Author Topic: Novus Ordo at work in 1957? (Read 5239 times)

parentsfortruth · « **on:** June 10, 2010, 10:35:48 PM »

A Novus Ordo Mess?
No, This Photograph Comes from the Half Novus Ordo of the 1950s
Hannibal Bugnini Actually Began His Changes to the Traditional Latin Mass in 1951
The So-called "Mass of 1962" Was the Product of the Half Novus Ordo Period
The "Mass of 1962" Is Not the Traditional Latin Mass

There is a widespread misconception that the so-called "Mess of 1962," or "Motu" Mess, is the Traditional Latin Mass. It isn't. Hannibal Bugnini, the Chief Architect of the Novus Ordo, was appointed by Pope Pius XII to the new Liturgical Reform Commission, and from that position he began implementing the invalid Novus Ordo service starting in 1951, with major landmarks in 1956, 1960, and 1962.

The photograph above shows Sacred Heart Church, of Hubbard's Woods, Illinois, after the 1957 wreck-ovation, undertaken with Church approval. Here we already see clearly the coming full-blown Novus Ordo. Mass is said facing the congregation, the crucifix is not on the altar, but relegated to the back wall, side altars are absent, and the baptistry is moved to the front of the church. The congregation at the time resisted the Protestantizing of their Church, but then, as now, the Church establishment forced the innovations upon them and stole their money to pay for them against their will.

http://traditio.com/comment/com1006.htm

Now, I can't say that I agree with Traditio all the time, because the guys running it now are NOT Father Morrison, but different people and very uncharitable and loony on some things., but Father Morrison (whoever he was) was a very nice person, and had the right idea on a lot of things.

I thought this was a valuable representation for those that think 1962 is the magical date where we can go back and say, "Hey, the Mass and everything was okay yet."

Matthew · « **Reply #1 on:** June 10, 2010, 10:49:52 PM »

That article is deceptive.

It implies that there are elements of the Novus Ordo in the 1962 Missale Romanum. That is false.

I have BEEN to the 1962 edition of the Tridentine Latin Mass a couple thousand times, and I assure you there is nothing Novus Ordo about it, not even a hint.

By the way, it's the SSPX (Bishop Williamson in particular) who is always preaching that the "rot was there well before Vatican II. If we could get the Fifties back, we'd just have Vatican III in 10 years' time..." etc.

I don't know who's party you think you're raining on, but photos like this I was well aware of.

How about the French Liturgical movement in the 1920's? They had 1/2 the Novus Ordo implemented back then in the monasteries.

Modernism wasn't born in 1969.

Matthew

stevusmagnus · « **Reply #2 on:** June 10, 2010, 10:53:17 PM »

I've seen this picture before. However, it is in no way representative of the way the Mass was said in the 1950's.

There were Modernist innovators of the liturgy who got away with private innovations like this here and there on the local level in the 50's. But I have yet to see any official authorization of these practices in 1950's liturgical docuмents.

The innovators then got their innovations written into the liturgical laws as "options" as we well know and some of them into the Mass itself (N.O.)

In any case, I may be wrong, but until I see official Church docuмents allowing the practices in this picture in the 50's, I can't help but see it as an isolated unauthorized innovation of that particular priest and or Bishop.

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #3 on:** June 10, 2010, 10:58:15 PM »

How did they get away with doing whatever they were doing in the 1950's? i.e. this?

ThomasAugustine · « **Reply #4 on:** June 10, 2010, 10:59:02 PM »

That sure is a creepy picture.
I know a dear old priest here who was ordained in the SSPX. I remember him telling me some priest had left because they didn't want to use the 1962 because of some changes to Holy Week and other things and use an older missel. I wish I had of paid better attention but as a convert there are so many things you are learning and taking in it's hard to keep track of it all. I do remember him specifically telling me there was experimenting going on with what would become the Novos Ordo as far back as the 1950's. Whatever the case, the NO and the 1962 are worlds apart. Man, that picture sure is creepy.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #5 on:** June 10, 2010, 11:00:06 PM »

For some reason I was wondering if the photo was what they say it is, and when.

Some of their photos could be Episcopalians or other denominations and who would be the wiser?

I know that the artist Henri Matisse designed some very avant-garde liturgical stuff, possibly in the '50's in France.

But who really knows what's up with Traditio?

Matthew · « **Reply #6 on:** June 10, 2010, 11:13:23 PM »

Not to sound partisan, but Traditio is well-known as a staunch opponent of the SSPX -- i.e., they have an axe to grind.

Look at their "Traditional Mass directory" and you can see what they think of SSPX Masses.

I don't even think someone could so carefully skirt the truth in every case, and miss it "by accident". No, I think it's willful.

If I were walking barefoot on a sidewalk with 15 shards of broken glass scattered about, and I happened to avoid each one of them, would you suppose I was avoiding them on purpose? Of course!

Traditio is certainly distorting things in favor of their position, and they are doing so on purpose.

To give ONE SMALL EXAMPLE, their directory claims that the SSPX is "in with Rome" now, and so going to an SSPX Mass is "suspect" and might have Novus Ordo elements.

I can't believe how they bald-face lie. Like I said, I don't think they're just "on the other team" or mistaken, I think they're malicious. To what end, I have no idea.

Matthew

Matthew · « **Reply #7 on:** June 10, 2010, 11:22:02 PM »

Here is their entry for SSPX Masses --

FULL OF COMPLETE LIES.

Whoever was responsible for this text is knowingly committing calumny, which is grave because the welfare of souls is involved.

"By their fruits you shall know them."
-Our Lord Jesus Christ

Matthew

Matthew · « **Reply #8 on:** June 10, 2010, 11:25:28 PM »

Among other vicious lies, they claim a "deal was made" with Rome.

This is obviously malicious, because anyone of GOOD WILL would know that no such deal was made. Simply visit the SSPX website, the Vatican website, etc.

It doesn't take rocket science to know if SSPX "did a deal" or not. It's public record that the SSPX is still in a canonically irregular position with Rome.

Just because some excommunications are lifted doesn't mean SSPX is in with Rome. What if Rome falsely excommunicated a sedevacantist bishop and later took it back? Would that make the bishop in question a sellout?

Anyhow, if the SSPX re-entered full communion with Rome, it would be plastered all over the place!

Matthew

Matthew · « **Reply #9 on:** June 10, 2010, 11:29:53 PM »

Traditio is pseudo-traditional.

If this is an official publication of theirs, then they are maliciously pursuing SOME KIND of agenda -- to what end, I don't know.

You just don't have good guys feeling the need to LIE! Lying is not necessary if you have truth on your side.

They must have SOME inordinate attachment -- money, number of parishioners, hatred of the SSPX, etc. to motivate them to lie about a traditional Catholic organization that is so pleasing to Our Lord Jesus Christ.

I would recommend that any good Catholic avoid Traditio completely. Their venom is poisonous to the soul.

Matthew

Matthew · « **Reply #10 on:** June 10, 2010, 11:33:14 PM »

Quote from: Elizabeth

For some reason I was wondering if the photo was what they say it is, and when.

Some of their photos could be Episcopalians or other denominations and who would be the wiser?

I know that the artist Henri Matisse designed some very avant-garde liturgical stuff, possibly in the '50's in France.

But who really knows what's up with Traditio?

Good point, Elizabeth.

Once someone is caught in a lie, you can't really trust anything they say. (See my other posts for proof of at least one lie)

Matthew

Raoul76 · « **Reply #11 on:** June 11, 2010, 12:24:07 AM »

StevusMagnus said:

Quote

There were Modernist innovators of the liturgy who got away with private innovations like this here and there on the local level in the 50's. But I have yet to see any official authorization of these practices in 1950's liturgical docuмents.

The innovators then got their innovations written into the liturgical laws as "options" as we well know and some of them into the Mass itself (N.O.)

The local level? Only if a scrawny fellow named Eugenio Pacelli could be considered "local." Because it was Pius XII who hired Bugnini as the head of HIS new Commission for Liturgical Reform. I realize there is a great sentimentality around Pius XII and that we are being told he was the last bulwark against the baddies, but I'm afraid this is not so.

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2009/04/compendium-of-1955-holy-week-revisions_11.html

You can read about the changes yourself here. It's hard to prove that a subtle liturgical change is an "incentive to impiety" but some of these seem quite silly. Personally I see the devil's mocking Cheshire Cat sense of humor all over this. Describing the Easter Vigil:

Quote

"At this point is introduced a new rite ad libitum for the blessing of the water. It is permitted, but not obligatory, to bless the water not in the font itself, but in a vessel set in the middle of the choir for that purpose, and then brought to the font and poured in. In this case, the Tract Sicut cervus is sung while the water is brought to the font, and afterwards, the prayer which speaks of the deer as a symbol of the Christian people. As with the prayers of the preceding day, the prayer is now to be said with hands closed."

Someone in the comments section of the website I posted talks about the effect this has:

Quote

"This has got to be the funniest part of the new Vigil.

"The 'Sicut cervus' was particularly powerful in the older vigil because the procession was going to the (already full) baptismal font. The analogy with the thirsty deer going to the water to drink is most apt.

But in the new Vigil, the font is empty and the water is borne in procession to the font. Much like a deer bringing water with it to an empty water hole. The disjunct with the Sicut cervus is painfully funny.

What was Bugnini thinking???"

The idea of the Psalm "Sicut Cervus" is that the hart or deer is longing for water the way the catechumen longs for baptism, and the way the Catholic longs for God. What sense does it make for the Catholic, symbolized by the deer, to carry the water about? Do you know of any deer who lug water about like washerwomen?

How many times have we seen Novus Ordo services with clowns or giant puppets that make you want to laugh? Here is a change that is authorized from the top down, and it has that same mocking quality. Although in this case it's so subtle that you wonder "Is it all in my imagination?" That is a favorite trick of the devil, making you wonder if you're seeing what you're seeing. Am I really laughing because the sight of these people sloshing water about and singing is funny, or because I'm an impious wretch myself? The disconnect results in people with serious faces sitting through ridiculous Noh-puppet Masses, not wanting to admit to themselves that God is being mocked.

Just open your mind and let the thought in that Pius XII was not the hero you think. Try it. See where it leads. If it's not true, God will chase it out of your mind, it will fall apart on further reflection. But geez, can people be more in denial about this? He started an all-new commission to change the liturgy and put BUGNINI in charge, not to mention NFP and the relaxed disciplinary laws and the bizarre communist-sounding statements in his encyclicals...

RomanCatholic1953 · « **Reply #12 on:** June 11, 2010, 12:27:13 AM »

This would never be allowed in the Parish I attended in
the 1950's and early 60's.
O what a ugly mural in the background, can anyone
guess what it means? It is certainly not inspirational.
I do not remember one discussion about Mass facing
the people until it was forced upon us starting in
1965.
I can remember at the end of High Mass, there
would be the Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament,
with the Divine Praises. This was not allow in the
1962 Rubics, so I was told by the Priests at that
time.

Elizabeth · « **Reply #13 on:** June 11, 2010, 12:48:37 AM »

Quote from: Matthew

Traditio is pseudo-traditional.

If this is an official publication of theirs, then they are maliciously pursuing SOME KIND of agenda -- to what end, I don't know.

You just don't have good guys feeling the need to LIE! Lying is not necessary if you have truth on your side.

Matthew

I was just thinking the exact same thing.

Last time I checked they gave SSPV a Happy Face.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #14 on:** June 11, 2010, 06:49:36 AM »

Quote from: parentsfortruth

How did they get away with doing whatever they were doing in the 1950's? i.e. this?

Just ask Raoul :rolleyes:. Pius XII gave Bugnini his start. Certainly Bugnini started tampering with the Roman Missal in the 1950s with the Holy Week rites, and they touched the Canon in 1962. But Traditio does go too far in claiming the 1962 Mass = Novus Ordo. Yet Matthew goes too far the other way in saying that there's "not even a hint" of NO in the 1962 Missal.