Here, Kwasniewski challenges the terminology of extraordinary being applied to the Tridentine Mass (Noble Beauty, 145). When one considers the Church's existence prior to Vatican II and the corrupted Mass (if you can call them that) formats of Paul VI, the terminology used to refer to the ancient and Old Mass as "extraordinary" is baffling at best, misleading at minimum, and an outright deception at worse. The Catholic Church has had its roots in both East and West, this is true, but the Catholic Church, since the Middle Ages, has primarily been Western. Thus, Western liturgical expressions have been the norm as they existed in the Celtic and English rites, the Ambrosian rite, the Mozarabic rite, and in the Tridentine rite, the Mass of Gregory the Great. Incidentally, in the Byzantine rite, our presanctified liturgy is attributed to Gregory Dialogous, the one who in the West, is called St. Gregory the Great. He is particularly called this as he is known for his dialogues, but that is an aside point. The fact that Catholics need to deal with is that the Tridentine Mass attributed to him is by no means an "extraordinary" Mass as there is no "extraordinary" time in the Church's liturgical year in opposition to a manufactured "ordinary" time. Indeed, the Tridentine Mass, especially after Quod Primum, was the dominant Mass of the Western Church and the Catholic Church, being Western held that as the dominant Mass. It was supposed to be that what would remain extraordinary were the more ancient rites and liturgical traditions.
One principle confusion that has emerged as this dupe about the Tridentine Mass being "extraordinary" are the growing numbers of extraordinary ministers of the holy Eucharist. First, no lay person should ever touch the Eucharist. This is for sanctified hands to touch only. And the Byzantine rite would never do this, so another difference for those counting. Second, if these are deemed "extraordinary" then what the Novus Ordo proponents are really doing is being deceitful in how they apply the term "extraordinary". They apply it one way to the Tridentine Mass as an act to belittle it and another way to these ministers of the holy Eucharist in order to enhance their occupation. The Novus Ordo proponents, have, in a way, politicized not only the Eucharist but also the term "extraordinary"! And as Kwasniewski points out, the growing number of these ministers was supposed to be few, not many, according to even the precepts of the Second Vatican Council, but here again, the Novus Ordo doesn't show itself as concerned with preserving any liturgical tradition or even the tradition of the Church. Neo-Catholics generally preserve the Novus Ordo because Neo-Catholics have always preserved the changes that the liberals have made to Church teaching. They'll insist that they won't accept fundamental changes, yet the goalposts of what constitutes a fundamental change for them don't seem to stop moving. Maybe it's time we hit them back hard and rebuke them for moving those goalposts?
Although Benedict XVI was by no means perfect, and I certainly don't concur with some of his private judgments, one thing Benedict XVI has to be commended for is his clamp-down on the liturgical malforms and his criticisms of seminaries to meet the requirements of Latin instruction prescribed by canon law (152). If Benedict XVI was not critiquing the Novus Ordo for its lack of liturgical formation, it's difficult to imagine what he was critiquing. It astonishes me how in the West there seems to be almost a universal lack of liturgical formation in both the Novus Ordo and the Tridentine Mass. In my own rite, we use the liturgy in order to open discussions about the nature of God and the sacraments. The liturgy becomes a holy mystagogy in this way. Something that would secure the Tridentine Mass is the tradition of mystagogy as the liturgy ought to become central in the life of the Christian. Kwasniewski touches on this theme numerous times in his work here. In fact, reading Kwasniewski's work, I was inspired by how liturgically-centered his theology is and if one changes a few words in select passages, Kwasniewski himself could almost be mistaken as an Eastern liturgist. He certainly is influenced by a Byzantine Catholic as he mentions the Byzantine Catholic theologian Michael Martin in his introduction.
And finally, the buzz-saw that the Novus Ordo proponents of Vatican II run into. The laity are entitled, by Vatican II, to the full spiritual benefits of the Church in its liturgy and sacraments (165). If there isn't a reason to make the Tridentine Mass ordinary again, I don't know what there is. But especially looking at this past year, we have seen Novus Ordo "bishops" who have rejected the plain Catholic teaching in its dogmatic theology and legal code. We have seen "bishops" effectively apostatizing. Some have refused to marry parishioners. Some have refused to give the sacraments. Some have even refused communion to Catholics who wish to respect Our Lord by receiving it on the tongue calling such humble Catholics arrogant and lacking humility for their very own humility. It is a disgusting position for the Catholic faithful to be in. We are entitled to the full benefit of the Church's service in both its liturgy and the sacraments. If our bishops say that we cannot attend Liturgy but we want to attend Liturgy, our bishops cannot tell us "no" or that it's for "health reasons" as they have done while still remaining themselves Catholics. If we request it reasonably, they cannot tell us "no" and shew us out the door. They would cease being Catholics themselves as they have a duty to defend the Catholic faith. There should have never been a Church shutdown. If the Catholic faithful want to attend the Tridentine Mass, then the bishops have a duty to make this widespread and available. If the faithful want to attend the Tridentine Mass more than once a week, the bishops must make it available more than once a week.
Thus, the battle for liturgical formation in the Church may not be easy but it is a battle that can be won. As more Catholics see the spiritual dryness of the Novus Ordo, the Tridentine Mass has to allow itself to become a holy mystagogy. It is the holy mystagogy that draws Westerners to the East, it will be the holy mystagogy that draws the Novus Ordo proponents to the Tridentine Mass. This mystagogy has been lacking in the West and it simply is inapplicable in the Novus Ordo. The Novus Ordo doesn't place a center spotlight on the liturgy. If anything, the Novus Ordo places a center spotlight on choice and the radical deformation of the liturgy. In order for liturgical restoration to be seen, we need the introduction of mystagogy to the West. That is how there will be true liturgical formation. Things such as the vernacular are exterior visuals. Really, the vernacular is the only similarity I have been finding in reading about the Novus Ordo and the liturgical destruction of the West with the Byzantine rite and yet my church's previous archbishop praised the accomplishments of the West in reclaiming a more "Eastern" tradition on this basis. I am failing to see where this "Eastern" influence in the Novus Ordo is though and I can only think that Easterners are failing to see the destruction that our sister Church in the West has been succumbing to from this "liturgy". An introduction of mystagogy to the Tridentine Mass would lead the West to a more Eastern understanding of the liturgy. Such with the emissaries of St. Vladimir of Kyiv. There was a difference between how the German Christians worshiped and the Greek Christians worshiped. The latter was more involved with the liturgy, even though at this time, there would have been barely any difference between the two liturgies.
No comments:
Post a Comment