Bugnini: "I am the liturgical reform!"
#11
(10-13-2010, 12:44 PM)CrusaderKing Wrote: http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives...rosary.htm

In the same year Marialis Cultus was issued, Bugnini was sacked and sent off to Iran, after Paul VI read a dossier documenting Bugnini’s Masonic affiliation—a dossier whose existence Bugnini himself admitted in his autobiography.

Bugnini purported it was put it there to discredit him. To quote only half of the context against him is intellectually dishonest.

Also it is interesting, that Paul VI realized in 1972 that there is the dust of the Satan coming from the walls of Vatican, but Bugnini was there until 1975

It worth to read the Marialis Cultus, as the pope stands with the Liturgical changes:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6MARIAL.HTM
Reply
#12
(10-13-2010, 05:30 PM)Mhoram Wrote: Besides, it's not that hard to believe that a guy who got put in charge of renovating the liturgy for the first time in 1500 years might get a little puffed up about that and say something like "I am the liturgical reform."  (Especially since it was basically true.)  Whether he said it or not, you don't have to see black helicopters to think it's possible.  You just have to be familiar with hubris.

I'm talking about all of the machinations I've seem some traditional catholics dream up about all of the "intrigue" surrounding the liturgical reform.  Some of the theories don't have much merit, and do have that "whoosh...whooosh..whooosh" of the black helicopters.
Reply
#13
(10-13-2010, 07:59 PM)yosupman Wrote:
(10-13-2010, 05:30 PM)Mhoram Wrote: Besides, it's not that hard to believe that a guy who got put in charge of renovating the liturgy for the first time in 1500 years might get a little puffed up about that and say something like "I am the liturgical reform."  (Especially since it was basically true.)  Whether he said it or not, you don't have to see black helicopters to think it's possible.  You just have to be familiar with hubris.

I'm talking about all of the machinations I've seem some traditional catholics dream up about all of the "intrigue" surrounding the liturgical reform.   Some of the theories don't have much merit, and do have that "whoosh...whooosh..whooosh" of the black helicopters.

The whoosh whoosh whoosh of the gratuitous insult.
Reply
#14
(10-13-2010, 05:16 PM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(10-13-2010, 05:03 PM)yosupman Wrote: Bugnini may have not been a holy man, but some of the stuff said about him sometimes sounds like conspiratorialist "black helicopter" theories. :o

One cannot disregard arguments by labeling it as a "conspiratorialist 'black helicopter' [theory]." Instead, claims must be refuted, information must be proved false, or the argument must be shown to be illogical in its conclusion. That something isn't palatable to notions of an idealistic reality is not an adequate refutation. 

Just because somone makes a claim does not mean I must refute it.  If I refute a claim, must someone refute, my refutation of the original claim?  I would say the burden of proof lies with those that make very serious claims.  
Reply
#15

[/quote]

The whoosh whoosh whoosh of the gratuitous insult.
[/quote

No insult was intended.  I'm sorry if I offended. 
Reply
#16
(10-13-2010, 08:03 PM)yosupman Wrote:
(10-13-2010, 05:16 PM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(10-13-2010, 05:03 PM)yosupman Wrote: Bugnini may have not been a holy man, but some of the stuff said about him sometimes sounds like conspiratorialist "black helicopter" theories. :o

One cannot disregard arguments by labeling it as a "conspiratorialist 'black helicopter' [theory]." Instead, claims must be refuted, information must be proved false, or the argument must be shown to be illogical in its conclusion. That something isn't palatable to notions of an idealistic reality is not an adequate refutation. 

Just because somone makes a claim does not mean I must refute it.  If I refute a claim, must someone refute, my refutation of the original claim?  I would say the burden of proof lies with those that make very serious claims.  

Right. And if a person offers evidence in favor of that claim, if you're going to say that the claim is false, you're going to have show either:

1) the evidence is false.

2) there is a logic fallacy somewhere

3) one of the premises is wrong

    a) why it is wrong

    b) how we know it is wrong


One cannot simply say: that sounds like "black helicopter" conspiracy nonsense and then disregard it. If someone took pictures, video, and sound recordings of that chopper, found 1000 witnesses to attest to its presence, and then presented it to you, it wouldn't cease to be true simply because it fits a conspiracy label. Conspiracies do happen and have happened in the course of history. The greatest example? The work of the devil in society.

If someone offers evidence against Bugnini, it is not logical to disregard it because it sounds too outlandish to be true. The greatest evils of society have been accomplished through man's indifference. There are great many evils ignored by people because the truth is too hard to swallow. As traditional Catholics, we should be the last to fall for this trick.
Reply
#17
(10-13-2010, 05:58 PM)glgas Wrote:
(10-13-2010, 12:44 PM)CrusaderKing Wrote: http://www.remnantnewspaper.com/Archives...rosary.htm

In the same year Marialis Cultus was issued, Bugnini was sacked and sent off to Iran, after Paul VI read a dossier documenting Bugnini’s Masonic affiliation—a dossier whose existence Bugnini himself admitted in his autobiography.

Bugnini purported it was put it there to discredit him. To quote only half of the context against him is intellectually dishonest.

Also it is interesting, that Paul VI realized in 1972 that there is the dust of the Satan coming from the walls of Vatican, but Bugnini was there until 1975

It worth to read the Marialis Cultus, as the pope stands with the Liturgical changes:

http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P6MARIAL.HTM

Maybe you should do more research into the life and times of Annibale Bugnini before accusing anyone of intellectual dishonesty. Bugnini also said he didn't know what Freemasonry is, what it does, or what it's purposes are, which is about as believable as the Tooth Fairy or the Easter Bunny. Pope Paul's 1972 statement could have meant any number of things, but he also did little to nothing to get rid of the smoke of Satan.

As far as the Pope standing with the liturgical changes, everyone here but you seems to realize there can be considerable authority behind a bad idea.
Reply
#18
Ok.......I just might ask.....what is Joesph Ratzinger's opinion about Bugnini?  Does he think Bugnini was a mason?  Just wondered.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)