Editor's Note: This series on the Propers of the Mass features the apologetics of Kevin M. Tierney. Helping Kevin launch this project was Jacob Michael, but now that it is up and running Jacob, with a heavier work-load and more in demand on other necessary projects, has turned it over to Kevin full-time. We are confident Kevin will do an excellent job 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 will compare 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! We continue with the fifth installment of the Disciplines of Lent:
On the Fourth Sunday of Lent, also known as Laetare Sunday, the Catholic faithful must once again prepare their mind, body, and soul for the trials of Lent. The devil steps up his temptation, attempting to get us to turn away from what we have started, since many may think they grow tired of their fast. Likewise, this is what satan does to those who come to the Faith, he will tempt them in due time to fall after receiving the knowledge of truth. As we continue, we must once again look at which liturgy gives us the reassurance that our fasts, our disciplines, are not in vain, and that in the end, these protect us from the devil, with the help of God's grace.
As is the custom in this series, The Traditional Mass will be marked by TM and both in Latin (in blue type) and English (in black type), the Novus Ordo Missae by NOM and in maroon type, as in marooned by synthetic novelty) We shall begin, as always, with the Introit:
INTROIT: Isais 66: 10-11; Psalm 121: 1
Laetare, Jerúsalem: et convéntum fácite, omnes qui dilígitis eam: gaudéte cum lætítia, qui in tristítia fuístis: ut exsultétis, et satiémini ab ubéribus consolatiónis vestræ. V. Lætátus sum in his, quæ dicta sunt mihi: in domum Dómini íbimus. V. Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto. Sicut erat in principio et nunc et semper et in saecula saeculorum. Amen. |
Rejoice, O Jerusalem, and come together all you that love her; rejoice with joy, you that have been in sorrow: that you may exult, and be filled from the breasts of your consolation. V. I rejoiced at the things that were said to me: We shall go into the house of the Lord.
V. Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, as it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. |
" Rejoice, O Jerusalem, and come together all you that love her; rejoice with joy, you that have been in sorrow: that you may exult, and be filled from the breasts of your consolation. I rejoiced at the things that were said to me: We shall go into the house of the Lord.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost, as it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen. (Then repeat "Rejoice")" (NOM, Introit, Isaiah 66: 10-11; Psalm 121: 1)
The Introits of both respective liturgies are the same, basically, as I pointed out in previous installments because there is no reference to repentance, atonement, fasting, or or guilt of self. Thus, I shall continue with the collect and the Opening Prayer:
Concéde, quæsumus, omnípotens Deus: ut qui ex mérito nostræ actiónis afflígimur, tuæ grátiæ consolatióne respirémus. Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, Qui Tecum vivit et regnat in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus, |
Per omnia saecula saeculorum.
Grant, we beseech Thee, O almighty God, that we, who for our evil deeds justly deserve to be punished, by the comfort of Thy grace may mercifully be relieved.
Through Jesus Christ our Lord, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, one God |
Forever and ever.
"Father of peace,
we are joyful in your Word,
your Son Jesus Christ,
who reconciles us to you.
Let us hasten toward Easter
with the eagerness of faith and love.
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, Opening Prayer)"
In the process of liturgical reform, the Novus Ordo felt that the way to better bring about the significance of the Traditional Collect was to do away with any mentioning of being chastened by suffering, the fact we are guilty before God, and the fact that God's grace provides comfort to us even in spite of our fallen natures. In short, as was noted in the Ottaviani Intervention, the Novus Ordo Missae reformed a prayer by completely scrapping it and inventing something altogether new. When one reforms something, one takes what was already there, and improves upon it. You do not bring about greater understanding of prayer 'A' by scrapping it and introducing prayer 'B.' There is every reason to recognize that anything that was omitted again had something to do with us being sinners who deserve condemnation due to our fallen natures. The Novus Ordo does not present the Church as struggling against satan here on earth, but that those faithful on earth have already triumphed over satan, so no struggling is necessary, we need only eagerly await the Resurrection.
For those who argue that the Novus Ordo is authentic liturgical reform, they must answer these questions. It is a fact that these two prayers are as different as night is from day, and hence, cannot be an act of reform, but a complete overhaul. As they say, facts are stubborn things, and the faithful must consider these facts in their decision of which liturgy to attend. Think about it, your immortal soul is at stake.
EPISTLE: Galatians 4: 22-31
Léctio Epístolæ beáti Pauli Apóstoli ad Gálatas.
Fratres: Scriptum est: Quóniam Abraham duos fílios hábuit: unum de ancílla, et unum de líbera. Sed qui de ancílla, secúndum carnem natus est: qui autem de líbera, per repromissiónem: quæ sunt per allegoríam dicta. Hæc enim sunt duo testaménta. Unum quidem in monte Sina, in servitútem génerans: quæ est Agar: Sina enim mons est in Arábia, qui conjúnctus est ei, quæ nunc est Jerúsalem, et servit cum fíliis suis. Illa autem, quæ sursum est Jerúsalem, líbera est, quæ est mater nostra. Scriptum est enim: Lætáre, stérilis, quæ non paris: erúmpe, et clama, quæ non párturis: quia multi fílii desértæ, magis quam ejus, quæ habet virum. Nos autem, fratres, secúndum Isaac promissiónis fílii sumus. Sed quómodo tunc is, qui secúndum carnem natus fúerat, persequebátur eum, qui secúndum spíritum: ita et nunc. Sed quid dicit Scriptúra? Ejice ancíllam et fílium ejus: non enim hæres erit fílius ancíllæ cum fílio líberæ. Itaque, fratres, non sumus ancíllæ fílii, sed líberæ: qua libertáte Christus nos liberávit.
A reading from the Epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul to the Galatians.
Brethren: it is written that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bond-woman, and the other by a free-woman. But he who was of the bond-woman was born according to the flesh; but he of the free-woman was by promise. Which things are said by an allegory. For these are the two testaments; the one from Mount Sinai, engendering unto bondage, which is Agar: for Sinai is a mountain in Arabia, which hath affinity to that Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children: but that Jerusalem which is above is free, which is our mother. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not; for many are the children of the desolate, more than of her that hath a husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born according to the flesh persecuted him that was after the spirit, so also it is now. But what saith the Scriptures? : Cast out the bond-woman and her son; for the son of the bond-woman shall not be heir with the son of the free-woman. So then, brethren, we are not the children of the bond-woman, but of the free; by the freedom wherewith Christ hath made us free.
Thanks be to God.
"The LORD said to Joshua,
"Today I have removed the reproach of Egypt from you."
While the Israelites were encamped at Gilgal on the plains of Jericho,
they celebrated the Passover
on the evening of the fourteenth of the month.
On the day after the Passover,
they ate of the produce of the land
in the form of unleavened cakes and parched grain.
On that same day after the Passover,
on which they ate of the produce of the land, the manna ceased.
No longer was there manna for the Israelites,
who that year ate of the yield of the land of Canaan." (NOM, First Reading, Joshua 5:9a 10-12, verse 10 may be omitted.)
One wonders what this has to do with the Lenten season when one reads the Novus Ordo first reading. It speaks of the Institution of the Passover. The fact that this was a feast celebrated in a structured cycle, a Jewish holy day of Obligation if you will, may be omitted. To mention a structured cycle is the antithesis of the Novus Ordo, which is always focused on constant changing.
The reading of the Traditional Epistle takes a far different angle. It reminds Christians that they are the children of promise from Isaac. This is a message that no doubt reassured those Christians who received this epistle who were being tempted by the Judaizers to return to Judaism, and a covenant which could not save. Likewise, when the devil tempts us to forsake the smaller things such as our disciplines, in an attempt to start us down the slippery slope of forsaking the Faith (as the devil is in the details, and prefers to start out small), we must remember we are the children of promise, whom all the promises of the Old Covenant were dedicated to. Gone is this exhortation in the Novus Ordo from any of the three liturgical cycles for the Fourth Sunday of Lent. Again, to better signify that which existed meant to be scrapped and to give the people something new altogether.
For the Second reading, I will only note the verse which is optional is that God has reconciled Himself to us through Christ. Many will begin to think that this speaks against universal salvation; something even attendees of the Novus Ordo have admitted is quite a prevalent view in the minds of many today. Why is it so many have forgotten the dogma Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus? For those who aren't familiar with the Latin, translated it states something we as Catholics must believe: Outside of the Church there is No Salvation! The next instance of this being blurred comes in the Gospel readings, as there are some striking differences. Therefore we shall skip for this week the Gradual and Tract, the latter of which is totally ignored in the Novus Ordo.
GOSPEL: John 6: 1-15
Sequentia sancti Evangelii secundum Joannem. |
In illo témpore: Abiit Jesus trans mare Galilææ, quod est Tiberíadis: et sequebátur eum multitúdo magna, quia vidébant signa, quæ faciébat super his, qui infirmabántur. Súbiit ergo in montem Jesus: et ibi sedébat cum discípulis suis. Erat autem próximum Pascha dies festus Judæórum. Cum sublevásset ergo óculos Jesus, et vidísset quia multitúdo máxima venit ad eum, dixit ad Philíppum: "Unde emémus panes, ut mandúcent hi?" Hoc autem dicébat tentans eum: ipse enim sciébat quid esset factúrus. Respóndit ei Philíppus: Ducentórum denariórum panes non suffíciunt eis, ut unusquísque módicum quid accípiat. Dicit ei unus ex discípulis ejus, Andréas frater Simónis Petri: Est puer unus hic, qui habet quinque panes hordeáceos, et duos pisces: sed hæc quid sunt inter tantos? Dixit ergo Jesus: "Fácite hómines discúmbere." Erat autem fnum multum in loco. Discubuérunt ergo viri, número quasi quinque míllia. Accépit ergo Jesus panes: et cum grátias egísset, distríbuit discumbéntibus: simíliter et ex píscibus quantum volébant. Ut autem impléti sunt, dixit discípulis suis: "Collígite quæ superavérunt fragménta, ne péreant." Collegérunt ergo, et implevérunt duódecim cóphinos fragmentórum ex quinque pánibus hordeáceis, quæ superfuérunt his, qui manducáverant. Illi ergo hómines cum vidíssent quod Jesus fécerat signum, dicébant: Quia hic est vere Prophéta, qui ventúrus est in mundum. Jesus ergo cum cognovísset, quia ventúri essent ut ráperent eum, et fácerent eum regem, fugit íterum in montem ipse solus.
Laus tibi, Christi
The continuation of the holy Gospel according to John. |
At that time, Jesus went over the Sea of Galilee which is that of Tiberias; and a great multitude followed Him, because they saw the miracles which He did on them that were diseased. Jesus therefore went up into a mountain, and there He sat with His disciples. Now the pasch, the festival day of the Jews, was near at hand. When Jesus therefore had lifted up His eyes, and seen that a very great multitude cometh to Him, He said to Philip, "Whence shall we buy bread that these may eat?" And this He said to try him; for He Himself knew what He would do. Philip answered Him, Two hundred penny-worth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one may take a little. One of His disciples, Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, saith to Him, There is a boy here that hath five barley loaves and two fishes; but what are these among so many? Then Jesus said: "Make the men sit down." Now there was much grass in the place. The men therefore sat down, in number about five thousand. And Jesus took the loaves; and when He had given thanks, He distributed to them that were set down. In like manner also of the fishes, as much as they would. And when they were filled, He said to His disciples, "Gather up the fragments that remain, lest they be lost." They gathered up therefore, and filled twelve baskets with the fragments of the five barley loaves, which remained over and above to them that had eaten. Now those men, when they had seen what a miracle Jesus had done, said, This is of a truth the prophet that is to come into the world. Jesus therefore, when He knew that they would come to take Him by force and make Him king, fled again into the mountain Himself alone.
"Tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to listen to Jesus,
but the Pharisees and scribes began to complain, saying,
"This man welcomes sinners and eats with them."
So to them Jesus addressed this parable:
"A man had two sons, and the younger son said to his father,
'Father give me the share of your estate that should come to me.'
So the father divided the property between them.
After a few days, the younger son collected all his belongings
and set off to a distant country
where he squandered his inheritance on a life of dissipation.
When he had freely spent everything,
a severe famine struck that country,
and he found himself in dire need.
So he hired himself out to one of the local citizens
who sent him to his farm to tend the swine.
And he longed to eat his fill of the pods on which the swine fed,
but nobody gave him any.
Coming to his senses he thought,
'How many of my father's hired workers
have more than enough food to eat,
but here am I, dying from hunger.
I shall get up and go to my father and I shall say to him,
"Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you.
I no longer deserve to be called your son;
treat me as you would treat one of your hired workers.'"
So he got up and went back to his father.
While he was still a long way off,
his father caught sight of him, and was filled with compassion.
He ran to his son, embraced him and kissed him.
His son said to him,
'Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you;
I no longer deserve to be called your son.'
But his father ordered his servants,
'Quickly bring the finest robe and put it on him;
put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet.
Take the fattened calf and slaughter it.
Then let us celebrate with a feast,
because this son of mine was dead, and has come to life again;
he was lost, and has been found.'
Then the celebration began.
Now the older son had been out in the field
and, on his way back, as he neared the house,
he heard the sound of music and dancing.
He called one of the servants and asked what this might mean.
The servant said to him,
'Your brother has returned
and your father has slaughtered the fattened calf
because he has him back safe and sound.'
He became angry,
and when he refused to enter the house,
his father came out and pleaded with him.
He said to his father in reply,
'Look, all these years I served you
and not once did I disobey your orders;
yet you never gave me even a young goat to feast on with my friends.
But when your son returns
who swallowed up your property with prostitutes,
for him you slaughter the fattened calf.'
He said to him,
'My son, you are here with me always;
everything I have is yours.
But now we must celebrate and rejoice,
because your brother was dead and has come to life again;
he was lost and has been found.'" (NOM Gospel, Luke 15 1-3, 11-32, verse 32 may be omitted)
The Traditional reading is quite a reassuring one for our time during Lent. It is the miracle of Christ feeding five thousand with barely any food. As I once heard during a homily about this passage, what little we have of ourselves, in the hands of God, can change the world. As we are tempted, we should always remember that. Suffer those temptations and put them towards say somebody's conversion. That little you give, God can work wonders with. In a time of temptation, which Lent no doubt is, this is something we must remember. Since the implicit message is that God will work through those deficiencies we have, that could be one reason the Novus Ordo dropped the reading. There is another reason, and this becomes clear when we discover what the Novus Ordo replaces it with. The passage was cut because it dealt with a supernatural act of God, a miracle if you will. As has been noted before, when it comes to the issues of miracles, they are always optional in the Novus Ordo.
The tale of the Prodigal Son is one who passed from death to life, just as we all do when we repent of our wrongdoings and call upon the name of the Lord. The son had to show pure contrition for his wrongdoings, something that is rarely stressed, if ever, in the Novus Ordo anymore. What is more important is that this transformation from death to life is truly something of the supernatural. When one sees the pieces of the puzzle and begins to put them together, and understands the realities of today (in that liberalism is something which is invading our Church at full steam), one understands why the former reading was cut, and this reading was chosen, and why the omission occurred. By omitting this verse, one might not receive the information that had the son not returned and repented, the Father would have viewed him as dead, just like we are in danger of condemnation if we also choose not to repent. It is negative theology we talked about earlier; something the Novus Ordo does everything it can to omit.
OFFERTORY: Psalm 134: 3, 6
Laudáte Dóminum, quia benígnus est: psállite nómini ejus, quóniam suávis est: ómnia quæcúmque vóluit, fecit in cælo et in terra.
Praise ye the Lord, for He is good: sing ye to His name, for He is sweet: whatsoever He pleased He hath done in Heaven and in earth.
we offer you these gifts
which bring us peace and joy.
Increase our reverence by this eucharist,
and bring salvation to the world.
We ask this in the name of Jesus the Lord. Amen." (NOM, Prayer over the Gifts)
Sacrifíciis præséntibus, Dómine, quæsumus, inténde placátus: ut et devotióni nostræ profíciant et salúti. Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum, Filius tuus Dominus noster, Qui Tecum vivit et regnat in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus,
Per omnia saecula saeculorum.
May this victim, we beseech Thee, O Lord, cleanse away our sins, sanctifying Thy servants in both soul and body for the celebration of this sacrifice. Through our Lord Jesus Christ Thy Son. Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, one God |
Forever and ever.
We first note that what the Traditional Secret calls a sacrifice, the Novus Ordo refers to it as a "gift." The Eucharist is certainly a gift, nobody disputes this, but one must also remember it is a sacrifice. While the Novus Ordo mentions this elsewhere, but I reiterate once again: repetition is the mother of all learning. What benefit to the faithful does this change have? Furthermore, one notes that the topic of God being appeased by this offering is entirely done away with in this prayer. As before, the topic of propitiation is something that is scant to be found, very sorely missing. While the Novus Ordo focuses on the rewards of that sacrifice, they never explain why there are those rewards, because by that sacrifice, God is appeased of His wrath, which we all deserve. Not to acknowledge this is Protestant in every way!
The Communion verses are both the same, another rarity, so let us continue on to the Postcommunion.
Da nobis, quæsumus, miséricors Deus: ut sancta tua, quibus incessánter explémur, sincéris tractémus obséquiis, et fidéli semper mente sumámus.
Per Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum. Qui vivis et regnas in cum Deo Patri in unitate Spiritus Sancti, Deus, unum Deum.
Per omnia saecula saeculorum.
Merciful God, who ceasest not to lavish upon us the riches of Thy sacraments; grant that we may ever draw near to Thine Altar with deepest reverence and with faith unwavering.
Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Who livest and reignest, with God the Father, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, one God |
For ever and ever.
You enlighten all who come into the world.
Fill our hearts with the light of your gospel,
that our thoughts may please you,
and our love be sincere.
Grant this through Christ our Lord. Amen."
(Prayer after Communion, NOM)
The Novus Ordo does not mention these sacraments as coming from God's mercy in abundance. It also fails to talk about the fact that these sacraments will give us grace to approach God more reverently. It talks about after we hear the Gospel, may we do these things. This is one of the classic equivocations of the Novus Ordo, confusing the Liturgy of the Word and the Eucharist as essentially equal, so that the faithful are nourished by instruction and food. We are fed in both areas, yet in an entirely different manner. As magnificent as the reading of Scripture is, that reading does not impart grace into the souls of the faithful. The reception of the Sacrament does impart grace. The Novus Ordo seems to focus on the light of the Gospel, and not the reception of the Sacrament. One cannot help but wonder how this sounds any different from a Protestant understanding, in which the big focus is on the reading of Scripture, not the reception of the sacrament.
For the Protestant mindset the sacrament may be symbolic, and have deep meaning, but the true moment is when the Scriptures are proclaimed to the faithful. Whereas for the Catholic, both are necessary, yet both cover different aspects. Protestants object to the sacramental aspect, and it seems as if this prayer after communion waters down this truth in ambiguity. As faithful Catholics, are we entitled to only a Mass with ambiguity that sacrifices precise definition on the altar of ecumenism, or are we entitled to the unadulterated Catholic faith which entails the fullness of the Holy Sacrifice? I leave that question for the readers to decide.
NEXT: Comparing the Propers of Lent: Passion Sunday