Michael Lofton's Gaffe: Unreasonable & Non-Theological Use of "Novus Ordo"

Michael Lofton's Gaffe on the Novus Ordo: A Reflection

Michael Lofton, a well-known Catholic apologist and host of the amateur "Reason & Theology" show, recently found himself at the center of a controversy involving the "Novus Ordo" pejorative term. 

Lofton, who has attempted to build a reputation for his thoughtful and often provocative discussions on Catholic theology, made a significant gaffe that has sparked widespread debate within the Catholic community. This blog post delves into the details of the incident, the reactions it has elicited, and the broader implications for discussions on liturgical terms.

The Incident

On the comment forum for a video regarding the Mayan Rite recently approved by the Vatican, he described the Ordinary Form of the Mass as the "Novus Ordo Mass" despite the official name being the Ordinary Form.  We used our SacerdotusTV channel to offer a fraternal correction, however, Lofton or whoever monitors the "Reason and Theology" YouTube channel did not take the fraternal correction in a a charitable manner.  The account responded to our comment in an attempt to refute it in a contrarian tone.  We responded again, but the person behind the account was obstinate on accepting the facts despite the evidence presented. 

Reactions and Backlash

The reaction to Lofton's comments was swift and intense. Some Catholics agreed with our correction while others were quick to "like" his comment despite it being erroneous.   This led Lofton or whoever runs his accounts to post a screenshot of the Vatican website showing "Novus Ordo Missa." Some so-called "radical traditionalists" even commented on the channels with a "gotcha" tone in regards to Lofton admitting that the "Novus Ordo" is a made-up novelty Mass and is invalid.  

Lofton's Response

Lofton continued a back-and-forth exchange and posted on X (formerly known as Twitter.  He attempted to justify his use of "Novus Ordo" by an appeal to authority and ad populum.  Lofton or the person behind the YouTube channel was reluctant to accept the fact that "Novus Ordo" is not an official term used in Catholic Liturgical documents in reference to the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite. 

Broader Implications

The gaffe by Michael Lofton has broader implications for discussions on liturgy within the Catholic Church and proper terminology. It underscores the deep-seated divisions and ignorance of the Catholic faith that exist among armchair apologists, liturgists and social media influences looking to make profits via social media platforms.  

The incident also highlights the importance of careful and respectful dialogue when discussing sensitive topics such as liturgy.  As a public figure and apologist, Lofton's words carry significant weight with those who subscribe to his content, and his comments have the potential to influence the opinions and beliefs of many Catholics. This responsibility underscores the need for thoughtful and measured discourse and vetting of any content that alleges to be Catholic, especially on topics that have the potential to cause division within the Church.

Conclusion

Using the term "Novus Ordo" is based on either ignorance or spitefulness against Vatican II and the Catholic Church or a blend of both. It can be ignorance in that a person may use the term believing it to be legitimately correct and authentically representative and definitive of the Ordinary Form of the Mass or the Paul VI Missal.  However, most of the time the term is used as a pejorative term meant to dismiss the Ordinary Form of the Mass.  Nowhere in any Catholic Liturgical document is the Mass referred to as "TLM" or "Novus Ordo."  We explain the origin of this term here in this post: Sacerdotus: No Such Thing as 'Novus Ordo' in the Catholic Church.

Lofton should have known better if he is truly for "Reason and Theology."  Summorum Pontificum written by Pope Benedict XVI which gives more broad permissions to say the Extraordinary Form of the Mass is clear and never mentioned the Ordinary Form as "Novus Ordo. It states:

Art 1.  The Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the lex orandi (rule of prayer) of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite.  The Roman Missal promulgated by Saint Pius V and revised by Blessed John XXIII is nonetheless to be considered an extraordinary expression of the same lex orandi of the Church and duly honoured for its venerable and ancient usage.  These two expressions of the Church’s lex orandi will in no way lead to a division in the Church’s lex credendi (rule of faith); for they are two usages of the one Roman rite.

It is therefore permitted to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal, which was promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Church’s Liturgy.  The conditions for the use of this Missal laid down by the previous documents Quattuor Abhinc Annos and Ecclesia Dei are now replaced as follows:

Art. 2.  In Masses celebrated without a congregation, any Catholic priest of the Latin rite, whether secular or regular, may use either the Roman Missal published in 1962 by Blessed Pope John XXIII or the Roman Missal promulgated in 1970 by Pope Paul VI, and may do so on any day, with the exception of the Easter Triduum.  For such a celebration with either Missal, the priest needs no permission from the Apostolic See or from his own Ordinary.

Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum on the "Roman liturgy prior to the reform of 1970" (July 7, 2007) | BENEDICT XVI

Note there is no mention of "Novus Ordo." The text describes the Ordinary Form as "Roman Missal promulgated by Pope Paul VI" and "..the ordinary expression... of the Latin rite."  Lofton in his comments erroneously claims and insists that the Church uses "Novus Ordo" to refer to the Ordinary Form of the Latin rite.  As you can see, this is false. He is simply not well read on the matter.  

Similarly, in the most recent Traditionis Custodes, the document does not mention "Novus Ordo" or even "TLM or Traditional Latin Mass" in reference to the Extraordinary form. It literally says in Latin "forma extraordinaria."  (see: Apostolic Letter issued “Motu proprio” by the Supreme Pontiff Francis “Traditionis custodes” on the use of the Roman Liturgy prior to the Reform of 1970, 16 July 2021 | Francis)

So we can see that the Catholic Church clearly describes the rite of 1962 as the "Extraordinary Form" and the rite of 1970 as the "Ordinary Form."  There is no mention of "Novus Ordo," "TLM," or even "Traditional Latin Mass."  These are colloquial definitions created by some Catholics in an attempt to create a narrative that there are two Masses and at some instances push the idea that one is invalid and the other is authentically Catholic.

By Lofton using the pejorative term "Novus Ordo," he is aligning himself with anti-Vatican II, anti-Ordinary Form, and anti-Pope Francis schismatics who attempt to push a false narrative based on ignorance or personal palates.  The term "Novus Ordo" makes no sense liturgically, historically or theologically.  The Mass CANNOT be new.  Jesus died once.  The Mass is a REPresentation of His Sacrifice on Calvary.  Therefore, there cannot be a "new sacrifice."  Hopefully, Mr. Lofton will be humble and accept our correction and issue one of his own and refrain from using "Novus Ordo" as it validates anti-Vatican II propaganda, is not used by the Catholic Church in official Liturgical documentation and is a term that lacks academic substance.

If not, he will be no different than Taylor Marshall, Rorate Caeli, One Peter Five, and others who push false narratives and are anti-Vatican II and anti-Pope Francis.  Then again, from online searches, it seems Mr. Lofton is seen as someone who may exhibit Dunning-Krueger syndrome and is not humble enough to accept facts and evidence that correct his errors.  On Reddit, we found this:

Michael Lofton? : r/Catholicism

This is why we at Sacerdotus cannot stress enough for Catholics and others to vet whatever content they come across that claims to be Catholic.  Many times, these so-called apologists and social media influences have a basic understanding of Catholicism and the Church's Liturgy.  The Catholic Church has the Catechism, the Bible, and documents in the form of decrees, motu propio, encyclicals and so on that officially and accurately present what the Church stands for and what she practices.  We do not need people on YouTube or any other outlet.  We can appreciate different views and takes, but we must go directly to the source for accurate knowledge: The Catholic Church.