I know that this isn't a perfect analogy, but I recently had a friend who said the following:
Perhaps the deficiencies of the Novus Ordo are crystallized in the fact that it leads to diffuse blog discussions (like this one) of how to pull it out of the ditch.To which I responded:
I don't think that there is a way to pull it out of the ditch, without totaling it. I think that the only way to save it is to overhaul it.
I liken it this way. Look at the modified street rods that are out there. It would be like taking a '42 Chevy coupe and restoring it to 100% stock body and interior, while souping up the chassis and putting in a Corvette ZR1 engine package. She'd look cool and have tons of power, but she wouldn't be authentic. That's what they tried to do with the Novus Ordo in the first place. And the driver put it into the ditch.
Realistically, there is nothing wrong with putting in a restored 216 inline 6-cylinder which was what was original to the car, it adds stock value and authenticity to the car. And will fit much better and with no modification. In other words, if it can be fixed without breaking it, don't break it.
I think that the Church is looking at the Novus Ordo reform of the reform this way. I think that they want to pull the wreck out of the ditch and reform the car into something that looks like a '42 Chevy, but in actuality is something different. Why? Because change is good? Why not restore the '42 Chevy into an authentic '42 Chevy? The parts are all there, the restoration won't be any more or less difficult. And once we have the '42 Chevy with the 216, isn't it going to be easier to drive, less apt to cause problems and keep to the authentic spirit of the car as it originally was?
The TLM was the '42 Chevy in it's original state.
The Novus Ordo was the '42 Chevy modified.
The attempt at the reform of the reform is to pull the car out of the ditch without totaling it.
What ought to happen is to pull the '42 Chevy out of the ditch and restore it to it's original state, as the car ought to be, all original parts. All original specs. It is authentic and it adds value. And it will run right.
In short...sometimes a reform is good, but a restoration always adds value. I think that the leadership which heads Holy Mother Church could learn something. Just sayin'.
The car analogy is apt, but I see it as more of a TLM is a '64 Pullman Benz and the NO is a '70s Trabant. Putting a Benz hood ornament or leather seats in the Trabant doesn't actually do anything to make it any better of a car. Its still a glorified golf cart.
ReplyDeletePerhaps the best post on this blog, ever! LOVE the car analogy! Maybe a '62 Chevy would have been a more appropriate model? Haha.
ReplyDeleteThose who inherited ownership of the Dealership routinely apologise for the errors of the former owners but rarely, if ever, aplogise for their own errors.
ReplyDeleteThe Chevy Volt of the Mass is here to stay.
Ha, Ha! Good stuff!
ReplyDeleteThe New Mass and the Ford Pinto were introduced to America the same year.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qZDVqhWGILA
As I understand it, the purpose of the "reform of the reform" was to return to what Vatican II actually said about liturgical reform, and to base our evaluation of the Novus Ordo Missae thereupon. To my knowledge, the originator of that term, who now goes by "Pope Benedict XVI," has never proposed specific changes to the reformed liturgy (such as it is), let alone introducing a third form of the Roman Rite -- a "hybrid," if you will. The latter is mostly internet chatter.
ReplyDelete