Movie Review
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Mass of the Ages - 3
Three Blaring Errors in A Perfect Storm
Documentary directed by Cameron O’Hearn,
produced by O’Hearn & Jonathan Weiss, 2021-2024
Rita Stewart & Salwa Bachar
The last article mentioned that Episode 2 of the Masses of the Ages contains grave errors that may lead to an attitude of complacency toward the Council. This article will review the most salient of those errors.
1. 'The Novus Ordo departed from the intentions of Vatican II'
Episode 2, quite aptly subtitled “A Perfect Storm,” claims that the Consilium established to implement liturgical reforms broke with the authentic spirit of Vatican II. (1) As evidence, it compares quotes from Sacrosanctum Concilium to what subsequently occurred, saying:
“This is what the bishops signed…‘That more Scripture be added to the readings’ (cf. SC 51). But the Consilium removed over forty Scripture verses and prayers of the Mass. ‘Latin must be retained’ (cf. SC 36) and ‘Gregorian chant has pride of place’ (cf. SC 116). But in ‘69, Paul VI said, ‘no longer Latin, but the spoken language will be the principle language of the Mass. We will lose a great part of the incomparable Gregorian chant.’
“Finally, Vatican II said ‘there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them’ (SC 23). But in ‘69, Consilium wrote that the altar should be built apart from the wall, so that Mass can be celebrated facing the people.”
At first, this appears a convincing argument, but the Novus Ordo actually transgresses neither the letter nor the spirit of the law in Sacrosanctum Concilium.
Letter of the law
The Novus Ordo Missae does not violate any decree in Sacrosanctum Concilium. It contains more Scripture than the old Mass, following a three-year lectionary cycle rather than the traditional one-year cycle. It also has retained the use of Latin and Gregorian chant - “hybrid” Masses are common in a growing number of conservative circles.
Lastly, the statement about “no unnecessary innovations” is ambiguous, so as to be impossible to contradict.
The documentary also skips over the passages of Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC) that explicitly paved the way for bold changes. For example, SC affirmed that “the rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity; they should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions; they should be within the people's powers of comprehension, and normally should not require much explanation” (SC 34).
This explains the move to the vernacular, as well as the removal of Signs of the Cross, genuflections, and other “repetitious” signs of devotion, which the documentary laments.
Another important fact is that the international vernacular commissions were set up during the Council, and not after it. For example, the ICEL (International Commission on English in the Liturgy), whose sole purpose was to translate the liturgical books of the Roman Rite from the Latin to English for the English-speaking countries, was established in 1963 during the Council in order to implement Vatican II’s implied directives on replacing Latin with the vernacular. (2)
Spirit of the law
With regard to the spirit of the law, it is important to remember that the Council Fathers utilized weaponized ambiguity as a deliberate strategy. The documentary itself notes that Msgr. Bugnini did not want Sacrosanctum Concilium to be rejected, so he warned his allies:
“We must tread carefully and discreetly. Proposals must be formulated in such a way that much is said without seeming to say anything. Let many things be said in embryo and, in this way, let the door remain open to legitimate and possible post-Conciliar deductions and applications.”
Echoing a similar sentiment, the infamous progressivist Fr. Karl Rahner boldly claimed, “What is most important in the Council is not the letter of the decrees it promulgated … its spirit, its more advanced tendencies, this is what is the most important.” (3)
Therefore, we should believe the writers of Sacrosanctum Concilium: The document is not to be taken at face value.
Beyond Sacrosanctum Concilium
The documentary largely ignores the other 15 Vatican II documents, despite parallels between their ideas and the Novus Ordo. For example, the Council attempted to soften the Church’s militant stance against Protestants. Implying that false religions may be salvific, Unitatis Redintegratio states:
“Separated churches and communities, although we believe they suffer from the defects already mentioned, have been by no means deprived of significance and importance in the mystery of salvation. The Holy Spirit has by no means refrained from using them as a means of salvation.”
Additionally, Nostra Aetate promotes “dialogue and collaboration” with Protestants, for Catholics should “recognize, preserve, and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men.”
It cannot be a coincidence that the Novus Ordo has ecumenical undertones, removing aspects of the liturgy that may offend Protestants. (4) The documentary notes that the notion of Mass as a sacrifice was downplayed and replaced with the idea of a “meal.” Why would this be, other than to please those who deny the Real Presence?
The notion that applying SC correctly would resolve the whole problem of the Council is naïve and ignorant.
2. 'Bugnini the only villain; Council Fathers & Paul VI had good will'
In order not to cast doubt on the holiness of Paul VI, the documentary presents him as a naïve, but fundamentally good Pope. He and the Consilium members were allegedly fooled by Bugnini’s insidious schemes.
It is undeniable that Msgr. Bugnini was shrewd and devious (as evidenced by his “weaponized ambiguity”). However, he could not have achieved what he did without support from Paul VI and other bad actors in the Vatican.
Paul VI: A holy man?
The pontificate of Paul VI was perhaps the most destructive of all the Conciliar Popes. To determine his responsibility for the Novus Ordo, we need only look at his support for the same progressivist ideas that gave rise to this new liturgy.
It is enough to see that Paul VI increased enormously the prestige of those progressivist theologians who John XXIII had invited to attend the Council, such as Card. Suenens (named as one of the four moderators of the Council), Fr. Yves Congar, Fr. Marie-Dominique Chenu, Fr. Henri de Lubac, Fr. Hans Kung and Fr. Karl Rahner, among others. He was known to embrace their most radical aims.
During and after the Council, the Pope repeatedly demonstrated his support for Progressivism, as well as his desire to personally mold the Church to these novel ideals. A list of some of his harmful actions make his stances clear:
3. 'Latin Mass with active participation, a new springtime '
As mentioned in the last article, Mass of the Ages presents contemporary traditionalist communities as the authentic fulfillment of Vatican II. French Benedictine Dom Alcuin notes that Latin Mass communities have achieved “true, conscious, active and fruitful participation, just as the Council desired.” He sees this as a sign that they have reached a “new springtime.”
Dom Alcuin is correct that active participation is linked to Vatican II, but incorrect in his positive assessment of it. The 1962 Missal (also known as the Dialogue Mass) was a preparation for greater liturgical changes to come. Prior to the Council, people spoke of “hearing Mass.” While they could spiritually unite their intentions with those of the priest, their presence was not decisive in the liturgy.
In her “Dialogue Mass” series, Dr. Carol Byrne shows that active participation is a revolutionary concept. She dismantles the popular myth that Pope Pius X called for “active participation” in his Motu proprio Tra le Sollecitudini, showing that the word “active” was not used in the original Latin text.
This active participation serves progressivist theology; particularly, it implicitly promotes the “universal priesthood of all believers” (taken from Martin Luther). The Novus Ordo Missae presents the priest as a mere “president” of the faithful, falsely suggesting that participation among the faithful is a requirement.
Therefore, although it is true that many modern traditionalist communities adhere to Vatican II (along with their acceptance of the ‘62 Missal), this is a sign of their deeper problem of adherance to the Progressivism that is destroying the Church, not an indication that they have reached a “new springtime.”
To be continued
1. 'The Novus Ordo departed from the intentions of Vatican II'
Episode 2, quite aptly subtitled “A Perfect Storm,” claims that the Consilium established to implement liturgical reforms broke with the authentic spirit of Vatican II. (1) As evidence, it compares quotes from Sacrosanctum Concilium to what subsequently occurred, saying:
“This is what the bishops signed…‘That more Scripture be added to the readings’ (cf. SC 51). But the Consilium removed over forty Scripture verses and prayers of the Mass. ‘Latin must be retained’ (cf. SC 36) and ‘Gregorian chant has pride of place’ (cf. SC 116). But in ‘69, Paul VI said, ‘no longer Latin, but the spoken language will be the principle language of the Mass. We will lose a great part of the incomparable Gregorian chant.’
“Finally, Vatican II said ‘there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them’ (SC 23). But in ‘69, Consilium wrote that the altar should be built apart from the wall, so that Mass can be celebrated facing the people.”
At first, this appears a convincing argument, but the Novus Ordo actually transgresses neither the letter nor the spirit of the law in Sacrosanctum Concilium.
Letter of the law
The Novus Ordo Missae does not violate any decree in Sacrosanctum Concilium. It contains more Scripture than the old Mass, following a three-year lectionary cycle rather than the traditional one-year cycle. It also has retained the use of Latin and Gregorian chant - “hybrid” Masses are common in a growing number of conservative circles.
Lastly, the statement about “no unnecessary innovations” is ambiguous, so as to be impossible to contradict.
The documentary also skips over the passages of Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC) that explicitly paved the way for bold changes. For example, SC affirmed that “the rites should be distinguished by a noble simplicity; they should be short, clear, and unencumbered by useless repetitions; they should be within the people's powers of comprehension, and normally should not require much explanation” (SC 34).
This explains the move to the vernacular, as well as the removal of Signs of the Cross, genuflections, and other “repetitious” signs of devotion, which the documentary laments.
The ICEL Commission to translate the Mass to English was established during Vatican II
Spirit of the law
With regard to the spirit of the law, it is important to remember that the Council Fathers utilized weaponized ambiguity as a deliberate strategy. The documentary itself notes that Msgr. Bugnini did not want Sacrosanctum Concilium to be rejected, so he warned his allies:
Rahner: The spirit of the Council - progressivist - is what matters!
Echoing a similar sentiment, the infamous progressivist Fr. Karl Rahner boldly claimed, “What is most important in the Council is not the letter of the decrees it promulgated … its spirit, its more advanced tendencies, this is what is the most important.” (3)
Therefore, we should believe the writers of Sacrosanctum Concilium: The document is not to be taken at face value.
Beyond Sacrosanctum Concilium
The documentary largely ignores the other 15 Vatican II documents, despite parallels between their ideas and the Novus Ordo. For example, the Council attempted to soften the Church’s militant stance against Protestants. Implying that false religions may be salvific, Unitatis Redintegratio states:
John Paul II meets amiably in ‘dialogue’ with Protestant evangelist Billy Graham
Additionally, Nostra Aetate promotes “dialogue and collaboration” with Protestants, for Catholics should “recognize, preserve, and promote the good things, spiritual and moral, as well as the socio-cultural values found among these men.”
It cannot be a coincidence that the Novus Ordo has ecumenical undertones, removing aspects of the liturgy that may offend Protestants. (4) The documentary notes that the notion of Mass as a sacrifice was downplayed and replaced with the idea of a “meal.” Why would this be, other than to please those who deny the Real Presence?
The notion that applying SC correctly would resolve the whole problem of the Council is naïve and ignorant.
2. 'Bugnini the only villain; Council Fathers & Paul VI had good will'
In order not to cast doubt on the holiness of Paul VI, the documentary presents him as a naïve, but fundamentally good Pope. He and the Consilium members were allegedly fooled by Bugnini’s insidious schemes.
It is undeniable that Msgr. Bugnini was shrewd and devious (as evidenced by his “weaponized ambiguity”). However, he could not have achieved what he did without support from Paul VI and other bad actors in the Vatican.
Paul VI: A holy man?
The pontificate of Paul VI was perhaps the most destructive of all the Conciliar Popes. To determine his responsibility for the Novus Ordo, we need only look at his support for the same progressivist ideas that gave rise to this new liturgy.
Paul VI celebrated the first Mass in the vernacular on March 7, 1965; later he mandated it for the Latin Rite
During and after the Council, the Pope repeatedly demonstrated his support for Progressivism, as well as his desire to personally mold the Church to these novel ideals. A list of some of his harmful actions make his stances clear:
- Embraced liturgical reform. Not only did Paul VI oversee the implementation of the Novus Ordo; he also spoke highly of these reforms, declaring, “We will have [with Vatican II and the Novus Ordo], therefore, a period of a greater liberty, that is to say, of fewer legal obligations and less internal inhibitions. Formal discipline will be reduced; all arbitrary intolerance will be abolished together with all absolutism; the positive law will be simplified; the exercise of authority will be tempered.”
Benedict XVI embraced Anglican Rowan Williams in Westminster Abbey in September 2010
- Encouraged false ecumenism. The Dicastery for Interreligious Dialogue proudly declares that Paul VI “is known for initiating the Church into a new awareness of the importance of dialogue, both inside and outside the Church. In 1964, in the midst of the Second Vatican Council, he established the Secretariat for non-Christians, later known as the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue (PCID) ... which invited experts to help write various guidelines on dialogue with the Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims and the followers of African Traditional Religion [paganism & animism].”(5)
Paul VI made the first visit of a Pope to the United Nations & warmly addressed its assembly
- Supported separation of Church and State. - In his unprecedented visit to the UN in 1965, Paul VI
renounced the Church’s claim to the Papal States (territories
usurped by Italian Masonry in the 19th century under Pope Pius IX) and supported the fundamentally secular UN as
the supreme arbiter of society. This effectively reversed the Church’s previous position, which affirmed the Church is supreme over all temporal authorities, requiring the latter to
submit to the Church.
- Advanced the interests of communists. John XXIII and Paul VI began a policy of tolerance toward communist regimes, called Ostpolitik. Paul VI was so popular among communists that, after his death, the Italian Communist Party purchased a newspaper ad praising him “for his passionate effort and elevated humanity with which he worked for the peace and progress of the peoples, by promoting dialogue, understanding and possible agreements among men of different faith and ideals.”
3. 'Latin Mass with active participation, a new springtime '
As mentioned in the last article, Mass of the Ages presents contemporary traditionalist communities as the authentic fulfillment of Vatican II. French Benedictine Dom Alcuin notes that Latin Mass communities have achieved “true, conscious, active and fruitful participation, just as the Council desired.” He sees this as a sign that they have reached a “new springtime.”
Prior to 1962 there was no active participation
of the faithful
In her “Dialogue Mass” series, Dr. Carol Byrne shows that active participation is a revolutionary concept. She dismantles the popular myth that Pope Pius X called for “active participation” in his Motu proprio Tra le Sollecitudini, showing that the word “active” was not used in the original Latin text.
This active participation serves progressivist theology; particularly, it implicitly promotes the “universal priesthood of all believers” (taken from Martin Luther). The Novus Ordo Missae presents the priest as a mere “president” of the faithful, falsely suggesting that participation among the faithful is a requirement.
Therefore, although it is true that many modern traditionalist communities adhere to Vatican II (along with their acceptance of the ‘62 Missal), this is a sign of their deeper problem of adherance to the Progressivism that is destroying the Church, not an indication that they have reached a “new springtime.”
To be continued
Posted February 24, 2025
______________________
______________________
 |
 |
 |