The pope’s master of ceremonies then witnessed Paul VI break down in tears.
  • NEW YORK TIMES

    LATIN MASS APPEAL

    By KENNETH J. WOLFE
    Published: November 28, 2009

    WALKING into church 40 years ago on this first Sunday of Advent, many Roman Catholics might have wondered where they were. The priest not only spoke English rather than Latin, but he faced the congregation instead of the tabernacle; laymen took on duties previously reserved for priests; folk music filled the air. The great changes of Vatican II had hit home.

    All this was a radical break from the traditional Latin Mass, codified in the 16th century at the Council of Trent. For centuries, that Mass served as a structured sacrifice with directives, called “rubrics,” that were not optional. This is how it is done, said the book. As recently as 1947, Pope Pius XII had issued an encyclical on liturgy that scoffed at modernization; he said that the idea of changes to the traditional Latin Mass “pained” him “grievously.”

    Paradoxically, however, it was Pius himself who was largely responsible for the momentous changes of 1969. It was he who appointed the chief architect of the new Mass, Annibale Bugnini, to the Vatican’s liturgical commission in 1948.

    Bugnini was born in 1912 and ordained a Vincentian priest in 1936. Though Bugnini had barely a decade of parish work, Pius XII made him secretary to the Commission for Liturgical Reform. In the 1950s, Bugnini led a major revision of the liturgies of Holy Week. As a result, on Good Friday of 1955, congregations for the first time joined the priest in reciting the Pater Noster, and the priest faced the congregation for some of the liturgy.

    The next pope, John XXIII, named Bugnini secretary to the Preparatory Commission for the Liturgy of Vatican II, in which position he worked with Catholic clergymen and, surprisingly, some Protestant ministers on liturgical reforms. In 1962 he wrote what would eventually become the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, the document that gave the form of the new Mass.

    Many of Bugnini’s reforms were aimed at appeasing non-Catholics, and changes emulating Protestant services were made, including placing altars to face the people instead of a sacrifice toward the liturgical east. As he put it, “We must strip from our ... Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is, for the Protestants.” (Paradoxically, the Anglicans who will join the Catholic Church as a result of the current pope’s outreach will use a liturgy that often features the priest facing in the same direction as the congregation.)

    How was Bugnini able to make such sweeping changes? In part because none of the popes he served were liturgists. Bugnini changed so many things that John’s successor, Paul VI, sometimes did not know the latest directives. The pope once questioned the vestments set out for him by his staff, saying they were the wrong color, only to be told he had eliminated the week-long celebration of Pentecost and could not wear the corresponding red garments for Mass. The pope’s master of ceremonies then witnessed Paul VI break down in tears.

    Bugnini fell from grace in the 1970s. Rumors spread in the Italian press that he was a Freemason, which if true would have merited excommunication. The Vatican never denied the claims, and in 1976 Bugnini, by then an archbishop, was exiled to a ceremonial post in Iran. He died, largely forgotten, in 1982.

    But his legacy lived on. Pope John Paul II continued the liberalizations of Mass, allowing females to serve in place of altar boys and to permit unordained men and women to distribute communion in the hands of standing recipients. Even conservative organizations like Opus Dei adopted the liberal liturgical reforms.

    But Bugnini may have finally met his match in Benedict XVI, a noted liturgist himself who is no fan of the past 40 years of change. Chanting Latin, wearing antique vestments and distributing communion only on the tongues (rather than into the hands) of kneeling Catholics, Benedict has slowly reversed the innovations of his predecessors. And the Latin Mass is back, at least on a limited basis, in places like Arlington, Va., where one in five parishes offer the old liturgy.

    Benedict understands that his younger priests and seminarians — most born after Vatican II — are helping lead a counterrevolution. They value the beauty of the solemn high Mass and its accompanying chant, incense and ceremony. Priests in cassocks and sisters in habits are again common; traditionalist societies like the Institute of Christ the King are expanding.

    At the beginning of this decade, Benedict (then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger) wrote: “The turning of the priest toward the people has turned the community into a self-enclosed circle. In its outward form, it no longer opens out on what lies ahead and above, but is closed in on itself.” He was right: 40 years of the new Mass have brought chaos and banality into the most visible and outward sign of the church. Benedict XVI wants a return to order and meaning. So, it seems, does the next generation of Catholics.

    Kenneth J. Wolfe writes frequently for traditionalist Roman Catholic publications.
  • This is so torturously sad! A Holy Father, a Pope moved to tears because of a change in required vesture. He might have said 'this won't do' and changed it back, or even applied some appropriate discipline and correction on those responsible. The lesson here seems to be that once things are set in motion they are not wholly under the control of a given pope. Correcting 40 years of degeneration will likely take more than another forty years of genuine reform. I recall reading somewhere many years ago that Paul VI. was said to have said 'the fires of hell are seeping into the Church, and I don't know whether anyone can put them out'. John Paul II., great as he was, did little to reverse the current trends. Our beloved Benedict XVI. is doing all he can, but seems to be being willfully disobeyed by 95% of our priests, bishops, and populace. One would think (yes, I am being slightly disengenuous here) that all the self styled charismatics would observe the Holy Father's example and exclaim, 'ah, you see, the Holy Spirit has at last spoken... at last he has been heard'. No - they and all the other factions hear only what pleases them.
  • We had a visiting Priest from Arlington for Thanksgiving Mass. Wish I'd seen this article before I met him. Would like to have asked him about it. Our new Bishop presided and chanted beautifully. He also included the 'Sanctus' bells!! I thought the bells had been dispensed with years ago? At least I haven't heard them since I've been here.

    Donna
  • Donna, your new Bishop has made a number of public statements about the bells at Mass in the Knoxville media since he arrived.
  • Mr. Wolfe, the author of this NYT op-ed piece, sings in the schola at Old Saint Mary's in Washington (directed by David Sullivan, who posts in these forums).
  • Noel, I sent you an Eamil to noeljones@usit- is that a correct address?
  • Yes, noeljones@usit.net is fine.
  • JennyJenny
    Posts: 147
    Hard to believe the New York Times printed this without any critique.
  • It's hard to believe they printed it at all, except that the editors don't understand enough about the issue to mangle the prose as they nearly always do.
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    The first paragraph suggests the changes were overnight; they were not.
    When the road crew finally hangs the 65/whatever mph signs, it means the speed is official;
    plenty happened before tightening the final bolt of the signpost.
    In Dec 1964 my grandfather died; my mother travelled from California to New York for the funeral;
    upon return she asked our pastor why the altar had not yet been turned around in our parish.
    In May 1965 I received my First Communion; gifts included a Children's Missal,
    and a supplement for the Dialogue Mass in English; I still have both.

    Kicking holes in the dike every time you walk by it
    and then crying when you discover your homestead is flooded
    is a pity-free scenario.

    Everyone has some ability and some responsibility to do some thing.
    The only occasion for crying is when you have ten fingers in the dike
    and you notice an eleventh hole while the bystanders are laughing.
    But even then, you do not remove your fingers to wipe your tears from your cheeks.