ONALD REAGAN said famously: “The great thing about having Alzheimer’s is you get to meet new people every day.” A political science professor told us that in the 1990s. The only problem was, he told that same story a billion times! Did he see the irony? When students are told the same thing over and over, they wonder whether their professor might be senile. As an author, how much repetition is too much? Is “information overload” a real thing? I often write about post-conciliar liturgical reforms: a truly enormous topic. How dare I broach such a vast subject? I will strive to remember the advice given by Father Valentine Young (d. 2020). Talking about young priests, he once said: “When they give a homily, they act like they have to say everything they know about a subject. That’s wrong.”
Adult In The Room = Chiron • Some claim the Catholic Church effectively ended in 1962. Others act like the Catholic Church didn’t begin until 1962. I believe both are wrong. I’ve spent decades learning about what the reformers did after Vatican II. The liturgical changes contradicted the explicit mandates of Vatican II—and I’m unaware of any serious Catholic liturgical scholar who rejects that view. The final nail in the coffin was a 2016 book by Yves Chiron called: “ANNIBALE BUGNINI: Reformer of the Liturgy.” It’s one of the most impressive books I’ve ever read; the author really knows his stuff. Those interested in liturgical history leading up to Vatican II should obtain the third edition of the Saint Edmund Campion Missal (SOPHIA INSTITUTE PRESS, 2022).
Paul Inwood’s Claim (1 of 5) • Most likely owing to an earlier article I published, I was recently sent the following Facebook exchange (December 2023). Notice how Paul Inwood says: “It is indeed a miracle that the TLM still exists, considering that its adherents make up a tiny splinter sect in the Church. [After fifty years] their numbers have not increased to any significant extent.”
Paul Inwood’s Claim (2 of 5) • With a snap of His fingers, Almighty God could create a billion new planets more splendid than earth. God does not require my assistance in combating error. Therefore, I won’t waste my time demonstrating how defective Paul Inwood’s statements are. He seems to be engaging in what I call “wishful reality.” In other words, Paul Inwood doesn’t like the Traditional Mass. Therefore (according to his way of thinking) nobody else could either. It’s as if he believes that BY TYPING OUT HIS THOUGHTS on Facebook they magically become true.
Paul Inwood’s Claim (3 of 5) • It’s possible that Mr. Inwood, being an elderly person, doesn’t know where to go to discover the truth of the matter. Perhaps he truly does believe “their numbers have not increased to any significant extent” over the last fifty years. On a purely factual level, he’s dead wrong—but things get worse for him. I speak to young diocesan priests all over the world, and so many of them have learned how to offer the Extraordinary Form. Some took advantage of COVID-19 to gain this knowledge. Many are currently forbidden from offering the TLM, but such a situation seems unlikely to endure.
Paul Inwood’s Claim (4 of 5) • Inwood’s statement is also foolish from a cultural perspective. Declarations by the Vatican have often focused on EF legislation. Nobody would have dreamt of such a thing during the 1970s. Consider: Summorum Pontificum, promulgated on 7 July 2007; Universae Ecclesiae, promulgated on 30 April 2011; Traditionis Custodes, promulgated on 16 July 2021. Many “influential” people attend the traditional rites; I mean people who run major Catholic organizations. I’m also talking about “famous” people like Dr. Scott Hahn or Justice Antonin Scalia. Recently, Cardinal Zuppi, head of the Italian Bishops’ Conference, led “Extraordinary Form” Vespers in the heart of Rome. Not long afterwards, the 1962 Missal was used in Saint Peter’s Basilica (!) by Monsignor Marco Agostini, MASTER OF CEREMONIES for Pope Francis. Recently, the USCCB Vice President and Archbishop of Detroit—who served on the Bishop’s Liturgy Committee alongside bishops like Cupich and Trautman—confirmed using the traditional PONTIFICALE ROMANUM. Indeed, an ex-employee of the USCCB named Mike Lewis started a blog called Where Pacha Is. Although Mr. Lewis claims to be ‘mainstream,’ his every thought and utterance is dominated by the Traditional Latin Mass.1
Paul Inwood’s Claim (5 of 5) • It strikes me that many people will not know who Paul Inwood is. Let me briefly say that his music was popular in Catholic churches during the 1980s. His influence seems to have waned around the time of the fall of the Soviet Union (circa 1991). As a youngster, some of his songs were sung in our parish church. Even though I was very young, Inwood’s music struck me as totally inappropriate. The words “gimmicky,” “secular,” and “Broadway” come to mind. Below is an example of sacred music (!) by Paul Inwood:
The Latin Mass? • When it comes to explicit mandates of the Second Vatican Council, the Extraordinary Form seems much closer to what the council fathers desired than the Ordinary Form—especially if we’re talking about how the MISSALE RECENS was celebrated during the 1980s and 1990s. Moreover, I believe the Extraordinary Form is extremely important vis-à-vis the continuity of the church. As Cardinal Ratzinger said beautifully in a 2003 interview: “We are today not another Church as 500 years ago. It is always the same the Church.”
Reform Of The Reform? • At the same time, it’s undeniable that a “reform of the reform” (ROTR) has taken place. [For the record, I’m speaking of the the liturgy as celebrated in the United States.] Broadly speaking, we no longer see as many instances of horrific liturgical abuse. We should praise God for this! Furthermore, many parishes have started moving towards the PROPRIA MISSAE; that is to say Singing the Mass rather than singing at Mass. Many (but not all) musical abominations have been discarded. Holy Mass in the Ordinary Form is no longer completely dominated by third-rate folk music or imitation Broadway—at least in many localities. Slowly but surely, items that had been forgotten are being recovered. For instance, the ROMAN CANON is becoming more prominent (especially when it comes to younger priests). Indeed, something Pope Saint Paul VI insisted on (20 June 1966) was that the ROMAN CANON be left “untouched.” However, Paul VI said that “two or three other anaphoras should be composed, or sought an existing texts, that could be used during certain defined seasons” [cf. Yves Chiron’s Annibale Bugnini: Reformer of the Liturgy, p. 128].
A New Project • When Pope Saint Pius X came to the papal throne on 4 August 1903, all the “heavy lifting” vis-à-vis church music had already been done by Abbat Pothier. Pope Saint Pius X did not choose the 1903 book by Dom Mocquereau to serve as the basis for the official edition. Instead, he chose the work of Abbat Pothier, which had established a magnificent ‘track record’ stretching back two decades. Consider the words of Auguste Pécoul (d. 1916)—considered the spiritual “son” of Abbat Prosper Guéranger of Solesmes—published on 24 June 1901:
“To forestall any confusion, let us remember that there is just one Gregorian notation—that restored, according to the ancient manuscripts, by the eminent Abbot of Saint-Wandrille, Dom Pothier.”
I feel it’s time that we began a Missal Project. Essentially, we need to start putting together drafts of how the Ordinary Form could be made more traditional. Such a project will require many years. It will also require patient and charitable collaboration. The reason I feel we should start such a project is so that it will be “ready and waiting” when a reformer pope ascends the throne of Peter.
“Ultra-Traditionalists” Perfect? • As someone who’s been intimately involved with the “TLM movement” going back to the 1990s, I have often observed that traditionalists can be “their own worst enemy.” I agree with Paul Inwood that some “ultra-traditionalists” pretend to resurrect something that never existed. It is simply false to pretend that the 1945 Missal (for example) is absolutely “perfect” in every respect and can never be improved. There were minor traditions that were not essential. One that springs immediately to mind is how the priest was required to read the entire Gospel quietly at the altar before (!) the deacon was allowed to begin chanting it. I know of so-called “ultra-traditionalist” parishes in operation today who have a Solemn High Mass on the Feast of Christ the King but low Masses on Christmas day and Easter Sunday. [I’m not going to reveal names for obvious reasons.] The reality is, the Feast of Christ the King was invented out of thin air in 1925. Its propers never exited before 1925. It’s a completely modern feast. Indeed, our Savior’s “kingship” was traditionally celebrated during the Epiphany Octave.
Musical Considerations • Some believe music which is “dignified” ipso facto sounds terrible. Something I’ve tried to emphasize in my articles on this blog is that sacred music—whether for the Extraordinary Form or the Ordinary Form—should be a “delight” for the listener. As Pope Pius XII reminded us in §60a of De musica sacra et sacra liturgia (1958) sacred music should be performed well. I realize that some “ultra-traditionalists” believe it’s a grave sin to sing anything in the vernacular during Mass. This is incorrect, and historically ignorant. Indeed, Bishop Urban Sagstetter (d. 1573) mandated (!) vernacular Communion songs in his diocese. I delved into this subject in an article published on 22 September 2022, and I won’t be repeating everything I said there. I would simply mention that we sing vernacular hymns at our Traditional Latin Masses here in Los Angeles, and they’re quite beautiful. Here’s an example recorded during last Sunday’s Mass:
1 Perhaps Paul Inwood has a different definition of “tiny splinter sect” than most people.
