; this is clear from the many wishes expressed in this regard in the ecumenical Council.

And so, after carefully considering the whole matter, because of our esteem and regard for all the Catholic bishops and with the aim of providing them with abundantly means for greater and more effective participation in Our concern for the universal Church, on our own initiative and by Our apostolic authority, We hereby erect and establish here in Rome a permanent Council of bishops for the universal Church, to be directly and immediately subject to Our power. Its proper name will be the Synod of Bishops.

This Synod, which, like all human institutions, can be improved upon with the passing of time, is to be governed by the following regulations:

I

The Synod of Bishops, whereby bishops chosen from various parts of the world are to offer more effective assistance to the supreme Shepherd, is to be constituted in such a way that it is: a) a central ecclesiastical institution; b) representing the whole Catholic episcopate; c) of its nature perpetual; d) as for structure, carrying out its function for a time and when called upon.

II

The Synod of Bishops has, of its very nature, the function of providing information and offering advice. It can also enjoy the power of making decisions when such power is conferred upon it by the Roman Pontiff; in this case, it belongs to him to ratify the decisions of the Synod.

1. The general purpose of the Synod are: 

a) to promote a closer union and greater cooperation between the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops of the whole world; 

b) to see to it that accurate and direct information is supplied on matters and situations that bear upon the internal life of the Church and upon the kind of action that should be carrying on in today's world; 

c) to facilitate agreement, at least on essential matters of doctrine and on the course of action to be taken in the life of the Church.

2. Its special and immediate purposes are: 

a) to provide mutually useful information; 

b) to discuss the specific business for which the Synod is called into session on any given occasion.

III

The Synod of Bishops is directly and immediately subject to the authority of the Roman Pontiff, whose responsibility is:

1. to call the Synod into session whenever he feels this will be advisable and to designate the place where the meetings are to be held;

2. to ratify the election of members described in articles V and VIII;

3. to determine matters for discussion at least six months before the Synod is to meet, if that be possible;

4. to see to it that the material to be discussed is sent to those who ought to be concerned about the discussion of these matters;

5. to set the agenda;

6. to preside over the Synod personally or through someone else.

IV

The Synod of Bishops can meet in General Session, in Extraordinary Session, and in Special Session.

V

The Synod of Bishops meeting in General Session will primarily, and as a general rule, be made up of:

1. a) the patriarchs, major archbishops and metropolitans outside of a patriarchate of the Catholic Churches of the Eastern rite;

b) the bishops elected by individual national episcopal Conferences, in accordance with the regulations in article VIII;

c) the bishops elected by the episcopal Conferences which have been established for a number of nations which do not have their own individual Conference, in accordance with the regulations in article VIII;

d) along with the above, ten religious chosen from the Roman Union of Superiors General to represent the clerical religious institutes.

2. The cardinals who are in charge of departments of the Roman Curia will also attend the General Sessions of the Synod of Bishops.

VI

The Synod of Bishops in Extraordinary Session will be made up of:

1. a) the patriarchs, major archbishops and metropolitans outside of a patriarchate of the Catholic Churches of the Eastern rite;

b) the Presidents of national episcopal Conferences;

c) the Presidents of episcopal Conferences which have been established for a number of nations which do not have their own individual Conferences;

d) three religious chosen by the Roman Union of Superiors General to represent the clerical religious institutes.

2. The cardinals who are in charge of the departments of the Roman Curia will also attend the Extraordinary Sessions of the Synod of Bishops.

VII

The Synod of Bishops meeting in Special Session will be made up of the patriarchs, major archbishops and metropolitans outside of a patriarchate of the Catholic Churches of the Eastern rite, as well as of those who represent either the episcopal Conferences of one or a number of nations or the religious institutes, as has been established in article V and article VIII, but in this case, all of them are to belong to the region for which the Synod of Bishops is being convoked.

VIII

The Bishops who will represent individual national Conferences are to be chosen in this manner:

a) one for each national episcopal Conference which has 25 members or less;

b) two for each national episcopal Conference of no more than 50 members;

c) three for each national episcopal Conference which has more than 100 members.

The episcopal Conferences which take in a number of nations will choose their representatives on the same basis.

IX

In choosing those who are to represent the episcopal Conferences of one or a number of nations and the religious institutes in the Synod of Bishops, great attention should be paid not just to the general knowledge and wisdom of individuals, but also to their theoretical and practical knowledge of the matter which the Synod is to take up.

X

The Supreme Pontiff may, if he so chooses, increase the number of members of the Synod of Bishops by adding bishops, or religious to represent the religious institutes, or clerics who are experts, to the extent of fifteen percent of the total number of the members mentioned in articles V and VIII.

XI

At the conclusion of the Session for which the Synod of Bishops has been convoked, the persons making up the Synod lose their office by that very fact, and the same is true of any individual members who have had some special role or function.

XII

The Synod of Bishops is to have a permanent General Secretary, with a suitable number of assistants assigned to him. In addition, any Session of the Synod of Bishops is to have a Special Secretary of its own who remains in office until the end of the Session.

Both the General Secretary and the Special Secretaries are to be named by the Supreme Pontiff.

We decree and establish all this, anything to the contrary notwithstanding.

Given at St. Peter's, Rome, on the fifteenth day of September, in the year 1965, the third of Our Pontificate.

PAULUS PP. VI

What about adding lay men and women to The Synod?

I think that can be accounted for in the last introductory paragraph that I bolded in red. It can be read just before # 1

Tomorrow I will post this response of one of the liberal pert of Vatican Two of whom it could be said that he loved the idea because it would mean th liberal pert of Vatican Two could continue the revolution.

A word or two about my use of "revolution" to describe what Happened at Vatican Two and its subsequent substantial changes that followed it.

Everything that I know about the Church prior to Vatican Two was changed.

What member of the Faithful fifty years old and older does not yet understand that V2 was a revolution that overturned the then existing order; literally everything was changed from The Holy Holocaust, to The Sacraments, To religious orders, to a new Raccolta, a New Code of Canon Law, to a new Catechism that falsely accused Jesus of twice causing scandal,  to a new Book of Blessings etc etc etc.

The Assumption of Mary in The Divine Liturgy of the Maronites

 

Friday Fun

 J. Reginald Von Dandepantz was serving a 5-7 year stretch at Rikers for Illegally Selling Time Shares, a Federal Fraud Felony, and he ended up having to serve more than the anticipated sentence of 1-2 years when, during the sentencing phase of his trial, the judge asked him if he had any words to say in his defense:

Well, your honor, I have to say that the thoughts in my head are spinning faster than the tires of Steven Hawking's wheelchair were spinning when he got trapped on the I 95 entrance ramp in Fort Kent, Maine during an ice storm in February of 1996.

Hawking was in Fort Kent to deliver his Keynote Address "I just made-up that Black Hole shit" at the third annual Bunsen Burner Boys Bash at Bohunk Bob's BBQ, Fish Bait, and Guns n' Bullets All You Can Eat Buffet.

This did not sit well with the Judge whose nephew, Timmy, had been the victim of a vicious attack by a rabid raccoon that left poor Tiny Tim a Crippled Cub Scout and it was only one week after the tragedy (and exactly two weeks before the Dandepantz trial began) that the mayor of Madawaska, Maine Lucien "Squeaky" Allouette, declared he would award a Ninja Warrior Bacon Badge to any person who successfully cooked bacon atop their metal lunch box solely using solar heat.

The entry fee is $25.00 per person and the participant must camp out the entire night and not pee out from inside of their tents because that is dangerous and dirty and there may be Brownies in the area.

After scolding Dandepantz for his very lame attempt to spin the felony fraud he was about to take the rap for - Hell, man- being forced to listen to that lame excuse is like being forced to watch Hawking trying to work the trampoline- the judge went on to describe the seriousness of the charge against Dandepantz:

This is no damn joke, buster. You paid to advertise in the Bangor Daily News your crummy scheme to seduce the good people of the great state of Maine, from Bucksport to Jonestown Beale, into arriving at your so-called membership drive to participate in an exclusive Rural Resort Time Share Program that turned out to be nothing more than a partially deflated Bounce House in the back yard of your Aunt Debbah's camp at Molasses Pond.

And for that pathetic excuse for a Rural Resort Time Share Program, you charged each participant $150.00.

Therefore, by the power vested in me by former Governor Paul LePage - who is now a Bar Tender who makes a wicked car bomb - I sentence you, J. Reginald Von Dandepantz, to 5-7 years in Rikers, ya bastid.


And the rest, as they say is history.

It was while at Rikers that J. Reginald Von Dandepantz developed his justly famous Prison Recipes Cookbook that is now selling faster than small tin foil packets of cocaine - and for a lot less too.

Here is the most requested recipe from Mr. Von Dandepantz cookbook, Cell Block C Casserole.

Steal three medium sized eggs from the Commissary (You may have to French Kiss Louie the Lip to get these and even though he "identifies as a girl" that bastid ain't ).

Anyways, beat the eggs like they are a stoolie, and slip them into one leg of your prison pants with a mouse you captured, after first tying off that pant leg with that length of rope you were saving to maybe hang yourself, and then run the circumference of your cell six times while slapping the wall with your pant leg as hard as you can.

Then, once you have done that, put your pants on the prison radiator and in the morning you will have a very nice warm and tasty casserole.