My experience at the NO
#51
(01-26-2012, 03:12 PM)NOtard Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 03:05 PM)TrentCath Wrote: ...

I will reply by quoting those who know far more about this than me '
Letter from Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci to His Holiness Pope Paul VI
September 25th, 1969

....

All of the above comes from the '[i]The Ottaviani Intervention'
which you may read here http://fisheaters.com/ottavianiintervention.html

...

I have been told that the Ottaviani Intervention was presented to the Pope before the Novus Ordo Missae was promulgated, and that, based on that, changes were made before promulgation, such that Cardinal Ottaviani withdrew his objections.

Is anybody familiar with this story, and is it true?

Father Cekeda gives one of the best descriptions of the Ottaviani intervention in this video:



No changes were made to the Novus Ordo itself, but many changes were made to the General Instruction which explained the mass.

My big criticism of this argument is that he builds up Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci as these fearless orthodox guys that didn't take crap from anyone to explain why they objected to the NO...but when they accept the changes to the General Instruction suddenly they have become weakhearted and "fooled."  I thought Cardinal Bacci "didn't scare easily?" What happened?  Ottavani, the hardline head of the Holy Office (formerly the Inquisition) couldn't see through this cleverness? 

Father Cekeda also doesn't mention the Apostolic Constitution of the Missale Romanum a document that carries much more weight than the memoirs of modernists in understanding what the NO is about.  You don't find any discussion of assembly theology, but within the second sentence the mass is described as a "sacrifice" and Paul points at continuity with the Mass of Pius V.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_v...um_en.html

Note: Ottavani did complain about some parts of the Apostolic Constitution of the Missale Romanum. 
Reply
#52
What is outrageous to me is that non-attendees/people who don't believe the NO fulfills an obligation attack, attack, attack the "bad fruit" of the NO but the instant someone says they have a good spiritual experience with it, or yes, ,stay Catholic because it is around, then suddenly 1) that's just "feelings and opinions" and 2) I, or others like me are being "spiritually weak" because we can't make it on our own without some form of liturgy.
Reply
#53
A good, long post TradCath. I'll have to read more :)

(01-26-2012, 04:12 PM)Norbert Wrote: What is outrageous to me is that non-attendees/people who don't believe the NO fulfills an obligation attack, attack, attack the "bad fruit" of the NO but the instant someone says they have a good spiritual experience with it, or yes, ,stay Catholic because it is around, then suddenly 1) that's just "feelings and opinions" and 2) I, or others like me are being "spiritually weak" because we can't make it on our own without some form of liturgy.

Bravo! :)
Reply
#54
(01-26-2012, 04:12 PM)Norbert Wrote: What is outrageous to me is that non-attendees/people who don't believe the NO fulfills an obligation attack, attack, attack the "bad fruit" of the NO but the instant someone says they have a good spiritual experience with it, or yes, ,stay Catholic because it is around, then suddenly 1) that's just "feelings and opinions" and 2) I, or others like me are being "spiritually weak" because we can't make it on our own without some form of liturgy.

If we had fishies I would give you one!
Reply
#55
(01-26-2012, 04:12 PM)Norbert Wrote: What is outrageous to me is that non-attendees/people who don't believe the NO fulfills an obligation attack, attack, attack the "bad fruit" of the NO but the instant someone says they have a good spiritual experience with it, or yes, ,stay Catholic because it is around, then suddenly 1) that's just "feelings and opinions" and 2) I, or others like me are being "spiritually weak" because we can't make it on our own without some form of liturgy.

A nice ad hominem but neither I nor anyone on this thread has done it.

When people can provide theological reasons and authority for their view then perhaps people will take them seriously, until then those who attend the NO and come on here often to criticise those who don't are just doing this  :deadhorse:
Reply
#56
(01-26-2012, 03:39 PM)Someone1776 Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 03:12 PM)NOtard Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 03:05 PM)TrentCath Wrote: ...

I will reply by quoting those who know far more about this than me '
Letter from Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci to His Holiness Pope Paul VI
September 25th, 1969

....

All of the above comes from the '[i]The Ottaviani Intervention'
which you may read here http://fisheaters.com/ottavianiintervention.html

...

I have been told that the Ottaviani Intervention was presented to the Pope before the Novus Ordo Missae was promulgated, and that, based on that, changes were made before promulgation, such that Cardinal Ottaviani withdrew his objections.

Is anybody familiar with this story, and is it true?

Father Cekeda gives one of the best descriptions of the Ottaviani intervention in this video:



No changes were made to the Novus Ordo itself, but many changes were made to the General Instruction which explained the mass.

My big criticism of this argument is that he builds up Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci as these fearless orthodox guys that didn't take crap from anyone to explain why they objected to the NO...but when they accept the changes to the General Instruction suddenly they have become weakhearted and "fooled."  I thought Cardinal Bacci "didn't scare easily?" What happened?  Ottavani, the hardline head of the Holy Office (formerly the Inquisition) couldn't see through this cleverness? 

Father Cekeda also doesn't mention the Apostolic Constitution of the Missale Romanum a document that carries much more weight than the memoirs of modernists in understanding what the NO is about.  You don't find any discussion of assembly theology, but within the second sentence the mass is described as a "sacrifice" and Paul points at continuity with the Mass of Pius V.

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_v...um_en.html

Note: Ottavani did complain about some parts of the Apostolic Constitution of the Missale Romanum. 

Who knows but compared to the rest of the curia and bishops who said nothing they certainly were hardline.
Reply
#57
(01-26-2012, 07:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 04:12 PM)Norbert Wrote: What is outrageous to me is that non-attendees/people who don't believe the NO fulfills an obligation attack, attack, attack the "bad fruit" of the NO but the instant someone says they have a good spiritual experience with it, or yes, ,stay Catholic because it is around, then suddenly 1) that's just "feelings and opinions" and 2) I, or others like me are being "spiritually weak" because we can't make it on our own without some form of liturgy.

A nice ad hominem but neither I nor anyone on this thread has done it.

When people can provide theological reasons and authority for their view then perhaps people will take them seriously, until then those who attend the NO and come on here often to criticise those who don't are just doing this  :deadhorse:

This thread was started by someone talking about his experience at the NO and others jumped in to tell him he was wrong.  He was talking about his experience, not about theology.  And he was attacked and criticized.  As I recall, nobody criticized anyone for not attending the NO.  I can think of only one poster who ever does that. 
Reply
#58
(01-26-2012, 08:29 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 07:59 PM)TrentCath Wrote:
(01-26-2012, 04:12 PM)Norbert Wrote: What is outrageous to me is that non-attendees/people who don't believe the NO fulfills an obligation attack, attack, attack the "bad fruit" of the NO but the instant someone says they have a good spiritual experience with it, or yes, ,stay Catholic because it is around, then suddenly 1) that's just "feelings and opinions" and 2) I, or others like me are being "spiritually weak" because we can't make it on our own without some form of liturgy.

A nice ad hominem but neither I nor anyone on this thread has done it.

When people can provide theological reasons and authority for their view then perhaps people will take them seriously, until then those who attend the NO and come on here often to criticise those who don't are just doing this  :deadhorse:

This thread was started by someone talking about his experience at the NO and others jumped in to tell him he was wrong.  He was talking about his experience, not about theology.  And he was attacked and criticized.  As I recall, nobody criticized anyone for not attending the NO.  I can think of only one poster who ever does that. 

:eyeroll:
Reply
#59
TC, there's a program that will allow you to block JayneK which may allow you to stop using that emoticon.
More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#60
(01-26-2012, 08:33 PM)Mithrandylan Wrote: TC, there's a program that will allow you to block JayneK which may allow you to stop using that emoticon.

Don't encourage him to stop.  I like him admitting that he has no reasonable argument to make.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)