Near-Sightedness Writ Large
Thomas A. Droleskey
Defenders of the doctrinal and liturgical revolutions that have profaned the honor and glory of the Most Blessed Trinity and devastated souls are attempting to paint what appears to be the forthcoming "motu proprio" of Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI by which the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition will be "liberated" to offered, at least privately, by "priests," whether validly ordained or not, who are attached to the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism in what they believe to be the most benign light possible. That is, some of the real, hard-core defenders of conciliarism are beginning to state that the "motu proprio" will be, once it is issued, relatively insignificant as most Catholics who assist at the abomination called the Novus Ordo Missae will not defect to the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition.
There is much merit to this view. Most Catholics have been fed a steady diet of spectacles purporting to be valid "liturgies." Many of these Catholics participate very "actively" in these "liturgies," invading the sanctuary as lectors and altar servers and "extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist" (truth-in-advertising here: I was a lector off and on in various places for a little over twenty years). They are not about to give up their "active" roles (or their Saturday evening "liturgies" that make it possible for them to have Sunday "free" for the really important things of life that have nothing to do with the Faith) to partake of the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that was normative in the counterfeit church of conciliarism for three years (what is commonly called the 1962 Missal was actually issued in 1961, the only additional change being made in 1962 being the insertion of the name of Saint Joseph into the Roman Canon). While some conservative "priests," most of whom are not priests at all, will take the time to learn how to offer this modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, others will not, fearing de facto repercussions to their clerical careers (demotion from pastor to curate, being "frozen" as a curate forever without any possibility of an appointment as a parish pastor, possible requests for psychological analysis).
John Allen, Jr., the Vatican correspondent for The National Catholic Reporter, a journal that has been in the vanguard of the conciliarist revolution, criticizing the conciliar "pontiffs" and their "bishops" at times for not being "progressive" enough in their approach to the "Church," wrote an op-ed commentary for the May 30, 2007, edition of The New York Times that demonstrates a bit of nearsighted insight into some aspects of the possibly forthcoming "motu proprio" but also demonstrates a complete whitewashing of authentic liturgical history and a distortion of the differences between the Immemorial Mass of Tradition and the synthetic concoction known as the Novus Ordo Missae. Here is Mr. Allen's editorial:
A SENIOR Vatican official has confirmed that sometime soon Pope Benedict XVI will expand permission for use of what’s popularly known as the Latin Mass, the service that was standard before the Second Vatican Council. Though some details remain vague, one point seems all too clear: When the decision officially comes down, its importance will be hyped beyond all recognition, because doing so serves the purposes of both conservatives and liberals within the church, as well as the press.
Pope Benedict’s intent, according to Vatican authorities, is to make the pre-1960s Mass optional, leaving Catholics free to choose which Mass they want to attend. Because the older Tridentine Mass, named for the 16th-century Council of Trent, has come to symbolize deep tensions in Catholicism, the pope’s decision is sure to trigger an avalanche of commentary.
Many on the Catholic right will hail the move as a death knell for the liturgical reforms of Vatican II, such as use of the vernacular languages and modern music, and participation by the laity, most of which conservatives have long derided as misplaced efforts to make the church “relevant.” The older Mass, many argue, has such beauty and elicits such a sense of awe that, over time, it will triumph, leaving the changes of the last 40 years as a failed experiment.
That argument fails the smell test of contact with reality. For one thing, Catholics old enough to remember the pre-Vatican II Mass know that it’s as capable of being celebrated in drab, uninspiring fashion as any other rite. Moreover, four decades after Vatican II, many Catholic priests don’t even know the old Mass. Given the other demands they face in light of a priest shortage, a good number won’t take the time to learn it.
Most basically, there’s scant evidence of a huge pent-up demand for the old Mass. Since 1984, celebration of the old Mass has been permitted with a dispensation from the local bishop. While some dioceses where it’s allowed report that the celebrations are often well attended, sometimes with a surprising number of younger Catholics, there’s been no widespread exodus from the new rite to the old.
In the end, the normal Sunday experience for the vast majority of Catholics will continue to be the new Mass celebrated in the vernacular. (It’s worth noting, however, that the new Mass can also be celebrated in Latin, with all the “smells and bells” dear to the high-church set.)
Many on the Catholic left, meanwhile, will make a cause célèbre out of the document because, to them, it symbolizes a broad conservative drift in Catholic affairs. They will read it as another sign of a “rollback” on Vatican II.
That argument, too, depends on selective perception. While Benedict certainly wants to call the church back to some Catholic fundamentals, evidence of a systematic lurch to the right is hard to come by. This is the same pope, after all, who scandalized Catholic traditionalists by jettisoning limbo and by praying alongside the grand mufti of Istanbul inside the Blue Mosque in Turkey. On the political front, Benedict has demanded debt relief for impoverished nations, said that “nothing positive” has come from the United States-led war in Iraq, and denounced capitalism as an “ideological promise” that “has proven false.”
And, of course, we in the press will abet the hype because it’s about conflict, which is the motor fuel of storytelling, and because we need to “sell” the story in order to win air time and column inches.
Benedict, a quintessential realist, will probably be among the few who understand right away that his ruling is not terribly earth-shattering. Sources close to the pope I have spoken to say his modest ambition is that over time, the old Mass will exert a “gravitational pull” on the new one, drawing it toward greater sobriety and reverence.
Perhaps — although it’s equally possible that traditionally minded Catholics will now have a broader “opt out” clause, making them less likely to pester priests and bishops about what they see as the defects of the new Mass.
In any event, the real impact of Benedict’s ruling is likely to be measured in small changes over a long arc of time, not in upheavals or revolutions. That reality, however, will do little to lower the rhetorical volume. If only we could convince the activists to slug it out in Latin, leaving the rest of us blissfully oblivious, then we might have something.
Mr. Allen does have a few legitimate insights interspersed with the patented conciliarist view of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition. He is, of course, correct when stating that Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI has not demonstrated a "lurch to the right" during his false "pontificate," pointing out the International Theological Commission's findings about Limbo Ratzinger approved and the latter's visit to the mosque in Turkey as evidence that he, Ratzinger, is just as "progressive" as he was as a young priest. Mr. Allen is also correct in stating that there will not be a huge rush out of the Novus Ordo, although there will be some people here and there who will indeed leave the Novus Ordo for good and be content, most unwittingly, obviously, to hear the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition offered at the hands of non-priests, one of the diabolical traps that escapes the ability of nearsighted revolutionaries even to admit, no less fathom.
Mr. Allen, however, misses some very important points, not the least of which is the simple fact that Joseph Ratzinger knows full well that there will be outspoken opposition from some conciliar "bishops," each of whom is, like himself, a non-bishop, which he knows full well will be used by his traditionalist defenders to demonstrate how "courageous" he, Ratzinger, is to run the risk of offending his own "bishops" in order to show his "generosity" to traditionally-minded Catholics in the conciliar structures, making an overture of "good will" to those in the "recognize and resist" camp, especially in the Society of Saint Pius X, in the process. Ratzinger knows that the exultation in the indult and "resist and recognize" communities will be loud and exuberant. He knows that there will be at least a few in "resist and recognize" camp who will tamp down their criticism of conciliarist novelties and errors and apostasies in order to "wave the papal flag" as the "liberals" howl and scream at the moon in the weeks and months following the release of the "motu proprio." This is all part of a very preternatural plan to coopt traditionally-minded Catholics over the course of the long term to make their peace with the One World Church and to accept the ethos of conciliarism, including the Novus Ordo Missae, as being perfectly compatible with the Catholic Faith.
Over and above all of this, however, is the fact that Mr. Allen does not recognize that the Immemorial Mass of Tradition was not an invention of the Council of Trent and that the Novus Ordo Mass offered in Latin will never satisfy Catholics, no matter how few in number, who recognize that Annibale Bugnini really meant it in 1965 when he was quoted as follows in L'Osservatore Romano:
We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants.
The Immemorial Mass of Tradition long antedates the Council of Trent, as the late Father Adrian Fortescue noted about ninety years ago, explaining that the Missal promulgated by Pope Saint Pius V in 1570 created nothing new whatsoever, that it was indeed, in all of its essential components, the same Mass that had been offered for over fifteen hundred years:
Essentially, the Missal of Pius V is the Gregorian Sacramentary; that again is formed from the Gelasian book, which depends upon the Leonine collection. We find prayers of our Canon in the treatise de Sacramentis and allusions to it in the [Fourth] Century. So the Mass goes back, without essential change, to the age when it first developed out of the oldest Liturgy of all. It is still redolent of that Liturgy, of the days when Caesar ruled the world, and thought he could stamp out the Faith of Christ, when our fathers met together before dawn and sang a hymn to Christ as God. The final result of our enquiry is that, in spite of some unresolved problems, in spite of later changes there is not in Christendom another rite so venerable as ours.
True, there were regional variations of the Mass as events developed in the Middle Ages. Different religious communities had their own missals. To standardize the offering of Holy Mass for the people in the world's dioceses, though, Pope Saint Pius V issued the Missal bearing his name in 1570 and specifically stated that any other local usages that were less than two hundred years old could not be used. The Missale Romanum he promulgated was such a fitting expression of the Mass of the preceding fifteen hundred years that only dioceses, Toledo (with its Mozarabic Rite) and Milan (with its Ambrosian Rite), with rites older than two hundred years opted out of it. This speaks volumes about the fidelity of the Missal of Pope Saint Pius V to the authentic, perennial liturgical tradition of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church.
Pope Saint Pius V permitted local usage prior to 200 years before 1570 in order to preclude the use of any missals or local customs that had in any way been influenced by the likes of John Wycliff and John Hus, to say nothing of efforts made by Catholics in the German states and elsewhere to try to "adapt" the Catholic liturgy to the innovations and novelties of Martin Luther and John Calvin, et al. Pope Saint Pius V wanted to place the Mass of the ages beyond the reach of any heretical influences, understanding that an incorporation of such influences in the context of the liturgy would corrupt Catholic Faith and morals and reduce the worship of God to an exercise in community self-congratulations. In other words, Pope Saint Pius V wanted to provide a bulwark (what we would call a "firewall" in our own day) against any Protestant influences in the liturgy. Pope Saint Pius V knew that Protestantism was from Hell and that its many mutations, both doctrinally and liturgically, would undermine the Faith of Catholics if any concessions were made to its novelties, especially in the offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not, therefore, a show. Our Lady was not waving her arms hysterically as her Divine Son offered Himself up to the Father in Spirit and in Truth. Saint John the Evangelist was not walking around giving a commentary on the events of Good Friday a la Pat Robertson or the late Jerry Falwell or Jimmy Swaggert as he represented the other newly-consecrated bishops at the foot of the Holy Cross. Saint Mary Magdalene was not involved in some spectacular display of maudlin sentimentality. Calvary was solemn.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass must communicate the solemnity and sobriety of Our Lord's Redemptive Act. Such solemnity and sobriety are part and parcel of every aspect of the Mass of the Catechumens and the Mass of the Faithful in the Immemorial Mass of Tradition. Although there are slightly different rubrics in the various offerings of the Mass of Tradition (Pontifical Mass, Solemn High Mass, High Mass, Missa Cantata, Low Mass), each genre has rubrics that are fixed and beyond the ability of the priest to change. There is no plethora of "options" as exist in the Novus Ordo Missae. Our attention is fixed on the actions of the priest acting as an alter Christus, acting in persona Christi, not on his celebratory "style." The Immemorial Mass of Tradition communicates with majesty and solemnity the great love that Our Lord had for us to redeem us by the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood. One can spend his entire life assisting at the Mass of the ages each and every day of his life and still not plumb the depths of this great mystery of love, still not fully come to appreciate fully the singular privilege give to us mere mortals to be fed by that which is denied to the angels: the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity made man in Our Lady's virginal and immaculate womb.
Unlike Pope Saint Pius V, however, the conciliarist revolutionaries--and those in the Liturgical Movement who preceded them in prominence--believe that Protestantism is from God Himself and that its novelties must be incorporated into the context of the Mass in order to appeal more fully to Protestants and in order to make the liturgy "come alive" for Catholics. This is why six liberal Protestants were included as "observers" during the work of the Consilium as it set about the task of constructing a synthetic liturgy that incorporated Protestant (and Jewish) elements into the context an allegedly Catholic act of worship, the Novus Ordo Missae.
Lest anyone contend that the Protestant "observers" did not influence the outcome of the Consilium's work, it is important to remind readers once again that Father Romano Thomassi, a pseudonym of a priest who has written a series of groundbreaking articles over the past five years or so for The Latin Mass: A Journal of Catholic Culture, has demonstrated conclusively from an examination of the correspondence written by some of these Protestant "observers" that they made their "observations" during coffee-breaks in the proceedings, where after those "contributions" were read into the record by bishop-members of the Consilium as their own remarks. Anyone who contends that Protestantism did not influence the synthetic creation of the Novus Ordo Missae is simply refusing to examine the actual facts of the matter, content to mislead others with bluff and bluster that signify only their own ignorance and their intellectual dishonesty as they refuse to examine the evidence that has been marshaled to prove that the Novus Ordo Missae represents a Protestantization of worship for conciliar Catholics.
The result of incorporating Protestant elements into conciliarism's Novus Ordo Missae has not been to attract large numbers of Protestants to the Catholic Faith. It has been to empty Catholic churches and to drive many of those who left in bewilderment and sadness and disappointment into the waiting arms of evangelicals and fundamentalists and Pentecostals. The late Monsignor Klaus Gamber, who was not a traditionalist and was in favor of what has become known as the "reform of the reform," put it this way in his The Reform of the Roman Liturgy:
Was all this really done because of a pastoral concern about the souls of the faithful, or did it not rather represent a radical breach with the traditional rite, to prevent the further use of traditional liturgical texts and thus to make the celebration of the "Tridentime Mass" impossible--because it no loner reflected the new spirit moving through the Church?
Indeed, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the prohibition of the traditional rite was announced at the same time as the introduction of the new liturgical texts; and that a dispensation to continue celebrating the Mass according to the traditional rite was granted only to older priests.
Obviously, the reformers wanted a completely new liturgy, a liturgy that differed from the traditional one in spirit as well as in form; and in no way a liturgy that represented what the Council Fathers had envisioned, i.e., a liturgy that would meet the pastoral needs of the faithful.
Liturgy and faith are interdependent. That is why a new rite was created, a rite that in many ways reflects the bias of the new (modernist) theology. The traditional liturgy simply could not be allowed to exist in its established form because it was permeated with the truths of the traditional faith and the ancient forms of piety. For this reason alone, much was abolished and new rites, prayers and hymns were introduced, as were the new readings from Scripture, which conveniently left out those passages that did not square with the teachings of modern theology--for example, references to a God who judges and punishes.
At the same time, the priests and the faithful are told that the new liturgy created after the Second Vatican Council is identical in essence with the liturgy that has been in use in the Catholic Church up to this point, and that the only changes introduced involved reviving some earlier liturgical forms and removing a few duplications, but above all getting rid of elements of no particular interest.
Most priests accepted these assurances about the continuity of liturgical forms of worship and accepted the new rite with the same unquestioning obedience with which they had accepted the minor ritual changes introduced by Rome from time to time in the past, changes beginning with the reform of the Divine Office and of the liturgical chant introduced by Pope St. Pius X.
Following this strategy, the groups pushing for reform were able to take advantage of and at the same time abuse the sense of obedience among the older priests, and the common good will of the majority of the faithful, while, in many cases, they themselves refused to obey.
The pastoral benefits that so many idealists had hoped the new liturgy would bring about did not materialize. Our churches emptied in spite of the new liturgy (or because of it?), and the faithful continue to fall away from the Church in droves.
Although our young people have been literally seduced in to supporting the new forms of liturgical worship, they have, in fact, become more and more alienated from the faith. They are drawn to religious sects--Christian and non-Christian ones--because fewer and fewer priests teach them the riches of our Catholic faith and the tenets of Christian morality. As for older people, the radical changes made to the traditional liturgy have taken from them the sense of security in their religious home.
The devastation of the Catholic Faith represented by the influences of Protestantism in the Novus Ordo Missae are discernible to any clear-thinking, unprejudiced soul. The late Father Gamber assessed the situation very clearly and soberly. Some self-styled "apologists," however, act as though there are no good doctrinal arguments against the Novus Ordo Missae and that traditionalists can argue merely about "styles" rather than anything of doctrinal substance that has a bearing upon the integrity of the Catholic Faith. This is false.
The late Bishop of Campos, Brazil, the Most Reverend Antonio de Castro Mayer, wrote a very strong letter to Giovanni Montini/Paul VI in 1969 prior to the implementation of the Novus Ordo Missae. The prophetic words of Bishop de Castro Mayer are founded in authentic Catholic scholarship, not in some irrational, emotional belief that the doctrinal problems Bishop de Castro Mayer documented are not real and have not taken their toll on the faith-life of Catholics in the past thirty-eight years:
Most Holy Father,
After a close examination of the Novus Ordo Missae, which will enter into use on November 30 next, and after having prayed and reflected a great deal, I consider that it is my duty, as a Catholic priest and bishop, to lay before Your Holiness my anguish of conscience, and to formulate, with the piety and confidence that a son owes to the Vicar of Christ, the following request.
The Novus Ordo Missae shows, by its omissions, and by the changes that it has brought to the Ordinary of the Mass, as well as by a good number of the general rules that describe the understanding and nature of the new Missal in its essential points, that it does not express, as it ought to do the theology of the Holy Sacrifice as established by the Holy Council of Trent in its XXII session. The teaching of the simple catechism cannot overcome this fact. I attach below the reasons that, in my opinion, justify this conclusion.
The pastoral reasons that could, perhaps, be invoked, initially, in favor of the new structure of the Mass, cannot make us forget the doctrinal arguments that point in the opposite direction. Furthermore, they do not seem to be reasonable. The changes that prepared the Novus Ordo have not helped to bring about an increase in the Faith and the piety of the faithful. To the contrary, they remain very disturbed, with a confusion that the Novus Ordo has increased, for it has encouraged the idea that nothing is unchangeable in the Holy Church, not even the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Moreover, as I indicate in the attached reasons, the Novus Ordo not only fails to inspire fervor, but to the contrary, diminishes the Faith in central truths of the Catholic life, such as the Real Presence of Jesus in the Most Holy Sacrament, the reality of the propitiatory Sacrifice, the hierarchical Priesthood.
I hereby accomplish an imperious duty in conscience by demanding, humbly and respectfully, that Your Holiness might deign, by a positive act that eliminates every doubt, to authorize us to continue using the Ordo Missae of Saint Pius V, whose effectiveness in bringing about the spread of Holy Church and an increase in the fervor of priests and faithful has been proven, as Your Holiness reminded us with so much unction.
I am convinced that Your Holiness’s fatherly kindness will bring to an end the perplexities that have risen in my heart of a priest and bishop.
Prostrate at Your Holiness’ feet, in humble obedience and filial piety, I implore you Apostolic Benediction.
+ Antonio de Castro Mayer
Bishop of Campos, Brazil
COMMENTS ON THE NOVUS ORDO MISSAE
The Novus Ordo Missae consists in general norms for the text of the Ordinary of the Mass. Both the text and the norms propose a new Mass that does not consider sufficiently the definitions of the Council of Trent concerning this matter, and constitutes, for this reason, a grave danger for the integrity and purity of the Catholic Faith. We have only examined here a few points, that, we believe, establish that which I have affirmed.
I. Definition of the Mass
In its no.7 the new Ordo gives the follow as a definition of the Mass: "Cena dominica seu Missa est sacra synaxis seu congregatio populi Dei in unum convenientis, sacerdote praeside, ad memoriale Domini celebrandum. Quare de sanctae ecclesiae locali congregatione eminenter valet promissio Christi: ‘Ubi sunt duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo, ibi sum in medio eorum’" (Mt. 18:10) 1.
In this definition:
There is insistence on the Mass understood as a meal. Moreover, this way of seeing the Mass can be found frequently, all along the general norms (cf. v.g. nos. 8, 48, 55d, 56 etc.). It seems even that the intention of the new Ordo Missae is to inculcate this aspect of the Mass, to the detriment of the other, which is essential, namely that the Mass is a sacrifice.
In fact, in the quasi-definition of the Mass given in article 7, the character of the sacrifice of the Mass is not signified.
Likewise, it attenuates the sacramental character of the priest, that distinguishes him from the faithful.
Furthermore, nothing is said of the intrinsic value of the Mass, independently of the presence of the assembly. Much to the contrary, it is supposed that there is no Mass without the "congregatio populi", for it is the "congregatio" that defines the Mass.
Finally, the text allows a confusion to exist between the Real Presence and the spiritual presence, for it applies to the Mass the text from Saint Matthew which only concerns the spiritual presence.
The confusion between the Real Presence and the spiritual presence, already seen in article 7, is confirmed in article 8, which divides the Mass into a "table of the word" and a "table of the Lord’s body". But it also hides the aspect of sacrifice in the Mass, which is the principal of all, since the aspect of a meal is only a consequence, as can be deduced from Canon 31 of the XXII session of the Council of Trent.
We observe that the two texts from Vatican II, quoted in the notes, do not justify the concept of the Mass proposed in the text. We also note that the few expressions, that are more or less passing references, in which are found expressions such as this, at the Altar: "sacrificium crucis sub signis sacramentalibus praesens efficitur" (no. 259) are not sufficient to undo the ambiguous concept, already inculcated in the definition of the Mass (no. 7), and in many other passages in the general norms.
II. The Purpose of the Mass
The Mass is a sacrifice of praise to the Most Holy Trinity. Such a purpose does not appear explicitly in the new Ordo. To the contrary, that which, in the Mass of Saint Pius V, shows clearly this sacrificial end is suppressed in the new Ordo. Examples include the prayers "Suscipe, Sancta Trinitas" from the Offertory and the final prayer "Placeat, tibi, Sancta Trinitas". Likewise the Preface of the Most Holy Trinity has ceased to be the Preface for Sunday, the Lord’s Day.
As well as being the "sacrificium laudis Sanctissimae Trinitatis" 2, the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice. The Council of Trent insists greatly on this aspect, against the errors of the Protestants (Chapter 1 & Canon 3). Such a purpose does not appear explicitly in the new Ordo. Here and there can be found a reminder of one or other expression that could be understand as implying this concept. But it never appears without the shadow of a doubt. Also, it is absent when the norms declare the purpose of the Mass (no. 54). In fact, it is insufficient to express the theology of the Mass established by the Council of Trent to simply affirm that it brings about "sanctification". It is not clear that this concept necessarily implies that of propitiation. Moreover the propitiatory intention, so clearly visible in the Mass of Saint Pius V, disappears in the New Mass. In fact the Offertory prayers Suscipe Sancte Pater and Offerimus tibi and that for the blessing of the water Deus qui humanae substantiae… reformasti have been replaced by other that make no reference to propitiation at all. It is rather the sense of a spiritual banquet that they impress.
III. The Essence of the Sacrifice
The essence of the Sacrifice of the Mass lies in repeating what Jesus did at the last Supper, and this not as a simple recitation, but accompanied by the gestures. Thus, as the moral theologians have said, it is not enough to simply say again historically what Jesus did. The words of consecration must be pronounced with the intention of repeating what Jesus accomplished, for when the priest celebrates, he represents Jesus Christ, and acts "in persona Christi".3 In the new Ordo there is no such precise statement, although it is essential. To the contrary, in the passage that speaks of the narrative part, nothing is said of the properly sacrificial part. Thus, when it explains the Eucharistic Prayer, it speaks of the "narratio institutionis" 4 (no. 54 d.) in such a way that the expressions: "Ecclesia memoriam ipsius Christi agit" 5 and another at the end of the consecration: "Hoc facite in meam commemorationem" 6 have the meaning indicated by the explanation given in the preceding general norms (no. 54 d.). We remark that the final phrase of the (traditional) consecration "Haec quotiescumque feceritis, in mei memoriam facietis"7 were much more expressive of the reality that in the Mass, it is the action of Jesus Christ which is repeated.
Furthermore, placing other expressions in the midst of the essential words of consecration, namely "Accipite et manducate omnes" 8 and "Accipite et bibite ex eo omnes" 9, introduce the narrative part into the same sacrificial act. Whereas, in the Tridentine Mass the text and movements guide the priest naturally to accomplish the propitiatory sacrificial action and almost impose this intention on the priest who celebrates. In this way the "lex supplicandi" 10 is perfectly in conformity with the "lex credendi" 11. We cannot say this for the New Ordo Missae. However, the New Ordo Missae ought to make it easier for the celebrant to have the intention necessary to accomplish validly and worthily the act of the Holy Sacrifice, especially given the importance of this action, not mentioning the instability of modern times, nor even the psychological conditions of the younger generations.
IV. The Real Presence
The sacrifice of the Mass is bound to the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. The Real Presence is a consequence of the sacrifice. By transsubstantiation the change of the substance of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of the Savior is accomplished, and thus the sacrifice takes place. As a consequence the perpetual Victim is present on the altar. The Blessed Sacrament is nothing other than the Victim of the Sacrifice, who remains once the sacrificial act has been accomplished. As a consequence of the new definition of the Mass (no. 7) the new Ordo allows ambiguity to exist concerning the Real Presence, which is more or less confused with the simply spiritual presence, indicated by the phrase "where two or three are gathered in my name".
Moreover, the suppression of nearly all the genjflexions, traditional expression of adoration in the Latin church, the thanksgiving seated, the possibility of celebrating without an altar stone, on a simple table, the equating of the eucharistic banquet with a spiritual meal, all lead to the obscuring of the Faith in the Real Presence.
The equating of the eucharistic banquet to a spiritual meal leaves open the idea that Jesus’ presence in the Blessed Sacrament is bound to its use, as his presence in the word of God. From this it is not difficult to conclude with the Lutheran error, especially in a society that is little prepared to think on a higher plane. The same conclusion is favored by the function of the altar: it is only a table, on which there is not normally place for the tabernacle, in which the Victim of the sacrifice is customarily kept. The same can be said for the custom for the faithful to communicate with the same host as the celebrant. By itself, this gives the idea that once the sacrifice is completed, there is no longer any place for reserving the Blessed Sacrament. Thus none of the changes in the new Ordo Missae lead to greater fervor in the Faith towards the Real Presence, but they rather diminish it.
V. The hierarchical priesthood
The Council of Trent defined that Jesus instituted his apostles priests, in order that they, and the other priests, their successors, might offer His Body and Blood (Session xxii, Canon 2). In this manner, the accomplishment of the Sacrifice of the Mass is an act that requires priestly consecration. On the other hand, the same Council of Trent condemned the Protestant thesis, according to which all Christians would be priests of the New Testament. Hence it is that, according to the Faith, the hierarchical priest is alone capable of accomplishing the sacrifice of the New Law. This truth is diluted in the new Ordo Missae.
In this Missal, the Mass belongs more to the people than to the priest. It belongs also the priest, but as a part of the assembly. He no longer appears as the mediator "ex hominibus assumptus in iis quae sunt ad Deum" 12 inferior to Jesus Christ and superior to the faithful, as Saint Robert Bellarmine says. He is not the judge who absolves. He is simply the brother who presides.
We could make other observations to confirm what we have said above. However, we feel that the points that we have raised suffice to show that the new Ordo Missae is not faithful to the theology of the Mass, as established definitively by the Council of Trent, and that consequently it constitutes a serious danger for the purity of the Faith.
+ Antonio, Bishop of Campos
Time, sadly, has proved Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer, not an arm armchair theologian or blogger, to be sure, to have been prophetic in his concerns about the Novus Ordo Missae, which is founded on a contempt for our Catholic past, a contempt it exhibits very directly in its dismissal of "outward signs of penance that belong to another age in the history of the Church" (Paragraph 15 of the General Instruction to the Roman Missal) and its Jansenist suppression of the feast days of saints and the omission of the references in its Collects to the prodigies wrought by the saints, meaning, of course, that the "Church" had it "wrong" until 1969, accepting "legends" as true and representing them as true in the "outdated" Immemorial Mass of Tradition.
The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the unbloody re-presentation (or perpetuation) of the one Sacrifice of the Son to the Father in Spirit and Truth on the wood of the Holy Cross. Its offering must be sacred, not profane. The sanctuary must reflect the eternity of God, Who exists outside of time and space, a preserve wherein an alter Christus is truly offering the Sacrifice of the Cross and at the same time giving a glimpse of the glories of Heaven itself. A genuine liturgical rite must also reflect the immutability and permanence of God and His Holy Truths. The Novus Ordo Missae seeks to make the "liturgy" bound to a particular time and place, obliterating the important distinctions between the sacerdotal priesthood the ordained priest and the common priesthood of the faithful, introducing instability and uncertainty and ceaseless change as natural and normal parts of "liturgical" life," thereby convincing most Catholics that all things pertaining to God, including doctrine, are subject to change and re-evaluation. The Novus Ordo Missae has taught people to expect change, both liturgically and doctrinally. The more, the better.
What the revolutionaries do not understand, however, is that the Novus Ordo Missae will be swept away one day, as will conciliarism itself. No, this will not happen as a result of the "motu proprio" that Dario "Cardinal" Castrillon Hoyos, the President of "Pontifical" Commission Ecclesia Dei, has said will be forthcoming soon. The Novus Ordo Missae and everything else to do will be swept away by the Triumph of the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. The true Catholic Faith will be restored in a flash, just as everything was restored by God to Holy Job:
Then Job answered the Lord, and said: I know that thou canst do all things, and no thought is hid from thee. Who is this that hideth counsel without knowledge? Therefore I have spoken unwisely, and things that above measure exceeded my knowledge. Hear, and I will speak: I will ask thee, and do thou tell me. With the hearing of the ear, I have heard thee, but now my eye seeth thee.
Therefore I reprehend myself, and do penance in dust and ashes. And after the Lord had spoken these words to Job, he said to Eliphaz the Themanite: My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends, because you have not spoken the thing that is right before my, as my servant Job hath. Take unto you therefore seven oxen, and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer for yourselves a holocaust: and my servant Job shall pray for you: his face I will accept, that folly be not imputed to you: for you have not spoken right things before me, as my servant Job hath. So Eliphaz the Themanite, and Baldad the Suhite, and Sophar the Naamathite went, and did as the Lord had spoken to them, and the Lord accepted the face of Job. The Lord also was turned at the penance of Job, when he prayed for his friends. And the Lord gave Job twice as much as he had before.
And all his brethren came to him, and all his sisters, and all that knew him before, and they ate bread with him in his house: and bemoaned him, and comforted him upon all the evil that God had brought upon him. And every man gave him one ewe, and one earring of fold. And the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning. And he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses. And he had seven sons, and three daughters. And he called the names of one Dies, and the name of the second Cassia, and the name of the third Cornustibil. And there were not found in all the earth women so beautiful as the daughters of Job: and their father gave them inheritance among their brethren.
And Job lived after these things, a hundred and forty years, and he saw his children, and his children's children, unto the fourth generation, and he died an old man, and full of days. (Job 42: 1-16)
Yes, God will restore to His Holy Church "twice as much" as before if we do penance as the consecrated slave of Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart, offering our sufferings and penances and humiliations through that Immaculate Heart to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. As my dear wife Sharon said to me as I was writing this article, "Who remembers the names of those who laughed at Job in his distress and suffering?" Indeed. Who will remember the names of those who laugh at us as we maintain the fullness of the Catholic Faith without making any concessions to anything to do with conciliarism or offer any recognition to the false shepherds in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism? We will remember the names of the true bishops and priests who remained faithful despite the pressures on them to "conform" to the demands of human respect. The names of near-sighted revolutionaries will be burned away as the fog of the conciliarism they helped to propagate is burned away by the brightness of the Son of God made Man in Our Lady's Virginal and Immaculate Womb.
May we simply do our parts as the consecrated slaves of Our Lady's Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart to make reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, praying as many Rosaries as our states-in-life permit, promoting the Brown Scapular and the Miraculous Medal to Catholics and passing out the Green Scapular to non-Catholics and those who have fallen away from the Faith.Yes, all will be restored in an instant. We must have trust in our Heavenly Mother's intercessory power to give a true 20/20 vision, that of the true Catholic Faith, to all men and women on the face of this earth, so that they will be loyal subjects of Christ the King and of herself, our Virginal and Immaculate Queen.
Viva Cristo Rey!
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint Joan of Arc, pray for us.
Saint Angela Merici, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Philip Neri, pray for us.
Saint Augustine of Canterbury, pray for us.
Saint Athanasius, pray for us.
Saints Monica, pray for us.
Saint Jude, pray for us.
Saint John the Beloved, pray for us.
Saint Francis Solano, pray for us.
Saint John Bosco, pray for us.
Saint Dominic Savio, pray for us.
Saint Scholastica, pray for us.
Saint Benedict, pray for us.
Saint Anthony of Padua, pray for us.
Saint Antony of the Desert, pray for us.
Saint Francis of Assisi, pray for us.
Saint Thomas Aquinas, pray for us.
Saint Bonaventure, pray for us.
Saint Augustine, pray for us.
Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, pray for us.
Saint Francis Xavier, pray for us.
Saint Peter Damian, pray for us.
Saint Frances Xavier Cabrini, pray for us.
Saint Lucy, pray for us.
Saint Monica, pray for us.
Saint Agatha, pray for us.
Saint Philomena, pray for us.
Saint Cecilia, pray for us.
Saint John Mary Vianney, pray for us.
Saint Vincent de Paul, pray for us.
Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.
Saint Athanasius, pray for us.
Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque, pray for us.
Saint Isaac Jogues, pray for us.
Saint Rene Goupil, pray for us.
Saint John Lalonde, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel Lalemont, pray for us.
Saint Noel Chabanel, pray for us.
Saint Charles Garnier, pray for us.
Saint Anthony Daniel, pray for us.
Saint John DeBrebeuf, pray for us.
Saint Alphonsus de Liguori, pray for us.
Saint Dominic, pray for us.
Saint Hyacinth, pray for us.
Saint Basil, pray for us.
Saint Vincent Ferrer, pray for us.
Saint Sebastian, pray for us.
Saint Tarcisius, pray for us.
Saint Bridget of Sweden, pray for us.
Saint Gerard Majella, pray for us.
Saint John of the Cross, pray for us.
Saint Teresa of Avila, pray for us.
Saint Bernadette Soubirous, pray for us.
Saint Genevieve, pray for us.
Saint Vincent de Paul, pray for us.
Pope Saint Pius X, pray for us
Pope Saint Pius V, pray for us.
Saint Rita of Cascia, pray for us.
Saint Louis de Montfort, pray for us.
Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich, pray for us.
Venerable Pauline Jaricot, pray for us.
Father Miguel Augustin Pro, pray for us.
Francisco Marto, pray for us.
Jacinta Marto, pray for us.
Juan Diego, pray for us.
The Longer Version of the Saint Michael the Archangel Prayer, composed by Pope Leo XIII, 1888
O glorious Archangel Saint Michael, Prince of the heavenly host, be our defense in the terrible warfare which we carry on against principalities and powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, spirits of evil. Come to the aid of man, whom God created immortal, made in His own image and likeness, and redeemed at a great price from the tyranny of the devil. Fight this day the battle of our Lord, together with the holy angels, as already thou hast fought the leader of the proud angels, Lucifer, and his apostate host, who were powerless to resist thee, nor was there place for them any longer in heaven. That cruel, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil or Satan who seduces the whole world, was cast into the abyss with his angels. Behold this primeval enemy and slayer of men has taken courage. Transformed into an angel of light, he wanders about with all the multitude of wicked spirits, invading the earth in order to blot out the Name of God and of His Christ, to seize upon, slay, and cast into eternal perdition, souls destined for the crown of eternal glory. That wicked dragon pours out. as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity. These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on Her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck the sheep may be scattered. Arise then, O invincible Prince, bring help against the attacks of the lost spirits to the people of God, and give them the victory. They venerate thee as their protector and patron; in thee holy Church glories as her defense against the malicious powers of hell; to thee has God entrusted the souls of men to be established in heavenly beatitude. Oh, pray to the God of peace that He may put Satan under our feet, so far conquered that he may no longer be able to hold men in captivity and harm the Church. Offer our prayers in the sight of the Most High, so that they may quickly conciliate the mercies of the Lord; and beating down the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, do thou again make him captive in the abyss, that he may no longer seduce the nations. Amen.
Verse: Behold the Cross of the Lord; be scattered ye hostile powers.
Response: The Lion of the Tribe of Juda has conquered the root of David.
Verse: Let Thy mercies be upon us, O Lord.
Response: As we have hoped in Thee.
Verse: O Lord hear my prayer.
Response: And let my cry come unto Thee.
Verse: Let us pray. O God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, we call upon Thy holy Name, and as suppliants, we implore Thy clemency, that by the intercession of Mary, ever Virgin, immaculate and our Mother, and of the glorious Archangel Saint Michael, Thou wouldst deign to help us against Satan and all other unclean spirits, who wander about the world for the injury of the human race and the ruin of our souls.