| Chapter Four |
THE "NEW MASS"
See EDITOR'S NOTE for an explanation of this work.
"And they took the bullock which he gave them, and dressed it; and they called on the name of Baal from morning even till noon, saying: O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered: and they leaped over the altar that they had made. J. "Ecumenism"
And when it was now noon, Elias jested at them, saying: Cry with a louder voice: for he is a good, and perhaps he is talking, or is in an inn, or on a journey, or perhaps he is asleep, and must be awaked. So they cried with a loud voice, and cut themselves after their manner, with knives and lancets, till they were all covered with blood." 3 Kings 18: 26-28
Protestants need take no comfort at seeing the Mass being "accommodated" to their beliefs, however. The final purpose of the Revolution is their subversion also, as many of them know all too well. For its essential motif is not Protestant, but ecumenical. Nor is it the true ecumenism which the Church learned early in its history, that of living at peace with non-believers. Even of working with them for truly humane goals, hoping and laboring at the same time to bring them to the knowledge of the hoped-for reunion of various schismatic and heretical Christian bodies with the true Fold of Christ, the Catholic Church. However, in keeping with its character, the Revolution has adopted the term for its own treacherous purposes. What it understands by ecumenism is the melting of all religious denominations into the pseudo-religious hash of a universal brotherhood. The Revolution calls for abandoning all doctrinal beliefs and moral imperatives as the way to liberty, the dissolution of all churches and nations for the sake of International Communism, and the subordination of all personal rights, possessions, and dignity as the means to absolute equalitarianism. Instead of God, the Revolution worships "man;" instead of Heaven, it promises an earthly utopia-"the Age of Aquarius;" and instead of virtue, it produces hedonism and utter inhumanity. The so-called "New Mass" is a major step toward the establishment of the universal "Rites of Man," the ritual expression and manifestation of that same spirit which produced the infamous and impudent "Declaration of the Rights of Man" of the French Revolution.
Forever sighing with "love," the "New Mass" frees its participants from the discordant tedium of believing anything. Those who desire to keep their faith are foolish to think they can frequent it and participate in it and fulfill their religious obligations by it, to say nothing of exposing themselves to it, without danger of absorbing its pseudo-pious heterodoxy and its enervating, corruptive anthropocentrism. True Catholics' mere tolerance of the "New Mass" is an assent to its manifold denials. At the "New Mass," what one believes is unimportant, so long as he does not make trouble, so long as he is "sincere," so long as he participates, so long as he allows every form of sacrilege and blasphemy to have its "rightful" place as the "sincere" expression of any of the loving brothers and sisters. Some may believe in the doctrine of Transubstantiation; some may not. Some may believe in Heaven and Hell, in the Catholic Church, in the Divine Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary; some may believe in absolutely nothing, except "life", or "peace," or "love", (or "Om")! "Let us not say," quoth the Flower Children, "It is not important." Rather, let us say, "It is not important enough that our differences of belief should disrupt our brotherly relationship, that it prevent our loving each other." This is to say, in other words, that Divine Truth is less important than human brotherhood.
Adult Catholics haven't caught on yet. They still go to church as if they were attending Mass, still make the same signs of reverence, still keep silence, and still genuflect-whether the Blessed Sacrament is in their churches or not. You may ask, "Well, is it?" I answer, "Who knows?" Does it matter? It may matter to you of course-or let us hope so-but does it matter to the others who are also in attendance? To your priests? To your bishop? To the Pope? If they cared one way or the other would they be a party to the suppression of that Liturgy whose every word, rubric, and sign strove to effect, bear witness to and adore, in as worthy a way as is humanly possible, the True Presence of the Crucified Son of God-regardless of what the world thought of it. Would they be party to the forcible and illicit installation of an Activity from which all these have been peremptorily removed (or made removable at the whim of the "president"), and in which there is not one unequivocal affirmation of this ineffable Mystery-lest, mind you, it unkindly offend the sensibilities of those present whose "faith" most unequivocally denies it? Thus the "ecumenism" of the "New Religion."
Obviously, it is the younger set who understand. For the "New Liturgy" speaks to them. They insist on having fun at the "New Mass." "That's what it's for!" There is a generation gap, you see. The young people and their clerical "soul brothers" are the real members of the "Renewed Church." They do not come for Mass; they gather for a "love-feast." They come for a party; so, is it surprising that they should want to act the part, that they should dress like party-goers (irreligious ones at that), haul in their instruments and their loud-speakers, hire players if necessary, sing their favorite songs, and dance if they feel a need? The generation gap with its complete alienation of many, many young people from true Catholicism, is as real as the abominable Copy is from the True Mass. Great discernment is not required to perceive this. True, many young people consider the antics of the "hippie" crowd extreme, and they secretly disdain the "hippie" clergy. This proves nothing about their own faith. The question is: Do they still believe in the True Church, or would they believe if they knew what it is? Do they accept its moral judgments? Would they accept its authority if it were to begin to command them, as it might? Do they pray as Catholics? No, the most of them have become complete eclectics, claiming for themselves the right and the wisdom to draw their own conclusions and do not imagine God would be less than satisfied. They have become complete subjectivists, and are now the defenseless prey of the Revolution, about which most of them have never heard a word.
The "New Mass" bends towards Protestantism so laboriously that at times it is just plain comical. The handiest example of this fact is the leaving to the decision of the "president" whether to make mention of the names of certain saints, particularly the Apostles and the Roman martyrs. Even though this option is indicated in the "missalettes," undoubtedly many attend the "New Mass" without paying any attention to it. In "Eucharistic Prayer, Form Number One," for instance, brackets thus enclose the names of the following saints:
We honor Joseph, her husband, the apostles and martyrs Peter and Paul, Andrew, (James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Jude; we honor Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian) and all the saints.
Again, after the "Narratio,"
another list is similarly presented:
For ourselves, too, we ask some share in the fellowship of your apostles and martyrs, with John the Baptist, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, (Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter, Felicity, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia) and all the saints.
Perhaps you and I, dear reader, can conjure up a better reason for this unbelievable innovation than I have found in print. The real reason for it, of course, is "ecumenical": Protestants generally accept the fact of the Heavenly beatitude of the Apostles, the Evangelists, St. Stephen and St. Barnabas, because their names are in the Bible. If they do not pray to these glorious persons, they do acknowledge that they are saved. Their problem is an unwillingness to believe that the Church can infallibly declare someone to be in Heaven; consequently, they have no interest in honoring the great Roman martyrs. Our liturgical devisers have none either, needless to say, but they thought it expedient to use the device of making the invocation of these saints optional rather than dropping their names outright, having done enough violence to the Canon of the Mass without this.
The real reason for this option, then, is to cater to Protestants, but this is not admitted in the "Novus Ordo". And it is expected that the ordinary Catholic priest will have another reason for availing himself of this wonderful convenience, he having no desire to compromise an article of faith. The question is, therefore, what other and what good reason could such a priest have for deciding that today he will omit invocation of these thirty-two sainted heroes of our Religion, simple men and women indeed but who once were accused of being extremely dangerous enemies of the Roman Empire and who are not truly and infinitely more dangerous to the forces of Revolution, since they possess a power of intercession and miracles equal to that of some of the angels. Here Father is then, standing at the Table, surrounded by unseen hosts of Seraphim and Cherubim, Principalities and Powers, convinced that he is now in the act of fulfilling the majestic prophecy of Malachy which says:
"For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts." Malachy 1:11
Here he is, a frail little man, all but annihilated by the proximity of such great heavenly presences and the outbursting power of the Sacramental Mystery; he is like Peter, James
on Mount Thabor when Jesus was transfigured before them:
"And…behold a bright cloud overshadowed them. And lo a voice out of the cloud, saying: This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him. And the disciples hearing fell upon their face, and were very much afraid." Matthew 17: 5-6
And now the moment has arrived when this small being must decide whether he will abbreviate the prayers and ignore the saints, who themselves are within his whisper's reach and who listen for their assignment to assist him and the Church in this divine work of accomplishing the most august Sacrifice. Can you not just hear him now:
"Sorry, Saints, I'll have to leave you out of it today. I'm in a frightful hurry. I spent too much time on the announcements, and the Scripture readings were a bit longer than usual. And it looks as if there will be a lot of communions today. And I have a golf appointment at ten; the fellas will never forgive me if I'm late. But tomorrow I'll check with you, tomorrow for sure. Yes, I know, I said that yesterday. But tomorrow for sure; it's a promise."
- Next: Chapter Four The "New Mass" - Part Twelve - The Language of the "New Mass"
- Previous: Chapter Four - The "New Mass" Part Ten - The "Communion"