![]()
25 Reasons why I do not attend (when I can help it) the Novus Ordo
Mass:
(the following is a criticism of a normal Catholic Mass, not a loony liberal
one)
Note: I believe the new rite of Mass and the old rite of Mass
are substantially and supernaturally equally Catholic and are both valid when
celebrated with the correct form, matter and intention. However, I also believe
that the new rite of Mass is a pale reflection of its traditional counterpart,
not poisonous, but severely deficient in its presentation of the eternal
sacrifice of Calvary, thus lessening the ability of the faithful to absorb the
graces that flow from it. We are human beings, a union of soul and body.
Therefore, the way something is presented has a profound effect upon our
reception of it. So without questioning the validity of the new rite of Mass, I
provide the following reasons for not attending it, based firmly on the
subjective way in which the objective reality of the Mass is enveloped by the
liturgy and the actions of the priest and laity.
1. The mere
fact that the new liturgy was created through a committee of "experts", drawn up
by them in a specific time and place, reflecting a specific need in the Church.
This is totally anti-traditional, and is unprecedented in the history of
liturgical development. Liturgy has always been the product of centuries of
development, overseen by the patient and eternal presence of the Holy Spirit. A
liturgy that is "created" is inevitably fixed to a specific point in time, and
also fixed to the personalities that devised it, and thus can be soon outdated
and even irrelevant to people with a different world-view. The traditional
liturgy transcends the mind of any man or group of men, becoming both timeless
and universal in its application.
2. Much of the Sacrificial language has
been removed from the liturgy. These prayers were also removed by such notorious
heretics such as Luther and Cranmer. Where is the mention of the Holy unspotted
Victim? The Offertory prayers have been simplified to such an extent that their
Catholic expression has almost been completely purged.
3. The celebration
of the new Mass depends heavily on the personality and preferences of the priest
celebrating it. The priest can choose the Greeting, the Penitential Rite, the
bidding prayers (or they could be composed by a member of the congregation) and
even the Canon of the Mass itself. Priests often ad lib during Mass, even
expanding the Entrance Rite into a mini-homily further concentrating on the
people present, rather than God. Moreover, the priest often alters the wording
of the liturgy in places, not rendering it invalid (changing the words of the
consecration would, though), but adding his own "personal touch" to the
proceedings, especially in respect to the "Ecce Agnus Dei". In this respect, the
rubrics for the new Mass are very loose lacking the precision of the traditional
liturgy.
4. Explicit teaching of the Trinity is reduced, thrown out with
much of the rest of the Offertory prayers with nothing replacing it. The sign of
the cross, in particular, has been radically suppressed.
5. The
invocation of the saints has also been reduced, especially by name, in the
Confiteor, the Offertory and the Canon of the Mass. This further enhances the
feel that the new Mass is an action of our earthly existence, rather than an
eternal action of God Himself in the presence of all the saints and angels. It
also reduces belief in the Communion of Saints and even purgatory, that we are
part of a greater Church - not only the Church militant, but also the Church
triumphant and expectant.
6. The lack of preparatory prayers for the
priest and servers before they approach the altar of God. The start of the new
Mass appears extremely casual, with the priest looking and talking to the people
present and paying attention to them, rather than preparing himself for the most
awesome and incredible action that any human can do: the sacrifice of God
Himself.
The roles of priest and laity have been confused by
:
7. the use of a single Confiteor. The priest is no longer set apart
from the servers and the people in confessing his sins to God and the court of
heaven as the chosen priest to offer the divine victim to God, acting in
persona Christi. The faithful do join him in offering Christ and
themselves to God the Father, but it is through the ministry of the priest that
it is accomplished. The priest has seemingly become a "representative of the
people" or a presider, rather than a person set apart to bring the Sacraments -
channels of grace - to God's people.
8. the priest no longer separately
receives Holy Communion. In the traditional liturgy, the priest has his own
"Domine non sum dignus..." ("Lord I am not worthy..."), and only after he had
received Communion did he present the sacred Host to the faithful with the "Ecce
Agnus Dei" with a "Domine non sum dignus" for the laity. They then made their
way forwards to the altar rail for their turn, fed by Christ with His own Body
and Blood through the ministry of the priest. In the new liturgy, the priest
first receives Communion, then usually followed by the Extraordinary Ministers
of Holy Communion and the faithful, all using a common "Domine non sum dignus"
to affirm their unworthiness.
9. the use of Extraordinary Ministers of
Holy Communion (usually referred to as Eucharistic Ministers) to distribute
Communion to the faithful. Having the laity touch the sacred Host at all
diminishes the uniqueness of the priesthood, and inevitably reduces belief in
the Real Presence. When any old Joe Bloggs can handle the Blessed Sacrament,
surely it can't be the very Body and Blood of Almighty God, can
it?
Following on :
10. Emphasis has been heavily weighted
from the Eucharistic sacrifice towards Scripture. Readings from Scripture are of
infinite value, but the notion of having three Scripture readings, a psalm with
responses by the laity, and a homily together with the wholesale destruction of
the sacrificial language has tipped the balance to a ridiculous extent.
Moreover, with the use of Eucharistic Prayer II, the time taken to prepare and
offer the sacrifice is reduced to a bare minimum.
The words of the
liturgy are ambiguous in respect to :
11. the response to the mystery
of faith. Responses such as "When we eat this bread and drink this cup we
proclaim your death Lord Jesus until You come in glory" hardly states the
Catholic belief that transubstantiation (that the substance of the bread and
wine have literally been replaced by the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ
Himself) has just taken place! Take another one: "Christ has died, Christ has
risen, Christ will come again" when Christ is fully present on the altar before
us!
12. who the offering is being directed to during the Canon. The
sacrifice is Christ offered by Christ to God the Father through the ministry of
the priest in union with the faithful present. However, immediately afterwards
in the mystery of faith, we then direct our words towards Christ Himself, not to
God the Father.
13. the response of the mystery of faith turns away from
the miracle of the consecration towards the belief in the second coming of our
Lord. Although this is a very important belief, it is hardly appropriate at that
time in the Mass.
14. the wrong translation of "pro multis" into "for
all" when the literal translation has always been "for many" as scripture states
most clearly (see St. Matthew's and St. Mark's account of the institution of the
Eucharist). The full translation is that Christ saves "all who believe in His
name" (cf. John 3:16), not simply "all" on its own.
Also
:
15. the use of the vernacular. Contrary to the teachings of Vatican
II, the whole canon of Mass is now said in the vernacular, suppressing the
immense feeling of unity that existed before. With the overrunning of Latin as
the language of the Church, much of the musical culture and heritage that
existed has now vanished. The beauty and the unchanging nature of Latin (used as
a liturgical language) has been discarded in favour of the ordinariness and
ambiguities of the vernacular.
16. the audible canon. The power of the
words of the consecration are simply too awesome to be heard, only silence can
convey the power and instil a reverent atmosphere to reflect the events taking
place. It is more important to know what is happening than what is simply being
said: we are dipping our toes into the pool of eternality, not hearing some
political speech. The words are a means an end, hearing them somewhat diminishes
this concept.
17. physical participation seemingly placed over spiritual
participation. The constant need to respond or listen drowns out the spiritual
participation that only comes through silencing one's senses, enabling us to
offer ourselves with Christ to God the Father.
The practice of
:
18. receiving Communion whilst standing. This reduces the sense of
humility before one's Creator, and the atmosphere of submission and obedience to
the Lord of all. Receiving communion whilst standing turns the whole affair into
an everyday event, walking up and picking up just a "symbol". In the traditional
liturgy, the priest comes to us, helpless children, who lack the ability to
speak, to feed ourselves, without the infinite mercy of God Himself.
19.
receiving Communion in the hand. Anything valuable should not be touched, as it
increases one's own familiarity with the subject making it become more ordinary
and casual. The Eucharist is the most valuable substance the universe has ever
seen, so don't touch it! It also blurs the line between priest and laity (see
above), and introduces the problem of particles left on the hand, all of which
are our Lord Jesus Christ whole and entire.
20. having the Blood of
Christ practically always presented to the people further increases the
confusion between the Mass and a commemorative meal. The language used makes the
problem worse; "The Body of Christ" and "The Blood of Christ" when both
are the Body and the Blood of Christ.
21. the priest facing the
people. This reduces the sacrificial tone of the Mass, turns it into a meeting
or a supper, and centres the Mass on the people present rather than towards the
Person to whom it is being offered. The priest, our shepherd, is seemingly no
longer leading us towards the next life, but is faced inwards on the
congregation concentrating on this life.
In addition :
22.
Awful music. With the dropping of Latin from the liturgy, modern secular music
was the only way to turn.
23. The suppression of symbolic gestures. The
abolition of gestures, such as genuflecting within the Credo, reduces the sense
of what we really believe in and what is important within our faith (i.e. the
Incarnation). The expression of our faith becomes "flat", lacking a dynamic
flavour. Moreover, the important practice of the priest keeping his index and
thumbs together after the consecration further diminishes the our belief in the
miracle of the Blessed Sacrament, that each and every particle being
substantially and supernaturally our Lord and our God.
24. Most "Novus
Ordo churches" have been re-ordered to reflect their neo-Protestant beliefs,
destroying altar-rails, replacing the high altar with a simple table, moving the
tabernacle into a corner, building a nice big chair for the "presider", making
it increasingly impossible to celebrate a Catholic Mass in a Catholic
atmosphere. Moreover, vestments, chalices and other important features of the
Mass have been cheapened.
25. The practice of altar girls and women
readers confuses Catholic theology on the distinct roles of the sexes, though
equal, are very different physically, socially and in their intended vocations.
Moreover, having the laity enter the sanctuary during Mass inevitably reduces
the sacredness of the sanctuary, the nature of the priesthood and questions the
presence of the Almighty God Himself in the tabernacle. Again, our worship has
become "flat", in that one part of the church is as holy as another. The loss of
a sense of awe and the complete lack of holy fear is most worrying.
Back to Lex orandi, lex
credendi page
Last modified 20th June, 1997, by David Joyce.