WHY THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS?
THE TRUE MASS
In 1969, Pope Paul VI issued a New Order of the Mass, the Novus Ordo
Missae. Up to that time, what is commonly referred to as the
"Tridentine" or "Latin" Mass, was used by the Church. On the face of
things, it may seem to be a simple matter for the Pope to change the
Mass. It has been done before. Is there a difference, then, between
the modifications made by Paul VI and the liturgical changes of the
past? There is a radical difference, and one that has had disastrous
consequences for the universal Church.
THE NEW MASS CONTRADICTS TRADITION
The "Tridentine" or Roman Rite Mass, while it has developed
organically over the 2,000 year history of the Church, is essentially
the Mass that was given to the Apostles and the Church by Our Lord
Jesus Christ Himself. Although various rites emerged, they all
maintained the same spirit imparted to the liturgy by Our Lord and
were only adapted to various cultures without any deviation in
doctrine. The Roman Rite, up to Vatican II, underwent only minor
changes, such that the famous English liturgist Fr. Adrian Fortescue
was able to state that "no one has ventured to touch it except in
unimportant details."
Pope St. Pius V, to protect the Roman Rite from innovations and
eliminate any variations, codified the Traditional Latin Mass in the
Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum in 1570. The Mass that he was
confirming was not some new creation like the Novus Ordo Missae, but
a Mass that matched in every respect the Faith of the Apostles. Nor
was it the Mass of some particular area of the Church like the
Eastern rites, but the universal rite of the Church, the rite of the
Roman See. His bull says in part:
"We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and
all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be
they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any
other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy
obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and
manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to
discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of
other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed;
and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any
ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this
Missal.
"Furthermore, by these presents , in virtue of Our
Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the
chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal
is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of
conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure,
and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors,
administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or
religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the
Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain
. . . that this present docuмent cannot be revoked or modified, but
remain always valid and retain its full force . . . [The complete
Apostolic Constitution "Quo Primum" of Pope St. Pius V (July 14,
1570) is available in print from Angelus Press or online].
What, then, was done at Vatican II? Were some changes made merely in
"unimportant details"? Was the proper honor and respect given to the
Rite essentially bestowed by Christ on His Church and confirmed by
incomparable proofs in the form of thousands of saints and countless
miracles? On June 5, 1969 Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani of the Holy
Office, and Antonio Cardinal Bacci, along with a group of Roman
theologians, presented Pope Paul VI with a "Short Critical Study of
the New Order of Mass." The Study contained a cover letter signed by
Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci which says, in part:
Most Holy Father, having carefully examined, and presented for the
scrutiny of others, the Novus Ordo Missae prepared by the experts of
the Consilium ad exequendam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia, and
after lengthy prayer and reflection, we feel it to be our bounden
duty in the sight of God and towards Your Holiness, to put before you
the following considerations:
1. The accompanying critical study of the Novus Ordo Missae, the work
of a group of theologians, liturgists and pastors of souls, shows
quite clearly in spite of its brevity that if we consider the
innovations implied or taken for granted which may of course be
evaluated in different ways, the Novus Ordo represents, both as a
whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic
theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the
Council of Trent. The "canons" of the rite definitively fixed at that
time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against
the integrity of the Mystery . . . ("The Ottaviani Intervention --
Short Critical Study of the New Order of Mass" is available from TAN
Books or online).
Vatican I in 1870 defined the Pope to be, not an absolute monarch,
but the guarantor of obedience to the revealed word. The legitimacy
of his power was bound up above all with his transmitting the Faith.
This fidelity to the deposit of the Faith and to its transmission
concerns in a quite special way the liturgy. No authority can
fabricate' a liturgy. The Pope himself is only the humble servant of
its homogenous development, its integrity, and the permanence of its
identity." The Pope, as the guardian of the Deposit of Faith, has a
duty to preserve the liturgy intact and pass it on essentially
unmodified to the next generation. The very authors of Vatican II, on
the other hand, openly acknowledged their desire not to pass on
Tradition, but to make it.
St. Vincent of Lerins in the 5th century gave as a standard for the
orthodoxy of doctrine that which has been believed everywhere
(ubique), always (semper), and by all (omnia). But, as Cardinal
Ratzinger points out, the Council Fathers of Vatican II rejected this
hallowed definition: "Vatican II's refusal of the proposal to adopt
the text of Lerins, familiar to, and, as it were, sanctified by two
Church Councils, shows once more how Trent and Vatican I were left
behind, how their texts were continually reinterpreted... Vatican II
had a new idea of how historical identity and continuity were to be
brought about." This new idea was nothing other than to create a
pseudo-tradition from the "common consciousness" of the Council
Fathers. This is pure Modernism and totally contrary to the Deposit
of Faith.
THE DESTRUCTION OF CATHOLIC WORSHIP
IS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH
The Church has always set forth the firm and clear principle that:
"The way we worship is the way we believe." The doctrinal truths of
the Faith are embodied in the worship we offer to God. In other
words, it is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that teaches us our
theology and not the reverse. The True Mass comprises the Apostolic
Tradition of faith and morals in its very essence. Every doctrine
essential to the Faith is taught therein. Pope Leo XIII points out in
Apostolicae Curae that the Church's enemies have always understood
this principle as "They knew only too well the intimate bond that
unites faith with worship, the law of belief with the law of prayer,
and so, under the pretext of restoring the order of the liturgy to
its primitive form, they corrupted it in many respects to adapt it to
the errors of the Innovators." It is no wonder, then, that Luther
coined the slogan: "Take away the Mass, destroy the Church."
St. Alphonsus Liguori (Bishop, Doctor of the Church and Patron of
Theologians) explains that "The devil has always attempted, by means
of the heretics, to deprive the world of the Mass, making them
precursors of the Anti-Christ, who, before anything else, will try to
abolish and will actually abolish the Holy Sacrament of the altar, as
a punishment for the sins of men, according to the prediction of
Daniel: 'And strength was given him against the continual sacrifice'
(Dan. 8:12)."
The question then becomes: Does the New Mass teach the Catholic
Faith? No, say both Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci: "It is clear that
the Novus Ordo no longer intends to present the Faith as taught by
the Council of Trent." Pope St. Leo the Great (Father and Doctor of
the Church) instructs us:
"Teach nothing new, but implant in the hearts of everyone those
things which the fathers of venerable memory taught with a uniform
preaching. . . Whence, we preach nothing except what we have received
from our forefathers. In all things, therefore, both in the rule of
faith in the observance of discipline, let the pattern of antiquity
be observed." How well founded, then, were the concerns expressed by
Pope Pius XII shortly before the introduction of the New Mass: "I am
worried by the Blessed Virgin's messages to Lucy at Fatima. This
persistence of Mary about the dangers which menace the Church is a
divine warning against the ѕυιcιdє that would be represented by the
alteration of the Faith in Her liturgy."
When you place the prayers and ceremonies of the traditional Latin
Mass side by side with those of the New Mass, you can easily see to
what degree the Church's traditional doctrine has been "edited out."
And the "editing" always seems to have been done on those parts of
the Mass expressing some Catholic doctrine which Protestants find
"offensive." Here are some examples:
Common Penitential Rite: The traditional Mass begins with the priest
reciting personal prayers of reparation to God called "The Prayers at
the Foot of the Altar." The New Mass begins instead with a
"Penitential Rite" which the priest and people recite together. Who
were the first to introduce a common penitential rite? The 16th
century Protestants, who wanted to promote their teaching that the
priest is no different from the layman.
The Offertory: The Offertory prayers of the traditional Mass clearly
express a number of Catholic teachings, as that the Mass is offered
to God to satisfy for sin and that the saints are to be honored. The
Protestants rejected these teachings and so abolished the Offertory
prayers. "That abomination called the Offertory," said Luther, "and
from this point almost everything stinks of oblation!" In the New
Mass as well, the Offertory is gone -- it has been replaced with a
ceremony called "The Preparation of the Gifts." The prayers
"offensive" to Protestants have also been removed. In their place is
the prayer "Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation," based on a
Jєωιѕн grace before meals.
The "Eucharistic Prayer": The traditional Mass has only one
"Eucharistic Prayer," the ancient Roman Canon. The Canon was always a
favorite target of Lutheran and other Protestant attacks. Instead of
just one Canon, the New Mass now has a number of "Eucharistic
Prayers," only one of which we will mention here. Eucharistic Prayer
No. 1 is an "edited" version of the Roman Canon. The lists of
Catholic saints, so despised by Protestants, are now optional, and
hence rarely used. The translators did some further "editing." Among
other things, the idea that Christ the Victim is offered at Mass (a
notion Luther condemned) has disappeared. All the Eucharistic Prayers
now incorporate some typical Protestant practice. They are recited in
a loud voice instead of silently, and they have an "Institution
Narrative," instead of a Consecration. (According to Protestant
beliefs, their ministers do not consecrate the Eucharist like
Catholic priests do; they just narrate the story of the Last Supper.)
Even Christs own words in the Consecration were altered: ". . . Which
shall be shed for you and for many, unto the remission of sins" was
changed to ". . . It will be shed for you and for all men so that
sins may be forgiven." (Rome acknowledged this "mistranslation"
recently.) The various signs of respect toward Our Lord present in
the Blessed Sacrament (genuflections, signs of the cross, bells,
incense, etc.) have been reduced, made optional, or eliminated.
Communion in the Hand: The 16th century Protestant Martin Bucer
condemned the Church's practice of placing the Host on the tongue of
the communicant as something introduced out of "a double
superstition: first, the false honor they wish to show to this
sacrament, and secondly, the wicked arrogance of priests claiming
greater holiness than that of the people of Christ, by virtue of the
oil of consecration." The practice in Protestant churches of
"communion in the hand" is thus based upon their rejection of
Christ's Real Presence and the priesthood. At the New Mass, just as
at a Protestant service, there is Communion in the hand. But the men
who created the New Mass went even further, for a layman may not only
receive Communion in the hand -- he is also permitted to distribute
it, even on a moment's notice. Let us recall St. Thomas Aquinas'
(1225-1274)* words on this subject: "The body of Christ must not be
touched by anyone, other than a consecrated priest. No other person
has the right to touch it, except in case of extreme necessity" (III,
82 a.3). (*St. Thomas Aquinas was given the title "Angelic Doctor".
His canonization decree states, "His doctrine was none other than
miraculous. He has enlightened the Church more than all other
Doctors")
Veneration of the Saints: The prayers of the traditional Mass
frequently invoke the saints by name and beg their intercession. The
Church's veneration of the saints in her worship was another practice
which Protestants dismissed as "superstition." The New Order of the
Mass dropped most invocations of the saints by name, or made them
optional. In the new Missal, moreover, the weekday prayers for
saints' feast days (most of which are also optional) have been
rewritten for the benefit of Protestants -- allusions to miracles,
the defense of the Catholic Faith, or to the Catholic Church as the
one, true Church have disappeared.
False Translations: Lastly, there is the matter of the false official
English translations of the New Mass. A whole book could be written on
the errors and distortions they contain. Here we will mention briefly
only the official translations of the prayers for the 34 "Sundays in
Ordinary Time." The following are some of the ideas which the English
translation suppresses: God's wrath, our unworthiness, error, sins
which "burden our consciences," God's majesty, obedience to His
commandments, supplication, humility, eternity, heaven -- many more
could be listed. Perhaps the most serious omission is the word
"grace." It appears 11 times in the Latin original. It does not
appear even once in the official English "translation"!
Clearly, then, the "new liturgy reflects a new ecclesiology, whereas
the old reflects another ecclesiology" (Cardinal Benelli) and one
quite foreign to the Catholic Church. This ultimately means as Fr.
Gelineau, S.J., one of the "experts" who co-authored the New Mass,
pointed out, that "The New Mass is a different liturgy. This needs to
be said without ambiguity. The Roman Rite, as we knew it, no longer
exists. It has been destroyed." The Catechism of the Council of Trent
tells us that "a Catholic sins against the Faith by participating in
non-Catholic worship." The New Mass is not Catholic worship, even if
it has retained the name "Catholic," as did the Anglican liturgy
until recently.
FRUITS OF VATICAN II AND THE NEW MASS
"By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns,
or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good
fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree
cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth
good fruit" (Matt. 7:15-17). Given the foregoing, it should be plain
that the New Mass was conceived for an evil purpose and constructed
by evil means. It only follows that such a tree would have disastrous
effects on the Church. Let us look at its fruits as reported in Index
of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II by
Kenneth Jones.
Priests. While the number of priests in the United States more than
doubled to 58,000, between 1930 and 1965, since then that number has
fallen to 45,000. By 2020, there will be only 31,000 priests left,
and more than half of these priests will be over 70.
Ordinations. In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained in the United
States. In 2002, the number was 450. In 1965, only 1 percent of U.S.
parishes were without a priest. Today, there are 3,000 priestless
parishes, 15 percent of all U.S. parishes.
Seminarians. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped
from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the
600 seminaries that were operating in 1965 have now closed.
Sisters. In 1965, there were 180,000 Catholic nuns. By 2002, that had
fallen to 75,000 and the average age of a Catholic nun is today 68. In
1965, there were 104,000 teaching nuns. Today, there are 8,200, a
decline of 94 percent since the end of Vatican II.
Religious Orders. For religious orders in America, the end is in
sight. In 1965, 3,559 young men were studying to become Jesuit
priests. In 2000, the figure was 389. With the Christian Brothers,
the situation is even more dire. Their number has shrunk by
two-thirds, with the number of seminarians falling 99 percent. In
1965, there were 912 seminarians in the Christian Brothers. In 2000,
there were only seven. The number of young men studying to become
Franciscan and Redemptorist priests fell from 3,379 in 1965 to 84 in
2000.
Catholic schools. Almost half of all Catholic high schools in the
United States have closed since 1965. The student population has
fallen from 700,000 to 386,000. Parochial schools suffered an even
greater decline. Some 4,000 have disappeared, and the number of
pupils attending has fallen below 2 million -- from 4.5 million.
Catholic Marriage. Catholic marriages have fallen in number by
one-third since 1965, while the annual number of annulments has
soared from 338 in 1968 to 50,000 in 2002.
Attendance at Mass. A 1958 Gallup Poll reported that three in four
Catholics attended church on Sundays. A recent study by the
University of Notre Dame found that only one in four now attend.
Only 10 percent of lay religious teachers now accept church teaching
on contraception. Fifty-three percent believe a Catholic can have an
abortion and remain a good Catholic. Sixty-five percent believe that
Catholics may divorce and remarry. Seventy-seven percent believe one
can be a good Catholic without going to mass on Sundays. By one New
York Times poll, 70 percent of all Catholics in the age group 18 to
44 believe the Eucharist is merely a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus.
Who could possibly claim that there is not a terrible crisis of faith
in the Catholic Church!? It is no wonder that Cardinal Ratzinger
affirmed: "I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find
ourselves today depends in great part on the collapse of the
liturgy." It is clear how the New Mass could create such a disaster.
Liturgy dictates belief. A protestantized liturgy yields heretical
belief, loss of the Faith, and devaluation of the priesthood. Satan
has been able to accomplish more effective damage to the entire body
of the Church in the past 35 years through the destruction of the
Mass than ever before.
CONCLUSION
The New Mass is condemned by its own nature and by its fruits. The
crisis in the Church will continue to worsen until we return to
orthodoxy and discipline. What is a Catholic to do in such
troublesome times? He must follow the advice of St. Vincent of
Lerins: "What then shall the Catholic do if some portion of the
Church detaches itself from communion of the universal Faith? If some
new contagion attempts to poison, no longer a small part of the
Church, but the whole Church at once, then his great concern will be
to attach himself to antiquity (Tradition) which can no longer be led
astray by any lying novelty."
St. Athanasius, one of the four great Doctors of the Eastern Church,
earned the title of "Father of Orthodoxy" for his strong and
uncompromising defense of our Catholic Faith against the Arian Heresy
which affected most of the hierarchy, including the pope. Athanasius
was banned from his diocese at least five times, spending a total of
seventeen years in exile. He sent the following letter to his flock
which is a powerful lesson for our times: "What saddens you is the
fact that others have occupied the churches by violence, while during
this time you are on the outside. It is a fact that they have the
premises -- but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our
churches, but they are outside the true Faith. You remain outside the
places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you. Let us consider:
what is more important? The place or the Faith? The true Faith,
obviously. Who has lost and who has won in this struggle? The one who
keeps the premises or the one who keeps the Faith?"
Topic: Why the Traditional Latin Mass? (Read 3307 times)