29 Comments
User's avatar
Donald Lippert's avatar

Thank you for your courageous, coherent, well-reasoned and thought-provoking post. The virulent (and some would say diabolical) opposition to the TLM has little to do with the language or aesthetics, rather as you clearly state, it has everything to do with the underlying theology (Christology, ecclesiology, soteriology, eschatology, etc.) which they cannot tolerate. But the seeds of Truth are already beginning to quicken and will sprout from the snow and bud forth when this cold winter has passed.

Expand full comment
JJ's avatar
Jun 28Edited

My youngest children have no memory of the NO. Great article keep up the good work

Expand full comment
Fr. Scott Bailey, C.Ss.R.'s avatar

The dress doesn’t make the bride beautiful.

Expand full comment
CarolAnn's avatar

All I can say is WOW! Great article!!

Expand full comment
Emilia Nessuno's avatar

A perfect argument. I agree completely. Too much of today's Catholicism is trying to have the appeal of Protestantism - namely, casualness. The good thing is that many (especially young) Catholics are sick of it and hunger for the beauty and reverence offered by classical Catholicism. Like you say, we need our eyes on God when approaching the Mass, not merely on trying to be attractive to the trends of the world!

Expand full comment
Peter Kwasniewski's avatar

The problem is not that the Novus Ordo does not stipulate ad orientem. It does, as I demonstrate here:

https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2015/11/the-normativity-of-ad-orientem-worship.html

The problem is that it allows either posture, and versus populum has been advanced as the ONLY way to do things ever since Paul VI.

So, the option has been "optioned out of existence":

https://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2017/05/optioned-out-of-existence-on-loss-of.html

The bigger problem, hence, is that the Novus Ordo is not a singular rite, but a workshop for making liturgy "happen," and that is why it can be said in so many different ways. Which is not at all how divine worship should be or ever was.

Expand full comment
Fr. Scott Bailey, C.Ss.R.'s avatar

It feels like a new religion because it is a new religion.

Expand full comment
Rusty Creel's avatar

Indeed, I can’t help but equate it to the state approved church in China.

Expand full comment
Patricia Miller's avatar

You might recommend Peter Kwasniewski’s recently written book, Close the Workshop: Why the Old Mass isn’t Broken and the New Mass Can’t be Fixed.

Expand full comment
Matthias Sevigny's avatar

I have not gotten my hands on it yet, but thats very true I should recommend that. I was at a dinner with Dr. Kwasniewski the other day and we hadn’t a chance to talk it over, but I think his ideas on it are as usual brilliant. Thank you!

Expand full comment
Peter Kwasniewski's avatar

Thanks for your fine article. If you want to see the full-fledged version of this argument, then definitely check out this book:

https://www.amazon.com/Close-Workshop-Mass-Broken-Fixed/dp/B0DYF7QJJ4/

Nice to see you last week! God bless. Dr. K

Expand full comment
June Gallinaro's avatar

Thank you for this great article.

Expand full comment
Esme Y.'s avatar

I stopped attending the Novus Bogus Mass this year after the local bishop (!) couldn’t remember the words of absolution when I went to him for Confession. He’s a nice guy, very friendly. But shouldn’t a priest, let alone a bishop, remember this?

My decision is not based on this experience alone. I walked out of the beginning of a Novus Bogus in Japan last May after the Filipino maids took over the “Mass” with guitars and commentary. The priest sat far in the background, a prop for the “performance” which was awful.

And don’t tell me YOUR Novus Bogus is wonderful because I’ve been to these masses in over 10 countries and they’re always bad. I congratulate you that you feel so good about your “Mass”.

It’s only in the Latin Mass where true reverence exists, where one feels the presence of God and where unadulterated Catholic doctrine is preached.

Expand full comment
Thomas Casey's avatar

Excellent discussion. As an Orthodox Christian with a history in the TLM, I deeply sympathize with your plight. The degradation of the Latin Rite is a tragedy for all of Christendom. I would suggest that the problems you identify run deeper than just V2. Dr. Geoffrey Hull, himself a traditionalist Catholic, wrote an excellent book, "The Banished Heart," that traces the origins of the problems you identify deeper into history. There's a pretty good summary here: https://theradtrad.blogspot.com/2013/08/book-review-banished-heart-origins-of.html

Expand full comment
Hilary White's avatar

"we got precisely the liturgy that many devious minds at the Council desired."

I'm sure you know (though your readers may not) that the specifics, like ad orientem, altar girls, etc, weren't called for by any document of the Council. In fact, the Council fathers never envisioned an entirely new liturgy for the Roman Rite. All of that was an invention of later actors.

Expand full comment
Hilary White's avatar

It's really helpful to remember that the GIRM was invented specifically because the No on its own wasn't working. And it is a constantly changing and changeable document, subject to revision at all times.

Expand full comment
Samuel Stuckless's avatar

As a new convert who has never attended the TLM, this article did absolutely nothing to convince me that I should stop attending a Novus Ordo parish because you did nothing to demonstrate how it is a break with the faith handed down. Just some ad hominems without evidence or analysis of the supposed theological departure. I'm open to listening to them, but without weaving them into your piece, this is just an expression of your own preferences and preaching to the choir.

I could read your supplemental materials but I was really hoping for a well-reasoned argument here.

Expand full comment
Matthias Sevigny's avatar

Thank you for your comment Samuel. First, I would like to say that I did not make any ad hominem attacks in my article. I assume you may have meant ad hoc fallacies. However, I did not commit that fallacy either in this article.

Secondly, This article did not serve the purpose of an in depth analysis of the liturgical reform. I did not imply so either in this article. There will certainly be essays more of that calibre to come in the future.

I would, however, point you to the excellent work of many diligent theologians and liturgists who have dealt with the history of the liturgical reform. Those listed in the appendix are a good place to start. If you are an avid reader I would also recommend the works of Michael Davies (The Liturgical Revolution, in three volumes), Peter Kwasniewski and the like. If you enjoy the medium of video more, I would recommend that you watch the Mass of the Ages trilogy on youtube, it is a good place to start.

I would implore you to read and explore these longer works. I would also implore you to find a good TLM and go to Mass, especially a High Mass if you can. This particular essay was simply not the medium for such an argument. Pax!

Expand full comment
Hilary White's avatar

I would suggest, then, reading books. That kind of detailed argumentation isn't very suited to the blogging format. There are many very in-depth and thorough examinations of the fundamental differences in theology of the Eucharist and the liturgy between the new and the old rites. My first suggestion would be the work done many years ago, in the midst of the worst of the crisis, by Michael Davies. It is a big read - three volumes - but you can't beat it for getting every single thing in there. After that there are many others to look up. At the top of the list of names I'd suggest is Cardinal Ottaviani, the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (or they may have called it the Holy Office then) DURINg the Council it self. Cardinal Heenan as well. After that there are many commentators. One of the clearest of these post conciliar commentators is Fr. Anthony Cekada (now unfortunately a sedevacantist) whose "Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI" (2010) is fairly recent and factual - lots of clear citations and documentation. Other names include Christopher Ferrara, Uwe Lang and of course our friend Dr. P. Kwasniewski. I think Cardinal Ratzinger's books on liturgy are well regarded, though I read them so long ago I can't really remember, and at that time was of a very different (conservative) mindset, so my memory may be skewed.

Expand full comment
Hilary White's avatar

... and of course, you can read what Louis Bouyer had to say about the process to create it, since he was on that committee.

Expand full comment
Bob Landry's avatar

Sir, you must have read a different essay than I did. The author made a convincing case for why the NO is a break from the Old Mass that spiritually nourished the faithful (and countless Saints) for almost two millennia. You'll appreciate this fact after attending your first TLM.

Expand full comment
Samuel Stuckless's avatar

Hey, cool, it sounds like he wrote an article you agree with. I thought this article was to attempt to pursuade and I was unpursuaded by the arguments presented here, that's all. Just suggesting some things that might have pursuaded me.

Expand full comment
Rusty Creel's avatar

Truth. Excellent post!

Expand full comment
Agnieszka's avatar

Thank you for the great article. This is what I have been thinking myself since I converted to TLM.

Expand full comment