Posted on 05/17/2008 7:18:13 AM PDT by markomalley
On the site Petrus there is an interview by Bruno Volpe with His Eminence Virgilio Card. Noè, [pronounced "No-eh"] "former papal MC, the predecessor of Archbp. Piero Marini.
Exclusive: the revelation of Card. Noè:" When Paul VI denounced the smoke of Satan in the Church, he was referring to liturgical abuses following Vatican II."
What is most fundamental to celebrating Mass well?
Simply putting yourself aside and obeying the rules in the book, saying the texts well and properly, is already a huge step in the right direction.
|
“Sloppily making the sign of the cross”? Man, that is hardcore straitlace.
I thought this was a story of the the church bashing the tobacco companies.
![]() |
Joe sez: "I've returned to the Mother Church. No more Sola Scriptura . . ." |
It is interesting. VatII was not called to deal with the liturgy and, while there was a (good) liturgical reform already going on, nobody was expecting anything particularly earthshaking from it - perhaps just the official approval of a few of the reforms, such as the restoration of Gregorian chant. Guess we can see how mistaken that was!
I just finished Russell Shaw’s new book on secrecy in the Church, and he points out that Vat II was all about trying to shed the closed, clericalized image that the Church had developed, mostly as a defensive reaction to Protestant and secularist attacks in the late 18th and 19th centuries. I do recall reading the phrase (in the front page report in the New York Times that covered almost the entire front page!) about “opening the windows” and thinking it was a good thing. Shaw points out that when Vat II began, most people welcomed the idea that there would perhaps be a little less pomp and circumstance - combined with secrecy, arrogance, and the feeling of a closed circle - among the bihsops and a little more of the realization that we were all Christians and they were the shepherds. He points out that early on, many attempts were made to deal with this, but that the clerical culture of secrecy (amply demonstrated by the bishops who covered up the gay pederasty in their dioceses) and privilege triumphed.
This was in the main because the lay people they picked to “integrate” the decision making process and provide transparency turned out to be modernists who were actually violently opposed to the Church’s entire project, and once they felt they had a voice, they immediately tried to destroy everything AND get themselves into positions of power in an organization they claimed to hate.
It’s very true, from my observation, that the laypeople who saw this as an opening were the most left-wing and non-Christian of all (this was in the 1960s, of course). I was living near Columbia U at the time, and there was a group there that hung out at something called the Paraclete Bookstore (aka, Parakeet) and sat around grumbling primarily about the Church position on contraception, of all things. They were infuriated when Paul VI came out with Humanae Vitae, and the attack began in serious at that point.
Of course, few of the bishops supported Humanae Vitae either, because there were already a large number of them who were modernists, although not particularly blatant.
But if you lived through the times and think back on them, the change to the liturgy was a symptom; however, because of its crucial position in the Church, it was virtually the nail in the coffin.
Very good observations.
And that is one thing I really like about the current Pontiff is that he is really making an effort to bring about a “reform of the reform” — may he live long enough to see some fruits of his labors.
“(this was in the 1960s, of course). ... grumbling primarily about the Church position on contraception, of all things. They were infuriated when Paul VI came out with Humanae Vitae, and the attack began in serious at that point.”
UMD for me and the grumbling became a shouting match because the first contraceptive pills became available. It was the release from consequences that led to the wholesale degradation of society, and predation of children today.
Freedom became licentiousness which has become an abyss of abortion and loss of any restraint.
What do these terms mean? I'm curious.
Memento: “Remember”
Prosit: “Helpful”
That’s what happened. I think the other thing was that these people were shocked that the Church actually didn’t realize how brilliant and modern they were and go along with it. Of course, the sad thing is that most bishops and lower clergy were equally opposed to Humanae Vitae.
Why is liturgical “dance” (and I put it in quotation marks because 35+ year old women prancing down the front of the church is not dance), going to be completely banned.
It’s still happening around the US and certainly in Cardinal Mahoney’s LA.
It’s a nauseating spectacle especially when they carry bowls of incense.
Ay....
“When is liturgical dance”... not Why.
Yikes Paraclete, thank goodness it closed.
You remember it too? FR is wonderful - I don’t think I’ve met anyone else in nearly 40 years who has even heard of the place!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.