What’s amazing to me regarding the origins of the prayers of the Pauline Mass, is the almost schizophrenic way they pulled prayers from this era or that, from this rite or that (some of them from Eastern Rites) in order to create this liturgical mesh of first millenium prayers, often with a modernistic take. Rather than something that authentically developed over time, they imposed a bureaucratized construct. To make matters worse, they deliberately omitted the “hard stuff,” from the Liturgy, such as references to the last four things, the necessity of obedience, personal chastisement of the priest, etc. Compare “Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa,” to the penitential Rite in the Novus Ordo. The level of self-prosecution in the latter is completely dwarfed by the former.
The arguments against the vernacular were laid out during the entire post-Tridentine period, because even in the 18th century there were reformers who wanted to say Mass in the vernacular, facing the people,etc. These reformers also wanted doctrinal updating to cope with the French Revolution, etc. They finally got their wish and disaster ensued.
I don’t understand the 20th century obsession with the early Church. The archaeologisms aside, I don’t really understand how nearly a thousand years of development could be cast off as “accretions.” Both doctrine and liturgy evolved during the last thousand years. The institution of the Papacy evolved, art styles evolved, etc., and it was as if the reformers just wanted to throw it away, and lead us into this golden age of a renewed early Church, which is ridiculous. We are not living in the early Church. We have 2,000 years of Christian history separating us from the first Christmas. These “accretions” may have developed for a reason. We aren’t Temple Jews from the 1st Century. We deal with modernism, Protestantism, relativism, and the secular state on a daily basis. Why on Earth would we shed the Catholic Church’s adaptations from the last 1,000 years just because people can’t understand Latin?
This fabrication of a rite of Mass has caused a disaster. Suddenly the Catholic Church was no longer dogmatic, hierarchical, mysterious, and ancient. It was “renewed,” democratic, subject to doctrinal revision and the individual’s conscience, ugly popular art movements, banal popular music, etc.
We went from being a worldwide, philosophical, dogmatic Church to AmChurch, and it would be foolish to act as though the democratization and de-Latinization of the liturgy didn’t play a role in what will eventually result in a schism of unprecedented proportions.
When I first went to the traditional Mass, I came to the overly-simplistic view that there are two faiths. One was Roman, Tridentine-based and anti-modern. The other is American, Novus Ordo-based, and enamored with tawdry American modernisms. While the situation isn’t that cut and dry, the “Conservative Novus Ordo” parishes seem like almost a myth to me. If I hadn’t encountered the Novus Ordo advocates on this and other forums, I would have never believed they even existed.
But what can we do about it? The superficial changes of the Vat II era have led to movements to change doctrine and compromise the truth of the Church. And when that happens, a schism ensues. I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a “Reformed American Catholic Church,” in the works right now.
Just my thoughts.
).