http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m160.html

Hosted and Edited by
Patriarch Jacobus Maria DeJesus, D.D.
J.M.J.
A.M.D.G.
F.V.T.
An Ecclesiastical, Religious, Spiritual, Devotional, Educational, Informational, News, Data, and E-Journal 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.

Do You Know?
What is “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a.  “The Vatican 2 church”?


Synod Vatican 2
[Thursday, October 11, 1962 -  Wednesday, December 8, 1965]



Introduction
What Was Synod Vatican 2?

"In fact, cardinal Liènart [a Freemason per Borghese, 1976], on the morning of the outset of the works, rose at the desk of the presidency, and threw away the mask. He said, in fact, that all the schemas predisposed by the members of the preparatory Commission created by John XXIII on 5 June 1960 with criteria that we might still define traditional, would be rejected a priori [in advance]. In that precise moment the ancient balances were shattered. The true [anti-Catholic] face of the Council appeared in all its actuality, before the Church, before the Catholics, before the world."  (Franco Bellegrandi, "The Counterlife of a Pope", Chapter XI.)


This is the REAL Synod Vatican 2:
An evil monster of some automatically excommunicated heretics,
and
automatically excommunicated anti-Catholic Innovators and Infiltrators!



Vatican 2's Biggest Failure?
Itself!

A Synod which automatically incurred the anathema of
Almighty God by rejecting all Sacred Apostolic Tradition!












Oh, MY GOD!!!

ALL THE CHANGES OF THE CHANGES, forced upon all loyal, faithful Catholics, are ILLEGAL & INVALID!

DONE BY  AUTOMATICALLY EXCOMMUNICATED  HERETICS and APOSTATES!   WHO are they?

THEY ARE THE anti-Catholic INNOVATORS:  Synod Vatican 2 Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, and Theologians!

These facts are found on various links at:
http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m03.html


Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi


Roman Catholic Church Pope Celestine I

The Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Celestine I [Saturday, September 10, 422  - Tuesday, July 27, 432 ] taught the principle:  Legem Credendi Lex Statuit Supplicandi.  [The Liturgical form of prayer becomes the standard of Faith.].

This is sometimes shortened to simply Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi:  The Law of Praying is the Law of Believing.  This simply means that you express, by a public, exterior liturgical act of worship, your own personal interior beliefs of your faith.  Thus, you pray what you believe and you believe what you pray.

This principle of prayer and belief has been quoted by a number of relatively recent Infallible Roman Catholic Popes.

Here are two examples:


Roman Catholic Pope, Leo XIII

“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 [the 16th Century Protestants of England] 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], Papal Bull Apostolicae Curae, Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, # 23, Tuesday, September 15, 1896 A.D.).


Roman Catholic Pope, Pius XII

Pope Pius XII cites:

“the well-known and venerable maxim, Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi” -- let the rule for prayer determine the rule for belief [45]”(Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 48, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).
It can also be translated as: “The Liturgical form of prayer becomes the standard of Faith.”  This is sometimes expressed as simply: Lex orandi, lex credendi. The law of praying is the law of believing.

Today some of these same observations can be applied to the official public liturgy which is used by the Vatican 2 church!

A Few Examples of
Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi in
“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a.  “The Vatican 2 church”

Example 1:

187. Objection 9

“(This “objection” is placed within quotation marks [editor's note: to avoid confusion, the “objection” has been put into italics instead] because it comprises the exact words a certain Archbishop wrote to me after I had called to his attention the mutilation: for all men, etc. in the new consecration “form.”) It is interesting to note here that the Form of Consecration used in the Mass goes back even before the Gospels to the primitive liturgy which was used in the Church before the Gospels and before the Epistles of St. Paul were written.

188. Reply Obj. 9

“This is an old artifice, the Anglican Schismatics having used exactly the same pretext. ‘They knew only too well,’ said Pope Leo XIII, ‘the infinite bond which unites faith with worship, “the law of belief with the law of prayer” (Lex Credendi, Lex Orandi) and so, under the pretext of restoring it to its primitive form, they corrupted the order of the liturgy in many ways, To adapt it to the errors of the innovators.’ (Bull Apostolicae Curae, emphasis added)”

“189. Elaborating further in the Vindication of the Bull, the English Bishops said, ‘It could not have been, as you seem to suggest, because the Reformers wished to go back to what was primitive, for they cut out with an unsparing hand the most ancient as well as the most modern portions of the Catholic rite’ (emphasis added)” (Patrick Henry Omlor, “Questioning the Validity of the Masses Using the New, All-English Canon”, Op. Cit.).

Example 2:

This author goes on to say, in part:

Appendix 2:  Lex Credendi: Lex Orandi

“What people already believe is automatically and necessarily mirrored in the very words of the prayers they recite. This truism is one part of the principle: ‘lex credendi: lex orandi,’ the law of belief is the law of prayer. This principle works reversely also; that is to say, people can be led towards certain beliefs by means of the very prayers they are accustomed to saying. And that is why parents teach their small children The Hail Mary, for example, and The Apostles’ Creed, even though these little ones do not yet fully understand everything they are praying. Now, whether or not these parents are familiar with the phrase, ‘lex credendi: lex orandi,’ they are nevertheless putting this principle into practice, for they are teaching their children to PRAY those things that they will ultimately come to BELIEVE.”

“Example 1: Using a ‘good’ word for an evil purpose.”

“To see how the 16th Century Heretics-Schismatics employed the principle, ‘lex credendi: lex orandi’ in order to ‘move the simple from the superstitious opinions of the Popish Mass,’ (Ridley), we need look no farther than the example furnished by their taking up a very good and ‘pious’ word, SPIRITUAL, in order to use it for a most evil purpose. All the quotations which follow immediately below are taken from the writings of these 16th-century ‘Reformers’. In every instance their use of the word ‘SPIRITUAL’ denotes the DENIAL OF THE REAL PRESENCE of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament; body, blood, soul and divinity. This is because they are using the ‘good’ word SPIRITUAL, and applying it to the SACRIFICE OF THE MASS and to THE EUCHARIST. (The reader is asked to bear with me through these examples which follow, for there is an important point to be made.)”

“(1) Wycliffe: ‘The Body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the Supper only after an heavenly and SPIRITUAL manner. And the mean whereby the Body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper is faith.’”

“(2) Ridley: ‘He left the same in mystery to the faithful in the Supper, to be received after a SPIRITUAL communication, and by grace.’”

“(3) Coverdale: ‘(W)e think not our Lord Jesus Christ to be so vile that He may be contained in corruptible elements. Again, lest the force of this most sacred mystery should be diminished, we must think that it is wrought by the secret and wonderful power of God, and that His Spirit is the bond of this partaking, which is for that cause called SPIRITUAL.’”

“(4) Cranmer: ‘Although Christ be not corporally in the bread and wine ... He is effectually present, and effectually worketh, not in the bread and wine, but in the godly receivers of them, to whom He giveth His own flesh SPIRITUALLY to feed upon.’”

“(5) Again Cranmer in replying to Gardiner: ‘Therefore ... we do not pray absolutely that the bread and wine may be made the body and blood of Christ, but that therewith in spirit and in truth we may be SPIRITUALLY nourished.’”

“(6) Latimer: ‘Then we be assured that we feed upon Him SPIRITUALLY.’”

“(7) The Liturgy, of King Edward VI: ‘For us He hath not only give His body to death and shed His blood, but also doth vouchsafe in a sacrament and mystery to give us His said body and blood SPIRITUALLY, to feed and drink upon.’  ‘ ... (F)or then we SPIRITUALLY eat the flesh of Christ and drink His blood, then we dwell in Christ and Christ in us.’   ‘He hath left in these holy mysteries as a pledge of His love, and a continual remembrance of the same, His own blessed body and precious blood, for us SPIRITUALLY to feed upon, to our endless comfort and consolation.’”

“(8) Grindall: ‘This is the SPIRITUAL, the very true, the only eating of Christ's body.’”

“(9) Jewell: ‘Thus, SPIRITUALLY, and with the mouth of faith, we eat the body of Christ and drink his blood.’”

“(10) Beacon: ‘He is also eaten or received SPIRITUALLY when we believe in Christ.’”

“(11) ‘The Book of Common Prayer’ (1549): ‘but also doth vouchsafe in a Sacrament and mystery to give us his said body and blood to feed upon them SPIRITUALLY.’ ‘Thou hast vouchsafed to feed us in these holy mysteries with the SPIRITUAL food of the most precious body and blood of thy Son.’ More examples could be given (there is no shortage of them), for indeed it is difficult to find ANY ONE of the 16th-century Heretics who FAILED to use the word ‘SPIRITUAL,’ when writing of the Sacrifice of the Mass and The Eucharist. But this very pious-sounding word, ‘SPIRITUAL’ did not fool those who were true, ORTHODOX Catholics. Finally, the Fathers of the Council of Trent condemned for all times the heresy contained in this use of the word ‘SPIRITUAL: ‘If anyone says that Christ received in the Eucharist is received SPIRITUALLY only, ... let him be anathema.’ (Canon 8, Session XIII).”

“The New, English Canon of the Mass mistranslates the prayer ‘quam oblationem’ to imply a spiritual offering. This prayer, which immediately precedes the consecration prayers, should read: ‘Do thou, O God, deign to bless what we offer, and make it approved, effective, right, and wholly pleasing in every way ...’ The bogus, HERETICAL ‘Canon’ now reads instead: ‘Bless and approve our offering; make it TRULY SPIRITUAL and acceptable.’ Obviously this is not just a ‘pious’ use of the word SPIRITUAL. For at no time did this particular word EVER appear in ‘the holy canon, which is so free from error that it contains nothing that does not in the highest degree savor of a certain holiness and piety.’ (Council of Trent, Ch. 4, Session 22) “Lex credendi: lex orandi.” Here is “ORANDI”: “Bless and approve our offering; make it truly SPIRITUAL.” Can “CREDENDI” be far behind? Can it be very long before “the simple people are moved” away from the belief in THE REAL PRESENCE?”

“Example 2: A Sacrifice of ‘Praise and Thanksgiving’.”

“In the new, English ‘Canon’ we find in two places (that is, prior to the consecrations of both the bread and the wine) the SEEMINGLY uncalled-for insertion of the words: AND PRAISE. The original Latin reads simply, ‘gratias agens’, GIVING THANKS. Why does the new, English ‘Canon’ say, ‘he gave you thanks AND PRAISE’? It is true that the Mass is a sacrifice of PRAISE, petition, THANKSGIVING, and atonement; but, obviously, that is beside the point here. The simple words, GIVING THANKS, are quite proper and appropriate in this place, for they have their basis in Holy Writ. Four different accounts - to wit, Matt. (26,27); Mark (14,23); Luke (22,19) and I Cor. (11,24) - all have either ‘He gave thanks’ or else ‘giving thanks’. There is a special MEANINGFULNESS in these words, inasmuch as ‘giving thanks’ is in Greek: EUCHARIST. Hence these very words, when recited by the priest just before the two consecrations, remind us of the Sacrament of the EUCHARIST. There is NO Scriptural account that makes mention that Our Lord on the occasion of instituting the Holy Eucharist gave thanks AND PRAISE. So, what is the explanation for this CHANGE made in the Canon of the Mass? Could it be another implementation of ‘lex CREDENDI: lex ORANDI’? As applied TO A SACRIFICE, this particular phraseology - that is, the words ‘praise’ and ‘thanksgiving’, taken together - did, in fact, convey a SINGULAR AND ESPECIAL SIGNIFICANCE to the 16th-century Heretics-Schismatics. According to the scholarly Canon Estcourt, ‘Luther led the attack. He DENIED THE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE of the Sacrifice of the Mass in ANY OTHER SENSE than as the sacrifice of PRAISE AND THANKSGIVING.’ (E. E. Estcourt, “The Question of Anglican Ordinations Discussed”, p. 281, emphasis added). But let us hear it from the Hieresiarchs themselves. First of all, Luther: ‘The Mass may be called a sacrifice, IF IT BE UNDERSTOOD as a sacrifice of PRAISE AND THANKSGIVING, not of a work, nor propitiatory.’ (De Usu Sacram, Euch. salutari, emphasis added) And by Cranmer, Luther’s English counterpart, we are informed: ‘When the old fathers called the mass or supper of the Lord a sacrifice, they meant that it was a sacrifice of LAUDS (i.e., ‘praise’) and THANKSGIVING ... BUT THEY MEANT IN NO WISE THAT IT IS A VERY TRUE SACRIFICE FOR SIN.’ (Cranmer, “On the Lord's Supper”, emphasis added) Thus to the Schismatics the Mass was a sacrifice of ‘PRAISE AND THANKSGIVING’ which, in their argot, meant a BARE COMMEMORATION of the Sacrifice of Calvary, or a SPIRITUAL AND SYMBOLIC sacrifice. But NOT A REAL SACRIFICE, nor a sacrifice of PROPITIATION. This point Cranmer made quite clear, ‘And yet have I denied that it is a sacrifice propitiatory for sin.’ So well-known and infamous was the connotation the Schismatics had attached to the words ‘praise and thanksgiving’ WHEN APPLIED TO THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS, the Fathers of the Council of Trent ONCE AND FOR ALL TIMES pronounced this solemn curse on this heresy: ‘If anyone says that the Sacrifice of the Mass is one only of PRAISE AND THANKSGIVING ... let him be anathema.’ (Canon 3, Session XXII). “Lex credendi: lex orandi.” Here is “orandi”: He gave you thanks AND PRAISE.

“Example 3: ‘Ein' feste Burg ist unser Gott’.”

“At the peak of his rebellion, Martin Luther penned the hymn, ‘Ein' feste Burg ist unser Gott’. It was ‘the production’, says the historian Ranke, ‘of the moment in which Luther, engaged in a conflict with a world of foes, sought strength in the consciousness that he was defending a divine (sic) cause which could never perish.’”

“‘Ein' feste Burg ist unser Gott’ was called by Heine ‘The Marseillaise of the Reformation.’

“This battle-hymn of rebellion AGAINST THE CATHOLIC CHURCH is now appearing on ‘hymn cards’ IN CATHOLIC CHURCHES. (St. Thomas Aquinas Church in Palo Alto, California, for example.) And as CATHOLICS sing this hymn, ‘A Mighty Fortress Is Our God’, do they yet realize that they are echoing the great hieresiarch in his apostasy, his rebellion AGAINST THE ONE, TRUE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, APOSTOLIC ROMAN CHURCH which was founded by the SON OF GOD?” “Lex credendi: lex orandi.” Here is “orandi”: “THE MARSEILLAISE OF THE REFORMATION.”

“EXAMPLE 4: ‘And I will go in to the table of God.’”
(New American version of Psalm 42, v. 4)

“The destruction of the altars was a measure SO DISTINCT IN ITS MEANING that we have NEVER BEEN ABLE TO CONCEIVE HOW THAT MEANING COULD BE MISUNDERSTOOD. The measure meant a bitter hatred of the Mass, and a hatred DIRECTED AGAINST THE MASS ITSELF, not merely against some obscure abuse ... Surely if these reformers HAD DESIRED ONLY TO REMOVE AN ABUSE, but were full of reverence for the great Christian Sacrifice itself, they would not have destroyed and desecrated the altars, AND SUBSTITUTED TABLES IN THEIR PLACE, alleging as their reason, in unqualified terms, that ‘the form of a table shall more move the simple from the superstitious opinions of the Popish Mass unto the right use of the Lord's Supper. For THE USE OF AN ALTAR IS TO MAKE SACRIFICE ON IT; THE USE OF A TABLE IS TO SERVE MEN TO EAT UPON IT.’ (Ridley's Works). (emphasis added). The foregoing were the words of the Roman Catholic Bishops of England in 1898. (Source: ‘A Vindication of the Bull Apostolicae Curae,’ par. 38, titled ‘The Destruction of Altars’).” (Patrick Henry Omlor, “Questioning the Validity of the Masses Using the New, All-English Canon,” Op. Cit.; emphasis in original text.).

“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a.  “The Vatican 2 church”

Various teachings, doctrines, dogmas, and most especially the liturgy of the Mass and Seven Sacraments which “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” teaches and/or uses are NOT CATHOLIC!

Because of lex orandi, lex credendi, this apostate catholic church, which has fallen into heresy, apostasy and schism from the Catholic Church, can only be called by the name which best describes and identifies what it really IS, i.e. the real name by which it prays and the real name of what it believes and teaches, i.e., those NON-CATHOLIC prayers, beliefs, and teachings of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” as found in the new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”.

Photograph taken on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D. and printed in the Pope's official newspaper, L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, Weekly Edition in English, Third Year, N. 18 (109) - Thursday, APRIL 30, 1970 A.D., page # 3.

Please note: the sequence of the names of the Cardinals given in the next paragraph seems to match the sequence of the Cardinals posing in this photograph:

“Among the many members of the Hierarchy present at the audience were Cardinals: Lercaro, Gracias. Giobbe, Confalonieri, Rugambwa, Felici, Gray, Enrique y Tarancon, and Willebrands” (Article: COMMISSION HOLDS FINAL MEETING, Pope commends work of “Consilium”, L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, Weekly Edition in English, Third Year, N. 17 (108) - Thursday, APRIL 23, 1970 A.D., page # 1).
But several years before this:
“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 [with its very active 6 Protestant member/experts] 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.

“In the Novus Ordo Missae lately promulgated by the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum [April 6, 1969], 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”  (Roman Theologians, The Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, June 5, 1969, # 1-2).

Why? Since
“the voting [in October 1967] showed considerable opposition (43 non placet), and very many substantial reservations (62 juxta modum),
most probably due in part to the principle of lex orandi, lex credendi, it was obviously foolhardy to let the Bishops vote again!

It seems that Paul 6 understood the problem the Bishops were having?

But instead of addressing the concerns of the Bishops, the Pope merely bypassed them! This is why it is so ironic that even Pope Paul 6 admitted this principle of lex orandi, lex credendi in his Speech on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D. to the members of the Consilium!

On this point the Pope said:

“...theology should have more influence on the liturgical texts, so that therefore the lex orandi might correspond more aptly with the lex credendi...” (Article: COMMISSION HOLDS FINAL MEETING, Pope commends work of Consilium, L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, Weekly Edition in English, Third Year, N. 17 (108) - Thursday, APRIL 23, 1970 A.D., page # 2).

John Carmel Cardinal Heenan

Therefore, Pope Paul 6, regarding whom it was said that the Novus Ordo Rite of Mass was written under the Holy Father's [Paul 6's] PERSONAL SUPERVISION (Cardinal Heenan, FORWARD to the English translation of the Novus Ordo in November, 1969 A.D.), knew all about lex orandi, lex credendi.

As you will note in the photograph below, Paul 6 seems to be beaming with joy and happiness as he stands next to these six Protestants!

This photo, taken in the Vatican on Friday, April 10, 1970, shows Pope Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978]  standing at the far right with the 6 Protestant members of the Consilium ad Exsequendam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia who actively helped to make up the Novus Ordo Rite, the “New Mass”.

The cover of the May 3, 1970 issue of La Documentation Catholique carried the above photo of Pope Paul 6 and the six Protestant members of the Consilium.  This photograph was also published in Issue No. 20 of World Trends.

Therefore, Pope Paul 6 knew full well that SIX Protestants were actively working on the Consilium! Therefore, when he had his photograph - which is shown above - taken with these SIX Protestants, he was NOT surprised to suddenly learn that there were Protestants who had been actively working on the Consilium, busily helping to make up the new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”!

How often does one hear how these six Protestant ministers were only observers and not active participants, and therefore did not actively participate in any way in making up the Novus Ordo Rite, the New mass?

The problem with this statement is that it is true, as far as it goes, but it does not go all of the way and complete the sentence which is:  “The Protestants were observers and active participants, and contributors.

Example # 1:

During his address to the General Synod of the United Church of Christ, an American Protestant denomination, William Wakefield Cardinal Baum [b. at Dallas, Texas on Sunday, November 21, 1926 - d. ?  ]  revealed that Protestant scholars had a voice in making up the Novus Ordo Rite.

As a follow-up to this revelation, Harold Acharhem, Religious Correspondent of The Detroit News, obtained an interview with Msgr. Baum during which the below quote was given and duly reported in the June 27, 1967 issue.

Protestant scholars, including an American Episcopalian, have had a voice in recent changes in the Catholic Mass and other liturgy, it was revealed today by the leading American spokesman on church unity.  Msgr. Willliam W. Baum of Washington, told delegates to the general synod of the United Church of Christ that the Papal Consilium on Liturgical Reform has ‘turned to Protestant theologians and liturgists, who sit in regularly on meetings...’

“In a private interview [with Harold Acharhem], Msgr. Baum said the Protestant liturgical scholars at the Vatican represent the world Anglican Communion, the Lutheran World Federation, and the World Council of Churches.  The Anglican representative, he said, is Dr. Massey Shepherd, California liturgist and professor at the Church Divinity School of the Pacific at Berkeley.  ‘I think this development is highly significant, but it has been overlooked’, said Msgr. Baum.

“They [the Protestants were] not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participate fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal.  It wouldn't mean much if they just listened, but they contributed.’”  (The Detroit News, June 27, 1967, article entitled:  “Protestants helped Revamp Catholic Mass, Priest Says”; emphasis added.)

How the Consilium Worked

1) Informal meetings or study sessions during which the practical details of the reform were worked out, discussed and modified.

2) Formal, i.e. plenary, meetings during which the draft rites which had been compiled in the study sessions were debated and voted upon.

Canon Ronald Jasper, in a letter dated February 10, 1977, explained that the Protestant Observers received all the documents from the drafters of the new rite in the same way as did other members of the Consilium. They were also present at the debates during the formal meetings when the experts debated.

But in the afternoons they always had informal meetings with the periti - experts - who had prepared the drafts.  At such meetings they were allowed to criticize and to comment on and to make suggestions. Then it was up to the periti to decide whether any of their points were worth taking up during the formal meetings. These informal meetings were a complete free-for-all, and there was a very frank exchange of views.  So, despite Vatican denials to the contrary, the above is proof that Protestants did in fact play a major part in making up the Novus Ordo Rite.  If more proof is needed, look at their fruits.

While it is true that they were only “observers” during the actual voting sessions, called the formal, i.e. plenary, meetings, during which only the periti (experts) were allowed to discuss or to vote, nevertheless, they were still allowed to be physically present at these sessions and their presence apparently had a deleterious (harmful) effect on the voting members, just as the Protestant presence had on the Fathers [i.e. the Bishops] at the Synod itself!

One proof for this last statement is to be found in an observation by one Protestant leader who is reported to have stated that the observers were providing some kind of check on what was being said. Every bishop who has stood up to speak has known that, in the tribune of S. Longinus was a group of intelligent and critical people, their pencils and biros poised to take down what he said and possibly use it in evidence against him and his colleagues on some future occasion... Members of the Council tended, therefore, to be very sensitive to what the representatives of those other communions [including the Protestants] were thinking, and did their best to avoid saying anything which was likely to cause offence. If some Father forgot himself and said things which were bound to cause a flutter in the observers’ tribune, he was sometimes rebuked by some later speaker (Dr. Moorman, the leader of the Anglican delegation at Synod Vatican 2).

But, as already mentioned above, it is also true that the six Protestants of the Consilium were allowed to take a very active role during the informal meetings with the periti (experts) by being allowed to criticize and to comment on and to make suggestions. According to Canon Ronald Jasper these informal meetings were a complete free-for-all, and there was a very frank exchange of views.

Example # 2:

Brother Roger Louis Schütz-Marsauche [b. at Provence, Switzerland on Wednesday, May 12, 1915 - d. stabbed to death by Luminita Ruxandra Solcan, a 36-year-old schizophrenic woman from Romania, while this Protestant minister of the Swiss Reformed Church was celebrating a Protestant “mass”, most probably The Ecumenical Protestant Lima Liturgy of 1982 (which was most likely edited by himself and Brother/Father Max Thurian), at Taizé, Saône-et-Loire, Burgundy, France on the evening of Tuesday, August 16, 2005].

He was a Protestant minister of the Swiss Reformed Church, the Prior and founder of the Protestant Community of Taizé, a Swiss Calvinist Protestant theologian, and a longtime friend of Pope JP-2, a.k.a. John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005].

Brother Roger reportedly had asked the Vatican that a reconciliation come about without requiring non-Catholics to repudiate their origins.

Brother Roger and Brother Max, the two Protestant observers from the Protestant Community of Taizé, were to exert a considerable amount of influence at Vatican II (Rousselot, L’influence de Taizé in Palestra del Clero, October 1, 1986, pp.1194-1207; see also F. Spadafora, Fuori della Chiesa non c'è salvezza, Krinon, ed., 1988, pp.91-99).

Brother Roger described a typical day during Synod Vatican 2 as follows:

“Before noontime, while leaving the Council meetings, we would meet up with the bishops we had made appointments with, and bring them to our apartment... There was no lack of conciliar work to discuss. For example, we would closely study the evolution of the texts, write up notes, and give our point of view when asked. Signs of friendship toward us were impressive. One could even say that they expected too much [involvement] from us...”  (J. L. Gonzales-Balado, Le défi de Taizé, Editions du Seuil, 1977, p.13; emphasis added.).

Example # 3:

Brother/Father Max Thurian [b. at Geneva, Switzerland on Tuesday, August 16, 1921 - d. at Geneva, Switzerland, on Thursday, August 15, 1996] was a Swiss Calvinist Protestant theologian who became the Sub-Prior and co-founder of the Protestant Community of Taizé in the 1940's, along with the founder and Prior, Brother Roger Louis Schütz-Marsauche, which community is located at Taizé, Saône-et-Loire, Burgundy, France.  The Protestant Community of Taizé is an ecumenical monastic community.

Max Thurian was also a Protestant minister of the Swiss Reformed Church.  He was a member of the notorious Concilium which modernized, updated, and synthesized the 16th Century Protestant Memorial Supper Meals of Luther, Cranmer, etc., which Pope Paul 6 called the Novus Ordo Missæ - a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Rite, which is still used today in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” by its pope and also by all of its cardinals, bishops and priests.

For many years he was an active member of the Faith and Order Commission of the Protestant World Council of Churches.  Plus, he was an editor of the volume Ecumenical Perspectives on Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry in conjunction with which was developed the infamous Lima Liturgy of 1982. The Ecumenical Protestant Lima Liturgy of 1982 was written by Faith and Order Commissioners and Staff with an introduction by Max Thurian.  It was most probably edited by both Brother Roger Louis Schütz-Marsauche and Brother/Father Max Thurian.

In 1976 Max Thurian reportedly stated that the Roman Catholic Church had rediscovered conformity with the apostolic church.  This made it possible for a Protestant to become a member of the Church without, however, renouncing his adherence to another ecclesial community. Interestingly, this is apparently what Pope Benedict 16th, Joseph Ratzinger [Tuesday, April 19, 2005 - present] also believes - but this is contrary to the Catholic Faith!

Despite the heretical indifferentism of The Protestant Community of Taizé, Pope JP-2, a.k.a. John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], visited this super-center of false ecumenism, which is located at Taizé, Saône-et-Loire, Burgundy, France, on Sunday, October 5, 1986, thereby adding his name to a long list of admiring visitors, which list includes three Protestant Archbishops of Canterbury, a number of Orthodox Metropolitans, fourteen Lutheran bishops of Sweden, and countless Protestant pastors from all over the world.  Birds of a feather do flock together!

Brother Max Thurian went through “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” invalid ceremony for Holy Orders - although he never had studied for the Priesthood in a Roman Catholic Seminary - in a semi-secret service on May 3, 1987 (which ceremony was not made public until May 11, 1988), conducted by the former Archbishop of Naples, Cardinal Ursi.

We understand that he:

1)  Did NOT make the required abjuration of heresy required of converts to the Roman Catholic Church.  Apparently “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has no such requirement for any of its converts?

2) Did NOT make the required Profession of the Catholic Faith. Apparently “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has no such requirement for any of its converts?

3) Did NOT take the required Oath Against Modernism, Apparently “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has no such requirement for any of its candidates for Sub-Deaconate, Deaconate, Priesthood, and Episcopacy?

4) Did NOT receive, at least conditionally, sub-conditione, the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation!  Apparently “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has no such requirement for any of its converts?

“Father” Max Thurian was later invited by Pope JP-2 to join the International Theological Commission.  But,  according to The Protestant Community of Taizé statement - no abjuration of [his] Protestant religion took place (Présent from May 19, 1988: “Max Thurian, prête catholique... et toujours pasteur Protestant”  (“Max Thurian, Catholic Priest,... and still Protestant Minister”).

Commentary

What is true of Brothers Roger and Max, likewise applies to all popes, cardinals, bishops and priests who are members of the apostate and heretical “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”:

Ҥ 1. All apostates from the Catholic faith and all heretics and schismatics:

1. Incur excommunication ipso facto [automatically], and

2.  Unless they repent, shall be deprived of any benefice, dignity, pension or other charge which they may hold in the Church, and be declared infamous; Clergy, after repeated warning, shall be deposed...” (Codex Iuris Canonici - Code of Canon Law - # 2314).

The Role of Pope Paul 6 in Making Up
The Novus Ordo Rite, the New Mass

Some people have asked:

“Why didn’t Pope Paul 6 intervene and send home all of the non-Catholic observers, including the Protestants, both at Synod Vatican 2, and in the Consilium, and also stop all of the anti-Catholic changes to the Mass and restore things back to the way they were before Synod Vatican 2?”
The short answer is that Pope Paul 6 was part of the problem, not part of the solution!  Part of this includes his apparent deep involvement with Protestants before Synod Vatican 2.

For example, while the future Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978] was the Archbishop of Milan, he proposed the Novus Ordo Rite with all of its radical changes in his Lenten Pastoral of 1958.

This was two years after his 1956 meeting of a delegation of four Anglican priests and a layman who stayed with him some ten days... the meetings were clandestine in the extreme...  (Bernard C. Pawley [Archdeacon of Canterbury], and Margaret Pawley, Rome and Canterbury Through Four Centuries: A Study of the Relations Between the Church of Rome and the Anglican Churches 1530-1981, London & Oxford, 1974, ISBN: 9780264661230).

“The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy.  There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass” (Jean Guitton, Apropos [17], December 19, 1993,  p. 8f.  Also, Christian Order, October,1994. N.B.  Jean Guitton was an confidant and friend of Pope Paul 6).

How true it is that by their fruits you shall know them (Matthew 7:16)!

So this is why Pope Paul 6 seems to be beaming with joy and happiness as he stands next to these six Protestants in the below photo!  They obviously did what he wanted them to do!

These SIX Protestants were apparently experts on updated, modernized, synthesized Protestant memorial supper meal mass liturgies since Pope Paul 6 said in his Speech on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D.:

“Looking at the work accomplished by you in these years, We are impelled to offer you a full measure of thanks for so great and so many labours. For you were prompt and diligent, as well as expert, in dealing with a matter that was complicated and very difficult--and without expecting any reward, but seeking only to be of service to the Church” (Article: COMMISSION HOLDS FINAL MEETING, Pope commends work of Consilium, L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, Weekly Edition in English, Third Year, N. 17 (108) - Thursday, APRIL 23, 1970 A.D., page # 1).
This same theme was actually mentioned in the few words of introduction to his Speech by the official publication of the Pope, the Vatican Newspaper L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO:
“On Friday, April 10, [1970] the Holy Father received in audience the Cardinals, Bishops and Experts [i.e., these 6 Protestants]... of the Consilium ad exsequendam Constitutionem de sacra Liturgia. The work of this Consilium had been done in conjunction with the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, under the presidency of Card. [Cardinal] Benno Gut”  (Article: COMMISSION HOLDS FINAL MEETING, Pope commends work of Consilium, L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, Weekly Edition in English, Third Year, N. 17 (108) - Thursday, APRIL 23, 1970 A.D., page # 1).
In his Speech of Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D., did Pope Paul 6, as the official guardian of the Catholic Faith condemn the members of this Consilium for making up a new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”?

NO!
 


Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani
[b. at Rome, Italy on
Wednesday, October 29, 1890
- d. at Rome, Italy on
Friday, August 3, 1979]

Antonio Cardinal Bacci
[b. at Giugnola, near Florence, Italy
on Friday, September 4, 1885 A.D. 
- d. at Vatican City, Rome, Italy,
on Wednesday, January 20, 1971 A.D.]

On the contrary, Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani and Antonio Cardinal Bacci had to do the Pope's job for him because the Pope certainly did NOT do his job!

Consider their Letter to him in which these two Roman Catholic Cardinals stated that:

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” (Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani and Antonio Cardinal Bacci, Letter to Pope Paul 6, Thursday, September 25, 1969 A.D.).
In his Speech of Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D., did Pope Paul 6 finally admit that:
“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”
NO!

Not only did Pope Paul 6 stubbornly IGNORE the Letter and its contents, plus its attached Study, which the two Cardinals had sent to him over six months before then, he REFUSED to admit the truth of the Catholic Church that the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the CATHOLIC theology of the Mass, instead, in his giddy euphoria, Paul 6 proclaimed:


Pope Paul 6 with the 6 Protestants
who helped him to make up the NOR

“Venerable Brothers and dear [Protestant] sons, We are glad to give you a heartfelt greeting, and to speak to you... Looking at the work accomplished by you in these years, We are impelled to offer you a full measure of thanks for so great and so many labours. For you were prompt and diligent, as well as expert, in dealing with a matter that was complicated and very difficult... This work of yours was indeed arduous; documents had to be drawn up by which that Constitution of the Council [Vatican 2] would be gradually put into effect, the liturgical texts themselves had to be prepared, tried out by long use, then presented in a new way, or else totally new formulations drawn up... let Us note the many Instructions and other documents edited, and books of a subsidiary nature written by some of your members [did this include the six Protestant members?]; the new [Novus]  Ordo Missae; the variations introduced... Since this Consilium of yours comes to its end, after its EXCELLENT activity

[no mention here of its activity which deviated dramatically from the INFALLIBLE Catholic dogmatic teachings on the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent!]
“...with a specially warm love, we impart to each and all of you
[including you six Protestants who have made up a liturgy which totally ignores the work of the Council of Trent which canons of the rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy - including the Protestant heresy which denies that the Mass is a Sacrifice and the denial of the Catholic dogma of Transubstantiation - directed against the integrity of the Mystery!]
the Apostolic Blessing
[in other words, I, the infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope, Pope Paul 6, do hereby infallibly totally repudiate ALL of the infallible teachings of the Infallible Roman Catholic Church Council of Trent which were promulgated by the Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope, Pope Pius IV!]”
(Article: COMMISSION HOLDS FINAL MEETING, Pope commends work of Consilium, L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, Weekly Edition in English, Third Year, N. 17 (108) - Thursday, APRIL 23, 1970 A.D., pages # 1 - # 2).

But since Pope Paul 6 has repudiated the infallible teachings of the Infallible Roman Catholic Church Council of Trent which were promulgated by the Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope, Pope Pius IV, Giovanni Angelo De Medici [Friday, December 25, 1559 - Thursday, December 9, 1565], this logically means that either Pope Pius IV, Giovanni Angelo De Medici, was not a Pope and not infallible, or that Pope Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978], is not a Pope and is not infallible, because there is a clear contradiction here since, as the Angelic Doctor teaches:

Truth cannot be Truth's contrary (Saint Thomas Aquinas [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Summa Contra Gentiles, IV,8) and moreover, since one truth cannot contradict another truth, every assertion contrary to the truth of Faith, We define to be altogether false (Fifth Lateran Council, [1512 A.D. - 1517 A.D.], Session 1, Friday, December 19, 1513 A.D.), at the very most, only one of these two “infallible popes” is teaching error and one is teaching the truth.
If that was not enough, in his Speech of Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D., Pope Paul 6 clearly ignored the fact he and his buddies who all accept his teachings have been automatically EXCOMMUNICATED!

How so?



Automatic Excommunication of
Anyone Who Changes the Ancient Catholic Mass


Roman Catholic Church
Doctrinal Council of Trent

Historically, because of such anti-Catholic supper meals, the Roman Catholic Church Doctrinal Council of Trent automatically excommunicated ANYONE who would teach against or change the Catholic Rite of Mass in the future! Ten years AFTER the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI of 1562 A.D. by Protestant Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, the Roman Catholic Church Council of Trent replied to the Protestant heresies concerning the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which they considered to be a mere memorial meal.

Among other things, the Infallible Roman Catholic Church Council of Trent Infallibly and DOGMATICALLY Decreed:

“CANON I.--If any one saith, that in the Mass a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat; let him be anathema.”

“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.”

“CANON IV.--If any one saith, that, by the Sacrifice of the Mass, a blasphemy is cast upon the most holy sacrifice of Christ consummated on the cross; or, that it is thereby derogated from; let him be anathema.”

“CANON VI.--If any one saith, that the Canon of the Mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated [abolished]; let him be anathema.”

“CANON VII.--If any one saith, that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety; let him be anathema.”

“CANON VIII.--If any one saith, that masses, wherein the priest alone communicates sacramentally, are unlawful, and are, therefore, to be abrogated [abolished]; let him be anathema.”

“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” (Roman Catholic Council of Trent, Canons & Decrees, Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562 A.D.).

But most of those who were connected with Synod Vatican 2, including the Synod Vatican 2 Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests who accepted Synod Vatican 2 and its aftermath - “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” - have been automatically excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church in virtue each of the above Canons which they violated and for which they incurred the automatic censure of anathema.


What is anathema?

“ANATHEMA then appears as the more solemn form of pronouncing or declaring excommunication” (Rev. P. Chas. Augustine, O.S.B., D.D., A Commentary on the New Code of Canon Law, Vol. 8, Canons 2255 & 2256, p. 170).

“ANATHEMA: A thing or person struck by God's malediction and intended for ruin. Cf. I Cor. 12:13; Rom. 9:3; Gal. l:8-9. Anathema, in actual Church discipline, is the term used for IPSO FACTO excommunication incurred by those denying a solemnly defined truth, as is concluded principally from the dogmatic canons of the Council of Trent and the Vatican Council, (i.e. Vatican 1)” (Parente, Piolanti, Garofalo, Dictionary of Dogmatic Theology, Anathema).




Roman Catholic Church Pope, Saint Pius V

But there is also yet at least one additional anathema. Here again, most of those who were connected with Synod Vatican 2, including the “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, and Priests who accepted Synod Vatican 2 and its aftermath - “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” - have been automatically excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church in virtue that Infallible Papal Bull which says in part:
“All other churches aforesaid are hereby denied the use of other missals, which are to be wholly and entirely rejected; and by this present Constitution, which shall have the force of law in perpetuity, We order and enjoin under pain of Our displeasure that nothing be added to Our newly published Missal, nothing omitted therefrom, and nothing whatsoever altered therein...We order them...not to presume in celebrating Mass to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal...

“Furthermore, by these presents and by virtue of Our Apostolic authority We give and grant in perpetuity that for the singing or reading of Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal must be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure, and may be freely and lawfully used...

“We likewise order and declare that no one whosoever shall be forced or coerced into altering this Missal and that this present Constitution can never be revoked or modified, but shall forever remain valid and have the force of law...

“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...” (Pope Saint Pius V, Papal Bull Quo Primum Tempore, Tuesday, July 14, 1570 A.D.).

The violation of the above Canons and Decrees of the Infallible Roman Catholic Church Council of Trent and the Papal Bull Quo Primum Tempore, are all self-evident because the years since Synod Vatican 2 prove that these violations have taken place and continue to take place EVERY TIME the Novus Ordo Missae, the so-called New Mass is used in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”!

It has been said that a picture is worth a thousand words. Here is the photographic evidence of the Protestant influence and active authorship of the Novus Ordo Rite Mass:


Photograph taken on
Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D. in the Vatican.

These SIX PROTESTANTS are, from left to right:

1) Dr. George.
2) Canon Jasper.
3) Dr. Shephard.
4) Dr. Konneth.
5) Dr. Smith.
6) Brother Max Thurian (in white), who is standing next to Pope Paul 6 (in white).
These SIX PROTESTANTS represent the following Protestant organizations:
The World Council of Churches.
The Church of England.
The Lutheran Church.
The Protestant Community of Taize.
The synthesis of the updated and modernized 16th Century PROTESTANT memorial supper meal, called the Novus Ordo Rite, or New Mass, of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, which is now used in the United States and in many other countries as the “New Mass”, was made up in part by these very active SIX PROTESTANT members of the Consilium. The “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope was obviously so proud of their work that he had his photo taken with them on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D., in the Vatican!

This photo proves in part why the New Mass is a new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, which contains only the mere shadow of the ancient CATHOLIC Traditional Rite of Mass because, by their own beliefs, Protestants do NOT believe in the CATHOLIC DOGMA of Transubstantiation!

Consider but one example-the Protestant denial of the Mystery of the Transubstantiation - found in the Black Rubric which explains why no one should kneel to receive Communion!

This is EXACTLY what has been going on in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” for some time!!!


Protestant Archbishop Thomas Cranmer

Here is the actual wording of the Black Rubric:

“For as concerning the sacramental bread and wine, they remain still in their very natural substances and therefore may not be adored, for that were idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful christians. And as concerning the natural body and blood of our saviour christ, they are in heaven and not here” (Protestant Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, Second Prayer Book of Edward VI, Black Rubric, 1552 A.D..)
So, IF you have ever wondered WHY “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” forbids kneeling, HERE is the reason! Through the Newspeak of praxis (actual practice) “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” uses this 16th Century PROTESTANT rubric of 1562 A.D.!

In reality, the clergy of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” are doing everyone a favor!

What is this “favor”?

“The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” clergy are preventing their people from committing the Mortal Sin of idolatry by preventing them from kneeling before a piece of mere bread and a chalice of mere wine, neither of which were Transubstantiated during the new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”!

Standing is Now REQUIRED!


United States Conference of
“The Synod Vatican 2 church”,
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”
catholic Bishops


N.B.  Notice How these bishops no longer wear
The Traditional Roman Purple Rabats (shirt fronts)
Which Roman Catholics Bishops Traditionally Wear!!!
This Color Instantly Tells Roman Catholics the Wearer is a Bishop!!

We have been given to understand that in the July, 2002 Newsletter of the United States Bishops’  Committee on the Liturgy, standing to get the “host” (not on your tongue, but in your hand), is now a requirement!

This official Newsletter of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” United States Bishops’  Committee on the Liturgy states in part:

“The bishops of the United States have decided that the normative posture for receiving Holy Communion should be standing.  Kneeling 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.”
In other words, will you now be arrested by the police and thrown into jail if you kneel to get a host plopped into your hand?!

Will you also be arrested by the police and thrown into jail if you also insist on having the host put on your tongue???!!!!

WHAT are YOUR “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” bishops NOT telling YOU?

WHY do “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” bishops NOT want you to KNEEL to get the host dropped in your hand?

Perhaps “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” bishops have a conscience after all?

Apparently some of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” bishops finally woke up from there long snooze and realized that everyone who was getting a host in a kneeling position was committing the mortal sin of idolatry!

Why?

Because the “host”, whether it happens to be a donut, cornbread, coffee cake, pizza, or any other weird thing, is only a donut, cornbread, coffee cake, pizza, or any other weird thing, or even the “traditional” host of unleavened bread, and nothing more!

In other words, it is NOT Jesus Christ really and truly physically present by transubstantiation under the species of bread (donuts, cornbread, coffee cakes, pizza, or any other weird things) and wine as it still is in the “Old Mass” of pre-Synod Vatican 2 days!

This is because this official Newsletter of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” United States Bishops’  Committee on the Liturgy of July, 2002, by praxis, has officially adopted the “Black Rubric” of the Second Prayer Book of Edward VI of 1552 A.D. made up by the first Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Cranmer [b. Nottinghamshire, England in 1489 A.D. - d. burnt at the stake in Oxford, England in 1556 A.D.].

Bishop Tom, while not explicitly forbidding people from kneeling to get the host, nevertheless set the precedent that it was better NOT to kneel because it is idolatry to kneel before a piece of bread because the position of kneeling visibly and physically manifests an external act of adoration, here the adoration of the host which does NOT contain Jesus Christ, which act of kneeling, being worship, then becomes the Mortal Sin of idolatry!

Brother Max Thurian (in white), who is standing next to Pope Paul 6 (in white), has allegedly said:

“This Novus Ordo Missae [i.e., the “new mass"] is so profoundly Ecumenical that it is THEOLOGICALLY possible for Protestants to celebrate the Lord's Supper in the SAME WORDS.  [He should know because he helped to piece it together!] The new simplified Offertory does NOT anticipate a sacrificial act [as it does in the Ancient Roman Rite of Mass] and therefore does away with the difficulty which the old Offertory [of the Ancient Roman Rite of Mass] presented to Ecumenical efforts.
So here, one of the six active Protestants of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Consilium, shown in the above photograph taken on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D. in the Vatican, who helped to make up the new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass” for “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, claims that it is THEOLOGICALLY possible for Protestants to celebrate the Lord's Supper in the SAME WORDS of this newly updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass” that is used in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”.

We were personally told by an Episcopalian priest that various priest-friends of his, who are members of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, take turns concelebrating together, at the same table, this new memorial supper meal liturgy in their respective churches. This was back in 1971!!!

Put in other words, what this Protestant priest told Us was that he concelebrates the Novus Ordo, “new mass”, with Priests from “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” whom he invites to his church. These priests come into his church, and, together, they concelebrate this new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”.

This Protestant Priest, in turn, gets invited over to “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”churches of his concelebration buddies, to use the same exact new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”! They even use the same brand new three year cycle - at least it was new in 1971!

The reason that he and other PROTESTANT priests can use the same exact new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, which is used in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, is because, as Brother Max Thurian, one of its photographed authors of this new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, says that the new simplified Offertory does NOT anticipate a sacrificial act! Therefore, there is no danger of accidentally transubstantiating!

In other words, there is no danger of accidentally turning this new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”,  into a CATHOLIC Traditional Mass!

But how do other Protestants view the Novus Ordo Rite of Mass, the new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”,  used in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”?

Here is one example:

“...nothing in the renewed
[i.e., in the new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”,  used in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”]
Mass need really trouble the Evangelical Protestant.”  (M.G. Siegvalt, Protestant Professor of Dogmatic Theology, Strasbourg).
Annibale Bugnini, C.M. [b. at Civitella de Lego, Italy 1912 - d. at Rome, Italy on Saturday,  July 3, 1982], who was the Secretary of the Consilium from 1964  - 1970, is the same person who earlier had been expelled from the Pontifical Lateran University where he is alleged to have taught classes on the liturgy from the standpoint of Protestant theology!

He is quoted as saying:

“The image of the liturgy, as given by the Council, is completely different from what it was previously” (Annibale Bugnini, C.M., La Documentation Catholique, No. 1491, January 4, 1967).

OFFICIAL DEFINITION
OF THE NOR - NOVUS ORDO RITE

Over the years, may people have wanted to vehemently argue with Us claiming that the New Mass is valid, that it is a Sacrifice, and that those who say it is only new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, are expressing a personal opinion because their church - “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” - still has the Mass!

Such people simply do not know the truth and are victims of wishful thinking!  Not one person, over the years, has not only never read the OFFICIAL DEFINITION of the New Mass, the Novus Ordo Rite, they do not even know that such a thing exists!!!!  Therefore, so that the Truth may set everyone free, it is necessary for you to learn not only that such a thing DOES exist, but also what it actually says.

In other words, WHAT IS THE OFFICIAL DEFINITION of the Novus Ordo Missae - “New Mass” used in “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”?

It should be self-evident that this OFFICIAL DEFINITION is the ONLY definition which matters, because it is what the Priests, Bishops, Cardinals and Popes of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”are expected to teach their de facto Protestant Laity!

“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. [12]” (THE GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, ICEL-International Committee on English in the Liturgy-Sacred Congregation of Rites Decree, Sunday, April 6, 1969 A.D., Benno Card. Gut, Prefect of the S.R.C., President of the Consilium, Chapter II, # 7.)

Footnote # 12:

“12. PRESBYTERORUM ORDINIS, no. 5; CSL, no. 33.” (THE GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, ICEL-International Committee on English in the Liturgy- Sacred Congregation of Rites Decree, April 6, 1969, Benno Card. Gut, Prefect of the S.R.C., President of the Consilium, Chapter II, Footnotes; Footnote # 12.)
Footnote # 12 refers one to: 1) PRESBYTERORUM ORDINIS, no. 5 which is the decree of Vatican 2 on the Life and Ministry of Priests. CSL is the Vatican 2 Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy. Since these 2 works are cited as the source of the definition found in THE GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS as promulgated by Benno Cardinal Gut who was the President of the Consilium which made up the Novus Ordo Rite, it is necessary to quotes these two references to avoid any possible confusion:
“...through the ministry of the Bishop, God consecrates priests so that they can share by a special title in the priesthood of Christ. Thus, in performing sacred functions they can act as the ministers of Him who in the liturgy continually exercises His priestly office on our behalf by the action of His Spirit...And especially by the celebration of Mass, men offer sacramentally the sacrifice of Christ.” (PRESBYTERORUM ORDINIS, # 5.)

“Although the sacred liturgy is above all things the worship of the divine Majesty, it likewise contains much instruction for the faithful. 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 presides over the assembly in the person of Christ are said in the name of the entire holy people and of all present. And the visible signs used by the liturgy to signify invisible divine things have been chosen by Christ or the Church. Thus not only when things are read `which were written for our instruction' (Rom. 15:4), but also when the Church prays or sings or acts, the faith of those taking part is nourished and their minds are raised to God, so that they may offer Him their rational service and more abundantly receive His grace.” (Constitution on the Liturgy, # 33.)

It should be clear to everyone that the definition which tells us that the Novus Ordo Rite is “to celebrate the memorial of the Lord” (THE GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, Chapter II, # 7) is NOT the same thing as “the sacrifice of Christ” (as found in PRESBYTERORUM ORDINIS, # 5).

The Lord's Supper is the assembly or gathering together of the people of God...” (GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, Chapter II, # 7) is NOT the same thing as “...by the celebration of Mass, men offer sacramentally...” (PRESBYTERORUM ORDINIS, # 5).

The Lord's Supper is the assembly or gathering together of the people of God...” (GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, CHAPTER II, # 7) is NOT the same as “...Although the sacred liturgy is above all things the worship of the divine Majesty...” (Constitution on the Liturgy, # 33).

“....the assembly or gathering together of the people of God...” (GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, CHAPTER II, # 7) is NOT the same as “...the prayers addressed to God by the priest who presides over the assembly...” (CONSTITUTION ON THE LITURGY, # 33).

About the only thing on which both the General Instruction and the Constitution on the Liturgy agree is the “with a priest presiding...” (GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, CHAPTER II, # 7) which is the same as “...by the priest who presides over...” (CONSTITUTION ON THE LITURGY, # 33).

Therefore, as you can see for yourself, there is to be found no CLEAR, OBJECTIVE, LOGICAL reason for saying that “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. [12]” (THE GENERAL INSTRUCTION AND THE NEW ORDER OF MASS, Chapter II, # 7.) is based upon either PRESBYTERORUM ORDINIS, # 5 and/or the CONSTITUTION ON THE LITURGY, # 33.

The variances generated by a comparison of the various points of these documents are irreconcilable because not only are these variances illogical-that would be bad enough-but what is of the gravest concern is that these variances are irreconcilable with the Deposit of Faith as it has been preserved by the Catholic Church!

For example, “the memorial of the Lord” as used in the teachings of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” is ambiguous and equivocal in the extreme! What EXACTLY does it mean? Think about it!

For example, “the memorial of the Lord” could mean:

1)  The Stations of the Cross.
2)  The 40 Hours Devotion.
3)  Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.
4)  A statue of Christ.
5)  A picture of Christ.
6)  A Crucifix.
7)  Etc.; etc.!


Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P.
With His Summa Theologica

But “that which signifies many things is an ambiguous sign and consequently occasions deception; this is clearly seen in equivocal words. But all deception should be removed from the Christian religion according to Col. 2:8: Beware, lest any man cheat you by philosophy and vain deceit.” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., SUMMA THEOLOGICA, Part III, Question 60, Article 3, Reply to Objection 1.)

Then, when one considers these ambiguous definitions within the context of Newspeak and praxis, one finds concelebrations with Protestant priests. In addition, historically, theologically, liturgically, dogmatically, one finds that the “new mass” is not “Catholic”!

For example, consider how, in The Ottaviani Intervention, mention is specifically made that:

“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” (Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani, Antonio Cardinal Bacci, Letter to Pope Paul 6, Thursday, September 25, 1969 A.D.).

Roman Theologians on
The Definition of Novus Ordo

“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. 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.
“10. The definition of the Mass is thus limited to that of a supper, and this term is found constantly repeated . 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 Sacramental function of the consecrating priest, or the intrinsic value of the Eucharistic Sacrifice independently of the people's presence. 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.

“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. 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.

“15. We shall later see how, in the same consecratory formula, and throughout the Novus Ordo, such equivocations are renewed and reiterated”(Roman Theologians, “The Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, June 5, 1969, # 9 - 15).

On the contrary, Pope Saint Pius V, Antonio-Michele Ghislieri [Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572], forbade any substantial changes (In practice, only rubrical texts could be changed for purposes of clarifications and new feasts were excluded from the prohibition of changes.) at all in the Ancient Roman Rite of Mass at any time in the future:
“...By this Our Decree, to be valid IN PERPETUITY, We determine and order that NEVER shall anything be added to, omitted from, or changed in this Missal [i.e., in the MISSALE ROMANUM-the Missal which contains the Ancient Roman Rite of Mass]...” Quo Primum Tempore Tuesday, July 14, 1570 A.D.) In addition, the Pope added severe penalties for the failure of anyone to obey this Bull.
There is the penalty of immediate and automatic excommunication for anyone-no matter what Office he has in the Church-who would change the Mass for any reason, including the reason that it contains errors:
“CANON VI.--If any one saith, that the Canon of the Mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated [abolished]; let him be anathema.”

“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...; let him be anathema.” (Council of Trent, Canons & Decrees, Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562 A.D.).

UNOFFICIAL DEFINITION
OF THE NOR - NOVUS ORDO RITE


“Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church”
Father Joseph Gelineau S.J.

The New Mass is a different liturgy.

This needs to be said without ambiguity.

The Roman Rite, as we knew it, no longer exists.

It has been destroyed!"

(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 along with other anti-Catholics and the 6 Protestants.  He was, of course, a professional apologist for the NOR.  This quotation is from his book - Demain La Liturgk, Paris, 1976, pp. 9-10; emphasis added).

Some would point out that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is not only a SACRIFICE, it is also a SACRAMENT and hence can be changed at the whim of anyone! This is simply NOT true!


Roman Catholic Church Pope, Clement VI

For example:

“The Roman Pontiff, regarding the administration of the Sacraments of the Church, can tolerate and even permit different [Ancient Historical] Rites of the Church of Christ...always without violating those things which pertain to the integrity and necessary parts of the Sacraments.” (Pope Clement VI, Pierre Roger De Beaufort [Monday, May 7, 1342 - Wednesday, December 6, 1352], SUPER QUIBUSDAM, Wednesday, September 29, 1351 A.D.).


Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P.
With His Summa Theologica

“The power of a Sacrament is from God alone, as We have shown above (A. 1; 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. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], SUMMA THEOLOGICA, Part III, Question 64, Article 2).

Roman Catholic Church Pope Saint Pius X
“It is well known that to the Church there belongs no right whatsoever to innovate in anything touching on the substance [i.e., the ontological essence] of the Sacraments” (Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], EX QUO NON, Monday, December 26, 1910 A.D.).

Infallible Roman Catholic Pope Pius XII
“...the Church has no power over the 'substance [essence] of the Sacraments'...” (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], SACRAMENTUM ORDINIS, Sunday, November 30, 1947 A.D.).

Infallible Roman Catholic Council of Trent
“...in the administration of the Sacraments, their substance [essence] being untouched (salva illorum substantia)...” (Roman Catholic Council of Trent, Session 21, Monday, July 16, 1562 A.D., Chapter 2).

Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P.,
With His Summa Theologica
“The Apostles and their successors are God's vicars in governing the Church which is built on faith and the Sacraments of faith. Wherefore, 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).


Infallible Roman Catholic Pope Innocent III

Returning now to the Mass as a SACRIFICE, historically, the theological truth which is known as Transubstantiation has been attacked by those who are ignorant of God's Holy Truths, but also defended by many, including this example of Papal Infallibility:

“You have asked [indeed] who has added to the form of the words which Christ Himself expressed when He changed the bread and wine into the Body and Blood, that in the Canon of the [Ancient Roman Rite of] Mass which the general [Western] Church uses, which none of the Evangelists is read to have expressed...

“In the Canon of the [Ancient Roman Rite of] Mass that expression, MYSTERIUM FIDEI, is found interposed among His words...

“Surely we find many such things omitted from the words as well as from the deeds of the Lord by the Evangelists, which the Apostles are read to have supplied by word or to have expressed by deed...

“From the expression, moreover, concerning which your brotherhood raised the question, namely MYSTERIUM FIDEI, certain people have thought to draw a protection against error, saying that in the Sacrament of the Altar, the truth of the Body and Blood of Christ does not exist, but only the image and species and figure, inasmuch as Scripture sometimes mentions that what is received at the Altar is Sacrament and Mystery and Example.

“But such run into a snare of error, by reason of the fact that they neither properly understand the authority of Scripture, nor do they reverently receive the Sacraments of God, equally ignorant of the Scriptures and the power of God (Matthew 22:29)...

“Yet MYSTERIUM FIDEI is mentioned, since something is believed there other than what is perceived; and something is perceived other than is believed. For the species of bread and wine is perceived there, and the truth of the Body and Blood of Christ is believed and the power of unity and of love...” (Pope Innocent III, Lotario Dei Conti Di Segni [Thursday, January 8, 1198 - Saturday, July 16, 1216], Letter, Cum Marthae Circa, to John, the Archbishop of Lyons, Friday, November 29, 1202 A.D.).

Now how about the clergy of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” who seem to take advantage of the learned ignorance (a.k.a., propaganda) which has victimized their own people!

For example, consider these warnings issued under Papal Infallibility by a Roman Catholic Pope:


Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius XII

“62. 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; 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”  (Roman Catholic Pope, Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Question # 1

What has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” done?

Has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” in fact
restored to its primitive tableform the Altar?

The Answer is YES!

“Round about the cauldron go;
In the poison'd entrails throw.
Toad, that under cold stone
Days and nights has thirty-one
Swelter'd venom sleeping got,
Boil thou first i' the charmed pot.
ALL. Double, double, toil and trouble;
Fire burn and cauldron bubble."

(William Shakespeare, The Tragedy of Macbeth, 1606 A.D., Act IV. Scene I.
A cavern. In the middle, a boiling cauldron.
First Witch.
N.B.:  Was this scene designed by Shakespeare as a subtle condemnation of the 16th Century Protestants who threw the Altars out of what before then had been Catholic Churches?! )

In fact, “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has not only restored to its primitive tableform the Altar of Sacrifice, “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has also ripped out the Altar of Sacrifice in every church and chapel under their control, with, so it seems, but few exceptions.

Why? Because history has repeated itself:

“# 38. THE DESTRUCTION OF ALTARS. The destruction of the altars was a measure so distinct in its meaning that we have never been able to conceive how the meaning could be misunderstood. This measure meant a bitter hatred of the Mass and a hatred directed against the Mass itself, not merely against some obscure abuse...  Surely if these reformers had desired only to remove an abuse, but were full of reverence for the great Christian Sacrifice itself, they would not have destroyed and desecrated the altars and substituted tables in their place, alleging as their reason, in unqualified terms, that the form of a table shall more move the simple from the superstitious opinions of the Popish Mass unto the right use of the Lord's Supper. For the use of an altar is to make sacrifice upon it; the use of a table is to serve men to eat upon it”  (The Catholic Bishops of England, Vindication of the Bull Apostolicae Curae, # 38, 1898 A.D.; emphasis added.).
So there you have it:
the use of an ALTAR is to make sacrifice upon it; the use of a TABLE is to serve men to eat upon it.
Thus, the Protestant influence has caused the Altar of Sacrifice to be removed from most churches and replaced by a table which emphasizes, not the SACRIFICE of the Mass, but the EATING of new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, meal!


Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius XII

Concerning this use of a supper table in place of the Altar of Sacrifice, the Infallible Roman Catholic Pope Pius XII Infallibly declared that one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive tableform (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Either the Pope is the Pope or he is not. Which is it?

Either the Pope is Infallible or he is not. Which is it?

IF the Pope is the Pope and IF the Pope is Infallible, then no Pope in the future can ever teach or do anything contrary to any of his predecessors.

The bottom line is that IF John-Paul 2 is the Pope and is Infallible, then he, by the definition of primacy and infallibility, MUST teach EXACTLY the same things ALL of his Infallible Pope predecessors taught, including Pope Pius XII who taught that one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive tableform (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947).


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2

But since “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], and “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” uses the primitive tableform, this logically means:

1)  That either Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

2)  Or that Pope John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

Why?

Because there is a clear contradiction here because, as Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, “Truth cannot be Truth's contrary”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Summa Contra Gentiles, IV,8).

“Moreover, since one truth cannot contradict another truth, every assertion contrary to the truth of Faith, We define to be altogether false”  (Fifth Lateran Council, [1512-1517], Session 1, Friday, December 19, 1513 A.D.).

Therefore, one of these two popes is teaching error and one is teaching the truth.

Which “Infallible pope” is teaching the Truth?
Which “Infallible pope” is teaching error?

Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Pius XII
Eugenio Pacelli
[Thursday, March 2, 1939
- Thursday, October 9, 1958]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?


Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius XII

To continue, remember what Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], taught under Roman Catholic Papal infallibility, saying in part:

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” (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Question # 2

What has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” done?

Has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” in fact had
black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments?

The answer is YES!

Today, it is an established historical Truth that “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has in fact had black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments. They replaced the black with white to signify an instant canonization of the newly dead!

Why? Because black vestments, according to CATHOLIC tradition, are used for Masses for the Dead, both on All Souls Day, November 2, each year, but also on the day of death or burial of a person and also on the anniversary of the death, and during the year when their loved ones have as many Masses Offered for their release from Purgatory as they can afford.

Black is a reminder not only of death itself, but also of the doctrine of Purgatory and also of one's obligation and responsibility to have as many Catholic Traditional Requiem Masses as possible Offered for one's loved ones who have died.

Here again one can see yet another Protestant heresy, this one on justification which errors were condemned by the Infallible Roman Catholic Council of Trent in the 16th Century!

Once more, you would do well to recall that infallible Papal teaching that one would be straying from the straight path... were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Either the Pope is the Pope or he is not. Which is it?

Either the Pope is Infallible or he is not. Which is it?

IF the Pope is the Pope and IF the Pope is Infallible, then no Pope in the future can ever teach or do anything contrary to any of his predecessors.

The bottom line is that IF John-Paul 2 is the Pope and is Infallible, then he, by the definition of primacy and infallibility, MUST teach EXACTLY the same things ALL of his Infallible Pope predecessors taught, including Pope Pius XII who taught that one would be straying from the straight path... were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments  (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947).


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2

But since “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2, John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], and “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” use white vestments in place of the Catholic Traditional black vestments, and thereby have excluded black as a color for the liturgical vestments, this logically means:

1)  That either Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

2)  Or that Pope John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

Why?

Because there is a clear contradiction here because, as Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, “Truth cannot be Truth's contrary”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Summa Contra Gentiles, IV,8).

“Moreover, since one truth cannot contradict another truth, every assertion contrary to the truth of Faith, We define to be altogether false”  (Fifth Lateran Council, [1512-1517], Session 1, Friday, December 19, 1513 A.D.).

Therefore, one of these two popes is teaching error and one is teaching the truth.

Which “Infallible pope” is teaching the Truth?
Which “Infallible pope” is teaching error?

Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Pius XII
Eugenio Pacelli
[Thursday, March 2, 1939
- Thursday, October 9, 1958]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?


Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius XII

To continue, remember what Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], taught under Roman Catholic Papal infallibility, saying in part:

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” (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Question # 3

What has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” done?

Has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” in fact forbidden
the use of sacred images and statues in its churches?

The answer is YES because actions speak louder than words!!

Today, it is also an established historical Truth that “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has in fact removed most, and in some instances, all, of the sacred images and statues in its churches  that were in these churches before the never-ending changes of the changes of the changes of the changes of the changes began.

In fact, it seems that very few of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” have any statues left in them.

We recall many years ago the true story of a “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church” priest who had all of the statues in his “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church” buried in the ground on the farm of one of his parishioners!

Shortly thereafter, “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” bishop” of that “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church” diocese had that “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church” church building bulldozed to the ground!

Why?

Apparently, he was afraid We were going to purchase that church building!  That church building had nothing wrong with it because it was a solid brick structure with a new roof on it and the continual maintenance on it kept it in very good condition!

Historically, the 16th Century Protestants threw out most, if not all, of the statues in what once had been Catholic Churches when they took over Roman Catholic Church chapels and church buildings in England, Germany and other countries!

But, according to Papal Infallibility, one would be straying from the straight path were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Either the Pope is the Pope or he is not. Which is it?

Either the Pope is Infallible or he is not. Which is it?

IF the Pope is the Pope and IF the Pope is Infallible, then no Pope in the future can ever teach or do anything contrary to any of his predecessors.

The bottom line is that IF John-Paul 2 is the Pope and is Infallible, then he, by the definition of primacy and infallibility, MUST teach EXACTLY the same things ALL of his Infallible Pope predecessors taught, including Pope Pius XII who taught that one would be straying from the straight path... were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches (Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical Mediator Dei, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947).


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2

But since “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2,  Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], and “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” have, by Newspeak and praxis, thrown out most of the sacred images and statues in their “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” churches, this logically means:

1)  That either Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

2)  Or that Pope John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

Why?

Because there is a clear contradiction here because, as Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, “Truth cannot be Truth's contrary”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Summa Contra Gentiles, IV,8).

“Moreover, since one truth cannot contradict another truth, every assertion contrary to the truth of Faith, We define to be altogether false”  (Fifth Lateran Council, [1512-1517], Session 1, Friday, December 19, 1513 A.D.).

Therefore, one of these two popes is teaching error and one is teaching the truth.

Which “Infallible pope” is teaching the Truth?
Which “Infallible pope” is teaching error?

Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Pius XII
Eugenio Pacelli
[Thursday, March 2, 1939
- Thursday, October 9, 1958]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?


Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius XII

On another point, Roman Catholic Papal Infallibility speaks again:

One would be straying from the straight path 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, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Question # 4

What has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” done?

Has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” in fact ordered
the crucifix so designed that the Divine
Redeemer's body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings?

The answer is YES!

You can prove this for yourself by going into most “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church” churches, with a few exceptions.  In that building you will frequently see what is called the risen Christ which now takes the place not only of the Divine Redeemer's body, which no longer shows any trace of His cruel sufferings, but in many cases totally replaces the Crucifix itself!

This excessive focus on the glorified state of the risen Christ glosses over the horrible pain, agony, sufferings and death of Christ on the Cross. When looking at a Crucifix, one can receive almost immediate consolation from their trials in this life because Christ's cross was bigger and heavier and more painful than ours.

But there is no way for anyone to personally identify with this risen Christ because, except for a virtual handful of people, no one else in this life has yet to rise from the dead.

But, in contradistinction, most people can relate in some way or another to the sufferings of Christ on the Crucifix.

Yet Roman Catholic Papal Infallibility teaches that one would be straying from the straight path 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, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

Either the Pope is the Pope or he is not. Which is it?

Either the Pope is Infallible or he is not. Which is it?

IF the Pope is the Pope and IF the Pope is Infallible, then no Pope in the future can ever teach or do anything contrary to any of his predecessors.

The bottom line is that IF John-Paul 2 is the Pope and is Infallible, then he, by the definition of primacy and infallibility, MUST teach EXACTLY the same things ALL of his Infallible Pope predecessors taught, including Pope Pius XII who taught that one would be straying from the straight path 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, On the Sacred Liturgy, # 62, Thursday, November 20, 1947).


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2

But since “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2, John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], and “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”  have, in most cases, replaced the Catholic Traditional Crucifixes that used to be in every Roman Catholic Church with the risen Christ which is so designed that the Divine Redeemer's body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings, this logically means:

1)  That either Pope Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

2)  Or that Pope John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

Why?

Because there is a clear contradiction here because, as Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, “Truth cannot be Truth's contrary”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Summa Contra Gentiles, IV,8).

“Moreover, since one truth cannot contradict another truth, every assertion contrary to the truth of Faith, We define to be altogether false”  (Fifth Lateran Council, [1512-1517], Session 1, Friday, December 19, 1513 A.D.).

Therefore, one of these two popes is teaching error and one is teaching the truth.

Which “Infallible pope” is teaching the Truth?
Which “Infallible pope” is teaching error?

Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Pius XII
Eugenio Pacelli
[Thursday, March 2, 1939
- Thursday, October 9, 1958]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2
General Audience Wednesday, July 21, 1999

“In the context of Revelation, we know that the ‘heaven’ or ‘happiness’ in which we will find ourselves is neither an abstraction nor a physical place in the clouds, but a living, personal relationship with the Holy Trinity. It is our meeting with the Father which takes place in the risen Christ through the communion of the Holy Spirit.”

“It is always necessary to maintain a certain restraint in describing these ‘ultimate realities’ since their depiction is always unsatisfactory. Today, personalist language is better suited to describing the state of happiness and peace we will enjoy in our definitive communion with God.”  (“The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2, General Audience, Wednesday, July 21, 1999, ¶ 4;  http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/ 1999)

Question # 5

What has “The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope JP-2 Infallibly Taught?

“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope JP-2
Infallibly Taught Heaven is not a Physical Place

Is this what Roman Catholic Church Popes Have Always Taught

The answer is NO!

Exhibit 1 - Divine Revelation Teaches the Contrary

“Behold Heaven is the Lord's, thy God” (Deuteronomy 10:14; emphasis added).

“Thus saith the Lord: Heaven is My Throne” (Isaias 66:1; emphasis added).

“But I say to you not to swear at all, neither by Heaven, for it is the Throne of God: Nor by the earth, for it is His footstool” (Matthew 5:34-35; emphasis added).

“Fear not, little flock, for it hath pleased your Father to give you a kingdom. Sell what you possess and give alms. Make to yourselves bags which grow not old, a treasure IN HEAVEN which faileth not: where no thief approacheth, nor moth corrupteth” (Luke 12:32-33; emphasis added).

“And no man hath ascended into Heaven, but He that descended from Heaven, the Son of man who is IN HEAVEN” (John 3:13; emphasis added).

“For we know, if our earthly house of this habitation be dissolved, that we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal IN HEAVEN” (2 Corinthians 5:1; emphasis added).

"Unto an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that can not fade, reserved IN HEAVEN for you” (1 Peter 1:4; emphasis added).

“And there are Three who give testimony IN HEAVEN, the Father, the Word [Christ], and the Holy Ghost. And these Three [Persons] are One [God]” (1 John 5:7; emphasis added).

“And immediately I was in the spirit: and behold there was a Throne set IN HEAVEN, and upon the Throne One sitting" .... The Four and Twenty Ancients fell down before Him that sitteth on the Throne, and adored Him that liveth for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the Throne, saying: Thou art worthy, O Lord our God, to receive glory, and honour, and power: because Thou hast created all things; and for Thy will they were, and have been created” (Apocalypse 4:2; 4:10-11; emphasis added).

Exhibit 2
Roman Catholic Church Popes Have Taught the Contrary


Roman Catholic Church Pope Honorius III

“‘Blessed are those who suffer persecution for justice’s sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven’ (Matthew 5:10).”  (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Honorius III, Cencio Savelli [Monday, July 18, 1216 - Thursday, March 18, 1227], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Papal Bulla “Solet Annuere”, On the Rule of the Friars Minor, Sunday, November 29, 1226 A. D., Chapter X, On the Admonition and Correction of the Friars; emphasis added).


Roman Catholic Church Pope Gregory IX

“8. Therefore, since the wondrous events of his glorious life are quite well known to Us because of the great familiarity he had with Us while We still occupied a lower rank, and since We are fully convinced by reliable witnesses of the many brilliant miracles, We and the flock entrusted to Us, by the mercy of God, are confident of being assisted at his intercession and of having IN  HEAVEN a patron whose friendship we enjoyed on earth” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Gregory IX, Ugolino, Count of Segni [Friday, March 19, 1227 - Thursday, August 22, 1241], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Papal Bulla “Mira Circa Nos”, On the Canonization of Saint Francis of Assisi, ¶ 8, Sunday, July 16, 1228; emphasis added).


Roman Catholic Church Pope Benedict XII

“By this Constitution which is to remain in force FOREVER, We, with Apostolic Authority, define the following: ..... all these Souls, immediately (mox) after death and, in the case of those in need of purification, after the purification mentioned above, since the ascension of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ  INTO HEAVEN, already before they take up their bodies again and before the general judgment, have been, are and will be with Christ  IN  HEAVEN,  IN  THE HEAVENLY  KINGDOM  AND PARADISE, joined to the company of the Holy Angels” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Benedict XII, Jacques Fournier [Monday, December 20, 1334 - Wednesday, April 25, 1342], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Apostolic Constitution “Benedictus Deus”, On the Beatific Vision of God, 1336 A.D.; emphasis added).


Roman Catholic Church Pope Eugene IV

“15.  It [the Sacrosanct Roman Church, founded by the voice of our Lord and Savior] firmly believes, professes, and preaches that the Son of God, in His assumed humanity, was truly born of the Virgin, truly suffered, truly died and was buried, truly rose again from the dead, ascended  INTO  Heaven, and  SITS  AT  the right hand of the Father, and will come at the end of time to judge the living and the dead.

“16. It [the Sacrosanct Roman Church, founded by the voice of our Lord and Savior], moreover, anathematizes, execrates, and condemns every Heresy that suggests contrary things” (The Infallible Roman Catholic Church Œcumenical Council of Florence - The Seventeenth Œcumenical Council, The First Council of Basel, Ferrara, Florence [Monday, April 9, 1438 A.D. - Thursday, August 7, 1445 A.D.], along with the Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Eugene IV, Gabriele Condulmer [Thursday, March 3, 1431 - Tuesday, February 23, 1447], who, using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Papal Bulla Cantate Domino, The Papal Bulla of Union with the Copts, Session 11, Friday, February 4, 1442, ¶ 15, ¶ 16; emphasis added).


Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius IX

“To use the words of Chrysostom, Prayer is ‘the source, the root, and the Mother of innumerable good things. The power of prayer extinguishes the strength of fire, restrains the raging of lions, settles wars and fights, endures storms, escapes devils, OPENS THE  DOORS  OF  HEAVEN, breaks the bonds of death, casts out diseases, repels injuries, and strengthens shattered cities’. (St. John Chrysostom, Homily 15 on the incomprehensible nature of God against the Anomaei.)”  (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius IX, Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti [Tuesday, June 16, 1846 - Thursday, February 7, 1878], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Apostolicæ Nostræ Caritatis”, Urging Prayers for Peace, ¶ 3, Tuesday, August 1, 1854; emphasis added).

“Above all, We constantly call upon the Virgin Mary, the Immaculate Mother of God, who is the most suitable and most powerful intercessor with God and who is the mother of graces and mercies. Then We invoke the patronage of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul and of all the saints WHO  REIGN  WITH  CHRIST  IN  HEAVEN. Nothing should be more important, nothing more preferable to you than to exhort the faithful entrusted to your care so that they, daily more firm and immovable, may persist in the profession of the Catholic Faith; avoid the snares, lies, and deceptions of their enemies; advance more quickly in the ways of God's commandments; and carefully abstain from sin”  (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius IX, Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti [Tuesday, June 16, 1846 - Thursday, February 7, 1878], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Apostolicæ Nostræ Caritatis”, Urging Prayers for Peace, ¶ 6, Tuesday, August 1, 1854; emphasis added).

“With a still more ardent zeal for piety, religion and love, let them continue to venerate, invoke and pray to the most Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, conceived without Original Sin. Let them fly with utter confidence to this most sweet Mother of Mercy and Grace in all dangers, difficulties, needs, doubts and fears. Under her guidance, under her patronage, under her kindness and protection, nothing is to be feared; nothing is hopeless. Because, while bearing toward us a truly Motherly affection and having in her care the work of our salvation, she is solicitous about the whole human race. And since she has been appointed by God to be the QUEEN  OF  HEAVEN and earth, and is exalted above all the choirs of angels and saints, and even STANDS  AT  THE  RIGHT  HAND of her only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, she presents our petitions in a most efficacious manner. What she asks, she obtains. Her pleas can never be unheard”  (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius IX, Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti [Tuesday, June 16, 1846 - Thursday, February 7, 1878], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Apostolic Constitution “Ineffabilis Deus”, The Immaculate Conception, Friday, December 8, 1854; emphasis added).

“Let us seek likewise the intercession of the most holy Apostles, Peter and Paul, and of all THE  BLESSED  IN  HEAVEN, that with their efficacious prayers before God, they may implore mercy and graces for all and powerfully avert all adversities and dangers afflicting the Church everywhere and especially in Italy” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius IX, Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti [Tuesday, June 16, 1846 - Thursday, February 7, 1878], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Quanto Conficiamur Moerore”, On Promotion of False Doctrines, ¶ 6, Monday, August 10, 1863; emphasis added).

“Let us also seek the suffrages of the Most Blessed Peter, Prince of the Apostles, and of Paul, his Fellow-Apostle, and of all THE  SAINTS  IN  HEAVEN, who having now become God's friends, HAVE  ARRIVED  AT  THE  HEAVENLY KINGDOM, and being crowned bear their palms, and being secure of their own immortality are anxious for our salvation” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius IX, Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti [Tuesday, June 16, 1846 - Thursday, February 7, 1878], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Quanta Cura”, Condemning Current Errors, ¶ 6, Thursday, December 8, 1864; emphasis added).

“Under their leadership, you will eagerly take up the task of diligently working for the cause of God, for the Church, and for the salvation of souls. You will strengthen the powers of the faithful who stand firm, assist the weakness of those who falter, and increase daily before God the merits which you have already attained by patience, constancy, and Priestly fortitude. The labors which those who act as ambassadors of Christ must sustain are very heavy at this time. But our trust should be placed in Him who has conquered the world. He helps those who labor in His name and rewards them with  A  CROWN  OF UNFADING  GLORY  IN  HEAVEN” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius IX, Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti [Tuesday, June 16, 1846 - Thursday, February 7, 1878], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Graves Ac Diuturnæ”, On the Church in Switzerland, ¶ 6, Tuesday, March 23, 1875; emphasis added).


Roman Catholic Church Pope Leo XIII

“This being so, no further and fuller ‘manifestation and revelation of the Divine Spirit’ may be imagined or expected; for that which now takes place in the Church is the most perfect possible, and will last until that day when the Church herself, having passed through her militant career, shall be taken up  INTO  the joy of the Saints triumphing IN  HEAVEN” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Divinum Illud Munus”, On the Holy Ghost, ¶ 6, Sunday, May 9, 1897; emphasis added).

“What more divine, what more delightful, than to meditate and pray with the Angels? With what confidence may we not hope that those who on earth have united with the Angels in this ministry will one day enjoy their blessed company  IN HEAVEN?” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Augustissimæ Virginis Mariæ”, On the Confraternity of the Holy Rosary, ¶ 10, Sunday, September 12, 1897; emphasis added).

“May they by these Virtues strive to honor God as they ought, and to win everlasting happiness  IN  HEAVEN” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Annum Sacrum”, On Consecration to the Sacred Heart, ¶ 9, Thursday, May 25, 1899; emphasis added).

“5. Therefore we earnestly exhort your faithful, although of various regions and tongues, to preserve that far more excellent kinship which is born from the communion of Faith and common Sacraments. For whoever are Baptized in Christ, have one Lord and one Faith; they are one body and one spirit, insofar as they are called to one Hope. It would be truly disgraceful that those who are bound together by so many holy ties and are seeking THE SAME  CITY  IN  HEAVEN should be torn apart by earthly reasons, rivaling with one another, as the Apostle says, and hating one another” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Reputantiubus”, On the Language Question in Bohemia, ¶ 5, Tuesday, August 20, 1901; emphasis added).


Roman Catholic Church Pope Saint Pius X

“6. We begin, then, with the philosopher Modernists place the foundation of religious philosophy in that doctrine which is commonly called Agnosticism. According to this teaching human reason is confined entirely within the field of phenomena, that is to say, to things that appear, and in the manner in which they appear: it has neither the right nor the power to overstep these limits. Hence it is incapable of lifting itself up to God, and of recognizing His existence, even by means of visible things. From this it is inferred that God can never be the direct object of science, and that, as regards history, He must not be considered as an historical subject. Given these premises, everyone will at once perceive what becomes of Natural Theology, of the motives of credibility, of external revelation. The Modernists simply sweep them entirely aside...”

“Yet it is a fixed and established principle among them that both science and history must be atheistic: and within their boundaries there is room for nothing but phenomena; God and all that is Divine are utterly excluded. We shall soon see clearly what, as a consequence of this most absurd teaching, must be held touching the most sacred Person of Christ, and the mysteries of His life and death, and of His Resurrection and Ascension  INTO  HEAVEN” (Infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical “Pascendi Dominici Gregis”, On the Doctrine of the Modernists, ¶ 6, Sunday, September 8, 1907; emphasis added).

Either the Pope is the Pope or he is not. Which is it?

Either the Pope is Infallible or he is not. Which is it?

IF the Pope is the Pope and IF the Pope is Infallible, then no Pope in the future can ever teach or do anything contrary to any of his predecessors.

The bottom line is that IF John-Paul 2 is the Pope and is Infallible, then he, by the definition of primacy and infallibility, MUST teach EXACTLY the same things ALL of his Infallible Pope predecessors taught, including the Roman Catholic Church Popes:  Honorius III, Gregory IX, Benedict XII, Eugene IV, Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Saint Pius X, each of whom taught, in various words, that Heaven IS a Place.


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2

But since “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2, John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], has taught that “.... heaven... is [not] a physical place... ” (“The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2, General Audience, Wednesday, July 21, 1999, ¶ 4;  http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/ 1999), this means:

1)  That either the Roman Catholic Church Popes:  Honorius III, Gregory IX, Benedict XII, Eugene IV, Pius IX, Leo XIII, and Saint Pius X, were not Popes, and therefore were NOT infallible.

2)  Or that Pope John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

Why?

Because there is a clear contradiction here because, as Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, “Truth cannot be Truth's contrary”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Summa Contra Gentiles, IV,8).

“Moreover, since one truth cannot contradict another truth, every assertion contrary to the truth of Faith, We define to be altogether false”  (Fifth Lateran Council, [1512-1517], Session 1, Friday, December 19, 1513 A.D.).

Therefore, which pope(s) taught error and which pope(s) taught the truth?

Which “Infallible pope(s)” taught the Truth?
Which “Infallible pope(s)” taught error?

Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Honorius III
Cencio Savelli
[Monday, July 18, 1216
- Thursday, March 18, 1227]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?
Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Gregory IX
Ugolino, Count of Segni
[Friday, March 19, 1227 
- Thursday, August 22, 1241]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?
Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Benedict XII
Jacques Fournier
[Monday, December 20, 1334 
- Wednesday, April 25, 1342]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?
Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Eugene IV
Gabriele Condulmer
[Thursday, March 3, 1431 
- Tuesday, February 23, 1447]?
Along with the Roman Catholic
Doctrinal Council of Florence
[Monday, April 9, 1438 A.D. 
- Thursday, August 7, 1445 A.D.]
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?
m
m
m
m
Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Pius IX
Giovanni Maria Mastai-Ferretti
[Tuesday, June 16, 1846
- Thursday, February 7, 1878]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?
Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Leo XIII
Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci
[Wednesday, February 20, 1878 
- Monday, July 20, 1903]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?
Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Saint Pius X
Giuseppe Sarto
[Tuesday, August 4, 1903 
- Thursday, August 20, 1914]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2
Sermon, June 6, 1985

“‘The way to achieve Christian unity, in fact,’ says the document of the Pontifical Commission for Russia, ‘is not proselytism, but fraternal dialogue...’”  (“The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope JP-2, Sermon, June 6, 1985, L’Osservatore Romano, The Official Vatican Newspaper, January 27, 1993, p. 2; emphasis added).

This has been the official policy of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” since the days of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” 2nd Pope John 23rd.

Another term for this fraternal dialogue, in an ecclesiastical/political context, is rapprochement  which was initiated by the Communist Russian leader Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev [b. in Kalinovka, Russian Empire, on Tuesday, April 17, 1894 - d. in Moscow, Russia, Soviet Union on Saturday, September 11, 1971] who offered this type of political fraternal dialogue to the Vatican on the occasion of the 80th birthday of Pope Roncalli (2nd Pope John 23rd), Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli [b. at Sotto il Monte, Italy on November 25, 1881 - d. at the Vatican on Monday, June 3, 1963]; Papacy: [Tuesday, October 28, 1958 - Monday, June 3, 1963], on Saturday, November 25, 1961.

This policy soon resulted in the Vatican ignoring the persecution of millions of Catholics by the Communists, especially in the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (and primarily in the Ukraine where over 8 million Catholics had died thanks to Stalin).

But this fraternal dialogue, or political  rapprochement  was then used by the Vatican with non-Catholic churches, e.g. various Protestant churches.  It was used extensively at Synod Vatican 2 by inviting observers from various non-Catholic churches to come to Synod Vatican 2 where some Protestants did a lot more than merely be observers.

Therefore, by the time one gets to the pontificate of the Vatican 2 church Pope John-Paul 2, which began on Monday, October 16, 1978, this policy of fraternal dialogue, which had become ecclesiastical rapprochement, was already firmly established.

So this fraternal dialogue, was not only something which Pope JP-2 believed and taught, but something which had already been the official policy of the Vatican 2 church since its official Ostpolitik (German for Eastern Politics) foreign policy, via fraternal dialogue, or political  rapprochement, towards the Communists was implemented by Agostino Cardinal Casaroli [b. at Castel San Giovanni, in the Province of Piacenza, Italy on November 24, 1914 - d. of cardiorespiratory disease at Rome, Italy on June 9, 1998], who held the second most powerful position in the Vatican, after the Pope himself, as the Vatican Secretary of State.

Question # 6

What has the Vatican 2 church
Pope JP-2 Infallibly Taught
along with the Vatican 2 church?

The Vatican 2 church Pope JP-2 Infallibly Taught
Fraternal Dialogue, Which had Already Been
The Official Policy of the Vatican 2 church since about 1961
 

Is this what Roman Catholic Church Popes Have Always Taught

The answer is NO!

Roman Catholic Church Popes Have Taught the Contrary


Roman Catholic Church Pope Leo XIII

“But how can hearts be united in Perfect Charity where minds do not agree in Faith?”  (Infallible  Roman Catholic Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical Præclara Gratulationis Publicæ, The Reunion of Christendom, Wednesday, June 20, 1894, ¶ 20.)


Roman Catholic Church Pope Pius XI

“Unity is not so much promoted by discussions [e.g. by fraternal dialogue or by ecclesiastical rapprochement] or by other artificial means, as by the example of a holy life and by good works” (Infallible  Roman Catholic Pope Pius XI, Achille Ratti [Monday, February 6, 1922 - Friday, February 10, 1939], using his Papal Infallibility, Promulgated his Infallible Encyclical, Ecclesiam Dei, ¶ 18, Monday, November 12, 1923).

Either the Pope is the Pope or he is not. Which is it?

Either the Pope is Infallible or he is not. Which is it?

IF the Pope is the Pope and IF the Pope is Infallible, then no Pope in the future can ever teach or do anything contrary to any of his predecessors.

The bottom line is that IF John-Paul 2 is the Pope and is Infallible, then he, by the definition of primacy and infallibility, MUST teach EXACTLY the same things ALL of his Infallible Pope predecessors taught, including the Roman Catholic Church Popes:  Leo XIII, and Pius XI, each of whom taught the contrary of fraternal dialogue.


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
John-Paul 2

But since the official policy of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” is fraternal dialogue, and since “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope John-Paul 2 taught:

“‘The way to achieve Christian unity, in fact,’ says the document of the Pontifical Commission for Russia, ‘is not proselytism, but fraternal dialogue...’”  (“The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope JP-2, Sermon, June 6, 1985, L’Osservatore Romano, The Official Vatican Newspaper, January 27, 1993, p. 2; emphasis added), this means:
1)  That either the Roman Catholic Church Popes:  Leo XIII and Pius XI, were not Popes, and therefore were NOT infallible.

2)  Or that Pope John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005], was not a Pope and therefore was NOT infallible.

Why?

Because there is a clear contradiction here because, as Saint Thomas Aquinas teaches, “Truth cannot be Truth's contrary”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Summa Contra Gentiles, IV,8).

“Moreover, since one truth cannot contradict another truth, every assertion contrary to the truth of Faith, We define to be altogether false”  (Fifth Lateran Council, [1512-1517], Session 1, Friday, December 19, 1513 A.D.).

Therefore, which pope(s) taught error and which pope(s) taught the truth?

Which “Infallible pope(s)” taught the Truth?
Which “Infallible pope(s)” taught error?

Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Leo XIII
Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci
[Wednesday, February 20, 1878 
- Monday, July 20, 1903]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?
Is it the
Roman Catholic Church Pope
Pope Pius XI
Achille Ratti
[Monday, February 6, 1922 
- Friday, February 10, 1939]?
Or, is it the
Vatican 2 church Pope
Pope John-Paul 2
Karol Wyotya
[Monday, October 16, 1978
- Friday, April 1, 2005]?


“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Pope
Pope Paul 6

For those of you who are sincere Catholics and who would say that you must trust and obey the “pope”, just remember this next photograph, the large one found below, of the second “pope” of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” and one of the two co-founding “popes” of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978].

In the below photo, YOU will see the second “pope” of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, an “infallible pope?, congratulating the six Protestant members of the Consilium which made up a new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, or Novus Ordo Missae, and yet, this same 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 (Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani and Antonio Cardinal Bacci, Letter to Pope Paul 6, Thursday, September 25, 1969 A.D.).

Let all sincere Catholics burn this photograph into their memories:

Photo taken in the Vatican
On Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D.

IF you would like to know the source of this photograph, it is from the Pope's official newspaper, the L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, Weekly Edition in English, Third Year, N. 17 (108) -  Thursday, APRIL 23, 1970 A.D., page # 2.

This photo of Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D. fully shows four of the six Protestants who are, from left to right:

1) Dr. George (shown shaking hands with Pope Paul 6);

2) Canon Jasper;

3) Dr. Shephard;

4) Dr. Konneth (the Pope's head is blocking most of Dr. Konneth although the top of his head is slightly visible);

5) Dr. Smith

Therefore, it should be clear from all of this that real Catholics can NOT go to such non-Catholic new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, despite the fact that they may be held in what used to be “Roman Catholic” Church buildings!

It is certainly past time for sincere Catholics to start praying for the conversion to the CATHOLIC Faith, from “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, of ALL of the members of the heretical, apostate and schismatic “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church”.

Please note:

The terms Protestant, heretical and schismatic are used within what has historically been the unchangeable position of the CATHOLIC Church regarding her official theological, dogmatic, liturgical, legal, etc., teachings, especially on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Seven Sacraments.

Hence the terms Protestant, heretical and schismatic are used within the context of objective definitions used historically and traditionally by the CATHOLIC Church in her lawful use of the various objective sciences of theology, liturgy, church history, canon law, philosophy, etc. as proven from the writings of well-respected authors of previous centuries whose legal precedents We simply follow.

Now, therefore, the members of the heretical, apostate, and schismatic “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church”, for whom your prayers are requested for their conversion to the Catholic Church, include not only all of the Religious and Laity of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, but also all of the Clergy of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”.

The reason is that, while professing themselves to be Catholic, in terms of at least some of their theological and liturgical beliefs, especially regarding the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, they are de facto PROTESTANTS, just as the 16th century Catholic Clergy, Religious and Laity were de facto  PROTESTANTS in places like England and Germany!

Even today, many of them in these same places are still de facto PROTESTANTS! Among “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” PROTESTANT Clergy, who are hereby included, in virtue of the principle of lex orandi, lex credendi, as Protestant, are “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” pope, plus “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” cardinals, bishops, priests and the lower ranks of the clergy of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”.

They are all under the censures of automatic excommunication for their direct, continuous violations of the Canons of the Council of Trent, especially session 22 on the Mass, and the Quo Primum Tempore of Pope St. Pius V!

In other words, IF you say you are a Catholic (this applies most especially to Catholic Clergy) you are required thereby to teach, to believe and to practice the Faith of the Catholic Church, including the proper use of the ancient and approved VALID and LAWFUL CATHOLIC liturgical rites for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Seven Sacraments.

What sense does it make for a Catholic Priest to use some kind of voodoo rite for the Mass and the Sacraments. Catholics have a right to expect that their Catholic Priest will use the right Rite! That he will in fact use an ancient, approved VALID and LAWFUL CATHOLIC traditional liturgical Rite for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Seven Sacraments.

Consider, for a moment, how, because of the Council of Trent and Pope Saint Pius V, Catholics could peacefully expect that their Catholic pastors would in fact use that ancient, approved VALID and LAWFUL CATHOLIC traditional liturgical rite for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which both the Council of Trent and Pope Saint Pius V have guarded and protected with their anathemas!

Yet “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” has abandoned these integral Catholic defenses! This is why the Roman Theologians have included this subject within their STUDY and concluded with it.

VIII. The abandonment of defenses


Cardinal Ottaviani

“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.

“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. 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, 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.

“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. Her unity is not only threatened but already tragically compromised. Errors against the Faith are not merely insinuated but positively imposed by means of liturgical abuses and aberrations which have been equally acknowledged. To abandon a liturgical tradition which for four centuries was both the sign and the pledge of unity of worship(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.”  (Roman Theologians, The Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, June 5, 1969, # 71-73).

Very few Catholics would - and NONE should - expect a Catholic Priest to use a voodoo rite, or a hindu ritual, or a shaman ritual, or a Protestant supper meal in place of the CATHOLIC traditional liturgical rite for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass!

If the members of the shinto religion went to a service where their shinto priest used the Ancient Roman Rite of the CATHOLIC Church in place of their shinto rituals, would there not be a riot and such a shinto priest physically thrown out of their place of worship?

Or, if such non-Catholic clergy were to invite Roman Catholic Church Bishops and/or Priests to take an active part in their meetings to update their liturgies, would there not be a riot and such non-Catholic clergy be physically thrown out of their place of worship?

How many catholic priests and bishops of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” have been physically thrown out of their “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church”churches for using the new, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant memorial supper meal liturgy some people mistakenly think is still a “mass”, instead of the CATHOLIC traditional liturgical Rite for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass - the Ancient Roman Rite!?

The sad thing is that it seems that a vast majority of Catholics do NOT know their CATHOLIC Faith as well as they should!  This seems to be one of the reasons why “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” popes and other clergy have been so successful in victimizing Catholics?!  It has taken advantage of the ignorance of its own people-victimizing them in this way while infecting them with the heresy of Modernism!

The innocent Catholic people who go to “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”are getting something other than the ancient, approved VALID and LAWFUL CATHOLIC traditional liturgical rite [the Ancient Roman Rite] for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and the Seven Sacraments - despite denials to the contrary from the clergy of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”.

Today, it seems as if there is really no substantial or ontologically essential difference between a person going to a Protestant Anglican - Episcopalian Church, or a Lutheran Church or a Methodist Church, or some other Protestant Church and a “Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church” church, which seems to have become the official teacher, not of CATHOLICISM, but instead, of MODERNISM!

But in order to be a REAL, ACTUAL member of the Catholic Church, one must properly fulfill their duties of membership. On the contrary, IF a Catholic freely chooses NOT to fulfill ALL of his duties of membership in the CATHOLIC Church, that person is no longer a de facto Catholic!

IF a person who calls himself a Catholic practices some other faith, e.g., a PROTESTANT faith, then, in reality, that person can NOT any longer call himself a Catholic and all of the legalisms in the world of heretical Modernism can't change that truth!

Bottom Line:
“The Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”
is NOT Catholic!

The bottom line is that the liturgical axiom of Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi, shortened to Lex orandi, lex credendi - which means the Law of Praying, is the Law of Believing, tells everyone who has ears to hear and eyes to see, that “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” is NOT Catholic because its liturgical Rites for the Mass and the Seven Sacraments are NOT Catholic!


Pope Paul 6 and Jean Guitton
Two Modernist Heretics!

The Protestantization of
The Mass was Paul VI’s intention.

The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy [which is only a memorial supper meal, not a sacrifice].  There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass” (Jean Guitton [b. at Saint-Étienne, Loire, in East-Central France on Sunday, August 18, 1901 - d. at Paris, France on Sunday, March 21, 1999],  Apropos, Number 17, December 19, 1993, (17), p. 8ff.  Also, Christian Order, October,1994. N.B.:  Jean Guitton was a confidant and an intimate friend of Pope Paul 6 who had 116 of his books and had made marginal study notes in 17 of these books.  Quotation and citations are in Christopher A. Ferrara and Thomas E. Woods, Jr., The Great Facade, The Remnant Publishing Company, 2002, p. 317).

Jean Guitton, a close friend of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Paul VI, repeated the same thing in a mid-1990 radio interview:

The intention of Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy — but what is curious is that Paul VI did that to get as close as possible to the Protestant Lord's supper.... there was with Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or at least to correct, or at least to relax, what was too Catholic, in the traditional sense, in the Mass – and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist Mass” (Jean Guitton, December 19 Radio Discourse, cited from Anthony Fraser, “Ecumenism – a Disaster for the Church”, Apropos, No. 18, 1996 (Scotland), p. 122).
“The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” Paul VI confidant, Jean Guitton, admitted:
Since Vatican II [Modernism is] the doctrine and method of the Church.
The prominent French philosopher and theologian Jean Guitton (1901-1999) was one of the most significant figures in the Novus Ordo revolution. A friend of both John XXIII and Paul VI, he was invited to the Second Vatican Council as a "lay observer." Although regrettably a firm adherent to the Vatican 2 church, Guitton nevertheless provided one of the most candid admissions by anyone as to the utterly heretical nature of Synod Vatican 2 - which was a CONVENTION of the anti-Catholic Infiltrators into the Roman Catholic Church, i.e. Communists, Freemasons, and Modernist Heretics (a.k.a. NEW Theology Theologians) to mention a few.

He wrote:

When I read the documents relative to the Modernism, as it was defined by Saint Pius X, and when I compare them to the documents of the Second Vatican Council, I cannot help being bewildered. For what was condemned as heresy in 1906 was proclaimed as what is and should be from now on the doctrine and method of the Church. In other words, the modernists of 1906 were, somewhat, precursors to me. My masters were part of them. My parents taught me Modernism. How could Saint Pius X reject those that now seem to be my precursors?”  (Jean Guitton, Portrait du Père Lagrange, Paris: Éditions Robert Laffont, 1992, pp. 55-56)

History Repeats Itself! 16th Century, Some Catholics AUTOMATICALLY became members of one of the NEW Protestant churches, with their NEW "faiths", NEW "masses", and NEW "sacraments"! 20th Century, Most Catholics AUTOMATICALLY became members of the NEW Synod Vatican 2 church, with its NEW "faiths", NEW "masses", and NEW "sacraments"! http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m160.html


“Synod Vatican 2 church”
a.k.a. “Vatican 2 church”
Father Joseph Gelineau S.J.

The New Mass is a different liturgy."

This needs to be said without ambiguity."
The Roman Rite, as we knew it,
no longer exists.  It has been destroyed!"

(“The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” 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 along with other anti-Catholics and the 6 Protestants.  He was, of course, a professional apologist for the NOR.  This quotation is from his book - Demain La Liturgk, Paris, 1976, pp. 9-10; emphasis added).

The “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” NOR has become a permanent workshop, to quote Father Joseph Gelineau, S.J., - one of, if not  THE  MOST,  RADICAL member of the Concilium that made up the “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church” NOR along with the 6 Protestants!

Synod Vatican 2 was characterized as:

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).
Many sincere Catholics are confused by many of the changes which have taken place since Synod Vatican 2 [Thursday, October 11, 1962 - Wednesday, December 8, 1965] which was held in the Vatican. It seems as if there is a kind of continual reference to Synod Vatican 2 as the reason why something is done, or not done, as the case might be.

Even the Popes since Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978], have taken the names of the two Popes immediately connected with Synod Vatican 2, i.e., John 23, Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli [Tuesday, October 28, 1958 - Monday, June 3, 1963], and Paul 6 which, for the very first time in almost 2,000 years has resulted in a double-name, i.e., “John-Paul”:

John-Paul 1, Albano Luciani [Saturday, August 26, 1978 - Thursday, September 28, 1978.

John-Paul 2, Karol Wyotya [Monday, October 16, 1978 - Friday, April 1, 2005].

In their acceptance of the changes made at Synod Vatican 2 and since then, some may say that such changes are legitimate because the church was simply outdated and need to change.

Others feel that the church had to become better suited to the times in which we live or that the church needed to be brought into harmony with the modern conscience. For some, there was a desire for a decentralized ecclesiastical government. Above all, there was a burning desire for innovation, evolution, adaptation, reform, and progress of faith. Still others envisioned a church of secular humanism harmonizing itself with existing forms of society; etc.

Some have gone to other religions to learn what they felt appealed to them such as a Priest who recently made a guest appearance on a TV program who had gotten a degree in Buddhism! For some Roman Catholic Priests, Bishops, Cardinals and Popes, such actions have gone far beyond merely listening to the teaching of their Protestant masters as had been the case with some of the Clergy around the turn of the last century because certain Priests, Bishops, Cardinals and Popes have become more Protestant than the Protestants themselves!


Roman Catholic Church Pope Saint Pius X

An infallible Roman Catholic Church Pope has spoken against such things. He has written in part:

“From all that has preceded, 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, especially in the ecclesiastical seminaries. They wish the Scholastic Philosophy to be relegated to the history of philosophy and to be classed among absolute systems, and the young men to be taught modern philosophy which alone is true and better suited to the times in which we live. They desire the reform of theology: rational theology is to have modern philosophy for its foundation, and positive theology is to be founded on the history of dogma. As for history, it must be written and taught only according to their methods and modern principles. Dogmas and their evolution, they affirm, are to be harmonized with science and history.

“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, though, indeed, some of the admirers of symbolism are disposed to be more indulgent on this head.

“They cry out that ecclesiastical government requires to be reformed in all its branches, but especially in its disciplinary and dogmatic departments. They insist that both outwardly and inwardly it must be brought into harmony with the modern conscience which now wholly tends towards democracy; a share in ecclesiastical government should therefore be given to the lower ranks of the clergy and even to the laity and authority which is too much concentrated should be decentralized.

“The Roman Congregations and especially the index and the Holy Office, must be likewise modified The ecclesiastical authority must alter its line of conduct in the social and political world; while keeping outside political organizations it must adapt itself to them in order to penetrate them with its spirit.

“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. They ask that 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 Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Encyclical Pascendi Dominici Gregis, ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE MODERNISTS, Sunday, September 8, 1907 A.D., # 38; emphasis added).

“First of all they lay down the general principle that in a living religion everything is subject to change, and must in fact be changed. In this way they pass to what is practically their principal doctrine, namely, evolution. To the laws of evolution everything is subject under penalty of death -- dogma [no "infallible" dogmas], Church, worship [note: this includes the Mass], the Books we revere as sacred, even faith itself. The enunciation of this principle will not be a matter of surprise to anyone who bears in mind what the Modernists have had to say about each of these subjects. Having laid down this law of evolution, the Modernists themselves teach us how it operates.

“And first, with regard to faith. The primitive form of faith, they tell us, was rudimentary and common to all men alike, for it had its origin in human nature and human life. Vital evolution brought with it progress, not by the accretion of new and purely adventitious forms from without, but by an increasing perfusion of the religious sense into the conscience. The progress was of two kinds: negative, by the elimination of all extraneous elements, such, for example, as those derived from the family or nationality; and positive, by that intellectual and moral refining of man, by means of which the idea of the divine became fuller and clearer, while the religious sense became more acute. For the progress of faith the same causes are to be assigned as those which are adduced above to explain its origin. But to them must be added those extraordinary men whom we call prophets -- of whom Christ was the greatest -- both because in their lives and their words there was something mysterious which faith attributed to the divinity, and because it fell to their lot to have new and original experiences fully in harmony with the religious needs of their time.

“The progress of dogma is due chiefly to the fact that obstacles to the faith have to be surmounted, enemies have to be vanquished, and objections have to be refuted. Add to this a perpetual striving to penetrate ever more profoundly into those things which are contained in the mysteries of faith. Thus, putting aside other examples, it is found to have happened in the case of Christ: in Him that divine something which faith recognized in Him was slowly and gradually expanded in such a way that He was at last held to be God.

“The chief stimulus of the evolution of worship consists in the need of accommodation to the manners and customs of peoples, as well as the need of availing itself of the value which certain acts have acquired by usage. Finally, evolution in the Church itself is fed by the need of adapting itself to historical conditions and of harmonizing itself with existing forms of society. Such is their view with regard to each. And here, before proceeding further, We wish to draw attention to this whole theory of necessities or needs, for beyond all that we have seen, it is, as it were, the base and foundation of that famous method which they describe as historical.

“Although evolution is urged on by needs or necessities, yet, if controlled by these alone, it would easily overstep the boundaries of tradition, and thus, separated from its primitive vital principle, would make for ruin instead of progress. Hence, by those who study more closely the ideas of the Modernists, evolution is described as a resultant from the conflict of two forces, one of them tending towards progress, the other towards conservation.

“The conserving force exists in the Church and is found in Tradition; Tradition is represented by religious authority, and this both by right and in fact. By right, for it is in the very nature of authority to protect tradition: and in fact, since authority, raised as it is above the contingencies of life, feels hardly, or not at all, the spurs of progress.

“The progressive force, on the contrary, which responds to the inner needs, lies in the individual consciences and works in them -- especially in such of them as are in more close and intimate contact with life. Already we observe, Venerable Brethren, the introduction of that most pernicious doctrine which would make of the laity the factor of progress in the Church. Now it is by a species of covenant and compromise between these two forces of conservation and progress, that is to say between authority and individual consciences, that changes and advances take place. The individual consciences, or some of them, act on the collective conscience, which brings pressure to bear on the depositories of authority to make terms and to keep to them.

“With all this in mind, one understands how it is that the Modernists express astonishment when they are reprimanded or punished. What is imputed to them as a fault they regard as a sacred duty”  (Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE MODERNISTS, Sunday, September 8, 1907 A.D., # 26-27; emphasis added).

See how students in those seminaries who were influenced by such Modernist errors while they were studying for the Holy Priesthood, and who later went on to become Cardinals and Bishops, could have so easily remained silent when the evolutionary changes made in the name of Synod Vatican 2 were made to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, the Seven Sacraments and the infallible dogmas of the UNCHANGEABLE Catholic Faith?!

Nay, how many of these students for the Priesthood in 1907 A.D., after they became Priests, Bishops and Cardinals, actually became the leaders of the Heresy of Modernism and subtly prepared themselves and their fellow Clergy for Synod Vatican 2 with all of its radical changes?


Jewish Cardinal Bea

This would explain in part why the Jewish Cardinal Bea, is quoted as saying:

“Similarly the last part of the mass needed overhauling, with some kind of common prayer replacing the unsuitable Leonine prayers for the conversion of Russia, which usually follow the mass and are said in the vernacular.*  (* The Holy See has recently [1960] permitted these prayers to be omitted, under certain circumstances. Whether they are omitted or not has come to be regarded as something of a test of the conservativeness of parishes and of their receptiveness to the liturgical movement, in the U.S.A. at least.)”  (From: Xavier Rynee, LETTERS FROM VATICAN CITY, p. 117.)

Giuseppe Cardinal Siri
Archbishop of Genoa

Is it any wonder, then, that one reads how:

[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).



Roman Catholic Church Pope, Saint Pius X

A Pope speaks on this subject:

    “And here we have already some of the artifices employed by Modernists to exploit their wares. What efforts do they not make to win new recruits! They seize upon professorships in the seminaries and universities, and gradually make of them chairs of pestilence. In sermons from the pulpit they disseminate their doctrines, although possibly in utterances which are veiled. In congresses they express their teachings more openly. In their social gatherings they introduce them and commend them to others. Under their own names and under pseudonyms they publish numbers of books, newspapers, reviews, and sometimes one and the same writer adopts a variety of pseudonyms to trap the incautious reader into believing in a multitude of Modernist writers. In short, with feverish activity they leave nothing untried in act, speech, and writing. And with what result? We have to deplore the spectacle of many young men, once full of promise and capable of rendering great services to the Church, now ["Now" was in 1907! It was bad then-but think of what it has become in the present "now", 1997!] gone astray. It is also a subject of grief to Us that many others who, while they certainly do not go so far as the former, have yet been so infected by breathing a poisoned atmosphere, as to think, speak, and write with a degree of laxity which ill becomes a Catholic. They are to be found among the laity, and in the ranks of the Clergy, and they are not wanting even in the last place where one might expect to meet them, in religious communities” (Pope Saint Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis, ON THE DOCTRINE OF THE MODERNISTS, Sunday, September 8, 1907, # 43).

History Repeats Itself! 16th Century, Some Catholics AUTOMATICALLY became members of one of the NEW Protestant churches, with their NEW "faiths", NEW "masses", and NEW "sacraments"! 20th Century, Most Catholics AUTOMATICALLY became members of the NEW Synod Vatican 2 church, with its NEW "faiths", NEW "masses", and NEW "sacraments"! http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m160.html

Yet even today there still seems to be a constant reference to Synod Vatican 2, the Popes connected with Synod Vatican 2, the Popes who have succeeded those Popes, the various historical events which have happened since John 23 became Pope and the various documents which have been issued since John 23 became Pope all make it sound as though nothing existed prior to the time of John 23!

In other words, with all of the emphasis on the above time period, it would seem as if the church did NOT actually exist until John 23 became the Pope!

At first sight, this may seem absurd and ridiculous! The Vatican did not just pop out of the clear blue sky one day and suddenly appear on Vatican hill in the city of Rome, totally complete with all of its different buildings, furnishings, gardens, staff, members, etc.! And, 2nd Pope John 23 was not the first Pope!

Plus, the Vatican world-wide organization consisting of various buildings such as churches, chapels, shrines, schools, convents, monasteries, seminaries, dioceses, hospitals, etc., not to mention all of their respective members, did not just suddenly appear from nowhere, as if by magic, the day 2nd John 23 became Pope!

In conclusion, We, though a sinner, pray that God will give each and every member of “The Synod Vatican 2 church”, a.k.a. “The Vatican 2 church”, through your prayers, the Grace of Conversion to the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation!

May all of us do this for the Greater Honor and Glory of God and the Salvation of Souls!

 
The Blessing
V. Sit + Nomen Domini benedictum.
R. Ex hoc nunc, et usque in saeculum.
V. Adjutorium nostrum in
Nomine Domini.
R. Qui fecit cœlum et terram.
V. Benedicat vos, Omnipotens Deus:
V. Pa + ter, et Fi + lius, et Spiritus + Sanctus, descendat super vos, et maneat semper.
R. Amen.
V. Blessed + be the Name of the Lord.
R. Now and for ever more.x
V. Our help is in the Name of the Lord.
mm
R. Who made Heaven and earth.
V. May Almighty God Bless thee:x
V. The Fa + ther, the + Son, and the Holy + Ghost, descend upon thee, and always remain with thee.
R. Amen.

Dear Visitors:

Please help Us to continue to provide the Truth,  which   all Catholics need to know,   in these days of deliberate confusion,   lies, brainwashing,  and   propaganda!

Some of Our web pages are the only places on the Internet where you will find some very important facts,  because some of these facts are from Our own many personal experiences,     as well as the result of Our meetings with many Catholic Traditional Clergy including various Patriarchs, Cardinals, Primates, Metropolitans, Archbishops, Bishops, and Religious and Secular Priests, over many, many, many decades,    plus    Our own eye-witness testimony,   concerning   some of the many, many, many changes, which began many, many, many decadesbefore the many, many, many younger generations of Catholics were even born,   and    of which changes all of these so many, many younger generations of Catholicshave no personal knowledge and/or personal experiences.

Most of these many changes    are not only   illegal,  but they are also   invalid,  and   most of them include the censure of  automatic excommunication of the perpetrators,  because, in reality, such changes by the cabal of   automatically excommunicated Innovators,   as well as   the secret gangs   of anti-Catholic Infiltrators,    are changes which are  anti-Catholic!

Discover what the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH teaches    about the UNCHANGEABLERoman Catholic Faith,   Mass, Sacraments,  etc., etc.

We have recently added what has quickly become Our very popular Editorial Pages on various subjects.

Please Donate to Our Patriarchal Website at:
http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m08.html
Thank You!  God Bless You!
Patriarch Jacobus Maria DeJesus, D.D.


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).
All Catholics Need Purgatory Fire Insurance NOW!
IF You are Wise by helping a Soul with Catholic Traditional
Requiem Masses to get out of Purgatory much faster NOW,
Another Wise and Charitable Person will help YOU,
when YOUR time comes, to get out of Purgatory much faster!
God Rewards Charity for the Suffering Souls in Purgatory!

Please Help a Suffering Soul in Purgatory NOW!
Our Blessed Mother asks Catholics to Pray her Traditional Rosary daily.
The Rosary will really make a Powerful difference in Your Life!
Please click here to go to the Editorial Contents Homepage.
Please click here to go to the Contents Homepage.
7