en.news
32K

Confused Cardinal Replaced Liturgy with "Loyalty"

Matthew Hazell published on Twitter.com (April 14) letters by Westminster Cardinal John Heenan (✝1975) which he wrote between 1965-1970 about the liturgical changes. The changes introduced by Vatican II (1962-1965) were discarded in 1969 by Paul VI with the introduction of his vernacular Novus Ordo.

In July 1965, Heenan wrote, “I much prefer the Latin. But we must face facts. The wish of the Church expressed by the almost unanimous vote in the Council is for permission to e given for the use of the mother tongue.” In reality, Vatican II allowed the vernacular only for small parts of the liturgy.

In March 1966, Heenan spoke of an “experimental stage” and of “no fear that the treasures of the Latin sung liturgy will be sacrificed.”

In April 1967, he found it “hard to get used to the new liturgy.” But, “You must try to be humble and accept what the Church has decided,” he moralised.

In February 1969, Heenan observed that “it is impossible to feel at home amid all the changes in the liturgy”. He called the liturgical turmoil "a great test of loyalty to the Holy See" adding that "we have to obey.“

Heenan wondered about “the extent to which we are committed to make changes – including the removal of the tabernacle from the high altar.”

Picture: John Heenan © wikicommons, CC BY-SA, #newsFzisjaobwr





P. O'B
Too bad he obeyed, but he did obtain a very early indult from Rome allowing the Old Mass in England. He died in 1975; I would love to see his opinion of the Conciliar wreck of the Church we have now.
john333
Father Don Gabriele Amorth is right about Medjugorje then the Cardinal is right.
If E Michael Jones is right then Cardinal is in limbo
If SSPX is right then Cardinal maybe in hell
If EWTN is right then Cardinal is in purgatory
If St JPII and the gang is right then he is in Heaven and St Pius X in hell

SSPV right we are all on the road to hell
Society of Saint Peter ?????? confused
Arthur McGowan
Moderators!