Friday, July 9, 2021


 The manufactured Ordinary Form of the Mass celebrated by Pope Francis ad orientem in organic continuity with the organically developed Extraordinary Form of the Mass:

Finally Father Anthony Ruff, OSB of Praytell confirms what Pope Benedict XVI often said about the “reformed” Mass now known as the Ordinary Form of the Mass. It was manufactured and imposed upon Catholics both clergy and laity. It did not develop in an organic way as the Tridentine Mass did over the centuries with the final organic development encoded in the 1962 Roman Missal.

This is what Fr. Anthony says about the manufacturing of the “Reformed Liturgy” which confirms Pope Benedict’s critique:

All the evidence indicates that the fathers of Vatican II intended not that the old rite continue, but rather that it be entirely replaced by a reformed rite. Here is a quick selection of relevant phrases from Sacrosanctum Concilium:

… “reform of the liturgy,” “rites revised,” “a general restoration of the liturgy itself,” “elements subject to change,” “both texts and rites drawn up,” “new forms,” “liturgical books revised as soon as possible,” “revision of the liturgy,” “rites should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions,” “more reading from holy scripture, more varied and suitable,” “no rigid uniformity,” “legitimate variations and adaptations,” “drawing up rites and devising rubrics,” “adaptations,” “an even more radical adaptation of the liturgy,” “restoration of the liturgy,” “necessary experiments,” “rite of Mass revised,” “rites simplified,” “elements discarded,” “elements restored,” “more representative portion of the holy scriptures,” “prayer of the faithful restored,” “communion under both kinds,” “new rite for concelebration,” “changes have become necessary,” “particular rituals prepared,” “catechumenate restored,” “both rites of baptism of adults revised,” “rite for baptism of infants revised,” “baptismal rite should contain variants,” “a new rite drawn up,” “rite of confirmation revised,” “rite and formulas for sacrament of penance revised,” “number of anointings adapted,” “prayers of rite of anointing revised,” “ordination rites revised,” “marriage rite revised and enriched,” “sacramentals to undergo a revision,” “rite of religious profession drawn up,” “rite of burial of infants revised,” “Compline drawn up,” “Matins adapted,” “Prime suppressed,” “revising the Roman office,” “psalms no longer distributed throughout one week,” readings from sacred scripture arranged,” “liturgical year revised,” “more use of baptismal features proper to the Lenten liturgy,” “an edition prepared containing simpler melodies,” “revision of the liturgical books,” “laws less suited to the reformed liturgy harmonized or abolished” …

My comments: The Ordinary Form of the Mass is what it is and even since 1970, there has been some 51 years of organic development of that 1970 Roman Missal. The best organic development was the new and glorious English translation of the Mass which may need some further organic development. 

What Fr. Anthony doesn’t get is that in terms of the organic implementation of Vatican II with the hermeneutics of continuity which is a valid hermeneutic by the way, a future pope, like Pope Benedict reinstated the 1962 Roman Missal as a valid liturgy for the Universal Church just as the Ordinariate’s Liturgy is such also. 

But, and this is a big but for both the orthodox and heterodox to recognize, the liturgy is for the worship of God and in the Ordinary Form today, chances are that a person will attend Mass in a language unknown to them but it won’t be Latin. 

But even if I attend Mass in Chinese and don’t understand a word of it, that Mass is still the worship of God. 

And no one should go to Mass because there is an army of liturgical ministers, especially Eucharistic Minsters, parading throughout the church building at Communion time to show that the Mass has lay ministers. That is not worship of God that is a sociological function in the extreme horizontal way. 

The Tridentine Liturgy erases such silly sentiments and places the focus on the worship of God alone.  


Mark Thomas said...

Yesterday, I had made the mistake here of having engaged haters of the Novus Ordo. They despise the Novus Ordo. They trash the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Ordinary Form.

Speaking humanly, they are unreachable.

Via the venom that they have spewed at the OF, they have denigrated the ministries of countless holy priests who offer the Novus Ordo.

The haters of the OF have denigrated the millions upon millions of holy Catholics who love, and are feed spiritually, by the Ordinary Form.

Said folks are divisive. They are liturgical warmongers.

They reject Pope Benedict XVI's/Church's teaching that there are two forms of the one Roman Rite.

Pope Benedict XVI: "It is not appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they were “two Rites”. Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the same rite.

"There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture."

Nevertheless, the liturgical warmongers reject Pope Benedict XVI's/Church's teachings in question.

Even more ridiculous is that said folks have attempted to pit Pope Benedict XVI against the Novus Ordo.

That is, they have pretended that Pope Benedict XVI despised the Novus Ordo...and employed Summorum Pontificum to drive the Novus Ordo out of the Church.

Utter nonsense.

He declared that his positive reason for having issued Summorum Pontificum was to ensure that those who desired the TLM would not break from the Church/return those who have abandoned the prevent a schism.

In the meantime, "the two Forms of the usage of the Roman Rite can be mutually enriching..."

However, the liturgical warmongers will not have that.

They refuse to side with Pope Benedict XVI/the Church. They prefer to side with Satan.

Anyway, the God-pleasing way forward is the path on which Father McDonald, God's holy priest, has traveled. The path to liturgical and respect for the TLM, as well as Novus Ordo.

The way of Father McDonald is the holy Catholic way.


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

To the liturgical warmongers: Those who have attacked the TLM...those who have attacked the Novus Ordo.


"Lastly, in faithful obedience to tradition, the sacred Council declares that holy Mother Church holds all lawfully acknowledged rites to be of equal right and dignity;"



-- " belongs to the Popes to examine current forms of worship, to introduce new ones and to regulate the arranging of worship..."

******* "to introduce new ones..." *******


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...


30 April, 2011

"The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church."


Mark Thomas

Pierre said...

Mark Thomas - you are the one who is unreachable. I do not “hate” the OF even though it has been a proven flop. When 80 percent of Americans attended Sunday Mass prior to the Council and bow only 15 percent do undee the “new and improved” OF, some introspection is required. What do you think the point of Father McDonald’s blog is? He is continually preaching for reform to the OF so it is much more like the EF. You truly are living in a fantasyland but you are in good company - there are many clueless bishops and priests who continue to beat that old tambourine that you are. Please go over to Father Z’s blog and share your “wisdom” there

Anthony said...

Yesterday, I had made the mistake here of having engaged haters of the Novus Ordo. They despise the Novus Ordo. They trash the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Ordinary Form.

While this is regrettable, it would not have been have been so pronounced if for the past 50 years the promoters of liturgical reform had not engaged in their own hatred and despising of the the traditional form of the Mass. It is the TLM, not the Novus Ordo, which has been severely restricted by the bishops. Adherents of the TLM are always asked to accept the Novus Ordo, but those promoting the Novus Ordo are never asked to accept the TLM. They way to peace within the Church is for all sides to accept the validity of both forms. REMOVE ALL THE RESTRICTIONS FROM THE OLD MASS: allow the faithful to organize their own parish for the TLM and stop blocking vocations of those attracted to the TLM. The goal among Catholics should be unity, not uniformity. Forced uniformity only creates divisions.

Pierre said...

Anthony, well said!

Mark Thomas said...

I believe, without question, the following:

In the face of the sick-to-its-core Traditional Catholic Movement, I believe that God has called Father McDonald to provide the TLM to holy Catholics who desire the TLM, but do not wish to associate with the sick Traditional Catholic Movement.

I am convinced that from there, God will initiate a worldwide holy Traditional Catholic Movement to bypass that which has posed as traditional Catholicism.

Otherwise, we will remain mired in the liturgical warmongering filth that the false, horrific, "Traditional Catholic Movement" has, for decades, unleashed within Holy Mother Church.

Now is not the time for Rome, as well as our bishops to, as rumored, move against the TLM.

It is time that our holy Churchmen, a charismatic leader...a Bishop Barron...somebody from their ranks seize the establish a movement that will bring, in healthy fashion, the TLM to Latin Church parishes.

We need said movement to exhort holy priests who, as the result of the sick-to-its-core Traditional Catholic Movement, have distanced themselves from the TLM, to establish TLMs at one parish after another.

We require such a movement to establish in widespread fashion the liturgical peace plan that holy Pope Benedict XVI initiated.

Again, now is not the time for our Churchmen, in reaction to the sickness that the Traditional Catholic Movement has unleashed among us, to give up on the full implementation of Pope Benedict XVI's liturgical peace plan.

May our bishops take note of Father McDonald, and additional holy priests of his ilk, who have demonstrated that the TLM, and Novus Ordo, the two forms of the one Roman Rite, can exist with each other in wonderful harmony.


Mark Thomas

Pierre said...

Mark Thomas,

Sounds like you are sticking with the Sick Liberal Catholic Movement which has devastated the Church.

John said...

For what it is worth:

The so called MT is a troll. He is not sincere in his believes but come to this blog to agitate the sincere Catholic folks about V2 and the liturgy in particular. He is sitting in his lair and gets off on how much irritation he can create. (Probably, Fr. Ruff from PT?) Best just to ignore him.

Mark Thomas said...

Anthony, thank you for your response. I appreciate several points that you made.

Anthony said...

"It is the TLM, not the Novus Ordo, which has been severely restricted by the bishops."

You are correct.

In 1988 A.D., Pope Saint John Paul II declared that "respect must everywhere be shown for the feelings of all those who are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, by a wide and generous application of the directives already issued some time ago by the Apostolic See for the use of the Roman Missal according to the typical edition of 1962."

The bishops all but ignored/blocked Pope Saint John Paul II's teaching in question.

In far too many ways, Summorum Pontificum has also been ignored/blocked.

Anthony, I agree with you on that.


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Anthony said..."Adherents of the TLM are always asked to accept the Novus Ordo, but those promoting the Novus Ordo are never asked to accept the TLM."

Anthony, Holy Mother Church has taught that respect must be shown to the TLM.

Pope Benedict XVI declared that there "there is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal. In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture.

"What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.

"It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place."

Vatican II teaches that "the sacred Council declares that holy Mother Church holds all lawfully acknowledged rites to be of equal right and dignity; that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way."


Mark Thomas

Mark Thomas said...

Anthony said..."They way to peace within the Church is for all sides to accept the validity of both forms."

Anthony, you and I agree on that.

Holy Mother Church has insisted all sides must accept the validity of both forms.

However, far too many folks — liturgical warmongers — on both sides have rejected said teaching.

The anti-TLM folks have sided with Satan as they have preferred liturgical warfare to peaceful existence with the EF.

The anti-Novus Ordo folks have sided with Satan as they have preferred liturgical warfare to peaceful existence with the OF.

It is unfortunate that said folks feel the need to attack the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

Anthony, in one way after another, you and I are in agreement in regard to the liturgical way forward within the Church.

Anthony, brother, peace and good health to you and your family.


Mark Thomas

Pierre said...

Mark Thomas,

Most of the people attacking the “Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” are 55 percent of the Novus Ordo types who do not believe in the Real Presence. Get it?

Anonymous said...


I am in no way here being sarcastic or attempting to be ironic.
But I believe your figure of 55% is a charitable underestimation.

The biggest problem, I believe, and based on my and other's experiences, are the thousands of priests over the past 50 years, who at best give very little emphasis to the Mass as a holy sacrifice; to say nothing of probably thousands of priests who will admit - if only privately and off the record - they really believe the Mass as a holy sacrifice, as traditionally understood, is an outdated notion of the Eucharist.

This has led to literally millions of average Catholic lay people around the world not so much rejecting the Mass as a holy sacrifice as never having been properly or truly taught, informed and formed etc re a core traditional belief of Catholicism - that is: the Mass as a holy sacrifice.

I am sure some will challenge the above. That is OK. My and other's experience, is only based on our, for example, having sons and daughters, neices and nephews, grandchildren etc complete up to 12 to 13 years of education in Catholic schools in recent decades.

Or anyone could also consult (sorry this last bit is a little sarcastic) :

The Research Institute of the Bloody Obvious.


Pierre said...

Anonymous at 9:50 PM,

Your points are legitimate. I used the word "attack" as a means of turning those words back on our resident troll. To be honest, I cannot recall at a Novus Ordo Mass a priest ever referring to the Mass as the Unbloody Sacrifice on Calvary as occurred frequently prior to the Council. My biggest complaint with the Church following the Council is that the Church stopped teaching the basics of the Catholic Faith and instead focused on love, love, love. But, do not Protestants love? Jews? Even Atheists? Even sending your child to a Catholic school does not guarantee the Faith is being taught. In many cases quite the opposite occurs. I know dozens of Catholics who had the "benefit" of a Catholic education and they no longer attend Mass or if they do, quite infrequently.

I suspect like you, that many priests are modern day Cranmers who do not believe in the Mass as a Holy Sacrifice.