Well the Universal Indult rumor is popping up again.
The more I think about it, the more unlikely I think it is. More once I collect my thoughts.
(Wasn't this the same paper that told us in not so many words, that the Pope was going to make a big ol' papal statement tossing out limbo and that it would be a huge production and ... then when Friday rolled around, the Pope didn't say a word about it?)
EDIT - yes, it was the same paper, and the same authors.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It is unclear to me who the "sources in Rome" in the Times article are. Are they the bloggers mentioned later?
Catholic News Service has published a story supporting the rumor as well, citing its own "informed Vatican source."
Amy Welborn has a worthwhile blog entry on the CNS piece.
I don't know -- maybe there is something to this rumor. It would be consistent with the Holy Father's comments before he became Pope, as well as some of the overtures that have allegedly been made towards SSPX.
It is possible that this step, if true, could mark the beginning of the "reform of the reform." We might find ourselves several generations later with a single mass again, only this one being closer to a revised version of the 1962 Missal.
As I say so many times, "Remains to be seen."
I hope something good happens, it's just that church rumors are often a let down.
I agree that this likely is another story about a non-event, but I do find the CNS story curious. I wonder whether it was based on independent sources from the Times article or if it used the same ones, and I wonder what exactly were the sources of the Times article in the first place. If the Times article is based on a blog rumor and the CNS article is based on the Times article, then the source is pretty flimsy. If the sources are independent, though, it does make things a wee bit more interesting.
Post a Comment