“Dr. Kwasniewski’s latest book will present challenges both to those who agree with him and to those who disagree with him. For those who agree with him, his evidence and arguments ask, ‘Can you see your way to embrace all of the implications of this book?’ For those who disagree, his evidence and arguments ask, ‘State for the record your superior evidence and the arguments that justify your disagreement.’ Dr. Kwasniewski has produced a volume that demands a verdict. Agree or disagree with this work as you see fit—but it cannot with integrity be dismissed or ignored.”
—FR. ROBERT MCTEIGUE, S.J., host of The Catholic Current via the Station of the Cross Catholic Media Network; author of Real Philosophy for Real People and Christendom Lost and Found
This comment, from the dust cover, is directly on target. Dr. K has made a case. If you disagree, you have to refute what he wrote.
If it is Thursday, or any day of the week, don’t get caught napping because Dr. K might have another book.
This time its:
Close the Workshop: Why the Old Mass Isn’t Broken and the New Mass Can’t Be Fixed by Peter A. Kwasniewski
RELEASES 26 FEBRUARY 10% off
You can pre-order from Angelico press. I’ll have other links for you as well as they become available.
Here is the table of contents.
I’ve been spot reading according to topics that catch my eye in the ToC.
However, it’s good to start at the beginning, since that is where good writers front load important concepts, helpful for reading the rest of the world.
In the Preface he lays out what he trying to do (my emphases and comments throughout):
As the subtitle of this book indicates, we are concerned here with two major issues: the soundness of the inherited Roman rite of the Mass, and the unsoundness of the new rite of Paul VI. Going, in a sense, from the more known (the fiasco of the new rite) to what is less known (the perfection of the old), the first part of this book will address the new Mass and the second part, the traditional Mass. Part I will explain why a ‘reform of the reform” is not possible without altogether deconstructing the modern rite and, in a sense, trying to re-engineer the goods of the old rite out of materials poorly suited to or incapable of such a transformation; [Again and again I have heard well-meaning priests say that what is needed is the Novus Ordo with elements of the Vetus Ordo. That ignores the vast question that instantly looms: If the Novus Ordo is to be “improved” with elements of the Vetus, why not just use the Vetus and cut out the confused middle?] that smells and bells can only cover up, not correct, the enormous problems embedded in the new rite, since these problems are genetic and not cosmetic in nature; and that even the quest for a “reverent celebration”—assuming it is not obstructed by hostile forces [Has anyone heard lately of bishops forbidding kneeling to receive Communion?] — involves serious spiritual dangers for both clergy and faithful. As for Part II, it is not this book’s purpose to demonstrate in detail all the glories and perfections of the traditional rite and to respond to the arguments people never cease to hurl against it; this I have done in several other works, notably
Turned Around: Replying to the Most Common Objections Against the Traditional Latin Mass (TAN Books, 2,014). Here, I will concentrate on how proposals to reform the old rite as well as pastoral experiments undertaken in our times to ‘improve” it or to ‘make it more relevant to the people” are contrary to the genius of the rite and disruptive to the communities that celebrate it, and, moreover, that the old rite has sufficient built-in “flexibility” to make itself at home in a great diversity of situations. The key aspect over which there is control is the ars celebrandi, that is, the manner in which the old rite is offered; and in that regard, I will indeed argue that we must take pains to celebrate it well,….
In short, Dr. K argues that the Novus Ordo is flawed to the point that it shouldn’t be used and that the Vetus Ordo (the term I prefer) has always been flexible and able to accomplish what the Novus Ordo was allegedly intended to do.
I maintain that one thing that we have gained from our time in the wilderness is an appreciation of the fact that there are people in the pews, and there is a knock on effect on them by how the priest celebrates Holy Mass. This is one dimension of the polyvalent catch-phrase I often use: “We are our rites!”
Also, in the Preface, and this point merits more than mention in a footnote. This echoes my frequent observation about how some people of a certain age, who lived in those iconic and halcyon days of change and rebellion against authority, are trigged by the sight of a biretta and become more tyrannical than the fictitious tyrants they fought against in their youth:
The bitterness, resentment, and anger of elderly clergy and religious towards the revival of traditional Catholicism in our day is at least partially connected with the psychological abuse visited upon them in the sixties, when they were coerced into conformity with a new paradigm that was presented as an unrepealable replacement of the Tridentine inheritance. When they see young people now happily taking hold of these things again as if the trauma of the conciliar and postconciliar period had never happened and as if their own sufferings were in vain), it must be like salt and vinegar in the wounds. One should not overlook, as well, the Stockholm syndrome. See Peter Kwasniewski, Reclaiming Our Roman Catholic Birthright: The Genius and Timliness of the Traditional Latin Mass (Angelico Press).
The growing desire for the Vetus Ordo and other expressions of traditional Catholicism must be a constant reminder of their failed experiments and, thus, possibly, wasted years.
In Dr. K’s part about Sacrosanctum Concilium, I note especially these points.
Let’s start with this:
On the whole, Sacrosanctum Concilium is marred by two errors: the rationalist assumption that things must always be easily understood by us, [This has been my constant observation for some 30 years now!] and the neo-Pelagian implication that we—or rather, the pope and his favored commission—are the primary architects of our worship, the ones who can build a better liturgy by our own efforts, even as post-World War H statesmen flattered themselves into thinking they could build a better world under the benevolent guidance of the United Nations.
Let’s tie that together with this:
This ancient tradition, like so many others, was abandoned in the 196os as part of the “extreme makeover” of the Church’s worship by committees that invented what they thought the world now needed, and suppressed what they thought it had outgrown. That is completely contrary to the way the liturgy has always been treated: as an inheritance to be proudly maintained and jealously protected. How could such a thing have happened? A purge and fabrication of this magnitude arose from the belief that Modern Man is essentially different from his predecessors, to such an extent that what past generations possessed and made use of can no longer be assumed profitable to modern people. This belief, as false as the day is long, dovetailed with the mania for system and method characteristic of modern times: with enough taxpayer dollars and enough government committees, we can build a better world—or, in this case, with enough “experts” backed by conciliar and papal muscle, we can build a better worship.
Yes, this puts a finger on a big part of the disaster that has resulted in sacred worship and our Catholic identity. It is also at the core of the antinomianism which is rampant (except when the powerful want to punish or suppress – and then they don’t use proper procedure by violate law right and left and in between).
Sound familiar? “We are no longer like peasants or slaves who have to grovel before a king. We are grown up Easter People who should stand for Communion and receive the Host like adults, rather than subservient children from a patronizing master.”
Contrast that with the left’s hyperpapalism, papalotry. “When the Pope says something, you must obey perinde ac cadaver! Never question. Just grovel and obey.”
Dr. K concludes this section with a helpful, hopeful truth:
“As St. Thomas Aquinas argues, following St. Augustine and other Church Fathers, God would not permit an evil unless He wills to bring forth from it a greater good.”
Like Tolkien’s “eucatastrophe”. Like the felix culpa.
I could go at this book like this section by section. Just get and read it.
In chessy news… 
Recently there was an incident in St. Peter’s Basilica. A man (allegedly with mental problems) profaned the main altar over the tomb of the Apostle. In the case of a profanation like this, the altar could be “reconciled”, a kind of spiritual reordering. The altar was not technically “desecrated”, that is, it did not lose its consecration. To lose consecration the mensa has to be broken or separated from its base, or its relics are removed. In this recent case the profaner climbed onto the mensa, kicked the candles off the altar and started to pull off the cloth. It’s one thing to climb up onto an altar for the sake of doing some cleaning or decoration. It’s another thing to do so for the sake of violating its sacredness. It seems to me that this profanation was not so bad as to require a reconciliation of the altar. Perhaps the altar cloth should go (by burning). The candlestick will need to be repaired.
Easter Water is blessed at Easter and at Pentecost. As you might surmise it is used for baptisms. Easter Water is blessed while mixing in Oil of Catechumens and Sacred Chrism. The Paschal Candle is also held in the water. There is a rite for blessing Baptismal Water apart from Easter or Pentecost. This is the water we generally use for baptism, though in a pinch, other true water may be used. We use Baptismal Water for much the same reason as regular Holy Water. The bonus is the lovely fragrance of the Chrism in the water.
Black can mate in 4.
In February 1858, the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared 18 times to a girl of 14 named Bernadette Soubirous (Saint Bernadette – canonized in 1933) in a natural grotto at Massabielle. While Bernadette could see her, others could not. The Lady named herself during the 17th apparition.
Today is the Feast of José Sánchez del Río.
In chessy news…
TheCavalierHatherly on Bad news and good news. The Bishop of Camden crushes the TLM. The FSSP will start up in the Diocese of Arlington: “Oh no! It should say “Labentibus”, with a “B.” Proh dolor!”
