When one thinks one has finally seen and heard all the nuttiness that the purveyors of the new religion have to offer, there is always some even more outlandish sacrilege afoot in clerical quarters, making one realise that one is still capable of being shocked.
Except today such outrages no longer induce in Melancholicus his wonted pious fury, only a wearying fatigue accompanied by a sigh of here we go again...
The offending news is printed below, in blue. Melancholicus has added his comments in red.
Rome Dominicans surprised at Dutch proposal for priestless Masses
[of course a 'priestless Mass' is an oxymoron, but that significant truth does not seem to occur to the author of this article, who comes across as far too dispassionate in her coverage of such a serious issue as denial of the priesthood and the sacrifice by a Catholic religious order]
By Carol Glatz
Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The general curia of the Dominicans expressed surprise [surprise? Outrage would be a more suitable response] over a booklet published by its order in the Netherlands [where else?] recommending that laypeople be allowed to celebrate Mass when no ordained priests are available [reality check: the Mass is an action of Christ, not of any individual or group. One who has not received sacerdotal ordination cannot therefore confect the Eucharist, and hence cannot offer Mass].
In a written statement released by the Vatican Sept. 18, the Dominicans' Rome-based leaders said that, while they "laud the concern of our brothers" over the shortage of priests, they did not believe "the solutions that they have proposed are beneficial to the church nor in harmony with its tradition." [which is putting it rather mildly]
The statement, dated Sept. 4, acknowledged the Dutch Dominicans' concerns about the shortage of vocations to the priesthood and the difficulty in offering the faithful in the Netherlands a wider celebration of the Eucharist.
But while the statement said Dominican leaders shared those same concerns it said they did "not believe that the method they (Dutch Dominicans) have used in disseminating" a booklet to all 1,300 parishes in the Netherlands was an appropriate way to discuss the issue [again, putting it rather mildly].
An open dialogue about the availability of the Eucharist and the priestly ministry should be carried out through a "careful theological and pastoral reflection with the wider church and the Dominican order," the statement said. [more Anglican-style management newspeak. When will they ever call a spade a spade?]
"The booklet published by our Dutch brothers was a surprise to the general curia of the Dominican order," it said.
In late August, the Dominicans in the Netherlands distributed a 38-page booklet, "Church and Ministry," that proposed parishes in need of an ordained priest choose their own person to become the Mass presider. The parish could then present such candidates -- "women or men, homo- or heterosexual, married or single" -- to the local bishop to ask that they be ordained, according to the booklet [so these persons will be offering 'Mass' even before they are 'ordained'? The mind boggles. Not even the corporation formerly known as ECUSA permits the non-ordained to preside at the eucharist. These Dominicans are more protestant than the protestants].
However, basing its recommendation on practices within the early church [ ! ], the booklet said if the bishop chooses not to ordain the candidate -- for example, because the person cannot meet the requirements of celibacy -- then the elected candidate and the congregation could still feel assured that when they come together to "share bread and wine in prayer," they are still receiving a real and valid Eucharist, the Dutch Dominicans' Web site said [a 'real and vaild Eucharist'? What planet do these people live on?].
"What is important is an infectious attitude of faith," the booklet said [Faith in what, precisely?].
One of the booklet's authors, theologian and Dominican Father Andre Lascaris, confirmed that the order was suggesting the elected leader would be celebrating a Mass and consecrating bread and wine for parishioners [No 'elected leader' can possibly celebrate Mass without the sacerdotal character imparted through the sacrament of orders. The bread and wine at such a 'celebration' would remain bread and wine; nothing more].
The "magical moment" of transubstantiation when Christ becomes present in the sacrament can also occur when people come together prayerfully [this is an old and wearisome error. The supplications of the congregation, however devoutly uttered, can in no wise effect transubstantiation, for which a priest is absolutely necessary], since the priest's words of the consecration "are missing in the oldest prayers" of the early church [this too is nonsense. Lascaris is as poor a liturgist as he is a theologian. The words of consecration are "missing" from such sources because they were considered too holy to be written down. They were not absent from the celebration of the liturgical rite], he told Catholic News Service by phone Sept. 19 from Huissen, Netherlands.
Because of the priest shortage in the Netherlands, local church officials advise Catholics to drive to a nearby parish that has a priest, and some parishes have a Liturgy of the Word and a Communion service with preconsecrated hosts.
But Father Lascaris said a eucharistic service with preconsecrated hosts is like receiving "bread and wine from someone else's table."
He said to imagine going to a restaurant, "and you sit down and they bring you food from another restaurant" from a city far away [the lunacy of this complaint is what happens when you remove the sacrificial aspect from the Mass; it degenerates into a picnic].
Parishioners also want to celebrate together with a presider from their own community [here this apostate priest assumes he knows what parishioners 'want'. Would Melancholicus prefer to receive the eucharist from the hands of Mrs. Jones simply because she lives on the same street, rather than from a validly ordained priest from out of town? What do you think, gentle reader?] since a leader or priest is a member and "a servant of the community," he said [is the sacerdotal office reduced to this? To the level of a glorified community worker?].
He said Mass should not be "a method of power; we see it as a method of celebrating." [take your socialist ideas elsewhere, Father. They have no place in the Church founded by Jesus Christ]
The Dutch Dominicans emphasized their proposals were meant for emergency situations when no local priest was available and a bishop refused to ordain a selected member of the community [emergency or not, it still doesn't change the fact that a lay person cannot confect the holy sacrifice of the Mass, nor the fact that such invalid simulations of the sacraments are sacrilegious].
In an interview posted on the Dutch Dominicans' Web site, Dominican Father Harrie Salemans, another of the booklet's authors, said: "The church is organized around priests and finds the priesthood more important than local faith communities. ... This is deadly for local congregations." [this is congregationalism. It is not Catholicism]
Father Lascaris told CNS he did not think publishing and distributing the booklet was inappropriate [of course he didn't. No heretic ever thinks that heretical acts might be inappropriate].
Barring the Dominicans from disseminating ideas would be "strange," as would not allowing them to talk to other people, to journalists or even to the pope about suggestions on how to address the lack of priests available to celebrate Mass, Father Lascaris said [it would seem that the Pope and the Dutch Dominicans adhere to different religions entirely].
The issue of priestly celibacy and the potential role of married priests came up at the Synod of Bishops on the Eucharist in late 2005. Both synod participants and Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed the obligation of celibacy for priests in the Latin rite.
The pope's 2007 apostolic exhortation, "Sacramentum Caritatis" ("The Sacrament of Charity"), and his special November 2006 meeting with top Vatican officials reaffirmed the value of priestly celibacy.
Alas! Who will deliver us from the putrid fruits of that wretched council? Forty years is far too long a time to be without authentic Catholic teaching and praxis. No wonder the faithful and their pastors in countries such as the Netherlands are so deluded as to openly espouse notions indistinguishable from low church protestantism. It might reasonably be asked whether anything even remotely resembling Catholicism still exists in the Netherlands, a country which before the catastrophe so abounded in vocations to the priesthood and religious life that Dutch priests and nuns could be found in the missions all over the world. Now, Melancholicus has no choice but to refuse communion with these heretical and apostate Dominicans, who have openly espoused novelty and in doing so have departed from the faith of the Church.