In a recent article in The Atlantic, Fr. John O’Malley, S.J. reacted to news that Pope Francis will offer a portion of today’s Mass in Washington, D.C., in Latin, saying:
It’s very unusual. It’s not unheard of, but it doesn’t make much sense, if you’re in an English parish, or a Spanish parish, to do it in Latin.
If nothing else, these progressive dinosaurs are tenacious.
“He’s the first pope in 50 years not to have participated in the Council,” O’Malley said. “That’s good, because he’s not fighting the battles of the Council.”
He can’t be serious. Francis is not only fighting the battles of the Council; he’s its poster pope.
In any case, the simple fact that the media considers Fr. O’Malley a “go-to” source for insight into the pope’s visit to the U.S. tells us all we need to know about the kind of coverage we can expect. (Not that any of us expected anything different.)
The Atlantic article continued:
The mass that will be celebrated in D.C. on Wednesday is not the pre-Vatican II mass. The service will include English, Spanish, and several other languages, according to a Vatican spokesperson, and the pope won’t be following the Tridentine liturgy. O’Malley was skeptical that the choice to include Latin is a sign of a traditionalist revival. “I think it can be interpreted that way, if you’re looking for that kind of a pointer,” he said. “But I don’t think that’s where it’s pointing.”
Only a dyed-in-the-wool conciliar revolutionary could possibly imagine that a dash of Latin in the Novus Ordo might be interpreted by anyone as a “traditionalist revival,” especially when that Mass is celebrated by the Generalissimo of the revolution himself.
In truth, Latin, and any other assorted smells and bells, including an ad orientem posture, that one might heap upon the new Mass amounts to little more than lipstick on a pig. In the end, the new rite is still the same “banal on the spot production” that it ever was, to quote Cardinal Ratzinger.
While that point is not lost on most of the regular commenters here, I am certain that it remains a stumbling block for many readers who as yet are still coming to grips (as I was not all that long ago) with the liturgical destruction wrought by Pope Paul VI of most bitter memory.
It is with these future traditionalists (aka Catholics) in mind that I offer an excerpt from the Offertory such as it is in the traditional Mass:
Receive, O Holy Father, almighty and eternal God, this spotless host, which I, Thine unworthy servant, offer unto Thee, my living and true God, for my innumerable sins, offenses, and negligences, and for all here present; and also for all faithful Christians both living and dead, that it may profit me and them for salvation unto life everlasting. Amen.
In just this one magnificent prayer, we are given to understand a number of very important truths concerning the Sacrifice of the altar:
– It is offered to God by the priest in a singular way
– It is offered in expiation for sin
– It is offered for the benefit of faithful Christians both living and dead
– It is offered unto the salvation of all concerned
These four points, each one critical for a fully Catholic understanding of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, are reprehensible to the Protestant.
It is for this very reason that this same doctrinally rich prayer, along with many others, was unceremoniously stripped from the rite en route to crafting a Novus Ordo; replacing it with the earthbound presentation of the gifts and the preparation of the altar.
The results are plain enough. According to a recent Pew Forum Survey, only 39% of Catholics bother to assist at Holy Mass every week.
Certainly some will argue; Yes, but I still go to Mass every week. I still know, in spite of the regrettable stripping of the Offertory from the Mass, that all four of the aforementioned points are true…
To which I must remind the reader, It’s not all about you!
Our focus in all things should be Christ; in the present case, we must focus our attention on the terrible offense against Him that is this stripped down rite that leads so many to lose the Catholic faith.
At this, I would simply urge those readers among us who are struggling to come to terms with the offensiveness of the new Mass – not simply due to abuses, but due rather to the rite itself – to consider coming out of the shadows and posting your questions, concerns, and even your arguments to the contrary.
What you will find is that our regular commenters, while passionate indeed, are mindful of the fact that most of us have been where you are, and will do what they can to help you make sense of this terrible crisis through which we are currently living, with kindness and charity.
Thanks to all in advance for the fruitful discussion to follow.
As a convert I spent 40 years [1965 – 2005] in the wilderness of the Novus Ordo Church. Thanks to Fr. Gruner and the Fatima Center I discovered Tradition it’s friends and allies, And now comes Louie Verrecchio; a man I would be proud to call son. God bless you, Louie for insights.
A Dash of Latin! What Flavor of Novus Ordo Missae is this?
I think that I will take in the Divine Liturgy Of St John Chrysostom for the Saturday Vigil in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church Parish in Astoria, Queens on Saturday at 5PM followed by the Tridentine Latin Mass of 1962 at Holy Innocents RC Church in Midtown Manhattan on Sunday, both very powerful Liturgies in combination.
Perhaps a Birthday Cake Flavored Sundae Novus Ordo Mass?
Collect for today 23/9/15
Almighty ever-living God, who, by a singular grace, gave the Priest Saint Pius a share in the Cross of your Son and, by means of his ministry, renewed the wonders of your mercy, grant that through his intercession we may be united constantly to the sufferings of Christ, and so brought happily to the glory of the resurrection. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.
United constantly to the sufferings of Christ
United constantly to the sufferings of Christ
United constantly to the sufferings of Christ
Maybe the Latin used will be, “Non serviam.”
Just had a conversation with a dear friend, who is very elderly, about the new Mass. This lady goes back and forth between her Novus Ordo parish, and my FSSP parish. She was quite hurt when I pointed out that abuses which occur in the new Mass by its very nature are an insult to Our Lord. She cries when she finds out what Pope Francis is up to – she can’t understand what’s going on and doesn’t seem able to face the horrible reality of this new church. Yes she still does not see, after so many years, what this Novus Ordo says to Our Lord.
I recall in the Old Testament many, many instructions by God about just how He wanted to be worshiped – every inch and foot, every material, wood, gold, silks, every psalm, prayer, procession – all had to be just so – because this worship, sacrifice, laud, adoration – was for HIM.
When this attitude of worship of HIM became a ceremony plotted for participation and celebration for/with the people was He offended?
When the people handle God in their very hands, with no protection for fragments of His Sacred Body from being dropped onto the floor – is He offended?
When priests who call Him down to His altar refuse to wear their chasubles or to wash their hands before the consecration, is He offended?
My elderly friend, who ‘enjoys’ the Novus Ordo and sees no insult, would say He is just glad to see everyone – after all they are there, no?
I firmly believe that the Novus Ordo is a valid, licit Mass, and that as long as form, matter, and intent are proper, Our Lord does condescend to appear before us, and that there is grace there. But it is in spite of the Novus Ordo not because of it.
Today is the feast day of Padre Pio, who bore the wounds of Christ for 50 years. Perhaps, his suffering is symbolic of Christ’s suffering Church for 50 years after Vatican II. Padre Pio, pray for us! The endless coverage of Bergoglio in America being greeted by the enemies of Christ without a whimper on his part is enough to break our hearts. Thank God for the “off” button!
“At this, I would simply urge those readers among us who are struggling to come to terms with the offensiveness of the new Mass – not simply due to abuses, but due rather to the rite itself – to consider coming out of the shadows and posting your questions, concerns, and even your arguments to the contrary.”
A NEW ZEALAND PERSPECTIVE
“It’s not all about the novus ordo
By MaryandMarthaSeptember 24, 2014
It seems lately that whatever I post about turns into a debate about the novus ordo vs the traditional rite.
To be frank (and this would seem to be the right website for that) I find it patronising and very short-sighted that people would think that my faith is somehow lessened because I grew up after Vatican II and because I attend and even enjoy my local novus ordo Mass each weekend.
I’ve been to a few Masses celebrated in Latin in the traditional rite and yes, they have their merits. They are quiet, reflective and filled with deep symbolism and beautiful ritual. But I also find the novus ordo to be beautiful in its own way. I like being able to hear the words of the Eucharistic prayer in my own language and have them wash over me as I kneel and comtemplate their mysteries. I like seeing clearly what the priest is doing on the altar. I enjoy praying the prayers with the rest of the congregation in a language we hold in common and understand. To me, both rites are equally valid, beautiful and remain the source and summit of our faith.
I don’t believe my faith has been damaged in any way at all by growing up after Vatican II. My faith is strong, I receive the Sacraments regularly, I spend time in prayer and my work is also based around bringing the Good News to people. My parents grew up before Vatican II and I see very little difference between their faith and mine.
So, here’s your chance… those who continue to rubbish our novus ordo and wish for a return to the past, have it out below… ”
I spent decades in the Novus Ordo wasteland. I was subjected to all sorts of stupid, mundane, boring, heretical, etc. nonsense. I finally reached the breading point and one day walked out of the NO mass because the pastoral associate, a woman, was preaching about how we are like oreo cookies, black on the outside, white on the inside. By the grace of God, I found a traditional place not far from me and after the first mass there, said to myself, “I’m home”. I was one of the best days of my life, if not the best. That was ten years ago and now I won’t attend a NO mass for any reason. After all, I’m not protestant.
I pity all the lost sheep in the NO Catholic world who go along to get along. Lets all pray for them that God have mercy on their poor souls and they once again find the true mass and worship God as he desires to be worshiped.
The whole Mass ought to have been in Latin. Do they realize how many people were alienated by using Spanish. Those of us who only understand English, but what about the Koreans, Syrians, Africans, Chinese and others that do not understand Spanish? What about the rest of us, are are we just white trash?
How can the N.O. mass be “enjoyed” when Our Blessed Lord in the Holy Eucharist is desecrated and profaned even when it is “celebrated” (presided over?) without unnecessary novelty? Eucharistic “ministers”, communion in the hand, no kneelers for receiving Our Lord. That’s novelty enough!!
I don’t wish “to have it out.” This subject is quite sad and depressing, and I only approach it as a mature lay man having not too long ago undertaken to attend only and exclusively the Mass of all ages. Somewhat well-read and self-educated, I am in no way a seasoned theologian.
I am not certain of the efficacy of the NO Mass, which constantly leaves my soul hungry. I am also quite suspicious of the ‘intent’ of the priests presiding at them, especially when they so-often serve us theological Pablum. (And as Theology is the highest study, the cultural, political and social studies implicit in their watered down theology also and most always tends to be liberal and progressive, feminist and even socialist.) I am uncertain of the efficacy of the NO Mass. I believe it to be deficient.
On the other hand, the Mass of all ages is much more reverent and rooted in tradition. It’s not man-centered as the NO Mass is. I sense it as a prayer toward God through Jesus Christ as our sacrificial offering on our behalf. It is both God-centered and Christ-centered. Not only is the prayer of the Sacrifice of the Mass done collectively with those at the particular Church, but one arrives at the sense that we are praying with faith of our fathers in past time, universally, as the Church Militant along with the mystical Church Suffering and the Church Triumphant.
The Mass of all ages is certainly represented as the Sacrifice of Our Lord at Calvary.
The NO Mass may be considered a supper only, if you so wish, or, if you stretch it, you may wish to believe is a gathering of faithful worshipping God, and, if one so wishes, that it is somewhat of a sacrifice, but we don’t all have to approach it the same way. In the NO Mass we are ‘atomized’ Catholics.
The Mass of all ages is certainly One and Catholic and Universal over all the ages.
The NO Mass is multiple, not one, and many things to many people, depending on one’s individual faith journey. So much for our participation in it.
I sense a certainty in the efficacy of the Mass of all ages.
I sense a deficiency in the NO Mass, and am uncertain of both its efficacy and the intention of the presiders of the NO Mass who have embraced it wholeheartedly without looking back before VII.
In my weakness I will hold on to tradition and to the certain. In fear I turn away from the uncertain.
The question really comes down to, which Mass is holier? I sense the holier one to be the Mass of all ages.
Let bolder and wiser men defend it better.
“So, here’s your chance… those who continue to rubbish our novus ordo and wish for a return to the past, have it out below… ”
In response to the generous invitation of our friend EVER MiNDFUL to waste time commenting on the NO at the New Zealand website…My question is why bother?
It is a provable fact that the NO is man-made. As such it is a proven “Faith Killer”. For it is designed to glorify man rather than God. It has been wildly successful. After all 30,000,000+ ex Catholics since Vatican 2 can’t be wrong. Not to mention that half of the remaining 25% of “Catholics” who still admit to attending Church do not attend weekly. Of the remaining 12.5% who attend weekly, half do not believe in the Real Presence and most do not agree with the Church’s position on Birth Control. In short the NO has done its job. Namely, to empty the Catholic Churches and destroy the Faith. After all Pleasing Man over God is a proven failure.
You speak as one who possessess that Sensus Catholicus. I know you thank God Almighty that you possess it bc it’s a Gift. I hope you speak like this to everyone you encounter & wear it on your sleeve, so to speak. In speaking thus, you show yourself to be Catholic, which is an impactful witness to the world.
No deliberation on the Novus Ordo, as has been pointed out by Rorate Caeli & here on Mr. V.’s site often by so many, is complete without bringing up the marvelous “Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI” by Fr. Anthony Cekada.
Notable points from Rorate Caeli:
• How the Mass of Paul VI was created.
• The writings of the liturgists who created it.
• The theological principles behind the words and gestures of the new rite.
Father Cekada amply demonstrates that the differences between the old Mass and the new run far deeper than aesthetics, connection with the past and the sense of mystery in religion. Work of Human Hands is a copiously referenced work and represents a major contribution to the liturgical debate currently taking place in the
Though scholarly in scope and citation, the book can be recommended not only to liturgical experts but to seminarians, college students and laymen as well—to anyone who cares about the causes and effects at work in the reformed liturgy.
For anyone who’d like brief & I might add, enjoyable recaps of each chapter of Work on Human Hands, you can find that on youtube here:
These brief treatments on the book in vid form are themselves riveting, yet are only part of what is dealt with in the compelling book, which belongs in the library of every Catholic.
This is from the revelations of St. Gertrude the Great; Our Lord offers Mass for her! Our Lord is a Priest forever and when we go to heaven we will see and hear Him offer Mass.
Excerpts from Our Lord’s Mass: …The Son of God then rose from His royal throne, and, turning towards God the Father, intoned the Gloria in excelsis, in a clear and sonorous voice. At the word Gloria, He extolled the immense and incomprehensible omnipotence of God the Father; at the words in excelsis, He praised His profound wisdom; at Deo, He honoured the inestimable and indescribable sweetness of the Holy Ghost. The whole celestial court then continued in a most harmonious voice, Et in terra pax bona, voluntatis…The Son of God then chanted the Gratius agimus, to the glory and honour of His Eternal Father. At the Preface, He remained silent for an hour after the words Per Jesum Christum, while the heavenly hosts chanted the Dominum nostrum with ineffable jubilation, declaring that He was their Creator, Redeemer, and the liberal Rewarder of all their good works ; and that He alone was worthy of honour and glory, praise and exaltation, power and dominion, from and over all creatures. At the words Laudant Angeli, all the angelic spirits ran hither and thither, exciting the heavenly inhabitants to sing the Divine praises. At the words Adorant Dominationes, the choir of Dominations knelt to adore our Lord declaring that to Him alone every knee should bow, whether in heaven, on earth, or under the earth. At the Tremunt Potestatis, the Powers prostrated before Him to declare that He alone should be adored ; and at the Coeli calorumque, they praised God with all the angel choirs…The saints then continued the Domine Deus Sabaoth. When this was ended, Gertrude saw our Lord rise from His royal throne, and present His blessed Heart to His Father, elevating it with His own hands, and immolating it in an ineffable manner for the whole Church. At this moment the bell rang for the Elevation of the Host in the church ; so that it appeared as if our Lord did in heaven what the priest did on earth; but the Saint was entirely ignorant of what was passing in the church…
The Old Mass is the Mass. The new ‘mass’, is and remains, a protestant service, built by Protestant and Jewish ‘advisors’ to make a service for a new Institution called the Novus Ordo, which exists in opposition to Holy Mother Church.
“Some shall depart and fall away from the Faith”, and it seems evident that the same spiritual falling away is intended by the apostasy referred to in this place…The authority, then, from which the revolt is to take place is that of the kingdom of God on earth, prophesied by Daniel as the kingdom which the God of heaven should set up, after the four kingdoms should be destroyed by the stone cut out without hands, which became a great mountain and filled the whole earth; or, in other words, the one Universal Church, founded by our Divine Lord, and spread by His Apostles throughout the world. In this one, only, supernatural kingdom was deposited the true and pure theism, or knowledge of God, and the true and only faith of God Incarnate, with the doctrines and laws of grace. This, then, is the authority from which the revolt is to be made, be that revolt what it may…Such being the authority against which the revolt is made, it cannot be difficult to ascertain its character. The inspired writers expressly describe its note. (There are three specific notes of the revolt against the Bride of Christ, or the ‘stone cut without hands’) 1-The first is, schism, as given by St John: 1 John 2: 18-19 “Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh, even now there are become many Antichrists: whereby we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us; but that they may be manifest, that they are not all of us.” [the Novus Ordo mass and its presiders belong to the ‘not of us’ category – they are the ‘sons’ of the Bishops who ‘went out from us’ at VII] 2-The second note is, the rejection of the office and presence of the Holy Ghost…this necessarily involves the heretical principle of human opinion as opposed to Divine Faith; of the private spirit as opposed to the infallible voice of the Holy Spirit, speaking thorugh the Church of God [this ‘private spirit’ is the spirit of VII which is opposed to the Holy Ghost and what He has taught for 2000 through the True Bride]. 3-The third note is, the denial of the Incarnation. St John writes, “Every spirit, which confesseth Jesus Christ as come in the flesh is of God : and every spirit that dissolveth Jesus (that is, by denying the mystery of the Incarnation, either the true Godhead, or the true manhood, or the unity, or divinity of the person of the Incarnate Son) is not of God, and this is antichrist, of whom you have heard that he cometh and is now already in the world” [this denial of God is explicit in the ‘religious indifferentism’ of VII and in its heresiarchs’ defense of the old convenant as salvific, among other ‘dissolvings’]….These are the marks by which…the antichristian revolt, or apostasy, may be distinguished.” Cardinal Manning, ‘The pope and the antichrist’, lecture one, “Christ versus Antichrist”.
I assisted at my 5th Mass of the Ages today since I was a boy in the 60’s.I long to be able to get to one on Sunday.
I described the difference between Vetus ordo and Novus ordo to a close friend thusly:
After a very good Novus ordo Mass I think “that was great!”
After a Vetus Ordo Mass I weep with compunction for my sins and thank Christ with all my heart for the Magnificence of His Priesthood and the institution of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.I just can’t stop thanking Him for His generosity in bequeathing us such a Holy treasure.
I can spend the rest of my life meditating on Mary and John at the foot of the Cross and the great Mystery of our Great High Priest offering Himself for us.This is so much easier to do in the Mass of the Ages compared to the banality we have now it is amazing.
The attack on the Priesthood and the minimization of Holy Sacrifice in the new form is deplorable.
The new rite should be abrogated….for the salvation of souls.
3littleshepherds1, the awesome truth that is described in your comment, is as foreign to the Novus Ordo lie as the awesome truth of the protection of the Holy Ghost upon the true successor of Peter was to that mad menace, Luther.
Check out SGG resources for a chapel where the True Mass is still offered.
PS. ‘SGG’ stands for Saint Gertrude the Great. http://sggresources.org/
Work of Human Hands. pg 278. “All the reformers rejected the Roman Offertory and its idea of a sin offering by the priest instead of a thank offering by the people.” Lutheran Litury, Luther Reed. VII changed the “Mass of the Faithful”, to the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and there is no ‘offertory’ in the N.O. – it is called the ‘Preparation of the Gifts’ – it completely removes the sacrificial nature of the bread and wine maintained in the traditional offertory and which holds fast the sacrificial role of the priest and replaces it with the ‘peoples’ gifts to be offered up. They got away with this by once again engineering a false ‘antiquity’ – when trying to find any source for so much of the new mass ‘it became necessary to create new formulas from scratch.” The point was to remove the ‘sacrificial’ character. With the Offertory gone, the ‘difficulties on the doctrinal plane that jeopardized ecumenical dialogue on the Eucharist” were removed.
link to more about ‘the work of human hands’ in de Maria’ comment below.
“You know it has ever been my desire to become a Saint, but I have always felt, in comparing myself with the Saints, that I am as far removed from them as the grain of sand, which the passer-by tramples underfoot, is remote from the mountain whose summit is lost in the clouds.
Instead of being discouraged, I concluded that God would not inspire desires which could not be realised, and that I may aspire to sanctity in spite of my littleness.”
St Therese of Liseux
Story of a Soul
Grain of sand , loving and worshiping God at the lowly Novus Ordo, but also praying for those enjoying the lofty summits
EM, I was banned a few years ago from ‘Being Frank’, for ‘being frank’ about the truths of Holy Mother Church. Truths that Mr Verrecchio doesn’t ban from Harvesting the Fruit, a rare rare rare thing.
The self-styled, and they are self-styled, excuses for not wanting to suffer by abstaining from the wretched Novus Ordo are as many as folks who don’t want to abstain or suffer. The Remnant spend a lot of virtual ink speaking about the Church ‘suffering’ like Christ. But the Novus Ordo isn’t suffering at all.
It is the Church proper, exiled, ridiculed, flagellated by the Neo-Conservatives that suffers, while, nonetheless, offering true and holy worship by her true Priests and keeping the true Faith as handed on by the ‘unhewen stone’ and her true Popes.
Holy Mother Church, by the Holy Ghost, tells us this:
“For, to the Catholic Church alone belong all those many and marvelous things which have been divinely arranged for the evident credibility of the Christian faith. But, even the Church by itself, because of its marvelous propagation, its exceptional holiness, and inexhaustible fruitfulness in all good works; because of its catholic unity and invincible stability, is a very great and perpetual motive of credibility, and an incontestable witness of its own divine mission.” First Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius
“Christ our Lord instituted His Church as a perfect society, external of its nature and perceptible to the senses, which should carry on in the future the work of the salvation of the human race, under the leadership of one head, with an authority teaching by word of mouth, and by the ministry of the sacraments, the founts of heavenly grace…This Church, after being so wonderfully instituted, could not, on the removal by death of its Founder and of the Apostles who were the pioneers in propagating it, be entirely extinguished and cease to be, for to it was given the commandment to lead all men, without distinction of time or place, to eternal salvation: “Going therefore, teach ye all nations.”[Mt 28:19] In the continual carrying out of this task, will any element of strength and efficiency be wanting to the Church, when Christ Himself is perpetually present to it, according to His solemn promise: “Behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world?”[Mt 28:20] It follows then that the Church of Christ not only exists to-day and always, but is also exactly the same as it was in the time of the Apostles, unless we were to say, which God forbid, either that Christ our Lord could not effect His purpose, or that He erred when He asserted that the gates of hell should never prevail against it.[Mt 16:18]” Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Mortalium Animos
“…the Church, although human faults can be found in her, is always the Church of Christ, and, as such, true and infallible in preserving and transmitting the sacred deposit of faith, that is, of truth and heavenly grace; and she is holy, in fact, the very same ‘Church of God, which He purchased with his blood’ [Acts 20:28]. God is always great and wonderful in his works, but He is especially to be considered so where his greatest charity is shown forth, where his most abundant redemption in our regard is made perfect, namely in the Catholic Church.” Pope Pius XII, Allocution to the Students of the Gregorianum, Oct. 17, 1953.
“The Church’s infallibility extends to the general discipline of the Church. …But if the Church could make a mistake in the manner alleged when it legislated for the general discipline, it would no longer be either a loyal guardian of revealed doctrine or a trustworthy teacher of the Christian way of life” Van Noort: Dogmatic Theology 2:114-115
“…although one of the Church’s marks is holiness because she is holy in her Founder, holy in her teaching, holy in the sanctity of a great many of her members, nonetheless she has also within her bosom many members who are not holy, who afflict and persecute and misjudge her.” Pope Pius IX, Allocution to Pilgrims from Savoy, Sept. 15, 1876
“She is the mystical body of Christ, the immaculate spouse of Christ, and consequently a most admirable mother and an incomparable and perfect teacher.” Pope Pius XI, Encyclical Divini Illius Magistri
“In fact, only a miracle of that divine power could preserve the Church, the Mystical Body of Christ, from blemish in the holiness of Her doctrine, law, and end in the midst of the flood of corruption and lapses of her members.” Pope St. Pius X, Encyclical Editae Saepe
“‘She is a garden enclosed, my sister, my spouse, a garden enclosed, a fountain sealed’ [Cant 4:12]. These words of Holy Scripture are applied, according to the Fathers, to the Catholic Church, the immaculate spouse of Christ….” Pope Leo XIII, Decretal Hortus Conclusus,
“Not least among the blessings which have resulted from the public and legitimate honor paid to the Blessed Virgin and the saints is the perfect and perpetual immunity of the Church from error and heresy” Pope Pius XI Quas Primas
Look to where the True Church is, reduced, exiled and rare, but flourishing where She lives and keeping the Faith, hated by almost everyone, including 99% of self-proclaimed Catholics.
PS. To the Being Frank folks, it is very much about the Novus Ordo. And ‘your faith’ … does it assent to Pope Eugene IV: Council of Florence, Decree Cantate Domino, or to Nostra Aetate? To the Council of Trent, or to the GIRM of the New Order? To Pius XII on ordinations (completely in harmony with the One Voice of the Church), or the Novus Ordo rites of initiation?
Would be interesting to know what if any reminder/suggestion of penance as been recommended for the ember days wed ,fri , sat in a novus ordo parish ??. Likewise for all traditionalists are we doing any penance for such souls . 1913 code of canon law requires us to fast & abstain on these days this (1913 code) bound all above 7 years to abstain and all those 21 & above to fast (1 meal) .
This particular debate is very much like tiptoeing through a minefield because there are so many aspects that have to be considered, and perhaps this testifies to the subtle “genius” of the liturgical reformers : that they were able to thoroughly undermine the Roman Liturgy but at the same time were held back enough to ensure validity and a minimalist expression of orthodoxy. It is true that the NO celebrated strictly according to the rubrics of the 1970 Missale Romanum projects an external similarity to the TLM but to identify the differences one has to go deeper. The famous Ottaviani Intervention characterised these theological differences as a “striking departure” from the Catholic doctrine of the mass, this was done not do much by outright denials or heretical insertions but by a playing down of that doctrine and by ambiguous expression much like the early communion service of Cranmer. These defects amazingly approved of by Paul VI paved the way for all kinds of Indults that would sanction abuses and previously abandoned practices e.g extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist, offertory processions, communion in the hand etc. which would further erode Catholic belief. At heart it was an abandonment of the liturgical wisdom of the Church as guided by the Holy Spirit through the ages in favour of a contrived liturgy created for the purposes of appeasing Protestantism. So while much of the abuses became apparent in the decades after the Council the destructive elements were already present in the NO rite itself which enabled that destruction to take hold with unstoppable force. It is in this manner I consider it true to say, as Louie has pointed out, that the source of the problem lies camouflaged in the Novus Ordo itself, and even though it can be celebrated in a manner resembling the TLM it is these masked defects that have brought us to the present doctrinal and liturgical wasteland the Post-Conciliar Church inhabits.
For many the Latin Mass is not possible and I suggest that that will be the case for more and more traditionalists over time. Ask yourself do SSPX ordinations have validity, do SSSP?, does any Catholic priest, progressive or traditionalist? If you answer yes then they all can perform the miracle of transubstantiation and forgive sins. Can you receive the Lord at a Novus Ordo Mass: yes. Is there still sanctifying grace there: yes. Is it better than boycotting the Novus Ordo and stay home: no. Those of us raised with the Baltimore Catechism are a dying breed. We now have at least two generations that were fed the new Catholicism. When the last generation of pre-Vat II dies what will remain? I suggest you ask yourself “how did the Jews worship and keep the faith during the Babylon captivity?”. It looks like it could be a long cold winter ahead.
If you are fortunate enough to have ready access to the Latin Mass take advantage of it and thank God for it, if not I suggest you go to the Novus Ordo, but don’t stay home like the protestants do. Raise your children with the Baltimore catechism and stay the course.
God have mercy on our souls!
“These defects amazingly approved of by Paul VI paved the way…”
Its built-in “defects” have successfully wrought upon the formally Catholic parishes of the planet a “doctrinal and liturgical wasteland”.
Indefectible = Bride of Christ (incapable of Universal error – because of the protection of the Holy Ghost).
Defectible = Novus Ordo (promulgator of universal error – because of the defection from Holy Mother Church and thereby protection afforded by the Holy Ghost).
Where is the Church? In the defectible? or the defectible?
No sovereign Roman Pontiff applied error universally, ever.
@Ever mindful: Since you are ever willing to share your opinions [or at least the opinions of others who you quote] what’s your take on the spectacle of “Pope” “Actual human manifestation of the counter-proposition to Proposition 80 of the Syllabus of Errors VI” [“Counter-proposition to SOE #80 VI” for short!] visit to the US?
Do you think Pope “Counter-proposition to SOE #80 VI” is embarrassing Pope “Counter-proposition to SOE #80 V” because he has no discernment of which worldly movements that he should adopt as his own? That Pope “Counter-proposition to SOE #80 VI” appears as gauche, crude, and heaven forbid un-nuanced in his profligate embracing of ALL of the secular movements apparent in the zeitgeist?
If you have trouble wrapping your head on the question, here is an article to help you:
Of particular interest (to me at least) is this section from the article:
“In #80 of the Syllabus, Pope Pius specifically condemned as error the proposition that ‘The Roman Pontiff can, and ought to, reconcile himself and come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization.’ In this he merely echoed every one of his predecessors. For why should the Vicar of Christ pay tribute to the latest version of the Tower of Babel, when God will sooner or later reduce it to a pile of rubble?
* * *
The Council [VII] would acknowledge the ‘problems’ of the ‘modern world’ in the course of extolling its supposed progress. Yet Gaudium et spes would say nothing about the gravest of those problems: world communism, whose adepts were killing, torturing and imprisoning Catholics at the very moment the document was being promulgated. The Vatican-Moscow Agreement had insured that the Council which purported to address the state of ‘the modern world’ would, absurdly, neglect to condemn or even mention the greatest threat to the world’s survival.
All in all, as Cardinal Ratzinger [the future Pope “Counter-proposition to SOE #80 V”] has noted, in Gaudium et spes ‘the attitude of critical reserve toward the forces that have left their imprint on the modern world is to be replaced by a resolute coming to terms with their movement.’ But what of #80 of Pius IX’s Syllabus, which had condemned the very notion that the Church ought to ‘come to terms with progress, liberalism and modern civilization’? Like the Roman liturgy and the teaching on the Last Things, the Syllabus would be forgotten in the Great Amnesia. As Ratzinger explains:
‘If it is desirable to offer a diagnosis of the text as a whole, we might say that (in conjunction with the texts on religious liberty and world religions) it (Gaudium et spes) is a revision of the Syllabus of Pius IX, a kind of counter-syllabus … Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a counter syllabus and, as such, represents, on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789 …’
So what Pius IX had solemnly condemned as error was officially accepted by the ‘countersyllabus’ (!) of Gaudium et spes. Pope was pitted against Council, and the teaching of the Pope was ‘revised’ to reconcile the Church to ‘the new era inaugurated in 1789’ an era which began when Robespierre and Marat filled barges with priests and nuns, mothers and children and sank them in the Loire, on their way to butchering a million Catholics in the French Revolution.
How could the Church attempt an ‘official reconciliation’ with an era which had begun with the genocide of Catholics in France and was continuing with the genocide of Catholics in the Soviet Union? How could the Church have ‘a resolute coming to terms’ with a civilization in which every vital link between Church and State had been severed, and even Catholic states had embraced the very error Pius IX condemned in the Syllabus: ‘In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship.'”
Assisting at a “mass” which is offensive to God is not a default position when one finds it impossible to assist at a Traditional Latin Mass.
The source of the problem is that a new non-Catholic religion was borne of VII, namely the Modernist Sect. To even attempt to indicate that the situation is replete with many facets, or highly complicated, is ludicrous. My 4 year old granddaughter can get it.
My take on these issues is that Cardinal Ratzinger was engaging in willful self-deception when he said “the attitude of critical reserve toward the forces that have left their imprint on the modern world is to be replaced [in the Church] by a resolute coming to terms with their movement”. For members of the Church to resist “the forces that have left their imprint on the modern world” has nothing to do with “critical reserve” but rather with actively courting martyrdom:
Viewed from the perspective of potential martyrdom – “a resolute coming to terms with the forces that have left their imprint on the modern world” is nothing other cowardly surrender by those who value life above faith. Pope “Counter-proposition to SOE #80 VI” is nothing more than a coward who burns incense at the altar of every false secular deity.
In my ignorance I am afraid I fail to understand the question
Yeah. The astounding facets of the Catholic Faith are ‘simply beautiful’, but the Faith is clear and unchanging – the unhewn stone – the pearl of great price.
PS. In the comment above yours I meant to say “Where is the Church? In the Indefectible? or the defectible?
But bill Gates had different plans.
I will translate for you:
Ever mindful: Since you are ever willing to share your opinions [or at least the opinions of others who you quote] what’s your take on the spectacle of “Pope Francis'” visit to the US?
Do you think “Pope Francis” is embarrassing “Pope Benedict XVI” because he has no discernment of which worldly movements that he should adopt as his own? That “Pope Francis” appears as gauche, crude, and heaven forbid un-nuanced in his profligate embracing of ALL of the secular movements apparent in the zeitgeist?
Do you agree that when viewed from the perspective of martyrs of the Church – like the Carmelites martyred by the forces of the anti-Christ French revolution recounted in this video:
that Pope Francis is nothing more than coward who burns incense at the altar of every false secular idol rather than risk his hide to martyrdom?
Watch out, De Maria, maybe you shouldn’t laud me at all as possessing the Sensus Catholicus. My reasoning is based on differentiating between the certain and the uncertain. And what have I primarily used to base that differentiation: sense or feelings. But how do I know it is genuine Sensus Catholicus?
Furthermore what is more ‘certain’ than obeying authority. And if my conscience were appeased by certainty, of doing what is certain is right, why not rely mainly and solely on authority par excellence, namely the Magisterium of the Church? And what is primarily that visible Magisterium above all else? Of course, it is the present Popes, the head of the Church visible. And if one argues the post-conciliar Popes as against the pre-conciliar Popes such as Pope St. Pius X or Pius V, on whom does one rely on for authority if they differ so much?
So certainty has once again given way to the uncertain.
But even that uncertainty is based on an understanding that the pre-conciliar Church is different from the post-conciliar Church. And what marks that change from the pre- and the post-conciliar Church? The Second Vatican Council itself; it is the watershed mark that differentiates the two. And not just VII, but the documents which emanated from VII. Then that begs the further question, how does one interpret VII documents?
Hence, Pope Benedict XVI — recognizing the devastation in the Church — call for a ‘hermeneutic of continuity’. But what does the ‘hermeneutic of continuity’ necessitate? Does it call for a re-examination, reconsideration and possible renunciation of the documents, in whole or in part? Or does it call for a ‘deepening’ and ever-further implementation and plummeting of the unknown treasures of VII as though the documents were an oracle from the Holy Spirit? This is the shaky grounds on which we now find ourselves.
The manifest Church is, unlike the manifest heretic, part of the Body of Christ.
A sense of the Faith is something manifest, as well.
I think that God writes straight with crooked lines…
Well, first, I’d never take back what I said to you before.
Second, to address merely a couple of your points & put in very fundamental terms for brevity, the problem is Modernism. Unless we start there, then uncertainty if I can use your word, results. When we speak of authority with regard to the Primacy of Peter, that Authority emanates directly from Jesus Christ. Following the Reign of Pius XII, an obstacle/impediment’s been in place-that being-they were & are Modernists, (holding to Heresy even within the regular exercise of the Universal Ordinary Magisterium.) They did not & do not possess the Authority of the Keys. When they speak /teach, they do not do so as shepherds of Holy Mother Church. True shepherds, protected by the Holy Ghost, cannot give faithful on a regular basis that which is unreliable & indeed harmful.
We must not speak of the Modernist BVI’s so called “hermeneutic as if it were an article of faith to which one must adhere, the fact that Catholics wordwide hear the blatherings of even priests insisting that the heresiarch’s “hermeneutic” is such notwithstanding. (Funny how Jorge has ditched that anyway, no? ) This was the invention of an heretic. The way to deal with the whole of VII is to nullify it-take any heresy within, let’s just say Lumen Gentium for one & it damns the entire Council. More can & actually ought to be & of course has been said, but for our purposes here in this format as alluded to earlier, in the Forum. In the meantime, may I suggest this audio- a very short treatment of these matters?
Alarico, I apologize for the wrong spelling, please forgive.
Thank you for this, Fr Mann. Yes, great deception and manipulation was involved – of diabolic origin. And thank you for your sacrificial service to the Church.
There is no “wish for a return to the past” here. That notion is just as banal as the novus ordo. In fact, I’m not sure if I know a single Tridentine Mass attendee who shares that sentiment… So, back to reality; precisely that which the Tridentine rite has in abundance (it’s most desirable attribute by the way). As far as I know, sacramentality doesn’t harken to the ‘past,’ but rather to current relevancies; contemporary life, modern society, that world in which we are a part of. Where as trends (incohesive, styalized novus ordo celebrations) have a timely quality of their own, accepted for the moment, reflective of the culture, offering little lasting sustenance.
How in the world can one stomach those prayers contained within the novus ordo when compared with those of the Tridentine? I’m sorry but what little beauty survived the onslaught of Vatican II pales to the real Mass. And also, when remarking about how wonderful that rite is, in what way precisely?What style are you referring to? There is hardly any semblance between the celebrations. So, yeah, no ill will here or anything bro, just no desire for outdated whimsy.
My post refers to Louie’s invitation to consider the Novus Ordo in comparison to the TLM, not the NO as celebrated in almost all parishes today but as celebrated strictly according to the rubrics of the 1970 Missale Romanum and free from all the subsequent Indults and abuses. That would mean the Novus Ordo celebrated ad orientem, in Latin, no lay readers (as this is not mandated), no extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist, no altar girls, no communion in the hand etc,. Now, as I think Louie was suggesting, many well meaning sincere Catholics, especially many young traditionally-minded priests consider such a celebration of the NO to be minimally different from the TLM and consider this to be the way to go to help restore the Church’s liturgical tradition. It is true that such a celebration of the NO can give the appearance of solid continuity and so dupe the faithful but this is where it is important for them to go deeper and discover that the NO, even when celebrated and clothed in the manner of the TLM, is still by comparison a deficient and impoverished expression of the Catholic doctrine of the mass.
Dear Fr Robert Mann SCJ,
You are making an extremely important point that IMHO cannot be overemphasized.
The r/r position is almost over. In less than a decade (my personal estimation) you will have a clear delineation between Catholics and non-catholics……there will be no more blurred lines like there are now, such as are on this very blog. Bergoglio has done his best to see to this and anyone who thinks our next false pope will be “more traditional” is nuts.
I customarily sit and meditate for 15 minutes in St Barnabas Cathedral, after the 8 am Sunday morning (Novus Ordo ) Mass, gazing at the twenty foot high Crucifix overhanging the main altar, with large statues of the Blessed Mother on one side and St John on the other…across I gaze at a thirty foot high window mosaic of the traditional 15 Rosary mysteries, and slightly across to the side a six foot marble depiction of the 12th Station…Jesus dies on the Cross
Reflecting after the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass…
THE REAL PRESENCE
I sit and meditate , and pray…
“If you do not know how to meditate on heavenly things, direct your thoughts to Christ’s passion and willingly behold His sacred wounds.
If you turn devoutly to the wounds and precious stigmata of Christ, you will find great comfort in suffering, you will mind but little the scorn of men, and you will easily bear their slanderous talk.
When Christ was in the world, He was despised by men; in the hour of need He was forsaken by acquaintances and left by friends to the depths of scorn. He was willing to suffer and to be despised; do you dare to complain of anything? He had enemies and defamers; do you want everyone to be your friend, your benefactor?
How can your patience be rewarded if no adversity test it? How can you be a friend of Christ if you are not willing to suffer any hardship? Suffer with Christ and for Christ if you wish to reign with Him.”
Thomas a Kempis
Imitation of Christ
Book 2; Chapter 1
just a note to be sure you saw my comment addressed to you here:
Peace be to you, rich
Changing hearts and minds on this subject takes much, much work. I for one have never been to a “by the books” NO myself and doubt that many have. I think traditionalist are in agreement for the most part that a complete departure from the new Mass would be a blessing and something that we all hope for with sincerest hearts, if only for Christian charity, as well as for personal convenience (let’s be honest, a long drive for a TLM can be quite burdensome with a large family). I think that the only way to get there will be much a reversal of the novelties in how they were implemented. Take it piece by piece. Remove all novelties one by one, while simultaneously inserting back into the liturgy all the traditional elements that are reminiscent of the traditional rite one by one as well. Make them mandatory. Once we arrive at the true NO of 1970, even with said defects, the elimination of it wouldn’t be so drastic to those who have been formed by it over the last 50 years. It took a long time to get to the craziness that goes on in most parishes these days. And although I wouldn’t mind dropping the new rite like a bag of cement, we have to keep in mind the serious deficiency of catechesis that we are up against with Joe six pack in the pews these days. There is serious work to be done to get to that point. And much prayer.
Dear De Maria,
no need to apologize for spelling. I should have used the verb “plumb’ not “plummet”, when I wrote “plummeting of the unknown treasures of VII”. It should be “plumbing the unknown treasures of VII.” (On second thought maybe the error was correct.)
” The new rite should be abrogated….for the salvation of souls.”
The novus ordo cannot be “abrogated” because it was never promulgated.
Non obligat lex nisi promulgata.
A law is not obligatory unless it is promulgated.
We should look at what actually happened. In Paul VI’s Apostolic Constitution, Missale Romanum he decreed three new “canons” (sic) with the same words of consecration. Nothing more. Whatever else was done was handled by others besides the Pope or the Pope speaking off the record as it were. Now Pope Paul VI said that the Novus Ordo was a “new rite” (contrary to session VII canon XIII of the Council of Trent) and he stated but never decreed that it was obligatory.
But even if one could say that it is lawfully promulgated, it is clearly illicit because of the aforementioned canon xiii of the Council of Trent, the profession of faith of this same council, and the decretum grecis of the Council of Florence, which essentially state that the Catholic faithful are bound to the received and approved (by tradition) rites in the solemn administration of the sacraments, and that the law of custom governs the celebration of the liturgy.
It does not matter if the Novus Ordo is celebrated in latin with gregorian chant, facing east and kneeling at communion or even if it could be said to be indisputably valid, it is the law of the Church, which is bound to custom in the liturgy and tradition in general, which make the Novus Ordo unacceptable to God and to the Catholic faithful.
With all due respect, the giving all the “I likes…” in your response goes back to what Louis said, “it’s not all about you.”
For all of those, there were specific reasons why the contrary is true in the TLM. Volumes could be written, and have for example on the ad orientem orientation, the whispered words of consecration, or the use of Latin in the TLM.
The subjective “I likes” of a few who adapted to the protestantized liturgy is woefully inadequate to compensate for the massive loss of faith and vocations that came as a result of the Novus Ordo.
You better like it a whole, whole lot, because it comes at a price…the price of many souls…family members, kids and grandkids, neighbors, etc. It also comes at another price…countless vocations to the priesthood lost.
Take the most traditional Latin Mass with the most resplendant vestments inserted, if you will, into the typical diocesan building wherein once the Catholic religion lived & breathed and what is the reality taking place? We must face reality. Namely, it is nothing more than a liturgy abhorrant to God Almighty, with the name of a heretic & apostate named within the Sacred Canon said within the false religion of the Modernist Sect borne of an heretical council. It may be valid, but God deplores its stench in the same way in which He abhors the stench of a valid liturgy of any schismatic sect.
As someone has already pointed out below, it’s not about what “you like” at all. It is about what is pleasing to God and what is Catholic, vs. what was specifically created to avoid offending heretics and is therefore displeasing to God and not Catholic. And in the interest of being frank, the very fact that you view the traditional Mass as merely an alternative is a clear sign that your faith has indeed been lessened by Vatican II.
Perhaps, Father, this would help those who as yet cannot see the yawning chasm between the NO and the TLM. Under “Articles,” click on “The Mass: Words that Count” by Dan Graham: http://www.catholictruthscotland.com/links.html
Regarding the speech Francis gave to the joint session of Congress today, the words “Jesus”, “Christ”, and “Lord” were not mentioned. Not once. Not any of them.
I did see it…thanks Maria. I fully realize that some will be upset when I speak out against that order but so be it. There is a vast difference between speaking the truth and being slanderous. Like you, I am no longer fooled by anyone or any ORDER in communion with Rome, no matter how impressive the smells and bells may be.
Rich, the ‘mimic’ seems to be the ‘faith’ for most folks.
VII/N.O. is ‘rabbinic catholicism’. Yes, it’s an oxymoron, but so is a Modernist Bride of Christ.
Yep….and our “buddy” jorge is going to force many to make a very hard decision (for them at least because the writing has been on the wall for decades) in the very near future. Ive opined at least once on this blog that bergoglio is a blessing for those who are sincere in their faith but still cling to the idea that the council was actually somehow part of the Catholic Church. The time for straddling the fence is about at an end.
I know. Horrific. Today he speaks here to the U.N. I cannot wait. The Dalai Francis —– what words of nonCatholic wisdom will flow — the imagination can only speculate. It never occurs to the apostate to mention His Majesty’s Holy Name-it’s simply not in his mindset. Heh, I wonder why. Bc he’s just so darn humble, I guess-Mr. Bergoglio wouldn’t want to bring up the name of Royalty, would he?
Just a quick tally of the short, three paragraph post here counts the words “I” thirteen times and “my” 7 times.
Can anyone give in defense of their attending the Novus Ordo a reason that is not rooted in pride?
There isn’t anything Catholic in the Novus Ordo. Any Protestant church could use it since it is Protestant. Protestant theology, prayers, hymns, and practices. Rejection of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass of All Time was the hallmark of the infiltration of the enemies of Christ within His Church. It had to reflect the heresy of ecumenism and religious liberty adopted in the demonic-influenced Second Vatican Council and they succeeded beyond their dreams.
Just like their predecessor’s, Crammer and Luther, they incrementally introduced the new religion of Modernism into the liturgy so the people would get used to its heretical and blasphemous sacrilege without protest. And just like the Catholics of those times, they became Protestant and were happy to do so.
You comment..”And just like the Catholics of those times, they became Protestant and were happy to do so.”
The Protestants of those times rejected the authority of the Pope , and were happy to do so….
It appears that many on this site reject the authority of the Pope, and are happy to do so…
Have I stumbled onto a Protestant website by mistake ?!
Only my feeble attempt at humour…
This thing is going take the much prophesied chastisement to fix (or to be more precise, this spiritual chastisement will turn physical). And we’re nearing the end now. Good Lord willing. Things are lining up, converging.
Craig, things do seem to be, to quote a commenter on another site, ‘reaching a high-water mark’. I’ve been reading the lecutres of Cardinal Manning on the ‘Crisis of the Holy See’, as he saw it in the 1850s and 60s. The revolt against the Voice of Holy Mother Church which has been going on since the Incarnation has certainly been reaching a ‘high-water mark’. It seems plain as day that the VII/N.O. Institution have all three marks of the Antichrist ‘mystery of iniquity’ movement that has been ‘progressing’ steadily for 2000 years.
I apologize for the late comment. Many priests and theologians have commented that the Novus Ordo is doubtfully valid and certainly illicit. As a condition of acceptance and communion with the Church, the FSSP must accept the Novus Ordo as equal to the Traditional Latin Roman Rite of Mass. The same is true of the diocese of Campos, Brazil, which must now hold the Novus Ordo as equal to the Traditional Latin Rite. Much the same was stated in the Pope Benedict XVI Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum on the celebration of the Roman Rite.
I would highly suggest that you listen to interviews with the late Fr. Hesse, Fr. Kramer, and the late Fr. Gruner. Read the Papal Bull “Quo Primum Tempore” by St. Pope Pius V, in which he uses papal infallibility to bind the Church to the use of either the codified Roman Latin Missal or to Rites of Mass older than 200 years previous to 1570 such as the Dominican, Ambrosian, and the Visigothic Mozarabic Rites. As such he anathematized any who would change or deny the use of such a Missal.
The clever trick was that Pope Paul VI never abrogated the Traditional Latin Mass. He simply decreed that only his Missal must be used and strong-armed any who might disagree. Please also read “A Brief Critical Study of the Novus Ordo” by a group of theologians headed by Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci.
Matter – is often changed, whole wheat flour and other novelties
Form – the form has been significantly changed; see a side by side comparison of the prayers
Intention – to intend what the Church intends is not a guarantee with the Novus Ordo. In fact, often the priests simply see the Mass as a re-enactment of the last supper, much like the Protestants. This is how many priests are formed today.
Because of this doubtful nature, the Novus Ordo is to be avoided. The Novus Ordo is an intrinsically defective Rite of Mass.