In April of 1985, The Coca-Cola Company launched a new formula for Coke. It seems that a committee reformulated coke and tested it on 200,000 people and, due to the outcome of their taste tests, decided that they would change their formula and retire ‘classic’ coke replacing it with ‘new’ coke. It was a clear demonstration of bureaucratic committees making decisions and changes that the people themselves did not demand or want. People began hoarding the old Coke and basically revolted against the Coke Company so vociferously that by July of 1985 they backed down and began offering both formulas: ‘New’ Coke and ‘Classic Coke’. Then they advertised both and eventually changed the name of New Coke to Coke II. Now Coke II is unavailable in the U.S. The people had spoken and they did not like the new product.
Then there is this type of interference which our Government has no business getting involved with:
“May 22, 1997
Last year Amtrak celebrated its silver anniversary. After a quarter-century, we still haven’t learned what should have been evident when Richard Nixon launched this ill-begotten experiment: Uncle Sam doesn’t have a clue as to how to run a railroad.
Since 1972 Amtrak has received more than $13 billion of federal subsidies. Twenty-five years later, Amtrak appears no closer to financial independence than the day taxpayer assistance began. Worse, Amtrak has no apparent plan to become self-sufficient. In fact, it is now pressing for a half-cent of the federal gasoline tax in order to have a permanent umbilical cord to the federal treasury. That hardly seems fair, since people who pay the gasoline tax — that is, people who drive their cars — aren’t using Amtrak.”
What should we learn by these two stories, picked at random? Committees don’t create good products and governments don’t run good companies. And what should the Catholic Church learn from this about the Novus Ordo Mass and the Traditional Mass? There is a striking parallel if one just takes a moment and thinks about it.
“[W]e have a liturgy which has degenerated so that it has become a show which, with momentary success for the group of liturgical fabricators, strives to render religion interesting in the wake of the frivolities of fashion and seductive moral maxims. Consequently, the trend is the increasingly marked retreat of those who do not look to the liturgy for a spiritual show-master but for the encounter with the living God in whose presence all the ‘doing’ becomes insignificant since only this encounter is able to guarantee us access to the true richness of being.” (Cardinal Ratzinger’s preface to the French translation of Reform of the Roman Liturgy by Monsignor Klaus Gamber, 1992).
Yes, we fabricated a ’new’ liturgy and removed the ‘classic’ liturgy by the act of a committee, the liturgical fabricators, much like Coca Cola did. The people responded immediately as they did in the Coke fiasco. The seminaries, monasteries and convents emptied and many existing priests, brothers and nuns left the Church while the pews likewise suffered from an emptying.
But unlike Coca-Cola, who looked at the bottom line and corrected their course, the Vatican, and the bishops tried to make the failed product (the Novus Ordo Liturgy) thrive by erecting obstacles to the Traditional Mass and what amounts to subsidizing the Novus Ordo Mass. Their reaction did nothing but create a schism between Traditional Catholics and Novus Ordo Catholics.
To fill the pews again, the bishops tried to outlaw the ‘classic’ Mass and sell the ‘new’ Mass on the concepts of simplicity, entertainment and by subsidies.
- The simplicity of the Novus Ordo made it quicker to say and more understandable on the cognitive level by the elimination of much of the content of the Traditional Mass and the change from Latin into the vernacular.
- They attempted to enlist the support of the Novus Ordo by the use of clowns, liturgical dancing, and folk songs and even tried rock and roll.
- As the seminaries, monasteries and convents still remained empty, they began the egalitarian movement, which the Church is still working on: for if the Mass is only run by men you can double the human pool by extending to women the same duties that were traditionally given to men.
- Then they began to import priests from developing nations and ordaining deacons in numbers heretofore unheard of in the Church.
- They introduced ‘extraordinary’ ministers and lay lectors and then extended this ‘ministry’ to both men and women; receiving from a woman points naturally to the consecration of women priests.
- Altar servers were now both boys and girls as well.
- Now there is talk of filling the pews with Protestant spouses by allowing the access to Communion like they did with formal adulterers. Will it work?
What they did not get was that the Novus Ordo was not working. It does not engender an allure for the youth to participate or to become priests or religious brothers and sisters. And all the while, even with these ‘subsidies and accommodations’ the Churches were emptying. Here in the US it seems that the USCCB is banking on illegal immigrants from South America to fill the pews. But Church closures and selling of old decaying and empty convents and monasteries are still rampant in many of our dioceses to this day. Katy Perry just bought a Convent for God-knows-what purpose or price.
However, all this time, the Traditional Catholics continue as they always have: no shortage of seminarians nor religious brothers and sisters. They do not have to subsidize and try to accommodate the youth in any way to ‘participate’ and to do their ancient duties. For every seat in a Traditional Seminary we have many applicants who are turned away while the standard diocesan Novus Ordo Seminaries have been coalescing and closing at a steady rate. This past year the US produced only 48 (I believe) new priests. And all of this is in the face of unheard of opposition from the bishops, cardinals and even our latest Pope who hates the Traditional Mass.
If the Catholic Church were a business, it would have failed without subsidies and it will eventually go broke unless its sole purpose is to become another Amtrak; producing a poor product in need of subsidizing and definitely not on the road to becoming self-sufficient.
I doubt any of the things they have done to ‘save’ the Novus Ordo is going to work. If it had been a company with a product the product does not fulfill its intended purpose. Therefore it does not succeed and the company goes belly up. If it must prop up the New Mass by incentives and discourage any competition of the Classic Mass then it is not succeeding on its own. Had it been a company the New Mass would have been ditched long ago and the Classic Mass would have taken its rightful place; because it works and draws the youth to the priesthood and the religious life and fulfills the spiritual yearning which dwells in our souls. In other words, if you want to fill your pews, your seminaries and your religious houses with people then you will return to what worked: the Traditional Latin Mass. Unless, of course, the intended purpose is to destroy the Church as it was and bring into being a new church made in their image.
Philip Augustine said:
As I’ve heard quite frequently from Radtrads that Saints from the 15th century to the 1960s wouldn’t recognize the current mass. Via Justin Martyr’s First Apology, I would certainly assert that minus the vernacular language, which would have been during the time, that Saints from the first 1000 years would recognize the Mass of Bl. Paul VI as more akin to their own form of worship. So, I will coin it the Mass of the Church Fathers!
The basic problem with your premise is that it relies on the fallacy of correlation equals causation. There is a whole litany of causes that occurred that has brought the Church to where it is today that to blame it on Vatican II or the Mass of Bl. Paul VI is facile.
The TLM is small minority which concentrates those who are serious about their faith, so naturally they will be catechized but there are faithful Ordinary form Catholics who are catechized but a smaller percentage do to it being the largest number. It’s basic math. The trouble is that when I say that the premier document that gives the order of the Mass is from the First Apology is Justin Martyr, most in the pews will say, “What did he apologize for?” Or, “Who’s Justin Martyr?”
LikeLike
Scoop said:
And most would also say, that they have no idea what is in the Vatican II documents, the Baltimore Catechism, the new Catechism of the Catholic Church, the teachings of the Church or anything else that was routinely taught in the past. Was the dumbing down part of the reform of Vatican II? If it was, it worked. Is the quality of saints going in the right way. Is a St. Pio of the same caliber as a Oscar Romero which seems more like a ratification of Liberation Theology rather than the making of a saint due to their holiness. The same might be true with John XXIII and Paul VI. It seems to serve the purpose of beatifying the Second Vatican Council period and has nothing to do with miracles, holiness and all the other criteria which is no longer required in such matters.
The analogy, I think is quite apt. The shenanigans all the way from the invitation of theologians censored by the Church to being the heads of the groups writing the schema and writing the documents all the way to the concessions and changes to the Mass (not authorized in its first promulgation).
If you are looking to turn the clock back in the Church and abandoning what grew organically from what came before is an argument that was refuted by popes during the early part of the 20th century and the latter part of the 19th century. You seem to think that it is a valid argument to return to past and to disregard the organic growth of liturgy.
And was it ever allowed even in the older Mass of Justin Martyr that the priest could come up with nearly 5000 options to say the Mass? We have concocted liturgical Eucharistic Prayers that abandon the Roman Canon which is almost never read anymore (though the new version strips the Roman Canon of much of its content).
And to add insult to injury, the oath against Modernism disappeared as did the Leonine prayers. If you want to praise the takeover by the Modernists that is your business but we are held firmly in their grasp. One need only read those popes who were fighting that ideology which began to become vogue amongst the theologians of the time. Not even their corrections, excommunications or warnings stopped them from heading up the various committees that wrote those document which to this day remain very fluidly written. They insisted on language that could be interpreted in a Traditional manner as well as in a Modernist manner. And we know what follows; it is certainly a Modernist take that has taken hold. The German Bishops are running the show and they are without a doubt the seat of the most radical of these modernist reformers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Scoop said:
And as for Justin Martyr and his Mass, do you think that you would have seen what Cardinal Ratzinger saw in the Novus Ordo Masses that he was witnessing? And Ratzinger was rather liberal in his views during the Council. Laughing, entertainment etc. is not what Justin Martyr saw, I would contend. Nor all the other changes that I have outlined here and in my last post. You may disagree but my reading of the saints makes it seem rather remote that the casualness of today’s Mass has anything to do with what the Church has had throughout the centuries. It was solemn, respectful, dignified and structured without an anything goes attitude; which is more of a Protestant invention since the schism of the reformation.
LikeLike
Philip Augustine said:
Abuses, such as a clown Mass are not what goes on in the majority of Ordinary form of the mass. Talking and clapping are common but I would say a lack of catechesis. As far as I’m seated, moments of silence are stated as you desire in the rubric of the Roman Missal, it’s ignored because people aren’t taught.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Scoop said:
It it is routinely not taught, which state correctly, then it is effectively not there. We have new actions which have been added but the people themselves like the orans posture or the lack of the bow or genuflection at the incarnatus est. Seems like an anything-goes attitude has been fostered by deliberate ignorance of the Mass not by some accident.
LikeLike
Philip Augustine said:
The best place I can instruct folks is PSR classes but most other teachers are volunteers, who volunteer because they have kids not they may or may not know much about the faith. Other than that parents can teach and maybe at Catholic School. However, other than that most parishes do not provide the means to continue the education of the laity. How do I know these things? Self-teaching.
The Missal in every church says to bow at the Incarnatus est; in fact, Pastors in the Missouri Synod are implementing these gestures into their services.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Scoop said:
Yes they do and nobody pays any attention to it; often, not even the priest. Our own Holy Father does not even genuflect in his Mass. It is hard for laity to instruct the laity on what they are to do at Mass when the pastors themselves don’t abide by the teachings either.
And lets not forge how long it took for us to have a Catechism after we lost the Baltimore. We had the blind leading the blind and they are now the ones that instruct our children in many cases . . . as well as the in the RCIA classes.
Many parishes today do not even use catechetical literature to teach but use the Bible which does nothing to foster a belief in the dogma of the Church especially when many of the teachers have their own disagreements with those dogmas.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Philip Augustine said:
Indeed, I can agree with you on the part of interpreting the Bible outside of deposit of faith. For example, in my discussion group, a gentleman tried to tell me that it was the son who told his Father that he would obey him and did nothing that did the Father’s will. It was so out of left field, I didn’t even know how to respond.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Scoop said:
Weirdness prevails it seems.
LikeLike
Philip Augustine said:
The point being is that “actions” has to do with an active effort to teach, I see very little.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Scoop said:
Nor do I. Not in the classrooms and not from the ambo.
LikeLike
Scoop said:
Another question to ask is why is the TLM a small minority? It was envisioned by the Council fathers that it would also be said with the Novus Ordo withinin their Churches. In other words that both would be offered on a given Sunday. That’t the way it was sold to them. As we know, that did not happen and the TLM was suppressed. You can take from that what you will but it is a reason why the majority is Novus Ordo and the TLM is a minority. Now they have had the advantage of being the only show in town due to this suppression by the bishops which was finally fixed by Pope Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum . . . though at least 20 years too late. The bishops have built in excuse for not being able to respond to our desires and needs and therefore we still find resistance and little availability. I am one of those. It is not an option for me. I MUST, if I am to keep my Sunday Obligation, go to a NO Mass.
LikeLike
Scoop said:
“The basic problem with your premise is that it relies on the fallacy of correlation equals causation. There is a whole litany of causes that occurred that has brought the Church to where it is today that to blame it on Vatican II or the Mass of Bl. Paul VI is facile.”
Is it really facile? Yes, the world invaded the Church and created pandemonium but it was Vatican II that did that. The following statistics cannot in any way been caused by simply outside forces. Anyone must, if they are honest, agree that we bare the the brunt of this unbelief that has swept the Church. The world cannot account for the unbelief of those who claim that Catholic, surely? And is it merely poor education or is it a loss of faith itself? It seems to me that Catholics are being taught exactly what the powers in our Church want us to believe. Here are the facts:
Priests. While the number of priests in the United States more than doubled to 58,000, between 1930 and 1965, since then that number has fallen to 45,000. By 2020, there will be only 31,000 priests left, and more than half of these priests will be over 70.
Ordinations. In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained in the United States. In 2002, the number was 450. In 1965, only 1 percent of U.S. parishes were without a priest. Today, there are 3,000 priestless parishes, 15 percent of all U.S. parishes.
Seminarians. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the 600 seminaries that were operating in 1965 have now closed.
Sisters. In 1965, there were 180,000 Catholic nuns. By 2002, that had fallen to 75,000 and the average age of a Catholic nun is today 68. In 1965, there were 104,000 teaching nuns. Today, there are 8,200, a decline of 94 percent since the end of Vatican II.
Religious Orders. For religious orders in America, the end is in sight. In 1965, 3,559 young men were studying to become Jesuit priests. In 2000, the figure was 389. With the Christian Brothers, the situation is even more dire. Their number has shrunk by two-thirds, with the number of seminarians falling 99 percent. In 1965, there were 912 seminarians in the Christian Brothers. In 2000, there were only seven.
The number of young men studying to become Franciscan and Redemptorist priests fell from 3,379 in 1965 to 84 in 2000.
Catholic schools. Almost half of all Catholic high schools in the United States have closed since 1965. The student population has fallen from 700,000 to 386,000. Parochial schools suffered an even greater decline. Some 4,000 have disappeared, and the number of pupils attending has fallen below 2 million — from 4.5 million.
Though the number of U.S. Catholics has risen by 20 million since 1965 (actually by a full 45%), Jones’ statistics show that the power of Catholic belief and devotion to the Faith are not nearly what they were.
Catholic Marriage. Catholic marriages have fallen in number by one-third since 1965, while the annual number of annulments has soared from 338 in 1968 to 50,000 in 2002.
Attendance at Mass. A 1958 Gallup Poll reported that three in four Catholics attended church on Sundays. A recent study by the University of Notre Dame found that only one in four now attend.
Only 10 percent of lay religious teachers now accept church teaching on contraception. Fifty-three percent believe a Catholic can have an abortion and remain a good Catholic. Sixty-five percent believe that Catholics may divorce and remarry. Seventy-seven percent believe one can be a good Catholic without going to mass on Sundays. By one New York Times poll, 70 percent of all Catholics in the age group 18 to 44 believe the Eucharist is merely a “symbolic reminder” of Jesus.
LikeLike
Philip Augustine said:
We’re not going to agree on it. The evidence is circumstantial at best to indicate Vatican II as the source of the decline of Catholicism in the United States and Western Europe. Naturally, this doesn’t factor in the rise of Catholicism in Latin American and Africa. So, one simply cannot myopically look at the United States’ Catholicism and declare Vatican II a failure.
What’s the state of Catholicism in Poland? Hasn’t it more or less been the success of Europe? Well, historically speaking, before the Vatican II Council had ended, Cardinal Wyszynski had a Synod of Krakow where he and Cardinal Wojtyla began to implement the changes of Vatican II into the Polish Church. During the Synod, they created “plenary meetings” of clerics and laity that was met with “it’s never been done before.” During these plenary meetings all attendees could vote on changes. A Synod, spurred by Vatican II, that created over 400 documents.
The Synod then created study groups to study the Vatican II documents and catechize the faith, which these study groups lasted until 1997. These groups built authentic Christian community, which Vatican II called for via ‘Communio.’
More or less, the Polish Church at little to no tension from anti-Conciliar radicals.
The majority of Poles still practice common practices of piety including 80% still regularly go to confession. The Polish Church also provides priest throughout all of Europe.
Again, they were on the forefront of implementing the changes of Vatican II.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Scoop said:
Its, true we won’t agree even in your last sentence since at the forefront of the implementation of the changes of Vatican II stood the periti and their collaborators who were tasked with the implementation of the liturgical changes. And we know what they did and how they closed their eyes to the abuses.
Now as to JPII, it is interesting that in his in his encyclical letter, Ecclesia de Eucharistia, he spoke of the ‘lights’ of the liturgical reform without mentioning what they were. But then goes on to say the following:
“Unfortunately, alongside these lights, there are also shadows. In some places the practice of Eucharistic adoration has been almost completely abandoned. In various parts of the Church, abuses have occurred, leading to confusion with regard to sound faith and Catholic doctrine concerning this wonderful sacrament. At times one encounters an extremely reductive understanding of the Eucharistic mystery. Stripped of its sacrificial meaning, it is celebrated as if it were simply a fraternal banquet. Furthermore, the necessity of the ministerial priesthood, grounded in apostolic succession, is at times obscured, and the sacramental nature of the Eucharist is reduced to its mere effectiveness as a form of proclamation. This has led here and there to ecumenical initiatives which, albeit well-intentioned, indulge in Eucharistic practices contrary to the discipline by which the Church expresses her faith. How can we not express profound grief at all this? The Eucharist is too great a gift to tolerate ambiguity and depreciation. It is my hope that the present Encyclical Letter will effectively help to banish the dark clouds of unacceptable doctrine and practice, so that the Eucharist will continue to shine forth in all its radiant mystery.”
Besides all of this, there was no discipline that was exercised. Many proclamations were made by the Pope to end the abuses and yet the bishops ignored them.
After the release of Instruction on Certain Questions concerning the Collaboration of if the Lay Faithful in the Ministry of the Priests, Catholic World Report wrote the following in 1998 which I totally agree with now as I did then:
“As we survey the Catholic scene we see no change whatsoever. In the parishes where those abuses occurred last year, they are still occurring today . . . These and other liturgical abuses have been condemned again. The condemnations have no practical effect . . . In an ordinary household when children misbehave, does the father issue a statement of policy—–and then when they ignore his words, another new statement in response to each repeated transgression . . . There is a time for action.”
LikeLike
Philip Augustine said:
So, in your opinion, if the Church of Poland implemented changes right away, why did none of these pious practices disappear there as mentioned by JP II? Did those ‘collaborators’ not have a voice in the Polish Church ?
LikeLike
Scoop said:
No they did not. Just as they had little effect on any 3rd world nation (which is what Poland and the rest of those behind the iron curtain were) until they were freed when the Soviets collapsed. So, their experience relied on the orthodoxy of their priests which was better preserved by being isolated from the 1st World Europe . . . same as China etc. Africa, the Iron Curtain, the Underground Churches under persecution were all free of the tampering of the liturgists and free-thinkers of the rest of Europe and the West. We took the brunt of the experimentation and now that the Poles are free it will not take long for them to start the downward spiral of places like Ireland, who was renowned for their piety and orthodoxy. Look at them now.
LikeLike
Scoop said:
And regarding Latin America, Catholics are declining and Protestantism is on the rise. During the unrest many were affiliated with Liberation Theology and there overall view cannot be deemed orthodox Catholicism. This Pew Poll doesn’t speak well for the future of Catholicism in Latin America. Is it headed in the right direction?
http://www.panoramas.pitt.edu/art-and-culture/growing-protestant-presence-latin-america
LikeLike
bozoboy87 said:
Good brother Scoop, does it bother you that people in south America are trading in their costumed pedophile priests and lesbian nuns and graven images for a relation with the risen Lord and the invisible god?
LikeLike
bozoboy87 said:
Abuses, such as a clown Mass are not what goes on in the majority of Ordinary form of the mass.
LikeLike
bozoboy87 said:
Aye, say, if your religion of the virgin queen is irritating you, do what good brother Chalcedon does…..go religion shopping. (;-D
LikeLike
stevebrown5376 said:
The question continues, is allowing communion to Protestants the grave mistake of the “New Coke?” I, along with the Archbishop of Philadelphia, Charles J. Chaput, believe so.
https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/05/what-happens-in-germany
LikeLiked by 1 person
stevebrown5376 said:
Another “New Coke,” who would have thought, after getting such a great Catholic education! (to you liberals out there who have never been introduced to irony, the previous sentence was sarcasm)
LikeLiked by 1 person
stevebrown5376 said:
This post should be above, sorry. http://www.newoxfordreview.org/note.jsp?did=0518-notes-speech
LikeLike
stevebrown5376 said:
Bergoglio tells Cruz he was born that way. Another “New Coke!”
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/ex-gays-gaining-attention
LikeLiked by 1 person