Sunday, November 21, 2010

What is the Abomination of Desolation?

Is it the novus ordo missae, as some traditional Catholics assert? That question has caused not a little consternation, not to mention insult. But it is a question worth exploring given the present state of liturgical and doctrinal confusion in the modern Church.

Cum ergo videritis abomination desolationis, quae dicta est a Daniele propheta, stantem in loco sancto, qui legit, intellegat: tunc qui in Iudaea sunt, fugiant ad montes; qui in in tecto, non descendat tollere aliquid de domo sua; et qui in agro, non revertatur tollere pallium suum. Vae autem praegnantibus et nutrient bus in illis diebus! (Matt 24: 15-19)

Desolatio, -nis, f. means a desert, an abandonment. It comes from the Latin verb desolare, which means to lay waste or to ruin. It is that which brings destruction, waste, hopelessness and despair. Specifically, in this context, the Church has always read this to mean the desolation of Antichrist.

Abominatio, -nis, f. means a detestation, a loathing aversion. It is repugnance, disgust and horror. It is a derivative of the Latin expression “ab homine”, which means “away from man”, or “inhuman”. It is something that is beastly or monstrous.

It would seem that the post-Vatican II liturgical changes fit the bill, so to speak. The idea of sacrifice has been diminished, translations fraught with errors are used in the modern lectionaries, the prayers have been changed to such an extent as to cloud what the Church has always taught. What’s more, the novus ordo liturgy was created by committee. It was new creation, albeit created from many of the same materials that made up the Traditional Latin Mass. This spirit of human creation has made creativity a central aspect of the novus ordo, to such an extent that every parish community has re-created the novus ordo for themselves. This has often resulted in a rather beastly monstrosity, but is this beastly monstrosity the desolation of abomination prophesied by the Prophet Daniel, and spoken of by Our Blessed Lord in today’s Gospel?

The Prophet Daniel explains (9:26-27) that after the Christ has been slain, at which time a portion of the people will deny the Christ, and another people, with their leader, will come and destroy the holy city and the sanctuary. The result of this destruction will be a ruin or a waste, i.e. a desolation. Then in the midst of this desolation, the abomination of the same will be erected in the temple.


Haydock’s biblical commentary reads:

The abomination of deslation was frist partly fulfilled by divers profanations of the timepl, as when the image of Cæsar was set up in the temple by Pilate, and Adrian’s statue in the holy of holies, when the sacrifices were taken away; but will be more completely fulfilled by Antichrist and his precursors, when they shall attempt to abolish the holy sacrifice of the mass. St. Hyppolitus, in his treatise de Anti-Christo, mentioned by Eusebius, St. Jerome, and Photius, thus writeth: “The churches shall lament with great lamentations, because there shall neither be made oblations, nor incense, nor worship grateful to God. …In those days the liturgy (or mass) shall be neglected, the psalmody shall cease, the reciting of the Scripture shall not be heard.” The prophet Daniel (xii 11.) calculates the reign of Antichrist, from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away; which, by able commentators, is understood of the sacrifice of the mass, which Antichrist will endeavor to suppress.


P. Huchedé in his History of Antichrist explains:

Then by order of the tyrant the continual sacrifice shall be abolished (Dan. 9:27). The holy sacrifice of the Mass shall no longer be offered up publicly on the altars. The Church shall be devasted; the sacred vessels desecrated; the priests shall be scattered and separated from their flocks and put to death. The beauty of the new Sion has vanished! Her priests sigh; her streets resound with wailings and lamentations because there is no one found to assist at the solemnities of the Lamb. The Church has taken up her abode in the catacombs. (26)


The holy city is equated with the visible, institutional Church. The leader is equated to the Antichrist, and the “other people” are equated with those who follow Antichrist. The abomination itself is equated to the suppression of the public offering of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. We can assume that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass will be replaced by some other rite in the “holy place”, that is the sanctuaries of the desolated churches. However, does this other rite constitute the novus ordo?

It is clear from the above that the event will be obvious and unmistakable, at least on the part of the faithful. The erection of the abomination of desolation will be at the hands of the Antichrist after he has unmistakably laid waste the visible, institutional Church. There will be no room for debate among faithful, traditional Catholics. As Huchedé says, “all the faithful shall be terror-stricken, for there is nothing to equal the ferocity with which the beast will persecute the Church” (26). In other words, if we are debating whether or not this or that is the abomination of desolation, then we can be sure that this or that is definitely not the abomination of desolation. The very event, itself, will silence all debate.

Secondly, the abomination belongs to, is of the "desolation", which etymologically signifies emptiness. Therefore, we can conclude that whatever rite that replaces the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass will be empty. Because a valid sacrament is confected at the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, it can not be said to be empty; thus it can not be the rite that replaces the public offering of the Mass.

On these two points we can safely conclude that the novus ordo missae is definitely not the abomination of desolation spoken of by Our Blessed Lord. However, at the risk of offending, it can be argued with legitimacy that there is a certain and mediate relationship between the post-Vatican II liturgical changes and the 20th Century Liturgical Movement that affected them, and the work of Antichrist in erecting the abomination of desolation in the holy place in the end times. Is the work of the 20th Century Liturgical Movement a precursor to the abomination of desolation, a kind of shadow for what is to come?

As Haydock’s commentary points out the abomination “will be more completely fulfilled by Antichrist and his precursors.” Throughout history there have been many antichrists at work in the world, all of whom are precursors to the one man of history who is or will be the Man of Perdition. It goes without saying that there are also shadows of the work of Antichrist in the world. For a plethora of reasons we can scrutinize the novus ordo missae, at least in some of the ways it is offered, as being a shadow of the work of Antichrist. At the very least, we can scrutinize the inherent weaknesses of the new Mass that have allowed irreverence, even sacrilegious acts before the Blessed Sacrament, and a weakening of Catholic faith due to poorly conceived and confusingly worded prayers. The spirit of creativity, inherent in the novus ordo has lead to the evolution of cult of human self-worship. One need only look at some of the extremely poor translations used for the new lectionary to conclude that the Scriptures are not being heard, or at least not being heard clearly, in many places.

Huchedé writes: “By his deceitful craft he [Antichrist] will detach the minds and hearts of all peoples from the religion of Jesus Christ…” (17).

Antichrist and his precursors endeavor first to weaken the faith of Christ in the minds and hearts of man in order to prepare a generation that will accept Antichrist. Given the fruits of the 20th Century Liturgical Movement, and given its roots in the heresy of Modernism, it is easy to conclude that its fruits are a shadow of the work of Antichrist. At the very least, the new Mass’ purposeful defects, put in place by the Modernists of the 20th Century Liturgical Movement, allow for a shadow of the abomination of desolation to weaken the faith of Christ in the hearts and minds of men.

It is not our place to condemn the work of the Magisterium of the Church as a work of Antichrist. Far be it! However, we would have to be naive beyond measure to conclude that all is well in regards to the liturgical life of the modern Church. The adoption of new translations and the call for a “New Liturgical Movement”, presumably to undo or correct the work of the 20th Century one, belies the fact that something is wrong.

And that something, which is wrong, needs to be taken as seriously as our considerations of eschatological event of the abomination of desolation. No, the novus ordo missae and the current state of Catholic worship in the Latin Church is not the abomination of desolation spoken of by Our Blessed Lord in today’s Gospel, but it does encapsulate a wrong that strikes to the very heart of our Church, because our liturgy is at the very heart.

Our Blessed Lord commands those in Judea to flee to the mountains, fugiant ad montes, without any delay. Just as the Christians escaped the ravages of the destruction of Jerusalem, the faithful are to seek refuge in the mountains, the high ground, in the time of the abomination of desolation. In our own confusing times, when our own sanctuaries are visited by irreverence and even sacrilege, traditional Catholics are called to flee to high ground. That high ground is the Traditional Latin Mass, of course. However, it is also the moral high ground that we must seek. We are called to bear forth the fruits of the Traditional Latin Mass and to attract others by our virtue, kindness and charity. If the Traditional Latin Mass is superior to the Ordinary Form, then our lives as traditional Catholics will reflect this reality, if only we hear the Mass fruitfully and remain faithful.

8 comments:

  1. Hey David,

    Without trying to play Devil's Advocate, one issue I have with the Novus Ordo vs. Latin Mass dichotomy is that it is a false either/or dilemma. I am an Eastern Rite Catholic. Our liturgy is light years away from the Novus Ordo; in fact, it has remarkable parallels to the Latin Mass in essentials, though certainly not in form.

    As I told a priest the other day, it's not so much that I love the Latin Mass (only) as that I can't stand the Novus Ordo. Any of the other 26 Rites are perfectly fine.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's not a false either/or. As a Roman Catholic the other Rites are not perfectly fine. Attending the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom on a regular basis is not an option for a Roman Catholic, if that is what you are suggesting.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The abomination that causes desolation is found in Daniel 3:1-6

    The abomination of anti-christ, is anyone that preaches a false image of God, and this is found in verse 6.

    666

    60 cubits high + 6 cubits wide + verse 6 = 666 = False image of God

    "Great news everyone!! Many will be lost and suffer alive in hell for eternity!!"

    2+2 never = 5

    Eternal suffering in hell cannot = Mercy

    Gospel (Good news) cannot possibly = many will be lost

    Anti-christ is the last thing you thought it would be........

    Another secret: 1 cubit = 20 inches so 60 cubits (image) = 1200 inches

    6 cubits = 120 inches

    Now cube it

    Square inches of Nebuchadnezzar's image is 1200 x 120 = 144,000 square inches

    This 144,000 is revealing the length of time the false image would be allowed to continue

    The year 2,000 is the year 6,000 from the fall of Adam. Using the prophetic rule that 1 day = 1 year = 1 day = 24 hours

    6,000 x 24 hours = 144,000

    Another secret:

    When a person creates a scroll and begins putting seals on it, the first seal is buried in the middle of the scroll, and as each seal is placed, the scroll gets thicker and thicker until you place the final seal, the 7th, on the outside of the scroll.

    Therefore the first seal to be opened is the one on the outside, the 7th, working your way to the first inside the rolled up scroll.

    The first seal was opened in the year 2,000, and we are now in the fourth horse rapidly moving toward the pure white horse who's rider is holding a bow which symbolizes the ark (arc) of the covenant.

    ReplyDelete
  4. David,

    Thank you for all that you do with your blog.

    Question. How is it that you say that the Divine Liturgy on a regular basis is not an option?

    My son and his family have elected to belong to the Eastern rite Byzantine church though he was raised by us as a Roman rite catholic. My wife and I regularly attend with him when we are in his area - about 5 months of the year.

    Are you saying he is wrong and/or that my wife and I are wrong in our attendance.

    Do you have any reference for saying that attendance on a regular basis is not an option?

    Jerry

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi, Jerry.

    There is nothing wrong with attending the Divine Liturgy. I used to attend the Divine Liturgy at an Ukrainian Byzantine Catholic Church once a week when there was a priest in residence who would offer daily Liturgy.

    To better clarify what I mean, I should have written, attending the Divine Liturgy "exclusively" is not an option for a Roman Catholic.

    The reason I say this is because Roman Catholics are Roman, and have a right to assist at the Roman liturgy. It is simply not an option for traditional Roman Catholics to exclusively assist at the Divine Liturgy. This may be the case where necessity demands it, but that is not a situation that the local bishop should mandate or allow to persist.

    It is false to suggest, therefore, that the Divine Liturgy suffices for a traditional Roman Catholic if there isn't a Traditional Latin Mass available in a given location. It is a beautiful liturgy, but it does not suffice for the traditional Roman Catholic.

    If a Roman Catholic chooses to change Rites, he should do this only after a long period of spiritual discernment and direction from his spiritual director and pastors.

    Hope this helps to clarify. God bless!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Is the OF (Ordinary Form of the Mass) a“shadow of the work of Antichrist”? The use of Haydock is commendable but how does it square with Sacred Scripture when Mat 24:42-44 states, “ Watch ye therefore, because ye know not what hour your Lord will come. But know this ye, that if the goodman of the house knew at what hour the thief would come, he would certainly watch, and would not suffer his house to be broken open. Wherefore be you also ready, because at what hour you know not the Son of man will come.” We will not know when or how the thief will come so how will we determine what will be a foreshadowing? To have a visible sign for the elect to see so that they can prepare counters what Christ said. And St. Augustine writes “Truly Jesus Himself shall extinguish by His presence that last persecution which is to be made by Antichrist. For so it is written, that He shall slay him with the breath of His mouth, and empty him with the brightness of His presence. It is customary to ask, when shall that be? But this is quite unreasonable. For had it been profitable for us to know this, by whom could it better have been told than by God Himself, the Master, when the disciples questioned Him? For they were not silent when with Him, but inquired of Him, saying, Lord, will You at this time present the kingdom to Israel, or when? Acts 1:6-7 But He said, it is not for you to know the times, which the Father has put in His own power. When they got that answer, they had not at all questioned Him about the hour, or day, or year, but about the time. In vain, then, do we attempt to compute definitely the years that may remain to this world, when we may hear from the mouth of the Truth that it is not for us to know this.” (City of God, Book 18 Chapter 53) The OF is not a shadow of the antichrists to come since we “hear from the mouth of the Truth that it is not for us to know this.” To label the OF a shadow of the great persecution to come could also be interpreted as saying that no one at the OF is part of the elect since they are being deceived by the antichrist(s).
    You also wrote on the OF, “but it does encapsulate a wrong that strikes to the very heart of our Church.” I did not know that a valid Mass with sufficient Grace to save us from the fires of Hell could strike at the very heart of the Church. How could Holy Mother Church give her children a spiritual food (OF) that will poison them!?! Oh my, have the gates of Hell prevailed? (Sarcasm) What wounds the heart of the Church more is when some Catholics believe they are the elect simply because of the form of Mass they attend and all others the reprobate. (And this is an observation of others and not directed at you, David.)
    What are the Eastern Rite Catholics to do when the high ground is the TLM? The high ground is the Church Herself with the 7 Sacraments as our aids. The visible Church in the Roman Rite has two approved forms of Mass and the Grace provided in both are sufficient to combat the antichrist(s).
    Is the OF in need of repair, yes, but that does not make it a mark of the Beast? We must not seek “an eye for eye” when hoping for the restoration of TLM in every parish. We cannot pluck a familiar means of Grace for a billion Catholics because the form was conceived in committee.

    ReplyDelete
  7. “We will not know when or how the thief will come so how will we determine what will be a foreshadowing?”

    This is an invalid equivocation between the actual hour of Our Blessed Lord’s glorious coming in judgment, and signs and foreshadowing of the things that indicate the coming of the end times. Attempting to calcuate the exact time of Our Lord’s coming in glory is not the same thing as discerning the signs of our time.

    True, we do not know the hour, but we do know that that hour is coming. We know this because we can and should observe the world around us, which contains signs that the hour is coming.

    Our Blessed Lord tells us: “And from the fig tree learn a parable: When the branch thereof is now tender, and the leaves come forth, you know that summer is nigh. So you also, when you shall see all these things, know ye that it is nigh, even at the doors” (Matt 24: 32-33; see also Mk 13:28-29 and Lk 21: 31).

    We are not left completely in the dark as to the glorious coming of Christ at the end of history. Our Blessed Lord admonishes us to use our intellect to discern the times just as he admonished the men of day to discern their time and the first coming of Our Savior (Matt 16: 3). It is not the hour that we discern, but the foreshadowings of that hour that we discern in order to prepare ourselves for the eventuality.

    Discerning the signs of our time is not to engage in determining the exact time, so the quotation from St. Augustine isn’t relevant to our discussion.

    “To label the OF a shadow of the great persecution that come could also be interpreted as saying that no one at the OF is part of the elect since they are being deceived by the antichrist.”

    For clarity purposes, I did not posit that the Ordinary Form was a shadow of the great persecution. Rather, I posited that it is a shadow of the Abomination of Desolation, which I conjectured was a completely empty religious rite of the Desolation.

    If someone interprets what I wrote as meaning that those who attend the Ordinary Form are not part of the elect that hardly is my fault. I can not control how people interpret what I write, just as I can not control how people interpret the Bible. To clarify, I never wrote that those who attend the Ordinary Form are NOT part of the elect. Nor did I write that those who attend the Extraordinary Form ARE part of the elect.

    My personal opinion, and my preferred interperation that I would like people to carry away is that those who attend the Ordinary Form in good faith are VICTIMS of the vandals of the 20th Century Liturgical Reform. Those who attend the Ordinary Form in bad faith, i.e. do not hold what the Church has always taught, are PROTESTANTS who call themselves Catholic.

    I will address your other points later.

    God bless!

    ReplyDelete
  8. “I did not know that a valid Mass with sufficient Grace to save us from the fires of Hell could strike at the very heart of the Church. How could Holy Mother Church give her children a spiritual food (OF) that will poison them!?!”

    You are implying that I posited that the Church proffered poison in foisting the novus ordo on her children. That is not what wrote, and that is not what I meant. I wrote that it is easy to conclude that the novus ordo is the shadow of the work of antichrist, as many traditional Catholics indeed have concluded. This conclusion can not be dismissed out of hand. I then went on to write that at the very least, “the new Mass’ purposeful defects, put in place by the Modernists of the 20th Century Liturgical Movement, allow for a shadow of the abomination of desolation”.

    I do not hold that he novus ordo is anything other than what it is. The novus ordo isn’t a poisoned well delivered by the hand of the Church to her children. It is valid and contains sufficient grace. True. However, just because it is valid and contains sufficient grace doesn’t mean that it can not be poisoned by evil men. Allow me to post an example of the poisoning:

    http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2010/11/vatican-ii-moment-pre-party-mass.html

    Do I need to present any other examples? Certainly not. I’m sure, Juan, you can think of about a half dozen other examples in parishes within easy driving distance from your house. The existence of these liturgical abuses is proof that the novus ordo can be used as a vehicle for the poison of error and stupidity.

    Now, by that token, however, the Extraordinary Form isn’t exempt. The history of the Traditional Latin Mass demonstrates that it too has been used as a poisoned well. Liturgical abuse certainly was no stranger to the pre-counciliar Mass. Indeed, the black Mass used the very same words and rubrics of the Traditional Latin Mass for centuries!

    However, the pertinent question here is: Was the novus ordo constructed to be poisoned? Were the changes put in place to intentionally make it easier to infect the public worship of the church with the errors of Modernism? My contention, is: YES, definitely! This conclusion comes from studying the architects of the changes, the changes, themselves, and by observing the results.

    To better illustrate what I mean, please see this short story I wrote, inspired by this discussion: http://arsorandi.blogspot.com/2010/11/short-story-about-well-built-to-be.html

    More later.

    God bless!

    ReplyDelete