jump to navigation

The hubris of the liturgical movement June 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, priests, Sacraments, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving.
comments closed

As I wrote last Friday, I have become convinced that the 20th century liturgical movement, a small but very loud and influential group of primarily academics, went very much off the rails and ventured into pride and radicalism as the movement evolved during the 40s and 50s.  I quoted in that previous post an HA Reinhold, whom I described as something of a moderate in the movement. And by the late 50s, he was, in a sense, somewhat moderate.  But he was also increasingly becoming swept up in the hubris and revolutionary attitudes regarding the Liturgy.  It is difficult to categorize these men consistently, for many of them evolved (or devolved?) towards an increasing acceptance of foisting enormous changes, even revolution, on the Mass, in order to try to address the movement’s patent failure to improve liturgical piety.  So, whether he was truly moderate or not is open to debate.

There are a couple of quotes from HA Reinhold’s book Bringing the Mass to the People (1958 – 4 years before the start of Vatican II), which are quoted in Dom Alcuin Reid’s The Organic Development of the Liturgy. I’ll present them without much comment, and let you determine if you sense any pride or even arrogance.  This first quote is from the book’s afterword:

After finishing the manuscript of this small book, I described its plan and purpose to a friend of mine, a rabbi. He listened very attentively, and then said: “A very neat plan indeed – too neat for me. We Jews reformed our rites about 100 years ago; we cut off what was wild growth, as we saw it, and we introduced the ‘colloquial’ – which means more than a ‘vernacular’ – language. But we have learned that we have made a mistake: we lost our sacredness and the mystery of our rites. Now all is obvious and trite; the beauty is gone. [How many Catholics feel the same way with regard to the Novus Ordo?]

Many people besides my rabbi friend may have the same fears; but are these in any way justified? I really do not think there is any resemblance between the two cases……The Mass has a basic plan, an essential structure which may unfold in various ways; the reform is being planned with a deep respect for Tradition, a vast store of historical data and, above all, the supervision of the Apostolic See.

To say there is no relation between the Mass and the previous Jewish temple worship, is amazing. In fact, the Mass is the perfection of Jewish worship, just as the Catholic Faith is the perfection of Judaism. To just blithely assert there is no relation between the two is to betray either an ignorance that would be incredible, given Reinhold’s credentials as an ostensible liturgical expert, or an unwillingness to countenance any data that cautions against revolution.  I also have to note that the “deep respect for Tradition” associated with the post-VII liturgical reform rings rather hollow.

But there was another paragraph, the final paragraph of the book, where the self-assuredness of the liturgical movement attains what Dom Reid describes as “breathtaking, gnostic, ultramontane, historical arrogance”:

The reform now underway is superior to preceding ones both in knowledge and in motive. As to knowledge: the research of the last decades has put us in a position better than that enjoyed by our predecessors for understanding the essential structure of the Mass and the development of the various rites. As to motive: the purpose of the reform of Charlemagne and Alcuin was uniformity, discipline and teh personal reform of the clergy; the purpose of that of Trent was simply to put an end to confusion. But Pius XII, following St. Pius X, wanted to enable the spiritually underfed and thirsting masses to refresh themselves at the “primary and indispensable source of the true Christian spirit,” and to make the Sacrament a matter of true prayer, to which a feeling of wonderment is only a preliminary step.

As Dom Reid notes, this analysis of the state of the Mass impugns its efficacy as the prime vehicle of formation and spiritual growth for over a thousand years of Saints, Doctors, and others.  It is veritably a protestant critique, betraying the very protestant “corruption” theory proferred by Joseph Jungmann (this was a theory that a pure and holy early Mass had been corrupted by various evil influences during late antiquity or the Middle Ages).

I must also note that significant aspects of that scholarship on which Reinhold hangs his hat above, has already been refuted or at least put in doubt. As Dom Reid notes several times in his book, basing the Mass on the latest “findings” of historical research will lead to a Mass that is constantly in upheaval.  But there were significant players in the liturgical revolution that had no problem with that, the most influential of which was Anibale Bugnini himself.  In point of fact, Bugnini was preparing yet another round of massive changes in the Mass when he was removed from his exceedingly influential position as head of the Concilium in 1976 under very mysterious circumstances.  It has been very widely reported that his removal was associated with documents Bugnini himself accidentally left at a meeting, which revealed him to be a life-long Freemason. Irrespective, Pope Paul VI terminated all further developments in the Liturgy, banished Bugnini to Iran, dissolved Concilium, and transferred authority for all Roman Rites (Mass, Baptism, etc) into the Sacred Congregation for Rites.

What has occurred since then, has been a very slow, very on-again, off-again, process of retrenchment, slowly undoing the excesses of the 1960s liturgical revolution.  With occasional successes for the revolutionaries, like lay people distributing Communion and girls playing at altar service.

Opinionated liturgical history lesson concluded.  Let us pray for the restoration of the great Roman Rite!

No Latin Mass at St. Mark tonight June 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Latin Mass, North Deanery.
comments closed

Again, no Nervous Urdu Latin Mass tonight.  It will return, in a hard-hitting Requiem style, on June 17.

This is too sweet June 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, episcopate, fun, General Catholic, Papa, sadness, true leadership.
comments closed

I will say I have been amazed at Pope Francis’ common touch.  He is a master at the public event, equal to early JPII.  But I will say he always appears very, very genuine.  I think he has a great resevoir of compassion and love towards the poor and sick.  That comes through below:

He seems very spry for 76.  It is funny how differently people age.

St. Augustine refutes protestantism……. June 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Interior Life, Liturgy, Saints, sanctity, Tradition, true leadership.
comments closed

….over 1000 years before Luther was born!  Some quotes below from Augustine’s writings against the Manicheans. It is very interesting to me how the same old errors keep coming up over and over again throughout the history of the Church.  All Luther did was repackage some old heresies, express them with great violence, win over a few princes with enticements to freely sin without repercussion, and protestantism was born.  This particular bit below explains why Catholics ask for the intercession of Saints and/or Martyrs (from pp. 58-59 of The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. III):

“A Christian people celebrates together in religious solemnity the memorials of the Martyrs, both to encourage their being imitated and so that it can share in st-augustinetheir merits and be aided by their prayers. [Thus, St. Augustine explodes the protestant idea that Catholic invoking the intercession of Saints is somehow idolatrous.  In fact, such has been practiced since the very earliest Church, and was practiced by Jews. Protestants like to pretend such invocations are “un-biblical,” but that is only because protestants excluded Maccabees from their Bible, and because they ignore or greatly changed the plain meaning of several other bits of Scripture. But even if Scripture had been utterly silent on the intercessory prayer of the Blessed in Heaven, it would make no difference, because the Church always believed such through Tradition dating from its earliest days.  If protestants believe the pure Christian Church went wildly astray, it went astray during Apostolic or within a generation of Apostolic times]  But it is done in such a way that our altars are not set up to any one of the Martyrs – although in their memory – but to God Himself, the God of those Martyrs. Who, indeed, of the presiding priests assisting at the altar in the places of the Saints ever said “We offer to you, Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian?”  What is offered is offered to God, who crowned the Martyrs……..That worship, which the Greeks called latria  [the very highest form of love/worship.  Beneath that is dulia, which is the love and honor accorded the Saints. The Blessed Mother falls in between with hyperdulia.  Agape is brotherly love between men, which is human but can have a supernatural aspect, and we should all know what eros is] and for which there is in Latin no single term, and which is expressive of the subjection owed to Divinity alone, we neither accord nor teach that it should be accorded to any save to the one God.”

I also thought this bit was great.  The LCWR should be forced to write this on a chalkboard 100 times a day.  But it also applies to protestants and, sadly, most Catholics today:Saint_Augustine_Hippo

Tell us straight out that you do not believe in the Gospel of Christ; for you believe what you want in the Gospel and disbelieve what you want.  You believe in yourself rather than in the Gospel.

Of course, that is the perenniel temptation of man, to decide for ourselves what to believe and practice regarding the Gospel.  And, we all probably fail in regard to a full or true practice of what the Gospel proclaims on a regular basis, But there is a fundamental difference between trying, but failing, to practice what the Gospel as it has been revealed by Christ through the Church, and pretending one has the authority to decide for themselves what to believe and practice. That is the root error that has unwound Christendom for the past 500 years.

My head will explode if members of the hierarchy take part in “celebrations” regarding the 500th anniversary of the great protestant revolt/heresy in 2017.

St. Augustine with a tonsure!  Sweet!

St. Augustine with a tonsure! Sweet!

Was Pope John XXIII a “traditional” Pope? June 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, episcopate, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, Papa, sadness, scandals, Society, Tradition.
comments closed

Rorate Caeli has a post up contending that Pope John XXIII was, contrary to progressive attempts to claim him as one of their own, actually a “traditional” Pope.  There is a good deal of evidence to support this claim, which Rorate lays out in brief:

As we have often affirmed here, the time is long past for us to reclaim Pope John XXIII, who died exactly 50 years ago today: in the Sacred Liturgy, in liturgical practices, in traditional devotion, in the promotion of the Latin language and culture, few recent Popes were as traditional as the “Good Pope”. This can be readily noticed in so many of his texts, as in the “Little Collection of Devout Meditations on the Mysteries of the Rosary”, whose full translation we first made available in 2011, and in which the Missale Romanum and the Breviarium Romanum are quoted several times. We can easily see how the documents of the Council would have turned out if he had been able to lead it with all his intellectual faculties by the beautiful decisions of the Roman Synod of 1960, and the very traditional original schemata (drafts) of the Conciliar documents, and the strong words of the Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia. As his predecessors in the 20th century, Leo XIII, Saint Pius X, Benedict XV, Pius XI, Pius XII, he was a good Pope. But he was our Good Pope. He was also a man of his age, marked by the optimism and regrets of the post-war generation, but always a son of Our Lady.
I guess there is a first time for everything, but I have to disagree with Rorate Caeli a bit here.Now, perhaps his faculties were degraded due to advanced age, but Pope John XXIII did make the critical decision to stop the voting on the prepared schema, which essentially led to the revolution that enveloped Vatican II.  When the Council started, in the first session, the plan was to start voting on some of the veryPope John XXIII 13 traditional, very orthodox “schema” that had been prepared on various subjects.  These schema had been prepared under the aegis of Cardinal Ottaviani of the Holy Office and were thoroughly in line with the Magisterium’s 2000 year Tradition – very visibly, obviously so.  They were very specific and focused like prior Magisterial statements.  The progressives were thoroughly displeased with them.

So, they staged a bit of a coup, seizing the microphone out of turn and demanding that the bishops be able to “get to know one another” for an unspecified period of time before voting.  What they actually intended was to use this time to push for rejection of the prepared schemas and having them re-written along radically different lines.  The issue was at loggerheads, so the conciliar bishops went ot the Pope to make a decision on whether they would proceed with voting, or whether they would “take a break” as the progressives demanded. Pope John sided with the progressives, which led to one liberal Dutch bishop proclaiming “this is our first great victory!”

Pope John XXIII further sided with the progressives in several other key decisions in the first session of the Council, which really set the Council on its direction towards being something very different from all prior councils. Things may have gone much further than he would have permitted had he lived, but there is no question “Good Pope John” set the stage for the progressive dominance at the Council.  There have been some rather unsubstantiated claims that Pope John turned decisively against the Council in between the first and second sessions and was working to terminate it prior to the start of the second session, but he died in the interim (God rest his Blessed soul).  Cardinal Heenan has been quoted in some books as claiming such, but that’s about the only “evidence” I have found that Pope John intended to terminate the Council before it departed too far from the prepared schemas.

I must also mention that Pope John XXIII’s modification of the Roman Canon – untouched, in essence, for many, many centuries – set a precedent that told the progressives that absolutely nothing in the Mass was sacrosanct (he had the name of St. Joseph entered in the canon along with the Blessed Mother in the Comunicantes prayer). Prior to the Council, it had been asserted that the Canon was of Apostolic origin and could not be changed. But, if the Canon could be changed – even a change as “slight” and as popular as this was – then anything could be changed. It was also an act that further reinforced the ultramontanist perspective that the Pope could do anything he wanted to the Liturgy, rather than the traditional view which is that the Pope is the guardian and custodian of the Liturgy, and that his prime role is not to “modernize” it, but to pass it on carefully to other generations, allowing for only natural, bottom-up, organic development. On a number of occasions, progressives in the Concilium (Bugnini’s group charged with producing the Novus Ordo in about 4 years) pointed back to both this insertion, and some of Pope Pius XII’s changes, to justify their destruction of the Roman Rite. If these “very traditional” Popes could make significant changes to the Mass, why could they, with an ostensible conciliar imprimatur, not redefine the entire Rite?

Pope John XXIII is, to me, something of an enigma. Not unlike Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.  There is no question Pope John took several steps to defend and advance the traditional practice of the Faith against the swelling, raging modernism of so many in the Church at that time, but he also undermined that defense through actions like those listed above. Another example would be the Apostolic Constitution Veterum Sapientia, which issued a universal Church law demanding the improvement in the learning and practice of Latin throughout the Church. But when the Constitition – the highest form of document a Pope can release! – was almost universally ignored, Pope John did nothing to enforce its provisions.  And the Council proceeded to almost eliminate Latin totally from the daily life of the Latin Church.

Anyhoo, just my daily evidencing of what a heretic I am.  Don’t read me!

Girl Scouts take part in conference with radical pro-aborts, including late-term abortionists June 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, contraception, Dallas Diocese, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, sexual depravity, unadulterated evil.
comments closed

This is exactly the kind of thing we can expect the Boy Scouts to be involved in within 15 or 20 years. It may not take that long. There might not be the overt focus on abortion, but it will be some cherished left wing shibboleth.

Nevertheless, the Girl Scout’s international organization just took part in a conference that featured notorious and incompentent late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart, “ethicist” Pete Singer (who advocates for post-birth child-murder), International Planned Barrenhood, and Cruella DeVille herself, Kathleen Sebelius.  It was the very A-list of the radical abortion left in this country:

WAGGGS has member organizations across the globe, the largest of which is GSUSA, contributing approximately a quarter of the ten million members that belong to WAGGGS. GSUSA is a co-founder of WAGGGS and one of WAGGGS’ largest financial supporters, paying over $1 million each year in membership fees which are triggered by each girl and adult member’s annual GSUSA registration.

The global organization is a well-known advocate for sexual and reproductive rights, including abortion, for youth, and claims to speak for all of its 10 million members.

In May 2013, WAGGGS participated in Women Deliver, a global conference with the purpose of “call[ing] for action to improve the health and well-being of girls and women.” [Is it just me, or is terming a conference that does nothing but praise and extol the nightmare of infanticide “Women Deliver” more than just a little diabolical?  I would say it’s even demonic]

The conference featured speakers such as late-term abortionist LeRoy Carhart, philosopher Peter Singer, who supports infanticide and euthanasia, and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. Some of the breakout sessions were entitled “Outing and Addressing Abortion Stigma” and “Why I Perform Abortions.” Exhibitors included many abortion and population control advocates such as Amnesty International, Guttmacher Institute, International Planned Parenthood Federation, Marie Stopes International, Planned Parenthood Federation of America, United Nations Population Fund, and WAGGGS.

Equally concerning is WAGGGS’ participation, along with International Planned Parenthood Federation and Planned Parenthood Global (PPFA global), in the Youth Advisory Group for the Women Deliver Conference. It seems to me that the Girl Scouts have some interesting, you might even say radical friends.

And the article goes on to list even more radical, amoral “friends.”

If you want to learn what some of the youth sex-education conference workshops put on by Planned Barrenhood are like, read here.  I have to warn you that material available at that link is not for delicate consciences.  Girl Scouts USA uses Planned Barrenhood sex-education resources for some of its training activities for young girls.  Some of the materials used cross over the line into pornography, and they certainly do absolutely nothing to discourage sexual activity by very young people who are utterly unprepared to engage in such acts – let alone the moral implications.  I don’t think I’m saying anything radical by claiming that many, many people who engaged in sexual promiscuity of all kinds at a young age lived to regret it tremendously.  And yet, once hooked into that very powerful activity, which can color and effect every aspect of life in a manner very akin to chemical addiction, withdrawing from it is extremely difficult.

And that, of course, is the point. Banned Parenthood has two sources of income: government subsidies, and abortion procedures performed.  They desire a constantly increasing of both. So they carefully lay the groundwork for a lifetime of promiscuity and debauched misery, based on contraception but with the ready backstop of abortion.  Precisely as Justice O’Connor pointed out in Casey vs. Planned Parenthood.

It’s all so diabolical. The way Planned Barrenhood, and Girl Scouts by extension, create a corrupt, unholy facsimile of well-ordered sexuality and family life, perverting everything related to both by a diabolical replacement of the holy with feel-good hedonism, and trumpeting as “family life” the destruction of millions of human beings.

It would be incredible, if it weren’t true.  And Girl Scouts USA are neck deep in it. As the original article points out, every Girl Scout through her dues helps support both Girl Scouts USA and the World Association of Girl Guides and Girl Scouts.  The cookies sold support the same.  And some of that money winds up at Planned Barrenhood.

The Boy Scouts are going to follow the same path. They have fallen to the zeitgeist.

And yet the Catholic Church in this country continues to support both. That is perhaps the most incredible of all.