In this simply stated but immensely appealing
article, Father Thwaites states why the Old Mass has
become increasingly appealing to him, whilst at the
same time the dangers of the New are now
increasingly apparent.
Thoughts on the New Rite of Mass
Hugh Thwaites, S.J.
The dangers in the new rite are not immediately apparent. They are
not apparent because Catholics, brought up in the faith, do not know
of the attraction Protestantism has for our fallen human nature, how
lethal it is, and do not recognise its symptoms.
During World War II, we were given lectures on poison gas. I remember
we were told that phosgene smelled like a field of rotting cabbages.
If I'd been caught in such a gas attack, I'd not have thought, "Ah!
Rotting cabbages! It must be a phosgene gas attack." I'd only have
realised what it was and started putting on my gasmask when my throat
started burning. On the other hand, if ever I'd once been caught in
such an attack, for the rest of my life I'm sure that at the very
first whiff of phosgene I'd have realised, "This is lethal."
Having therefore been reared as an Anglican, perhaps I know more of
its attractions and of its dangers and can better recognise its
symptoms than can those who have always been Catholics.
It seems to me that Protestantism comes easier to fallen human nature
than does the true faith. It can seem more attractive. It lets us
live lower down the mountain of God. It makes fewer demands on us.
It does not call for that total submission of intellect and will that
God requires of His rational creatures. It does not call for the
"obedience of faith" that St. Paul speaks of.
Someone who had never before smelled phosgene might at first think it
a pleasantly sweet smell. Catholics with only a book knowledge of
Protestantism might well think, at first encounter and not recognising
it as such, "This is very attractive. Why was it all made to look so
difficult before?" Having been reared an Anglican, I recognise it and
want to keep away.
We all know that there were six Protestant observers who had a hand in
the framing of the new rite of Mass. Their finger prints on the
finished result are plainly visible to me, though seemingly invisible
to many.
One of the main dangers of the new rite is that it presents no
built-in bulwark against a gradual slide into a Protestantised
liturgy, and thence into Protestantism.
One obvious difference between Catholic and Protestant liturgy is that
the Catholic liturgy is sacramental. Christ operates directly,
immediately, in each of the sacraments, and in the sacramental
sacrifice of the Mass He is always the principal Celebrant.
Protestant liturgy is non-sacramental, ex opere operantis not ex opere
operato. When I was an Anglican our liturgy was very reverent, very
devout and correct, and was carried out with great decorum. But it
all depended on us. There was no sense of anything objectively
happening on the altar table - for the very good reason, of course,
that nothing did happen on the altar table.
For Catholics, the whole attraction of the Mass is what happens on the
altar: the fact that Jesus Christ, at the bidding of one of His
priests, takes the place of the bread and wine, and asks us to offer
ourselves together with Him to the Father in one, perfect Sacrifice.
As St. Robert Bellarmine put it, the Mass is the sacrifice in which
the entire Church, in union with her Divine Head, offers herself to
the Father.
Protestant liturgy, in the absence of the Divine Sacrifice, offers God
the sacrifice of praise, the sacrifice of a humble and contrite heart,
the offering of devout hymns. This is good in itself, but it is no
substitute for the Sacrifice that God has asked us to offer in memory
of Him.
The new rite allows the celebrant to move the style of the liturgy in
a Protestant direction. I was in Sydney a few years ago during Holy
Week. To begin with, I went to the church of the parish where I was
staying. The liturgy there was so charismatic and I asked where I
could find something more Catholic, and I was directed to a parish
which had a reputation for its good liturgy. So I went there. The
liturgy was indeed carried out with great reverence. The choir,
mostly women, was in splendid choir dress, and the English chant, of
both priest and people, was as good as anything I've heard in a
Catholic church. But I couldn't help thinking, "If they did this a
little better, it would be nearly as good as what happens every Sunday
in Worcester Cathedral".
That is, the more correctly our new liturgy is carried out, the more
it can outwardly resemble Protestant liturgy.
Recently too I was in Trinidad, not having been there for over 30
years. In the 1960's the liturgy was carried out very much like
anywhere else. But now in 1993 the liturgy did not seem to be
Catholic at all; it seemed to be the liturgy of another
religion.
As I sat in my president's chair, and heard the enthusiastic singing,
the handclapping, the guitars and the tambourines, as I saw men walk
right in front of the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle without so
much as a nod, as I heard the Precious Blood referred to as "wine", I
remembered Dom Gueranger's dictum, "To change people's religion, you
need do no more than change their books of worship". And I wondered,
"Where will it all end?"
As an Anglican, we were not high church. But we certainly were not
low church. The liturgy in that Trinidad church seemed very low
church indeed.
When people forget about Original Sin, they are unaware of the chronic
weakness of our intellect and wills, and of our chronic tendency to
slide into error and sin. Our faith needs a frequent input of
doctrinally nourishing liturgy if it is to stay pure. The traditional
rite of Mass provided this. The new rite does not.
There is nothing wrong with the new rite. Rome cannot feed her
children with poison. But the new rite of Mass does not give us what
we need. Michael Davies' analogy is helpful here. If a doctor tells
a couple that their child need milk every day, and they give the child
only water, the child may not live. There is nothing wrong with
water. But if the child needs milk, water may not be enough.
There is no heresy in the new rite. Rome cannot authorise heresy.
But the new rite, it would seem, does not give us enough Catholic
doctrine to prevent Catholics from unwittingly becoming Protestant in
their thinking. As Fulton Sheen put it, "If you don't behave as you
believe, you will end by believing as you behave." The new rite of
Mass is capable of being carried out in a Protestant manner. Given
the chronic tendency of our fallen human nature to go for what is
easier, our liturgy, in the hands of the ill-instructed, will always
tend to a Protestant interpretation. And Catholic liturgy carried out
in a Protestant manner will lead the worshippers to
Protestantism.
"Where will it all end?" So far as I am concerned, it has ended by my
being resolved to offer Mass, as much as possible, in the traditional
rite of the Church. This rite exactly expresses my eucharistic faith.
The new rite does not. Neither does it nourish my faith. The
traditional rite of Mass has nourished the faith of countless
Catholics in the years past. Please God it will do the same for me,
and for many others, in the years to come.
=========================
After the New Order of Mass was introduced in 1970, the late Cardinal
Heenan obtained in November 1971 a Papal Indult, under which any
bishop in England and Wales could permit celebrations of the Old Mass
for the benefit of a group of the faithful.
In October 1984, Pope John Paul II granted an Indult to every bishop
in the world allowing the celebration of Mass according to the Roman
Missal of 1962.
In July 1988 Pope John Paul II said to the bishops of the world:
"It is necessary that all the pastors and other faithful have a
new awareness, not only of the lawfulness but also of the richness for
the Church, of diversity of charisms, traditions of spirituality and
apostolate (Ecclesia Dei moto proprio 5,a) . . .
"To all those Catholic faithful who feel attached to some previous
liturgical forms of the Latin tradition I wish to manifest my will to
facilitate their ecclesial communion by means of the necessary
measures to guarantee respect for their rightful aspirations. In this
matter I ask for the support of the bishops and of those engaged in
the pastoral ministry in the Church (E.D. 6,c) . . .
". . . moreover, respect must everywhere be shown for all those who
are attached to the Latin liturgical tradition, but a wide and
generous application of the directives already issued . . ."
(E.D. 6,c).
Shortly after, the Holy Father appointed a Commission of nine
Cardinals to examine the legal status of the traditional rite of the
Mass commonly known as the Tridentine Mass. Subsequently, the
Commission stated that bishops cannot forbid or place restrictions on
the celebration of the traditional rite of Mass, whether in public or
private, and that the Holy See does recognise the right of the priest
to celebrate the traditional Mass.
- Christian Order, May 1993, pages 260-263, used
with kind permission.
Back to Articles page