Lessons from the Sixties: Selective Synodality and Princely Protests

NLM is pleased to offer readers a translation of a thought-provoking article that appeared at the German site Motu-proprio: Summorum-Pontificum.

The Ottaviani Intervention

Clemens V. Oldendorf

It is actually astonishing how little of Paul VI’s liturgical reform, especially his Novus Ordo Missae, which he promulgated fifty years ago, is being commemorated this year. The isolated contributions and initiatives that remind us of it come from the criticizing corner. [1] But it is noticeable that yesterday, September 25th (as of the original writing), as far as we can see, passed completely unnoticed. [2]

On this date, Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci transmitted to Pope Paul VI the Brief Critical Examination of the “Novus Ordo Missae,” which had previously been prepared by a working group of tradition-oriented theologians. This was greatly enhanced by the signatures of the two princes of the Church who made this criticism their own, especially since Ottaviani was at the time the supreme guardian of the purity of the doctrine of faith, and could have been referred to as “the Panzerkardinal” far earlier than Joseph Ratzinger, who would later follow him in the same position.

If the advocates of liturgical reform and the representatives of university-based liturgical studies overlook and ignore this jubilee with almost complete silence, perhaps it is because they do not want to unnecessarily remind people today, in a time that is forgetful of history, that the liturgy of the Church was ever celebrated in a manner visibly different from what is now the common practice, and is, in principle, also prescribed in such a way as to be normative.

With the keyword “normative”, we are referring to the Missa normativa, which at the Synod of Bishops in 1967 was presented, as it were (not to say demonstrated) as the prototype of the Novus Ordo, and which was broadly rejected by the Synod Fathers. The votes and decisions of a Synod of Bishops do not bind the Pope in his decisions, and since the Novus Ordo, which came two years later, corresponded almost perfectly to this Missa normativa, one could already see back then what “synodality” means if its tendency does not actually fit in with the Holy Father’s agenda.

But back to the Brief Critical Examination. This document criticized above all a softening of the doctrine of the Eucharistic Real Presence and sacrificial character of the Mass as seen in the liturgical texts and gestures, both in details and in totality, of the rite as Paul VI had presented it. The Cardinals therefore implored the Pontiff not to deprive the Church of the possibility of offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass according to the former Missale Romanum. Looking at the ecclesiastical constellation at that time, this action was, in point of fact, much more explosive and massive than, for example, what the Dubia to Amoris laetitia represent today. Above all, the process was more remarkable than the interventions that Cardinal Burke and Bishop Schneider have been submitting at regular intervals, since the Dubia remained unanswered.

The investigation — later also called the Ottaviani Intervention — was, by the way, not momentous in effect, yet not completely without consequences, inasmuch as Paul VI had the entire first edition of the Novus Ordo Missae books pulped (!). Nevertheless, in the next edition, only the definition of the Holy Mass contained in [the introduction to] this Ordo was half-heartedly “improved” by the insertion of an addition [with Tridentine language]; nothing more changed in the rite itself.

What remains to be recorded, and what should one perhaps learn from the events of that time for today?

The critique mounted by the Brief Critical Examination did not hinge upon liturgical abuses. The object of criticism was a Novus Ordo in Latin, at the high altar, without altar girls or communion in the hand. In the eyes of the authors and signatories, this already deviated considerably from the doctrine of the Council of Trent on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and yet such a celebration today, in circles that were close to or still hope for the idea of a Reform of the Reform, would certainly already be regarded as an expression of the continuity of the contemporary liturgy with the traditional Roman practice. In theory, this form is probably also most likely to be the so-called usus ordinarius, which in purely theoretical terms is to be the reference point for liturgical celebrations according to the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum. With this motu proprio in 2007, at least what Ottaviani and Bacci requested in 1969 — but did not then receive — was finally made possible.

And to be historically fair, it must be said that Ottaviani later celebrated exclusively in the Novus Ordo and even in Italian alone — despite the fact that, due to his position, and also on account of his blindness, he could undoubtedly have easily obtained the special indult to adhere to the earlier missal, an indult that was intended from the start for old, handicapped, and frail priests, as long as that they celebrated privately with one altar boy, and none other present. Later, Ottaviani never again spoke a word of criticism against what the liturgical scholar Klaus Gamber described as “the new papal rite,” to distinguish the Novus Ordo from the Ritus Romanus that had been passed down from Gregory the Great and Pius V to Paul VI.

After a footnote in Amoris laetitia and before the Amazon Synod [3], it is certainly instructive to remember Ottaviani’s silence, though whether it would be a model for Burke and Schneider to follow suit I leave open; but such silence would surely be more consistent for the circles of people who, at least under John Paul II and Benedict XVI, considered papalism to be, in principle, in conformity with tradition. Under Francis, of course, we experience a papolatry of emotions which is now completely uncoupled from theology, and that would have been utterly unthinkable even under Pius IX.

NOTES

[1] See, e.g., “The Strange Birth of the Novus Ordo”; “The New Mass: Fifty Years of Problems”; “Hyperpapalism and Liturgical Mutation”; “Lament for the Liturgy”; “Critique of the Novus Ordo in Two Recent Books”; “A Half-Century of Novelty: Revisiting Paul VI’s Apologia for the New Mass.”

[2] See, however, this article: “The Ottaviani Intervention Turns 50: A Perceptive and Still Relevant Critique,” which was published on the date the study bears (June 5) rather than the date it was delivered to Paul VI (September 25).

[3] This article was published on September 26, prior to the opening of the current Synod.

The Psychology of Difficulty: Time for a New Youth Strategy

At the Fota XI conference in Ireland in July 2018, which had the Divine Office as its theme, many participants made remarks about the way in which the recitation of the postconciliar Liturgy of the Hours has severely fallen off in practice. Many clergy, apparently not seeing it as a serious obligation, either don’t pray it at all, or skip it all too readily. This is perhaps less a problem among younger clergy than among older generations, who, in the confusion following the Council, threw off many obligations (clerical clothing, daily Mass, daily Office, etc.) as so many out-of-date constraints by which their “work in the world” was being hampered—or so they thought. In reality, what finally killed their work in the world was the death of the spiritual life, the loss of the primacy of the cult of God over the “needs,” real or imaginary, of Man. This inversion and perversion is what is killing the Church in the West, wherever it is dying.

It is true that, as Matthew Hazell showed in his talk at Fota, there were a fair number of vota from bishops and superiors prior to the Council asking that the “burden” of the Divine Office be mitigated — sometimes considerably, as by the suppression of certain canonical hours, or by the rendering optional of the little hours. As we know, in the end the ancient office of Prime was suppressed without further ado, and the entire breviary stripped down and reorganized into what some critics have called (not unreasonably) “the Liturgy of the Minutes.”

I found most interesting an observation someone at the conference made, who said: If you make a certain obligation too easy, it becomes all the more easy to hold it in contempt. One feels that it is hardly worth the trouble. (A good example of a light burden readily shirked off is the current one-hour Eucharistic fast.) A heavier burden, because it feels heavy, feels serious, and the absence of it is, oddly, uncomfortable. If you are used to bearing a yoke, and suddenly the yoke is lifted, one can feel off-balance, deprived of a companion, naked and exposed, at a loss.

The old office had weight or gravity to it, and the duty to pray it was emphasized strongly in canon law and priestly formation. (It makes little difference, for our present ascetical theme, whether we are speaking about the pre-Pius X or the Pius X breviary; for both placed considerable demands on the clergy.) The sight of a Catholic priest praying his breviary in the sanctuary before Mass, in the pews after Mass, in the bus, on the train, in practically any spare moment, was a familiar sight. One of the participants in Fota told a story about how, before the Council, an elderly priest would stop his car at night, get out, and finish his breviary by the car headlights, in order not to fail in his responsibility.

Now, I have noticed that, as a general rule, there are two and only two ways of making an appeal to young men to discern the priesthood, and something similar can be said for appeals about religious life. The first way is to say (through words, images, music…): “This is going to be incredibly hard. It will demand everything you’ve got. Many won’t be able to hack it. But with God’s help, you just might. We’re not desperate for you, though, so don’t bother to come if you’re not serious.” The second way is to say: “The life of a Catholic priest is wonderful! You get to be so helpful to people every day. It’s bright and cheerful, even fun at times. We need you. We’ll make it work out for you and nothing will be too hard.”

I was thinking about this in connection with a vocations video my son showed me, made by the Russian Orthodox:

This “trailer” for the longer version (also worth watching) obviously and beautifully illustrates the first type of message. And even though it makes use of the nowadays almost obligatory “Gandalf slaying the Balrog” type of soundtrack, it is impressive in its earnestness.

Contrast this virile message with the flaccid tone of all too many Roman Catholic vocational videos, where it is all smiles, handshakes, coffee hours, and the like. For example, this one, from the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., starts off with a soundtrack that can’t quite decide whether it’s jazz, classical, easy listening, or a movie soundtrack, then features a slick cardinal doing his shtick, followed by jolly junior students — regular guys just like you and me!

This one, from the same diocese, is even worse — especially for the wild west liturgical life it gives us a sneak peak of. It would be hard to imagine most serious young Catholic men finding this appealing.

Another awful vocation video would be this one from the Legionaries of Christ. But in reality, the entire genre is choked with examples of this kind.

Why don’t we contrast the Archdiocese of Washington with the SSPX’s vocational video? It's enough to watch a minute to see that this is going to be very different.

Now, I will be the first to admit that the script could have been more interesting. It follows the somewhat hackneyed “day in the life of…” model. Nevertheless, what do we find here? The soundtrack is Renaissance polyphony. The narrator tells us about the symbolism of a liturgical vestment and shows the seminarians filing in for the office of Prime (believed by some beatniks to have been abolished — don't break it to them that it survived the purge!). Beautiful images of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are followed by a panning shot that features the Angelic Doctor, who is repeatedly referred to. Cassocked teachers lead seminarians in prayer on their knees before class begins. Athletics make a required but thankfully brief appearance. A man is shown repairing a chasuble, which I consider very forward-thinking. All in all, the SSPX video is far closer to the Eastern Orthodox one, and would be similarly appealing to a man in search of a great cause to which to dedicate his life.

All this fits in well with the oft-observed phenomenon that the prospect of challenge or difficulty is what attracts intrepid spirits to make huge commitments. The U.S. Marines have capitalized on this strategy for years. They seek to attract not just warm bodies but talented candidates looking for the best, prepared to endure hardship to win glory. In other words, an elite. In fact, the strategy is as old as Our Lord, who says “take this teaching — if you can” (cf. Mt 19:12), and St. Paul, who compares Christians to olympians in training (cf. 1 Cor 9:24–27). Why, then, are we so afraid of this idea of an elite?

The apostles are often presented nowadays as a ragtag and bobtail crew, but let us consider for a moment how false this picture is. Several were strong and dedicated fishermen who knew how to labor day and night. They were not lily-livered wimps. Another was a Jewish zealot, the desperate sort who would have been ready to ambush Roman soldiers and strangle them. Another was a tax collector, which meant someone who could dominate and intimidate people, and keep a close eye on money in and money out. Two were nicknamed “sons of thunder,” presumably because of their temperaments.

The psychology at work — if you want to recruit good men, set them a towering challenge and then push them hard in its pursuit — seems obviously true in the realm of the military, athletics, and extreme outdoor activities; but it proves no less true in the realm of priestly and religious vocations. If a young man or a young woman is going to commit his or her entire life to the Lord, should it not look and feel quite serious, all-encompassing, demanding everything, but also promising everything? It will take all your mind, heart, soul, and strength, every waking minute, your voice, your lips, your senses, your imagination, your memory — “take it all, O Lord, I give it all to Thee,” as St. Ignatius prayed — but it promises to give you deification, eternal life, a hundredfold now and forever.

For this admirable exchange to be believable — that is, to be able to believe that the Church believes in the reality of this exchange — the way of life it entails must be radical and all-consuming; from the vantage of fallen human nature, it will be burdensome. But this is a necessary step along the path to that “freedom of the children of God” for which we long.

The traditional Latin liturgy is this way, too: it demands more and delivers more. It requires a fuller participation of the whole man, soul and body. We are given more to do spiritually and physically. It makes nothing easy for us — except praying, the one thing we need to do most of all. All of the difficulty is for the sake of breaking open our minds and hearts for communion with God, which will not be won cheaply, lest it be held cheap.

There are a lot of people out there in media, public relations, and, dare I say it, the Church hierarchy, who need to figure out this lesson. The Synod could use a serious injection of the same realism and nobility. (It won't help, since the whole thing has been rigged from the start, but it never hurts to say what the Synod might have been, had it been run by sane people in touch with youth.)

The most obvious way we can recover the toughness, challenge, and lofty purpose we have lost is to take up again the old breviary and the old Mass, and move on from there to a future full of promise.

Litany for the Clergy

In times such as our own, and particularly with the Synod on Youth taking place under circumstances far from optimal and seemingly bent on a tired regurgigation of outworn mantras, we would do well to pray a great deal more for our clergy — however angry or hopeless we might feel, and indeed, especially when there is so much to be angry or discouraged about. For, whatever else one may say, the worst or at least the most pervasive error of the postconciliar period has been the worldly activism that has sucked dry the wellsprings of contemplation, adoration, and reparation from the daily life of the Church. As we know from the dialogue betwen Abraham and the Lord, if there are only a few righteous men beseeching the Lord for mercy in any city, it will be spared; but if not, the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah is inescapable.

With this in mind, I would like to share a Litany for the Clergy that was recently published at the always edifying blog Vultus Christi, associated with Silverstream Priory. I have prayed this Litany a number of times during the silent Canon of the Mass and found that it well suited the pressing need of my heart to offer earnest petition at this time for our hierarchs, our clerics, and our seminarians (indeed, in a way that harmonizes with the Canon's opening, the Memento for the living, and Memento for the dead).

Crucifixion by Mikhail Nesterov (1912)

Litany for the Clergy

(for private use)

Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.
Christ, have mercy. Christ, have mercy. 
Lord, have mercy. Lord, have mercy.
Christ, hear us. Christ, hear us.
Christ, graciously hear us. Christ, graciously hear us. 

God the Father, from whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named, have mercy on us.
God the Son, Eternal High Priest and Sovereign King, have mercy on us.
God the Holy Ghost, Source of sanctity, Guide of shepherds, have mercy on us.
Holy Trinity, one God, have mercy on us.

For the Pope, Vicar of Christ, hear us, O Lord, and have mercy.
For all the cardinals of God’s Holy Church, hear us, O Lord, and have mercy.
For all the bishops of God’s Holy Church, hear us, O Lord, and have mercy.
For all the priests of God’s Holy Church, hear us, O Lord, and have mercy.
For all the deacons of God’s Holy Church, hear us, O Lord, and have mercy.
For all the seminarians of God’s Holy Church, hear us, O Lord, and have mercy.
For all ministers of God’s Holy Church, hear us, O Lord, and have mercy.

For clergy faithful to their promises, precious Blood of Jesus, fortify them.
For clergy striving to be holy, precious Blood of Jesus, fortify them.
For clergy reverent in liturgy, precious Blood of Jesus, fortify them.
For clergy orthodox in doctrine, precious Blood of Jesus, fortify them.
For clergy courageous in preaching, precious Blood of Jesus, fortify them.
For clergy generous with Confession, precious Blood of Jesus, fortify them.
For clergy devoted to works of mercy, precious Blood of Jesus, fortify them.

For disoriented clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, console them.
For demoralized clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, console them.
For exhausted clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, console them.
For unappreciated clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, console them.
For calumniated clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, console them.
For persecuted clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, console them.
For silenced clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, console them.

For abusive clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, wash over them and convert them.
For ambitious clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, wash over them and convert them.
For irreverent clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, wash over them and convert them.
For heretical clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, wash over them and convert them.
For cowardly clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, wash over them and convert them.
For vindictive clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, wash over them and convert them.
For tepid clergy, precious Blood of Jesus, wash over them and convert them.

Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world, spare and save Thy priests.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world, heal and purify Thy priests.
Lamb of God, who takest away the sins of the world, multiply Thy holy priests.

V. Arise, O Lord, into Thy resting place: Thou and the ark, which Thou hast sanctified.
R. Let Thy priests be clothed with justice: and let Thy saints rejoice.

Let us pray. O Lord Jesus Christ, be merciful unto Thy Church and let the light of Thy countenance shine upon us, that we who dwell in the valley of the shadow of death may be delivered from the evils that afflict us, and may receive many shepherds after Thy Sacred Heart, who will lead Thy flock in holiness to the pastures of grace and glory, where Thou livest and reignest with the Father in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end. Amen.

Our Lady, Queen of the Clergy, pray for us.
St. Joseph, chaste spouse of the Bride, pray for us.
St. Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
St. John the Baptist, pray for us.
St. John, beloved disciple, pray for us.
St. John Chrysostom, pray for us.
St. John Vianney, pray for us.

A Litany for the Holy Father

With the upcoming Synod, so many needs and crises in the Church, and, in general, out of our piety as Catholics towards the Holy Father, we should be praying for Pope Francis more than ever these days.

I was therefore delighted when Dom Benedict Andersen, a monk of Silverstream Priory in Ireland, sent me this beautiful "Litany for the Holy Father," which invokes every canonized or beatified pope in the history of the Church. The Litany is divided up according to days, with repeated opening and closing sections.

According to Dom Benedict, readers should feel free to print this on their own, but Silverstream does have nicely printed copies available (suggested donation, 1 dollar or 1 euro each).