As everyone knows, I love both forms of the Latin Rite Mass as long as both are celebrated well, reverently and with actual participation of the priest and laity present.
I believe the two forms can coexist and enrich the Church in their diversity, even their ecclesiological diversity.
In red are some comments Fr. Z made about another article which you can read HERE. . However, I want to focus just on what Fr. Z is writing and not to what he is reacting. My comments are in black embedded in his reaction:
[This is exactly the position of many diocesan bishops and others who think that people only want more “cow bell”, i.e., incense, ad orientem, lace, Latin, servers in cassocks, bells, a certain style of vestment, etc. Hence, they should be perfectly content with the Novus Ordo dressed up in all those things. This is wrong of course, but they are too ignorant of the differences in the rites to know that.] It is a grostesque mistake not to be in favor of the reform of the reformed Mass bringing back to it what was purged by Bishop Bugnini and his committee, ultimately approved by Pope Paul VI. If the Vetus Ordo can be reformed into something not resembling it, so too can the Novus Ordo be reformed into something not resembling its original.
Most Catholics, who still practice their faith by Sunday Mass attendance, would have a problem with an all Latin Mass in the Vetus Ordo, but not a Modern Mass in the vernacular but looking like the Vetus Ordo—it would help to bring liturgical peace to the Church and avoid elitism of those who only want the Vetus Ordo and look down their noses at those who don’t want it and are as good of Catholics as any Vetus Ordo Catholic might or might not be!
And most Catholics would not have a problem with an all vernacular TLM!
[Liturgy is doctrine. But if you oppose the Vetus and Novus you have to hold that the goal of the reform was blatant discontinuity.] Yes, Fr. Z, we know both rites are different. The vernacular facilitates an inculturation that is good, using one’s language rather than a dead language, facilitates not only inculturation, but actual participation in the Mass, both contemplative and vocal of the laity. The NO Mass also illustrates not only that all must actually participate in the Mass, but that the laity also have role in the Church, particularly bringing our Faith and Good Works to the secular world of home, work and play as well as the public political square. Thus laity taking on liturgical ministries of acoyltle ( to include Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion) and reader makes visible the refined reality of the ecclesiology of the post-Vatican II Church. The TLM and other liturgies associated with it aren’t wrong and also can include a more modern expression of ecclesiology by allowing lay lectors and active singing and speaking of the parts of the Mass by the laity.
But the liturgy, Fr. Z, although doctrinal is more than a teaching tool! It is about worshipping Jesus Christ truly present in a sacrament way at the altar and in Holy Communion. While instruction is important, liturgy is spirituality, worship and experiencing in the present the eternal sacrifice of Christ on the Cross and His Glorified Risen Presence in the Liturgy and the Church. It is about the Risen Lord’s personal relationship with each Catholic individually and collectively! It is private and communal at the same time. It is about salvation! An atheist can know everything the Catholic Church teaches and remain an atheist, even if he loves the older Mass over the newer Mass. Knowledge of doctrine does not necessarily lead to conversion and a personal relationship with Christ Who transforms our life!
12 comments:
"a Modern Mass in the vernacular but looking like the Vetus Ordo": Therein lies the problem (actually already highlighted by the Fr. Z). Why should something be dressed up to be something it isn't ( as Fr. Kavanagh oft points out) ? No, keep the Missal of John XXXIII as the Missal of John XXIII and the Missal of 2002 as the Missal of 2002. How often is forgotten that the Missal of Paul VI has been altered.
It is wrong to have the Reform of the Reform and liberation of the old Mass opposed to one another. They can work in tandem. Would a completely TLM style Novus Ordo, either in completely or partially in Latin, be ideal? I think not but we should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Let's achieve what we can for now while working for further improvements.
We should also remember what a TLM style Novus Ordo would do beyond just the immediate form of the Mass. It would break the lie that Vatican II and the new Mass mandated the revolution in the liturgy that we have been experiencing for the last 60 years. This is why you often see more opposition to such a Mass than you do to the TLM itself. The latter can be treated as an exception while the former breaks the paradigm of the radical reformers.
While Summorum Pontificum was in force, we had liturgical peace, and if it was reinstated, we would again. It is only nasty progressives like Grillo that can't live with that.
I strongly object to an all-vernacular Mass because Latin is our common bond. With a Missal in hand, there is no need for an all-vernacular Mass. It is difficult to square that with the very provisions of Sacrosanctum Concilium which call for the retention of Latin. Moreover, the greatest portion of our Liturgical Musical Heritage is in Latin. My mother, who was raised a Protestant, bemoaned the loss of the Latin Musical Heritage. She said that music played a role in her becoming Catholic.
Until the Church acknowledges what a flop the Novus Ordo has been, there will be no recovery of the Faith. The Rite itself is the very epitome of disunity with each priest left to his own judgment as to how the Mass it to be celebrated.
I suspect when these double-knit dinosaurs go to their reward, the younger clergy will reinvigorate the Faith by turning to our sacred liturgical traditions and music.
Were an Anglicanorum Ordinariate church close by, you'd never see me at Novus Ordo Mass again.
Father Zuhlsdorf said..."...many diocesan bishops and others who think that people only want more “cow bell”, i.e., incense, ad orientem, lace, Latin, servers in cassocks, bells, a certain style of vestment, etc."
"Hence, they should be perfectly content with the Novus Ordo dressed up in all those things. This is wrong of course..."
So much for Pope Leo XIV's notion to direct trads to the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
So much for Archbishop Cordileone's claim that trads — younger trads, in particular — are keen to experience the Latin Liturgical Tradition via the Novus Ordo.
Archbishop Cordileone to Raymond Arroyo:
"Even the current form of the Mass, celebrated in a more traditional way, with the priest ad orientem, sacred music, great solemnity and reverence, is what they desire."
So much for the reports that an increasing amount of trads have embraced Latin Church liturgical tradition via "the Vatican II Mass, the Mass of Paul VI" (Pope Leo XIV's words).
Even Michael Matt, to his alarm and disgust, has insisted that trads, on an increasing basis, have embraced "dressed up" Novus Ordo Masses.
However, Father Zhulsdorf has assured us that trads will continue to reject attendance at even a "traditional" Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
If we are to believe Father Zuhlsdorf, then the trad war continues against the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Does ecclesiology mean the theology of the church per se?
Via his recent appearance on Raymond Arroyo's show, Archbishop Cordileone had portrayed young trads as having rejected liturgical warmongering directed against the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI.
Young trads embrace the "dressed up" Novus Ordo Mass. That is fantastic.
Unfortunately, with the exception of young trads, Archbishop Cordileone also portrayed various Catholics who insist upon "the more traditional form of way the Church worships" as determined "to go outside of officially approved institutions and communities" to find said Mass.
Archbishop Cordileone insisted that said folks would "seek spiritual nourishment outside of the family in union with Rome. They will do that."
That is a bleak portrayal of various trads.
Incredibly, Father Zuhlsdorf has topped Archbishop Cordileone's bleak portrayal of trads.
Father Zuhlsdorf would have us believe that trads — young ones included — in general refuse to worship via the Holy Mass of Pope Saint Paul VI — even when said Mass is replete with "incense, ad orientem, lace, Latin, servers in cassocks, bells, a certain style of vestment, etc."
With the exception of his positive portrayal of young trads, Archbishop Cordileone's appearance on The Prayerful Posse was not of much help to the trad cause.
But compared to Archbishop Cordileone's portrayal of trads, which was not great, Father Zuhlsdorf's portrayal in question of trads was far more horrific.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Yes and who comprises the Church and how she functions.
With only 5% of Catholics in the Diocese of Speyer, Germany, I think the Novus Bogus has done its job of emptying churches very nicely.
Steve - From a Catholic college catalogue: "ECCLESIOLOGY - Ecclesiology is an in-depth scriptural and historical examination of the mystery of the Church. Explores the historical origins of contemporary issues in ecclesiology such as universal salvation, Chrisitan unity, authority and collegiality, the role of laity and infallibility. Additional topics include the mission, membership and ministries of the Catholic Church in the world, and its relationship to other churches.
The Catholic Church is highly organized, with local parishes as its building blocks and a central government in the Vatican. Catholics are defined as those who are in communion with the pope."
Selfish bishops and priests should adopt this generous prelate's approach:
In Canada, the Archbishop of Moncton, Guy Desrochers, C.Ss.R., has welcomed the IBP (Institut du Bon Pasteur (IBP), a society of apostolic life of pontifical right established in 2006 under Pope Benedict XVI, with exclusive use of the Traditional Roman Rite. He wrote: “I consider all Catholics, whether practicing or not, following either the older Latin rite of Mass or the reformed rite since Vatican II, to be part of the one flock that Jesus entrusts to me and to my delegates”.
One last comment regarding the lack of generosity of some bishops towards the TLM:
Hence, again and again we see that bishops would prefer to see a smoking crater rather than a normal parish with growing numbers of young families, happy, practicing the Catholic Faith being sustained and fostered by the Traditional Latin Mass and other sacraments.
Post a Comment