Rorate-Caeli: New Interview with Fr. Charles Murr on what Mother Pascalina Knew about Bugnini, Paul VI, and Other Major Figures

JMJ

Rorate has posted an interesting interview that includes details about Bugnini. I have quoted below the key elements.

This will come as nothing new to seasoned Trads, but represents another step in understanding how we got to this point!

P^3

Fr. Murr, if Archbishop Bugnini was somehow involved with Freemasonry, what can we say, then, about Bugnini and the Conciliar liturgical reforms?

MURR: I think it is better to ask whether “Freemasonic designs” had something to do with the liturgical reforms that Bugnini decided the Second Vatican Council desired. Were Bugnini’s reforms concerned with a more perfect adoration and worship of God, or with celebrating the Freemasonic concept of the brotherhood of man? When certain Council Fathers insisted that not one word of the 1,600-year-old Roman Canon be touched, by any stretch of the imagination, could that be taken to mean they wanted to concoct entirely new canons?¹⁰ When Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò recently suggested that the Second Vatican Council be “reconsidered” (my own word), I sighed in full agreement.¹¹

If Paul VI did not “reverse course” on Bugnini’s work with the reforms, then why didn’t the Holy Father excommunicate or “fire” Bugnini?

MURR: Paul VI was a lifelong career diplomat. In the Vatican, where international diplomacy was created (along with all the rules), a bishop and member of the Roman Curia is never “fired” — evidently, even when that bishop is a Freemason. Bishops are off-limits. Prior to the defrocking of Theodore McCarrick, this was a fundamental rule of Vatican diplomacy. Moreover, if the Holy Father had excommunicated or even “fired” Bugnini, that would raise questions with Bugnini’s work. Paul VI was unwilling to do this.

...

Comments

A Reply to Martin Blackshaw’s FLAWED Remnant article titled: FLAWED: SSPX Advice on Abortion-tainted Vaccines

+ JMJ An article has appeared in the Remnant (link to article) and I am afraid that there are a number of flaws in it that need to be addressed. The author, Martin Blackshaw, believes that both the Church and the SSPX are misapplying the principle of Moral Theology called 'Cooperation In Evil'. Unfortunately, Mr. Blackshaw rests most of his arguments on citing authors that support his position, without considering the possibility that they are wrong. This highlights a key factor in this crisis: ignorance of the faith and its application . I don't am not singling out Mr. Blackshaw for this criticism, I have observed that it applies to laity and religious, superior and subject a like. No one seems immune in this enduring crisis, myself included. I further believe that this ignorance is why so many Catholics, both traditional and non, rely on their gut feeling or "Catholic conscience" for charting their way through this crisis of the faith. While...

The Vatican and SSPX – An Organizational Culture Perspective

Introduction The recent and continuing interactions between the Vatican and the SSPX have been a great opportunity for prayer and reflection. The basis for the disagreement is theological and not liturgical. As noted by Dr. Lamont (2012), the SSPX theological position on the four key controversial aspects of the Second Vatican Council are base on prior theological work that resulted from relevant magisterial pronouncements. So it is difficult to understand the apparent rejection of the theological position of the SSPX.

Rome and the SSPX - the latest

+ JMJ Bishop Fellay gave a conference late last month and provided some more insight into the situation with Rome. There are comments on Deus Ex Machina Blog and Hilary White has now entered the fray. What is one Catholic to think about all these opinions? What a Catholic is to think: With the Church! What does the Church think about obedience? Virtue as it is? If there is no proximate occasion of sin and the other conditions are met, then one cannot resist the command.

Doctrinal Preamble April 15, 2012 vs Protocol 1988

+ JMJ Reproduced below are the Doctrinal Preamble of Bishop Fellay (2012) and Protocol of Archbishop Lefebvre (1988) for comparison. Perhaps when I have time I will add detailed commentary. Now, given that Archbishop Lefebvre stated that there was nothing wrong with the 1988 text of the protocol, comparing it with that of Bishop Fellay ... where's the problem? Are as Kaesekopf of Suscipedomine wrote : ...can someone explain why trads would reject this? Or rather, why a sedeplenist trad (who accepts the validity of the NO) would reject this? Update: To make a comparison easier, I have inserted the comparable elements of the Protocol developed by Archbishop Lefebvre with that of Bishop Fellay. I have also included my own commentary in blue . Last thought, when I first read the preamble I thought ... ok so what's the problem? Now I that I've read it again ... I still ask: What's the problem? It was based on the Protocol signed by Ar...

Rome,the SSPX and this time of Crisis - Updated

+ JMJ Obviously there's lots of events right now. First we have the April 1st - I almost thought it was April Fools - meeting between Pope Francis and Bishop Fellay. Nothing really news worthy as this is a natural progression as Rome appears to be considering fulfilling Archbishop Lefebvre's wish to 'accept us as we are'. Second we have the April 8th publication of what will be a verbose exhortation of the Synod of the Family. I'm willing to bet that the Pope will give with one hand (unilateral regularization of SSPX) and take with the other (ambiguous document that opens the flood gates of sin further). Much to pray for. P^3

Tradicat

Search This Blog