Paul VI, as everybody knows, was a sad person. Long before he was pope he got involved in the "priest worker" movement in France which turned into a sad flop, and a big scandal. He suffered from depression for years, as is evidenced in his biographies. He suffered much as pope.
His family was somewhat wealthy and they lived here during summer months when he was born in 1897, in the shadow of the Brescian Alps. His father was later a member of the Italian Parliament. His mother's family had owned the villa. His cousin Vittorio donated the property and now it's furnished with the family's old furniture. Everybody here speaks with a funny accent, Bresciano.
His parents had the wing in the bottom pic - they lived on the two floors and he was born on the middle floor. There isn't much there, but it is still an experience to walk through the rooms.
Paul VI should never have been elected, or never have accepted the job. John XXIII even had a not-too-favorable opinion of him. He called him his "Hamlet Cardinal", in other words, he couldn't make up his mind or stand firmly for anything. He was a staw in the wind, bending every which way to suit the time and circumstance.
ReplyDeleteHence the disaster with the Holy Mass, and all that came from Vatican II. Paul VI bent to the "Spirit of Vatican II" and of the times, and in the process listened to evil men who ruined the Church. Some of them are still sitting in the Vatican pulling strings (Cardinals Sodano, Re, Kasper).
No one visits because he was not a good Pope. He might have been a personally good man (and from what I've read, even that is questionable), but not a good Pope except for Humanae Vitae.
why is it, pray tell, that you almost never blog about anything to do with Pope Paul VI, and now when you at last do it is only to say that he was a sad person? on the other hand you have no such things to say of pius xii? it seems to me you're deliberately vilifying Paul VI and glorifying pius xii. he mustn't have been all that good as you make him out to be. dish the dirt on him too. I might also go as far as to say that perhaps your resentment towards Paul VI stems from your rejection of the Mass of Paul VI. Rad Trads, go figure.
ReplyDeleteThe documents and writings that were products of Vatican II are held in high esteem. We always hear it said that the documents meant to preserve a great lot of the older ways, but the erroneous interpretation of these documents by the clergy they went out to resulted in a deterioration. Did Paul VI have nothing to contribute to these? Were they all products of the men whose will he submitted to? The Mass of Paul VI introduces to the liturgy long lost practices such as the Prayer of the faithful and increased the number of readings from scripture too. this predates the rites of the tridentine mass. But still the Trads cling to their outmoded and unfounded notion that the tridentine mass is more spiritual? The Novus Ordo too can be just as reverential as the tridentine form seems. I've been to very many masses celebrated in the OF and have never seen a single instance of irreverence.
ReplyDeleteI hope that through the ongoing embarrassing beatification-process for Pope Montini´his personal and moral misconduct in his milanese and also later years will be revealed. In 2006 there had been a shocking article in the italian periodical L’Espresso.
ReplyDeleteNot everyone's dislike stems from a "rejection" of the Mass of Paul VI. For many it is simply a dislike, which as Catholics we are entitled. We don't have to like it, and many do not, preferring the Tridentine. Which not admittingly has been unlawfully and brutally surpressed. One's preference for one thing is a matter of taste, like a TV show and does not infer a rejection of the other. Get the facts straight before you start accusing someone of rejection of the Pauline Mass. Otherwise you sit in the seat of judgement, which is a hot seat along with actual rejection of the Pauline Mass.
ReplyDelete