In a previous post, I likened the Novus Ordo to a veritable highway to delusion.
Want to see some evidence for just how efficient it is?
In a previous post, I likened the Novus Ordo to a veritable highway to delusion.
Want to see some evidence for just how efficient it is?
What can one say, Louie after watching those clips ? You are spot on in saying that those who attend the Novus Ordo are on the highway to delusion. Those prelates will have a great deal to answer for before God for leading His children to delusion. The Novus Ordo is a vehicle that Satan has used masterfully to destroy the faith of countless people. Please God, let your merciful chastisement begin ASAP so that Holy Mother the Church can shine gloriously as You desire her to do.
We growl like hungry bears;
we moan like mournful doves.
I’m pretty shocked that +Gomez is still allowing ++Mahoney-style shenanigans at that congress. +Gomez is a priest of Opus Dei. I was going through the process of becoming a Supernumerary in Opus Dei until October of last year, and I felt they made the most of the Novus Ordo better than anyone. They seemed to take the mantra of “Say the black, do the red” very seriously. Communion was distributed only by priests. You had to kneel for Communion, and of course Communion in the hand was out of the question. In their oratories, Opus Dei offers the in NO in Latin only. Given that a few Opus Dei bishops have been in Francis’ cross-hairs lately, I feel safe in saying that +Gomez probably received orders not to do anything that would result in shots fired in his general direction. Cleaning up the liturgies at that conference would have sent the Pentacatholics in Louie’s video into an uncontrollable fit of NCR/Commonweal/LCWR style-rage.
This Sunday, I’m going to be conditionally baptized by an SSPX priest, and next month I will be conditionally confirmed by +de Mallerais. I had to get away from the Novus Ordo. I am going to lose friends because of this decision. They will call me “schismatic” and condemn me to the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels. I don’t know, maybe they’re right. But if I had stayed in the newChurch, I would have lost my faith and paved my own road to hell anyway. The SSPX still believes in the religion I fell in love with nearly twenty-five years ago through reading those old, dusty pre-Vatican II tomes in my high school library. By the way, the Society priest I’ve been working with has been amazing. He’s young and filled with love for Christ and His Church. Thank God for +Lefebvre and the SSPX (and for you too, Louie).
I attend the NO Mass every Sunday. The Mass I attend is nothing like what that video depicted.
I don’t know what that video is depicting.
Louie, you ask, “What can we say?” Well, as my mother used to say, although not on this topic, “All the fools aren’t dead yet.” And as legendary Denver priest Fr. C.B. Woodrich said, also not at all on this topic, “What a bunch of crap!” Both off topic, but both quite apropos. Thanks for keeping our eyes open.
Can a “liturgy” invented by the Father of Lies free us from the Father of Lies??
The definition of banality.
Highway to hell is more like it.
Notice that the music in the final liturgical segment is taken from Ennio Morricone’s great score to The Mission. These conciliarist vandals have no qualms about diabolically twisting everything their dirty hands touch.
“…and us that most Australian GENDER INCLUSIVE greeting”
Who dem ladies
Dressed in blue
That Prelate’s view –
From east to west
They one up-man-ship
Did I say man?
I be a mess –
They says they each
And all approved
‘Cause they know how
To rock Her dome.
Them cassocked boys
They frown and glare
At them there ladies
Feets all bare.
Then bishop smacks
Upside they heads,
“You cassocked boys
Yo’ time is deads.
Them bluey gals –
They sure can sell
…just DO like they
Is much behooved
To shake yo booty
And be approved!”
The video shows, among other things, that mere validity isn’t enough.
“All things betray thee, who betrayest Me.”
It’s time Catholics put there foot down and draw the line. These services are not masses, but celebrations of syncretism the likes of which have not been produced since the days the homosexual Emperor Heliogabalus (the ‘balus’ coming from Syrian worship of Baal) pranced effeminately around the Roman Capital trying to unify all the cults into one universal worship.
Bishops of the world, wake up! Let’s call a spade a spade. This is not worship of the Spouse of Christ united to the Kingship of Christ, but worship of our Lord’s old nemesis, Baal.
Opus Dei will never do anything that compromise their structure and organization, regardless the Pope in charge. As liberals, I’d say OD employs the modernist trick of sifting from right to left within Vatican hierarchy very well…. Somebody had to accommodate the NO conservatives and make them feel “safe” while pulling the boat to the left.
For your record: Numerary women from Valencia (Spain) teach the Korán to Muslim immigrants encouraging them to imitate Mohamed’s virtues. (Second to last paragraph- Spanish)
And the new general vicar proposed after being elected in one of his first press conference to: ” We want to shout with the strength the same from long ago: “Freedom, Equality and Fraternity”.
Indeed yours is a great comment. It further proofs the modernist nature of the NO mass. It’s like a choice menu: From the clown mass to the Opus Dei numerary centers NO mass, passing through the welcome sodomite mass…In fact, the possibility are endless.
The problem appears to be not Opus Dei in itself, but liberals within Opus Dei. A similar problem exists in the Catholic Church where you have liberals all the way up to the Pope.
“The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.”
When the intention is wrong, the fruits will always reveal themselves to be rotten
For the Novus Ordo, the intention was a criticism of the real Mass (that it was somehow inadequate), a rejection of it’s mystery and power as an act of worship, an act of ruthless censorship, a devastating loss of faith, an idolatry of modern man.
So was the very act of calling the Second Vatican Council. A loss of Faith, coupled with a temptation to idolise modern man. Notice how all the charts for falling conversions and vocations date from 1959 when the Council was called (i.e. it effectively started then, just like the ‘Synod’ started the moment the Pope first announced it).
With ‘great humility’ the calling of the Council and the changes to the Mass were the atomic bombs dropped on the Church, just when it was really becoming strong.
The third great atomic attack, not legislated for by the Council but just snuck in for the Hell of it (but secretly and obviously intended from the off by those ‘that knew’), was the deliberate turning of the priest away from the Person he was supposed to be addressing (God) in the Novus Ordo. From this moment the New Mass has never recovered and can never recover.
If you consider the art of playwriting you will find that all good writing and all good texts must have a purpose, and that every character within the work has a unique purpose (a motivation/an action/a superobjective). And not just individual characters, but every line, every scene, every act, all have different purposes and are actually finely balanced arguments which deliberately build up to the single point that the writer is trying to make through the working of the dramatic conflict of arguments.
Crudely, if the Mass were a play and the main character for whom, by whom and about whom the play was written is suddenly, in an outrageously novel and worldly “I’m doing this because I CAN” way, ignored, and most of the words, written to be addressed solely to him, are no longer addressed to him directly but somehow through a microphone, looking at and speaking to people as though they themselves were really the sole point or focus of the dialogue itself, and that even the body language (which tends to say everything clearer and better) has amazingly turned AWAY from even the idea of actually addressing Him, then the play is no longer the play. It is something totally new. It is a caricature of the original, a critique of the original, but not the same as the original – it cannot be!
It can only be but a minor very subjective work ‘based on’ some ideas found in the original play, ideas which survived a contemptuous abrupt editing and were flexible enough for hidden and improvised purposes, new purposes, ones that weren’t adequately dealt with in the original in the minds of this great and humble scriptwriting committee. I believe this new play, as can be seen in your video above is written by egotists who wants to ‘have’ some of the glory of the original for themselves and for ‘their people’. However, Holy Mass can not be treated in this contemptuous way. It is not a play to be butchered and twisted and ‘interpreted’ – we don’t ‘interpret’ the Mass, it interprets us! It ‘reads’ us. To dare to touch it, to alter one word would and could be an act of sacrilege.
So, the turning to ‘the people’/the microphone/the camera/the media during the Mass, and therefore away from God, was the third and most damaging of the three atomic ‘tests’ carried out by the weak and vain fools who felt so humble in their drunken stupor when they had the power, adrenaline, and worldly attention and popularity coursing through their veins.
When the priest is not physically facing God and mentally utterly convinced that he is directly speaking only to his Maker in everything he is doing, then he not worshipping God.
The above video would and should make all people of good faith cringe and gag. We have many of us been caught in low grade versions of the video but they are sinful and evil situations, they cause great harm. They are a stumbling block to the Faithful.
If the liturgy is the universal medium of the Church Militant.
If the ‘medium is the message’ as a philosopher once penned.
If the message we acquire from these assemblies is not Christ crucified.
Then these liturgies are not Catholic liturgies, and the masses are invalid.
The problem is indeed Opus Dei itself, which promotes going with the flow.
“At the close of a long life (for I was born in 1905 and I now see the year 1990), I can say that it has been marked by exceptional world events: three world wars, that which took place from 1914 to 1918, that which took place from 1939 to 1945, and that of the Second Vatican Council from 1962 to 1965. The disasters caused by these three wars, and especially by the last of them, are incalculable in the domain of material ruins, but even more so in the spiritual realm.”
-Abp. Marcel Lefebvre, Prologue, Spiritual Journey
This is just straight up paganism.
AlphonsusJr is correct. The problem is Opus Dei itself.
how dare u make these vids, u LOUIS VECCHIO!!!!!! no wonder u have that last name, since ur STUCK IN THE OLD WAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! EVOLVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yes, but this neopaganism is infantile, impoverished, devoid of any of the depth, nobility, or culture generating fecundity of ancient paganism. It’s a pitiful paganism for a pitiful people, soaked in today’s toxic cult of sentimentality.
You are right in that “The” problem is not OD. Personally, I think “The” problem is CVII and the subsequent pope teachings that followed its aftermath. Within the CVII there were three major principles that shook to the ground the Foundations of the Church: The Reform of the liturgy, Collegiality and Ecumenism.
However please note that Opus Dei was at the core of all of this, not only at the moment of the Council but before setting the stage. I can’t qualify its influence before the council was called but surely during and specially after. I’m going to provide a few points to clarify this:
“Mortalium ánimos” was an encyclical promulgated by Pope Pius XI in January 1928. This document forbids or at least strongly discouraged any partake or association with religious ends between Catholics and heretics and/or members of false religions (aka. All the rest pseudo Faiths). Well, 9 months later, (10-2-1928) Opus Dei was born with its message of “universal call to sanctity trough the santification of one’s professional work and the ordinary duties of his/her state in life”. This call includes “Cooperators” members that can be and in fact are and had been non catholic and even non Christian.
Secondly, the now Beatified Alvaro del Portillo, was instrumental in moderating the language used by the revolutionaries during the making of the CVII documents to appease the stronger opposition growing and as wisely Alphonsus Jr pointed out “go with the flow”, which flow? one might say: “Paul VI’s flow”.
Finally, by their fruits you shall know them. The law of divorce in Spain was approved and signed by a supernumerary, former president of Spain, Adolfo Suarez in 1981. Also the law passed because it received the final signature of the illegitimated King of Spain Juan Carlos I who was educated by a numerary priest Federico Suarez. The same can be said about the law on abortion one of the most liberals in Europe which, All Spaniards funded with their taxes whether you liked or not (current average of more than 500 abortions per month in Spain).
I can provide many more examples to you to proof te heretical nature of OD and its rotten fruits. Now, the deceive full lie falls into the appearance of good. I have personally no doubt OD is form by excellent honestly good people that believe OD is their call to serve God within the Church. In turn, I have also no doubt it is OD responsible for neutralizing their Faith and place it secondarily by putting above another set of principles non faith based.
@ PlacidoPax: Wow, you sound like Don Giovanni insulting the Commendatore:
La Statua del Commendatore
No, vecchio infatuato!
La Statua del Commendatore
La Statua del Commendatore
La Statua del Commendatore
Ah, tempo più non v’è!
(La statua scompare. Da tutte le parti si alzano le
fiamme e la terra comincia a tremare sotto i piedi
di Don Giovanni.)
Da qual tremore insolito sento assalir gli spiriti!
Donde escono quei vortici di fuoco pien d’orror?
Coro Di Demomii
Tutto a tue colpe è poco!
Vieni, c’è un mal peggior!
Chi l’anima mi lacera! Chi m’agita le viscere!
Che strazio, ohimè! che smania! che inferno! che terror! ecc.
Che ceffo disperato! Che gesti da dannato!
Che gridi! che lamenti! Come mi fa terror! ecc.
Don Giovanni (Il foco cresce; si sprofonda.)
(Le fiamme avvolgono Don Giovanni. La scena si
calma ed escono gli altri personaggi.)
To adapt Commendatore’s message for the present time PlacidoPax I call upon you to repent of your modernism before you are dragged off to Hell! Pentiti! Pentiti!
How do these ‘Bishops’ (let’s face it, anyone) get through such an abomination? They’ve dipped their fingernails in LSD, or have the latest blockbuster playing inside their glasses so they don’t have to look. Or they are THAT brainsoaked in the idiocy of the desolator they really are ‘gettin jiggy-widdit’. I half expected to see Bergoglio doing a Michelle Pfeiffer, ‘my funny valentine’ slither on the ‘altar’…why not? seriously. I think he’d look fab in a shiseido red.
The great G.K. Chesterton wrote: “Art, like morality, consists of drawing the line somewhere.” The Novus Ordo has no lines anywhere. It begins and ends on a satanic continuum that has nothing to do with Calvary, and pierced Heart of Our Lord, “whereout poured water to our baptism and blood to our redemption”. The fact is this mass-continuum is constructed for a satanic ‘periphery’ that, like the abyss made for satan and his kind, will never be exhausted.
PS. The Old True Rites, the Old True Doctrine and Discipline, the habit, the Sacred Language etc. – these treasures and their sanctuary do not belong to the New Order sacrilege:
“For the Novus Ordo, the intention was a criticism of the real Mass”.
the question then is, why criticize/oppose the Holy Ghost and His works done for our salvation over some 2000 years? We could put answers in the mouths of Montini et al, but the utter evil of it probably couldn’t find words.
I suspect the average demon is only too happy to get charismaticcy with a Group-mind overshadowing a bunch of pitiful pagans just as much as noble pagans. The spiritual toxins events such as this release into the lives of those who participate is very real.
“I was already so outside of myself with the desire for Communion that even should lances have been held to my heart I think I’d have gone into their midst.”
St Teresa of Avila
500th birthday today!
“Behold,these are not the times to believe everyone; believe only those who you see are walking in conformity with Christ’s life…Believe firmly what Holy Mother Church holds, and you can be sure you will be walking along a good path.”
St Teresa of Avila
“The great G.K. Chesterton wrote: ‘Art, like morality, consists of drawing the line somewhere.’ The Novus Ordo has no lines anywhere.”
This is so well put.
”what Holy Mother Church holds” is not what unholy fraternity VII/Novus Error Holds.
We shall roar all of us like bears, and shall lament as mournful doves. We have looked for judgment, and there is none: for salvation, and it is far from us.
PS. Bereft of Apostolic commentary, in protestant manner, make of it what ye will.
Another example of a “liturgy” with dancing. The dancing starts at 2:36:00:
The call to repentance starts shortly after the dance.
A further example of a “liturgy” inculturated with a local dance:
No call to repentance followed this liturgical abomination.
Sorry for the link starting at the beginning. The link with the correct starting point is here:
While we agree that the “inculturation” of VII is being used by modernists to demolish liturgies–like the ones in your video, we disagree with the idea that the N.O. rite is a work of the devil, or that it leads people to lose their Faith in the Church and its teachings, including the Real Presence, and especially that it leads to darkened intellects and delusion-which are the direct results of SIN. That doesn’t describe us, or the many people we’ve known over the years, who’ve attended N.O. Masses exclusively.
We’re all in the same boat you’re in right now, and have been actively denouncing the errors we’ve had thrown our way from modernists for half a century now. People who lost the Faith did it because they chose to join themselves with the cultural revolution going on in the ’60’s and stayed with it as it infected the clergy and teaching institutions which should have been standing against it, many of whom (NOT ALL) adopted the false Christ of the age, and used the Confessionals, classrooms and pulpits to propegate it–including the homily portion of the Mass.
But if they wanted to, they could learn the TLM, and wage the same campaign using IT instead of the N.O. while their Bishops go on ignoring the abuses they carry with them. Their homilies would go on attacking truth and Scriputure, only they’d dedicate them to instructing those present in their versions of the meaning of the Mass prayers -ala deChardin and their other heroes.
-“Water flowing from the left side of the Temple purifying all it touched” would be explained as a sign of God’s unconditional, undemanding Mercy for unrepentant sinners. The prayer to be spared from evil and deceitful men, would be touted as God’s condemnation of homophobes…etc. Weekly Bulletins would announce TLM Masses dedicated to things like our local LGBT brothers and sisters’ latest community efforts. And rainbow flags would still be decorating the vestibules and entries.
God only knows what prayers they would say in silence.
All of that would be potentially destructive of the Faith. None of that would be the fault of the rite they would be using.
Like Fr. Hess, here are two other highly-educated, Faithful Catholic men, very well versed in Church History and Canon law, who dedicated their lives to safeguarding and spreading the Catholic Faith. Like them, we think it’s the culture of sin and the infection of modernism that are the real destroyers of Faith, not the rite that is under attack here.
In an interiew with EWTN, Cardinal Burke said, when comparing the N.O. to the TLM:” ” they are the same rite, and I believe that, when the so-called New Rite or the Ordinary Form is celebrated with great care and with a strong sense that the Holy Liturgy is the action of God, one can see more clearly the unity of the two forms of the same rite.”
-And when speaking of Pope Benedict’s reasons for promoting the TLM he said
that Benedict: ” expressed the hope that through these two forms of the same rite – it’s all the same Roman rite, it can’t be different, it’s the same Mass, same Sacrament of Penance and so forth -there would be a mutual enrichment. And that continuity would be more perfectly expressed in what some call the “reform of the reform”
And Bishop Fulton J. Sheen wrote a letter in 1978, saying:
“The Vatican Council approved the updating of the Liturgy and amongst the changes were those recommended for the Mass. The changes made by Pope Paul VI were not doctrinal changes, they merely changed from Latin to the vernacular. There have been many changes in the Mass down through the centuries.
The Lord never said Mass in Latin; He used the language of the time. Moreover, the change in translation does not alter the meaning of the text. I am always looking for translations that make the Scriptures more understandable and clear.” http://www.cathinfo.com/catholic.php/Fulton-Sheen
What, listen, gt a clue.
It”s a bit like saying ‘Dolly’ – the genetically modified lamb chop – was authenically a lamb chop… When Lent turns to the joy of Pentecost, will we all lament for the confusion of Dolly, and her Novus Ordo mmodified bloooograaaahsss? I guess heaps will.
Thank you, Indignus!
I always appreciate your comments, as clearly others here do as well.
I think we must be careful to acknowledge that is by God’s grace that we (and others) have been spared the loss of faith that the Novus Ordo engenders. Our Lord’s generosity toward us in no way lessens the danger that the rite itself presents.
I would also stop well short of saying that “People who lost the Faith did it because they chose to…” adding that it is more accurate to say that the majority of Catholic today never reallyhad the Faith as all they have ever truly known is the Novus Ordo and the conciliar spin preached endlessly by the popes.
I say this with myself in mind. At one time, in spite of my sincerity, I had not the true Faith, and this was thanks in large measure to the influence of the Novus Ordo. The same is true of many others who are best viewed as victims of the current crisis, the centerpiece of which the New Mass.
Why God opens some eyes and not others is a mystery to me. I do know, however, that the witness of those who held fast to tradition even when I couldn’t understand, somehow helped me connect the dots with the help of that grace.
In conclusion, that the Novus Ordo leads innocent people to embrace something other than the Catholic faith seems obvious to me, from both observation and experience.
Ha Ha – the “cookie” monster!
As per the second posted article, I cringe to think what would become of mankind if we indeed did have “more JP2s”. Good grief… These opus dei prelates have thoroughly imbibed the modernist Kool-Aid…
Thanks for the kindness of your time and words. You’re right- our comment about people who lose the Faith embracing the culture was stated as too much of a sole-cause type of generalization (it was based on our experiences with a large number of people) as there are obviously other possible causes, including those you mentioned experiencing personally.
But isn’t your insistence that the N.O. “engenders” the loss of Faith, also based more on your own personal experience than on actual statistics? Where is there evidence that the “rite” itself is a principlal cause of loss of Faith, when people who are interviewed about it most often cite other causes? And you have to discount those who never had the Faith, which may even amount to a vast majority due to the problems with catechesis.
Many studies cite personal disagreements with Church teachings as the number-one cause given by people who left the Church—usually about sexual matters and/or the priestly celibacy. Those seem to strongly indicate they embraced the culture. Other reasons were the sex abuse scandal, and bad experiences with individuals in their parishes; and later realizatiions of past rebelliousness, immaturity, and ignorance of the seriousness of sin–for which they blame teachers and priests.
We’re not defending the N.O. because of any great affinity for it, as we far prefer the TLM. But as Cardinal Burke points out, the fact that the TLM is “superior” doesn’t make the N.O. intrinsically evil or harmful. The abuses we all mention so often in your comment section, are not part of the rite.
We recently read a very well written and informative article about the responsibility of the laity to help the Church by fighting abuses -listing 10 of the most common ones–and the resources which explain the Church laws being broken in each case. We wish we had had something like this to help us all these years, as we took these things on without such great info. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1874835/posts
We watched the Fr. Hesse video you provided as well as another he did on the sacraments. Our reaction is sincere doubt that he’s right- about some very important matters.
1. That no Pope has the authority to change the Latin rite Mass, and that was supposedly “understood” when it was dogmatically declared unchangeable by Session 7 of Trent.
It’s our understanding that Dogma is unchangeable reavealed Truth- safeguarded by the Church. That no new Dogma is possible since revelation ended with St. John. So if the Liturgy-other than the consecration, was meant to be part of Dogma, the entire Mass would have to remain as it was at the time Jesus said the first one (At the Last Supper? A seder meal?) And all the developments and changes made in the Liturgies until the TLM was formally declared unchangeable, as is claimed, would have been taboo. We did a search to see if anyone else thought this, and found Robert Sugenis talking about this here: http://catholicintl.com/question-22-october-2007/
2. That the N.O. is a schismatic rite simply because of the Latin words Pro Multis, which were used as written, were mistranslated into the vernacular by ICEL(Many as All) A mistranslation is easily corrected, isn’t it? and hasn’t it been? So there’s no cause to call it a schismatic right anymore?
We see that there are arguments still going on about these matters, by people far more higly trained than we are. But that sesus Catholicus that you talked about Louie, seems to be shouting in our hearts and minds, that this whole idead of the N.O. being so evil and leading people away from Faith, is a big mistake.
We see that you feel differently, but can’t shake the feeling that you’re wrong. We have a lot of respect for you as a fellow Catholic and searcher for truth. So we’re just giving you our take on this, for whatever it’s worth. You have our continued love and prayers, as always. Just not our agreement. We’re glad you’ve shown yourself so open to opposing ideas–it’s one of the reasons this place is so special.
Pax Christi 🙂 🙂
It seems you’ve been so busy smelling the lilies that you got lost in the weeds. To blame the N.O. for the loss of faith of so many to the point it’s likened to poison, I believe, is a mistake. I again listened to the Fr. Hesse video, (every bit this time), and I remain unconvinced. To me, it seems that in order to prove his position, he strains at gnats. No, I’ve not formally studied the great depths of our faith, nor do I have an alphabet after my name, but others that do would disagree with him with arguments which seem to have more common sense, or sense of the faith. For him to take the 13th canon of the 7th session of Trent, ( CANON XIII.-If any one saith, that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church, wont to be used in the solemn administration of the sacraments, may be contemned, or without sin be omitted at pleasure by the ministers, or be changed, by every pastor of the churches, into other new ones; let him be anathema.), binds the Pope, seems to be a stretch. To my understanding of the plain reading of this translation is that it applies to the bishops, pastors and priests of the churches, (plural/lower case), referring to “the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church”, (singular/capitalized). It looks like if the Pope approves and distributes, whomsoever contemns, omits or changes them is anathematized, not the Pope. Also, his reason given for the N.O. being schismatic was because of the translation of “multis” as “all”. Aside from his admitted disagreement with the “former fathers” and the (Catechism of the )Council of Trent’s position that “This is the Chalice of My Blood” was sufficient for the transubstantiation, would not the current correction of that translation mend that break? Additionally it would seem that if it is held that the N.O. is a schismatic rite, any Pope which approved or promoted such a rite would also be in schism, hence not the Pope. Therefore the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church would be in interregnum. That would make Salvemur right, and we know that can’t be. 😉 God bless you Louie, Salvemur, and all.
“In March of 1965, in the periodical L’Osservatore Romano, Bugnini was quoted as saying: ‘We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants.'”
If the person who was responsible for the liturgical “reform” said it was his goal to strip everything CATHOLIC from the liturgy, what exactly does it take to make you realize that you aren’t attending a Catholic Mass when you attend a NO service!
“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”
Not that I have any great love for Bugnini, but if you take a good look at the quote, he said to remove the shadow of a stumbling block. You then mistakenly inferred that meant his goal was to strip everything Catholic… Read more carefully to keep from being fooled.
I don’t know what to tell you Mike other than your vanity must be involved in this. The clear implication of the statement by Bugnini was the novel ecumenism of VII was so important that even if an element of the Catholic liturgy were only a shadow of a stumbling block to the Protestants, not even a stumbling block itself, Bugnini thought it must be removed!
One need only compare the TLM and NO side-by-side to confirm that this is exactly what was done – anything that was “too Catholic” was removed. Do you deny this?
The theologians who were tasked with examining the NO liturgy by Cardinals Ottavianni and Bacci had this to say about the resulting NO missae that confirms Bugnini had in mind the most modernist of Protestant HERETICS in formulating the new liturgy:
“The new form of Mass was substantially rejected by the Episcopal Synod, was never submitted to the collegial judgment of the Episcopal Conferences and was never asked for by the people. It has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants.”
Of course, If you had checked the link before reflexively replying to my quote you would have realized that Bugnini also said this:
“In 1974 preceding his second downfall, Bugnini proudly proclaimed Vatican II to be a ‘major conquest of the Catholic Church'”.
Does a Catholic even speak like this? Exactly who was conquering the Catholic Church, or did you even stop to contemplate this?
Mike another question. Paul VI jettisoned 1900 years of organic liturgical development in the expectation that “unity” could be reached with the “most modernist of protestants”. How did that work out?
One other thing. I know that many of my Catholic forbears died a martyr’s death rather than attend a heretic’s “worship” service. When the six protestant heretics and a protestant sympathizer got together to adulterate the Roman rite so that even “the shadow of a stumbling block” to the heretics would be removed I take them at their word and conclude that their goal was to pawn of a protestant fraud on the trusting Catholic faithful. Those who were responsible for this travesty, and those who let it happen, are to my mind traitors.
First, I’d read the link you supplied long ago which spurred me on to read more about Bugnini, hence my comment of not having great love for him. That said, my concern is that we address accurately those things we quote. My use of the word “inferred” was intentional. While an argument could be made that if one wants to remove stumbling blocks and their shadows ultimately means that anything Catholic is a stumbling block, that would only be an assumption of intent. Even if that were his intent, the responsibility of the implementation of his work lies with the Pope who accepted the package. You mention comparing the TLM & N.O. side by side to confirm that anything too Catholic was removed. That adverb “too” would suggest that you acknowledge that some Catholic still remains. Anyhow, I don’t think that’s the right approach. I know of none here that would deny the superlative position of the TLM. I would rather see an examination of the prayers and actions of the N.O. as required in the GIRM, and have it shown what is in error, sinful or poisonous. Not due to abuses, or lack, or that it was/could be done better, but where heresy resides.
Oh, Please! This had all the Look & Feel of The Opening Ceremonies of The Summer & Winter Olympics. The only thing missing was someone lighting the Olympic Cauldron.
That & the Voice of Bob Costas!