THE TRADITIONAL MASS: A NECESSITY, NOT A FASHION OR PREFERENCE
by Pauly Fongemie
February 22, 2014
There is a fallacy making the rounds in Catholic circles given to a preference for myth making rather than an honest appraisal of the state of the Church; that fallacy is that the Latin or Traditional Roman Mass is acceptable for now for those mistakenly characterized as "reluctant to change", because it is a mere "preference" or as Francis, who prefers to be called, the Bishop of Rome, and not the Pope, avers, "a fashion."
The leading indicators that this preference for "a preference" and or the fashion of referring to Tradition as a quaint "fashion" is false and absurd speak for themselves. Why? Simply because it is the Mass that is the common denominator throughout the Catholic world and by the Mass I mean the Novus Ordo Mess. Each country and continent have their own peculiarities that impact the Faith, but the Novus Ordo, especially in the West is the one enduring influence that has brought so much widespread decline and dissent. This novelty, which the Pope who promulgated it called it, in contradiction to the binding norms of Tradition, has produced the following:
1. Malformation in Catholic beliefs - apparent in both clergy and laity, and never more so than in those who have never known anything but anti-Tradition. A sense that the faith is a cafeteria of mere lifestyle choices.
2. Diminution and even outright disbelief in the Real Presence and the sacredness of the Holy Mass - that it can be tinkered with or changed according to the times and the mood of the times.
I was once again reminded how devastating the effects of the Novus Ordo have been for the unsuspecting Catholic people, especially those most intimately involved - the priest - this very week, in fact, not just reminded once more, but shockingly so!
What was the occasion? What happened and by whom? A Catholic priest, trained in the Novus Ordo for the Novus Ordo with a typical Novus Ordo mentality, unbeknown to him, whom I presume is in good faith, that is, through no fault of his uttered something that would have been unheard of forty years ago.
It was said during a special news program that included an audience of Protestants and Catholics, one of whom was this Catholic priest who makes regular appearances on that show and others like it. The purpose was a discussion of the soon to be released movie, Son of God, a Protestant endeavor by a couple of filmmakers, whom I also presume to be in good faith, through no fault of their own. I always find it disconcerting, but given the state of the Church here, gratis weak and apostate shepherds, all too understandable and even expected, that non-Catholic epics have such an influence on Catholics, but what the priest said, when he was called on to comment answered, revealing much, was that there were three times in his life when Jesus was really present to him:
- when his mother read the Bible to him,
- when he visited the Holy Land,
- and the movie, Son of God.
This is striking, positively shocking on its face, if one thinks with the mind of Tradition - and one must because Tradition is the Faith. I wonder if there are any Novus Ordo or modernized Catholics, for whom Tradition is an option in the practical sense, who viewed the program and picked up on the omission or admission through omission, I should say!
Here we have a Catholic priest who was specifically ordained for Sacrifice, the Eternal Sacrifice of the Holy Mass, whose most intimate encounters with Christ are at the moment of Consecration at the Mass when Our Lord, at his beckoning, consents to come down and alter the substance of the Host and Wine, and afterward the Communion of the priest. Yet the Mass, per se, was not even a blip on the radar screen as to an awareness of the presence of Christ in this priest's conscientiousness, at least as not as profound as a movie, apparently!
After this realization, there is no more that ought to be said, except to request prayers for this priest, a very good man who simply wants to save souls and become a Saint himself. Now I know that he is truly sincere, devout and doing the best he knows. He does not know that he does not know, blame for which cannot be imputed to him. There are so many just like him, dear innocent ones who have been betrayed by those who were entrusted with defending and passing down the Faith in its entirety, without nuance or blemish - the shepherds of the Church, many of whom were and are Judases, who abandon the flock to the wolves, and to these marauders also, those trusting priests under their tutelage. One wants to put one's arms around such innocent ones, in order to erase through sheer love and empathy the dark spell of Modernist cant. Of course, I cannot as life does not afford such opportunities.
I had paused from my writing this piece to view the aforementioned program, intending to complete it as originally formed in my mind. After careful consideration, I have decided to do so despite the fact that the priest's words are convincing evidence alone that we took a very wrong and precipitous turn at the end of the 60s; when one has discovered that he is going the opposite way the road was designed to lead to, the only sane, rational, normal, responsible act is to admit one's error, and retrace one's steps to find the point of false departure and re-enter at the correct place. Except human pride, when so much has been invested in pursuing a course of self-evident decline, is a most stubborn companion, a bad companion for any safe journey. Pride is not one of the deadly sins for nothing.
The necessity of Tradition where the Faith and its practices are concerned:
It is therefore necessary to receive these Divine oracles integrally, in the same sense in which they have been kept, and are still being kept, by this Roman Chair of Blessed Peter. Mother and Mistress of all the churches, She has always kept whole and inviolate, and taught to the faithful, the faith given by the Lord Jesus Christ, showing all the faithful the way of salvation and the doctrine of uncorrupted truth.
Ven. Pope Pius IX
The Church must persist in the teaching transmitted to her by Christ.
Pope John Paul II
Our teaching may contain nothing impious, nothing diluted.
St. Gregory Nazianzen
I cannot sufficiently be astonished that such is the insanity of some men, such the impiety of their blinded understanding, such, finally, their lust after error, that they will not be content with the rule of faith delivered once and for all from antiquity, but must daily seek after something new, and even newer still, and are always longing to add something to religion, or to change it, or to subtract from it!
St. Vincent of Lerins
The nature of the Catholic faith is such that nothing can be added to it, nothing taken away. Either it is held in its entirety or it is rejected totally. This is the Catholic faith which, unless a man believes faithfully and firmly, he cannot be saved.
Pope Benedict XV
Fly to the Catholic Church! Adhere to the only faith which continues to exist from the beginning, that faith which was preached by Paul and is upheld by the Chair of Peter.
St. Hippolytus of Rome
This Apostolic Church never turned from the way of truth nor held any kind of error. It is imperative that nothing of the truths which have been defined be lessened, nothing altered, nothing added, but that they be preserved intact in word and meaning. This is the true rule of faith.
Pope St. Agatho the Wonderworker
And I hold it not with the understanding that a thing can be held which seems better and more suited to the culture of a certain age, but in such a way that nothing else is to be believed than by the words; and I hold that this absolute and unchangeable truth preached by the Apostles from the earliest times is to be understood in no way other than by the words.
Oath Against Modernism
Diabolical error decks itself out with ease in lying colors with some appearance of truth, so that the force of pronouncement is corrupted by a very brief addition or change, and the confession of faith which should have resulted in salvation, by a subtle transition leads to death!
Pope Clement XIII
With the Father of Lights, there is no change nor shadow of alteration.
St. James 1: 17
God's Word is one and the same, and, as it is written, "The Word of God endures forever" unchanged, not before or after another, but existing the same always.
St. Athanasius
Let us regard the tradition of the Church also as worthy of belief. Is it a tradition? Seek no further!
St. John Chrysostom
Change nothing; be content with tradition.
St. Cyprian
Let nothing novel be introduced!Pope Pius XII
St. Vincent of Lerins
The ancient doctrines must be confirmed, but novel and absurd inventions must be condemned and cast aside.
St. Cyril of Alexandria
The devil is always discovering something novel against the truth.
Pope St. Leo the Great
The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators, but men of tradition.
Pope St. Pius X
The necessity of Tradition, in particular as it relates to the Holy Mass:In his infallible [indicated by the solemn, binding language used] papal bull, Quo Primum Tempore, Establishing Forever the Canon of the Mass, His Holiness, Pope Saint Pius V, July 13, 1570, commanded among other aspects of the Mass emphasis in bold, added by me:
Venerable Brethren, Health and Apostolic Benediction!
... All other of the churches referred to above, however, are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas, by this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.
We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.
Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force not withstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and not withstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription - except, however, if more than two hundred years' standing.
Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. ... know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
We must note that this bull is in perpetuity, the violation of which incurs the wrath of God. And wrath we have incurred for our rash installation and "embrace" of the New Mass of Pope Paul VI which he himself said was a novelty, later adding that " ... the Smoke of Satan had entered the sanctuary ..." and at another time "The Church is in auto-demolition." Now the Holy Mass is first and foremost a Sacrifice of Propitiation, but it is also a catechism, for it not only includes the Nicene Creed as well as Scripture, it is the very summit of the Faith, encapsulating it with perfection. The aspects of the catechism include the Sunday instruction or sermon, and this portal has been used effectively to alter the Faith by the wolves in sheep's clothing who with audacity and cunning abuse their offices. The English Martyrs won the crown of Sainthood precisely because they refused to "embrace" such a sacrilege with the capacity to dilute, even destroy the Faith. And the Mass of the apostate Cranmer was actually a cut above the present Novus Ordo. These Martyrs at Tyburn would have been scandalized to learn that not only do we embrace the Novus Ordo, but that we do not even mind that several Protestant observers at the Vatican Council were influential in the results. No one could ever accuse 21st century Catholics of doing what it takes to be dedicated, ever watchful Catholics, let alone Martyrs. It is inexplicable, inexcusable that those of us who were of age at the time could be so willing to be complicit in such deceit and betrayal; it is altogether too understandable why the second and present generations have no clue.In THE BARBARIANS HAVE TAKEN OVER, the eminent Catholic writer and chronicler of Tradition, Michael Davies, wrote:
The most evident characteristic of the post-conciliar Catholicism has been the self-exaltation of man and an almost total neglect of the honor we are bound to offer to Almighty God. Similarly, there is now an almost total lack of interest in Heaven, the world to come, and an excessive preoccupation with this world. The average Catholic bishop in the U.S.A. will be more concerned with warning his flock of the dangers of a nuclear war, rather than the danger of losing their immortal souls and spending an eternity in Hell. The traditional liturgy is evidently God-centered, focused on Heaven, aptly symbolized by priest and people offering the Sacrifice together facing the east, the traditional symbol of the Resurrection and the heavenly Jerusalem. In the reformed liturgy the priest and people have turned in upon themselves, and the purpose of their coming together often appears to be mutual entertainment rather than the solemn worship of a transcendent and omnipotent God. The celebrant, the "president of the assembly", is to be the focus of attention, but the presence of our Eucharistic King in a tabernacle on the center of the altar remained a distraction to any parishioner who had retained at least a vestigial Catholic sentiment-----so the tabernacle had to go! [p. 4]
The author's next work was THE ETERNAL SACRIFICE, The Liturgy Since Vatican II. Here we find, emphasis in bold, added by me:
Archbishop Dwyer went on to lament the fact that the Latin Church has cut itself off from its cultural roots and its whole magnificent musical heritage. He recollected a warning given during the Council by the great Cardinal Michael Browne of Ireland: " 'Caveamus, Patres, caveamus!' - 'Let us take heed, Fathers, let us beware!' We thought it amusing then; we might take it a little more seriously now." We might indeed!
We might also have heeded a warning from the greatest of all liturgists, Dom Prosper Gueranger. In his work, Liturgical Institutions, which was published in 1840 he warned of an "anti-liturgical heresy" which has characterized all the enemies of the Church. When we study this heresy, he warned, "we shall see diabolical wisdom at work, striking skillful blows, and leading infallibly to vast consequences. The first characteristic of the anti-liturgical heresy is hatred of Tradition as found in the formulas used in Divine worship. ... Every sectarian who wishes to introduce a new doctrine finds himself, unfailingly, face to face with the Liturgy, which is tradition at its strongest and best, and he cannot rest until he has silenced this voice, until he has torn up these pages which recall the faith of past centuries. As a matter of fact, how could Lutheranism, Calvinism, Anglicanism establish themselves and maintain their influence over the masses?" How indeed?
Please take a moment to decide for yourselves what the answer is. How did the Protestant sectarians establish themselves and maintain their hold over the masses? Here is Dom Gueranger's answer. Please listen to it carefully. Memorize it. Ponder over it when this Congress has ended and face up to the grim reality of its implications. "All they had to do," states Dom Gueranger, "was to substitute new books and new formulas, and their work was done."
"All they had to do was to substitute new books and new formulas, and their work was done. There was nothing that still bothered the new teachers," he wrote, "they could just go on preaching as they wished: the faith of the people was henceforth without defence."
This bears thinking about, does it not? Please ponder these words in conjunction with the judgment of the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales concerning the liturgical rites composed by the apostate Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer: "To remodel the existing rites in the most drastic manner is a proposition for which we know of no historical foundation and which appears to us absolutely incredible."
Dom Gueranger had much to say on the hatred evinced by the enemies of the Church for the use of Latin in the liturgy. Forgive me if I quote him at some length. I am sure that you would not wish to miss a word of what he has to say:
Since the liturgical reform had for one of its principal aims the abolition of actions and formulas of mystical signification, it is a logical consequence that its authors had to vindicate the use of the vernacular in Divine worship. This in the eyes of the sectarians is a most important item. Cult is no secret matter. The people, they say, must understand what they sing. Hatred for the Latin language is inborn in the heart of all enemies of Rome. They recognize it as the bond of Catholics throughout the universe, as the arsenal of orthodoxy against all the subtleties of the sectarian spirit. They consider it the most efficient weapon of the papacy. The spirit of rebellion which drives them to confide the universal prayer to the idiom of each people, of each province, of each century, has for the rest produced its fruits, and the reformed themselves constantly perceive that the Catholic people, in spite of their Latin prayers, relish better and accomplish with more zeal the duties of cult than the Protestant people. At every hour of the day divine worship takes place in Catholic churches. The faithful Catholic who assists leaves his mother tongue at the door. Apart from the sermons, he hears nothing but mysterious words which, even so, are not heard in the most solemn moment of the Canon of the Mass. Nevertheless, this mystery charms him in such a way that he is not jealous of the lot of the Protestant, even though the latter does not hear a single sound without perceiving its meaning. ... We must admit it is a master blow of Protestantism to have declared war on the sacred language. If it should ever succeed in destroying it, it would be well on its way tovictory. [pp. 38-39]
And from Michael Davies work, THE ROMAN RITE DESTROYED, I cite the following passages for those of you who are astonished that I have said what I did above concerning the impact of Protestants at Vatican II, and note well the text I have put in bold:
M.G. Siegvalt, a professor of dogmatic theology in the Protestant faculty at Strasbourg, testifies that: "... nothing in the renewed Mass need really trouble the evangelical Protestant". Jean Guitton, a close friend of Pope Paul and a lay observer at Vatican II, quoted a Protestant journal as praising the manner in which the new Eucharistic prayers had dropped "the false perspective of a sacrifice offered to God".
A Swedish Lutheran praised the reform because it had taken: "A notable step forward in the ecumenical field and has drawn near the liturgical forms of the Lutheran Church.
... Writing in the February 1974 issue of Veritas, journal of the Anglican Association, the editor, Canon C.B. Armstrong, points out that Series III [an Anglican updated service. - the Web Master] is intended not only to approximate to the Novus Ordo Missae but to be acceptable to Protestants of a far more Evangelical nature than the Church of England. "In form it approximates closely to the new Roman Mass, omitting a few doctrinal statements which would not be likely to find general acceptance in England. In matter it avoids being specific, as will be seen, on doctrines which would not be accepted by non-conformists .. .its main objects seem to be (1) to keep outwardly in line with the liturgical reforms on the Continent, and (2) to conciliate the Free Churches of this country and overseas with the hope of producing a United Christian rite in a United Christian Church." [p. 30]
In other words, our "New Mass" dovetails with that of the newly revised Anglican liturgy!!!!!! Davies continues, ibid in bold:
Sufficient evidence should have been provided in this pamphlet to prove that there are definite parallels between the reform of Archbishop Bugnini and the reform of Cranmer and other Protestant heresiarchs. I have been astonished to find some priests asserting in public that no "parallel" exists. What they are doing is confusing the word "parallel" with the word "identity". I have nowhere alleged that there is complete identity between the reforms of Archbishop Bugnini and Cranmer. The fact that the present reform has been approved by the Pope and permits the use of the Roman Canon is sufficient to disprove any allegation of complete identity. (The few minor changes in the Roman Canon, while totally deplorable, do not make it in the least compatible with Protestant doctrine.)
On the other hand, the introduction of the vernacular, the abolition of most of the Offertory prayers, the replacement of altars by tables, Communion in the hand, and Communion under both kinds, all constitute obvious parallels which no honest person could overlook. These are only a few - I shall provide a complete list in Pope Paul's New Mass. Meanwhile, readers who are interested would find it a fruitful exercise to examine Cranmer's innovations, as set out in Chapter 12 of Cranmer's Godly Order, and compare them with the innovations imposed by Archbishop Bugnini, the supreme architect of the post-conciliar reform. [p. 42]
Writing in the Canadian Catholic Register on 1 October 1977, Bishop G. Emmet Carter professed to explain the "real issue behind Lefebvre". As a convenient method of avoiding the actual arguments put forward by Archbishop Lefebvre, Bishop Carter remarked: "He has decided that the legitimately elected pope and the validly ordained bishops of the Universal Catholic Church are wrong. He has decided that he, Marcel Lefebvre, is 'right envers et contre tous' (against all comers)."
The same could have been said of St. Athanasius, who underwent the agony of having his excommunication confirmed by the Pope when he stood contra mundum - against the world. But there were some bishops who supported St. Athanasius and there are a good number today who support Msgr. Lefebvre in private. I have recently received a letter from an Archbishop thanking me for my defense of Msgr. Lefebvre in the first pamphlet in the present series. But what the words of Bishop Carter brought most vividly to my mind was a passage from Nineteen Eighty-Four: "Being in a minority, even in a minority of one, did not make you mad. There was truth and there was untruth, and if you clung to the truth even against the whole world, you were not mad.
The Fort is Betrayed
What this pamphlet should have made clear is that an important faction among the bishops at Vatican II wished to remove all obstacles preventing reunion with Protestants; that Protestant observers played an important part in the Council itself and in the Consilium which produced the Novus Ordo Missae; that the Novus Ordo Missae was defined as a Protestant service and can be officially celebrated in such a manner that not only Anglicans but Evangelical Protestants feel at home with it and consider that its theology conforms to Protestant norms: that although Article 7 has been changed, the form of Mass which it so accurately described, has not; that there is co-operation between our own Church and at least the Church of England in working towards a common service which will eventually be acceptable to nonconformists; and that our liturgy is still evolving and the evolution is taking a direction which removes it ever farther from the theology of the Council of Trent and ever closer to the theology of the Reformation. During the course of the Council Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx remarked: "One is astounded to find oneself more in sympathy with the thinking of Christian, non-Catholic 'observers' than with the views of one's own brethren on the other side of the dividing line. The accusation of connivance with the Reformation is therefore not without foundation. What is, in fact, happening then?
What indeed?
Protestants have good cause to rejoice at what has happened. One Lutheran theologian has summed it up as follows:
"Though some criticisms remain necessary and though some desiderata remain to be accomplished, those not (yet) united with the Latin Church may say, gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro.
Given the accuracy of the assessment set out in this pamphlet the only appropriate reply which a Catholic can make to the question posed by Father Schillebeeckx is to quote the words used by St. John Fisher of his apostate colleagues:
"The fort is betrayed even of them that should have defended it." [pp. 44-45]
Davies concludes with this startling admission from one of the Protestants:
Mr. McAfee Brown also reveals that there were occasions when the observers were able to have a direct "voice" on the Council floor. "Is there anything you Observers want said on the Council floor about De Oecumenismo?" one bishop asked. The Observers then put their views in writing to be incorporated into written interventions made on their behalf by bishops.
Thus, although it could be argued that officially the observers played no part in drafting the conciliar documents, since they could neither vote nor speak in the debates, it is clear that they were able to influence the final format of these documents. This is precisely what took place with the formulation of the new liturgical rites by the post-conciliar Consilium. [p. 50]
No, my friends and foes alike, I will never consent to the proposition that the Tridentine Mass, the Roman Mass of the Ages, is a preference or fashion to be discarded when the time is deemed advantageous. For me, who seeks to uphold the fullness of the Catholic Faith, to die in this Faith, there is no option but Tradition, imbued with the Creed of St. Athanasius, that commands:
Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic [Apostolic/Universal] Faith, which except everyone shall have kept whole and undefiled, without doubt he will perish eternally.
The Tridentine Mass is an absolute irreplaceable necessity!
E-MAIL
HOME--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TRADITIONAL MASS
www.catholictradition.org/necessity.htm