RSiscoe's thread about not attending the Novus Ordo Mass


#1

For some reason I’m unable to access RSiscoe’s thread about why he doesn’t attend the Novus Ordo Mass. I’ll try to remember some of the major points he made.

He talked about the possible lack of validity in the Novus Ordo Mass. I dealt with that in a thread in the apologetics section. He cited the fact that there are priests who use invalid matter for Communion, but that’s just not something that can be blamed on the Mass itself. The one who’s to blame is the priest doing such things.

He mentioned that at the time of the “Reformation” folk songs were used in church services rather than Gregorian chant, and he said that’s the way it is with most parishes today. However, Vatican II NEVER called for folk songs and urged us to keep on using Gregorian chant, saying that it had “pride of place.”

He said that receiving Communion in the hand and offering it under both species takes away from the sacredness of the Mass (or something to that effect). However, both of those were practiced in the early Church. I’m not exactly crazy about either practice, and we don’t have to believe that such practices are wise, but if the Church has allowed them, then we have to submit to the Church’s judgment. This article talks about Communion in the hand more: matt1618.freeyellow.com/communion.html

He claimed that the Novus Ordo is Protestantized and that Protestants helped construct the Novus Ordo Mass, but both claims are actually false: jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#prot4
jloughnan.tripod.com/albers2.htm#prota1
jloughnan.tripod.com/albers4.htm#active
jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#prot3
jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#declare

And as for the Ottaviani Intervention, that took place before the Novus Ordo Mass had finished being composed. But afterward he completely changed his tune:
jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#ottaviani


#2

[quote=DavidJoseph]For some reason I’m unable to access RSiscoe’s thread about why he doesn’t attend the Novus Ordo Mass. I’ll try to remember some of the major points he made.

He talked about the possible lack of validity in the Novus Ordo Mass. I dealt with that in a thread in the apologetics section. He cited the fact that there are priests who use invalid matter for Communion, but that’s just not something that can be blamed on the Mass itself. The one who’s to blame is the priest doing such things.

He mentioned that at the time of the “Reformation” folk songs were used in church services rather than Gregorian chant, and he said that’s the way it is with most parishes today. However, Vatican II NEVER called for folk songs and urged us to keep on using Gregorian chant, saying that it had “pride of place.”

He said that receiving Communion in the hand and offering it under both species takes away from the sacredness of the Mass (or something to that effect). However, both of those were practiced in the early Church. I’m not exactly crazy about either practice, and we don’t have to believe that such practices are wise, but if the Church has allowed them, then we have to submit to the Church’s judgment. This article talks about Communion in the hand more: matt1618.freeyellow.com/communion.html

He claimed that the Novus Ordo is Protestantized and that Protestants helped construct the Novus Ordo Mass, but both claims are actually false: jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#prot4
jloughnan.tripod.com/albers2.htm#prota1
jloughnan.tripod.com/albers4.htm#active
jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#prot3
jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#declare

And as for the Ottaviani Intervention, that took place before the Novus Ordo Mass had finished being composed. But afterward he completely changed his tune:
jloughnan.tripod.com/defensem.htm#ottaviani
[/quote]

I think the reason they deleted my post is that it was way too powerful. I have never seen them delete a post on these boards. If the post would have been retutable, they would have refuted it. I don’t think it was. And it was not so much what I wrote that made it so powerful, but the quotes I provided. How can anyone refute what the Council of Trent condemned, or what the itself Vatican admitted in L’Ossavitore Romano?

And regarding the Ottaviani Intervention. It was dated September 25, 1969. At that time the original Novas Ordo was finished, although I agree that it has continued to change every since.

After Cardinal Ottaviani issued his scathing attack on the New Mass, he was silenced by Pope Paul VI (according to Malachi Martin). Afterwards, when the Cardinal had gone completely blind he is said to have signed something retracting what he initially wrote. But this seems completely illogical. For one, how can you retract a completely scathing attack, in which he went into very great detail by examining the New Mass point by point, by signing one short “retraction”. That does not cause the arguments to disapear. Are we really supposed to believe that by signing one piece of paper after he had gone blind that it nullified all that he wrote in such great detail? It seems much more likely that the blind Cardinal did not know what he was singing. After all, he was completely blind and would have to take someone elses word for what he was signing.

By the way, have you read the Ottaviani Intervention?

You can find it here: 64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:3Fs52WBUj_gJ:www.kensmen.com/catholic/ottavianiintervention.html+Ottaviani+Intervention&hl=en


#3

[quote=RSiscoe]I think the reason they deleted my post is that it was way too powerful.
[/quote]

:rotfl:
They must be part of the Protestant-Masonic conspiracy. The simpliest explaination is the surest. It violated the rules of the forum. Eight posts long on the original post!

If it seems like there is always one group that gets persecuted more on this website than others, it is not the “power” of the message as much as it is the same people that think the rules do not apply to them. Maybe that is why they are at odds with the Church to begin with.


#4

Yeah, I’m sure Archbishop Bugnini was just a great Italian Catholic. Nevermind him being shipped of to Tehran. Afterall, there are so many Catholics that were waiting there for him!

Take a look at the destruction - the altars being destroyed, the statues being destroyed, the tabernacles going who knows where, the loss of the Latin language in the overwhelming majority of Masses, the many Eucharistic prayers (some countries like France having over 10), the loss of reverance for the reception of Holy Communion, etc. Surely there is an agenda here. I can no longer tell if my Cathedral on face value if it is Catholic or Protestant judging by appearance on the inside. We can’t have a diocese indult Tridentine Mass, but our bishop is a good buddy with every Protestant in town. When you ask his office if Free Masons are excommunicated, for some odd reason they don’t reply.

Anyway, everything has been wrecked from top down. You cannot even find the same Novus Ordo celebrated in two churches. Every church celebrates Mass in a differant way. If one says that these people don’t and didn’t have an agenda, then they are sadly mistaken. There is no unity in this Missal.

Yeah, I’m sure Cardinal Ottaviani was pleased when they turned off his microphone. The fact of the matter is that the overwheling amount of criticism the Cardinals had in their Intervetion is still taking place to this day.


#5

The thread was removed because it was 8 posts long. Please review the forum rules for further explaination to that rule.


#6

[quote=RSiscoe]I think the reason they deleted my post is that it was way too powerful. I have never seen them delete a post on these boards. If the post would have been retutable, they would have refuted it. I don’t think it was. And it was not so much what I wrote that made it so powerful, but the quotes I provided. How can anyone refute what the Council of Trent condemned, or what the itself Vatican admitted in L’Ossavitore Romano?

And regarding the Ottaviani Intervention. It was dated September 25, 1969. At that time the original Novas Ordo was finished, although I agree that it has continued to change every since.

After Cardinal Ottaviani issued his scathing attack on the New Mass, he was silenced by Pope Paul VI (according to Malachi Martin). Afterwards, when the Cardinal had gone completely blind he is said to have signed something retracting what he initially wrote. But this seems completely illogical. For one, how can you retract a completely scathing attack, in which he went into very great detail by examining the New Mass point by point, by signing one short “retraction”. That does not cause the arguments to disapear. Are we really supposed to believe that by signing one piece of paper after he had gone blind that it nullified all that he wrote in such great detail? It seems much more likely that the blind Cardinal did not know what he was singing. After all, he was completely blind and would have to take someone elses word for what he was signing.

By the way, have you read the Ottaviani Intervention?

You can find it here: 64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:3Fs52WBUj_gJ:www.kensmen.com/catholic/ottavianiintervention.html+Ottaviani+Intervention&hl=en
[/quote]

Well guess what? If you actually went to those links and read what was on them carefully, thoroughly, and with an open mind, then you’d find that someone had indeed refuted your post.

As for what you claim about Ottaviani, first I’d like to say that I misspoke. Ottaviani’s change of heart came after the Novus Ordo was PROMULGATED rather than just finished. Second, do you have any evidence for what Malachi Martin claimed? It sounds to me like mere hearsay. But then again, I heard that Martin claimed that Satanism is practiced in the Vatican. He seems to love conspiracy theories.


#7

bump


#8

will someone PLEASE tell me what “bump” means? why do peoiple put that on their post?


#9

[quote=UKcatholicGuy]will someone PLEASE tell me what “bump” means? why do peoiple put that on their post?
[/quote]

It is designed to put a thread that no one else has deemed worthy of respose back on top of “new posts” that are legitimatly being responded to. It shows a singular arrogance when bumped by the author of the thread.

Of my! Did I just bump this again?


#10

[quote=pnewton]It is designed to put a thread that no one else has deemed worthy of respose back on top of “new posts” that are legitimatly being responded to. It shows a singular arrogance when bumped by the author of the thread.
[/quote]

Who are you to call me arrogant?


#11

RSiscoe wrote:

After Cardinal Ottaviani issued his scathing attack on the New Mass, he was silenced by Pope Paul VI (according to Malachi Martin). Afterwards, when the Cardinal had gone completely blind he is said to have signed something retracting what he initially wrote. But this seems completely illogical. For one, how can you retract a completely scathing attack, in which he went into very great detail by examining the New Mass point by point, by signing one short “retraction”. That does not cause the arguments to disapear. Are we really supposed to believe that by signing one piece of paper after he had gone blind that it nullified all that he wrote in such great detail? It seems much more likely that the blind Cardinal did not know what he was singing. After all, he was completely blind and would have to take someone elses word for what he was signing.

Well - first of all (and as you point out), Cardinal Ottaviani was blind, and did NOT compose the so-called “Ottaviani Intervention.”

Secondly, he ONLY signed a covering letter - together with Cardinal Bacci.

Thirdly, the “scathing attack” was prepared mainly by Fr. Guerard des Lauriers, under the inspiration and behest of (guess who?) - yes, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

Fourthly, des Lauriers was an open sedevacantist (who was also to be a Professor at Lefebvre’s Econe Seminary and infect many of the seminarians. He was to become a Thuc line bishop, but would be reconciled with Holy Mother Church prior to his death. Thanks be to God!

By the way, have you read the Ottaviani Intervention?

Well, again, I can answer “YES”. But your post demands that I ask you: “Have you comprehended what you have written about it”?

Good and faithful watchdog that he was, after having been assured by the Supreme Pontiff - who is also the Supreme Law Maker and Law Interpreter, and who is protected by the Holy Spirit from infallibly foisting on the Catholic Church an invalid Sacrament (the Mass) OR a Mass which is NOT “a true and proper sacrifice” (one which is precisely the same Mass as instituted by Christ at the Last Supper - then the faithful Cardinal rejected the Lefebvrian/des Lauriers (at least potentially) heretical notions and remained in complete harmony with the Church.


#12

Eddy Areny wrote:

Yeah, I’m sure Archbishop Bugnini was just a great Italian Catholic. Nevermind him being shipped of to Tehran. Afterall, there are so many Catholics that were waiting there for him!

I am sick and tired of people who are full of erroneous innuendo!

I guess that you refer to the Lefebvrian allegation that Bugnini was a Freemason.

Seeing that you are an expert on the matter, please post verifiable evidence that Bugnini was a Freemason. Not innuendo! Not a “cardinal” said! Not snide side references - evidence that would stand up in court - please!


#13

In all sincerity, when I hear people rant and rave about items like the “Ottaviani Intervention” and “Bugnini the Freemason”, etc. I visualize ill-educated and ill-informed individuals that have drank just a bit too deeply from too many hateful and spurious geocities.com websites. Let us all pray for them.


#14

[quote=DavidJoseph]Who are you to call me arrogant?
[/quote]

I apologize for the ill-considered word. All this bumping stuff is a pet peeve of mine and I hope if it continues, the moderators put a stop to it. If a thread dies for lack of interest, let it go.


#15

[quote=Sean O L]Eddy Areny wrote:

I am sick and tired of people who are full of erroneous innuendo!

I guess that you refer to the Lefebvrian allegation that Bugnini was a Freemason.

Seeing that you are an expert on the matter, please** post verifiable evidence that Bugnini was a Freemason.** Not innuendo! Not a “cardinal” said! Not snide side references - evidence that would stand up in court - please!
[/quote]

I always understood that hi-degree Freemasonry was a profoundly SECRET society. To demand court evidence of a membersip in a SECRET Society would be strange indeed unless a Hi-degree member revealed it against an oath of SECRECY unto death.
One can only observe actions and words of one who is embued with the philosphies of Freemasonry and therefore an advocate of its beliefs penetrating the Church.
I believe that Bugnini revealed such characteristics of Freemasonry. Therefore, whether or not he was a carded member would be unecessary.
In the end, he would fit the description of Pius IX & X of a typical modernist mentality which Pius X described as the “synthesis of all heresies”.
However, if you believe that Bugnini was a true-blue faithful Roman Catholic, who stood by all the Pope Pius’ teachings, and want to defend him as such go right ahead.


#16

[quote=Pariah Pirana]In all sincerity, when I hear people rant and rave about items like the “Ottaviani Intervention” and “Bugnini the Freemason”, etc. I visualize ill-educated and ill-informed individuals that have drank just a bit too deeply from too many hateful and spurious geocities.com websites. Let us all pray for them.
[/quote]

AMEN!
“God bless Mom, Dad, RSisco, TNT, Eddie Arent, Exporter, JLW and their ilk so that they may see the hidden wisdom of Msgr Bugnini, Cd Kasper, Cd Keeler, Bp Ryan, Bp Weakland, Cd Mahony, Bp Lynch and all the great unappreciated Prelates wisely promoted by John Paul II through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost (I mean Spirit). Amen.”
"Oh, and Lord, please remove their ill-formities and ill-educated influence of the teachings of Pius IX, St Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII, Benedict XV, Leo XII. Amen."
I’m feeling “better-formed” already. In all sincerity, of course.


#17

[quote=TNT]AMEN!
“God bless Mom, Dad, RSisco, TNT, Eddie Arent, Exporter, JLW and their ilk so that they may see the hidden wisdom of Msgr Bugnini, Cd Kasper, Cd Keeler, Bp Ryan, Bp Weakland, Cd Mahony, Bp Lynch and all the great unappreciated Prelates wisely promoted by John Paul II through the inspiration of the Holy Ghost (I mean Spirit). Amen.”
"Oh, and Lord, please remove their ill-formities and ill-educated influence of the teachings of Pius IX, St Pius X, Pius XI, Pius XII, Benedict XV, Leo XII. Amen."
I’m feeling “better-formed” already. In all sincerity, of course.
[/quote]

Onward strawman ad-hominems, onward uncharitable diatribes, onward unsubstantiated accusations. Onward onward the Rad-Trads go, where they stop nobody knows.:confused: For them much prayer they are in need of.:gopray2: But I know this one stops here.

Moderators close the thread please!

Thank you.:wink:


#18

[quote=EddieArent]Take a look at the destruction - the altars being destroyed, the statues being destroyed, the tabernacles going who knows where, the loss of the Latin language in the overwhelming majority of Masses, the many Eucharistic prayers (some countries like France having over 10), the loss of reverance for the reception of Holy Communion, etc. Surely there is an agenda here.
[/quote]

Yup! There sure is! It’s just that these guys don’t want to admit it. It’s too discomfiting. Better to go on pretending that everything’s okey-dokey.


#19

TNT wrote:

I always understood that hi-degree Freemasonry was a profoundly SECRET society. To demand court evidence of a membersip in a SECRET Society would be strange indeed unless a Hi-degree member revealed it against an oath of SECRECY unto death.

So you are only too willing to accept unsubstantiated claims of an anonymous “cardinal” who found an alleged “dossier” (the contents of which are NOT known and have never been disclosed despite the repeated false claims of “traritionalists”), and it being unknown whether or not Pope Paul VI actually read said “dossier”!

Furthermore, your “illuminated” reason is able to discern a connection with Bugnini being sent to Iran because of his alleged (but non-public) membership of Freemasonry.

Congratulations, oh Great Nabob on your attainment of the higher realms of ascendency. If only you were not anonymous, I could send you an appropriate offering.

That’s the problem!

I am reminded of an event about 25 years ago when my family attended the Latin Mass celebrated by Fr. Augustin Cummins, C.Ss.R., in a Public Hall next to the Parish Church in Clayton.
Just after Mass, one of the country boys invited my 10 year-old-son to a fist-fight “round the back of the Church - where God can’t see us.”

You and other anonymous “traditionalists” display the same conviction that “God can’t see YOU”, while you are posting anonymously and when you demean the Vicar of Christ, Christ’s current normative liturgy of Mass, the Sacraments, and spread calumny against your opponents, like Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, who is now deceased, but who strenuously denied the charge of being a Freemason, and without supplying an ounce of verifiable evidence. I say these are the actions of cowards.

The Bitter Struggle

I guess that Archbishop Bugnini - whatever HIS sins may be - would have the consolation of knowing that God DOES see all of the actions of ALL sinners, and, in addition to His Infinite Mercy does mete out Infinite Justice.


#20

[quote=Sean O L]TNT wrote:

So you are only too willing to accept unsubstantiated claims of an anonymous “cardinal” who found an alleged “dossier” (the contents of which are NOT known and have never been disclosed despite the repeated false claims of “traritionalists”), and it being unknown whether or not Pope Paul VI actually read said “dossier”!

Furthermore, your “illuminated” reason is able to discern a connection with Bugnini being sent to Iran because of his alleged (but non-public) membership of Freemasonry.

Congratulations, oh Great Nabob on your attainment of the higher realms of ascendency. …
[/quote]

I never even mentioned Iran??
You forgot this part of my post:

One can only observe actions and words of one who is embued with the philosphies of Freemasonry and therefore an advocate of its beliefs penetrating the Church.
I believe that Bugnini revealed such characteristics of Freemasonry. Therefore, whether or not he was a carded member would be unecessary.
In the end, he would fit the description of Pius IX & X of a typical modernist mentality which Pius X described as the “synthesis of all heresies”.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.