First, there is a liturgical bishop who just said this about the Bugnini Mass and I say, “duh! Ya think???
More than six decades after the approval of Sacrosanctum Concilium and the liturgical reform that followed the Second Vatican Council, the archbishop of Catanzaro-Squillace, Claudio Maniago, president of the Episcopal Commission for the Liturgy of the Italian Episcopal Conference (CEI), has acknowledged that “we still do not know how to celebrate in a way that brings forth the splendor of the liturgy”.
And Timothy Cardinal Radcliffe says this:
I do deeply sympathise with people whose love of the Tridentine Mass has led them into tension with the hierarchy. Some of them are my friends and I hate to see them pained. But it is good always to remember that the Eucharist is the sacrament of our unity in Christ. So I believe that the sacrament can never become a sign of disunity with the Body of Christ. However painful it might be, if the Church declares that a rite is not to be used, however much one might love it, it cannot be good to let its celebration be a source of division.
It is possible to celebrate the new Rite in Latin with great dignity and solemnity. I did so once for the funeral of a cousin of mine. Some people rushed up afterwards and congratulated me for celebrating the old rite, and I had to explain that it was the new rite. They had not been able to tell the difference. Many people can, of course.
What to say? What to say? Oh! What am I to say? A hell of a lot!
First, Archbishop Claudio Maniago is only now realizing that the Bugnini Mass, in terms of how it is celebrated AROUND THE WORLD says that “we still do not know how to “bring forth the splendor of the (Bugnini) Liturgy!
Might it be its shallow rubrics? It endless options? Facing the Assembly? It’s inane musical selections? Priests who see themselves as entertainers and the central star of the Mass? Casual and irreverent reception of Holy Communion, standing and on the run and by popping the Host in one’s mouth while on the run and sharing it with others? A child can figure out what the problem is with the Bugnini Mass and initiate a reform of the reform in continuity with the TLM! It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out!
And then secondly, we have Cardinal Radcliffe’s inane answer to why Catholics must be obedient to only celebrating the Bugnini Mass as a source of liturgical unity in the Church! Has His Eminence never heard of the other liturgical Rites of the Latin Rite? Has he never heard of the Eastern Rite Liturgies? Does he not realize that the Bugnini Mass is so wildly celebrated in such diverse ways that there is no real unity in its celebration and even in the same parish? That the Bugnini Mass is so diverse that it varies from priest to priest, parish to parish, diocese to diocese? That there is no real unity in the Bugnini Mass in the Latin Rite as there was on the eve of Vatican II????
And then he says most Catholics, who are truly dumb, can’t tell the difference between a Bugnini Mass in Latin and the TLM? If that is the case, then there is no problem Cardinal Radcliffe—the dumb laity think that a Latin TLM and a Latin Bugnini Mass show forth no differences and thus there is unity?
Is there senility in these prelates? One has to wonder!

8 comments:
That Cardinal Radcliffe celebrated the new Rite in Latin with great dignity and solemnity once is part of the problem. Such a form of the new Mass is considered an exception, something that should be done only rarely and with special permission. In many, if not most, dioceses it is actually forbidden. If the good Cardinal and other bishops want the faithful to fully embrace the new Mass then take off all the chains that allow such of form. It is not so much the new Mass per se that people object to but to a form of it that is completely divorced from our liturgical tradition.
"Might it be its shallow rubrics? It endless options? Facing the Assembly? It’s inane musical selections? Priests who see themselves as entertainers and the central star of the Mass?" Exactly Father. A lot of priests and bishops sure seem blind to or comfortable with mediocrity.
They’re lazy and it's all about them
We know how to celebrate the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI in splendored, reverent fashion. Whether we do so is another matter.
We do not require a reform-of-the-reform to inject splendor and reverence into the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI. The sure way to accomplish that is as Pope Benedict XVI noted:
"The most sure guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives.
"This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal."
The reformed Roman liturgy is replete with "spiritual richness and the theological depth."
It is unbelievable that "we" — certain Churchmen — are unaware supposedly as to how to celebrate the Mass in splendored, reverent fashion. I believe that it's a matter of celebrants who opt simply for banal liturgy.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Father McDonald, here is a very powerful statement of Pope Benedict throwing water on Vatican II (and other Councils of the Church). It is a must read. Too bad this statement was not given the attention it deserved before more losses of the Faithful occurred.'
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2026/09/professor-ratzinger-criticizes-council.html
Except that bishops will not allow it. I speak from experience. The traditional style Novus Ordo exists on paper but is rare to non-existent in real life. This is part of the problem. Do not argue against the old Mass with a phantom TLM style new Mass. Make such a Mass possible first and then we can have a conversation.
Pope Benedict XVI did not throw water upon Vatican II.
The article in question promoted by Rorate Caeli noted that Joseph Ratzinger's comments in question had been uttered "long before he became Benedict XVI."
The fact is that as Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger had praised Vatican II.
Examples:
On October 10, 2012 A.D., adhering to the following declaration from Pope Saint John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI confirmed Vatican II as "the great grace bestowed on the Church..."
We also have during his final days as Pope, Benedict XVI's 2013 A.D. positive assessment of Vatican II:
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130214_clero-roma.html
========
Just prior to the end of his earthly life, Joseph Ratzinger, via the title of Pope Emeritus, praised Vatican II.
https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2022-10/benedict-xvi-letter-steubenville-pope-emeritus.html
-- Benedict XVI: Vatican II was both meaningful and necessary
"Pope emeritus Benedict XVI sends a letter to an international symposium on "The Ecclesiology of Joseph Ratzinger" held at the US Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio, and upholds the importance and legacy of the Second Vatican Council."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Speaking of Rorate Caeli, and Joseph Ratzinger's connection to Vatican II...
If we that via the article in question promoted by Rorate Caeli, that "Pope Benedict" had thrown water" upon Vatican II, then he had thrown water upon himself.
The reason is that via a different article, Rorate Caeli had portrayed Joseph Ratzinger as having inflicted massive damage upon the Church via his prominent role at Vatican II.
-- RORATE EXCLUSIVE—
"New biography describes great influence of Fr. Joseph Ratzinger in Vatican II."
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/12/rorate-exclusivenew-biography-describes.html
========
Rorate Caeli insisted:
"For example, he was able to change the Church’s presentation of the concept of the sources of Revelation, he helped suppress an independent schema on Our Lady, he opposed an “anti-Modernist spirit,” and he was in favor of using the vernacular languages during Holy Mass.
"As Seewald himself stated in a recent interview: Ratzinger helped the “advance of Modernism in the Church,” and “was always a progressive theologian."
The Rorate Caeli article concluded, much to its chagrin, that Joseph Ratzinger did not regret the vital role that he had played at Vatican II.
In fact, at the end of his earthly life, as Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger heaped praise upon Vatican II.
EWTN News, October 21, 2022 A.D.
https://www.ewtnnews.com/vatican/benedict-xvi-reflects-on-vatican-ii-in-new-letter
"In a new letter, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI characterizes the Second Vatican Council as “not only meaningful, but necessary."
========
We also have during his final days as Pope, Benedict XVI's 2013 A.D. positive assessment of Vatican II:
https://www.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2013/february/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20130214_clero-roma.html
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Post a Comment