Liturgical Abuses Encouraged by John Paul II says Former Master of Ceremonies
(09-08-2011, 06:19 AM)Stubborn Wrote:
(09-07-2011, 04:24 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(09-07-2011, 07:26 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Back when the revolution was only starting, we used to call our situation as "being in the catacombs" - trads were driven "underground" by Church hierarchy everywhere. Not sure how that relates to your post, but figured I'd flop that in there.

Around the same time in Toronto, there was an ecumenical charismatic group that called itself "the Catacombs".  Anybody can use a name. 

By the way, the early Christians who sometimes met in the catacombs did not view the Church hierarchy as their enemies. 



Well Jayne, please step into the "way back machine" for the moment and suppose you're a priest that was raised, taught, practiced the faith and was ordained the old way.
Now suppose you objected to the new faith that was being forced upon you. A simple rumor of your objection sufficed in many circumstances to warrant a firm warning of your disobedience and obstinacy - if you were lucky ------ many times there was no warning, you were immediately kicked out of your rectory, often times publicly slandered by your superiors in the process. I assure you that many of the persecuted priests of the late 60s early 70s had much worse words for their Judas' than "enemies".

What would *you* do to remain faithful to your faith and vocation? I will tell you what some priests did - they hid. They celebrated private Masses in peoples homes, garages, basements, hotel rooms, banquet halls etc and lived with whoever would have them. The new catch name for ridicule, "traditionalists", called their own homes "the catacombs" - that's what I was talking about.

What would you call your hierarchy who not only allowed such injustices but propagated them?

AMEN!  :)

Shortly after the disaster, I remember some Priests and Prelates telling me that they personally knew Bishops who, upon their return home after the convention of anti-Catholic infiltrators, committed suicide!  Their consciences condemned them for not speaking out against the wholesale anti-Catholic changes!

Many of these same Priests and Prelates told me that they also personally knew Priests who either in anger left that place, or despair became addicts, usually to alcohol; yet even some of them likewise committed suicide rather than have to use what they called that abomination!

I never met any of them before they did themselves in, one way or another.  But I did have a number of opportunities to meet the kinds of Priests mentioned above - those who secretly, in hiding, would continue to offer the Holy Sacrifice of Mass.

[Image: Private%20Masses%20Pre%20V-2.jpg]

They would also continue to preach and to teach what they had been taught in Roman Catholic Seminaries before the changes.  I used to serve Mass for some of them.  I used to take some friends to some of their Masses.

But I did know one Priest who tried to come to terms with his conscience.  I had known him for many years.  After the changes he was no longer the same person.  His intense hatred for his Bishop was evident.  He and his young protege, who at that time had been Ordained a Priest only a short time, used to take great delight in saying what they would do, probably even publicly if it ever came to that, to one of the symbols of that vehemently detested Bishop!  I understood their anger, rejection, and hatred towards that traitor, but I prayed for them so that the good God would give them peace of mind and heart.  A short time later the young priest developed major heart problems and died shortly thereafter.  The old Priest probably died many years ago by now?  It was all so very, very sad to see and hear two very good, devout, devoted, faithful Catholic Priests who had been so terribly victimized by their own Bishop!  By the way, that Bishop, still relatively young himself, died shortly after that young Priest died of heart problems.

I had heard that a certain percentage (I no longer remember the exact number) of Bishops took early retirement after that thing!

One retired Bishop secretly Consecrated a Dominican Priest a Bishop when the Priest confronted him for not doing anything during that thing and was told - Now let's see what YOU do now that YOU are also a Bishop!

Insofar as I know, all the newly Consecrated Dominican Bishop did was to continue to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass at the local Traditional Catholic Church (where I used to serve Mass for him) before his death on the Feast Day of the Immaculate Conception when the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared to him at the foot of his bed in order to take his soul to Heaven - this from a very trustworthy eye-witness who heard and saw the whole thing!

Thank you for reading!  :)

God Bless You!  :pray:

A Catholic Catholic
Reply
Yes, I saw and heard many of the same things you are talking about too. People these days have no clue what injustices those superiors who were in charge are guilty of, what it took and what it did to multitudes of faithful clergy and lay people to implement the "New Springtime". No idea whatsoever and most of them would just as soon brush it under the rug if they did believe it.









 
Reply
(09-09-2011, 07:33 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Yes, I saw and heard many of the same things you are talking about too. People these days have no clue what injustices those superiors who were in charge are guilty of, what it took and what it did to multitudes of faithful clergy and lay people to implement the "New Springtime". No idea whatsoever and most of them would just as soon brush it under the rug if they did believe it.
 

AMEN!!! :pray:

Very well put! :)

God Bless You! :pray:

A Catholic Catholic
Reply
(09-09-2011, 07:33 AM)Stubborn Wrote: Yes, I saw and heard many of the same things you are talking about too. People these days have no clue what injustices those superiors who were in charge are guilty of, what it took and what it did to multitudes of faithful clergy and lay people to implement the "New Springtime". No idea whatsoever and most of them would just as soon brush it under the rug if they did believe it.

AMEN, again! :)

I was thinking about what you said about how most people have

Quote:No idea whatsoever and most of them would just as soon brush it under the rug if they did believe it.

Over the years I have come to the conclusion that there are many people this way.  It is so sad how they appear as though they do not want to know the Truth!

When a person simply states True historical FACTS, they either go into denial (because to accept the Truth is either too painful for them, or implies THEY need to take some kind of ACTION against the diabolical attack against everything Catholic!), or they feel victimized and do not know what to do about it because they, too often it seems, are confused, or have fallen victim to this or that "official" disinformation campaign, or are not sure who to trust and who not to trust? 

As a result, many of them left the Church in large numbers in disgust and feeling betrayed.  Many of them joined various Protestant Churches out of contempt for their "Catholic" leaders!

For example, in the heart of what is called "Cajun Country" in Southern Louisiana, one rather large city used to have a fairly large number of Catholic Churches.  But because no one went to them after the changes, these church buildings, along with their school buildings, were sold off and bought by Protestant Baptists!

Now many of these "Catholics", who used to go to these church buildings when they were still Catholic churches, now go to the same church buildings, even though they are now Protestant Baptist!

I came upon these Prophecies of Our Lord and Our Blessed Mother about certain changes which seem to me to fit the True historical objective FACTS like a glove ???

Would you care to comment ???

Quote:I give you a warning. The disciples who are not of My Gospel are now working hard to remake according to their ideas, and under the influence of the enemy of souls [Satan], a Mass that contains words which are odious in My Sight. When the fatal hour arrives where the faith of My Priests are put to the test, it will be these texts that will be celebrated, in this second period.

The first period is the one of My Priesthood, existing since Me. The second is the one of the persecution, when the enemies of the Faith and of Holy Religion will impose their formulas in the book of the second celebration. Many of My holy Priests will refuse this book, sealed with the words of the abyss. Unfortunately, amongst them are those who will accept it.
(Prophecy of Our Lord to Marie-Julie Jahenny on Saturday, November 27, 1902 which was the 72nd anniversary of the Miraculous Medal Apparition of Saturday, November 27, 1830.)

[Image: marie%20julie-02.jpg]

Marie-Julie Jahenny

Quote:They will not stop on this hateful and sacrilegious road. They will go further to compromise all at once, and in one blow, the Holy Church, the Clergy, and the Faith of my children.  (Prophecy of Our Blessed Mother to Marie-Julie Jahenny on Tuesday, May 10, 1904.)

Also, it is claimed that Our Blessed Mother prophecized, to Marie-Julie Jahenny, the

Quote:dispersion of the pastors by the church herself; true Pastors, who will be replaced by others formed by Hell

and Our Lady also warned about

Quote:new preachers of NEW sacraments, NEW temples, NEW baptisms, NEW confraternities.

all of which sounds to me like, in reading these Prophecies, I am reading about the history of what DID happen to the Roman Catholic Church, beginning in the early 1940's, and which still continues through today ???

Thank you for reading!  :)

God Bless You!  :pray:

A Catholic Catholic
Reply
Haven't I read somewhere that a cleric stated that he believed the Third Secret of Fatima included a warning about the convening of an "evil Council"?
Reply
(09-09-2011, 08:53 PM)A-Catholic-Catholic Wrote: Over the years I have come to the conclusion that there are many people this way.  It is so sad how they appear as though they do not want to know the Truth!

True. Sometimes when I think about it, I can hardly believe it myself so it one sense, it's not too surprising that so many people will not believe it or even give a care.

(09-09-2011, 08:53 PM)A-Catholic-Catholic Wrote: When a person simply states True historical FACTS, they either go into denial (because to accept the Truth is either too painful for them, or implies THEY need to take some kind of ACTION against the diabolical attack against everything Catholic!), or they feel victimized and do not know what to do about it because they, too often it seems, are confused, or have fallen victim to this or that "official" disinformation campaign, or are not sure who to trust and who not to trust? 

As a result, many of them left the Church in large numbers in disgust and feeling betrayed.  Many of them joined various Protestant Churches out of contempt for their "Catholic" leaders!

For example, in the heart of what is called "Cajun Country" in Southern Louisiana, one rather large city used to have a fairly large number of Catholic Churches.  But because no one went to them after the changes, these church buildings, along with their school buildings, were sold off and bought by Protestant Baptists!

Now many of these "Catholics", who used to go to these church buildings when they were still Catholic churches, now go to the same church buildings, even though they are now Protestant Baptist!

A definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. +45 years later, the insanity continues........  In wake of church closings 'Roamin' Catholics' look for home

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- They call themselves "Roamin' Catholics," traveling from church to church each Sunday, looking for a new place to worship since Cleveland's oldest black Catholic church was shut down more than a year ago.

Initially, there were nearly 50 of them from St. Adalbert Catholic Church on East 83rd Street after it closed June 6, 2010, as part of a diocesewide downsizing.

But some found other worship communities -- both Catholic and Protestant -- while others just quit church, cold turkey.

Roamer Phillis Fuller Clipps, 54, said she knows of 14 former Adalbert members or families who joined Protestant churches, 29 who no longer attend any church and 69 who joined other parishes.


(09-09-2011, 08:53 PM)A-Catholic-Catholic Wrote: I came upon these Prophecies of Our Lord and Our Blessed Mother about certain changes which seem to me to fit the True historical objective FACTS like a glove ???

Would you care to comment ???

I don't remember ever hearing of Marie-Julie Jahenny,  but I would believe them since they appear to agree with LaSalette's and Fatima's - not to mention the fact that we are living it right now.
Reply
(09-10-2011, 07:42 AM)Stubborn Wrote:
(09-09-2011, 08:53 PM)A-Catholic-Catholic Wrote: Over the years I have come to the conclusion that there are many people this way.  It is so sad how they appear as though they do not want to know the Truth!

True. Sometimes when I think about it, I can hardly believe it myself so it one sense, it's not too surprising that so many people will not believe it or even give a care.

AMEN! I have met so many, many people like this!  It is almost like a scene out of the movie They Live in which a well-organized large group of aliens, who have disguised themselves as human beings, took control of the world and put subliminal messages everywhere that said "Obey!"  Only by wearing special glasses could a person actually "see" who were the aliens and who were the human beings, not to mention read all of the subliminal messages on the front covers of magazines, front pages of newspapers, even on billboards!

Quote:A definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over expecting different results. +45 years later, the insanity continues........  In wake of church closings 'Roamin' Catholics' look for home

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- They call themselves "Roamin' Catholics," traveling from church to church each Sunday, looking for a new place to worship since Cleveland's oldest black Catholic church was shut down more than a year ago.

Initially, there were nearly 50 of them from St. Adalbert Catholic Church on East 83rd Street after it closed June 6, 2010, as part of a diocesewide downsizing.

But some found other worship communities -- both Catholic and Protestant -- while others just quit church, cold turkey.

Roamer Phillis Fuller Clipps, 54, said she knows of 14 former Adalbert members or families who joined Protestant churches, 29 who no longer attend any church and 69 who joined other parishes.

Quote:
(09-09-2011, 08:53 PM)A-Catholic-Catholic Wrote: I came upon these Prophecies of Our Lord and Our Blessed Mother about certain changes which seem to me to fit the True historical objective FACTS like a glove ???

Would you care to comment ???

I don't remember ever hearing of Marie-Julie Jahenny,  but I would believe them since they appear to agree with LaSalette's and Fatima's - not to mention the fact that we are living it right now.

I was just thinking back about the Prophecies of Our Lady of LaSalette.   

As most Catholics probably know, on Saturday, September 19, 1846, the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared near LaSalette, France to two children, Peter Maximim Giraud, 11, and to Frances Melanie Mathieu, 14.  Each was given a Secret Prophecy, both of which were sent to Pope Pius IX who, on August 24, 1852, recognized this apparition and these Secret Prophecies as genuine. 

Melanie's entire Secret was published in 1879 with the approval of the Bishop of Lecce in Italy.  In this edition, approved by the Bishop of Lecce, one reads:

Quote:Rome will lose the faith and become the seat of the anti-Christ.... The Church will be in eclipse...”

One must wonder IF maybe this is what the Prophecy of Saint Peter is about?

Quote:For the time is, that judgment should begin at the house of God.  (1 Peter 4:17)

Concerning Fatima, it was claimed that a brief

Quote:Extract from the Third Message of Fatima was also sent personally to President Kennedy, Prime Minister Mac Millan and Party Chairman Khrushchev, to let them study it in private.  This Fatima text played an important part in the signing of the Anglo-American-Russian Moscow Agreement.  (The German paper Neues Europa of Stuttgart, Germany, October 15, 1963).

According to Neues Europa, the Vatican had unofficially furnished each of these three world leaders the same Extract of the Third Secret of Fatima.  Here is part of the text of what they would have read according to Neues Europa which seems to explain what are today a few details of the history of the Church since about 1962:

Quote:“What I have already made known at LaSalette... I repeat today... there is no order in anything.  Even in the highest positions, it is Satan who governs... [Satan will]... find his way into the highest positions in the church.... I shall be forced to let fall my Son's arm.  If those at the top in the world and in the church do not oppose these acts, it is I who shall do so, and I shall pray God my Father to visit His justice on... [mankind]... there will also come a time of the hardest trials... Cardinals will be against Cardinals... Bishops... against Bishops... Satan will put himself in their midst.  In Rome.. there will be big changes... what is rotten will fall... the church will be darkened and the world will be plunged into confusion...”

This last part seems to me to perfectly describe what has been happening in the Church since about 1962, two years after Our Lady of Fatima had requested that the full text of the Third Secret be revealed ???  2nd Pope John 23rd shut up the Third Secret inside the Vatican Archives instead of revealing it.  :(

Thank you for reading!  :)

God Bless You!  :pray:

A Catholic Catholic
Reply
(05-18-2011, 05:49 PM)wulfrano Wrote: The NO changed the words of consecration that were dogmatically fixed forever by the Council of Florence and the Roman Catechism.  Therefore, there is no Transubstantiation in the NO Mess.

AMEN!

The FORM for the Double Consecration is to be found, historically, in at least four dogmatic documents:

First Document:

Quote:However, since no explanation was given in the aforesaid Decree of the Armenians in respect of the Form of Words which the Holy Roman Church, relying on the teaching and authority of the Apostles Peter and Paul, has always been wont to use in the Consecration of the Lord’s Body and Blood, We concluded that it should be inserted in this present text.

It uses this Form of Words in the Consecration of the Lord’s Body: “For this is My Body”. (Hoc est enim Corpus meum).

And [It uses this Form of Words in the Consecration] of His Blood: “For this is the Chalice of My Blood, of the New and Eternal Testament: the Mystery of Faith: which shall be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins”.  ( Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti; mysterium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.). (Roman Catholic Pope Eugene IV, Papal Bulla, Cantate Domino which document is also called The Decree of Union with the Copts, and was issued with the Infallible and Doctrinal Œcumenical Council of Florence, Session 11, Friday, February 4, 1442.  N.B.  The original document is in Latin, so I have inserted the original Latin text as found in the original document for the Form for the Double Consecration.)


Second Document:

Quote:FOR THIS IS MY BODY.  (Hoc est enim Corpus meum).  (1570 edition of the Missale Romanum of the Infallible and Doctrinal Roman Catholic Council of Trent.    N.B.  The original document is in Latin, so I have inserted the original Latin text as found in the original document for the Form for the Double Consecration.)

Quote:FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT:  THE MYSTERY OF FAITH:  WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS. (Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti; mysterium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.). (1570 edition of the Missale Romanum of the Infallible and Doctrinal Roman Catholic Council of Trent.  N.B.  The original document is in Latin, so I have inserted the original Latin text as found in the original document for the Form for the Double Consecration.)

Third Document:

Quote:Form To Be Used In The Consecration Of The Bread....
This is my body.  (Hoc est enim Corpus meum). 

Quote:Form To Be Used In The Consecration Of The Wine....
We are then firmly to believe that it consists in the following words: This is the chalice of my blood, of the new and eternal testament, the mystery of faith, which shall be shed for you and for many, to the remission of sins.  (Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti; mysterium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.).  (The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Translated by Fathers John A. McHugh, O.P. and Charles J. Callan, O.P., PART II : THE SACRAMENTS, THE SACRAMENT OF THE EUCHARIST.  N.B.  The original document is in Latin, so I have inserted the original Latin text as found in the original document for the Form for the Double Consecration.)

Fourth Document:

Quote:V. 1. Defects may arise in respect of the formula, if anything is wanting to complete the actual words of Consecration. The words of Consecration, which are the formative principle of this Sacrament, are as follows:  Hoc est enim Corpus meum; (“For this is My Body”) and: Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti; mysterium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. (“For this is the Chalice of My Blood, of the New and Eternal Testament: the Mystery of Faith: which shall be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins”)

If any omission or alteration is made in the formula of Consecration of the Body and Blood, involving a change of meaning, the Consecration is invalid.

An addition made without altering the meaning does not invalidate the Consecration, but the Celebrant commits a Mortal Sin.
  (Laws on Offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass based upon the Decrees of the Council of Trent Set Forth in the Roman Missal Restored by Saint Pius V, July 14, 1570 A.D.:  MISSALE ROMANUM, Part V, Defects which may occur in Celebrating Mass, Chapter II, Defective Formula.    N.B.  The original document is in Latin, so I have inserted the original Latin text as found in the original document for the Form for the Double Consecration.)

Thanks for reading!  :)

God Bless You!  :pray:

A Catholic Catholic
Reply
Before you start hurling blame at JPII (and Paul VI)  for the many abuses and the NO itself,  you might want to consider these quotes I found on Fr. Z's blog.  Very interesting comments indeed.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/10/fr-bouyer...s-imposed/

Henry Edwards says:
15 October 2009 at 10:00 am
Bryan, I’m possibly less of a Paul VI apologist than you, but there’s another mitigating factor that may not have mentioned yet.

First, let me mention that — though no liturgical historian — I was aware as a young but informed Catholic in the late 1950′s of the liturgical movement that bore tangible fruit in the promulgated Novus Ordo of the late 1960′s. Actually, it did — as a counter-establishment movement at that time before Vatican II — have certain conspiratorial aspects, though not like the particular kind of wacko “conspiracy theory” that traces everything to the Knights Templar. But the movement did go back quite a way, and had been driven somewhat underground, perhaps since around the time of Pius X’s 1907 Syllabus of Errors.

Also, in the mid 1960′s I enjoyed (?) the perspective of a member of the archdiocese of the only U.S. episcopal member of the Bugnini group that was preparing the new liturgy, and indeed of the parish that he seemed to use as an experimental liturgical laboratory trying out various ideas, and even (now that perhaps at this late date I can confess my guilt) a sort of parish liturgy leader in some of these trials.

Now, in regard to Paul VI’s desire that the new Mass be made as amenable as possible to Protestants, it should be understood that there was nothing necessarily heretical or even suspect about this. Many faithful Catholics in the aftermath of the Council shared almost euphorically the expectation that the new liturgy would spur a wholesale influx of Protestants into the One True Church. Of course, we now know that nothing of sort happened — and instead that the Church itself was Protestantized — but in that time of hope the optimism seemed neither suspect nor unrealistic. Perhaps, even now, one can imagine a pope feeling obliged to pursue this prospect in following Christ’s command to spread the Gospel.

But the “new” factor is this. In the several years preceding the promulgation of the Novus Ordo, the liturgical situation was even more chaotic than what most Catholics alive now have experienced. Dozens (or even hundreds) of different Eucharistic prayers were in use in lots of places — circulating in the form of hastily mimeographed documents that upon arrival in a parish were three-hole punched and inserted in the loose-leaf altar binder for trial use the following Sunday. It seemed that a new one appeared at least monthly, and many of these (as I recall) were worse than anything recently mentioned from Switzerland or Austria or wherever.

Now I do believe that some of those involved did intend to gut the liturgy for the purpose of gutting the Faith — as in fact has occurred. However, I do not believe that Paul VI shared or even realized this goal.

Instead, I suspect a compelling argument (and perhaps the strongest one) in favor of the Novus Ordo was that it — with its “only” four EPs, one of them being the Roman Canon that Paul VI personally insisted on retaining — was necessary to quell the uncontrolled experimentation that was spreading like cancer in the Church, and thereby establish some semblance of liturgical order. Though as a rather traditionally minded Catholic I am as critical as most of the unintended consequences of this approach, I would admit that it had some temporary success, and that worse might have occurred if nothing whatsoever had been done.

Of course, in retrospect I (like most everyone else) can see better things that could have been done, like settling on a 1965-type revision of John XXIII’s 1962 Missal that he and the Council plainly intended to be the basis for going forward. However, I can also see that by 1968 it may have seemed impossible to hold the fort to this extent.


Fr_Sotelo says:
15 October 2009 at 1:01 pm
Henry Edwards raises very important points in his post above. The changes made by Paul VI at the request of the Consilium were not weird inventions out of nowhere. Experimentation was going on under Pius XII and, during Vatican II, as Henry states, it went into overdrive. I believe the 1962 Missal was disregarded already at the end of the Council in many places. This made the Pauline missal a helpful concession which was “necessary to quell the uncontrolled experimentation that was spreading like cancer in the Church” (words of Henry Edwards).

In the seminary, I once read through the stacks of old “Orate Fratres” magazines (the precursor to “Worship” of the Collegeville Benedictines). I was shocked that going back to the 1940′s, one can see clamorning for the vernacular. In addition, I found old articles on the “need” to shorten the penitential rite, face the people for certain parts of the Mass, such as collects, have prayers of intercession, rework the lessons of Scripture to have more variety, make the offertory prayers sound less like a part of the Canon, have a sign of peace, eliminate the Last Gospel and prayers after Low Mass, etc.

Even the Third Eucharistic Prayer of the Pauline Missal was there, in black in white, in a 1950′s edition of Orate Fratres, written and published by the Italian liturgist Cipriano Vaggagini, OSB. And here we think it was sprung onto us the by liturgical Consilium.

It was mind blowing to me, as I always believed that the Novus Ordo came out of nowhere and was a concession to Protestants by Bugnini. The reality is that the Novus Ordo changes were circulating in discussion for many years before the Council. What is also interesting is to realize that the Consilium had over 30 members, making 6 Protestants consultants a small minority.

And if the Orate Fratres mindset is any indicator, I seriously doubt that Protestants suggested any changes that the Catholic liturgists hadn’t already been suggesting; nay, the Catholic members of the Consilium (including Lercaro) were chomping at the bit to get these changes pushed through. Who needs Bugnini and masons to tamper with the liturgy when so many prominent Catholic liturgists were on standby to spring into action with a new Missal and a new rite?

Reply
(09-12-2011, 01:19 PM)Lion of St. Jarlaths Wrote: Before you start hurling blame at JPII (and Paul VI)  for the many abuses and the NO itself,  you might want to consider these quotes I found on Fr. Z's blog.  Very interesting comments indeed.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/10/fr-bouyer...s-imposed/

........................

Fr_Sotelo says:
15 October 2009 at 1:01 pm
Henry Edwards raises very important points in his post above. The changes made by Paul VI at the request of the Consilium were not weird inventions out of nowhere. Experimentation was going on under Pius XII and, during Vatican II, as Henry states, it went into overdrive. I believe the 1962 Missal was disregarded already at the end of the Council in many places. This made the Pauline missal a helpful concession which was “necessary to quell the uncontrolled experimentation that was spreading like cancer in the Church” (words of Henry Edwards).

In the seminary, I once read through the stacks of old “Orate Fratres” magazines (the precursor to “Worship” of the Collegeville Benedictines). I was shocked that going back to the 1940′s, one can see clamorning for the vernacular. In addition, I found old articles on the “need” to shorten the penitential rite, face the people for certain parts of the Mass, such as collects, have prayers of intercession, rework the lessons of Scripture to have more variety, make the offertory prayers sound less like a part of the Canon, have a sign of peace, eliminate the Last Gospel and prayers after Low Mass, etc.

Even the Third Eucharistic Prayer of the Pauline Missal was there, in black in white, in a 1950′s edition of Orate Fratres, written and published by the Italian liturgist Cipriano Vaggagini, OSB. And here we think it was sprung onto us the by liturgical Consilium.

It was mind blowing to me, as I always believed that the Novus Ordo came out of nowhere and was a concession to Protestants by Bugnini. The reality is that the Novus Ordo changes were circulating in discussion for many years before the Council. What is also interesting is to realize that the Consilium had over 30 members, making 6 Protestants consultants a small minority.

I found some of the same information in my own research!  :)

However, there are also some differences as well!

Here are some items of interest:

Since at least the middle of the 19th Century there had been an interest in various aspects of the liturgy, its history, ceremonies and music. Benedictines were particularly prominent in this international Liturgical Movement.

In the United States, St. John’s Benedictine Abbey in Collegeville, Minnesota, was well-known as a center of liturgical activity. It was there that an influential liturgical journal, “Orate Fratres” (later renamed “Worship”) was first published in 1926.

The abbey was instrumental in founding the Benedictine Liturgical Conference in 1940 to hold national meetings called “Liturgical Weeks”. In 1943 this organization became simply the “Liturgical Conference”, and was no longer sponsored by the Benedictines. The “Liturgical Weeks” were attended by thousands of priests, religious and laity interested in liturgical reform.

At first the main concern of the Liturgical Movement was that people be educated about the liturgy so they could better understand and participate in it. Later some liturgists decided that the people’s participation would be possible only if changes were made in the rites, and began to advocate such changes. Thus many of the practices associated with the “New Mass” after the Council actually had their beginnings decades earlier.

Then in the early 1940’s, one finds Father Augustin Bea, S.J., the future Augustin Cardinal Bea, S.J. [b. at Riedböhringen, Germany on Saturday, May 28, 1881 - d. at Rome, Italy on Saturday, November 16, 1968], who was called the “super-ecumenist”, and who was also the confessor of Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958]. 

He was involved with Pope Pius XII’s first liturgical change, the new liturgical translation of the Psalms, which replaced that of Saint Jerome’s Vulgate, so disliked by the Protestants because the Vulgate Edition of the Bible was the official translation of the Holy Scriptures in the Roman Catholic Church.

But the problem is that the Vulgate Edition was Decreed to be authentic and to be used by the Nineteenth Œcumenical Council, the Council of Trent:

Quote:“But if any one receive not, as Sacred and Canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin Vulgate Edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the Traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema (Council of Trent, Session 4, Monday, April 8, 1546, Decree Concerning the Canonical Scriptures; emphasis added.)

Quote:“Moreover, the same Sacred and Holy Synod - considering that no small utility may accrue to the Church of God, if it be made known which out of all the Latin editions, now in circulation, of the Sacred Books, is to be held as authentic - ordains and declares, that the said old and Vulgate Edition, which, by the lengthened usage of so many years, has been approved of in the Church, be, in public lectures, disputations, sermons and expositions, held as authentic; and that no one is to dare, or presume to reject it under any pretext whatever.... [the same Sacred and Holy Synod] ordains and decrees, that, henceforth, the Sacred Scripture, and especially the said old and Vulgate Edition, be printed in the most correct manner possible” (Council of Trent, Session 4, Monday, April 8, 1546, Decree Concerning the  Edition, and the Use, of the Sacred Books; emphasis added.)

Pope Pius XII himself actually admitted that he himself made this liturgical change:

Quote:“6. You are surely well aware that this Apostolic See has always made careful provision for the schooling of the people committed to its charge in the correct spirit and practice of the liturgy; and that it has been no less careful to insist that the sacred rites should be performed with due external dignity. In this connection We ourselves, in the course of our traditional address to the Lenten preachers of this gracious city of Rome in 1943, urged them warmly to exhort their respective hearers to more faithful participation in the eucharistic sacrifice. Only a short while previously [i.e. before the Lent of 1943], with the design of rendering the prayers of the liturgy more correctly understood and their Truth and unction more easy to perceive, We arranged to have the Book of Psalms, which forms such an important part of these prayers in the Catholic Church, translated again into Latin from their original text.[8]  Footnote # 8.  Cf. Apostolic Letter (Motu Proprio) In Cotidianis Precibus, Saturday, March 24, 1945 (AAS 37, 1945; pp. 65-67).”  (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical, “Mediator Dei”, On the Sacred Liturgy, Thursday, November 20, 1947, ¶ 6; emphasis added.)

Father Gerald Ellard, S.J., was a founder and associate editor of “Orate Fratres” (later called “Worship”) and a prolific writer on the liturgy. In his 1948 book “The Mass of the Future” (Milwaukee: Bruce Publishing Company, 1948) Father Ellard writes in part:

Quote:At the 1947 Liturgical Week in Portland the Masses were all celebrated versus populum [facing the people] with brilliant success…. (“The Mass of the Future”,  p. 271.)

In some places bishops explicitly allowed the practice. Father Ellard quotes from two pastoral letters written by French bishops in 1945 and 1946, both making explicit allowances for Masses facing the people.

Father Ellard also describes the altar of a Church in Burlington, Vermont, built so that the priest can celebrate facing in either direction, and comments approvingly:

Quote:Perhaps in this double provision it is the real prototype of the setting of the Sacrifice of the Future. (“The Mass of the Future”,  p. 270.)

Note that none of the advocates of Mass facing the people mentions the history or the significance of the Priest facing the East, “ad orientem”. The usual rationale given for the Priest facing the people at Mass was that it was a more ancient practice.

The following data was sent to me some years ago by a friend:

Quote:The conspiracy to destroy the Traditional Latin Mass was already at work in high places in the Vatican during the 1950’s (perhaps taking greater control in the mortal illness of Pope Pius XII in the last years of his reign) and early 1960’s.  In those years Annibale Bugnini, C.M. [b. at Civitella de Lego, Italy 1912 - d. at Rome, Italy on Saturday,  July 3, 1982] and Ferdinando Giuseppe Cardinal Antonelli, O.F.M. [b. ?   - d. at Rome on July 12, 1993] (who later signed the decree promulgating the Novus Ordo worship service) headed a “Commission for Liturgical Reform,” which authored the various liturgical innovations introduced in the 1950’s and during the reign of Pope John XXIII.

These Innovators freely admitted that the gradual changes that they introduced were part of an overall program to create a new form of worship. Annibale Bugnini, C.M. quoted a fellow “liturgist”'s comments on the radical changes introduced in 1956 to the ancient form of the Holy Week rites as follows:

Quote:“No doubt it is still too early to assess the full import of this document, which marks an important turning-point in the history of the rites of the Roman liturgy....  This reform is only the first step toward measures of wider scope, and it is not possible to judge accurately of a part except when it is placed in its whole.”

The Innovators of these insidious changes introduced in the 1950’s and early 1960’s viewed them as steps in their plan to create a new form of worship.  It seems only consistent that traditional Catholics who reject the Novus Ordo worship service reject as well the steps that led to it.  (“The Roman Catholic”, September 1984)

The same friend also sent me this data:

Quote:It is the common belief among many traditional Catholics that Pope John XXIII made no real changes in the Missal as promulgated by him in 1962, but in fact those who accept the 1962 changes are logically forced to accept the reason for which they were promulgated, i.e. an interim liturgical reform dependent upon the changes that would be wrought by Vatican II. 

Those who accept the 1962 changes (like the Indultarians) are forced to accept also the other disciplines that came with them.  They are forced to turn back the clock of time to the turbulent years of the 1960’s with all the anguish of those changes that lead to such devastation of the Church.  Why should traditional Catholics go back and accept that which ushered revolutionary changes into the Church and ultimately give birth to a whole new religion?

The destruction of the Catholic Mass and its replacement with a neo-Protestant communion service was the result of a concerted effort (or conspiracy) by a group of Modernists. 

It is an undisputed fact that the Novus Ordo worship service was composed under the supervision of Annibale Bugnini, C.M. with the assistance of six Protestant ministers, with whom Pope Paul VI did not hesitate to pose in an historic 1970 photograph.  The six were Dr. George, Canon Jasper, Dr. Shepherd, Dr. Kunneth, Dr. Smith, and Brother Max Thurian, representing respectively the World Council of Churches, the Anglican and Lutheran communions, and the French Protestant Taize community.

After the Consilium had met and finished its work, Dr. Smith, the Lutheran representative, publicly boasted:

Quote:“We have finished the work that Martin Luther began.”

Thurian later recanted, publishing an article highly critical of the Novus Ordo, including the statement that:

Quote:“The great problem of contemporary liturgical life (apathy towards worship, boredom, lack of vitality and participation) stems from the fact that the celebration has sometimes lost its character as mystery, which fosters the spirit of adoration.”

Quote:What is also interesting is to realize that the Consilium had over 30 members, making 6 Protestants consultants a small minority.

The 6 Protestants may have been a relative small minority, but they were apparently sought out by some Council Fathers according to what follows:

Quote:They [the six Protestant ministers] are not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participate fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal. It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed (William Wakefield Cardinal Baum [b. at Dallas, Texas on Sunday, November 21, 1926 - d. ?  ], the executive director of the American Catholic Bishop’s Commission on Ecumenical Affairs, “The Detroit News”, June 27, 1967).

Canon Ronald Jasper, in a letter dated February 10, 1977, explained that the Protestant Observers received all the documents from the drafters of the new rite in the same way as did other members of the Consilium. They were also present at the debates during the formal meetings when the experts debated.  The Observers were not permitted to join in these debates.

Quote:But in the afternoons they always had informal meetings with the periti - experts - who had prepared the drafts.  At such meetings they were allowed to criticize and to comment on and to make suggestions. Then it was up to the periti to decide whether any of their points were worth taking up during the formal meetings.

These informal meetings were a complete free-for-all, and there was a very frank exchange of views.

Brother Roger described a typical day during Synod Vatican 2 as follows

Quote:Before noontime, while leaving the Council meetings, we would meet up with the bishops we had made appointments with, and bring them to our apartment... There was no lack of conciliar work to discuss. For example, we would closely study the evolution of the texts, write up notes, and give our point of view when asked. Signs of friendship toward us were impressive.

One could even say that they expected too much [involvement] from us... 
(J. L. Gonzales-Balado, “Le défi de Taizé”, Editions du Seuil, 1977, p.13; emphasis added).

Quote:Now I do believe that some of those involved did intend to gut the liturgy for the purpose of gutting the Faith — as in fact has occurred. However, I do not believe that Paul VI shared or even realized this goal.

My research finds the opposite of this concerning Pope Paul VI.  Here are a few examples:

While the future Pope Paul VI was still the Archbishop of Milan, he proposed the Novus Ordo with all of its radical changes in his Lenten Pastoral of 1958.  This was two years after his 1956 meeting of:

Quote:“a delegation of four Anglican priests and a layman who stayed with him [Cardinal Montini] some ten days... the meetings were clandestine in the extreme...” (Bernard C. Pawley [Archdeacon of Canterbury], and Margaret Pawley [his Wife], “Rome and Canterbury Through Four Centuries: A Study of the Relations Between the Church of Rome and the Anglican Churches 1530-1981”, London & Oxford, 1974, ISBN: 9780264661230).

Quote:The Novus Ordo Missae “was written under the Holy Father's [Pope Paul 6’s] personal supervision”(Cardinal Heenan, Forward to the English translation of the Novus Ordo, November, 1969 A.D.)

The “New York Daily News” quoted Pope Paul VI saying that Catholics “should prepare themselves to be disturbed” about the changes to the Mass and added: [b]“We note that pious people will be those most greatly disturbed” [/b](“New York Daily News”, Thursday, November 27, 1969).

Quote:“The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy.  There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass” (Jean Guitton [b. at Saint-Étienne, Loire, in East-Central France on Sunday, August 18, 1901 - d. at Paris, France on Sunday, March 21, 1999], “Apropos”, Number 17, December 19, 1993, (17), p. 8ff.  Also, “Christian Order”, October,1994. N.B.:  Jean Guitton was a confidant and an intimate friend of Pope Paul VI who had 116 of his books and had made marginal study notes in 17 of these books.  Quotation and citations are in Christopher A. Ferrara and Thomas E. Woods, Jr., “The Great Facade”, The Remnant Publishing Company, 2002, p. 317).

Here are a few random quotes:

Since Vatican II

Quote:Modernism is "the doctrine and method of the Church” (Jean Guitton, “Portrait du Père Lagrange”, Paris: Éditions Robert Laffont, 1992, pp. 55-56)

Quote:One of the fruits [of the NEW mass] may be that non-Catholic communities may be able to celebrate the Last Supper with the same prayers as the Catholic Church.  Theologically, this is possible (Brother Max Thurian of the Protestant Community of Taizé, “La Croix”, May 20,1969 edition).

Quote:The image of the liturgy as given by the Council is completely different from what it was previously (Annibale Bugnini, C.M., “La Documentation Catholique”, No. 1491, January 4, 1967).

Quote:“Why does the Mass keep changing?  Here is the answer... It would have been foolhardy to introduce all the changes at once.  It was obviously wise to change gradually and gently.  If all the changes had been introduced together, you would have been shocked! [N.B.  Not to mention the fact that the changes would never have been accepted!]” (John Carmel Cardinal Heenan [b. at Ilford, England on Thursday, January 26, 1905 - d. at Westminster, England, on Friday, November 7, 1975], Lenten Pastoral Letter, October 12, 1969).

Thank you for Reading!  :)

God Bless You!  :pray:

A Catholic Catholic
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)