The “Old Mass and the “Novus Ordo” Mass: Irreconcilable differences? - Fr. Jerry J. Pokorsky
  • francis
    Posts: 10,824
    The evidence that the two Missals are irreconcilable isn't only asserted by staunch traditionalists. It's asserted by non-Popes such as Fr. Gelineau, and by Popes such as Francis.
    Let us all not forget that Paul VI himself blatantly described the new rite in his audience in November 26, 1969. He stated the very intentions of what the 'novel' rite would actually be and how it would impact the church.

    Pope Paul VI : Address to a General Audience, November 26, 1969
    ...liturgical innovation of the new rite of the Mass.
    ...a change in a venerable tradition that has gone on for centuries.
    ...something that affects our hereditary religious patrimony, which seemed to enjoy the privilege of being untouchable and settled. It seemed to bring the prayer of our forefathers and our saints to our lips and to give us the comfort of feeling faithful to our spiritual past, which we kept alive to pass it on to the generations ahead.
    ...We shall become aware, perhaps with some feeling of annoyance, that the ceremonies at the altar are no longer being carried out with the same words and gestures to which we were accustomed—
    ...We must prepare for this many-sided inconvenience.
    ...It is the kind of upset caused by every novelty that breaks in on our habits.
    ...We shall notice that pious persons are disturbed most
    ...Even priests may feel some annoyance in this respect.
    ...This novelty is no small thing. We should not let ourselves be surprised by the nature, or even the nuisance, of its exterior forms.
    ...As intelligent persons and conscientious faithful we should find out as much as we can about this innovation. (NOTE: WE ARE ALL DEFINITELY DOING THIS!!!!)
    ...we shall do well to take into account the motives for this grave change. (NOTE: we are trying to do well to take into account the motives, you can be sure.)
    ...This moment is shaking the Church, arousing it, obliging it to renew the mysterious art of its prayer. (NOTE: The irony of this statement is that the church has definitely been 'aroused' and is renewing (returning) to it's tradition!)
    ...It is here that the greatest newness is going to be noticed, the newness of language. No longer Latin, but the spoken language will be the principal language of the Mass. The introduction of the vernacular will certainly be a great sacrifice for those who know the beauty, the power and the expressive sacrality of Latin.
    ...We are parting with the speech of the Christian centuries; we are becoming like profane intruders in the literary preserve of sacred utterance. (NOTE: um, I don't think you 'are becoming'... it appears that you already ARE the greatest of intruders...) We will lose a great part of that stupendous and incomparable artistic and spiritual thing, the Gregorian chant.
    ...We have reason indeed for regret, reason almost for bewilderment. What can we put in the place of that language of the angels? We are giving up something of priceless worth. But why? What is more precious than these loftiest of our Church's values?
    ...The answer will seem banal, prosaic. (NOTE: yup, it is.)
    ...If the divine Latin language kept us apart from the children, from youth, from the world of labor and of affairs, if it were a dark screen, not a clear window, would it be right for us fishers of souls to maintain it as the exclusive language of prayer and religious intercourse? (NOTE: The Mass is NOT a dialogue with the world. On that supposition alone this is a very deceptive invitation.)
    This audience can be easily obtained on the interwebs.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • .We shall notice that pious persons are disturbed most


    Does he say "pious" or "devout" or "anyone with a pulse"?

    ..We are parting with the speech of the Christian centuries; we are becoming like profane intruders in the literary preserve of sacred utterance.


    Pope Paul clearly spoke the truth. Think of (nearly) countless examples of "profane intruders"

    .If the divine Latin language kept us apart from the children, from youth, from the world of labor and of affairs, if it were a dark screen, not a clear window, would it be right for us fishers of souls to maintain it as the exclusive language of prayer and religious intercourse?


    If .... but it doesn't keep us apart from the children (etc); it's not a dark screen.... at least not in the sense the reformers apparently mean the term.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • francis
    Posts: 10,824
    Does this mean that those who are NOT pious are those who are NOT disturbed?
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores
  • Andrew_Malton
    Posts: 1,187
    No. Although it's still possible.

    "pious persons are disturbed most".

    This means:

    There is a set of 2 or more pious persons, all of whom are more disturbed than anyone else. Call them the "most disturbed". Then this is equivalent to:

    Forall X. (D(X) -> P(X))
    Forall X. (not P(X) -> not D(X))
    Not Exists X. not (D(X) -> P(X))
    Not Exists X. (D(X) & not P(X))
    Anyone who is not pious is less disturbed than someone else, who is pious.
    No one who is most disturbed is not pious.
    Anyone who is most disturbed is pious.

    But the following are all still possible:

    Someone is pious and not most disturbed.
    Someone is pious and not disturbed at all.
    Someone is disturbed but not pious. (In this case there are others, pious and more disturbed than he).
    Everyone who is disturbed is pious.
    Everyone who is pious is disturbed. (This is @Francis 's question above)
    If there is any person who is not pious, then there is someone who is not pious and still is more disturbed than everyone else except the most disturbed.

  • ....pious...disturbed,....

    Hmmm. Is this a change in vocabulary. "pious" = "disturbed"?
  • ServiamScores
    Posts: 2,888
    Does this mean that those who are NOT pious are those who are NOT disturbed?
    This is certainly my experience. They are only disturbed by my being disturbed.
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,216
    Pope Paul VI's general audience of November 26, 1969 is here:
    https://www.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/it/audiences/1969/documents/hf_p-vi_aud_19691126.html

    The quotes above are shown in the Italian text, along with these unfulfilled promises:

    Moreover, the new rite of Mass establishes that the faithful are to "learn to sing 'together, in Latin, at least the parts of the Ordinary of the Mass, and especially the Creed and the Lord's Prayer, the Our Father" (n. 19). But we also remember, an admonition and a consolation, that Latin will not disappear from our Church because of this; it will remain the noble language of official acts of the Apostolic See; it will remain as a teaching instrument of ecclesiastical studies and as a key of access to the patrimony of our religious, historical, and humanistic culture, and if possible, in flourishing splendor. [My translation.]

    Ma del resto il nuovo rito della Messa stabilisce che i fedeli «sappiano cantare ‘insieme, in lingua latina, almeno le parti dell’ordinario della Messa, e specialmente il simbolo della fede e la preghiera del Signore, il Padre nostro» (n. 19). Ma ricordiamolo bene, a nostro monito e a nostro conforto: non per questo il latino nella nostra Chiesa scomparirà; esso rimarrà la nobile lingua degli atti ufficiali della Sede Apostolica; resterà come strumento scolastico degli studi ecclesiastici e come chiave d’accesso al patrimonio della nostra cultura religiosa, storica ed umanistica; e, se possibile, in rifiorente splendore.
    Thanked by 1tomjaw
  • MatthewRoth
    Posts: 2,311
    To Liam's point: except that the people involved were not Anglos…
  • Liam
    Posts: 5,093
    But the analysis here is largely by people in the Anglosphere. That was the object of my comment.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • a_f_hawkins
    Posts: 3,467
    The context of this address is that it is the week before the introduction of the NO, and that the implementation was different in Italy from the Anglosphere. For us implementation took another four years tossing texts back and forth between ICEL and National Conferences.
    The more significant papal address is from the week before. That was considered important enough, and general enough, that it was published in AAS [AAS 61 (1969) 777-780]. English version in DOL 211.
    ... But be very sure of one point: nothing of the substance of the traditional Mass has been altered. Some people might let themselves be persuaded that a particular ceremony or its accompanying rubric involves or implies an altering or lessening of the truth received once for ever and authoritatively guaranteed by Catholic Truth. They might conclude that the equation between the lex orandi and the lex credendi has been jeopardized.This is absolutely not the case. ...
    Thanked by 2smvanroode Elmar
  • .This is absolutely not the case. ...


    Someone tell the ghost writers of Amoris Laetitia, or nearly everything which comes forth from the mouth of His Holiness Francis, Bishop of Rome.
    Thanked by 1ServiamScores
  • francis
    Posts: 10,824
    ... But be very sure of one point: nothing of the substance of the traditional Mass has been altered. Some people might let themselves be persuaded that a particular ceremony or its accompanying rubric involves or implies an altering or lessening of the truth received once for ever and authoritatively guaranteed by Catholic Truth. They might conclude that the equation between the lex orandi and the lex credendi has been jeopardized.This is absolutely not the case. ...
    ...Bring me the broom of the wicked witch of the west! (smoke and loud voice)
    ...Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain. (smoke and loud voice)

    Here's the deal in my mind:

    The infiltration of the church happened without its members realizing what was occuring. (however, there were warnings and rumblings from those at the top in key positions in the Vatican, but they were belittled and dismissed.)

    We trusted every spirit in the hierarchy mainly because the faith remained unchallenged for so many centuries FROM WITHIN ITS RANKS.

    We did not realize that the church had been compromised and the Mass and the sacraments had been changed.

    The "spirits" (including the one of VII) are now being put to the test.

    [1] Dearly beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits if they be of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. [2] By this is the spirit of God known. Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God: [3] And every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God: and this is Antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh, and he is now already in the world. [4] You are of God, little children, and have overcome him. Because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world. [5] They are of the world: therefore of the world they speak, and the world heareth them.

    [1] "Try the spirits": Viz., by examining whether their teaching be agreeable to the rule of the Catholic faith, and the doctrine of the church. For as he says, (ver. 6,) He that knoweth God, heareth us [the pastors of the church]. By this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

    [2] "Every spirit which confesseth": Not that the confession of this point of faith alone, is, at all times, and in all cases, sufficient; but that with relation to that time, and for that part of the Christian doctrine, which was then particularly to be confessed, taught, and maintained against the heretics of those days, this was the most proper token, by which the true teachers might be distinguished from the false.

    [3] "That dissolveth Jesus": Viz., either by denying his humanity, or his divinity.

    [3] "He is now already in the world": Not in his person, but in his spirit, and in his precursors.

    [I would also add that to 'dissolveth Jesus' is to dissolve the tradition (magisterium).]


    [6] We are of God. He that knoweth God, heareth us. He that is not of God, heareth us not. By this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

    1 John 4:1—6, DRB

    [23] Then if any man shall say to you: Lo here is Christ, or there, do not believe him. [24] For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. [25] Behold I have told it to you, beforehand.

    Jesus to his disciples in the book of Matthew.


    Do not dismiss the audience of November 26 with that of the 19th. It was blatantly put forward from the mouth of PVI himself what the intention of the 'new rite' would intend to destroy. And now it has come full circle, and in the face of the new rite, the one venerable rite which was handed down to us is now to be abolished.

    A man cannot cut off his head and expect his body to live.
  • Come to think of it, make sure that bishops and pastors (and Susan, on the parish council) and anyone else who says that traditionalists reject (whatever) know that accepting the "Mass of Vatican II" changes no teaching of the Church.
    Thanked by 2tomjaw ServiamScores