http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m99.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 Really Know for Certain?

Are All “Catholic” Priests

REALLY Catholic Priests?

Mass of a Real Catholic Priest.

Mass? of a Real Catholic Priest?
“Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the Traditions which you have been taught, whether by word [oral Tradition] or by Our letter [written Tradition - Scripture]” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).

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


Part One

Vocation to the Catholic Priesthood


Part Two

The Roman Catholic Traditional Pontificale Romanum Contains the Approved Latin Text for the Liturgical Rite for Administering the Sacrament of Holy Orders


Part Three

The CALL


Part Four

Infallible Dogmatic Teachings of the Infallible Roman Catholic Council of Trent On the Sacrament of Holy Orders, Including Minor Orders and Major Orders


Editorial Commentary
 
 
 
 
 


Important Quotes


What  Makes  a  “Catholic”  Priest  a  REAL  Catholic  Priest?


Part One

Vocation to the Catholic  Priesthood

A Vocation to the Holy Catholic Priesthood, which Priesthood is received in the Sacrament of Holy Orders as it was perfectly instituted by the Eternal High Priest, Jesus Christ, is a Special Grace of God.

Usually, the elements of the Vocation to the Holy Catholic Priesthood include both interior and exterior helps and/or inspirations in addition to the reception of certain efficacious Graces which lead a person to have the desire to want to become a Priest of the Catholic Church, along with those Graces which produce meritorious perseverance in regard to this decision.

Ususally, the Vocation to the Holy Catholic Priesthood is the result of prayerful deliberations according to the principles of reason and faith concerning a person's future.

In extraordinary cases, these prayerful deliberations are not necessary because the Vocation to the Holy Catholic Priesthood is revealed by an abundant Supernatural light on the Soul which leaves no doubts that a person is being called by God to become a Catholic Priest.

In rare cases, it is Jesus Christ Himself who calls a person to the Holy Catholic Priesthood, whether in a Supernatural Vision, or in some other Supernatural and Mystical manner.

The two signs of a real vocation to the Holy Catholic Priesthood are:

1. A negative sign - the absence of Canonical impediments.

2.  A positive sign - by the Grace of God, a firm resolution to do God's Holy Work as a Catholic Priest.

Ultimately, whatever doubts or confusion or indicision a person might have of whether or not to be Ordained to the Holy Catholic Priesthood are removed forever when the person is called by the Ordaining Bishop to come forward to be Ordained to the Holy Catholic Priesthood.

Part Two

The Roman Catholic Traditional Pontificale Romanum
Contains the Approved Latin Text for the Liturgical Rite
For Administering the Sacrament of Holy Orders

All of the following texts in Latin are taken directly from this Approved 1891 edition of the Pontificale Romanum, the first page of which is shown directly above.


This Pontificale Romanum, 1891 edition,
was given the Adprobation, shown directly above.


License to Print (Imprimatur)
This Pontificale Romanum was given on May 8, 1891.


Part Three

Latin Text Taken from this 1891 Edition of the
Roman Catholic Traditional Pontificale Romanum

The CALL

The Mass is interrupted before the
last verse of the Tract, Gradual, Alleluia, or Sequence.

The Call

The Ordaining Bishop, with his Mitre on,
sits on the Faldstool before the center of the Altar.

The Arch-Deacon bids the Candidate(s) come forward and reads his (their) name(s):

Accedat, qui Ordinandus est ad Ordinem Presbyteratus: N. N.  (Name is read.) 

(Accedant, qui Ordinandi sunt ad Ordinem Presbyteratus:  N. N., etc.  [Names are read].)
 

Let him come forward who is to be Ordained to the Order of Priesthood: N. N. (Name is read.) 

(Let those come forward who are to be Ordained to the Order of Priesthood: N. N., etc. [Names are read].)

Each Candidate Responds:

Adsum.  Present. 

Each Candidate for the Holy Priesthood leaves his place and comes before the Altar, kneeling, while holding a burning candle in his right hand.

The Postulation

The Arch-Deacon presents the Candidate(s) to the Ordaining Bishop, requesting him to Ordain him (them):
 
Reverendissime Pater, postulat Sancta Mater Ecclesia Catholica, ut hunc præsentem Diaconum (hos præsentes Diaconos) ad onus Presbyterii ordinetis.  Most Reverend Father, Our Holy Mother, the Catholic Church, requests that you ordain the Deacon(s) here present to the Order of the Priesthood. 

The Scrutiny

The Ordaining Bishop inquires:

Scis illum esse dignum (illos esse dignos)?  Doest thou know him (them) to be worthy? 

The Arch-Deacon Answers:

Quantum humana fragilitas nosse sinit, et scio, et testificor ipsum dignum (ipsos dignos) esse ad hujus onus officii.  As far as human frailty allows to know, I know and I testify that he is (they are) worthy of the charge of this Order.

The Ordaining Bishop Says:

Deo gratias. Thanks be to God.

Part Four

Infallible Dogmatic Teachings of the
Infallible Roman Catholic Council of Trent
On the Sacrament of Holy Orders,
Including Minor Orders and Major Orders
 
 

The Twenty-Third Session

Being the seventh under the Sovereign Pontiff, Pius IV, celebrated on the fifteenth day of July, MDLXIII [1563].

The True and Catholic Doctrine, Touching the Sacrament of Order, Decreed and Published by the Holy Synod of Trent, in the Seventh Session, in Condemnation of the Errors of Our Time

CHAPTER I

On the Institution of the Priesthood of the New Law.

Sacrifice and Priesthood are, by the Ordinance of God, in such wise conjoined, as that both have existed in every law. Whereas, therefore, in the New Testament, the Catholic Church has received, from the institution of Christ, the Holy Visible Sacrifice of the Eucharist; it must needs also be confessed, that there is, in that Church, a new, visible, and external Priesthood, into which the Old has been transformed. And the Sacred Scriptures show, and the Tradition of the Catholic Church has always taught, that this Priesthood was instituted by the same Lord our Saviour, and that to the Apostles, and their successors in the Priesthood, was the power delivered of Consecrating, Offering, and Administering His Body and Blood, as also of Forgiving and of Retaining Sins.

CHAPTER II

On the Seven Orders.

And whereas the ministry of so Holy a Priesthood Is a Divine thing; to the end that it might be exercised in a more worthy manner, and with greater veneration, it was suitable that, in the most well-ordered settlement of the church, there should be several and Diverse Orders of Ministers, to Minister to the Priesthood, by virtue of their Office; Orders so distributed as that those already marked with the Clerical Tonsure should ascend through the Lesser [Minor Orders] to the Greater [Major] Orders. For the Sacred Scriptures make open mention not only of Priests, but also of Deacons; and teach, in words the most weighty, what things are especially to be attended to in the Ordination thereof; and, from the very beginning of the Church, the names of the following Orders, and the ministrations proper to each one of them, are known to have been in use; to wit those [in descending sequence] of Subdeacon, Acolyte, Exorcist, Lector, and Door-keeper [Porter]; though these were not of equal rank: for the Subdeaconship is classed amongst the Greater [Major] Orders by the Fathers and Sacred Councils, wherein also we very often read of the other Inferior [Minor] Orders.

CHAPTER III

That Order is truly and properly a Sacrament.

Whereas, by the testimony of Scripture, by Apostolic Tradition, and the Unanimous Consent of the Fathers, it is clear that Grace is conferred by Sacred Ordination, which is performed by words and outward signs, no one ought to doubt that Order is truly and properly one of the Seven Sacraments of Holy Church. For the Apostle says;  I admonish thee that thou stir up the Grace of God, which is in thee by the imposition of my hands. For God has not given us the spirit of fear, but of power and of love of sobriety.

CHAPTER IV

On the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, and on Ordination.

But, forasmuch as in the Sacrament of Order, as also in Baptism and Confirmation, [an Indelible] Character is imprinted, which can neither be effaced nor taken away; the Holy Synod with reason condemns the opinion of those, who assert that the Priests of the New Testament have only a temporary power; and that those who have once been rightly Ordained, can again become Laymen, if they do not exercise the ministry of the Word of God. And if any one affirm, that all Christians indiscriminately are Priests of the New Testament, or that they are all mutually endowed with an equal Spiritual power, he clearly does nothing but confound the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, which is as an army set in array; as if, contrary to the Doctrine of Blessed Paul, all were Apostles, all Prophets, all Evangelists, all Pastors, all Doctors. Wherefore, the Holy Synod declares that, besides the Other Ecclesiastical Degrees, Bishops, who have succeeded to the place of the Apostles, principally belong to this Hierarchial Order; that they are placed, as the same Apostle says, by the Holy Ghost, to rule the Church of God; that they are superior to Priests; administer the Sacrament of Confirmation; Ordain the Ministers of the Church; and that they can perform very many other things; over which functions others of an Inferior Order have no power. Furthermore, the Sacred and Holy Synod teaches, that, in the Ordination of Bishops, Priests, and of the Other Orders, neither the consent, nor vocation, nor authority, whether of the people, or of any civil power or magistrate whatsoever, is required in such wise as that, without this, the Ordination is invalid: yea rather doth it decree: that all those who, being only called and instituted by the people, or by the civil power and magistrate, ascend to the exercise of these ministrations, and those who of their own rashness assume them to themselves, are not ministers of the church, but are to be looked upon as thieves and robbers, who have not entered by the door. These are the things which it hath seemed good to the Sacred Synod to teach the Faithful in Christ, in general terms, touching the Sacrament of Order. But It hath resolved to condemn whatsoever things are contrary thereunto, in express and specific Canons, in the manner following; in order that all men, with the help of Christ, using the Rule of Faith, may, in the midst of the darkness of so many errors, more easily be able to recognize and to hold Catholic Truth.

Canons on the Sacrament of Order

CANON I.--If any one saith, that there is not in the New Testament a visible and external Priesthood; or that there is not any power of Consecrating and Offering the True Body and Blood of the Lord, and of Forgiving and Retaining Sins; but only an Office and bare Ministry of Preaching the Gospel, or, that those who do not Preach are not Priests at all; let him be anathema.

CANON II.--If any one saith, that, besides the Priesthood, there are not in the Catholic Church other Orders, both Greater [Major Orders] and Minor [Orders], by which, as by certain steps, advance is made unto the Priesthood; let him be anathema.

CANON III.--If any one saith, that Order, or Sacred Ordination, is not truly and properly a Sacrament instituted by Christ the Lord; or, that it is a kind of human figment devised by men unskilled in Ecclesiastical matters; or, that it is only a kind of Rite for choosing Ministers of the Word of God and of the Sacraments; let him be anathema.

CANON IV.--If any one saith, that, by Sacred Ordination, the Holy Ghost is not given; and that vainly therefore do the Bishops say, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; or, that a Character [which is indelible] is not imprinted by that Ordination; or, that he who has once been a Priest, can again become a Layman; let him be anathema.

CANON V.--If any one saith, that the Sacred Unction which the Church uses in Holy Ordination, is not only not required, but is to be despised and is pernicious, as likewise are the other ceremonies of Order; let him be anathema.

CANON VI.--If any one saith, that, in the Catholic Church there is not a Hierarchy by Divine Ordination instituted, consisting of Bishops, Priests, and Ministers; let him be anathema.

CANON VII.--If any one saith, that Bishops are not superior to Priests; or, that they have not the power of Confirming and Ordaining; or, that the power which they possess is common to them and to Priests; or, that Orders, conferred by them, without the consent, or vocation of the people, or of the secular power, are invalid; or, that those who have neither been rightly Ordained, nor sent, by Ecclesiastical and Canonical power, but come from elsewhere, are lawful ministers of the Word and of the Sacraments; let him be anathema.

CANON VIII.--If any one saith, that the Bishops, who are assumed by authority of the Roman Pontiff, are not legitimate and true Bishops, but are a human figment; let him be 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, Volume 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 Roman Catholic Council of Trent and the Vatican Council, (i.e. the Roman Catholic Council Vatican I).  (Parente, Piolanti, Garofalo, Dictionary of Dogmatic Theology, “Anathema”.)


Editorial Commentary

Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi

This Infallible Doctrinal and Theological Truth was taught by the Infallible Roman Catholic Pope Saint Celestine I:

Legem Credendi Lex Statuit Supplicandi.  [The Liturgical form of prayer becomes the standard of Faith.].   (Pope Saint Celestine I [Saturday, September 10, 422  - Tuesday, July 27, 432]).
This is sometimes shortened to simply Lex Orandi, Lex CredendiThe Law of Praying is the Law of Believing.  This simply means that you declare, by a public, exterior liturgical act of worship, both your own personal interior beliefs of your faith and your own personal interior worship of God, externally expressed in public worship ceremonies.  Thus, you pray what you believe and you believe what you pray.

Form of the Words Used by the Catholic Priest
For the Double Consecration which Effects Transubstantiation

The Form of words used by the Catholic Priest for the Double Consecration in the Catholic Mass is found in the Catholic Roman Missal, e.g. in the 1943 Missale Romanum, Canon Missae, page 375, printed in black ink.

Several other sources also give the exact Form of words:

1.  The Papal Bulla of Pope Eugene IV, Cantate Domino, Union with the Copts, with the Œcumenical Council of Florence,  Session 11, Friday, February 4, 1442 A.D.:

“In the Consecration of the Body, the Church uses this Form of words:
HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM.
In the Consecration of the Blood the Church uses the following Form of words:
HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI:  MYSTERIUM FIDEI:  QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM.”  (An Infallible Papal Bulla of the Infallible Roman Catholic Pope Eugene IV, Gabriele Condulmer [Thursday, March 3, 1431 - Tuesday, February 23, 1447], Cantate Domino, Union with the Copts, with the Infallible Œcumenical Council of Florence,  Session 11, Friday, February 4, 1442 A.D.)
2.  The Catholic Roman Missal, e.g. in the 1943 Missale Romanum, De Defectibus In Celebratione Missarum Occurrentibus, On Defective Forms, page xlviii, printed in red ink:
“The words of Consecration, which are the formative principle of this Sacrament, are as follows:  Hoc est enim Corpus meum; and: Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni  testamenti;  mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.” (Missale Romanum, De Defectibus In Celebratione Missarum Occurrentibus, On Defective Forms.)
Protestants Do Not Believe in Transubstantiation

Protestants came to emphasize the figurative interpretation of the eucharist in Ratramnus, which put him in line with their largely commemorative reading of this sacrament, while the Catholics were at pains to show that Ratramnus was nevertheless a faithful son of the church, that is: their Roman Catholic church.”  (Willemein Otten, "Between Augustinian Sign and Carolingian Reality: The Presence of Ambrose and Augustine in the Eucharistic Debate Between Paschasius Radbertus and Ratramnus of Corbie", p. 138; emphasis added.)

The private mass is the greatest blaspheming of God, and the highest idolatry upon earth, an abomination the like to which has never been in Christendom since the time of the apostles”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 171; emphasis added.)

“....so have I been a blasphemer of God, who for the space of fifteen years was a friar, and blasphemed God with celebrating that abominable idol, the mass. It had been better for me I had been a partaker of other great wickednesses instead....”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 254; emphasis added.)

What signifies it to dispute and wrangle about the abominable idolatry of elevating the sacrament on high to show it to the people, which has no approbation of the Fathers, and was introduced only to confirm the errors touching the worship thereof, as though bread and wine lost their substance, and retained only the form, smell, taste. This the papists call transsubstantiation, and darken the right use of the sacrament....”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 360; emphasis added.)

“....the papists, in the mass, make crosses and other apish toys...   When I first began to celebrate mass in popedom, and to make such crossings with marvellous twistings of the fingers, and could not rightly hit the way....  we were in those times poor plagued people, and yet it was nothing but mere idolatry.   They terrified some in such sort with the words of consecration, especially good and godly men who meant seriously, that they trembled and quaked at the pronouncing of these words: Hoc est corpus meum, for they were to pronounce them, sine ulla hesitatione; he that stammered, or left out but one word, committed a great sin....   Such an honest friar was I fifteen years together; the Lord of his mercy forgive me. The elevation is utterly to be rejected by reason of the adoring thereof. Some churches, seeing we have put down the elevation, have followed us therein, which gives me great satisfaction.”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 361; emphasis added.)

“....The substance is bread and wine, prefiguring the true body and blood of Christ, which is spiritually received by faith.”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 361; emphasis added.)

“....As to private mass, we cannot hinder it, but must leave it to God, to be acted by those over whom we have neither power nor command; yet, nevertheless, we will openly teach and preach against it, and show that it is abominable blasphemy and idolatry.”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 468; emphasis added.)

“....The private mass, since the time of Gregory, now above eight hundred years, has deceived many saints. John Huss was taken captive by that deceitful painted stuff. I much wonder how God drew me out of this idolatry.”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 507; emphasis added.)

The mass ought to be abolished.... because, according to the spirit, it is judged to be an abominable idolatry.....”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 512; emphasis added.)

“.....My book on the abolition of the mass is written with much vehemence against the blasphemers.... the foundation and ground of the mass, and of popedom, is nothing but imposture, extortion, and idolatry.”  (EX-Roman Catholic Priest, Protestant Priest Martin Luther, Table Talk [1549 A.D.], # 512; emphasis added.)

Therefore, when the Infallible Doctrinal and Theological Truth of  Legem Credendi Lex Statuit Supplicandi  [The Liturgical form of prayer becomes the standard of Faith.] which was Infallibly taught by Pope Saint Celestine I [Saturday, September 10, 422  - Tuesday, July 27, 432]). and which is sometimes shortened to simply Lex Orandi, Lex Credendi, is applied to the Protestant Memorial Supper Meal, which takes the place of the Catholic Traditional Mass for all Protestants, it should be more than self-evident that the Protestant Memorial Supper Meal does not contain any REAL Transubstantiation or REAL Consecration.

The Protestant denial of Transubstantiation in their Memorial Supper Meal means - in plain English - that their bread is still bread and their wine is still wine.

It is actually IDOLATRY for Protestants, not only to think that the bread and wine have been Transubstantiated, but also to KNEEL to receive the bread as well as the wine in those places that present the wine along with the bread.

One proof for this statement is to be found in what is called the "Black Rubric" of the EX-Roman Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury, the Protestant Archbishop Thomas Cranmer who, in his Second Prayer Booke of Edward VI states that KNEELING is IDOLATRY because Christ is NOT really present because Christ is in Heaven:

...for as concernynge the Sacramentall bread and wyne, they remayne styll in theyr verye naturall substaunces, and therfore may not bee adored, for that were Idolatrye to be abhorred of all faythfull christians. And as concernynge the naturall bodye and bloud of our sauiour Christ, they are in heauen and not here: for it is agaynst the trueth of Christes true naturall bodye, to be in moe places then in one at one tyme(EX-Roman Catholic Archbishop of Canterbury, the Protestant Archbishop Thomas Cranmer,  Second Prayer Booke of Edward VI, Black Rubric, 1552.)!
History repeated itself in the 20th Century with Pope Paul 6's anti-Catholic, updated, modernized, synthesized 16th Century Protestant Memorial Supper Meal mass.

Today, history still continues to repeat itself, not only with the NEW mass of Paul 6, and also with its many variations by JP-2, which are performed by EX-Roman Catholic Popes, EX-Roman Catholic Cardinals, EX-Roman Catholic Archbishops, EX-Roman Catholic Bishops, and EX-Roman Catholic Priests in church and chapel buildings which, before the changes to the unchangeable Catholic Faith, Catholic Traditional Rite of Mass and the Seven Sacraments, used to be found in the pre-Vatican 2, and pre-Paul 6, Roman Catholic Churches, but also with everything else - for example - forbidding kneeling for communion, as per the renewed Protestant Black Rubric of Thomas Cranmer:

“The bishops of the United States have decided that the normative posture for receiving Holy Communion should be standingKneeling is NOT a licit [lawful] posture for receiving Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States of America unless the bishop of a particular diocese has derogated from this norm in an individual and extraordinary circumstance.” (July, 2002 Newsletter of the United States Bishops’  Committee on the Liturgy).
Is it not wonderful how the United States Bishops are so concerned about YOU not committing the Mortal Sin of Idolatry by kneeling before ordinary bread and wine that, in imitation of the Black Rubric of Protestant Archbishop Cranmer, they forbid kneeling at communion because there is no Transubstantiation during any of the various versions of the Novus Ordo Missae, the NEW mass, in ALL languages - including Latin!

No Transubstantiation = No valid Catholic Mass

Therefore, just as the Protestants do not have Transubstantiation during their Memorial Supper Meal, so also neither do the current EX-Roman Catholic Pope, EX-Roman Catholic Cardinals, EX-Roman Catholic Archbishops, EX-Roman Catholic Bishops, and EX-Roman Catholic Priests have Transubstantiation during their Memorial Supper Meals which they still claim is a mass!

Protestants Do NOT Have Valid Catholic Priests

This issue was addressed by Pope Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878
to Monday, July 20, 1903], in his Encyclical Apostolicae Curae, Tuesday, September 15, 1896,
Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, the full text of which you will find at:
http://www.traditionalcatholicmass.com/home-m22.html

Likewise, for Similar Reasons,
The EX-Roman Catholic Church
Does NOT Have Valid Catholic Priests either!

A side-by-side comparison of three different liturgical rites that are used for the Administration of the Sacrament of the Holy Priesthood, with brief commentaries, observations, statements, etc.,  clearly proves that only the Pontificale Romanum of the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Church contains, not only the required proper matter and form for the valid Administration of the Sacrament of the Holy Catholic Priesthood, but also that the entire Rite itself, taken in its totality, speaks about, anticipates, and effects the valid Administration of the Sacrament of the Holy Catholic Priesthood.

Furthermore, of these three rites, it is the only Rite which contains the EXACT Form of words, word-for-word, with not even one omission, and with not even one change, in what Pope Pius XII Infallibly decred was necessary for the essential words of validity in the Form.

That same web page, as in the above link, also contains A Side-by-Side Comparison, in
detail, of the Ancient Roman Rite with the Novus Ordo Rite of the Required Essential Form  according to the Infallible Apostolic Constitution, Sacramentum Ordinis, On the Sacrament of Order, by Pope Pius XII, First Sunday of Advent, November 30, 1947.

The "Form" is contained in what is called the "Ordination Preface".

In the comparison of the Ordination Preface, as it is found in the Pontificale Romanum of the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, with the changed Ordination Preface, as it is found in the 1969 and 1976 editions of the Roman Pontifical in English of the Novus Ordo Rite of the Synod Vatican 2 church, you will find that there are:

1)  a total of 7 sentences or phrases and/or words which the Novus Ordo Rite of the Synod Vatican 2 church eliminated and abolished which includes two words (in English) and one word (in Latin) which Pope Pius XII Infallibly teaches in Sacramentum Ordinis are essential for the Form, and thus are required for validity;

2)  a total of 5 sentences or phrases and/or words concerning which the Novus Ordo Rite of the Synod Vatican 2 church changed the sequence;

3)  and also a total of 3 sentences or phrases which the Novus Ordo Rite of the Synod Vatican 2 church substituted for the pristine original texts found in the unadulterated Ordination Preface in the Pontificale Romanum of the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Church.

The reason why it is necessary for the Roman Catholic Church to have Priests who are validly Ordained is so that these validly Ordained Priests have the power of the Sacrament of the Holy Priesthood to Offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass.

By the same token, the reason why it is NOT necessary for the Synod Vatican 2 church to have even one validly Ordained Priest is because the Synod Vatican 2 church has only - at the very best - a 16th Century updated, modernized, synthesized Protestant Memorial Supper Meal which has no Consecration and therefore no Transubstantiation - hence no real Mass, only a Memorial Supper Meal.

One proof for this is found in the renewed Protestant Black Rubric of Thomas Cranmer:

“The [Synod Vatican 2 church] bishops of the United States have decided that the normative posture for receiving Holy Communion should be standingKneeling is NOT a licit [lawful] posture for receiving Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States of America unless the bishop of a particular diocese has derogated from this norm in an individual and extraordinary circumstance.” (July, 2002 Newsletter of the United States Bishops’  Committee on the Liturgy).
More proof for this is found in the official definition of a Synod Vatican 2 church "priest" who is only the "President of the Assembly":

Synod Vatican 2 Defines the "Priest" as the President of the Assembly

“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.” (Synod Vatican 2, “Constitution on the Liturgy”, ¶ 33; emphasis added. N.B.:  The term “the priest who presides over the assembly” makes him the “President of the Assembly”.  In other words,  the “President of the Assembly” is the one “who presides over the assembly” no matter who that person is, whether a “priest” or a “non-priest”.)

Synod Vatican 2
Official Definition of the NOR, Novus Ordo Rite
a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae - the NEW mass

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.  [Footnote # 12]”  (“The General Instruction and the New Order of Mass,” ICEL-International Committee on English in the Liturgy-Sacred Congregation of Rites Decree, Easter Sunday, April 6, 1969, promulgated by Benno Walter Cardinal Gut, O.S.B. [b. at Reiden, a municipality in the district of Willisau, in the canton of Lucerne, Switzerland, on Thursday, April 1, 1897 A.D. - d. at Rome, Italy on Tuesday, December 8, 1970 A.D.], Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, and the President of the Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia - Consilium for implementing the Synod Vatican 2 “Constitution on the Liturgy”,  Chapter II, ¶ 7; emphasis added).

 “[Footnote # ] 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, Easter Sunday, April 6, 1969, promulgated by Benno Walter Cardinal Gut, O.S.B. [b. at Reiden, a municipality in the district of Willisau, in the canton of Lucerne, Switzerland, on Thursday, April 1, 1897 A.D. - d. at Rome, Italy on Tuesday, December 8, 1970 A.D.], Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, and the President of the Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia - Consilium for Implementing the Synod Vatican 2 “Constitution on the Liturgy”, Chapter II, Footnotes; Footnote # 12.)

Footnote # 12 refers one to:  1) “Presbyterorum Ordinis”, no. 5 which is the decree of Synod Vatican 2 on the Life and Ministry of Priests.  CSL is Synod Vatican 2’s “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy”.

Since these two works are cited as the source of the definition found in “The General Instruction and the New Order of Mass,” as promulgated on Easter Sunday, April 6, 1969, by Benno Walter Cardinal Gut, O.S.B. [b. at Reiden, a municipality in the district of Willisau, in the canton of Lucerne, Switzerland, on Thursday, April 1, 1897 A.D. - d. at Rome, Italy on Tuesday, December 8, 1970 A.D.], Prefect of the Sacred Congregation of Rites, and the President of the Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia - Consilium for implementing the Synod Vatican 2 “Constitution on the Liturgy”.  Because this Consilium made up the Novus Ordo Rite, it is necessary to quote 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.” (Synod Vatican 2, “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.”  (Synod Vatican 2, “Constitution on the Liturgy”,  ¶ 33; emphasis added).

Synod Vatican 2 church Confusion of Confusion

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 the Synod Vatican 2 “Presbyterorum Ordinis”, ¶ 5.)

The Lord’s Supper is the assembly or gathering together of the people of God...”  (“The 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” (Synod Vatican 2, “Presbyterorum Ordinis”, ¶ 5.)

“The Lord’s Supper is the assembly or gathering together of the people of God...” (“The 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...”    (Synod Vatican 2, “Constitution on the Liturgy”,  ¶ 33).

“....the assembly or gathering together of the people of God...” (“The 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...”   (Synod Vatican 2, “Constitution on the Liturgy”,  ¶ 33).

About the only thing on which both “The General Instruction and the New Order of Mass,”, Chapter II, ¶ 7, and the Synod Vatican 2 “Constitution on the Liturgy”, agree is the “with a priest presiding...” (“The General Instruction and the New Order of Mass,”, Chapter II, ¶ 7) which is the same as “...by the priest who presides over...”   (Synod Vatican 2, “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 the Synod Vatican 2 “Presbyterorum Ordinis”, ¶ 5, and/or the Synod Vatican 2 “Constitution on the Liturgy”,  ¶ 33.

The inconsistent variances found in the various points of these documents are irreconcilable because not only are these variances illogical, 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!

EACH said document of the Vatican 2 church are ambiguous and equivocal which begets confusion of confusion.  For comparison, consider the PRECISE, CLEAR, LOGICAL definitions given by the Roman Catholic Church.  For example, consider these brief quotes from the Roman Catholic Council of Trent.

Precise, Clear, and Logical Definitions
of the Roman Catholic Church

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

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

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

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

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

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

HERE is clarity, logic, objectivity and consistency! There is even the penalty of automatic excommunication which is incurred by ANYONE-no matter who he or she is-who does NOT believe what is taught by these Canons which are promulgated under INFALLIBILITY!

Synod Vatican 2 church Deceptive Ambiguity

Compare this situation with the sad state of affairs of the Synod Vatican 2 church.  Not only is there seldom to be found any clarity, logic and objectivity, but there is-at best-only an apparent (not real) consistency with the Deposit of Faith.  Finally, there is not even ONE penalty imposed upon anyone who chooses to believe differently than what the Synod Vatican 2 church teaches!

Thus the Synod Vatican 2 church does not teach the SAME thing as does the Roman Catholic Church!  But in addition, the WAY in which the Roman Catholic Church teaches is totally different from the way in which the Synod Vatican 2 church teaches!

Finally, for those who still believe (perhaps because they are either in denial of the Truth or because of emotional insecurity) that the teachings of the Synod Vatican 2 church are the same as those of the Roman Catholic Church-despite the contrary which has just been proven-consider this additional point:  The “memorial of the Lord” as used in the teachings of the Synod Vatican 2 church is ambiguous and equivocal in the extreme!

What EXACTLY does the memorial of the Lord really mean?  Think about it!

For example, it could mean:

1) the Stations of the Cross;
2) 40 Hours Devotion;
3) Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament;
4) a Crucifix;
5) the Gospels;
6) a picture or an icon of Jesus Christ;
7) etc.!
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., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, “Summa Theologica”, Part III, Question 60, Article 3, Reply to Objection 1.)

So, by its very definition of the Novus Ordo Rite, the Synod Vatican 2 church, when the teachings of Saint Paul are applied to it, CHEATS its members by DECEPTION through deliberate ambiguity and equivocation!  Yet Christ says of Himself:  “I am the Truth.” (John 14:6).

But deception is NOT the Truth!  Therefore, the Vatican 2 church not only officially teaches lies, it also does not have Christ, the Truth, in a moral sense.  In addition, the Synod Vatican 2 church does not have Christ in a material sense either because by its deception via ambiguity and equivocity it DENIES the dogma of the Truth of the TRANSUBSTANTIATION as it is found in the Deposit of Faith in the Catholic Church!

Therefore, by its very definition, the Novus Ordo Rite of Mass is NOT the Mass instituted by Jesus Christ Who is the Truth!  Hence, it is NOT a true, real, valid Mass!  It is, in other words, by its very definition, NOT a Mass at all!  It is only a “memorial” which could possibly be a bronze placque which was placed in a cemetery in Rome, or someplace else, by the president of the Consilium which made up the Novus Ordo Rite, which stands beside many other such bronze placques also set in cemeteries as a memorial for the dead, or perhaps for a certain group of dead such as those who died in a certain war or during an extermination holocaust, e.g. the 7 million Ukrainian men, women and children who were martyred by deliberate starvation for the Holy Catholic Faith by the atheist Communist Stalin during the 1930’s!

The Synod Vatican 2 church
Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia

The  16th Century Protestant Memorial Supper Meals were updated, modernized, and synthesized by the Consilium

Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia - Consilium for implementing the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy
of the Synod Vatican 2 church under the personal supervision of Pope Paul 6 which became Paul 6’s Novus Ordo Missae (NEW Order of mass), a.k.a. the NOR (Novus Ordo Rite - NEW Order Rite).

October, 1967

October, 1967, the Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia - Consilium for implementing the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy - had completed a draft version for the revision and the ultimate total DESTRUCTION of the Missale Romanum - the liturgical book which contains all of the prayers and rubrics for the Mass Celebrant to use for Mass.

This version of the anti-Catholic Consilium  for the said revision, changes, and the ultimate total DESTRUCTION of the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass  was presented to the Synod of Bishops that happened to be meeting in Rome in October, 1967.

The Bishops of this Roman Synod attended the first public performance of this updated, modernized, synthesized  anti-Catholic, per se invalid and illegal, 16th Century Protestant Memorial Supper Meal, a.k.a. Protestant mass, in the Sistine Chapel.

When the Bishops of this Roman Synod were asked to vote on this updated, modernized, synthesized  anti-Catholic, per se invalid and illegal, 16th Century Protestant Memorial Supper Meal, a.k.a. Protestant mass,, the voting went as follows:

1)  71 Bishops voted placet (approved).

2)  43 Bishops voted non placet (not approved).

3)  62 Bishops voted iuxta modum (not pleasing).

4)  4 Bishops abstained.

In response to concerns of the Bishops, some minor changes were made to the text.

Letter to Pope Paul VI
Thursday, September 25, 1969

Attached to the Thursday, June 5, 1969 document - A Critical Study of the New Order of Mass, which was written by A Group of Roman Theologians - was a Cover Letter written by Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani and Antonio Cardinal Bacci to Pope Paul VI dated Thursday, September 25, 1969.

Rome, September 25, 1969

Most Holy Father,

Having carefully examined, and presented for the scrutiny of others [A Group of Roman Theologians], the Novus Ordo Missae prepared by the experts of the Consilium ad exequdam Constitutionem de Sacra Liturgia, and after lengthy prayer and reflection, We feel it to be Our bounden duty in the sight of God and towards Your Holiness, to put before you the following considerations:

1. The accompanying Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae, the work of a group of theologians, liturgists and pastors of Souls, shows quite clearly, in spite of its brevity, that if we consider the innovations implied or taken for granted, which may of course be evaluated in different ways, the Novus Ordo represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent. The “canons” of the Rite definitively fixed at that time provided an insurmountable barrier to any heresy directed against the integrity of the Mystery [i.e. the Catholic Mass].

2. The pastoral reasons adduced to support such a grave break with Tradition, even if such reasons could be regarded as holding good in the face of Doctrinal considerations, do not seem to Us sufficient. The innovations in the Novus Ordo and the fact that all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place, if it subsists at all, could well turn into a certainty the suspicion, already prevalent, alas, in many circles, thattruths which have always been believed by the Christian people, can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that Sacred Deposit of Doctrine to which the Catholic Faith is bound for ever.   Recent reforms have amply demonstrated that fresh changes in the liturgy could lead to nothing but complete bewilderment on the part of the Faithful who are already showing signs of restiveness and of an indubitable lessening of faith. Amongst the best of the Clergy the practical result is an agonizing crisis of conscience of which innumerable instances come to our notice daily.

3. We are certain that these considerations, which can only reach Your Holiness by the living voice of both shepherds and flock, cannot but find an echo in Your paternal heart, always so profoundly solicitous for the Spiritual needs of the children of the Church. It has always been the case that when a law meant for the good of subjects proves to be, on the contrary, harmful, those subjects have the right, nay the duty of asking with filial trust for the abrogation of that law.

Therefore we most earnestly beseech Your Holiness, at a time of such painful divisions and ever- increasing perils for the purity of the Faith and the unity of the Church, lamented by You our common Father, not to deprive us of the possibility of continuing to have recourse to the fruitful integrity of that Missale Romanum of St. Pius V, so highly praised by Your Holiness and so deeply loved and venerated by the whole Catholic World.

Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani

Antonio Cardinal Bacci

(Emphasis added.)

What was the response?

The official Newspaper of the Pope, L'OSSERVATORE ROMANO, in the English edition of that time, claimed to know nothing of any such letter to Paul 6, or even of the Critical Study of the New Order of Mass.

Behind the scenes, Paul 6 asked the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a.k.a. the Holy Office - Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office - of which Cardinal Ottaviani himself had been the Secretary (Prefect), and who had been replaced by Franjo Cardinal Šeper, to examine the document  A Critical Study of the New Order of Mass.

The anti-Catholic Infiltrators in it responded on Wednesday, November 12, 1969 that the document contained many affirmations that were:

“superficial, exaggerated, inexact, emotional and false” (Christophe Geffroy and Philippe Maxence, Enquête sur la messe traditionnelle (with preface by Cardinal Alfons Maria Stickler), p. 21).
On the contrary, even the most casual reading of this document - throughout the entire text, filled with specific facts and Historical Truths,  along with a defense of Catholic Tradition - which you can prove to your own satisfaction when you read the actual text of  - A Critical Study of the New Order of Mass.

The text proves its adherence to the authentic Apostolic Tradition of the Roman Catholic Church with specific, objective, and true factual statements which are in harmony with, along with some direct quotes from, the Doctrines and Canons on The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass by the Roman Catholic Council of Trent, Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562, A.D.

The Role of Pope Paul 6

Some people have asked:

Why didn’t Pope Paul 6 intervene to stop all of the changes to the Mass?
The short answer is that Pope Paul 6 was part of the problem, not part of the solution!

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 - Novus Ordo Missae - 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 Novus Ordo Rite, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae, was written under the Holy Father’s [Paul 6’s) personal supervision! (John Carmel Cardinal Heenan [b. at Ilford, England on Thursday, January 26, 1905 - d. at Westminster, England, on Friday, November 7, 1975], Forward to the English translation of the Novus Ordo, November, 1969).

The Novus Ordo Rite itself declares that it is published by authority of Pope Paul VI.


Paul 6 with Jean Guitton

“I say that the intention of Paul VI, and the new liturgy which bears his name, was..... to bring the Catholic Mass, again I say, as close as possible to the [Protestant] Calvinist liturgy”.

(Jean Guitton, French philosopher and close friend of Pope Paul VI, in the radio program “Ici Lumiere 101,” broadcasted by Radio-Courtoisie, Paris, December 19, 1993, translated by Adrian Davies in Latin Mass, Winter 1995 [IV, 1], pp. 10-11.)
The position of the 6 active Protestant members of the CONSILIUM is summed up by Brother Thurian:
“This Novus Ordo Missae [NEW Order of Mass] is so profoundly Ecumenical that it is theologically possible for Protestants to celebrate the Lord’s Supper in the SAME WORDS.   The new simplified Offertory does NOT anticipate a sacrificial act [as it does in the Ancient Roman Rite] and therefore does away with the difficulty which the “old” Offertory [of the Ancient Roman Rite] presented to Ecumenical efforts.”
N.B.:   Protestants - by definition - do NOT believe the UNCHANGEABLE Catholic DOCTRINES on the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass  (a.k.a. the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Church).

IF Protestants really believed these UNCHANGEABLE Catholic DOCTRINES on the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass, it would NOT have been necessary for the Roman Catholic Council of Trent to formally teach these UNCHANGEABLE Catholic DOCTRINES on the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass in Session 22 on Monday, September 17, 1562, A.D.

Likewise, it would NOT have been necessary for the Roman Catholic Council of Trent to formally issue all of its Canons - complete with the penalty (censure) of anathema (automatic excommunication latae sententiae) - against those who do NOT believe what the Roman Catholic Church teaches concerning the Holy Sacrifice of the Catholic Traditional Mass as found in the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Church.

How do other Protestants view the Novus Ordo Rite of mass?  Here is a representative example:

“...nothing in the renewed [i.e. the NOR - the NEW Order] mass need really trouble the Evangelical Protestant.”  (M.G. Siegvalt, Protestant Professor of Dogmatic Theology, Strasbourg.)

Photo Taken on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D. in the Vatican

The SIX PROTESTANTS who gave their input in making up the NEW mass 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, and the Protestant Community of Taize.

The updated, modernized, and synthesized anti-Catholic, per se invalid and illicit, 16th Century PROTESTANT Supper-Memorial-Meal

(which had its heretical theological sources in the infamous heretical Memorial Meals of the heretic John Scotus Eriugena  and of the heretic Berengar of Tours, which heresies were condemned by the Roman Catholic Church in the 9th and 11th Centuries)
the Novus Ordo Rite, which is now used in the United States and in many other countries as the NEW Mass, which Pope Paul 6, Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978], calls the Novus Ordo Missae, was made up in part by the very active SIX PROTESTANT members of the Synod Vatican 2 Consilium.

The Pope was obviously very proud of their work.  So proud in fact that he had his photo taken with them on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D., in the Vatican and is shown, in the photo below, shaking the hands of these Protestants as a gesture of congratulations!

Therefore, it should be self-evident that since the so-called NEW mass of Paul 6 is, in reality, nothing more than a revised, modernized, and synthesized version of the anti-Catholic, per se invalid and illegal, 16th Century    Protestant   versions of the    Protestant   Memorial Supper Meals,  all of the above Doctrines and Canons on The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass by the Roman Catholic Council of Trent in Session 22 on Monday, September 17, 1562, A.D. likewise apply to this anti-Catholic, per se invalid - in ALL languages including Latin - and illicit/illegal, NEW mass of Paul 6 and to all of the many versions of the Novus Ordo Missae (NEW Order of mass), including all of those made up by Pope JP-2, the total number of which is unknown!

Therefore, is it any wonder that the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Traditional Mass has been DESTROYED?!

Here is an admission by one of the Peritus (experts) at Synod Vatican 2:


Father Joseph Gelineau S.J.

The NEW mass:

is a different liturgy... This needs to be said without ambiguity:  The [Ancient] Roman Rite... no longer exists.  It has been DESTROYED!”
“Let those who like myself have known and sung a Latin-Gregorian High Mass remember it if they can.  Let them compare it with the Mass that we now have.  Not only the words, the melodies, and some of the gestures are different. To tell the Truth, it is a different liturgy of the Mass.  This needs to be said without ambiguity:  The [Ancient] Roman Rite as we knew it no longer exists [le rite romain tel que nous l'avons connu n'existe plus].  It has been DESTROYED  [il est detruit].  Some walls of the former edifice have fallen while others have changed their appearance, to the extent that it appears today either as a ruin or the partial substructure of a different building.  We must not weep over the ruins or dream of an historical reconstruction.”

(Father Joseph Gelineau S.J. [b. at Champ-sur-Layon, Maine-et-Loire, West-Central France, on Sunday, October 31, 1920 - d. at Sallanches, a commune in the Haute-Savoie  department in the Rhône-Alps, South-Eastern France, on Friday, August 8, 2008].

He was a Synod Vatican 2 “peritus” - expert - and was one of the most influential members of Archbishop Annibale Bugnini's Consilium, which composed the NEW Mass, who helped to make up the NOR - Novus Ordo Rite, a.k.a. the NEW mass, a.k.a. the “Novus Ordo Missae”.  Gelineau was obviously very proud of what he did, and a professional apologist for the NOR.  This quotation is from his book: “Demain La Liturgk”, Paris, 1976, pp. 9-10; emphasis added).

Some of the Excommunicated Modernist Heretics
Who Were at Synod Vatican 2

Some people have asked:

Why didn’t Synod Vatican 2 itself intervene to stop all of the changes to the Mass?
In addition to the fact that the Council Fathers would not go against what  Pope Paul 6 wanted - which was:
to bring the Catholic Mass, again I say, as close as possible to the [Protestant] Calvinist liturgy” (Jean Guitton, French philosopher and close friend of Pope Paul VI, in the radio program “Ici Lumiere 101,” broadcasted by Radio-Courtoisie, Paris, December 19, 1993, translated by Adrian Davies in Latin Mass, Winter 1995 [IV, 1], pp. 10-11.)
another reason is because it is a known fact that Synod Vatican 2 had a number of NEW Theology Theologians who were Periti at Synod V-2, including the only Layman to be a Peritus at V-2
(Jean Guitton, Layman, a French philosopher and a close friend of Pope Paul VI),
and also including, but not limited to, these six clerics:
m

Six NEW Theology Theologians - Periti - Theological Experts
Who Advised the Bishops at Synod Vatican 2 - Left to Right:

Top Row:
1.  Fr. Hans Küng [b. 1928 - present?]
2.  Fr. Karl Rahner, S.J. [b. 1904 - d. 1984]
3.  Fr. John Courtney Murray, S.J. [b. 1904 - d. 1967]

Bottom Row:
4.  Cardinal Yves Congar, O.P. [b. 1904 - d. 1995]
5.  Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx, O.P. [b. 1914 - d. 2009]
6.  Cardinal Henri-Marie De Lubac, S.J. [b. 1896 - d. 1991]

The above collage shows six of the NEW Theology Theologians who were Periti at Synod V-2 according to Bishop Aloysius Wycislo:


Bishop
Aloysius John Wycislo

Pope Pius XII's encyclical Humani Generis had.... a devastating effect on the work of a number of pre-conciliar theologians.... theologians and biblical scholars, who had been under a cloud for years, surfaced as periti [theological experts who advised the Bishops] at Vatican II.

(Bishop Aloysius John Wycislo [b. at Chicago, Illinois on Wednesday, June 17, 1908 - d. on Tuesday, October 11, 2005],  Bishop of Green Bay, Wisconsin [Tuesday, April 16, 1968 - retired on Friday, June 17, 1983, his 75th birthday], Vatican Two Revisited; Reflections by One who was there, paperback edition published by Alba House on October, 1987; emphasis added.)

Wycislo specifically mentions Hans Kung, Karl Rahner, John Courtney Murray, Yves Congar, Edward Schillebeeckx, and Henri De Lubac as theologians who had been under a cloud of suspicion of heresy, and yet they were admitted as periti, i.e. theological experts, to Synod Vatican 2!

What kind of a theological expert is someone who has been under a cloud of suspicion of heresy?

How can such a person, who had been under a cloud of suspicion of heresy, have any credibility or be given any credentials?

How can such a person even claim to be a theological expert?

What is it that makes him a theological expert?  How can a person who has been under a cloud of suspicion of heresy be classified as an expert in anything, except for being an expert Heretic?

So also, HOW can a theologian - who had been under a cloud of suspicion of heresy - no less! - be considered a theological expert in Catholic Theology, especially Thomistic Theology, a.k.a. Scholastic Theology, as well as Scholastic Philosophy?


 
 

23. Because the changes such as: table instead of altar; facing people instead of tabernacle; Communion in the hand, etc., emphasize Protestant doctrines (e.g., Mass is only a meal; priest only a president of the assembly; Eucharist is NOT the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, but merely a piece of bread, etc.)  (62 Reasons Why, In Good Conscience, Catholics CAN NOT Attend the New Mass, Compiled by the Priests of the Diocese of Campos, Brazil, Reason 23.).
 
 



 


Important Quotes

“[Saint Paul commands,] ‘Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the Traditions which you have been taught, whether by word [oral Tradition] or by Our letter [written Tradition - Scripture]’ [2 Thessalonians 2:15]. From this it is clear that they did not hand down everything by letter [written Tradition - Scripture], but there is much also that was not written [oral Tradition]. Like that which was written [written Tradition - Scripture], the unwritten [oral Tradition] too is worthy of belief. So let us regard the Tradition [oral Tradition] of the Church also as worthy of belief. Is it a Tradition? Seek no further”  (Patriarch Saint John Chrysostom [b. Antioch, c. 347 A.D. - d. at Commana in Pontus on Friday, September 14, 407 A.D.], Patriarch of Constantinople [Thursday, February 26, 398 A.D. - Thursday, June 24, 404 A.D.], exiled from his See the 2nd time on Thursday, June 24, 404 A.D., Father and Doctor of the Catholic Church; Homilies on Second Thessalonians [A.D. 402]).

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


“Therefore, heresy is so-called from the Greek word meaning choice, by which each chooses according to his own will what he pleases to teach or believe.  But we are not permitted to believe whatever we choose, nor to choose whatever someone else has believed.  We have the Apostles of God as authorities, who did not themselves of their own will choose what they would believe, but faithfully transmitted to the nations the teaching received from Christ.  So, even if an Angel from Heaven should preach otherwise, he shall be called anathema”  (Saint Isidore of Seville [b. Cartagena, Spain 560 A.D. - d. Seville, Spain, 636 A.D.], Bishop of Seville, Doctor of the Catholic Church, Etymologies, 8, 3; emphasis added).

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

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

“For there shall be a time, when they will not endure sound doctrine; but, according to their own desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears: And will indeed turn away their hearing from the Truth, but will be turned unto fables” (2 Timothy 4:3-4).

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

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

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

“God is Truth”.  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. Wednesday, March 7, 1274 A.D., in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 16, Article 5; Summa Theologica, Part II-II, Question 93, Article 2, Reply to Objection 2. Summa Contra Gentiles, Book I, Chapter 60.)

“Truth knows no distinction of persons.  Therefore, he who speaks the Truth is invincible, dispute with whom he may”  (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., Commentary on Job, Chapter 13, Lesson 2).

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

“But such as dare either to put together another faith, or to bring forward or to teach or to deliver a different Creed... let them be anathema [i.e. automatically excommunicated]” (Fourth Œcumenical Council, the First Council of Chalcedon, Session 5, Sunday, October 22, 451 A.D.).

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

“If anyone rejects all ecclesiastical Tradition, either written or unwritten:  let him be anathema.” (Seventh Œcumenical Council, the Second Council of Nicæa [Thursday, September 24, 787 A.D. - Friday, October 23, 787 A.D.], Anathema 4).


Keeping the UNCHANGEABLE
Catholic Traditional Mass

Keeps the UNCHANGEABLE
Catholic Traditional Faith

 
Please click here to return to homepage.

 

Please Click Here for the 
Holy Rosary Web Page
Our Blessed Mother asks that all Catholics Pray her Traditional Rosary daily.
The Rosary will really make a Powerful difference in Your Life!
Great Testimonials
to Saint Jude Thaddeus

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).