Tag Archives: Novus Ordo

Food For Thought – Communion in the Hand…WHY?


Out of reverence towards this Sacrament, nothing touches it but what is consecrated.’

–St. Thomas Aquinas

Have you noticed a change in the way the Catholic Church receives and administers Holy Communion from the way it once was?

Do you remember when Catholics always knelt for Holy Communion?

Do you remember when Catholics received Holy Communion on the tongue only?

Do you remember when only the priest administered Holy Communion?

Do you remember our priests and sisters teaching us it was sacrilegious for anyone but the priest to touch the Sacred Host?

Do you remember when tabernacles were always on the center of the altar as the primary focal point?

Why has kneeling for Holy Communion disappeared?

Why are tabernacles disappearing from the center of the Churches and placed on the side?

Why are people receiving Communion in the hand?

Why are there lay-ministers of the Eucharist?

Why were these things changed?

If things were changed for the sake of “modern times” and “modern men”, has it resulted in record crowds of “modern men” flocking into the Churches to pray and receive the Sacraments?

Do we have record turnouts in our seminaries, monasteries, and convents?

Has the introduction of these new things increased the amount of vocations in the Church?

Has the introduction of these new things increased the amount of converts coming into the Church?

Was there a “vocation crisis” before these essential and fundamental things were changed?

In the rubrics of the Old Rite of Mass, why was there such precaution taken against the desecration of the Sacred Species?

Why did the priest wash his fingers after administering Holy Communion?

Why did the priest scrape the corporal with the paten so as not to allow even the slightest minute particle to fall to the ground and be desecrated?

Why when Holy Communion was dropped, the Host was covered and left on the floor until after Mass, where the priestwould then remove it, and then carefully clean the area where the Sacred Host lay?

Why did these rubrics disappear?

Was there more faith in the Real Presence before the “renewal?”

Was there a deeper and greater understanding and appreciation of the Blessed Sacrament as really and truly being the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity  of Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine?

Were the old rubrics simply “over scrupulous?

“Did the old rubrics and strict laws safeguarding reverence, dignity, and holiness, not express the Catholic Faith regarding the Blessed Sacrament properly?

Do we now understand and believe in it in a different manner, and this is therefore manifested by the actions of first the clergy, then the laity?

Are we afraid to adore the Sacred Host?Are we ashamed to adore the Sacred Host?

Is it any coincidence that Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament began to fade away more and more with the introduction of Communion in the hand and lay ministers of the Eucharist?

Has Catholic teaching changed regarding TRANSUBSTANTIATION, that is, the changing of the bread and wine into the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ during the Sacrifice of the Mass?

If the teaching has not changed, why has attitude, spirit, rubrics and practice changed?

Where did Communion in the hand come from since it is nowhere proposed or even mentioned in the documents of Vatican II?

Why did it still come about on a worldwide scale even after Pope Paul VI in his 1969 letter to the Bishops, “Memoriale Domini” stated “This method, ‘on the tongue’ must be retained?”

If it is supposed to be “optional”, why are the little children in most parochial schools taught no other way than receiving in the hand as “this is the way it is done?”

Why is there a new attitude of “anyone can handle it?”

Have we created a “vicious circle” or a “cause and effect” situation where radical changes are introduced, vocations drop as a result, and then more changes such as “lay ministers of the Eucharist” are introduced appealing to their need because of the “vocation crisis?”

The results of Communion in the hand and the Novus Ordo have caused a major crisis in the Catholic Church. The New York Times reported that when Catholics were asked, in a Times-CBS news poll, what best describes their belief about what happens to the bread and wine at Mass, most chose the answer that the bread and wine are “symbolic reminders of Christ” over the answer that they are “changed into the Body and Blood of Christ”. The official Church teaching, which we must believe in order to be saved, is this: “The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharist species subsist. Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and the whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.”

What is the solution to this terrible loss of faith? We must return to the traditional teachings of the Church and to the Traditional Latin Mass as codified by Pope St. Pius V, who declared, by virtue of his apostolic authority, was to last in perpetuity and never at a future date could it be revoked or amended legally. The way we worship is the way we believe (lex orandis, lex credendi)

Ecclesiastical Materialism


Introduction. From the title, one might expect that I would be writing about avarice among the clergy. I am not addressing that at all, however. Recently I received from an old friend, who is a Novus Ordo conservative, a note in which he invited me to come back “to Rome — and the true Church — outside of which there is no salvation.”

His invitation, although made with all good intentions, nevertheless prompted me to write this response. What he means is that I should give up my repudiation of Vatican II and its subsequent reforms, submit to the local bishop, and be somehow “regularized” within the structures of the Novus Ordo.

First response. My first response is the following. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that there is one true Church of Christ, and only one, which is the Roman Catholic Church. The Novus Ordo teaches that the Church of Christ merely “subsists in” the Catholic Church. (Lumen Gentium)

The Roman Catholic Church teaches that outside of the Roman Catholic Church there is no salvation. The Novus Ordo teaches that outside the Roman Catholic Church there is salvation, namely that non-Catholic religions are means of salvation. (Decree on Ecumenism, Catechesi Tradendæ of John Paul II)

The Roman Catholic Church condemns religious liberty. The Novus Ordo teaches religious liberty. (Decree on Religious Liberty)

The Roman Catholic Church condemns the idea that the college of bishops has supreme jurisdiction over the whole Church. The Novus Ordo teaches this condemned doctrine, known as collegiality. (Lumen Gentium)

The Roman Catholic Church condemns adultery and fornication in all cases. The Novus Ordo teaches that these are morally acceptable in certain cases. (Amoris Lætitia)

The Roman Catholic Church condemns as a mortal sin of sacrilege the giving the Holy Eucharist to non- Catholics. The Novus Ordo approves of it. (1983 Code of Canon Law)

The Roman Catholic Church condemns the use of birth control devices as mortally sinful and intrinsically evil. The Novus Ordo permits birth control devices for prostitutes. (Ratzinger, “Benedict XVI,” in a published interview)

What I have responded above is only a smattering of the myriad dogmatic, moral, liturgical, and disciplinary contradictions between the Roman
Catholic Church and what we call the Novus Ordo. We could provide the endless list of heresies and blasphemies of Bergoglio. But these things are well known.

The four marks of the Church. I will add to this first response the four marks of the Church.

(1) The Roman Catholic Church is one in faith, that is, in order to be Catholic all must profess the same dogmatic and moral teachings which are taught by the Roman Catholic Church. The Novus Ordo has no unity of faith, and as we have seen, has no continuity with the Catholic past in any of the essential aspects of the Church’s unity.

(2) The Roman Catholic Church is catholic, that is, universal, since it preaches a single doctrine to the whole world. Since the Novus Ordo lacks unity in doctrine, and lacks continuity with the Church’s past in matters of doctrine, it cannot have the mark of catholicity. For catholicity presupposes unity.

(3) The Roman Catholic Church is holy. The Novus Ordo is unholy, because it condones evil disciplines, preaches condemned doctrines and heresies, leads people into error and sin, and promotes the evil New Mass, promotes abominable ecumenical acts with non-Catholic religions, and condones sacrilegious liturgical practices.

(4) The Roman Catholic Church is apostolic. The Novus Ordo has abandoned apostolic doctrine and discipline, and teaches and does what is contrary to this sacred apostolic deposit.

Come back to what?

My friend’s invitation makes it sound as if the Catholic religion is intact in the institutions he wants me to embrace. It is as if it is the year 1950, and that I have wandered off into schism because of my pride. If this were true, I would return immediately. But there is an elephant in the room.

The elephant is this: The Novus Ordo is innovation, is heresy, is alien to the religion revealed by God and taught by the Roman Catholic Church.

It is as much a break with the past as the heresy of Martin Luther was. What is different, however, between Martin Luther and the Novus Ordo? There is this significant difference: Martin Luther was excommunicated and subsequently founded his own church.

The Novus Ordites have never been excommunicated, and have never founded their own church. This difference is the key to understanding the present problems in the Catholic

Ecclesiastical materialism. Now I will explain ecclesiastical materialism. The Roman Catholic Church has a visible aspect and an invisible aspect. What is visible is the external profession of faith, the administration of the sacraments, and the visible government. What is invisible is the grace and assistance of the Holy Ghost which infuses the virtues of faith, hope, and charity, the authority to govern, and the indelible character on the soul in Baptism, Confirmation, and Holy Orders.

The Holy Ghost, furthermore, assists the Church by an invisible influence in its promulgation of doctrine, morals, liturgy, and discipline, in such a way that these things are free from error. It is this invisible assistance which guarantees the infallibility and indefectibility of the Church.

All of these qualities are invisible, but are nonetheless what make the Catholic Church the one, true Church of Jesus Christ, outside of which there is no salvation. These invisible qualities have made the Catholic Church for two thousand years the unchanging, permanent, always consistent and coherent institution of divine truth in a sinful, ignorant, and ever-fluctuating world.

Even the administration of the sacraments has an external and internal aspect. The external aspect is the visible rite itself. The internal aspect is the validity of the sacrament, whereby it confers the grace it signifies. It is therefore possible that the external rite be observed and administered, even though, through some internal and invisible defect, the sacrament is not valid.

In our discussion here, we are saying that what is left of the authority of the Church in the Novus Ordo is merely the material or visible aspect of authority, that is, persons designated to receive authority. What is lacking to them is the divine authority, and the divine assistance which necessarily accompanies it. Body and soul. Just as the soul is the life of the body, so it is authority which gives life, so to speak, to the person who is designated to be pope or bishop. It is to say that a mere election or appointment is not sufficient. The authority must come to him from Christ, the Invisible Head of the Church, in order that he be a true pope or a true bishop.

This authority is transferred only on condition that the designated person have the intention of promoting the objective and proper ends of the institution over which he is placed. It is for this reason that the president-elect of the United States does not obtain power in November
when he is merely elected, but in January when he is inaugurated, and only on condition of swearing to uphold the Constitution of the United States. He must swear that he intends to lead the country to its objective and proper ends. Were he to fail to so swear, he would fail to obtain the power, and would remain a president-elect, a president only materially, until such time as the Congress removed the election from him.

What has happened to the Church since 1958.

What we are facing in the Novus Ordo is this: Modernists, by remaining secretive for decades, managed to obtain by the normal and legal process of appointment and designation, a position in the Church to which authority is normally connected. So John XXIII was elected pope in 1958. By a defect, however, the authority, which is invisible and which is given byChrist the Head of the Church, was never transferred to John XXIII and his successors. What was this defect? It is that they intended to pervert the Church, and to lead it in a direction contrary to its nature and purpose given to it by God. In a word, they wanted to
transform the structures and institutions of the Roman Catholic Church into a huge vehicle of their
Modernism. This evil intention is what has blocked the flow of authority from Christ into them. Without this authority they remain non-popes, false popes.

The bishops who have embraced this perversion of Catholicism are also false bishops for the same reason.
That the authority of Christ and the assistance of the Holy Ghost are lacking can be seen from the
Hiroshima effect of Vatican II.

The Novus Ordo religion — essentially Modernism — has wrecked all of the institutions of the Catholic Church. What is left is only a lifeless shell of these institutions. There are the same physical buildings. There are the same institutions of government. There is still a functioning Vatican. There is still a diocesan bishop. There is still a chancery. There are pastors appointed. There are functioning parishes. There are rectors of seminaries, the few that are left.

What we are seeing here, however, is merely a carcass of the Church’s authority. It is something like a dead whale which has washed up on the shore. These institutions, both the buildings and the government, constitute, from a purely material and
visible point a view, a continuity with the past. Internally and invisibly, however, they are full of doctrinal, moral, liturgical, and disciplinary
corruption. The stench of death rises from them, that is, the stench of heresy and all of its effects.

Everything is infected with gangrene: the Mass, the rites of the sacraments, the catechism, doctrine, morals, attitudes. We see the effects of this infection, as well, in the emptying of the seminaries, convents and religious houses of all kinds, in the breathtaking decline of religious belief and practice, especially among the young, in the nauseating and disgusting conduct of the clergy, even to the point of sodomitic orgies in the Vatican, enhanced with both drugs and liquor, which recently took place, and was reported in the major newspapers, e.g., the London Times.

The Novus Ordo popes, consequently, are mere “cadavers” of real popes, inasmuch as they sit in the chair of Peter, wear the uniform of a pope, but have no power from Christ to teach, rule and sanctify in His name.

My second response. My second response, therefore, is that the Novus Ordo conservatives are ecclesiastical materialists. They can see only the continuity of lifeless institutions from pre- to post-Vatican II, and from that they conclude that salvation consists in adhering to these lifeless institutions. They see only the material side of the Church, its visible
side, and turn a blind eye to the absence of the invisibles of the Church, especially the assistance of the Holy Ghost in keeping the Church free from error and defection. The Novus Ordo religion is one big error and defection. The fact that error and defection can be found in it is an infallible sign that the invisible assistance of the Holy Ghost is not with the Modernist “popes” and “bishops.” They have no authority to rule, no matter if they are maintaining the buildings and governmental institutions of the Church.

An analogy. To illustrate my point, I will make an analogy to a hijacked airplane. Imagine a scene in which terrorists, who have come through the ranks of the airline as uniformed, licensed, and authorized pilots, one day show their true colors by announcing that the airplane will be flown into the side of a building. They slit the throats of anyone who tries to
stop them. From the outside, the plane is flying as normal. Inside there is chaos, terror, and horror. The Novus Ordo conservative could be compared to the passenger who would say: “For as long as we are still flying, and the pilots are authorized and uniformed pilots, and the airline logo is still on the plane, there is nothing to fear.”

The sedevacantists are those who have done something to stop the evil pilots, and who have had the common sense to declare that if the pilots intend the ruination of the aircraft and its passengers, they do not have the authority to pilot the plane. These sedevacantists are considered “extreme” and “misled” by the passengers who are consoled — indeed blinded — by the purely external signs of the normal functioning of the plane. These are the Novus Ordo conservatives. A carcass of authority.

The Novus Ordo conservative looks merely at the carcass of authority
and government, which is really the only thing left intact since Vatican II, and from it concludes to the identity of the pre- and post-Vatican II religion. He fails to understand that if the invisible qualities of the Church do not vivify the visible institutions of the Church, then these institutions are dead in the practical order.

The Catholic Church, as the Church founded by Christ and assisted by the Spirit of Truth, always retains these institutions of the papacy and episcopacy and her faithful are always attached to them. Therefore in this present hijacking of these institutions, the Church does not lose her power to teach, to rule, and to sanctify, for these pertain to her divine constitution. Just as the solution to the hijacked airline is to wrest the control of the aircraft from those who would pervert its function and destination, so the solution for the Church is to wrest control of these sacred institutions from the Modernists so that once again the government of the Church may
function normally.

In order to wrest control, however, it is first necessary to identify the hijacker and to proclaim what is common sense: that he who intends the destruction of the aircraft and its passengers does not have the authority to pilot the aircraft. Likewise the Modernist, though sitting in a papal or episcopal throne, does not have the authority to pilot the Church.

The worst thing anyone could do in such a case is to reassure Catholics that because we find these Modernists sitting in the papal throne or episcopal throne, then for that reason they must have the authority to rule the Church. It is as absurd as to say that because the hijacking pilots are seated in the cockpit, they have the authority to pilot the plane and we must obey them.

The Novus Ordo conservative, in remaining loyal to the Modernist “authorities,” stymies and paralyzes
a proper and efficacious reaction to the problem in the Church. He invites everyone to rally to the Modernists, and to spurn and condemn the sedevacantists as schismatics. If the four Novus Ordo cardinals who presented the Dubia to Francis had the courage to declare him a non-pope, for reason of heresy, the Catholic Church would be on the road to recovery. Instead, they were careful to tell Francis that they were not sedevacantists. Cardinal Burke, one of the Dubia cardinals, stated in an interview in December that if Francis were a public heretic, he would no longer be the pope.

Leave Rome? Who has left Rome? It is not to leave Rome, the one true Church, to be faithful to Catholic doctrine, liturgy and discipline. It is not to leave Rome to denounce as Modernism, the worst heresy to assail the Church according to Saint Pius X, the aberrations of Vatican II in doctrine, liturgy, and discipline. It is not to leave Rome to declare that those who deviate from the true faith cannot rule the Catholic Church.

It is to leave Rome, however, to embrace the new religion of Vatican II, and to associate with the authority of Christ those who have devastated, in a matter of fifty-nine years, counting from 1958, the magnificent Catholic Church, built up for centuries by true popes and bishops with the assistance of the Spirit of Truth. For Rome is the Church, and the Church is the Faith.

All of these discussions always revert to a single question: Do the reforms of Vatican II constitute a new religion, different from the Catholic religion? If
they do, then the position of the sedevacantists is correct. For it is impossible that the Church, assisted
by the Holy Ghost, could promulgate to the whole world a false religion. If, on the other hand, they do not constitute a new religion, if indeed there is continuity of true doctrine, liturgy and discipline, then the sedevacantist is wrong and the Novus Ordo conservative is right. So it is pointless to talk about anything else unless this single burning question is answered.

His Excellency Bishop Donald Sandborn Most Holy Trinity Seminary

God Bless BJS!!

Vatican II: worth forgetting, but numbers that cannot be forgotten

For more info on what has been going on to the Catholic Church please see link below:


The following statistics via CARA:

As numbers don’t lie, the three charts above show the undeniable slow death of the Church. It also shows the so-called “Francis Effect” has had zero effect on Sunday Mass attendance.

Now, for a glimpse of what the Church was. The numbers of Pius XII, the pontiff preceding the Council, are below. And they are equally as staggering in a good way as the post-Council numbers are devastatingly bad:

Novus Ordo “Messes”

Here are just a few other Novus Ordo Messes documented:

    The Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo Service


    Title & Description



    Date of Photo

    Afro Mess “Afro” Mess
    during which people dressed as African “gods” and “goddesses”, while a pagan priestess acted as an acolyte of the presbyter
    Novus Ordo Presbyter VIIIth Encounter of UNESCO Schools, Sao Luis do Maranhao, Brazil November 17, 2001
    Army Mess “Army” Mess
    in which the performer of the Mess wears a camouflage smock and “consecrates” kommunion kookies in a wicker basket atop an army jeep
    Presbyter Norman Oswald Milwaukee, Wisconsin June 6, 2004
    Balloon Mess “Balloon” Mess
    in which the celebrant and congregation dance to a rock band holding helium balloons
    Newchurch Cardinal Christoph Schönborn Wolfsthal, Austria November 19, 2008
    Barefoot Mess “Barefoot” Mess
    in which teenagers sit around the Novus Ordo “table” in T-shirts, shorts, and bare feet
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Novus Ordo Parish June 9, 2003
    Beach MessBeach Mess Presbyter “Beach” Mess
    in which Mess is performed on the sand of a beach with the congregation dressed (actually partially undressed) in beach and swimwear
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Novus Ordo Parishes,
    Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts
    October 11, 2003
    Bikers Mess 1Bikers Mess 2 “Bikers” Mess
    in which motorcyclists recline on their “hogs” dressed in T-shirts and jeans, bandana head coverings, boots, and black leather
    Archbishop Timothy Dolan Holy Hill,
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    August 30, 2003
    Black Culture Mess “Black Culture” Mess
    in which Africans dressed in native skirts dance around the Novus Ordo “table”
    Roger Cardinal Mahony Cathedral,
    Los Angeles, California
    May 10, 2003
    Buddha Mess “Buddha” Mess
    in which the Mess is performed on a small table before a much larger Buddha altar
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Nuns In the West Conference, Hacienda Heights, California May 23-26, 2003
    Bum's Mess “Bum’s” Mess
    in which Mess is performed on a picnic table, and some of the participants come in undergarments
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Plainfield, Illinois Summer 2002
    Camouflage Mess “Camouflage” Mess
    in which vestments of camouflage material, designed by a Lutheran minister, are used
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Iraq April 2003
    Camp Mess “Camp” Mess
    in which “Mess” is performed on an overturned canoe
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Poland 2004
    Campfire Mess “Campfire” Mess
    in which “Mess” is performed on a toolbox by a presbyter “vested” in hiking clothes in front of a campfire
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Andrew Boboli Academy,
    Cardboard Box Mess “Cardboard Box” Mess
    in which Mess is said on a cardboard box
    Jesuit Presbyter World Youth Day,
    Toronto, Canada
    Summer 2002
    Carnival Mess “Carnival” Mess
    in which Newchurchers dressed as carnival fools stand around the table holding hands
    Novus Ordo Cardinal Karl Lehmann St. Pius Church,
    Bad Neuenahr-Ahrweiler, Germany
    July 29, 2007
    Charismatic Mess “Charismatic” Mess
    in which members of the congregation bark like dogs, oink like pigs, and roll on the floor
    Novus Ordo Presbyter University of Steubenville,
    Steubenville, Ohio
    October 20, 1997
    Cheesehead Mess “Cheesehead” Mess
    in which the performer of the Mess wears a mitre of cheddar cheese
    Archbishop Timothy Dolan Milwaukee, Wisconsin September 26, 2002
    Chinese Tea Mess “Chinese Tea” Mess
    in which Chinese tea is offered at the Offertory, and ancestors are worshipped at a pagan-style side altar
    Novus Ordo Bishop Allen Vigneron Our Lady of the Rosary,
    Union City, California
    February 7, 2004
    Circus Mess “Circus” Mess I
    in which the Mess is performed by presbyter and deacon vested in circus colors and sporting red clown’s noses
    Novus Ordo Presbyter and Deacon St. Michael, Wuerzburg, Germany August 7, 2005
    Circus Mess “Circus” Mess II
    in which the Mess is performed by a presbyter in a clown chasuble and consecrating what looks like a layer cake and Kool-Aid in plastic cups
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Jerry Hogan Worcester, Massachusetts October 17, 2011
    Clown Mess “Clown” Mess
    in which the performer is “vested” as a clown and engages in “sacred laughter”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Brian Joyce Christ the King Church, California September 1, 2002
    Coffee Mess “Coffee” Mess
    in which coffee is used for “communion”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. William’s Church,
    Louisville, Kentucky
    October 4, 2002
    Come As Your Are Mess “Come as You Are” Mess
    in which the recipients of the “cookie” come up dressed as clowns
    Novus Ordo Presbyter John Johnson St. James the Greater Church,
    Dogtown, St. Louis, Missouri
    March 17, 2004
    Cookie Mess “Cookie” Mess
    in which invalidating ingredients are used (said to characterize the majority of Messes performed in the United States)
    Bishop John Cummins Oakland, California June 17, 2002
    Cowboy Mess “Cowboy” Mess
    in which the presbyter and his ministers were all “vested” as cowboys and live poultry were placed about the altar
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Canada 2005
    Dance Mess “Dance” Mess
    in which participants dance around the Novus Ordo “table”
    Archbishop Anthony Pilla Kent State University Newman Center,
    Kent, Ohio
    June 16, 2003
    Dip It Yourself Mess “Dip It Yourself” Mess
    in which children dip their Novus Ordo cookie into — what? — milk, grape juice, wine?
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Martin de Corléans,
    Aosta, Italy
    Disco Mess “Disco” Mess
    in which a mob of presbyters “concelebrates” Mess in the “disco” style, with hands waving and bodies undulating before the Novus Ordo dinner table
    Novus Ordo Presbyters Plobsheim, France May 31, 2009
    Divine Mercy Mess “Divine Mercy” Mess
    in which participants act like charistmatics with hands swaying
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Various April 27, 2003
    Dorito Mess “Dorito” Mess
    in which a “Dorito” corn chip is used as matter
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Religious Education Congress,
    Cathedral, Los Angeles, California
    October 21, 2003
    Drum Mess “Drum” Mess
    in which the presbyter performs the Mess with clay pots, sesame stick, and snare drum on the “table”
    Presbyter Garry Boy Scout Meeting,
    Friedberg, Germany
    Easter Bunny Mess “Easter Bunny” Mess
    in which the presbyter concelebrates the Mess with an Easter bunny, who hands out chocolate eggs for “communion”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Hartberg, Austria April 8, 2012
    Family Mess “Family” Mess
    in which the presbyter performs the Mess while the kids loll around the “sanctuary” bored out of their goards with their backs toward presbyter, and altar
    Presbyter Joseph Ziliak St. John the Baptist Parish,
    Newburgh, Indiana
    Fetish Mess “Fetish” Mess
    in which semi-naked natives wearing fetish feathers gather around the “sanctuary”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Tom Gier Society of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity 2000
    Field Mess “Field” Mess
    in which the presbyter performs the Mess in a field while the kids loll around in the grass
    Polish Presbyter Poland May 24, 2004
    French Bread Mess “French Bread” Mess
    in which french bread is “elevated” while people squat around a circular coffee table
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Steve Kelly A Living Room in Los Angeles, California 1996
    Field Mess “Front Yard” Mess
    in which the presbyter takes his ease in the front yard while a female “homilist” does all the work
    Presbyter Raymond Thomas St. Mary/St. Francis Cabrini Church,
    Conneaut, Ohio
    Summer 2006
    Gay Mess “Gay” Mess
    in which presbyters gather around the bishop in the rainbow-colored flag, the Radical Gay Movement’s war banner
    Roger Cardinal Mahony St. Dominic’s Church,
    Eagle Rock, California
    February 4, 2001
    Guitar Mess “Guitar” Mess
    in which the presbyter himself “performs” Mess and the music on the profane guitar
    Novus Ordo Presbyter “Dan” University of Canberra, Australia,
    “Spiritual Meeting Place”
    Gym Mess “Gym” Mess
    in which “a joyful and creative liturgy designed by and for families with Gospel-centered messages geared toward children” is performed while children crowd around the Novus Ordo “table” Indian-style
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Joan of Arc Church, Minneapolis, Minnesota July 20, 2003
    Gymnastic Mess “Gymnastic” Mess
    in which gymnasts dressed in flimsy costumes perform during the performance of the Novus Ordo Mess
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Menzingen, Switzerland May 2, 2004
    Haystack Mess “Haystack” Mess
    in which the presbyter simulates Mess on a haystack
    Presbyter Jim Profit Guelph, Ontario, Canada June 1, 2008
    Hindu Mess “Hindu” Mess
    in which pagan Hindu girls dance around the altar chanting the Hindu om
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Thomas d’Sa and Newparish presbyter Toronto, Canada July 2, 2006
    Hoverboard Mess “Hoverboard” Mess
    in which the performer of the Mess “presides” from a hoverboard, which he rides up and down the center aisle
    Novus Ordo Presbyter San Pablo, Philippines December 24, 2015
    Ignatian Retreat Mess “Ignatian Retreat” Mess
    in which a semi-nude Novus Ordo Jesuit presbyter dances a Mess
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Robert Ver Eecke, S.J. Boston, Massachusetts September 9, 2003
    Indian Chief Mess “Indian Chief” Mess
    in which a Novus Ordo Jesuit presbyter dons an Indian chief’s headdress and performs the Mess
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Tekakwitha Conference, Tucson, Arizona 2005
    Indian Feather Mess “Indian Feather” Mess
    in which the Novus Ordo Archbishop of Denver sports Indian feathers and tom-toms
    Archbishop Charles Chaput Denver, Colorado August 4, 2003
    Juggler Mess “Juggler” Mess
    in which a clown-juggler juggles the “cookies” while the presbyter “performs” Mess in a circus
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Heller Circus Knie,
    July 21, 2002
    Juvenile Mess “Juvenile” Mess
    in which seventh-grade girls prance around the “altar” while the presbyter performs “Mess” behind an altar frontal reading, “Treat others the way you would like to be treated,” enclosed in a big pink heart
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Laurie O’Toole Warrnambool, Victoria, Australia June 27, 2003
    Kitchen Table Mess “Kitchen Table” Mess
    in which Mess is performed on kitchen table with biscuits
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Austria October 31, 2003
    Kool-aid Mess “Kool-aid” Mess
    in which a Newchurch cardinal “consecrates” grape, cherry, and orange Kool-aid
    Newchurch Cardinal Roger Mahony Archdiocesan Pastoral Council Meeting
    Los Angeles
    February 13, 2007
    Life Teen Mess

    “Life Teen” Mess
    in which “Life Teen” charismatics worship the Novus Ordo “cookie”

    Novus Ordo Presbyter Various September 2, 2003
    Life Teen Mess

    “Low Dinner Table” Mess
    in which the Novus Ordo “Dinner Table” Is So Low that the presbyter has to perform the Mess kneeling

    Novus Ordo Presbyter Attard, Malta August 2014
    Menorah Mess “Menorah” Mess
    in which a Jewish Menorah is placed on the Novus Ordo “table”
    Archbishop Alfred Hughes Chapel of Notre Dame,
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    October 5, 2003
    Mother Earth Mess “Mother Earth” Mess
    in which a Novus Ordo Franciscan Sister of the Perpetual Adoration makes an offering to Goddess Mother Earth
    Novus Ordo Priestess Various August 12, 2003
    Mummers Mess “Mummers Mess”
    in which lectors and gift bearers are dressed up like Voodoo practitioners
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Robert Feeney Our Lady of Mt. Carmel,
    South Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    December 31, 2003
    Nightclub Mess “Nightclub” Mess
    in which the performer dresses in a tuxedo and tells jokes
    Monsignor Reynolds Pompano Beach, Florida April 7, 2003
    Oecumenical Day Mess “Oecumenical” Mess
    in which a joint Protestant-Catholic oecumenical service is performed
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Gotthold Hasenhuttl Berlin June 1, 2003
    Pancake Mess “Pancake” Mess
    in which a vested priestess cuts the pancake “species,” assisted by a presbyter and a bishop, while a T-shirted acolyte uses an ice-cream scoop in the clay “chalice,” all this taking place on a table covered with a multicolored party tablecloth
    Novus Ordo Bishop Pedro Casaldaliga (in background) Goiania, Brazil,
    Jesuit Youth House
    Papal Buddha Mess Papal “Buddha” Mess
    in which Mess is celebrated with a Buddha atop the Novus Ordo “table”
    Pope John Paul II Assisi, Italy October 26, 1986
    Papal Clown Mess Papal “Clown” Mess
    in which clowns entertain in front of the pope on his throne
    Pope John Paul II St. Peter’s Square,
    Vatican City
    November 17, 2002
    Papal Hindu Mass Papal “Hindu” Mess
    in which what appear to be Hindu ceremonies are performed in front of the papal Mess
    Pope John Paul II New Delhi,
    November 7, 1999
    Papal Nudie Mess Papal “Nudie” Mess
    in which a bare-breasted lectoress reads the Epistle in front of the pope and his clergy
    Pope John Paul II Papua New Guinea 1984
    Papal Sugar Cookie Mess I Papal “Sugar Cookie” Mess I
    in which JPII “consecrates” matter looking like a giant sugar cookie
    Pope John Paul II St. Peter’s Basilica,
    Vatican City
    September 4, 2003
    Papal Sugar Cookie Mess II Papal “Sugar Cookie” Mess II
    in which Benedict-Ratzinger “consecrates” matter looking like a giant sugar cookie
    Pope Benedict XVI Redemptoris Mater Seminary, 
    April 21, 2005
    Papal Woodstock Mess IPapal Woodstock Mess II

    Papal Woodstock Mess III

    Papal “Woodstock” Mess
    at which youth, dressed in beachwear (if at all), lounge around on the grass looking bored
    Pope John Paul II XIIth World Youth Day 1997
    Patio Mess “Patio” Mess
    in which Mess is performed on a round patio table
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Paul Villeroy St. Augustine Parish, Signal Mountain, Tennessee July 11, 2004
    Peanut Butter Cookie Mess “Peanut Butter Cookie” Mess
    in which peanut-butter cookies are used for the matter
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Archdiocese in the Southern United States October 23, 2003
    Picnic Mess “Picnic” Mess
    in which the short-sleeved presbyter holds up a cookie and glass of Kool-Aid, with other plastic containers of Kool-Aid on the picnic table
    Novus Ordo Franciscan Presbyter Franciscan Profession, United States 2003
    Pink Panther Mess “Pink Panther” Mess
    in which a cutout of a pink panther, the school’s “spirit” mascot, was placed in front of the “table”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Rhenne Mt. Carmel Academy,
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Polka Mess “Polka” Mess
    in which sacred music is replaced by polkas, and the polka is danced around the Novus Ordo “table”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Perkovich St. Peter’s Basilica,
    Vatican City
    Pontoon Mess “Pontoon” Mess
    in which Mess is performed on a pontoon raft lurching back and forth on a river at a summer camp
    Novus Ordo Pastor Joe Campbell Our Lady of Perpetual Help Church,
    LaFollette, Tennessee
    December 11, 2002
    Pool Mess “Pool” or “Paedophile” Mess
    in which Mess is performed on a TV table beside a swimming pool for semi-naked boys
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Tony Janton La Salle College High School,
    Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania
    July 15, 2014
    Potato Chip Mess “Potato Chip” Mess
    in which the matter is potato chips and grape juice, held not in sacred vessels, but in glass containers
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Rita’s Church,
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
    November 20, 2003
    Priestess Mess “Priestess” Mess
    in which a woman plays the role of a presbyter and performs the Mess
    Presbyter Cooper St. Matthias Church,
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin
    March 25, 2003
    Pub Mess “Pub” Mess
    in which a presbyter performs Mess in a pub, accompanied by guitars and saxophones
    Novus Ordo Presbyter
    Sean Horrigan
    Mucky Duck Pub,
    Houston, Texas
    December 26, 2003
    Puppet Mess “Puppet” Mess
    in which a presbyter “performs” Mess using ventriloquism through “Charlie,” a dummy
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Douglas Sweet St. Joseph Church,
    Shreveport, Louisiana
    Pub Mess “Rabbit” Mess
    in which a presbyter “con”-celebrates Mess with Reggie “the Rabbit,” a professional rugby team mascot
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Jersey St. Michael Church,
    Darceyville, Australia
    September 29, 2013
    Sail MessSail Mess “Sail” Mess
    in which a bishop is consecrated on Novus Ordo “tables” made up like ships’ sails
    Bishop Michael Guyard France November 13, 2003
    Sandwich Mess “Sandwich” Mess
    in which the presbyter “consecrates” a bologna sandwich
    Presbyter Burnier Jesuit Youth House (Casa da Juventude),
    Goiania, Brazil
    Sitting Bull Mess “Sitting Bull” Mess
    in which the presbyter sits while performing the Mess before what he supposedly believes is his God, “before Whom every knee should bow”
    Polish Novus Ordo Presbyter Karibo,
    Skull Mess “Skull” Mess
    in which a grotesque skull image was projected on a screen above the altar, and a man and woman, back to back and totally naked, were projected on the same screen
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Andrä, Graz, Austria March 25, 2005
    Soda Mess “Soda” Mess
    in which Mountain Dew is served in plastic champagne classes for the “fruit of the vine”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Matamata,
    New Zealand
    January 28, 2002
    Sponge Bob “Sponge Bob” Mess
    in which a Sponge Bob cartoon figure decorates the Novus Ordo “sanctuary”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Barnabas Church,
    Long Beach, California
    June 7, 2009
    Spook Mess “Spook” Mess
    in which kids dress as little devils, etc., gather around the Novus Ordo “table”
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Charles Borromeo Church,
    Woonsocket, Rhode Island
    October 24, 2003
    Spring Water Mess “Spring Water” Mess
    in which the Transitional Deacon of the Mess, vested in shorts and running shoes, offers a bottle of spring water with a straw in it
    Presbyter Brian Christianson and Transitional Deacon Jim Hoener Schipol Airport, Amsterdam August 24, 2005
    Squat Mess “Squat” Mess
    in which the presbyter performs Mess squatting down in front of a “stool-altar” in the woods
    Jesuit Presbyter Jacek Olczyk Poland September 21, 2005
    Picnic Mess “Star Wars” Mess
    in which the presbyter wields a light saber like Darth Vadar
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Christoph Nobs St. Stephen, Putzbrunn, Germany June 8, 2013
    Stock Exchange Mess “Stock Exchange” Mess
    in which a presbyter simulated a Novus Ordo service in front of the Manila Stock Exchange’s tote board
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Stock Exchange,
    Manila, Philippines
    January 2, 2008
    Tango Mess “Tango” Mess
    in which danceuses cavort to the beat of a steel drum band
    Novus Ordo Presbyter St. Monica Church,
    Rochester, New York
    June 2, 2003
    Tet Mess “Tet” Mess
    in which danceuses trip the light fantastic before the Novus Ordo table right out of a scene from an oriental restaurant
    Novus Ordo Bishop Allen Vigneron St. Anthony Church,
    Oakland, California
    January 2004
    Vestal Virgin Mess “Vestal Virgin” Mess
    in which Novus Ordo nuns dance like pagan Vestal Virgins during the dedication of a Novus Ordo square “table”
    Roger Cardinal Mahony Cathedral,
    Los Angeles, California
    September 6, 2002
    Voodoo Mess “Voodoo” Mess
    at which witch doctors of voodoo participate, and animist (pagan) practices are included
    Auspices of the Archbishop of Sao Paulo Our Lady of Achiropita Parish,
    Sao Paulo, Brazil
    May 31, 2003
    Washtub Mess “Washtub” Mess
    at which Newchurchers congregate around a washtub altar
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Grosskrotzenburg, Germany August 2001
    Wildflower Mess “Wildflower” Mess
    in which German rye is served on rocks amidst wildflowers
    Novus Ordo Presbyter Ignatian Hike, Jesuit Community University,
    Freiburg, Germany
    August 24, 2003
    Witch Mess “Witch” Mess
    at which white witches assemble in coven with approval of the Novus Ordo bishop
    Novus Ordo Priestesses Oakland, California March 31, 2003
    Womyn Mess “Womyn” Mess
    at which Novus Ordo “table” servettes, lectresses, gift-bearers, etc., were all adult womyn, vested in Novus Ordo albettes
    Novus Ordo Priestesses National Council of Catholic Women,
    Washington, D.C.
    October 31, 1999

    Open Letter to Pope Francis

    This letter was written October 1, 2014 (www.TwoHeartsPress.com) By Dr. Kelly Bowring, Author of best-sellers “The Secrets, Chastisement, and Triumph” and “The Signs of the Times”. Although the Novus Ordo and so-called modern “Catholics” still have not completely seen the destruction and heresy of the 2nd Vatican Council in its entirety, it is comforting to know that a lot of Catholics are very unhappy with the hierarchy and the tolerance this new religion has for evil. Although they are still a long way off from discovering the truth about this modernist religion, and it is unfortunate it took someone as bad as Bergolio to start raising questions, never the less progress is better than complacency. Especially when it comes to the salvation of their souls


    Dear Pope Francis,

    As a Catholic theologian, the Church teaches that I am permitted to raise questions regarding the content of your interventions (On the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian 24). Thus, I would like to do so in this open letter.

    Since becoming Pope, many of your actions and statements have raised concerns among not a few Catholic Cardinals. I too have raised some issues previously, particularly about how your words and actions seem to fulfill the credible Catholic prophecies of our times. The center of the growing concern is focused on what seems to be your intentions to change or alter Catholic doctrine and to possibly make pastoral concessions in regard to the doctrinal teaching of faith and morals.

    Just Raising Questions

    I begin by asking whether Benedict XVI was referring to you and your cohort when he famously stated at the beginning of his pontificate: “Pray that I don’t flee for fear of the wolves”? Are you planning to mislead many, by first focusing on the family (changing the meaning of marriage, compromising sexual morality and life issues), as it is the foundation of society and the domestic church? Why have you been deemphasizing the doctrines of homosexuality, cohabitation, abortion, and contraception? Why are you strategically placing Church leaders in key places that promote doctrinal compromise and change, and thus are already causing confusion? Are you about to direct the Catholic Church to make a number of alarming statements, regarding why it has to change and amend various parts of its structure and beliefs? Why does it seem the changing laws in our countries are being instigated in unison with the changes being proposed in our churches, with both sets of new laws blending together, to redefine and welcome every kind of sin?

    Could This Become A Question of Papal Validity?

    It is objectively impossible to change, dismiss, or compromise even one doctrine of the Faith. As I have discussed in another article, the Church teaches that even a pope can enter into personal heresy if he refuses to believe in even one doctrine, and if so, he de facto invalidates himself as Pope. Is there a single doctrine of the Faith that you refuse to believe in? Or are trying to change? Or will in fact soon change?

    St. Thomas Aquinas confirms that any member of the Church who obstinately disbelieves even one doctrine of Faith loses all the grace of theological faith; and thus willfully maintaining only a kind of opinion in accordance with his own will, makes himself a heretic. It becomes more a matter of scandal when Church leaders treat doctrine as if it were not doctrine, claim a doctrine has been hitherto controverted, and then make efforts to redefine it by treating it as an open matter of questions of opinions or of discussion among experts. This is at its core the work of deception. Further concern occurs when members of the Church’s hierarchy say they do not intend to change a Church’s doctrine, while they then set out to make seemingly merciful but in reality damning pastoral concessions with the secretly intended effect of making a doctrine obsolete.

    You Cannot Change Any Doctrine in the Catechism

    While all the doctrines in the Catechism are not infallibly defined, the Catechism teaches only truth, the truth that was “once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3). Significantly altering any teaching in the Catechism, which is the Source of sacred doctrine, “the sure and authentic reference text for teaching Catholic doctrine” (FD 3), which without error “synthesizes normatively the totality of the Catholic faith” (GDC 120) and the “fundamental salvific truths” of the Faith (GDC 124), leads objectively to heresy and apostasy. Whether you change a doctrine or simply sanction breaking it in the name of making a pastoral concession (for no matter how seemingly noble a reason) or simply replace it with new laws of tolerance, all of this would amount to heresy. Changing Church doctrine even under the guise of pastoral innovation does not validate the change. Today there is a widespread radical liberalism of misguided compassion, false mercy, and excessive tolerance in the name of being pastoral and up-to-date. But only what is pastorally true can be truly pastoral. Mercy can never be cited as an alternative or counter to doctrine. Doctrinal truth cannot be adapted to the believer and age, but the believer and age must be invited to adapt to doctrinal truth. A new or revised Church teaching or allowance that overrides or changes any article of Faith, or even gives it a different interpretation from the traditional and true one, would necessarily be heretical. Is this what you are planning?

    Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life and there is no salvation through anyone else. He is the fullness of all divine Revelation, which subsists fully only in the Catholic Church. The Catholic faithful must believe as true all Church doctrine. This faith “is necessary for salvation” (CCC 183) for those who are aware of it. And while the pope “has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church” (CCC 882), this applies only when he is and remains valid. Your office as pope commissions you to dutifully safeguard and authentically interpret the doctrines entrusted to the Church’s authentic Magisterium by our divine Redeemer (Matthew 16:18, 18:18), but which are not for you as an individual to subject to the play of power and agenda. And while the Church’s teaching on the ‘development of doctrine’ allows genuine progress in articulation and understanding of Revelation, it never sanctions changing, abandoning, or rejecting any Church doctrine.

    The Word, as given to us in Scripture (the Bible) and Tradition (the Catechism), cannot be changed. The whole divine truth of the Faith, handed down to us in the form of sacred doctrine, is “wisdom above all human wisdom” and only understood and accepted through a profound and authentic “fear of the Lord”. It is the duty of the Church’s hierarchy to call the faithful to an “obedience of faith” to the whole truth of sacred doctrine in Scripture and Tradition with a freedom of conscience that is never freedom ‘from’ the truth but always and only freedom ‘in’ the truth. And all work of genuine plurality must safeguard the unity of the faith in its doctrinal integrity.

    Instead of calling humanity to conversion to Christ and the truth of doctrine while fulfilling Christ’s great commission to “go and make disciples of all nations, teaching them to observe all the truths” for conversion through Baptism, some see your approach is that of seeking to adapt and compromise doctrine to current trends in secular thinking and behavior and bend it to accommodate other religious orientations. Pope Francis, we must hold fast to what has been entrusted to us by Christ and His Apostles, that is, the whole deposit of faith found in sacred doctrine (1 Tim 6:20). We are called to let the supernatural truth of Christ speak for itself, for “what makes us believe (doctrine) is not the fact that revealed truths appear as true and intelligible in the light of our natural reason (especially from within the context of a morally corrupt society), we believe because of the authority of God himself who reveals them, who can neither deceive nor be deceived” (CCC 156). But while God cannot deceive, a pope can, especially with a deceptive badge of (false) humility and (false) love for humanity that is displayed and not genuinely practiced. Some have expressed concerns about your true intentions in this regard.

    To reiterate my main point – Pope Francis, you may not change, alter, or dismiss even one doctrine without dismantling the whole deposit of Faith itself. “For whoever keeps the whole law, but fails in one particular point, has become guilty in respect to all of it” (James 2:10). Even if only the smallest and most insignificant doctrine is (at first) rejected, compromised or changed, then the whole of God’s truth is compromised. Pope Francis, you may update or change Church traditions, as many in the hierarchy have done validly, but you cannot change the Church’s doctrine, not even one iota, not even regarding the least significant doctrine (e.g., communion for the remarried, a Church blessing for same-sex couples, changing the meaning of the Holy Eucharist), without de facto invalidating your pontificate. For a Church leader to allow any substantial pastoral change to a doctrine would be impossible because it would necessarily make such revised pastoral accommodation incompatible with doctrine, which again is akin to heresy and apostasy. Make a compromise with even one Catholic doctrine and you open Pandora’s box in effect delegitimizing all Catholic doctrine.

    Are You Leading the Church Toward the Great Apostasy and Schism?

    Pope Francis, are you organizing a new evangelical movement, which will be announced in stages and with a strategy of gradualness, so as to avoid creating too many questions, but which will be received as a breath of fresh air by many? Are you forming a false ecumenical fellowship as part of a newly renovated church, seeking to unite the churches of the world in a New World Church, which will lead to new rituals and abominations? The Church cannot be made to suit the modern world, nor can her doctrine be changed to become inclusive, in order to suit other denominations and religions and fashions.

    And no matter what other good you do, no matter what other humanitarian engagement you promote, or popularity contest you win, if you lead the faithful astray, you will be nothing more than a false pope. Just like all of us, you have two choices – to remain loyal to the Truth of Christ or embrace lies as a substitute for it, which is heresy, and spread those lies through deceit and cunning apostasy, thus dividing the Church into schism.

    Pope Francis, whatever your plans, the fact is that it seems to many that you are already adding to the spiritual confusion of our times. Your focus seems to be more on man than on God, on pleasing or impressing man more than God, on seemingly helping man in his sin more than on rightfully serving and obeying God in His Commandments. If this is so, then where are you going with this? And where are you taking the Church?

    Is the False Prophet Among Us?

    Pope Francis, there are many biblical teachings and prophecies about the false prophet, some of which you seem to be fulfilling. Why are you vigorously supporting dissenting bishops who are proposing heretical pastoral concessions and in effect seeking to tamper with sacred doctrine, while you are ruthlessly dismissing, demoting or disempowering other Bishops who are known to be faithful to doctrine? Why do you offer tremendous pastoral sensitivity to people who don’t even want to practice the Faith and are bent on offending it, while you have directed massive antagonism towards those who do? Why does it seem more and more to some that a diabolical though intentionally nebulous disorientation of the Church’s doctrine is afoot under your leadership?

    The Bible warns of false teachers who lead God’s people astray with their lies and their recklessness. St. Jude says they will pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness. Our Lord too repeatedly warned about the false teachers who will lead many to spiritual ruin. Jesus tells the parable about the weeds and the wheat, whereby the cockle-seeds of false doctrine so resemble the wheat that even farmers (theologians/apologists/bishops) have difficulty distinguishing them, for the devil likes to mask falsehood with truth, to use virtue to justify vice, and twist doctrine to justify heresy so that even the faithful are deceived. Jesus indeed warned to beware of false prophets, who come to us in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. And St. Paul declares about such villains: “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that of Christ, let him be accursed.”

    Pope Francis, are you the wolf in shepherd’s clothing that Catholic prophecy has warned us about? Are you the prophesied false prophet of lies and deception who will lead the Church into schism? Are you the anti-John the Baptist and precursor of the antichrist who will rule over the world? Will you soon be at death’s door, as the Book of Revelation prophesizes, only then, just as if a miracle has taken place, seem to have risen from the dead?

    Two sources of approved private revelation are particularly worth considering here. First at La Salette, Our Lady warned that Rome would lose the faith and become the seat of the antichrist, the Church will be eclipsed, and we won’t know who the true pope is. And second at Akita, Our Lady warned that the deceit of Satan will infiltrate into the Church to such an extent that we will see (good) Cardinals divided against (bad) Cardinals where the Church will be caught up in a revolution. And there are many other credible Catholic prophecies that give insight, warning, and direction about our times, ones that every Catholic should be aware of. They tell us that a Church leader is coming and that through him the world will be deceived by his many acts deemed to be works of great charity, but done behind an exterior false façade of humility and sweet words presented with a wonderful and loving external charisma. By his teachings, he will encourage humanity to an exalted humanism in place of God.

    It is quite possible for a master deceiver to fool the Catholic faithful: Fr. Maciel, founder of the Legionaries of Christ, with his seeming orthodoxy, humility and displayed holiness, successfully deceived even a pope saint (St. John Paul). The Catechism even states that in the latter times a great part of the faithful will be misled, specifically through a religious deception. Pope Francis, are you an imposter who will compromise the Church’s doctrine, proudly proclaim your solution to unite all churches as one, and lead the Catholic Church into schism? Will you be applauded by the secular world and hailed as a modern innovator because you condone sin? Will you soon hold a referendum that will adapt the Laws of the Church and condone new practices of sin sympathetic to twisted human rights and then force a new oath pledge upon the Church to this new false doctrine? Are you going to make a mockery of Catholic faith and morals in the name of changing discipline, pastoral action, and popular vote and follow through with the agenda to make supreme the place of individual conscience over Catholic doctrine?

    In our times more than ever, Satan wants to cause great spiritual damage to humanity through deception. We know that the false prophet will be masquerading as a friend to Catholics, Protestants, Jews, and Muslims. Instead, he is the false one who has entered the house of God to deceive and destroy souls through what will be the greatest religious deception in history.

    Pope Francis, if you are the false prophet, seeking to steal souls through deceit, then you will lose. The Book of Revelation says that both the false prophet and the antichrist will be thrown into the lake of fire where they will suffer forever. “Evil may have its hour, but God will have His day” (Ven. Fulton Sheen). Much of what will happen to the Church in these times has been foretold, and we know that God will allow these abominations for a good reason. The Church, like Christ, will suffer her passion, crucifixion and death, only then to enter her resurrection into the new Era of Peace (Fatima). And we know there will be no defeat for the faithful, who will stand firm in the Faith and uphold the Truth – the Word of God – even in the face of adversity, heresy, apostasy, and schism. Pope Francis, to whatever defense you may have or make about the questions I have raised, time will tell the truth of things.

    To the Catholic Faithful

    To the Catholic faithful I say this: We live in dark and dangerous times, where our faith and morals are being attacked and repressed on all sides, most sinisterly from within the Church herself. St. Paul warned in his first letter to Timothy “that in the latter times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and (false) doctrines of demons through the pretensions of liars” (1 Timothy 4:1). You must now be alert to the signs of the times that were prophesied in Scripture, including in the Book of Revelation, and in credible Marian and modern prophecy. Solid Catholic prophecy indicates the time of the great battle foretold in Scripture to take place in the latter times is in fact upon us today. No matter what is to come, Jesus’ Catholic Church will remain intact, though a remnant. Jesus promised that the Truth could never change or be defeated. Those who separate themselves from the Church in these times by compromising doctrine, even if following a pope, will no longer be united to the true Church.

    Pray for the grace to discern the Truth. The victory is the Lord’s. All you need to do is trust in the Truth, so that you can avoid the traps which may be laid down to steal your souls. Do not allow a false doctrine to be imposed on you, even if you are (wrongly) accused of lack of tolerance, lack of compassion, lack of love, lack of respect for human rights, and for being unjustifiably judgmental. May Jesus open your eyes to any possible deceit that is at hand or to lies that may be presented with half-truth, with double-talk; and may the Lord not allow any false leader to divide the Church. Pray for the grace of discernment, so that you will never deny the Truth. Be firm in your belief in the divine Word, the Church’s Teachings, and the Sacraments. No matter how much Jesus’ Church is attacked, God will never permit it to be destroyed (St. John Bosco’s famous dream of the war within the Barque of Peter comes to mind here). There may be a devious plan unfolding to mislead you into the great apostasy, the first seal of the Book of Revelation, and it will be the greatest deceit in history; so examine everything you are told from this point forward, even by Pope Francis. For man can never live on bread alone, but only on the true Word of God. To deny or abandon even one doctrine of Faith is to deny and abandon Christ Himself, as Judas did. The faithful must be alert to any possible agenda to alter or dismiss doctrine to the whims of modernity and relativism.

    To the Catholic faithful and people of good will, I declare, vigilance is now required! Do not allow lies from any Church source to deceive you, and do not wrongly maintain misguided loyalties. Follow the Word of God as it was laid down from the beginning. Do not fall for the false, charitable appeals being made for the rights of those who seek acceptance for their own sinful lives, while they defy the Laws of God and now may soon receive Church sanction to continue doing so. And know this: if the pope takes the Church into heresy, the doctrines of the Church will remain true. And how can the faithful tell what is what – if any new teachings claim that Jesus condones sin, then you will know this is a lie. The truth is that Jesus always and clearly detests all sin, unequivocally, though loves the sinner. And Jesus would never compromise His truth!

    In Closing

    Pope Francis, if you intend to accommodate any doctrine of faith to today’s profane and secular world or even to de-emphasize a certain doctrine such as to produce a new tolerance to sin, the Church will not join you, nor the faithful concede. For such apostasy would invalidate your pontificate. I instead invoke you to take up your true calling to more actively safeguard and clearly promote sacred doctrine and with it to form evangelizers who are authentic living witnesses of the Faith to form the saints of the third Christian millennium. At this time, I only encourage all Catholics to love and obey you, Pope Francis, and in all matters of the true Faith; but I also encourage the faithful to become more aware and alert to the signs of the times. Pope Francis, if you should still yet decide to allow any change in doctrine, then the Church’s legitimate hierarchy will make the faithful aware of such matters clearly at that time and how we should best respond in good faith. Otherwise, only love, obedience, and prayers for you Pope Francis, while remaining rightly alert and vigilant as to the prophetic signs of the times at hand.

    Sincerely in Christ,

    Kelly Bowring


    Dr. Kelly Bowring wrote his doctoral dissertation on the nature and meaning of “sacred doctrine” within the teachings of the Church, which was later published as “To Hold and Teach the Catholic Faith” (St. Paul’s/Alba House). He has also written two recent best-selling books on biblical, Marian, and modern prophecy: “The Secrets, Chastisement, and Triumph” with imprimatur by Cardinal Vidal and “The Signs of the Times” (Two Hearts Press LLC, http://www.TwoHeartsPress.com).

    Please visit http://www.francisquotes.com for more examples of this so-called pope teaching heresy contrary to the Faith taught to us by Christ and His Apostles.

    God Bless BJS!!

    Miracles vs. V2/Modernist Clergy

    But Jesus said: Do not forbid him. For there is no man that doth a miracle in my name, and can soon speak ill of me.Mark 9:38

    A statement was recently discovered in a book by a man from Italy, presumably Catholic, stating that many priests, bishops, and even those in the Vatican no longer believe in miracles. In case there are other Catholics who may doubt the existence of miracles, this is a good opportunity to review what the Catholic Church has taught on the subject. Some Catholics may not know, but the Church teaches that it is mandatory to believe in the principle of miracles.

    Looking at the definition of “Miracle” in “A Catholic Dictionary” (Attwater), it states that a miracle is “an effect wrought in nature directly by God” and that it is “wrought independently of natural powers and laws and of such a character that man reasonably concludes that God himself, who alone is above and beyond nature, is the immediate and direct cause…“. Most importantly, the definition also states, “Though a Catholic is bound to accept this principle as a matter of faith, the miraculous character of each individual occurrence must be settled by evidence. Hence no individual miracles, except those mentioned in holy Scripture, are of faith.

    Scripture confirms the continuance of miracles in the Church (which has been clearly seen throughout its history):
    “Otherwise believe for the very works’ sake. Amen, amen I say to you, he that believeth in me, the works that I do, he also shall do; and greater than these shall he do.” John 14:12

    “And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name they shall cast out devils: they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up serpents; and if they shall drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them: they shall lay their hands upon the sick, and they shall recover.” Mark 16:17,18 

    Council of Trent (16th century):

    “And the bishops shall carefully teach this, -that, by means of the histories of the mysteries of our Redemption, portrayed by paintings or other representations, the people are instructed, and confirmed in (the habit of) remembering, and continually revolving in mind the articles of faith; as also that great profit is derived from all sacred images, not only because the people are thereby admonished of the benefits and gifts bestowed upon them by Christ, but also because the miracles which God has performed by means of the saints, and their salutary examples, are set before the eyes of the faithful; that so they may give God thanks for those things; may order their own lives and manners in imitation of the saints; and may be excited to adore and love God, and to cultivate piety. But if any one shall teach, or entertain sentiments, contrary to these decrees; let him be anathema.”

    First Vatican Council (1870):

    “If anyone says that all miracles are impossible, and that therefore all reports of them, even those contained in sacred scripture, are to be set aside as fables or myths; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, nor can the divine origin of the Christian religion be proved from them: let him be anathema.”

    Baltimore Catechism (1885): 
    Q. 324. How did Christ show and prove His divine power? 

    A. Christ showed and proved His divine power chiefly by His miracles, which are extraordinary works that can be performed only by power received from God, and which have, therefore, His sanction and authority.

    Q. 1210. Has God Himself honored relics? 

    A. God Himself has frequently honored relics by permitting miracles to be wrought through them. There is an example given in the Bible, in the IV Book of Kings, where it is related that a dead man was restored to life when his body touched the bones, that is, the relics of the holy prophet Eliseus.

    The Oath against Modernism (Pope St. Pius X, 1910)

    “To be sworn to by all clergy, pastors, confessors, preachers, religious superiors, and professors in philosophical-theological seminaries:

    ….I accept and acknowledge the external proofs of revelation, that is, divine acts and especially miracles and prophecies as the surest signs of the divine origin of the Christian religion and I hold that these same proofs are well adapted to the understanding of all eras and all men, even of this time.”

    This is a post on http://www.faithfulcatholics.com concerning the modernist stance on miracles and what the Catholic Church has always recognized and taught. I am not the author merely the distributor. Please feel free to create a free profile on the website for more faithful Catholic info.

    God Bless BJS!!

    Infallibility & Indefectability of The Church

    ​”And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.” Matthew 16:18

    “Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Matthew 19:24

    There are four marks of the Church; One, Holy, Catholic (universal), and Apostolic. The Church also has particular attributes. Two of its attributes are Infallibility and Indefectability. Here we consider some of the Church’s teaching regarding its Infallibility and Indefectability.


    Extraordinary Magisterium (I.e. the teaching office)

    • The Pope himself is infallible when speaking ex Cathedra according to the conditions laid down by the Vatican Council in 1870
    • The Pope in union with an Ecumenical Council is infallible when defining points of Faith and Morals.

    These are two ways that the Magisterium of the Church is infallible in teaching in an extraordinary way.

    Ordinary Magisterium

    Question: Is the Church’s Magisterium infallible in any other way?

    Answer: Yes the Church can also be infallible in its Ordinary Magisterium.

    Question: When is the Church infallible in its Ordinary Magisterium?

    Answer: When the pope and the bishops are in moral unanimity, which means most all of them, teaches a belief as the doctrine of Christ, as concerning faith and morals, to the whole church, then you have something called Universal Ordinary Magisterium. It has to be taught by the pope in union with all the bishops who are dispersed throughout the world. If those conditions are met, then there is present the Universal Ordinary Magisterium and according to that same Vatican Council of 1870, we owe the assent of faith to what is proposed as the doctrine of Christ by this Universal Ordinary Magisterium. This is of Divine Faith which means it is revealed by Christ Himself. So this act of the Magisterium has the same infallibility as a papal pronouncement ex Cathedra, which is solemn or extraordinary magisterium; and is very rare.

    An example of Universal Ordinary Magisterium is the teaching of guardian angels. There is no solemn declaration concerning the existence of guardian angels,  but it’s universally taught by the Catholic Church. So, it is impossible,  therefor, that the pope and bishops together, teaching what is contained in revelation, teaching it universally to the whole church could err. It’s impossible because they are the teaching Church and as such they are assisted in that role by the Holy Ghost.

    Question : Isn’t it the Universal Ordinary Magisterium only when it is a teaching in line with Tradition?

    Answer :When the Ordinary Magisterium (pope in union with the majority of bishops), teaches Universally then we are witnessing Tradition actively happening before our eyes. It is not possible for it not to be line with Tradition since the Universal Ordinary Magisterium and Tradition is one and the same thing.

    Question : But do not many priests and bishops today say that this is possible for the Ordinary Magisterium to teach contrary to Christ and that this is what has happened today with the Novus Ordo Church?

    Answer : Yes, it is true that many do say that, but they have unwittingly fallen into a grave doctrinal error contrary to the teaching of both Christ Himself and His Church. If you ask them to substantiate their error they cannot.

    Question : Bishop Williamson seems to present a new notion of the Church’s indefectability. Does he?

    Answer : Yes, he does seem to present indefectability as merely the survival of the Church and he talks about defections as being the defections of Catholics to Islam in the 6th and 7th centuries and the defection of many Catholics to Protestantism in the 16th century. And this is not what the Church means by indefectability.

    What the Catholic Church means by indefectability is that the Catholic Church in her universal teachings concerning faith and morals and in her Sacred Liturgy and in her disciplines, cannot propose anything that is contrary to faith and morals. That the Church is always holy in these regards/aspects. That is, dogma and of course morals with that liturgy and discipline. It can never teach a false religion. It can never  defect from the truth in its official teaching and that includes Universal Ordinary Magisterium. It cannot propose to us to do something evil; give us an evil discipline or an evil law. It cannot promulgate to us a false liturgy; a liturgy that does not portray the truth concerning the Holy Eucharist and the other sacraments. It is prevented, by the assistance of Christ, from doing this. Thus is the promise of Christ. And the whole power of the Church, is that it has this assistance from Christ precisely not to do these things. It is preserved from error.

    Pope Pius the IX said in 1868, in a letter addressed to Protestants, said – in this Church, meaning the Catholic Church – “the truth must always remain stable and inaccessible to every change. So as to keep, absolutely intact, the deposit confided to her and for whose safeguard the presence and assistance of the Holy Ghost has been promised to her forever.” In one sentence, that’s what the indefectability of the Catholic Church means.

    That large numbers of people defecting/defected from the Catholic Church does not have anything to do with the indefectability of the Catholic Church. The indefectability is the absolute stability of the Church in proposing the truth and in proposing the true liturgy and true disciplines that are not sinful.

    Now, if we compare that to what has happened since Vatican 2, why are we reacting so much to Vatican 2 and its reforms – what Bp Williamson calls Conciliarism. Why are we reacting to all that? Why have we set up an Apostolate against those who have imposed the doctrines of Vatican 2? Who have imposed the new code of cannon law? Who have imposed the new liturgy and all of the other things that have come out of Vatican 2? Ecumenism, and many other disciplines that are contrary to Faith. Why are we opposing them if those things do not constitute a new and false religion, which is not the Catholic religion? Our very actions attest to the fact that we know, by faith, that what has come out of the Vatican 2 is a new and false religion. Otherwise, we would not oppose it. Indeed, we have gone to so much trouble to oppose it. It would be much easier to go to our local parish churches and accept everything. But we have made our lives – lives of opposition to this new religion and we are staking our eternal salvation on this opposition to this new religion. Therefore, we cannot associate this new religion and with the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, with the authority to teach, rule, and sanctify the Church, which is given by Christ – this Church, which is assisted by the Holy Ghost. Otherwise, we must say that the Church has defected. This Catholic Church, which has been promised the assistance of Christ and the Holy Ghost, that it has defected by giving the whole world this false religion. So the only conclusion is, that those who are promoting this false religion, do not represent the Catholic Church. They are phony prelates, who do not represent the Catholic Church and they are manifesting their phoniness by the fact that they are promulgating this new religion.

    Question : You mention Conciliarism as the term used by Bishop Williamson. Can you speak about this notion of Conciliar Church and Catholic Church and the distinctions?

    Answer : Yes, the SSPX in general, distinguishes between the Conciliar Church and the Catholic Church. They go so far as to say that the Novus Ordo pope is the pope of two different churches – the Conciliar Church and the Catholic Church and sometimes he speaks as head of the Conciliar Church and sometimes he speaks as head of the Catholic Church and the way that you can tell how he is speaking is that the Society of Saint Pius X will put what he says into a sifter, essentially,  and will sift out to you the Catholic stuff and the other things will remain in the sifter. But there is a problem with that whole theory. The precise problem that we are facing is that the modernists did not break away from the Catholic Church. That they, through subterfuge,  managed to rise to powers – to places of power and they then used that to impose this new religion. Now, in fact they did not have the power, but they seemed to have the power. And they use that to promote this new religion. It’s like rats at the bottom of the ship that have gotten up to the top deck and are now steering the ship ; both at the rudder and at the wheel but they have not declared themselves outside of the ship and no one else has declared them outside of the ship. That is the precise problem that we have, but that does not mean that they cease to be rats. These are modernists (better off if they were just rats), who are not Catholics. Who are attempting to thrust upon the Church this new religion and our reaction to them must be precisely that they are not in fact, true prelates of the Catholic Church, they have no authority at all to teach, rule, and sanctify the Church. They are phony prelates from which we must avoid and accuse them. They should be identified as non-Catholic, more protesters, and thrown out of the Church of Christ.

    When the sheep realize that there is a wolf in sheep’s clothing in the fold, they run as fast as they can to get away from him. This is the only proper response Catholics should have. Our Lord has stated the sheep hear His voice and know Him, we are armed with the Faith this is how we know when Christ is speaking. St. Paul even tells us, even if he or an angel of Heaven should come to us preaching a different word from what has already been taught, let him be anathema. Not, let us consider him the pope in certain circumstances or that he’s in charge of multiple churches.

    Question : What is the response to Bp. Williamson who says this is thinking humanly, all too humanly?

    Answer : How does humanity get into any of this? This is simply a defending of the Indefectability and Infallibility of the Catholic Church; the assistance of the Holy Ghost to the government of the Catholic Church: to the true pope and true bishops of the Catholic Church. That – where is humanity in that? Those are supernatural, invisible things that come from God. How is it thinking humanly? He would like to accuse it as being an emotional response. Thinking, well, Novus Ordo is so horrible that these people could not be popes. This is untrue, as there is no emotion involved in this at all.

    This is plain and simply a recognition of the true nature of the Catholic Church, of the assistance of the Holy Ghost to the Catholic Church, and the fact that this false religion cannot come down from God. It cannot come down from the authority of Christ, nor from the authority of the pope.

    Pope Pius XII stated that the authority of Christ and the authority of the pope are one and the same authority. So, if we hand to them the papacy, we have to hand to them at the same time the Catholicity of the Novus Ordo, and the Catholicity of Vatican 2, and we have to hand to them the legitimacy of everything that has been done for the past 50+ years and then we have to turn around and condemn ourselves.

    Question : Is this understanding of the Church’s teaching regarding Infallibility and Indefectability becoming more and more popular because of Francis?

    Answer : Francis very well could be a big factor in it. There’s really no longer any reason to make any arguments when Francis is saying all the horrendous things that he has been saying for the past 3 years. Bergoglio’s statements are so damning, that anyone with a brain could figure out that he is not a Roman Catholic. How can anyone say that man is a Roman Catholic?  He is a very clear and open heretic.

    We have one duty: Be faithful to the teaching of the Church.

    God Bless BJS!!

    Vatican 2: A Weapon of Mass Destruction 

    1. If something is true, then like God it always was and always will be. It remains true no matter what. 

    2. A good tree cannot bear forth bad fruit, a bad tree cannot bear forth good fruit. 

    3. In the Old Testament sacrifices by the Jews were made to appease God, but nothing would atone for original sin (bc it carries infinite demerits against the infinitely good Creator), except an infinite and perpetual sacrifice, which only God the Son could offer, the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is exactly that, the crucifixion of Christ offered back to the Father in an unbloody manner instituted by Christ Himself

    Traditional Mass vs. Modern Mass

    A Typical Modern Mass:

    In a typical modern parish on a Sunday, the entire service is conducted in English.  The priest sits or stands facing the people throughout, and often makes spontaneous remarks to them during the course of the service.  Lay people in the sanctuary add comments or proclaim the Scripture readings.  Part of the service takes place at a table.  The tabernacle is never on the table, but at the priest’s back, or off in a corner.  The Sign of Peace is an occasion for handshaking, emotionalism, or socializing.  The priest gives Communion in the hand to most people, and he is assisted by lay men and women.  The priest makes few genuflections, if any.  It is rare that two celebrations of the new Mass are exactly alike.  They vary from priest to priest and from parish to parish.  In many places some bizarre things have been incorporated into the Mass: there are “Clown Masses,” “Puppet Masses,” Balloon Masses,” and masses featuring movies, slide shows, skits, and popular music.

    The Traditional Mass:

     Contrast this with the traditional Latin Mass.  It is celebrated in the ancient and venerable language of the Catholic Church.  The priest faces Our Lord in the tabernacle throughout.  He makes no spontaneous comments on his own, but recites exactly the same prayers that priests have used for centuries.  The priest alone touches the Sacred Host with his hands.  The people kneel for Holy Communion before their Lord and Savior, and receive Him on the tongue alone.  There is no handshaking and socializing before the Blessed Sacrament.  The people follow the Mass silently and reverently with Missals (Mass-books) which translate the words of the priest.  The gestures of the priest are reverent and restrained, and include numerous genuflections out of reverence for the Blessed Sacrament.  The texts and rites of the traditional Latin Mass are the same everywhere and do not vary from priest to priest or church to church.  Everything is governed by uniform and very specific rules.

    Liturgy Expresses Doctrine:

     Even the casual observer would conclude that the modern Mass and traditional Mass seem to send out radically different “signals” about what the Mass is, what it does, and what those present believe.  The new rite leaves the impression that the Mass is a common meal or instructional service; the old rite, that it is an action primarily directed at adoring an all-holy God.  This brings us to a principle which is a key to understanding why some Catholics adhere to the traditional Mass: liturgy of its nature expresses doctrine.  Pope Pius XII spoke of this in his Encyclical on the liturgy: 

    The worship she [the Church] offers to God, all good and great, is a continuous profession of the Catholic faith…In the sacred Liturgy, we profess the Catholic faith explicitly and openly.

    Liturgy not only expresses common doctrine; it also influences what people believe.  Prayers and ritual gestures expressing adoration of Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist, for instance, reinforce and reaffirm our common faith in that doctrine.  If you remove from public worship prayers and gestures that allude to a particular truth such as this, you can be fairly sure that in time worshippers will cease to believe in it.

    The Traditional Mass & Doctrine:

     Because liturgy both expresses doctrine and influences what people believe, the Church down through the centuries has closely guarded the text of the Missal, in order to insure that it accurately reflected her beliefs and excluded anything that compromised them.  The Catholic Church has always first and foremost spoken of the Mass as a “sacrifice.”  It is infallible teaching that Christ left a visible Sacrifice to His Church “in which that bloody sacrifice  which was once offered on the Cross should be made present” (Council of Trent)  The doctrine that the Mass is primarily a sacrifice offered to God is wonderfully and precisely expressed in the traditional Latin Mass.  So too are Catholic teachings on countless other points, such as the Real Presence, the nature of the priesthood, purgatory, the identity of Christ’s true Church, and the intercession of the saints.

    Making Catholics Protestants:
     The Protestants also understood how well the Mass clearly expressed the Church’s doctrine.  When they wanted to spread their new and false teachings, they changed the liturgy.  In the 16th century, Luther made Catholics into Protestants by getting Catholics to worship like Protestants. From Luther’s biography:
    “Next came the reform of the Liturgy, which touched the common man more intimately because it altered his daily devotions.  He was being invited to drink the wine [sic] at the Sacrament, to take the elements into his own hands, to commune without previous confession, to hear the words of institution [consecration] in his own tongue, and to participate extensively in sacred song.”
    Luther laid the theoretical groundwork for the most significant changes.  His principle was that the Mass is not a sacrifice…(Roland Bainton, Here I Stand, Mentor ed., p.156)
    Liturgical changes thus became a means for undermining the Catholic faith and spreading a doctrinal revolution.  On the face of it, the liturgical practices Luther introduced in the 16th century in order to destroy the belief that the Mass is a sacrifice resemble to a remarkable degree the changes made in the Mass since the early 1960’s/  What is the explanation of this?  And since worship and belief go hand in hand, what principles or beliefs were behind the 1960’s changes in worship?  To answer these questions we have to speak about the Second Vatican Council.
    Vatican II & Its Reforms:
    The Second Vatican Council (October 11, 1962 to December 8, 1965) was called by John XXIII.  He said he wanted to “open the windows” of the Church to the modern world.  He said he hoped to “update” the Church, make it more relevant to the times and thus draw more people to the Church.  He called the Catholic bishops together so that they could discuss sweeping changes in Catholic worship, discipline and doctrine.  After the death of John XXIII, the work of this Council continued under Paul VI and resulted in many radical changes.  Catholics soon found themselves faced with “reforms” in every phase of their religious life.  Millions of words have been written about these “reforms.”  Catholics were told time and time again: “the essentials of the faith have not been changed” and that Vatican II brought about a true “renewal” in the Church.
    The Fruits of Vatican II:
    However, Our Lord said that we can judge a tree by its fruits – that a good tree brings forth good fruits and a bad tree brings forth bad fruits.  What have been the fruits of Vatican II?  Priests and sisters abandoned their sacred calling by the tens of thousands, priestly vocations dried up (in the U.S. from 1965 to 2002, ordinations decreased by 72% and the number of seminarians by 90%), convents emptied (in the same period, the number of teaching sisters decreased by 93%), attendance at Mass dropped dramatically (from 74% of U.S. Catholics in 1958 to 17% in 2002), and the Church’s doctrines and moral teachings are openly denied or studiously ignored by clergy and laity alike (in 1997, 85% of U.S. Catholics polled denied that artificial contraception was morally wrong; in 2000, 65% believed that Catholics may divorce and remarry).  Obviously, these fruits are bad.  This leads straight to the conclusion that the tree that produced them – Vatican II – was bad as well.
    Principles Behind Vatican II:
    The “renewal” of Vatican II produced such disastrous effects because it was founded on two dangerous principles: ecumenism and modernism.
    Ecumenism – Seeks to fuse Catholicism with non-Catholic religions.  Doctrines or ritual practices which Protestants or other non-Catholics find objectionable must therefore be eliminated, downplayed, or rendered ambiguous.
    Modernism – Teaches that truth changes from age to age, and that the Church must therefore change as well, in order to be “relevant” to the modern secular world.  Modernist clergy gut traditional Catholic worship, doctrine and morality by filtering it through modern relativist philosophy and various secular “dogmas” and “values.”  Modernists strip the faith of those teachings and practices the modern world deems intransigent, exclusivist, difficult, unenlightened, fanatical or embarrassing.  As a result, the notion of objective religious truth disappears, religion is reduced to little more than emotions and symbols, and the principles of morality (if any) become fuzzy.
    It was Vatican II’s program of ecumenism and modernism that led to the creation of the New Mass.
    The Creation of the New Mass:
    Since concepts and practices spurned by non-Catholics and modern secular society abounded in the traditional Mass, the innovators in the post-Vatican II church decided to jettison the old rite and create a new Mass to replace it.  It would be designed to please two constituencies:
    To satisfy Protestants, the new rite needed to eliminate or downplay the Catholic teaching that the Mass is a propitiatory sacrifice (one which makes satisfaction for sin), offered by an ordained priest, in which Christ becomes present under the appearances of bread and wine through Transubstantiation.
    To placate modern man, it needed to abolish or de-emphasize ideas such as hell, penance, punishment for sin, miracles, the soul, and separation from the world.
    The work of formulating such a rite was entrusted to a Vatican commission called “Consilium.”  Among the participants were six Protestants: Ronald Jasper, Massey Shepard, Raymond George, Friedrich Kunneth, Eugene Brand, and Max Thurian, representing the Anglicans, the World Council of Churches, the Lutherans, and the ecumenical Taize community.  Of their role, Bishop (later Cardinal) William Baum said:
    They [were] not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participated fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal.  It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed. (Detroit News, 27 June 1967.)
    The end result was the promulgation of the New Mass in April, 1969.

    A Revealing Document
    In the 1969 General Instruction which originally introduced the official text of the New Mass, its authors presented the doctrinal principles behind the rite they created.  It is a very revealing document.  Here are some salient points:
     Definition of the Mass.  The General Instruction refers to the Mass as “the Lord’s Supper” – a term favored by Protestants – and defines it as “The sacred assembly, or gathering together of the people of God, with a priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.” Luther himself could have written this definition.  Father Luca Brandolini, who participated in creating the New Mass, said of the passage:   “It defines it [the New Mass] exactly, beginning with the assembly.”
    Community Meal. The Instruction presents the Mass primarily as a community meal or a memorial, rather than a sacrifice.
    Presence of Christ. The Instruction makes no mention of Christ’s Real Presence and of transubstantiation.  Instead, it teaches that Christ is “present’ in the assembly, in the scriptural readings, and in the priest, and that the “Last Supper” is made present.
    Role of the Priest. The congregation “offers” the Mass, and the priest merely “presides.”  His role is now to be “president of the assembly.”
    The Consecration. What in the old rite was called the Consecration is in the new rite called the “Institution Narrative.”  This term is used by Protestants to mean that the Eucharist, instead of being a sacrifice, is merely a “retelling of the story” of the Last Supper.  But when a priest recites the words of consecration as a mere narrative, his intention is considered defective and his Mass is invalid – i.e., Christ does not become truly present and the sacrifice does not occur.
    When faithful Catholics sounded the alarm about how the new rite promoted these dangerous ideas, the creators of the New Mass tried to cover their tracks.  In 1970 they issued a second edition of the General Instruction, one which retained most of the objectionable language but also introduced some traditional terms.  The Vatican also revised this document in 1975 and again in 2001.  Conservatives haled each new version as a “return to reverence” or “Rome cracking down,” but the revisions were no more effective than a Band-Aid on a cancer, since the essence of the 1969 rite itself – ecumenist and modernist – remained unchanged.  This new rite is the one now used in churches throughout the world.
    An Ecumenical and Modernist Rite:
    When you place the prayers and ceremonies of the traditional Latin Mass side by side with those of the New Mass, it is easy to see how the foregoing principles were put into practice, and how much of the Church’s traditional doctrine was “edited out” to placate Protestants and modern man.  Here are some examples:
     Common Penitential Rite.  The traditional Mass begins with the priest reciting personal prayers of reparation to God called “The Prayers at the Foot of the Altar.”  The New Mass begins instead with a “Penitential Rite” which the priest and people recite together.  Who were the first to introduce a common penitential rite?  The 16th century Protestants, who wanted to promote their teaching that a priest is not different from a layman.
    The Offertory. The Offertory prayers of the traditional Mass contain specific allusions to a number of Catholic teachings: that the Mass is offered to God to satisfy for sin, that the saints are to be honored, etc. The Protestants rejected these teachings and abolished the Offertory prayers.  “That abomination called the Offertory,” said Luther, “and from this point almost everything stinks of oblation!”  In the New Mass, the Offertory is gone – it has been replaced with a ceremony called “The Preparation of the Gifts.”  The prayers offensive to Protestants have also been removed.  In their place is the vague prayer “Blessed are you, Lord God of all creation,” based on Jewish grace before meals.
    The Eucharistic Prayer.  The traditional Mass has only one “Eucharistic Prayer,” the Roman Canon.  This ancient and venerable prayer was a favorite target of Protestant diatribes.  Instead of just one Canon, the New Mass has eleven Eucharistic Prayers – all but the first newly composed, including three for children that are written in theological baby-talk.  All the Eucharistic Prayers now incorporate some typical Protestant practices: they are recited in a loud voice instead of silently, and they have an “Institution Narrative” instead of a Consecration.  The various signs of respect toward our Lord present in the Blessed Sacrament (genuflections, signs of the cross, bells, incense, etc.) have been reduced, made optional or eliminated.
    Communion in the Hand.  The 16th century Protestant Martin Bucer condemned the Church’s practice of placing the Host on the tongue of the communicant as: something introduced out of a double superstition; first, the false honor they wish to show this sacrament, and secondly, the wicked arrogance of priests claiming greater holiness than that of the people of Christ, by virtue of the oil of consecration. The basis for the Protestants’ practice of communion in the hand, thus, is a rejection of Christ’s real Presence and the notion of sacrificing priesthood.  Introducing the practice into the New Mass – a rite where Christ is “present” in the assembly and where the priest is merely a “presider” – betokens a similar rejection of Catholic doctrines.  But the men who created the New Mass went the Protestants one better: a member of the laity is not only allowed to receive Communion in the hand, but also to distribute it as well – and she may very well be wearing shorts or a miniskirt.  The symbolism of communion in the hand also appeals to contemporary man.  He likes to think of himself as “autonomous,” “adult,” and subject to no one – notions completely at odds with the symbolism of the traditional practice.
    Veneration of the Saints.  The prayers of the traditional Mass frequently invoke the saints by name and beg their intercession.  The Church’s veneration of the saints in her worship was another practice which Protestants dismissed as “superstition.”  The New Order of the Mass dropped most invocations of the saints by name or made them optional.  In the new Missal, moreover, the weekday prayers for saints’ feast days (most of which are also optional) have been rewritten for the benefit of Protestants – allusions to notions such as the merits of the saints, the triumph of the Catholic Faith, the Catholic Church as the true Church, the evils of heresy, and the conversion of non-Catholics have disappeared.
    The Faithful Departed.  As a Catholic, you know that when someone dies, you pray for the repose of his soul.  This Catholic belief is reflected in the Prayers for the Dead in the traditional Mass – “Be merciful, O Lord, to the soul of N.” etc.  The Protestants reject the teaching that we can pray for the soul of someone who has died, and modernists reject the traditional doctrines on purgatory and the soul.  The New Mass provides 114 Prayers for the Dead.  In all but two prayers the word soul has been removed.  An oversight?  Father Henry Ashworth, who helped compose the New Mass, stated in 1970 that the omissions were intentional.
    “Negative” Theology.  Modern man is uncomfortable with the “hard” side of the Catholic religion, and post-Vatican II theologians have done their best to explain it away.  The creators of the New Mass therefore systematically suppressed from the orations of the new Missal concepts such as hell, divine judgement, God’s wrath, punishment for sin, wickedness of sin as the greatest evil, and the evil of the world.  (Ask yourself when you last heard these notions even mentioned at the modern Mass.)
    Our Lord’s Words.  When Our Lord instituted the Eucharist at the Last Supper, He said His Blood would be she “for you and for many.”  This is exactly what the words of consecration say in Latin in the traditional Mass.  In Vatican-approved translations of the New Mass for the major 

    Western languages, however, the “many” disappeared for nearly forty years.  In English, German, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish, for instance, it was replaced with “for ALL” – a rendition of the words of consecration that had never previously appeared in any Eucharistic rite in the history of Christendom.  The theoretical justification given for the change turns out to have been the writings of Joachim Jeremias – a German Protestant and modernist.  The real point of the fraudulent translation, however, was to depict Our Savior as the premier ecumenist who will save “all,” no matter what they believe.  In 2006 the Vatican finally told national bishops’ conferences to change the phrase back to “for many.”  But the modernist and ecumenical nature of the entire rite that surrounds it is still the same.
    Irreverence and Sacrilege:
    Over and above promoting false doctrine, the New Mass is a sacrilege.  A sacrilege is an act of omission which demeans the sacred character of something holy.  Consider how the practices in the New Mass insult and demean the sacred character of the Eucharist.  Christ’s own words for the consecration of the Precious Blood have been falsified.  Communion in the hand, whereby hosts are placed in unconsecrated hands, is officially approved.  Non-ordained men and women hand out communion.  Crumbly communion breads are used, and particles fall to the floor.  People casually pop the host into their mouth, as if it were a little snack.  When hosts are dropped, no one bothers to purify the floor of particles.  A handshaking sessions takes place when people should be quietly preparing for communion.  Priests no longer purify their fingers after handling the host.  Kneeling for communion is abolished nearly everywhere.  Everyone now goes to communion, but next to no one now goes to confession.
    Then there is the general atmosphere of irreverence in most churches where the New Mass is celebrated, all of which conveys the idea that what is going on is not really particularly holy or sacred.  People carry on conversations in church before and after Mass.  The priest’s way of speaking intentionally folksy and casual.  Sometimes the priest behaves like a ham actor starring in an amateur dramatic performance.  The laity dress informally, as they would for shopping or recreation, or even immodestly in tight or revealing clothing.  The music, often accompanied by guitars, piano, and percussion, has a secular or pop-sounding tone.  Churches are stripped bare of statues and sacred symbols inside, and left looking no more “holy” than an airport terminal.
    All this conveys one idea: the Mass and Christ’s Real Presence are “no big deal.”  As such, the New Mass degrades the most sacred act that exists on this earth – renewing in an unbloody manner the sacrifice of the Cross – and insults the Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Him who won our redemption.  The New Mass is therefore grossly sacrilegious.  That countless Catholics of good will have been led to accept it unquestioningly is a testament to the diabolical cleverness of its creators who launched a doctrinal revolution under a false flag of obedience.
    The Fruits: A Loss of Faith:
     Liturgy of its nature, as we have noted, affects the beliefs of those who participate in it.  The fruits of the New Mass, then, should come as no surprise.  Catholics have stopped believing the central tenet of Catholic teaching on the Mass – that the bread and wine become Christ’s Body and Blood through transubstantiation.  In a New York Times/CBS News Poll (April 1994) U.S. Catholics were asked whether the bread and wine at Mass were:“changed into the Body and Blood of Christ” (the traditional doctrine), or “symbolic reminders of Christ” – the classic Protestant position.

    In the 18-44 age group 70% of Catholics said the bread and wine were only symbolic reminders of Christ.  In the 45-64 group, 58% also said “symbolic reminders,” while only 38% chose the traditional doctrine.  Even in the 65-and-above group, 45% still chose “symbolic reminders,” with only a bare majority (51%) opting for the traditional doctrine.
     In past ages, Catholic martyrs chose to die rather than say that Christ’s presence in the Eucharist was nothing more than a symbolic reminder.  Now the average Catholic’s beliefs about the Eucharist are indistinguishable from that of a Lutheran, a Presbyterian, or a Methodist.  The principal cause for this corruption of the man in the pew’s beliefs on the Eucharist is the New Mass.  He has been exposed to its doctrinal errors and sacrilegious practices every week for decades.  He has gotten the message of the New Mass – and he has lost the faith.
    The Practical Consequences:
     In light of the foregoing, it should be easy to understand why certain Catholics will have absolutely nothing to do with the New Mass and will assist exclusively at the traditional Latin Mass.  The traditional Mass is faithful to doctrines the Church has constantly held and proclaimed – while the New Mass waters down or obliterates these doctrines in order to accommodate non-Catholics.  The traditional Mass treats the Blessed Sacrament with the greatest possible reverence – while the New Mass treats the host like ordinary bread.  The traditional Mass is Catholic and rooted in apostolic tradition – while the New Mass is Protestant, modernist and corrupts the faith.
     The practical attitude the Catholic ought to take regarding the New Mass may be summed up in two words: Stay Away.
    If this sounds surprising or radical, consider this: the primary purpose of the Mass is to honor and adore God.  A rite that compromises His Church’s doctrines, passes off falsehoods as truths, falsifies His Son’s words, mistreats His Son’s Body, corrupts the faith and is imbued with Protestantism and modernism cannot honor God.  All it can do is dishonor Him.
     No Catholic, obviously, wants to dishonor God.  For this reason, Catholics who reject the errors of the New Mass and Vatican II will not go to church at all on Sunday if no traditional Mass is available to them.  Rather than offend God by participating in a service that dishonors Him, they (like Catholics of 16th century England when the Protestant liturgical changes were introduced) will stay home, read their missals and unite themselves spiritually with the true Masses being said throughout the world.
    “Approved” Traditional Masses:
     From 1969 onwards, Catholics who rejected the Vatican II errors and the New Mass have been keeping the traditional Mass alive.  Beginning in the 1980s, however, the modernist hierarchy has been trying to win these Catholics over to the Vatican II religion by allowing “approved” traditional Masses under the auspices of the diocesan bishops, and by authorizing the foundation of organizations like the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter (FSSP) that use the 1962 Missal and other older liturgical books.
     The first step in this direction came with the 1984 “Indult.”  This was followed in 1988 by the Vatican approval of the FSSP, and finally by Benedict XVI’s 2007 Motu Proprio, which authorized any priest to celebrate Mass using the 1962 Missal.  Because of Indult and Motu Masses and groups like FSSP, more Catholics have been exposed to the traditional Mass, many perhaps for the first time in their lives.  This certainly has a positive side to it.  But this phenomenon also presents serious problems.  At a Motu Mass, hosts doubtfully consecrated beforehand at the New Mass may be distributed from the tabernacle at communion.  The priest from the FSSP or the local diocese who celebrates the Motu Mass is now almost always doubtfully ordained – because either he or the bishop who ordained him received Holy Orders according to the dubious post-Vatican II ordination rites.  Hosts consecrated at a Motu Mass may be placed in the tabernacle and later distributed sacrilegiously in the hand at a celebration of the New Mass.
     Motu Masses and groups like FSSP neutralize and compromise resistance to Vatican II and the New Mass.  This is precisely why they receive official approval.  Vatican guidelines issued in 1991 require priests who celebrate Indult Masses to preach and teach adherence to the Vatican II changes, as well to emphasize “their acknowledgement of the doctrinal and juridical value of the liturgy as revised after the Second Vatican Council.”  A 1999 Vatican document exhorts FSSP priests to concelebrate the New Mass with diocesan bishops to “facilitate this ecclesial communion.”  Motu priests and FSSP priests, then, are by definition sold men.  Approval from the modernist hierarchy buys their silence about the errors of Vatican II and the evil of the New Mass, and they become (perhaps unwittingly) just a ritualist High Church wing in the one-world ecumenical super-church.
     This serves the modernists’ purposes well.  Resistance to the New Mass and attachment to the traditional Mass can then be portrayed as nothing more than nostalgia, aesthetics, antiquarianism, preference or warm feelings, as is evident from a 2004 interview with Cardinal Castrillon Hoyos, head of the Vatican commission that regulates Indult Masses.  These Masses, he said, are part of “a great variety of gifts” in the Church, in which the traditional Mass and the New Mass “proclaim the same Catholic faith, with different emphasis and expressions that are both legitimate, in full and reciprocal fraternal respect.”
     Benedict XVI made this equivalence quite explicit in his 2007 Motu Proprio: he designated the New Mass the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, and the old Mass the Extraordinary Form.  Thus along with the New Mass, kiddie liturgies, altar girls and communion in the hand, the “Latin Mass” then winds up as merely one more option on the post Vatican-II buffet table, where all the dishes are supposed to be treated as equally good, and where your choice is just a matter of your personal taste.
    Fulfilling the Sunday Obligation:
     The modern clergy sometimes claim that going to a traditional Latin Mass at a church not approved by the diocese does not fulfill the Sunday obligation or is a sin.  Implicit in such a statement is the notion that a Catholic is somehow obliged to go to the New Mass.  This is dead wrong.  Your first obligation is to honor God and save your soul.  No one can legitimately oblige you to assist at a Mass that both dishonors God through its irreverence and endangers your salvation through undermining the Catholic faith.  As regards sin, if you’ve gone to the New Mass for a while, you’ve probably figured out that the modern clergy have just about managed to do away with the idea of sin.  If going to the traditional Mass is a sin, it’s probably the only one the post-Vatican II clergy still believes in.
     Ironically, the modern clergy’s pronouncements on the Sunday obligation have contradicted their own Code of Canon Law.  The 1983 Code states that the Sunday obligation “is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite.”  Our situation today is akin to that of Catholics in 16th century England.  Nearly all the bishops and priests in those days had adopted new doctrines – Protestantism – and attempted to impose a heretical new Mass on the faithful.  Catholics ignored the innovator’s laws and pronouncements which commanded them to fulfill their Sunday obligation at what was in fact a non-Catholic service.  Instead, good Catholics sought out faithful priests who would provide them with a true Catholic Mass and with sound Catholic doctrine.
     So too in our own days.  Our churches and cathedrals are occupied by a clergy who promote a false doctrine and a non-Catholic form of worship.  Like Catholics in 16th century England, we have no 

    obligation to follow the commands of a clergy that has publicly defected from the faith.  However, since we have both the right and the obligation under divine law to sound doctrine and pure worship, we can and must seek out faithful Catholic priests who will provide what we need to save our souls.
    An Invitation:
     Since Vatican II, Catholics throughout this country have banded together to preserve the traditional Mass and sacraments.  In some areas traditional Catholics have acquired and furnished splendid churches to give their Lord and Master a home.  In other areas, the Holy Sacrifice is offered in rented rooms, just as the first Mass, the Last Supper, was offered in a rented room.  In either case, it is the Mass that matters, and it is the Mass, at St. Leonard said, upon which the sun rises and sets.  If what we have said here has filled you with the desire to assist at the traditional Latin Mass, we invite you to join us the next time Mass is celebrated (daily).
     What we have said here is necessarily only a brief exposition of the position of Catholics who “stand fast and hold the traditions” (2 Thess 2:15).  For this reason, we invite you to investigate further the matter through reading and studying.  There are a great number of traditional books and periodicals which offer an explanation and a defense of our position.
     Finally, we invite you to pray, and to seek the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the saints.  May you be granted the grace to be true to the one, true Faith till death.
    For directions, assistance, mature questions, comments, and concerns; including Mass locations, traditional Catholic websites, books, sacramentals, and videos please e-mail TradCat4Christ@gmail.com

    A 1988 pamphlet by Rev. Anthony Cekada (revised 1994, 2004, 2006, 2008)
    Abridged and distributed by TradCat4Christ@gmail.com
    God Bless you and your families, Blessed Virgin Mary pray for us!