Apologetics Bible Catholic Church Catholic Faith Christian

“TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS ABOLISHED IN 1969?


Photo Credit: http://www.salvemaliturgia.com/

 

NOTE: This post has permission with the owner according to him, we don’t need to mention his / her name for the credits.

Ultratraditionalist Page:

“On November 30, 1969, the first Sunday of Advent, the Novus Ordo Missae took effect, and what is now known as the Extraordinary Rite was effectively abolished. The floodgates of mediocrity and stupidity flew open.
“With the loss of a sense of the supernatural, there is a loss of the sense of a need for sacrifice today. The closer one comes to God, the greater should be one’s sense of sinfulness. The further one gets from God, as today, the more we hear the philosophy of the new age: “I’m OK, You’re OK.” This loss of the inclination to sacrifice has led to the obscuring of the Church’s redemptive mission. Where the Cross is downplayed, our need for redemption is given hardly a thought.
The aversion to sacrifice and redemption has assisted the secularization of the Church from within. We have been hearing for many years from priests and bishops about the need for the Church to adapt herself to the world. Great popes like St. Pius X said just the opposite: the world must adapt itself to the Church…
The devil hates the ancient Mass. He hates it because it is the most perfect reformulation of all the teachings of the Church. It was my husband who gave me this insight about the Mass. The problem that ushered in the present crisis was not the traditional Mass. The problem was that priests who offered it had already lost the sense of the supernatural and the transcendent. They rushed through the prayers, they mumbled and didn’t enunciate them. That is a sign that they had brought to the Mass their growing secularism. The ancient Mass does not abide irreverence, and that was why so many priests were just as happy to see it go.” ~Dr. Alice von Hildebrand
And so the ancient Mass went — but only temporarily. It is worth noting that, for all the anguish that the sudden shelving of the old rites caused, these rites have at least come down to us intact: if the Ordo Missae of 1962 was out of the reach of the faithful, it was also out of the reach of modernist tinkerers who have had a field day with the new Ordo.
Viewed in this light, the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae and its constellation of latent follies was not the source of the crisis of the last four decades, but — thanks to the divine Providence that works all things to our good — its remedy. Because God is ultimately in charge, and not Archbishop Bugnini or any other infiltrators in the Church, the Novus Ordo was always bound to be an instrument of good, for all the damage that has been wreaked on its account. It has destroyed our illusions about our spiritual health. It has torn the veneer of holiness off the rot and the maggots and put them in our collective face.
A bitter cure, to be sure, but that is often the nature of a cure. A boil, after all, has to be lanced and drained. The process is painful and disgusting, but necessary.
And there is healing at the end of it.
…and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail.

MY RESPONSE:

That is a foolish nonsense. Pope Paul VI when he promulgated in the First Sunday of Advent of November 30, 1969 did not abolish the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite also called as the Missal of Pope Pius V or Traditional Latin Mass. He did not even said in his Apostolic Constitution “Missale Romanum” that he is abolishing the Old Rite, rather he only promulgate or put into effect the new revised Missal which is called as the Novus Ordo Missae. In fact years later, Pope Paul VI through Monsignor Annibale Bugnini the framer of the Novus Ordo Missae gave to the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales the indult or permission to use the Tridentine Missal. For 50 years they were using the same Missal until today without interruption. Centuries later Pope John Paul II through his indult entitled “Quattuor Abhinc Annos” gave permission to those attached to the 1962 Roman Missal to use it and later on his successor Pope Benedict XVI through his Motu Propio “Summorum Pontificum” made it clear that the 1962 Roman Missal also called as the Traditional Latin Mass was never abrogated or abolished:

“It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy.”

(Pope Benedict XVI, Motu Propio “Summorum Pontificum”, July 7, 2007)
When Pope Paul VI promulgated on November 30, 1969, he did not abolish or abrogated the Traditional Latin Mass, because of the wide acceptance of many Dioceses to the Novus Ordo that the Old Missal fell into use but never abrogated or abolished, meaning not used anymore but not forbidden because Pope Paul VI granted permission to the LMS of England and Wales through the Agatha Christe indult to use the Old Missal. That is why your claims are unfounded.
That is why the claim “On November 30, 1969, the first Sunday of Advent, the Novus Ordo Missae took effect, and what is now known as the Extraordinary Rite was effectively abolished. The floodgates of mediocrity and stupidity flew open.” Is just a foolish claim and untrue.” The statement “floodgates of mediocrity and stupidiy flew open” is another thing, what do you mean by “mediocrity” and “stupidity” with regards to the implementation of the Novus Ordo Missae?
Another Foolish claim is this:
“And so the ancient Mass went — but only temporarily. It is worth noting that, for all the anguish that the sudden shelving of the old rites caused, these rites have at least come down to us intact: if the Ordo Missae of 1962 was out of the reach of the faithful, it was also out of the reach of modernist tinkerers who have had a field day with the new Ordo.
Viewed in this light, the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae and its constellation of latent follies was not the source of the crisis of the last four decades, but — thanks to the divine Providence that works all things to our good — its remedy. Because God is ultimately in charge, and not Archbishop Bugnini or any other infiltrators in the Church, the Novus Ordo was always bound to be an instrument of good, for all the damage that has been wreaked on its account. It has destroyed our illusions about our spiritual health. It has torn the veneer of holiness off the rot and the maggots and put them in our collective face.
A bitter cure, to be sure, but that is often the nature of a cure. A boil, after all, has to be lanced and drained. The process is painful and disgusting, but necessary.
And there is healing at the end of it”

This is what I call a foolish Conspiracy Theory, the faithful had never been deprived of the 1962 Roman Missal because 2 years after the Promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae, Pope Paul VI gave permission to the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales to continue to use the 1962 Roman Missal. Therefore, the faithful were not deprived of it. But it is always there, and in 1988, Pope John Paul II, gave permission to those attached to the 1962 Roman Missal to use the Old Missal for their own spiritual benfit and on 1984 Pope John Paul II through the indult Quattuor Abhinc Annos gave futher permission to use the 1962 Roman Missal and in 1988 the Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei Adflicta the Pope further expanded this permission when exhorted the Bishops to be generous in granting such faculty for all faithful who requested it. That is why after this Motu Propio there are Traditionalist Priestly Societies in communion with the Pope that benefited from this Motu Proprio like the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter who were former SSPX priests, Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, Institute of the Good Shepherd, Personal Apostolic Administration of Saint Jean Marie Vianney and many more. And these groups were workin with the Bishops of the Dioceses in training priests on how to celebrate the 1962 Roman Missal. And during the Pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI he further extend this permission and made it a Law to permit the use of the 1962 Roman Missal in many Dioceses. So the claim that the faithful were deprived of the 1962 Roman Missal after the Novus Ordo was promulgated in November 30, 1969 is nonsense, not true and a lie.
So it is not true that the 1962 Roman Missal was abolished in 1969 nor was the faithful been deprived of it.
Another false statement that you said is this:

“With the loss of a sense of the supernatural, there is a loss of the sense of a need for sacrifice today. The closer one comes to God, the greater should be one’s sense of sinfulness. The further one gets from God, as today, the more we hear the philosophy of the new age: “I’m OK, You’re OK.” This loss of the inclination to sacrifice has led to the obscuring of the Church’s redemptive mission. Where the Cross is downplayed, our need for redemption is given hardly a thought.
The aversion to sacrifice and redemption has assisted the secularization of the Church from within. We have been hearing for many years from priests and bishops about the need for the Church to adapt herself to the world. Great popes like St. Pius X said just the opposite: the world must adapt itself to the Church.”

This is another nonsense, when the Novus Ordo Missae wasd promulgated the sense of the Supernatural and sense of a need for a sacrifice was still retained in the Novus Ordo, in fact Pope Paul VI clarified that notion during his General Audience:

“The Mass of the new rite is and remains the same Mass we have always had. If anything, its sameness has been brought out more clearly in some respects.
The unity of the Lord’s Supper, of the Sacrifice on the cross of the re-presentation and the renewal of both in the Mass, is inviolably affirmed and celebrated in the new rite just as they were in the old. The Mass is and remains the memorial of Christ’s Last Supper. At that Supper the Lord changed the bread and wine into His Body and His Blood, and instituted the Sacrifice of the New Testament. He willed that the Sacrifice should be identically renewed by the power of His Priesthood, conferred on the Apostles. Only the manner of offering is different, namely, an unbloody and sacramental manner; and it is offered in perennial memory of Himself, until His final return (cf. De la Taille, Mysterium Fidei, Elucd. IX).”

(Pope Paul VI, General Audience, November 19, 1969)

He made this assurance weeks before he promulgated the Missal. The Novus Ordo Missae is a valid Mass, it has the same Sacrifice of the Mass, and the same real presence of Christ, body, blood, soul and divinity in the Holy Eucharist. How can we call it an abomination if it is a valid Eucharist, the Same Sacrifice of the Cross and approved by the Church. So how can a valid Missal be an abomination to God? What part of the rite in the Novus Ordo is Abominable to God? Why would the Church promulgate a rite that would be abominable and sacrilegious?
The Novus Ordo like the Traditional Latin Mass confects the same Eucharist and the same Sacrifice of the Cross. Some parts of the rite may be different but the essential elements are still present and retained. And if you compare it with Protestant service books, they are very much different.

Therefore, the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae in the First Sunday of Advent is not a end to the need of Sacrifice but rather it is still retained. Because according to Pope Benedict XVI in the Summorum Pontificum he said:

“ The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. The Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is nonetheless to be considered an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi of the Church and duly honoured for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite.”

(Motu Propio “Summorum Pontificum”, July 7, 2007)

Therefore, both Masses are both expressions of the Lex Orandi of the Catholic Church of the Roman Rite and and is no way lead to a division in the Church’s Lex Credendi.
Regarding the statement of Dr. Hildebrand because that is based only on her personal opinion. But her opinion doesn’t make the Novus Ordo the way she described it contrary to how the Magisterium of the Church describes it. Pope Paul VI already made it clear that the New Rite is the same Mass like that of the Old and he said that “The unity of the Lord’s Supper, of the Sacrifice on the cross of the re-presentation and the renewal of both in the Mass, is inviolably affirmed and celebrated in the new rite just as they were in the old.” Therefore, the promulgation of the Novus Ordo does not diminish the need for a sacrifice but rather affirms it and the promulgation of the Novus Ordo did not abolish the Traditional Latin Mass, because years later many Popes had granted permission to use it to those who are asking for it. Therefore, your statement are just lies and nonsense and pure speculations and conspiracy theories.

TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS ABOLISHED IN 1969?

Ultratraditionalist Page:

“On November 30, 1969, the first Sunday of Advent, the Novus Ordo Missae took effect, and what is now known as the Extraordinary Rite was effectively abolished. The floodgates of mediocrity and stupidity flew open.
“With the loss of a sense of the supernatural, there is a loss of the sense of a need for sacrifice today. The closer one comes to God, the greater should be one’s sense of sinfulness. The further one gets from God, as today, the more we hear the philosophy of the new age: “I’m OK, You’re OK.” This loss of the inclination to sacrifice has led to the obscuring of the Church’s redemptive mission. Where the Cross is downplayed, our need for redemption is given hardly a thought.
The aversion to sacrifice and redemption has assisted the secularization of the Church from within. We have been hearing for many years from priests and bishops about the need for the Church to adapt herself to the world. Great popes like St. Pius X said just the opposite: the world must adapt itself to the Church…
The devil hates the ancient Mass. He hates it because it is the most perfect reformulation of all the teachings of the Church. It was my husband who gave me this insight about the Mass. The problem that ushered in the present crisis was not the traditional Mass. The problem was that priests who offered it had already lost the sense of the supernatural and the transcendent. They rushed through the prayers, they mumbled and didn’t enunciate them. That is a sign that they had brought to the Mass their growing secularism. The ancient Mass does not abide irreverence, and that was why so many priests were just as happy to see it go.” ~Dr. Alice von Hildebrand
And so the ancient Mass went — but only temporarily. It is worth noting that, for all the anguish that the sudden shelving of the old rites caused, these rites have at least come down to us intact: if the Ordo Missae of 1962 was out of the reach of the faithful, it was also out of the reach of modernist tinkerers who have had a field day with the new Ordo.
Viewed in this light, the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae and its constellation of latent follies was not the source of the crisis of the last four decades, but — thanks to the divine Providence that works all things to our good — its remedy. Because God is ultimately in charge, and not Archbishop Bugnini or any other infiltrators in the Church, the Novus Ordo was always bound to be an instrument of good, for all the damage that has been wreaked on its account. It has destroyed our illusions about our spiritual health. It has torn the veneer of holiness off the rot and the maggots and put them in our collective face.
A bitter cure, to be sure, but that is often the nature of a cure. A boil, after all, has to be lanced and drained. The process is painful and disgusting, but necessary.
And there is healing at the end of it.
…and the gates of hell shall NOT prevail.

MY RESPONSE:

That is a foolish nonsense. Pope Paul VI when he promulgated in the First Sunday of Advent of November 30, 1969 did not abolish the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite also called as the Missal of Pope Pius V or Traditional Latin Mass. He did not even said in his Apostolic Constitution “Missale Romanum” that he is abolishing the Old Rite, rather he only promulgate or put into effect the new revised Missal which is called as the Novus Ordo Missae. In fact years later, Pope Paul VI through Monsignor Annibale Bugnini the framer of the Novus Ordo Missae gave to the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales the indult or permission to use the Tridentine Missal. For 50 years they were using the same Missal until today without interruption. Centuries later Pope John Paul II through his indult entitled “Quattuor Abhinc Annos” gave permission to those attached to the 1962 Roman Missal to use it and later on his successor Pope Benedict XVI through his Motu Propio “Summorum Pontificum” made it clear that the 1962 Roman Missal also called as the Traditional Latin Mass was never abrogated or abolished:

“It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy.”

(Pope Benedict XVI, Motu Propio “Summorum Pontificum”, July 7, 2007)
When Pope Paul VI promulgated on November 30, 1969, he did not abolish or abrogated the Traditional Latin Mass, because of the wide acceptance of many Dioceses to the Novus Ordo that the Old Missal fell into use but never abrogated or abolished, meaning not used anymore but not forbidden because Pope Paul VI granted permission to the LMS of England and Wales through the Agatha Christe indult to use the Old Missal. That is why your claims are unfounded.
That is why the claim “On November 30, 1969, the first Sunday of Advent, the Novus Ordo Missae took effect, and what is now known as the Extraordinary Rite was effectively abolished. The floodgates of mediocrity and stupidity flew open.” Is just a foolish claim and untrue.” The statement “floodgates of mediocrity and stupidiy flew open” is another thing, what do you mean by “mediocrity” and “stupidity” with regards to the implementation of the Novus Ordo Missae?
Another Foolish claim is this:
“And so the ancient Mass went — but only temporarily. It is worth noting that, for all the anguish that the sudden shelving of the old rites caused, these rites have at least come down to us intact: if the Ordo Missae of 1962 was out of the reach of the faithful, it was also out of the reach of modernist tinkerers who have had a field day with the new Ordo.
Viewed in this light, the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae and its constellation of latent follies was not the source of the crisis of the last four decades, but — thanks to the divine Providence that works all things to our good — its remedy. Because God is ultimately in charge, and not Archbishop Bugnini or any other infiltrators in the Church, the Novus Ordo was always bound to be an instrument of good, for all the damage that has been wreaked on its account. It has destroyed our illusions about our spiritual health. It has torn the veneer of holiness off the rot and the maggots and put them in our collective face.
A bitter cure, to be sure, but that is often the nature of a cure. A boil, after all, has to be lanced and drained. The process is painful and disgusting, but necessary.
And there is healing at the end of it”

This is what I call a foolish Conspiracy Theory, the faithful had never been deprived of the 1962 Roman Missal because 2 years after the Promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae, Pope Paul VI gave permission to the Latin Mass Society of England and Wales to continue to use the 1962 Roman Missal. Therefore, the faithful were not deprived of it. But it is always there, and in 1988, Pope John Paul II, gave permission to those attached to the 1962 Roman Missal to use the Old Missal for their own spiritual benfit and on 1984 Pope John Paul II through the indult Quattuor Abhinc Annos gave futher permission to use the 1962 Roman Missal and in 1988 the Motu Propio Ecclesia Dei Adflicta the Pope further expanded this permission when exhorted the Bishops to be generous in granting such faculty for all faithful who requested it. That is why after this Motu Propio there are Traditionalist Priestly Societies in communion with the Pope that benefited from this Motu Proprio like the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter who were former SSPX priests, Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest, Institute of the Good Shepherd, Personal Apostolic Administration of Saint Jean Marie Vianney and many more. And these groups were workin with the Bishops of the Dioceses in training priests on how to celebrate the 1962 Roman Missal. And during the Pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI he further extend this permission and made it a Law to permit the use of the 1962 Roman Missal in many Dioceses. So the claim that the faithful were deprived of the 1962 Roman Missal after the Novus Ordo was promulgated in November 30, 1969 is nonsense, not true and a lie.
So it is not true that the 1962 Roman Missal was abolished in 1969 nor was the faithful been deprived of it.
Another false statement that you said is this:

“With the loss of a sense of the supernatural, there is a loss of the sense of a need for sacrifice today. The closer one comes to God, the greater should be one’s sense of sinfulness. The further one gets from God, as today, the more we hear the philosophy of the new age: “I’m OK, You’re OK.” This loss of the inclination to sacrifice has led to the obscuring of the Church’s redemptive mission. Where the Cross is downplayed, our need for redemption is given hardly a thought.
The aversion to sacrifice and redemption has assisted the secularization of the Church from within. We have been hearing for many years from priests and bishops about the need for the Church to adapt herself to the world. Great popes like St. Pius X said just the opposite: the world must adapt itself to the Church.”

This is another nonsense, when the Novus Ordo Missae wasd promulgated the sense of the Supernatural and sense of a need for a sacrifice was still retained in the Novus Ordo, in fact Pope Paul VI clarified that notion during his General Audience:

“The Mass of the new rite is and remains the same Mass we have always had. If anything, its sameness has been brought out more clearly in some respects.
The unity of the Lord’s Supper, of the Sacrifice on the cross of the re-presentation and the renewal of both in the Mass, is inviolably affirmed and celebrated in the new rite just as they were in the old. The Mass is and remains the memorial of Christ’s Last Supper. At that Supper the Lord changed the bread and wine into His Body and His Blood, and instituted the Sacrifice of the New Testament. He willed that the Sacrifice should be identically renewed by the power of His Priesthood, conferred on the Apostles. Only the manner of offering is different, namely, an unbloody and sacramental manner; and it is offered in perennial memory of Himself, until His final return (cf. De la Taille, Mysterium Fidei, Elucd. IX).”

(Pope Paul VI, General Audience, November 19, 1969)

He made this assurance weeks before he promulgated the Missal. The Novus Ordo Missae is a valid Mass, it has the same Sacrifice of the Mass, and the same real presence of Christ, body, blood, soul and divinity in the Holy Eucharist. How can we call it an abomination if it is a valid Eucharist, the Same Sacrifice of the Cross and approved by the Church. So how can a valid Missal be an abomination to God? What part of the rite in the Novus Ordo is Abominable to God? Why would the Church promulgate a rite that would be abominable and sacrilegious?
The Novus Ordo like the Traditional Latin Mass confects the same Eucharist and the same Sacrifice of the Cross. Some parts of the rite may be different but the essential elements are still present and retained. And if you compare it with Protestant service books, they are very much different.

Therefore, the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae in the First Sunday of Advent is not a end to the need of Sacrifice but rather it is still retained. Because according to Pope Benedict XVI in the Summorum Pontificum he said:

“ The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. The Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is nonetheless to be considered an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi of the Church and duly honoured for its venerable and ancient usage. These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite.”

(Motu Propio “Summorum Pontificum”, July 7, 2007)

Therefore, both Masses are both expressions of the Lex Orandi of the Catholic Church of the Roman Rite and and is no way lead to a division in the Church’s Lex Credendi.
Regarding the statement of Dr. Hildebrand because that is based only on her personal opinion. But her opinion doesn’t make the Novus Ordo the way she described it contrary to how the Magisterium of the Church describes it. Pope Paul VI already made it clear that the New Rite is the same Mass like that of the Old and he said that “The unity of the Lord’s Supper, of the Sacrifice on the cross of the re-presentation and the renewal of both in the Mass, is inviolably affirmed and celebrated in the new rite just as they were in the old.” Therefore, the promulgation of the Novus Ordo does not diminish the need for a sacrifice but rather affirms it and the promulgation of the Novus Ordo did not abolish the Traditional Latin Mass, because years later many Popes had granted permission to use it to those who are asking for it. Therefore, your statement are just lies and nonsense and pure speculations and conspiracy theories.

Defend The Catholic Faith
Safeguards have been created to ensure the orthodoxy of the contents of our website. If, despite strictly adhering to the dogmas and magisterial authority of the Church, errors have been pointed out and proven, I will humbly submit to the authority of the Church.