Author Topic: Controlling the mic at Vatican II (Read 2080 times)

stevusmagnus · « **on:** April 19, 2012, 07:08:58 PM »

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/04/controlling-mic-at-vatican-ii.html#more

Controlling the mic at Vatican II

One of the central issues regarding the pending agreement between the Vatican and the Society of Saint Pius X is the weight of the pastoral Second Vatican Council and its docuмents.

Robert Moynihan, in his report on the negotiations, writes about a visit with Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, who attended the Council and lives at the Vatican. This eye-opening account concerning Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, who headed what is now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, from 1959 to 1968, is worth a quick read. Cardinal Ottaviani, sans mic, went on to co-author the most credible liturgical plea made to Paul VI.

***

Whenever I think about the Council, I said, I always have one image in my mind: an aging Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, now blind, about age 80, limping, the head of the Holy Office and so the chief doctrinal officer of the Church, born in Trastevere to parents who had many children, so a Roman from Rome, from the people of Rome, takes the microphone to speak to the 2,000 assembled bishops.
And, as he speaks, pleading for the bishops to consider the texts the curia has spent three years preparing, suddenly his microphone was shut off. He kept speaking, but no one could hear a word. Then, puzzled and flustered, he stopped speaking, in confusion. And the assembled fathers began to laugh, and then to cheer...

"Yes," Gherardini said. "And it was only the third day."

"What?" I said.

"Ottaviani's microphone was turned off on the third day of the Council."

"On the third day?" I said. "I didn't know that. I thought it was later, in November, after the progressive group became more organized..."

"No, it was the third day, October 13, 1962. The Council began on October 11."

"Do you know who turned off the microphone?"

"Yes," he said. "It was Cardinal Lienart of Lille, France."

"But then," I said, "it could almost be argued, perhaps, that such a breech of protocol, making it impossible for Ottaviani to make his arguments, somehow renders what came after, well, in a certain sense, improper..."

"Some people make that argument," Gherardini replied.

***

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #1 on:** April 20, 2012, 12:18:42 PM »

Vatican II was operated in a deceitful manner, does anyone refute this?

Also, the tepid response of Card. Gherardini shows that he's okay with deception.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #2 on:** April 20, 2012, 12:54:07 PM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

**
Whenever I think about the Council, I said, I always have one image in my mind: an aging Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, now blind, about age 80, limping, the head of the Holy Office and so the chief doctrinal officer of the Church, born in Trastevere to parents who had many children, so a Roman from Rome, from the people of Rome, takes the microphone to speak to the 2,000 assembled bishops.
And, as he speaks, pleading for the bishops to consider the texts the curia has spent three years preparing, suddenly his microphone was shut off. He kept speaking, but no one could hear a word. Then, puzzled and flustered, he stopped speaking, in confusion. And the assembled fathers began to laugh, and then to cheer...
***

Is this verified as historically accurate? The reason I'm asking it because it sounds so "unCatholic" and lacking basic consideration toward a fellow Cardinal.

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #3 on:** April 20, 2012, 02:04:33 PM »

Sadly, it is very hitsorically accurate. The liberals had absolutely no shame.

Cardinal Ottaviani was humiliated. Imagine, the head of the Holy Office being treated in such a manner! They had no regard for authority and still have none. They only use authority now as a stick to beat Traditionalists with.

MeganProFide · « **Reply #4 on:** April 20, 2012, 07:25:43 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Is this verified as historically accurate? The reason I'm asking it because it sounds so "unCatholic" and lacking basic consideration toward a fellow Cardinal.

Stevusmagnus is right -- a story like this does not need to be verified, because it fits so perfectly with the disorientation of the modernist mindset that it is undeniable.

Sede Catholic · « **Reply #5 on:** May 10, 2012, 12:12:24 AM »

Quote from: stevusmagnus

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2012/04/controlling-mic-at-vatican-ii.html#more

Controlling the mic at Vatican II

One of the central issues regarding the pending agreement between the Vatican and the Society of Saint Pius X is the weight of the pastoral Second Vatican Council and its docuмents.

Robert Moynihan, in his report on the negotiations, writes about a visit with Monsignor Brunero Gherardini, who attended the Council and lives at the Vatican. This eye-opening account concerning Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, who headed what is now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, from 1959 to 1968, is worth a quick read. Cardinal Ottaviani, sans mic, went on to co-author the most credible liturgical plea made to Paul VI.

***

Whenever I think about the Council, I said, I always have one image in my mind: an aging Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani, now blind, about age 80, limping, the head of the Holy Office and so the chief doctrinal officer of the Church, born in Trastevere to parents who had many children, so a Roman from Rome, from the people of Rome, takes the microphone to speak to the 2,000 assembled bishops.
And, as he speaks, pleading for the bishops to consider the texts the curia has spent three years preparing, suddenly his microphone was shut off. He kept speaking, but no one could hear a word. Then, puzzled and flustered, he stopped speaking, in confusion. And the assembled fathers began to laugh, and then to cheer...

"Yes," Gherardini said. "And it was only the third day."

"What?" I said.

"Ottaviani's microphone was turned off on the third day of the Council."

"On the third day?" I said. "I didn't know that. I thought it was later, in November, after the progressive group became more organized..."

"No, it was the third day, October 13, 1962. The Council began on October 11."

"Do you know who turned off the microphone?"

"Yes," he said. "It was Cardinal Lienart of Lille, France."

"But then," I said, "it could almost be argued, perhaps, that such a breech of protocol, making it impossible for Ottaviani to make his arguments, somehow renders what came after, well, in a certain sense, improper..."

"Some people make that argument," Gherardini replied.

***

Quote

"Do you know who turned off the microphone?"

"Yes," he said. "It was Cardinal Lienart of Lille, France."

"Cardinal" Lienart was also the man who started the takover of Vatican II by the Modernists.

He made a speech claiming that the original schema was not acceptable.

So then the modernists drew up a really evil one.

"Cardinal" Lienart was also a satanist.

Anthony M · « **Reply #6 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:12:19 AM »

Sede - We don't need nutcase comment like that on the list thanks !

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #7 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:25:41 AM »

It's clear that the modernist cardinals are haters of Traditional Catholicism.

I don't think it would be safe for my soul to just take a cardinal's word on something. An atheist or just a hater of the church could join some weak seminary where they don't really make tough demands on the postulants and that priest, if he's got the gift of gab and a smooth personality could ingratiate himself to others and find himself promoted to bishop where he would only then have to smooth over the pope.

Many cardinals are strictly secular in their heart.

Many cardinals just like the perks of being a cardinal.

There is also real political and social POWER in a catholic cardinal that is not present in the anglican cardinals or any of the protestant sects (although there are exceptions with the power wielded by some tv evangelists) a man who craves power may be drawn to positions of power.

And there would also be cardinals who actually openly despise the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church.

If what I said was untrue or wildly inaccurate, then how did Vatican II happen with all it's vulgar fruits? Case 1 is N.O. church, Case 2 is the status of the majority of american nuns over the last 40 years, Case 3 is the status of catholic K-12 schools in the U.S. and Case 4 is the way non-believing priests who want to discard all tradition and openly doubting theologians are never called to task while the Traditionalists are always treated as "schismatics"?

Like I said, I'm not sure it would be safe for my soul to just take the word of a cardinal.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #8 on:** May 10, 2012, 07:40:40 AM »

That needs to be pointed out again and again, it is a kind of demonic pharisaism to be called schismatic by non-believers - schismatic because you have the Faith. It is really unbelievable we've gotten to the point that these wolfish pharisees persecute the believers with a smirk, and the "Catholic" (trads and others) sheep bleat in approval.

Thursday · « **Reply #9 on:** May 10, 2012, 08:52:54 AM »

I think it was the liberal Cardinal Alfrink who did it, this excerpt is from the Rhine Flows Through the Tiber. Brings to mind the communist rules for revolution number 5. Always preach true democracy; but seize power as fast and as ruthlessly as possible.

Even so relatively sober a book as Fr. Ralph Wiltgen's The Rhine Flows into the Tiber portrays the debates as no nobler than a playground quarrel. Perhaps the saddest description is Fr. Wiltgen's account of Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani being silenced:

"On October 30, the day after his seventy-second birthday, Cardinal Ottaviani addressed the council to protest against the drastic changes which were being suggested in the Mass. "Are we seeking to stir up wonder, or perhaps scandal, among the Christian people, by introducing changes in so venerable a rite, that has been approved for so many centuries and is now so familiar? The rite of Holy Mass should not be treated as if it were a piece of cloth to be refashioned according to the whim of each generation." Speaking without a text, because of his partial blindness, he exceeded the ten-minute time limit which all had been requested to observe. Cardinal Tisserant, Dean of the Council Presidents, showed his watch to Cardinal Alfrink, who was presiding that morning. When Cardinal Ottaviani reached fifteen minutes, Cardinal Alfrink rang the warning bell. But the speaker was so engrossed in his topic that he did not notice the bell, or purposely ignored it. At a signal from Cardinal Alfrink, a technician switched off the microphone. After confirming the fact by tapping the instrument, Cardinal Ottaviani stumbled back to his seat in humiliation. The most powerful cardinal in the Roman Curia had been silenced, and the Council Fathers clapped with glee.19"

This exceprt from a Siri interview also claims it was Cardinal Alfrink (1985)
http://www.fedeecultura.it/file/siri.pdf

Nella discussione sul “De Episcopis”
il suo amico cardinal Ottaviani
contestò non solo la funzione
indicativa della votazione del 30
ottobre 1963 sulla collegialità, ma
anche la sua legittimità, mettendo
in pratica sotto accusa i moderatori
stessi.

SIRI: È difficile dare una valutazione
sui moderatori. Molto difficile.
Solo Agagianian raccoglieva l’approvazione
e l’assenso di tutti. Ottaviani
era un vero difensore della fede, ma
aveva una caratteristica (non lo chiamo un
difetto): si scaldava. E questo irritava gli altri.
Un giorno Alfrink, presidente di turno,
gli tolse addirittura la parola.

E il Concilio applaudì.

SIRI: No, non si può dire che applaudì.
Ci fu qua e là... ma non fu un applauso
dell’Assemblea. Il gesto di Alfrink non fu
approvato della grande maggioranza, e recò
una certa pena. Ottaviani era allora a capo
del Sant’Uffizio: non se la presero con la
persona ma con l’ufficio. Ottaviani quando
si metteva in moto sembrava un ippopotamo.
Una persona cara, eravamo tanto
amici, un uomo di Dio. È stato parecchi
anni cieco, eppure sempre sereno.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #10 on:** May 10, 2012, 09:10:44 AM »

First, I do want to offer an apology if I may have besmirched the memory of any bishops at the council who were unwittingly betrayed. I offer my mea culpa if my above post came across as a blanket accusation. This apology is applicable for bishops and cardinals who were truly devout and lovers of tradition and is not to be applied to any deceivers.

Which reminds me. The deceivers must truly be atheists because who would want to face the Almighty knowing they took part in the destruction of the Holy Catholic Church.

Thursday · « **Reply #11 on:** May 10, 2012, 09:29:45 AM »

Here is that excerpt from the Siri interview translated, its a bit touching. It must have been torture for the true defenders to watch the Church being usurped like that.

In the discussion on "De Episcopis" your friend Cardinal Ottaviani challenged not only the function indicative of the vote of 30 October 1963 on collegiality, but also its legitimacy, basically accusing the moderators themselves.

SIRI: It is difficult to evaluate the moderators. Very difficult. Card. Agagianian assessed and approved all of them.Ottiavani was a true defender of the faith but had a characteristic (I’m saying a defect) that warmed. Which annoyed others. One day Cardinal Alfrink took away his voice (mic).

And the council applauded.

SIRI: No, you cannot say that applauded.
There was applause here and there ... but it was not the applause of the assembly. The gesture of Alfrink was not approved by the great majority, and carried a certain penalty. Ottaviani was then head the Holy Office did not respond personally, but with his office. Ottaviani was then set in motion like a hippopotamus. A loved one, we were so friends, a man of God who had been several years blind, yet always serene.