Abp. Viganò discusses failure of Vatican II Novus Ordo Mass

 In a recent interview, Archbishop Viganò noted something that bears repeating (well, he said a lot that bears repeating, but this stood out to me).

Excerpt (highlights mine):

Those who prepared the conciliar documents to have them approved by the Council Fathers acted with the same malice that the drafters of the liturgical reform adopted, knowing that they would interpret ambiguous texts in a Catholic way, while those who were to disseminate and utilize them would interpret them in every sense except that.

In fact, this concept is confirmed in everyday practice. Have you ever seen a priest who celebrates the Novus Ordo with the altar facing East, entirely in Latin, wearing the fiddleback (Roman) chasuble and distributing Communion at the Communion rail, without this arousing the ire of his Ordinary and confreres, even though, strictly speaking, this way of celebrating would be perfectly legitimate? Those who have tried — certainly in good faith — have been treated worse than those who habitually celebrate the Tridentine Mass. This demonstrates that the continuity hoped for in the Council’s hermeneutic does not exist, and that the break with the pre-conciliar Church is the norm to which one must conform, to the satisfaction of conservatives.

An P again:

For those who don't know, here is an image of the fiddleback (Roman) chasuble:

And this below is an example of the so-called "Gothic chasubles", which you're more familiar with, unless you attend the TLM:

The fiddleback or Roman chasuble is obviously designed for the priest to be facing ad orientem, toward the east and God, whereas the Vatican II Gothic one is for the priest facing ad populum, toward the people. The Roman chasuble is a portable icon screen, fulfilling the role the iconostasis does in the Eastern Liturgies. Iconostases and Roman chasubles serve as the curtain in the Jerusalem Temple, the confection of the Eucharistic sacrifice being the highest and holiest sacrament.

Before Vatican II's liturgical changes (implemented over a decade), it was easy to believe something holy was occurring, indeed, nothing less than the Incarnation of God brought forward time into our midst; after the Novus Ordo reigned supreme, however, it would take a miracle to believe in Transubstantiation. This is because the liturgy remains the Church's main teaching device.

Viganò states in the interview:

Now, if Vatican II was a revolutionary act, both in the way it was conducted and in the documents it promulgated, it is logical and legitimate to think that its liturgy is also affected by this ideological approach, especially if we bear in mind that it is the chief means by which the faithful and clergy are catechized. It is no coincidence that Luther and the other Protestant and Anglican heretics used the liturgy as their main method to spread their errors among the faithful.

An interview very worth reading.

An Préachán