This is a lecture on the reforms of the Mass after Vatican II. One of the major flaws in it is that the lecturer states that it was Vatican II that reformed the Mass. It was not. It was a committee men, mostly bishops and priests, chosen by Pope St. Paul VI after Vatican II, called, Concilium, who reformed the Mass and Pope Paul VI approved.
Thus the reform of the Mass after Vatican II was a work of a committee which the reigning pope, with his own authority, approved and promulgated.
What we have today is not what Vatican II recommended. What Vatican II recommended some vernacular but maintains Latin, Gregorian Chant, active/actual participation and the expansion of the lectionary to include more Scripture. It called for noble simplicity and the elimination of “useless” repetition.
VATICAN II DID NOT REFORM THE MASS! THAT WAS DONE LATER BY POPE PAUL VI AND A GROUP OF MEN WHO FABRICATED A NEW RITE. FABRICATION IS POPE EMERITUS I WORDS, NOT MINE.
But, here is a somewhat prejudicial lecture to an extremely small group of aging Catholics in a pre-Vatican II and magnificent large church in San Francisco. This Church is striking in that it is pre-Vatican II the only change a free standing altar in front of the magnificent older altar.
Vatican II did not ask that churches be wreckovated, high altars not used or removed and altar railings removed. Vatican II did not mandate standing for Holy Communion, receiving in the hand and the removal of art and statues in churches:
17 comments:
I think a credible argument could be made that the whole Novus Ordo project was Ultra Vires and it certainly was unprecedented in Church history. A pope is not an absolute monarch. Too bad the Vatican did not conduct a synod of the laity when it was pushing this flop. The reforms were pushed by a little politburo who could have given a tinker’s dam about what the laity thought. The hubris of this closed group boggles the mind. That being said, The people have voted with their feet.
St. Ignatius Church is one of the largest churches on the west coast and one of the more beautiful churches in San Francisco. When you walk inside, you get the feeling that it could double as a hangar for a zeppelin, it is so huge. Unfortunately, it belongs to the Jesuits and is on the campus of USF. I'll reserve judgment on whatever content the video has to share, since it is so long, I simply do not have time to watch it.
Popes Saint Paul VI, as well as Saint John Paul II, insisted that the Holy Mass was reformed in line with Vatican II.
Pope Saint John Paul II, for example, heaped praise upon the experts who, with Pope Saint Paul VI's authorization, worked to reform the Liturgy.
Just eight days ago, via the Rorate Caeli blog, liturgical warmongers Peter Kwasniewski, as well as New Catholic, launched another of their countless attacks against the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
Peter Kwasniewski stated that "Paul VI’s new liturgical books, drafted in unseemly haste by an audacious committee of arrogant men who placed themselves above and outside of the stream of tradition..."
Conversely, via his Apostolic Letter, Pope Saint John Paul II declared:
"With a view to the practical implementation of the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Liturgy. Pope Paul VI instituted a Consilium.
"Later the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, and they carried out the task entrusted to them with generosity, competence and promptness.
Pope Saint John Paul II declared as well:
"The reform of the rites and the liturgical books was undertaken immediately after the promulgation of the Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium and was brought to an effective conclusion in a few years thanks to the considerable and self less work of a large number of experts and bishops from all parts of the world."
"This work was undertaken in accordance with the conciliar principles of fidelity to tradition and openness to legitimate development, and so it is possible to say that the reform of the Liturgy is strictly traditional and in accordance with the ancient usage of the holy Fathers."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
The Novus Ordo is a flop - listing your non sequiturs does not change that
This predictable "conversation" is getting to be TOO pred
What the presenter does not indicate as she gushes over Pope Francis erasing both Popes John Paul and Benedict is how this has undermined the authority of papal documents and papal Magisterium. Just as this pope has abrogated Benedict’s Magisterium on the liturgy, the next pope can do the same to Francis and his documents.
"VATICAN II DID NOT REFORM THE MASS! THAT WAS DONE LATER BY POPE PAUL VI AND A GROUP OF MEN WHO FABRICATED A NEW RITE. FABRICATION IS POPE EMERITUS I WORDS, NOT MINE."
I wonder as to the context of then-Cardinal Ratzinger's "fabrication" remark.
Did he refer to manner in which some priests, along with parish liturgical committees, have fabricated liturgies?
But if we are talking about the official Rite, then the following stands in opposition to the notion of banal, fabricated liturgy:
Pope Benedict XVI declared via Summorum Pontificum:
"In more recent times, the Second Vatican Council expressed the desire that the respect and reverence due to divine worship should be renewed and adapted to the needs of our time. In response to this desire, our predecessor Pope Paul VI in 1970 approved for the Latin Church revised and in part renewed liturgical books; translated into various languages throughout the world, these were willingly received by the bishops as well as by priests and the lay faithful.
"Pope John Paul II approved the third typical edition of the Roman Missal. In this way the Popes sought to ensure that “this liturgical edifice, so to speak ... reappears in new splendour in its dignity and harmony.”
========================================================================================
-- If the Mass is banal and fabricated, then why, via the above, did Pope Benedict XVI declare that, in response to Vatican II, the liturgy "reappears in new splendour in its dignity and harmony.”
==========================================================================================
Via Summorum Pontificfum, Pope Benedict XVI declared:
"The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite."
Pope Benedict XVI (then-Cardinal Ratzinger) insisted supposedly that the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI is banal and fabricated.
However, he insisted that said Mass is the "ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite."
Banal, fabricated liturgy will not renew the Church. Pope Benedict XVI knew that.
That is why I question the context of the "banal, fabricated" quote.
I find it difficult to believe that Pope Benedict would have permitted banal, fabricated liturgy to have served as the "ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
My parish offers the Missal of Pope Paul VI with great reverence, ad orientem, Latin, all male servers, all male lay readers, and communion offered at the altar rail with no extraordinary ministers of holy communion. Thus, in continuity with our Latin Rite patrimony. Yet when I attend the traditional Latin Mass at times I wonder why any of it was changed. As long as I can respond as I typically do during the Novus Ordo Mass, I wouldn't mind only attending the once known extraordinary form of the Roman Rite. At the end of the day, I'm a twelve year convert and all I want to be is Catholic. I don't need made up 'spirit of Vatican II' nonsense in the liturgy, and teachings of the Church. The modernists can hopefully someday stop leading people to hell.
Again, I question the context of Emeritus' (then-Cardinal Ratzinger) "banal, fabricated" liturgy remark.
But if he meant that the reformed Roman Liturgy is banal and fabricated, then Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI contradicted himself in monumental fashion.
Pope Benedict XVI declared:
-- That the reformed Mass can enrich the TLM. How can a supposed banal, fabricated liturgy enrich the TLM?
-- "There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal."
On the one side, supposed banal, fabricated liturgy, does not contradict, on the other side, traditional liturgy?
=======================================================================
-- "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."
The supposed banal, fabricated Missal does not contradict the Missal of 1962 A.D. There is not a rupture between the supposed banal, fabricated Missal, and the Missal of 1962 A.D.
How is that possible?
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Drew,
You are fortunate - your parish is an exception. I was trained before the Council and used a Missal and Kyriale to say and sing the prayers at Mass. The reforms were unneccessary
Ah yes, PF is the gift that keeps on giving:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-appoints-pro-abortion-world-economic-forum-speaker-to-pontifical-academy-for-life/?utm_source=popular
I have not encountered from Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI an explanation as to the context of his "fabricated, banal" remark.
Anti-Novus Ordo folks for decades have employed said comment to "prove" that Emeritus stands with them in opposition to the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
However, as I have noted, Emeritus has, time and again, insisted that the supposed fabricated, banal, Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI is in line with the TLM/Tradition...and can even enrich the TLM.
How is that possible in regard to a supposed fabricated, banal Liturgy?
Cardinal Ratzinger:
"Lest there be any misunderstanding, let me add that as far as its content is concerned (apart from a few criticisms), I am very grateful for the new Missal, for the way it has enriched the treasury of prayers and prefaces, for the new Eucharistic prayers and the increased number of texts for use on weekdays, etc., quite apart from the availability of the vernacular."
Pax.
Mark Thomas
It certainly is, TJM. Yeah, I tend to agree.
One minor correction, the Mass is in English with various prayers in Latin. Also, we do a ‘low Mass’ on Sundays where everything is spoken in English similar to the daily Mass. My wife and I are usually at the ‘low Mass’ most Sundays.
The reform of the Mass reminds me of: Mark 2-21
21 Nobody sews on a piece of new cloth to patch an old cloak; if that is done, the new piecing takes away threads from the old cloth, and makes the rent in it worse.
So, in reality, the situation with the Mass is even more problematic since there was nothing to patch in the first place. Instead, the reformers made holes in an otherwise intact garment. Ever since we must wear this new creation even though it seems to fit no one.
Mark Thomas,
You can continue to repeat your non sequiturs all you like but the Novus Ordo has been a flop of epic proportions..
Pope Benedict issued Summorum Pontificum as a preliminary step to fixing or replacing the Novus Ordo. If you cannot comprehend that, there is no help for you. The Novus Ordo is banal, puerile and a source of disunity.
How old are you, 16?
TJM,
Take it easy. Maybe he WANTS someone to try to sell him a car.
Jerome Merwick,
Spot on. Fyi, Jerome is my middle name
Post a Comment