Archbishop Bugnini's book

[AlexV]

…should be required reading for those interested in the Roman liturgy’s “reform”.

It’s dense…900+ pages, with copious footnotes. But it’s illuminating.

My new favorite passage comes early, in a chapter on the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship.

Bugnini complains…as often in the book…that there were cardinals and bishops who opposed him. His defense? They didn’t know the mind of the pope. He did. He describes how he would convey to them what the pope wanted, and how they would (disobediently) object and thereby reject authority. He notes the pope could use anyone he wanted to convey his will, even a mere priest (Bugnini was not yet a bishop), and that questioning what he reported was tantamount to disobedience.

In fact, reading Bugnini is a lot like reading what some people post here about alleged “obedience” or lack thereof.

Case in point (one of hundreds). Cardinal Heenan personally requested the so-called Agatha Christie Indult from Paul VI. Paul wrote to Bugnini and told him to grant it. Bugnini ADDED a cover letter saying there must be no publicity given to Tridentine Masses offered under the Indult. When questioned, Bugnini argued he was expressing the “mind of the pope” (a frequent phrase in his book).

Direct from God, then, to Paul, to Annibale. And anyone who questioned Annibale…was questioning God Himself.

 

[eelpis]

…should be required reading for those interested in the Roman liturgy’s “reform”.

It’s dense…900+ pages, with copious footnotes. But it’s illuminating.

My new favorite passage comes early, in a chapter on the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship.

Bugnini complains…as often in the book…that there were cardinals and bishops who opposed him. His defense? They didn’t know the mind of the pope. He did. He describes how he would convey to them what the pope wanted, and how they would (disobediently) object and thereby reject authority. He notes the pope could use anyone he wanted to convey his will, even a mere priest (Bugnini was not yet a bishop), and that questioning what he reported was tantamount to disobedience.

In fact, reading Bugnini is a lot like reading what some people post here about alleged “obedience” or lack thereof.

Case in point (one of hundreds). Cardinal Heenan personally requested the so-called Agatha Christie Indult from Paul VI. Paul wrote to Bugnini and told him to grant it. Bugnini ADDED a cover letter saying there must be no publicity given to Tridentine Masses offered under the Indult. When questioned, Bugnini argued he was expressing the “mind of the pope” (a frequent phrase in his book).

Direct from God, then, to Paul, to Annibale. And anyone who questioned Annibale…was questioning God Himself.

It seems like he (Bugnini) had a hyper-ultramontanist mindset. This mindset seems to be shared by some conservatives as well.

 

[Dempsey1919]

It seems like he (Bugnini) had a hyper-ultramontanist mindset. This mindset seems to be shared by some conservatives as well

He was only an ultramontanist when it suited him. I believe the point eelpis was trying to make is that Bugnini was a hypocrite. When people disagreed with him, he was the only one who knew the “mind of the pope,” and when the Pope went against his wishes, Bugnini added his own letters in an effort to further his own agenda.

 

[childofmary1143]

Case in point (one of hundreds). Cardinal Heenan personally requested the so-called Agatha Christie Indult from Paul VI.

Alex,

Can you explain to me the “Agatha Christie” indult? Also who is the publisher of this book so that I may read it?

 

[Dempsey1919]

Can you explain to me the “Agatha Christie” indult?

When the Mass of Paul VI was promulgated and the Tridentine Mass was supressed, the author Agatha Christie and many others sent a petition to Pope Paul asking him to allow the celebration of the Tridentine Mass for those who wanted it. This indult only applied to England and Wales, and was granted in 1971.

Interestingly, Pope Paul VI was a big Agatha Christie fan.

 

[AlexV]

Some Americans especially don’t appreciate that though Bugnini was a priest before 1972, he was unquestionably more powerful than the cardinal prefects of his Congregation. “Secretary” in the Roman curial tradition has nothing to do with the American English connotations of the word.

 

[gjbrunning]

Bugnini’s book was published by The Liturgical Press. Originally priced at about $60.00 they have it on sale now for $14.87. I passed it up as too expensive. Perhaps I’ll bite at this sale price.

God rest his soul.

 

[childofmary1143]

What is the title of the book?

 

[AJV]

What is the title of the book?

The Reform of the Liturgy (1948-1975).

The Heenan Indult was given not for the 1962 missal, but the modifications upto and including 1967 Tres Abhinc Annos.

 

[cam100]

When the Mass of Paul VI was promulgated and the Tridentine Mass was supressed, the author Agatha Christie and many others sent a petition to Pope Paul asking him to allow the celebration of the Tridentine Mass for those who wanted it. This indult only applied to England and Wales, and was granted in 1971.

Interestingly, Pope Paul VI was a big Agatha Christie fan.

I remember reading somewhere that the Agatha Christie on the petition wasn’t the same person as the famous mystery novel author, although the pope may have thought they were the same person. I don’t know if this is accuarate or not. The famous author Agatha Christie wasn’t a Catholic, though.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I remember reading somewhere that the Agatha Christie on the petition wasn’t the same person as the famous mystery novel author, although the pope may have thought they were the same person. I don’t know if this is accuarate or not. The famous author Agatha Christie wasn’t a Catholic, though.

As far as I’m aware, it was the famous Agatha Christie. Although not Catholic, she loved the Tridentine Mass for it’s beauty, culture, and historical importance. She signed the petition for these reasons.

 

[AlexV]

Lots of non-Catholics signed it. Bugnini scoffs at this in his book (so much for ecumenism!!)…he notes “intellectuals” (= bad) were concerned with “saving a cultural heritage” (= bad), not the mission of saving souls (whoa, quite a leap!).

 

[giuseppeTO]

…should be required reading for those interested in the Roman liturgy’s “reform”.

It’s dense…900+ pages, with copious footnotes. But it’s illuminating.

My new favorite passage comes early, in a chapter on the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship.

Bugnini complains…as often in the book…that there were cardinals and bishops who opposed him. His defense? They didn’t know the mind of the pope. He did. He describes how he would convey to them what the pope wanted, and how they would (disobediently) object and thereby reject authority. He notes the pope could use anyone he wanted to convey his will, even a mere priest (Bugnini was not yet a bishop), and that questioning what he reported was tantamount to disobedience.

In fact, reading Bugnini is a lot like reading what some people post here about alleged “obedience” or lack thereof.

Case in point (one of hundreds). Cardinal Heenan personally requested the so-called Agatha Christie Indult from Paul VI. Paul wrote to Bugnini and told him to grant it. Bugnini ADDED a cover letter saying there must be no publicity given to Tridentine Masses offered under the Indult. When questioned, Bugnini argued he was expressing the “mind of the pope” (a frequent phrase in his book).

Direct from God, then, to Paul, to Annibale. And anyone who questioned Annibale…was questioning God Himself.

Alex … interesting observation!

Cardinal Mahoney in Los Angeles used the same explanation in refusing to grant the indult Mass in his diocese. He says that Pope JPII let him know that he wasn’t in favor of a “generous” application of the indult.

 

[ProVobis]

The famous author Agatha Christie wasn’t a Catholic, though.

There were Anglican bishops and other non-Catholics on that petition. There were petitions from other countries as well. Maybe they knew a good thing when they saw it.

unavoce.org/articles/2001/english_indult.html

 

[ProVobis]

Alex … interesting observation!

Cardinal Mahoney in Los Angeles used the same explanation in refusing to grant the indult Mass in his diocese. He says that Pope JPII let him know that he wasn’t in favor of a “generous” application of the indult.

But didn’t JPII officially DECREE the “wide and generous” application of M62?

 

[Dempsey1919]

But didn’t JPII officially DECREE the “wide and generous” application of M62?

Yeah, but that didn’t stop some Bishops from deciding otherwise. Many Cardinals and Bishops feel that it is their right to do whatever they want in their diocese. Look at the open disobedience of some Bishops after the promulgation of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum.

 

[Our_Refuge]

I have read *Reform of the Liturgy *twice and may read it again. This is one of the most fascinating books I have ever read. Father Bugnini left nothing out of the book. All of the accusations are there. The footnotes are very insightful.
So AlexV what do you think? Was there a conspiracy? I have concluded that there was. When I found out that the same men that wrote the Constitution on the Liturgy also wrote the New Mass my head started spinning. I am convinced that they never intended to follow the Constitution. The all vernacular mass and the gutting of the Latin mass was always their goal. The fact that Bishop Jean Bluyssen of the Netherlands started communion in the hand and was also a memeber of the Consilium that wrote the mass…well it is was pretty sneaky if you ask me.
On a scale of 1-10, I have to give the book a 10.

 

[Dempsey1919]

I am convinced that they never intended to follow the Constitution. The all vernacular mass and the gutting of the Latin mass was always their goal. The fact that Bishop Jean Bluyssen of the Netherlands started communion in the hand and was also a memeber of the Consilium that wrote the mass…well it is was pretty sneaky if you ask me.

I believe that Sacrosanctum Concilium was written in such a way as to allow a liberal interpretation. I think Bugnini worded it carefully so that he could use it to justify his agenda, or assault on the Roman rite.

 

[rwoehmke]

Now let’s accept that there was a conspiracy and that a priest(powerful secretary, not just a note taker) and a hand full of sneaky Bishops foisted this radical new Mass on the world. Where were the rest of the Bishops and Cardinals? The only clerical outcry, as I recall were some of those in the curia and Le Fevere (sic) and he was more or less unhappy with the whole kettle of fish and not just the new Mass. These roll-over-and-accept Bishops were for the most part if not totally appointed before the Council. Hardly a murmur even from some of the best.

Might be a good book, but even at $15 bucks I have better stuff to read.

 

[AlexV]

Read the book. There were MANY protests. Bugnini spent most of his time on the job squashing protests. Hard to believe powerful bishops and cardinals could be squashed by a lowly priest (until 1972)? Read the book. It’s full of his threats to people that he knew the mind of the Pope, and that they were being “disobedient”. The late Bugnini would fit in very well on these boards.

His most outrageous moment in the book may be when he told one protestor (a German layman/professor) that “finally, people are worshipping in spirit and in truth”.

Let that sink in for a minute. He means until Bugnini, liturgy was not in spirit and not in truth.