Is that what some of the influential Catholic bloggers are telling us now?
Hocus pocus, as many Latin Mass people have heard, is alleged to be a pejorative term originating sometime during the Reformation, mocking the words of consecration at Mass. Sounds right to me. Today however, so it seems to me, many Traditionalists regard the Novus Ordo - Ordinary Form of Mass - the Mass of Paul VI - as just that, hocus pocus. Derision of the OF also contributes to disrespect for the Eucharist. Though there have been, and continue to be, horrible and stupid liturgical abuses added to the OF, it remains the Ordinary Form of Mass for the Roman Rite.
No doubt, the Extraordinary Form is enjoying its renaissance.
Although, reading conservative blogs and unofficial 'dispatches' from Rome, one is inclined to believe that the traditional Mass is overtaking the Ordinary Form/Novus Ordo Mass these days. Nevertheless, the EF has yet to be celebrated by the Pope in a major setting - meaning a public celebration such as a Papal Mass, for a solemnity, such as Christmas or Easter. Likewise, it remains the Ordinary Form, not the Extraordinary Form which is celebrated in all of the Catholic dioceses and most of the parishes throughout the world. In the meantime, Traditionalists are waiting for the Vatican II generations to die off in hopes that the EF will be restored as the only form of Mass. They also keep repeating to anyone who will listen or read, that the Ordinary Form lacks something, is not holy or as holy as the EF, and that it is blasphemous, and that it was an innovation even out of the pope's control, and Anna Catherine Emmerich was right... Google her if you don't know what I'm talking about. Despite all that is said, the Mass of Paul VI, though valid and licit, is nonetheless derided and disparaged by many.
The Vatican II generation(s) are idiots and cannot possibly understand culture...
Therefore they must die - die off, for culture and civilization to be restored. They speak of the ordinary faithful, numerous daily OF Mass-goers - who unlike their traditionalist counterparts remain faithful in attending 'the daily sacrifice' despite changes and innovations they disagreed with, but had no power to do anything about - as if they are apostates. Not a few traditionalists refuse to attend any Mass but an EF Mass - thus missing opportunities for frequent Communion. I digress. No doubt there is an arrogance, quite a smug arrogance on both sides of the liturgical divide. What is missing? Meekness and humility. The Holy Father does not speak like the others who attempt to translate his words, or tell us what he really means. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that the problem with cult, is that one tends to 'strain out the gnat' while 'swallowing the camel' - concentrating more upon 'the outside of the cup and dish,' while the interior remains distracted, even disconnected - so caught up in externals and theological debate. Hard for me to express since I'm not a liturgist - but some of you know what I'm saying. Some say elites - I say snobs.
However, if you've ever assisted at a monastic Mass, say at a Trappist monastery or Charterhouse, you come to understand that the Mass is prayed. You recognize the holiness of the Mass - you participate in it - when it is celebrated with reverence and devotion! No matter which form. How many good priests have been ordained for the Ordinary Form of Mass since the Council? How many priests celebrate the OF with reverence and devotion? Many, many do, led by their bishops and the Holy Father. So - who are those who seed divisions amongst the faithful, always railing that something is wrong with the Ordinary Form of Mass? Always pointing out flaws, stirring up doubt and confusion in ordinary souls?
"The Novus Ordo is NOT the Mass of the Council."
So says Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, a Church historian and scholar of the Second Vatican Council. This week the pundits are posting on what the Cardinal said here:
I must emphasise that the form of the post-conciliar liturgy with all its distortions, is not attributable to the Council or to the Liturgy Constitution established during Vatican II which by the way has not really been implemented even to this day. The indiscriminate removal of Latin and Gregorian Chants from liturgical celebrations and the erection of numerous altars were absolutely not acts prescribed by the Council. - Vatican InsiderAnd they are running with it. The Cardinal makes two points ordinary people need to consider, and good priests ought to emphasize and use to settle ordinary people's fears and concerns. The Cardinal acknowledges that in the process of liturgical reform, some things went wrong, such as: "Excesses which catapulted numerous faithful into total chaos, leaving many fumbling around in the dark." He points out that 50 years since the Council is a relatively short time to sort through the upheaval councils can create in their wake, cautioning, We need to allow ourselves a little more breathing space" ...in implementing the reforms.
At least that is how I read it, uncultured and uncouth as I may be. It is how I read the Pope, as well as Cardinal Burke, who celebrates Mass in both forms. Obviously mistakes have been made, but the Novus Ordo, the Mass of Paul VI is the Ordinary Form of Mass in the Roman Rite. Creating new 'dissent' may not be the right tactic to use in promoting the Faith.
Perhaps this is another reason the Church needs strong bishops to shepherd their flock, as well as those shepherds they appoint to guide them...
Be wary of those who 'traverse sea and land' seeking to enrich themselves.