07 20, 2014 Fr. Angelo M. Geiger le grand pourfendeur de "crypto-lefebristes" chez ses confrères Franciscains de l'Immaculée

sur <maryvictrix> QUOTE: That should be “In Defense of Pope Benedict and the Latin Mass.”
___The Week has recently published a hit peace on the new Mass and Vatican II by Michael Brendan Dougherty. Ostensibly it is praise of Pope Benedict and his support of the Traditional Latin Mass–well deserved praise, I must say, of the Pope Emeritus’ promulgation of Summorum Pontificum.
___ But then there is this: Benedict’s intervention was not perfect. His intellectual attempt to save the Council and the new Mass from criticism with a “hermeneutic of continuity” was a noble failure. If the council intended continuity, why did it throw every aspect of Catholic worship up for possible revision in its documents? Why was the council swiftly followed by the worst spasm of iconoclasm in the history of the church — a tearing down of altars, images, statues — and a hasty revision to nearly every part of Catholic life?
___ Interesting rhetorical questions, which Dougherty does not answer. Fr GEIGER évite prudemment de répondre personnellement à cette question , mais seulement de nier que la cause en soit le concile, soit plus probablement l'esprit du préconcile = des cardinaux du "Rhin qui s'est jeté dans le Tibre" But the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy is a nice spinning lure that always hooks the fish.
___ Cela évite d'examiner s'il n'y a pas une cause commune solide à ce "post hoc", telle sûrement que l'esprit du préconcile?
It just illustrates how Benedict XVI is so often used and abused in order to push one agenda or another. Calling Pope Benedict’s hermeneutic of continuity a “noble failure” and brushing it off with a wave of the hand also illustrates why I am not a traditionalist. UNQUOTE

Soutenir le Forum Catholique dans son entretien, c'est possible. Soit à l'aide d'un virement mensuel soit par le biais d'un soutien ponctuel. Rendez-vous sur la page dédiée en cliquant ici. D'avance, merci !