Daphne McLeod, Chairman of the English organisation Pro Ecclesia et Pontifice insists that the Mass debate is a “red herring” to distract Catholics from the real issue, which is the damage being done by modern catechetics and the need to teach the Faith properly. Click on the link below to read Daphne’s analysis and then tell us if you agree…
Tags: catechetics, faith, Mass
-
Daphne is very convincing, as always. However, two caveats: one, I think a restoration of the ancient Mass will naturally lead to a restoration of traditional Catholic catechetics, simply because that Mass is an enactment of traditional theology. Two, a small flaw in this argument is that the theology behind the Novus Ordo is not Catholic (as Ottaviani pointed out long ago); therefore, though Novus Ordo seminaries are crowded in some Third World countries, I believe their devotion and zeal will ultimately be blunted unless they find the true liturgy. Their theology may not have been changed by Study Weeks, but it was just as surely changed by the Novus Ordo – they just don’t realize it yet. And if their theology has been changed, then their formation is not complete.
-
Torquemada, I very much agree with you that the catch in Daphne’s argument is that the novus ordo is not Catholic. As Cardinal Ottaviani said it is a complete departure away from Catholic theology. So how can children be truly made Catholic if you are teaching them that the new Mass is “Catholic”?
-
My problem is that I have always believed that vocations were at an all time low and that was something to do with the new Mass. The figures quoted by Daphne are quite startling.
It would be interesting to know if there are other reasons for this apparent upsurge in vocations. Or is it a case of the Holy Spirit leading souls into the priesthood despite the deficiencies in the new Mass?
-
I have long been an admirer of Daphne McLeod’s work in challenging the terrible teaching in Catholic schools for years now. Most of my life I have taught in Catholic secondary schools and tried my best to teach the orthodox faith despite meeting with opposition from some colleagues.
However, although attending the novus ordo myself, I find when teaching the children that I instinctively teach them the theology of the traditional Mass, because books on the new Mass all focus on the Mass as a meal between Jesus and his “friends”. They are never called apostles and the idea of the Mass as the sacrifice of Calvary is never mentioned.
So, although I endorse everything that Daphne says about catechetics and the importance of teaching the faith, I cannot really see how it is possible to separate teaching the faith from teaching the Mass and the two Masses are very different in their theology – otherwise there would not be any controversy over them. It is not Latin that causes the controversy because Latin is still the official language of the Mass and the Church (wasn’t Pope JPII funeral novus ordo Mass in Latin?)
I don’t think that Daphne’s statement really helps teachers, then, because to teach that the new Mass is OK is to teach that all that happened at the Last Supper was that Jesus had a meal with his friends and gave us his body and blood as food for our souls. Protestants can go along with that (and do) understanding Communion only in a very general and symbolic sense.
-
Why can’t teachers just teach that the two Masses are different rites but similar or whatever the pope said recently. Why make heavy weather of it, since so many Catholics prefer the new Mass with a minority wanting the old Mass back. Daphne is right – more important to teach them all about the doctrines and moral teachings and let them pick their favourite Mass. No big deal.
-
Rebel
One problem with your approach is that the Catholic religion is not a matter of what people prefer. We don’t get to vote or take a poll on how to get to heaven – or decide which teachings we are comfortable with and which we reject. This popularity concept is one of the fatal flaws of the Vatican II church.
The other problem – closely related to the first – is that the two Masses are not merely different rites (despite what the Pope said – they are not even remotely related). One of them is Catholic, and the other is not! Therefore, only one of them will promote the real Catholic approach to life, while the other will continue to promote the modernist approach to life (i.e. “it’s all good, just pick what you like.”)
My point is, you can’t teach the new Mass with Catholic theology, because the new Mass isn’t Catholic! That’s schizophrenia. So “letting people pick their favorite Mass” will result in more of the same mess – since most will pick the easy way out, which is the Novus Ordo.
My response to Daphne’s argument is that neither the liturgy nor the teachings have priority: everything should be restored at once, as the sacred whole it was meant to be. None of this piecemeal garbage.
And since that is not likely to happen under the present Pope, it seems as though it will be reserved for the Third Secret calamities.
-
Daphne McLeod surely forgets that the liturgy, in particular the rite of Mass, is an expression of doctrine, otherwise the principle ‘lex orandi lex credendi’ would be meaningless.
The Novus Ordo is indisputably the first-begotten son of the new theology which came into its own at Vatican II and which would later become the foundation of the new catechesis. It is, in my opinion, extremely naïve—theologically and historically—to think that the new rite of mass and old style catechesis can flourish side by side their being an interaction between them.
As to those countries which Daphne tells us are blessed with high numbers of priestly vocations, am I alone in thinking that they are all, to a greater or lesser extent, developing economies? He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
-
I’m sorry Heather Priest, but I don’t get your last paragraph. I know materialism begets spiritual decay but I don’t understand what you mean in relation to the previous 2 paragraphs.
-
I would say that Daphne’s argument is a perfect vindication of the position of the SSPX. It has consistently stood firm against both the New Mass and the flawed doctrines of Vatican II.
However, there is no question that the New Mass is primarily responsible for the rot in the Church today. This is obvious because from Our Lord’s sacrifice flow the graces to sanctify the Church. Restrict or remove this source of grace and all else will automatically fail. Heather Priest hit on this point when he referred to the ‘lex orandi, lex credendi’. So, put the Mass right and the rest will correct itself.
And here is another suggestion. We know that next to the Mass there is no greater prayer for sanctifying souls than the rosary. You will all be aware that when the Tridentine Mass was kicked out of the picture, so too was the rosary to a great extent. The rosary needs to be re-introduced to the young, for Our Lady said to Sister Lucy of Fatima that there is no trouble, spiritual or material, that cannot be overcome by the power of the rosary.
So what am I saying here. I’m saying prayer first, the true Mass and the rosary, and from that will follow the grace and understanding to correct the doctrine. We cannot act without first being fortified and enlightened by the prayers of the Church, the Mass and the rosary. Sound catechetics will not restore the true Mass, but the true Mass will restore sound catechetics.
-
semperfidelis, I think I know what Heather Priest was meaning in his final paragraph. Unless I am way off track, I think he is saying that where there is poverty and a very poor standard of living, young men will be attracted to the priesthood – a hot meal every day and a comfortable bed at night. It certainly makes sense to me – otherwise how do we explain the apparent flowering of vocations in these countries?
-
Welcome to the blog, schoolteacher. You have chosen an appropriate thread from which to launch your blogging career with Catholic Truth!
I agree completely with what you say and, in fact, your own experience in teaching mirrors my own although I taught at secondary not primary stage. Still, when I addressed 6th formers in assembly on the Mass, I used to emphasise the sacrificial nature of the Mass only to find myself the subject of a complaint to one of the priest-governors by a non-Catholic member of staff who thought all that about sacrifice had gone out of that open window at Vatican II. The priest-governor assured him that he was right I was wrong and said just to ignore me!!
Without a doubt, the theology of the Mass is inextricable from catechesis and I know of parents in the central belt of Scotland who are home-schooling their children, apparently concerned at the poor catechesis in their local schools, yet taking them to the novus ordo Mass. Talk about not joining up the dots!
Anyway, a renewed welcome, schoolteacher – keep blogging!
-
Editor, I cannot completely accept the “hot meal and comfortable bed” comment. Now I know that sometimes this happens, just as the lure of all that unearned respect, trust and esteem which used to occur in this part of the world attracted young men to the priesthood. However, I know some of these young and devout third world priests and they are a credit to their seminaries. Also, very few full blooded males would relinquish a cuddly wife for a “hot meal and a comfortable bed”!!
No, I’m with Torquemada in his first comment on this when he says “their theology may not have been changed by Study Weeks but it was just as surely changed by the Novus Ordo, they just do not realize it yet”. Spot on! I see this even today with some older folk and good priests. They do not see that the fundamentals have changed. “The Mass is the Mass says one” or “how come priests have a day off when they are obliged to say Mass every day?” and look in disbelief when you explain why. And so on. They just sleepwalked into the new theology just as sure as the folk who walked into Protestantism at the Reformation, led by their Bishops.
-
semperfidelis, when you are very poor and hungry, a cuddly wife is not always top of your list of priorities. Anyway, there is no shortage of evidence for the thesis that there are those in under-developed nations who choose the priesthood for all the wrong reasons and not because they are sanctified by the novus ordo. But, as Heather Priest intimated, this kind of revelation is only for “those who have ears to hear”. To mix holy metaphors, maybe it is a case of remembering what St Paul says about not feeding meat to those who can still take only milk or words to that effect, so forget about this possible explanation for all those vocations in under-developed nations (which, whatever the explanation, are not due to the novus ordo Mass, that’s for sure) and let’s move on…
-
It is a horrible mess.How about time people start crossing the dots?There is a good school in Ireland who might appreciate a few new students.They would quite enjoy the West of Ireland.
“I’m saying prayer first, the true Mass and the rosary, and from that will follow the grace and understanding to correct the doctrine. We cannot act without first being fortified and enlightened by the prayers of the Church, the Mass and the rosary. Sound catechetics will not restore the true Mass, but the true Mass will restore sound catechetics.”
There is no other way.
-
Well said, Credo. Well said.
-
If anyone is interested in reading an analysis of the implementation difficulties involved in Summorum, I’ve just posted links on the Hoyos thread (“Open Letter to Cardinal Hoyos”).
-
Thanks Torquemada. Very useful. Will take a look later.
-
But editor, I do not want to move on. Since “there is no shortage of evidence for the thesis that there are those in under-developed nations who choose the priesthood for all the wrong reasons” can you supply me with some of this evidence? Also, I am a vegetarian and wouldn’t touch meat. Dairy products are my preference!!
-
Can’t say more than I have. Take is as an informed opinion, for what that is worth, semperfidelis. And reflect on the effects of Original Sin. If you think no-one ever became a priest for the wrong motives (and no swipes at Irish grannies, please, my mother is one) then you are best left to enjoy the company of the men in white coats.
-
There is no question that some men enter the priesthood for all the wrong reasons – hence their inability to withstand temptation. I once spoke to a woman in Glasgow who told me her son left the priesthood after a matter of weeks, because he fell for a girl in the parish. No-one will convince me he entered the priesthood in order to become a saint.
Or is it true, as I once read in Catholic Truth of all places, that the new Mass doesn’t make saints the way the old Mass did – or words to that effect.
-
Joan
I have yet to come across a priest of the New Mass who has any depth of sanctity about him. I don’t mean by this that the younger ones are not intent on holiness, but that they simply are not reaching their potential because of the New Mass. It doesn’t sanctify souls. It makes them lukewarm.
-
I agree – you just need to see the way priests behave in churches and even when they take Communion to the sick, chatting away, to know there is no depth of sanctity there.
-
I have just come away from an SSPX Mass in Holloway. Just before the homily, the priest said that he would be taking the Blessed Sacrament to the sick immediately after Mass. He asked that nobody should try to speak to him as he left the church, and, as he passed by, would they be gracious enough to kneel out of respect for the Blessed Sacrament until he had passed by.
How about that for a contrast with what Faithful has just written – and the SSPX is being castigated by the conciliar church! Somebody has got it wrong somewhere, what, what, what?
-
the convert
SPOT ON!!
-
CT bloggers,
Would you help me out with an exchange I’ve recently had on Father Z’s blog (“What Does the Prayer Really Say?”) regarding validity? I’ll post my comment, followed by another comment from another blogger, followed by Father Z’s response – the reason I’m posting them is that neither response made any sense whatsoever to me!
I started out with this:
“…we know that in order to be valid, the Novus Ordo watered down consecration has to have four conditions, one of which is the intention of the priest to consecrate. So actually I have 2 dreaded questions: one, what if the priest has been trained in seminary that this is just a “memorial meal,” not transubstantiation? And two, even if the Novus Ordo is valid, what does that have to do with anything? I ask that because during the past 40 years, this “valid” Novus Ordo has in fact been the centerpiece of the decline, decay and dissipation of the Catholic faith (hmmm…just as Lefebvre said it would). In my opinion, therefore, validity is utterly irrelevant and cannot possibly be used to defend the Novus Ordo. What is relevant is the disastrous outcome of worship using the Novus Ordo – which, to me, makes it indefensible.”
To which another Blogger replied:
A priest needs only the intention of doing what the Church does; he can be mistaken about what the Church does. He does not need to believe in transubstantiation. You can read Card. Billot (one of the authors of Pascendi, certainly no Modernist) on the topic here:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/DOCTRINE/INTENTIO.TXT (scroll down)
“But it is not necessary that the minister think as the Church does, or that he not err concerning her teaching; for it is enough if his intention is towards something which is identically that which the Church intends, or, something which amounts to the same thing, for example, if he intends to do that which Christ instituted, or which is commanded in the Gospel, or which Christians are accustomed to do according to the prescription of their religion.” (this quotes from Pascendi)
And to which Father Z replied:
I don’t accept your premise. The consecration is valid. Thus it is not watered down. It is either valid or not: not “watery valid”.
As bad as the seminaries were… and I was in one of the very worst in the USA… I don’t think any of the men got out of the seminary thinking that Mass was only a memorial meal.
Well… what you are fastening on, I think, is the way that the Novus Ordo has been celebrated, rather than the way it ought to have been celebrated. Those are very different. This is another reason why we need celebrations of the older Mass! However… I will cede something in this. Often we hear people say things like, when the Novus Ordo is celebrated like the older Mass, it is a) far better, b) just fine, c) no problem, etc. In fact, I often hear that the more the Novus Ordo is celebrated like the older form, the better it is.
I think that pushes the conclusion to the fore: why not just use the older Mass?”
-
Torquemada
The blogger who responded to you is guilty of serious error. First, the link he gave you, and which you reproduce here, is merely a translation of what someone thinks Cardinal Billot had to say as an author of Pascendi on what constitutes intention on the part of a priest when consecrating during Mass.
Furthermore, his quotation beginning: “But it is not necessary that the priest think as the Church does… etc.”, which you say in brackets is quoted from Pascendi, is not from Pascendi at all. I don’t know where this person got this quotation from, but I can’t find anything in my reading of Pascendi that says anything remotely similar.
It is clearly understood and taught by the Church that the priest must have the intention of the Church, which was the intention of Christ, to consecrate. Therefore, he must absolutely believe that the words he speaks at the consecration of the Mass effects Transubstantiation.
Let’s consider his quote in more detail.
“for it is enough if his intention is towards something which is identically that which the Church intends…”
How can his intention be “towards something” and “identically that” at the same time? This is a contradiction in terms. If his intention is towards, it cannot then be identical.
“or something which amounts to the same thing, for example, if he intends to do that which Christ instituted…”
If he intends to do that which Christ instituted, then clearly he intends, with the Church, to effect Transubstantiation. The is no “amounts to the same thing” involved.
“or which Christians are accustomed to do according to the prescription of their religion.”
Protestants call themselves Christians and are accustomed to reject Transubstantiation. For them communion is merely a sign not a Sacrament. How does that fit with the above quote? This is heresy.
I challenge this blogger to point out exactly where (under what title and paragraph in the official Pascendi document) such a quote as his is to be found. My bet is he can’t answer.
I don’t think Fr. Z is being entirely honest with you either. There is no way he left one of the “worst seminaries” in the US confidently assured that none of the young priests of his year thought the Mass to be just a meal. Most priests today in the world think the Mass is nothing more than a meal.
The truth is that the whole construction of the New Mass lends itself to the idea of a meal rather than Our Lord’s sacrifice on Calvary. The words of consecration are still present, but the rest is Protestant. It would take a miracle for any young priest today to escape this poisonous liturgy and the poisonous teaching of his seminary professors and still believe in the Mass as a sacrifice.
You make a great point, though, valid or not this Mass is so Protestantised that it has destroyed the Catholic faith of countless priestly and lay souls.
One thing Fr. Z did get right is that there is no such thing as a “watery valid” regarding the consecration. It is either valid or invalid. Period.
One last point. Fr. Z fools himself if he believes that the Novus Ordo can be celebrated like the older form. The two rites are so far apart in theology that there is no way the Novus Ordo could ever resemble the Tridentine rite. Not in a billion years.
-
Torquemada
Strike at least some of what I said in my last post. I checked with a traditional Catholic priest and he confirms that a priest who does not believe in transubstantiation can nevertheless confect the sacrament during Mass if he INTENDS to do what THE CHURCH DOES.
I then asked this traditional priest how a priest who doesn’t believe in transubstantiation could have the intention of the Church, knowing that the Church intends transubstantiation. He shook his head and said “exactly”, it would be difficult but it is possible.
So now we know. Still, validity aside I think your main point, and mine, is that regardless of the validity question, and it is a big question over many of these New Masses, the fact is that the New Mass causes a weakening and/or loss of the Catholic Faith. That’s the real issue.
-
Read this report on Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos from Fr Z and the few comments from his bloggers below. Note Fr Z’s advice is always to be patient about Summorum Pontificum which seems to undermine Daphne’s assurance that SP has now changed the landscape.
Anyway, click on the following link and see if you think this strengthens or weakens Daphne’s case. Note isabella’s comment. I found her comment very interesting since, in many ways, it mirrors my own experience.
http://wdtprs.com/blog/2008/09/card-castrillons-intro-to-new-edition-of-fortescueo’connell/ -
I think that the report on Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos from Fr Z does weaken Daphne’s case. As other bloggers have pointed out the Sacrifice of Calvary is present in the Tridentine Mass. The Novus Ordo Mass is presented as no more than a meal.
By chance I happened to attend a Novus Ordo Mass at the weekend. The priest was Nigerian. I found it no different or better than that performed by home grown priests. I must remember to bring along my tamborine if I attend one again in the near future.
-
I attended a Novus Ordo Mass a few months ago whilst visiting relatives. A young Priest from India offered the Mass, which was on the eve before a Holy Day of Obligation. He carefully decanted the contents of the chalice into four smaller vessels, and six extraordinary ministers stepped up to distribute Holy Communion. There were about 12- 15 people in the body of the church. I wondered if he had thought about whether they were really necessary.
-
the convert, that is so typically ridiculous and reminds me of the silly priest who asked me, as Head of RE in a Sixth Form College, who would help distribute Communion during the lunchtime Mass on a day when about three students and one member of staff apart my me, attended. He was very young and so may have missed the import of my sarcastic “Will you not be able to manage on your own?”
Absolutely ridiculous.
-
I have had an email from a reader in the archdiocese of Edinburgh who thinks the poll wording misrepresents Daphne’s position somewhat. He writes and I quote…
“Daphne is claiming, wrongly, that the teaching of doctrine rather then the abolition of the true Mass is the cause of all our woes. It’s the other way around. I think a better question would have been something like: “Is the crisis in the Church today due more to the abolition of sound Catechetics than the Tridentine Mass.” Or something to that effect.” End of quote.
I have emailed Daphne to ask her to come onto the blog and tell us herself because my reading of her statement is that she called the Mass argument “a red herring” and now that Summorum Pontificum has arrived, we can leave the Mass aside and concentrate on teaching the faith properly. Now I fail to see (a) that SP has made a blind bit of difference in Scotland or even in the wider UK and (b) that it is possible to fully teach the faith until the traditional Mass is the “ordinary” rite, for want of a better term.
What do the rest of you think? What DOES Daphne mean? Who has interpreted her statement correctly, i.e. who is right – the posh lad from Edinburgh or the humble wee lassie from Glesca toon?
Vote NOW!
-
editor
I agree with you although, like the posh lad from Edinburgh, I originally read the question wrong.
-
I think it is obvious that Daphne means the teaching of religion should be improved because that is what will end the crisis in the Church, and she backs this up by referring to good novus ordo priests. That shows her true colours. She is a novus ordo Catholic, quite happy with things as they are. I am surprised at her, though, because if anyone should know that teachers who try to teach the faith properly are persecuted, she should. She has written about that loads of times, so what is she saying, that all the persecuted teachers were those who were trying to plug the traditional Mass? I don’t think so.
The editor has told us she only started going to trad Masses this past two years but had a hard time trying to teach the faith well before that.I hope Daphne comes onto the blog to explain herself. I for one cannot understand her argument.
-
I forgot to say that I vote for the Glesca lassie!
-
Athanasius
Just wanted to say “thanks” – and only a day late – for your analysis of the Pascendi quote etc. Very helpful!
-
I keep checking to see if Daphne has blogged. I think she must realise she has made a bloomer with that statement!
-
I would put this question to Daphne. The New Mass was imposed upon the Church universally. Catechetics have always been taught locally using a few recognised and trusted methods. Why is it, then, that all locally taught catechetics disintegrated simutaneously with the imposition of the New Mass?
In other words, if the Mass went first followed by the teaching of sound doctrine, then is it not correct to say that the Mass must be fully restored first before sound doctrine returns?
It’s a simple thing to work out. Diminished Mass = diminished grace = diminished doctrinal teaching.
If sound catechetical teaching is, as Daphne suggests, still possible in parishes where the Novus Ordo Mass reigns, then I wish she would quote several examples of individually flourishing parishes and dioceses, both home and abroad, that have kept 100% the fulness of the Catholic Faith. I am not aware of a single one.
-
I think Our Lord gave us the answer: He instituted the Mass on Holy Thursday, and post-resurrection, before He ascended into Heaven, He instructed his apostles to “Go preach the Gospel to all nations…”
His final words on this earth, therefore, were a clear mandate to His first priests/bishops to go and teach the Faith – but not before He had instituted the Mass.
No parent who loves his children, sends them out to work or to learn, note, without first making sure they are properly fed. So, with Our Lord. It is simply not possible to teach the fullness of the Faith outside of the traditional Mass. Daphne knows that in her heart of hearts, I’m sure of it.
Here, as they say in other ecclesial communities, endeth the lesson!
-
I must say that like Joan I am disappointed that Daphne has not accepted my invitation to come onto the blog. Difficult to understand.
-
Well, Daphne has not yet come onto the blog and I don’t suppose she will now. That makes me suspicious. She can’t be sure of her ground or she would be keen to convince us all.
I’m sorry, but I cannot think of Daphne McLeod as a traditional Catholic any more. She is what the Americans call a “conservative” Catholic, who accepts the Vatican II aberrations and works with them.
I will be reading the flock with a more critical eye in future because it is obvious that you cannot possibly say that the Mass is secondary to teaching the faith when the Mass is at the centre of the faith.
-
I forgot to say that I agree with editor’s observation that if Our Lord saw fit to give us the Mass first and instruction to teach later, that should be good enough for us (including Daphne McLeod).
-
I am bitterly disappointed that Daphne has not blogged on this thread.
She has been one of my heroes for years now. I’ve always thought of her as a really sound Catholic, so this is very much a let-down for me.
I know that it is just not possible to teach the faith thoroughly without teaching the Mass properly and you cannot do that with the novus ordo. I’m amazed to discover that she doesn’t realise that.I will now have to take a look at the books she has been recommending because although I always just use the Catechism myself to teach from and make my own resources, I’ve recommended the books she recommends to other teachers and parents, presuming they contained traditional teaching. I’ll have to revisit that practice now.
Has anyone on this blog read the American and Australian books which Daphne recommends? Do they include teaching about the Mass and if so which rite? -
Good news! Daphne is planning to contribute to this thread. She emailed this morning to say there are things here that require an answer so just be patient. She is busy writing up the Flock right now but she will be along soon. So be patient everyone.
In the meantime, I thought that this link which corrects the novus ordo emphasis on the Mass as a meal might be of interest to us all.
http://www.ncregister.com/site/article/16063/ -
On the “Catholic Truth Goes to Town” thread, Editor says that Daphne has promised to make an appearance here – and made that promise this morning, no less. I imagine Daphne is quite busy…
-
Well Editor, I see you beat me to the punch. Must be my instant karma for beating Londoniensis to posting that long article by Casey!
-
Regarding the article just posted by Editor above, could someone please explain to me how the 1962 and Paul VI Missals can be “mutually enriching”? To be more specific, what part of Paul VI’s Missal could possibly enrich the real Mass?
-
Torquemada
How about through its abolition!!
-
Torquemada, you ought to have kept quiet and left me to my wide-eyed supposition that you had some kind of extra-terrestrial if not supernatural powers!
-
Athanasius, you’re slipping. Can’t be through abolition if the question is about “mutual enrichment”
Think, think, think, Athanasius, and when you’ve done that….
Think again!
-
editor
I was attempting to answer Torquemada’s “to be more specific, what part of Paul VI’ Missal could possibly enrich the real Mass” question.
Granted it was not the best choice of words, so some thought should have been applied here. So let me re-phrase. Torquemada, what about any part that we can have abolished? Words of consecration excepted, of course.
-
Athanasius, have you been drinking? What you REALLY mean is “abolition of the new Mass would be mutually enriching because it would enrich those who used to attend it – now forced to attend the traditional Mass – as well as taking the strain from the rest of us having to keep trying to reason with people who think they ought to attend it as the “ordinary rite”.
Put that bottle away and pay attention!
-
I sent Daphne a reminder that we are awaiting her gracious presence on this thread so let’s hope she can find time today but remember she is busy producing the next edition of the Flock (as I should be busy producing the next edition of Catholic Truth – which is almost ready for the printers, hold on to your hats, why don’t you! Drives me crazy this fashion of turning round a sentence with the question in reverse, although I’ve worked one into the November edition for fun!)
-
editor
Yes, you are correct, that’s what I mean. Ok so it’s awkward but you catch my drift.
And no, I’m not putting my “Buckie” away for anyone. I like the cheap grape.
-
Regardless of the various reactions engendered by Daphne McLeod’s article about the cause of the crisis in the Church, let us not lose sight of the fact that Daphne has devoted her life to teaching the Faith. Not only as a school teacher, but as a speaker at Hyde Park Corner, at Conferences and at every opportunity she could take.
I do not believe Daphne would be capable of teaching anything that was other than the Truth and I think her record shows that she merits more respect than would appear to be the case from certain comments in this thread. -
I see that the yes vote is slowly making headway though has quite a bit to catch up with the no vote. I cannot see how teaching the doctrines of the Carholic faith can be separated from the restoration of the Tridentine Mass.
-
The Convert
Well said about Daphne. I’ve only known her briefly, through the May Conference, but it was immediately apparent that her devotion to the Faith is rock-like.
Editor and Athanasius
Now, getting between the two of you on this “abolition” argument would be like sticking my head in a vise, or trying to separate Faith and Reason. However, I will use my supernatural powers to point out that “mutually enriching,” in the context of Summorum, refers to the rites, whereas, in the context of Editor’s argument, it refers to people. Editor’s argument is therefore null and void – unless she decides to whip out her rolling pin – and Athanasius wins the day!
-
Torquemada
I will be submitting your name to Rome for canonisation. As for the editor, come on, let’s have a bit of humble pie. Thank you!!
the convert
I do not think for one moment that anyone would doubt Daphne’s love for the faith and her defence of it. What is being discussed here is not some kind of divergence from the faith on Daphne’s part, but merely a proposition that most of us happen to disagree with. She reckons that a restoration of sound doctrinal teaching in Catholic schools will, in due course, bring about a restoration of the true Mass. We argue that it is the other way around and that a restoration of sound doctrinal teaching is impossible unless the grace of the true Mass has first been restored. History proves Daphne wrong. There will never be a change in modernist doctrinal teaching in Catholic schools until the grace of the Mass is restored. We are not having a go at Daphne, but hers is the oddest suggestion I have heard about how to solve the crisis of faith in the Church.
-
the convert, I fail to see any comments on this thread that are personally insulting or disrespectful to Daphne. Only people expressing views, strong more or less, on her position on this matter. She made the statement and therefore must accept that not everyone will agree with it and that, moreoever, people tend to express their views strongly. I like that, personally. I can’t be bothered with the wimpish neither hot nor cold expressions of mild concern when the matter is grave and urgent.
I don’t merely share your admiration for Daphne’s labours in the field of education but I am very fond of her as a person. She has been very good to me not least when I was going through difficult times trying to teach the Faith – even without the added “complication” of the traditional Mass. Try teaching that contraception is an evil in any Catholic school today. As one of my Catholic headteachers told me, as far back as my student days, Catholic female teachers are as “up” for promotion as everyone else, with no mention of any possible children coming along. And, as he pointed out, they seldom do.
So, please can we stop this red herring throwing when people are forthright in their views. It means I have to keep wasting time pointing out that this is all part of the business of debating. I’m sure Daphne herself won’t feel under personal attack. Her ideas on this occasion are under attack – but then my ideas are under attack all the time!! No big deal.
Here’s a link to another writer commenting on Daphne’s statement – and he, too, is a Daphne fan, the convert, so keep cool. Click on the following link which leads to an article on the subject on the Catholic Action UK blog site http://oxfordlmsrepevents.blogspot.com/
-
Torquemada & Athanasius,
I’m not keen on pies. At least, not right now cos I’m trying to lose some weight (no, not from my head…)
Still, I get your drift and will merely say that Athanasius needn’t give up his Buckie quite yet…
(Will that do, Athanasius?)
-
Athansius
On that canonisation, I think someone beat you to it:
-
editor
That you are allowing me to continue swigging the liquid grape will suffice amply.
Torquemada
It doesn’t hurt to second the motion!!
-
editor
To tell you the truth, I don’t actually drink. I even get dizzy on wine gums!!
-
I keep checking to see if Daphne has come onto this thread but still no sign of her. Still, I’m learning a lot on the other threads!
-
Disappointingly, Daphne doesn’t seem to have made it yet! She did promise and I am sure she will keep her word, so we’ll just keep watching!
-
If a baptised child is not taken to Church because its parents no longer go, it will not know that there is such a thing as Mass – either Traditional Latin or Novus Ordo. How is a child to obtain Grace from something which it does not even know exists? If Daphne were to be given the opportunity to provide decent catechetic classes for a prolonged period to a group of children, they would learn about the Mass and, once knowing about it and being able to attend it, they would be open to the Grace it brings.
I can see where Daphne is coming from. She has a point and I do not accept that showing compassion for her point of view constitutes wimpish behaviour or a lack of understanding of what goes and what does not go in a robust debate. -
Of course it is acceptable to “show compassion” for Daphne’s point of view. What is less acceptable – and to me, prettty annoying, is for those of us who disagree with Daphne and who say so in no uncertain terms, to be accused of lacking respect for her when what we don’t have to respect is her opinion on this matter. There is a very real difference and I used to say so at meeting when I taught RE when the nonsense was being perpetrated of encouraging pupils to “respect all religions”. I had great fun with that daft concept. Apply the same principle to “respect all political parties” and watch the headlines when you invite a member of the BNP into address a class. Crazy. We respect PEOPLE as human being created in the image and likeness of God – their opinions and beliefs, on the contrary, are all too often of their own (or some other idiot’s) making.
Nobody is arguing that it is not possible to TEACH parts of the Faith to novus ordo attenders or even formal Protestants. The question is, more to the point – can they properly UNDERSTAND it? Not really is the answer; take the Mass, for example; they can only understand up to a point if the teacher is telling them that the Mass is the sacrifice of Calvary re-enacted and the priest appears wearing a Clown mask and telling them we are about to “celebrate” Hallowe’en.
Ask the kids in the Bishopbriggs parish where the priest appeared wearing a red nose (Christmas, reindeer) at the start of Mass if THEY believe the Mass is as solemn act, Calvary re-enacted.
It is certainly a bit easier to teach Catholic morality since it is easy enough to teach about the natural law and the Church’s moral authority but, these teachings are difficult enough to fully embrace when we have the help of the Sacraments. Drinking in the poison that is poured out during novus ordo “celebrations” can only make the teaching (and understanding) more difficult.
The fact is that Daphne has ignited this discussion yet shows a startling unwillingness to continue it on this blog. That, I find, personally disappointing, to say the least. Let her be as robust with us as we have been with her – she won’t find us complaining about her forthrightness if she is in the right. We don’t waste our time in pettiness at Catholic Truth, we have more important things to deal with – or, to be grammatially correct, with which to deal!
-
Thinking for an instance of the woman who asked Our Lord for a drink of water at the well: He knew her story, and He certainly would not have agreed with her take on life, but wasn’t it wonderful handling of the situation when He advised to:”Go and sin no more”? How fortunate for her that it was Our Lord whom she met at the well.
Daphne’s article is not a matter of eternal Truth, which must be believed. It is her opinion – one side of the two sides of a story. -
the convert, with respect, you are misusing Scripture here. No-one is accusing Daphne of ANYTHING! She has made Statement A. I believe Statement A is wrong and that Statement B is correct.
She has the task of convincing us that Statement A is correct, not Statement B.
What’s “Go and sin no more” got to do with this?
-
Actually, the convert, it was the woman taken in adultery that Our Lord told to “go and sin no more”. The Samaritan woman at the well was another occasion when Our Lord let her know that he knew that she was not living a good life (not just that he didn’t like her “take on life” as if she were guilty of no more than preferring gardening to housework)
To HER he promised the water that would mean she would never thirst again and THAT is precisely what those of us who disagree with Daphne believe. That only if the children are taught the FULL faith will they be able to partake of the “waters of life” – the full sacramental life of the church.
But as I keep saying, if we are all misunderstanding Daphne, all she needs to do is come online and tell us. No censorship here!
-
I think Martin Luther should be allowed to speak in this matter. He said: “destroy the Mass and you will destroy the Catholic Faith.” Just look at the Protestant Reformation. What was its first priority? To destroy the Mass and eliminate the priesthood. Without the true Mass there can be no true doctrine. If you doubt that then look again at the bitter fruits of the New Mass on the Church today. Surely no-one can seriously believe that if the Tridentine Mass were still the ordinary rite in the Church that catechetics would be as perverse as they are now.
Daphne is right to some extent in that there was a two-pronged attack on the Mass and doctrine after Vatican II, both being so intricately linked. However, it must be maintained that the Mass is at the heart of this present crisis because it is the heart of the Catholic Faith. Sound doctrine is the life’s blood of the Faith, being pumped by the heart through the mystical body.
-
So, Daphne has still not arrived. What can I say?
-
What about: Daphne, oh Daphne, wherefore art thou dear Daphne. To be fair to her she did say that she wasn’t very good with computers. Maybe she just hasn’t the knowhow to get here and leave a comment, or maybe she just accepts that she made a mistake and is slightly embarrassed.
-
If Daphne really really wanted to enter the arena, she could have done it by proxy via any one of several computer-literate friends. She is very busy preparing the new version of The Flock, which is very time-consuming and must go out on time. Besides, she might have already decided that she doesn’t want to involve herself for reasons best known to herself – that decision should be respected.
-
No, she decided that she DID want to involve herself, the convert, or so she told me. Said there were things on this thread that needed to be answered (for which I read “corrected)
Oh and I am in the middle of writing up the November edition of Catholic Truth which needs to be finished, like, yesterday.
I would say, sarcastically, that “where there’s a will there’s a way” but we do need to remember that Daphne recently celebrated her 80th birthday. I’m having a hard time keeping up with things and I’m only 29…
-
Editor
What fountain of youth have you been drinking from? I’m keenly interested, as I’m only 39…..
-
Torquemada
I think that fountain of youth you refer to is called Scotch, otherwise know as the water of life!!
-
Athanasius
Funny, I didn’t notice that fountain at the May Conference…..
The convert
I wonder if Daphne has decided that this is not a debatable question, or that it would serve no purpose to debate it?
-
Torquemada
We tend to hide it from Americans because it tends to have the effect of fire water on them. Where you offered a nice wine gum when you arrived? I thought so!!
-
Sorry Torquemada, not “where” were.
-
Athanasius
No wine gum, just a “full Scottish breakfast” at Coatsbridge, which tended to have an effect directly opposite that of fire water!
-
Torquemada
Yes, we call that the Aztec two-step over here!!
-
Daphne McLeod has emailed to say she has had much difficulty signing up for our blog and she asks me to post her comments below. She says she will not give up trying to register, but in the meantime, here is her response to most, if not all, of the comments above…
FROM DAPHNE…
First, I never said I want catechetics to be corrected instead of restoration of the Tridentine Mass. I want both as most Cathoics do. But I don’t want catechetics to go on being ignored. It is too important for that. Ideally we want daily R.E. lessons for every Catholic child given by teachers trained to give them, in groups of the same age. Til we get that we must concentrate on warnng parents off Cathoic schools and helping them teach the faith at home using the sound American books now aavailable.
‘When Tridentine Mass is restored the catechetics will be fine also’ I don’t know how this lady visualises this happening. Are all the heresies in the R.E. books going to rearrange themselves as truths ? Are the diocesan advisors/inspectors and teachers who know only modern catechetics going to be infused with sound teaching ? No obviously false catechetics need to be attacked directly and urgently by all faithful Catholics if the Church is to survive in a viable form in this country.
‘Daphne is a Novus Ordo Catholic’ I am not sure what this label means .I am a Catholic pure and simple as I hope we all are. Like anyone my age i attended the Tridentine Mass for the first forty years and I still do whenever I can. I arranged one recently to celebrate my 8oth birthday. But I don’t miss Mass if I can’t get to the rite I prefer and as I know the Ordinary by heart I say the ancient prayers.
Rosary linked to the Tridentine Mass It is the false catechetics which destroyed devotion to the Rosary. I know a teacher who was sacked for giving her seven year olds a lesson on it one October. Bishop O’Donoghue insists it is taught in Lancaster in his excellent Mission Documents.‘Good young Novus Ordo priests second rate’. It is very sad that any Catholic can suggest this. These devout,dedicated and courageous young men who have informed themselves about the faith and who always say the Mass reverently, many now learning the Tridentine Mass, deserve better than that. We should all thank God for them and pray for them – life isn’t always easy!
Motives of Eastern European, African and Asian vocations questioned. This allegation is made with no evidence to support it but their wonderful results, packed churches, stable marriages, religious convents packed show the opposite.
‘Novus Ordo children can’t be taught that the Mass is a Sacrifice.’ Why ever not? I have been preparing children for the Sacraments for 60 years and I have never stopped teaching that because the Mass is the Sacrifice of Calvary re-presented on the altar. The ‘Faith and Life series’ teaches this and so does our English “Bread of Life” Communion book.
I know there is more but that is all I have time for. Most of the others will be answered by a more careful reading of my article and I will try and fit more in the Flock if I have space. read it on our web-site http://www.proeccleia.com It will be posted when I have finished it.
I knew this article would be controversial and that it would take many Catholics time to adjust their minds to such new ideas. Also I realise there are emotional aspects which people have to deal with themselves. I can only provide the facts for you to consider. I feel the most important thing after prayer is to discuss it aimiably as we all want the same for our Church and our children. God Bless, Daphne.
-
Daphne
I have never for one second questioned your devotion to the faith and to the Church, but I must nevertheless take issue with you on this.
“But I don’t want catechetics to go on being ignored.”
In the first place, as I have repeatedly said, the SSPX certainly do not ignore catechetics and have repeatedly refused deals with Rome that do not include doctrinal restoration. As for everyone else, who exactly is ignoring catechetics?
I presume you refer to traditional groups not being vocal enough on the subject for it is obvious that the mainstream don’t see a problem? Catholic Truth and others have repeatedly raised issues about poor catechesis in schools. The mainstream system doesn’t want to know.
“When Tridentine Mass is restored the catechetics will be fine also.” “I don’t know how this lady visualises this happening.”
It will happen, Daphne, because the grace of the Tridentine Mass, when fully restored as the ordinary rite of the Church, will supply the grace and wisdom for it to happen. The Novus Ordo is not supplying that grace and wisdom because many priests simply do not believe that it is the sacrifice of Calvary. Its construction is so greatly flawed, Protestant theology, that it doesn’t edify. Nor does it encourage Catholic thinking on catechesis.
“No obviously false catechetics need to be attacked directly and urgently by all faithful Catholics if the Church is to survive in a viable form in this country.”
Once again, Daphne, I must insist that Catholic Truth, as well as individuals and other traditional groups, have attacked false catechetics directly and urgently. We are, however, as you know, in a minority. If you have a grand plan to bring a national objection to false catechetics about, then you will find me all ears. Truly, though, your suggestion is impractical.
“Daphne is a Novus Ordo Catholic.” “I am not sure what this label means.”
Daphne, it means simply the difference between those who refuse the Novus Ordo Mass because of its poisonous effect on the soul, valid or otherwise, and those who think it quite acceptable to attend the New rite of Mass with merely a disclaimer that they really still prefer the Tridentine rite and go to that when they can. Archbishop Lefebvre said, correctly, that if one cannot get to the Tridentine Mass then one should stay at home and sanctify one’s self with following the missal, saying the rosary, making a spiritual communion, etc. They did this in Japan for one hundred years when the true Mass was taken from them. Note that I am not saying here that the Novus Ordo is invalid per se, but that its Protestant theology gradually erodes the faith of the Catholic soul. This is what Archbishop Lefebvre meant also. That’s why catechetics have gone to pot!
We cannot be all things to all men, Daphne. We are either for the Tridentine Mass as the true Mass of the Church, or we are for the Novus Ordo. We can’t argue that both can co-exist for such an argument opposes the lex orandi lex credendi of the Church, since the two rites imply two completely different belief systems. And experience proves this to be infallibly true. The Novus Ordo has wrecked the Catholic Faith, catechetics included.
“Good young Novus Ordo priest second rate.” “It is very sad that any Catholic can suggest this.”
It would be false not to suggest it, Daphne, for the statement is absolutely true. This is not to cast doubt on the genuine integrity and good will of young Novus Ordo priests. No, it is merely to state the obvious, e.g., that with the best will in the world young Novus Ordo priests cannot possibly have the same grasp of the faith as young priests formed in a traditional seminary. This is a fact of life. The formation in modern seminaries is, to put it nicely, appalling. You’re right about praying for all priests, though.
Now, Daphne, you speak of Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia in terms of “packed churches,” “stable marriages” and “religious convents packed,” as if to suggest that Vatican II is not flawed after all and that the Novus Ordo Mass can be a source of great growth for the Church.
This is completely false. There are a number of reasons why CERTAIN AREAS within the continents and countries you speak of enjoy greater numbers of faithful. Let us not forget that the AIDS epidemic in Africa is precisely the result of fruequent adultery. Stable marriage in Africa is a rarity in general terms.
As regards growth areas in these places, you will generally find that people are more religious the less worldly they are. And it is true to say that the areas you refer to are generally impoverished areas in which religion is more attractive to the simple-living population. The acid test for religious growth is one in which Catholicism flourishes in wealthier nations, just as Catholicism did in Western nations before the Council. I have no doubt that if the traditional faith was restored you would see still greater growth in the places you mentioned, as well as a rebirth of faith in this country and elsewhere in the West. So the poverty aspect does play a part in this phenomenon in Eastern Europe, Africa and Asia. It is not a sign that Conciliar reform can, and does, work. Not a chance.
“Novus Ordo children cannot be taught that the Mass is a sacrifice.” “Why ever not?” Because their priests are telling them that it is not by their ambiguity in celebration and by the very defects in the theology of the Mass itself. We all know that example teaches more than words. Children will hear the words of their catechism teacher, but will learn what to believe, or not to believe, from the example of their priests and what goes on at the average Novus Ordo Mass. That is if their parents even take them to Mass any longer.
You are right to suggest that the Tridentine Mass and sound catechetics go hand in hand, Daphne, but you must understand that until the true Mass is fully restored there CAN be no restoration of the latter. The crisis is so great now that only divine intervention can restore all things in Christ. We do our bit but we are never, ever going to see a full restoration of things until Our Lady’s Immaculate Heart triumphs and God steps in to resolve matters. God Bless you.
-
Daphne, your surprise at the notion that children attending novus ordo Masses cannot be taught the Mass is a sacrifice, amazes me.
You are in a better position than most to know that teachers have been disciplined and forced to resign for teaching sound traditional doctrine including the Mass as Sacrifice. You kow what happened to me when a colleague complained to a priest governor that I was talking in sixth form assemblies about the Mass as sacrifice. What did the priest govenor say? “Just ignore her, that all went out with Vatican II” – verbatim quote, omitting only that part where he called me “old fashioned” in case anyone wonders about my dress sense…
I have to agree with Athanasius, Daphne, and you’ve no idea how that maddens me. He’s a bit too smart for his own good, that lad, and one day I’ll sort him out…
-
Hello Daphne
Between Editor and Athanasius, I must say I’m just bringing up the rear, but just a few more comments:
First, I can’t see insisting (key word: insisting) that anyone make their choice between the two Rites, period, end of story. The convincing on that score has to come from within, not from someone else’s argument, and it will come when the worshiper understands that God is not well served by a Novus Ordo liturgy. External arguments may hasten the process of realization, but I think our fearless leaders are being a little too militant about it. (uh-oh, I sense the rolling pin being unsheathed)
However, that brings me to that dreaded word “reverent.” Daphne, saying the Novus Ordo “reverently” does not make it more Catholic. It may make it more appropriate for a religious setting, but the only way to make it more Catholic is to restore all the text that was stripped from it, text (and rubrics) that enacted Catholic theology. As I’ve said before, pagans can celebrate their rituals reverently, including sacrificing chickens, but that reverent attitude doesn’t make it more valid. Reverence by itself does not beget Sacred Mystery and Real Presence. On the other hand, Sacred Mystery and Real Presence, if one is properly disposed, are sure to beget reverence.
As for the idea that Novus Ordo children cannot be taught the sacrifice, you are right, of course they can, but I agree with Athanasius on this point. When you have a liturgy that tries to suppress the sacrifice, does this confirm or deny the catechesis? When you teach the children something in the Catholic classroom, don’t you expect to have it affirmed during Mass? This problem highlights more than any other the need to restore both Mass and Catechetics together.
In fact, as far as I’m concerned, catechetics should include detailed explanations, suitable to grade level, as to why the Novus Ordo is harmful to our Faith!
-
The oddest thing about Daphne’s article, in my view, is that is it aimed at a group of people who are her principle allies. No one has made more efforts at setting up new schools, and home schooling, on proper catechetical lines, than trads, around the world. Yes, her message has been ignored by most Catholics, but not by us.
It just seems to me to be addressing the wrong set of people. I often feel like forcing The Flock into the hands of liberal bishops, priests, school governors – the whole Catholic establishment – but alas there’s none so blind as those that will not see.
-
Joseph Shaw
I completely agree with you. That’s my view on things exactly.
-
Athanasius with your comments about never going to new mass can you explain how your Sunday obligation can be met by sitting at home following the missal, saying the rosary, making a spiritual communion, etc. in terms of canon law since I can see no justification if a valid new mass is available to you.
-
Welcome to the blog Joseph Shaw! Your first comment is to the point and I agree entirely – Daphne has done such superb work in the field of catechesis and exposing the crisis in education that I am disappointed at this going off at a tangent somewhat.
Anyway, delighted to welcome you aboard Joseph Shaw – keep blogging!
-
norman
I think it fair to state that where I live, between two cities, there would always be an option for a Tridentine Mass. However, where that option is absent Catholics have to weigh the poisonous effect of the New Mass on their souls against the law of the Church in respect to fulfilling their Sunday obligation.
The first thing to say on this is that missing Mass is not a mortal sin when there is no intention to commit mortal sin. The second thing is that most Catholics fail in their Sunday obligation now anyway by attending Saturday vigil Masses, which were initially introduced as a rare and strictly regulated indulgence for those who could not get to Sunday Mass because of work and the threat of losing their jobs. So, generally speaking, Sunday is the Christian Sabbath. Saturday is the Jewish one.
The Church cannot force souls to undermine their faith by stating in canon law that it is a mortal sin not to attend a Mass that has been shown to be so poisoned by Protestant theology that it has led to a universal crisis of faith in the Church. Canon law is there to uphold the Faith, not undermine it.
Can the law of the Church, for example, insist that you attend a Mass at which the most precious body, blood, soul and divinity of Our Saviour is trodden under foot by reason of the countless particles of the sacred host that fall from the hands of Communicants irreverently receiving in this manner? No, it cannot insist that you attend such a Mass and it would have held you guilty of mortal sin for attending such a Mass before Vatican II.
Can the law of the Church hold you guilty of mortal sin because you avoid a Mass in which the sacrifice of Our Lord on Calvary is obscured by a theology that is clearly Protestant and was applied to this New Mass by a suspected Freemason? Again, you would have been in mortal sin if you had attended such a Mass before the Council.
Can the law of the Church hold you guilty of mortal sin for avoiding a Mass at which ecumenism is frequently encouraged, either in sermons or by the direct involvement of non-Catholics in the Mass? No, for the Church condemns ecumenism, better known as religious indifferentism, as an error very dangerous to the Catholic Faith. You would have been in mortal sin for assisting at such a Mass before Vatican II.
Can the Church seriously hold you guilty of mortal sin because you are appalled by the irreverence, sacrilege and outright profanity that takes place at the average New Mass by ministers of the Eucharist, altar girls, Communion in the hand, drinking from the chalice, no kneeling, people holding conversations, absence of genuflections, people leaving in their droves after Communion, still chewing on the sacred host as they exit the church?
No, it cannot. It cannot because you are upholding the faith of the centuries and the eternal teaching of the Church by refusing to involve yourself in these scandals. You would certainly have been held guilty of mortal sin if you had involved yourself with this kind of thing before the Council.
The Pope is the supreme legislator of canon law, but he cannot legislate against the tradition of canon law. He must legislate to uphold the faith, not undermine it. You are not bound to attend a Mass that is going to weaken or destroy your faith in the sacrifice of Our Lord on Calvary, or otherwise render you indifferent to Catholic devotions and your Catholic duty. The New Mass is guilty of all of this and more. Just look at what it has done to the Catholic world in forty years. And is it not odd that these modern Popes sought to re-write canon law at the same time they began to champion modernism against the condemnations of their predecessors?
Anyway, I would say the question is academic for most concerned Catholics because there are, I think, sufficient Latin Masses for those who can be bothered to travel to them. I hope this answers your question.
-
norman
I should qualify my statement above by saying that if the conscience of the uninformed modern Catholic tells him that he must attend the New Mass on Sundays to fulfil his obligation, despite all that has been said, then better that than that he fall into any kind of despair about the situation. My comments about the New Mass are intended to help the faithful, not demoralise them. But please bear in mind also that canon law refers to an obligation to attending an explicitly “Catholic” rite Mass. The Novus Ordo is not explicitly Catholic.
-
That last bit on your comment above was really helpful Athanasius. That Canon Law refers to our obligation to attend “an explicitly Catholic rite of Mass”.
I never thought of it that way before. Will have to chew that over a bit.
-
Epiphany
It does somewhat shift the goalposts, does it not?
-
That is some response Athanasius and will take a while for me to fully take in. Meantime can you point out where in canon law it says the bit about being obliged to attend an explicitly catholic rite of mass so I can look into what you have said.
-
norman
It is not my intention to mislead people so please let me clarify that my use of the word “explicitly” in reference to attendance at a Catholic rite Mass was my own, not canon law’s. The reason I used the word is because it is understood by canon law’s term “Catholic rite Mass” that for a rite of Mass to be Catholic, it must be explicitly so. The Novus Ordo is not explicitly Catholic. Indeed, apart from the words of consecration, it is explicitly Protestant.
Anyway, here are two websites to look at. Hope these help.
-
norman
If you fancy a longer read, go to this website:
-
Don’t forget that Archbishop Lefebvre’s Open Letter is also available on our website. Go to Links and click on Open Letter to Confused Catholics.
-
You have confused me Athanasius with the reference to canon law and then not I think epiphany read the same from the other comment. I have read Lefebvre’s letter before and I would be a bit cautious about looking at the writings of one man with the same authority as canon law when the two are far removed regardless of how much you value his opinion.
-
norman
Your confusion, if you’ll pardon my saying so, seems to be of your own making. The links I sent to you were not only the opinions of “one man.”
If you mean that you are confused by my use of the word “explicitly,” then don’t be. The word was mine and was used merely to enhance the fact that Catholics are obliged under canon law to attend Mass in a Catholic rite on Sundays and holy days.
As I pointed out clearly, and you will find many opinions more eminent than my own on this subject if you do an Internet search under canon law and the New Mass, the New Mass is NOT explicitly Catholic. I suggest you start with a Google search under the word “apologetics.” This will give you the most extensive apologetics site on the web where you will find much good reading on the subject.
The bottom line is this: Canon law obliges us to attend a Catholic rite Mass on Sundays and holy days under pain of mortal sin. The Novus Ordo is not explicitly Catholic and therefore we are not bound by canon law in the matter. Furthermore, the 1983 code of canon law was written to compliment the revolution in the Church.
Hence, if you look closely at the canon that refers to Mass attendance you will also find that they have slipped in a really strange qualification that says if you can’t find a Catholic rite Mass, or the priest is inconvenienced, then you may attend a “liturgy of the word.” In other words, a priestless Mass! This law is already being much abused so that many parishes now have only “a liturgy of the word.” It is the modernist’s way of leading us further into Protestantism. Canon law cannot be used to undermine the faith in this way, so don’t just take canon law at face value. Read what the experts have to say about it, especially St. Thomas Aquinas.
-
Epiphany
Did I confuse you with my use of the word “explicitly” regarding canon law and attendance at the New Mass?
-
Athanasius, your use of the word “explicitly” is not confusing at all – at least not to me. Epiphany can speak for herself.
Maybe norman is misunderstanding the meaning of “explicitly”; to make something “explicit” just means to make it definite. To make something – say a statement – “explicit” just means to make that statement absolutely clear – definite.
So to say that Canon Law makes it explicit that we must attend a CATHOLIC rite, just means that Canon Law makes it absolutely clear, makes it “definite” that we must attend a Mass that is Catholic in its theology.
Logically, then, since Archbishop Bugnini publicly stated that he had removed Catholic theology from the Mass to make it more palatable to Protestants (see Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, March 19th, 1965, page 6, column 4) it would seem that Catholics are NOT obliged and cannot BE obliged to attend a novus ordo Mass created by a man on public record admitting that he deliberately made the Mass less, or non or UN-Catholic.
I hope I have not added to your confusion, norman, but please say so if I have.
Seems clear enough to me but then they don’t call me Sister Clarissa for nothing…
-
editor
Thank you so much for that input. If I hadn’t been clear to norman before, your comments certainly leave no room for doubt as to what I meant. Great intervention. Thank you.
norman
Are you happy with this clarification?
Epiphany
Are you ok with this explanation?
-
Athanasius, this link won’t work for me http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Rhodes/3543/attend.htm
Help! Maybe it is just a blip and will work later, but thought I ought to report it in case you have (perish the thought) made a mistake in copying it. Just this once!
-
My doubt was that I understood you to be quoting canon law and then you said you werent I wasnt really questioning the content as much I didnt mean to try to speak for epiphany but thought it was clear from his comment that he linked your comment to canon law like I did sorry about that if am wrong. The first link does explain well the case against the new mass meeting your obligation but as you said it is for the individual. Not in as good a position to live near two citys where there is always latin mass so would be given a real problem if I got the same position in not thinking the new mass is meeting the obligation. The thing I cant see is why if the new mass can be valid without the kindof shocking stuff lefebvre talked about it doesnt meet the obligation.
-
Athanasius, I understood fine what you meant by “explicit”.
Maybe if norman goes to the thread where editor tells us about a Leeds parish where the priest is spreading jam on the Blessed Sacrament for children at Mass, he will begin to wonder if he can be obliged to attend those Masses.
If – and I take your word for it – Canon Law is explicit that we must attend a Mass that is a Catholic rite then obviously the parishioners in that Church in Leeds are not obliged to attend those sacrilegous Masses.
Could Heather Priest or Mons Meg confirm this just to be sure?
-
editor
That link works fine for me, but then I think your computer is so old that the serial number is written in Roman numerals!!
norman
Epiphany answers your question somewhat. The question is not one of validity at these Masses, but one of theology. If the theology of the New Mass is Protestant, which it surely is, then your soul will gradually be poisoned by it. Would you attend a Protestant church every week to fulfil your obligation? No, I didn’t think so. The New Mass has a very poisonous effect on the Catholic Faith, similar to that of the Protestant meal service. Just ask yourself how much you really know about the tradtional faith after so many years of attending this Mass. It should tell you something.
As I said before, however, if this is a major problem in conscience for you, then best go there until you can come to terms with the tragic reality of the situation we face today. But remember, canon law cannot be applied to a rite of Mass that is Protestant in its theology and damaging to souls.
Epiphany
I hope either priest will confirm what I have said. Make no mistake, however, that Canon Law does say that one is obliged to attend a Catholic rite Mass. I have read this in the Law myself.
-
Sorry epiphany I didnt mean to draw you into my discussion. I understand why some catholics think its better not to goto new mass ever but I dont think I will ever sit at home instead of going to a new mass. The mention of the scandal in leeds is a red herring because that is a shocking thing to do and even if there are problems at the new mass that is not a fair reflection on the vast majority. It is possible to goto new mass and avoid the odious concessions most of the time and if you went to one that bad you would let the priest know all about it and never go back there. I like all your faith and conviction but find it hard to be so certain in black and white terms.
-
norman
If I may suggest a devotion to Our Lady’s rosary, if you don’t already recite that prayer every day, will help you see things more black and white. In the meantime I can only advise that you just avoid the scandals of the New Mass as best you can by refusing such things as touching the Blessed Sacrament with your hands or receiving Communion from lay people.
-
norman, I am coming to see more and more that Our Lord was very “black and white” in his sayings.
He was clear e.g. “if you love me you will keep my commandments” (black and white) and “love your neighbour as yourself” (black and white) and there are plenty more examples.
We live in times when it is considered a good thing to be broad-minded but again Our Lord said that “the way to life is narrow”. So we cannot be broad minded in the way our society means.
I hope this is clear. I do understand your worry about missing Mass. I feel the same. However, I am getting a bit clearer in my mind from reading the SSPX thread.
It is dreadful that we are being put in this position of not knowing what to do on a Sunday morning. Terrible. I believe our bishops and priests will have to answer for this in the next life. I really do.
-
Daphne on novus ordo priests. I meant to say that I know plenty of youngish priests who are very nice and keen to work with the young but when we discuss things they are not really sound. They are ecumenical and want the children to “participate” in the Mass, bringing the offertory gifts, saying bidding prayers that they have written themselves and so on. They don’t really have a Catholic attitude to the Mass.
So, although I sympathise with you Daphne, wanting to praise young priests who mean well and who often try hard to be orthodox, the bottom line is that if you go along with the new Mass, you cannot really impose traditional thinking and total reverence.
If you’ve attended a class or school Mass in recent years, you will know that.
-
schoolteacher
I share your sorrow about the things we have to go through because of the Church Hierarchy, the confusion over Sunday Mass obligation, etc. They have robbed us of our inheritance and now force us against conscience to obey that which is undermining the last remnants of the Catholic Faith. Truly tragic. Truly apocalyptic. What they have done to our once-glorious faith.
-
I’ve been told that Daphne and another blogger are having difficulty in signing up for this blog. Since it is one of the simplest blogs to join, I’m puzzled, but all my attempts to help them have not worked. I’m also aware that some people have had to click “lost password” to receive a new Wordpress password.
Note that because the Wordpress passwords are long and contain numbers and symbols etc. it is advisable to change your password to something you will remember easily.
Once logged into your Dashboard page (site admin) you just click on Profile, then scroll down and type in new password. Click on “update profile” and that’s it. You are even permitted to take your chosen username as your password if you wish, so you only have one word to remember.
Hope this helps.
-
Oh dear. Looks like Daphne is still struggling with Wordpress!
Comments are now closed.
114 comments