FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. (/showthread.php?tid=31452)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - Unum Sint - 10-15-2009

Father Louis Bouyer: I wrote to the Holy Father, Pope Paul VI, to tender my resignation as member of the Commission charged with the Liturgical Reform. The Holy Father sent for me at once (and the following conversation ensued):

Paul VI: Father, you are an unquestionable and unquestioned authority by your deep knowledge of the Church’s liturgy and Tradition, and a specialist in this field. I do not understand why you have sent me your resignation, whilst your presence, is more than precious, it is indispensable!

Father Bouyer: Most Holy Father, if I am a specialist in this field, I tell you very simply that I resign because I do not agree with the reforms you are imposing! Why do you take no notice of the remarks we send you, and why do you do the opposite?

Paul VI: But I don’t understand: I’m not imposing anything. I have never imposed anything in this field. I have complete trust in your competence and your propositions. It is you who are sending me proposals. When Fr. Bugnini comes to see me, he says: "Here is what the experts are asking for." And as you are an expert in this matter, I accept your judgement.

Father Bouyer: And meanwhile, when we have studied a question, and have chosen what we can propose to you, in conscience, Father Bugnini took our text, and, then said to us that, having consulted you: "The Holy Father wants you to introduce these changes into the liturgy." And since I don’t agree with your propositions, because they break with the Tradition of the Church, then I tender my resignation.

Paul VI: But not at all, Father, believe me, Father Bugnini tells me exactly the contrary: I have never refused a single one of your proposals. Father Bugnini came to find me and said: "The experts of the Commission charged with the Liturgical Reform asked for this and that". And since I am not a liturgical specialist, I tell you again, I have always accepted your judgement. I never said that to Monsignor Bugnini. I was deceived. Father Bugnini deceived me and deceived you.

Father Bouyer: That is, my dear friends, how the liturgical reform was done!

==============================

(The letter to me then continues):

Of course, this plays into the I think unfinished story you were recounting about Cardinal Gagnon’s investigation, and the aftermath. I must add that I saw on another traditionalist list group a few years back the comment from Prof. Luc Perrin (Strasbourg) that he himself had a typescript copy of Fr. Bouyer’s memoirs, which could not then be published due to family opposition or something of the sort, but that they contained bombshells…


Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - DarkKnight - 10-15-2009

Stories like this make Fr. Malachi Martin look more credible all of the time.


Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - Maldon - 10-15-2009

I am sure this is true, but it begs the question: what was the outcome of this conversation?

If any normal human being were in the shoes of Paul VI and had this conversation, the consequences would have been different from what we know to have occurred historically. Thus, this "recorded" conversation makes no sense or lacks context, or Paul VI was an out and out liar, arch-heretic, or retarded. How could this conversation have happened, and NOT have been followed up by

A) The immediate expulsion of Bugnini (we need a date for this conversation); and
B) The immediate reversal of the direction of the liturgical reform.

Only a retarded pope, a blackmailed pope, or an evil pope could have had this conversation and DONE NOTHING.
So take your pick.
As usual, nothing from this moment f history makes sense, except the business of the smoke of satan.




Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - Unum Sint - 10-15-2009

As far as consequences, wasn't Bugnini exiled to Iran?


Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - jovan66102 - 10-15-2009

(10-15-2009, 12:58 PM)Unum Sint Wrote: As far as consequences, wasn't Bugnini exiled to Iran?

Not for destroying the Liturgy, obviously, but only when he got caught out as a member of the Synagogue of Satan! :)


Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - CatholicThurifer - 10-15-2009

I agree, the lack of context is strange, but doesn't surprise as it comes from a traditional, not traditionalist, priest.  :fish:

(10-15-2009, 12:55 PM)maldon Wrote: I am sure this is true, but it begs the question: what was the outcome of this conversation?

If any normal human being were in the shoes of Paul VI and had this conversation, the consequences would have been different from what we know to have occurred historically. Thus, this "recorded" conversation makes no sense or lacks context, or Paul VI was an out and out liar, arch-heretic, or retarded. How could this conversation have happened, and NOT have been followed up by

A) The immediate expulsion of Bugnini (we need a date for this conversation); and
B) The immediate reversal of the direction of the liturgical reform.

Only a retarded pope, a blackmailed pope, or an evil pope could have had this conversation and DONE NOTHING.
So take your pick.
As usual, nothing from this moment f history makes sense, except the business of the smoke of satan.



Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - SCG - 10-15-2009

(10-15-2009, 12:55 PM)maldon Wrote: Only a retarded pope, a blackmailed pope, or an evil pope could have had this conversation and DONE NOTHING.
So take your pick.

Or maybe the conversation never took place. I share this commenter's "healthy skepticism."

Quote: What proof is there that this conversation ever took place? It doesn’t read right.

"I was deceived. Father Bugnini deceived me and deceived you."

And the Pope, the Vicar of Christ on earth, finding that he had been deceived couldn’t undo what Bugnini had done??

I must add that I saw on another traditionalist list group a few years back the comment from Prof. Luc Perrin (Strasbourg) that he himself had a typescript copy of Fr. Bouyer’s memoirs, which could not then be published due to family opposition or something of the sort, but that they contained bombshells…

Of course, the old family opposition preventing the proof from being shown to the world.

Call this healthy scepticism.

Comment by **** — 15 October 2009 @ 1:21 am



Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - OCLittleFlower - 10-15-2009

There seems to be several posibilities.

a) This is all a pack of lies.

b) Paul VI was stupid.

c) Paul VI was a heretic.

d) Paul VI was chicken.

e) This is all an evil pack of lies.


Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - SaintRafael - 10-15-2009

(10-15-2009, 01:47 PM)OCLittleFlower Wrote: b) Paul VI was stupid.

c) Paul VI was a heretic.

d) Paul VI was chicken.

Probably a combination of all of the above. Pope Paul VI was an extremely weak man who is said to have spent nights crying because he had no clue what to do.
Then there is the evil side of the man who is reported to have been a homosexual who was arrested in plain clothes as a bishop one night by a police officer and other homosexual stories.

I will not be surprised if Pope Paul VI is declared an official heretic by a future traditional Pope in the next 30-50 years over the Novus Ordo.


Re: From Father Z's: How Liturgical Reform was done. - glgas - 10-15-2009

This book of Fr. Louis Bouyer may be the key of his views on that time

http://undpress.nd.edu/book/P00118

Louis Bouyer, Eucharist: Theology and Spirituality of the Eucharistic Prayer. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1968. xii + 484p. $22. ISBN10 0-268-00498-6.


Here is an analysis http://sanctaliturgia.blogspot.com/2006/09/louis-bouyer-eucharist.html

Here is an other one: http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2006/09/sancta-liturgia-louis-bouyer-eucharist.html

I will try to get the book, but reading the reviews I am not sure that he wholeheartedly opposed the new Mass, or the nem canons

In 1968 Fr. Bouay became member of the International Theological Commission
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Bouyer

so the quoted dialogue should happen between 1964 and 1969, and relates to the variable canons issues in that time. (1967?)