Matthew Hazell Profile picture
Jun 3 5 tweets 2 min read Twitter logo Read on Twitter
(1/5) An interesting omission in the Novus Ordo's first reading for Trinity Sunday this year (Year A)...! Image
(2/5) As it happens, this is not a one-off for Trinity Sunday: we see the same kind of censorship in the first reading in Year B... Image
(3/5) The thing is, these aren't the readings that were originally proposed. In the 1967 draft «Ordo lectionum», we have readings that are not compromised or censored: see Schema 233 (De Missali, 39), 31 Jul 1967, pp. 73-74 (pics). ImageImage
(4/5) It should also be noted that the Revised Common Lectionary (used by various Protestant groups, based on the Novus Ordo lectionary) avoids these compromised readings, assigning Genesis 1:1–2:4a and Isaiah 6:1-8 as its 1st readings for Years A and B respectively.
(5/5) If we do ever get a third edition of the Novus Ordo lectionary, then these sorts of compromised readings should be corrected, or replaced with other, more suitable ones. (Oh, and all short forms should also be abolished!)

• • •

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

Jun 5
(1/11) I agree with a lot of what Dr Chapp writes here, though by no means all, as I don't agree entirely with his general view of "radical traditionalism"... though I'd be happy to "dialogue" about that...
Permit me a few comments, if I may:
(2/11) I agree that if anything like a "reform of the reform" (IMO the absolute bare minimum of requirements) is going to be any sort of going concern, then an authentic synodality could (nb. could!) be a way of approaching this issue. Image
(3/11) However, like Dr Chapp, I think such a project is now completely out of bounds in this pontificate.
Truthfully, this has been obvious for quite some time – the reaction to Cardinal Sarah's address at Sacra Liturgia 2016 (e.g. thetablet.co.uk/news/5825/pope…) made that very clear. Image
Read 12 tweets
Apr 23
Deeply scandalous: the President of the Pontifical Academy for Life is openly in favour of the introduction of laws permitting euthanasia: such laws, he says, "cannot be excluded" & "can constitute the greatest common good that is concretely possible" in modern society. 😡 Image
Archbishop Paglia's own appalling remarks can be found here, with the headline "The time has come for a law on assisted suicide": ilriformista.it/sul-suicidio-a…
Such a law, he says, "cannot be excluded" for all the reasons one has come to expect from the current pontificate: "accompaniment", "dialogue", "listening"... 🤮🤮🤮🤮

Still, let us remind ourselves what the Church teaches about euthanasia...
Read 11 tweets
Apr 5
(1/4) Today's 1st lesson in the trad Roman Rite: perfectly suited to Holy Week, esp alongside St Luke's Passion, in which Our Lord sweats drops of his Most Precious Blood (Lk 22:44) before it is spilled on the Cross.

This reading is *nowhere* to be found in the Novus Ordo.

🤨 Image
(2/4) And it's not as if this is a mediaeval addition to the Roman Rite. Far from it: Isa. 62:11b + 63:1-7 is found in *all* the ancient lectionaries we have — Würzburg (c. 700); Paris BN lat. 9451 (8th c.); Corbie (c. 772-780); Murbach «comes» (8th c.); & Alcuin (9th c.).
(3/4) Why did the Consilium remove this reading, then?
Schema 176 (De Missali, 25), 25th July 1966, p. 46 gives us the answer: "The first reading, Isa 62:11 + 63:1-7, does not seem possible to keep, on account of its character, which smacks of anger and revenge." 🤦 Image
Read 4 tweets
Apr 3
No, I'm actually just taking Cardinal Roche at his words when he says that he thinks "the theology of the Church has changed". It's quite clear what his understanding is – see, e.g., this interview he gave in May 2022 (pics: omnesmag.com/actualidad/vat…, English via Google Transl). ImageImage
This is, of course, a recapitulation of what he said to The Tablet in February 2022:
And, further, this repeats claims he made in «Notitiae», the journal of the CDF/DDF, in 2020: see cultodivino.va/content/cultod…, pp. 248-258 (pic: p. 253). Image
Read 8 tweets
Mar 31
Mr Lewis seems to have completely missed the fact that the primary criticism of the Cardinal's comments was that they were just flat out *wrong* – which he might have known if he'd read Pius XII's «Mediator Dei» beforehand. Of course, this encyclical isn't cited in his article...
To remind everyone: there has been no change in the Church's theology of the liturgy in this respect: see MD, esp. nn. 85-87 (pic: vatican.va/content/pius-x…).
See also these brief notes on the relationship between «Sacrosanctum Concilium» and «Mediator Dei»:
Read 4 tweets
Mar 29
Now, not to beat a dead horse *too* much, but the redaction history of «Optatam totius» 10 is interesting.
It was heavily restructured in the 4th session of the Council, with "the surpassing excellence of virginity" specifically added at this final stage (see AS IV.4, pp. 18-19).
Contra @pjfahey, the reason given for this was to make sure that "in the whole of n. 10, the superiority of the evangelical counsel of the renunciation of marriage for the sake of the Kingdom of Heaven is clearly affirmed": see AS IV.4, archive.org/details/ASIV.4…, p. 39.
These modifications to «Optatam totius» 10 were accepted by the Council Fathers by 2,011 votes to 11: see the figures for «Suffragatio 373» in AS IV.4, p. 172 (archive.org/details/ASIV.4…).
Read 4 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!

:(