Matthew Hazell Profile picture
Jan 25 8 tweets 3 min read
"For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God." (Eph. 5:5; see also 1 Cor. 6:9-10; Gal. 5:19-22; 1 Tim. 1:8-11; Heb. 13:3; Rev. 21:8; 22:15).
One of the primary objections to this "radical inclusion" Cardinal McElroy talks about is that it involves dispensing with the universal call to holiness – you know, that thing the most recent ecumenical Council of the Church spoke about at length in ch. 5 of «Lumen Gentium»...!
"Thus it is evident to everyone, that all the faithful of Christ of whatever rank or status, are called to the fullness of the Christian life and to the perfection of charity; by this holiness as such a more human manner of living is promoted in this earthly society." (LG 40)
This call to holiness is also a biblical call: e.g., "Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord." (Heb. 12:14)
"For God has not called us for impurity, but in holiness. Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you." (1 Thess. 4:7-8)
I do not think it is an accident that the word "holiness" is nowhere to be found in Cardinal McElroy's article. And neither, incidentally, is it to be found anywhere in the Working Document for the Continental Stage of the #Synod.
Lots of (empty) "synodal talk" about "enlarging the tent", "radical inclusion", "listening", "welcome" etc. etc. blah blah blah... but absolutely zero sense of the *obligation* of all the faithful to strive for holiness and perfection (LG 42: «invitantur et tenentur»)!
The world needs holiness. The Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, needs every one of its members to pursue holiness. A self-referential #synod on "synodality" hell-bent on conforming the Church to the world is a catastrophic, fruitless, and devastating dead end.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Matthew Hazell

Matthew Hazell Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @M_P_Hazell

Jan 26
(1/15) Fun* fact: Neither the collect nor the postcommunion in the traditional Roman Rite for this coming Sunday (4th after Epiphany) are contained anywhere in the Novus Ordo, despite having over a millennium of constant use in the liturgy.

* nb. for "fun" read "concerning"

🧵
(2/15) Collect (transl.): "O God, who know that our human frailty cannot stand fast against the great dangers that beset us, grant us health of mind and body, that with your help we may overcome what we suffer on account of our sins."
(3/15) This prayer appears in a total of 43 manuscripts, dating from the 8th century. In all of these, it is an Epiphanytide collect; in the vast majority of them (37), it is used on the 4th Sun aft Epiphany.
It has completely disappeared from the Novus Ordo. Image
Read 15 tweets
Jan 25
"Thinking with the Church" would seem to require one to say that Limbo "remains a possible theological hypothesis" & the reasons to hope that unbaptised infants who die are in heaven "are reasons for prayerful hope, rather than grounds for sure knowledge": vatican.va/roman_curia/co…
The ITC's document on "The hope of salvation for infants who die without being Baptised" definitely takes the view that such infants can be saved, but it is quite even-handed. As the text says, "there is much that simply has not been revealed to us."
A final, personal note: my wife & I have lost two babies to miscarriage. So I understand the strong hope that @mfjlewis has for his son.
But using the pain & sorrow of miscarriage to rigidly insist "no Limbo" and label it as "obsolete & harsh theology" is completely out of line.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 24
(1/7) Well, for this particular case, we have a little more explicit reasoning, given to us by Fr Carlo Braga, C.M., one of Bugnini's close collaborators...
(2/7) "The figure of St Raymond of Penyafort is characterised by his apostolic works in favour of penitents & slaves. The mention of the miracle of his having sailed on the sea using his cloak is secondary to the effects of the prayers inspired by the salient events of his life."
(3/7) Translated quote from C. Braga, "Il «Proprium de Sanctis»", in Ephemerides Liturgicae 84.6 (1970), pp. 401-431, at p. 424.
A full English translation of the essay can be found at (with links to all 5 parts at the beginning).
Read 7 tweets
Jan 10
Or, in summary: "Benedict XVI himself said that his own motu proprio, «Summorum Pontificum», was not primarily motivated by a reconciliation of the SSPX. Here's why he was WRONG."

For pity's sake... 🤦🤦🤦🤦🤦
This is just so unremittingly, unrelentingly, incomprehensibly stupid...
Anyone even passingly familiar with Ratzinger's writing on the liturgy knows that liturgical reconciliation and the question of continuity were always the central aspects for him – the SSPX was secondary! Image
"What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful."
It is notable that WPI completely passes over this fundamental quotation from Benedict's letter accompanying SP.
Read 4 tweets
Jan 6
New year, same ridiculous, idiotic, ostrich-like arguments. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. 🤷
Quite the statement to publish this idiocy on the day of Benedict XVI's funeral, though. Congrats, I guess, for hitting levels of crassness seldom seen by anyone.
And I see we're still claiming that prudential non-dogmatic decisions of Councils are somehow guaranteed by the Spirit to express the "will of God".
So what about Canons 68 & 69 of Lateran IV, which decreed Jews be marked out by their clothing & not allowed to hold public office? Image
Were those conciliar decrees, now rightfully recognised as anti-Semitic, the "will of God"? What about those of the Councils of Constance (completely annulled less than a century later), or Lateran V (a total failure), or of numerous others?
Read 12 tweets
Nov 24, 2022
Cardinal Ladaria, on @DerSynodaleWeg: "It would have been desirable if the authors of the texts & the Plenary Assembly of the Synodal Way had been more careful & had more confidence in the vision the Magisterium has developed in relation to sexuality in recent decades..." (cont.)
"...The preservation of the constitutive life-receiving and transmitting character of man remains one of the great prophetic tasks of the community of believers in this time of progressive commercialisation of human existence..." (cont.)
"...In the texts of the Synodal Way, the stipulation of the conciliar constitution «Dei Verbum» [art. 7] and in particular the question of the transmission of the faith thanks to the apostolic succession are almost forgotten..." (cont.)
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(