Archbishop Annibale Bugnini and Reform of the Liturgy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Spyridon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This is a blog site by a person who doesn’t reveal what his credentials are.

However, in his blog he wrote : “Another note, this blog is my place for my views.”

It shouldn’t be taken as being representative of true Catholic history, it’s an opinion site.

Jim
 
I also understand that the late archbishop wished to push the reforms farther than he did, but Bl Paul VI put the breaks on…
 
I don’t like how he (Archbp Bugnini) just manufactured a rite out of thin air when those things are supposed to naturally develop and change organically/naturally over time.
 
Last edited:
Nitpicking- the OF isint a Rite, it’s a form of the Mass.

But I still get what you’re saying
 
angel12 said:
Marini wasn’t at VII, but according to the description on amazon, “Among the services rendered by this important book is the abundant tribute paid to the energy and skills of Annibale Bugnini”
Click to expand...
Yes, yes yes!

Now that’s what I wanted!

I know who Marini is, but wasn’t aware of this book.
 
KMG said:
He did once say, “I am the liturgical reform.”
Click to expand...
Yeah, I’m well aware of his less than savory comments, etc.

I’m trying hard to understand him and see things from his angle.
 
semper_catholicus said:
I don’t like how he just manufactured a rite out of thin air when those things are supposed to naturally develop and change organically/naturally over time.
Click to expand...
Unclear who the pronoun “he” refers to in your Post. Pope Paul or Abp Bugnini
 
semper_catholicus said:
I don’t like how he (Archbp Bugnini) just manufactured a rite out of thin air when those things are supposed to naturally develop and change organically/naturally over time.
Click to expand...
What makes you think he acted alone? Any serious reading of the story of the reforms would show that there most certainly was (name removed by moderator)ut from others.

As for “organic development”, the breviary of Pius X most certainly wasn’t. Read the article that Spyridon linked to below.
Spyridon said:
Hey @OraLabora are you familiar at all with the Quinones Breviary?
Click to expand...
I’ve heard of it, but as it never gained traction I tend to view it as a footnote in history.

You can see its psalter schema here:

http://www.gregorianbooks.com/gregorian/www/www.kellerbook.com/Foursch.htm

Thanks for the link to the article by Fr. Taft, I agree with him completely.
 
Last edited:
OraLabora said:
What makes you think he acted alone? Any serious reading of the story of the reforms would show that there most certainly was (name removed by moderator)ut from others.
Click to expand...
I knew he didn’t act alone, but he was led the way and was mostly in charge.
 
This long bothered me as well, but there are a few things to keep in mind:
  1. While heavily redacted, the reformers still did draw upon many ancient prayers. Things were moved around, but a lot of the “new” elements did exist at some point in the Latin liturgy’s history.
  2. When one attends a very solemn OF Mass with all of the traditional “trimmings” (Latin, polyphony, chant, incense, Ad Orientem, etc.), it feels a lot more like an EF Mass… you get a better sense of continuity.
 
I’ve said it before and will say it again.

Most Rad Trads don’t hate the OF, they hate what they think the OF is
 
PaulfromIowa said:
You seem to have accepted a polemic as fact
Click to expand...
Bugnini exerted a massive amount of influence on the reforms of the Liturgy.

It’s not polemics - it’s objective fact.

Like I said, open up a Roman Missal or a LOTH volume and tell me whose name you see on the first page. Hint: it’s not Paul VI.
 
Doesn’t make it wrong.

Thomas Jefferson authored the Declaration of Independence while owning slaves.

That tidbit doesn’t make the Declaration of Independence wrong.

Jim
 
The Missal of St. John XXIII was fine and the litgurical reforms went too far
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top