2, Chapter XVI
Ordo Missae Promulgated by Pope Paul VI
new concept of the world, and of the relations of the Church with
that world, was bound to affect the means by which the Church expresses
and lives her faith: Liturgy, therefore, the school of faith, will
itself be transformed by that Liberal ecumenical spirit which sees
Protestants as separated brethren and no longer as heretics imbued
with principles radically contrary to the doctrine of the Church.
effort is no longer to convert but to unite. Hence the attempt to
synthesize Catholic Liturgy and Protestant worship.
presence of six Protestant pastors on the Commission for Liturgical
Reform speaks volumes.
Pope himself (Allocution 13 January 1965) spoke of "liturgical
renovation" as "of a new religious pedagogy" which
will take "its place as the central motor of the great movement
inscribed in the constitutional principles of the Church,"
principles renovated in the Council.
Dwyer, a member of the Liturgy Consilium and Archbishop of
Birmingham, recognized the importance of that reform (press conference,
23 October 1967):
the Liturgy which forms the character, the mentality, of men faced
with problems...The liturgical reform is, in a deep sense, the
key to aggiomamento. Make no mistake, the Revolution begins
is insistence on the community spirit and the active participation
of the faithful-and one cannot help thinking of the spirit which
animated Luther and his disciples (see Cristiani's book, From
Lutheranism to Protestantism). (See the Institutions Liturgiques
of Dam Gueranger, extracts edited by Diffusion de la Pensée
Française, especially chapters 14 and 23.) Dom Guéranger's disclosure
of all the efforts of the heretics against the Roman Liturgy throws
a strange light on the conciliar (and post-conciliar) liturgical
if one studies all the details, particularly of the new reform of
the Mass, one is stupefied to rediscover the reforms advocated by
Luther, the Jansenists, and the Council of Pistoia.
can this reform of the Mass be reconciled with the canons of the
Council of Trent and the condemnations in Pius VI's Bull Auctorem
are not judging intentions; but the facts (and the consequences
of those facts, which, moreover, are like the consequences of the
introduction of those reforms in past centuries) compel us to recognize
with Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci (Brief Critical Examination,
delivered to the Holy Father, 3 September 1969) "that the New
Ordo departs in striking fashion, as a whole and in detail, from
the Catholic Theology of the Holy Mass, defined for ever by the
Council of Trent."
the “Normative Mass" presented by Fr. Bugnini in 1967 to the
Synod of Bishops in Rome was strongly opposed by the, bishops. At
the conference he gave to Superiors General in October 1967, at
which I was present, we were astounded at the way the liturgical
past of the Church was treated. I was, myself, shocked at the answers
given to objectors, and I could not believe that the speaker was
the person to whom the Church was entrusting her liturgical reform.
Cardinal Cicognani and Gut told me of their immense sorrow at this
incomprehensible reform. Another Cardinal, still living, said to
me that Article 7 in the first version of the Instruction was heretical.
explanations, on the word of Mgr. Bugnini himself, have made no
change in the doctrine previously expressed. In any case, the New
Mass has not been modified: it remains a Catholic-Protestant synthesis.
That has been publicly recognized by the Protestants.
the Congregation for the Faith were to ask me, I could make a radical
and detailed study, with references, of the similarities between
the New Mass and Protestant worship, and of the similarities between
the terms used, accordingly, for the divine realities of the Mass
and Protestant terms.
conclusion, it is certain, in the opinion of those, even, who use
the New Rite, that the New Mass represents a very perceptible depreciation
of the sacred mystery: for example, the expression of the Catholic
faith in the divine realities of this mystery is weakened-expression
in words, gestures, acts, in all that puts the mark of the sublime
on this reality which is the heart of the Church.
than that: there are numerous suppressions and new attitudes which
end by breeding doubt in the minds of the faithful and leading them,
without their being aware of it, to adopt a Protestant mentality.
Ecumenism produces its effects little by little and diminishes the
faith of Catholics. Many, especially the young, leave the Church.
could the Holy See embark on such a reform without taking account
of the acts of the Magisterium, but instead going the way of the
Protestants, the Jansenists, and the Council of Pistoia?
is why we are clinging to the Roman Mass of all time, which, according
to the infallible judgment of Saint Pius V, can be neither abolished
nor censured. We wish to keep the Catholic faith by keeping the
Catholic Mass-and not an ecumenical Mass which, even though valid
and not heretical, inclines to heresy.
is that which makes me say I cannot see how clerics can be trained
on the new Mass; priest and sacrifice have a quasi-transcendental
relation: if sacrifice is made doubtful, then priesthood is made
of the Protestantizing of the Church
though the Liturgy
from Ce qui'il taut d'amour à l'homme by Julien Green of
the Académie Française, Plon, Paris, 1978. J. Green was converted
from Anglicanism in 1916.)
first time I heard Mass in French, I could scarcely believe
it was a Catholic Mass and I never again felt at home on it.
Only the Consecration reassured me, but it was word for word
like the Anglican consecration (p, 135).
day when I was in the country with my sister Anne we watched
a televised Mass…I recognized it, and so did Anne, as a
rather crude imitation of the Anglican service to which
we had been accustomed in our childhood. The old Protestant
who sleeps in me under my Catholic faith woke up suddenly
as the screen presented this plain and stupid imposture, and
when the strange ceremony had come to an end I just said to
my sister: "Why did we become Catholics?”
at once I understood how cleverly the Church was being drawn
from one way of believing to another. The faith was not tampered
with – it was more subtle than that. It could have been objected
to me that sacrifice is mentioned at least three times in
the new Mass, but I could have answered that there is a great
difference between just mentioning a truth and throwing light
on it. We already knew that the Mass is the memorial of the
Super. That is the Eucharist is also the crucifixion of Christ,
without which there is no salvation, is said to us no longer.
So, the reality of the propitiatory sacrifice of the Mass
is in process of discreet obliteration from the consciousness
of Catholics, lay people and priests…
priests who have it, so to say, in their blood are not likely
to forget it, and so they say Mass in conformity with the
intention of the Church. But what about young priests? What
do they still believe? And who dare say what their Mass
is worth? (p. 143).
encyclicals will make no change in the fact that the modern
rationalist world rejects miracle. Acceptance of the Mass
can be brought about only if the miraculous element is suppressed.
Cut down to Protestant dimensions it will have some
chance of surviving in the Christianity of today, but it
will no longer be the Moss (page 144).
Church, already agitated, was further disturbed with cross-currents
when Mgr. Lefebvre took his stand against the Mass of Paul
VI and the Council. The history of his interminable controversy
with the Vatican is too well known to need recounting here.
Millions of Catholics felt themselves involved, myself included.
The question I put to conciliar priests was simple: “What
is the objection to the Old Mass?" The answer was: "It
is out-of-date.” Yet at the same time we were told that the
New Mass drew on older sources and was therefore closer to
the first Masses said in the Church. It would need specialists
to see clearly into the obscurity of these problems. There
were heated discussions about the disappearance of the sacrifice
of the Cross. That Cross, in the New Mass, was nothing
but a phantasm: we were in the Cenacle on Maundy Thursday
evening. But we were at the same time at the Supper
and on Calvary in the abandoned Mass of Saint Pius V. The
difference between the two is enormous, and it allowed the
Anglican Church to glimpse the possibility of the union
it had ardently desired since before the 1914 war. The
new Church responded warmly. Sacrifice was mentioned at least
three times in the New Mass -mentioned, but nothing more.
Whereas the Eucharist was fully explained to the faithful.
We had evidently been landed with what the theologians call
an obscuration of an essential part of the Mass. To
protest was considered an act of rebellion. The French bishops
gave us to understand that the Mass of Saint Pius V was henceforward
forbidden – which was a formal lie. And the rent was made.
was very disturbed, for at the age of sixteen I had sworn
fidelity to the Mass of the Council of Trent, and today I
was ordered to have no part in it. Whatever one may think
of certain attitudes of Mgr. Lefebvre, we are in debt to that
French prelate for having bravely aroused the conscience of
part of the Catholic world by compelling it to ask itself
about its faith. Do we believe or do we not believe in
the reality of the sacrifice of the Mass? To what degree are
we Roman Catholics, or do we tend to have a faith which is
ready to make concessions to Protestantism? I acknowledge
the authority of the Pope, and the idea of leaving the Church
would fill me with horror; but I remain faithful to my profession
of faith in 1916, and I will not abandon it at all. To say
that preference for the Mass of Saint Pius V is an act of
rebellion is indefensible (p. 150-151).
Courtesy of the Angelus
Press, Regina Coeli House
2918 Tracy Avenue, Kansas City, MO 64109