http://www.shrineofsaintjude.net/home-quotes.html
Saint Jude
Pray
for Me
Catholic Shrine of Saint Jude
Patron Saint of Difficult, Impossible, & Hopeless Cases
Saint Jude
Pray
for Us
 
J.M.J.
A.M.D.G.-
F.V.T.
An Ecclesiastical, Educational, Religious, Devotional, Informational, Data, and E-News Web Site, Dedicated to Preserving the Authentic Apostolic Tradition of the Catholic Church on Important Subjects and Issues Concerning the Catholic Church and Her Members.
Important Catholic Quotes for Today!
“If thou wilt receive profit, read with Humility, simplicity and Faith; and seek not at any time the fame of being learned.”

(Thomas a'Kempis, Imitation of Christ, Book I, Chapter 5:2;4.)


Knowledge
 
“It is of the greatest importance that in order to gain assured knowledge of things, to rely on exact acquaintance with facts, rather than on the uncertain testimony of public rumor; and then what we have proved for certain we may proclaim without hesitation.”

(Saint Bernard of Clairvaux  [b. Castle Fontaines, near Dijon, France in 1090 A.D. - d. at Clairvaux, France on Friday, August 21, 1153 A.D.], Abbot of Clairvaux, Doctor of the Church, Letters).






Brief Introduction
Dear Readers,

Thank you for your interest in Important Catholic Quotes for Today!

For your information, along with all other pre-Vatican 2 Roman Catholic Priests and Prelates (Bishops of whatever rank of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction), many times I myself have publicly taken the two required Oaths (small portions of which are found below) in which, among other things, I did promise and swear that I would not only believe, preach, and teach, but also write, only what is consistent with the authentic Apostolic Tradition of the Catholic Church, because only it has the Supernatural guarantee of Truth.

Therefore, the following direct quotes, the sources of which I have identified, along with whatever notes, analysis, and commentaries I may make concerning them, are, to the best of my knowledge, consistent with the authentic Apostolic Tradition of the Catholic Church which has the Supernatural guarantee of Truth.

This is one of the unique things about this web site because the Laity, who today have many websites on the internet, for obvious reasons, have not taken these two required Oaths.  In addition, it is also my understanding that the NEW clergy  (i.e those Priests and Prelates who are NOT pre-Vatican 2), have NOT taken these two required Oaths, either.

Therefore, this web site, to the best of my knowledge, is the ONLY web site on the entire internet at this time, of which the author many times has taken the two required Solemn Oaths which require me to write only what is consistent with the authentic Apostolic Tradition of the Catholic Church which has the Supernatural guarantee of Truth! Hence, to the best of my knowledge, no other internet web site can make this claim because none of these Priests or Prelates are pre-Vatican 2.

Happy Reading!

Have a Wonderful Day!

God Bless You!
mmm
Father Michael


The Profession of Faith

In accordance with Canon Law - Church Law - I have taken The Profession of Faith many times.  This is a Solemn Oath which means that anyone who takes it and later violates it, commits the Mortal Sin of Perjury each time it is violated.  Here are a few important parts of the actual text for today:

I, (state your name), believe and vow with a firm faith each and every single article of Faith, which is found in the Collection of the Articles of Faith, which the Holy Catholic Church uses, which are....

“... most steadfastly admit and embrace Apostolic and Ecclesiastical Traditions...

“...I will NEVER accept and interpret it (i.e. Sacred Scripture) otherwise than in accordance with the UNANIMOUS CONSENT of the Fathers.....

“I, (state your name), by this present’ promise, vow and swear that, with the help of God, I shall most constantly hold and profess this true Catholic Faith, without which no one can be saved and which I now freely profess and truly hold.  With the help of God, I shall profess it whole and inviolate to my dying breath; and, with all the power and ability in me, I will see to it that those under me and any others who come under my care by virtue of my Office, to Hold, to Teach, and to Preach all of the above mentioned TruthsTo this end, so help me God and these Holy Gospels of God.”

(The Profession of Faith is required to be taken by all Roman Catholic Sub-Deacons, Deacons, and Priests at their respective Ordinations, by all Bishops at their Episcopal Consecration, by all Archbishops and Cardinals at their respective Elevations, and by every Pope-Elect prior to his Coronation and Installation.  This Profession of Faith was mandated by the Roman Catholic Council of Trent, Session 25, Wednesday, December 4, 1563, Decree Concerning Reform, Chapter II.  Roman Catholic Pope Pius IV, Giovanni Angelo De Medici [Friday, December 25, 1559 - Thursday, December 9, 1565] issued the actual text for this Solemn Oath in his Papal Bulla, Injunctum Nobis, on Friday, November 13, 1564; emphasis added.)


Who must Make The Profession of Faith

CANON 1406

§ 1.  The following are bound by the obligation of making the Profession of Faith in accordance with the formula approved by the Apostolic See:

1.  In the presence of the Presiding Officer or his Delegate, all who attend an Ecumenical or a particular Council or a Diocesan Synod with an effective vote or the right to counsel; the Presiding Officer makes it in the presence of the Council or the Synod.

2.  In the presence of the Dean of the Sacred College, of the Cardinals first in rank among the Cardinal Priests and the Cardinal Deacons, and of the Cardinal Chamberlain, those who have been promoted to the Cardinalitial rank;

3.  In the presence of a Delegate of the Holy See, those who have been promoted to an Episcopal See, even a non-residential See, or to the post of governing an Abbacy Nullius, a Prelacy Nullius, a Vicariate Apostolic, or a Prefecture Apostolic;

4.  In the presence of the Cathedral Chapter, the Capitular Vicar (in the presence of the Board of Consultors, the Administrator);

5.  In the presence of the Local Ordinary or his Delegate and of the Chapter, those promoted to be Capitular Dignitaries or Canons;

6.  In the presence of the Local Ordinary or his Delegate and of the other Consultors, those appointed to the post of Diocesan Consultor;

7.  In the presence of the Local Ordinary or his Delegate, the Vicar General; Pastors and all who have received any Benefice, even a manual one, to which the Care of Souls is attached; in Seminaries, at the beginning of each Scholastic Year or at least when the post is assumed, the Rector and the Instructors in Sacred Theology, Canon Law, and Philosophy; all who are to be promoted to the Order of Sub-Diaconate; Censors of Books; and, before faculties are given for the exercise of these functions, Priests who are to be assigned to the hearing of Confessions, and Sacred Preachers;

8.  In the presence of the Ordinary or his Delegate, the Rector of a University or a Faculty; in the presence of the Rector of the University or of the Faculty or of his Delegate, all the Professors in a Canonically established University or Faculty, at the beginning of each Scholastic Year or at least when the post is assumed; and also those who, having passed their examination, are to be awarded academic degrees;

9.  In the presence of the Appointing Chapter or the Superior or their Delegate, Superiors in Clerical Religious Institutes.

§ 2.  When anyone, giving up a previous appointment, obtains another Office, Benefice, or Dignity of the same kind, he must again make the Profession of Faith in accordance with this Canon.”

(English translation from:  John A. Abbo, S.T.L, J.C.D., Jerome D. Hannan, A.M., LL.B., S.T.D., J.C.D., The Sacred Canons, A Concise Presentation of the Current Disciplinary Norms of the Church, Volume II - Canons 870-2414, pp. 642-644.)

The Oath Against Modernism

In accordance with the requirements of the A.A.S., S.C.S. OFF., Decree of March 22, 1918, I have also taken The Oath Against Modernism many times.  This is a Solemn Oath which means that anyone who takes it and later violates it, commits the Mortal Sin of Perjury each time it is violated.  Here are a few important parts of the actual text for today:

I (state your name), firmly accept and embrace each and every Doctrine defined by the Church’s unerring Teaching Authority and all that She has maintained and declared, especially those points of Doctrine which are directly opposed to the errors of our time....

“...Fourthly, I sincerely hold that the Doctrine of Faith was handed down to us from the Apostles through the officially approved Fathers [of the Catholic Church], in exactly the same sense and with always the same meaning.  And, therefore, I completely reject the heretical notion that Dogmas evolve and change from one meaning to another different from the one meaning which the Church held from the beginning.

I likewise condemn every erroneous notion according to which, instead of the Divine Deposit of Faith, entrusted by Christ to His Spouse, the Church, and to be faithfully guarded by Her, one may substitute a philosophical system, or a creation of the human mind, gradually refined by human effort and capable of continual and indefinite development.

“Fifthly, I hold with certainty and sincerely profess that Faith is not a blind Religious sentiment evolving from the hidden recesses of subliminal consciousness, and morally formed by the influence of heart and the motion of the will, but that it is a real assent of the intellect to objective Truth learned by hearing, an assent wherein we believe to be true whatever has been spoken, testified, and revealed by the personal God, our Creator and Lord, on the authority of God, Who is the perfection of Truth.

“Furthermore, in all due reverence, I submit to, and fully uphold, all of the condemnations, declarations and the prescripts contained in the Encyclical Letter PASCENDI, and in the Decree LAMENTABILI, especially those concerning what is called the history of dogmas.  I also reject the error of those who say that the Faith held by the Church may conflict with history, and that Catholic Dogmas, in the sense in which they are now understood, cannot be reconciled with the actual origins of the Christian Religion....

“Finally, I profess that I am completely opposed to the error of the Modernists who hold that there is nothing inherently Divine in Sacred Tradition; or who - which is far worse - admit it in a pantheistic sense.  For them, there would remain only a bare simple fact, like the ordinary facts of history, to the effect that the system begun by Christ and His Apostles still find men to support it by their energy, skill and ability; therefore, I most firmly retain and will retain to my last breath the Faith of the Fathers of the Church, which has the Supernatural guarantee of Truth...

“...that we may never believe nor understand anything other than the absolute and unchangeable Truth preached from the beginning by the Apostles.

All this I promise to keep faithfully, entirely and sincerely and to guard them inviolately and never to depart from them in any way in Teaching, in Word, or in Writing.Thus I promise, thus I swear, so help me God and His Holy Gospels.”

(Oath Against Modernism, Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Motu Proprio - On His Own Initiative - Sacrorum Antistitum, Thursday, September 1, 1910; emphasis added.)

All those who are required to take The Profession of Faith, per Canon Law 1406, are also required to take the Oath Against Modernism at the same time.  (A.A.S. [Acta Apostolicae Sedis - Acts of the Apostolic See] - Year 10, Volume 10, page 136; S.C.S. OFF. [Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office], Decree of March 22, 1918.)

This document is on the Internet at:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/aas/documents/AAS%2010%20%5B1918%5D%20-%20ocr.pdf


Coronation Oath of the Pope-Elect

“I VOW:

TO CHANGE NOTHING of the received Tradition, and nothing thereof, I have found before me guarded by my God pleasing Predecessors, to encroach to alter (to change), OR TO PERMIT ANY INNOVATION therein;

“To the contrary: with glowing affection as Her truly faithful student and successor, to reverently safeguard the passed on good, with my whole strength and utmost effort;

“To cleanse all that is in contradiction with Canonical order that may surface;

“To guard the Holy Canons and Decrees of our Popes likewise as Divine Ordinances of Heaven, because I am conscious of Thee, Whose place I take through the Grace of God, Whose Vicarship I possess with Thy support, being subject to severest accounting before Thy Divine Tribunal over all that I confess.

If I should undertake to act in anything of contrary sense, or should permit that it will be executed, Thou willst not be merciful to me on the dreadful day of Divine Justice.

“Accordingly, without exclusion, We subject to severest Excommunication anyone - be it Ourself or be it another - who would dare to undertake anything NEW in contradiction to this constituted Evangelic Tradition and the purity of the Orthodox Faith and the Christian Religion, or would seek to change anything by his opposing efforts, or would concur with those who undertake such blasphemous venture.”

(Liber Diurnus Romanorum Pontificum, as found in Jacques Paul Migne's [b. Saint-Flour, France on Saturday, October 25, 1800 - d. Paris, France on  Sunday, October 24, 1875], Patrologiæ Latinæ Cursus Completus,  published in 221 volumes [1862 - 1864], Volume 105, S. 54; emphasis added.)


Contents

Knowledge

The Armor of God....Truth

Brief Introduction

The Profession of Faith

Who must Make The Profession of Faith

The Oath Against Modernism

Coronation Oath of the Pope-Elect

From Sacred Scripture

Old Testament

New Testament

Saint Matthew, Apostle and Evangelist

Saint John, Apostle and Evangelist - Gospel

Saint Paul, Apostle

Saint James the Just, Apostle

Saint Peter, Apostle

Saint John, Apostle and Evangelist - Epistle

Saint John the Apostle Writing the Apocalypse

From the Fathers of the Catholic Church
Bishop Saint Polycarp [b. c. 69 A.D.]

Patriarch Saint Athanasius [b. 296 A.D.]

Bishop Saint Pacian [b. c. 310  A.D.]

Catholicus Saint Basil the Great [b. 329 A.D.]

Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. 340 A.D.]

Patriarch Saint John Chrysostom [b. c. 347 A.D.]

Bishop Saint Augustine [b. 354 A.D.]

Saint Vincent of Lerins [b. c. 400 A.D.]

From Councils of the Roman Catholic Church
First Council of Chalcedon [451 A.D.]

Second Council of Nicæa [787 A.D.]

Fourth Lateran Council - [1215 A.D.]

Council of Trent [1547 A.D.]

The Catechism of the Council of Trent

Concerning The Catechism of the Council of Trent

Council of Trent [1551 A.D.]

Council of Trent [1562 A.D.]

From Popes of the Roman Catholic Church
Pope Saint Stephen I

Pope Saint Leo I

Pope Saint Gregory I, the Great

Pope Paul III

Pope Paul IV

Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio

Canon Law, 188.4

Catholic Encyclopedia - Heretical clerics

Pope Saint Pius V- Quo Primum
Quo Primum Tempore
Pope Saint Pius V- De Defectibus
De Defectibus
Change of for many to for all

Suppression of Mystery of Faith

THE BLACK RUBRIC

Correct Form for the Double Consecration

Infallible Council of Florence Infallibly Set the Words of the Double Consecration

Side-by-side Comparison - Consecration of the Bread into the Body of Christ

Consecration of the Wine into the Blood of Christ - Latin

Consecration of the Wine into the Blood of Christ - English

Pope Pius VI

Pope Gregory XVI

Pope Leo XIII

Pope Saint Pius X

Condemnation of the Heresy of Modernism

Council of Vigilance

Automatic Excommunication of Modernist Heretics

Pope Pius XII
The Vatican 2 church

The church of the Never-Ending Changes

A Table is Not an Altar

Altar forbidden to be restored to its primitive tableform

Black forbidden to be excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments

Sacred images and statues to be used in Churches

Crucifix so designed to show cruel sufferings of the Divine Redeemer's Body

From Doctors of the Church
Bishop Saint Isidore of Seville [b. 560 A.D.]

Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P. [b. 1225 A.D.]

An Explanation of Private Revelations

From Private Revelations

The Secret of LaSalette

First and Second Secrets of Fatima

Third Secret of Fatima Sent to President Kennedy and to Other World Leaders

Text of the Third Secret of Fatima
Venerable Mary of Agreda [b. 1602]

Marie-Julie Jahenny [b. 1850]

From Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church
Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani [b. 1890]

Uniate Patriarch Kyr Josyf Cardinal Slipyj [b. 1892]

Giuseppe Cardinal Siri [b. 1906]

From Bishops and Archbishops Of the Roman Catholic Church
Bishop Saint Ivo of Chartres [b. c. 1040 A.D.]

Bishop Antonio Romeo

Bishop George J. Musey, D.D.

From Converts from Communism Concerning Infiltration of Communists Into the Roman Catholic Church
Mrs./Dr. Bella V. Dodd [b. c. 1904]
Infiltration of the Catholic Church?
The Venona Secrets

Douglas Arnold Hyde [b. 1911]

Manning R. Johnson

Statistics
Statistics in General

An Index of Catholicism’s Decline

Tremendous Value of The Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass

God Has Warned Everyone Not to Change The Liturgical Rites Which He Himself Instituted

Father Joseph Gelineau S.J. [b. 1920]

The Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists. It has been destroyed.

What happened to two Old Testament Priests who made one change

62 Reasons Why, In Good Conscience, Catholics CAN NOT Attend the NEW Mass

The Ottaviani Intervention

The Cover Letter to Pope Paul 6

The Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, June 5, 1969, by A Group of Roman Theologians

Pray the Traditional Rosary daily

Hope

From Sacred Scripture
 



Old Testament

“And Nadab and Abiu, the Sons of Aaron, taking their censers, put fire therein, and incense on it, offering before the Lord strange fire: which was not commanded them.   And fire coming out from the Lord destroyed them:  and they died before the Lord.” (Leviticus 10:1-2; emphasis added.)

“Nadab and Abiu died before their Father.”(1 Paralipomenon 24:2)

“11:2. Save me, O Lord, for there is now no Saint: Truths are decayed from among the children of men.

11:3. They have spoken vain things, every one to his neighbour: with deceitful lips, and with a double heart have they spoken.

11:4. May the Lord destroy all deceitful lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things” (Psalm 11:2-4).

“The Fool hath said in his heart: There is no God” (Psalm 13:1).

“90:5. His Truth shall compass thee with a shield: thou shalt not be afraid of the terror of the night.

90:6. Of the arrow that flieth in the day, of the business that walketh about in the dark: of invasion, or of the noonday devil.

90:7. A thousand shall fall at thy side, and ten thousand at thy right hand: but it shall not come nigh thee.

90:8. But thou shalt consider with thy eyes: and shalt see the reward of the wicked.

90:9. Because Thou, O Lord, art my hope: thou hast made the most High thy refuge.

90:10. There shall no evil come to thee: nor shall the scourge come near thy dwelling.

90:11. For He hath given His Angels charge over thee; to keep thee in all thy ways” (Psalm 90:5-11).

144:17. The Lord is just in all His ways: and Holy in all His works.

144:18. The Lord is nigh unto all them that call upon Him: to all that call upon Him in Truth.

144:19. He will do the will of them that fear Him: and He will hear their prayer, and save them.

144:20. The Lord keepeth all them that love Him; but all the wicked He will destroy” (Psalm 144:17-20).

A deceitful tongue loveth not Truth: and a slippery mouth worketh ruin” (Proverbs 26:28).

9 They that trust in Him, shall understand the Truth: and they that are faithful in love shall rest in Him: for Grace and Peace is to His Elect.

10 But the wicked shall be punished according to their own devices: who have neglected the just, and have revolted from the Lord.

11 For he that rejecteth Wisdom, and Discipline, is unhappy: and their hope is vain, and their labours without fruit, and their works unprofitable” (Wisdom 3:9-11).

What can be made clean by the unclean? and what Truth can come from that which is false?” (Ecclesiasticus 34:4).

Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness” (Isaias 5:20).

No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper” (Isaias 54:17).

“And strength was given him against the Continual Sacrifice, because of sins: and Truth shall be cast down on the ground, and he shall do and shall prosper” (Daniel 8:12).

“And he shall confirm the Covenant with many, in one week: and in the half of the week the Victim and the Sacrifice shall fail: and there shall be in the temple the abomination of desolation: and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation, and to the end” (Daniel 9:27).

“And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall defile the Sanctuary of Strength, and shall take away the Continual Sacrifice: and they shall place there the abomination unto desolation” (Daniel 11:31).

“For from the rising of the sun even to the going down, My Name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is Sacrifice, and there is offered to My Name a Clean Oblation: for My Name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord of hosts” (Malachias 1:11).

“2:6. The law of Truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with Me in peace, and in equity, and turned many away from iniquity.

2:7. For the lips of the Priests shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the law at his mouth: because he is the Angel of the Lord of hosts” (Malachias 2:6-7).

“I am the Lord and I change not” (Malachias 3:6).


New Testament


Saint Matthew, Apostle and Evangelist

“By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit” (Matthew 7:15-17).

“And after six days Jesus taketh unto Him Peter and James, and John his Brother, and bringeth them up into a high mountain apart:  and He was transfigured before them.  And His face did shine as the sun:  and His garments became white as snow” (Matthew 17:1-2).



Saint John, Apostle and Evangelist

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God” (John 1:1).

“And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we saw His glory, the glory as it were of the Only Begotten of the Father,) full of Grace and Truth” (John 1:14).

“The next day, John saw Jesus coming to him, and he saith:   Behold the Lamb of God, behold Him who taketh away the sin of the world” (John 1:29).

“And you shall know the Truth, and the Truth shall make you free” (John 8:32).

“43   Why do you not know My speech?  Because you cannot hear My word.

44   You are of your father the Devil, and the desires of your father you will do.  He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the Truth; because Truth is not in him.  When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own:  for he is a liar, and the father thereof.

45   But if I say the Truth, you believe Me not.

46   Which of you shall convince Me of sin?  If I say the Truth to you, why do you not believe Me?

47   He that is of God, heareth the words of God.  Therefore you hear them not, because you are not of God” (John 8:43-47).

“I am the Way, and the Truth and the Life.  No man cometh to the Father but by Me” (John 14:6).

“And I will ask the Father, and He shall give you another Paraclete, that He may abide with you for ever.  The Spirit of Truth, Whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth Him not, nor knoweth Him:  but you shall know Him; because He shall abide with you, and shall be in you” (John 14:16-17).

“But when the Paraclete cometh, Whom I will send you from the Father, the Spirit of Truth, Who proceedeth from the Father, He shall give testimony of Me” (John 15:26).



Saint Paul, Apostle

“But though We, or an Angel from Heaven, Preach a Gospel to you besides that which We have preached to you, let him be anathema” (Galatians 1:8; emphasis added).

“11   But when Cephas [Peter] was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

12   For before that some came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles:  but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them who were of the circumcision.

13   And to his dissimulation the rest of the Jews consented, so that Barnabas also was led by them into that dissimulation.

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly unto the Truth of the Gospel, I said to Cephas before them all:  If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of the Gentiles, and not as the Jews do, how dost thou compel the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?” (Galatians 2:11-14; emphasis added).

Am I then become your enemy, because I tell you the Truth?”  (Galatians 4:16; emphasis added).

“...because they receive not the love of the Truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying” (2 Thessalonians 2:10).

“Therefore, Brethren, stand fast; and hold the Traditions which you have learned, whether by Word [oral teaching], or by Our Epistle [written teaching]” (2 Thessalonians 2:14; emphasis added).

“Hold the Traditions which you have learned” (2 Thessalonians 2:14.)

“Now the Spirit manifestly saith that in the last times some shall depart from the Faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of devilsnspeaking lies in hypocrisy and having their conscience seared” (1 Timothy 4:1).

“O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so called. Which some promising, have erred concerning the Faith” (1 Timothy 6:20-21).

Be not led away with various and strange doctrines.  Jesus Christ yesterday, and today, and the same forever” (Hebrews 13:8-9).



Saint James the Just, Apostle

“Blessed is the man that endureth temptation; for when he hath been proved, he shall receive a crown of life, which God hath promised to them that love Him” (James 1:12).

“With the Father of light there is no change nor shadow of alteration” (James 1:17).

“17   So Faith also, if it have not Works, is dead in itself.

18   But some man will say:  Thou hast Faith, and I have Works:  shew me thy Faith without Works; and I will shew thee, by Works, my Faith.

19   Thou believest that there is one God.  Thou dost well:  the Devils also believe and tremble.

20   But wilt thou know, O vain man, that Faith without Works is dead?

21   Was not Abraham our Father justified by Works, offering up Isaac his Son upon the altar?

22   Seest thou, that Faith did co-operate with his Works; and, by Works, Faith was made perfect?” (James 2:17-22; emphasis added).

“But if you have bitter zeal, and there be contentions in your hearts; glory not, and be not liars against the Truth.   For this is not Wisdom, descending from above:  but earthly, sensual, devilish” (James 3:14-15).

“1    Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl in your miseries, which shall come upon you.

2    Your riches are corrupted:  and your garments are motheaten.

3    Your gold and silver is cankered:  and the rust of them shall be for a testimony against you, and shall eat your flesh like fire.  You have stored up to yourselves wrath against the last days” (James 5:1-3).



Saint Peter, Apostle

“For the time is, that judgment should begin at the House of God [the Church]” (1 Peter 4:17).

“But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of Truth shall be evil spoken of.  And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not” (2 Peter 2:1-3; emphasis added).



Saint John, Apostle and Evangelist - Epistle
Blessed Virgin Mary Receiving Holy Communion from Saint John

“No lie is of the Truth” (1 John 2:21).



Saint John the Apostle Writing the Apocalypse
Saint John, Apostle
Evangelist and Author of the Apocalypse
[b.  ?  A.D. - d. at Ephesus, c. 101 A.D.]

“7    Behold, He cometh with the clouds, and every eye shall see Him, and they also that pierced Him.  And all the tribes of the earth shall bewail themselves because of Him.  Even so.  Amen.

8    I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord God, Who is, and Who was, and Who is to come, the Almighty.

9    I, John, your Brother and your partner in tribulation, and in the kingdom, and patience in Christ Jesus, was on the island, which is called Patmos, for the Word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus.

10   I was in the spirit on the Lord’s Day [Sunday], and heard behind me a great Voice, as of a trumpet,

11   Saying:  What thou seest, write in a book, and send to the Seven Churches which are in Asia, to Ephesus, and to Smyrna, and to Pergamus, and to Thyatira, and to Sardis, and to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea.

12   And I turned to see the Voice that spoke with me.  And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks:

13   And in the midst of the Seven Golden Candlesticks, One like to the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the feet, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.

14   And His head and his hairs were white, as white wool, and as snow, and his eyes were as a flame of fire,

15   And His feet like unto fine brass, as in a burning furnace.  And His voice as the sound of many waters.

16   And He had in his right hand Seven Stars.  And from His mouth came out a sharp two edged sword:  and His Face was as the sun shineth in his power.

17   And when I had seen Him, I fell at His feet as dead.  And He laid His right hand upon me, saying:  Fear not.  I am the First and the Last,

18   And alive, and was dead, and behold I am living for ever and ever, and have the keys of death and of Hell.

19   Write therefore the things which thou hast seen, and which are, and which must be done hereafter.

20   The mystery of the Seven Stars, which thou sawest in My right hand, and the Seven Golden Candlesticks.  The Seven Stars are the Angels [Bishops] of the Seven Churches.  And the Seven Candlesticks are the Seven Churches” (Apocalypse 1:7-20; emphasis added).

“1  Unto the Angel [Bishop] of the Church of Ephesus write:  These things saith He, Who holdeth the Seven Stars [Seven Bishops] in His right hand, Who walketh in the midst of the Seven Golden Candlesticks:

2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them that are evil, and thou hast tried them, who say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

3  And thou hast patience, and hast endured for My Name, and hast not fainted.

4 But I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first charity.

5 Be mindful therefore from whence thou art fallen:  and do penance, and do the first works.  Or else I come to thee, and will move thy candlestick out of its place, except thou do penance.

6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaites, which I also hate.

7  He, that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches:  To him, that overcometh, I will give to eat of the Tree of Life, which is in the Paradise of my God” (Apocalypse 2:1-7; emphasis added).

“And the third angel sounded the trumpet, and a great Star [Bishop] fell from Heaven [the Church], burning as it were a torch, and it fell on the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters [the Mass and Sacraments]: And the name of the Star [Bishop] is called Wormwood.  And the third part of the waters [the Mass and Sacraments] became wormwood; and many men died of the waters [fake Masses and Sacraments], because they were made bitter [invalid Masses and invalid Sacraments, a.k.a. Memorial Supper Meals, a.k.a. happy meals]” (Apocalypse 8:10-11; emphasis added).

“And I heard another voice from Heaven, saying:  Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues.  For her sins have reached unto Heaven, and the Lord hath remembered her iniquities” (Apocalypse 18:4-5; emphasis added).

“And there came down fire from God out of Heaven, and devoured them; and the Devil, who seduced them, was cast into the Pool of Fire and Brimstone, where both the Beast and the False Prophet shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.   And I saw a Great White Throne, and One sitting upon it, from whose Face the earth and heaven fled away, and there was no place found for them” (Apocalypse 20:9-11; emphasis added).

“For I testify to every one that heareth the words of the Prophecy of this Book:  If any man shall add to these things, God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book.   And if any man shall take away from the words of the Book of this Prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of Life, and out of the Holy City, and from these things that are written in this Book” (Apocalypse 22:18-19).

From the Fathers of the Catholic Church


Bishop Saint Polycarp [b. c. 69 A.D.]
“Let us abandon the vanities of the crowd and their false teachings; let us return to the Word which was delivered to us from the beginning” (Bishop Saint Polycarp [b. c. 69 A.D. - d. martyred on Saturday, February 23, 166 A.D.] was a Disciple of Saint John the Apostle, who made him the Bishop of Smyrna. Saint Polycarp is an Apostolic Father of the Catholic Church).

Patriarch Saint Athanasius [b. 296 A.D.]
“But God’s Word is one and the same and, as it is written: The Word of God endureth forever [Isaias 40:8] unchanged, not before or after another, but existing the same always.  For it was fitting, whereas God is One, that His Image should be One also, and His Word One and One His Wisdom” (Patriarch Saint Athanasius [b. Alexandria, Egypt 296 A.D. - d. Alexandria, Egypt on Wednesday, May 2, 373A.D.], Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt, Father of Orthodoxy in the Catholic Church, Four Discourses Against the Arians, Discourse II, Chapter XVII, Introduction to Proverbs viii. 22, Continued, ¶ 36; emphasis added).

“Let us note that the very Tradition, teaching, and Faith of the Catholic Church from the beginning, which the Lord gave, was preached by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers. On this was the Church founded; and if anyone departs from this, he neither is, nor any longer ought to be called, a Christian”  (Patriarch Saint Athanasius [b. Alexandria, Egypt 296 A.D. - d. Alexandria, Egypt on Wednesday, May 2, 373A.D.], Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt, Father of Orthodoxy in the Catholic Church, Letter to Serapion of Thmuis, 359 A.D.).

“Revealed Truth, to be what it professes, must have an uninterrupted descent from the Apostles.  Its teachers must be unanimous and persistent in their unanimity and it must bear no human master’s name as its designation”  (Patriarch Saint Athanasius [b. Alexandria, Egypt 296 A.D. - d. Alexandria, Egypt on Wednesday, May 2, 373A.D.], Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt, Father of Orthodoxy in the Catholic Church).

“The Heretics may possess the buildings of the Church, but you possess the Faith of the Church... It is a fact that they have the premises - but you have the Apostolic Faith. They can occupy our churches, but they are outside the True Faith.  You remain outside the places of worship, but the Faith dwells within you.  Let us consider: what is more important, the place or the Faith? The True Faith, obviously.  Who has lost and who has won in this struggle - the one who keeps the premises, or the one who keeps the Faith?....  Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the True Church of Jesus Christ”  (Patriarch Saint Athanasius [b. Alexandria, Egypt 296 A.D. - d. Alexandria, Egypt on Wednesday, May 2, 373A.D.], Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt, Father of Orthodoxy in the Catholic Church, “Coll. Selecta SS. Eccl. Patrum.,” Caillu and Guillou, Volume 32, pp 411-412; emphasis added.)


Bishop Saint Pacian [b. c. 310  A.D.]
Christianus mihi nomen est, Catholicus cognomen.
Christian is my name, Catholic is my surname.

“7.  Many things the Holy Spirit hath taught us, Whom God sent from Heaven to the Apostles as their Comforter and Guide. Many things reason teaches us, as Paul saith, and honesty, and, as he says, nature itself. (1 Corinthians 11:14).  What! Is the authority of Apostolic men, of Primitive Priests, of the most Blessed Martyr and Doctor Cyprian, of slight weight with us? Do we wish to teach the teacher? Are we wiser than he was, and are we puffed up by the spirit of the flesh against the man, whom his noble shedding of blood, and a crown of most glorious suffering, have set forth as a witness of the Eternal God? What thinkest thou of so many Priests on this same side, who throughout the whole world were compacted together in one bond of peace with this same Cyprian? What of so many aged Bishops, so many Martyrs, so many Confessors? Come say, if they were not sufficient authorities for the use of this name, are we sufficient for its rejection? And shall the Fathers rather follow our authority, and the antiquity of Saints give way to be emended by us, and times now putrifying through their sins, pluck out the grey hairs of the Apostolic Age? And yet, my brother, be not troubled; Christian is my name, Catholic is my surname. [Christianus mihi nomen est, Catholicus cognomen.] The former [Christian] qualifies me, while the latter [Catholic] proclaims me for what I am. The latter [Catholic] demonstrates what the former [Christian] signifies.”

“8.   And, if I finally must explain the word Catholic and translate it from the Greek into the Roman idiom, Catholic means ubique Unum - everywhere One, or, as the more learned - doctores  - think, obedience to all the Commandments of God.  Whence the Apostle, whether you be obedient in all things (2 Corinthians 2:9).  And again, For as by the disobedience of one man, many were made sinners; so also by the obedience of One, many shall be made just (Romans 5:19).  Therefore he who is a Catholic, the same man is obedient   He who is obedient, the same is a Christian, and thus the Catholic is a Christian. Wherefore our people, when named Catholic are separated by this appellation from the heretical name. But if also the word Catholic means ubique Unum - everywhere One, as those first think, David indicates this very thing, when he saith,  The Queen stood at thy right hand, in gilded clothing; surrounded with variety (Psalm 44:10). ....If thou askest the reason of the name, it is evident.”

(Bishop Saint Pacian [b. c. 310  A.D. - d. 390 A.D.], Father of the Catholic Church, Bishop of Barcelona, Spain [360 A.D. - 390 A.D.], Epistola I, Contra Sympronianum, De Catholico Nomine, ¶ 7 and ¶ 8.  Letter I, Against Sympronian, a.k.a. Sympronianus, On the Catholic Name, ¶ 7 and ¶ 8. [375 A.D.]; De Scriptoribus Ecclesiasticis; emphasis added.

For the record, it should also be noted that, like all of the Apostles, except Saint John, and like many of the Priests and Bishops of the Catholic Church during the first 1,200 years of her existence, and like over 60 Roman Catholic Popes,   Bishop Saint Pacian was validly Married.

The validly Married couple had at least one Child, a Son - Flavius Lucius Dexter who became the High Chamberlain to the Roman Emperor Flavius Theodosius Augustus I [b. in January, 347 - d. on January 17, 395], Emperor [379 to January 17, 395], and the Praetorian Prefect to his Son, the Roman Emperor Flavius Honorius Augustus [b. on September 9, 384 - d. August 15, 423], Emperor [January 17, 395 to August 15, 423].

Saint Jerome, a.k.a. Eusebius Hieronymus, a.k.a. Sophronius [b. Stridon, Dalmatia c. 340 A.D. - d. Bethlehem, Palestine, Wednesday, September 30, 420 A.D.], Doctor of the Catholic Church, knew Flavius Lucius Dexter  to whom he dedicated his work De Viris Illustribus - On Illustrious Men.)


Catholicus Saint Basil the Great [b. 329 A.D.]
“Dogmas of Faith cannot be altered one jot or tittle because of the law [of Faith] we are told one jot, or one tittle shall not pass of the law (Matthew 5:18).”  (Catholicus Saint Basil the Great [b. Caesarea, Cappadocia 329 A.D. - d. Caesarea, Cappadocia on Monday, January 1, 379 A.D.]. His Mother was Emmelia, the Daughter of a holy martyr.  He was the Catholicus of Caesarea, Metropolitan Archbishop of Cappadocia, Exarch of Pontus, Superior of fifty Chorepiscopi [Sunday, June 14, 370 A.D. - Monday, January 1, 379 A.D.], Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, De Spiritu Sancto, Chapter 1, ¶ 2.)

Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. 340 A.D.]

Nor was Mary less than was befitting the Mother of Christ.  When the Apostles fled, she stood before the Cross and with reverent gaze beheld her Son's wounds, for she waited not for her  Child's death, but the world's salvation.” (Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. in Gaul, possibly at Trier, Arles, or Lyons in 340 A.D. - d. at Milan, Italy on Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.] Patriarch of Milan [374 A.D. - Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.], Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, Letters, # 63, written in 396 A.D.)

It may be that under the symbolic figure of that Woman, Mother-in-Law of Simon [Peter] and Andrew, it was our flesh that was ill, suffering from the fever of various crimes.” (Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. in Gaul, possibly at Trier, Arles, or Lyons in 340 A.D. - d. at Milan, Italy on Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.] Patriarch of Milan [374 A.D. - Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.], Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, Espositio Evangelii Secundum Lucam, - An Exposition of the Gospel According to Luke, 4. Found in:  “Corpus Christianorum” 14, 128; emphasis added.)

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:

In the above quote, it is very easy to miss the word and in Mother-in-Law of Simon [Peter] and Andrew.  Research indicates that the Apostles, who were also biological Brothers, Saint Peter and Saint Andrew, married biological Sisters!  In other words, the Mother-in-Law of Saint Peter was also the same Mother-in-Law of Saint Andrew!  Most probably the reason for this was that when they were children, they all lived in the same small village, and had known one another from a young age?  It was apparently somewhat common in those days to marry a person one had already known for some years when growing up?

“... [Peter] exercised his primacy, that is, the primacy of confession, NOT of honor; the primacy of belief, NOT of rank.” (Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. in Gaul, possibly at Trier, Arles, or Lyons in 340 A.D. - d. at Milan, Italy on Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.] Patriarch of Milan [374 A.D. - Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.], Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, The Sacrament Of The Incarnation of Our Lord, Chapter 4, ¶ ¶ 27-33; emphasis added.)



Patriarch Saint John Chrysostom [b. c. 347 A.D.]

Cease laboring in vain and sowing upon rock, many have been saying to me. But I hearkened to none of themFor there is Hope, I said to myself, that, God willing, my writing will accomplish something; but if that which We deprecate should take place, We shall at least have the advantage
of escaping self reproach for keeping silence, and We shall not be worse than sailors on the sea, who, when they behold men of their own craft drifting on a plank, because their ship has been broken to pieces by the winds and waves, take down their sails, and cast anchor, and get into a boat and try to rescue the men, although strangers, known to them only in consequence of their calamity.

But, if the others were unwilling to be rescued, no one would accuse those of their destruction
who attempted to save them.  This is what We offer YOU; but We trust that, by the Grace of God, YOU also will do your part!”  (Patriarch Saint John Chrysostom [b. Antioch, c. 347 A.D. - d. at Commana in Pontus on Friday, September 14, 407 A.D.], Patriarch of Constantinople [Thursday, February 26, 398 A.D. - Thursday, June 24, 404 A.D.], exiled from his See the 2nd time on Thursday, June 24, 404 A.D., Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, Treatise on the Priesthood, Book I, An Exhortation to Theodoret after His Fall, Letter II, ¶ 5; emphasis added).

Nothing so becomes a Church as silence and good order.    Noise belongs to theatres, and baths, and public processions, and market-places: but where doctrines, and such doctrines, are the subject of teaching, there should be stillness, and quiet, and calm reflection, and a haven of much repose.”  (Patriarch Saint John Chrysostom [b. Antioch, c. 347 A.D. - d. at Commana in Pontus on Friday, September 14, 407 A.D.], Patriarch of Constantinople [Thursday, February 26, 398 A.D. - Thursday, June 24, 404 A.D.], exiled from his See the 2nd time on Thursday, June 24, 404 A.D., Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, Homily XXX [30] on Acts 13:42; emphasis added.)


Bishop Saint Augustine [b. 354 A.D.]

“We must hold to the Christian religion and to communication in her Church, which is Catholic and which is called Catholic, not only by her own members but even by all her enemies. For whether they will or not, even heretics and schismatics, when talking, not among themselves, but with outsiders, call the Catholic Church nothing else but the Catholic Church.  For otherwise they would not be understood unless they distinguish the Catholic Church by that name which she bears through out the whole world.”

(Bishop Saint Augustine, a.k.a. Aurelius Augustinus [b. Tagaste, Africa, Saturday, November 13, 354 A.D. - d. Hippo Regia, Africa, Wednesday, August 28, 430 A.D.], Bishop of Hippo Regia, Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, the Doctor of Grace, a protégé of Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. in Gaul, possibly at Trier, Arles, or Lyons in 340 A.D. - d. at Milan, Italy on Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.] Patriarch of Milan [374 A.D. - Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.].  Saint Augustine’s De Vera Religione, The True Religion, 7, ¶ 12 [390 A.D.]; emphasis added).

“The Rock (Petra) made Peter true, for the Rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:4).”

(Bishop Saint Augustine, a.k.a. Aurelius Augustinus [b. Tagaste, Africa, Saturday, November 13, 354 A.D. - d. Hippo Regia, Africa, Wednesday, August 28, 430 A.D.], Bishop of Hippo Regia, Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, the Doctor of Grace, a protégé of Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. in Gaul, possibly at Trier, Arles, or Lyons in 340 A.D. - d. at Milan, Italy on Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.] Patriarch of Milan [374 A.D. - Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.]. Saint Augustine’s Sermon XCVII [97]; [CXLVII [147] in the Benedictine Edition.]; On the Same Words of the Gospel of John 21:15, “Simon, Son of John, Lovest Thou Me More than These?” etc.; emphasis added )

“1. THE Gospel which has just been read touching the Lord Christ, who walked on the waters of the sea; and the Apostle Peter, who as he was walking, tottered through fear, and sinking in distrust, rose again by confession, gives us to understand that the sea is the present world, and the Apostle Peter the type of the One Church. For Peter in the order of Apostles first, and in the love of Christ most forward, answers oftentimes alone for all the rest.

“Again, when the Lord Jesus Christ asked, whom men said that He was, and when the disciples gave the various opinions of men, and the Lord asked again and said,

But whom say ye that I am?
“Peter answered,
Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
“One for many gave the answer, Unity in many.

“Then said the Lord to Him:

Blessed art thou, Simon Barjonas: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father Who is in Heaven.
“Then He added,
and I say unto thee.
“As if He had said,
Because thou hast said unto Me, ‘Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God;’ I also say unto thee, ‘Thou art Peter.’
“For before [that] he was called Simon. Now this name of Peter was given him by the Lord, and that in a figure, that he should signify the Church [i.e. the Christian people]. For seeing that Christ is the rock (Petra)Peter is  [signifies] the Christian people.

“For the rock (Petra) is the original name. Therefore Peter is so called from the Rock [Christ]not the rock from Peter; as Christ is not called Christ from the Christian, but the Christian from Christ.

Therefore,  He saith,

Thou art Peter; and upon this Rock
which thou hast confessedupon this Rock  [Christ] which thou hast acknowledged, saying,
“Thou art the [Rock] Christ, the Son of the living God, will I build My Church;”
“that is upon Myself  [Christ - the Rock], the Son of the living God,
will I [Christ - the Rock] build My Church.
I [Christ - the Rock] will build thee [Peter] upon Myself [Christ - the Rock], NOT Myself [Christ - the Rock] upon thee [Peter].”

(Bishop Saint Augustine, a.k.a. Aurelius Augustinus [b. Tagaste, Africa, Saturday, November 13, 354 A.D. - d. Hippo Regia, Africa, Wednesday, August 28, 430 A.D.], Bishop of Hippo Regia, Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, the Doctor of Grace, a protégé of Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. in Gaul, possibly at Trier, Arles, or Lyons in 340 A.D. - d. at Milan, Italy on Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.] Patriarch of Milan [374 A.D. - Friday, April 4, 397 A.d.], Sermon XXVI [26]; LXXVI [76] Bendectine Edition]; Again on Matthew 14:25: “Of the Lord Walking on the Waves of the Sea, and of Peter Tottering”, ¶ 1; emphasis added.)

“2. For men who wished to be built upon men, said:

I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas,
“who is Peter.

But others who did not wish to be built upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said:

But I am of Christ.
And when the Apostle Paul ascertained that he was chosen, and Christ despised, he said,
Is Christ divided? was Paul Crucified for you? or were ye Baptized in the name of Paul?
And, as not in the name of Paul, so neither in the name of Peter; but in the name of Christ: that Peter might be built upon the Rock  [Christ],  NOT the Rock   [Christ]  upon Peter.

(Bishop Saint Augustine, a.k.a. Aurelius Augustinus [b. Tagaste, Africa, Saturday, November 13, 354 A.D. - d. Hippo Regia, Africa, Wednesday, August 28, 430 A.D.], Bishop of Hippo Regia, Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church, the Doctor of Grace, a protégé of Patriarch Saint Ambrose [b. in Gaul, possibly at Trier, Arles, or Lyons in 340 A.D. - d. at Milan, Italy on Friday, April 4, 397 A.D.] Patriarch of Milan [374 A.D. - Friday, April 4, 397 A.d.], Sermon XXVI [26]; LXXVI [76] Bendectine Edition]; Again on Matthew 14:25: “Of the Lord Walking on the Waves of the Sea, and of Peter Tottering”, ¶ 2; emphasis added.)


Saint Vincent of Lerins [b. c. 400 A.D.]
“In an Epistle sent at the time to Africa, he [Pope Saint Stephen I (Friday, May 12, 254 - Sunday, August 2, 257)] laid down this RULE: Let there be no innovation - nothing but what has been handed down. For that holy and prudent man well knew that true piety admits no other rule than that whatsoever things have been faithfully received from our Fathers the same are to be faithfully consigned to posterity.

It is our duty to follow Religion, not to make Religion follow us. The proper characteristic of Christians is not to impose their own beliefs or observances upon posterity, but to preserve and keep what we have received from those who went before us. What then was the issue of the whole matter? What but the usual and customary one?  Antiquity was retained, novelty [i.e. change] was rejected” (Father Saint Vincent of Lerins, [b. Toul, France, c. 400 A.D. - d. Island of Lerins, c. 450 A.D.], A Commonitory [an aid to memory] for the Antiquity and Universality of the Catholic Faith Against the Profane Novelties of All Heresies, Chapter VI, ¶ 16; emphasis added).

Magnopere curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est.
Care must especially be had that that [Faith] be held, which was believed everywhere, always, and by all”  (Father Saint Vincent of Lerins, A Commonitory [an aid to memory] for the Antiquity and Universality of the Catholic Faith Against the Profane Novelties of All Heresies, Chapter 3; emphasis added).

From Councils of the Roman Catholic Church


First Council of Chalcedon [451 A.D.]
“We have only one doctrine; this is the faith of the Doctors of the Church; this is the faith of the Holy Apostles; this is the faith which has saved the world”  (Fourth Œcumenical Council, the First Council of Chalcedon [Sunday, October 8, 451 A.D. -  Wednesday, November 1, 451 A.D.]).

Second Council of Nicæa [787 A.D.]
“We preserve the teachings of the Fathers [of the Church]; We anathematize those who add or subtract anything” (Seventh Œcumenical Council, the Second Council of Nicæa [Thursday, September 24, 787 A.D. - Friday, October 23, 787 A.D.]; emphasis added).


Fourth Lateran Council - [1215 A.D.]

There is one Universal Church of the Faithful, outside of which there is absolutely no salvation”  (Twelfth Œcumenical Council, the Fourth Lateran Council - [Sunday, November 1, 1215 A.D. - Monday, November 30, 1215 A.D.], Canon 1; emphasis added).

We excommunicate and anathematize every heresy that raises against the holy, orthodox and Catholic faith... condemning all heretics under whatever names they may be known” (Twelfth Œcumenical Council, the Fourth Lateran Council - [Sunday, November 1, 1215 A.D. - Monday, November 30, 1215 A.D.], Canon 3; emphasis added).



Council of Trent [1547 A.D.]

But, though He died for all, yet do not all receive the benefit of His death, but those only unto whom the merit of His Passion is communicated. For as in truth men, if they were not born propagated of the seed of Adam, would not be born unjust, seeing that, by that propagation, they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own, so, if they were not born again in Christ, they never would be justified; seeing that, in that new birth, there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace whereby they are made just. For this benefit the Apostle exhorts us, evermore to give thanks to the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, and hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption, and remission of sins.”  (“The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Œcumenical Council of Trent”, Translated by Father James Waterworth, Session Six, Monday, January 13, 1547, “Decree on Justification”, Chapter III, Who Are Justified Through Christ, pp. 31-32; emphasis added).



The Catechism of the Council of Trent

“The additional words ‘for you and for many’, are taken, some from Matthew, some from Luke [Matt. xxvi.28, Luke xxii.20], but were joined together by the Catholic Church under the guidance of the Spirit of God. They serve to declare the fruit and advantage of His Passion. For if we look to its value, we must confess that the Redeemer shed His Blood for the salvation of all; but if we look to the fruit which mankind have received from it, we shall easily find that it pertains NOT UNTO ALL, but to MANY of the human race. When therefore (our Lord) said: ‘For you’, He meant either those who were present, or those chosen from among the Jewish people, such as were, with the exception of Judas, the Disciples with whom He was speaking. When He added, ‘And for many’, He wished to be understood to mean the remainder of the Elect from among the Jews or Gentiles.”  (The Roman Catechism, a.k.a. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, The Eucharist,  ¶ 63.); emphasis added).

With reason, therefore, were the words for all  not used, as in this place the fruits of the Passion are alone spoken of, and to the elect only did His Passion bring the fruit of salvation. And this is the purport of the Apostle when he says: Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many [Hebrews 9:28]; and also of the words of our Lord in John: I pray for them; I pray not for the world, but for them whom Thou hast given Me, because they are Thine [John 17:9].”  (The Roman Catechism, a.k.a. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, The Eucharist,  ¶ 64.); emphasis added).


Concerning The Catechism of the Council of Trent

“23. We recommend equally that all Seminarists have in their hands, and frequently peruse, that golden book known as ‘The Catechism of the Council of Trent’, or ‘Roman Catechism’, dedicated to all Priests invested with the Pastoral Office (Catechismus ad Parochos). Noted both for the richness and exactness of its Doctrine, and for the elegance of its style, this Catechism is a precious summary of all theology, both dogmatic and moral. The Priest who knows it thoroughly has always at his disposal resources which will enable him to preach with fruit, to acquit himself fitly in the important ministry of the Confessional and the Direction of Souls, and be in a position to refute triumphantly the objections of unbelievers” (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical, “Depuis Le Jour”, On the Education of the Clergy, Friday, September 8, 1899, ¶ 23; emphasis added.)

“24. VI. Since it is a fact that in these days Adults need instruction no less than the young, all Pastors, and those having the Care of Souls, shall explain the Catechism to the people in a plain and simple style adapted to the intelligence of their hearers. This shall be carried out on all holy days of obligation, at such time as is most convenient for the people, but not during the same hour when the children are instructed, and this instruction must be in addition to the usual homily on the Gospel which is delivered at the parochial Mass on Sundays and holy days. The Catechetical  instruction shall be based on ‘The Catechism of the Council of Trent’; and the matter is to be divided in such a way that in the space of four or five years, treatment will be given to the Apostles' Creed, the Sacraments, the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer and the Precepts of the Church.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Encyclical “Acerbo Nimis”, On Teaching Christian Doctrine, ¶ 24, Saturday, April 15, 1905; emphasis added).



Council of Trent [1551 A.D.]

“Canon 1. If anyone denies that in the Sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharistare contained truly, really and substantially the Body and Blood together with the Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ and consequently the whole Christ, but says that He is in it only as in a sign, or figure or force; let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, Session 13, Thursday, October 11, 1551; emphasis added).

“Canon 2.  If anyone says that in the Sacred and Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist the substance of the bread and wine remains conjointly with the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and denies that wonderful and singular change of the whole substance of the bread into the Body and the whole substance of the wine into the Blood, the appearances only of bread and wine remaining, which change the Catholic Church most aptly calls TRANSUBSTANTIATION; let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, Session 13, Thursday, October 11, 1551; emphasis added).



Council of Trent [1562 A.D.]

“Canon 1. If anyone says that in the Mass a true and real sacrifice is not offered to God; or that to be offered is nothing else than that Christ is given to us to eat [as in the Protestant Memorial Supper Meal used in the Vatican 2 church today]; let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562, On the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 1; emphasis added).

“Canon 3. If anyone says that the Sacrifice of the Mass is one only of praise and thanksgiving; or that it is a mere commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross but not a propitiatory one; or that it profits him only who receives, and ought not to be offered for the living and the dead, for sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562, On the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 3; emphasis added).

“Canon 6. If anyone says that the Canon of the [Ancient Roman Rite of] Mass contains errors and is therefore to be changed; let him be anathema” (Council of Trent, Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562, On the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 6; emphasis added).

“Canon 9. If anyone says that the [Ancient Roman] Rite of the Roman Church...  is to be condemned...  let him be anathema”  (Council of Trent, Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562, On the Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 9; emphasis added).

From Popes of the Roman Catholic Church


Pope Saint Stephen I
[254 - 257]
“Let them innovate in nothing, but keep the Tradition” (Pope Saint Stephen I [254 - 257], Letter to Saint Cyprian, 74.)


Pope Saint Leo I
[Saturday, September 29, 440 - Thursday, November 10, 461]

He who discovers that others are in error, but fails to correct them, thereby testifies that he himself is in error.”  (Pope Saint Leo I [Saturday, September 29, 440 - Thursday, November 10, 461], Encyclical Letter XV [15], To Bishop Turibius, Bishop of Astorga, Spain, On the Errors of the Priscillianists, ¶ XVI [16], Sunday, July 21, 447 A.D.; emphasis added).

Let not that be defended which may not be believed.”  (Pope Saint Leo I [Saturday, September 29, 440 - Thursday, November 10, 461], Encyclical Letter XCIII [93], To the Fourth Œcumenical Council, The First Council of Chalcedon [Sunday, October 8, 451 A.D. -  Wednesday, November 1, 451 A.D.]; emphasis added).

“The crafty Tempter never delights so much in wounding the hearts of men as when he can poison their unwary minds with errors [heresies] that are opposed to Gospel Truth, we must strive by the mighty teaching of the Holy Ghost to prevent Christian knowledge from being perverted by the devil’s falsehoods. And against this danger it behooves the rulers [Prelates: Bishops, Archbishops, etc.] of the churches especially to guard and to avert from the minds of simple folk, [heretical] lies which are colored by a certain show of Truth [i.e. by using “double-talk”, ambiguity, etc. to teach heresy, but make it appear to be only the Truth, but instead admix parts of Truth to their lies to attempt to gain credibility].  ‘How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!’  (Matthew 7:14).

“And they seek to entrap men, not so much by watching their actions, but by very deceptive innocuous distinctions of meaning, corrupting the force of the meaning of sentences by some very slight addition or change [i.e. by deceptive phraseology and subtle, vague heretical equivocity], whereby sometimes a statement, which is made for [eternal] salvation, is turned into [eternal] destruction by an imperceptible  change.

“But since the Apostle says, ‘For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you’ [1 Corinthians 9:19], it tends to the progress of the whole Church, that, whenever wickedness reveals itself in setting forth wrong opinions, the things which are harmful be not concealed, and that what will inevitably end in ruin may not injure the innocence of others.

“Wherefore, they must put down their blind wanderings and downfalls to themselves, who with rash obstinacy prefer to glory in their shame than to accept the offered remedy.

You do right, Brother, to be displeased at their stubbornness, and We commend you for holding fast that teaching which has come down to us from the Blessed Apostles and the Holy Fathers”  (Pope Saint Leo I [Saturday, September 29, 440 - Thursday, November 10, 461], Encyclical  Letter CXXIX [129], To Patriarch Proterius, Patriarch of Alexandria, Egypt, ¶ 1; emphasis added).



Pope Saint Gregory I, the Great
[Friday, September 3, 590 - Monday, March 12, 604]

“If people are scandalized at the Truth, it is better to allow the birth of scandal, than to abandon the Truth” (Pope Saint Gregory I, the Great [Friday, September 3, 590 - Monday, March 12, 604], Homily on Ezechiel, 7; cited by Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Question 43, Article 7).

“It's a dumb dog that doesn't bark when the wolf is among the sheep” (Pope Saint Gregory I, the Great [Friday, September 3, 590 - Monday, March 12, 604], Homily on Ezechiel, 7).



Pope Paul III
Alessandro Farnese
[Saturday, October 13, 1534 - Thursday, November 10, 1549]

But, though He died for all, yet do not all receive the benefit of His death, but those only unto whom the merit of His Passion is communicated. For as in truth men, if they were not born propagated of the seed of Adam, would not be born unjust, seeing that, by that propagation, they contract through him, when they are conceived, injustice as their own, so, if they were not born again in Christ, they never would be justified; seeing that, in that new birth, there is bestowed upon them, through the merit of His passion, the grace whereby they are made just. For this benefit the Apostle exhorts us, evermore to give thanks to the Father, who hath made us worthy to be partakers of the lot of the saints in light, and hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the Kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption, and remission of sins.”  (“The Canons and Decrees of the Sacred and Œcumenical Council of Trent”, Translated by Father James Waterworth, Session Six, Monday, January 13, 1547, “Decree on Justification”, Chapter III, Who Are Justified Through Christ, pp. 31-32.  Infallibly Promulgated by Pope Paul III, Alessandro Farnese [Saturday, October 13, 1534 - Thursday, November 10, 1549]; emphasis added).


The Catechism of the Council of Trent

“The additional words ‘for you and for many’, are taken, some from Matthew, some from Luke [Matt. xxvi.28, Luke xxii.20], but were joined together by the Catholic Church under the guidance of the Spirit of God. They serve to declare the fruit and advantage of His Passion. For if we look to its value, we must confess that the Redeemer shed His Blood for the salvation of all; but if we look to the fruit which mankind have received from it, we shall easily find that it pertains NOT UNTO ALL, but to MANY of the human race. When therefore (our Lord) said: ‘For you’, He meant either those who were present, or those chosen from among the Jewish people, such as were, with the exception of Judas, the Disciples with whom He was speaking. When He added, ‘And for many’, He wished to be understood to mean the remainder of the Elect from among the Jews or Gentiles.”  (The Roman Catechism, a.k.a. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, The Eucharist,  ¶ 63.); emphasis added).

“With reason, therefore, were the words for all  not used, as in this place the fruits of the Passion are alone spoken of, and to the elect only did His Passion bring the fruit of salvation. And this is the purport of the Apostle when he says: Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many [Hebrews 9:28]; and also of the words of our Lord in John: I pray for them; I pray not for the world, but for them whom Thou hast given Me, because they are Thine [John 17:9].”  (The Roman Catechism, a.k.a. The Catechism of the Council of Trent, The Eucharist,  ¶ 64.); emphasis added).

Concerning The Catechism of the Council of Trent


Pope Leo XIII
Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci
[Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903]

“23. We recommend equally that all Seminarists have in their hands, and frequently peruse, that golden book known as ‘The Catechism of the Council of Trent’, or ‘Roman Catechism’, dedicated to all Priests invested with the Pastoral Office (Catechismus ad Parochos). Noted both for the richness and exactness of its Doctrine, and for the elegance of its style, this Catechism is a precious summary of all theology, both dogmatic and moral. The Priest who knows it thoroughly has always at his disposal resources which will enable him to preach with fruit, to acquit himself fitly in the important ministry of the Confessional and the Direction of Souls, and be in a position to refute triumphantly the objections of unbelievers” (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical, “Depuis Le Jour”, On the Education of the Clergy, Friday, September 8, 1899, ¶ 23; emphasis added.)


Pope Saint Pius X
Giuseppe Sarto
[Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914]

“24. VI. Since it is a fact that in these days Adults need instruction no less than the young, all Pastors, and those having the Care of Souls, shall explain the Catechism to the people in a plain and simple style adapted to the intelligence of their hearers. This shall be carried out on all holy days of obligation, at such time as is most convenient for the people, but not during the same hour when the children are instructed, and this instruction must be in addition to the usual homily on the Gospel which is delivered at the parochial Mass on Sundays and holy days. The Catechetical  instruction shall be based on ‘The Catechism of the Council of Trent’; and the matter is to be divided in such a way that in the space of four or five years, treatment will be given to the Apostles' Creed, the Sacraments, the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer and the Precepts of the Church.” (Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Encyclical “Acerbo Nimis”, On Teaching Christian Doctrine, ¶ 24, Saturday, April 15, 1905; emphasis added).



Pope Paul IV
[Monday, May 23, 1555 - Tuesday, August 18, 1559]

Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio
Papal Bulla
Sunday, February 15, 1559

“By virtue of the Apostolic office which, despite our unworthiness, has been entrusted to Us by God, We are responsible for the general care of the flock of the Lord. Because of this, in order that the flock may be faithfully guarded and beneficially directed, We are bound to be diligently watchful after the manner of a vigilant Shepherd and to ensure most carefully that certain people who consider the study of the Truth beneath them should be driven out of the sheepfold of Christ and no longer continue to disseminate error from positions of authority. We refer in particular to those who in this age, impelled by their sinfulness and supported by their cunning, are attacking with unusual learning and malice the discipline of the orthodox Faith, and who, moreover, by perverting the import of Holy Scripture, are striving to rend the unity of the Catholic Church and the seamless tunic of the Lord.

1.  In assessing Our duty and the situation now prevailing, We have been weighed upon by the thought that a matter of this kind [i.e. error in respect of the Faith] is so grave and so dangerous that the Roman Pontiff, who is the representative upon earth of God and our God and Lord Jesus Christ, who holds the fulness of power over peoples and kingdoms, who may judge all and be judged by none in this world, may nonetheless be contradicted if he be found to have deviated from the Faith. Remembering also that, where danger is greater, it must more fully and more diligently be counteracted, We have been concerned lest false prophets or others, even if they have only secular jurisdiction, should wretchedly ensnare the souls of the simple, and drag with them into perdition, destruction and damnation countless peoples committed to their care and rule, either in spiritual or in temporal matters; and We have been concerned also lest it may befall Us to see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by the prophet Daniel, in the holy place. In view of this, Our desire has been to fulfil our Pastoral duty, insofar as, with the help of God, We are able, so as to arrest the foxes who are occupying themselves in the destruction of the vineyard of the Lord and to keep the wolves from the sheepfolds, lest We seem to be dumb watchdogs that cannot bark and lest We perish with the wicked husbandman and be compared with the hireling.

2   Hence, concerning these matters, We have held mature deliberation with our venerable brothers the Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church; and, upon their advice and with their unanimous agreement, we now enact as follows:-

In respect of each and every sentence of excommunication, suspension, interdict and privation and any other sentences, censures and penalties against heretics or schismatics, enforced and promulgated in any way whatsoever by any of Our predecessors the Roman Pontiffs, or by any who were held to be such (even by their “litterae extravagantes” i.e. private letters), or by the sacred Councils received by the Church of God, or by decrees of the Holy Fathers and the statutes, or by the sacred Canons and the Constitutions and Apostolic Ordinations - all these measures, by Apostolic authority, We approve and renew, that they may and must be observed in perpetuity and, if perchance they be no longer in lively observance, that they be restored to it.

Thus We will and decree that the aforementioned sentences, censures and penalties be incurred without exception by all members of the following categories:

(i) Anysoever who, before this date, shall have been detected to have deviated from the Catholic Faith, or fallen into any heresy, or incurred schism, or provoked or committed either or both of these, or who have confessed to have done any of these things, or who have been convicted of having done any of these things.

(ii) Anysoever who (which may God, in His clemency and goodness to all, deign to avert) shall in the future so deviate or fall into heresy, or incur schism, or shall provoke or commit either or both of these.

(iii) Anysoever who shall be detected to have so deviated, fallen, incurred, provoked or committed, or who shall confess to have done any of these things, or who shall be convicted of having done any of these things.

These sanctions, moreover, shall be incurred by all members of these categories, of whatever status, grace, order, condition and pre-eminence they may be, even if they be endowed with the Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal, Primatial or some other greater Ecclesiastical dignity, or with the honour of the Cardinalate and of the Universal Apostolic See by the office of Legate, whether temporary or permanent, or if they be endowed with even worldly authority or excellence, as Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor.

All this We will and decree.

3. Nonetheless, We also consider it proper that those who do not abandon evil deeds through love of virtue should be deterred therefrom by fear of punishment; and We are aware that Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Legates, Counts, Barons, Marquises, Dukes, Kings and Emperors (who ought to teach others and offer them a good example in order to preserve them in the Catholic Faith), by failing in their duty sin more gravely than others; since they not only damn themselves, but also drag with them into perdition and into the pit of death countless other people entrusted to their care or rule, or otherwise subject to them, by their like counsel and agreement.

Hence, by this Our Constitution which is to remain valid in perpetuity, in abomination of so great a crime (than which none in the Church of God can be greater or more pernicious) by the fulness of our Apostolic Power, We enact, determine, decree and define (since the aforesaid sentences, censures and penalties are to remain in efficacious force and strike all those whom they are intended to strike) that:-

(i) each and every member of the following categories - Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals, Legates, Counts, Barons, Marquises, Dukes, Kings and Emperors - who:
 (a) hitherto (as We have already said) have been detected, or have confessed to have, or have been convicted of having, deviated [i.e. from the Catholic Faith], or fallen into heresy or incurred schism or provoked or committed either or both of these;

 (b) in the future also shall [so] deviate, or fall into heresy, or incur schism, or provoke or commit either or both of these, or shall be detected or shall confess to have, or shall be convicted of having [so] deviated, or fallen into heresy, or incurred schism, or provoked or committed either or both of these; (since in this they are rendered more inexcusable than the rest) in addition to the aforementioned sentences, censures and penalties, shall also automatically, without any exercise of law or application of fact, be thoroughly, entirely and perpetually deprived of:- their Orders and Cathedrals, even Metropolitan, Patriarchal and Primatial Churches, the honour of the Cardinalate and the office of any embassy whatsoever, not to mention both active and passive voting rights, all authority, Monasteries, benefices and Ecclesiastical offices, be they functional or sinecures, secular or religious of whatsoever Order, which they may have obtained by any concessions whatsoever, or by Apostolic Dispensations to title, charge and administration or otherwise howsoever, and in which or to which they may have any right whatsoever, likewise any whatsoever fruits, returns or annual revenues from like fruits, returns and revenues reserved for and assigned to them, as well as Countships, Baronies, Marquisates, Dukedoms, Kingships and Imperial Power;

(ii) that, moreover, they shall be unfit and incapable in respect of these things and that they shall be held to be backsliders and subverted in every way, just as if they had previously abjured heresy of this kind in public trial; that they shall never at any time be able to be restored, returned, reinstated or rehabilitated to their former status or Cathedral, Metropolitan, Patriarchal and Primatial Churches, or the Cardinalate, or other honour, any other dignity, greater or lesser, any right to vote, active or passive, or authority, or Monasteries and benefices, or Countships, Baronies, Marquisates, Dukedoms, Kingships and positions of Imperial power; but rather that they shall be abandoned to the judgement of the secular power to be punished after due consideration, unless there should appear in them signs of true penitence and the fruits of worthy repentance, and, by the kindness and clemency of the See itself, they shall have been sentenced to sequestration in any Monastery or other religious house in order to perform perpetual penance upon the bread of sorrow and the water of affliction;

(iii) that all such individuals also shall be held, treated and reputed as such by everyone, of whatsoever status, grade, order, condition or pre-eminence he may be and whatsoever excellence may be his, even Episcopal, Archiepiscopal, Patriarchal and Primatial or other greater Ecclesiastical dignity and even the honour of the Cardinalate, or secular, even the authority of Count, Baron, Marquis, Duke, King or Emperor, and as such must be avoided and must be deprived of the sympathy of all natural kindness.

4. [By this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity, We] further enact, determine, decree and define:-]

that those who shall have claimed to have the right of patronage or of nominating suitable persons to Cathedral, Metropolitan, Patriarchal and Primatial Churches, or to Monasteries or other Ecclesiastical benefices which may be vacant by privation of this kind (in order that those which shall have been vacant for a long time may not be exposed to the unfit, but, having been rescued from enslavement to heretics, may be granted to suitable persons who would faithfully direct their people in the paths of justice), shall be bound to present other persons suitable to Churches, Monasteries and benefices of this kind, to Us, or to the Roman Pontiff at that time existing, within the time determined by law, or by their concordats, or by compacts entered into with the said See; and that, if they shall not have done so when the said period shall have elapsed, the full and free disposition of the aforesaid Churches, Monasteries and benefices shall by the fulness of the law itself devolve upon Us or upon the aforesaid Roman Pontiff.

5. [By this Our Constitution,] moreover, [which is to remain valid in perpetuity, We] also [enact, determine, decree and define:-]

as follows concerning those who shall have presumed in any way knowingly to receive, defend, favour, believe or teach the teaching of those so apprehended, confessed or convicted:

(i) they shall automatically incur sentence of excommunication;

(ii) they shall be rendered infamous;

(iii) they shall be excluded on pain of invalidity from any public or private office, deliberation, Synod, general or provincial Council and any conclave of Cardinals or other congregation of the faithful, and from any election or function of witness, so that they cannot take part in any of these by vote, in person, by writings, representative or by any agent;

(iv) they shall be incapable of making a will;

(v) they shall not accede to the succession of heredity;

(vi) no one shall be forced to respond to them concerning any business;

(vii) if perchance they shall have been Judges, their judgements shall have no force, nor shall any cases be brought to their hearing.;

(viii) if they shall have been Advocates, their pleading shall nowise be received;

(ix) if they shall have been Notaries, documents drafted by them shall be entirely without strength or weight;

(x) clerics shall be automatically deprived of each and every Church, even Cathedral, Metropolitan, Patriarchal, Primatial, and likewise of dignities, Monasteries, benefices and Ecclesiastical offices, and even, as has been already mentioned, of qualifications, howsoever obtained by them;

(xi) laymen, moreover, in the same way - even if they be qualified, as already described, or endowed with the aforesaid dignities or anysoever Kingdoms, Duchies, Dominions, Fiefs and temporal goods possessed by them;

(xii) finally, all Kingdoms, Duchies, Dominions, Fiefs and goods of this kind shall be confiscated, made public and shall remain so, and shall be made the rightful property of those who shall first occupy them if these shall be sincere in faith, in the unity of the Holy Roman Church and under obedience to Us and to Our successors the Roman Pontiffs canonically entering office.

6. In addition, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity We enact, determine, decree and define:-]

that if ever at any time it shall appear that any Bishop, even if he be acting as an Archbishop, Patriarch or Primate; or any Cardinal of the aforesaid Roman Church, or, as has already been mentioned, any legate, or even the Roman Pontiff, prior to his promotion or his elevation as Cardinal or Roman Pontiff, has deviated from the Catholic Faith or fallen into some heresy:

(i) the promotion or elevation, even if it shall have been uncontested and by the unanimous assent of all the Cardinals, shall be null, void and worthless;

(ii) it shall not be possible for it to acquire validity (nor for it to be said that it has thus acquired validity) through the acceptance of the office, of consecration, of subsequent authority, nor through possession of administration, nor through the putative enthronement of a Roman Pontiff, or Veneration, or obedience accorded to such by all, nor through the lapse of any period of time in the foregoing situation;

(iii) it shall not be held as partially legitimate in any way;

(iv) to any so promoted to be Bishops, or Archbishops, or Patriarchs, or Primates or elevated as Cardinals, or as Roman Pontiff, no authority shall have been granted, nor shall it be considered to have been so granted either in the spiritual or the temporal domain;

(v) each and all of their words, deeds, actions and enactments, howsoever made, and anything whatsoever to which these may give rise, shall be without force and shall grant no stability whatsoever nor any right to anyone;

(vi) those thus promoted or elevated shall be deprived automatically, and without need for any further declaration, of all dignity, position, honour, title, authority, office and power, without any exception in respect of those to which they may have been promoted or elevated before they deviated from the Faith, became heretics, incurred schism, or provoked or committed any or all of these.

7. Finally, [by this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity, We] also [enact, determine, define and decree]:-

that subject persons, be they members of anysoever of the following categories:

(i) the clergy, secular and religious;

(ii) the laity;

(iii) the Cardinals, even those who shall have taken part in the election of this very Pontiff previously deviating from the Faith or heretical or schismatical, or shall otherwise have consented and vouchsafed obedience to him and shall have venerated him;

(iv) Castellans, Prefects, Captains and Officials, even of Our Beloved City and of the entire Ecclesiastical State, even if they shall be obliged and beholden to those thus promoted or elevated by homage, oath or security; shall be permitted at any time to withdraw with impunity from obedience and devotion to those thus promoted or elevated and to avoid them as warlocks, heathens, publicans, and heresiarchs (the same subject persons, nevertheless, remaining bound by the duty of fidelity and obedience to any future Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates, Cardinals and Roman Pontiff canonically entering).

To the greater confusion, moreover, of those thus promoted or elevated, if these shall have wished to prolong their government and authority, they shall be permitted to request the assistance of the secular arm against these same individuals thus promoted or elevated; nor shall those who withdraw on this account, in the aforementioned circumstances, from fidelity and obedience to those thus promoted and elevated, be subject, as are those who tear the tunic of the Lord, to the retribution of any censures or penalties.

8. [The provisions of this Our Constitution, which is to remain valid in perpetuity are to take effect] notwithstanding any Constitutions, Apostolic Ordinations, privileges, indults or Apostolic Letters, whether they be to these same Bishops, Archbishops, Patriarchs, Primates and Cardinals or to any others, and whatsoever may be their import and form, and with whatsoever sub-clauses or decrees they may have been granted, even “motu proprio” and by certain knowledge, from the fulness of the Apostolic power or even consistorially or otherwise howsoever; and even if they have been repeatedly approved and renewed, have been included in the corpus of the Law or strengthened by any capital conclaves whatsoever (even by oath) or by Apostolic confirmation or by anysoever other endorsements or if they were legislated by Ourself. By this present document instead of by express mention, We specially and expressly derogate the provisions of all these by appropriate deletion and word-for-word substitution, so that these may otherwise remain in force.

9. In order, however, that this document may be brought to the notice of all whom it concerns, We wish it or a transcription of it (to which, when made by the hand of the undersigned Public Notary and fortified by the seal of any person established in ecclesiastical dignity, We decree that complete trust must be accorded) to be published and affixed in the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles in this City and on the doors of the Apostolic Chancery and in the pavilion of the Campus Florae by some of our couriers; [we] will [further] that a quantity of copies affixed in this place should be distributed, and that publication and affixing of this kind should suffice and be held as right, solemn and legitimate, and that no other publication should be required or awaited.

10. No one at all, therefore, may infringe this document of our approbation, re-introduction, sanction, statute and derogation of wills and decrees, or by rash presumption contradict it. If anyone, however, should presume to attempt this, let him know that he is destined to incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles, Peter and Paul.

Given in Rome at Saint Peter's in the year of the Incarnation of the Lord 1559, 15th February, in the fourth year of our Pontificate.
 

+  Ego PAULUS, Catholicae Ecclesiae Episcopus.  (+ I, Paul, Bishop of the Catholic Church)
+ Ego Io. Bellayus, episcopus Ostiensis.

+ Ego R., cardinalis de Carpo, episcopus Portuensis.

+ Ego F., cardinalis Pisanus, episcopus Tusculanus.

+ Ego Fed., cardinalis Caesius, episcopus Tusculanus.

+ Ego P., cardinalis episcopus Albanen.

+ Ego R., cardinalis S. Angeli, maior poenitentiarius.

+ Ego T., cardinalis Crispus.

+ Ego Fulvius, cardinalis Perusinus.

+ Ego Io. Mich., cardinalis Saracenus.

+ Ego Io., cardinalis S. Vitalis.

+ Ego Io., cardinalis Puteus.

+ Ego Hier., cardinalis Imolensis.

+ Ego B., cardinalis Tranensis.

+ Ego Diomedes, cardinalis Arianensis.

+ Ego Scipio, cardinalis S. Pancratii.

+ Ego Tha., cardinalis Gaddus.

+ Ego Virg., cardinalis de Spoleto.

+ Ego F.M., cardinalis Alexandrinus.

+ Ego Cle. Monilianus, cardinalis Araec.

+ Ego G. Asc., diaconus cardinalis Cam.

+ Ego N., cardinalis de Sermoneta.

+ Ego Ia., cardinalis Sabellus.

+ Ego Hier., cardinalis S. Georgii.

+ Ego Inno., cardinalis de Monte.

+ Ego Aloy., cardinalis Cornelius.

+ Ego C., cardinalis Carafa.

+ Ego Alfon., cardinalis Neapolitanus.

+ Ego Vitellotius, cardinalis Vitellius.

+ Ego Io. Baptista, cardinalis consiliarus.

(Pope Paul IV, Gian Pietro Carafa  [Monday, May 23, 1555 - Tuesday, August 18, 1559], Papal Bulla, Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio, Sunday, February 15, 1559.  Source: Bullarium Romanum, Volume IV, Section I, pages 354-357.)


Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:  This Papal Bulla is the basis for this law of the Roman Catholic Church:

“On account of the tacit resignation admitted by the law itself any Office is vacant ipso facto and without any declaration, if a Cleric:...
4.  Publicly defects from the Catholic Faith”  (Codex Iuris Canonici - Code of Canon Law, 188.4).

Also:
Heretical clerics and all who receive, defend, or favor them are ipso facto deprived of their benefices, offices, and ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The pope himself, if notoriously guilty of heresy, would cease to be pope because he would cease to be a member of the [Roman Catholic] Church.”  (Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume Seven: Gregory - Infallibility, Nihil Obstat, June 1, 1910, Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor, Imprimatur, John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New YorkHeresy, VIII. Church Legislation on Heresy,  page 261-b; emphasis added).

Pope Saint Pius V
Antonio-Michele Ghislieri
[Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572]

Quo Primum Tempore
Apostolic Constitution
Tuesday, July 14, 1570
Official Text is in the Missale Romanum
Tuesday, July 14, 1570

From the very first, upon Our elevation to the chief Apostleship, We gladly turned our mind and energies and directed all out thoughts to those matters which concerned the preservation of a pure liturgy, and We strove with God's help, by every means in our power, to accomplish this purpose. For, besides other decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, there were stipulations for Us to revise and re-edit the sacred books: the Catechism, the Missal and the Breviary. With the Catechism published for the instruction of the faithful, by God's help, and the Breviary thoroughly revised for the worthy praise of God, in order that the Missal and Breviary may be in perfect harmony, as fitting and proper - for its most becoming that there be in the Church only one appropriate manner of reciting the Psalms and only one rite for the celebration of Mass - We deemed it necessary to give our immediate attention to what still remained to be done, viz, the re-editing of the Missal as soon as possible.

Hence, We decided to entrust this work to learned men of our selection. They very carefully collated all their work with the ancient codices in Our Vatican Library and with reliable, preserved or emended codices from elsewhere. Besides this, these men consulted the works of ancient and approved authors concerning the same sacred rites; and thus they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers. When this work has been gone over numerous times and further emended, after serious study and reflection, We commanded that the finished product be printed and published as soon as possible, so that all might enjoy the fruits of this labor; and thus, priests would know which prayers to use and which rites and ceremonies they were required to observe from now on in the celebration of Masses.

Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us. This ordinance applies henceforth, now, and forever, throughout all the provinces of the Christian world, to all patriarchs, cathedral churches, collegiate and parish churches, be they secular or religious, both of men and of women - even of military orders - and of churches or chapels without a specific congregation in which conventual Masses are sung aloud in choir or read privately in accord with the rites and customs of the Roman Church. This Missal is to be used by all churches, even by those which in their authorization are made exempt, whether by Apostolic indult, custom, or privilege, or even if by oath or official confirmation of the Holy See, or have their rights and faculties guaranteed to them by any other manner whatsoever.

This new rite alone is to be used unless approval of the practice of saying Mass differently was given at the very time of the institution and confirmation of the church by Apostolic See at least 200 years ago, or unless there has prevailed a custom of a similar kind which has been continuously followed for a period of not less than 200 years, in which most cases We in no wise rescind their above-mentioned prerogative or custom. However, if this Missal, which we have seen fit to publish, be more agreeable to these latter, We grant them permission to celebrate Mass according to its rite, provided they have the consent of their bishop or prelate or of their whole Chapter, everything else to the contrary notwithstanding.

All other of the churches referred to above, however, are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be discontinued entirely and absolutely; whereas, by this present Constitution, which will be valid henceforth, now, and forever, We order and enjoin that nothing must be added to Our recently published Missal, nothing omitted from it, nor anything whatsoever be changed within it under the penalty of Our displeasure.

We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.

Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain that no one whosoever is forced or coerced to alter this Missal, and that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force notwithstanding the previous constitutions and decrees of the Holy See, as well as any general or special constitutions or edicts of provincial or synodal councils, and notwithstanding the practice and custom of the aforesaid churches, established by long and immemorial prescription - except, however, if more than two hundred years' standing.

It is Our will, therefore, and by the same authority, We decree that, after We publish this constitution and the edition of the Missal, the priests of the Roman Curia are, after thirty days, obliged to chant or read the Mass according to it; all others south of the Alps, after three months; and those beyond the Alps either within six months or whenever the Missal is available for sale. Wherefore, in order that the Missal be preserved incorrupt throughout the whole world and kept free of flaws and errors, the penalty for nonobservance for printers, whether mediately or immediately subject to Our dominion, and that of the Holy Roman Church, will be the forfeiting of their books and a fine of one hundred gold ducats, payable ipso facto to the Apostolic Treasury. Further, as for those located in other parts of the world, the penalty is excommunication latae sententiae, and such other penalties as may in Our judgment be imposed; and We decree by this law that they must not dare or presume either to print or to publish or to sell, or in any way to accept books of this nature without Our approval and consent, or without the express consent of the Apostolic Commissaries of those places, who will be appointed by Us. Said printer must receive a standard Missal and agree faithfully with it and in no wise vary from the Roman Missal of the large type (secundum magnum impressionem).

Accordingly, since it would be difficult for this present pronouncement to be sent to all parts of the Christian world and simultaneously come to light everywhere, We direct that it be, as usual, posted and published at the doors of the Basilica of the Prince of the Apostles, also at the Apostolic Chancery, and on the street at Campo Flora; furthermore, We direct that printed copies of this same edict signed by a notary public and made official by an ecclesiastical dignitary possess the same indubitable validity everywhere and in every nation, as if Our manuscript were shown there. Therefore, no one whosoever is permitted to alter this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.

[Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:  The above two sentences, which have been underlined, was the usual terminology used by Roman Catholic Popes in their documents to issue the censure/penalty of automatic Excommunication of those who did not obey their Decrees, no matter the format used, e.g. a Papal Bulla, an Apostolic Constitution, etc.]
Given at St. Peter's in the year of the Lord's Incarnation, 1570, on the 14th of July of the Fifth year of Our Pontificate.  (Pope Saint Pius V, Antonio-Michele Ghislieri [Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572], Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum Tempore, Tuesday, July 14, 1570; emphasis added).

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:

This Apostolic Constitution, Quo Primum Tempore, by Pope Saint Pius V, is at the very beginning of the Missale Romanum.  This Infallible document, issued by an Infallible Roman Catholic Pope, means that, except for minor rubrical clarifications, and the addition of new Feast Days, and other relatively minor things, this edition of the Missale Romanum, which, according to this document, restored the Missal to at least that of about the 6th Century, and perhaps even earlier, where the Pope writes concerning those in charge of doing this that they have restored the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers.

In other words, neither the Roman Catholic Council of Trent (Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562), nor the Roman Catholic Pope, Saint Pius V, made up a brand-new rite for Offering the Catholic Traditional Mass.  All they did was to RESTORE the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers.

Therefore, for anyone to attempt to claim that either the Roman Catholic Council of Trent, or the Roman Catholic Pope, Saint Pius V, set a legal PRECEDENT, by making up their own liturgical rite for Offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Cahtolic Mass, just as some of the ex-Roman Catholic Bishops and Priests had already done before that time, e.g. the first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, with both his First Prayer Book of Edward VI of 1549 and his Second Prayer Book of Edward VI of 1552 (ten years before Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562, of the Roman Catholic Council of Trent), is both ludicrous and simply not true!

This also means that there is no such thing as the mis-nomered Tridentine Rite, or the Pius V Rite, a.k.a. the Pian, Rite, for Offering Mass.

Instead, the use of such terms is a thinly disguised deception to try to claim legitimacy for the wholesale changes to the Missale Romanum by the Concilium of Synod Vatican 2 and by those who issued and by those who have used, and today who use, one or another of the various versions of the Novus Ordo Rite (NOR), a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae, a.k.a. the New Mass, a.k.a. the Memorial Supper Meal, etc.

The point is that those who issued, and those who have and/or who today use, any version of the New Mass, by whatever name it is called, have incurred the censure/penalty of automatic excommunication for not only changing, but for mutilating, the Missale Romanum.



Pope Saint Pius V
Antonio-Michele Ghislieri
[Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572]

De Defectibus
Concerning Defects
Official Text of this Decree is in the Missale Romanum
Tuesday, July 14, 1570

On Defects That May Occur in the Celebration of Mass

I

The Priest who is about to celebrate Mass should take every precaution to ensure that none of the requisites for the Consecration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist shall be wanting.  Defects may arise in respect of the materials to be Consecrated, in respect of the formula to be used, and in respect of the consecrating minister [Mass Celebrant].  If any one of these, namely, right materials, right formula and intention, and Priestly Ordination of the Celebrant, is lacking, then there is no Sacrament. When these are forthcoming, whatever other defects there may be the Sacrament is truly present.  Other defects which may occur in celebrating Mass, although they will not invalidate the Sacrament, may nevertheless give rise to sin or scandal.

II
On Defective Matter

Defects may arise in respect of the materials if any requisite is lacking. It is requisite that the bread shall be wheaten, and the wine made from the juice of the grape. For such materials to be Consecrated, at the act of Consecration, they must be in the presence of the Priest.

III
On Defective Bread

If the bread is not wheaten; or if so much other grain is mixed with the wheat that the bread is no longer wheaten; or if it is otherwise adulterated, the Sacrament is not Consecrated.

2. If it has been made with rose-water, or other distillation, it is doubtful whether it is Consecrated.

3.  If it has begun to go moldy, but is not yet bad; also if it is not unleavened, according to the practice of the Latin Church, it is Consecrated, but the Celebrant commits a mortal sin.

4. If the Celebrant discovers before the Consecration that the Host is corrupt or not wheaten, he should put aside that Host, take another, and after offering it, at least mentally, continue from the place where he left off.

5. If he makes the discovery after Consecration, even though not until he has consumed that Host, he should take another, offer it, and begin again from the Consecration, that is, from the words:  Qui pridie quam pateretur.  If he has not yet consumed the former Host, he should do so after receiving the Body and Blood, or give it to some one else to consume, or reverently reserve it somewhere. If he has consumed it, he should nevertheless consume the Consecrated one as well; for the rule that the Sacrament must be completed is of more importance than the rule that it must be received fasting.

6. If he makes this discovery after receiving the Blood, he must again take fresh bread, and wine with water. After offering them, the Priest should Consecrate, beginning at the words: Qui pridie, etc. He should then immediately consume both, and go on with the Mass, so that the Sacrament may not remain incomplete, and that due order may be kept.

7. If the Consecrated Host should disappear, either from some chance cause such as wind, or by a miracle, or from being consumed by some animal, and cannot be recovered; then another must be Consecrated, after first being offered, beginning at the passage: Qui pridie quam pateretur.

IV
On Defective Wine

If the wine has become mere vinegar, or wholly bad, or has been made from sour or unripe grapes, or has been mixed with so much water that the wine is adulterated; the Sacrament is not Consecrated.

2. If the wine has begun to go sour, or bad, or is to a marked extent acid, or is unfermented grape-juice, or has been mixed with rose-water or some other distillation; the Sacrament is Consecrated, but the Celebrant commits a mortal sin.

3. If the Celebrant discovers before tile Consecration of the Blood, even though he has already Consecrated the Body, that the wine or water or both are not in the Chalice, he must immediately take wine and water, and after offering them, proceed to Consecrate, beginning at the words: Simili modo, etc.

4. If he discovers after the words of Consecration that water and not wine has been put into the Chalice, he must put the water into some other vessel, then put wine with water into the Chalice, and Consecrate it, beginning at the words: Simili modo, etc.

5. If he makes this discovery after receiving the Body or the unmixed water, he must again take another Host to Consecrate, and also wine and water in the Chalice, offer both Consecrate them, and receive them, notwithstanding that he will have broken his fast. Or, if the Mass is being celebrated in a public place, where a number of people are present, he may, to avoid scandal, take only the wine  mixed with water, offer it, Consecrate it, and immediately consume it, thereafter continuing the Mass.

6.  If he discovers, either before or after the Consecration, that all the wine is sour, or otherwise bad, the same rule will hold good; he must proceed as if he had discovered that no wine, or only water, had been put into the Chalice [see ¶ 3 and ¶ 4 above].

7. If the Celebrant remembers that he has put no water in:  then if the Chalice has not yet been Consecrated, he must immediately put water in, and say the words of Consecration; but if the Chalice has been Consecrated, he is not to do so, for the water is not essential to the Sacrament.

8. If by reason of defective bread or wine the requisite materials are altogether unobtainable; then, if the Body has not yet been Consecrated, he must proceed no further. If after the Consecration of the Body, or even of the wine, he discovers that one element is defective, even though already Consecrated; then, if the requisite material is absolutely unobtainable, he must proceed and finish the Mass, omitting however all words and actions relating to the defective element; but if it can be had by waiting awhile, he should wait, so that the sacrifice may not be left incomplete.

V
On Defective Forms

Defects may arise in respect of the formula, if anything is wanting to complete the actual words of Consecration. The words of Consecration, which are the formative principle of this Sacrament, are as follows:  Hoc est enim Corpus meum; and: Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni  testamenti;  mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorumIf any omission or alteration is made in the formula of Consecration of the Body and Blood, involving a change of meaning, the Consecration is invalid. An addition made without altering the meaning does not invalidate the Consecration, but the Celebrant commits a mortal sin.

2. If the Celebrant cannot remember whether he has said the usual words of Consecration, he is not on that account to be disturbed. But if he knows for certain that he has omitted something essential to the Sacrament, i.e. the formula of Consecration, or part of it, he must repeat the formula, and go on with the Mass from that point. If he is doubtful, and yet thinks that very probably he has omitted something essential, he should repeat the formula conditionally, though the condition need not be expressed. But if it was something inessential, he need not repeat it, but should go on with the Mass.

VI
On Defects of the Minister [Mass Celebrant]

Defects may arise in respect of those things requisite in the Minister [Mass Celebrant]. These are: first intention, then the disposition of the soul; disposition of the body; disposition of the vestments, disposition in the ministry itself in which they [defects] may possibly occur.

VII
On Defects of the Intention

If there is no intention to Confect [to Consecrate], but only to pretend to do so:

(a) item: if other Hosts remain oblivious [out of sight] on the Altar, or another part of the wine, or another Host is not seen [out of sight], which he does not intend to Consecrate, except only that which he sees:

(b) item:  if he has eleven Hosts before him, and he intends to Consecrate only ten [Hosts], without determining which ten he intends to Consecrate; in this case he does not Consecrate, because of the [lack of] the required intention.  Otherwise, if he thinks there are [only] ten, and wills to Consecrate all [of the Hosts] that he has before him: for then [in that case] all [of the Hosts] are Consecrated: and, therefore, every Priest should always have the intention, to always Consecrate all [Hosts] which are placed before him for Consecration.

2. If the Priest thinks that he is holding one Host, but after the Consecration discovers that two were joined [stuck] together, he should consume both together at the Communion. If he discovers, after receiving the Body and Blood, or even after the ablution, some other Consecrated fragments, large or small, he should consume them, for they belong to the same sacrifice.

3. If an entire Consecrated Host is left over, he should put it with the others in the Tabernacle: if he cannot do this, he should leave it lying on the Altar upon the Corporal, suitably covered, for the Priest who follows him to consume with the other Host which he will Consecrate: or, if neither of these courses is possible, he should reserve it suitably in the Chalice or on the Paten until it can be put into the Tabernacle, or consumed by someone else. If it cannot be suitably reserved, he may consume it himself.

4. If he [the Mass Celebrant] does not have an actual intention during the Consecration itself, because he is distracted, but [only] a virtual [intention], when he ascended up to the Altar he had the intention to do what the Church does, the Sacrament is Confected [Consecrated].  Nevertheless, the Priest should always take care so that he always has an actual intention, as well as virtual.

VIII
On Defects of the Dispositions of the Soul

If such a one is suspended, excommunicated, unfrocked, irregular, or otherwise canonically impeded, his Consecration of the Sacrament is valid, but he commits a mortal sin, both by receiving Communion unworthily, and also by exercising  Priestly functions, which have been forbidden to him.

2. If such a one, having access to a suitable confessor, celebrates in mortal sin, commits a grave sin.

3. If such a one, in case of necessity, not having access to a suitable confessor, celebrates in mortal sin, without contrition, he commits a grave sin.  Not, however, if he is contrite; but even so, he must confess as soon as possible.

4. If, during the celebration of the Mass, the Priest remembers that he is in mortal sin, he should make an act of contrition, at the same time resolving to confess and make satisfaction.

5. If he remembers that he is excommunicate, or suspended, orthat the place is under interdict, he should make an act of contrition, and resolve to seek absolution. If, however, in the above cases, the Consecration has not yet taken place, andthere is no danger of scandal, he must discontinue the Mass he has begun.

IX
On Defects of the Dispositions of the Body

If such a one has not fasted from midnight, even if he has taken only water, or other drink or food, and that by way of medicine, and in the smallest quantity, may not communicate or celebrate.

2. If food or drink has been taken before midnight, there is no sin, even though sleep has not followed, or the food remains undigested. It is, however, sometimes advisable to abstain on account of the mental disturbance, which takes away devotion.

3. If particles of food remaining in the mouth are swallowed, they do not impede Communion, since they are swallowed not as food, but as saliva. The same principle holds good if in washing the mouth a drop of water is unintentionally swallowed.

4. If several Masses are celebrated in one day, as at Christmas, the Celebrantshould wash his fingers at each Mass in a clean vessel, but drink the ablution at the last Mass only.

5, If an emission has occurred during the night, either as a result of previous thought which was a mortal sin, or because of over-indulgence in food or drink, he must abstain from Communion and celebration, unless his confessor thinks otherwise. Incase of doubt whether there was mortal sin in the preceding thought, it is advisable toabstain from celebrating, except in case of necessity. If it is certain that there was nomortal sin in the thought, or that there was no thought at all, but the trouble was due to anatural cause or to a diabolic illusion, the Priest may communicate and celebrate; unlesshe is so troubled in mind on account of the bodily disturbance that it seems better to abstain.

X
On Defects that Occur in the Ministry Itself

There are other possible defects which  may occur in the ministry itself, if any of its requisites are wanting, as in the following cases: if the celebration takes place in an unblessed place, orone not approved by the bishop, or on an unconsecrated Altar, or on one not covered with the three cloths; if no wax candles are lit; if it is not the proper time for celebrating, which is commonly from dawn to noon; if the Celebrant has not said at least Matins and Lauds; if any of the Priestly vestments are lacking; if the Priestly vestments and the Altar cloths have not been blessed by a bishop, or by some one else having the authority to bless them; if there is no cleric or other man to serve the Mass, or if some one serves who should not, such as a woman; if there is no proper Chalice and Paten (the Chalice should have a cup of gold or silver or tin, and not of brass or glass); if the Corporals are not clean(they should also be of linen, not decorated in the middle with silk, and blessed by a bishop or by someone else having the authority to bless them); if the Priest celebrates with covered head, without a dispensation; if there is no Missal, even though he may know by heart the Mass he intends to say.

2. If the church is violated while the Priest is celebrating, and before he reaches the Canon, the Mass should cease; but not if he has already passed the Canon. If there is danger of an invasion by the enemy, or of flooding, or of the collapse of the building where Mass is being celebrated, before the Consecration the Mass should cease; after Consecration the Priest may hasten to receive the Sacrament, leaving out everything else.

3. If the Priest becomes gravely ill, or faints, or dies, before the Consecration, the Mass is left. If the Body only has been Consecrated, not the Blood, or if both have been Consecrated, another Priest should continue the Mass from the point where it was interrupted, and in case of necessity a Priest who is not fasting. If the first Celebrant does not die, but is ill, and yet able to communicate, and there is no other Consecrated Host, the Priest who takes over the Mass should divide the Host, and give one part to the sick Priest, receiving the other half himself. If the Priest dies when the formula of the Consecration of the Host has been half-said, the Mass need not be continued, since no Consecration has taken place. If he dies when the formula of the Consecration of the Blood  has been half-said, another Priest should continue the Mass, and repeat over the same Chalice the complete formula from the words: Simili modo postquam coenatum est; or he may pronounce the complete formula over another prepared Chalice, and receive the Host of the first Priest, and the Blood Consecrated by himself, and then the remaining half-Consecrated Chalice.

4. Anyone who, apart from such cases of necessity, does not receive the entire Sacrament, commits a mortal sin.

5. If a fly, or spider, or anything else falls into the Chalice before the Consecration, the Priest should throw the wine into a suitable place, and put other wine, mixed with a little water, into the Chalice, offer it, and continue the Mass. If a fly or anything of the kind falls in after the Consecration, and it is an occasion of nausea to the Priest, be should take it out and wash it with wine, and after Mass burn it, and put the ashes and wine into the sacrarium. But if it is not an occasion of nausea, and involves no other risk, he should drink it with the Blood.

6. If anything poisonous, or likely to cause vomiting, falls into the Chalice, the Consecrated wine must be put aside in another Chalice, and other wine and water taken and Consecrated afresh. After Mass, the Blood should be kept, placed on linen cloth or cotton wool until the wine has dried up; then the cotton wool should be burnt, and the ashes thrown into the sacrarium.

 7. If anything poisonous touches the Consecrated Host, the Priest should Consecrate another, and receive it in the manner prescribed. The first one should be kept in the tabernacle apart, until the element is decayed, when it should be put into the sacrarium.

8. If in receiving the Blood the fragment of the Host remains in the Chalice, the Priest should draw it with his finger to the brim of the Chalice, and consume it before washing his fingers; or he may pour in wine and so consume it.

 9. If the Priest makes the discovery before Consecration that the Host is broken, but not so as to be evident to the people, he should Consecrate that Host; but if it would cause scandal to the people, he should take another and offer it; and if the Host had already been offered, he should consume it after the ablution. If it is discovered before the offering that the Host is broken, he should take another that is unbroken, if this can be done without scandal or overmuch delay.

10. If through cold or through carelessness the Consecrated Host falls into the Chalice, nothing need be repeated on that account; the Priest should go on with the Mass, perform the ceremonies and usual crosses with the rest of the Host, which is not wet with the Blood, if he can do so conveniently. But if the whole Host has become wet, he should not take it out, but say everything omitting the crosses, and receive the Body and Blood together, crossing himself with the Chalice, and saying: Corpus et Sanguis Domini nostri, etc.

11. If in winter-time the Blood should become congealed in the Chalice, the Chalice should be wrapped in hot cloths. If this is of no avail, it should be placed in boiling water near the Altar, until it liquifies, but no water must be allowed to get into the Chalice.

12. If through negligence any of the Blood of Christ is spilt, and it falls on the ground or on the table of the Altar, it should be licked up with the tongue, and the place itself scraped as much as necessary, and the scraping burnt, and the ashes thrown into the sacrarium. If it falls on the Altar-stone, the Priest should mop up the spot, and the spot should be well washed, and the ablution thrown into the sacrarium. If on the Altar linen, and it soaks through to the second or third cloths, the cloths should be thrice washed where the drop fell, with the Chalice underneath, and the water of the washing thrown into the sacrarium. If on the Corporal alone, or on the Priest's vestments, they must be washed in the same way, and the ablution thrown into the sacrarium. If on the cloth or carpet: underfoot, that too must be well washed in the manner just described.

13. If it should happen that all the Blood is spilt after the Consecration: any that remains, however little, should be swallowed, and the Priest should deal with the rest in accordance with the above directions. If none at all remains, he should take wine and water again, and Consecrate them, from the words: Simili modo, postquam coenatum est, etc., after first offering the Chalice.

14. If the Priest vomits the Eucharist, and the elements appear in their entirety, he should reverently shallow them, unless to do so will provoke nausea; in which case, the Consecrated elements should be carefully separated, put in some place until they are decayed, and afterwards thrown into the sacrarium the elements are not apparent, the vomit should be burnt, and the ashes thrown into the sacrarium.

15. If the Consecrated Host, or any particle of it, falls on the ground, it should be reverently taken up, and the place where it fell washed and slightly scraped, the piece or scraping being put into the sacrarium. If it falls outside the Corporal on the Altar cloth, or otherwise on any linen, such cloth or linen should be carefully washed, and the water used for washing thrown into the sacrarium

16. Finally, defects may occur in the ministry itself, if the Priest is ignorant of the rites and ceremonies to be observed therein, all of which have been fully described in the above Rubrics.

(Pope Saint Pius V, Antonio-Michele Ghislieri [Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572], Papal Decree De Defectibus, Concerning Defects, Official Text of this Decree is at the beginning of the Missale Romanum, Tuesday, July 14, 1570; emphasis added.)

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:

It is plain and very clear for all to see in reading De Defectibus V - On Defective Forms, that the Form used for the Double Consecration in the so-called “Roman Missal” of the NOR - Novus Ordo Rite - does NOT conform to the Form required by the Roman Catholic Church under her infallible teaching authority under pain of nullity.

This means quite simply that a Form of Double Consecration which is null and void is invalidmper se.  But since part of the essence of the Mass, as it was perfectly, and unchangeabley, instituted by Jesus Christ, is the Double Consecration, this means that an invalid Form causes and invalid Mass!

In other words, not only does nothing happen during the Consecration in the NOR, because there is no transubstantiation of bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ, but so also there is no Mass period!

Every NOR - Novus Ordo Rite - New Mass - has such a defective Form and is quite simply NOT A MASS!

Finally, regarding Pope Saint Pius V, he very clearly states - so that there can be no room for any doubts - that:

If any omission or alteration is made in the formula of Consecration of the Body and Blood, involving a change of meaning, the Consecration is invalid.

Words meaning something!

Perhaps some of you are wondering if the differences in the Form of the Novus Ordo Rite are only superficial and really do not involve a change of meaning?


Change of for many to for all

First, in the Form for the Consecration of the Most Precious Blood, pro multis (for many) was changed to pro omnibus (for all) in the NOR - Novus Ordo Rite.

This is heretical, as explained above, by the Roman Catholic Council of Trent, Session Six, Monday, January 13, 1547, “Decree on Justification”, Chapter III, Who Are Justified Through Christ, and also in its Official Catechism.


Suppression of Mystery of Faith

Second, in the Form for the Consecration of the Most Precious Blood, Mysterium Fidei (Mystery of Faith), which is a direct reference to Transubstantiation, has been removed!

Pope Paul 6 admits in his document that he has in fact changed the Form, especially by dropping “Mysterium Fidei”, where he says:

“The words ‘Mysterium Fidei’, now taken out of the context of the words of Christ, are said by the priest as an introduction to the acclamation of the faithful.” (Pope Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978], Missalis Romani, Thursday, April 3, 1969 A.D., ¶ 6; emphasis added.)
Here is a grave change of meaning!  By dropping “Mysterium Fidei” from the Form for the Consecration of the Most Precious Blood of Christ, the actual object of the Holy Faith is changedWhat is believed is not that which is expressed!

The principle of Pope Saint Celestine I, Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi (The Law of Praying Is the Law of Believing-in other words-You Believe What You Pray and You Pray What You Believe) clearly shows that something  contrary to the Catholic Faith  is here very subtly presented for belief!

A different faith is offered - albeit in a most subtle manner - to the unsuspecting people whose ignorance of their Holy Faith was being used against them by certain enemies of Jesus Christ!  This is what comes from fooling around with something which is fine just the way it is!  (Old Proverb says: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!:  The Mass, especially the Form of the Double Consecration, wasn’t “broke” so none of it needed to be “fixed”!)

Mysterium Fidei refers to the very mystery of the Transubstantiation, i.e. what is actually taking place during the time the required Form is being used!

In other words, at the very moment when the wine is supposed to be Transubstantiated into the Precious Blood of Christ, the words “Mysterium Fidei”, which most beautifully express this wonderful Mystery of Christ’s great love for us, are suppressed!

And this is not only in the English and other vernacular translations, but in the original Latin of the Novus Ordo itself!

Therefore, what Pope Saint Pius V said would happen, if there is a change of meaning in the Form of Consecration so that the Consecration, and thus the Mass itself would be invalid, is exactly what happens every time the Novus Ordo Rite is used!

Of course there may be those who say that this doesn’t make any difference because Vatican 2 and Pope Paul 6 changed things and so one needn’t worry about such infallible decrees prior to 1969!

On the contrary, Vatican 2 was a Pastoral, not Doctrinal, Council.  Therefore, it could not change anything taught infallibly!  It lacked the power and authority to do it!

But again, no one, be it a Doctrinal Council, a Pope, whomever, can ever change even one decree issued under Infallibility!  Why?  Because of the very nature of Infallibility!  Infallibility certifies that a certain thing is trueBut that which is true can never change or be changed by its very natureThis is the essence of Infallibility and the basis upon which it receives its force!

Therefore, any Council or Pope which attempts to change something issued Infallibly in the past does not only NOT believe in Infallibility - and thus is not really a believing Catholic and thus is no longer a member of the Catholic Church and has no longer any jurisdiction to do anything in the Catholic Church - but also does not have the necessary power and authority and jurisdiction to make such a change because Jesus Christ, when He instituted the Church, never gave such power to anyone, not to Saint Peter, not to any of the Apostles - to no one!  Just as no one can change the Ten Commandments, not even a Pope, so also the same is true here concerning the Mass and the Sacraments!

Why is this?

Because:

The dispensing of the Sacraments belongs to the Church’s ministers; but this Consecration is from God Himself.  Consequently, the Church’s ministers can make no laws regarding the Form of the Consecration and the Manner of Celebrating”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 83, Article 3, Reply to Objection 8; emphasis added).
In other words, the Church has to use what Jesus Christ instituted, the way He instituted it - especially the Church must use the Form instituted by Christ!  Thus, both a Doctrinal Council and a Pope have very limited power, authority and jurisdiction in this regard!

Jesus Christ never gave this kind of absolute power, authority and jurisdiction to anyone!

“On the contrary, The institutor of anything is he who gives it strength and power: as in the case of those who institute laws. But the power of a Sacrament is from God alone, as we have shown above (A. 1; Q 62, A 1).  Therefore, God alone can institute a Sacrament.”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 64, Article 2, On the Contrary; emphasis added).

Therefore, Jesus Christ, as the real Head of the Church, kept it Himself!  And He has shared it with no one - no Council and no Pope!

“Ambrose says (De Sacram. iv): ‘The Consecration is accomplished by the words and expressions of the Lord Jesus... when the time comes for perfecting the Sacrament, the Priest uses no longer his own words, but the words of Christ.  Therefore, it is Christ’s own words that perfect this Sacrament.’” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 78, Article 1).

Since the NOR - Novus Ordo Rite - does NOT use the words of Christ, there is no Consecration - no Sacrifice and no Sacrament!

No wonder the Vatican 2 Bishops of the U.S. forbid kneeling for communion:

“The bishops of the United States have decided that the normative posture for receiving Holy Communion should be standingKneeling is NOT a licit [lawful] posture for receiving Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States of America unless the bishop of a particular diocese has derogated from this norm in an individual and extraordinary circumstance.” (United States Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, July, 2002 Newsletter; emphasis added.)
In doing this, the U.S. Bishops have gone even further than the first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer, whose Black Rubric only discouraged people from kneeling for communion!

Here is the text:

THE BLACK RUBRIC
Original Version

ALthough no ordre can be so perfectlye deuysed, but it may be of some, eyther for theyr ignoraunce and infirmitie, or els of malice and obstinacie, mysconstrued, depraued, and interpreted in a wrong parte. And yet because brotherly charitie willeth, that so muche as conueniently may be, offences should be taken away:  therfore we willing to dooe the same. Wheras it is ordeyned in the booke of common prayer, in the administracion of the Lordes Supper, that the Communicantes kneelynge shoulde receiue the holye Communion:  whiche thyng beynge well mente, for a sygnificacyon of the humble and gratefull acknowledgeynge of the benefites of Christe, geuen unto the woorthye receyuer, and to auoyde the prophanacion and dysordre whiche about the holye communion myghte elles ensue. Lest yet the same kneelynge myght be thought or taken otherwyse, we dooe declare that it is not mente thereby, that any adoracion is doone, or oughte to bee doone, eyther unto the Sacramentall bread or wyne there bodelye receyued, or unto anye reall and essenciall presence there beeyng of Chrystes naturall fleshe and bloude. For as concernynge the Sacramentall bread and wyne, they remayne styll in theyr verye naturall substaunces, and therfore may not bee adored, for that were Idolatrye to be abhorred of all faythfull christians. And as concernynge the naturall bodye and bloud of our sauiour Christ, they are in heauen and not here: for it is agaynst the trueth of Christes true naturall bodye, to be in moe places then in one at one tyme.    (Second Prayer Booke of Edward VI, Black Rubric, 1552; emphasis added.  Written by Protestant Archbishop Thomas Cranmer [b. Nottinghamshire, England in 1489 A.D. - d. burnt at the stake in Oxford, England in 1556 A.D.]).


Correct Form for the Double Consecration

For the Consecration of the Sacred Body:

Hoc est enim Corpus meum.

For the Consecration of the Most Precious Blood:

Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni  testamenti;  mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.

For all Roman Catholics, this Form for the Double Consecration was issued DE FIDE by an Infallible Roman Catholic Pope along with the Infallible Roman Catholic Council of Florence:


Infallible Roman Catholic Council of Florence Set the Words of the Double Consecration

There is no concern here about “accidentals”, but only about the “essentials”.  EXACTLY WHICH WORDS does the Roman Catholic Church INFALLIBLY teach are necessary for the Double Consecration in the Mass?  In other words, which words are indispensable for the valid Form?  In the De Defectibus V, above, you have already read what these words are.  But what is the basis for these words?

Fortunately, historically, the Roman Catholic Church has set forth the EXACT WORDS which are REQUIRED, and therefore, NECESSARY, for validity in this document:

“But since in the above written Decree of the Armenians the Form of the words, which in the Consecration of the Body and Blood of the Lord the Holy Roman Church confirmed by the teaching and authority of the Apostles, had always been accustomed to use, was not set forth, We have thought that it ought to be inserted here.
In the Consecration of the Body, the Church uses this Form of words:

HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM.

In the Consecration of the Blood the Church uses the following Form of words:

HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI:  MYSTERIUM FIDEI:  QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM.”

(Solemnly Decreed Under Infallibility by the Doctrinal and Infallible Œcumenical Council of Florence  - The Seventeenth Œcumenical Council, [Monday, April 9, 1438 A.D. - Thursday, August 7, 1445 A.D.], along with the Infallible Roman Catholic Pope Eugene IV, Gabriele Condulmer [Thursday, March 3, 1431 - Tuesday, February 23, 1447], who Infallibly Promulgated his Infallible Papal Bulla Cantate Domino - The Papal Bulla of Union with the Copts, Session 11, Friday, February 4, 1442, ¶ 40 and ¶ 41; emphasis added).
In plain, simple, English this means that ANYONE who deviates from this Form, or who changes, or deletes, or adds, even as much as one word, is, thereby, no longer a real Roman Catholic - be he a Pope, a Cardinal, a Bishop, or even a Synod or a Council of Bishops!

But what has the Vatican 2 church, the church of the changes, of the changes, of the changes, of the never-ending changes, done?

Has the Vatican 2 church kept this Infallible Form for the Double Consecration 100% intact, without changing, or by adding or deleting, even ONE word?


Here is a side-by-side comparison:

Consecration of the Bread into the Body of Christ

ANCIENT ROMAN RITE
of the Roman Catholic Church
 
 

Consecration of the Sacred Body of Christ:

HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM.
 
 

Traditional English Translation
in the 1943 ROMAN MISSAL

FOR THIS IS MY BODY.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

NOVUS ORDO RITE
NOVUS ORDO MISSAE
THE NEW MASS
of the Vatican 2 church

Consecration of the Body:

ACCIPITE ET MANDUCATE EX HOC OMNES:  HOC EST ENIM CORPUS
MEUM, QUO PRO VOBIS TRADETUR.

OFFICIAL ICEL English translation
in the 1969 ROMAN MISSAL:

Take this, all of you, and eat it:  this is
my body which will be given up for you.


Consecration of the Wine into the Blood of Christ - Latin
Consecration of Christ's Precious Blood:

HIC EST ENIM CALIX
SANGUINIS MEI
NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI:
MYSTERIUM FIDEI:
QUI PRO VOBIS ET  PRO MULTIS
EFFUNDETUR IN
REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Consecration of the Blood:

ACCIPITE ET BIBITE EX EO OMNES:
HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI,
QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM.  HOC FACITE IN
MEAM COMMEMORATIONEM.
m


Consecration of the Wine into the Blood of Christ - English
Traditional English Translation
in the 1943 ROMAN MISSAL:

FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF
MY BLOOD OF THE NEW AND
ETERNAL TESTAMENT:
THE MYSTERY OF FAITH:
WHICH SHALL
BE SHED FOR YOU
AND FOR MANY
UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS.
mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

OFFICIAL ICEL English translation
in the 1969 ROMAN MISSAL:

Take this, all of you, and drink
from it: this is the cup
of my blood, the blood
of the new and everlasting covenant.
 It will be shed for you
and for all men
so that sins may be forgiven.  Do this
in memory of me.
mmmmm

Hence, those who use the Form that the BUTCHERS of the INFALLIBLE VALID Form of the Double Consecration are unable to validly Consecrate either the Sacred Body or the Most Precious Blood of Jesus Christ!  BOTH Forms are defective and invalid and publicly mock the Roman Catholic doctrine of Papal Infallibility, along with the Infallibility of a Roman Catholic Doctrinal Council!

Therefore, it is IDOLATRY to kneel to receive whatever - be it a host, or cornbread, or a bagel, or a slice of bread, or a muffin, or a donut, etc. (some of these things have actually been used, especially cornbread which a relative of mine - a V-2 deacon - proudly told me that he bakes in his own oven!) - they plop in your hand in the Vatican 2 church!



Pope Pius VI
Giovanni Angelo Braschi
[Wednesday, February 15, 1775 - Thursday, August 29, 1799]

“In order to expose such snares, something which becomes necessary with a certain frequency in every Century, no other method is required than the following: Whenever it becomes necessary to expose statements which disguise some suspected error or danger under the veil of ambiguity, one must denounce the perverse meaning under which the error opposed to Catholic Truth is camouflaged.”  (Pope Pius VI, Giovanni Angelo Braschi [Wednesday, February 15, 1775 - Thursday, August 29, 1799], Encyclical “Auctorem Fidei,” Thursday, August 28, 1794, ¶ 6; emphasis added).



Pope Gregory XVI
Bartolomeo Alberto-Mauro-Cappellari
[Wednesday, February 2, 1831 - Monday, June 1, 1846]

We repeat that ALL   [N.B.  This also includes ALL future Popes!]   must abide by the general RULES and DECREES of Our Predecessors” (Pope Gregory XVI, Bartolomeo Alberto-Mauro-Cappellari [Wednesday, February 2, 1831 - Monday, June 1, 1846], Encyclical Inter Præcipuas, Wednesday, May 8, 1844, ¶ 11; emphasis added).

“We greatly deplore the fact that, where the ravings of human reason extend, there is somebody who studies new things and strives to know more than is necessary, against the advice of the Apostle. There you will find someone who is overconfident in seeking the Truth outside the Catholic Church, in which it can be found without even a light tarnish of error. Therefore, the Church is called, and is indeed, a pillar and foundation of Truth.

“You correctly understand, Venerable Brothers, that We speak here also of that erroneous philosophical system [the Heresy of Modernism] which was recently brought in and is clearly to be condemned.

“This system [the Heresy of Modernism], which comes from the contemptible and unrestrained desire for innovation, does not seek Truth where it stands in the received and Holy Apostolic Traditions. Rather, other empty doctrines, futile and uncertain doctrines, condemned by the Church, are adopted. Only the most conceited men wrongly think that these teachings can maintain and support Truth itself” (Pope Gregory XVI, Bartolomeo Alberto-Mauro-Cappellari [Wednesday, February 2, 1831 - Monday, June 1, 1846], Encyclical Singulari Nos - On the Errors of Lammenais, ¶ 8; emphasis added).



Pope Leo XIII
Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci
[Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903]

“7.  ....For this reason, in the first place, the principal documents, in which Our Predecessors, at the request of Queen Mary, exercised their special care for the reconciliation of the English Church, were considered. Thus Julius III sent Cardinal Reginald Pole, an Englishman, and illustrious in many ways, to be his Legate a latere for the purpose, as his angel of peace and love, and gave him extraordinary and unusual mandates or faculties and directions for his guidance (given in August 1553 in Si Ullo Umquam Tempore, Post Nuntium Nobis, and other documents). These (documents) Paul IV confirmed and explained.

“8. And, here, to interpret rightly the force of these documents, it is necessary to lay it down as a fundamental principle that they were certainly not intended to deal with an abstract state of things, but with a specific and concrete issue....   This, besides being clear from the nature and form of the said documents, is also obvious from the fact that it would have been altogether irrelevant to instruct the Legate  - one whose learning had been conspicuous in the Roman Catholic Council of Trent - as to the conditions necessary for the bestowal of the Sacrament of Orders.”  (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ - Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, Promulgated Friday, September 18, 1896, ¶ 7 and ¶ 8; emphasis added.)

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:  In this Encyclical you will note how the Pope makes references to some previous Papal Documents, e.g. Si Ullo Umquam Tempore, Post Nuntium Nobis, which type of usage one finds frequently in various Papal documents before Synod Vatican 2.  However, after Synod Vatican 2, references to pre-Vatican 2 Roman Catholic Popes seem to be rather rare.

“9.  ....Moreover, what the Letters of Julius III themselves say about freely using the Pontifical faculties, even on behalf of those who had received their consecration minus rite and not according to the accustomed form of the Church, is to be especially noted.  By this expression those only could be meant who had been consecrated  [Bishops] according to the Edwardine rite, since besides it and the Catholic Form there was then no other rite in England.”  (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ - Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, Promulgated Friday, September 18, 1896, ¶ 9; emphasis added.)

“10. ....For this purpose all of the necessary written evidence and the pertinent parts of the new Ordinal were submitted to the Pope. The Legation having been splendidly received, and their evidence having been ‘diligently discussed’ by several of the Cardinals, ‘after mature deliberation’ Paul IV issued his Bulla Praeclara Carissimi on June 20 of that same year. In this, while giving full force and approbation to that which Cardinal Pole had done, it is ordered in the matter of the Ordination (rite) as follows:

‘Those who have been promoted to ecclesiastical Orders . . . by any one but a Bishop validly and lawfully ordained are bound to receive those Orders again.’
“11. But who those Bishops not validly and lawfully ordained were had been made sufficiently clear by the foregoing documents and the Faculties used in the said matter by the Legatethose, namely, who have been promoted to the Episcopate, as others to other Orders, not according to the accustomed (Traditional) form of the Church, or, as the Legate himself wrote to the Bishop of Norwich, the Form and Intention of the Church not having been observedThese were certainly those promoted according to the new form of rite, to the examination of which the Cardinals specially deputed had given their careful attention.

“12. Moreover, when some doubted as to who, according to the mind of the Pontiff, could be called and considered bishops validly and lawfully ordained, the said Pope shortly after that, on October 30 (1555), issued a further Letter in the form of a Brief and said:

‘We, wishing to remove the doubt and to provide opportunely for the peace of conscience of those who during the schism were promoted to Orders, by expressing more clearly the mind and the intention which We had in the aforesaid Letter, declare that only those Bishops and Archbishops who were not Ordained and Consecrated in the Form of the Church cannot be said to have been validly and lawfully ordained’.
“13. Unless this declaration had applied to the actual case in England, that is to say, to the Edwardine Ordinal, the Pope would certainly have done nothing by this last Letter for the removal of doubt and the restoration of peace of conscience. Further, it was in this sense that the Legate understood the documents and commands of the Apostolic See, and duly and conscientiously obeyed them; and the same was done by Queen Mary and by the others who helped her to restore religion and Catholic institutions to their former state.

Invariable Practice of the Holy See

“14. The authority of Julius III and of Paul IV, which We have quoted, clearly shows the origin of that practice which has been observed without interruption for more than three centuries, that Ordinations conferred according to the Edwardine rite should be considered null and void. This practice is fully proved by the numerous cases of absolute re-ordination according to the Catholic rite even in Rome. In the observance of this practice we have a proof directly affecting the matter in hand. For, if by any chance, doubt should remain as to the true sense in which these Pontifical documents are to be understood, the principle holds good that [the ancient historical] Custom is the best interpreter of law. Since in the Church it has ever been a constant and established rule that it is sacrilegious to repeat the Sacrament of Order, it never could have come to pass that the Apostolic See should have silently acquiesced, and tolerated such a custom. But not only did the Apostolic See tolerate this practice, but approved and sanctioned it as often as any particular case arose which called for its judgement in the matter.” (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ - Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, Promulgated Friday, September 18, 1896, ¶ ¶  10-14; emphasis added.)

“18. It is important to bear in mind that this judgement was not based merely on the omission of the tradition of instruments, for in such a case, according to the established custom, the direction would have been to repeat the Ordination conditionally. Still more important is it to note that the judgement of the Pontiff applies universally to all Anglican ordinations, because, although it refers to a particular case, it is not based upon any reason special to that case, but upon the Defect of Form, which Defect equally affects all these ordinations - so much so, that when similar cases subsequently came up for decision, the same decree of Clement XI was quoted as the norma [norm].” (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ - Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, Promulgated Friday, September 18, 1896, ¶ 18; emphasis added.)

“23.   ....Being fully aware of the necessary connection between Faith and Worship, between lex orandi, lex credendi [the law of praying is the law of believing], they corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers, under the pretext of restoring it to its primitive form. Thus, in the whole Ordinal, not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood, and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice, but, as We have just stated, every trace of these things, which had been in such prayers of the Catholic Rite, as they had not entirely rejected, was deliberately removed and struck out.” (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ - Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, Promulgated Friday, September 18, 1896, ¶ 23; emphasis added.)

Catholic Doctrine of Intention

“26. With this inherent Defect of Form is joined the Defect of Intention which is equally essential to the Sacrament. The Church does not judge about the mind and intention in so far as it is something by its nature internal; but in so far as it is manifested externally she is bound to judge concerning it.  When anyone has rightly and seriously made use of the due Form and the Matter requisite for effecting or conferring the Sacrament, he is considered by the very fact to do [intendisse] what the Church does....” (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ - Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, Promulgated Friday, September 18, 1896, ¶ 26; emphasis added.)

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:  In this Encyclical you will note that either or both Defect of Form  and  Defect of Intention  cause any Sacrament to be invalid, not just the Sacrament of Holy Orders - especially the Priesthood and the Episcopacy.

However, it needs to be clearly understood that in the above text where it says in part:

When anyone has rightly and seriously made use of

this anyoneis imputed to be a validly Ordained Catholic Priest or a validly Consecrated Catholic Bishop.

For example, not just anyone  who has rightly and seriously made use of the due Form and the Matter requisite for effecting the Sacrament of the Most Holy Eucharist during the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Ancient Roman Rite of Mass can be said to have Transubstantiated!

On the contrary, this very Encyclical itself not only mentions previous Popes who held that the Edwardine rite was invalid, and hence the use of it was unable to validly ordain Priests or validly consecrate Bishops, but Pope Leo XIII himself clearly states, as part of his conclusion:

“28. Wherefore, strictly adhering, in this matter, to the Decrees of the Pontiffs, Our Predecessors, and confirming them most fully, and, as it were, renewing them by Our authority, of Our own initiative and certain knowledge, We Pronounce and Declare that Ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void.” (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ - Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, Promulgated Friday, September 18, 1896, ¶ 28; emphasis added.)

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:  In other words, in order to be able to validly Administer five of the seven Sacraments (Baptism and Matrimony are excluded), a person must be a validly Ordained Catholic Priest or a validly Consecrated valid Bishop. because ONLY a valid Priest or a valid Bishop has the Grace and Power of the Sacrament of the Priesthood and/or the Episcopacy to be able to validly Confect/Adminster any of the other five Sacraments.

Of both urgent and immediate importance to all Catholics today is this simply historical fact:

The history of the 16th Century Protestant revolt has repeated itself today!

It is an historical fact that all of the Liturgical Books have been changed in the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes!

Not only the Breviary, not only the Rituale Romanum (Roman Ritual) which is used by validly Ordained Catholic Priests in valdily administering the Sacraments, as well as administering Blessings, not only the Pontificale Romanum (Roman Pontifical) which is used by validly Ordained Catholic Bishops in valdily administering the Sacraments, most especially Holy Orders, primarily the Sacrament of the Holy Priesthood and the Sacrament of the Holy Episcopacy (the fullness of the Holy Priesthood), but also the Missale Romanum (Roman Missal) which is used for Offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass!  This is the same thing the 16th Century ex-Roman Catholic Protestant Bishops and Priests did, e.g. Thomas Cranmer, Martin Luther, etc.!

The basic principles of Catholic Traditional Theology, as reviewed by Pope Leo XIII in his Encyclical Apostolicæ Curæ,   quoted in part above, concerning the Defect of Proper Matter, Defect of Proper Form, and Defect of Proper Intention, clearly prove that the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, has no valid Sacraments and has no valid Mass!

Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them.

The apologists for all of the changes in the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, try to confuse people by claiming this is not true.  But all they can do is to resort to non-Catholic teaching, or abstruse philosophy, most especially the bogus theory of the continual evolution of dogmas, a.k.a. the Heresy of Modernism, to try to somehow prove what they falsely claim.

This is why the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, is in the state of continual, always constantly on-going, always Never-Ending Changes - is constantly evolving itself into the proverbial black hole of nothingness  - the ultimate acme of athiesm!

“48. In Doctrina [In Doctrine].  In the face of the combined efforts of incredulity and heresy to bring about the ruin of the Catholic Faith, it would be a real crime for the Clergy  [Archbishops, Bishops and Priests]  to remain in a state of hesitancy and inactivity.In such an outpouring of error and conflict of opinion, the Clergy  [Archbishops, Bishops and Priests]  must not be faithless to their mission  which is  to defend Dogma - when it is assaulted, Morality - when it is mocked, and Justice - which is frequently outraged.

“[To each Archbishop, Bishop and Priest it belongs] .. to make himself a road block to the attacks of error and the deceits of heresy; to watch the tactics of the wicked who war against the Faith....;
to unmask the plots and to reveal the ambushes and traps; they must warn naive people, strengthen those who are timid, and open the eyes of the blinded.

Superficial erudition, or merely common knowledge, will not suffice for all of this - there is the need for the solid, profound and continuous study  [by every Catholic Archbishop, Bishop, and Priest]  of   a massive amount of Doctrinal knowledge  which must be sufficient to cope with the subtlety and remarkable cunning of our Modern opponents....”  (Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Encyclical “Depuis Le Jour”, On the Education of the Clergy, Friday, September 8, 1899, ¶ 48 In Doctrina; emphasis added.  Encyclical to the Archbishops, Bishops, and Clergy of France.)



Pope Saint Pius X
Giuseppe Sarto
[Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914]

“1. ....These latter days have witnessed a notable increase in the number of the enemies of the Cross of Christ, who, by arts entirely new and full of deceit, are striving to destroy the vital energy of the Church, and, as far as in them lies, utterly to subvert the very Kingdom of Christ. Wherefore, We may no longer keep silence, lest We should seem to fail in Our most Sacred Duty, and lest the kindness that, in the hope of wiser counsels, We have hitherto shown them, should be set down to lack of diligence in the discharge of Our Office.”  (Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, On the Doctrine of the Modernists -  Sunday, September 8, 1907, ¶ 1; emphasis added.)

38. ..it is abundantly clear how great and how eager is the passion of such men for INNOVATION. In all Catholicism there is absolutely nothing on which it does not fasten. They wish philosophy to be reformed.. SCHOLASTIC PHILOSOPHY to be relegated to the history of philosophy.. young men.. taught modern philosophy which alone is true and suited to the times in which we live.

“They desire the reform of theology.. [with] modern philosophy for its foundation.. history.. must be written and taught only according to their methods.. In the Catechism no dogmas are to be inserted except those that have been reformed and are within the capacity of the people. Regarding worship, they say, the number of external devotions is to he reduced, and steps must be taken to prevent their further increase.. a share in ecclesiastical government should.. be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity.. authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized.

“With regard to morals, they adopt the principle of the AMERICANISTS, that the active virtues are more important than the passive, and are to be more encouraged in practice.. the clergy should return to their primitive humility and poverty, and that in their ideas and action they should admit the principles of Modernism...

What is there left in the Church which is not to be reformed by them and according to their principles?” (Pope, Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, On the Doctrine of the Modernists, Sunday, September 8, 1907, ¶ 38; emphasis added ).


“53. Having said this much in general, We now ordain in particular a more careful observance of Article XLII of the above-mentioned Constitution Officiorum, according to which:

it is forbidden to Secular Priests, without the previous consent of the Ordinary, to undertake the editorship of papers or periodicals.
“This permission shall be withdrawn from any Priest who makes a wrong use of it after having received an admonition thereupon. With regard to Priests who are correspondents or collaborators of periodicals, as it happens not infrequently that they contribute matter infected with Modernism to their papers or periodicals, let the Bishops see to it that they do not offend in this manner; and if they do, let them warn the offenders and prevent them from writing.

“We solemnly charge in like manner the Superiors of Religious Orders that they fulfill the same duty, and should they fail in it, let the Bishops make due provision with authority from the Supreme Pontiff. Let there be, as far as this is possible, a Special Censor for newspapers and periodicals written by Catholics. It shall be his Office to read in due time each number after it has been published, and if he find anything dangerous in it let him order that it be corrected as soon as possible. The Bishop shall have the same right even when the censor has seen nothing objectionable in a publication.

“54. We have already mentioned congresses and public gatherings as among the means used by the Modernists to propagate and defend their opinions. In the future, Bishops shall not permit Congresses of Priests except on very rare occasions.   When they do permit them it shall only be on condition that matters appertaining to the Bishops or the Apostolic See be not treated in them, and that no resolutions or petitions be allowed that would imply a usurpation of Sacred Authority, and that absolutely nothing be said in them which savors of Modernism, Presbyterianism, or Laicism.

“At Congresses of this kind, which can only be held after permission in writing has been obtained in due time and for each case it shall not be lawful for Priests of other Dioceses to be present without the written permission of their Ordinary. Further, no Priest must lose sight of the solemn recommendation of Leo XIII:

Let Priests hold as Sacred the Authority of their Pastors, let them take it for certain that the Sacerdotal Ministry, if not exercised under the guidance of the Bishops, can never be either holy, or very fruitful, or worthy of respect  [Footnote # 30: Leo Xlll, Encyclical of February 10, 1884, Nobilissima Gallorum].
“55. But of what avail, Venerable Brethren, will be all Our commands and prescriptions if they be not dutifully and firmly carried out? In order that this may be done it has seemed expedient to us to extend to all dioceses the regulations which the Bishops of Umbria, with great wisdom, laid down for theirs many years ago.
In order,” they say, “to extirpate the errors already propagated and to prevent their further diffusion, and to remove those teachers of impiety through whom the pernicious effects of such diffusion are being perpetuated, this Sacred Assembly, following the example of St. Charles Borromeo, has decided to establish in each of the Dioceses a Council consisting of approved members of both branches of the Clergy, which shall be charged with the task of noting the existence of errors and the devices by which new ones are introduced and propagated, and to inform the Bishop of the whole, so that he may take counsel with them as to the best means for suppressing the evil at the outset and preventing it spreading for the ruin of Souls or, worse still, gaining strength and growth.”[Footnote # 31:  Acts of the Congress of the Bishops of Umbria, November, 1849, Title 2, Article 6.]
We Decree, therefore, that in every Diocese a Council of this kind, which We are pleased to name the Council of Vigilance, be instituted without delay.

“The Priests called to form part in it shall be chosen somewhat after the manner above prescribed for the Censors, and they shall meet every two months on an appointed day in the presence of the Bishop. They shall be bound to secrecy as to their deliberations and decisions, and in their functions shall be included the following:   they shall watch most carefully for every trace and sign of Modernism both in publications and in teaching, and to preserve the Clergy and the young from it they shall take all prudent, prompt, and efficacious measures.    Let them combat novelties of words, remembering the admonitions of Leo XIII:

It is impossible to approve in Catholic publications a style inspired by unsound novelty which seems to deride the piety of the Faithful and dwells on the introduction of a New Order [NOVUS ORDO] of Christian life, on new directions of the Church, on new aspirations of the modern Soul, on a new social vocation of the Clergy, on a NEW Christian civilization, and many other things of the same kind.”  [Footnote # 32:  Instruction of the Sacred Congregation of Extraordinary Ecclesiastical Affairs, January 27, 1902.]
Language of the kind here indicated is not to be tolerated either in books or in lectures...

“....Finally, We entrust to the Councils of Vigilance the duty of overlooking assiduously and diligently social institutions as well as writings on social questions so that they may harbor no trace of Modernism, but obey the prescriptions of the Roman Pontiffs.

“56. Lest what We have laid down thus far should pass into oblivion, We will and ordain that the Bishops of all Dioceses, a year after the publication of these letters and every three years thenceforward, furnish the Holy See with a diligent and sworn report on the things which have been Decreed in this Our Letter, and on the Doctrines that find currency among the Clergy, and especially in the Seminaries and other Catholic Institutions, those not excepted which are not subject to the Ordinary, and We impose the like obligation on the Generals of Religious Orders with regard to those who are under them.

“57. This, Venerable Brethren, is what We have thought it Our duty to write to you for the salvation of all who believe.   The adversaries of the Church will doubtless abuse what We have said to refurbish the old calumny by which We are traduced as the enemy of science and of the progress of humanity.

“As a fresh answer to such accusations, which the history of the Christian Religion refutes by never-failing evidence, it is Our intention to establish by every means in our power a special Institute in which, through the co-operation of those Catholics who are most eminent for their learning, the advance of science and every other department of knowledge may be promoted under the guidance and teaching of Catholic Truth. God grant that We may happily realize Our design with the assistance of all those who bear a sincere love for the Church of Christ. But of this We propose to speak on another occasion.

“Meanwhile, Venerable Brethren, fully confident in your zeal and energy, We beseech for you with Our whole heart the abundance of heavenly light, so that in the midst of this great danger to Souls from the insidious invasions of error upon every hand, you may see clearly what ought to be done, and labor to do it with all your strength and courage.

“May Jesus Christ, the Author and Finisher of our Faith, be with you in His power; and may the Immaculate Virgin, the Destroyer of All Heresies, be with you by her prayers and aid. And We, as a pledge of Our affection and of the Divine solace in adversity, most lovingly grant to you, your Clergy and People, the Apostolic Benediction.

“58. Given at St. Peter’s, Rome, September 8, 1907, in the fifth year of Our Pontificate. PIUS X, POPE.”

(Pope, Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, On the Doctrine of the Modernists, Sunday, September 8, 1907, ¶¶ 53-58; emphasis added ).


“Moreover, in order to check the daily increasing audacity of many Modernists who are endeavoring by all kinds of sophistry and devices to detract from the force and efficacy, not only of the Decree Lamentabili sane exituM (the so-called Syllabus), issued by Our order by the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition on July 3 of the present year [1907], but also of Our Encyclical letter Pascendi Dominici Gregis, given on September 8 of this same year [1907],  We do by Our Apostolic Authority repeat and confirm  both that Decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation
and those Encyclical letters of Ours,  adding the Penalty of Excommunication against their contradictors, and this  We declare and Decree that should anybody, which may God forbid, be so rash as to defend any one of the propositions, opinions or teachings condemned in these documents he falls, ipso facto, under the censure  contained under the chapter Docentes of the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, which is  the first among the Excommunications latae sententiae
[automatic Excommunication], simply reserved to the Roman Pontiff.

“This Excommunication is to be understood as salvis poenis, which may be incurred by those who have violated in any way the said documents, as propagators and defenders of heresies, when their propositions, opinions and teachings are heretical, as has happened more than once in the case of the adversaries of both these documents, especially when they advocate the errors of the Modernists that is, the synthesis of all heresies” (Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Melchiorre Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Motu Proprio, Præstantia Scripturæ Sacræ, ¶ 5, Monday, November 18, 1907.  Automatic Excommunication of Heretics, especially the Heretics of the Heresy of Modernism; emphasis added).



Pope Pius XII
Eugenio Pacelli
[Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958]

“20. As a duty of conscience, We raise Our protest against all of this, while to the whole of Christendom We denounce the injury inflicted upon the Church.

“21. These victims, in fact, have been condemned as enemies of the State not only because of having professed, but also for having striven openly and strenuously to defend, the Catholic Religion, when in Truth they are second to none in their love of country, respect for public authority, and their observance of lawprovided these be not contrary to the Natural, Divine or Ecclesiastical Law.”

What indeed has happened, especially in more recent times, in Bulgaria, unfortunately has been happening already for some time amongst other peoples where the Church of the Oriental Rite flourishes, namely, amongst the peoples of Rumania,   of the Ukraine, and among many other peoples also” (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958] Orientales Ecclesias, Monday, December 15, 1952, # 20 - 21).

“It is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the Altar restored to its primitive tableform; were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches; were he to order the Crucifix so designed that the Divine Redeemer's body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings...” (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, Thursday, November 20, 1947, ¶ 62; emphasis added.)

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:

What has the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, done?

Has the Vatican 2 church of the Never-Ending Changes    NOT forbidden the primitive tableform?



Vatican 2 church Modernized primitive tableform - This is a Contradiction of Terms!
A Table is Not an Altar

For Purposes of Clarity
Here is a Side by Side Visual Comparison:


Catholic Church
The Church of the Unchangeable Traditions
Traditional Altar of Sacrifice

Vatican 2 church
The church of the Never-Ending Changes
Modernized Memorial Supper Meal Table
Is the Supper-Food Burning????

For Purposes of Greater Clarity
Here is a larger Visual Comparison of the Sanctuary:

Catholic Traditional Sanctuary
Altar Rail at Edge of Sanctuary


Vatican 2 church NO Sanctuary
NO Altar Rail


What has the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, done?

Has the Vatican 2 church of the Never-Ending Changes   excluded black as a color for the liturgical vestments?

For Purposes of Clarity
Here is a Side by Side Visual Comparison:


Catholic Church
The Church of the Unchangeable Traditions
Funeral in Black Vestments

Vatican 2 church
The church of the Never-Ending Changes
Funeral in White Vestments

What has the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, done?

Has the Vatican 2 church of the Never-Ending Changes   forbidden the use of sacred images and statues in churches?

For Purposes of Clarity
Here is a Side by Side Visual Comparison:


Catholic Church
The Church of the Unchangeable Traditions
Sacred Images and Statues

Vatican 2 church
The church of the Never-Ending Changes
Only a Few, or No, Sacred Images & Statues
Where Have All the Statues Gone?
The Same Place Where the Altar Went!
The Same Place Where the Missal Went!
The Same Place Where the Crucifix Went!
The Same Place Where the Vestments Went!

What has the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, done?

Has the Vatican 2 church of the Never-Ending Changes    ordered the Crucifix so designed that the Divine Redeemer's body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings?

Several Varities of the Risen Christ Cross

For Purposes of Clarity
Here is a Side by Side Visual Comparison:


Catholic Church
The Church of the Unchangeable Traditions
Crucifix Shows Cruel Sufferings of Christ

Vatican 2 church
The church of the Never-Ending Changes
Saint Matthew roman catholic church
Has NO Cross in its NO Sanctuary!

In the above NO Cross picture, it is obvious that the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, in some cases, has gotten rid of even the Risen Christ Cross in its NO Sanctuary!

This just proves that the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes,really IS the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes!

What next????  NO priests???

From Doctors of the Church


Bishop Saint Isidore of Seville [b. 560 A.D.]
“Therefore, heresy is so-called from the Greek word meaning choice, by which each chooses according to his own will what he pleases to teach or believe.

But we are not permitted to believe whatever we choose, nor to choose whatever someone else has believed. M

“We have the Apostles of God as authorities, who did not themselves of their own will choose what they would believe, but faithfully transmitted to the nations the teaching received from Christ.

“So, even if ‘an Angel from Heaven’ should preach otherwise, he shall be called  anathemaX[[Galatians 1:8]”  (Bishop Saint Isidore of Seville, Spain, [b. Cartagena, Spain 560 A.D. - d. Seville, Spain, 636 A.D.], Doctor of the Catholic Church, Etymologies, 8, 3; emphasis added).



Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P. [b. 1225 A.D.]

“God is immutable” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 9, Article 1).

“God is Truth” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 16, Article 5; Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Question 93, Article 2, Reply to Objection 2. Summa Contra Gentiles Book I, Chapter 60.)

“Truth cannot be Truth’s contrary” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Summa Contra Gentiles, Book IV, Chapter 8).

“Do not heed by whom a thing is said, but rather what is said” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P.
Letter to Brother John).

“On the contrary, The institutor of anything is he who gives it strength and power: as in the case of those who institute laws. But the power of a Sacrament is from God alone, as we have shown above (A. 1; Q 62, A 1).  Therefore, God alone can institute a Sacrament.”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 64, Article 2, On the Contrary; emphasis added).

The Apostles and their Successors are God’s Vicars in governing the Church which is built on Faith and the Sacraments of FaithWherefore, just as they may not institute another church, so neither may they deliver another faith, nor institute other sacraments...”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 64, Article 2, Reply to Objection 3; emphasis added.)

The dispensing of the Sacraments belongs to the Church’s ministers; but this Consecration is from God Himself.  Consequently, the Church’s ministers can make no laws regarding the Form of the Consecration and the Manner of Celebrating”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part III, Question 83, Article 3, Reply to Objection 8; emphasis added).

“Hold firmly that our faith is identical with that of the ancients.  Deny this, and you dissolve the unity of the Church”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Disputations Concerning Truth, 14, 12).

An Explanation of Private Revelations


Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P. [b. 1225 A.D.]

“As regards the guidance of human acts, the prophetic revelation varied not according to the course of time, but according as circumstances required, because as it is written (Proverbs 29:18), ‘When prophecy shall fail, the people shall be scattered abroad.’  Wherefore at all times men were Divinely instructed about what they were to do, according as it was expedient for the Spiritual welfare of the Elect”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Question 174, Article 6, Body; emphasis added).

“The prophets who foretold the coming of Christ could not continue further than John, who, with his finger, pointed to Christ actually present. Nevertheless as [Saint] Jerome says on this passage, ‘This does not mean that there were no more prophets after John. For we read in the Acts of the Apostles that Agabus and the four maidens, daughters of Philip, prophesied.’ John, too, wrote a prophetic book about the end of the Church; and at all times there have not been lacking persons having the spirit of prophecy, not indeed for the declaration of any new doctrine of faith, but for the direction of human acts. Thus Augustine says (De Civ. Dei [City of God] v, 26) that ‘the emperor Theodosius sent to John who dwelt in the Egyptian desert, and whom he knew by his ever-increasing fame to be endowed with the prophetic spirit: and from him he received a message assuring him of victory’” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Question 174, Article 6, Reply to Objection 3; emphasis added).


Father Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. [b. 1877]

“In regard to the visits of the Lord, we must also remember that they often differ appreciably.  There are visits of consolation, like the apparitions of Lourdes; But if people do not profit by them, the Lord comes to chastise; and if they do not profit by this Divine correction, He may come to condemn. [Footnote # 4:  Cf. Saint Thomas In Isaiam, Chap. 24: ‘The visitation of the Lord is multiple; of consolation...of correction...and at times of condemnation.’]” (Reverend Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. [b. Auch, France 1877 A.D. - d. Rome, Italy, 1964 A.D.], who taught dogmatic and Spiritual theology for 53 years at the Pontifical University of Saint Thomas Aquinas, the Angelicum, in Rome, The Three Ages of the Interior Life, Prelude of Eternal Life, Translated by Sister M. Timothea Doyle, O.P., Volume Two, Chapter XXXIX, The effects of the Passive Purification of the Spirit in Relation Especially to the Three Theological Virtues, p. 402; emphasis added).

From Private Revelations

Apparition of Our Lady of LaSalette
Saturday, September 19, 1846
To
Peter Maximim Giraud and Frances Melanie Mathieu

Brief Excerpt of The Secret of LaSalette given to Frances Melanie Mathieu

Lucifer, with a very great number of demons will be unchained from Hell. By degrees they shall abolish the Faith, even among persons Consecrated to God. They shall blind them in such a manner that, without very special Graces, these persons shall imbibe the spirit of those wicked angels. Many Religious Houses will entirely lose the Faith, and shall be the cause of the loss of many persons. ...And tremble you also who make profession of serving Jesus Christ, but inwardly worship yourselves, because God has delivered you to His enemies, because corruption is in holy places....  Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of anti-Christ.”

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:

On Saturday, September 19, 1846, the Blessed Virgin Mary appeared near LaSalette, France to two children, Peter Maximim Giraud, 11 years old, and to Frances Melanie Mathieu, 14 years old.

Each one was given Secret Prophecies which were sent to Pope Pius IX who, on August 24, 1852, recognized this Apparition and these Secret Prophecies as genuine.  The Pope also permitted Bishop de Bruillard to make a like pronouncement.  Bishop de Bruillard obtained the help of his friend Bishop Villecourt of La Rochelle in this regard.  Melanie's entire Secret was published in 1879 with the approval of the Bishop of Lecce in Italy.

Since the Prophecy of Our Lady was fulfilled that Lucifer, with a very great number of demons will be unchained from Hell  it is logical and rational to understand why the human agents of the demons would want to attack this Prophecy.

This they have done, not by directly attacking it - that would never work and Lucifer, who is Satan, knows this, but rather by attempting to confuse people with their subtle propaganda of lies against it which too often easily deceive even the most devout Catholics!

But, when one reads in the Extract of the Third Secret of Fatima, especially:

1) What I have already made known at LaSalette through the children Melanie and Maximin, I repeat today before you.

2) Even in the highest positions, it is Satan who governs and decides how affairs are to be conducted.

3) There will also come a time of the hardest trials  ...  Cardinals will be against Cardinals, and Bishops against Bishops.

[Editor's Note:  This happened at Synod Vatican 2 (Thursday, October 11, 1962 - Wednesday, December 8, 1965)].
4) Satan will put himself in their midst.
[Editor's Note:  This happened at Synod Vatican 2].
5) In Rome, there will also be big changes.
[Editor's Note:  The liturgical rites for the Mass and Sacraments were changed; Altars were replaced with tables; statues, etc. were thrown out.].
these Prophecies of Our Lady of Fatima are consistent with the Prophecies of Our Lady of LaSalette, who, at Fatima, specifically referred to her previous Prophecies at LaSalette, but gave more details, as found in the above examples 2 through 5!

Examples 2 and 3, but most especially examples 4 and 5, verify that in fact Our Lady of LaSalette did Prophecize that:

corruption is in holy places....  Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of anti-Christ.
When will victimized Catholics,   similar to what the victims in the movie They Live eventually did,   put on the proverbial glasses of Truth to see very clearly all of the anti-Catholic Infiltrators who have invaded the Church and taken control of the Church by taking control of the Vatican itself,  and   who have thrown out everything that is Catholic except for the Catholic name and the real estate and bank accounts??!!

To rejuvenate the famous observation of Saint Jerome:

The whole world groaned, and was astonished to find itself Arian” (Saint Jerome, a.k.a. Eusebius Hieronymus, a.k.a. Sophronius [b. Stridon, Dalmatia c. 340 A.D. - d. Bethlehem, Palestine, Wednesday, September 30, 420 A.D.], Doctor of the Catholic Church, “The Dialogue Against the Luciferians”, ¶ 19; emphasis added).
Today it can be said, based upon the continuing changes in the Vatican 2 church, a.k.a. the church of the Never-Ending Changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes, which has the Satanic audacity to try to still call itself Catholic, that:
The Catholic world, when it finally wakes up from having been demonically hypnotized by the lying propaganda of the anti-Catholic Infiltrators, and, after putting on the glasses of Truth, will be totally terrified to find itself no longer Catholic!


First and Second Secrets of Fatima


Photo of Sister Lucy
Who Wrote Down the Three Secrets of Fatima

Source
The THIRD MEMOIR of Sister Lucy
Dated August 31, 1941
Written for the Bishop of Leiria-Fatima, Portugal

English Translation

 
... This will entail my speaking about the Secret, and thus answering the first question.

What is the secret? It seems to me that I can reveal it, since I already have permission from Heaven to do so. God's representatives on earth have authorized me to do this several times and in various letters, one of which, I believe, is in your keeping. This letter is from Father José Bernardo Gonçalves, and in it he advises me to write to the Holy Father, suggesting, among other things, that I should reveal the Secret. I did say something about it. But in order not to make my letter too long, since I was told to keep it short, I confined myself to the essentials, leaving it to God to provide another more favourable opportunity.

In my second account I have already described in detail the doubt which tormented me from 13 June until 13 July, and how it disappeared completely during the Apparition on that day.

Well, the Secret is made up of three distinct parts, two of which I am now going to reveal.

The first part is the vision of Hell.

Our Lady showed us a great sea of fire which seemed to be under the earth. Plunged in this fire were demons and souls in human form, like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, floating about in the conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames that issued from within themselves together with great clouds of smoke, now falling back on every side like sparks in a huge fire, without weight or equilibrium, and amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fear. The demons could be distinguished by their terrifying and repulsive likeness to frightful and unknown animals, all black and transparent. This vision lasted but an instant. How can we ever be grateful enough to our kind heavenly Mother, who had already prepared us by promising, in the first Apparition, to take us to Heaven. Otherwise, I think we would have died of fear and terror.

We then looked up at Our Lady, who said to us so kindly and so sadly:

You have seen Hell where the Souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end: but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the Pontificate of Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father. To prevent this, I shall come to ask for the Consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of reparation on the First Saturdays.   If my requests are heeded, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace; if not, she will spread her errors throughout the world, causing wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred; the Holy Father will have much to suffer; various nations will be annihilated.   In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to me, and she shall be converted, and a period of peace will be granted to the world”. *
* Please Note: It is here, in her FOURTH MEMOIR, that Sister Lucy adds: “In Portugal, the dogma of the faith will always be preserved, etc. ...”.  (emphasis added.)


The Third Secret of Fatima
Sent to President Kennedy and to Other World Leaders
mmmmm

Photo of a Pilgrim Virgin Statue
of Our Lady of Fatima

Introduction

 
The Miracle of the Sun on Saturday, October 13, 1917, witnessed by over 70,000 people, including atheists, gave the seal of authenticity to the entire Fatima messages and secret prophecies.

Beginning on Sunday, May 13, 1917, our Blessed Mother appeared once a month for six months at Fatima, Portugal, to three young children: Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco. During her visit on Friday, July 13, Mary gave a Secret to the three children. It is divided into three parts.

The First Part of the Secret is the vision of Hell which the children saw.

The Second Part of the Secret is a prophetic message about the end of World War I and a conditional  prophecy about the beginning of World War II.

The first two parts of the Secret were revealed years ago. But until Monday, June 26, 2000, the Vatican had never “officially” revealed the Third Secret of Fatima. You will find it to be very interesting, to say the least, to compare the "Extract" which the Vatican "unofficially" released to world leaders in 1960 with the supposed "official full text" they claim to have revealed on Monday, June 26, 2000. It is obvious that these two versions are different from each other!

Please keep in mind that both the Second and Third Parts of the Secret were actual prophecies at the time the Blessed Virgin Mary revealed them on Friday, July 13, 1917.

How many of you remember the great anticipation Roman Catholics had in 1960 waiting for 2nd Pope John 23rd, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli [Tuesday, October 28, 1958 - Monday, June 3, 1963], to release the full text of the Third Secret of Fatima?  There was also great disappointment that it was not released.

The Office of the Vatican Secretariat of State secretly, albeit "unofficially", released an “Extract” of the Third Secret of Fatima in October, 1960, in the form in which you find it below, to the diplomatic services in Washington, D.C., London, England, and Moscow, Russia.

This “Extract” of the Third Secret of Fatima was also sent personally to United States President John F. Kennedy, Great Britain Prime Minister Harold MacMillan, and Russian Party Chairman Nikita Khrushchev, so as to let all three of them study it in private.

Louis Emrich obtained a copy of this "Extract" of the Third Secret of Fatima in 1963, apparently from the Office of the Vatican Secretariat of State, although some claim it was personally given to him by Cardinal Ottaviani.  Louis Emrich was a "contact" for the German newspaper Neues Europa.

Louis Emrich gave a copy of this “Extract” of the Third Secret of Fatima to the German newspaper Neues Europa of Stuttgart, Germany which published it. Shortly afterwards, it was quoted by the French newspaper Le Monde et La Vie of Paris, France.


Cardinal Ottaviani


When Cardinal Ottaviani was asked whether the Neues Europa "Extract" of the 3rd Secret of Fatima should be published, the Cardinal, who had read the Third Secret, and who was usually indifferent to most apparitions, surprisingly and excitedly exclaimed very emphatically allegedly said:

"Publish 10,000 copies! Publish 20,000 copies! Publish 30,000 copies!"


Even though the full text of the Third Secret of Fatima was not released in 1960, at least an “Extract” of it was released to world leaders in 1960!

mmmm



"Extract" of the Third Secret of Fatima
Printed in Le Monde et La Vie of Paris, France

Editor's Note:

Here the "Extract" of the Third Fatima Secret is printed.

For purposes of clarity, we have arbitrarily numbered each paragraph.

In addition, those people and things to which Our Lady of Fatima made direct reference, but without mentioning names and without explicitly stating to what she was referring, are put into brackets [like this].

Also, to avoid confusion, these "Editor's Notes", clarifications, etc., will be made in blue.

But first, you must realize the importance of the Third Secret of Fatima.

The German newspaper said:

"This Fatima text played an important part in the signing of the  Anglo - American - Russian Moscow agreement."
It claimed that:
"This Extract from the third message of Fatima was sent to President Kennedy, Prime Minister MacMillan and Party Chairman Khrushchev, so as to let them study it in private." It also said that "the Vatican has taken steps to ensure that, until further notice, the full document will remain a papal secret."
The reasonable question is this:
Is the official source reliable on which the German newspaper depended upon to guarantee the authenticity of the Third Secret of Fatima?
First, Neues Europa is not a tabloid newspaper. Historically, it has been a serious source of news and its readers would not have tolerated being mislead.

Second, how could such a well-respected newspaper claim to have received a copy of the "Extract" of the Third Secret of Fatima directly from the Vatican Secretariat of State, through Louis Emrich, a "contact" for the German newspaper, Neues Europa, if that was not true?

The Vatican Secretariat of State could have easily issued an official denial. But no such denial was ever issued! Did the German newspaper receive an assurance that no denial would be issued?

Thus, it seems reasonable to conclude that the official source is reliable. So, instead of the Vatican printing the "Extract" in the Pope's official newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano [Roman Observer], it unofficially "leaked" the "Extract" through Louis Emrich, a "contact" for the German newspaper, Neues Europa, of Stuttgart, Germany.

End of Editor's Note


mm
Text of the “Extract” of the Third Secret of Fatima
First Printed by the German Newspaper
Neues Europa on October 15, 1963
Then Quoted by The French Newspaper
Le Monde et La Vie of Paris, France

TEXT AS PRINTED IN
LE MONDE ET LA VIE

THE FATIMA SECRET WORDS FROM HEAVEN

It was the 13th of October, 1917.

[Editor's Note:  The actual date was Friday, July 13, 1917.]
On that day, the Holy Virgin [Mary] appeared for the last time to the little visionaries Jacinta, Francisco and Lucia at the end of a series of, in all, six apparitions. After the manifestation of the miracle of the sun at Fatima, the Mother of God revealed a special secret message to Lucia, in which she particularly stated:


The Blessed Mother's Exact Words:

1.   Don't worry, Dear Child, I am the Mother of God speaking to you and begging you to proclaim in my name the following message to the entire world....

2.  In doing this, you will meet with great hostility. But be steadfast in the faith and you will overcome this hostility. Listen, and remember well what I say to you: men must become better. They must implore the remission of the sins which they have committed and will continue to commit. You ask me for a miraculous sign so that all may understand the words in which, through you, I address mankind. This miracle you have just seen was the great miracle of the sun! Everyone has seen it - believers, and unbelievers, country and city dwellers, scholars and journalists, laymen and Priests. And now, in my name, it is proclaimed:

3.  A great punishment shall

[conditionally]
come to all mankind, not as yet today, nor even tomorrow, but in the second half of the Twentieth Century. What I have already made known at LaSalette through the children Melanie and Maximin, I repeat today before you. Mankind has not developed as God expected. Mankind has been sacrilegious and has trampled underfoot the [Spiritual] Gifts which were given it.

4.  There is no order in anything. Even in the highest positions, it is Satan who governs and decides how affairs are to be conducted. He will even know how to find his way to the highest positions in the Church. He will succeed in sowing confusion in the minds of the great scholars who invent arms with which half mankind can be destroyed in a few minutes."

5.  He will bring the mighty ones under his thumb and make them manufacture armament in bulk. If mankind does not refrain, I shall be forced to let fall my Son's arm. If those at the top in the world and in the Church do not oppose these acts, it is I who shall do so, and I shall pray God my Father to visit His justice on men."

6.  Then it is that God will punish men more harshly and more severely than he punished them by the flood, and the great and powerful shall perish thereby as well as the small and weak

7.  There will also come a time of the hardest trials for the [Roman Catholic] Church. Cardinals will be against Cardinals, and Bishops against Bishops.

[Editor's Note:  This happened at Synod Vatican 2 (Thursday, October 11, 1962 - Wednesday, December 8, 1965)].
Satan will put himself in their midst.
[Editor's Note:  This happened at Synod Vatican 2].
In Rome, there will also be big changes.
[Editor's Note:  The liturgical rites for the Mass and Sacraments were changed; Altars were replaced with tables; statues, etc. were thrown out.].
What is rotten will fall, and what will fall must not be maintained.

The[Roman Catholic]Church will be darkened and the world plunged into confusion.

8.  The big, big war

[World War III]
will
[conditionally]
happen in the second half of the Twentieth Century.
[N.B.  The fact that it did not happen then does not automatically mean it will never happen!].
Then fire and smoke will fall from the sky and the waters of the oceans will be turned to steam - hurling their foam towards the sky; and all that is standing will be overthrown.

9.  Millions and more millions of men [women and children] will lose their lives from one hour to the next; and those who remain living at that moment will envy those who are dead. There will be tribulation wherever the eye can see and misery over all the earth and desolation in all countries.

10. The time is continually approaching, the abyss is growing wider, and there is no end. The good will die with the wicked, the big with the small, the princes of the [Roman Catholic] Church with their faithful, and the sovereigns of the world with their subjects. Satan's henchmen will then be the only sovereigns on earth.

11. This will be a time which neither King nor Emperor, Cardinal nor Bishop is expecting, but it will come, nevertheless, in accordance with my Father's plans, to punish and avenge.

12. Later, however, when those who survive all things are still alive, God and His glory will once more be invoked and will once more be served as He was not so long ago, when the world had not yet been corrupted.

13.  I call on all true imitators of my Son Jesus Christ; all true Christians and latter day Apostles. The time of times is coming and the end of all ends, if mankind is not converted and if this conversion does not come from above, from the directors of the world and the directors of the [Roman Catholic] Church. But woe, woe if this conversion does not come about and if all remains as it is, nay, if all becomes even worse.

14.  Go, my child, and proclaim it! I shall remain always by your side, to help you.



Remember:   When Cardinal Ottaviani was asked whether the Neues Europa "Extract" of the 3rd Secret of Fatima should be published,   the Cardinal, who had read the Third Secret, and who was usually indifferent to most apparitions,  surprisingly and excitedly exclaimed very emphatically allegedly said:

Publish 10,000 copies! Publish 20,000 copies! Publish 30,000 copies!



Venerable Mary of Agreda [b. 1602]
“The mystery of which I am about to speak, with many others concerning our great Queen, was recorded by the Evangelist [Saint John] in the metaphors of the 21st Chapter of the Apocalypse; especially introducing the most holy Mary under the type of the holy Jerusalem and describing her under cover of all the circumstances mentioned in that chapter.  Although in the first part I have explained it at length in 3 chapters, applying it as it was then given me to understand, to the mystery of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mother; yet it is necessary now to interpret it in relation to the mystery of the descent of the Queen of Angels after the Ascension of the Lord.

Let it not be objected that there is a contradiction or repugnance in these different applications: for both of them are legitimately founded on the literal text of the Scriptures and there can be no doubt that the Divine Wisdom can comprehend in the same and identical words many mysteriesand sacraments.  As David said:  God hath spoken once, these two things have I heard, that power belongeth to God [Psalm 61:12]and God certainly included a double meaning in the same words without equivocation or contradiction” (Venerable Mary of Agreda, [b. at Ágreda, Spain on Tuesday, April 2, 1602 - d. at Ágreda, Spain on Sunday, May 24, 1665], Mystical City of God,  Book IV, The Coronation, ¶ 14, pp. 42, 43; emphasis added).





Marie-Julie Jahenny [b. 1850]

Marie-Julie Jahenny [b. at Blain, Brittany - West France - on Tuesday, February 12, 1850 -
d. at La Fraudais, a short distance Northeast of Blain, Brittany on Tuesday, March 4, 1941].

N.B.  Most of the quotes are taken from “The Breton Stigmatist”, which is a biography of Marie-Julie Jahenny, by the Marquis de la Franquerie.  Emphasis is frequently added.

Marie-Julie Jahenny saw that

There will not remain any vestige of the Holy Sacrifice, no apparent trace of the Faith. Confusion will be everywhere...”

These enemies want the church to be the place of infernal dances. This is what they seek, and this, unfortunately, too, especially in those cities where the Faith is degenerated. There will even be priests who will not have the courage to defend the Religion. For God, this is the pain that is the most heartbreaking. It is the celebration of the Mysteries of the Holy Religion which enrages the most enemies.”  (September 29, 1879, Saint Michael the Archangel to Marie-Julie Jahenny.)

It is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that soothes the irritated anger of the Lord” (September 29, 1879, Saint Michael the Archangel to Marie-Julie Jahenny.)

Marie-Julie Jahenny saw “many, many bishopsembracing thisinfamous, sacrilegious, religion”:

Our Lord told her:  “I see joining with alacrity this guilty, infamous, sacrilegious religion. I see Bishops joining... On seeing these many, many Bishops...Ah! My Heart is wounded to death-- and the whole flock following them, all of it without hesitation, hastening to damnation and Hell, My Heart is wounded to death as at the time of My Passion... (“The Breton Stigmatist”, by the Marquis de la Franquerie, October 26, 1882, pp. 34-35; emphasis added.)

Our Lord describes how Lucifer will proceed. He (Satan) will address priests: "You will dress in a large red cloak...We (devils) will give you a piece of bread and a few drops of water. You can do everything that you did when you belonged to Christ...." "But," says Our Lord, "they do not add, Consecration and Communion."  (“The Breton Stigmatist”, June 3, 1880, p. 39; emphasis added.)

Marie-Julie Jahenny speaks of a “horrible religionwhich would replace the Roman Catholic Church.

Jesus Christ

On Saturday, November 27, 1901 or 1902, the anniversary of the Miraculous Medal Apparition [Saturday, November 27, 1830], Our Lord warned of the conspiracy of evil people which was already inventing a new liturgy - this was in 1901 or in 1902!!! - to replace the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass:

I give you a warning. The disciples who are not of My Gospel are now working hard to remake, according to their ideas, and under the influence of the enemy of souls [Satan], a Mass that contains words which are odious in My Sight. When the fatal hour arrives where the faith of My Priests are put to the test, it will be these texts that will be celebrated, in this second period.

“The first period is the one of My Priesthood, existing since Me. The second is the one of the persecution, when the enemies of the Faith and of Holy Religion will impose their formulas in the book of the second celebration. These infamous spirits are those who crucified me and are awaiting the kingdom of the New Messias.  Most of My Holy Priests will refuse this book sealed with he words of the abyss [Hell].  Unfortunately, they will be the exception.  It will be used [by all of the others].  (emphasis added).

There will be a book of the ‘second celebration’ by the infamous spirits who have crucified Me anew and who await the reign of a NEW Messiah to make them happy. Most Holy Priests will refuse this book sealed with the words of the abyss [Hell].  Unfortunately, they will be the exception.  It will be used [by all of the others]...
The Holy Sacrifices of the Altars will have taken an infernal [Satanic] form. In the streets, in cities, in the countryside and in all villages, the infectious poison of those cursed [liturgical] books [of the ‘second celebration’] will spread with an immensity and with a rapidity hotter than the sun's path, from sunrise to sunset.” (July 21 1881, Our Lord to Marie-Julie Jahenny).

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:

Both in 1881 and again in either 1901 or in 1902, Our Lord prophecized about the book of the second celebration.

This obviously refers to the NEW Mass, the NOR - Novus Ordo Rite, Novus Ordo Missae, which, according to this Prophecy of Jesus Christ, is sealed with the words of Hell, having been made up under the influence of the enemy of souls and which contains words which are odious in My Sight!

When Christ says that most of His Holy Priests will be the exception to using the NEW book for the Mass, the context seems to indicate that the number of Priests who do use the NEW book for the Mass will be very large, and that the number of His Holy Priests will be very tiny.

Our Blessed Mother

On Tuesday, May 10, 1904, Our Lady described the New Clergy and their liturgy:

“They will not stop on this hateful and sacrilegious road. They will go further to compromise all at once, and in one blow, the Holy Church, the Clergy, and the Faith of my children.”

She announced the “dispersion of the pastors” by the church herself; true Pastors, who will be replaced by others formed by Hell:

“...NEW preachers of NEW sacraments, NEW temples, NEW baptisms, NEW confraternities.”

From Cardinals of the Roman Catholic Church


Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani [b. 1890]

“....the NOVUS ORDO represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Synod of Trent.  The Canons on the [Ancient Roman] Rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery” (His Eminence Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani [b. on Wednesday, October 29, 1890 - d. on Friday, August 3, 1979] was Secretary of the Holy Office of the Roman Curia from 1959 to 1966 when that dicastery was reorganized as the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, in which he served as Pro-Prefect, until 1968, the Prefect-Emeritus of the Sacred Congregation of the Faith,  Letter to Pope Paul, Thursday, September 25, 1969; emphasis added).

“It is rather strong to claim that the New Mass is contrary to the Council of Trent but, displeasing as it is, it is true” (His Eminence Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani [b. on Wednesday, October 29, 1890 - d. on Friday, August 3, 1979], Cardinal Prefect of the Supreme Holy Office).

“Are we seeking to stir up wonder, or perhaps scandal, among the Christian people, by introducing changes in so venerable a rite that has been approved for so many centuries and is now so familiar?  The rite of Holy Mass should not be treated as if it were a piece of cloth to be refashioned according to the whim of each generation” (His Eminence Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani [b. on Wednesday, October 29, 1890 - d. on Friday, August 3, 1979], Cardinal Prefect of the Holy Office, 1962, Ralph M. Wiltgen, “The Rhine Flows into the Tiber”, Tan Books, 1967, p. 28).

I pray to God that I may die before the end of the council -- in that way I can die a Catholic” (His Eminence Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani [b. on Wednesday, October 29, 1890 - d. on Friday, August 3, 1979], Cardinal Prefect of the Holy Office, following a speech by Cardinal Montini  - the future Paul VI - on the need for changes in the Church, June, 1962).


Uniate Patriarch Kyr Josyf Cardinal Slipyj [b. 1892]

“...Catholic Ukrainians, who have sacrificed mountains of bodies and shed rivers of their blood for the Catholic Faith...even now are undergoing a very terrible persecution, but what is worse, they are defended by no one... Our Catholic Faithful, prohibited from celebrating the Liturgy and receiving the Sacraments, must descend into the Catacombs.

“Thousands and thousands of the Faithful, of Priests and Bishops have been thrown into prison and deported to the polar regions of Siberia.  Now, however, because of negotiations and diplomacy, Ukrainian Catholics, who as martyrs and confessors suffered so much, are being thrown aside as inconvenient witnesses of past evils.

“In recent letters and communications which I have received, our Faithful lament:

‘Why have we suffered so much?  Where is justice to be found?  Ecclesiastical diplomacy has labeled us as impediments.  Cardinal Slipyj does nothing for his Church’.
“And I answer:  What can I do?...When Pimen, the Patriarch of Moscow, in an electoral Synod openly declared that the Union of Brest was annulled, not one of the Vatican delegates present protested.....  One of the eminent Cardinals here expressed astonishment that the Ukrainians who have been treated so badly and unjustly have, nevertheless, remained Catholic.....”

(Uniate Patriarch Kyr Josyf Cardinal Slipyj [b. Zazdrist, Wednesday, February 17, 1892 - d. Rome, Friday, September 7, 1984], Visti Y Rymu, Rik 9, ¶ 16 and ¶ 17, Rome, December 1971; emphasis added.

The first part of the 1968 movie - The Shoes of the Fisherman, starring Anthony Quinn, who plays the lead role as the fictional character Archbishop Kyril Lakota, who, in the second part of the movie becomes Pope Kyril I, contains biographical data about Patriarch Cardinal Slipyj.

This movie is based on the novel of the same title by the Australian author Morris West which was published on Monday, June 3, 1963.  This novel reached #1 on the New York Times bestseller list for adult fiction on June 30, 1963, and became the #1 bestselling novel in the United States for 1963, according to Publishers Weekly.

This movie was nominated for two Academy Awards for Best Score by George Davis, and Best Art Direction by Edward Carfagno.

What is interesting about this novel is that it was also in 1963, the same year this novel was published, that the administration of Russian Premier Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev [b. in Kalinovka, Dmitriyevsky Uyezd, Kursk Governorate, Russian Empire on April 15, 1894 - d. in Moscow, Russia, Soviet Union, USSR, on September 11, 1971.] released his Beatitude, Uniate Patriarch Kyr Josyf Cardinal Slipyj, from a Siberian Gulag.

This release came about as the result of political pressure from 2nd Pope John 23rd, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli [Tuesday, October 28, 1958 - Monday, June 3, 1963] and from the United States President John Fitzgerald Kennedy [b. at Brookline, Massachusetts on Tuesday, May 29, 1917 - d. assassinated at Dallas, Texas on Friday, November 22, 1963 (age 46)].

Notice that:

1)  Monday, June 3, 1963 is the date on which this novel was published.

2)  Monday, June 3, 1963 is also the same date on which 2nd Pope John 23rd died.)



Giuseppe Cardinal Siri [b. 1906]

“[Synod Vatican 2 was] the greatest disaster in recent ecclesiastical history” (Giuseppe Cardinal Siri [b. Sunday, May 20, 1906 in Genoa, Italy - d. Tuesday, May 2, 1989], Archbishop of Genoa, Italy, from “Pontiff”, p. 369 - Gordon Thomas/Max Morgan Witts).

From Bishops and Archbishops
Of the Roman Catholic Church


Bishop Saint Ivo of Chartres [b. c. 1040 A.D.]

“Do not be one of those timourous physicians who like their tranquility more than the saving of the sick... Even though Salome should dance before Herod, should ask for John's head and should obtain it from the detestable King, John's duty is to cry out: NON LICET! [It is not permitted!]”  (Bishop Saint Ivo of Chartres, a.k.a. Yves, I’ve, Yvo  [b. Beauvais, France or Auteuil, France, c. 1040 A.D. - d. Chartres, France, Tuesday, May 30, 1116 A.D.], Bishop of Chartres [1090 A.D. - Tuesday, May 30, 1116 A.D.], Letter # 24, To Bishop Hugh of Lyons, October, 1094 A.D.)


Bishop Antonio Romeo

“[Synod Vatican 2 was] a sinister farce acted out by three thousand good-for-nothings, some of whom, despite the gold [pectoral] crosses on their chests, don’t even believe in the Trinity or the Virgin”  (Bishop Antonio Romeo of the Sacred Congregation of Rites in Bob Considine’s column ON THE LINE in the NEW YORK JOURNAL AMERICAN of Friday, November 27, 1964; emphasis added).



Bishop George J. Musey, D.D.
Moderator at a Large Meeting with the Laity after a Solemn Mass

An Open Letter to Archbishop Lefebvre

Your Grace,

Four years ago, November 8, 1979, in an article entitled “The New Mass and The Pope”, you went on record as opposed to those who contend that we have no true Pope on the Throne of St. Peter – those who have since come to be stigmatized as “Sedevacantists”.

Because of the prominence you enjoy among Traditional Catholics – even though you have lately resigned your position as head of the Society of St. Pius X and largely retired from the public scene – most of these, including priests, have taken your authority for this and parroted your reasoning. Today they are loathe to recognize the Bishops Consecrated by Archbishop Ngo-Dihn-Thuc, who hold with him that the Popes of, and since, Vatican II are illegitimate.

“A good number of theologians,” you wrote, “teach that the Pope can be heretical as a private doctor or theologian, but not as a teacher of the Universal Church.” Reasoning that unless a Pope “willed to engage infallibility,” any doctrinal error he might make would not be made in his capacity as a teacher of the Universal Church.

Do you mean to say that a Pope does not speak as a Pope unless he speaks ex Cathedra (“willing to engage infallibility”)?  If so, then we must hold that papal Bulls, Constitutions, Encyclicals, and other such lesser pronouncements are not really “papal”documents, as they are commonly called, after all.

And why do you arbitrarily limit the field of discussion to whether a Pope can become heretical, saying that he cannot be heretical as a teacher of the Universal Church?  What of one who is found to have been heretical before his election? If perhaps a Pope cannot become formally heretical, can a heretic be validly elected Pope? Why do you take no account of the Constitution
Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio  of Pope Paul IV, which solemnly declares invalid the elevation or election to office of even a (supposed) Pope who is found to “have deviated (sic) from the Catholic faith” before-hand? You blithely ignore the main authority for the stand of the Thuc Bishops.

You say that Paul VI “acted much more the Liberal than as a man attached to heresy” and that “equivocation is the very mark of a Liberal”. But in matters of orthodoxy is not ambiguity or equivocation equivalent to doubt? If so, what of the maxim, Dubius in Fide hæreticus? (Cf. Canon 1325). Are not Liberal Catholics at least suspected of heresy? Is not a Liberal Pope, on that score along, at best a doubtful Pope?

“The visibility of the Church,” you say, “is too necessary to its existence for it to be possible that God would allow that visibility to disappear for decades”. Is your implicit allowance for it disappearing at all tantamount to doubting the indefectibility of the Catholic Church?

If her existence, as a visible society, depends entirely on the Pope, then how does it not follow that during the interregnum between the death and election of a Pope, the Church ceases to be visible? What matters the length of time?

“The reasoning of those who deny that we have a Pope,”  you wrote, “puts the Church in an inextricable situation. Who will tell us who the future Pope is to be? How, as there are no (valid) Cardinals, is he to be chosen.”

By the Bishops of the Church, says St. Robert Bellarmine, in his classic work De Conciliis et Ecclesia, I, c. 14, in the event of the papacy being vacant because of heresy, it would be for them to convene, he says, in a General Council – though “Imperfect”  – for this sole purpose, namely to “supply the Church with a head.”  Why do you take no account of this great authority either?

You stress the necessity of a “firm maintenance of Tradition rather than the affirmation that the Pope is not the Pope”.  Are the “Sedevacantists” honestly claiming that “the Pope is not the Pope”? Are not you the author of this Petitio Principiithis logical “Begging the Question”which makes fools rather of you and your followers?

Do you think we whom you oppose are so insane as to mouth contradictions? How can anything not be what it essentially is?

If the Pope is the Pope, then he very obviously cannot not be the Pope at the same time. The question is whether this or that person is or is not the Pope; whether the supposed Pope is actually, truly or legitimately Pope  – either any longer because of falling into public heresy after his otherwise valid election, or never Pope to begin with for having previously “deviated from the Catholic faith”.

But to say, or imply, that the Pope is the Pope because he is the Pope (as you and yours do) is logically ludicrous.

Unless Your Grace is prepared to publicly answer this letter to the point (ad rem),exposing the fallacies in our own argumentation, then it is high time your authority be discounted.  (Sacred Heart Newsletter, November, 1983, Official Publication of the Western Catholic Diocese of the U.S.A., Ordinary, Bishop George Musey, D.D., pages 4 and 5; emphasis added).


Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:

Concerning the Dubius in Fide hæreticus reference to Canon Law 1325 in the above Open Letter, this Canon states in part:

“§ 2 defines three classes of Catholics who have suffered ‘shipwreck of the faith’.  The first class is that of heretics who, having been baptized, retain the name of Christians, but obstinately deny or doubt some of the truths that must be believed by divine or Catholic faith”  (Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B., D.D., Professor of Canon Law, “A Commentary on the New Code of Canon Law” [1917 Code of Canon Law], Volume 6, Administrative Law, Book III, Part IV, The Teaching Office of the Church, Profession of Faith, Canon 1325, § 2, p. 334, Imprimatur Sti. Ludovici, die 22. Nov. 1920 + Joannes J. Glennon, Archiepiscopus Sti. Ludovici, B. Herder Book Co., 1921; emphasis added).

The Douay-Rheims has:  shipwreck concerning the faith [1 Timothy 1:19].

On this same subject, besides the Papal Bulla Cum Ex Apostolatus Officio  and Canon Law Canon 1325, there is also Canon Law 188.4:
“On account of the tacit resignation admitted by the law itself any Office is vacant ipso facto and without any declaration, if a Cleric:...
4.  Publicly defects from the Catholic Faith”  (Codex Iuris Canonici - Code of Canon Law, 188.4).

In addition:

Heretical clerics and all who receive, defend, or favor them are ipso facto deprived of their benefices, offices, and ecclesiastical jurisdiction. The pope himself, if notoriously guilty of heresy, would cease to be pope because he would cease to be a member of the [Roman Catholic] Church.”  (Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume Seven: Gregory - Infallibility, Nihil Obstat, June 1, 1910, Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor, Imprimatur, John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York, Heresy, VIII. Church Legislation on Heresy,  page 261-b; emphasis added).

Bishop George Joseph Musey, Jr., D.D. [b. 1928]
Conferring With Another Bishop

Bishop George Joseph Musey, Jr., D.D., R.I.P., of Dickinson, Texas [b. in Galveston County on Friday, September 14, 1928 A.D. - d. on Sunday, March 29, 1992 A.D.].  His Parents were Mary Abraham and George Musey, Sr.

He was Ordained a Roman Catholic Priest on Thursday, May 22, 1952 A.D. by Bishop Wendolin F. Nold, Bishop of the Diocese of Galveston/Houston [1950 - 1975].

He was Consecrated a Bishop on Thursday, April 1, 1982 in Divine Providence Catholic Church at Acapulco, Mexico by the two Mexican Bishops, Bishop Moisés Carmona y Rivera [b. at Quechultenango, Guerrero, Mexico on Thursday, October 31, 1912 A.D. - d. martyred in Mexico on Friday, November 1, 1991 A.D.], Pastor of Divine Providence Catholic Church at Acapulco, Mexico, and Bishop Adolfo Zamora y Roberto Martinez D.D., of Mexico City, Mexico [b  1910 A.D. -  d. Sunday, May 3, 1987 A.D.].

From Converts from Communism
Concerning
Infiltration of Communists
Into the Roman Catholic Church


Mrs./Dr. Bella V. Dodd [b. c. 1904]
[b. Maria Asunta Isabella Visono in Picerno, Basilicata, Kingdom of Italy, c. 1904 -
d. in Manhattan, New York, after undergoing gall bladder surgery on Tuesday, April 29, 1969]

An article in “Christian Order”  magazine (November, 2000) recounts how Mrs. Bella Dodd and her associate, Douglas Hyde, revealed the plan for the Communist subversion of the Roman Catholic Church.

Mrs. Bella Dodd also claimed that the Communist party actively infiltrated agents into Roman Catholic Seminaries.  She  told her friend, Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, the theologian, that:

“When she was an active party member, she had dealt with no fewer than four Cardinals within the Vatican who were working for us, [i.e. the Communist Party]” (Christian Order magazine, “The Church in Crisis”, reprinted from The Latin Mass magazine; emphasis added).

Mrs. Bella Dodd gave voluminous testimony on the Communist infiltration of the Roman Catholic Church and in the United States government before the House Un-American Activities Committee in the 1950’s.

In a lecture at Fordham University during that time, Mrs. Dodd unveiled what would seem to be an uncanny prophecy of future chaos in the Roman Catholic Church.

She  provided detailed information of the Communist subversion of the Roman Catholic Church.  Speaking as a former high ranking official of the American Communist Party, Mrs. Dodd said in part:

In the 1930’s we put eleven hundred men into the priesthood in order to destroy the [Roman Catholic] Church from within.
The idea was for these men to be ordained and progress to positions of influence and authority as Monsignors and Bishops.


Mrs./Dr. Bella V. Dodd - School of Darkness

But WHY did Mrs./Dr. Bella V. Dodd NOT mention anything about the Communist Infiltration into the Roman Catholic Church in her 1954 book “School of Darkness”?

Dr. Alice von Hildebrand, a friend of Mrs./Dr. Bella V. Dodd, reportedly said in an interview on Monday, July 28, 2003 with International News Analysis Today that Bella Dodd had refrained from detailing Communist efforts to undermine the Catholic Priesthood at the request of Bishop Fulton J. Sheen, the person responsible for bringing Dodd back into the Roman Catholic Church.

This is the very same Bishop Fulton J. Sheen who refused to support a U.S. Senator’s offficial investigation of the Communist Party and individual Communists!

WHY??? Does this force one to conclude that Bishop Fulton J. Sheen was himself what is called a “Communist sleeper”?

In 1950, a dozen years before Synod Vatican 2, Mrs. Dodd stated that:

“Right now they [the Communist infiltrators] are in the highest places in the Church”
where they were working to bring about CHANGE in order to weaken the Church’s effectiveness against Communism.

She also said that these CHANGES would be so drastic that:

“you will not recognize the Catholic Church.”

Therefore, is it any wonder that Synod Vatican 2 was packed with Freemasons, Communists, Modernists, and Satanists attending this anti-Catholic CONVENTION??!!

Brother Joseph Natale O.S.B., Founder of Most Holy Family Monastery, was present at one of Dr. Bella Dodd's lectures in the early 1950's.

He relates:

I listened to that woman for four hours and she had my hair standing on end.   Everything she said has been fulfilled to the letter. You would think she was the world's greatest prophet, but she was no prophet. She was merely exposing the step-by-step battle plan of Communist subversion of the Catholic Church.

“She explained that of all the world's religions, the Catholic Church was the only one feared by the Communists, for it was its only effective opponent. Back then, she said:

Right now they are in the highest places in the Church.
“They are working to bring about change in order that the Catholic Church would not be effective against Communism . . . that these changes would be so drastic that you will not recognize the Catholic Church.

“The whole idea was to destroy, not the institution of the Church, but rather the Faith of the people, and even use the institution of the Church, if possible, to destroy the Faith through the promotion of a pseudo-religion — something that resembled Catholicism but was not the real thing.

“This would be necessary in order to shame Church leaders into an openness to the world, and to a more flexible attitude toward all religions and philosophies. The Communists would then exploit this openness in order to undermine the Church.”

Brother Joseph Natale O.S.B. is a real person, in case anyone has any doubts about him?  Brother Joseph was trained at St. Vincent’s Benedictine Archabbey in Latrobe, Pennsylvania.  St. Vincent’s Archabbey was the largest Benedictine monastery in the United States.  In the 1960’s, Brother Joseph left with the permission of the then Archabbot Dennis Strittmatter to start his own Benedictine community.

Shortly after leaving St. Vincent’s, Brother Joseph started his Benedictine community in Southern New Jersey.  Brother Joseph never allowed the NEW Mass to be celebrated at his monastery, only allowing the Catholic Traditional Roman Rite of Mass.

Brother Joseph printed, distributed and sold numerous books, pamphlets and audio tapes defending the Catholic Faith and educating Catholics about the true teachings of Catholicism.  Brother Joseph Natale, O.S.B. died on Saturday, November 11, 1995.  R.I.P.

The New York Times ran a front page article entitled “Bella Dodd Asserts Reds Got Presidential Advisory Posts”  reporting that she:
swore before the Senate Internal Security subcommittee today that Communists had got into many legislative offices of Congress and into a number of groups advising the President of the United States” (The New York Times, Wednesday, March 11 1953, C. P. Trussell, “Bella Dodd Asserts Reds Got Presidential Advisory Posts”).

Infiltration of the Catholic Church?

July 28, 2003
By Toby Westerman
Copyright 2003 International News Analysis Today
www.inatoday.com

Clerical abuse against children, charges of Mafia-style cover-ups, and the destruction of Catholic moral teaching are tearing at the Catholic Church, and turning the 2,000 year-old faith into fodder for lowbrow comedy.

An affidavit recently obtained by INA Today attributes the Catholic Church's present state of collapse to a calculated attack beginning decades ago, with initial successes appearing in the 1960s.

The affidavit affirms that Communist Party organizer and high Party official, Bella Dodd, made public statements during the decade of the 1960s declaring that the Catholic priesthood was infiltrated by numerous Communist agents, whose mission was “to destroy the Catholic Church from within.”

Dodd later returned to the Catholic Church and published a book about her experiences, entitled School of Darkness (out of print at present).

“In the late 1920's and 1930's, directives were sent from Moscow to all Communist Party organizations. In order to destroy the Catholic Church from within, party members were to be planted in seminaries and within diocesan organizations,” Dodd stated according to the affidavit.

“I, myself, put some 1,200 men in Catholic seminaries,” Dodd publicly declared.

Dodd did not include these remarks concerning her activities directed against the Catholic Church in her book, which was first published in 1954, leading some to question whether the remarks were actually made.

In an exclusive interview with INA Today, Catholic philosopher Dr. Alice von Hildebrand confirmed that Dodd had made the remarks, and provided the affidavit from Paul and Johnine Leininger, who witnessed Dodd making the public statements.

When contacted by INA Today, Mrs. Johnine Leininger stated that there were others who could also verify that Dodd made the statements regarding infiltration into Catholic seminaries.

Dr. Von Hildebrand told INA Today that Dodd had earlier refrained from detailing Communist efforts to undermine the Catholic priesthood at the request of Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, the individual responsible for bringing Dodd back into the Church.

Dodd's infiltrators would have reached their highest positions of power and influence in the early to mid-60's, the period which saw the initial doctrinal and moral collapse within the Catholic Church.

The process of Communist infiltration into Catholic seminaries, which Dodd described in her public talks, would have been part of a larger plan called “Outstretched Hand.”

Communist Party archives in Moscow confirm the existence of operation “Outstretched Hand,” and define its goals, according to Herbert Romerstein, author of the seminal work on Soviet espionage in the United States before, during, and after WWII, “The Venona Secrets.”

At least one Soviet agent directly involved in “Outstretched Hand” is identifiable.

One document in Moscow's Soviet archives reveals that the Communist Party had infiltrated several influential Catholic organizations, including the Holy Name Society, the largest parish-oriented Catholic men's group, which is devoted to increasing reverence for the name of God and to good works in the Church and in society in general. A Holy Name Society chapter exists in almost every Catholic parish in the U.S.

[One is left to wonder if the Communists also infiltrated the Knights of Columbus at the national level?]

The same document acknowledged the existence of a certain “Party comrade,” who was “well known” in “conservative Irish Catholic circles” and who held offices “in various Catholic organizations…”

The “Party comrade” operated in a key parish which provided “leadership” and shaped “the policies of most of the reactionary and anti-Communist campaigns that are now developing in the Catholic world,” according to the Soviet file.

Romerstein also recounts in The Venona Secrets that the staff of the Catholic anti-Communist publication entitled Wisdom, produced by a priest of the Paulist order, was infiltrated, and unknowingly employed two Communist agents in influential positions.

The Party boasted that one of their agents was “widely known to be a conservative in Irish circles,” and was a staff correspondent for Wisdom. Romerstein identified the Party member and Soviet agent as Jeremiah F. O'Carroll, who, in 1930, was the president of the Irish Emergency Relief organization.

Although O'Carroll was identified as a spy in 1938, he remained listed as a staff correspondent for Wisdom at least until March 1939.

The second Soviet agent who worked for Wisdom remains unknown to this day.

The most recent - and notorious - incident of hostile infiltration into the U.S. Catholic Church is that of veteran FBI agent and convicted spy, Robert Hanssen. While placing his nation in mortal danger through his espionage activities, Hanssen also was believed to be a fervent Catholic.

Hanssen led a double life of betrayal, while serving as a spy for both the Soviet and “reformed” regimes in Moscow.

Although the precise extent of Communist infiltration of which Dodd spoke remains unknown, the effects are recognizable. Today, traditional Catholic beliefs, practices, and morality are not merely questioned, but are denounced and scorned by many of those who should protect and profess Church doctrine.

Mrs. Leininger, who confirmed Dodd's statements, told INA Today that she knows of several priests who faithfully taught the Catholic religion until they became bishops or were promoted to other influential posts, and then immediately exhibited hostility to that same faith which they had previously professed.

Leininger described these priests as “sleepers,” a term designating individuals or groups who carry out their espionage function only at a selected time. Before becoming active, the “sleeper” will refrain from any espionage or subversive functions.

Dodd's infiltrators -- those who lost or never actually held the Catholic faith -- would have been the mentors of the present generation of Catholic priests and bishops, in effect conducting their own “School of Darkness.”  (Op. Cit., emphasis added.)


The Venona Secrets

Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel wrote a book entitled “The Venona Secrets - Exposing Soviet Espionage and America’s Traitors”, published in 2000 A.D. by Regnery Publishing, Inc., An Eagle Publishing Company, One Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C.  20001

The subject matter concerns Soviet Communist espionage in the United States before, during, and after WWII.  The source for this work was obtained from the official Communist Party archives in Moscow, Russia.

According to the Preface of this book:

“....researchers were given access to Soviet archives.  An article in a hard-line Russian newspaper in April, 1993 said: ‘What right do the Americans have to conduct research into secret materials in our archives?  Which traitor to Russia’s interests opened the door to them?’ But before the hard-liners succeeded in convincing Boris Yeltsin to restrict some of the more interesting sections, we had obtained thousands of pages of documents from the archives of the Communist International.  Other researchers shared thousands more with us, and we in turn shared the material with Eric Breindel.”

“In 1982 he [Eric had] ..... joined the Staff of the Senate Intelligence Committee....”

“When Eric and I compared the ‘Verona’ material with the documents we had obtained from the Soviet archives and with material the FBI had released about its investigations, we realized that the whole story had not yet been told....”

Among other things, these archives confirmed the existence of operation “Outstretched Hand” which included the infiltration of Communists into Roman Catholic Seminaries!

In addition, the official Communist Party archives in Moscow, Russia includes a document which divulges that members of the Communist Party had also infiltrated a number of important Roman Catholic organizations, including the Holy Name Society which used to be found in almost all Roman Catholic parishes in the U.S.!  (Op. Cit.; emphasis added.)



Douglas Arnold Hyde [b. 1911]
[b. at Worthing , Sussex, England on April 8, 1911
d. at Kingston Upon Thames, England on September 19, 1996]

Ex-Communist and celebrated Roman Catholic convert, Douglas Hyde, revealed long ago that in the 1930’s the Communist leadership issued a worldwide directive about infiltrating the Roman Catholic Church.
 

I Believed

The Autobiography
of a Former
British Communist
 

Douglas Hyde
 

William Heinemann
London, Melbourne, Toronto

William Heinemann, London, Melbourne, Toronto, 1950  Edition
 


Catholic Book Club
1952  Edition

In 1950 Douglas Hyde published “I Believed”, an autobiographical account of the journey of his Wife, Carol, and himself from Communism to Catholicism.

He was a member of the Communist Party, working as news editor on the “Daily Worker” - the largest Communist publication in Britain -  until 1948, when he converted to Catholicism and resigned.

After his resignation, he published his autobiography, I Believed. The Autobiography of a Former British Communist.  He also wrote a book, Dedication and Leadership, about his experiences and the specific tactics of the Communists especially in the way that they recruited their members and built them into leaders

His loss of faith in Communism originated from his reading of the “Weekly Review”, originally with a view to searching out evidence of fascism and anti-semitism in leading Catholic figures.

Hyde explains it this way:

“One day, reading the Weekly Review, a thought struck me which was so obvious as to be almost laughably so. Yet it was so opposed to all I had held for so long that it cast doubts upon almost all my thinking to date.”

“For twenty years I had been troubled by the evidence of the unequal distribution of wealth and the social injustices which appeared to flow from it. I had reasoned: ‘The unequal distribution of property [used here in the sense of ‘means of production’] gives rise to great social injustice. Therefore private property is wrong and should be abolished.’ Millions have reasoned along similar lines. It has influenced an entire generation.”

“Now suddenly the slipshod character of such pre-fabricated thought struck me between the eyes. The maldistribution of property did not necessarily prove that private property was wrong in itself. If it proved anything at all it was surely that its distribution was wrong and that a means must therefore be found to spread it more evenly over the population as a whole. The formulation should have been: ‘The unequal distribution of property gives rise to great social injustice. Therefore property should be more equitably distributed.’”

“It had hitherto seemed axiomatic that those who revolted against inequality should turn to Marxism for a solution and that those who stood for the perpetuation of inequalities and injustices should oppose communism as a consequence. That there could possibly be a solution which was not a Marxist one had hardly occurred to me.”

Carol and Douglas Hyde:
“...found it difficult to accept the existence of God intellectually. We had quite sincerely believed that we knew all the answers without Him. Dialectical materialism had explained to our satisfaction, the whole universe for us; like Nietzsche it had proclaimed that ‘God is dead’ and we had believed it and felt it to be true.”

“For us He had been dead for years. We had appeared to get on alright without Him. We had been aware of the existence of no inner life, of no spiritual needs. Our communism had been our whole life. When doubts had come about the policies of the Party, about its methods, even about the desirability of its goal, they did not necessarily and immediately undermine our dialectical materialism nor prove that it must, therefore, be wrong.”

“Even the exciting realisation that the culture of the Middle Ages which I had loved for so long was still alive, and that it was a Catholic culture which had not died with the Reformation, did not prove the existence of God, although it helped. Belief in God might be but the product of a certain stage of man’s historical development, surviving into a later period along with the rest of the ‘ideological superstructure’ that went with it. That superstructure of the Middle Ages might be attractive, it might include a great outpouring of human genius in terms of magnificent churches and cathedrals, glorious music, works of art which took one’s breath away, literature which gripped as nothing else could – and still not prove that God was alive or even necessary as an explanation for it all, even though faith in God had been its inspiration.”

“But that phase had passed. We had come to accept the intellectual case for God, to see that without it not only Catholicism but the universe itself made nonsense. We had discovered with some surprise that the great thinkers and philosophers of the Church had made out a better case for the God’s existence than Marx and Engels had done for His non-existence.”

“Yet we realised that that was not enough. Belief meant being able to feel the existence of the spiritual, to know about Him. Christians even said they loved Him, they talked to Him and listened to Him. That was still outside our experience and, in moments of depression, we feared that it would remain so.”

“Yet all paths seemed to lead to Rome. I was asked to review Avro Manhattan’s book, The Catholic Church against the Twentieth Century, along with a pamphlet by the Rev. Stanley Evans. The first was a large book set out to prove, by means of telling the story of Vatican policies since World War I, that the Catholic Church was fascist.”

“The other had much the same intention, attempting to show that the Church was against all ‘progress’. Once, I should have had great fun with them, using them to smear catholics and fascists at one and the same time. I tried to do the same now, failed and hated myself for even attempting it. It was a last desperate attempt to salvage the way of life I had loved. It failed completely.”

“Instead I found myself saying: ‘The Catholic Church against the twentieth century? So what? So am I, if the twentieth century means the crazy world I see about me which has endured two world wars and goodness knows how many revolutions already, and with the war clouds gathering so soon after the last war.]”

“Against the twentieth century? Against the century of the atom bomb? Against a world right off the rails? Against those beliefs which lead to people persecuting men like Archbishop Stepinac and preparing a Red Terror against the Slovak peasants? Against the crazy post-war conditions right here in Britain? Why not? So am I.”

“Instead of gaining ammunition against the Church from Manhattan’s book, I learned, despite the tendentious writing, something of the Church’s social teaching. It was written to make anti-Catholics. It helped to make me ‘pro’ instead.”

“The Anglican Stanley Evans I knew already and I knew his type of parson-cum-communist-sympathiser well enough. The Party uses such people, but it rarely respects them. I had used such types myself. I read his pamphlet with distaste. He wanted to show that the Church was opposed to ‘progress’ everywhere. And again, so what? It all depended on what you meant by ‘progress’.”

“Was Nagasaki progress? When the story, one of a vast number which make such things normal to newspaper life, came over the tape machine about a boy of eighteen sent to jail by a London court for theft and described as living on the immoral earnings of his twenty-year-old divorceé wife, was that progress?...Were the preparations now going forward in Hungary for the persecution of the Church and suppression of the religion of the vast majority of the people there progress? Was it progress for our generation more and more to move away from the idea of the worth of the individual to that of the impersonal masses?”

“And in any case was it really so certain as we had imagined it to be that the world must inevitably ‘progress’, that the past was necessarily less good than the present and still less so than the future? Must the new always, automatically, be superior to the old?”

“Somewhere I had seen a reactionary described as one who, finding himself on the edge of a precipice, sees the danger and steps back in time. On the basis of that definition I was a reactionary. And again, so what?”

“Perhaps in one of life’s grand Chestertonian paradoxes, the ‘progressives’ were really the ‘reactionaries’ – in the light of their own definition of the term – and those who saw the danger and drew back might yet be the ‘progressives’, possessing a new solution which was really the oldest of all. The line of thought those two anti-Catholic publications set in motion helped me along my road to Rome.”

Mr. Hyde wrote the following concerning September, 1946:
“Members of the Political Bureau [of the Communist Party] who had been to Czechoslovakia had been told that it was believed that the fight against the Church could be carried through without too much difficulty in the Czech lands, so strong had the Part become there. But the Slovak Catholics, they were told, were much more completely in the grip of the priests and bishops, and ‘special measures’ would be required. At a Daily Worker executive meeting we were told that those special measures would probably have to take the form of armed action at some point. Sooner or later the catholic peasants could be provoked into violence, some incident would be presented as the intended forerunner of armed insurrection and tough counter-measures would then provide the chance for conducting the thorough-going purge which was required. A bit of terror would soon settle them.”

“Again, I should almost certainly have approved and justified such schemes before I began to read and think along Christian lines. Now I was filled with an uneasiness which at times amounted to revulsion as I heard it all explained. It was not communism but I that had changed, but I now found the application of our theories and tactics clashing with all I felt to be right.”

“But that was just it. I was beginning to say that some things were right and some were wrong. I was judging communist behaviour on the basis of ethics and not expediency – a thoroughly un-Marxist thing to do.”

“It was still not always a fully conscious process, but I became increasingly aware of what was happening and found myself viewing it from outside myself as it were, an interested and often astonished spectator of my own mental and spiritual processes.”

“Thus, for example, in a break between editions, one of my reporters, son of a well-known author, who had worked on the Yugoslav Youth Railway, was describing some of the things he had seen.”

“He told how at communist meetings the local populace would be brought to gather to hear a speech from Tito, or from one of the other communist leaders. At pre-arranged points during the speech Party members in the crowd would start to chant ‘Tito, Tito,’ or maybe ‘Tito, Stalin, Tito, Stalin,’ and the crowd would take it up, repeating the names over and over again. It was a technique used by Mussolini and Hitler and was now being turned to good account in the cause of communism.”

“He went on to describe how, when he had turned up at one such meeting, the word had gone around that an English comrade was present and they had quickly switched to ‘Tito, Stalin, Harry Pollitt [General Secretary of the British Communist Party], which they had kept up for an astonishing length of time. My reporters laughed uproariously at the story. Suddenly I realised that I was making myself conspicuous by not laughing at all; instead I was feeling utterly disgusted.”

“It was not sufficient now to tell myself that the end justified the means. Once a Marxist begins to differentiate between right and wrong, just and unjust, good and bad, to think in terms of spiritual values, the worst has happened so far as his Marxism is concerned.”  (Op. Cit.; emphasis added.)



Manning R. Johnson
[b.  ?  - d.  in ?  An alleged "coroner's report"
claims Manning Johnson died from a coronary condition]

Manning R. Johnson was the Communist candidate for U.S. Representative from New York 22nd District, 1935; he subsequently left the party, wrote Color, Communism, and Common Sense, and was an government witness in the perjury trial of Harry Bridges and before the Committee on Un-American Activities.

Manning Johnson belonged to the Communist party in the 1940s and early 50s, during which time he authored the book Color, Communism and Common Sense.

After leaving the Party, he testified in 1953 before the House un-American Activities Committee regarding the Communist Agenda and the Catholic Church:

"Once the tactic of infiltration of religious organizations was set by the Kremlin ... the Communists discovered that the destruction of religion could proceed much faster through infiltration of the (Catholic) Church by Communists operating within the Church itself. The Communist leadership in the United States realized that the infiltration tactic in this country would have to adapt itself to American conditions (Europe also had its cells) and the religious make-up peculiar to this country. In the earliest stages it was determined that with only small forces available to them, it would be necessary to concentrate Communist agents in the seminaries. The practical conclusion drawn by the Red leaders was that these institutions would make it possible for a small Communist minority to influence the ideology of future clergymen in the paths conducive to Communist purposes This policy of infiltrating seminaries was successful beyond even our Communist expectations."  (Op. Cit.; emphasis added.)

Statistics

“By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit” (Matthew 7:15-17).

Given the foregoing, it should be plain that the NEW Mass was conceived for an evil purpose and constructed by evil means. It only follows that such an evil tree would have disastrous effects on the Roman Catholic Church. Let us look at the fruits of the NEW Mass, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Rite - NOR, the Novus Ordo Missae, etc.

From 1965 to 1973, between 22,000 and 25,000 Priests left the Priesthood.

Today, this figure has reached over 110,000.

In addition, 157,000 out of 365,000, or about 43%, of what were once Roman Catholic parishes have no resident Priest.

In 1970 there were 1,003,670 women Religious with perpetual or provisional vows; in 1992 that number was down to 655,031 (cf. “In the Murky Waters of Vatican II”, ISBN 0-89555-636-7).

The 1998 edition of the Official Catholic Directory of the Vatican 2 church in the U.S. revealed that the number of seminarians was only 1,700, a decline of almost 97% from the 1965 figure of 48,992.

In countries such as France and Holland the percentage of Catholics going to the Vatican 2 church NEW Mass each Sunday has declined to a single digit.

In the U.S., attendance at Vatican 2 churches has steadily declined from 71% in 1963 to 25% percent in 1993, a decrease of 65%.

Newsweek polls and surveys show that only 15% of the members of the Vatican 2 church believe they should always obey the teachings of their church.

Almost as many Vatican 2 catholics think abortion is permissible as non-Catholics.

75% of the members of the Vatican 2 church disagree with their church on what it teaches in regard to the forbidding of divorce and contraception.

Another study revealed that only 25% of Vatican 2 church “catholics”  now believe in the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Holy Eucharist and only 50% of Vatican 2 priests still believe in the Real Presence.

Who could possibly claim that there is not a terrible crisis of Faith, especially in what used to be Roman Catholic Churches now illegally operated and owned by the Vatican 2 church?

Such are some of the rotten fruits of the Vatican 2 church that used to be the Roman Catholic Church before it was hijacked at Synod Vatican 2 by Communist, Freemasonic, and Modernist Infiltrators who should be congratulating themselves on their victory?!

In case you missed it, here are a few similar facts of how By their fruits you shall know them:


An Index of Catholicism’s Decline


A Review by Pat Buchanan

As the Watergate scandal of 1973-1974 diverted attention from the far greater tragedy unfolding in Southeast Asia, so, too, the scandal of predator-priests now afflicting the Catholic Church may be covering up a far greater calamity.

Thirty-seven years after the end of the only church council of the 20th century, the jury has come in with its verdict: Vatican II appears to have been an unrelieved disaster for Roman Catholicism.

Liars may figure, but figures do not lie. Kenneth C. Jones of St. Louis has pulled together a slim volume of statistics he has titled Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II.

His findings make prophets of Catholic traditionalists who warned that Vatican II would prove a blunder of historic dimensions, and those same findings expose as foolish and naive those who believed a council could reconcile Catholicism and modernity. When [2nd] Pope John XXIII threw open the windows of the church, all the poisonous vapors of modernity entered, along with the Devil himself. Here are Jones's grim statistics of Catholicism's decline:

Priests.

While the number of priests in the United States more than doubled to 58,000, between 1930 and 1965, since then that number has fallen to 45,000. By 2020, there will be only 31,000 priests left, and more than half of these priests will be over 70.

Ordinations.

In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained in the United States. In 2002, the number was 450. In 1965, only 1 percent of U.S. parishes were without a priest. Today, there are 3,000 priestless parishes, 15 percent of all U.S. parishes.

Seminarians.

Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the 600 seminaries that were operating in 1965 have now closed.

Sisters.

In 1965, there were 180,000 Catholic nuns. By 2002, that had fallen to 75,000 and the average age of a Catholic nun is today 68. In 1965, there were 104,000 teaching nuns. Today, there are 8,200, a decline of 94 percent since the end of Vatican II.

Religious Orders.

For religious orders in America, the end is in sight.

In 1965, 3,559 young men were studying to become Jesuit priests. In 2000, the figure was 389.

With the Christian Brothers, the situation is even more dire. Their number has shrunk by two-thirds, with the number of seminarians falling 99 percent. In 1965, there were 912 seminarians in the Christian Brothers. In 2000, there were only seven.

The number of young men studying to become Franciscan and Redemptorist priests fell from 3,379 in 1965 to 84 in 2000.

Catholic schools.

Almost half of all Catholic high schools in the United States have closed since 1965. The student population has fallen from 700,000 to 386,000. Parochial schools suffered an even greater decline. Some 4,000 have disappeared, and the number of pupils attending has fallen below 2 million -- from 4.5 million.

Though the number of U.S. Catholics has risen by 20 million since 1965, Jones' statistics show that the power of Catholic belief and devotion to the Faith are not nearly what they were.

Catholic Marriage.

Catholic marriages have fallen in number by one-third since 1965, while the annual number of annulments has soared from 338 in 1968 to 50,000 in 2002.

Attendance at Mass.

A 1958 Gallup Poll reported that three in four Catholics attended church on Sundays. A recent study by the University of Notre Dame found that only one in four now attend.

Only 10 percent of lay religious teachers now accept church teaching on contraception.

Fifty-three percent believe a Catholic can have an abortion and remain a good Catholic.

Sixty-five percent believe that Catholics may divorce and remarry.

Seventy-seven percent believe one can be a good Catholic without going to mass on Sundays.

By one New York Times poll, 70 percent of all Catholics in the age group 18 to 44 believe the Eucharist is merely a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus.

At the opening of Vatican II, reformers were all the rage.

They were going to lead us out of our Catholic ghettos by altering the liturgy, rewriting the Bible and missals, abandoning the old traditions, making us more ecumenical, and engaging the world.

And their legacy?

Four decades of devastation wrought upon the church, and the final disgrace of a hierarchy that lacked the moral courage of the Boy Scouts to keep the perverts out of the seminaries, and throw them out of the rectories and schools of Holy Mother Church.

Through the papacy of Pius XII, the church resisted the clamor to accommodate itself to the world and remained a moral beacon to mankind. Since Vatican II, the church has sought to meet the world halfway.

Jones' statistics tell us the price of appeasement.


Tremendous Value of
The Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass

1.  By devoutly attending the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass, you fulfill your sacred Sunday duty and responsibility to your Infinite Creator, Almighty God, by uniting yourself with the Mass Celebrant who, on your behalf, as your Mediator with God, offers to Almighty God an Infinite Sacrifice of:

1) Adoration/Worship;
2) Thanksgiving;
3) Petition;
4) Propitiation/Reparation for your actual sins which so greatly offend the good God.
2.  By devoutly attending such Holy Masses, you render the greatest gratitude and homage possible to the Sacred Humanity of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, God Incarnate.

3. At the hour of your death, the Holy Masses you devoutly attended will be your greatest consolation.

4. Every Holy Mass you devoutly attend will go with you to your Judgment and will plead for pardon for you from the Just Judge.

5. Every Holy Mass you devoutly attend diminishes the temporal punishment due to your sins, more or less, according to the intensity of the degree of your personal fervor.

6. Through the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, as the Holy Victim of this Sacred Sacrifice, Jesus Christ supplies for many of your faults, negligences, and sins of omission.

7. In virtue of every Holy Mass you devoutly attend, Jesus Christ forgives you all of the Venial Sins for which you are determined to avoid and for which you are really sorry.  He also forgives you all of your unknown and/or forgotten sins which you never confessed.

8. Every Holy Mass you devoutly attend reduces Satan's power over you.

9. By reverently, religiously, piously, and devoutly attending the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, you give the Poor, Suffering Souls in Purgatory the greatest relief it is possible to give them.

10. One Holy Mass which you devoutly attended during your life will be of more value and benefit to you than 1,000 Masses offered for you after your death.

11  Through the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Mass,  you are preserved from many dangers and many misfortunes which otherwise would have befallen you.

12.  Every Catholic Traditional Mass you devoutly attended before your death will greatly shorten your time in Purgatory by hundreds of earth years.

13.  For every Catholic Traditional Mass you devoutly attended, Almighty God will send one Holy  Saint, and one Holy Angel, to comfort you at your death.

14. During the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass, you kneel amid a multitude of Holy Angels of Heaven.  For example, at every Holy Mass, 3,000 Holy Angels from the Choir of Thrones are reverentially present at that Holy Mass.

15.  Every Holy Mass you devoutly attend brings you blessings in your temporal goods and temporal affairs.

16.  At every week-day Holy Mass you devoutly attend (i.e. not at the Sunday Mass), which is Offered to Almighty God in honor of any particular Holy Angel or Holy Saint, thanking God for the favors bestowed on that Holy Angel or Holy Saint, you provide that Holy Angel or Holy Saint a new degree of honor, joy, and happiness in Heaven.  Because of this, you then receive the special love and protection of that Holy Angel or Holy Saint for yourself.

17.  Every Holy Mass you devoutly attend which is Offered to Almighty God in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary, e.g. Our Lady of Mount Carmel (July 16), Assumption (August 15), Immaculate Heart of Mary (August 22), Immaculate Conception (December 8), etc., Our Blessed Mother will shower you with her special love, blessings, and protection in this life.  On your Day of Judgement, Our Lady will be permitted to plead for Mercy for you with her Divine Son, the Just Judge, with the same degree of fervor as the same number of Masses you devoutly attended in her honor.  (Culled from various sources.)


God Has Warned Everyone Not to Change
The Liturgical Rites Which He Himself Instituted

Despite the above Laws which forbid changing what is in the Catholic Traditional Rite for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, which some pre-Vatican 2 liturgical historians have considered to be the Ancient Roman Rite, the changes really began in the 1944 edition of the Missale Romanum  under the influence of the "super ecuemnist", as some called him, the German Jesuit Cardinal,  Augustin Cardinal Bea, S.J. [b. at Riedböhringen, Germany on Saturday, May 28, 1881 - d. at Rome, Italy on Saturday, November 16, 1968], who had been the Confessor to Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958].

Other changes followed, but nothing like the almost total mutilation of the Missale Romanum  by the Concilium of Synod Vatican 2.

This is not merely an "opinion", but an actual historical liturgical fact which was verified by one of the people on this infamous Concilium who has actually told the Truth about what happened to the Catholic Traditional Rite for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass:



Father Joseph Gelineau S.J. [b. 1920]

“Let those who like myself have known and sung a Latin - Gregorian High Mass remember it, if they can.  Let them compare it with the Mass that we now have.  Not only the words, the melodies, and some of the gestures are different. To tell the Truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass.  This needs to be said without ambiguity:  the Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists [le rite romain tel que nous l'avons connu n'existe plus]. It has been destroyed [il est detruit].  Some walls of the former edifice have fallen while others have changed their appearance, to the extent that it appears today either as a ruin or the partial substructure of a different building.  We must not weep over the ruins or dream of an historical reconstruction.” (Father Joseph Gelineau S.J. [b. at Champ-sur-Layon, Maine-et-Loire, West-Central France, on Sunday, October 31, 1920 - d. at Sallanches, a commune in the Haute-Savoie  department in the Rhône-Alps, South-Eastern France, on Friday, August 8, 2008].   He was a Synod Vatican 2 peritus - expert - who helped to make up the NOR - Novus Ordo Rite - the New Mass - along with other anti-Catholics and the 6 Protestants. He was proud of what he did, and a professional apologist for the NOR.  This quotation is from his book - Demain La Liturgk, Paris, 1976, pp. 9-10; emphasis added).

It should be noted that Father Joseph Gelineau, S.J. was one of, if not THE  MOST,  RADICAL member of the Concilium that made up the NOR - Novus Ordo Rite - along with the 6 Protestants!

Apparently, all of the pereti (experts) on the Concilium, who butchered (There is no other way to say it!) the Catholic Traditional Rite for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, had either forgotten, or never knew, that God punishes those who change any of the Liturgical Rites which He Himself instituted?

Here is an historical example of what happens to those who are responsible for any illegal, unlawful, and invalid changes to the Liturgical Rites which He Himself instituted.

This is an example of what actually happened to two Old Testament Priests who changed what today might be considered one extremely minor thing!


Nadab and Abiu CHANGED only ONE thing what God Instituted in the Old Law
Which had only the Shadow of the Good Things to Come in the New & Eternal Law

“And Nadab and Abiu, the Sons of Aaron, taking their censers, put fire therein, and incense on it, offering before the Lord strange fire: which was not commanded them.   And fire coming out from the Lord destroyed them:  and they died before the Lord.” (Leviticus 10:1-2; emphasis added.)

“Nadab and Abiu died before their Father.”(1 Paralipomenon 24:2)

Therefore, because the Lord instantly killed the Old Testament Priests, Nadab and Abiu, because they CHANGED only ONE thing, what do you think the Lord will do to those New Testament Priests and Bishops who CHANGED almost EVERYTHING concerning the Liturgical Rites for Offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic  Traditional Mass and Administering the Seven Sacraments!?

What do YOU think God will do to those Catholic Laity who take part in these CHANGES?!

A word to the wise.....


62 Reasons Why, In Good Conscience,
Catholics CAN NOT Attend the NEW Mass


These 62 Reasons have been compiled
by the Priests of the diocese of Campos, Brazil


Please Note: All quotes followed by an asterisk " * " are from The Ottaviani Intervention which consists of two parts. The first part is a brief Cover Letter to Pope Paul 6 which was signed by Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani and Antonio Cardinal Bacci, at Rome, on September 25, 1969. This Letterwas attached to the second part of the Intervention: "A Critical Study of the New Order of Mass", by a Group of Roman Theologians.


1. Because the New Mass is not an unequivocal Profession of the Catholic Faith (which the traditional Mass is), it is ambiguous and Protestant. Therefore since we pray as we believe, it follows that we cannot pray with the New Mass in Protestant Fashion and still believe as Catholics!

2. Because the changes were not just slight ones but actually "deal with a fundamental renovation ... a total change ... a new creation." (Msgr. A. Bugnini, co-author of the New Mass)

3. Because the New Mass leads us to think "that truths ... can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic Faith is bound forever." *

4. Because the New Mass represents "a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent" which, in fixing the "canons," provided an "insurmountable barrier to any heresy against the integrity of the Mystery." *

5. Because the difference between the two is not simply one of mere detail or just modification of ceremony, but "all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place (in the New Mass), if it subsists at all." *

6. Because "Recent reforms have amply demonstrated that fresh changes in the liturgy could lead to nothing but complete bewilderment in the faithful who already show signs of uneasiness and lessening of Faith." *

7. Because in times of confusion such as now, we are guided by the words of our Lord: "By their fruits you shall know them." Fruits of the New Mass are: 30% decrease in Sunday Mass attendance in U.S. (NY Times 5/24/75), 43% decrease in France (Cardinal Marty), 50% decrease in Holland (NY Times 1/5/76).

8. Because "amongst the best of the clergy the practical result (of the New Mass) is an agonizing crisis of conscience..." *

9. Because in less than seven years after the introduction of the New Mass, priests in the world decreased from 413,438 to 243,307 -- almost 50%! (Holy See Statistics)

10. Because "The pastoral reasons adduced to support such a grave break with tradition ... do not seem to us sufficient." *

11. Because the New Mass does not manifest Faith in the Real Presence of our Lord -- the Traditional Mass manifests it unmistakably.

12. Because the New Mass confuses the REAL Presence of Christ in the Eucharist with His MYSTICAL Presence among us (proximating Protestant doctrine).

13. Because the New Mass blurs what ought to be a sharp difference between the HIERARCHIC Priesthood and the common priesthood of the people (as does Protestantism).

14. Because the New Mass favors the heretical theory that it is THE FAITH of the people and not THE WORDS OF THE PRIEST which makes Christ present in the Eucharist.

15. Because the insertion of the Lutheran :"Prayer of the Faithful" in the New Mass follows and puts forth the Protestant error that all the people are priests.

16. Because the New Mass does away with the Confiteor of the priest, makes it collective with the people, thus promoting Luther's refusal to accept the Catholic teaching that the priest is judge, witness and intercessor with God.

17. Because the New Mass gives us to understand that the people concelebrate with the priest -- which is against Catholic theology!

18. Because six Protestant ministers collaborated in making up the New Mass: George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian.

19. Because just as Luther did away with the Offertory -- since it very clearly expressed the sacrificial, propitiatory character of the Mass -- so also the inventors of the New Mass did away with it, reducing it to a simple Preparation of the Gifts.

20. Because enough Catholic theology has been removed that Protestants can, while keeping their antipathy for the True Roman Catholic Church, use the text of the New Mass without difficulty. Protestant Minister Thurian (co-consultor for the 'New Mass' project) said that a fruit of the New mass "will perhaps be that the non-Catholic communities will be ale to celebrate the Lord's Supper using the same prayers as the Catholic Church." (La Croix 4/30/69)

21. Because the narrative manner of the Consecration in the New Mass infers that it is only a memorial and not a true sacrifice (Protestant Thesis)

22. Because by grave omissions, the New Mass leads us to believe that it is only a meal (Protestant doctrine) and not a sacrifice for the remission of sins (Catholic Doctrine).

23. Because the changes such as: table instead of altar; facing people instead of tabernacle; Communion in the hand, etc., emphasize Protestant doctrines (e.g., Mass is only a meal; priest only a president of the assembly; Eucharist is NOT the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, but merely a piece of bread, etc.)

24. Because Protestants themselves have said "the new Catholic Eucharistic prayers have abandoned the false (sic) perspective of sacrifice offered to God." (La Croix 12/10/69)

25. Because we are faced with the dilemma: either we become Protestantized by worshipping with the New Mass, or else we preserve our Catholic Faith by adhering faithfully to the traditional Mass, the "Mass of All Time."

26. Because the New Mass was made in accordance with the Protestant definition of the Mass: "The Lord's Supper or Mass is a sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God which gathers together under the presidency of the priest to celebrate the memorial of the Lord." (Par. 7 Intro. to the New Missal, defining the New Mass, 4/6/69)

27. Because by means of ambiguity, the New Mass pretends to please Catholics while pleasing Protestants; thus it is "double-tongued" and offensive to God who abhors any kind of hypocrisy: "Cursed be ... the double-tongued for they destroy the peace of many." (Sirach 28:13)

28. Because beautiful, familiar Catholic hymns which have inspired people for centuries, have been thrown out and replaced with new hymns strongly Protestant in sentiment, further deepening the already distinct impression that one is no longer attending a Catholic function.

29. Because the New Mass contains ambiguities subtly favoring heresy, which is more dangerous than if it were clearly heretical since a half-heresy half resembles the Truth!

30. Because Christ has only one Spouse, the Catholic Church, and her worship service cannot also serve religions that are at enmity with her.

31. Because the New Mass follows the format of Cranmer's heretical Anglican Mass, and the methods used to promote it follow precisely the methods of the English heretics.

32. Because Holy Mother Church canonized numerous English Martyrs who were killed because they refused to participate in a Mass such as the New Mass!

33. Because Protestants who once converted to Catholicism are scandalized t to see that the New Mass is the same as the one they attended as Protestants. One of them, Julien Green, asks: "Why did we convert?"

34. Because statistics show a great decrease in conversions to Catholicism following the use of the New Mass. Conversions, which were up to 100,000 a year in the U.S., have decreased to less than 10,000! And the number of people leaving the Church far exceeds those coming in.

35. Because the Traditional Mass has forged many saints. "Innumerable saints have been fed abundantly with the proper piety towards God by it ..." (Pope Paul VI, Const. Apost. Missale Romanum)

36. Because the nature of the New Mass is such as to facilitate profanations of the Holy Eucharist, which occur with a frequency unheard of with the Traditional Mass.

37. Because the New Mass, despite appearances, conveys a New Faith, not the Catholic Faith. It conveys Modernism and follows exactly the tactics of Modernism, using vague terminology in order to insinuate and advance error.

38. Because by introducing optional variations, the New Mass undermines the unity of the liturgy, with each priest liable to deviate as he fancies under the guise of creativity. Disorder inevitably results, accompanied by lack of respect and irreverence.

39. Because many good Catholic theologians, canonists and priests do not accept the New Mass, and affirm that they are unable to celebrate it in good conscience.

40. Because the New Mass has eliminated such things as: genuflections (only three remain), purification of the priests fingers in the chalice, preservation from all profane contact of priest's fingers after Consecration, sacred altar stone and relics, three altar clothes (reduced to one), all of which "only serve to emphasize how outrageously faith in the dogma of the Real Presence is implicitly repudiated." *

41. Because the traditional Mass, enriched and matured by centuries of Sacred Tradition, was codified (not invented) by a Pope who was a saint, Pius V; whereas the New Mass was artificially fabricated by six Protestant ministers and a 33rd degree Freemason, i.e., Msgr. A Bugnini who was later exiled from the Vatican because of his ties with Freemasonry.

42. Because the errors of the New Mass which are accentuated in the vernacular version are even present in the Latin text of the New Mass.

43. Because the New Mass, with its ambiguity and permissiveness, exposes us to the wrath of God by facilitating the risk of invalid consecrations: "Will priests of the near future who have not received the traditional formation, and who rely on the Novus Ordo Missae with the intention of 'doing what the Church does,' consecrate validly? One may be allowed to doubt it!" *

44. Because the abolition of the Traditional Mass recalls the prophecy of Daniel 8:12: "And he was given power against the perpetual sacrifice because of the sins of the people" and the observation of St. Alphonsus de Liguori that because the Mass is the best and most beautiful thing which exists in the Church here below, the devil has always tried by means of heretics to deprive us of it.

45. Because in places where the Traditional Mass is preserved, the Faith and fervor of the people are greater. Whereas the opposite is true where the New Mass reigns (Report on the Mass, Diocese of Campos, ROMA, Buenos Aires #69, 8/81)

46. Because along with the New Mass goes also a new catechism, a new morality, new prayers, new Code of Canon law, new calendar, -- in a word, a NEW CHURCH, a complete revolution from the old. "The liturgical reform ... do not be deceived, this is where the revolution begins." (Msgr. Dwyer, Archbishop of Birmingham, spokesman of Episcopal Synod)

47. Because the intrinsic beauty of the Traditional Mass attracts souls by itself; whereas the New Mass, lacking any attractiveness of its own, has to invent novelties and entertainment in order to appeal to the people.

48. Because the New mass embodies numerous errors condemned by Pope St. Pius V at the Council of Trent (Mass totally in vernacular, words of Consecration spoken aloud, etc. See Condemnation of Jansenist Synod of Pistia), and errors condemned by Pope Pius XII (e.g., altar in form of table. See Mediator Dei).

49. Because the New Mass attempts to transform the Catholic Church into a new, ecumenical church embracing all ideologies and all religions -- right and wrong, truth and error -- a goal long dreamt of by the enemies of the Catholic Church.

50. Because the New Mass, in removing the salutations and final blessing when the priest celebrates alone, shows a denial of, and disbelief in the dogma of the Communion of Saints.

51. Because the altar and tabernacle are now separated, thus marking a division between Christ in His priest-and-Sacrifice-on-the-altar, from Christ in His Real Presence in the tabernacle, "two things which of their very nature, must remain together." (Pius XII)

52. Because the New Mass no longer constitutes a vertical worship between God and man, but rather a horizontal worship between man and man.

53. Because the New Mass, although appearing to conform to the dispositions of Vatican Council II, in reality opposes its instructions, since the Council itself declared its desire to conserve and promote the Traditional Rite.

54. Because the Traditional Latin Mass of Pope St. Pius V has never been legally abrogated and therefore remains a true rite of the Roman Catholic Church by which the faithful may fulfill their Sunday obligation.

55. Because Pope St. Pius V granted a perpetual indult, valid "for always," to celebrate the Traditional Mass freely, licitly, without scruple of conscience, punishment, sentence or censure (Papal Bull Quo Primum)

56. Because Pope Paul VI, when promulgating the New Mass, himself declared. "The rite ... by itself is NOT a dogmatic definition ..." (11/19/69)

57. Because Pope Paul VI, when asked by Cardinal Heenan of England, if he was abrogating or prohibiting the Tridentine Mass, answered: "It is not our intention to prohibit absolutely the Tridentine Mass."

58. Because "In the Libera Nos of the New Mass, the Blessed Virgin, the Apostles and all the Saints are no longer mentioned; her and their intercession thus no longer asked, even in time of peril." *

59. Because in none of the tree new Eucharistic Prayers (of the New Mass) is there any reference ... to the state of suffering of those who have died, in none the possibility of a particular Memento, thus undermining faith in the redemptive nature of the Sacrifice.*

60. Because we recognize the Holy Father's supreme authority in his universal government of Holy Mother Church, but we know that even this authority cannot impose upon us a practice which is so CLEARLY against the Faith: a Mass that is equivocal and favoring heresy and therefore disagreeable to God.

61. Because, as stated in Vatican Council I, the "Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter, that by His revelation they might make new doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of Faith delivered through the Apostles." (Dnz 3070)

62. Because heresy, or whatever clearly favors heresy, cannot be a matter for obedience. Obedience is at the service of Faith and not Faith at the service of obedience! In this foregoing case then, "One must obey God before men." (Acts 5:29)


*    The Ottaviani Intervention consists of two parts. The first part is a brief Cover Letter to Pope Paul 6 which was signed by Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani and Antonio Cardinal Bacci, at Rome, on Thursday, September 25, 1969.  This Letter was attached to the second part of the Intervention: "A Critical Study of the New Order of Mass", by a Group of Roman Theologians.


 

Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani

Antonio Cardinal Bacci

The Letter of
Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani
and
Antonio Cardinal Bacci
to Pope Paul 6

Plus

A Critical Study of the New Order of Mass
by
A Group of Roman Theologians
a.k.a.
The Ottaviani Intervention



Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani
Prefect of the Holy Office, The Vatican

The Ottaviani Intervention



The Cover Letter to Pope Paul 6
by
Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani
and
Antonio Cardinal Bacci

Rome, September 25, 1969

Most Holy Father,

Having carefully examined, and presented for the scrutiny of others, the Novus Ordo Missae prepared by the experts of the Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia, and after lengthy prayer and reflection, We feel it to be our bounden duty in the sight of God and towards Your Holiness, to put before you the following considerations:

1. The accompanying critical study of the Novus Ordo Missae, the work of a group of theologians, liturgists and pastors of souls, shows quite clearly in spite of its brevity that if we consider the innovations implied or taken for granted, which may of course be evaluated in different ways, the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The "canons" of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery.

2. The pastoral reasons adduced to support such a grave break with tradition, even if such reasons could be regarded as holding good in the face of doctrinal considerations, do not seem to Us sufficient. The innovations in the Novus Ordo and the fact that all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place, if it subsists at all, could well turn into a certainty the suspicion, already prevalent, alas, in many circles, that truths which have always been believed by the Christian people, can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic faith is bound for ever. Recent reforms have amply demonstrated that fresh changes in the liturgy could lead to nothing but complete bewilderment on the part of the faithful who are already showing signs of restiveness and of an indubitable lessening of faith. Amongst the best of the clergy the practical result is an agonizing crisis of conscience of which innumerable instances come to our notice daily.

3. We are certain that these considerations, which can only reach Your Holiness by the living voice of both shepherds and flock, cannot but find an echo in Your paternal heart, always so profoundly solicitous for the spiritual needs of the children of the Church. It has always been the case that when a law meant for the good of subjects proves to be on the contrary harmful, those subjects have the right, nay the duty of asking with filial trust for the abrogation of that law.

Therefore we most earnestly beseech Your Holiness, at a time of such painful divisions and ever- increasing perils for the purity of the Faith and the unity of the Church, lamented by You our common Father, not to deprive us of the possibility of continuing to have recourse to the fruitful integrity of that Missale Romanum of St. Pius V, so highly praised by Your Holiness and so deeply loved and venerated by the whole Catholic World.

Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani

Antonio Cardinal Bacci




The Critical Study of
the New Order of Mass
June 5, 1969
by
A Group of Roman Theologians

SUMMARY

I. History of the change.

The new form of Mass was substantially rejected by the Episcopal Synod, was never submitted to the collegial judgment of the Episcopal Conferences and was never asked for by the people. It has every possibility of satisfying the most modernist of Protestants.

II. Definition of the Mass.

By a series of equivocations the emphasis is obsessively placed upon the "supper" and the "memorial" instead of on the unbloody renewal of the Sacrifice of Calvary.

III. Presentation of the ends.

The three ends of the Mass are altered; no distinction is allowed to remain between Divine and human sacrifice; bread and wine are only "spiritually" (not substantially) changed.

IV. Presentation of the essence.

The Real Presence of Christ is never alluded to and belief in it is implicitly repudiated.

V. Presentation of the four elements of the Sacrifice.

The position of both priest and people is falsified and the Celebrant appears as nothing more than a Protestant minister, while the true nature of the Church is intolerably misrepresented.

VI. The destruction of unity.

The abandonment of Latin sweeps away for good and all unity of worship. This may have its effect on unity of belief and the New Order has no intention of standing for the Faith as taught by the Council of Trent to which the Catholic conscience is bound. VII. The alienation of the Orthodox.

While pleasing various dissenting groups, the New Order will alienate the East.

VIII. The abandonment of defenses.

The New Order teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the purity of the Catholic religion and dismantles all defenses of the deposit of Faith.


I. History of the Change


1. In October 1967, the Episcopal Synod called in Rome was requested to pass a judgment on the experimental celebration of a so-called "normative Mass," devised by the Consilium for implementing the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. This Mass aroused the most serious misgivings. The voting showed considerable opposition (43 non placet), very many substantial reservations (62 juxta modum), and 4 abstentions out of 187 voters. The international press spoke of a "refusal" of the proposed "normative Mass" on the part of the Synod. Progressively- inclined papers made no mention of this.

2. In the Novus Ordo Missae lately promulgated by the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum, we once again find this "normative Mass", identical in substance, nor does it appear that in the intervening period the Episcopal Conferences, at least as such, were ever asked to give their views about it.

3. In the Apostolic Constitution, it is stated that the ancient Missal promulgated by St. Pius V, 14th July 1570, but going back in great part to St. Gregory the Great and to still more remote antiquity, <1> , was for four centuries the norm for the celebration of the Holy Sacrifice for priests of the Latin rite, and that, taken to every part of the world, "it has moreover been an abundant source of spiritual nourishment to many holy people in their devotion to God". Yet, the present reform, putting it definitely out of use, was claimed to be necessary since "from that time the study of the Sacred Liturgy has become more widespread and intensive among Christians".

4. This assertion seems to us to embody a serious equivocation. For the desire of the people was expressed, if at all, when-thanks to St. Pius X-they began to discover the true and everlasting treasures of the liturgy. The people never on any account asked for the liturgy to be changed or mutilated so as to understand it better. They asked for a better understanding of a changeless liturgy, and one which they would never have wanted changed.

5. The Roman Missal of St. Pius V was religiously venerated and most dear to Catholics, both priests and laity. One fails to see how its use, together with suitable catechesis, could have hindered a fuller participation in, and greater knowledge of, the Sacred Liturgy, nor why, when its many outstanding virtues are recognized, this should not have been considered worthy to continue to foster the liturgical piety of Christians.

6. Since the "normative Mass", now reintroduced and imposed as the Novus Ordo Missae, was in substance rejected by the Synod of Bishops, was never submitted to the collegial judgment of the Episcopal Conferences, nor have the people-least of all in mission lands-ever asked for any reform of Holy Mass whatsoever, one fails to comprehend the motives behind the new legislation which overthrows a tradition unchanged in the Church since the fourth and fifth centuries, as the Apostolic Constitution itself acknowledges. As no popular demand exists to support this reform, it appears devoid of any logical grounds to justify it and to make it acceptable to the Catholic people.

7. The Vatican Council did indeed express a desire for "the rite of the Mass to be revised in such a way that the intrinsic nature and purpose of its several parts, as well as the connection between them, may be more clearly manifested..." <2> We shall now see how the Novus Ordo recently promulgated corresponds with this original intention.

8. An attentive examination of the Novus Ordo reveals changes of such magnitude as to justify in themselves the judgment already made with regard to the "normative Mass". Both have in many points every possibility of satisfying the most modernistic of Protestants.


II. Definition of the Mass


9. Let us begin with the definition of the Mass given in No. 7 of the "Institutio Generalis" at the beginning of the second chapter of the Novus Ordo: "De structura Missae":

    9.1 "The Lord's Supper is the assembly or gathering together of the People of God, with a priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord. <3> For this reason the promise of Christ is particularly true of the local congregation of the Church: 'Where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in their midst'" <4> <5>
10. The definition of the Mass is thus limited to that of a "supper", and this term is found constantly repeated . <6> This "supper" is further characterized as an assembly presided over by the priest and held as a memorial of the Lord, recalling what He did on the first Maundy Thursday. None of this in the very least implies either the Real Presence, or the reality of the sacrifice, or the Scramental function of the consecrating priest, or the intrinsic value of the Eucharistic Sacrifice independently of the people's presence. <7> It does not, in a word, imply any of the essential dogmatic values of the Mass which together provide its true definition. Here, the deliberate omission of these dogmatic values amounts to their having been superseded and therefore, at least in practice, to their denial. <8>

11. In the second part of this paragraph 7 it is asserted, aggravating the already serious equivocation, that there holds good, "eminenter," for this assembly Christ's promise that "Ubi sunt duo vel tres congregati in nomine meo; ibi sum in medio eorum". <9> This promise, which refers only to the spiritual presence of Christ with His grace, is thus put on the same qualitative plane, save for the greater intensity, as the substantial and physical reality of the Sacramental Eucharistic Presence.

12. In no.8 a subdivision of the Mass into "liturgy of the word" and Eucharistic liturgy immediately follows, with the affirmation that in the Mass is made ready "the table of God's word" as of "the Body of Christ", so that the faithful "may be built up and refreshed"--an altogether improper assimilation of the two parts of the liturgy, as though between two points of equal symbolic value. More will be said about this point later.

13. The Mass is designated by a great many different expressions, all acceptable relatively, all unacceptable if employed, as they are, separately and in an absolute sense. We cite a few: the Action of Christ and of the People of God; the Lord's Supper or Mass; the Paschal Banquet; the Common participation in the Lord's Table; the memorial of the Lord; the Eucharistic Prayer; the Liturgy of the Word and the Eucharistic Liturgy; etc.

14. As is only too evident, the emphasis is obsessively placed upon the supper and the memorial instead of upon the unbloody renewal of the Sacrifice of Calvary. The formula "the Memorial of the Passion and Resurrection of the Lord" is, besides, inexact, the Mass being the memorial of the Sacrifice alone, in itself redemptive, whilst the Resurrection is the consequent fruit of it. <10>

15. We shall later see how, in the same consecratory formula, and throughout the Novus Ordo, such equivocations are renewed and reiterated.


III. Presentation of the Ends


16. We come now to the ends of the Mass.

17. 1. Ultimate end. This is that of the Sacrifice of praise to the Most Holy Trinity according to the explicit declaration of Christ in the primary purpose of His very Incarnation: "Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith: Sacrifice and oblation thou wouldest not: but a body thou hast fitted to me". <11>

18. This end has disappeared: from the Offertory, with the disappearance of the prayer "Suscipe, Sancta Trinitas"; from the end of the Mass with the omission of the "Placet tibi Sancta Trinitas"; and from the Preface, which on Sunday will no longer be that of the Most Holy Trinity, as this Preface will be reserved only to the Feast of the Trinity, and so in future will be heard but once a year.

19. 2. Ordinary end. This is the propitiatory Sacrifice. It too has been deviated from; for instead of putting the stress on the remission of sins of the living and the dead it lays emphasis on the nourishment and sanctification of those present. <12> Christ certainly instituted the Sacrament of the Last Supper putting Himself in the state of Victim in order that we might be united to Him in this state but his self-immolation precedes the eating of the Victim, and has an antecedent and full redemptive value (the application of the bloody immolation). This is borne out by the fact that the faithful present are not bound to communicate, sacramentally. <13>

20. 3. Immanent end. Whatever the nature of the Sacrifice, it is absolutely necessary that it be pleasing and acceptable to God. After the Fall no sacrifice can claim to be acceptable in its own right other than the Sacrifice of Christ. The Novus Ordo changes the nature of the offering, turning it into a sort of exchange of gifts between man and God: man brings the bread, and God turns it into the "bread of life"; man brings the wine, and God turns it into a "spiritual drink".

21. "Thou art blessed Lord God of the Universe, because from thy generosity we have received the bread [or "wine"] which we offer thee, the fruit of the earth [or "vine"] and of man's labor. May it become for us the bread of life [or "spiritual drink"]." <14>

22. There is no need to comment on the utter indeterminateness of the formulae "panis vitae" [bread of life] and "potus spirtualis" [spiritual drink] which might mean anything. The same capital equivocation is repeated here, as in the definition of the Mass: there, Christ is present only spiritually among His own: here, bread and wine are only "spiritually" (not substantially) changed. <15>

23. In the preparation of the offering, a similar equivocation results from the suppression of two great prayers. The "Deus qui humanae substantiae dignitatem mirabiliter condidisti et mirabilius reformasti" was a reference to man's former condition of innocence and to his present one of being ransomed by the Blood of Christ: a recapitulation of the whole economy of the Sacrifice, from Adam to the present moment. The final propitiatory offering of the chalice, that it might ascend "cum odore suavitatis," into the presence of the divine majesty, whose clemency was implored, admirably reaffirmed this plan. By suppressing the continual reference to God in the Eucharistic prayers, there is no longer any clear distinction between divine and human sacrifice.

24. Having removed the keystone, the reformers have had to put up scaffolding; suppressing real ends, they have had to substitute fictitious ends of their own: leading to gestures intended to stress the union of priest and faithful, and of the faithful among themselves; offerings for the poor and for the church superimposed upon the Offerings of the Host to be immolated. There is a danger that the uniqueness of this offering will become blurred, so that participation in the immolation of the Victim comes to resemble a philanthropical meeting, or a charity banquet.


IV. Presentation of the essence


25. We now pass on to the essence of the Sacrifice.

26. The mystery of the Cross is no longer explicitly expressed. It is only there obscurely, veiled, imperceptible for the people. <16>And for these reasons:

27. 1. The sense given in the Novus Ordo to the so-called "prex eucharistica" [eucharistic prayer] is: "that the whole congregation of the faithful joins Christ in proclaiming the works of God and offering the sacrifice".<17>

28. Which sacrifice is referred to? Who is the offerer? No answer is given to either of these questions. The initial definition of the "prex eucharistica" [eucharistic prayer] is as follows: "The eucharistic prayer, a prayer of thanksgiving and sanctification, is the center of the entire celebration. By an introductory dialogue the priest invites the people to lift their hearts to God in prayer and thanks...". <18>The effects thus replace the causes, of which not one single word is said. The explicit mention of the object of the offering, which was found in the "Suscipe," has not been replaced by anything. The change in formulation reveals the change in doctrine.

29. 2. The reason for this non-explicitness concerning the Sacrifice is quite simply that the Real Presence has been removed from the central position which it occupied so resplendently in the former Eucharistic liturgy. There is but a single reference to the Real Presence (a quotation--in a footnote--from the Council of Trent), and again the context is that of "nourishment". <19>

30. The Real and permanent Presence of Christ, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, in the transubstantiated Species is never alluded to. The very word transubstantiation is totally ignored.

31. The suppression of the invocation to the Third Person of the Most Holy Trinity ("Veni Sanctificator") that He may descend upon the oblations, as once before into the womb of the Most Blessed Virgin to accomplish the miracle of the divine Presence, is yet one more instance of the systematic and tacit negation of the Real Presence.

32. Note, too, the eliminations:

32.1 of the genuflections (no more than three remain to the priest, and one, with certain exceptions, to the people, at the Consecration);

32.2 of the purification of the priest's fingers in the chalice;

32.3 of the preservation from all profane contact of the priest's fingers after the Consecration;

32.4 of the purification of the vessels, which need not be immediate, nor made on the corporal;

32.5 of the pall protecting the chalice;

32.6 of the internal gilding of sacred vessels;

32.7 of the consecration of movable altars;

32.8 of the sacred stone and relics in the movable altar or upon the "mensa"--"when celebration does not occur in sacred precincts" (this distinction leads straight to "eucharistic suppers" in private houses);

32.9 of the three altar-cloths, reduced to one only;

32.10 of thanksgiving kneeling (replaced by a thanksgiving, seated, on the part of priest and people, a logical enough complement to Communion standing);

32.11 of all the ancient prescriptions in the case of the consecrated Host falling, which are now reduced to a single, casual direction: "reverenter accipiatur" [it is to be picked up reverently]; <20>

all these things only serve to emphasize how outrageously faith in the dogma of the Real Presence is implicitly repudiated.

33. 3. The function assigned to the altar. <21>The altar is almost always called the table.<22>"First the altar, the Lord's table, is prepared as the center of the eucharistic liturgy (footnote # 39)".<23>It is laid down that the altar must be detached from the walls so that it is possible to walk round it and celebration may be facing the people; <24>also that the altar must be the center of the assembly of the faithful so that their attention is drawn spontaneously toward it (ibid). But a comparison of nos. 262 and 276 would seem to suggest that the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament on this altar is excluded.<25>This will mark an irreparable dichotomy between the presence, in the celebrant, of the eternal High Priest and that same Presence brought about sacramentally. Before, they were one and the same presence. <26>

34. Now it is recommended that the Blessed Sacrament be kept in a place apart for the private devotion of the people (almost as though it were a question of devotion to a relic of some kind) so that, on going into a church, attention will no longer be focused upon the Tabernacle but upon a stripped bare table. Once again the contrast is made between private piety and liturgical piety: altar is set up against altar.

35. In the insistent recommendation to distribute in Communion the Species consecrated during the same Mass, indeed to consecrate a loaf <27>for the priest to distribute to at least some of the faithful, we find reasserted a disparaging attitude toward the Tabernacle, as toward every form of Eucharistic piety outside of the Mass. This constitutes yet another violent blow to faith in the Real Presence as long as the consecrated Species remain. <28>

36. 4. The formulae of consecration. The ancient formula of consecration was properly a sacramental not a narrative one. This was shown above all by three things:

a) The Scriptural text not taken up word for word: the Pauline insertion "mysterium fidei" was an immediate confession of the priest's faith in the mystery realized by the Church through the hierarchical priesthood.

b) The punctuation and typographical lettering: the full stop and new paragraph marking the passage from the narrative mode to the sacramental and affirmative one, the sacramental words in larger characters at the center of the page and often in a different color, clearly detached from the historical context. All combined to give the formula a proper and autonomous value.

c) The anamnesis ("Haec quotiescumque feceritis in mei memoriam facietis"), which in Greek is "eis ten emou anamnesin" (directed to my memory). This referred to Christ operating and not to the mere memory of Him, or of the event: an invitation to recall what He did ("haec...in mei memoriam facietis") in the way He did it, not only His Person, or the Supper. The Pauline formula ("Hoc facite in meam commemorationem") which will now take the place of the old--proclaimed as it will be daily in vernacular languages--will irremediably cause the hearers to concentrate on the memory of Christ as the end of the Eucharistic action, whilst it is really the beginning. The concluding idea of commemoration will certainly once again take the place of the idea of sacramental action. <29>

37. The narrative mode is now emphasized by the formula "narratio institutionis" [institution narrative] <30>and repeated by the definition of the anamnesis, in which it is said that "...the Church keeps his [Christ's] memorial...". <31>

38. In short: the theory put forward by the epiclesis, the modification of the words of Consecration and of the anamnesis, have the effect of modifying the modus significandi [manner of signifying] of the words of Consecration. The consecratory formulae are here pronounced by the priest as the constituents of an historical narrative and no longer enunciated as expressing the categorical and affirmative judgment uttered by Him in whose Person the priest acts: "Hoc est Corpus Meum" [For this is My Body] (not, "Hoc est Corpus Christi" [This is the Body of Christ])." <32>

39. Furthermore the acclamation assigned to the people immediately after the Consecration: ("we announce death, O Lord, until Thou comest") introduces yet again, under cover of eschatology, the same ambiguity concerning the Real Presence. Without interval or distinction, the expectation of Christ's Second Coming at the end of time is proclaimed just as the moment when He is substantially present on the altar, almost as though the former, and not the latter, were the true Coming.

40. This is brought out even more strongly in the formula of the third optional acclamation: "When we eat this bread and drink this cup, we proclaim your death, Lord Jesus, until you come in glory", <33>where the juxtaposition of the different realities of immolation and eating, of the Real Presence and of Christ's Second Coming, reaches the height of ambiguity." <34>


V. Presentation of the
Four elements of the Sacrifice


41. We now come to the realization of the Sacrifice, the four elements of which were:

1) Christ, 2) the priest, 3) the Church, 4) the faithful present.

42. In the Novus Ordo, the position attributed to the faithful is autonomous (absoluta) [absolute], hence totally false from the opening definition: "The Lord's Supper is the assembly or gathering together of the people of God, with a priest presiding, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord", <35>to the priest's salutation to the people which is meant to convey to the assembled community the "presence" of the Lord. <36>

43. A true presence, certainly, of Christ but only spiritual, and a mystery of the Church, but solely as assembly manifesting and soliciting such a presence.

44. This interpretation is constantly underlined: by the obsessive references to the communal character of the Mass; by the unheard of distinction between "missa cum populo" [mass with a congregation] <37>and "missa sine populo" [mass without a congregation] <38>by the definition of the prayer of the faithful <39>, where once more we find stressed the "sacerdotal office" of the people <40>presented in an equivocal way because its subordination to that of the priest is not mentioned, and all the more since the priest, as consecrated mediator, makes himself the interpreter of all the intentions of the people in the Te igitur and the two Memento.

45. In "Prex eucharistica III" [Eucharistic Prayer III] the following words are addressed to the Lord: "From age to age you gather a people to yourself, in order that from east to west a perfect offering may be made to the glory of your name", <41>the in order that making it appear that the people, rather than the priest, <42>are the indispensable element in the celebration; and since not even here is it made clear who the offerer is, the people themselves appear to be invested with autonomous priestly powers. From this step it would not be surprising if, before long, the people were authorized to join the priest in pronouncing the consecrating formulae (which actually seems here and there to have already occurred).

46. The priest's position is minimized, changed and falsified. Firstly in relation to the people for whom he is, for the most part, a mere president, or brother, instead of the consecrated minister celebrating in persona Christi [in the Person of Christ]. Secondly in relation to the Church, as a "quidam de populo" [someone taken from the people]. In the definition of the epiclesis, the invocations are attributed anonymously to the Church. <43>The part of the priest has vanished.

47. In the Confiteor which has now become collective, he is no longer judge, witness and intercessor with God; so it is logical that he is no longer empowered to give the absolution, which has been suppressed. He is integrated with the fratres [his brothers]. Even the server addresses him as such in the Confiteor of the "Missa sine populo" [Mass without a congregation].

48. Already, prior to this latest reform, the significant distinction between the Communion of the priest, the moment in which the Eternal High Priest and the one acting in His Person were brought together in closest union, and the Communion of the faithful had been suppressed.

49. Not a word do we now find as to the priest's power to sacrifice, or about his act of consecration, the bringing about through him of the Eucharistic Presence. He now appears as nothing more than a Protestant minister.

50. The disappearance, or optional use, of many sacred vestments (in certain cases the alb and stole are sufficient) <44>obliterates even more the original conformity with Christ: the priest is no more clothed with all His virtues, becoming merely a "graduate" whom one or two signs may distinguish from the mass of people <45>: "a little more a man than the rest," to quote the involuntarily humorous definition by a Dominican preacher. <46>Again, as with the "table" and the Altar, there is separated what God has united: the sole Priesthood of the Word of God.

51. Finally, there is the Church's position in relation to Christ. In one case, namely the "missa sine populo" [mass without a congregation] is the Mass acknowledged to be "Actio Christi et Ecclesiae" [the action of Christ and the Church], <47> whereas in the case of the "missa cum populo" [mass with a congregation] this is not referred to except for the purpose of "remembering Christ" and sanctifying those present. The words used are: "In offering the sacrifice through Christ in the Holy Ghost to God the Father, the priest associates the people with himself" <48>instead of words which would associate the people with Christ Who offers Himself "per Spiritum Sanctum Deo Patri" [through the Holy Ghost to God the Father].

52. In this context the following are to be noted:

1) the very serious omission of the phrase "Per Christum Dominum Nostrum" [through Christ Our Lord], the guarantee of being heard given to the Church in every age; <49>

2) the all-pervading "paschalism," almost as though there were no other, quite different and equally important, aspects of the communication of grace;

3) the very strange and dubious eschatologism whereby the communication of supernatural grace, a reality which is permanent and eternal, is brought down to the dimensions of time: we hear of a people on the march, a pilgrim Church--no longer militant against the Potestas tenebrarum--looking toward a future which having lost its link with eternity is conceived in purely temporal terms.

53. The Church--One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic--is diminished as such in the formula that, in the "Prex Eucharistica IV" [Eucharistic Prayer IV] has taken the place of the prayer of the Roman Canon "on behalf of all orthodox believers of the Catholic and Apostolic faith." Now they are no more nor less than: "all men to seek and find you". <50>

54. Again, in the Memento of the dead, these have no longer passed on "with the sign of faith and sleep the sleep of peace" but only "who have died in the peace of thy Christ," and to them are added, with further obvious detriment to the concept of visible unity, the host of all the dead "whose faith is known to you alone."

55. Furthermore, in none of the three new Eucharistic Prayers is there any reference, as has already been said, to the state of suffering of those who have died, in none the possibility of a particular Memento: all of this, again, must undermine faith in the propitiatory and redemptive nature of the Sacrifice. <51>

56. Desacralizing omissions everywhere debase the mystery of the Church. She is not presented above all as a sacred hierarchy: Angels and Saints are reduced to anonymity in the second part of the collective Confiteor: they have disappeared, as witnesses and judges, in the person of St. Michael, from the first. <52> The various hierarchies of angels have also disappeared (and this is without precedent) from the new Preface of "Prex II." In the Communicantes the reminder of the Pontiffs and holy martyrs on whom the Church of Rome is founded and who were, without doubt, the transmitters of the apostolic traditions, destined to be completed in what became, with St. Gregory, the Roman Mass, has been suppressed. In the Libera nos the Blessed Virgin, the Apostles and all the Saints are no longer mentioned: her and their intercession is thus no longer asked, even in time of peril.

57. The unity of the Church is gravely compromised by the wholly intolerable omission from the entire Ordo, including the three new Eucharistic Prayers, of the names of the Apostles Peter and Paul, Founders of the Church of Rome, and the names of the other Apostles, foundation and mark of the one and universal Church, the only remaining mention being in the Communicantes of the Roman Canon.

58. A clear attack upon the dogma of the Communion of Saints is the omission, when the priest is celebrating without a server, of all the salutations, and the final Blessing, not to speak of the Ite Missa est <53>now not even said in Masses celebrated with a server.

59. The double Confiteor showed how the priest--in his capacity of Christ's Minister, bowing down deeply and acknowledging himself unworthy of his sublime mission, of the "tremendum mysterium" about to be accomplished by him and of even (in the Aufer a nobis) entering into the Holy of Holies--invoked the intercession (in the Oramus te, Domine) of the merits of the martyrs whose relics were sealed in the altar. Both these prayers have been suppressed; what has been said previously in respect of the double Confiteor and the double Communion is equally relevant here.

60. The outward setting of the Sacrifice, evidence of its sacred character, has been profaned. See, for example, what is laid down for celebration outside sacred precincts, in which the altar may be replaced by a simple table without consecrated stone or relics, and with a single cloth . <54>Here too all that has been previously said with regard to the Real Presence applies, the disassociation of the "convivium" and of the sacrifice of the supper from the Real Presence Itself.

61. The process of desacralization is completed thanks to the new procedures for the offering: the reference to ordinary not unleavened bread; altar-servers (and lay people at Communion sub utraque specie) being allowed to handle sacred vessels <55> ; the distracting atmosphere created by the ceaseless coming and going of priest, deacon, subdeacon, psalmist, commentator (the priest becomes a commentator himself from his constantly being required to "explain" what he is about to accomplish)--of readers (men and women), of servers or laymen welcoming people at the door and escorting them to their places whilst others carry and sort offerings. And in the midst of all this prescribed activity, the "mulier idonea" [suitable woman] (anti-scriptural and anti-Pauline) who for the first time in the tradition of the Church will be authorized to read the lessons and also perform other "ministeria quae extra presbyterium peraguntur" [perform other ministries outside the sanctuary]. <56>Finally, there is the concelebration mania, which will end by destroying Eucharistic piety in the priest, by overshadowing the central figure of Christ, sole Priest and Victim, in a collective presence of concelebrants. <57>


VI. The destruction of unity


62. We have limited ourselves to a summary evaluation of the new Ordo where it deviates most seriously from the Theology of the Catholic Mass and our observations touch only those deviations that are typical. A complete evaluation of all the pitfalls, the dangers, the spiritually and psychologically destructive elements contained in the document--whether in text, rubrics or instructions--would be a vast undertaking.

63. No more than a passing glance has been taken at the three new Canons, since these have already come in for repeated and authoritative criticism, both as to form and substance. The second of them <58>gave immediate scandal to the faithful on account of its brevity. Of Canon II it has been well said, amongst other things, that it could be recited with perfect tranquility of conscience by a priest who no longer believes either in Transubstantiation or in the sacrificial character of the Mass--hence even by a Protestant minister.

64. The new Missal was introduced in Rome as "a text of ample pastoral matter," and "more pastoral than juridical," which the Episcopal Conferences would be able to utilize according to the varying circumstances and genius of different peoples. In this same Apostolic Constitution we read: "we have introduced into the new missal legitimate variations and adaptations." Besides, Section I of the new Congregation for Divine Worship will be responsible "for the publication and constant revision of the liturgical books." The last official bulletin of the Liturgical Institutes of Germany, Switzerland and Austria says: "The Latin texts will now have to be translated into the languages of the various peoples; the 'Roman' style will have to be adapted to the individuality of the local Churches: that which was conceived beyond time must be transposed into the changing context of concrete situations in the constant flux of the Universal Church and of its myriad congregations." <59>

65. The Apostolic Constitution itself gives the coup de grace to the to the Church's universal language (contrary to the express will of Vatican Council II) with the bland affirmation that "one (?) and the same prayer in a great diversity of languages will ascend, more fragrant than any incense, to our heavenly Father..." <60>

66. The demise of Latin may therefore be taken for granted; that of Gregorian chant, which even the Council recognized as "liturgiae romanae proprium" [specially suited to the Roman liturgy] <61>ordering that "principem locum obtineat" [it should be given pride of place in liturgical services], <62>will logically follow, with the freedom of choice, amongst other things, of the texts of Introit and Gradual.

67. From the outset therefore the new rite is launched as pluralistic and experimental, bound to time and place. Unity of worship, thus swept away for good and all, what will now become of the unity of faith that went with it, and which, we were always told, was to be defended without compromise?

68. It is evident that the Novus Ordo has no intention of presenting the Faith as taught by the Council of Trent, to which, nonetheless, the Catholic conscience is bound forever. With the promulgation of the Novus Ordo, the loyal Catholic is thus faced with a most tragic alternative.


VII. The alienation of the Orthodox


69. The Apostolic Constitution makes explicit reference to a wealth of piety and teaching in the Novus Ordo borrowed from the Eastern Churches. The result--utterly remote from and even opposed to the inspiration of the oriental Liturgies--can only repel the faithful of the Eastern Rites. What, in truth, do these ecumenical options amount to? Basically to the multiplicity of anaphora (but nothing approaching their beauty and complexity), to the presence of the deacons, to Communion sub utraque specie. Against this the Ordo would appear to have been deliberately shorn of everything which in the Liturgy of Rome came close to those of the East. <63>; Moreover, in abandoning its unmistakable and immemorial Roman character, the Ordo lost what was spiritually precious of its own. Its place has been taken by elements which bring it closer only to certain other reformed liturgies (not even to those closest to Catholicism) and which debase it at the same time. The East will be ever more alienated, as it already has been by the preceding liturgical reforms.

70. By way of compensation the new Liturgy will be the delight of the various groups who, hovering on the verge of apostasy, are wreaking havoc in the Church of God, poisoning her organism and undermining her unity of doctrine, worship, morals and discipline in a spiritual crisis without precedent.


VIII. The abandonment of defenses


71. St. Pius V had the Roman Missal drawn up (as the present Apostolic Constitution itself recalls) so that it might be an instrument of unity among Catholics. In conformity with the injunctions of the Council of Trent it was to exclude all danger, in liturgical worship, of errors against the Faith, then threatened by the Protestant Reformation. The gravity of the situation fully justified, and even rendered prophetic, the saintly Pontiff's solemn warning given at the end of the Bull promulgating his Missal: "Should any person venture to do so, let him understand that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul." <64>

72. When the Novus Ordo was presented at the Vatican Press Office, it was asserted with great audacity that the reasons which prompted the Tridentine decrees are no longer valid. Not only do they still apply, but there also exist, as we do not hesitate to affirm, very much more serious ones [i.e., reasons] today. It was precisely in order to ward off the dangers which in every century threaten the purity of the deposit of faith ("depositum custodi, devitans profanas vocum novitates." <65> that the Church has had to erect under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost the defenses of her dogmatic definitions and doctrinal pronouncements. These were immediately reflected in her worship, which became the most complete monument of her faith. To try to bring the Church's worship back at all cost to the ancient practice by refashioning, artificially and with that "unhealthy archeologism" so roundly condemned by Pius XII, <66>what in earlier times had the grace of original spontaneity means--as we see today only too clearly--to dismantle all the theological ramparts erected for the protection of the Rite and to take away all the beauty by which it was enriched over the centuries. <67>

73. And all this at one of the most critical moments--if not the most critical moment--of the Church's history! Today, division and schism are officially acknowledged to exist not only outside of but within the Church. <68>; Her unity is not only threatened but already tragically compromised. <69>Errors against the Faith are not merely insinuated but positively imposed by means of liturgical abuses and aberrations which have been equally acknowledged. <70>To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries was both the sign and the pledge of unity of worship <71>(and to replace it with another which cannot but be a sign of division by virtue of the countless liberties implicitly authorized, and which teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic religion) is, we feel in conscience bound to proclaim, an incalculable error.

ENDNOTES


Sources with Abbreviations

(N.B.  Some of the hyperlinks
are no longer functional.)


(Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis:The Roman Theologians most probably used copies of original papal and conciliar documents-in Latin-as their sources. The sources given below are given as a courtesy for those who wish to examine these same Latin sources which the Roman Theologians used, but which have been translated into English.)

CT = The Council of Trent, Canons and Decrees, Edited By J. Waterworth, (Chicago, 1848), - Scanned by Hanover College students, 1995. Taken from the Internet at: http://history.hanover.edu/early/trent.html

CCT = The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Taken from the Internet at: http://abbey.apana.org.au/Official/Catechisms/Trent/

ES-L = Henry Denzinger Enchiridion Symbolorum, 32nd edition in Latin, Herder, 1957.

GIN = "The General Instruction and the New Order of Mass", International Committee on English in the Liturgy, 1969.

GRIM = Documents on "The General Instruction of the Roman Missal".
Taken from the Internet at:   http://www.ewtn.com/

MD = Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Mediator Dei, November 20, 1947.

PT = "Papal Teachings: The Liturgy", selected and arranged by the Benedictine Monks of Solesmes; translated by the Daughters of St. Paul, St. Paul Editions, 1962.

QPT = Pope St. Pius V, Quo Primum Tempore, July 14, 1570.

V2-PO = "Documents of Vatican II", Editor, Walter M. Abbott, S.J., Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests, Presbyterorum Ordinis, December 7, 1965.
Taken from the Internet at: uunet!uts.mcc.ac.uk!mfulsmb
It will also be found at: http://www.rc.net/rcchurch/vatican2/

V2-SC = "Documents of Vatican II", Editor, Walter M. Abbott, S.J., Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Consilium, December 4, 1963. Taken from the Internet at: uunet!uts.mcc.ac.uk!mfulsmb It will also be found at: http://www.rc.net/rcchurch/vatican2/


Endnotes


<1> "The prayers of our Canon are found in the treatise De Sacramentis (4th-5th centuries)...Our Mass goes back, without essential change, to the epoch in which it developed for the first time from the most ancient common liturgy. It still preserves the fragrance of that primitive liturgy, in times when Caesar governed the world and hoped to extinguish the Christian faith; times when our forefathers would gather together before dawn to sing a hymn to Christ as to their God...(cf. Pl. jr., Ep. 96)...There is not in all Christendom a rite so venerable as that of the Roman Missal." (A. Fortescue) "The Roman Canon, such as it is today, goes back to St. Gregory the Great. Neither in East nor West is there any Eucharistic prayer remaining in use today that can boast such antiquity. For the Roman Church to throw it overboard would be tantamount, in the eyes not only of the Orthodox, but also of Anglicans and even Protestants having still to some extent a sense of tradition, to a denial of all claim any more to be the true Catholic Church." (Fr. Louis Bouyer)

<2> V2-SC, Chapter II The Most Sacred Mystery of the Eucharist, Decrees, # 50.

<3> For such a definition, the Novus Ordo refers one in a note to two texts of Vatican II. But rereading these texts one finds nothing to justify the definition.

The first text referred to runs as follows:

"...through the ministry of the bishop, God consecrates priests, that being made sharers by special title in the priesthood of Christ, they might act as His ministers in performing sacred functions. In the liturgy they continue to carry on His priestly office by the action of His Spirit..and especially by the celebration of Mass they offer sacramentally the Sacrifice of Christ." (V2-PO, Chapter II, The Ministry of Priests, Section I, Priest's Functions, # 5.)

The second text runs thus:

"For in the liturgy God speaks to his people, and Christ is still proclaiming his Gospel. And the people reply to God both by song and prayer. Moreover the prayers addressed to God by the priest who, in the person of Christ, presides over the assembly, are said in the name of the entire holy people and of all present" (V2-SC, Chapter I General Principles for the Restoration and Promotion of the Sacred Liturgy, III. The Reform of the Sacred Liturgy, C. Norms Based on the Educative and Pastoral Nature of the Liturgy, # 33).

One is at a loss to explain how, from such texts as these, the above definition could have been drawn.

We note. too, the radical alteration, in this definition of the Mass, of that laid down by Vatican II: "Thus the Eucharistic Action, over which the priest presides, is the very heart of the congregation" (V2-PO, Chapter II The Ministry of Priests, Section 1 Priests' Functions, # 5). The centrum [center] having been spirited away, in the Novus Ordo the congregatio [congregation] itself has usurped its place.

<4> Matthew 18:20.

<5> GIN, Chapter II, Structure, Elements and Parts of the Mass, I General Structure of the Mass, # 7.

<6> GIN

1. Chapter II, Structure, Elements and Parts of the Mass, I General Structure of the Mass, # 8.

2. Chapter II, Structure, Elements and Parts of the Mass, III Individual Parts of the Mass, C) Liturgy of the Eucharist, # 48.

3. Chapter II, Structure, Elements and Parts of the Mass, III Individual Parts of the Mass, C) Liturgy of the Eucharist, Eucharistic Prayer, # 55d.

4. Chapter II, Structure, Elements and Parts of the Mass, III Individual Parts of the Mass, C) Liturgy of the Eucharist, Communion Rite, # 56.

<7> The Council of Trent reaffirms the Real Presence in the following words:

"Principio docet Sancta Synodus et aperte et simpliciter profitetur in almo Sanctae Eucharistiae sacramento post panis et vini, consacrationem Dominum nostrum Jesum Christum verum Deum atque hominem vere, realiter ac substantialiter (can. I) sub specie illarum rerum sensibilium contineri" (ES-L, # 874).

["In the first place, the holy Synod teaches, and openly and simply professes, that, in the august sacrament of the Holy Eucharist, after the consecration of the bread and wine, our Lord Jesus Christ, true God and man, is truly, really, and substantially [canon 1] contained under the species of those sensible things." CT, Session XIII, October 11, 1551, Decree on the Most Holy Eucharist, Chapter 1, The Real Presence of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist.]

In session XXII, which interests us directly (De sanctissimo Missae Sacrificio), the approved doctrine [of the entire Session] is clearly synthesized in nine canons.

1. The Mass is a true and visible Sacrifice, not a symbolic representation: "quo cruentum illud semel in cruce peragendum repraesentaretur atque illius salutaris virtus in remissionem eorum, quae a nobis quotidie committuntur peccatorum applicaretur" (ES-L, # 938).

["...whereby that bloody sacrifice, once to be accomplished on the cross, might be represented, and the memory thereof remain even unto the end of the world, and its salutary virtue be applied to the remission of those sins which we daily commit..." CT, Session XXII, September 17, 1562, The Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Chapter 1, The Institution of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.]

2. Jesus Christ Our Lord "sacerdotem secundum ordinem Melchisedech ac in aeternum (Psalm 109:4) constitutum declarans, corpus et sanguinem suum sub specibus panis et vini Dec Patri obtulit ac sub earundem rerum symbolis Apostolis (quos tunc Novi Testamenti sacerdotes constituebat). ut sumerent. tradidit, et eisdem eorumque in sacerdotio successoribus, ut offerent, praecepit per haec verba: 'Hoc facite in meam commemorationem' (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24) ut semper catholica Ecciesia intellexit et docuit" (ES-L, # 938).

["...declaring Himself constituted a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchisedech (Genesis 14:18; Psalm 109:4; Hebrews 7:11), He offered up to God the Father His own body and blood under the species of bread and wine; and, under the symbols of those same things, He delivered (His own body and blood) to be received by His apostles, whom He then constituted priests of the New Testament; and by those words, Do this in commemoration of Me (Luke 22:19; 1 Corinthians 11:24) He commanded them and their successors in the priesthood, to offer (them); even as the Catholic Church has always understood and taught...." CT, Session XXII, September 17, 1562, The Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Chapter 1, The Institution of the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.]

The celebrant, the offerer, the sacrificer is the priest. consecrated for this, not the people of God. the assembly. "Si quis dixerit. illis verbis: 'Hoc facite' etc. Christum non istituisse Apostolos sacredotes, aut non ordinasse. ut ipsi aliique sacredotes offerent corpus et sanguinem suum: anathema sit" (ES-L, # 949).

["CANON II. If any one saith, that by those words, 'Do this for the commemoration of me' (Luke xxii. 19), Christ did not institute the apostles priests; or, did not ordain that they, and other priests should offer His own body and blood; let him be anathema." CT, Session XXII, September 17, 1562, The Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canons on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 2.]

3. The Sacrifice of the Mass is a true propitiatory Sacrifice and NOT a "bare commemoration of the sacrifice accomplished on the Cross". "Si quis dixerit: Missae sacrificium tantum esse laudis et gratiarum actiones aut nudam commemorationem sacrificii in cruce peracti, non autem propitiatorium; vel soli prodesse sumenti, neque pro vivis et defunctis, pro peccatis, poenis, satisfactionibus et aliis necessitatibus offeri debere, anathema sit" (ES-L, # 949).

["CANON III. If any one saith, that the sacrifice of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and of thanksgiving; or, that it is a bare commemoration of the sacrifice consummated on the cross, but not a propitiatory sacrifice; or, that it profits him only who receives; and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead for sins, pains, satisfactions, and other necessities; let him be anathema." CT, Session XXII, September 17, 1562, The Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canons on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 3.]

Canon 6 will also be recalled: "Si quis dixerit Canon Missae errores continere ideoque abrongandum esse, anathema sit" (ES-L, # 953): and Canon 8: "Si quis dixerit Missae. in quibus solus sacerdos sacramentaliter communicat, illicitas esse, ideoque abrogandas, anathema sit" (ES-L, # 955).

["CANON VI. If any one saith, that the canon of the mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated; let him be anathema." CT, Session XXII, September 17, 1562, The Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canons on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 6.]

["CANON VIII. If any one saith, that masses, wherein the priest alone communicates sacramentally, are unlawful, and are, therefore, to be abrogated; let him be anathema." CT, Session XXII, September 17, 1562, The Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canons on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 8.]

[Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis: It is well worth while recalling Canon 9 as well: "CANON IX. If any one saith, that the rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned; or, that the mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar tongue only; or, that water ought not to be mixed with the wine that is to be offered in the chalice, for that it is contrary to the institution of Christ; let him be anathema." CT, Session XXII, September 17, 1562, The Doctrine on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canons on the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, Canon 9.]

<8> It is superfluous to assert that if a single defined dogma were denied, all dogma would ipso facto fall, insofar as the very principle of the infallibility of the supreme hierarchical Magisterium, whether papal or conciliar, would thereby be destroyed.

<9> "For where there are two or three gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Matthew 18:20).

<10> The Ascension should be added if one wished to recall the "Unde et memores" which furthermore does not associate but clearly and finely distinguishes: "...tam beatae Passioni, nec non ab inferis Resurrectionis, sed et in caelum gloriosae Ascensionis." ["calling to mind...the blessed passion, not only His rising from the dead, but also His glorious Ascension into Heaven."]

<11> Hebrews 10:5 (cf. Psalm 39:7).

<12> GIN, # 54.

<13> This shift of emphasis is met with also in the surprising elimination, in the new Canons, of the Memento of the dead and of any mention of the sufferings of the souls in Purgatory, to whom the propitiatory Sacrifice was applied.

<14> Cf. Mysterium Fidei in which Paul VI condemns the errors of symbolism together with the new theories of "transignification" and "transfinalization": "To confirm what we have said by examples, it is not allowable to emphasize what is called the "communal" Mass to the disparagement of Masses celebrated in private, or to exaggerate the element of sacramental sign as if the symbolism, which all certainly admit in the Eucharist, expresses fully and exhausts completely the mode of Christ's presence in this sacrament. Nor is it allowable to discuss the mystery of transubstantiation without mentioning what the Council of Trent stated about the marvelous conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the Body and of the whole substance of the wine into the Blood of Christ, speaking rather only of what is called "transignification" and transfiguration," or finally to propose and act upon the opinion according to which, in the Consecrated Hosts which remain after the celebration of the sacrifice of the Mass, Christ Our Lord is no longer present" (Paul VI, Encyclical "Mysterium Fidei", On the doctrine and worship of the Eucharist, September 3, 1965, # 10).

<15> The introduction of new formulae, or expressions, which, though occurring in texts of the Fathers and Councils, and of the Church's magisterium, are used in a univocal sense not subordinated to the substance of doctrine with which they form an inseparable whole (e.g., "spiritualis alimonia" [spiritual nourishment]; "cibus spiritualis" [spiritual food]; "potus spiritualis", [spiritual drink]; etc.) is amply denounced and condemned in Mysterium Fidei. Paul VI states that:

    "Having safeguarded the integrity of the faith, it is necessary to safeguard also its proper mode of expression, lest by the careless use of words, we occasion (God forbid) the rise of false opinions regarding faith in the most sublime of mysteries. St. Augustine gives a stern warning about this in his consideration of the way of speaking employed by the philosophers of that which ought to be used by Christians."

    "'The philosophers', he says, 'speak freely without fear of offending religious listeners on subjects quite difficult to understand. We, on the other hand, must speak according to a fixed norm, lest the lack of restraint in our speech result in some impious opinion even about the things signified by the words themselves.' [De Civit. Dei X, 23 - The City of God, 10, 23; P.L. 41,300.]"

    "The Church, therefore, with the long labor of centuries, and, not without the help of the Holy Spirit, has established a rule of language and confirmed it with the authority of the councils. This rule, which has more than once been the watchword and banner of Orthodox faith, must be religiously preserved, and let no one presume to change it at his own pleasure or under the pretext of new science. Who would ever tolerate that the dogmatic formulas used by ecumenical councils for the mysteries of the Holy Trinity and the Incarnation be judged as no longer appropriate for men of our times and therefore that others be rashly substituted for them? In the same way it cannot be tolerated that any individual should on his own authority modify the formulas which were used by the Council of Trent to express belief in the Eucharistic Mystery. For these formulas, like the others which the Church uses to propose the dogmas of faith, express concepts which are not tied to a certain form of human culture, nor to a specific phase of human culture, nor to one or other theological school" (Paul VI, Encyclical "Mysterium Fidei", On the doctrine and worship of the Eucharist, September 3, 1965, # 23-25).

<16> Contradicting what is prescribed by Vatican II: "48. The Church, therefore, earnestly desires that Christ's faithful, when present at this mystery of faith, should not be there as strangers or silent spectators. On the contrary, through a good understanding of the rites and prayers they should take part in the sacred action, conscious of what they are doing, with devotion and full collaboration. They should be instructed by God's word, and be nourished at the table of the Lord's Body. They should give thanks to God. Offering the immaculate victim, not only through the hands of the priest but also together with him, they should learn to offer themselves. Through Christ, the Mediator,[38] they should be drawn day by day into ever more perfect union with God and each other, so that finally God may be all in all" (V2- SC, # 48).

<17> GIN, # 54.

<18> GIN, # 54.

<19> "Council of Trent, Session 21, Decree "de Communione eucharistica", c. 1-3: Denzinger 929- 932 (1725-1729)" (GIN, # 241, footnote # 63).

<20> GIN, # 239.

<21> GIN, # 262.

<22> The altar's primary function is recognized once: "The altar, where the sacrifice of Christ is made present under sacramental signs...'' [GIN, # 259]. This single reference does not seem to remove to any extent the equivocations of the other repeated designation.

[Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis: By "the other repeated designation" is meant "the table of the Lord". This would have been made more clear if the Roman Theologians had given the FULL text which reads: "The altar, where the sacrifice of Christ is made present under sacramental signs, is also the table of the Lord." Therefore, the Roman Theologians themselves are guilty of deliberate ambiguity at least and equivocation at worst. One is left to wonder: Why did the Roman Theologians do this? One possible explanation is that the translated text has been corrupted and the original is somewhat different. But if the original text of the Ottaviani Intervention as published by the Roman Theologians omits the final clause-which We have added because it is found in GIN, # 259-then such an act was either: a) accidental; b) deliberate. If deliberate, then this is a grave fault on the part of the Roman Theologians which no excuses can mitigate. Unfortunately, this is not their only error, some of which We point out in other "notes"!]

<23> GIN, # 49. "'Inter Oecumenici', no. 91; Instruction 'Eucharisticum mysterius', no 24" (GIN, # 39). Cf. GIN, # 262.

<24> GIN, # 262.

<25> GIN, # 262; GIN, # 276.

<26> "To separate tabernacle from altar is to separate two things which by their origin and their nature should remain united" (PT # 817, Pope Pius XII, "Allocution to the International Congress on Pastoral Liturgy", September 22, 1956).

[Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis Further data germane to the subject of altar/table is found here: "But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive tableform; were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the divine Redeemer's body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings; and lastly were he to disdain and reject polyphonic music or singing in parts, even where it conforms to regulations issued by the Holy See."]

["This way of acting bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to which the illegal Council of Pistoia gave rise. It likewise attempts to reinstate a series of errors which were responsible for the calling of that meeting as well as for those resulting from it, with grievous harm to souls, and which the Church, the ever watchful guardian of the 'deposit of faith' committed to her charge by her divine Founder, had every right and reason to condemn.[53] For perverse designs and ventures of this sort tend to paralyze and weaken that process of sanctification by which the sacred liturgy directs the sons of adoption to their Heavenly Father of their souls' salvation" (MD, # 62, 64).]

<27> Rarely in the Novus Ordo is the word "hostia" used, a traditional one in liturgical books with its precise significance of "Victim." This. needless to say, is part of the reformers' plan to emphasize only the aspects "supper," "food."

<28> In accordance with the customary habit of the reformers of substituting and exchanging one thing for another, the Real Presence is made equivalent to the Presence in the word (GIN, # 7; GIN, # 54). But this latter presence is really of quite another nature, having no reality except in usu [literally-in use; i.e., when it is taking place ]; whilst the former is in a stable manner, objective and independent of the communication that is made of it in the Sacrament. The formulae "God speaks to his people... Christ is present by his word in the midst of the faithful" (GIN, # 33), are typically Protestant ones, which strictly speaking, have no meaning, as the presence of God in the word is mediated, bound to an act of the spirit, to the spiritual condition of the individual and limited in time. This error has the most serious consequences; the affirmation (or insinuation) that the Real Presence is bound to the usus, and ends together with it.

["...in the liturgy God speaks to his people" (V2-SC, # 33).]

["Christ...is present in his word" (V2-SC, # 7).]

<29> The sacramental action of the institution is emphasized as having come about in Our Lord's giving the Apostles His Body and Blood "to eat" under the species of bread and wine, not in the act of consecration and in the mystical separation therein accomplished of the Body from the Blood, essence of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. (Cf. MD # 66.)

[The mystery of the most Holy Eucharist which Christ, the High Priest instituted, and which He commands to be continually renewed in the Church by His ministers, is the culmination and center, as it were, of the Christian religion. We consider it opportune in speaking about the crowning act of the sacred liturgy, to delay for a little while and call your attention, Venerable Brethren, to this most important subject" (MD # 66).]

<30> GIN # 55d.

<31> GIN # 55e.

<32> The words of Consecration as inserted in the context of the Novus Ordo can be valid by virtue of the minister's intention. They could also not be valid because they are no longer so ex vi verborum [from the force of the sacramental words themselves], or, more precisely. by virtue of the modus significandi [manner of signifying, i.e., from the meaning] they had in the Mass up to the present time.

[Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis: The Novus Ordo Rite of Mass is per se INVALID in any language, including Latin, because this liturgical rite does NOT contain the ontological essence of the Mass as Jesus Christ, the Eternal High Priest, instituted it. The "Roman Theologians" who wrote this "Critical Study" apparently either forgot about the requirements of the ontological essence of the Mass or were ignorant of them! Irregardless, in plain English this simply means that it is IMPOSSIBLE for ANYONE, irregardless whether or not they have the required proper Valid Intention, to effect ANY Transubstantiation, whether of the bread or of the wine or of both!]

Will priests of the near future who have not received the traditional formation, and who rely on the Novus Ordo with the intention of "doing what the Church does," consecrate validly? One may be allowed to doubt it.

[Editor’s Note, Commentary, and Analysis: The ontological essence of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass requires much more than merely the proper Valid Intention to effect ANY Transubstantiation, whether of the bread or of the wine or of both! Put another way, even IF a valid Celebrant of Mass did in fact have a valid intention, there is no way his valid intention could effect any transubstantiation in any of the following liturgical rites of "mass" or supper/meal service or gospel service or pseudo- Christian service: Anglican; Lutheran; Baptist; Presbyterian; Congregational; Methodist; United Brethren; Disciples of Christ; Mormon; Salvation Army; Christian Science; Four- Square Gospel; etc. Why? Because not one of these Protestant services, a.k.a. liturgical rites, has a valid rite of Mass. It would be a strange sight to see someone trying to transubstantiate, WITH a valid intention, in a Four-Square Gospel service! The same is true also, then, of the Novus Ordo Rite because it, too, is a PROTESTANT supper or meal service, made up by six Protestants and those heretical apostate Catholics who were the members of the Concilium which merely updated the PROTESTANT "mass" rites of the Anglicans, Lutherans, etc. in that satanic synthesis Paul VI calls the Novus Ordo Missae!]

<33> GIN, The Order of Mass with a Congregation, Eucharistic Prayer I # 64c; Eucharistic Prayer II # 77c; Eucharistic Prayer III # 84c; Eucharistic Prayer IV # 93c.

<34> Let it not be said, according to the well-known Protestant critical procedure, that these phrases belong to the same scriptural context. The Church has always avoided their juxtaposition and superimposition precisely in order to avoid any confusion of the different realities here expressed.

<35> GIN, # 7.

<36> "After the entrance song, the priest and the congregation make the sign of the cross. Then the priest expresses the presence of the Lord in the assembled community by means of a greeting. This greeting and the people's response manifest the mystery of the Church's unity" (GIN, # 28).

<37> GIN # 77-152.

<38> GIN # 209-231.

<39> GIN # 45.

<40> "In the general intercessions or prayer of the faithful, the people exercise their priestly function by interceding for all mankind. It is appropriate that this prayer be included in all Masses celebrated with a congregation, so that intercession may be made for the Church, for civil authorities, for those oppressed by various needs, for all mankind, and for the salvation of the world " (GIN # 45) .

<41> GIN, The Order of Mass with a Congregation, # 80.

<42> As against the Lutherans who affirmed that all Christians are priests and hence offerers of the Supper, see A. Tanquerey: "Synopsis theologiae dogmaticae," [Synopsis of dogmatic theology], vol. III, Desclee, Paris, Tournai, Rome, 1930: "Each and every priest is, strictly speaking, a secondary minister of the sacrifice of the mass. Christ Himself is the principal minister. The faithful offer through the intermediary of the priest but not in the strict sense."

["CANON II. If any one saith, that by those words, Do this for the commemoration of me (Luke xxii. 19), Christ did not institute the apostles priests; or, did not ordain that they, and other priests should offer His own body and blood; let him be anathema" (CT, Session 22, September 17, 1562, Canon 2).]

Editor’s Note/Commentary/Analysis: Christ functions at every Mass as the Eternal High Priest, hence as the Principal Offerer, the agent of Whom is the secondary offerer, the Mass Celebrant, and also as the Infinite Victim. However, this is true of only VALID Rites of Mass. It does NOT apply in any way to INVALID Rites of Mass, e.g., the Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist, and all other Protestant rites/services, including the Novus Ordo Missae! This is a very important distinction!]

<43> GIN # 55c.

<44> GIN # 298.

<45> We note in passing an incredible innovation which is sure to have the most serious psychological effects: the Good Friday liturgy in red vestments instead of black (GIN # 308b), the commemoration, that is, of any martyr instead of the mourning of the whole Church for her Founder.

["...one would be straying from the straight path were he to... want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments..." (MD, # 62).]

<46> Fr. A. M. Rouget, O.P., speaking to the Dominican Sisters of Bethany at Plessit-Chenet.

<47> "...the eucharistic celebration, in which the priest acts for the salvation of the people, retains its efficacy and dignity as the action of Christ and the Church" (GIN, # 4).

"...hence the daily celebration of Mass is strongly urged, since even if there cannot be present a number of the faithful, it is still an act of Christ and of the Church" (V2-PO, # 13).

<48> GIN, # 60.

"Within the community of believers, the presbyter is another who possesses the power of orders to offer sacrifice in the person of Christ.[49] He therefore presides over the assembly and leads its prayer, proclaims the message of salvation, joins the people to himself in offering the sacrifice to the Father through Christ in the Spirit, gives them the bread of eternal life, and shares in it with them" (GRIM, "General Instruction of the Roman Missal", 4th edition, issued by the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship on March 27, 1975. # 60).

<49> John 14:13-16; 23-24.

<50> GIN, The Order of Mass with a Congregation, # 89.

<51> In some translations of the Roman Canon, the "locus refrigerii, lucis et pacis" [a place of refreshment, light and peace] was rendered as a simple state ("blessedness, light, peace"). What is to be said, then, of the disappearance of every explicit reference to the Church suffering?

<52> In all this welter of curtailment a single enrichment only: the mention of omission in the accusation of sins at the Confiteor: "in what I have failed to do" (GIN, The Order of Mass with a Congregation, # 3a).

<53> At the press conference introducing the [Novus] Ordo, Fr. Joseph Lecuyer, CSSp, in what appears to be, objectively speaking, a profession of purely rationalistic faith, spoke of converting the salutationes [salutations] in the "Missa sine populo" [Mass without a congregation] from the plural to the singular. "Dominus tecum," ["The Lord be with you" - only one person, to replace "Dominus vobiscum", "The Lord be with you" - more than one person]; "Ora, frater" ["Pray, brother", to replace "Orate, fratres", "Pray, brethren."], etc. His reason was "so that there would be nothing [in the Mass] which does not correspond with the truth."

Ite Missa est [The Victim (Jesus Christ) has been sent to the Altar in Heaven before the Holy Trinity by the hands of the Holy Angel (Saint Michael the Archangel).]

<54> GIN # 260, 265.

<55> GIN, # 244d.

<56> GIN, # 70.

<57> We note in this connection that it seems lawful for priests obliged to celebrate alone either before or after concelebration to communicate again sub utraque specie [under both species] during concelebration.

<58> It has been presented as "The Canon of Hippolytus", but in fact nothing of that original text remains in the new rite except for a few traces.

<59> "Gottesdienst," no. 9, May 14th 1969.

<60> GRIM, Apostolic Constitution, Paul VI, "Missale Romanum", Promulgation of the Roman Missal Revised by Decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, April 3, 1969, # 13.

<61> ["The Church recognizes Gregorian chant as being specially suited to the Roman liturgy. Therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services. Other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action as laid down in Article 30."] V2-SC, # 116.

<62> V2-SC, # 116.

<63> One has only to think of the following elements in Byzantine liturgical rite:

1) its reiterated and lengthy penitential prayers;

2) the solemn rites of vesting of the celebrant and deacon;

3) the preparation of the offerings at the proscomidia, a complete rite in itself;

4) the continual presence in the prayers, even those of the offerings, of the Blessed Virgin, the Saints and Choirs of Angels (who are actually invoked, at the entrance with Gospel, as "invisibly concelebrating";

5) the choir identifying itself with them in the Cherubicon);

6) the iconostasis [sanctuary screen] which divides the sanctuary from the rest of the church, the clergy from the people;

7) the hidden Consecration, symbolizing the divine mystery to which the entire liturgy alludes;

8) the celebrant's position versus ad Deum never versus ad populum;

9) Communion given always and only by the celebrant;

10) the continual marks of profound adoration shown to the Sacred Species;

11) the essentially contemplative attitude of the people.

The fact that these liturgies, even in their less solemn forms, last for over an hour, and are constantly defined as "tremendous and unutterable...celestial, life-giving mysteries..." need no elaborating.

It is finally worth noting how, in the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom, and in that of St. Basil, the concept of "supper" or "banquet" appears clearly subordinate to that of Sacrifice, as it did in the Roman Mass.

<64> "Accordingly, no one whosoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, direction, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree and prohibition. Should any person venture to do so, let him understand that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul." (QPT, # 9)

In Session XIII, (Decree on the Most Holy Eucharist), the Council of Trent manifested its intention:

"Ut stirpitus convelleret zizania execrabilium errorum et schismatum, quae inimicus homo...in doctrina fidei usu et cultu Sacrosanctae Eucharistiae superseminavit--Mt. 13:25 et seq.--quam alioqui Salvator noster in Ecclesia sua tamquam symbolum reliquit eius unitatis et caritatis, qua Christianos omnes inter se coniunctos et copulatos, esse voluit." (ES-L, # 873a).

[" that It might pluck up by the roots those tares of execrable errors and schisms, with which the enemy hath, in these our calamitous times, oversown [Matthew 13:25, ff.] the doctrine of the faith, in the use and worship of the sacred and holy Eucharist, which our Saviour, notwithstanding, left in His Church as a symbol of that unity and charity, with which He would fain have all Christians be mentally joined and united together" (CT, Session 13, October 11, 1551, Decree on the Most Holy Eucharist).


<65> "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding the profane novelties of words, and oppositions of knowledge falsely so called" (1 Timothy 6:20).

<66> "Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to return in spirit and affection to the sources of the sacred liturgy. For research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins, contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful investigation of the significance of feast-days, and of the meaning of the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion. But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive tableform; were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the divine Redeemer's body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings...This way of acting bids fair to revive the exaggerated and senseless antiquarianism to which the illegal Council of Pistoia gave rise. It likewise attempts to reinstate a series of errors which were responsible for the calling of that meeting as well as for those resulting from it, with grievous harm to souls, and which the Church, the ever watchful guardian of the "deposit of faith" committed to her charge by her divine Founder, had every right and reason to condemn" (MD, # 62; # 64).

<67> "Let us not deceive ourselves with the suggestion that the Church, which has become great and majestic for the glory of God as a magnificent temple of His, must be brought to its original and smallest proportions, as though they were the only true ones, the only good ones" (Paul VI, Encyclical "Ecclesiam Suam," August 6, 1964).

<68> "A practically schismatic ferment divides, subdivides, splits the Church" (Paul VI, Homily "In Coena Domini," April 3, 1969).

<69> "There are also among us those "schisms" and "separations" which St. Paul sadly denounces in I Corinthians" (Paul VI, Homily "In Coena Domini," April 3, 1969).

<70> It is well-known how Vatican II is now being repudiated by the very men who once gloried in being its leaders. While the Pope declared at the Council's end that it had changed nothing, these men came away determined to "explode" the Council's teachings in the process of actually applying it. Unfortunately the Holy See, with inexplicable haste, approved and even seemingly encouraged through Consilium an ever-increasing infidelity to the Council.. This infidelity went from changes in mere form (Latin, Gregorian Chant, suppression of the ancient rites, etc.) all the way to changes in substance which the Novus Ordo sanctions. To the disastrous consequences we have attempted to point out here, we must add those which, with an even greater effect psychologically, will affect the Church's discipline and teaching authority by undermining the respect and docility owed the Holy See.

<71> "...Do not let us deceive ourselves with the suggestion that the Church, which has become great and majestic for the glory of God, as a magnificent temple of His, must be brought back to its original and smallest proportions, as though they were the only true ones, the only good ones..." (Paul VI, "Ecclesiam suam").


Please Click Here for the
Holy Rosary Web Page
Our Blessed Mother asks that all Catholics Pray her Traditional Rosary daily.
The Rosary will really make a Powerful difference in Your Life!

HOPE
 
“Rejoicing in Hope.  Patient in tribulation.  Instant in prayer” (Romans 12:12).

“Now the God of Hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing; that you may abound in Hope, and in the power of the Holy Ghost”  (Romans 15:13).

“Charity is patient, is kind: Charity...beareth all things, Believeth all things, Hopeth all things, endureth all things” (1 Corinthians 13:4, 7).

“Now Faith is the substance of things to be Hoped for, the evidence of things that appear not” (Hebrews 11:1).


Dear Visitors:

Thank you for stopping by to visit the Shrine of Saint Jude web site.  You are welcome to visit us again, as often as you like.

If you like our newly redesigned and improved web site, please share this information with others and help them to know more about how powerful Saint Jude really is and that God still works "miracles" today!

Have a Wonderful Day!

God Bless You!
mmm
Father Michael

Please click here to return to SSJ Newsletter!
Please click here to return to Home Page. Thank You!