If Pope Francis Suppresses The Latin Mass He Will Have Made Himself A Tool Of The Antichrist

In order for the Antichrist to ascend to power, he has to remove the major obstacles which stand in his path. Those who focus first on politics or economics will be oblivious to his rise and may even find themselves supporting him unwittingly. Politics and economy are not obstacles to him because as sacred scripture notes, the world is already in the clutches of the evil one as God has given him license to for a short time before his ultimate destruction. He does not need to get control over what he already has been allowed to and already does have control over. If he who can offer Christ, God incarnate, all of the riches of the earth and the power therein as part of a simple test in the desert, then certainly the same and more can be offered to any mere man.

If riches and power are not the obstacle to him, then the object which he has to remove therefore must be spiritual. Specifically, it will be to remove that object or objects which provide the means through which with man’s help the grace of God flows into the world. The grace of God can be likened to a water supply and a home which the water is used in to the world, and the pipe through which the water flows as the conduits of this grace. If the antichrist, who wants to bring about the destruction of the human race by, say for this example, setting fire to the house of humanity, he needs to prevent the house from having any means to put out the fire, which in life is the grace of God and in the example is the water, and as such he will attempt to turn off the pipes so that when he goes to burn the house down there will be no means of stopping the fire once it is started.

Now the grace of God is limitless and the ways which He can transmit that grace to the human race equally limitless. However, certain means are more effective than others because God has designated them as His chosen means. For example, it is clear that Christ did not have to suffer and die on the cross for the sins of man- this is obvious. However, He chose to because this was part of His plan and it was through that means that He brought reconciliation to the human race. In the same way, God has certain means of transmitting his grace more quickly and effectively than others because they were chosen by Him. As the Catholic Encyclopedia notes,

Almighty God can and does give grace to men in answer to their internal aspirations and prayers without the use of any external sign or ceremony. This will always be possible, because God, grace, and the soul are spiritual beings. God is not restricted to the use of material, visible symbols in dealing with men; the sacraments are not necessary in the sense that they could not have been dispensed with. But, if it is known that God has appointed external, visible ceremonies as the means by which certain graces are to be conferred on men, then in order to obtain those graces it will be necessary for men to make use of those Divinely appointed means. This truth theologians express by saying that the sacraments are necessary, not absolutely but only hypothetically, i.e., in the supposition that if we wish to obtain a certain supernatural end we must use the supernatural means appointed for obtaining that end.

This is not to place a limitation on God, but to rather identify that contrary to popular contemporary sentiments which view the transmission of God’s grace in an almost entirely individualistic way with no set parameters, the Church has always taught that God gives many means for dispensing grace, but it is all done in an orderly fashion with certain means being able to lead men to grace quicker than other and certain ones being able to transmit more grace than others.

A highway running in an orderly fashion, sorted by different types of access. Just as the DOT (theoretically) tries to order the flow of traffic so to maximize efficiency and promote the largest number of people getting safely to their destination, God has provided men with the road maps that lead to His grace and ultimately, will lead man home if he follows them. Certain roads get a man to God’s destination faster than others.

There are many recognized, public conduits of God’s grace, such as the Sacraments of the Church. These are visible signs of God’s grace and mercy and means by which He transmits His grace to us such as Baptism, Marriage, and the Holy Eucharist. However, as the Church has always said, the greatest conduit of grace is the Holy Mass because:

…as Christians we venerate in the bloody sacrifice of the Cross the one, universal, absolute Sacrifice for the salvation of the world. And this indeed is true in a double sense first, because among all the sacrifices of the past and future the Sacrifice on the Cross alone stands without any relation to, and absolutely independent of, any other sacrifice, a complete totality and unity in itself; second because every grace, means of grace and sacrifice, whether belonging to the Jewish, Christian or pagan economy, derive their whole undivided strength, value, and efficiency singly and alone from this absolute sacrifice on the Cross. The first consideration implies that all the sacrifices of the Old Testament, as well as the Sacrifice of the Mass. (source)

Since the sacrifice on the Cross was what reconciled man with God and appeased the just wrath of God, as the mass is the greatest conduit of God’s grace that He has given to us.

A detailed explanation, part-by-part, of the Mass and what happens.

The great Catholic saint and mystic of the 20th century, St. Pio of Petrelcina, noted the importance of the mass. He said that as the mass is the sacrifice through which God’s grace is made most abundant to man, it is more important that the mass is said than even should the sun be extinguished:

“Every holy Mass, heard with devotion, produces in our souls marvelous effects, abundant spiritual and material graces which we, ourselves, do not know. It is easier for the earth to exist without the sun than without the holy Sacrifice of the Mass.”


“If we only knew how God regards this Sacrifice, we would risk our lives to be present at a single Mass.”

Great saints throughout the ages have echoed the same:

“When Mass is being celebrated, the sanctuary is filled with countless angels who adore the divine victim immolated on the altar.” – St. John Chrysostom

“The angels surround and help the priest when he is celebrating Mass.” – St. Augustine

“The heavens open and multitudes of angels come to assist in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.” – St. Gregory

“If we really understood the Mass, we would die of joy.” – St. John Vianney

Since the mass is the greatest means of communicating God’s grace to the world, then one of the prime targets of the wrath of the antichrist before he comes will be the destruction of the mass, as it is the main conduit of the water of God’s grace. This destruction can take place by one of two means.

Muslims burning an effigy of Pope Benedict XVI after his Regensburg address.

But it is not just Muslims. Many Hindus, Jews, atheists, and governments have been throughout history and still are equally vicious persecutors of the Church. Some of them are honest enough, at least in private, to admit they do not even care for reason, but simply hate the Church because they hate Christ. In the words of the infamous American pornographer Al Goldstein, “The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think that Christ sucks. Catholicism sucks. We don’t believe in authoritarianism.” Ford then asked, “What does it mean to you to be a Jew?” To which Goldstein responded, “It doesn’t mean sh*t. It means that I’m called a kike.” Ford also asked, “Do you believe in God?” Goldstein said, “I believe in me. I’m God. F*ck God. God is your need to believe in some super being. I am the super being. I am your God, admit it. We’re random. We’re the flea on the ass of the dog.” (source)

First, the mass can be stopped by being abolished from without. This comes in the forms of persecution, apostasy, anti-clericalism, the LGBT, the rise of demon worship, false beliefs and hatred of Christ and His Church that populate the world. The rise of paganism and the persecutions of the Muslims which are happening around the world in every country are examples of external persecution that are building up and make no secret of their intense hatred of the Catholic Faith and all it is for. Just as in the past and even in many nations today, they will begin persecutions except using their positions of power and influence in the world as well as their technological wares, they will be able to effect greater persecution over larger numbers of people more quickly than before.

This also include heresy too. It does not matter that man styles himself a “Christian” but continues to persist in an erroneous sect because that is the essence of heresy from it Greek root literally means ” a choice”:

The term heresy connotes, etymologically, both a choice and the thing chosen, the meaning being, however, narrowed to the selection of religious or political doctrines, adhesion to parties in Church or State. (source)

Protestant heretics in their natural and subversive state. As we have noted, heresy is a form of rejection that cannot be separated from subversion. There is no worse crime that a man can commit by blatant, unrepentant heresy, since it is to reject saving truth and lead others into perdition. It is for this reason that notorious heretics were justly executed for centuries by legitimate authorities.

According to the classical Christian definition of heresy, it is choosing another teaching instead of following that which is taught as truth because one does not like it. St. Paul warned in both 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy to stand firm against all false teachings:

I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry. (2 Timothy 4:1-5)

Jesus had even harder words on heresy from John 6. This was when after clearly explaining multiple times to the Jews that He had to give His flesh as true food to eat (which is the fulfillment of the grain offering of Daniel 9 that the Antichrist will stop as we explained above), they did not want to hear what he had to say:

Then the Jews began to complain about him because he said, “I am the bread that came down from heaven.” They were saying, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” Jesus answered them, “Do not complain among yourselves. No one can come to me unless drawn by the Father who sent me; and I will raise that person up on the last day. It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to me. Not that anyone has seen the Father except the one who is from God; he has seen the Father. Very truly, I tell you, whoever believes has eternal life. I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, and they died. This is the bread that comes down from heaven, so that one may eat of it and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”

The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” So Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day; for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink. Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them. Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me. This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever.” He said these things while he was teaching in the synagogue at Capernaum.

When many of his disciples heard it, they said, “This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?” But Jesus, being aware that his disciples were complaining about it, said to them, “Does this offend you? Then what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life; the flesh is useless. The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But among you there are some who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the first who were the ones that did not believe, and who was the one that would betray him. And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted by the Father.”

Because of this many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him. So Jesus asked the twelve, “Do you also wish to go away?” Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom can we go? You have the words of eternal life.” – John 6:41-68

In other words, Jesus told his own disciples that they can buzz off if they don’t want to accept His teachings, or if they want to claim they accept Him yet persistently refuse to acknowledge clearly revealed truth. This is the reason why Our Lord again makes explicitly clear in Sacred Scripture:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?’ Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.’- Matthew 7:21-23

Heresy has already infected the entire world and has caused and is causing much damage in undermining the work of the Church. It could not be a better cover, for while men think they are doing the will of the Lord they are nothing but tools of the antichrist because all of them lead people away from the truth. It is irrelevant what their intentions are, because intention does not matter- action is what counts. it does not matter that Adam did not intend to sin as he did- the fact is that he did.

Adam and Eve.

Action matters. Not intentions.

Second, the mass can be stopped by stripping it of its power from within. This is the more insidious evil because as opposed to assault from external forces, it has to come by traitors in the ranks of the Catholic “faithful” themselves, either by people who ignore the requirements for a valid mass or from men who illegally say the formula has changed so to give the appearance of a valid mass when it is not.

A “clown mass.” There are many heretical priests who partake of these “things,” which are blasphemous farces. These “masses” are neither valid nor have any good to them, but are a sign of the decrepit state which the Church is facing today.

Catholic.com has an excellent article about the validity of a mass, and it identifies three points that must be present, for if any one of them is missing, the mass is not valid:

-Right intention. This means the priest has to actually intend to say the mass and consecrate the Eucharist. While a priest is supposed to believe that Eucharist is the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ because it is, over 60% of American Catholics do not believe this. I cannot speak for priests, but if the state of the people is any indication, then it is likely there are many priests who do not believe and likewise do not intend to consecrate at mass. This speaks to the reason why it is very important that when going to mass that one finds a priest who is reverent and cares for the sacredness of his office. This is not so much a problem with priests who celebrate the Latin mass or who are members of the SSPX, but can be an issue with priests who celebrate the contemporary for of the mass that has been used since the 1960s, called the Novus Ordo.

Because this matter deals with individual temperaments, it is less of an issue that one would need to corrupt in an institutional sense. The best way to remedy this problem is to find a faithful priest.

-Correct matter. This means using the proper bread and wine during mass, not Welch’s 100% Grape Juice in little plastic cups and Wonder Bread cubes that are thrown into the garbage like cocktail hors d’ouvres after “services.” If this is taking place, then its clear the priest doesn’t believe, and goes back to the first issue. This is an individual consideration, not an institutional one.

-Proper form. This means celebrating the mass in its proper order. This is where the corruption can take place because one can invalidate the consecration of the Eucharist as well as the entire sacrifice by using an improper form, either by direct choice or by deception into thinking that a valid mass is being celebrated when it really is not.

Now this might seem as an “obsession” about the mass, but it is an obsession worth obsessing over, because it is at the mass that Christ instituted at the last supper that the Eucharist becomes Christ- body, blood, soul and divinity. The reason for the mass is the Eucharist, and without a valid mass there is no valid Eucharist. To deny the Eucharist is to spiritually starve oneself to spiritual death. Therefore, the question of validity is a matter of life and death to a Christian.

The reason for mass.

As I alluded to above, there has been a TREMENDOUS amount of controversy since Vatican Council II in the 1960s about the validity of the mass. This would seem to be merely an internal conflict, but its strikes to the heart of the Church because without the Mass, there is no Christ, and if that is the case, the mass is no different than just a guy preaching with some music playing. In other words, it is the difference between the Catholic Faith and all heresies throughout Church history, from the Nicolaitans to the Protestants and all in between or who may come after. But more than just the difference between truth and heresy, the proper form of the mass or not is the difference between either severely reducing or shutting off the flow of God’s grace to the world.

Make no mistake, it is error to say that the current form of most Catholic masses, called the Novus Ordo (N.O.) is invalid, because it clearly most are since they meet the three requirements listed above. The problem with the Novus Ordo is that it is a stripped down version of the Latin Mass that is susceptible to error, misinterpretation, and ultimately provides for a reduced flow of God’s grace in a way that Latin mass is not. Dr. Peter Kwasiniewski, writing for the Catholic Blog One Peter Five, elaborates on this in an article about the mass, noting how this is the mass which formed countless saints for centuries, was the mass of the Crusaders, and converted countless men to the true Faith, standing as a and often times the only bulwark for centuries amidst social and political turmoil:

If we take a conservative estimate and consider the Roman Mass to have been codified by the reign of Pope St. Gregory the Great (ca. 600) and to have lasted intact until 1970, we are talking about close to 1,400 years of the life of the Church—and that’s most of her history of saints. The prayers, readings, and chants that they heard and pondered will be the ones you hear and ponder. 

For this is the Mass that St. Gregory the Great inherited, developed, and solidified. This is the Mass that St. Thomas Aquinas celebrated, lovingly wrote about, and contributed to (he composed the Mass Propers and Office for the Feast of Corpus Christi). This is the Mass that St. Louis IX, the crusader king of France, attended three times a day. This is the Mass that St. Philip Neri had to distract himself from before he celebrated it because it so easily sent him into ecstasies that lasted for hours. This is the Mass that was first celebrated on the shores of America by Spanish and French missionaries, such as the North American Martyrs. This is the Mass that priests said secretly in England and Ireland during the dark days of persecution, and this is the Mass that Blessed Miguel Pro risked his life to celebrate before being captured and martyred by the Mexican government. This is the Mass that Blessed John Henry Newman said he would celebrate every waking moment of his life if he could. This is the Mass that the Fr. Frederick Faber called “the most beautiful thing this side of heaven.” This is the Mass that Fr. Damien of Molokai celebrated with leprous hands in the church he had built and painted himself. This is the Mass during which St. Edith Stein, who was later to die in the gas chambers of Auschwitz, became completely enraptured. This is the Mass that great artists such as Evelyn Waugh, David Jones, and Graham Greene loved so much that they lamented its loss with sorrow and alarm. This is the Mass so widely respected that even non-Catholics such as Agatha Christie and Iris Murdoch came to its defense in the 1970s. This is the Mass that St. Padre Pio insisted on celebrating until his death in 1968, after the liturgical apparatchiks had begun to mess with the missal (and this was a man who knew a thing or two about the secrets of sanctity).

The classical Roman rite has an obvious theocentric and Christocentric orientation, found both in the ad orientem stance of the priest and in the rich texts of the classical Roman Missal itself, which give far greater emphasis to the Mystery of the Most Holy Trinity, the divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ, and the sacrifice of Our Lord upon the Cross.[7] As Dr. Lauren Pristas has shown, the prayers of the new Missal are often watered-down in their expression of dogma and ascetical doctrine, whereas the prayers of the old Missal are unambiguously and uncompromisingly Catholic.[8] It is the real McCoy, the pure font, not something cobbled together by “experts” for “modern man” and adjusted to his preferences. More and more Catholic pastors and scholars are acknowledging how badly rushed and botched were the liturgical reforms of the 1960s. This has left us with a confusingly messy situation for which the reformed liturgy itself is totally ill-equipped to provide a solution, with its plethora of options, its minimalist rubrics, its vulnerability to manipulative “presiders,” and its manifest discontinuity with at least fourteen centuries of Roman Catholic worship—a discontinuity powerfully displayed in the matter of language, since the old Mass whispers and sings in the Western Church’s holy mother tongue, Latin, while the new Mass has awkwardly mingled itself with the ever-changing vernaculars of the world. (source)


Any person who has been a Catholic and lived through the transition from the Mass as it was said for centuries until the abrupt post-Vatican II changes will note the massive changes that happened. There has also been a notable, measurable, exponential decline that can be directly correlated with Vatican II.

In all fairness, it must be noted that there were many problems existing in the Church leading up to Vatican II, and there was a looming decline in the Church. While many people attended, much of it, especially in the United States and Europe, was or was becoming something of cultural practice instead of actual belief. There were many people who were in the churches but did not understand what they believed even in fundamental ways. However, these are not problems uncommon to the Church from history. Indeed, there is likely a not a problem that has not existed among the human race that has not been found in the Church and in the worst possible form. Yet this is the miracle of the Catholic Faith, since the Church is the only institution which has survived since antiquity, seeing the rise and fall of empires, civilizations, and entire peoples, all the while often times being managed in the most inefficient way possible by the most incompetent and unqualified of people and undergoing the worst crises one could conceive of, yet still managing to survive, recover, and grow through and beyond them in ways that no human organization ever could manage to do. It is a testament to the words of Christ is sacred scripture that:

And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” Then he sternly ordered the disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Messiah. -Matthew 16:17-20

The issue here is not whether the church will survive or not, because God Himself will see to it that She will. The question here is rather that which Jesus Himself asked his disciples:

I tell you, he will quickly grant justice to them. And yet, when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” -Luke 18:8

The Three Seers of Fatima- Lucia dos Santos, Francisco Marto, and Jacinta Marto. The Most Holy Virgin revealed to them three secrets, and the revelations, which are officially recognized by the Catholic Church, are regarded formally as some of the most important visions of Our Lady for our times and history.

The precipitous and really, historic decline of the Catholic Faith that we are seeing take place becomes even more alarming when juxtaposed against the revelations of Fatima, and in particular the Third Secret, of which there is much controversy over because there is a tremendous amount of questions over whether or not it has been completely revealed, to which the growing questions are met with silence from Church authorities.

As we and many others have pointed out, those who claim to have seen the Third Secret of Fatima say that it mirrors the message of Our Lady of Akita, which says:

“As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests.”

“The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, bishops against bishops. The priests who venerate me will be scorned and opposed by their confreres…churches and altars sacked; the Church will be full of those who accept compromises and the demon will press many priests and consecrated souls to leave the service of the Lord.

“The demon will be especially implacable against souls consecrated to God. The thought of the loss of so many souls is the cause of my sadness. If sins increase in number and gravity, there will be no longer pardon for them” (source)

However, there may be even more that is not being said. In an article from the Catholic Traditionalist website One Peter Five, noting that part of the message involves a “bad council” and a “bad mass”:

Today, on the Feast of Pentecost, I called Fr. Ingo Dollinger, a German priest and former professor of theology in Brasil, who is now quite elderly and physically weak. He has been a personal friend of Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI for many years. Father Dollinger unexpectedly confirmed over the phone the following facts:

Not long after the June 2000 publication of the Third Secret of Fatima by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger told Fr. Dollinger during an in-person conversation that there is still a part of the Third Secret that they have not published! “There is more than what we published,” Ratzinger said. He also told Dollinger that the published part of the Secret is authentic and that the unpublished part of the Secret speaks about “a bad council and a bad Mass” that was to come in the near future.

Father Dollinger gave me permission to publish these facts on this High Feast of the Holy Ghost and he gave me his blessing. (source)

It is of note that Sr. Lucia dos Santos, one of the Fatima visionaries, explicitly stated that the Third Secret was to be revealed publicly no later than 1960, especially considering that Vatican II happened a mere two years later:

It was under the direct order of her bishop and, with the assistance of Our Lady, that Sister Lucy dos Santos wrote the third part of the Secret down on January 2, 1944. Speaking to Sister Lucy, the Queen of Heaven told her that it was God’s Will that she commit the Secret to paper and entrust it to her bishop and, through him, to Pope Pius XII. At that time, the Blessed Virgin also indicated that this part of the Secret was to be revealed to the Faithful no later than 1960.

Upon learning that her bishop was unwilling to open the envelope containing the Secret, Sister Lucy “made him promise,” in the words of Canon Galamba, “that the Third Secret would be opened and read to the world upon her death or in 1960, whichever would happen first.” If her bishop died first, it was agreed that the Secret would be confided to the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon. Despite this agreement, the Secret was, in fact, delivered to the Vatican where it has remained undisclosed to the public for over fifty years.

Since 1960 when, after reading the Secret, Pope John XXIII decided not to reveal the contents publicly, there has been growing speculation concerning what it contains. While in the past, speculation often identified the Secret with all sorts of cataclysms and disasters, more recent scholarship has indicated that it most likely concerns the widespread chaos, confusion and loss of faith that has gripped the Roman Catholic Church over the last three and a half decades. (source)

Again, I emphasize that I am not saying the Novus Ordo mass is in itself invalid. What I am stating is that there is a body of evidence which strongly indicate the decline of the Faith and increasing abuses of the Faith from within the Church is tied to the changes made at Vatican II that have been warned about by numerous people and per the Fatima messages are also including from God Himself.

Since Vatican II, the common understanding was that the “old mass” (as some called it) was banned, and this view was promoted by many bishops, who took extraordinary measures to insure the traditional mass was not said. However, some priests insisted it was not, noting that it was never banned and that it could not be banned based on Catholic Tradition itself. Such was the impetus for the formation of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) who continued to say the traditional mass (and are not to be confused with the Society of St. Pius V (SSPV), who are sedevacantist heretics) on the basis of this argument, maintaining they were neither heretics nor schismatics, but simply continuing in the tradition of the Church as it always was.

In 2007, a long needed clarification came from Pope Benedict XVI, who said, echoing the position of the SSPX and in direct opposition to those who said the “old mass” was banned, said that both forms of the mass were permitted:

In the first place, there is the fear that the document detracts from the authority of the Second Vatican Council, one of whose essential decisions – the liturgical reform – is being called into question.

This fear is unfounded.  In this regard, it must first be said that the Missal published by Paul VI and then republished in two subsequent editions by John Paul II, obviously is and continues to be the normal Form – the Forma ordinaria – of the Eucharistic Liturgy.  The last version of the Missale Romanum prior to the Council, which was published with the authority of Pope John XXIII in 1962 and used during the Council, will now be able to be used as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgical celebration.  It is not appropriate to speak of these two versions of the Roman Missal as if they were “two Rites”.  Rather, it is a matter of a twofold use of one and the same rite.

As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted.  At the time of the introduction of the new Missal, it did not seem necessary to issue specific norms for the possible use of the earlier Missal.  Probably it was thought that it would be a matter of a few individual cases which would be resolved, case by case, on the local level.  Afterwards, however, it soon became apparent that a good number of people remained strongly attached to this usage of the Roman Rite, which had been familiar to them from childhood.  This was especially the case in countries where the liturgical movement had provided many people with a notable liturgical formation and a deep, personal familiarity with the earlier Form of the liturgical celebration.  We all know that, in the movement led by Archbishop Lefebvre, fidelity to the old Missal became an external mark of identity; the reasons for the break which arose over this, however, were at a deeper level. Many people who clearly accepted the binding character of the Second Vatican Council, and were faithful to the Pope and the Bishops, nonetheless also desired to recover the form of the sacred liturgy that was dear to them.

There is no contradiction between the two editions of the Roman Missal.  In the history of the liturgy there is growth and progress, but no rupture.  What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.  It behooves all of us to preserve the riches which have developed in the Church’s faith and prayer, and to give them their proper place.  Needless to say, in order to experience full communion, the priests of the communities adhering to the former usage cannot, as a matter of principle, exclude celebrating according to the new books.  The total exclusion of the new rite would not in fact be consistent with the recognition of its value and holiness. (source)

In the following decade since this clarification, there has been a tremendous growth in the popularity and prevalence of the Latin mass worldwide as well as within the SSPX. However, there is talk coming from the Vatican that Pope Francis and his associates are directly looking at attempting to reverse the work done by Pope Benedict, possibly going so far as to expressly (and illegally) forbid the saying of the Latin mass:

Sources inside the Vatican suggest that Pope Francis aims to end Pope Benedict XVI’s universal permission for priests to say the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM), also known as the Extraordinary Form of the Mass. While the course of action would be in tune with Pope Francis’ repeatedly expressed disdain for the TLM especially among young people, there has been no open discussion of it to date.

Sources in Rome told LifeSite last week that liberal prelates inside the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith were overheard discussing a plan ascribed to the Pope to do away with Pope Benedict’s famous document that gave priests freedom to offer the ancient rite of the Mass.

The overheard plans are nearly identical to comments from an important Italian liturgist in an interview published by France’s La Croix earlier this month. Andrea Grillo a lay professor at the Pontifical Athenaeum of St Anselmo in Rome, billed by La Croix as “close to the Pope,” is intimately familiar Summorum Pontificum. Grillo in fact published a book against Summorum Pontificum before the papal document was even released.

Grillo told La Croix that Francis is considering abolishing Summorum Pontificum. According to Grillo, once the Vatican erects the Society of Saint Pius X as a Personal Prelature, the Roman Rite will be preserved only within this structure. “But [Francis] will not do this as long as Benedict XVI is alive.”

The plan, as related to LifeSite, involved making an agreement with the Society of St. Pius X and, with that agreement in place, sequestering those Catholics wanting the TLM to the SSPX. For most, that would strip them of access to the TLM since there would not be nearly enough SSPX priests to service Catholics wanting the TLM worldwide.

Moreover, LifeSite’s source suggested that the plan may explain a May 20, 2017 letter by the recently ousted Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Cardinal Gerhard Müller. Even though Cardinal Müller wanted the SSPX fully reconciled to help fight modernists in the Church, the May 20 letter seemed to scuttle an agreement between Pope Francis and the SSPX which would see them get a personal prelature. The letter includes provisions long known to be completely unacceptable to the SSPX, thus nullifying an understanding SSPX leader Bishop Bernard Fellay believed was imminent.

The LifeSite source suggested that the May 20 letter by Muller perhaps was written because he knows what Francis was up to and wanted to avoid the plan to bury Summorum Pontificum with Pope Benedict. “It’s directed not so much against Fellay but against the agreement,” said the source. “Pope Francis was very angry that document came out from Cardinal Muller and some say that’s why he made the decision to dismiss him.” (source)

At the same time this is happening, there is an active move under way lead by Pope Francis himself and his colleagues to bring about a shared Eucharist with the Lutherans:

Pope Francis and the global Lutheran leader have jointly pledged to remove the obstacles to full unity between their Churches, leading eventually to shared Eucharist.

They made the commitment in a joint statement signed before a congregation of Catholic and Lutheran leaders at the conclusion of a joint service in Lund, Sweden, to commemorate the 500th anniversary of the start of the Reformation.

The statement was signed by Pope Francis and Bishop Munib Younan, who is president of the Lutheran World Federation (LWF), which was founded in Lund in 1947. After they finished signing, the congregation stood for a long round of applause as the two leaders hugged each other.

The two leaders appeared to single out married couples where one partner is Catholic and the other Lutheran. “Many members of our communities yearn to receive the Eucharist at one table, as the concrete expression of full unity,” they noted.

“We experience the pain of those who share their whole lives, but cannot share God’s redeeming presence at the Eucharistic table,” they said, adding: “We acknowledge our joint pastoral responsibility to respond to the spiritual thirst and hunger of our people to be one in Christ.”

“We long for this wound in the Body of Christ to be healed,” they continued. “This is the goal of our ecumenical endeavors, which we wish to advance, also by renewing our commitment to theological dialogue.”

In their statement, the leaders acknowledged that “Lutherans and Catholics have wounded the visible unity of the Church.”

“Theological differences were accompanied by prejudice and conflicts, and religion was instrumentalized for political ends,” they said, adding later: “Today, we hear God’s command to set aside all conflict. We recognize that we are freed by grace to move towards the communion to which God continually calls us.”

As well as pledging to work towards intercommunion, the leaders prayed that Catholics and Lutherans will be able to witness together to the Gospel of Jesus Christ and work for justice and peace.

“We urge Lutherans and Catholics to work together to welcome the stranger, to come to the aid of those forced to flee because of war and persecution, and to defend the rights of refugees and those who seek asylum,” they said, adding that their “joint service” must also extend to God’s creation. (source)

Interfaith relations with the goal of bringing heretics into full conversion and reconciliation with the Catholic Church is imperative. However, as this article notes, this is not about actual reconciliation, but rather an intercommunion- with the Lutherans remaining separate from the Church and still persisting in their current beliefs. This remains consistent with Francis’ stated view that people should not proselytize, i.e. actually convert people, but allow them tor remain along their own paths:

It’s fair to ask what kind of Catholic Church we as Evangelicals want to see. At lunch I asked Pope Francis what his heart was for evangelism. He smiled, knowing what was behind my question and comment was, “I’m not interested in converting Evangelicals to Catholicism. I want people to find Jesus in their own community.  There are so many doctrines we will never agree on. Let’s be about showing the love of Jesus.” (source)

The abundant lack of clarification coming from Rome in combination with a consistent pattern of openly self-contradicting, vague, and highly questionable statements and actions coming from Francis and his supporters on many issues make both the intercommunion issue with Protestants and the seeming disdain Francis has for the Latin mass all the more serious. Latin mass or not aside, the simple fact is that the Lutherans or any other Protestant, barring formal readmission to the Catholic Church either as as separate rite (such as the case with the Anglican Communion in the Catholic Church) or by reception into the Roman Rite cannot receive communion because the Lutherans do not believe that the Eucharist is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ and as such do not have a valid mass. To say that a person who denies the Real Presence in the Eucharist could receive the Bread of Life is either (a) to desecrate the Eucharist and commit open blasphemy or (b) to formally not consecrate the Eucharist and reduce it to a mere symbol, and thus at the same time invalidate the pass because the consecration of the Eucharist is the essential part of the mass

Daniel 9:27 notes that as part of its rise to power, the antichrist will stop the grain offering, which is the prefigurement of the Eucharist:

He shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall make sacrifice and offering cease; and in their place[f] shall be an abomination that desolates, until the decreed end is poured out upon the desolator.

Am I saying that Pope Francis is the antichrist? No.

Am I saying that Pope Francis is directly working to bring about rise of the antichrist? No.

Am I saying that the Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon? No.

I am saying that Pope Francis actions toward the Latin mass and intercommunion, in light of Catholic teaching and whether he intends them to or not, may result in the creation of conditions favorable to the rise of the antichrist.

Right now, the Catholic Church is in poor condition worldwide, caused by a historic apostasy that has been going on for almost 60 years directly following Vatican II and amidst many warning signs that a change would cause disastrous results, particularly concerning the mass. The Church is facing massive persecution from without worldwide, especially in areas that were once considered ancient lands of Christendom. She is also facing massive persecution from within, as due to decades of poor catechesis, bad leadership, and a lack of faith the “faithful” are for the most part a group of baptized pagans declining in number and with a poor understanding of what the Faith teaches (this does not include the 60%+ of “Catholics” worldwide who are Catholic in name only). While the Church will never fail because Christ said she would not, what holds the faithful together is really the graces which flow from the mass and in particular through the Eucharist.

Again, if a change to the Novus Order mass in its current state is made so to allow for intercommunion with the Lutherans, than barring their clear conversion and acceptance of the Faith the Eucharist will either be illegally permitted to be desecrated or simply not consecrated at all. Both are terrible options, but the latter is the more likely, and would immediately invalidate the mass, as it would stop the “grain offering” for the majority of “masses” said around the world. As far as Catholics who persist in saying the Traditional mass, they would be immediately “ghettoized” as a rejected, scorned minority in the walls of the Church and possibly charged with false claims of heresy for their actions.

I am not saying this will happen, but neither am I saying it will not. I am saying that the warning signs are clear, present, and under the administration of the current pope, who has made countless dubious statements and refuses to answer simple and legitimate theological questions posed about his stances on matters of faith and morals, there is much to be concerned about.

What happens at mass

Ultimately, the Mass is the big target because through it flow the graces which as the saints say sustain the entire world, and are naturally more important than even the Sun itself. It would not need be entirely extinguished either, but simply suppressed enough over a large enough segment of the world that the supply of grace is cut off to such an extent that, using the example I gave earlier of a water supply, house, and the pipes that bring the water to the house, the water supply flow is so reduced that it cannot stop a fire should one start. As we have been warning, the greatest persecution of Christians in history is not behind us. It is ahead of us. It will come from the enemies of the Church from without, but also from those apostates within. We have been aggressively warning that Christians need to prepare themselves now, and if need be to move to safe areas while there is still time.

Keep your eyes on the state of the mass, because if “intercommunion” without conversion is allowed by the Pope in combination with the suppression of the Latin mass, then he will have cut off the flow of the greater part of God’s grace to the world as He designed it to flow and will have made himself either by accident or action a tool of the antichrist.



  • Shane Bass

    Brother Andrew,

    I was wondering about your writings on the SSPX, have they been placed into schism, or are they valid? I also noticed you did not mention the FSSP, is this because they are in communion with Rome? My questions are purely informational as you had said SSPV are heretical (sedevacantists) and that the SSPX are not? I just wanted some clarification upon my questions. I look up to you and those at this site and read it daily. So with all humility I only ask the question to be informed and nothing else. I go to an FSSP church.

    Thank you

    • Nan

      Sspx places themselves in s just when Lefebvre consecrated his own bishops. None of their priests have valid holy orders, as the bishops were invalid.

      Priests must have valid consecration to holy orders but also have permission from the Bishop whose territory they’re in. Because they’re set up in a parallel system their sacraments are a parody.

      While I know Pope Francis extended the year of mercy grace for the parishioners, who would receive valid absolution for their sins, there are important distinctions, the first being that he never said the sspx priests were able to take confessions validly, just that the recipients were validly absolved. Nor were their joly orders made valid so they don’t validly consecrated the Host and their mass isn’t valid.

  • Juan

    Great article Andrew, as you say the Third secret of Fatima was kept in secret after 1960 intentionally and even now remain partially in secret. Another issues regarding sister Lucia happened in Fatima and Coimbra but better not to talk about it and just be aware that the Vatican kept and keep in secret all the truth about the Third secret.
    Roman Catholic Church needs to reconsider “Filioque”, that wasn’t in the Mass of Pope Saint Gregory and also needs to look towards Orthodoxy, where the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass remain as pure as it was in Saint Gregory times. The Roman Catholic Church needn’t to look for dialogue with no Christian religions (where obviously doesn’t dwells the Logos) but with our Orthodox and no chalcedonian brothers in Jesuchrist.
    Pope Francis prosecution of the Franciscans of the Immaculate show everything we need to know about his intentions.
    I want also add that European people, like you and me and millions more (living in Europe, America or any other continent) have the same right to proud of our ancestors and traditions than any other on the World. A Chinese, a Black or a Middle Eastern (since the Punic Wars we have a conflictive relationship with them) have all the right to be proud, we too, we did good things and bad things as any other… then, why everybody is proud and sometimes arrogant about their heritage and we have to be perpetually ashamed and having to say “I am sorry for be European”. No, we can be also so proud to be European but we must be first Apostolic Christians. If everybody would participate with all the heart and all the soul in Eucharisty it would be in Earth as it is in Heaven and the devil know it and just because it he wants to suppress the Holy Mass.
    God bless you for your articles, full of precision and humbleness.

  • Nan

    Pope Francis will do nothing to Summorum Pontificum. SSPX priests still lack faculties, so they are mot going to save the Church.

    What you don’t realize us there have always been parishes offering the Mass of the ages. I sang in the choir of one. They never changed Mass and continued in Latin. There are others that did the same and eill continue. There are young priests who have learned the old mass and training DVDs are available.

  • richinnameonly

    Very interesting and clear article, even with all the details that are spelled out. But could it leave one with a sense of apprehension if they were looking at joining and committing to the Catholic Church? Truth about what is happening, especially when prophecy is involved, must be revealed and not hidden. You do a good job in making us think about these things. Are similar uncertainties currently in the Orthodox and Anglican Churches?

    • Julie

      I have to add here, Rich…..that we have at our disposals our catechism, the constitution of the sacred liturgy, the General Instructions of the Roman Missal that spells out what is valid and what is not of the Mass….we have our local bishop.

      Over 70% of the American bishops left the Synod disagreeing with the pope and the certain German partition led by Cardinal Marx. And Germany is seeing many Catholics leave. There is one diocese there where only 44% of the clergy believe in the Eucharist. As I said, I don’t think Germany ever fully and deeply converted to Catholicism except in the regions of Low Germany.

      The gates of hell will not prevail against the bark of Peter….but it has been said the faithful will become very small….Mary guides and protects us in this desert.

    • Grandmere

      I can tell you that the Anglican Communion is in a real state of crisis. The Church of England has gone to Sodom and Egypt. The majority of the rest of the Communion worldwide is in open revolt, even to the point of sending a rescue Bishop for England and Europe (Andrew Lines). They have also established a missionary structure called The Anglican Mission in England, which is NOT part of the Church of England. Nobody really considers the Abp. of Canterbury as first among equals. A sword is coming to cut the Gordian knot. The primates who are orthodox have a structure called GAFCON to fight back against the apostasy that has engulfed the CofE, Church of Canada, Province of Brazil and Province of S. Africa.

      • richinnameonly

        It seems the Anglican Church, ahem, Communion, is a bit confusing. I’m just not studied up enough and I see a small octopus surrounded by a little bit of ink with GAFCON trying to clear the water or cut some tentacles off. The RCC endures many attempts at it’s weakening even from within. The Orthodox Church is one that I hear the least about, but I’m really not sure why. Does it get fewer attacks, have less internal discord, or is my head in the sand?

        • OrthodoxChristianAmerican

          The issues in Orthodoxy are rarely a matter of Dogma so much as disputes over canonicity, and efforts by agents of other powers to undermine the Unity.

          I will say that there should have never been an attempt to institute a ‘new calendar’ within Orthodoxy, among other things.

          I have mentioned before that i’m a Russian Orthodox ‘Old Believer’ (or ‘Starovery’) ‘sympathizer’, I could say more but I’m on the fence over those particular internal issues.

          • Juan

            Brother, inside the Old Believers you have Aleksandr Dugin, a sufi friendly Russian pro-nazi esotericist. It means nothing but this man is “a little jewel”.

          • OrthodoxChristianAmerican

            Dugin is Dugin, I will not judge him or his enthusiasms. ‘Preslest’ is a real thing even if the Starovery were the real Orthodox in it’s fullness they’d still be exposed to it. And there is more than one grouping of Old Believers, because they disagree as to the severity of the crisis they’d found themselves in. Some became weird I’m certain.

          • richinnameonly

            If I were Orthodox I’d probably be an “Old Calendarist”, but not really because of the calendar itself.

          • OrthodoxChristianAmerican

            Oh I fully understand:-). As I say I go even further and i’m very sympathetic to the Old Believers, as I often say.

  • Julie

    I speak Portuguese.

    When you read the messages of Our Lady, there is an omission after ‘Portugal will retain the faith’….the blank implying in my mind that many areas that were once Catholic will lose the faith.

    The consecration of Russia was accepted by heaven according to Sr Lucia. The third secret has been revealed and you can find it on the Vatican website.

    I was very sympathetic to Cardinal Mueller….but then I later read he was among the cardinals who were slowing down the process for dealing with sexual crimes committed by priests.

    I studied papal infallibility at our diocesan seminary. There are no more dogmas to be defined, four of them of which 3 refer to the Blessed Mother. The pope speaks to us now in encyclicals — but not all encyclicals carry the same weight of truth.

    One of the primacy of Peter is the immediate acceptance if a pope makes a decree, and in our times it is through these encyclicals. Pope Paul VI instructed all the seminaries teach in Latin, and he was ignored. His ‘Nuntiandi Evangelii’ is a classic on evangelization for the Church. Yet when the recent encyclical came out regarding Catholics who are married but now in civil marriages….this was not accepted by over 70% of the American bishops. Cardinal Schoenborn reassured the present pope that this encyclical upheld orthodoxy….but in contrast to the Catholic world’s automatic acceptance of a pope’s initial ‘decree’, this encyclical has been with met with much resistance, confusion, and questioning….not the sign of the Holy Spirit.

    Cardinal Sarah from Africa has upheld the traditional sacred of the liturgy. He is a beacon of light for our times.

    We must uphold the primacy of Peter and pray for our pope. You really have to take time to see what comes out after our present pope makes a statement as the media and those who want change speak first and don’t always represent P Francis’ words.

    But for these confusing times, I agree we need to turn to a more contemplative prayerful lifestyle, seek to live in His will in detachment from the world, pray for the Church, and follow the Holy Spirit in living out the Word of God.

    I am reading more about what is happening at Medgugorje….and there are insinuations from some articles that America could be severely punished for her sins.

  • Coombes Larry

    I am sorry, I have to say something on this.

    In regards to the Anti-Christ, I have to finish my book. I have FINALLY managed to a few days off away from screams for classes! I am feeling a bit better but really must finish my latest AMV first. I have reason – not least that I am still academiced out! But I still contend that this is NOT the time of The Anti-Christ and Erdogan is NOT the Anti-Christ. I mean, where are the signs and wonders? Anywhere?!

    But in regards to the Latin, there are a number of errors here. For the record I am pro the Latin Mass. It does not personally suit me but I never think it should have been suppressed. However, there are a number of common errors here which tend to keep being past on and the Rad-Trads tend to be immune to correction. I am not saying that Walid is a Rad-Trad. He is not as he accepts the validity of the NO (though I prefer the term ‘Pauline rite.) Nevertheless, there are a number of errors here.

    1) The Pauline rite is NOT a cut down version of the Tridentine; which is what is being said here. There is sloppy terminology here. One can celebrate a Latin Pauline rite. Indeed, that was the intention of Vatican II. The shift into the vernacular is actually a distortion of VII. As it is, the Pauline rite inherits NOTHING from the Tridentine s it cannot be a watered down copy because it is not a copy of the Tridentine at all. The Pauline rite is based on a very Catholic 2nd Century rite. The same rite the Church of England’s Eucharist is based on using VERY Catholic language (enough that I knew Anglicans who were confused themselves as to why the language of their Eucharistic service was so transubstanciate.) That is why we can have an Anglican oridinariate – because the Anglicans draw their Eucharistic rite from the same source as us and the Anglicans owe nothing to the Tridentine rite.

    So… unless we are saying that 2nd Century Christians had a weak, watery Liturgy open to confusion… there is no way that the Pauline rite can be seen as inferior copy of the Tridentine.

    2) The idea that Vatican II and the Pauline rite weakened the Church WORLDWIDE just does not stand up to scrutiny. I accept that the West has suffered much and that the Church is facing unparalleled attacks from within and without in the Western Church. (Indeed, hold that it is only amater of times before Christians across the West, most especially my own home – the UK – will be rounded up, executed and buried in mass grave. So I am not understating how bad things are.) So it is natural for Western Catholics, seeing the devastation coming straight after VII would confuse causation with correlation. But the West is not the world. Westerners forget this. Worldwide the Pauline rite has been a HUGE SUCCESS! It opened up the Mass and Catholicism to Africa and Asia where Catholicism is booming! Furthermore, while the Western Church is beset with heresy, the Eastern church is NOT! In terms of conversions, vocations and development of the Church, the world outside the East shows the Church growing!

    The argument that the Pauline rite is an inferior rite leading to inferior Catholicism and killing the sense of the reverent does not hold up the minute you factor the world outside the West.

    Also, the collapse of Christianity in the West cannot be explained by VII and the Pauline rite when every other Christian denomination in the West is facing the same devastation!!! We’re going to argue that a Catholic council smashed apart the Baptists, the Methodists, the Church of Christ, etc, etc? Christianity across the denominations were hit with the same hell as the Catholic Church in the West AT THE SAME TIME. This cannot be understood by a Catholic Council. There HAS to be another cause for the specifically Western apostasy.

    At the time of the Pauline rite the Church knew it was hitting an attack from a literal cultural revolution based on rabid promiscuity ushered in by the Pill and by the heavily anti-Christian Beatles (and just about every other pop band to follow.) We also now know that many Bishops were liberals at heart who deliberately stood down as the Church was assaulted. This happened across the denominations. The sexual/cultural revolution did not hit the East and Africa. Result: completely different Church experience.

    It is here that the Latin only crowd engage in lots of special pleading… Watch out for it. Example: “Ahh, but Vatican II was really about the Western Church.= and not the East…” Stand by.

    But there is no other explanation for the FULL facts other than the sexual revolution which had nothing to do with either Vatican II or the Pauline rite. Indeed, I would argue that Vatican II has SAVED the Church by making the Mass accessible to the world outside of the West. It’s been boom time since. If Vatican II had not been the West would still have apostatised but the East would not have been converted. As it stands, I am enjoying being a country where Catholicism is winning. The Churches seat over a 1000 people per Mass EASY… with Churches within 3 miles of each other where I am!! The local Bishop is a gem too. Not at all like the ivory tower liberals of the old country.

    3) The Latin is best crowd have a tendency to elivate the Tridentine Rite higher than it should be. Worthy as the Tridentie rite is, the “Tridentine is the Mass of all Ages” argument is very weak.

    a) The Tridentine cannot be the Mass of all ages when it only came into being after the council of Trent in the 16th Century! That does not make sense. If we go with the logic that if a Mass if not Tridentine then you inferior Catholicism then every Mass in the 1,500 years plus prior to Trent was inferior. That means the Mass of the Apostles – which was MUCH closer to the Pauline rite than the Tridentine rite – was somehow insufficiently Catholic. That undercuts the Catholic Church and does not make sense. It really is a csse of sawing off the branch you are standing on.

    b) The Tridentine rite was NOT an organic development of previous Masses. Instead, it was a rather heavy reaction to the heresies of Protestantism and elevated the priest such that the congregations participation became near zero during the Mass. Witnesses from those that lived in the days of the Tridentine tell me that they were NOT the glory days of reverence. The priest often could not be heard, the congregation brought their rosaries to pray just to have something to do during the Mass, Masses of 20 minutes were not uncommon… My mother who was a convert in the days of the Tridentine welcomed the Pauline Rite because with the Tridentine the laity just watched. This was not how things were prior to Trent.

    Oh, note that the council of Trent and the arrival of the Tridentine did NOTHING to stop the apostacy of the time! Protestantism carried on and many were lost to the thin theology of the Protestantism. By the Tridentine ‘only’ crowd’s ***own*** terms the Tridentine rite was a failure.
    [I do not hold, however, that Trent was a failure. I just apply the same standard to the Pauline rite as the Tridentine]

    Stand by for special pleading and dual standards…

    c) The Church has had a number of approved rite. The Latin is preferred in the West and is the general world standard but there are other rites including the Ambrosian rite, the Dominican rite, the byzantine rite and now the Anglican rite… along with MANY others! By calling the Tridentine the “Mass of all ages” and making it the gold standard the Tridentine ‘only’ crowd are saying that ALL the other rites are inferior or even invalid. Which would, er, annoy a lot of non-Latin Catholics.

    Again… we hit special pleading at this point.

    Besides, as Dave Armstrong – a man worthy of being listened to – points out; Reverence is mainly an INTERIOR disposition. Yes, the external helps direct the heart but it does not replace it or have a completely deterministic effect.

    Besides, if I may add; people _are_ different. One side does not fit all. I know a lot of the Latin crowd LOVE smell, bells and incense along with huge Cathedrals plastered with statues and gold. They relate to the sense of the Transcendence, awe and reverence towards God.
    Fine. I have no problem with this. [I notice that that Latin only crowd seem to how very similar personality traits and preferences in line with perfectionism. I get the impression that a lot of the ‘Tridentine is best’ comes from a natural human tendency to assume what moves them will affect everyone else… when it is not the case.]

    But… personally, it does not work for me!! I am a man who likes the humble and intimate. It’s my nature. I am a Romantic; the sort of person to actively choose a Citroen 2V over a porsche. In a way, I am drawn more to the Franciscan way – simple and poor. Huge, ornate Cathedrals leave me cold and I am distracted. I feel distanced from proceedings. I get distracted my lots of music too. It’s how I am. It is at this point certain Rad-Trads call me a disgrace to Catholicism and there is nothing I can do about that! But I do know that different people relate to different things. I have been in a 12th century Fransican Chapel and a tiny, near mud hut of a Church in the Philippines and it is in those places I can most easily pray. I find God in the poor and the humble. I have tried the ornate, the Latin, the smells, bells and incense… and I just do not get it. But I do not then define my experience as being the universal standard. I know I am unusual as my personality type is represented by low single figure percentage digits! I grant that but everyone is a minority to some degree. There is just a question of how big your minority is in terms of temperment, interests and way of thinking.
    One size does not fit all. The Church, in her wisdom, recognises this and has allowed for all manner of private devotions, forms of prayer and rites within certain limits. Indeed, the failure of the post-Vatican II has been the crushing of anything EXCEPT the Pauline rite. The Tridentine should never have been banned in the West! I also accept that, in the West, terrible abuses have been carried out in the name of Vatican II but almost always in DEFIANCE of what was laid down in the actual council. Note that the church leaders who implemented this abuses were bron an brd on the Latin Tridentine rite.

    As it stands, the arguments that the Pauline rite (and by extension all other valid rites in the Church) is intrinsically inferior to the Tridentine do not stand up to scrutiny. I could go on for pages and pages but it is 3AM and I need to get some sleep. Though I am only up this late because I am finally faintly awake after sleeping 15-18 hours a day recovering from exam season.

    And, because it’s a bit of a tradition for me to end with an AMV… I have JUST discovered Hatsune Miku! Here she is – live in concert! That’s impressive when you consider she is a computer program.
    [Hey, I need cute after what I have been through lately!]

    I now understand the anime troupe of a girl holding a mallet…

    • richinnameonly

      I think your Citroen may get run over by Erdogan and his resurrected Ottoman Empire in a few years.

      • Juan

        Today was a military air show in Spain with participation of NATO members. Was so significant that an average Spaniard, asked by a TV reporter, answered that the best air patrol and exercise was the Turkish one. A lot of people is absolutely unaware of Turkish military power and capacity, no mention of the possibility of gnostic/demonic syncretism trough sufism.
        Erdogan isn’t the Antichrist but is for sure an antichrist.

        • richinnameonly

          Some people will wake up to Turkey’s agenda and strength, but very late. Which ever way it turns out with Erdogan there will be surprised people also. Especially if it turns out that he IS “the” end time anti-Christ.

      • Coombes Larry

        For the record, I am not arguing that Erdogan is not reviving the Ottoman Empire. I am not saying he will not be successful. I am not arguing against WWIII. In fact, I am expecting the beginnings could be by the end of this year for various reasons. I can go a long way with Walid. I can even accept that Erdogan is the AntiChrist of our time.

        But I argue, along with virtually anyone else who has studied the subject that Erdogan does NOT match the template of The AntiChrist. But, I have to write a book to cover it all. I just raised one objection – the lack of signs and wonders. The AntihCrist is supposed to deceive the nations by miracles. Where are they? Any of them? No miracle = not the AntiChrist. It’s not a side issue either. It is supposed to be the defining mark of his operation and, through his power he deceives the Christians!!! Not the Muslims but Christians. Muslims can be deceived by raw might. It takes signs and wonders to confuse and split the Christians.

        Just sayin’.

        Surprised the Tridentine crowd haven’t mobbed me yet. Doubtless it’s time difference. 🙂

        • richinnameonly

          I understand. We won’t know for sure until we’re in the thick of it and we have our 20/20 hindsight. Could be that most miracles he performs will be religious, spiritual, and political masterful machinations and deceptions no one thought possible. BTW, I liked Citroens but haven’t seen any here for many years!

          • Coombes Larry

            It was more a European thing. And Citroens were largely killed off by claims of lack of safety but I wonder how much of that was EU over regulation of everything. I mean, the UK and France now want to ban petrol and diesels vehicles for electric only. That’s going to work out well.

            So glad God led me out.

            Thanks for your thoughts. In time I hope to post bits of my book to give some idea. But later. It’s been far too crazy.

        • Grandmere

          As we say here, “It’s always 5:00 somewhere”. lol

          • Coombes Larry

            I’ve only just got this!!! 😀

    • Kevin Nicholson

      Coombes Larry,
      Here is the antithesis to your premise of a holy new order mass:

      16:04 – Here Fr. Hesse gives an introduction to going over the document Ecclesia Dei and how and why this document pronounces material heresy, schismatic statements, and is in error.

      52:50 – “In one and the same document [Ecclesia Dei] we face double heresy, a major error in moral theology, and as far as canon law is concerned: a lie.”

      53:33 – “The sad thing is that we have several groups in the Church that base their very existence on this heretical, schismatic, and fraudulent document.”

      59:11 – Fr. Hesse talks about a statement in Gaudiem et Spes that is “downright Satanism.”

      59:49 – “Documents like this cannot be accepted and who does it ceases to be a Catholic. Therefore, if a priest of the Fraternity of St. Peter is honest and is good and is likeable and lovable—he might be personally, and as much as I might appreciate his efforts to keep the old Mass going—the moment he tells me that Vatican II can be interpreted in a Catholic way—(he personally might not know better or understand better)—but the moment he says that, I will entirely distrust him for all kinds of theological judgements because then I can see [that] he doesn’t even recognize heresy where it is so patently evident.”

      1:16:25 – “The Holy Spirit is still with the Church. The Holy Spirit made sure that the new missal was never made obligatory with a papal signature. There is no such thing as a papal signature on the obligation to use that horrible book called ‘the new missal.’”

      1:18:32 – “The Holy Spirit takes care. At the same time the Holy Spirit made sure that Vatican II never defined anything. As a matter of fact, there’s an explicit term on that. Pope John XXIII said ‘this Council does not want to define or condemn.’”

      1:23:55 – Here he begins to get to the greatest detail about the question if the New Mass is valid or not.

      The other uploads of this same video talk on tradcatknight and other YouTube channels have many problems, including:

      • The audio and video is mismatched for about 81% of the total video length on other channels.
      • The entire section in the part 1 video from about 1 hour to about 1 hour, 30 minutes into the video on other channels is a word-for-word repeat of an earlier part of the video.
      • The audio track is not remastered to remove as much background noise as possible.

      All of the above problems are fixed in this corrected, remastered video you are now watching and the audio is remastered. You can download the remastered MP3 of this talk at the same place you can download all of Fr. Hesse’s talks (see further below). Note that there is a glitch at 00:01:24 and 1:31:52. These were present in the original video and couldn’t be fixed.

      Fr. Gregory Hesse, S.T.D., J.C.D., S.T.L., J.C.L., Canon Lawyer, Doctor of Thomistic Theology, lifelong friend and personal secretary of Cardinal Stickler at the Vatican from 1986-1988 has provided us with many talks and conferences where he gives a no-nonsense, intelligent, learned, and witty exposition and explanation of relevant topics facing contemporary faithful Catholics. Fr. Hesse got to know approximately 45 cardinals while studying and working in Rome for 15 years and he has an uncanny and substantial knowledge of many things. You would be hard-pressed to find another theologian quite like him.

      • Coombes Larry

        Yeah, right. There will always be Rad-Trad loons yelling that the Tridentine Mass is the Catholic Church. Well it isn’t. I mean, I’m all for Tradition and I’m all for valid liturgy but the Rad-Trad crowd are beyond obsessive!

        Anyway, none of the above explains the failing of Christianity across all the denominations in the West nor the rise of Catholicism in the East. A load of grips and special pleading regarding VII does absolutely nothing to explain the worldwide situation. ***Nothing at all***. And claiming the Pauline rite is not valid is like saying that the Mass of the Apostles from the 2nd Century was not valid. I’ll take Fr Gregory Hesse and raise you Saint JPII and Pope Benedict XVI! I’ll also raise you the 1000+ Mass attendees at any Catholic Church I can attend here in the Far East. I am outside of the West now so I am seeing what you guys are not.

        The Rad-Trads will continue to gripe and usually eventually end up as Sedevantists. See Gerry Matatics. I can’t help that.

        • Kevin Nicholson

          The traditional catholic church is the body of Christ. Church dogma is historical. Your not listening to the argument: heresy leads to the falling away. Gee! wake up….

          • Coombes Larry

            No, ***you’re*** not listening! As usual, the facts I pointed were ignored when they are CENTRAK to the argument!

            I ***get*** the Rad-Trad argument! But the argument touted has no explanatory power! If vII = heresy and loss of the sacred then…

            a) It would not be boom time for the Church in the East
            b) Protestantism would be at least stable in the West while the Catholic Church sunk.

            Neither are true. That nails it. Rad-Trad arguments regarding Vatican II are deterministic and therefore, just apply Universally. But their cause and effect reasoning does not hold water. Trads simply ignore the data outside of their frame of reference. Besides, I trust the likes of SAINT JPII over you in regards to the definition of heresy and what equals a valid Mass thank you very much.

            Besides, my waifu says you’re wrong so there.

          • Kevin Nicholson

            Heresy Mr Coombes….

          • Georgeorwell

            He also worshiped with animist, witch doctors, heretics, pagans, schismatics, and apostates. Kissing the Koran and smoozing Jewish Rabbis. He was no Catholic.

          • Coombes Larry

            Yeah, yeah. ***You*** get to decide who is a heretic and become a Magesterium of one and so end up a Protestant. I’ve seen it before. Rad-Trads like yourself end up sedevatentists and it seems you are well on your way.

            And you’ve completely ignored the facts of the case as I expected.

          • Kevin Nicholson

            Christ through His church makes disciples. Truth is objective never oxymoron. Keep studying and submit to God the Father’s will. End of debate.

          • Coombes Larry

            Well, if it’s the end of the ‘debate’ then I will end with the storming ‘Echo’ by Gumi but video with Miku.

            Us heretics like cute things…

            [I’m stunned by the technology. I had no idea things had advanced the way they had!]

          • Kevin Nicholson

            Trust the Lord for a Christian wife and Godly children…https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7y7CLWArdFY

            Follow the Holy Spirit in all your endeavors.
            Peace in Christ our Redeemer Mr. Coombes.

  • DantesRivers

    Today I participated for the first time in my life in the Chrismation,Baptism and reception of the Eucharist of an infant in our parish. May God answer the powerful prayers of the priest her parents, relatives,friends and those of us who witnessed it.

    • DantesRivers

      To the Protest ants.
      The church (not the Bible) is the pillar and ground of the truth.
      I Timothy 3:15
      But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

  • Yet, The Charmatistic evangelicals used the same Scriptures you just cited and we have thousands of different interpretations.

    I believe Acts spoke of why having an apostolic succession and hierarchy is far better than every man claiming to be inspired by the Holy Spirit to interpret the Scriptures and starts his own church with no bishopric oversight.

  • Georgeorwell

    Because the Council of Trent was dogmatic and V II was not–or at least that is what is claimed. Its application, however, is very dogmatic.

  • Kamau41

    “The Pope is already a “tool of Satan,” and those who insist on following the hierarchy out of Rome are both deluded and participants.” What an incredible blasphemous claim. So Reader, what do you with the Holy Scriptures, when Jesus made it so crystal clear in St. Matthew 16:18-19,
    which He says while giving the keys to St. Peter:
    “And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this ROCK I will build my CHURCH, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the KEYS of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.”

    • Grace Ziem

      Actually, Jesus referred to Peter in this passage as petros (stone/rock) and said He would build His church on the petra (rock foundation); 2 different words. Petros is loose, petra is firm. Peter denied Christ after this statement; Jesus as the son of God is the foundation of the church

      • “Peter denied Christ after this statement…”

        That is not the end of the story and you know it.

        Three times Jesus commanded Peter, “Feed My sheeps,” to confirm again His appointment of Peter.

        Peter’s own words, as recorded by Luke the beloved physician, “My brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that I should be the one through whom the Gentiles would hear the message of the good news and become believers,” (Acts 15:7).

        Kamau’s assertion stands.

        • Grace Ziem

          No, I never said it was “the end of the story”; the 3 times Jesus said to feed my sheep was one time for each denial. The fact stands that Jesus used the term PETROS for Peter (rock/stone that can be thrown) and PETRA (rock foundation) for what He would build His church on. Christ’s words did NOT say He would build His church on any person. His church is built on CHRIST!

          • Your problem is simply this.

            You think that Christ only built the Church upon Himself when He, in fact, entrusted the task of building the Church unto the apostles, exactly spelled out in the Great Commission.

            Christ is the chief cornerstone, you understand this. In Revelation, the new Jerusalem were built on stones, twelve stones named after the apostles. It was through the apostles that Christ built the Church. It was through the apostles’ successors the Church spread from Jerusalem to Samaria and to Judea and beyond.

            The leader of this apostolic Church was Peter, which is why Jesus commanded thrice, “FEED MY SHEEPS.”

            No matter how you try to argue, Christ’s own words and the lives of the apostles bear witness.

            The beautiful thing about viewing the Scriptures through the eyes of the Catholic-Orthodox lens is seeing the multifaceted interpretation is very much like looking at the schematic drawing of a electronic circuits. Without proper training, a technician cannot interpret the symbols of the schematic, in order to troubleshoot the complicated electronic circuit that makes modern living possible. Without a power source, a diode would not be able to regulate voltage or current, without resistors to limit the amount of current passing through the circuit, and without all the important pieces of the circuit, it is without function. It has a form, but no power, and utterly useless. I know this because I have been a electronic technician since January and is going deeper into the theory and application of electronic circuitry through a bachelor degree program.

            The Church without Christ is useless. The Church without the guidance and guardianship of the Holy Spirit is useless. The Church without Holy Spirit empowered men who are entrusted to facilitate the message of Christ while zealously guarding the Faith is useless.

            Christ spent 3 years, a drop in the ocean of time since Christ Who Created the Heavens and Earth is outside of time, investing completely into twelve men, flawed and all, transforming each one of them from failure to bedrocks and pillars of the Church. Peter, a failed fisherman, became fisher of men. St. Paul, once a zealous murderer, became the most zealous missionary and apostle of Christ. Together, Peter and Paul changed the course of history forever because they both saw Christ. That is not to disregard the other who also have been martyred for their testimony in Christ, all save John who gave us one final public revelation.

            The Church has stood the test of time. Jesus promised He would be with the Church unto the end of the age, but He never promised there would not be ravenous wolves dressed in the cloth deceiving many, leading many to damnation. The story of a remnant who will not bow to Baal is still a persist theme from the times of the first generation apostles to today’s generation within the Catholic-Orthodox Church.

          • Grace Ziem

            I don’t have a problem; I agree with the scripture-based comments you made, but not one unsupported by scripture.. Paul was also commissioned by Christ, and he founded many churches. Peter was a great leader in Jerusalem, but founded no churches. Peter was corrected by Paul for an error in practice vs jewish customs, making Gentiles very uncomfortable. It was of course resolved after Paul talked to Peter about it. Peter was admonished by Christ after the “rock” statements, Christ referring to his comments as Satan (when Peter didn’t understand why Christ needed to die.

            Your church wants to “shoe-horn” Peter in a role as first pope, and scripture doesn’t support it. Probably all your popes have been as fallible as Peter… (My “pope” is Christ and Him ALONE!). Christ called Paul to reach the Gentiles and neither as “the” sole leader.

            You will not be able to bully me into following your non-scriptural position so give it a rest!

  • Coombes Larry

    Question to which I think you know the answer(s).

    A few things to help you tackle the Rad-Trads.

    As I say, the whole “Loss of Latin/Tridentine = loss of the sacred = heresy = apostacy” argument of the Trads (as distinct from genuine Traditionalists who have a liturgical preference but do not stand in judgment over everyone else including the Magesterium) is deterministic. The argument is A=B.


    Well, as I have pointed out, when you factor in the worldwide situation the cause and effect claim completely breaks down. The Trads then either ignore the break in the expected chain of causation – as we have seen in this thread or… I had one case where they attempted a mass of special pleading.

    But here is something else. People have short memories. Those who lived in the days of the Tridentine prior to Vatican II were DELIGHTED with the changes because the Tridentine was FAILING! Masses were 20 minutes long and the priests were negligent. Now… wait for it… It was called for a reason.

    I can’t speak for the US but I can for the UK. Church attendence in the UK started declining after WWII, in the days of the Tridentine. The 2nd Vatican Council was called in 1963 and finished in 1965 with the reforms implemented in 1969 in the UK.

    Now, the argument of the Trads goes… the Pauline rite and use the vernacular caused heresy and the meltdown of (apparently the whole of) Christianity. An effect cannot precede a cause unless you are a time traveller (OK, I am but that’s not relevant here…) and so the Trad position requires that Mass attendance crashed AFTER the implementation of the Pauline rite.

    But Mass attendance was already in decline in the UK prior to VII. Then it dropped off a cliff in 1963! Get that? 1963! Vatican II had only just kicked off! Nothing had been decided yet. So what happened in 1963? The arrival of the contraceptive pill and the Beatles! Note that, at the time, the Beatles were GODS!! They were the prophets of their time and they pushed free sex and anti-Christianity with a passion. John Lennon in particular HATED Christianity! You had two REVOLUTIONS that happened in the UK in particular (which is one reason why the UK is now so completely busted and rushing towards tyranny as fast as it can) but matched with the rest of the West – the sexual revolution of 1963 and the cultural revolution of 1967. The UK had already thrown out its own culture and Christian heritage before Pauline rite was introduced! These two revolutions also impacted Protestant churches as well. I mean, the UK was Protestant and it was the Church of England that suffered the fastest decline and now now explicitly rejected Christianity wholesale. The CoE is now nothing more than a left wing pressure group. Now how the hell could Vatican II cause that? It had to be the sexual revolution.

    Oddly enough, the Trads completely ignore not one but two REVOLUTIONS in Western culture along with a time line that does not match their claims regarding the almighty destructive power of Vatican II which has both the power to destroy both Catholicism and Protestantism in the West but yet have no affect on the East which also uses the Pauline rite.

    I teach critical reasoning skills. It’s part of my job and live and die by exam results in Asia where there is no time for liberal nonsense. So I cover causation versus correlation. It is easy demonstrable that the Trads have confused cause and effect. I can understand the confusion but not that they do not adapt when the real cause is shown.
    You probably won’t be able to get through to the Rad-Trads but this can help preserve your sanity and keep you focused on the mission and not liturgy obsession. As I say, from what I observe of the Trads, they do seem to be a bunch of unbalanced perfectionists forming a perfectionist only club. It’s very a very elite club on the grounds it seems to exclude 97.635% of the world’s Catholics who they claim are not, in fact, Catholic.

    Got to stop here. Loadsa classes now!

  • filomena seiffert

    I prefer the traditional mass but lets not forget the words of Jesus to Peter; what you bound on earth will be bond in heaven, what you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven, therefore the pope has the authority given by Jesus to change things. The Gregorian mass did not exist until some centuries had passed after Jesus death. We know the celebration of the last soup was put in place by the apostles and It was simple. Pope Francis has great charity for the whole human race. Jesus preached in Samaria and the Samaritans were treated by the Jews as a inferior race and inferior creed but they both had the same father Abraham. I doubt that I like to be in joined services with any other religion then the Catholic but many will adhere to it. Can I say it is wrong? no, I can not because Jesus gave the power to Peter. I remember Peter telling Saphire to drop dead and she did.

  • All For Him

    Hi Andrew, I need to ask a question, sspx is recognise and resist. The Catholic faith says we must venerate all saints under pain of mortal sin. Here’s my dilemma, John Paul kissed the Quran, no threat to his life, Daniels companions refused to bow to the statue and were sent to the fire, john Paul whored with other false religions, Solomon the wisest man ever alive what was his end, so I ask you, do you venerate him as a saint. So our Lady gives us the rosary, perfection from heaven yet he goes and adds to it. Ecumenism, all churches subsist in the catholic faith: heresy that is. The road is narrow, our Lord only gave St Peter the keys no one else. You can call me a sedevacantist heretic, I choose Jesus, not Allah or Hinduism or Ra or whatever else. We are supposed to convert people to the faith, not send them to hell with their doctrines of error. Vatican 2 is where this all began. Since V2 all faiths lead to Christ apparently. I did my cathecism 2016/2017 novus ordo, now I’m reading older documents and the amount of heresy and irreverence is blinding.
    Tell you I’ll try convert anyone to the true faith, Jesus is my judge, if you all want to send people down the wide road by being NICE encouraging them to remain in error, just know those souls are on your heads. I was a methodist, then charismatic, then baptist and they are wrong, I’m a Catholic.

    Peace to you all

    • Anthony

      I’ve noticed these too and I’m converting as well, but no one is talking about it too much. The church now won’t claim to be the one true church even though it is. Well if they’ll call us radtrads or sedevecantist then who cares, sacred tradition is exactly that.. SACRED. I see why walid isn’t worried about sounding NICE like you say, truth is what matters most important. At RCIA i notice the new teachings and new ways that are taught us and it really is just a compromise and a lack of wanting to be blunt and have black&white teaching like Jesus did. Jesus sounded very unkind many times but by doing so He showed more love than anyone because He warns us of what will be our condemnation. Its like i told my catholic friend, I said a while ago, “I think I’m going to have to learn a lot of things on my own.” And it’s not because I think I’m better than anyone else or this or that, it’s because Catholics aren’t being taught Catholic teaching that’s all. It’s true, I can say this as someone on the outside looking in easier than others I guess. The road narrows to holiness and righteousness. Was reading Jeremiah today and let me say that if you want to be holy, you will be hated among even your brethren like all the prophets before and like Francis of Assisi and st. Benedict. It was the sacred tradition that attracted me to the church in the first place. I only been to the NO one time and there was an altar girl, and the lay people were handing out the Eucharist with the priest in the hand. I’m still not sure if it was valid looking back now, but I don’t plan on returning there. I pray for us all, I pray for revival and for renewal. God bless

  • LOL, so being an Anglo-Catholic doesn’t make me a Christian? What a contradiction.

    I know whom I turn to for salvation. I’m saved, being saved, and will be saved. That’s why the Nicene Creed is professed at every Mass. That’s why we consume the Eucharist because it is the Body and Blood of Christ which He promised to rise up in the last day. It’s why we go to the priest for confessions and to receive absolution for our sins as if the priest was Christ Himself, being empowered by the Holy Spirit to do so. It is why we sit and listen to instruction on how to live as a Christian during Mass.

    Being an Anglo-Catholic is to worship God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit the way the primitive Church did as spelled out in the Book of Acts, and through handed down traditions.

    It is why Pentecostalism has created a mess of splintering denomination all because each organizations claimed to be inspired by the Holy Spirit.

  • Anthony

    I do love the orthodox liturgy I’ll say….. 🙂 God bless

  • “Trevor, you are the one who sees it necessary to set yourself apart! ”

    Just reading the first sentence makes me ignore the rest. Who split from the Church, you or Trevor?

    • Grace Ziem

      The church ex-communicated and shunned many; people were deserted by the “church” as much as they “left” it. Walid, when I was reading the Bible as a child, you were training to be a terrorist; I don’t understand your self-righteousness, sir. We are all sinners. You could reach more people if you were less focused on condemnation.

  • You are just babbling and being incoherent. The fact the question raised in my profile rose your blood pressure validated my decision to become Anglo-Catholic, bringing myself closer to the worship style of the primitive Church.

    You just had to complain about the priest which has been brought up by myself as something more offensive to the Lord to have his hands consecrating the Bread and Wine when it has been used to molest boys. What the priest has done will be accounted for when he stands before Christ who sees all.

    You see, it wasn’t the scandal of the Roman Catholic Church that almost made me turn atheist. It was the scandal among evangelicals. A megachurch pastor in Utah’s affair and divorce from his wife to be with another man, and ripping the congregation in half, nearly broke me.

    I thank God for keeping me in the Faith. Finding this website and reading the first centuries Church Fathers such as St. Clement, St. Irenaeus, and Justin Martyr pounded the nails in the coffin of Protestantism.

    By the way, to be a Catholic is to be a Christian, and to be a Christian is to be set apart from the world.

    • Grandmere

      Well said, brother.

    • Kamau41

      Beautifully said my brother.

      • Thank you and appreciate your support.

  • Grandmere

    While he takes a breath, do us a favor and take a hike.

  • Grace Ziem

    We don’t have to ridicule people when we disagree. It is unChristian to ridicule someone trying to follow Christ; but kind, principled disagreement is different. Unfortunately, both are too often condemned here.

  • Anthony
  • “Is that not( and this is just an inquiry ) “answering a matter before hearing it?”

    Yes it is.

  • “What strikes me odd is that you do not recognize you went from one scandalous offense that was of such significance you left fellowship, to attach yourself to another institution ridden with scandal and privacy, of even more reprehensible behavior.”

    What strikes me as odd is you think the behavior of a priest invalidates the Catholic Church.

    I am reminded of how the prophet Nathan confronted David regarding his infidelity and conspiracy to have Uriah murdered to cover up the infidelity with Bathsheba. David confessed to Nathan his sins and the prophet forgave David. Today, you would condemn David and Nathan alike.

    “All I am saying is we must keep our eyes on Christ and not become enraptured by large institutions and organizations that are filled with rottenness and dead men’s bones.”

    Christ established an institution. The Church. A visible and mystical representation of Mount Sion on earth in order that we through the Mass approach the heavenly Mount Sion per the Book of Hebrews. It is why when I kneel at the communion rail to eagerly receive the Body and Blood of Christ via the Sacrament of the Eucharist, my eyes are transfixed on the 2D icon of Christ crucified and to silently contemplate what He did for me. To the right of the altar, there is also a 3D icon of the crucified Christ. Such humbleness that God in the flesh would hang in shame for the salvation of the human race.

    I have walked among offshoots of Pentecostalism. I found them to be wanting. When I walked into the Anglican Catholic parish, I found peace where Christ is revered and exalted, exactly as the primitive church worshiped. The acts of individual priests does not invalidate the Catholic Church. They will be accounted for when they stand before Christ and unless they repent, they will receive far worse fate.

    Christ promised to be with the Church to the end of the age and that the gates of hell will not prevail against her. Thus far His promise still stands.

  • “I am of considerable age, not great age, but old enough and hale enough to give evidence that my taking of the table of the Lord is acceptable to Him, “As oft as you do this, do so in remembrance of me…” and I continue daily in His service.”

    You rejected the Eucharist, pure and simple. You abandoned the Faith because Jesus was quite clear what was being broken and poured out.

    “You have taken your eyes off Jesus and set your affections on frauds and imposters.”

    The only imposter and fraud I see is YOU.

    “Continue in your reading of the Word of God if that indeed is where your affections lie.”

    You assume I don’t. You are flailing because you know you are going against 2,000 years of doctrine handed down and defended against heretics. Deep down, you know it. You are in denial.

  • Coombes Larry

    There are actually very few Rad-Trads worldwide and, as far as I can make out, the US has a disproportionate number.

    They are just very loud!

  • Coombes Larry

    I completely missed this post at this time. I wanted to say; “Credit to you for noticing that!”

    Yes, I have already this point with Walid. But he wants a book for me t prove my case. I am on it but had to take a break to recover after exam season… Yes the two defining characteristics of The Anti-Christ are:

    1) He will be a Jew and deceive the Jews and then the world and ‘ascend’ to the Temple in Jerusalem.
    2) He will deceive the entire world, and, in a way ***especially*** the Christians by signs and wonders which are truly miraculous and including raising the dead and having babies in mother’s arms proclaiming him the Messiah and the Son of God.

    So, yeah, Erdogan does not fit. Thanks for the input, I completely missed it!