Silence in the Ratzinger Corner? Maybe because the Motu's drive for the Elimination of the Mass can be Traced to Josef Ratzinger's Rejection of the Catholic Theology of the Mass in His Critical Text, "Introduction to Christianity"?
"Wonderful book, Josef! No more of that 'blood and guts stuff,' just "Total Self-Giving"!
From Josef Ratzinger's book, Introduction to Christianity, trans. J.R. Foster (New York: Herder and Herder, 1970), pp. 213-215.
From the chapter, "The Christological Articles of the Creed" and the subsection, "Suffered Under Pontius Pilate, Was Crucified, Dead and Buried": "What position is really occupied by the cross within faith in Jesus as the Christ....As we have already established, the universal Christian consciousness in this matter is extensively influenced by a much-coarsened version of St. Anselm's theology of atonement [Notice he only traces this back to the 11th century and not to the Deposit of the Faith]....To many Christians, and especially to those who only know the faith from a fair distance, it looks as if the cross is to be understood as part of a mechanism of injured and restored right. It is the form, so it seems, in which the infinitely offended righteousness of God was propitiated again by means of an infinite expiation. It thus appears to people as the expression of an attitude which insists on a precise balance between debit and credit; at the same time one gets the feeling that this balance is based nevertheless upon a fiction....The 'infinite expiation' on which God seems to insist thus moves into a doubly SINISTER light [emphasis mine]. Many devotional texts actually force one to think that Christian faith in the cross visualizes a God whose unrelenting righteousness DEMANDED A HUMAN SACRIFICE, the sacrifice of his own Son, and ONE TURNS AWAY IN HORROR from the righteousness whose SINISTER WRATH makes the message of love incredible [emphasis mine]....In the Bible the cross does not appear as part of a mechanism of injured right; on the contrary, in the Bible the cross is quite the reverse: it is the expression of the process in which one is what one does, and does what one is; it is the expression of a life that is completely being for others. To anyone who looks more closely, the scriptural theology of the cross represents a real revolution as compared with the notions of expiation and redemption entertained by non-Christian religions, though it certainly cannot be denied that in the later Christian consciousness [like in the Catholic Faith as defined by the Council of Trent!] this revolution was largely neutralized and in its whole scope seldom recognized....[Now Ratzinger begins speaking about St. Paul's Letter to the Hebrews] When our text says that Jesus accomplished the expiation through his BLOOD, this blood is again not to be understood as a MATERIAL GIFT, a quantitatively measurable means of expiation; it is simply the concrete expression of a love of which it is said that it extends 'to the end" (John 13:1)."
pp. 221-222, "Thus it should now also be plain that with the cross, it is not a matter of an accumulation of physical pain, as if its redemptive value consists in its involving the largest possible amount of physical torture. WHY SHOULD GOD TAKE PLEASURE IN THE SUFFERING OF HIS CREATURE, INDEED HIS OWN SON, or even see in it the currency with which reconciliation has to be purchased from him? The Bible and right Christian belief are far removed from such ideas....Basically this also answers the question with which we started, whether it is not an unworthy concept of God to imagine for oneself a God who demands the slaughter of his son to pacify his wrath. To such a question one can only reply, indeed God must not be thought of in this way. But in any case such a concept of God has nothing to do with the idea of God to be found in the New Testament."
Dr. Chojnowski: What better set of ideas to use to reject not only the entire Catholic theology of the Mass but even the entire Catholic theology of the Cross and the Redemption of Man? Glad we are just talking about Latin and embroidered copes!
Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI demonstrated his "modernist" in his 24 books that he wrote. Everything and anything was related and rooted in his Jewish Mentality for the New World Order. All Jews who converted to Catholic Church have ill-perverted mindset of their corrupted "kabbalah = Zionism = Communism = Luciferianism) God told us to watch out their leaven. But, we let them come in so easily and they slippery bypass all the gates and reached to the chair of St. Peter and now, they have stolen the church under the regime of Vatican II Conciliar pseudo church. It's too little too late, even now that some of us wake up but GOD WILL HAVE NO CHOICE BUT DESTROY THEM ONE MORE TIME.ReplyDelete
AND THIS TIME WOULD BE WORSE THAN THE TIME OF DELUGE. I PRAY FOR THE CONVERSION OF SINNERS BUT I AM GLAD. GOD WILL DO IT ON TIME. THE SEEDS OF SATAN WILL NEVER REPENT.
GOD CAN NOT BE JUSTICE WITHOUT BEING MERCY AND HE ALREADY SHOWN US MANY TIMES. GOD DESTROYS THE WICKED IS OUR MERCIFUL. THANK GOD FOR THAT.
DON'T FORGET THE ROSARY AND FATIMA MESSAGE. "ONLY I CAN HELP YOU"... SHE WILL WIN.
It would seem that Ratzinger was (and maybe still is) of the impression that the Catholic view of Christ's Atonement was that of penal substitution (that Calvinist caricature of the Sacrifice on the Cross!), rather than that of satisfactory atonement in light of Christ's superabundant merits!ReplyDelete
Contrast with Pope Clement VI's Bull of Jubilee, "Unigenitus Dei Filius", promulgated on 01/25/1343, on the subject of indulgences in light of Christ's satisfaction, he wrote (asterisks are emphasis mine) "the only begotten Son of God...who innocent, immolated on the altar of the Cross is known to have poured out not a little drop of blood, **which however on account of union with the Word would have been sufficient for the redemption of the whole human race**, but copiously as a kind of flowing stream... Therefore, how great a treasure did the good Father acquire from this for the Church militant, so that the mercy of so great an effusion was not rendered useless, vain, or superfluous, wishing to lay up treasures for His sons, so that thus the Church is an infinite treasure to men, so that they who use it, become the friends of God." (Cited from Denzinger 550)
Ratzinger would have been better to take the Summa Theologiae of St. Thomas to heart, but we already know from his own writings as to how he disdained the theology of the Scholastics.