Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae 5

 

ARTICLE VI
We have limited ourselves above to a short study of the Novus Ordo where it deviates most seriously from the theology of the Catholic Mass. Our observations touch upon deviations which are typical. To prepare a complete study of all the pitfalls, dangers, and psychologically and spiritually destructive elements the new rite contains, whether in texts, rubrics, or instructions, would be a vast undertaking.

We have taken no more than a passing glance at the three new Eucharistic Prayers, since they have already come in for repeated and authoritative criticism. The second gave immediate scandal to the faithful due to its brevity.50 Of Eucharistic Prayer II, it has well been said that a priest who no longer believed in either Transubstantiation or the sacrificial character of the Mass could recite it with perfect tranquillity of conscience, and that a Protestant minister, moreover, could use it in his own celebrations just as well.

The new Missal was introduced in Rome as an "abundant resource for pastoral work," as "a text more pastoral than juridical," which national bishops' conferences could adapt, according to circumstances, to the "spirit" of different peoples. Section One of the new Congregation for Divine Worship, moreover, will now be responsible "for the publication and constant revision of liturgical books."

This idea was echoed recently in the official newsletter of the Liturgical Institutes of Germany, Switzerland and Austria:

"The Latin texts must now be translated into the languages of different nations. The ‘Roman style’ must be adapted to the individuality of each local Church. That which was conceived in a timeless state must now be transposed into the changing context of concrete situations, and into the constant flux of the universal Church and its myriad congregations." 51
The Apostolic Constitution itself, in promulgating the Novus Ordo Missae, deals a death-blow to the Church's universal language when, contrary to the express wish of the Second Vatican Council, it unequivocally states that "in great diversity of languages, one [?] and the same prayer will ascend, more fragrant than incense."

The demise of Latin may therefore be taken for granted. Gregorian chant, which Vatican II recognized as a distinctive characteristic of the Roman liturgy, decreeing that it "be given pride of place in liturgical services"52, will logically follow, given, among other things, the freedom of choice permitted in choosing texts for the Introit and the Gradual.

From the outset, therefore, the new rite was pluralistic and experimental, bound to time and place. Since unity of worship has been shattered once and for all, what basis will exist for the unity of the faith which accompanied it and which, we were told, was always to be defended without compromise?

It is obvious that the New Order of Mass has no intention of presenting the Faith taught by the Council of Trent. But it is to this Faith that the Catholic conscience is bound forever. Thus, with the promulgation of the New Order of Mass, the true Catholic is faced with a tragic need to choose.

ARTICLE VII
The Apostolic Constitution explicitly mentions the riches of piety and doctrine the Novus Ordo supposedly borrows from the Eastern Churches. But the result is so removed from, and indeed opposed to the spirit of the Eastern liturgies that it can only leave the faithful in those rites revolted and horrified.

What do these ecumenical borrowings amount to? Basically, to introducing multiple texts for the Eucharistic Prayer (the anaphora), none of which approaches their Eastern counterparts' complexity or beauty, and to permitting Communion Under Both Species and the use of deacons.

Against this, the New Order of Mass appears to have been deliberately shorn of every element where the Roman liturgy came closest to the Eastern Rites.53 At the same time, by abandoning its unmistakable and immemorial Roman character, the Novus Ordo cast off what was spiritually precious of its own. In place of this are elements which bring the new rite closer to certain Protestant liturgies, not even those closest to Catholicism. At the same time, these new elements degrade the Roman liturgy and further alienate it from the East, as did the reforms which preceded the Novus Ordo.

In compensation, the new liturgy will delight all those groups hovering on the verge of apostasy who, during a spiritual crisis without precedent, now wreak havoc in the Church by poisoning Her organism and by undermining Her unity in doctrine, worship, morals and discipline.

 

ARTICLE VIII
Saint Pius V had the Roman Missal drawn up (as the present Apostolic Constitution now recalls) as an instrument of unity among Catholics. In conformity with the injunctions of the Council of Trent, the Missal was to exclude all dangers, either to liturgical worship or to the faith itself, then threatened by the Protestant Revolt. The grave situation fully justified, and even rendered prophetic, the saintly Pontiff's solemn warning given in 1570 at the end of the Bull promulgating his Missal:

"Should anyone presume to tamper with this, let him know that he shall incur the wrath of God Almighty and His holy Apostles Peter and Paul." 54
When the Novus Ordo was presented at the Vatican Press Office, it was impudently asserted that conditions which prompted the decrees of the Council of Trent no longer exist. Not only do these decrees still apply today, but conditions now are infinitely worse. It was precisely to repel those snares which in every age threaten the pure Deposit of Faith,55 that the Church, under divine inspiration, set up dogmatic definitions and doctrinal pronouncements as her defenses. These in turn immediately influenced her worship, which became the most complete monument to her faith. Trying to return this worship to the practices of Christian antiquity and recreating artificially the original spontaneity of ancient times is to engage in that "unhealthy archaeologism" Pius XII so roundly condemned.56 It is, moreover, to dismantle all the theological ramparts erected for the protection of the rite and to take away all the beauty which enriched it for centuries.57 And all this at one of the most critical moments, if not the most critical moment, in the Church's history!

Today, division and schism are officially acknowledged to exist not only outside the Church, but within her as well.58 The Church's unity is not only threatened, but has already been tragically compromised.59 Errors against the Faith are not merely insinuated, but are, as has been likewise acknowledged, now forcibly imposed through liturgical abuses and aberrations.

To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship,60 and to replace it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division, a liturgy which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith, is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an incalculable error.

Corpus Domini
5 June 1969

 

BEGINNING        PAGE 2         PAGE 3         PAGE 4   

FOOTNOTE 1-25         FOOTNOTES 25-60