The Traditional Latin ('Tridentine') Mass vs. the New (Novus Ordo) Mass (5)

Item

Traditional Latin ("Tridentine") Mass*

New ("Novus Ordo") Mass*

Stable Annual Cycle Making Truths Easier to Remember?

Yes

No

Note: When people hear the same readings each year, they are more likely to take them to heart as time progresses. On the other hand, if certain readings are not heard for years at a time, the average person is less likely to remember them. 

"The ordinary parishioner rarely, if at all, comes into contact with such concentrated amounts of information phrased in a 'literary' manner as he does at Mass on Sundays. He normally gets his information from television or tabloid papers in an easily assimilated form. His reaction to a long series of readings now inflicted on him, plus responsorial psalm, sermon, and bidding prayers, is simply to 'turn off.' It would be found that if the parishioners from an average parish were asked what the readings had been on their way out after Mass many would have no idea at all. One merit of the traditional cycle of readings was that the gospels at least acquired a certain familiarity as they came round in their due course year by year. Now each reading will be heard only once every three years, and from the point of view of consolidation this might just as well be every ten or twenty years. The net result of the new lectionary will be that the ordinary Catholic will now be less rather than more familiar with the Scriptures." (Davies)

Careful Selection of Scripture to Avoid 'Unpleasant Realities' (e.g. Hell, Judgment)?

No

Yes. In various places, in the Novus Ordo Mass, Scripture has been 'carefully selected' to remove 'unpleasant topics'. For example, according to the 1970 Mass Lectionary, in the Year "C" (every third year)...

* A reading from Revelation, Chapter 22, is carefully carved to exclude "negative" passages. Instead of reading Rv. 22:12-20, the parishioners are given only verses 12-14, 16-17, and 20. Omitted verses 15, 18,19 speak of those who are not saved: "the dogs (this does not refer to animals, but rather is a "term of contempt"), the sorcerers, the unchaste, the murderers, the idol-worshipers, and all who love and practice deceit". Ironically, verses 18-19 include a warning to "anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book". What Novus Ordo attendees hear is the following "happy message":

"'Behold, I am coming soon. I bring with me the recompense I will give to each according to his deeds. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.' Blessed are they who wash their robes so as to have the right to the tree of life and enter the city through its gates. 'I, Jesus, sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the root and offspring of David, the bright morning star.' The Spirit and the bride say, 'Come.' Let the hearer say, 'Come.' Let the one who thirsts come forward, and the one who wants it receive the gift of life-giving water. The one who gives this testimony says, 'Yes, I am coming soon.' Amen! Come, Lord Jesus!"

Instead of the complete message as given in Scripture...

"'Behold, I am coming soon. I bring with me the recompense I will give to each according to his deeds. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end.' Blessed are they who wash their robes so as to have the right to the tree of life and enter the city through its gates. Outside are the dogs, the sorcerers, the unchaste, the murderers, the idol-worshipers, and all who love and practice deceit. I, Jesus, sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the root and offspring of David, the bright morning star.' The Spirit and the bride say, 'Come.' Let the hearer say, 'Come.' Let the one who thirsts come forward, and the one who wants it receive the gift of life-giving water. I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words in this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book. The one who gives this testimony says, 'Yes, I am coming soon.' Amen! Come, Lord Jesus!"

* On the feast of Corpus Christi - a feast specifically devoted to the Holy Eucharist, an "amputated" passage appears from 1 Corinthians. The Novus Ordo attendees hear the following "happy message":

"For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, 'This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.' For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes."

Instead of the complete message as given in Holy Scripture...

"'For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread, and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, 'This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.' In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.' For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes. Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. A person should examine himself, and so eat the bread and drink the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are ill and infirm, and a considerable number are dying. If we discerned ourselves, we would not be under judgment; but since we are judged by (the) Lord, we are being disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world."

Are these warnings not necessary to hear? - Warnings possibly needed to save one's soul! 

* Passages which are not likely to ever be heard in Year C (or in any other year - despite the claim that one hears the "whole of Scripture" over a certain period of years in the Novus Ordo Mass) include various 'negative' passages such as Romans 1:18-32, which includes very severe condemnations against acting homosexuals, and other passages of Scripture which may cause "difficulties" to certain persons (e.g. feminists, homosexuals, etc.).

In any event, Scripture passages dealing with sin and other 'negative' topics are less likely to be heard. This is despite the fact that it is claimed that Jesus "spoke more frequently on so-called negative topics than on positive topics" (click here for tough love in the New Testament). The omission of certain verses tends to distort Jesus' message. And, of course, it is clear that the hearing of these passages is necessary to understand Jesus' full teaching.

One may even argue that such 'creative' Scripture selections in the Novus Ordo Masses amounts to a "censoring" of the Bible - the word of God!

Is this not especially ironic considering that the "reformers" claimed to want to provide the faithful with more Scripture?

Remember that if certain concepts are not mentioned "they are thereby taken out of our minds - and the priest's mind as well", giving us a distorted view of the Gospel. Since this occurs year after year, these concepts will eventually be entirely forgotten. 

Furthermore, even if Scripture was given in its entirety, sadly, the modern translation of the Bible which has been used in the Novus Ordo Mass nowhere contains the actual word "hell"!

Distractions

Few

Many

Unequivocally Catholic?

Yes

No. The rite has even been used by Protestants who continue to adhere to heretical beliefs, which begs the question of why those who reject the Mass as a sacrifice and who reject the Real Presence can use a liturgy designed for Catholics who believe in the Mass as a sacrifice and the Real Presence.

Protects Against Heresy / Favors Heresy

Protects against heresy

"[E]very true Christian detests heresy, and all that savors thereof!" (Liturgical Year)

"After a first and second warning, break off contact with a heretic, realizing that such a person is perverted and sinful and stands self-condemned." (St. Paul, Ti. 3:10-11)

"Can. 1324 It is not enough to avoid heresy, but one must also carefully shun all errors which more or less approach it; hence all must observe the constitutions and decrees by which the Holy See has proscribed and forbidden dangerous opinions of that sort." (1917 Code of Canon Law)

Although not heretical, a case may be made that certain elements (or more clearly the removal of certain prior elements) may tend to favor heresy. This is demonstrated even by the fact that heretics have themselves used the rite, while not giving up their heretical beliefs.

"There are definite parallels between the Novus Ordo Missae and the 'Reformers'' Communion Service - ours is now acceptable to Protestants who reject our Eucharistic teaching. Although ours does not contain formal heresy, the 'Reformers'' services also did not contain heresy, but were ambiguous so that all could put their own interpretation on it - they were trying to pull in the Catholics to their beliefs" 

"I have never claimed that the official Latin text of the Novus Ordo Missae contains formal heresy. What I allege is that faith in the sacrificial nature of the Mass is seriously diluted by omissions and ambiguous phraseology" (Davies) 

"To the best of my knowledge no one has accused the New Mass of containing formal heresy. Cranmer's 1549 Communion Service did not contain heresy, nor did his 1552 version for that matter. [As one of Davies' earlier books] makes clear, his new rites are significant not for what they contain but for what they omit." (Davies) 

Some (Non-heterodox) Catholics Refuse to Attend this Rite of Mass, Considering Themselves "Conscientious Objectors"

No

Yes

Some (Non-heterodox) Priests Refuse to Celebrate Mass in This Rite?

No

Yes

Note that some of the reforms are said to have caused a "crisis of conscience" for priests. This is unheard of! 

Also note that since the Second Vatican Council, there has been a near 50% decline in the number of priests (going from nearly 13 priests for every 10,000 Catholics to about 7).

Implementation of Rite Surrounded With Much Controversy & Even Scandal?

No

Yes (e.g. due to unprecedented nature of changes, unprecedented imposition of the Mass, lack of respect for tradition, use of Protestant 'advisors', concern regarding ambiguity of the rite, etc.)

"What we are faced with in the present reform is the systematic overthrowing of the most sacred liturgical traditions of the Latin Church on a scale that is quite unprecedented. Nothing like it has ever happened before. If it is granted that the present reform contains nothing that is heretical (neither did Cranmer's), and that Pope Paul VI had a legal right to make the changes, it is certainly arguable that morally he was acting ultra vires, i.e., outside the limits of his authority. He did indeed have supreme authority over the Church, Her liturgy included, but he was the custodian of Tradition, within which all the ancient liturgical traditions form so pre-eminent a part. He was the custodian of the liturgy. It was entrusted to his keeping, but the liturgy belongs to the whole Church." (Davies)

Considering the situation in the Church since the imposition of the Novus Ordo, it also seems opportune to remember the words & warnings of St. Pope Pius V when he originally codified the 'Tridentine' Missal: "Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this ['Tridentine'] Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever...[B]y this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure... Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription - except, however, if more than two hundred years' standing.... Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should any person venture to do so, let him understand that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul." (Quo Primum, 1570 A.D.)

Laity Commonly Ignorant of Truths of the Faith?

No

Yes

Note: For example, it has been reported that around 70% of Catholics today no longer believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist. Not only is this a chief tenet of our faith, but failure to believe in it has serious consequences. As St. Paul warns in 1 Cor. 11:29: "For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself." 

Profanation & Sacrilege During Mass

Unheard of

Has been known to happen frequently. Note that the practice of Communion in the Hand alone may cause Christ's body to be trampled on by numerous persons since those who receive Holy Communion in this manner usually fail to check their fingers for sacred particles, allowing them to fall to the ground and be stepped on by other parishioners. Note: Click here for more on this topic. Note that other instances of profanation and sacrilege have frequently occurred in the last several decades, not a small number of which have been intentional.

"The Egyptian people were plunged into the Red Sea, but the Hebrew people went over. Moses passed through; but Pharaoh was cast down headlong, because the heavier weight of his sins plunged him downwards. In the same way do sacrileges cast down headlong into the lake of burning fire those who fling their proud insults in the face of God." (St. Ambrose of Milan, Doctor of the Church, c. 385 A.D.)

Beauty of Rite "Universally Acknowledged and Admired"?

Yes

"Nicholas Wiseman was appointed as the first English cardinal and the first Archbishop of Westminster following the restoration of the Catholic hierarchy in England and Wales by Blessed Pius IX in 1850. This great pastor and scholar wrote, concerning the ['Tridentine'] Mass that he celebrated each day of his priestly life: If we examine each prayer separately, it is perfect: perfect in construction, perfect in thought, and perfect in expression. If we consider the manner in which they are brought together, we are struck with the brevity of each, with the sudden but beautiful transitions, and the almost stanza-like effect, with which they succeed one another, forming a lyrical composition of surpassing beauty. If we take the entire service as a whole, it is constructed with the most admirable symmetry, proportioned in its parts with perfect judgment and so exquisitely arranged, as to excite and preserve an unbroken interest in the sacred action. No doubt, to give full force and value to this sacred rite, its entire ceremonial is to be considered. The assistants, with their noble vestments, the chant, the incense, the more varied ceremonies which belong to a solemn Mass, are all calculated to increase veneration and admiration. But still, the essential beauties remain, whether the holy rite be performed under the golden vault of St. Peter's, or in a wretched wigwam, erected in haste by some poor savages for their missionary" (Davies)

No

Note: In contrast to the magnificent & beautiful 'Tridentine' rite - a rite highly praised ("the most beautiful thing this side of heaven") and respected, the new rite itself has relatively "little inherent beauty", and has been charged with "banality", even by high-ranking prelates. 

Holy Sacrifice Vs. Celebration 

Holy Sacrifice / Re-Presentation of Calvary

Celebration

Note: Traditionally, Catholics referred to the "Holy Sacrifice of the Mass" rather than a "Celebration of the Eucharist". Protestants tend to have "worship celebrations".

Mass Vs. Eucharist or Liturgy

Mass

Eucharist or Liturgy

Note: The Holy Eucharist is received at Mass. Moderns attempt to do away with the very Catholic word "Mass" and refer to the Mass as simply as "the Eucharist" or the liturgy. While the term "Mass" may offend Protestants, the terms "Eucharist" and "liturgy" are not offensive to Protestants.

Penitential?

Yes

"The Lord certainly does not spare the criminal, because He will not leave the crime unavenged. For either the man repents his crime and punishes himself, or God vindicates it with the man and strikes him. Neither, therefore, is sin spared, because never is it forgiven without having been avenged." (Pope St. Gregory I the Great, Doctor of the Church, 6th century A.D.)

"Do not plot to repeat a sin; not even for one will you go unpunished." (Sirach 7:8)

No 

"Before the Mass was penitential and God focused, now it seems to speak, 'I'm okay, you're okay.'" In fact, music played at some Novus Ordo Masses literally (and pridefully!) contains the bold words "take me as I am, Lord."

"Humble people you save; haughty eyes you bring low." (Ps. 18:28)

"Those who fear the LORD prepare their hearts and humble themselves before him." (Sirach 2:17)

"Before you have fallen, humble yourself; when you have sinned, show repentance." (Sirach 18:20)

Ease of Focusing on the Sufferings & Death of Christ During Mass

Very easy

"Of what should we especially think during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass? Of the sufferings and the death of Jesus Christ [who is made present on the altar]." (Catechism of St. John Neumann)

Much more difficult

Encourages Thanksgiving After Communion?

Yes

"Thanksgiving after communion is also necessary. The prayer we make after communion is the most acceptable to God, and the most profitable to us." (St. Alphonsus Liguori, Doctor of the Church)

"After Holy Communion we should spend some time in adoring our Lord, in thanking Him for the grace we have received, and in asking Him for the blessings we need." (Baltimore Catechism)

"We should spend sufficient time in thanksgiving after Holy Communion to show due reverence to the Blessed Sacrament; for Our Lord is personally with us as long as the appearance of bread and wine remains." (Baltimore Catechism)

"[T]he divine Redeemer is most closely united...with each and every one of the faithful, and He ardently desires to speak with them heart to heart, especially after Holy Communion" (Pope Pius XII)

"After Holy Communion Jesus Christ abides within us by His grace as long as we commit no mortal sin; and He abides within us by His Real Presence until the sacramental species are consumed." (Catechism of St. Pius X)

"If you keep your thoughts fixed on our Lord after Communion, you will feel for a long time that consuming fire which will inspire in your heart the desire for good and a shrinking from evil." (St. John Vianney)

"Wherefore, if there is no time when we must not offer God thanks, and if we must never cease from praising Him, who would dare to reprehend or find fault with the Church, because she advises her priests and faithful to converse with the divine Redeemer for at least a short while after Holy Communion, and inserts in her liturgical books, fitting prayers, enriched with indulgences, by which the sacred ministers may make suitable preparation before Mass and Holy Communion or may return thanks afterwards? So far is the sacred liturgy from restricting the interior devotion of individual Christians, that it actually fosters and promotes it so that they may be rendered like to Jesus Christ and through Him be brought to the heavenly Father; wherefore this same discipline of the liturgy demands that whoever has partaken of the Sacrifice of the altar should return fitting praise to God. For it is the good pleasure of the divine Redeemer to hearken to us when we pray, to converse with us intimately and to offer us a refuge in His loving Heart." (Pope Pius XII, "Mediator Dei")

"There are others who deny any impetratory power to our prayers, or who endeavor to insinuate into men's minds the idea that prayers offered to God in private should be considered of little worth, whereas public prayers which are made in the name of the Church are those which really matter, since they proceed form the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ. This opinion is false; for the divine Redeemer is most closely united not only with His Church, which is His beloved Spouse, but also with each and every one of the faithful, and He ardently desires to speak to them heart to heart, especially after Holy Communion... How highly all should esteem mental prayer is proved not only by ecclesiastical documents but also by the custom and practice of the saints." (Pope Pius XII, "Mystici Corporis Christi")

No

Note: Not only is there (generally) little time for thanksgiving after Holy Communion in the New Mass, but the practice may even be discouraged - if not by the noise and chatter of others or by loud music, then sometimes even by the priest. Sadly, parishioners miss out on "the most profitable time for prayer."

Emphasis on the Grave Matter of the Salvation of One's Soul?

Yes

Generally not (often it seems as though salvation is presumed)

"How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few." (Our Lord Jesus Christ, Mt. 7:14)

"Many are invited, but few are chosen." (Our Lord Jesus Christ, Mt. 22:14)

"Strive to enter through the narrow gate, for many, I tell you, will attempt to enter but will not be strong enough." (Our Lord Jesus Christ, Lk. 13:24)

"For it is time for the judgment to begin with the household of God; if it begins with us, how will it end for those who fail to obey the gospel of God? 'And if the righteous one is barely saved, where will the godless and the sinner appear?'" (St. Peter, 1 Pt. 4:17-18)

"So then, my beloved, obedient as you have always been, not only when I am present but all the more now when I am absent, work out your salvation with fear and trembling." (St. Paul, Phil. 2:12)

"[M]any will be damned; few will be saved." (St. Benedict Joseph Labre)

"Taking into account the behavior of mankind, only a small part of the human race will be saved." (Sr. Lucy of Fatima)

"The number of the Elect is so small - so small - that were we to know how small it is, we should faint away with grief" (St. Louis Marie de Montfort)

Emphasis on Holiness?

Yes

Generally not

Penetrating Sermons vs. "Feel Good" Homilies

Penetrating sermons

"Feel good" homilies

"If the people leave the church praising the preacher, one can be certain that he did not do his duty well. Sighs, not praise, are the proof of effective oratory." (Bl. Dominic Barberi)

Awareness of our Sinfulness

Great awareness

Lack of awareness

Note: Often times, the New Mass seems to give the impression "that we are worthy of glory, rather than being sinners". In fact, it has been pointed out that the new Mass tends to make us forgetful that we are sinners which, therefore, essentially enables us to commit more sin.

Personal Piety Encouraged?

Encouraged

"But, assuredly, of all the duties which man has to fulfill, that without doubt, is the chiefest and holiest which commands him to worship God with devotion and piety." (Pope Leo XIII)

Not generally (and may even be ridiculed / discouraged)

Attendees Appropriately Attired?

Usually Yes

"Give to the LORD the glory due his name! Bring gifts, and enter his presence; worship the LORD in holy attire." (1 Chron. 16:29)

Often No

Note: Often attendees wear shorts, t-shirts, jeans, sleeveless tops, tight and otherwise immodest clothing, etc. Note: For information on modest / immodest dress, click here.

Examples of Laity in Church

Laity usually provide a good example in church

Laity often provide a poor example in church (poor dress, lack of reverence, talking, eating, etc.)

People Will Commonly Drive Many Miles (Or Even Move) to Attend This Rite of Mass Over Another Rite Mass

Often

Very uncommon (if at all)

Charged With "Blurring the Distinction Between the Hierarchical Priesthood and the 'Priesthood of the Faithful'"?

No

Yes (including lay readers, lay 'ministers', etc.)

Great Importance of Mass is Clear

Very clear

Less clear 

"[T]he liturgy is the summit toward which the activity of the Church is directed; at the same time it is the font from which all her power flows" (Second Vatican Council)

Mass is Timeless?

Yes

Note: The most important parts of the Mass trace back to the earliest centuries of the Church (even apostolic times), without ever becoming "outdated".

No 

Note: Not only does the use of the vernacular language contribute to the loss of timelessness (for example, note that the earliest Bible translations into the vernacular are almost unreadable only centuries later, whereas the Latin language is "fixed" and Latin translations are "good forever"), but the "faddish nature of many of the elements may tend to 'date' the Mass."

Liturgical Abuses Legalized?

No

Yes 

Note: Various practices such as Communion in the hand, Communion under both species, use of 'lay ministers', female 'altar boys', etc. began as liturgical abuses which were later 'legalized' (or 'reluctantly tolerated') under certain conditions. 

Agrees With Council Directives?

Yes

No 

Note: The New Mass seems to contradict the directives of the Second Vatican Council. For example, the Council said:

"The use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law, is to be preserved in the Latin rites." (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, The constitution on the sacred liturgy, December 4, 1963)

"The Church recognizes Gregorian chant as being specially suited to the Roman liturgy. Therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services." (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, The constitution on the sacred liturgy, December 4, 1963) 

"The pipe organ is to be held in high esteem in the Latin Church, for it is the traditional musical instrument, the sound of which can add a wonderful splendor to the Church's ceremonies and powerfully lifts up men's minds to God and higher things." (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, The constitution on the sacred liturgy, December 4, 1963)

"Finally, in faithful obedience to tradition, the sacred Council declares that Holy Mother Church holds all lawfully recognized rites to be of equal right and dignity; that she wishes to preserve them in the future and to foster them in every way." (Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, The constitution on the sacred liturgy, December 4, 1963)

"Father Louis Bouyer has put in record that those who have taken it upon themselves to apply the Vatican II Constitution on the Liturgy are not simply in formal opposition to the Council but have deliberately turned their backs upon what the liturgical movement had set out to do." (Davies)

"Cardinal Ratzinger [the future Pope Benedict XVI] described the late Msgr. Klaus Gamber as 'the one scholar who, among the army of pseudo-liturgists, truly represents the liturgical thinking of the center of the Church.' And Msgr. Gamber writes: One statement we can make with certainty is that the new Ordo of the Mass that has now emerged would not have been endorsed by the majority of the Council Fathers. They ensured that the Liturgy Constitution of the Council contained stipulations that appeared to make any drastic remodeling of the traditional Mass impossible. The Latin language was to be preserved in the Latin rites (Art. 36), and steps were to be taken to ensure that the faithful could sing or say together in Latin those parts of the Mass that pertain to them (Art. 54). All lawfully acknowledged rites were held to be of equal authority and dignity, and were to be preserved in the future and fostered in every way (Art. 4). The treasury of sacred music was to be preserved and fostered with great care (Art. 114), and Gregorian chant was to be given pride of place in liturgical services (Art. 116). There were to be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly required them, and care was to be taken that any new forms adopted should grow in some way organically from forms already existing (Art. 23). The explicit commands of the Council Fathers were cast aside contemptuously by Archbishop Bugnini and the Committee (Consilium) that he controlled. It had obtained the power to interpret (or, more accurately, to misinterpret) the wishes of the Council Fathers. Msgr. Gamber writes: 'Much more radical than any liturgical changes introduced by Luther, at least as far as the rite was concerned, was the reorganization of our own liturgy - above all, the fundamental changes that were made in the liturgy of the Mass.' He continues: Was all this really done because of a pastoral concern about the souls of the faithful, or did it not rather represent a radical breach with the traditional rite, to prevent the further use of traditional liturgical texts and thus make the celebration of the 'Tridentine' Mass impossible - because it no longer reflected the new spirit moving through the Church?" (Davies)

Charged With Ambiguity?

No 

Yes

"[W]hatever pertains to sacred worship is intimately connected with its object and cannot have either consistency or durability if this object is vague or uncertain" (Pope Pius IX, "Ineffabilis Deus", 1854 A.D.)

Communion Under One or Both Species?

Note: Click here for more on this topic

Priest - Both species

Laity - One species

Note: Although the practice of communicating under both species is not in itself theologically objectionable, its actual practice has led to many serious problems, concerns, and abuses. For example: 

* Danger of spillage & profanation 

* Confusion of teaching regarding the Real Presence in one species (e.g. thinking Christ is not received fully and entirely under one species alone) 

* Concern regarding unsanitary conditions when using a 'shared cup' (including concerns regarding remnants of lipstick, saliva, etc. which may remain in the chalice) 

* Danger of infection/spread of disease (now potentially including AIDS and other untreatable conditions). Note that the use of a 'shared cup' has been called a "dangerous health practice" and that the mere wiping of a cup is wholly insufficient to prevent the transmission of disease. (It is shown to be an entirely false claim that the species of wine kills any significant amount of bacteria.) 

* May interfere with medications 

* Concern regarding the inability of some (including children) to use with due caution 

* Concern regarding the inability of some persons to tolerate the species of wine 

* Etc.

Hundreds of years ago, in consideration of various concerns such as those above, the Church approved of Communion under one species for the laity. And clearly, numerous saints have communicated under the species of bread alone, with no detriment to their holiness or salvation.

"If anyone says that the holy Catholic Church has not been influenced by just causes and reasons to give communion under the form of bread only to layman and even to clerics when not consecrating, or that she has erred in this: let him be anathema." (Council of Trent) 

Priest - Both species

Laity - May be under both species

Note: Introduction of Communion under both species for lay persons in the 20th century began as a result of disobedience to the Pope. It has contributed to irreverence, desecration, and sacrilege. It has caused some Catholics to erroneously (and heretically) believe that it is necessary to Communicate under both species or that they receive Christ "more fully" if they receive Holy Communion under both species. It has also led to the widespread proliferation of 'Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion' (lay persons dispensing Holy Communion), a practice always condemned by the Church. [Click here for more information on this topic.] Many Catholics mistakenly believe this practice is the norm in the Church, however, the truth is that Communion under both species may be allowed only under certain conditions. And, even this limited toleration was extracted from the Holy See due to widespread disobedience on the part of certain of the faithful (e.g. liberals / modernists, feminists). 

"The holy council, guided by the Holy Spirit, who is the Spirit of wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of counsel and of godliness (see Isa. 11:2), and following the custom and the judgment of the Church itself, teaches and declares that they laity and clerics who are not celebrating are not bound by any divine command to receive the sacrament of the Eucharist under both species. And faith leaves no possibility of doubting that Communion under one species is sufficient for salvation." (Council of Trent)

Great Continuity With Previous Councils?

Yes

No

"If any one saith that the rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the Canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned; or that the Mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue [that is, the vernacular, or language of the people] only; let him be anathema." (Council of Trent)

"There are abuses in some churches whereby... secular songs are sung in the church... These abuses are to stop and we decree that any transgressors shall be duly punished by their superiors." (Council of Basel)

"And whereas such is the nature of man, that, without external helps, he cannot easily be raised to the meditation of divine things; therefore has holy Mother Church instituted certain rites, to wit that certain things be pronounced in the mass in a low, and others in a louder, tone." (Council of Trent)

"If any one saith, that the canon of the mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated; let him be anathema." (Council of Trent)

"What great care is to be taken, that the sacred and holy sacrifice of the mass be celebrated with all religious service and veneration, each one may easily imagine, who considers, that, in holy writ, he is called accursed, who doth the work of God negligently; and if we must needs confess, that no other work can be performed... [which is] so holy and divine as this tremendous mystery itself, wherein that life-giving victim [Christ], by which we were reconciled to the Father, is daily immolated on the altar by priests, it is also sufficiently clear, that all industry and diligence is to be applied to this end, that it be performed with the greatest possible inward cleanness and purity of heart, and outward show of devotion and piety." (Council of Trent)

Break With Tradition?

No

Yes 

"Fr. Adrian Fortescue, one of the greatest liturgists produced by the English-speaking world, condemned the sixteenth-century Protestant 'Reformers' for changing the existing rites of the Mass in their respective countries to conform to their heretical doctrines of the Eucharist, as in doing so they broke away utterly from all historic liturgical evolution. This was the first radical reform of the liturgy in the entire history of the Church in either East or West [until the Second Vatican Council]." (Davies)

Calendar

Fuller calendar

Less full calendar (dropped feast days, fewer saints, less priority given to feasts, etc.)

Retention of Ancient Ceremonies?

Yes

Many dropped

Note: Although the most important elements of the 'Tridentine' Mass trace back even to apostolic times, the New Mass was fabricated by men in the 1960's. These men even received assistance from Protestant (heretical) observers.

Choirs / Soloists

Choirs / Soloists

Choirs, Bands, Soloists, Tape Recordings ("anything goes")

Choir Members

Trained men of "known piety and probity of life"

"Finally, only men of known piety and probity of life are to be admitted to form part of the choir of a church, and these men should by their modest and devout bearing during the liturgical functions show that they are worthy of the holy office they exercise. It will also be fitting that singers while singing in church wear the ecclesiastical habit and surplice, and that they be hidden behind gratings when the choir is excessively open to the public gaze." (Pope St. Pius X, "Inter Sollicitudines", 1916 A.D.) 

"On the same principle it follows that singers in church have a real liturgical office, and that therefore women, being incapable of exercising such office, cannot be admitted to form part of the choir. Whenever, then, it is desired to employ the acute voices of sopranos and contraltos, these parts must be taken by boys, according to the most ancient usage of the Church." (Pope St. Pius X, "Inter Sollicitudines", 1914) Note: For more information regarding the 'Proper Role & Behavior of Women', click here (Priests & Vocations Section)

"Think now of what kind of choir you are about to enter. Although clothed with a body, you have been judged worthy to join the Powers of heaven in singing the praise of Him who is Lord of all." (St. John Chrysostom, Doctor of the Church)

Anyone

Communion in the Hand?

No

Yes 

Note: Communion in the Hand for lay persons is a Protestant inspired practice that began in the 20th century as the result of disobedience to the Pope. This practice has contributed to irreverence, loss of faith, desecration and sacrilege. There are numerous and important reasons why faithful Catholics should never receive Communion in the hand, such as... 

* Communion in the hand lessens respect for the Holy Eucharist. 

* Communion in the hand contributes to sacrilege & desecration. 

* Communion in the hand leads to loss of faith in the Real Presence. 

* Communion in the hand goes against the expressed wishes of recent popes (one recent pope warned that "the innovation could lead to irreverence, profanation, and the adulteration of sacred doctrine") and was introduced in the 20th century in defiance of their wishes. No known pope recommends this practice. 

* Communion in the hand often results in sacred particles - Christ's true Flesh and Blood - being dropped on the floor and trampled on by parishioners. In fact, since most people fail to examine their hands for sacred particles after receiving Holy Communion in the hand, there could be dozens or more sacred particles on the floor in any parish where this practice is tolerated. This means that many people at each parish may literally be stepping on Christ's body - even those parishioners who don't take Communion in the hand. It is useful to remember the Church's constant teaching regarding the fact that even the tiniest particle of the Eucharist contains Christ's Body, whole and entire: 

"Yes, the same Jesus Christ is just as much in a particle of a host as in a whole host." (Catechism of St. Pius X) 

"Jesus Christ is present whole and entire in the smallest portion of the Holy Eucharist under the form of either bread or wine; for His body in the Eucharist is in a glorified state, and as it partakes of the character of a spiritual substance, it requires no definite size or shape." (Baltimore Catechism) 

"Nor should it be forgotten that Christ, whole and entire, is contained not only under either species, but also in each particle of either species. Each, says St. Augustine, receives Christ the Lord, and He is entire in each portion. He is not diminished by being given to many, but gives Himself whole and entire to each." (Catechism of the Council of Trent)

"Christ's Flesh is food, and His Blood is drink; yet is He whole under each Species. He is not cut by the receiver, nor broken, nor divided: He is taken whole. He is received by one, He is received by a thousand; the one receives as much as all; nor is He consumed, who is received. And when the Sacrament is broken, waver not, but remember that there is as much under each fragment as is hidden under the whole. Of the substance there is no division; it is but the sign that is broken; and He who is the Signified, is not thereby diminished, either as to state or stature." (Sequence) 

"[O]ur Lord is not in the Sacrament as in a place. Place regards things only inasmuch as they have magnitude. Now we do not say that Christ is in the Sacrament inasmuch as He is great or small, terms which belong to quantity, but inasmuch as He is a substance. The substance of the bread is changed into the substance of Christ, not into magnitude or quantity; and substance, it will be acknowledged by all, is contained in a small as well as in a large space. The substance of air, for instance, and its entire nature must be present under a small as well as a large quantity, and likewise the entire nature of water must be present no less in a glass than in a river. Since, then, the body of our Lord succeeds to the substance of the bread, we must confess it to be in the Sacrament after the same manner as the substance of the bread was before consecration; whether the substance of the bread was present in greater or less quantity is a matter of entire indifference."

(Catechism of the Council of Trent) 

"If any one denieth that in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist the whole Christ is contained under each species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema." (Council of Trent) 

* Communion in the hand requires that one 'self-communicate' - even though Holy Communion should not be handled by lay persons ["To touch the sacred species...is a privilege of the ordained" (Pope John Paul II)] Note: click here for more information on this topic.

* Communion in the hand (self-communicating) detracts from priestly dignity and places lay persons on the same level as priests.

* Those who take Communion in the hand risk dropping the Sacred Host onto the floor. 

* Communion in the hand engenders an "unbecoming familiarity", "discourages reverence for the mystery", "precludes awe" and "all but extinguishes a sense of sacredness". 

* Communion in the hand has been used as a tool by liberals and feminists who want to change the Church. They want the practice to be imposed on everyone. 

* Communion in the hand may physically sully the Holy Eucharist and lead to illness since those who receive Communion in the hand do not wash their hands before handling the Eucharist. [Note: Those who receive Communion in the hand may have, only minutes previously, touched filthy dollar bills (e.g. for the collection), touched contaminated collection baskets, touched the unwashed hands of multiple strangers (e.g. 'sign of peace'), sneezed or coughed into their hands, lifted dirty kneelers, etc.] 

* Communion in the hand has aided those who steal the Holy Eucharist for use in satanic rituals. 

*Etc.

"Wherever I go in the whole world, the thing that makes me the saddest is watching people receive Communion in the hand." (Mother Teresa)

For more on this topic, click here