the arguments against the novus ordo pictures
Post on 30-May-2018
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
1/34
The Arguments against the Novus Ordo
The Novus Ordo Missae:
A Recapitulation of the arguments against the "New Mass"
by Carey J. Winters
[Taken from Real Catholicism, 6/7 Volume I]
Introduction: The Mass
The Canon of the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church goes back to the time of the Apostles. By
the year 600 or so it was firmly fixed so much so that, when Pope St. Gregory the Great added a
few words to the Hanc Igitur, the people of Rome were outraged. According to Canon Hesse, they
threatened to kill the Pope because he had dared to touch liturgy (TheNew Mass Mess
audiotape).
In 1570 Pope St. Pius V codified the existing liturgy, in his Bull, Quo Primum. Purified of accretions,
the Traditional Mass was established, in that Bull, as the Latin Rite Mass in perpetuity; it was not to
be altered, nor was a new rite to be constructed. Pius did not promulgate a new Order of Mass; the
Missale the Pope and the Tridentine Fathers endorsed was the one then in use in Rome the onethat formed, according to Michael Davies,1 "the basis for most of the Mass rites in use throughout
Latin Christendom" (The Tridentine Mass, p.9). Faced with the Reformation's heresies, the Council of
Trent had as its first priority the codification of Catholic Eucharistic teachings. Davies notes that "it
seems reasonable to conclude that the Council Fathers intended the reformed Missal to be
investigated with the same permanence as their doctrinal teaching, because the Missale would give
liturgical expression to what they had defined by their dogmatic decrees" (The Tridentine Mass, p.
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
2/34
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
3/34
Part I: The 'New Mass' Itself
The General Instruction
From the General Instruction:
Traditional Latin Mass (Council of Trent) The Mass is the true and special sacrifice of the New Law. In
it Jesus Christ, by the ministry of the Priest offers His Body and Blood to God the Father under the
appearances of bread and wine by a mystical immolation in an unbloody manner for a renewal and
memorial of the Sacrifice of the Cross.
Novus Ordo Missae (Pope Paul VI) The Lord's supper, or Mass, is the assembly, or gatheringtogether, of the people of God with the priest presiding to celebrate the memorial of the Lord. For this
reason the promise of Christ is particularly true of the local congregation of the Church: "Where two
are three are gathered in My Name, there I am in the midst of them."
The General Instruction for the New Mass makes clear a theological shift. Commenting on one
particularly riveting portion (see above), Fr. Wathen points out that "the New Mass is a memorial
meal. This instruction does not say that the priest offers a sacrifice. He merely presides over the
assembly. Christ's presence is not physical but spiritual, as when any group of 'Christians' gather.
The French writer, Edith Delamare, comments: 'Here the [Protestant] Lord's Supper and the
[Catholic] Mass are merged into one ... In the present ecumenical context, it is as if neither Luther nor
the Council of Trent ever happened.'" (Who Shall Ascend, p. 534).2
So much criticism was received regarding this particular passage that it was somewhat modified it
now reads "with a priest presiding and acting in the person of Christ..." Although the sop was
sufficient to quiet conservative concern, the essential errors and ambiguities remain.
The priest is still a 'presider;' the Novus Ordo steadfastly refuses to speak of the priest as a
'celebrant.' Dr. Rama Coomaraswamy quotes Fr. Martin Patino, a member of the Concilium who
assisted in the preparation of the Novus Ordo: "The [new] mass is not an act of the priest with whom
the people unite themselves, as it used to be explained. The Eucharist is, rather, an act of the people,
whom the ministers serve by making the Savior present sacramentally .... This former formulation,
which corresponds o the classical theology of recent centuries, was rejected because it placed what
was relative and ministerial (the hierarchy) above what was ontological and absolute (the people of
God)" (The Problems with the New Mass, p. 72)
The Mass is still referred to as the Lord's Supper. Cardinal Ottaviani's Critical Studynoted that the
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
4/34
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."
The studied ambiguity of the General Instruction is found throughout the New mass; its use allows a
muddying of the theological waters without the formal denial of any Catholic beliefs. The Ottaviani
Intervention charged that the purposes of the reformers were served through omissions, implicit
denials (of the Real Presence) and the fragmenting of the Church's unity of belief through the
introduction of countless options. (For a study of ambiguity and the role it played in the theological
transformations of the Council, the reader is referred to In the Murky Waters of Vatican II, by Atila
Sinke Guimaraes, published by MAETA.)
The Penitential Rite
The Traditional Roman Mass begins with what are called "the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar," in
which the priest offers personal prayers of reparation to God. In the Novus Ordo, these prayers have
been replaced by a Penitential Rite, which the priest and people recite together. As Cardinal Ottaviani
charged, there is a blurring, in the New Mass, of the distinction between priest and laity evident in
this change (one also instituted by 16th Century Protestant reformers).
The Offertory
In the Traditional Roman Mass, the first part is the Offertory, which very clearly expresses the
sacrificial, propitiatory character of the New Mass. The Novus Ordo effectively abolishes the
Offertory; of the 12 Traditional Offertory prayers, only two were retained in the New Mass. The term
'Offertory' itself has vanished; there remains only something called "The Preparation of the Gifts," the
instructions for which lay heavy emphasis on procession. The deleted prayers are the same ones
removed by Luther and Cranmer. It was, as Davies points out, "the doctrine of the Mass as a sacrifice
of propitiation which outraged the Protestant Reformers" (Pope Paul's New Mass, p. 320). "The
abomination called the offertory," remarked Luther, "and from this point on almost everything stinks of
oblation."
Fr. Wathen notes that "practically all the prayers of the Offertory ... were deemed useless ... The
given reason ... is that all these prayers are recent insertions into the Mass; none of them were in the
Mass before, say, 1100 or 1200 A.D." (The Great Sacrilege, p. 71). Citing as an example the deleted
Suscipe, Sancte Paterboth Fr. Wathen and Dr. Coomaraswamy demonstrate the incompatibility
between the Catholic theology expressed in that prayer and the new religion of 'Catholic' modernists.
The prayer itself reads:
Receive, O Holy Father, Almighty and Everlasting God, this spotless
host, which I, Thine unworthy servant, offer unto Thee, my living and
true God, for mine own countless sins, offenses, and negligences,
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
5/34
and for all here present, as also for all faithful Christians, living and
dead, that it may avail for my own and their salvation unto life
everlasting.
"What a marvel of doctrinal exactitude!" exclaims Coomaraswamy. "Along with the actions of the
priest, this prayer makes it clear that what is offered at the Mass is the 'spotless host' or victim.
Second, the propitiatory (atoning) nature of the Mass is explicit it is offered for our sins. Third, it
reminds us that the Mass is offered 'for the living and the dead,' and fourth, that it is the priest who
offers the Sacrifice as a mediator between man and God ... In the New Mass this prayer, needless to
say, has been entirely deleted" (The Problems with the New Mass, p. 34). In addition to the
acknowledgment of unworthiness and the clear sacrificial language, Fr. Wathen notes that he prayer
"was said silently by the celebrant ... If there are two things we cannot abide in the 'new age,' it is
silent prayers during the communal prayer service, and the priest's acting as if he were about to do
something in virtue of his own priesthood, which the laity cannot participate in" (The Great Sacrilege,
p. 72).
The prayer that has replaced the Suscipe, Sancte Pateris a modified Jewish table grace:
Blessed are you, Lord, God of all Creation, Trough your goodness
we have this bread to offer, which earth has given and human hands
have made. It will become for us the bread of life.
The offering of Cain has been substituted for that of Abel; the new prayer makes no reference to the
propitiation for sin. Patrick Henry Omlor notes that "where Catholics humbly beseech God'sacceptance the prayer of the Jew audaciously says 'Here we made it, You take it.' without humility.
No contrite heart. No respect for the Divine. Rudely imposed upon the Catholic ear and mind is a
'prayer' of unbelievers in Christ, rejecting the Sacrifice, Redemption and Salvation wrought by Christ,
the God-Man" (The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Knox Query, p. 18).
Davies notes that the new prayer is "fully compatible with the Teilhardian theory that human effort, the
work of human hands, becomes in a certain way the matter of the Sacrament. Thus we have a rite
that is not simply compatible with Protestantism but with the Cult of Man" (Pope Paul's New Mass, p.
322). Davies also finds that the prayer "would certainly fit in with the ethos of a Masonic hall" (p. 320).
He sees in the "We offer" another example of the systematic blurring in the Novus Ordo, of the
distinction between priest and laity; it is now possible to interpret it as a service concelebrated by the
entire congregation.
The Ottaviani Intervention charges that the prayer in question "alters the nature of the sacrificial
offering by turning it into a type of exchange of gifts between God and man. Man brings the bread,
and God turns it into 'the spiritual drink.' ... The expressions 'bread of life' and 'spiritual drink,' of
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
6/34
course, are utterly vague and could mean anything. Once again we come up against the same basic
equivocation: According to the new definition of the Mass [in the General Instruction], Christ is only
spiritually present among His own; here bread and wine are only spiritually and not substantially
changed" (pp. 37-38).
The new "Invitation to Prayer" deserves mention. In the Traditional Mass, the Priest asks "Prayer,
Brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable...." This has been changed to "our sacrifice"
in the New Mass. While it may at first reading sound equivalent, it is not. The Catholic Church
teaches that it is the priest who offers the sacrifice to God; the laity offers penance, prayers, personal
sacrifices, true, but only the priest, acting in the person of Christ, offers the Body and Blood. Pius XII
remarked in Mediator Deithat "in this most important subject, it is necessary in order to avoid giving
rise to a dangerous error, that we define the exact meaning of the word 'offer.' The unbloody
immolation, at the words of Consecration, when Christ is made present upon the Altar... is performed
by the priest and by him alone, as the representative of Christ and not as the representative of the
faithful." For Protestants, of course, the presider is the one chosen to represent the people, rather
than Christ. Pius XII's 'dangerous error' is codified in the Novus Ordo. Hearing the words of the New
Mass 'Invitation to Prayer' often enough will probably make of the congregation de facto Lutherans.
Eucharistic Prayer I
Fr. Wathen points out that the word Canon means rule, orstandard of measure. "It refers, therefore, to
something fixed, unchangeable, and irreplaceable ... Eucharistic Prayer, Form Number One [subtitled The
Roman Canon] is notthe Roman Canon because it has been changed, or rather, mutilated both in the Latin and
in the translation" (The Great Sacrilege, pg. 82). Furthermore, three additional Eucharistic Prayers are offered
as alternatives to its use. Davies notes that the Consilium had originally planned to forbid the use of the Roman
Canon, but it remained, in severely modified form, at the insistence of the Pope (Pope Paul's New Mass, p.
329).
Dr. Coomaraswamy notes that Eucharistic Prayer I "is merely modeledon the traditional Canon, but
contains several significant differences ...[W]ith the destruction of the traditional Offertory, with its
prayers that state precisely what occurs during the Canon, and with the modern mistranslations,
Eucharistic Prayer Number One is totally capable of being given an entirely Modernist and Protestant
interpretation" (The Problems with the New Mass, p. 37).
That Eucharistic Prayer, for example, asks that the offering "may become forus the Body and
Blood..." Coomaraswamy notes that such a phrase is understandable in the Cranmerian/Protestant
sense, which denies that the bread and wine are transubstantiated themselves. As Davies explains,
"the addition of 'for us' does facilitate an interpretation in line with the theory oftransignification,
where the Presence of Christ in the Sacrament is really only for the believer and not in the order of
objective reality. Transignification is a doctrine fully in line with that of the Protestant Reformers" (The
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
7/34
Roman Rite Destroyed, p. 37).
Davies maintains that, although the so-called 'Roman Canon' is not obligatory on a single day
throughout the year, its inclusion "enabled the majority of orthodox priests to accept the New Mass
without doing too much violence to their consciences" (The New Mass, p. 15). Most of the priests
who would have been expected to protest were molified by the first Eucharistic Prayer a pattern,
once again, that Davies find parallel to the staged technique of Cranmer's liturgical revolution.
Eucharistic Prayer II
Davies states that Eucharistic Prayer II, "[designated] the Canon of Hippolytus, was written by a third-
century anti-pope with views of dubious orthodoxy ... It never formed a part of the official liturgy of the
Church, its original version has been lost, and the text we have has certainly been modified" (Pope
Paul's New Mass, p. 347). Dr. Coomaraswamy points out that it "is said to have been taken from
Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition ... However, to this already questionable document, the innovators
have made significant changes" (The Problems with the New Mass, page. 39). Edward T. Snyder's
web article, 'Distorting Hippolytus,' compares the Hippolytus document and the Eucharistic Prayer
line by line. Snyder notes omissions, in Eucharistic Prayer II, of phrases that serve to describe Our
Lord's diving role and to link Him with the Mass, or to point up the role of the priest (Lex orandi, lex
credendiweb page). Reformers suppressed a specific reference to Hell and the chains of Satan
and they added 'for us,' making, according to Coomaraswamy, their heretical intent more than clear.
"All pretense of a Catholic interpretation is eliminated .... There is absolutely no preparation (build-upor development) in Eucharistic Prayer 2 for the 'Consecration' of the species ... Sneeze and you will
miss it" (Problems, p. 40).
Davies notes that he word hostia, victim, appears nowhere in Eucharistic Prayer II. "The chief value
of the Canon of Hippolytus from the ecumenical standpoint is that its sacrificial phraseology is
minimal it was composed at a stage in the third century when there was still a long way to go
before matter which was implicit in the Mass was made explicit in its prayers. Bringing this prayer into
the Mass in the twentieth century is precisely the type of liturgical archaelolgism condemned as
pernicious by Pope Pius XII in his encyclical Mediator Dei" (The New Mass, p. 21)
According to Davies, "the Liturgical Establishment makes no secret of the fact that the new
Eucharistic Prayers are modeled on the Jewish berakah, a prayer of praise and thanksgiving. This is
a point which they repeat ad nauseam in their books, articles and lectures ... The fallacy here is that
although Our Lord may have used the berakah format at the last Supper this no more makes the
Eucharistic Prayer a berakah than it makes the Mass a Passover meal. The Last Supper was a
propitiatory sacrifice he would offer on the Cross the next day" (Pope Paul's New Mass, pp. 333-334).
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
8/34
Davies quotes Fr. J. D. Crichton, whom he describes as England's arch-liturgist; Fr. Crichton finds
great merit in Eucharistic Prayer II, because of its clearberakah pattern.
Coomaraswamy maintains that the Novus Ordo's creators exhibit a clear preference for Eucharistic
Prayer II. "The official documents from Rome instruct us that Eucharistic Prayer 2 can be used on
any occasion. It is recommended for sundays 'unless for pastoral reasons another Eucharistic Prayer
is chosen.' It is also particularly suitable "for weekday masses, or for the mass in particular
circumstances'... It is recommended for 'masses with children, young people and small groups,' and
above all for Catechism classes..." (Problems, p. 41).
Eucharistic Prayer III
Eucharistic Prayer III says to Our Lord that "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 and honor of Your name." Coomaraswammy notes that,
according to this prayer, "it is the people, rather than the Priest, who are the indispensable element in the
celebration:" (ibid). Davies states that "in not one of the new Eucharistic Prayers is it made clear that the
Consecration is effected by the Priest alone, and that he is not acting as spokesman or president for a
concelebrating congregation." (The Roman Rite Destroyed, p. 39). This, to Davies, is further evidence of the
Protestantization of the Mass, since, for Protestants, the minister possesses no powers denied to a layman.
Eucharistic Prayer IV
This prayer, according to Dr. Coomaraswamy, was composed by Fr. Cipriano Vagaggiani. Coomaraswamy
finds the Latin itself innocuous, but notes that the approved translation in American use was open to heretical
interpretation. "In the Latin version... the words unus Deus ("One God") are to be found, and no explicit heresy
is taught... The mistranslation ofunus Deus by 'You alone are God' clearly departs from the traditional norm. In
the absence of any other reference to this prayer to the Son or the Holy Ghost, the use of the word 'alone'
appears to be an explicit denial of the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity... It is for this reason that some have
referred to this Eucharistic Prayer as the 'Arian Canon'" (Problems, p. 42)
The 'Institution Narrative'
Coomaraswamy points out that "in theNovus Ordo Missae, as in the Lutheran service, the words of
Consecration the very heart of the Traditional Rite are now part of what is called the 'Institution
Narrative,' an expression not found in the traditional Missals of the Church. In the Traditional Missal, the words
of Consecration are capitalized and set apart from the remaining text, making clear the form (words) of the
Sacrament. In the AmericanNovus Ordo missalettes, they run together, undifferentiated, with the remainder of
the text. The tacit implication is that the priest is merely telling a story, in the accepted protestant tradition,
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
9/34
rather than acting in the person of Christ to confect a Catholic Sacrament.
The Church has always taught that, for the Sacrament to be valid, there must be 1) a properly
ordained priest, 2) who intends to do at the altar what the Church intends, 3) using the proper matter
(bread and wine), and 4) using the proper form (words). Coomaraswamy notes that "the form of hte
Consecration in the Traditional Mass has been fixed since Apostolic times. It has been 'canonically'
fixed since the so-called Armenian Decree of the Council of Florence (1438-1445)" (The Problems
with the New mass, p. 47). That form, according to the Council of Trent, is:
FOR THIS IS MY BODY.
***
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.
* Changes in the Consecration: "pro multis"
Although the official Latin text of the Novus Ordo Missae retains the words "pro multis," "for many," in
the words of Consecration, that is a version of the Mass which Americans will rarely if ever
experience. When the Novus Ordo was translated into the vernacular, those words were rendered:
"for all men"; then "for all." An identical 'error' occurs in a number of languages Italian, French,
German, Spanish, Croation suggesting that there was a decision made within the Congregation for
Divine Worship in this regard.
The innovation was defended in an unsigned article in Notitiae, the Congregation's official journal.
Readers were told that, in Aramaic (presumed to be Our Lord's language), the expression "for many"
means "for all." Such is not the case, however; Davies points out that both Aramaic and Hebrew have
different words to express both concepts. Patrick Henry Omlor gives kolorkolla as the Aramaic word
for 'all'; 'saggi'an is the Aramaic word for 'many.' "Three months laterNotitiae published a signed
article admitting this" (Pope Paul's New Mass, p. 623). There has, of course, been no correction
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
10/34
made.
Omlor points out that it is "an unquestionable fact that throughout 19 centuries and right up to the
very present (i.e., before the vernacular craze became epidemic) not a single rite of the Catholic
Church, not the schismatic Easter Orthodox Churches, not a single heretical Church, even, ever used
the words 'for all men' in this place. Eight Eastern Rites there are in communion with the Holy See,
and, as the first part of this century at least, there were eleven different languages used by these
eight rites. Now in all these rites and all these languages, and also, of course, in the Latin of the
Roman Rite, the formula reads 'for many'" (Insights into Heresy, p. 15)
Omlor argues convincingly that the change in ICEL's form involves basic change in theological
meaning. There is a blurring, he maintains, of the distinction between the sufficiency and the efficacy
of Christ's death. "[T]here are some men who, through their perverse failure to cooperate with God's
grace, thereby nullify for themselves the benefits of this Purchase.... Christ's death was sufficientfor
all, but it is effective... only for those who avail themselves of the necessary graces God gives hem
for salvation" (The Ecumenist Heresy, p. 4). As the Council of Trent explained, "Though He died for
all, yet not all receive the benefit of His death, but only those unto whom the merit of His Passion is
communicated" (Session VI, Chapter 3). Omlor cites the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas, the authors
of the Catechism of the Council of Trent, St. Alphonsus, Pope Innocent III, Pope Benedict XIV and
others, all of whom expounded upon the vital distinction between sufficiency and efficacy.
Joachim Jeremias, a German Protestant, was the first in modern times to suggest the change to "for
all." According to Hugh Ross Williamson, Jeremias, "at the time a professor at the University of
Gottingen... attacked the Divinity of Christ" (The Great Betrayal, cited by Omlor). Jeremias firstadvanced the theory that 'for many" meant "for all" in his 1966 book, The Words of Jesus.
According to Fr. Wathen, "the reason for mistranslating the words "pro multis" to mean "for all men"
was to implant the Lutheran error (held by almost all Protestants) that through the Sacrifice of Christ
on the Cross, all will be saved who have faith in that Sacrifice, regardless of their own moral
goodness, regardless of their acceptance of other revealed truths, regardless of membership in the
Chruch. But this idea is only an intermediary one, meant to suggest a still more heterodox idea, that
eventually all men will be saved taken to Heaven even the damned" (Great Sacrilege, p. 86).
Three points need to be made regarding this change of wording.
1) The liturgical reformers have changed the words of Our Lord, and, with the new wording, altered
His meaning. In Matthew 26:28 and Mark 14:24, Jesus Christ said "for many." With incredible
arrogance, the reformers have evidently decided that He shouldhave said, "for all."
2) The reformers lacked the authority to make the change. Leo XIII's BullApostolicae Curae says that
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
11/34
"the Church is forbidden to change, or even to touch, the matter or form of any Sacrament." The
Church has no power over the substance of Sacraments, according to Pope Pius XII, since those
Sacraments were instituted by Jesus Christ (Sacramentum Ordinis, 1947). He was echoing the words
of Pope St. Pius X, who said "it is well known that to the Church there belongs no right whatsoever to
innovate anything touching on the substance of the Sacraments" (Ex quo, nono, 1910)
3) De Defectibus established that, if anything in the established form was omitted, the Mass would be
invalid. De Defectibus is a bull of Pope St. Pius V, covering defects in the Mass. Printed in the front of
every Traditional Roman altar Missal, it explicitly states that "If anyone removes or changes anything
in the Form of the Consecration of the Body and Blood, and by this change of words does not signify
the same thing as these words do, he does not confect the Sacrament." For the Mass to be valid, the
entire, intact form [as cited on page 4] must be recited.
"In our Sacraments," teaches the Catechism of the Council of Trent, "the form is so definite that any,
even a casual deviation from it renders the Sacrament null" (Part II, Ch. 1, cited by Omlor).
*Changes in the Consecration: "The Mystery of Faith"
The Consecration of the Chalice has been butchered. Not only have the words "for many" been
changed to "for all," but the phrase "the Mystery of Faith" has been excised from the form, and
inserted later in the Mass.
Dr. Coomaraswamy's comments on this change bear quoting in toto: "[T]he phrase has been
removed from the form and made into the introduction to the peoples 'Memorial Acclamation,' thus
implying that the Mystery of Faith is the Death, Resurrection and Final Coming of Our Lord, rather
than His 'Real Presence' on the altar. Nor are the other Memorial Acclamations any more specific,
e.g., 'when we eat this bread and drink this cup we proclaim Your death, Lord Jesus, until You come
in glory."
"Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, the principal architect of the new Mass, informs us in his memoirs thathe discussed this issue directly with Paul VI. The Concilium had wished to leave the text of the
'Memorial Acclamation' up to the various National Bishops' Committees on the liturgy, but Paul VI
urged that 'a series of acclamations... be prepared for use after the consecration.' According to
Archbishop Bugnini, Paul VI feared that 'if the initiative were left to the Bishops' Committees,
inappropriate acclamations such as My Lord and my Godwould be introduced.' The Catholic Church
traditionally has always encouraged the private and quiet use of the ejaculatory prayerMy Lord and
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
12/34
my God, by the people at the elevation of the Host during Mass and Benediction; Pope St. Pius X
attached rich indulgences to this practice, as it both affirmed belief in the Real Presence and gave
praise to God" (The Problems with the New Mass, p. 57)
The words 'the Mystery of Faith' are not found in the Holy Scripture; St. Thomas Aquinas teaches that
they were handed down to the Church by the Apostles who received them from Our Lord (Summa, III,
Q. 78, A. 3-9). Certainly this is the position of Pope Innocent III, in Cum Carthae Circa which, by
virtue of its inclusion in Denzinger, Omlor views as part of the ordinary Magisterium. Omlor stresses,
therefore, that those words are "derived from Tradition (Tradition with a capital 'T', which is one of the
two sources of Divine Revelation)..." (No Mystery of Faith: No Mass, p. 12). To charges that 'the
mystery of Faith' does not appear in the wine consecration form of the Eastern rites, Omlor responds
with a quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia: "It is abundantly clear that this diversity [of rites] arose
from the traditions handed down by the different Apostles." "Through God's Infinite Wisdom... and
foreknowledge of all things, it has turned out," he notes, "that only in the Western Church has the
doctrine of the Real Presence been assailed" (No Mystery of Faith: No Mass, p. 19). In other words,
those words signifying Christ's Real Presence exist in the Latin Rite because God knew Latin Rite
Catholics would need them.
The phrase 'The Mystery of Faith' was removed by Luther and Cranmer as well, since both
understood that it referred to transubstantiation. Omlor quite clearly argues that, by removing 'the
Mystery of Faith' from the form of the Sacrament, the Novus Ordo revisionists have done precisely
what De Defectibus cautioned against, and no Mass is therefore celebrated.
The change was not without precedent. The phrase was omitted from the wine consecration formwhen Pope Pius XII's New Order of Holy Week was translated into the vernacular. The Sacred
Congregation of the Holy Office issued a Monitum (warning), calling the omission 'nefarious.'
The 'Short Form' Controversy. Omlor explains that "Defenders of the 'short form' position hold that
these first few words of the wine-Consecration form in the Latin Rite, 'This is the Chalice of My
Blood,' suffice for the valid consecration of the precious Blood. They claim that the remaining words
of the sacramental form, namely, 'of the new and eternal testament, the mystery of faith, which shall
be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins, although being part of the wine-consecration
form laid down in the Roman Missal, are nevertheless not necessary for the valid consecration of the
wine and hence not necessary for the validity of the Mass.
"The defenders of the 'entire form' position deny the foregoing supposition. They hold that, except for
the word 'for,' ALL the words of the sacramental form for the wine-consecration, exactly as laid down
in the Roman Missal are absolutely necessary for bringing about the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
13/34
and therefore are essential for the celebration of a valid Mass" (Why the Short Form Cannot Possibly
Suffice, p. 1). Omlor proceeds to demonstrate that the 'short form' position is a minority one; "very
many great theologians, including saints, popes and doctors of the Church, have held that the [short
form is] insufficient for the validity of the Consecration.... These exponents include St. Thomas
Aquinas; St. Antonius; Pope ST. Pius V; Pope Innocent III; the authors of the Catechism of the
Council of Trent...." and many others. Cajetan (1469-1534), a Dominican cardinal, was, according to
Omlor, the first 'Thomist' to oppose the mind of St. Thomas and Pope Pius V had Cajetan's opinion
on this matter deleted from the authorized Roman edition of the Cardinal's Commentaries.
The crux of Omlor's argument is that, according to Pope Leo XIII's BullApostolicae Curae (1896), "All
know that the Sacraments of the New Law, as sensible and efficient signs of invisible grace, must
both signify THE GRACE which they effect, and effect THE GRACE which they signify... The form
consequently cannot be apt or sufficient for a Sacrament which omits what it must essentially signify."
The short form fails to signify in the necessary, unambiguous manner the remission of the sins of
Christ's Mystical Body.
It is indisputable that the mere existence of the two opposing opinions makes the validity of the wine
consecration form of the New Mass doubtful. According to Fr. Heribert Jone, a well-known Catholic
moral theologian, "Matter and form must be certainlyvalid. Hence, one may not follow a probable
opinion and use either doubtful matter or form. Acting otherwise, one commits a sacrilege"
(Handbook of Moral Theology, p. 308).
The Communion Rite
In the Traditional Mass, the priest says, while distributing Communion, "May the Body of Our Lord
Jesus Christ preserve your soul unto life everlasting, Amen." In the Novus Ordo, whoever distributes
Communion merely says, "The Body of Christ" without specifying whether the phrase applies to
the host, or the recipient. (It's a change typical of the studied ambiguity throughout the Novus Ordo.)
Davies notes that "the American hierarchy is actually preparing the way for Catholic acceptance ofthe concept that the Sacrifice in the Mass is that of Christ being offered in virtue of His presence in
the congregation who offer themselves. In the official [Sept. 1976] Newsletterof the Bishops'
Committee on the Liturgy, a ruling was laid down when distributing Holy Communion a priest must
notsay: 'Receive the Body of Christ' or 'This is the Body of Christ.' The reason given is that the
congregation itself is the Body of Christ" (The Roman Rite Destroyed, p. 39). According to that
Newsletter, "the use of the phrase The Body of Christ:Amen, in the communion rite asserts in a very
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
14/34
forceful way the presence and role of the community... The change to the use of the phrase ... rather
than the long formula which was previously said by the Priest has several repercussions in the
liturgical renewal. First, it seeks to highlight the important concept, of the community as the Body of
Christ; secondly it brings into focus the assent of the individual in the worshiping community...." The
assent of the worshiping community, of course, has nothing whatsoever to do with the objective
reality of transubstantiation, which can be effected in its absence; it is only in the heretical Lutheran
transignification that the belief of the recipient impacts on the reality of the Sacrament.
The Revised Propers
The propers of the Mass are the variable Sunday and Feast day prayers. Fr. Anthony Cekada
attempted a line-by-line comparison of the old and new Propers, in The Problems with the Prayers of
the Modern Mass (hereinafter, PPMM). He found he task arduous, since many of the old orations
have been moved or altogether deleted, and the liturgical calendar itself has been drastically
modified. Epiphanytide, Septuagesima and the Ember Days were deleted, the number of Saints
remembered in the calendar was dramatically reduced, and feasts have been relocated or
suppressed.
The Traditional Missal, according to Fr. Cekada, contains 182 orations. "About 760 of those were
dropped entirely. Of the approximately 36% which remained, the revisers altered over half of them....
Thus, only some 17% of the orations from the old Missal made it untouched into the new Missal"
(PPMM, p. 9). Fr. Cekada's conclusion is that "the contents of Paul VI's Missal represent a radicalbreak with the Church's liturgical tradition."
*The Agenda of the Reformers
fr. Cekada quotes Fr. Carlo Braga, assistant to Fr. Bugnini (the latter, Secretary for the Concilium
charged with liturgical reform). Fr. Braga's words should sound warning bells in the ears of those who
can recall the textbook definition of heresy.
"Revising the pre-existing text becomes more delicate when faced
with a need to update content or language, and when all this affects
not only form, but also doctrinal reality. This [revision] is called for in
light of the new view of human values... The Council clearly
proposes this [new view] and it was kept in mind when the Temporal
Cycle was revised... In other cases, Ecumenical requirements
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
15/34
dictated appropriate revisions in language. Expressions calling
positions or struggles of the past are no longer in harmony with the
Church's new positions. An entirely new foundation of Eucharistic
theology has superceded devotional points of view or a particular
way of venerating and invoking the Saints. Retouching the text,
moreover, was deemed necessary to bring to light new values and
new perspectives." (Fr. Carlo Braga, 'Il Proprium de Sactis',
Ephemerides Liturgicae 84, 1970, p. 419).
*Doctrines deleted or downplayed
Fr. Cekada found that the above-mentioned 'new values' required the downplaying or obliteration in
the new Propers of a long list of Catholic 'doctrinal realities.'"These include hell, judgment, God's
wrath, punishment for sin, the wickedness of sin as the greatest evil, detachment from the world,
purgatory, the souls of the departed, Christ's kingship on earth, the Church Militant, the triumph of the
Catholic Faith, the evils of heresy, schism and error, the conversion of non-Catholics, the merits of
the Saints, and miracles...." (PPMM, p. 28). Some of the 'adjustments' were made by way of
mistranslations. There are, according to Christopher Monckton, former editor of the (London)
Universe, over 400 mistranslations in the English version of the New Mass errors paralleled in
other vernacular translations except the Polish. Both he and Davies maintain that the inaccurate
renderings serve to dilute or remove allusions and references to those doctrines of the Mass that are
specifically Catholic. Monckton finds that "The thoroughness and determination with which thoseteachings.... have been removed is demonstrated by many minor omissions which are often
repeated" (quoted in Pope Paul's New Mass, pp. 617-618).
'Negative theology.' Concilium Study Group member Fr. Auge explained the need to rework the
'negative theology' of the Advent and Lenten Propers. "Some of these collects, in fact, spoke of,
among other things, the punishments, anger or divine wrath for our sins, of a Christian assembly
oppressed with guilt, continually afflicted due to its disorders, threatened with condemnation to
eternal punishment, etc." (cited in PPMM, p. 11) Fr. Cekada explains that the Concilium simply
rewrote or abolished "texts which contained ideas that contemporary man finds disturbing." The
possibility of damnation has been excised from the old Collect for the 3rd Sunday after Pentecost, now
used fro the 17th Sunday in Ordinary Time. The prayer for support in human weakness now asks only an
increase in charity. "The revisers," notes Fr. Cekada, "were forced to change the entire character of the Lenten
prayers. The traditional Lenten orations relentlessly emphasized fasting and mortifications of the flesh...
Emergency surgery was prescribed" (PPMM, pp. 15-16). Orations that once spoke of heroic mortifications of
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
16/34
the flesh now speak of 'moderation' and 'restraint.' Orations mentioning our guilt, temporal or eternal
punishment or spiritual combat were suppressed or altered.
Consideration was given to abolishing Ash Wednesday; in the end, two of the four orations were
eliminated, and the other two 'doctored.' One, which formerly asked for the spirit of compunction for
sin, now contains only what Fr. Cekada terms "incongruous talk about celebrating the paschal
mystery." The other was stripped of the words "pardon," "humility," the "fragility of the human
condition," and the concept of death as a penalty for our guilt. The Holy Thursday prayer that
mentioned that Judas Iscariot was punished by God for his guilt has been removed.
Detachment from the world is no longer a concern; orations that spoke of putting aside earthly
pleasures have been deleted.
Rites and Prayers for the Dead have undergone extreme reconstruction. "White vestments
replaced black;Alleluia replaced Eternal Rest Grant unto Them, and the typical funeral, in America at
least, was turned into something akin to a canonization ceremony ... Hell, for contemporary man, is
not on his list of fundamental options" (PPMM, p. 20). The word 'soul' has been excised almost
entirely from the new Missal. In the New Mass for All Souls' Day ti does not appear once. Revisers
dropped 11 of the traditional prayers from the dead which used the word 'soul' and struck the word
itself from 23 of the 25 orations they retained.
Ecumenism. "The notion of acknowledging the one, true God has been deleted from the Collect for
St. Cyril of Jerusalem. The Collect for the Propagation of the Faith,... now the Collect fro the
Evangelization of Peoples, underwent similar revisions... The goal of the missionary's apostolate has
been changed; in the old collect it was to bring nations to know the only true God and Jesus Christ
the phrase is a quote from Our Lord's discourse in John 17; in the new collect, it appears to be
merely 'preaching the Gospel.' The means have been turned into an end" (PPMM, pp. 22-23).
Mention of the Church Militant has been struck from the Feasts of Christ the King and St. IgnatiusLoyola.
Allusions to the existence of heresy have been deleted; the Oration for Heretics and Schismatics has
been abolished. The Church apparently no longer has enemies; mention of them has been struck
from the ST. Pius V oration. We no longer pray for the conversion of the Jews or Pagans. We now
ask that the Jews increase in faithfulness to theirCovenant, and "come to the fullness of redemption."
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
17/34
Gone is the mention of Jewish faithlessness and blindness.
Fr. Cekada notes that "the merits of the saints followed the soul into virtual oblivion" (PPMM, p. 25).
Traditional prayers which invoked the "merits and intercession" of the saints now ask only for their
prayers. The miracles of the saints fare no better; all have been suppressed, as Fr. Braga
explained, to adapt to "the mentality of modern man." Those miracles were, after all, "characteristic of
a certain hagiography of the past."
Fr. Cekada further noted in a 1986 speech that "the greatest outrage that the translators perpetrated
was consistently leaving out the word 'grace' from their translations. It appears in the Latin original of
the Orations 11 times, but not once in the official English version. Thus, the word which is
fundamental to Catholic teaching on the Fall of man, the Redemption, sin, justification, and the entire
sacramental system has utterly disappeared without a trace..." (Cited in The Problems with the New
Mass, p. 80)
****
Fr. Cekada summarizes: "The virtual elimination of these 'doctrinal realities' from the new Missale is
nothing less than an attack on the integrity of the Catholic faith. Liturgy of its nature expresses
doctrine, and, as Pope Pius XII observed, the entire liturgy 'bears public witness to the faith of the
Church.' This intimate connection between liturgy and doctrine is often summed up in the old adage,
Lex orandi, led credendi 'the law of prayer is the law of belief' ... During the course of the liturgical
year, [these prayers] bore witness individually to countless truths, each of which was (and is) and
integral part of the Church's law of belief. Shrouding a substantial portion of these truths in obscurity,ambiguity or silence is an invitation for men to deny them... If hell, the human soul or the wickedness
of sin count for little in the new liturgy, they will in turn count for little for the man in the pew" (PPMM,
p. 28-31).
Part 2: Architects of The 'New Mass'
*Annibale Bugnini and theConcilium
According to Mary Ball Martinez, "as early as 1947 Pope Pacelli... was setting up a commision for the
complete overhauling of the sacred liturgy. As secretary he chose a 35-year-old priest, one Fr.
Bugnini, who had the evocative first name of Annibale, having been born in a town along the shores
of Lake Trasimeno where Hannibal and his elephants roundly defeated the Romans. Beating the
Romanness out of the Missale... became the major goal of Fr. Bugnini and his group of periti.
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
18/34
"That the Pope gave great importance to this committee and its work is evident in lines from an
autobiography which Bugnini wrote... 'We enjoyed the full confidence of Pius XII who was kept
informed of our work by Msgr. Montini and even more by Fr. Bea, his confessor. Thanks to these
intermediaries we could arrive at remarkable results even in periods when the Pope's illness
prevented anyone else from seeing him'" (The Undermining of the Catholic Church, p. 90).
Martinez maintains that the Curial office, the Sacred Congregation for Rites, opposed Bugnini's
innovations consistently, and it therefore took 6 years for the changes Maxima Redeptionis came
finally in 1955, moving Easter's celebration to the evening before, and suppressing the Three Hours
devotion on Good Friday and the solemnities ofTenebrae. In many of the Easter ceremonies,
Martinez notes that the priest faced the people, and the prayers at the foot of the altar and the last
Gospel were suppressed, "making of it a kind of dress rehearsal for the New Mass, still a decade in
the future" (p. 91).
Fr. Bugnini was appointed Professor of Sacred Liturgy at the Lateran University in 1957. In 1960 he
was appointed Secretary to the Preparatory Commission for the Liturgy of the Second Vatican
Council. Michael Davies maintains that "he was the moving spirit behind the drafting of the
preparatory schema, the draft document which was to be placed before the Council Fathers for
discussion... As was stressed in Msgr. Bugnini's own journal, Notitiae, the Liturgy Constitution which
the Council Fathers eventually passed was substantially identical with the draft schema which he had
steered through the Preparatory Commission" (Pope Paul's New Mass, p. 498).
The Concilium...
In March, 1964 the formation of the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution on the
Liturgy known as the Concilium, was announced; fr. Bugnini was appointed its secretary. Although
over 50 prelates from around the world were members, it was Bugnini who wielded the power,
guiding daily the work of some 150 consulting liturgists who were producing the new texts and
rubrics.
Fr. Cekada explains that "Concilium's mission and juridical standing were an anomaly. In the normal
scheme of the things, the Vatican's Sacred Congregation of Rites decided and regulated all mattersaffecting the Church's worship. It appears, however, that the members of the Congregation were
opposed to many of the schemes in the air for reworking the Sacred Liturgy... Establishing a new
entity to propose liturgical changes, therefore, achieved the proverbial end-run around a well-
entrenched opposition" (PPMM, p. 7).
In 1969, Pope Paul incorporated the Concilium into the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship as a
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
19/34
special commission. As Davies explains, "Notitae, the official journal of the Concilium, became the
journal of the new Congregation. Father Annibale Bugnini was appointed secretary... and became
more powerful than ever. In fact, it is certainly no exaggeration to claim that what had, in fact,
happened was that the Concilium, in other words Father Bugnini, had taken over the Sacred
Congregation for Divine Worship" (Pope Paul's New Mass, p. 502). Dubbed the "evil spirit of liturgical
reform" by Dietrich von Hildebrand, Bugnini had over 150 changes in circulation within twelve
months.
Freemasonic Connections
In 1972 Pope Paul created Bugnini Titular Archbishop of Dioclentia. In 1975, however, the Archbishop
left his briefcase behind in a conference room, where it was found and inspected by the Dominican
Friar charged with restoring the room to order. In search only of the identity of the case's owner, the
Dominican found, according to Piers Compton, documents whose "signatures and place of origin
showed that they came from dignitaries of secret societies in Rome" (The Broken Cross, p. 61). The
letters were addressed to "Brother Bugnini." According to Davies "a Roman priest of the very highest
reputation.. Had this information placed into the hands of Paul VI, with the warning that if action were
not taken at once he would be bound in conscience to make the matter public. Msgr. Bugnini was
then dismissed and his entire congregation dissolved" (Pope Paul's New Mass, p. 505).
Bugnini was appointed the Apostolic pro-Nuncio to Iran, and repeatedly denied that he had
Freemasonic affiliations. When the Italian Register came to light in 1976, however, it showed his April
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
20/34
23, 1963 initiation date and number, and gave his code name as 'Buan.'
The Luciferian nature of secret societies
"Their god," wrote Pius VIII, "is the devil, and Pius IX referred to the lodge as the "synagogue ofSatan." Their references are factual, rather than poetic. Masonry, like its Kabbalistic forefather, is
Luciferian at its inner core. 33rd degree Freemason Oswald Wirth wrote: "The beguiling serpent who incites
us to eat the fruit.... represents both a nobler and subtler impulse, whose purpose is to make man aware of his
need to rise in the scale of beings... The modern mason... by carrying out the divine plan, himself becomes a
god...." (cited in de Poncins'Freemasonry and the Vatican, pp. 87). J.D. Buck states that "the only personal god
Freemasonry accepts is humanity in total. God, the Great Architect of the Universe, personifies himself through
man, Humanity, therefore, is the only personal god there is" (Symbolism of Mystic Masonry, p. 216).
This Masonic belief in the immanent divinity of man represents a revolt against the divine life; the
1931 French Masonic Reviewspecifically stated that "henceforward there are only two doctrines... for
which men are combating; Integral Humanism, no matter what may be the particular form of social
reconstruction favored by its protagonists... and Clerico-Theism" (cited in Fr. Fahey's Mystical Body
of Christ in the Modern World, p. 38).
The ecumenical goal of secret societies.
Fr. James Wathen has pointed out that "only the extremely naive would not recognize in the
Ecumenical Movement the machinations of Freemasonry, which from the Nineteenth century has had
as one of its principle goals the amalgamation of the churches, and the deletion from all of them the
last traces of authentic Christianity" (Who Shall Ascend, p. 487). "Our final aim is that of Voltaire and
that of the French Revolution the complete annihilation of Catholicism, and ultimately of
Christianity," wrote a conspirator within the Carbonari, whose Supreme Direcotry, theAlta Vendita,
became a "kind of nucleus for all the secret societies spread throughout Italy" (The Broken Cross, p.
12). Masonry's Integral Humanism will issue in the creation of an artificial world-state built according
to their principles. Brother Riandey taught that "the future world will create a still newer one. After
having assimilated Christianity and all other forms of spirituality, it will, as it were, give birth, by
analogy to the physical phenomenon of a total collectivization, to a kind of pantheism" (Le Temple,Sept.-Oct. 1946).
Roca, a defrocked priest, Satanist, and Masonic theoretician, had been quite explicit in his
statements regarding this syncretic goal. He envisioned "a new Christianity, sublime, vast, profound,
truly universal, absolutely encyclopedic... a universal cult into which all cults will be absorbed whose
God will be humanity, which to my eyes, commingles with Christ, who is thus the entire universe"
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
21/34
(Glorieux Centenaire, pp. 77, 525, 528). "It is only a theocratic society having the characteristics of
Freemasonry that we can hope some day to unite Islam and Christianity, the Jews with the
Buddhists, Europe and Asia in one idea and one intense hope. In a word, it is up to Freemasonry to
form the Universal Church." In the Bulletin du Grand Orient(n. 57), he summarizes: "Masonry wishes
to be the super-church, the church which will reunite all churches."
It was primarily this intention that brought ringing condemnations from Pope after Pope; since the
time of Clement XII, some 18 encyclicals condemned Freemasonry and threatened Catholics who
joined or cooperated with them with excommunication. Masonry needs a universal religion of its
liking, in order to blend together all humanity under Lucifer's utopian banner. The Church had been its
most powerful enemy; after all, there has been enmity between her seed and that of the serpent
since the time of Eden.
The method of secret societies
Subversion from within has become Masonry's chosen approach to the Catholic Church. The method
proved quite successful; a century ago the secret societies were able to boast of "more than eight
hundred priests, among whom are many professors and prelates as well as some Bishops and
Cardinals" in Rome. In 1903, Freemason and Cardinal Mariano Rampolla, having served as Leo
XIII's secretary of state, was nearly elevated to the chair of Peter.
Martinez notes that, "according to the Milanese journalist Pier Carpi, who claims to have absolute
proof... [Roncalli] was initiated into Masonry attaining... the 18th or Rosicrucian Degree. Yves Marsaudon,
State Minister of the Supreme Council of French secret societies, wrote the preface to Brother Charles
Riandey's Masonic book on ecumenism. Piers Compton quotes that preface: "To the memory of Angelo
Roncalli, priest, Archbishop of Messamaris, Apostolic Nuncio in Paris, Cardinal of the Roman Church,
Patriarch of Venice, Pope under the name of John XXIII, who has deigned to give us his benediction, his
understanding, and his protection." A second preface was dedicated to "his August continuer, His Holiness Pope
Paul VI" (The Broken Cross, pp. 49-50)
By 1976 Italian publications were printing lists of clerics, some in high office, whose secret society
membership had been uncovered. Numbered among them were the recently deceased AgostinoCardinal Casaroli, Secretary of State and prefect of the Pontifical Commission for the Revision of
Canon law the most powerful Vatican official after the Pope, whose place he assumes in the
latter's absence.
Once clerics sympathetic to the revolution were in place, the Church could be torpedoed from within.
Roca had spelled out the conditions for the successful subversion of Catholicism: "You must have a
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
22/34
new dogma, a new religion, a new ministry, and new rituals that very closely resemble those of the
surrendered Church." He also predicted that "The divine cult directed by the liturgy, ceremonial, ritual
and regulation of the Roman Catholic Church will shortly undergo transformation at an ecumenical
Council" (cited in The Broken Cross, p. 42).
The success of secret societies
certainly one encounters, among the documents of the Second Vatican Council, statements without
Catholic precedent, which mark a departure from formal doctrine. Gaudium et Spes, n. 12, tells us
that "Believers and unbelievers agree almost unanimously that all things on earth should be ordained
to man as to their center and summit." It's a statement with which any Freemason would agree but
the Church has always taught that human life is ordered to God.
The predicted Masonic transformation is nowhere more evident than in the Novus Ordo Missae.
Under Bugnini's leadership, references to man's frailty and propensity for sin have been excised, as
befits candidates for godhood. By Bugnini's own admission 'ecumenical sensitivity' fueled the
construction of new Eucharistic prayers, and references to those Catholic teachings despised by
Protestants have been omitted or downplayed. The next world receives scant attention in a mass
designed by those who look forward to ruling a universal temporal kingdom.
Six Heretics
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
23/34
According to Michael Davies, a published photograph of Pope Paul VI with Vatican II's six Protestantliturgical 'observers'"proved to be a source of astonishment and even scandal to large numbers of the
faithful who had had no idea that Protestants played any part in the compilation of the new Catholic
rites" (Pope Paul's New Mass, Appendix III). Those heretics represented the World Council of
Churches, the Anglican and Lutheran communions, and the Taize community. Davies goes on to
quote Cardinal Baum, who maintains that the Protestants in question were "not simply there as
observers, but as consultants as well and they participated fully in the discussions on Catholic
liturgical renewal."
Their impact was considerable. "Prayers referring to the doctrines of sacrifice and the Real Presence
have been minimized to such an extent that the Novus Ordo Missae can now be celebrated in a
manner that is completely acceptable to some Protestants" (Pope Paul's New Mass, p. 255). M. G.
Siegvalt, a professor of dogmatic theology on the Protestant faculty at Strasbourg, notes that "nothing
in the renewed Mass need really trouble the Evangelical Protestant," the Eucharistic prayers having
dropped what observer jean Guitton termed "the false perspective of sacrifice offered to God." Alfredo
Cardinal Ottaviani's intervention also cited the reduction of the priest's role to one approximating that
of a Protestant minister, a new definition of the Mass as an "assembly," and ambiguous and
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
24/34
equivocal language throughout, which compromise Church doctrines.
Davies maintains that "Not only do these Protestants feel at home with the prayers of the Novus Ordo
Missae, but they state quite explicitly that they consider that there has been a change in the Catholic
theology of the Mass which brings it into line with evangelical teaching on the Lord's Supper" (p. 271).
(By way of example, the language of the prayer that asks that the gifts "be for us" the Body and Blood
allows for the denial of Transubstantiation and the substitution oftransignifaction, a Protestant
notion that holds that the Presence of Christ in the Sacrament is real only for the believer.)
Davies notes a liturgical convergence in the revised liturgies of Anglicans, Methodists and others,
quoting writers from the various denominations who expressed their desire for what one called "a
United Christian rite in a United Christian Church." He cites the efforts of the Societas Liturgica, under
the auspices of the World Council of Churches, whose Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox members
strive for just that sort of convergence. Similarly, the ICET (International Consultation on English
Texts) proposes texts "which will be acceptable to all the Churches... in the hope of furthering
ecumenism." The American bishops have made many ICET texts mandatory.
Fr. Wathen observes that "Protestants need take no comfort at seeing the Mass being
'accommodated' to their beliefs... the final purpose of the Revolution is their subversion, also... For its
essential motif is not Protestant, but ecumenical... What [the Revolution] understands by ecumenism
is the melting of all religious denominations into the pseudo-religious hash of universal brotherhood....
Instead of God, the Revolution worships 'man.'" (The Great Sacrilege, p. 127)
The Novus Ordo Missae, quite simply, is the new rite of 'Mass' meticulously constructed under thedirection of a Freemason, with the official assistance of six forma heretics. It is the oft-stated intention
of Freemasonic theoreticians to subvert and destroy the Catholic Church; heretics are termed such
precisely because they deny Catholic teaching. There remains no logical reason to believe that it was
not designed to harm the faith.
The Novus Ordo does not become acceptable should it be established that it contains no explicit
heresy. As Cardinal Ottaviani warned, "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 turn into a certainty the suspicion
already prevalent, alas, in many circles, that truths which have always been believed by Christian
people can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the
Catholic faith is bound forever."
Part 3: Legal Questions
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
25/34
What is the force of Quo Primum?
Fr. Wathen explains that "Quo Primum established the Traditional Rite in perpetuity with all the force
which the Pope's office possessed" (Ascend, pp. 528-529). An act of the Council of Trent as well as a
Sainted Pope, Quo Primum says that "by virtue of our Apostolic Authority we give and grant inperpetuity that for the singing or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever this Missal may be
followed absolutely, without any scruple or conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgement or
censure, and may be freely and lawfully used." It was declared "unlawful henceforth and forever
throughout the Christian world to sing or to read Masses according to any other formula other than
that of this Missal, published by us," with the exception of an Indult granted to approved mass rites
that had been in use for over 200 years at that time. Furthermore, Quo Primum specifically states that
"no one whosoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute,
ordinance, command..."
"You can find canonists who will tell you that Pope Paul VI, having authority equal to that of Pope St.
Pius V, could legally abrogate Quo Primum, and legally introduce a new missal," Fr. Wathen
observes. Michael Davies has found several who say precisely this. Certainly in purely disciplinary
measures, the principle is a true one. However, Fr. Wathen's argument is that Quo Primum "is a law
that was imposed with the fullest pontifical authority, whose intention was to protect the Mass insofar
as it might ever need protecting, from any mischief whatsoever... It should be taken as a self-evident
fact that the Church, as a perfect society one, that is, which possesses all the means necessary
for the achievement of the ends of its existence has all the power and authority she needs to
protect the Mass of the Roman Rite, and that, in the legislation, Quo Primum, she attempted to raise
such an incontestable bulwark" (Ascend, pp. 530-531).
Is Papal infallibility involved?
According to Fr. Wathen, "the prevalent opinion is that, by his Apostolic Constitution Missale
Romanum of April 3, 1969, His Holiness Pope Paul VI established the Novus Ordo Missae to replace
the Traditional Latin Mass... Consequently, to refuse to offer this 'New Mass' is a serious violation of
Church law. And to question it on doctrinal grounds is tantamount to questioning the doctrine of Papal
Infallibility" (Great Sacrilege, pp. 16-17). There are those, he notes, "who say that the Holy Ghostwould never permit the supreme authority of the Church to impose as a universally binding law
something which is contrary or harmful to faith or morals... Any law, they imagine, that the Church
passes which has to do with their moral obligations cannot be harmful to them, else the Church will
have violated her infallibility" (Ascend, p. 514).
This argument, however, does not bear scrutiny. The First Vatican Council, which laid down the
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
26/34
conditions for infallibility, states that, among other requirements, the Pope must speak as the Pope,
exercising his office of teaching the whole Church. In addition to the Latin Rite, there are five other
liturgical Rites within the universal Church some 12 million souls who would not have been directly
affected by the introduction of the Novus Ordo. Liturgical precepts might in fact be morally wrong,
since "they are not universally binding, and are not protected by the Church's infallibility" (Ascend, p.
516). Furthermore, "the doctrine of Papal infallibility, by stating in what respect the Pope cannot err,
admits, in effect, that in all other areas of his vast prerogatives the Pope is completely fallible...
[T]here is no divine promise that the Pope will not be permitted to use his great authority in the most
wicked and destructive ways" (Great Sacrilege, pp. 21-22)
It is a moot point. Fr. Wathen finds that "Christ and the True Church, through the decree of Pope Pius
II, Execrabilis, have rendered all the acts of the Council, and all that are done by virtue of the Council,
null and void" (Ascend, p. 516). According to Execrabilis, no future council, and no pope, may
overturn the solemn definitions of the Sacred Magisterium. Any council called to contravene existing
Magisterial teaching was anathematized in advance; those involved incur, in addition to ecclesiastical
censure, "the indignation of almighty God, and of Saints Peter and Paul, His Apostles."
Was the Traditional Latin Mass Suppressed?
In 1986, Pope John Paul II called together nine Cardinals and formed a papal commission. The
commission's purpose was to examine the legal status of the Traditional Latin Mass, and it was to
answer two questions: 1) Did Pope Paul VI abrogate the Latin Rite? And 2) Does any priest needpermission to offer Mass in the Traditional Rite?
The commission concluded unanimously that Pope Paul did not abrogate the traditional rite; he never
gave the bishops the authority to forbid celebration according to the traditional rite of Mass.
To the second question, the commission responded 8 votes in the negative, and one in the positive.
Priests cannot be obligated to celebrate the new rite of mass; bishops cannot forbid or place
restrictions on the celebration of the traditional rite, whether in public or in private.
According to Fr. Paul Leonard, the commission recommended that the Pope issue a papal decreebased on the commission's findings, but "Cardinal Agostino Casaroli, the Vatican's Secretary of State,
maneuvered the situation in such a manner so as to obstruct [issuance of a papal decree]." Cardinal
Casaroli, a member of the commission in question, was also among those named as a secret society
member when the Italian Register was published in 1976. He served as Prefect of the Pontifical
Commission for the Revision of Canon Law which produced the new 1983 Code, deleting specific
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
27/34
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
28/34
Fr. Morrison notes that "Traditional Catholics generally believe that no such 'indult' [permission] is
necessary for the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass, which was canonized by Sacred Tradition
and mandated 'in perpetuity' by Pope St. Pius V in his Solemn Bull Quo Primum [1570]. The form of
the 'Indult' Mass is that of the Missale Romanum of 1962. Such masses are, in and of themselves,
legitimate, as long as there is no admixture of the Novus Ordo Mass with the Traditional Latin Mass.
Some diocesan 'Indult' Masses are 'pseudo-traditional,' in that they are a hybrid, using the New Mass
calendar, lectionary, rubrics, vernacular, Communion-in-the-hand, altars facing the people, Hosts
consecrated at a Novus Ordo Mass or other untraditional variations.
"In addition, some 'Indult' Masses offer a modernistic environment, featuring sermons with a
modernistic tone, utilizing 'extraordinary' lay ministers to distribute Communion failing to observe the
traditional precept for the Eucharistic Fast, or following other untraditional practices" (Traditio web
page: ).
Part 4: Fruits Of The 'New Mass'
Dr. Berger, a Lutheran socioligist, is forthright in his evaluation of the impact of the New mass on the
Catholic population. "The Liturgical Revolution no other term will do is a mistake touching
millions of Catholics at the core of their religious belief," he said. "Let me only mention the sudden
abolition, and indeed, prohibition of the Latin mass, the transposition of the officiating priest from the
front to the back of the altar (the first change symbolically diminished the universality of the Mass, the
second, its transcendent reference) ad the massive assault on a wide variety of forms of popular
piety... If a thoroughly malicious sociologist, bent on injuring the Catholic community as much as
possible, had been able to be advisor to the Church, he could hardly have done a better job"
(Homiletic and Pastoral Review, Feb. 1979, cited by Coomaraswamy).
Proof of the damage is easy to find. Despite continual talk of the ongoing Catholic 'renewal,' statistics
show a generalized withering since the introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae. According to Michael
Davies, "Mass attendance has decreased by percentages ranging from a modest 22% in England to
70% in France and Holland; there has been a catastrophic decline in baptisms, as much as 50% in
Britain and the U.S.A. Conversions have plunged, seminary enrollment has declined by anything from25% to 80%, while ordinations have declined as much as 97%.
"To make matters worse, there has been an exodus from the priestly and religious life. In the U.S.A.
alone, 10,000 priests have abandoned their vocation and over 50,000 nuns have left their convents"
(The Goldfish Bowl: the Church Since Vatican II, pp. 24-25). In less than seven years after the
introduction of the new Mas, priests in the world decreased form 413,438 to 243,307 nearly 50%
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
29/34
(Holy See Statistics).
Part 5: Conclusions
The New Mass, concludes Fr. Wathen, is "Humanist, Protestant (meaning anti-sacrificial), irreverent,
or, if none of these things, then pointless, purposeless, and therefore mischievous. Added to these
faults is the fact that it is questionably valid with respect to its consecratoin formula..." (Ascend, p.
5470548). Most of his charges have been substantiated in this newsletter, but a summary of sorts is
in order.
The Novus Ordo is probably invalid
Fr. Wathen notes that "suspicion of the invalidity of the New Mass is drawn from the new Missal and
from the attendant features; they who officiate at this Meal are no longer priests but presidents; they
stand not at an altar but a table not so much to offer it as to 'celebrate'..." Genuflections and acts
oflatria due Our transubstantiated Lord have been suppressed. Altar rails, suggestive of kneeling,
have been removed. As the Ottaviani Intervention noted, there are in the New Mass an "implicit
denials of Christ's Real Presence and the doctrine of Transubstantiation."
The words of Consecration. The changes in the words of Consecration have been fully discussed;
because of their deviation from the form defined by the Council of Trent, and their violation of the Bull
De Defectibus, the validity of the Sacrament is highly questionable.
The intention. Pope Leo XIII published his Bull,Apostolicae Curae, in 1896, declaring Anglican
orders to be invalid. He reached that decision based upon two factors the defect of form (the
words of their ordination rite failed to provide the necessary signification) and defect of intention.
Either of those defects, he said, would have been sufficient to render the alleged sacrament invalid.
The defect of intention cited by the Pontiff refers to the intent of the rite's framers. "Concerning the
mind or intention, insomuch as it is itself something interior, the Church does not pass judgment; but
insofar as it is externally manifested, She is bound to judge of it," Pope Leo explained. The Anglicans
had demonstrated, by their own words and writings, an intention to concoct a new type of priesthood
substantially different from the one specified by Christ, and therefore His Church.
The architects of the New Mass have written and spoken endlessly on the newness oftheircreation.
The altered role of the priest, the suppression of sacrificial terminology in favor of "meal" terminology,
the alteration of the words of Consecration, etc. have all been externally manifested in the Novus
Ordo. As the Ottaviani Intervention explicitly states, "it is obvious that the New Mass has no intention
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
30/34
of presenting the Faith taught by the Council of Trent... [It] teems with insinuations or manifest errors
against the integrity of the Catholic Faith."
Furthermore, the Novus Ordo was concocted by the Church's avowed enemy, a Freemason, in
cooperation with six formal heretics who deny transubstantiation. ("Can any person of sound mind
conceivably suppose," asks Omlor, "that Annibale Bugnini, that most talented operative of
Freemasonry, which is the 'mystical body of Satan,' would be taking pained to preserve the validity of
the Catholic mass and would be making sure that the Mystical Body of Christ was being properly
signified in the words of the Consecration form?") There is, in other words, clear defect of intention on
the part of the New Mass.
No doubtful sacraments. Omlor notes that "a sacramental form that is ambiguous is ipso facto
invalid," citing the Catechism of the Council of Trent (McCarthy's Case, p. 25). Coomaraswamy
further explains that receipt of a questionable sacrament is sacrilege an act directed against God.
Fr. Henry Davis, S.J., writes that "in conferring the sacraments, as also in the consecration of the
mass, it is never allowed to adopt a probable course of action as to validity and to abandon the safer
course. The contrary was explicitly condemned by Pope Innocent III... to do so would be a grievous
sin against religion, namely an act of irreverence toward what Christ Our Lord has instituted. It would
be a grievous sin against charity, as the recipient would probably be deprived of the graces and
effects of the Sacrament. It would be a grievous sin against justice, as the recipient has a right to
valid sacraments.
"Matter and form must be certainly valid. Hence one may not follow a probable opinion and use either
doubtful matter or form. Acting otherwise, one commits sacrilege" (Moral and Pastoral Theology, p.27, cited by Coomaraswamy, p. 63).
The Novus Ordo is a Sacrilege
"Whether the New Mass is valid or invalid, it is an atrocity, an unspeakable attack on the True Mass,"
writes Fr. Wathen, who has contended steadfastly that the Novus Ordo is sacrilegious. "The New
Mass itself is an abuse of the Catholic Mass, which was given a definite and immutable form by Pope
St. Pius V, exactly so that abuses could be avoided, discerned and condemned" (Ascend, p. 513). Fr.
Wathen's book, The Great Sacrilege was published in 1971: long before many of the evil effects of
the New mass were obvious, Fr. Wathen maintained that the Novus Ordo's irreverent mimicries" were
to be avoided, that the sanctuaries in which it was enacted were to be regarded as desecrated,
"impious and sordid actions" having been committed there (Canon 1172, Par. 1.3, cited by Fr.
Wathen). The Great Sacrilege remains essential readinf for those who would understand the scope of
the travesty thrust upon Catholics.
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
31/34
The Novus Ordo is Spiritual Subversion
Protestant ethos. The incorporation of heretical Protestant constructs and prayers in the New Mass,
with the assistance of Protestant advisors, has been documented. The designers of the Novus Ordo
invited into the consulting process those whose specific errors separated them from the Church; the
resulting rite cannot but subvert the faith of Catholic who was, heretofore, isolated from Protestant
error.
Jewish Intent. "Keep in mind," Omlor writes, "that all insertions or deletions in the Novus Ordo are
the result of Jewry's insistence for a complete overhauling of the Catholic mind. A reshaping of the
Catholic thinking and attitude toward Jewry and thus toward God and the Truths He gave us is their
goal. What better way to change Catholic thinking than to change the Mass Book, and Ritual, the
heart of Catholic belief and worship? For, as you pray, so you think .... as you think, so you prayer...
the one reflects the other. The unorthodox thinking and attitude exhibited by V-2 Catholics today
stems mainly from the new attitude and thinking they have acquired due to the profane changes
effected by the Novus Ordo. The constant repitition of arrogant 'prayers' of nonbelievers... amounts to
the programmed reconditioning of the mind... concerning Apostolic doctrine and beliefs." (The Holy
Sacrifice of the Mass and the Knox Query, p. 19).
The re is considerable support for Omlor's change. Within the New Mass itself we find the
substitution of a Jewish table grace for the traditional Suscipe, Sancte Paterin the Offertory. The
Canon has been replaced by Eucharistic Prayers admittedly patterned on the Jewish berakah, or
kiddush prayers. Prayers for the conversion of the jews and heretics have been deleted, and the "two
covenant" theory repeatedly condemned by the Church finds expression in the prayers of Holy Week(Catholics now ask that the Jews may remain faithful to theircovenant, as though ti coexists with the
New Covenant of Jesus Christ). The Talmudic glorification of man pervades the New Rite, enshrining
the very naturalism Popes have repeatedly condemned. Catholics are now instructed that Mass on
the Jewish Sabbath fulfills their Sunday obligation.
Furthermore, the stated intention of assorted Jewish pressure groups to effect changes in Catholic
thinking during the Second Vatican Council must be taken into account. A detailed examination of the
subject is undertaken by Vicomte Leo de Leo de Poncins, in his 1967 book Judaism and the Vatican.
De Poncins includes in his book a lengthy quotation rom the January 25, 1966 Look Magazine article,
"How the Jews changed Catholic Thinking," written by that publication's senior editor, Joseph Roddy.
The article gave many details of secret negotiations between Cardinal Bea and the leaders of the
[Masonic] B'nai B'rith and the American Jewish Committee. Bea met with what the Lookarticle
termed a "latter day Sanhedrin" to "take questions the Jews wanted to hear answered;" Rabbi
Abraham Heschel met with Pope Paul, whom he urged to purge Catholic doctrine and liturgy of all
vestiges of anti-Semitism. A glance at the Novus Ordo indicates that the Jewish reform program is
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
32/34
well underway.
Humanistic subversion. "The New Mass is the liturgy of the Conciliar anti-religion," says Fr. Wathen
(Ascend, p. 545). "It is the embodiment and expression of the counter-theology of the Second Vatican
Council," the Council which agreed that "all things on earth should be ordered to man, as to their
summit and crown." In the writings of the Council narcissism and the toxic glorification of modern
culture triumph. The Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern Worlddeclared that human
life, including the life of the Church, was no longer ordered to God. Instead, "Christians cannot yearn
for anything more ardently than to serve the men of the modern world" (#93). The Church, rather than
proclaiming the debt to God, "proclaims the rights of man" (#41). Far from being entrusted with all
truth, as previously held, the Church is now merely "joined with the rest of men in the search for truth"
(#16). To these conceptual falsehoods of the New Mass gives liturgical expression. Fr. Wathen
maintains that "every new mass offered, no matter how it is offered or by whom, or in what language,
is a statement of belief in and acceptance of [this] Conciliar Humanism. It is the worship of the
modern Baal 'Modern Man'" (Ascend, p. 545).
The Novus Ordo is an instrument of the World Revolution
"The place the New mass has in the grand design of World Revolution is a poorly kept secret,"
maintains Fr. Wathen, adding that its purpose is to mold Catholics "into servile citizens of the Global
Commonwealth, which is being consolidated with every day that passes. The proper religious
mentality for the New World Order is to worship God in the person of the People of God, which, of
course, is nothing but the World State itself. Its chief doctrines will be those of Freemasonry, the
Fatherhood of God, the Brotherhood of Man, democracy and socialism" (Ascend, p. 526). Throughthe New Mass and Conciliar teaching, he maintains that Catholics are being programmed to accept
complete amalgamation into the One World Religion. "The New Mass is the rite of worship of the
Global Chruch. It is bland and nebulous and plastic enough to serve for any religious creed and any
ritual adaptation, as we all well know" (Ascend, p. 528).
"The purpose they had in mind for the New Liturgy the word 'Mass' has all but disappeared
was, as they have said so often, mainly educational. To put it simply, their purpose is largely fulfilled.
The people, for the most part, are religious zombies. And they are completely manageable, as, from
their point of view, it has daily grown more easy to get to Heaven. By now it would see m there is no
way to go to Hell, for it no longer exists" (ibid).
The Novus Ordo's Acceptance is a victory for Satan.
According to St. Alphonsus Liguori, "the devil has always attempted, by means of heretics, to deprive
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ordo Pictures
33/34
the world of the Mass, making them precursors of the anti-Christ, who, before anything else, will try to
abolish and will actually abolish the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, as a punishment for the sins of men,
according to the prediction of Daniel, 'And strength was given him against the continual sacrifice'
(Dan. 8:12)" (The Dignity and Duties of the Priest, cited by Coomaraswamy, p. 13). The acceptance
of a probably invalid, undoubtedly sacrilegious Novus Ordo in lieu of the true Mass clearly advances
Satan's plan. That the New Order of Mass should have been constructed with the official assistance
of the heretics to whom St. Alphonsus refers demonstrates a Satanic 'game plan' unaltered across
time.
Fr. Lawrence Brey wrote that the Holy Mass "may well be the final test of orthodoxy... which will
differentiate the true Remnant Church and its faithful from the growing body of apostates who have
affiliated themselves with the new religion of the Beast" (cited in The Great Sacrilege, p. 153).
For Further Investigation:
Fr. Wathen's The Great Sacrilege ($10), The Ottaviani Intervention ($7), Fr. Cekada's The Problems
with the Prayers of the Modern Mass ($4), and Dr. Coomaraswamy's The Problems with the New
Mass ($7) are all published by Tan, and available from Catholic Treasures, P.O. Box 5034, Monrovia,
CA 91017, (626) 359-4983.
Who Shall Ascendis available from St. John the Baptism Priory, 3014 S. Third Street, Louisville,
Kentucky 40208. Its 689 pages cover the Conciliar Church, the Second Vatican Council, Sacraments,and the world revolution.
RealCatholicism
.... a monthly newsletter examining current statements and practices of the Church hierarchy, in the light of
Magisterial teaching.... The ammunition you need to combat abuses and to remain with the historic Catholic
Faith. Subscription cost for one year $24 (Canadian3 $28). Please make checks payable to Carey Winters.
RealCatholicism, 798 Kenilworth Drive, Box 113, Towson, MD 21204.
1. Citation of Michael Davies' exhaustive research in no way implies this writer's agreement with his
conclusions. As one E. A. Wilson's letter to the Remnantexplained, Davies has "an uncanny ability
for gathering correct facts and, after thoroughly examining those facts, reaching erroneous
-
8/14/2019 The Arguments Against the Novus Ord
top related