Very well stated. That “carnival” state, when the new Mass was first introduced, caused me to leave the church for a long while. I still see it in Novus Ordo Masses - even those considered reverent. The entire structure is unreliable and always subject to change. It could be simply a raucous or enthusiastic rendition by the choir of some awful modern composition that ruins everything. I recall watching 2 young girls in front of me jumping up and down on the kneelers because they were so physically roused by the music. That’s the opposite of what we desire in the holy Mass. These kinds of things are all outward and tied to emotion, rather than devotion. You mentioned also the various Eucharistic ministers too. A Huge mistake on so many levels! Whenever I have the chance to attend the Vetus Ordo, I breathe a sigh of relief because I know what to expect. It’s always the same and that allows peace and depth of attention. I know I will not be jarred out of my mind by so many distractions and spiritual and psychological stress, if you could call it that. The old Mass is like a solid rock surrounded by swift rapids. It’s there to save me.
I remember a hideous NO Mass setting that was reminiscent of of an actual merry-go-round. Whatever joy one might feel in proclaiming the Creed certainly doesn't translate to the 'Holy, Holy, Holy' or 'Lamb of God'--but there we were, asked to incongruously apply the same rousing tune at the height of the Sacrifice. John 11:35 comes to mind.
Indeed, a friend of mine once said the Euthyphro offers the perfect argumentative framework for a discussion of the papacy, in this way:
“Is something true/good/beautiful because the pope authoritatively declares it to be such; or does the pope authoritatively declare it to be such because it is already such and capable of being known to be true?” This is an ecclesiastical variation on the Euthyphro dilemma: Is something pious because God wills it, or does God will it because it is pious?
Years ago, while living in RI, I was asked for a variety of reasons to host Alice vonHildebrand at my home. She was invited (by Anthony Esolen, still there at the time) to give a talk at Providence College. [I'm happy to say that the hall for her talk was filled to capacity.] My point is that I took her to Holy Mass that morning at my local [unicorn] parish, where I was gratified for the opportunity to show her how beautiful a NO Mass could be. I was perplexed that she looked at very little (and may not have heard much either). Although a perfectly gracious guest in all things, she kept her head down and said nothing. Nothing at all.
Only now do I understand the difference between the rites, and how nothing--be it the reverent silence, the careful gestures on the altar, or the faith-filled movements for the reception of Holy Communion--could have made up for the paucity of the Mass itself. . And only now I wonder if she has helped to pray me away from my sober carnivale and into the Mass of the Ages.
A lot of people don't realize - although now, at least the approx. 150K who have watched my Pints with Aquinas podcast do - that I was working for DECADES in unicorn land. I had practically everything you could ask for in that regard. And... the thing was still broken. Still impoverished. Still modular, rationalistic, plodding, and still a battle zone with every new chaplain or administrator. It got so wearying. And the contrast with the old rite, truly a rite, venerable, articulate, mystical, rubrically exact, loomed larger and larger.
I remember one Lent at that parish, hearing the plaintive Parce Domine sung beautifully from the loft, and my ears perked up--What was that?! Why had I never heard it before? What did it mean? Those are the hidden treasures that shine of their own accord and belong in the setting for which they were written.
Everything you've been saying is confirmed in the preconciliar speeches. It was interesting to hear the Pope recently mention the comparison of "tradition and novelty" in regard to the Mass. When Fr. Pablo mentioned in his homily on Saturday, claricalism, that as well was severely evident in the preconciliar speeches. They blamed the people for the selfish changes they pushed. One Bishop from the US tried to shut down their arguments by noting that the laity follow along just fine when they use the missals, obviously a fact, but there were clearly other motives. Not wanting to suffer the people to their own prayers, and save them from their ignorance, was a ruse.
If more people would read the speeches and documents, I really believe that this would be blown out of the water, and nobody could deny that mistakes (speaking charitably) were made, and need to be remedied.
Very well stated. That “carnival” state, when the new Mass was first introduced, caused me to leave the church for a long while. I still see it in Novus Ordo Masses - even those considered reverent. The entire structure is unreliable and always subject to change. It could be simply a raucous or enthusiastic rendition by the choir of some awful modern composition that ruins everything. I recall watching 2 young girls in front of me jumping up and down on the kneelers because they were so physically roused by the music. That’s the opposite of what we desire in the holy Mass. These kinds of things are all outward and tied to emotion, rather than devotion. You mentioned also the various Eucharistic ministers too. A Huge mistake on so many levels! Whenever I have the chance to attend the Vetus Ordo, I breathe a sigh of relief because I know what to expect. It’s always the same and that allows peace and depth of attention. I know I will not be jarred out of my mind by so many distractions and spiritual and psychological stress, if you could call it that. The old Mass is like a solid rock surrounded by swift rapids. It’s there to save me.
I remember a hideous NO Mass setting that was reminiscent of of an actual merry-go-round. Whatever joy one might feel in proclaiming the Creed certainly doesn't translate to the 'Holy, Holy, Holy' or 'Lamb of God'--but there we were, asked to incongruously apply the same rousing tune at the height of the Sacrifice. John 11:35 comes to mind.
This seems like a perfect piece to use in conjunction with a discussion of Plato's "Euthyphro" and what is and is not holy.
Yes!
Indeed, a friend of mine once said the Euthyphro offers the perfect argumentative framework for a discussion of the papacy, in this way:
“Is something true/good/beautiful because the pope authoritatively declares it to be such; or does the pope authoritatively declare it to be such because it is already such and capable of being known to be true?” This is an ecclesiastical variation on the Euthyphro dilemma: Is something pious because God wills it, or does God will it because it is pious?
On another note, is it just a coincidence that Novus Ordo and Novus Ordo Seclorum seem so closely aligned? Has someone written on this?
Oh yes, many people have commented on the striking coincidence.
Years ago, while living in RI, I was asked for a variety of reasons to host Alice vonHildebrand at my home. She was invited (by Anthony Esolen, still there at the time) to give a talk at Providence College. [I'm happy to say that the hall for her talk was filled to capacity.] My point is that I took her to Holy Mass that morning at my local [unicorn] parish, where I was gratified for the opportunity to show her how beautiful a NO Mass could be. I was perplexed that she looked at very little (and may not have heard much either). Although a perfectly gracious guest in all things, she kept her head down and said nothing. Nothing at all.
Only now do I understand the difference between the rites, and how nothing--be it the reverent silence, the careful gestures on the altar, or the faith-filled movements for the reception of Holy Communion--could have made up for the paucity of the Mass itself. . And only now I wonder if she has helped to pray me away from my sober carnivale and into the Mass of the Ages.
What a remarkable story!
A lot of people don't realize - although now, at least the approx. 150K who have watched my Pints with Aquinas podcast do - that I was working for DECADES in unicorn land. I had practically everything you could ask for in that regard. And... the thing was still broken. Still impoverished. Still modular, rationalistic, plodding, and still a battle zone with every new chaplain or administrator. It got so wearying. And the contrast with the old rite, truly a rite, venerable, articulate, mystical, rubrically exact, loomed larger and larger.
I remember one Lent at that parish, hearing the plaintive Parce Domine sung beautifully from the loft, and my ears perked up--What was that?! Why had I never heard it before? What did it mean? Those are the hidden treasures that shine of their own accord and belong in the setting for which they were written.
Excellent consideration as the joyful carni vale approaches right after Martinmas!
Yes! A liturgy and a whole rhythm of life to which modernity is always covertly and often overtly hostile.
Everything you've been saying is confirmed in the preconciliar speeches. It was interesting to hear the Pope recently mention the comparison of "tradition and novelty" in regard to the Mass. When Fr. Pablo mentioned in his homily on Saturday, claricalism, that as well was severely evident in the preconciliar speeches. They blamed the people for the selfish changes they pushed. One Bishop from the US tried to shut down their arguments by noting that the laity follow along just fine when they use the missals, obviously a fact, but there were clearly other motives. Not wanting to suffer the people to their own prayers, and save them from their ignorance, was a ruse.
If more people would read the speeches and documents, I really believe that this would be blown out of the water, and nobody could deny that mistakes (speaking charitably) were made, and need to be remedied.
I appreciate this article! I suppose I have long described this distinction with the term “a-religious” as opposed to “anti-ritual”.
“Religious” here defined as a virtue.
Yes, I think this is a way to say the same thing, since the virtue of religion has to do with acts of reverence and cult.