July 11, 2004
vol 15, no. 158

More "Not So" Ordinary Time

    A Comparison of the Propers of the Traditional Latin Mass and the Novus Ordo

    by Kevin M. Tierney


      Editor's Note: This series on the Propers of the Mass features the apologetics of Kevin M. Tierney in this special feature simply called "Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi" which, of course, translated means roughly how one prays is how one believes. As you can see the differences between the two are as clear as black and white. One, the Latin Mass is full and reverent, the Novus Ordo sterile and bland. It needs innovation and novelty to spice things up. The Latin Mass merely depends on the Divine. This series compares the Propers of the synthetic Novus Ordo with the absolute Propers of the Traditional Latin Mass to show all that the NOM comes up far, far inferior, if not worse. Many might place the blame on the venom of the vernacular, but we all know what vipers injected this poison. It must be sucked out and spit out forever. Hopefully this series will give readers motivation to expedite that process in the counter-revolution dedicated to taking back the Mystical Body of Christ for Christ! He focuses today on the Sixth Sunday After Pentecost and the 15th Sunday in Ordinary Time.

Editor's Note: For the Traditional SUNDAY MASS with the Latin included, see "Dóminus fortitúdo"

    Traditional Proper compared to
    the Novus Ordo

    The Gospels for today are totally different with the Traditional Gospel from Mark on the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes and the Novus Ordo Gospel from Luke on the Good Samaritan and so, because it is impossible to compare them, I shall not focus too much on the accounts by Mark and Luke, but rather on those prayers that are more similar to show how different they really are. For in actuality, New Order Catholics are all trying to be Good Samaritans today on a humanist level without realizing the why and the graces therein derived through the merits of Jesus Christ's propitiatory Sacrifice on the Cross for us. Because so many fail to understand this their true knowledge of the faith and appreciation of the Traditional Latin Mass is disappearing as fast as the multitudes devoured the loaves and the fishes. Yes, there is a lesson to be learned in the differences after all.

    In today's collect in the Novus Ordo, it is prayed that the light of truth guides us all to Christ, and that all of us who follow Him reject what is contrary to the Gospel. Part of that truth is understanding the proper nature of the Mass, what that Mass is, what it does, and what it teaches. With this in mind, we shall examine the two liturgies, and see which one better leads us to Christ.

    As is the custom in this series, The Traditional Mass will be marked by TM and be in blue type , the Novus Ordo Missae by NOM and in maroon type, as in marooned by synthetic novelty). Since there is no real negative difference between the choice of the Introits for both liturgies, we shall move on to comparing Collects.

    O God of all power and might, Who art the giver of all good things; implant in our hearts the love of Thy name, increase in us true religion, nourish us with all goodness and by Thy mercy keep us in the same. Through Our Lord…... (TM, Collect)

    God our Father, your light of truth guides us to the way of Christ. May all who follow him reject what is contrary to the gospel. We ask this through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen. (NOM, Collect)

    As has become rather custom, we once again notice more clarity from the Rite of Tradition. God is portrayed as a God of power and might, Whom all good things come from. It talks about God implanting certain things without our souls, and those things having consequences, namely an increase in true religion and love of His name. Conversely, the Novus Ordo talks more about the action of what man is doing, not what God is doing. It asks that we reject all that is contrary to the Gospel, but doesn't talk about how God implants that truth within us so that we know what is true and what is false. We have a God Who actively protects those whom are His people, as the Traditional Introit states, again showing the harmony that one simply will not find in the Novus Ordo.

    Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin may be destroyed, to the end that we may serve sin no longer. For he that is dead is justified from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall live also together with Christ: Knowing that Christ rising again from the dead, dieth now no more, death shall no more have dominion over him. For in that he died to sin, he died once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God: So do you also reckon, that you are dead to sin, but alive unto God, in Christ Jesus our Lord. (TM, Epistle Romans 6:3-11)

    Moses said to the people: "If only you would heed the voice of the LORD, your God, and keep his commandments and statutes that are written in this book of the law, when you return to the LORD, your God, with all your heart and all your soul. "For this command that I enjoin on you today is not too mysterious and remote for you. It is not up in the sky, that you should say, 'Who will go up in the sky to get it for us and tell us of it, that we may carry it out?' Nor is it across the sea, that you should say, 'Who will cross the sea to get it for us and tell us of it, that we may carry it out?' No, it is something very near to you, already in your mouths and in your hearts; you have only to carry it out." (NOM, 1st Reading, Deuteronomy 30:10-14)

    Keeping in line with earlier parts of the liturgy, the Traditional Rite talks about how because of God's action (baptism) we are dead to the old way, and walk in new life in Christ Jesus. Furthermore, if we die with Him in baptism, we shall rise, just as He rose from the dead. These are very comforting words indeed. The Novus Ordo also offers for the faithful some very comforting words, this is true. God's laws in the end, are able to be known, for they are right on our minds and hearts. It is just up to us to act upon this. Both are exhortations, yet one omits any reference to a supernatural event, namely baptism and most importantly, the Resurrection. It is quite en vogue with many in the Novus Ordo today to teach that the Resurrection didn't actually happen. This was a later addition, a corruption if you will, of the Scriptures and of true religion.

    I would submit that the reading in the Novus Ordo does not give us the whole story, that being the context of what the passage actually says. God recalls the choice he gives Israel in verse 15, and let us pick up with verse 16:

    If you obey the commandments of the LORD, your God, which I enjoin on you today, loving him, and walking in his ways, and keeping his commandments, statutes and decrees, you will live and grow numerous, and the LORD, your God, will bless you in the land you are entering to occupy. If, however, you turn away your hearts and will not listen, but are led astray and adore and serve other gods, I tell you now that you will certainly perish; you will not have a long life on the land which you are crossing the Jordan to enter and occupy. I call heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live, by loving the LORD, your God, heeding his voice, and holding fast to him. For that will mean life for you, a long life for you to live on the land which the LORD swore he would give to your fathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob." (Deuteronomy 30:16-20)

    Once again, we see a God who is anything but neutral. After giving the prescription to follow His law, God outlines what happens to those who disobey His law. The results are not very pretty, as one perishes, and they are stripped of the inheritance promised to them. Our inheritance is contingent upon our faithfulness. Another idea en vogue is the idea that the God is still obligated to grant several promises to the Jews as a people, rather than the Traditional understanding, that all of God's promises to the Jews were fulfilled in the Catholic Church, the true heirs of Abraham according to promise. Hence, it would then reason that because of the unfaithfulness by many people of the Old Covenant, they are not deserving of the promises of Abraham. They do not deserve the land that was given to their forefathers, since while their fathers were obedient to God, they were not. Did the High Priests not serve another God, when they turned down the True King and swore allegiance to Caesar? That faithful remnant of those in the Old Covenant who chose Christ were granted the blessing. Those who did not choose Christ received the curse. The point of the earlier verses 10-14 was to demonstrate one could not claim they were ignorant of God's law, or could not know it, for God tells them where it truly resides, on them, all they need to do is carry it out.

    Here the Novus Ordo engages in what has been called "a shortening of the hand of God." While always speaking of the positive aspect of the law, it never talks about the negative aspect, that the punishment is for non-compliance. Whenever a directive is given from God, there are always three parts to it, the actual command, what happens when it is obeyed, and what happens when it is transgressed. The Novus Ordo will spend much time talking about the second part, but certainly not the third. In the Church of dialogue, the Church does not use her "justice" but rather the "arms of mercy". First, this assumes that punishments in and of themselves are not acts of mercy, which they are. They are punishments meant to wake people up. As St. Paul tells us, he "turned him over to Satan so he would stop sinning." Unless you are a Traditional Catholic of course, there are no negative repercussions for failure to comply with the Novus Ordo "rulings" (one cannot call them commands, but rather, what Novus Ordinarians perceive to be commands.)

    We shall now examine the creative editing done for the Psalms in the Novus Ordo. For the Jews of their time, the purpose of the Psalms was more than carrying just a good tune. The Psalms they sang had within them rich doctrinal truth, and in many cases, foretold of greater events. The Church likewise sees in these Psalms the foretelling of the New Covenant, and we look at just how gracious God was to those under the Old Covenant, in constantly providing them insight to the life ahead of them.

    Yet the Novus Ordo attempts constantly to demonstrate that what we have traditionally understood in the Old Covenant pointing to the New Covenant is not true. For the Old way that Paul said could not save, the Novus Ordo states that it is salvific for those who believe in it, hence, we have two orders of salvation. This in itself is a contradiction as Paul clearly stated in Galatians 1: 8-10. While the Novus Ordo does not clearly teach this "two orders of salvation" explicitly, this is all the buzz within "theological circles" of the Church since Vatican II. And as we shall see, nothing will stop the New Theologians from pushing their New Theology, even if it means gutting Scripture in the process. Observe with what the Novus Ordo omits in her Responsorial Psalm. How can such a large chunk of omitted text be a casual omission? Anything omitted from the Novus Ordo shall appear in bold.

    But I pray to you, LORD, for the time of your favor. God, in your great kindness answer me with your constant help. Rescue me from the mire; do not let me sink. Rescue me from my enemies and from the watery depths. Do not let the floodwaters overwhelm me, nor the deep swallow me, nor the mouth of the pit close over me. Answer me, LORD, in your generous love; in your great mercy turn to me. Do not hide your face from your servant; in my distress hasten to answer me. Come and ransom my life; because of my enemies redeem me. You know my reproach, my shame, my disgrace; before you stand all my foes. Insult has broken my heart, and I am weak; I looked for compassion, but there was none, for comforters, but found none. Instead they put gall in my food; for my thirst they gave me vinegar. Make their own table a snare for them, a trap for their friends. Make their eyes so dim they cannot see; keep their backs ever feeble. Pour out your wrath upon them; let the fury of your anger overtake them. Make their camp desolate, with none to dwell in their tents. For they pursued the one you struck, added to the pain of the one you wounded. Add that to their crimes; let them not attain to your reward. Strike them from the book of the living; do not count them among the just! But I am afflicted and in pain; let your saving help protect me, God, that I may praise God's name in song and glorify it with thanksgiving. My song will please the LORD more than oxen, more than bullocks with horns and hooves: "See, you lowly ones, and be glad; you who seek God, take heart! For the LORD hears the poor, does not spurn those in bondage. Let the heavens and the earth sing praise, the seas and whatever moves in them!" God will rescue Zion, rebuild the cities of Judah. God's servants shall dwell in the land and possess it; it shall be the heritage of their descendants; those who love God's name shall dwell there. (Psalm 69:14-37)

    If this is just another casual omission, one has to wonder why one of the main points of Psalm 69 is part of that omission. It leaves out God's servant humbly crying to Him for assistance, as those who even "from the book of the living" and who would normally attain to God's reward fiercely persecute God's servant. As a result, they lose the inheritance promised to them, and are struck from the book of life. Sound familiar? This is an all too common strain in the Old Testament, of those within the Covenant attacking and killing God's prophets. The exact same premise was omitted as in the first reading, that of those who were originally of the calling, but did not receive the reward promised to them. That reward is given to those in the Church, not outside it. For the Second Reading, we see St. Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, 1:15-20. Likewise, The Gospels shall be listed primarily for reference purpose only, as we shall then move on to later prayers in the Mass.

    In those days again, when there was a great multitude, and had nothing to eat; calling his disciples together, he saith to them: I have compassion on the multitude, for behold they have now been with me three days, and have nothing to eat. And if I shall send them away fasting to their home, they will faint in the way; for some of them came from afar off. And his disciples answered him: From whence can any one fill them here with bread in the wilderness? And he asked them: How many loaves have ye? Who said: Seven. And taking the seven loaves, giving thanks, he broke, and gave to his disciples for to set before them; and they set them before the people. And they had a few little fishes; and he blessed them, and commanded them to be set before them. And they did eat and were filled; and they took up that which was left of the fragments, seven baskets. And they that had eaten were about four thousand; and he sent them away. (Gospel, Mark 8:1-9, TM)

    There was a scholar of the law who stood up to test him and said, "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?" Jesus said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read it?" He said in reply, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself." He replied to him, "You have answered correctly; do this and you will live." But because he wished to justify himself, he said to Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" Jesus replied, "A man fell victim to robbers as he went down from Jerusalem to Jericho. They stripped and beat him and went off leaving him half-dead. A priest happened to be going down that road, but when he saw him, he passed by on the opposite side. Likewise a Levite came to the place, and when he saw him, he passed by on the opposite side. But a Samaritan traveler who came upon him was moved with compassion at the sight. He approached the victim, poured oil and wine over his wounds and bandaged them. Then he lifted him up on his own animal, took him to an inn, and cared for him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper with the instruction, 'Take care of him. If you spend more than what I have given you, I shall repay you on my way back.' Which of these three, in your opinion, was neighbor to the robbers' victim?" He answered, "The one who treated him with mercy." Jesus said to him, "Go and do likewise." (Gospel, NOM, Luke 10:25-37)

    Be Appeased, O Lord, by our supplications, and graciously accept these offerings of Thy people: neither suffering the hope of anyone to be in vain, nor his prayer to remain unheard, that we may obtain that for which we faithfully pray. Through our Lord… (TM, Secret)

    Lord, accept the gifts of your Church. May this Eucharist help us grow in holiness and faith. We ask this in the name of Jesus the Lord. Amen. (NOM, Prayer over the Gifts)

    We see that the Traditional Mass starts out it's secret as it has many times, asking God to be appeased because of what we are doing. That is it speaks of a propitiatory nature. It explains what the sacrifice does to God that is it appeases God of His wrath. The Novus Ordo doesn't ask that God be appeased, but just to accept the gifts. It speaks of what the sacrifice does to man, again focusing on the expiatory nature of the Sacrifice.

    Ladies and gentleman, a Protestant can state that by an offering of praise that he grows in holiness and faith. What he cannot say is what he is offering will appease God.

    Grant, O Lord, that we who have been filled with Thy gifts may be cleansed by their virtue and strengthened by their help. Through Our Lord… (Postcommunion Prayer, TM)

    Lord, by our sharing in this mystery of the Eucharist, let your saving love grow within us. Grant this through Christ our Lord. Amen.< (NOM, Post Communion)

    The Novus Ordo certainly asks that something be accomplished as a result of "sharing in this Eucharist" but doesn't state what it is. Nobody really knows what it is. The Traditional Rite doesn't care for such open ended ambiguity, but rather states that we be cleansed by the virtue of the sacrament, and given strength by its help. This sacrament is definetly doing something in the faithful.

    It is not clear whether or not it is the Blessed Sacrament which does the activity or not in the Novus Ordo. For all we know, just as a Calvinist could do, they could pray to God that after receiving communion His love grows within us. Yet certainly they would not think by saying this prayer that it is the Blessed Sacrament itself that accomplishes these goals. Yet as we know from one of Paul VI's most trusted aides, the New Mass itself was made to resemble a Protestant liturgy "as close as possible."

    A protestant liturgy rejects the sacramental teaching of the Eucharist while viewing the Eucharist as an important event. It is certainly not The Body and Blood of Christ under the appearances of bread and wine to those who embrace heresy. Nor is it to them a sacrament that inwardly changes the individual in their justification. Protestant thinking certainly rejects it's propitiatory nature, and a host of many other things. Is it any wonder then that today we have Catholics confused on just what the Eucharist is, who should receive it, and what it does? Even bishops? I submit this change is not surprising at all, since the law of prayer determines the law of belief. Hence, the purpose of this column to remind all: Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi.

Kevin Tierney

    July 11, 2004
    vol 15, no. 158
    Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi