POPE FRANCIS ON THE VATICAN II
REFORMED ROMAN MISSAL
THE NEW TRADITIONALISTS
A COMMENTARY
A COMMENTARY
NOVEMBER 7, 2022
by John R. Connolly
by John R. Connolly
Pope Francis’ insistence on the acceptance of the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal, also referred to as the Novus Ordo, as the universal form of the Roman Missal for the Catholic Church in the Latin Rite is an absolutely essential cornerstone of his mission to reform the twenty-first century church through a restoration of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. In this effort Pope Francis is not adding any new teachings to the Catholic Church. He is simply repeating the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and its original intent to reform the Tridentine Roman Missal and introduce a new Roman Missal, the Vatican II revised Roman Missal, and to make it the universal missal for the church in the Latin Rite. This was the intent of the bishops when they accepted Sacrosanctum Concilium. The was the intent of Pope Paul VI when he promulgated Missale Romanum. In 1970 Paul VI did not present the Vatican II reformed Missal as just another form of the Roman Missal to be celebrated along with the Tridentine Missal. He did not decree that there were now two equally acceptable forms of the Roman Missal. With the force of law Paul VI legislated that the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal was the universal missal for the church in the Latin Rite. Francis wants to realize this objective in the Catholic Church today. This, he says, is why he wrote both Traditionis Custodes and Desiderio Desideravi, so that the unity of the church might be expressed in one and the same prayer life. (DD, 61). Francis clearly states in Disiderio Desideravi that his intent is to establish this unity in the whole church in the Latin Rite. (DD, 61).
Another reason for restoring the universal acceptance of the new Vatican II Missal in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church is to defend the church’s authentic understanding of tradition. The fundamental arguments of the Lefebvrist, their rejection of the validity of the Second Vatican Council and the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal are rooted in a distorted understanding of the Catholic Church’s notion of tradition. In his dialogue with Archbishop Lefebvre Pope Paul VI told the archbishop that his understanding of tradition was a distortion of the church’s notion because it was based upon a rigid and dead notion of tradition in which everything remains the same. (1976 Letter, p. 3). On the other hand, the pope explained, the church’s view of tradition is a living notion in which some old traditions can be renounced, and new ones introduced so that the church can better communicate its teachings. This, Paul VI explains, is precisely what the Second Vatican Council did when it presented its teachings, including the development of the new Vatican II reformed Roman Missal. The pope goes on to point out that since the council and its teachings were deliberated on and agreed upon by the bishops with the assistance of the Holy Spirit in an ecumenical council, nothing it proposed is contrary to the church’s fundamental and immutable tradition. (1976 Letter, p. 3, text, pp. 4-5). In rejecting Lefebvre’s request for permission to celebrate the Eucharist according to the Tridentine Missal, Paul VI responds by saying that to grant this request “would be on Our part to accept the introduction of a seriously erroneous concept of church and tradition.” (1976 Letter, p. 5, text, p. 4). In Ecclesia Dei Pope John Paul II says that the root cause of the Archbishop Lefebvre’s schismatic act is rooted in an incomplete understanding of the church’s notion of tradition. The archbishop, the pope claims, rejects the church’s living notion of tradition which includes the possibility of a “growth” in insight into the realities that are being developed. (ED, # 4).
The teachings of the Second Vatican Council and Paul VI’s promulgation of the reformed Vatican II Roman Missal in Missale Romanum represent an authentic development in the church’s traditional teaching on the Eucharist. This was a moment of fuller understanding, a moment of deepening of the church’s traditional understanding, a moment in the development of doctrine. Development includes continuity with what went before, but is also includes change, a new, deeper, and fuller understanding. The new missal includes what is true and valid in the Tridentine Roman Missal. At the same time, it reforms it by incorporating the Second Vatican Council’s developments in the church’s understanding of the Eucharist. It was the decision of the pope and the bishops at the council that the teaching on the Eucharist promulgated in the documents of the Second Vatican Council were an authentic development of the Church’s tradition decided upon with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. To reject the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, its liturgical reform, and/or the validity of the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal involves, either knowingly or unknowingly, a rejection of the church’s authentic understanding of tradition. Celebrating the Eucharist according to the Tridentine Roman Missal is either a conscious or unconscious act of refusing to accept the church’s understanding of tradition.
A third reason for restoring the universal acceptance of the Vatican II Roman Missal is that the Tridentine Roman Missal cannot serve as an adequate basis for the liturgical life of a Vatican II reformed Catholic Church. In his 1974 Declaration Archbishop Lefebvre makes a rather intriguing and interesting statement which may be of some assistance today in trying to understand the relationship between the reformed Vatican II Roman Missal and the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. The archbishop states that “It is impossible to modify the lex orandi without modifying the lex credenda. To the Novus Ordo Missae correspond a new catechism, a new priesthood, new seminaries, a charismatic Pentecostal Church – all things opposed to orthodoxy and the perennial teaching of the Church.” (Lefebvre, 1974 Declaration). What is significant in this statement is that Lefebvre saw that something new was added in the Vatican II Missal, something that was not present in the old missal. From Lefebvre’s perspective the new missal was so radically new that he judged it, along with the council and its teachings, to be corruptions of the church’s tradition. Therefore, he rejected both the teachings of the council and its reformed liturgy as heretical. The understanding of the bishops at the council and Paul VI is that the new elements in the reformed missal represent a development in the church’s lex credenda. The new missal contains a development in the church’s understanding of the Eucharist that is not found in the Tridentine Missal. There is a real change in the Vatican II Missal, something new is added, a fuller understanding, a development in the church’s tradition. At the same time, as both Paul VI and Francis say what was true in the Tridentine Missal can be found in the Vatican II reformed Missal. As a result, there is really no need to celebrated the old Latin Mass.
If one truly accepted the Second Vatican Council and its teachings, including its reform of the liturgy, would that believer not willingly and enthusiastically choose to celebrate the Eucharist according to the Vatican II Roman Missal, as the foundation and center of one’s liturgical life? There would be no reason to go back to the Tridentine Roman Missal since everything good and true in it is also contained in the new Roman Missal. Archbishop Lefebvre himself seemed to understand this, because in his dialogues with Paul VI, John Paul II, and Cardinal Ratzinger he was never willing to accept the legitimacy of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. Was this because he realized that if he accepted the teachings and liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council, it would be inconsistent for him to reject the validity of the Vatican II Roman Missal?
To celebrate the Eucharist according to the pre-Vatican II Tridentine Missal is either a conscious rejection of the council and its liturgical expression in the Vatican II Roman Missal or the result of an incomplete understanding of the development in the church’s understanding of the liturgy and the Eucharistic that took place at the council and that came to life in the Vatican II Roman Missal. In Desiderio Desideravi Pope Francis says that he does not understand how it is possible for someone to say that she/he recognizes the validity of the council and, at the same time, does not worship according to the liturgical reform born out of the council. (DD, 31).
One thing does seem clear. The Tridentine Roman Missal cannot serve as an adequate liturgical and theological foundation for celebrating the Eucharist in a reformed Vatican II church because it does not accept the developments that took place in the council. In fact, some elements of it might even distort the theological understanding of the Eucharist expressed in the council and in the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal. Could they perhaps even be called corruptions? (See Austen Ivereigh, The Limits of Dialogue, Why Francis has been so Tough on Traditionalists? Commonweal, January 20, 2022.). Pope Francis’ objective to reform the church according to teachings of the Second Vatican Council cannot be realized without the acceptance of the Vatican II Roman Missal as the official and universal Roman Missal for the church in the Latin Rite. It is the traditional liturgy of the church today. Those who accept the Vatican II Roman Missal and worship according to it are the new traditionalists. Speaking to the bishops of the world Pope Francis invokes the following prayer, “Upon you I invoke the Spirit of the risen Lord, that he may make you strong and firm in your service to the People of God entrusted to you by the Lord, so that, your care and vigilance express communion even in the unity of one, single Rite, in which is preserved the great richness of the Roman liturgical tradition.” (Francis, Letter, Traditionis Custodes, p. 5).
Pope Francis’ insistence on the acceptance of the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal, also referred to as the Novus Ordo, as the universal form of the Roman Missal for the Catholic Church in the Latin Rite is an absolutely essential cornerstone of his mission to reform the twenty-first century church through a restoration of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. In this effort Pope Francis is not adding any new teachings to the Catholic Church. He is simply repeating the teachings of the Second Vatican Council and its original intent to reform the Tridentine Roman Missal and introduce a new Roman Missal, the Vatican II revised Roman Missal, and to make it the universal missal for the church in the Latin Rite. This was the intent of the bishops when they accepted Sacrosanctum Concilium. The was the intent of Pope Paul VI when he promulgated Missale Romanum. In 1970 Paul VI did not present the Vatican II reformed Missal as just another form of the Roman Missal to be celebrated along with the Tridentine Missal. He did not decree that there were now two equally acceptable forms of the Roman Missal. With the force of law Paul VI legislated that the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal was the universal missal for the church in the Latin Rite. Francis wants to realize this objective in the Catholic Church today. This, he says, is why he wrote both Traditionis Custodes and Desiderio Desideravi, so that the unity of the church might be expressed in one and the same prayer life. (DD, 61). Francis clearly states in Disiderio Desideravi that his intent is to establish this unity in the whole church in the Latin Rite. (DD, 61).
Another reason for restoring the universal acceptance of the new Vatican II Missal in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church is to defend the church’s authentic understanding of tradition. The fundamental arguments of the Lefebvrist, their rejection of the validity of the Second Vatican Council and the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal are rooted in a distorted understanding of the Catholic Church’s notion of tradition. In his dialogue with Archbishop Lefebvre Pope Paul VI told the archbishop that his understanding of tradition was a distortion of the church’s notion because it was based upon a rigid and dead notion of tradition in which everything remains the same. (1976 Letter, p. 3). On the other hand, the pope explained, the church’s view of tradition is a living notion in which some old traditions can be renounced, and new ones introduced so that the church can better communicate its teachings. This, Paul VI explains, is precisely what the Second Vatican Council did when it presented its teachings, including the development of the new Vatican II reformed Roman Missal. The pope goes on to point out that since the council and its teachings were deliberated on and agreed upon by the bishops with the assistance of the Holy Spirit in an ecumenical council, nothing it proposed is contrary to the church’s fundamental and immutable tradition. (1976 Letter, p. 3, text, pp. 4-5). In rejecting Lefebvre’s request for permission to celebrate the Eucharist according to the Tridentine Missal, Paul VI responds by saying that to grant this request “would be on Our part to accept the introduction of a seriously erroneous concept of church and tradition.” (1976 Letter, p. 5, text, p. 4). In Ecclesia Dei Pope John Paul II says that the root cause of the Archbishop Lefebvre’s schismatic act is rooted in an incomplete understanding of the church’s notion of tradition. The archbishop, the pope claims, rejects the church’s living notion of tradition which includes the possibility of a “growth” in insight into the realities that are being developed. (ED, # 4).
The teachings of the Second Vatican Council and Paul VI’s promulgation of the reformed Vatican II Roman Missal in Missale Romanum represent an authentic development in the church’s traditional teaching on the Eucharist. This was a moment of fuller understanding, a moment of deepening of the church’s traditional understanding, a moment in the development of doctrine. Development includes continuity with what went before, but is also includes change, a new, deeper, and fuller understanding. The new missal includes what is true and valid in the Tridentine Roman Missal. At the same time, it reforms it by incorporating the Second Vatican Council’s developments in the church’s understanding of the Eucharist. It was the decision of the pope and the bishops at the council that the teaching on the Eucharist promulgated in the documents of the Second Vatican Council were an authentic development of the Church’s tradition decided upon with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. To reject the teachings of the Second Vatican Council, its liturgical reform, and/or the validity of the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal involves, either knowingly or unknowingly, a rejection of the church’s authentic understanding of tradition. Celebrating the Eucharist according to the Tridentine Roman Missal is either a conscious or unconscious act of refusing to accept the church’s understanding of tradition.
A third reason for restoring the universal acceptance of the Vatican II Roman Missal is that the Tridentine Roman Missal cannot serve as an adequate basis for the liturgical life of a Vatican II reformed Catholic Church. In his 1974 Declaration Archbishop Lefebvre makes a rather intriguing and interesting statement which may be of some assistance today in trying to understand the relationship between the reformed Vatican II Roman Missal and the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. The archbishop states that “It is impossible to modify the lex orandi without modifying the lex credenda. To the Novus Ordo Missae correspond a new catechism, a new priesthood, new seminaries, a charismatic Pentecostal Church – all things opposed to orthodoxy and the perennial teaching of the Church.” (Lefebvre, 1974 Declaration). What is significant in this statement is that Lefebvre saw that something new was added in the Vatican II Missal, something that was not present in the old missal. From Lefebvre’s perspective the new missal was so radically new that he judged it, along with the council and its teachings, to be corruptions of the church’s tradition. Therefore, he rejected both the teachings of the council and its reformed liturgy as heretical. The understanding of the bishops at the council and Paul VI is that the new elements in the reformed missal represent a development in the church’s lex credenda. The new missal contains a development in the church’s understanding of the Eucharist that is not found in the Tridentine Missal. There is a real change in the Vatican II Missal, something new is added, a fuller understanding, a development in the church’s tradition. At the same time, as both Paul VI and Francis say what was true in the Tridentine Missal can be found in the Vatican II reformed Missal. As a result, there is really no need to celebrated the old Latin Mass.
If one truly accepted the Second Vatican Council and its teachings, including its reform of the liturgy, would that believer not willingly and enthusiastically choose to celebrate the Eucharist according to the Vatican II Roman Missal, as the foundation and center of one’s liturgical life? There would be no reason to go back to the Tridentine Roman Missal since everything good and true in it is also contained in the new Roman Missal. Archbishop Lefebvre himself seemed to understand this, because in his dialogues with Paul VI, John Paul II, and Cardinal Ratzinger he was never willing to accept the legitimacy of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council. Was this because he realized that if he accepted the teachings and liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council, it would be inconsistent for him to reject the validity of the Vatican II Roman Missal?
To celebrate the Eucharist according to the pre-Vatican II Tridentine Missal is either a conscious rejection of the council and its liturgical expression in the Vatican II Roman Missal or the result of an incomplete understanding of the development in the church’s understanding of the liturgy and the Eucharistic that took place at the council and that came to life in the Vatican II Roman Missal. In Desiderio Desideravi Pope Francis says that he does not understand how it is possible for someone to say that she/he recognizes the validity of the council and, at the same time, does not worship according to the liturgical reform born out of the council. (DD, 31).
One thing does seem clear. The Tridentine Roman Missal cannot serve as an adequate liturgical and theological foundation for celebrating the Eucharist in a reformed Vatican II church because it does not accept the developments that took place in the council. In fact, some elements of it might even distort the theological understanding of the Eucharist expressed in the council and in the Vatican II reformed Roman Missal. Could they perhaps even be called corruptions? (See Austen Ivereigh, The Limits of Dialogue, Why Francis has been so Tough on Traditionalists? Commonweal, January 20, 2022.). Pope Francis’ objective to reform the church according to teachings of the Second Vatican Council cannot be realized without the acceptance of the Vatican II Roman Missal as the official and universal Roman Missal for the church in the Latin Rite. It is the traditional liturgy of the church today. Those who accept the Vatican II Roman Missal and worship according to it are the new traditionalists. Speaking to the bishops of the world Pope Francis invokes the following prayer, “Upon you I invoke the Spirit of the risen Lord, that he may make you strong and firm in your service to the People of God entrusted to you by the Lord, so that, your care and vigilance express communion even in the unity of one, single Rite, in which is preserved the great richness of the Roman liturgical tradition.” (Francis, Letter, Traditionis Custodes, p. 5).
IN THE NEWS
A Living Catholic Tradition: Pope Francis Unifies the Roman Rite,
by Rita Ferrone
Commonweal Magazine, July 23, 2021
(Access online, permission not available)
by Rita Ferrone
Commonweal Magazine, July 23, 2021
(Access online, permission not available)
STATISTICS ON THE PRE-VATICAN II MASS
The number of Catholics who are celebrating the pre-Vatican II Latin Mass has been grossly exaggerated by the conservative Catholics who support it. The Latin Mass Directory website shows a total of 1,664 sites around the world that offer the Pre-Vatican II Latin mass in a worldwide church of more than 1.2 billion Catholics.
The most sites are in the United States with a total of 659 venues. In a nation of about 70 million Catholics, that’s approximately 10 venues for every million Catholics. Based on these figures this means that the Pre-Vatican II Latin Mass is celebrated in only 4% of the 16,700 Catholic parishes in the United States.
The most sites are in the United States with a total of 659 venues. In a nation of about 70 million Catholics, that’s approximately 10 venues for every million Catholics. Based on these figures this means that the Pre-Vatican II Latin Mass is celebrated in only 4% of the 16,700 Catholic parishes in the United States.