Liturgical integrity, ecclesial unity.

Dear Readers, unity in the Church is or should be a paramount concern for Catholics. For us - us Catholics, that is - liturgical integrity goes hand in hand with ecclesial unity. A unity of minds and hearts expresses the lex credendi lex orandi lex vivendi algorithm.

Cardinal Ottaviani and the other Roman theologians who wrote to the Holy Father to draw attention to significant deficiencies in the Novus Ordo were concerned about the threat to unity that the new order of the Mass represented. Were the Cardinal's concerns warranted? Many well-informed Catholics think so, and given the countless bizarre celebrations of the Novus Ordo Missae witnessed in the past 50+ years, it is easy to understand why Cardinal Ottaviani and his brother theologians were so concerned that introducing such a radically altered liturgy would threaten the unity of the Church. That so many Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist, a fact repeatedly testified to in reliable polls, certainly seems to confirm the concerns of Cardinal Ottaviani.

Fast forward to 2021. Pope Francis issued his own concerns about unity and, albeit almost as an after though, the state of Novus Ordo Liturgy. The passages cited below might contextualize contemporary concerns about unity in a way that may surprise the occasional student of history. Which is to say, the Catholic who only knows the new Mass - and who has only heard how bad the older use was - may want to reevaluate their perspective, or begin to augment their understanding, so they may be able to better understand why Catholics closely allied to the usus antiquior (1962 Missal) are so attached to the older Mass.

Confronted with the perspective of contemporaries of those who revised the Mass, learned men who foresaw many of the challenges to unity the new Mass represented, perhaps the restrictions that Traditiones Custodes asserts could be retracted, and the peaceful coexistence of diverse uses might enter a new chapter typified by mutual enrichment for the sake of unity. Ironically, Traditiones Custodes exacerbates tensions between Catholics, and undermines "the respect and docility owed the Holy See" (note 60).

The passages cited below are the closing paragraphs of the study that has come to be known as the Ottaviani Intervention.

= = =

Excerpt and footnotes from The Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, A. Card. Ottaviani, A. Card. Bacci, et al. 5 June 1969.

= = =

St. Pius V had the Roman Missal drawn up (as the present Apostolic Constitution now recalls) as an instrument of unity among Catholics. In conformity with the injunctions of the Council of Trent, the Missal was to exclude all dangers, either to liturgical worship or to the faith itself, then threatened by the Protestant Revolt. The grave situation fully justified--and even rendered prophetic--the saintly Pontiff's solemn warning given in 1570 at the end of the Bull promulgating his Missal:

Should anyone presume to tamper with this, let him know that he shall incur the wrath of God Almighty and His holy Apostles Peter and Paul. [54]

When the Novus Ordo was presented at the Vatican Press Office, it was impudently asserted that conditions which prompted the decrees of the Council of Trent no longer exist. Not only do these decrees still apply today, but conditions now are infinitely worse. It was precisely to repel those snares which in every age threaten the pure Deposit of Faith, [55] that the Church, under divine inspiration, set up dogmatic definitions and doctrinal pronouncements as her defenses. These in turn immediately influenced her worship, which became the most complete monument to her faith. Trying to return this worship to the practices of Christian antiquity and recreating artificially the original spontaneity of ancient times (by creating a new liturgy) is to engage in that "unhealthy archaeologism" Pius XII so roundly condemned. [56] It is, moreover, to dismantle all the theological ramparts erected for the protection of the rite and to take away all the beauty which enriched it for centuries. [57] And all this at one of the most critical moments--if not the most critical moment--in the Church's history! Today, division and schism are officially acknowledged to exist not only outside the Church, but within her as well. [58] The Church's unity is not only threatened, but has already been tragically compromised. [59] Errors against the Faith are not merely insinuated, but are--as has been likewise acknowledged--now forcibly imposed through liturgical abuses and aberrations. To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, [60] and to replace it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division--a liturgy which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith--is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an incalculable error.

Corpus Domini 5 June 1969

= = =

54. Bull "Quo Primum," 13 July 1570. In Session 23 (Decree on the Most Holy Eucharist), the Council of Trent announced its intention to "uproot completely the cockle of the damnable errors and schism which in these fateful times of ours and enemy has sown (see Matt. 13:25) in the teaching of the faith about the Holy Eucharist and about the use and worship of the Eucharist. In addition to his other purpose, our Saviour left the Eucharist in his Church as a symbol of unity and love which he desired to unify and unite all Christians." DB 873.

55. "Keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words." (1 Tim. 6:20)

56. "Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to return in spirit and affection to the sources of the Sacred Liturgy. For research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins, contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful investigation of the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion. But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the right path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive table form; were he to want black excluded as a color for liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the Divine Redeemer's Body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings... This way of acting bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to which the illegal Synod of Pistoia gave rise. It likewise attempts to reinstate a series of errors which were responsible for the calling of that meeting as well as for those resulting from it, with grievous harm to souls, and which the Church, the ever watchful guardian of the "depositum fidei" committed to her charge by her Divine Founder, had every right and reason to condemn." "Mediator Dei," I.5, PTL 548, 549.

57. "Let us not deceive ourselves with the suggestion that the Church, which has become great and majestic for the glory of God as a magnificent temple of His, must be brought to its original and smallest proportions, as though they were the only true ones, the only good ones." Paul VI, Encyclical "Ecclesiam Suam," 6 August 1964.

58. "A practically schismatic ferment divides, subdivides, splits the Church." Paul VI, Homily "In Coena Domini," 3 April 1969.

59. "There are also among us those "schisms" and "separations" which St. Paul sadly denounces in I Corinthians." Paul VI, ibid.

60. It is well-known how Vatican II is now being repudiated by the very men who once gloried in being its leaders. While the Pope declared at the Council's end that it had changed nothing, these men came away determined to "explode" the Council's teachings in the process of actually applying it. Unfortunately the Holy See, with inexplicable haste, approved and even seemingly encouraged through Consilium an ever-increasing infidelity to the Council. This infidelity went from changes in mere form (Latin, Gregorian Chant, suppression of the ancient rites, etc.) all the way to changes in substance which the Novus Ordo sanctions. To the disastrous consequences we have attempted to point out here, we must add those which, with an even greater effect psychologically, will affect the Church's discipline and teaching authority by undermining the respect and docility owed the Holy See.

= = =

This text is part of the Internet Modern History Sourcebook. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts for introductory level classes in modern European and World history.

Unless otherwise indicated the specific electronic form of the document is copyright. Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. If you do reduplicate the document, indicate the source. No permission is granted for commercial use of the Sourcebook.

© Paul Halsall, January 1999

= = =

Postscript

It is very troubling to witness liturgical decadence. This blogger left his former diocesan Catholic home when liturgical antics became unbearable to the point of crushing. This blogger served as a choir director for some 19 years for Novus Ordo liturgies, and volunteered as an altar server for at least twenty years before giving up and moving on. Yours truly served along with many good priests, lay men and lay women. Those same fellow dedicated servants of the Liturgy were, however, often at the mercy of others far less dedicated to reverent and dignified celebrations of the Novus Ordo Mass. In our neck of the woods, diocesan liturgies are, like many places, typically banal at best and more often circuses characterized by the usual deficiencies: cheap tunes sung by well meaning singers to silent congregations; celebrants preaching in highly affected voices treating congregations to weak wit and carelessly prepared homilies that often sound like tributes to Me-Myself-and-I; communicants treating the Body of Christ with casual indifference or, worse, dropping the Host with little concern for their infraction.

Surely any honest witness to the deplorable state of diocesan liturgies can appreciate the prescience of Cardinal Ottaviani, et al. To repeat a paragraph:

To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries stood as a sign and pledge of unity in worship, [60] and to replace it with another liturgy which, due to the countless liberties it implicitly authorizes, cannot but be a sign of division--a liturgy which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic Faith--is, we feel bound in conscience to proclaim, an incalculable error.

One might be forgiven for risking the assumption of placing a smile on the face of Cardinal Ottaviani had he lived to witness the advent of Divine Worship, the Mass of the Anglicanorum Coetibus personal ordinariates.

Monsignor Entwistle, Ordinary-emeritus of the Personal Ordinariate of Our Lady of the Southern Cross, in an interview some years ago speaking on Divine Worship, captured what all liturgical forms should be:

There is a poetry in the language, there is a rhythm to the language and somehow that connects with people’s desire and search for truth, and beauty and holiness.

We do not triumph the glories of Divine Worship merely to pour salt in the wounds of our brethren. Ordinariate Catholics, by continuing to celebrate reverently the sacred rites, are rightly inviting diocesan Catholics to join in the worship of Almighty God with due respect for His majesty and glory. If diocesan Catholics need a witness closer to their own liturgical form to inspire them to embrace renewal, perhaps they might consider the witness offered by/at the Oxford Oratory, where the Novus Ordo Mass is celebrated with dignity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGVJdCAPlHY