I copy below what is at Fr. Z’s blog. It makes a great point, because Bishop Bugnini, with St. Pope Paul VI’s promulgation, did to the 1962 Roman Missal what he might have done to the Eastern Rite St. John Chrysostom Divine Liturgy if he had the chance and authority to do so:
Peter Kwasniewski invites a mind experiment.
Let us run with this thought experiment for a moment. Imagine the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom as our starting point. Now, take away most of the litanies; substitute a newly-composed anaphora (with only the words of consecration remaining the same); change the troparia, kontakia, prokeimena, and readings; greatly reduce the priestly prayers, incensations, and signs of reverence; and while we’re at it, hand cup and spoon to the laity, so they can tuck in like grown-ups. [By the way, I recently published at NLM two satirical posts that presented, in detail, such a “reform” of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom: see here and here.]
Would anyone in his right mind say that this is still the Byzantine Divine Liturgy in any meaningful sense of the term?
Sure, it might be “valid,” but it would be a different rite, a different liturgy.
Just for good measure, let’s say we also remove the iconostasis, turn the priest around, take away some of his vestments and substitute ugly ones, and replace all the common tones of the ordinary chants with new melodies reminiscent of Broadway show tunes and anti-Vietnam folk songs. Now we’d have not only a different rite but a totally different experience. It is not the same phenomenon; it is not the same idea (in Newman’s sense of the word “idea”); it is not the expression of the same worldview; indeed, it is not the same religion, if we take the word in the strict meaning of the virtue by which we give honor to God through external words, actions, and signs.
We are our rites.
Change the rites and, over time, the content of what people who attend those rites will change.
Once their belief changes, their behavior will change.
This is an AI description of the Order of the St. John Chrysostom Divine Liturgy:
The Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom is the main Eucharistic service in Eastern Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic Churches, divided into the Liturgy of the Word (readings, hymns, sermons) and the Liturgy of the Eucharist (Great Entrance, Anaphora/Eucharistic Prayer, Communion, Dismissal). Key parts include the Great Litany, Antiphons, the Little Entrance with the Gospel, Epistle/Gospel readings, the Trisagion hymn, the Creed, the Eucharistic Prayer over the gifts, the Our Father, Communion, and final prayers and dismissal.
- Priest and Deacon prepare the bread and wine (the gifts).
- Opening Blessing: "Blessed is the Kingdom...".
- Great Litany: Series of petitions for the world, Church, and people.
- Antiphons: Psalms sung in response to petitions, often with hymns.
- Little Entrance: Procession with the Gospel Book, often with the hymn "Only-Begotten Son".
- Trisagion Hymn: "Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal" (sung before readings).
- Epistle Reading: From the New Testament (Acts, Epistles).
- Gospel Reading: From the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, John).
- Homily/Sermon: Explanation of the readings.
- Great Entrance: Priest and Deacon process with the prepared gifts (bread and wine) to the altar.
- Anaphora (Eucharistic Prayer): The central prayer of consecration, including the Cherubic Hymn, the Sursum Corda, Sanctus, Words of Institution, and Epiclesis.
- Creed (Symbol of Faith): Recitation of the Nicene Creed.
- Our Father: The Lord's Prayer.
- Fraction & Preparation for Communion: Breaking the bread, prayers over the gifts.
- Holy Communion: Distribution of the consecrated bread and wine.
- Post-Communion Prayers: Prayers of thanksgiving.
- Final Blessing & Dismissal: "Let us depart in peace...".


4 comments:
Bugnini di not "fabricate" the Novus Ordo.
Some of this did happen and has, fortunately, been mostly undone.
If this, and the linked were to occur, and be enforced: 1) It would reek of progressives with axes to grind; 2) it would be inorganic rupture - a fabrication; 3) it would principally be driven by conjecture (useless repetition); 4) it would drive believers away as an unwelcomed loss of orthodoxy and culture; 5) it would effortlessly drive believers to Orthodoxy, myself included; 6) it would mortally wound the presbyterate; and 7) though satirical, this and the links would reduce divine worship to cheesy sentimentality.
I am with Ratzinger not you: The following quotation is attributed to Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the future Pope Benedict XVI:
The liturgical reform, in its concrete realization, has distanced itself even more from its origin. The result has not been a reanimation, but devastation. In place of the liturgy, fruit of a continual development, they have placed a fabricated liturgy. They have deserted a vital process of growth and becoming in order to substitute a fabrication. They did not want to continue the development, the organic maturing of something living through the centuries, and they replaced it, in the manner of technical production, by a fabrication, a banal product of the moment.
Peter Kwasniewski's "Experiment" is a callback to Peter Kwasniewski's denunciation of Pope Benedict XVI's "lie" (Mister Kwasniewski's claim):
That is, the TLM, as well as the supposed banal, fabricated Bugnini Novus Bogus, comprise the one Roman Rite.
Pope Benedict XVI's claim in question is vital to Summorum Pontificum's credibility. Pope Benedict XVI:
"These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite."
However, as AI Overview has noted:
"Summorum Pontificum (2007) does indeed rise or fall on the "two forms of the one Roman Rite" argument, as this framework was the foundational theological and legal rationale used by Pope Benedict XVI to liberalize the use of the 1962 Roman Missal.
"...the "one rite, two forms" argument allowed Pope Benedict to declare that the 1962 Missal was never juridically abrogated......."
=======
Peter Kwasniewski's "experiment," which Father McDonald has referenced, is accepted to a person within Trad Inc. Nobody within, or, for that matter, without Trad Inc., believes Pope Benedict XVI's claim in question.
Anyway, that is the case certainly among trads.
The notion that the TLM, as well as the tainted (supposedly) "Bugnini Mass," comprised the one Roman Rite, has enabled Trad Inc. to claim that Summorum Pontificum was an unsustainable, muddled document.
Father McDonald, your insistence that Peter Kwasniewski, via his experiment, "makes a great point," is bad news...major league bad news...in regard to Summorum Pontificum's credibility.
If the Holy Mass of Pope Paul VI is "Bugnini's banal, fabricated, Novus Bogus," then Summorum Pontificum could only have failed.
Such liturgical poison could not possibly have lived in peace, let alone enriched, the TLM...as Pope Benedict XVI had claimed.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Post a Comment