Read an Interview with Matthew, the owner of CathInfo

Author Topic: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing  (Read 5083 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
« Reply #90 on: January 07, 2019, 09:03:47 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Stick with them on what? Going to a mass with a conductor leading the singing in front of the altar rail? You are not ever clear on what you are "sticking with" , nor posting the quotes from Pius XI and XII which you claim you are flowing.
    It’s easy, I obey them, not you or TIA.

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #91 on: January 07, 2019, 09:08:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Chapter 3 #5 of the decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, De Musica Sacra et sacra liturgia
    Sept. 3, 1958, approved by Pope Pius XII.  
    ...from the same pope who destroyed Holy Week?
    PUH-LEASE!!!


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #92 on: January 07, 2019, 09:09:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It’s easy, I obey them, not you or TIA.
    Its easy: I obey the 250 before them, not Pius XI or Pius XII when they import modernism into the liturgy which ended in the Novus Ordo.

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #93 on: January 07, 2019, 09:09:56 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • ...from the same pope who destroyed Holy Week?
    PUH-LEASE!!!
    Yes, and he hardly ruined it.  I am not a dissenter.  I love and trust the Pope.  I do,not trust dissenters. 

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #94 on: January 07, 2019, 09:10:45 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Its easy: I obey the 250 before them, not Pius XI or Pius XII when they import modernism into the liturgy which ended in the Novus Ordo.
    Nope, not modernism, just organic development.  There is no holiness in dissenters.  I’ll stick with the Pope.


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #95 on: January 07, 2019, 09:10:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It’s easy, I obey them, not you or TIA.
    Obey who on what? That is the question. What are you talking about? The others have posted clearly what they are talking about and you have said nothing but that you follow Pius XI and XII, but you do not post what you are talking about or the instructions from PIUS XII and XII on your mysterious subject. 

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #96 on: January 07, 2019, 09:11:53 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, and he hardly ruined it.  I am not a dissenter.  I love and trust the Pope.  I do,not trust dissenters.
    Your 1st sentence shows you a an ignorant zealot.
    Your 2nd sentence shows you despise Archbishop Lefebvre ( a "dissenter").
    Your 3rd sentence shows you a hippocrite for not showing the same love to Francis.
    Your 4th sentence show you a hippocrite as a sede who doesn't like dissenters.
    Go to bed, please.

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #97 on: January 07, 2019, 09:13:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Nope, not modernism, just organic development.  There is no holiness in dissenters.  I’ll stick with the Pope.
    A totally fabricated rite with no basis in Church history is somehow "organic development."
    You have no idea what you are talking about. :facepalm:


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #98 on: January 07, 2019, 09:24:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Pius XII Empowered Progressivists 
    for the Liturgical Reform
    Dr. Carol Byrne, Great Britain
    By the time Pius XII was elected Pope in 1939, neo-Modernism or Progressivism had already begun to re-establish itself in the Church with the rise of the “New Theology” and to make itself manifest in the liturgy – the place where the ordinary Catholic comes regularly in touch with the Faith.


    A reform that changed the face of Catholic worship...
    [color][size][font]
    We have seen how the slogan “active participation” has become the motto for liturgical reform and acted as a catalyst to change the face of Catholic worship. But the real revolt was not superficial: It was aimed at changing the fundamentals of the Faith itself, especially the doctrine of the Eucharist and the priesthood. 

    “Active participation” also raises deeper questions.
    [/font][/size][/color]
    • How have the faithful slid so quiescently into a non-traditional way of worshipping? 
    • How has it been so easy for the reformers to change the way Catholics have been participating in the Mass for centuries? 
    • How have they been allowed to alter the fundamentals of the Faith as expressed in the Tridentine liturgy?
    [color][size][font]
    The answers to these questions lie in the fact that it was the Popes themselves (from Pius XI onwards) who personally promoted “active participation” of the laity, first tentatively and then in increasingly lethal doses. In this way, they advanced the progressivist agenda of the reformers and effectively undermined the objections of the faithful. 

    The new concept of the Church as that ‘of the people’ 

    Pope Pius X had taught that the singing of the liturgy was a function of the sacerdotal office, i.e., a prerogative of the ordained ministers of the altar and the choir of Levites. Pius XI, on the contrary, presented it as the right and duty of all the baptized, whether clerical or lay. 


    [/font][/size][/color]
    Catholics today, above, followed the Protestants with congregational singing
    [color][size][font]
    In these two approaches – the former strictly clerical, the latter open and “democratic” – we find an echo of the types of liturgies characteristic of two opposing religions: Catholicism and Protestantism. One cannot help drawing the inference that such a revolutionary move on the part of Pius XI echoes the doctrinal conflicts of the two religions as well. 

    As the 16th-century Protestant reformers rejected the Catholic priesthood, their congregational singing was among the most efficient agencies in carrying this principle to the minds of the people. It can be regarded as the liturgical expression of principles common to Protestantism and embodied in Lutheranism and Calvinism alike. 

    One wonders, therefore, what place such a practice might be thought to have in a Catholic liturgy codified by order of the Council of Trent, until the realization dawns that congregational singing was the sine qua non demand of the Liturgical Movement initiated by Lambert Beauduin for the purposes of promoting Ecumenism.

    Pius XII: a vacillating Pope 

    Pius XII tried to solve the problem by taking both sides of the dispute.
    [/font][/size][/color]
    • He prophesied about the “suicide of altering the Faith in the Church’s liturgy,” (1) but appointed Bugnini as its gravedigger when he fatally made him Secretary of the Commission for Liturgical Reform in 1948. (2)
    • He condemned the abuses of the Liturgical Movement in Mediator Dei in 1947, but by 1956, having allowed the same (and worse) abuses to metastasize throughout the Church, he declared that “the liturgical movement has appeared as a sign of God’s providential dispositions for the present day, as a movement of the Holy Spirit in His Church.” (3) 
    • He upheld the necessity of Latin in the liturgy in Mediator Dei, but the authorized use of the vernacular increased considerably during his pontificate in many countries. 
    • He taught that interior participation in the liturgy is of primary importance, but placed emphasis on the “activity” of the laity as the best means to achieve participation. 
    • He showed sensitivity to the faithful who preferred to pray silently at Mass, but indicated that their preference was not worthy of respect by promoting the “Dialogue Mass” for the whole congregation. (4)
    [color][size][font]
    It is evident from this brief sketch that, for Pius XII, the liturgy had two faces, the traditional (sacred) and the modern (worldly), now differentiated, now enigmatically confused in Mediator Dei. This explains how the message it contained was capable of being filtered through various prisms, with the result that the Pope is hailed by conservatives as a defender of Tradition and by progressivists as a friend of aggiornamento or adapting the liturgy to the demands of the modern world. 

    In keeping with this dual vision, the liturgy became the battleground where these two antagonistic forces confronted each other and fought for hegemony in the Church.


    [/font][/size][/color]
    A chronicle of the Liturgical Reform by Card. Antonelli from 1948 to 1970
    [color][size][font]
    Whether this duality was a product of the Pope’s mind or whether it reflected the pressures he was under from the massive, co-ordinated actions of the Liturgical Movement, we do not know. But because of his vacillation and refusal to fly the Catholic flag in a recognizable manner, he left himself open to the suspicion that he may have been attracted by the “adaptations” which he pretended to censure. While recognizing that the Liturgical Movement could produce harmful effects, he, nevertheless, gave it his blessing and stated his desire to assist it forward. (5) 

    But perhaps the greatest boost he gave to the progressivist reformers was his recognition of their efforts as a “movement” within the Church (Mediator Dei § 4). Bugnini saw this as a major strategic coup: 

    “In his Encyclical Mediator Dei of November 11 [sic], 1947, Pius XII put the seal of his supreme authority on this movement, which by now was to be found everywhere in the Church.” (6) 

    In this sense, the encyclical can be said to have applied not so much the bridle as a rather sharp spur to the Liturgical Movement in the lead up to Vatican II. 

    But what clinches the Pope’s willing complicity in the Liturgical Movement is the fact that a year earlier than Mediator Dei, in 1946, he had already set in motion plans for a select group (7) of liturgical specialists to institute a general reform of the liturgy. (8) 

    The rise of a bureaucratic team to ‘manufacture’ liturgical renewal 

    Pope Pius XII, having first surrounded himself with a "Praetorian Guard" (9) of scholars and experts, established the Pontifical Commission for the General Reform of the Liturgy in 1948 and stacked it with a majority of progressivists. These included:
    [/font][/size][/color]
    • Card. Clemente Micara – an ongoing protector since 1946 of serial predator Fr. Marcial Maciel – as President; 
    • Fr. (later Archbishop) Bugnini – the future destroyer of the Roman Rite – as Secretary;
    • Fr. (later Cardinal) Giuseppe Antonelli – co-responsible with Bugnini for producing the Novus Ordo– as General Director; 
    • Fr. (later Cardinal) Bea, Pius XII’s confessor, who had helped draft Mediator Dei and would play a major role in Ecumenism at Vatican II; 
    • Mgr. (later Cardinal) Dante, Papal Master of Ceremonies from 1947-1967; 
    • Fr. Joseph Löw who would work with Fr. Antonelli to change the Easter Vigil in 1951 and Holy Week ceremonies in 1955; 
    • Fr. Carlo Braga who collaborated closely with Bugnini and became Secretary of the Consilium under Paul VI.
    [color][size][font]
    With this Commission, Pius XII created a new class of liturgical specialists and entrusted key offices, carrying great power and influence, to them, and allowed them to become the dominant force in the Liturgical Movement. 

    The fundamental contradiction inherent in his policy is that Mediator Dei was hijacked within a few years by the type of progressivist reformers he seemed to think he was opposing. 

    Continued 


    [/font][/size][/color]
    • Mgr. George Roche, Pie XII Devant l’Historire, Editions Robert Laffont, Paris, 1972, p. 52.
    • Then, still in the reign of Pius XII, he was appointed Consultant to the Sacred Congregation of Rites (1956) and to Professor of Sacred Liturgy in the Lateran University (1957).
    • Address of Pope Pius XII to the International Congress on Pastoral Liturgy held at Assisi, September 22, 1956. See Acta Apostolici Sedis, October 29, 1956, p. 712, and L'Osservatore Romano, September 24, 1956.
    • He urged that “the whole congregation, in accordance with the rules of the liturgy, either answer the priest in an orderly and fitting manner, or sing hymns suitable to the different parts of the Mass, or do both.” (Mediator Dei § 105).
    • Address of Pope Pius XII given to the International Congress on Pastoral Liturgy at Assisi in 1956.
    • A. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy (1948-75), Collegeville, Liturgical Press, p. 6.
    • Fr Bugnini, at that time a rising star in the Liturgical Movement, correctly claimed that the liturgical reform under Pius XII was “a fruit produced by the thought and prayer of elite minds and then gradually shared with ever widening circles of the faithful.”
    • A. Bugnini, op. cit., p. 7 (footnote 5): “In an audience granted to Cardinal Carlo Salotti, Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, on May 10, 1946, Pope Pius XII expressed his wish that a start be made on studying the problem of a general reform of the liturgy. In another audience, granted to Archbishop Alfonso Carinci, Secretary of the same Congregation, on July 17, 1946, it was determined ‘that a special commission of experts should reflect on the general reform of the liturgy and offer concrete proposals.’”
    • The Praetorian Guard was an elite corps of soldiers chosen from among the most experienced and trustworthy troops to act as the Roman Emperor’s bodyguard.


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #99 on: January 07, 2019, 09:49:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • By the way: Did you ever wonder why the sacrilegious and blasphemous gatherings take place at Assisi? 

    Its because the liturgical reforms of Pius XI and Pius XII were geared toward ecumenical unity, and many of the liturgical modernists' innovations had thir origins in pre-conciliar meetings held in Assisi:



    Pius XII: 
    ‘The Reforms Come from the Holy Spirit’
    Dr. Carol Byrne, Great Britain
    Pope Pius XII’s address to the participants at the Assisi Congress in 1956 contains a number of unwelcome surprises for those who thought of him as in every way a solidly traditional Pope. Just as the Congress itself had turned out to be a platform for tendentious propaganda, so the Pope’s speech reflected and perpetuated the reformers’ “narrative,” endorsing their message about “active participation” for the faithful in the liturgy. 

    A papal fanfare for the Liturgical Movement


    Pius XII in 1956, Conservative in appearance but already deep in the Liturgical Reform
    [color][size][font]
    In his speech, Pius XII lauded what he termed the “practical accomplishments” of the Liturgical Movement in the last 30 years. Among the “practical accomplishments” which he had so far enabled were the following:
    [/font][/size][/color]
    • The vernacular could be used in the administration of the Sacraments;
    • The faithful could recite aloud the server’s responses during Mass and sing along with the choir;
    • Women were officially permitted, albeit under certain conditions, to sing in the choir; (1)
    • The 1955 Holy Week liturgy, particularly the Easter Vigil, was gutted and reconstructed to cater for “active participation” of the laity;
    • In some ceremonies the celebrant was required to face the people and there was an optional dialogue in the vernacular;
    • The Breviary was drastically shortened (“simplified”) as the precursor to a more thorough reform incorporating the wishes of the progressivists. In the Opening Speech of the Assisi Congress in 1956, Cardinal Cicognani said that the “simplification of the rubrics was the forerunner of the eventual reform of the Breviary.” (2)
    [color][size][font]
    The Pope stated that “undeniable progress” had been made through these reforms. But “progress” does not necessarily guarantee improvement, as in the case of the progress of a terminal disease. In the context of the Liturgical Movement, “progress” meant only an advance along the road toward the goals envisaged by the architects of Progressivism. 

    And we know exactly what those goals were – the replacement of the Church’s traditional liturgy with a man-centred construct in which the “active participation” of the laity would be the predominant feature. Yet, Pius XII stated: “We sincerely desire that the Liturgical Movement progress and we wish to help it.” 

    A new ‘pastoral’ approach to the liturgy 

    These reforms represented a significant turning point in the Church’s liturgical development, the precedence of so-called “pastoral liturgy” (aimed at adapting the ceremonies to the prevailing mentality of modern man) over the objective liturgical tradition of the Church.


    [/font][/size][/color]
    Progressivist Fr. Jungmann accused the traditional rite of losing its power to sanctify
    [color][size][font]
    As Bugnini explained in his Memoirs, the Liturgical Movement, with the support of Pope Pius XII, “entered upon its true course – that of pastoral concern – and was, thus, returning to the ideal it had had in the beginning.” (3) But where does that leave the liturgy of all the intervening centuries? It was obviously to be passed over as neither “true,” nor “pastoral,” nor “ideal.” 

    In fact, one of the speakers at the Assisi Congress, Fr. Josef Jungmann, posited that the Church’s liturgy had, since early Christian times, become “corrupted” and had lost its power to sanctify the faithful because they could neither understand nor participate in it. 

    The implication of this blasphemous smear on the Church’s sacred patrimony is that what we once esteemed was never really valuable in the first place. From which it follows that somewhere in its early history the Holy Spirit had departed from the Catholic liturgy, only to return in the 20th century with the new “pastoral” approach of the Liturgical Movement. 

    Playing to the gallery 

    It is undeniable that Pius XII favored this new “pastoral” approach and even thought that it bore the Divine stamp of approval. To the delight of the Assisi participants gathered in Rome, he stated: 

    “The Liturgical Movement is, thus, shown forth as a sign of the providential dispositions of God for the present time, of the movement of the Holy Spirit in the Church.”

    If God was with it, who could be against it? A more imprudent and divisive opinion could hardly be imagined – imprudent because it seemed to imply that the traditional liturgy was grossly deficient and needed Spirit-led changes; and divisive because it signalled the Pope’s preference for the reformers, rather than the conservatives in the Church, at least on certain issues.


    [/font][/size][/color]
    The Assisi Papers were approved by Pius XII - a huge step forward for Liturgical Reform
    [color][size][font]
    But, the salient point is that the Pope – or whoever wrote his speech – simply assumed that because the liturgical reforms were promoted by members of the Church, their Movement must perforce enjoy Divine approval. His statement that “the chief driving force, both in doctrine and in practical application, has come from the hierarchy” is deeply troubling for two reasons. 

    First, it is an admission devastating in its implications. It reveals that it was the Church’s leaders, including the Pope himself, who were the driving force behind the international effort to reform the liturgy. In other words, it was the Pastors, more so than the liturgists, who were responsible for driving the sheep towards a liturgical cliff over which they would fall with astonishing suddenness within a few years. 

    However, only a tiny minority of Bishops at that time favored the reforms; and at the beginning of his pontificate most did not even have the slightest suspicion that such reforms were being planned. It is incomprehensible, therefore, that he should seek to alter the spirituality of Catholics who valued the Church’s traditions to suit those who did not. 

    Second, the Pope talked as if the reforms were unimpeachably orthodox “both in doctrine and in practical application” as if the lex credendi were in perfect accord with the lex orandi. Here we are not addressing the orthodoxy of Pius XII’s magisterial teaching on matters of Catholic doctrine. But to the degree that his reforms promoted “active participation” of the laity in the sacred functions, they introduced a tension between the Faith and pastoral practice. The laity was now seen to be “on the move” against a “despotic” clergy, who had allegedly robbed them of their rightful roles in the liturgy, to take back what belonged to them by virtue of their Baptism. The clergy-laity class struggle had been the raison d’être of the Liturgical Movement since its inception by Dom Lambert Beauduin. 

    Even though Pius XII taught the true doctrine of the Catholic priesthood, he nevertheless gave official impetus to the rolling revolution of lay “active participation,” which challenged the exclusive role of the priest. By promoting this competitive spirit, he initiated the process that turned the liturgy into an ideological battleground which continues to our day, to the detriment of the ministerial priesthood and the confusion of the faithful. 

    Pius XII misled by false propaganda 

    Much of Pius XII’s Assisi speech echoed the desiderata which the reformers had been putting forward in their various congresses and publications. The fact that the forces of Progressivism should play a pivotal role in the Pope’s speech is highly significant. It shows that he was swayed by their rhetoric in making policy decisions for the rest of the Church. He took their word for it that “the faithful received these directives with gratitude and showed themselves ready to respond to them.” 

    But, that was pure fabrication put about by Bugnini, who had massaged the results of the liturgical Commission’s surveys to give the misleading impression of general acceptance. For all his efforts, Bugnini had not produced evidence that was in reality objectively convincing or statistically significant. 

    Also, the reformers had been spreading a false sense of despondency about how useless the traditional rites were and claiming that the faithful welcomed with relief all the new, exciting initiatives that were on offer. 

    There was no general euphoria among the Catholic population, clerical or lay, in response to the reforms. In fact, the reformers themselves complained for years about the lack of enthusiasm for “active participation” and the extreme difficulty in getting the faithful to say or sing the responses. Besides, it is dishonest to claim that the laity accepted the reforms with joy on the basis of their presence at ceremonies, which they attended out of duty and obedience. 

    Continued


    [/font][/size][/color]
    • See the Encyclical Musicae Sacrae (Of Sacred Music), 25 December 1955, § 74. The document allows female choristers on the lame excuse “where there are not enough boys” to sing in church. But how few are “not enough?” Men (of whom there was never a shortage in those days) could always have been recruited to make up the numbers. As with the altar server debacle of the 1990s, the best way to ensure a dearth of boys in liturgical roles is to have girls perform alongside them.
    • La Maison-Dieu, No. 47-8, 1956, pp. 44-5
    • A. Bugnini, The Reform of the Liturgy, p. 6


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #100 on: January 07, 2019, 11:41:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hmm, Carol Byrne a modern woman who writes on theology vs Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII, both Vicars of Jesus Christ on earth. 

    It takes me not even a second to figure this one out.  


    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #101 on: January 08, 2019, 03:57:30 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hmm, Carol Byrne a modern woman who writes on theology vs Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII, both Vicars of Jesus Christ on earth.

    It takes me not even a second to figure this one out.  
    Yes: Pius XI and Pius XII did well because Dr. Byrne is a woman.
    Well done.

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #102 on: January 08, 2019, 07:50:45 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hmm, Carol Byrne a modern woman who writes on theology vs Pope Pius XI and Pope Pius XII, both Vicars of Jesus Christ on earth.

    It takes me not even a second to figure this one out.  
    It takes us forever to figure out what you are specifically talking about and specifically what Pius XI and XII said to support whatever you are talking about. For all we know you are an effeminate who likes to stand in front of the laity at mass and make a spectacle of yourself. The "lovers"  of the Dialogue, the Novus Ordo, are all effeminate feelings oriented types, that is why men do not go to mass anymore, only the feelings oriented types "love the show". 

    Offline Student of Qi

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 557
    • Reputation: +287/-47
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #103 on: January 08, 2019, 08:43:40 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Yes, that's exactly my point. There were musical practices that greatly took away from the Mass back then, but Pope Pius X brought Gregorian chant back to eliminate those practices. Ironically, he is using Gregorian chant to distract from the Mass.

    It is such a distracting practice. They don't need Flappity-flap-flap-flap in the front. They need him in the loft, upstairs. He needs to stay up there.
    I love your post here, I found it especially amusing that youyou say he needs to stay in the loft and your avatar is a pigeon outside of one.  :laugh2:
    I totally agree with you though.
    Many people say "For the Honor and Glory of God!" but, what they should say is "For the Love, Glory and Honor of God". - Fr. Paul of Moll

    Anonymous

    • Guest
    Re: Dialogue Mass/leading the choir in singing
    « Reply #104 on: January 08, 2019, 11:23:28 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • It takes us forever to figure out what you are specifically talking about and specifically what Pius XI and XII said to support whatever you are talking about. For all we know you are an effeminate who likes to stand in front of the laity at mass and make a spectacle of yourself. The "lovers"  of the Dialogue, the Novus Ordo, are all effeminate feelings oriented types, that is why men do not go to mass anymore, only the feelings oriented types "love the show".
    The dialogue mass isn’t the Novus Ordo!  It’s a mass that encouraged laypeople to say some prayers at the mass.  No big deal here.  Since when is encouraging laypeople to pray a bad thing?  

     

    Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16