"The great Father Zed, Archiblogopoios"
-
Fr. John Hunwicke
"Some 2 bit novus ordo cleric"
- Anonymous
"Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a traditionalist blogger who has never shied from picking fights with priests, bishops or cardinals when liturgical abuses are concerned."
- Kractivism
"Father John Zuhlsdorf is a crank"
"Father Zuhlsdorf drives me crazy"
"the hate-filled Father John Zuhlsford" [sic]
"Father John Zuhlsdorf, the right wing priest who has a penchant for referring to NCR as the 'fishwrap'"
"Zuhlsdorf is an eccentric with no real consequences" -
HERE
- Michael Sean Winters
"Fr Z is a true phenomenon of the information age: a power blogger and a priest."
- Anna Arco
“Given that Rorate Coeli and Shea are mad at Fr. Z, I think it proves Fr. Z knows what he is doing and he is right.”
- Comment
"Let me be clear. Fr. Z is a shock jock, mostly. His readership is vast and touchy. They like to be provoked and react with speed and fury."
- Sam Rocha
"Father Z’s Blog is a bright star on a cloudy night."
- Comment
"A cross between Kung Fu Panda and Wolverine."
- Anonymous
Fr. Z is officially a hybrid of Gandalf and Obi-Wan XD
- Comment
Rev. John Zuhlsdorf, a scrappy blogger popular with the Catholic right.
- America Magazine
RC integralist who prays like an evangelical fundamentalist.
-Austen Ivereigh on
Twitter
[T]he even more mainline Catholic Fr. Z. blog.
-
Deus Ex Machina
“For me the saddest thing about Father Z’s blog is how cruel it is.... It’s astonishing to me that a priest could traffic in such cruelty and hatred.”
- Jesuit homosexualist James Martin to BuzzFeed
"Fr. Z's is one of the more cheerful blogs out there and he is careful about keeping the crazies out of his commboxes"
- Paul in comment at
1 Peter 5
"I am a Roman Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
I am a TLM-going Catholic, in no small part, because of your blog.
And I am in a state of grace today, in no small part, because of your blog."
- Tom in
comment
"Thank you for the delightful and edifying omnibus that is your blog."-
Reader comment.
"Fr. Z disgraces his priesthood as a grifter, a liar, and a bully. -
- Mark Shea
A watershed.
Loading ...
Why did Bugs want to prevent using a single book? More disassembly in the name of a return to earlier praxis or another attempt at sabotage/subterfuge?
I think it’s because he didn’t want priests to continue to celebrate the entire mass himself at the altar, absorbing the roles of other ministers into the role of the celebrant…. as is such in the EF low mass.
If this book were available a priest could celebrate the mass in the OF and have it look very much like the EF.
Having a separate book for the lectors (lectionary), choir (graduale), Evangelarium (deaons), Sacramentary (celebrant)… helps to keep the “activity” happening at different locations in the sanctuary…. It also leads to a priest beginning to think he ant celebrate mass, alone & privately without “other ministers”.
It would have been useful to indicate what part of the liturgical year is covered by any given volume. Having to guess is time consuming since the files are very large. A short description next to each volume as to content would do the trick.
I understand the volumes are out of print (for shame!), but being out of print is not the same as being out of copyright. If only that were the case. Does anyone know the copyright status of these works? In the new copyright law passed for Vatican City, which may be found, here:
http://www.alai.org/assets/files/infos-nationales/italy-2012.pdf
it says:
“One deviation from the Italian copyright rules consists in the fact that all laws, legal acts, and public documents are copyrightable. This differs from art. 11 of the Italian Law…Nonetheless, the correct unaltered usage of Vatican’s public acts is permitted when made without gainful intent.”
If I read this correctly, it should be lawful to download the MR, possibly because of age, but more likely as long as it is provided without gainful intent (i.e., for free).
Are there any Italian copyright lawyers out there? Sorry to be so scrupulous, but copyright is a big deal in some areas like music and academics. If this is legit, then could they, please, also make a copy of the Latin editio typica of the Breviary?
The Chicken
I was under the impression that the Latin texts of the Church are not under copyright?
What can I cite as evidence for the point about Bugnini if this point comes up in an argument? Where do I find that in the record—is it in his book? Or is Father the original source on this?
How much room would these files need? If one were to download it onto one’s computer, would they take up an enormous amount of space? Would it be better to store them in another place, such as one of those back-up sites?
Small but possibly important fine print in the title page: This is Edition 2 of the MR. We are currently on Edition 3. So I take it that this is not licit to use liturgically because it has been superseded.
Wow: ingentes gratiae tibi, Pater. Sometimes the internet can be a force for great good.
“Small but possibly important fine print in the title page: This is Edition 2 of the MR. We are currently on Edition 3. So I take it that this is not licit to use liturgically because it has been superseded.”
The Latin Lectionary has also been revised since this originally was published, using the Nova Vulgata.
Elizium23 is correct. The publication date is MCMLXXVII. The new edition is MMII.
Geoffrey said: “The Latin Lectionary has also been revised since this originally was published, using the Nova Vulgata.”
Can you explain in more detail? I just compared the “First Sunday of Advent” and everything is identical to the Nova Vulgata (including the Responsorial Psalm) except the 1975 edition adds a single word (“enim”) in the Gospel reading.
Bressani56:
It is my understanding that when the liturgical books were being promulgated after the Second Vatican Council, the revision of the Latin Vulgate was a work in progress. The Book of Psalms was published in 1969 and the New Testament in 1971. The entire Nova Vulgata wasn’t published until 1979.
Whatever parts of the Nova Vulgata that were happened to be completed were utilized in the appropriate liturgical books, but not all. Basically, any liturgical book in Latin published before 1979 is probably a potpourri of old and new Vulgate texts.
A revised 3-volume Latin lectionary was published a few years ago, though not by but with the permission of the Holy See:
http://www.theologicalforum.org/ProductInformation.aspx?BrowseBy=Category&CategoryId=120&ProductId=367
I just wish there were an edition of the LOTH with the two year cycle of readings. Of course it would be more than four volumes.
Thank you for posting the link, Father. Interestingly, the illustration added to the end of the volumes is that of a priest reflecting, while vesting, that he “can’t wait to find out what this ‘special announcement’ is all about”. That leads me to wonder if the booklet / manual reportedly being prepared by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of Sacraments to help priests offer Mass properly (source: http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/vatican-preparing-a-manual-to-help-priests-celebrate-mass) will finally be released in early 2014. Nevertheless, early 2014 is not too far away.
Well, I obviously missed the other glaring link to the page about the Vatican II hymnal.
I was planning to do some editing to the PDFs to remove the nasty adverts, but then I noticed that this is the Editio Iuxta Typicam Alteram, the 2nd edition of the missal. I’m not interested in having them for myself, but if there is still some interest from the community toward having clean copies, I would be happy to oblige.