Liturgy of the Hours - week of June 10

Status
Not open for further replies.
OraLabora said:
Use the Common of the BVM, including generic collect, if there’s nothing specific. Same issue for us using French and/or Latin. I checked in my Canadian Ordo and often for new feasts they’ll put the new collect in there, but alas there isn’t one for this feast. Edit: I just checked my missalette and there is a proper collect (in French!) so your local missalette should have the collect to use; the rest you can take from the Common.
Click to expand...
I’ve had success on these newer and obscure feasts (such as our local patrons that aren’t universally celebrated) with Google — but mind you, I’m praying privately. I can usually stumble upon a diocesan web page or newspaper that has the collect and other relevant details.
 
Exactly. Before Lent, Ordinary Time runs in Weeks 1-X (with no explicit First Sunday of OT) and after Easter they run Y-34. X and Y need not meet in the middle. Catholic Math 😁
 
Cor_ad_Cor said:
Catholic Math 😁
Click to expand...
That’s the same math where soon = 40 years…

We were promised the Gregorian chant antiphonary for the Liturgy of the Hours “soon” in 1970. We saw the first volume in 2010… and that’s only for Vespers of Sundays, Feasts and Solemnities.
 
Glennon_P said:
Two questions:
  1. The memorial of Mary, Mother of the Church is a new feast and my 35-year-old LOTH naturally doesn’t have it. Do I just use Common of the BVM? Or are there more specifics?
Click to expand...
It looks like there is an instruction for English version by USCCB: http://www.usccb.org/about/divine-worship/liturgical-calendar/mother-of-the-church.cfm, which was already given:
ajfrab said:
THE LITURGY OF THE HOURS

Monday after Pentecost
The Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Church
Memorial

Psalmody of the day. Other elements from the Psalter of the day or the Common of the Blessed Virgin Mary, except for the following:
Click to expand...
For comparison, full Lithuanian version has been confirmed this year: https://lk.katalikai.lt/assets/file...nos_minejimo_dekretas_liturginiai-tekstai.pdf - presumably, full English version shouldn’t be lagging too far behind…

I suppose an additional option might be to use the Latin version, given in Adnexus
 
Repeating a lie does not change it to a truth, and those who have slandered and libeled him will be (or already have been) held accountable.

Repetition of a falsehood does not create substantiation. Your indirect repetition of that fabrication leaves everyone to believe that at least three popes were either fools or simpletons - or both. I seriously doubt they were. And your comment about demonic is totally unnecessary.
 
Ok, I do NOT subscribe to the idea that Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict were simpletons. Nor do I believe that Pope Paul was one either.

That’s not what I’m saying.

Pope Paul’s own words was that the smoke of satan has entered the Church. I believe was that the Holy Father was unaware of the true motives of some people at the Vatican, but later identified some of these bad actors.

It shouldn’t be shocking to hear that there are some clergy in the Roman Curia, Vatican bank, and some Cardinals who had/have a real crisis of faith.

The whole sex abuse scandal is due to a crisis of faith.

It’s an attack on Holy Mother Church by a few from within and more importantly by the devil.

The devil wants to destroy our church and will do anything possible to do so
 
Last edited:
Bugnini is a convenient boogie-man for those who seek to undermine the liturgical reform legitimately promulgated by Paul VI. As far as the sex scandals, this is horrible but nothing new. Catholic priests have always been tempted by such evil perversions, and there have always been corrupt clergy. Yet Christ’s Church continues to be guided by the Holy Spirit working through such broken vessels like them and us.

Paul VI knew what he was doing, and as Pope, he had the authority to do it. All this gossip, insinuation of evil intent, and sensationalism is a way for professional Catholics to avoid evangelizing a pagan world and, instead, focus on liturgical perfection as a substitute for holiness.

If all the mental energy spent on liturgical wars was spent in reaching out to fallen away Catholics, almsgiving, discipleship training, and evangelization outreach, we would have converted the world by now.
 
I don’t think Saint Pope Paul Vl was purposely demoting the Octave like he didn’t think Pentecost was important. It isn’t like that.
I think a lot of it probably comes down to the new weekday reading cycle. The corpus of Acts is read really all throughout the season of Easter. I think he may have thought it could come off as a little repetitive to have literally just gone through all of Acts and then start over with the Pentecost narrative and subsequent readings immediately following it in the Octave. It makes it a lot easier to have an Easter Octave for the reason you have a resurrection story and narratives around it in all four gospels. The narrative of Pentecost is only found in Acts. It would have been easy to have a Pentecost Octave still and I personally think it should not have been removed.
I think that Octave actually should have stayed even before the Christmas Octave did. Though the Christmas Octave is an interesting one, it still retains it’s old “order of Octave”, it was actually a third order Octave which allowed saints days to be celebrated in it which we see today. Most of the Christmas Octave has saint days in it.
Easter and Pentecost were Octaves of the first order. Nothing took precedence over them. Though ember days were inside of the Octave of Pentecost which was a great tradition as well.
My issue with not having the Octave of Pentecost is that I think a lot of people view Pentecost as just being the end of the Easter season now, when it is so much more than that.
 
Last edited:
Windmill said:
Bugnini is a convenient boogie-man for those who seek to undermine the liturgical reform legitimately promulgated by Paul VI. As far as the sex scandals, this is horrible but nothing new.
Click to expand...
  1. I NEVER said I agree with the sex scandal things about Pope Paul VI. I was making the argument that conservative Catholics us the story of Pope Paul VI crying at the removal of the Octave of Pentecost as a way to DEFEND Paul VI. The same people who propagate the above legend are the same conservatives who proudly talk about his great work with Humanae vitae and his quote about the “smoke of satan. The people who claim his was a great sinner don’t give him any credit.
  2. in regards to Bugnini, he started working on revisions to the liturgy under Pope Pius XII. Pope Paul VI didn’t really pick him as much as he simply let him keep doing what he was doing. And it’s became public record in 1975 that Bugnini was a member of the Italian Freemasons. Hence, Pope Paul demoted Bugnini and essentially exiled him by making him Nuncio to Iraq.
So it’s NOT a slight against Paul VI, Pius XII or John XXIII or any other post Vatican II Popes to theorize that Bugnini took advantage of his position. Bugnini was charged with “restoring” the Mass to its ancient form. But it allowed him to secretly slip in or remove a few things which he felt would promote his Freemason ideas.

But by then, the Mass was already 5 years old and there was no going back. This (I believe) is why Pope Benedict (who was a HUGE architect of Vatican II) eventual hope a reform of the reform would eventually grow organically as more people witnessed the Extraordinary Form.

God Bless
 
Last edited:
Dovekin said:
40.png
phil19034:
The devil wants to destroy our church and will do anything possible to do so.
Click to expand...
Including repeating lies about St Paul VI?
Click to expand...
Excuse me, but I am NOT repeating or condoning lies about Paul VI.

I NEVER said I agree with those accusations. I don’t.

I believe Pope Paul trusted Bugnini, just like Pope Pius XXII did. And Bugnini abused that trust and removed the Octave of Pentecost without Pope Paul realizing it.

I don’t think that diminishes Pope Paul. We are all human and it very human to trust someone not worthy of trust.

Pope Paul believed strongly that love could overcome all. Well, trusting & idealistic people of power (like Paul VI) can taken advantaged of by scrupulous people
 
phil19034 said:
I believe Pope Paul trusted Bugnini, just like Pope Pius XXII did. And Bugnini abused that trust and removed the Octave of Pentecost without Pope Paul realizing it.
Click to expand...
I do not believe that. Paul VI was known as a man of the curia, even though he had spent a decade away as archbishop of Milan. He spent his career working with people like Bugnini, getting them to accomplish the tasks the Church set out for them. I doubt that he was surprised by the disappearance of octaves but even more I doubt that Bugnini abused his trust.

So if we are going to throw around accusations about what the devil would do to destroy the Church, first on the list are stories about how the Pope is being subverted by his closest aides. It is not the Pope who successfully gave us a reformed liturgy, but evil minions who thwarted all the saintly pope’s efforts, like the freemason Bugnini.

This kind of distortion is familiar in a lot of conspiracy theories. It is not the bishops who did this, but the people who work for them. It is not the president, but the “deep state” that undermines everything. etc. This allows the speaker put up a front of defending the top person while attacking his accomplishments.

I am not suggesting anything about other accusations against Paul VI. Just asking if the story you told looks like something the devil might be doing to divide the Church. After all, many people use it in a divisive way.
 
phil19034 said:
in regards to Bugnini, he started working on revisions to the liturgy under Pope Pius XII. Pope Paul VI didn’t really pick him as much as he simply let him keep doing what he was doing. And it’s became public record in 1975 that Bugnini was a member of the Italian Freemasons. Hence, Pope Paul demoted Bugnini and essentially exiled him by making him Nuncio to Iraq.
Click to expand...
That’s true! I’ve actually met some traditionalists who don’t even like the 62 missal because they claim Bugnini already had imposed modernism in it.
 
Bugnini repeatedly denied affiliation with the Masons. There is no proof, there are only insinuations and gossip about him being a Mason. And those all spring from an unsubstantiated rumor that some people mentally justify with Bugnini’s reassignments. You seem to take his Masonic compromise as a given, and this seems to justify your critiques of the reforms themselves.
Once you cast that cloud of suspicion, you’ve ruined a reputation and unjustly called into question the trustworthiness of the liturgical reforms.

Look, I prefer the EF. Heck, I’m one of the only two MC’s in our county for the EF Mass. I started a men’s Schola 15 years ago. I see the value of the EF Mass in the life of the Church. However, I see no value in these types of discussions among laymen on matters they have absolutely no competency (meaning, authority to change). Church politics have been a part of church government forever. It’s just that with the advent of modern media, those processes have become fodder for public consumption. We should be more focused on the mission of the Church and less on saving the world from the pretend specter of Bugnini.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top