The “Tridentine” Mass, while it had developed over the 2,000 year history of the Church, is essentially the Mass that was given to the Apostles and the Church by Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Although various rites emerged, they all maintained the same spirit imparted to the liturgy by Our Lord and were only adapted to various cultures without any deviation in doctrine. The Roman Rite, up to Vatican II, underwent only minor changes, such that the famous English liturgist Fr. Adrian Fortescue was able to state that “no one has ventured to touch it except in unimportant details.”

Pope St. Pius V, to protect the Roman Rite from innovations and eliminate any variations, codified the Traditional Latin Mass in the Apostolic Constitution Quo Primum in 1570. The bull says in part: “We specifically command each and every patriarch, administrator, and all other persons or whatever ecclesiastical dignity they may be, be they even cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, or possessed of any other rank or pre-eminence, and We order them in virtue of holy obedience to chant or to read the Mass according to the rite and manner and norm herewith laid down by Us and, hereafter, to discontinue and completely discard all other rubrics and rites of other missals, however ancient, which they have customarily followed; and they must not in celebrating Mass presume to introduce any ceremonies or recite any prayers other than those contained in this Missal.
“Furthermore, by these presents [this law], in virtue of Our Apostolic authority, We grant and concede in perpetuity that, for the chanting or reading of the Mass in any church whatsoever, this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely, without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment, or censure, and may freely and lawfully be used. Nor are
superiors, administrators, canons, chaplains, and other secular priests, or religious, of whatever title designated, obliged to celebrate the Mass otherwise than as enjoined by Us. We likewise declare and ordain . . . that this present document cannot be revoked or modified, but remain always valid and retain its full force . . . .

“Those therefore who after the manner of wicked heretics dare to set aside Ecclesiastical Traditions, and to invent any kind of novelty, or to reject any of those things entrusted to the Church, or who wrongfully and outrageously devise the destruction of any of those Traditions enshrined in the Catholic Church, are to be punished thus:

Jean Guitton, close confidant of Pope Paul VI: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic Liturgy in such a way that it should almost coincide with the Protestant liturgy. There was with Pope Paul VI an ecumenical intention to remove, or, at least to correct, or, at least to relax, what was too Catholic in the traditional sense in the Mass and, I repeat, to get the Catholic Mass closer to the Calvinist mass”.

To accomplish this ecumenical goal, the Consilium enlisted the help of these Protestant observers: 1. A. Raymond George (Methodist) 2. Ronald Jaspar (Anglican) 3. Massey Shepherd (Episcopalian) 4. Friedrich Künneth (Lutheran) 5. Eugene Brand (Lutheran) 6. Max Thurian (Calvinist-community of Taize).
Their contribution in making the New Mass was immortalized in a picture taken of them during an audience with Paul VI after thanking them for their assistance. The image was subsequently published in L’Osservatore Romano on April 23, 1970 with the title: “Commission Holds Final Meeting, Pope Commends Work of Consilium”.



Archaism or Antiquarianism: The most common excuse was “In the early Church”. As if the Church had been in a state of progressive deterioration for the entire time of her existence. The entire development of the Church was thus condemned. Of course, there was no explanation of what was wrong, or why, all of a sudden in the 1960’s, everything should be done exactly as it was done in the Early Church, (as if that were how it was done anyway.) For comparison, imagine if all of a sudden we were forced to start using horse-drawn carriages, wood heat and oil lamps, simply because that how it was done in Early America? There is not an ounce more sanity is saying “in the Early Church.” Protestant reformers had also claimed they were going back to ancient usages. Their purpose was to negate, with a single stroke the development of the Church. Thus they were able to bring people to deny all those doctrines which have become explicit in the Faith and Prayer of the Church.
Pope Pius XII warned of the pretext for change based on antiquarianism, in His Encyclical letter Mediator Dei:
“The same reasoning holds in the case of some persons who are bent on the restoration of all the ancient rites and ceremonies indiscriminately. The Liturgy of the early ages is most certainly worthy of all veneration. But ancient usage must not be esteemed more suitable and proper, either in its own right or in its significance for later times and new situations, on the simple ground that it carries the savor and aroma of antiquity. The more recent liturgical rites likewise deserve reverence and respect. They too owe their inspiration to the Holy Spirit, Who assists the Church in every age even to the consummation of the world. (Matthew 28:20). They are equally the resources used by the majestic Spouse of Jesus Christ to promote and procure the sanctity of men.
Assuredly it is a wise and most laudable thing to return in spirit and affection to the sources of the sacred Liturgy. For research in this field of study, by tracing it back to its origins, contributes valuable assistance towards a more thorough and careful investigation of the significance of feast-days, and of the meaning of the texts and sacred ceremonies employed on their occasion But it is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity by every possible device. Thus, to cite some instances, one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the altar restored to its primitive table-form; were he to want black excluded as a colour for the liturgical vestments; were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues In Churches; were he to order the crucifix so designed that the Divine Redeemer’s Body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings…
Clearly no sincere Catholic can refuse to accept the formulation of Christian doctrine more recently elaborated and proclaimed as dogmas by the Church, under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit with abundant fruit for souls, because it pleases him to hark back to the old formulas. Just as obviously unwise and mistaken is the zeal of one who in matters liturgical, would go back to the rites and usage of antiquity, discarding the new patterns introduced by disposition of Divine Providence to meet the changes of circumstances and situation.” 33 33. Mediator Dei. Pars. 61, 62, 63.

Of course, the “New Mass” is no more the restoration of the Mass of the ancient church of Rome than it is an “up-to-date” version of the “Mass of St. Pius V.”


One of the main artifices was the use of mistranslation of the Latin “Novus Ordo.” This “mistranslation” is not the result of ignorance, but of connivery; Certain ideas were not lost in the crossover. There is perfect correspondence between the rites of the “Novus Ordo” and the “errors” in the translations. There is great consistency in the errors among the various languages as well.


Another main artifice was the retention of certain “innocuous” words and ideas which the people were accustomed to. For example, most people took the new “penitential rite” as a slightly altered form of the Confiteor, simply reduced to a comfortable brevity. However, as will be seen, it is not that simple.

Thus the faithful read meanings into words which the words do not say, while they failed to advert to what the words did say. Their children, not having the background they did, were better able to see the thing as it was, for they saw only what is there, and heard only the words which are spoken.

The language of the “New Mass” is in the genre of the Revolution. That clarity of thought and intention which exists in the articulations of the Sacred Magisterium of the Church does not exist in the “New Mass”. One cannot expect to find clear-cut affirmations or negations. They will find truth suggested – as well as many shades of falsehood. The very soul of the Revolution is deception and its total objective is influence. The Revolutionary will seem to believe whatever it serves his immediate purpose to believe.


“The desacralization of the ministries of the Church seemed to represent the newness of Christianity.” – Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) International Symposium on the Thirtieth Anniversary of the Promulgation of the Conciliar Decree, Presbyterorum Ordinis (23-28 October 1995)
DESACRALIZE – dictionary definitions:
1. remove the religious or sacred status or significance from.
2. to divest of sacred qualities or status
3. to remove the aura of sacredness from; secularize


All acts of reverence were banned, while new “rituals” of irreverence, such as the “Rite of Peace” were instituted, Communion in the hand, etc the “mass” is said either with the priest’s back to the tabernacle or it has been removed, communion rails removed, all ornamentation, incense, rich vestments, architecture, music; no silence, no hushed tones. All of the magnificent Gregorian chant Masses were banned.

At the same time, the emphasis on sin and the unworthiness of man was pushed into the background as much as possible. What little mention there is of sin, is shifted from an offense against God, into an offense against “our brothers and sisters”.

Everything centers on Man, all is to please Man, The music, the guitars, what do the people like! (really they think it is nonsense) Man is inherently Good. All will be saved.


The distinction between good and bad is no where to be seen. Considering they claim this is a return to “the early Church” ; it should be noted that in the early Church, catechumens were not even allowed to be present.

The saints are pushed out; in the “New Religion”, are equal, so the idea of persons of great sanctity is not compatible.


The priest, was blended into the “Community.” Also his priesthood, and his priestly powers are faded out. Only a priest can offer sacrifice. The idea of “Authority”, over the people is phased out, religious anarchy in other words. The priest became one of “us”.

In a reversal of the order God set on Earth, women are given a role in the liturgy; their heads are not covered . The women’s lib movement is interlaced in the whole thing.

The individual has been taken away and replaced him with “the community.” Even the priest is denied private prayers. The revolution detests the individual person, with a mind and a will, and an eternal destiny of his own, with a personal faith and an divinely imposed obligations.

Revolutionary terminology, hippie wording, as well as communist wording is heavy in the “New Mass” And, of course the theme of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity permeates the whole thing.


All reference to sacrifice is discarded and replaced with thoughts of a meal; said on a table.

The priest is now called the “president”.

Earth and Nature, instead of Heaven
and the Supernatural

Reference to Heaven, is replaced with simply earthly good and happiness

Almost all reference to the Blessed Virgin have been cast out.

We are told here that the pine cones represent life after death and the unity of Christians in God……
Notice the location of the tabernacle and also of the “cross”.


There was obviously a concerted effort to make the whole thing ridiculous; to make the Church into a laughing stock. Young people were expected to take this serious? Obviously God is not being worshiped and adored – if the thing has been “desacralized”, so what is this all about? You see, the only logical conclusion is you must be a moron. The idea was to get across that Catholic = moron. The clumsy English helps get this across as well as the, stupid banners, “Gregorian? Chant” in English etc. The pictures below show to what lengths some go, and of course, they never get stopped……….

Of course, who would stop it, when the “Cardinal” (Dolan), is wearing cheese on his head…

Is anyone still amazed that these characters molest children?

In Paul VI’s “decree” Missale Romanum, he nowhere clearly delineates the Catholic doctrine of the Holy Sacrifice, and, more particularly, that of the Blessed Eucharist. On the contrary, he chooses his words so that they are easily susceptible of a Protestant interpretation.
He speaks of the three principal parts of the Mass, the Offertory, the Consecration, and the Communion, only to indicate that the “reform” has required their “simplification.”
“Also to be eliminated are elements which, with the passage of time, came to be duplicated, or were added with but little advantage, above all in the rites of offering the bread and wine, and in those of the breaking of the bread and of communion” (Appendix II Par. 7).
The Offertory has been suppressed, as will be seen.
“The breaking of the bread” is a scriptural phrase which the early Christians used to refer to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Paul VI uses this expression to refer to the Consecration, since among Catholics it was by no means a normal way of speaking of it. He pretended that this expression was quite familiar to Catholics, but it was not, anymore than it was normal for us to refer to each other as “brothers and sisters.”
Now read the following excerpt from Pope Paul VI’s Missale Romanum:
“All this is wisely ordered in such a way that there is develop[ed more and more among the faithful a “hunger for the Word of God” (Amos 8:11), which, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, leads the people of the New Covenant to the perfect unity of the Church. We are fully confident that both priests and faithful will prepare their hearts more devoutly and together at the Lord’s Supper, meditating more profoundly on Sacred Scripture, and at the same time they will nourish themselves more day by day with the words of the Lord. It will follow then that according to the wishes of the perpetual source of spiritual life, an instrument of prime value for transmitting Christian doctrine, and finally the center of all theology.” (Appendix II, Par. 10).
The Sacred Scriptures have been given a great prominence in the “New Mass.” Note:
First, the imagery which we Catholics normally associate with the reception of the Body of Our Lord is used throughout in connection with our hearing of the reading of the Scriptures.
Second, Holy Communion is given the Protestant terminology, the “Lord’s Supper.”
Third, not the reception of the Blessed Eucharist but the hearing of the word of God “leads the people of the New Covenant to the unity of the Church” (typical Protestant biblical phraseology).
Fourth, the reception of Holy Communion is intertwined with the listening to the word of God, which occurs during the early part of the “mass.”
Fifth, the reception of the Eucharist is strictly communal-no mention of the personal union of the soul with its Spouse. (The community cannot receive Sacraments, only its members.
Sixth, the community, having shared the “Lord’s Supper,” will nourish themselves, not on the Body of Christ, but “with the words of the Lord!”
Seventh, again, as if to identify the words of Christ with the Word made Flesh, Paul VI says, the Sacred Scriptures, (not the Blessed Eucharist) will be “a perpetual source of the spiritual life.”

Variety being so important, so people have a choice as to what they like (worship of Man) there is now not “the Mass”, but a choice of four: Eucharistic Prayer Number one (EPI), EPII, EPIII and EPIV…. Also notice the are calling the sacrifice of the mass, simply a “prayer”.

When “EPI” is replaced by one of the other “Eucharistic Prayers,” a total of thirty-five prayers, or seventy percent, are thereby discarded from the Ordinary of the Mass.

Seven-tenths of the prayers of the Mass were discarded.

Not to mention the many brief versicles and responses which were all banned from the “New Mass”, as well as twenty-five Signs of the Cross, twelve genuflections, and many lesser acts of reverence; to the tabernacle, to the crucifix, to the Blessed Sacrament, and at the pronunciation of the Names of Jesus Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary and the Saints. These acts of reverence include bowing the head, elevation of the eyes, kissing the altar stone and its relics, turning toward the tabernacle and the crucifix, and the subdued tone of the voice. Abrogated also is the “ritual of the hands” whereby the celebrant by various positions and gestures signifies the thought of the prayers he is reciting.

The rubrics of the Missale Romanum require that the celebrant avoid touching anything except the Sacred Host with “canonical fingers” — the thumb and index fingers of both hands—from the time of the Consecration until the final ablution. Each time he removes or replaces the pall, and each time he opens or closes the tabernacle, every time he even moves from one place to another while the Blessed Sacrament is present on the altar, the priest is bidden to genuflect. But all such rubrics are discarded in the “Novus Ordo.” Gone too are the ablutions of the fingers and the sacred vessels after communion.
Some thirty-five prayers, all of which have been repeated by countless priests and saints throughout the whole world for well over a thousand years and all the reverences, symbols, and gestures which accompanied and interpreted them are about to be stricken from the Mass.…. ….And Paul VI says:

“But, let everyone understand well that nothing has been changed in the essence of our traditional Mass. Some perhaps will get the idea that by the introduction of such
and such a ceremony, or the addition of such and such a rubric, that such things constitute or hide alterations of minimizations of defined truths or ideas sanctioned by the Catholic Faith. But there is nothing in this idea, absolutely. First of all, because ritual and rubrics are not, in themselves, a matter of dogmatic definition.” Allocution of Paul VI on November 19, 1969

Notice, he does not mention, that ANYTHING is being removed.

All of these Prayers at the Foot of the Altar, were deleted:

V. I will go in unto the Altar of God.
R. To God who giveth joy to my youth.
V. Judge me O God, and distinguish my cause from the nation that is not holy, deliver me from the unjust and deceitful man.

R. For Thou, O God, art my strength: why hast Thou cast me off? and why do I go sorrowful whilst the enemy afflicteth me?

V. Send forth Thy light and Thy truth: they have led me and brought me unto Thy holy hill, and into Thy tabernacles.

R. And I will go in unto the Altar of God: to God, Who giveth joy to my youth.
V. I will praise Thee upon the harp, O God, my God: why art thou sorrowful, O my soul? and why dost thou disquiet me?

R. Hope thou in God, for I will yet praise Him: Who is the salvation of my countenance, and my God.
V. Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost.
R. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

V. I will go in unto the Altar of God.
R. To God, Who giveth joy to my youth.
V. Our help  is in the Name of the Lord.

R. Who hath made heaven and earth.

I confess to almighty God, to Blessed Mary ever Virgin, to blessed Michael the archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the saints, and to you brethren, that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word and deed, through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault. Therefore, I beseech blessed Mary ever Virgin, blessed
Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the saints, and you, brethren, to pray to the Lord our God for me.

May almighty God have mercy upon thee, forgive thee thy sins,and bring thee to life everlasting.


SERVER: I confess etc…

May almighty God have mercy upon you, forgive you your sins, and bring you to live everlasting.


May the almighty and merciful Lord grant you pardon, absolution and remission of your sins.




I confess to almighty God, and to you, my brothers and sisters, that I have sinned through my own fault in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do; and I ask blessed Mary, ever virgin, all the angels and saints, and you, my brothers and sisters, to pray for me to the Lord our God.

May almighty God have mercy on us, forgive us our sins, and bring us to everlasting life.



1. Sin is much minimized;
I have sinned through my own fault in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do;
I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word and deed, through my fault, through my fault, . through my most grievous fault.
2. The the blessed Virgin, and the angels and saints are left out leaving only “you, my brothers and sisters”. In the “new religion”, the evil of sin is in its offensiveness to man.

3. The priest is no longer placed above the people, as a representative of Jesus Christ, (“and to you, Father”), but just one of them (“us”).

4. The idiot element: what possible need to say: “in my thoughts and in my words, in what I have done, and in what I have failed to do……” Who is going to take that seriously?

5. Revolutionary language (hippie style): “you, brethren”, has become “you, my brothers and sisters. This also makes a bigger issue of them.

More discarded prayers…..
V. Thou wilt turn, O God, and bring us to life.
R. And Thy people shall rejoice in Thee.
V. Show us, O Lord, Thy mercy.
R. And grant us Thy salvation.
V. O Lord, hear my prayer.
R. And let my cry come unto Thee.
V. The Lord be with you.
R. And with thy spirit.
Take away from us our iniquities, we entreat Thee, O Lord, that with pure minds we may worthily enter into the Holy of Holies. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

Since there is no altar, one cannot “go up” to it. And since there is no tabernacle, there can be no mention of the “Holy of Holies.”

We beseech Thee, O Lord, by the merits of Thy Saints, whose relics are here, and of all the Saints, that Thou wilt deign to pardon me all my sins. Amen.

In “New Church” saints and martyrs don’t have a great place, because now all men are equal, whether they are virtuous or not. Worship of Man.

Cleanse my heart and my lips, O Almighty God, Who didst cleanse the lips of the prophet Isaias with a burning coal; through Thy gracious mercy so purify me that I may worthily proclaim Thy holy Gospel. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.

These were private prayers of the priest, and private prayer during the communal exercise is not tolerated.


Correct Translation
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men of good will. We praise Thee. We bless
Thee. We adore Thee. We glorify Thee. We give thanks to Thee for Thy great glory. O
Lord God, heavenly King, God the Father Almighty. O Lord, the only-begotten Son, Jesus Christ. O Lord God, Lamb of God, Son of the Father. Thou who takest away the sins of the world, have mercy
upon us. Thou Who takest away the sins of the world, have mercy on us. Who takest away the sins of the world, receive our prayer. Thou who sittest at the right hand of the Father, have mercy upon us. For Thou only are holy, Thou only art the Lord; Thou only, O Jesus Christ, art most high. With the Holy Ghost, in the glory of God the Father. Amen.

The New Rendering
Glory to God in the highest, and peace to His people on earth. Lord God, heavenly King, almighty God and Father, we worship you, we give you thanks, we praise you for your glory. Lord Jesus Christ, only Son of the Father, Lord God, Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world: have mercy on us; you are seated at the right hand of the Father: receive our prayer. For you alone are the Holy One, you Alone are the Lord, you alone are the Most High, Jesus Christ, with the Holy Spirit, in the glory of God the Father. Amen.
1. Adoration of God is minimized (or left out). “We praise Thee, we bless Thee, we adore Thee, we glorify Thee…” reduced to “we worship you, we give you thanks, we praise you for your glory. The word “adore” is very important, because in the language of theologians, “worship” simply means, to give honor. “Adoration” is the “absolute worship of Latria”, which is due to God alone.

2. Blurring of the concept of personal “sins” of individuals. “Who takest away the sins of the world”, is changed to “You take away the sin of the world:”

3. The changing of the position of the word “earth” suggests, that it means “earthly peace” instead of “heavenly peace to those who are now dwelling on earth.”

4. Revolutionary language: The phrase “to men of good will” is turned in peace to His people. The word “people” is important in Communist parlance: People’s Republic of China. In the language of the Revolution, “peace” means that situation when all opposition to the “new order” has been suppressed.

5. Stupid element. “Thou, who takest away the sins of the world, have mercy on us” is changed into a grammatical disaster: “You take away the sin of the world: Have mercy on us.”

The excuse here is “mistranslation”. The “new mass” was imposed with the excuse that “scholarship” had been able to restore the Mass to an earlier form. And now they are claiming to be too ignorant to tell the difference between “peace to men of good will” and “peace to his people”.

The Creed has been changed from “I believe”… to “we believe”, thus taking away the individual, and replacing him with“the community.”

The genuflection at the words “and the Word was made flesh by the Holy Ghost, by the Virgin Mary, and was made man”, was dropped. It is to be noted, that the last Gospel, St. John’s great gospel on the Incarnation was also dropped. The revolutionaries are well aware of the importance of these acts of reverence.


Practically all of the prayers of the Offertory, one of the principal parts of the true Mas, were discarded, which means the following prayers are not found in the “New Mass”:

Accept, O Holy Father, Almighty and Eternal God, this spotless host, which I, Thy unworthy servant, offer to Thee, my living and true God, to atone for my numberless sins, offenses, and negligences; on behalf of all here present and likewise for all faithful Christians living and dead, that it may profit me and them as a means of salvation unto life everlasting. Amen.
O God,  Who in creating man didst exalt his nature very wonderfully and yet more wonderfully didst establish it anew; by the Mystery signified in the mingling of this water and wine, grant us to have part in the Godhead of Him Who hath deigned to become a partaker of our humanity, Jesus Christ, Thy Son our Lord; Who liveth and reigneth with Thee, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, world without end. Amen.

We offer unto Thee, O Lord, the chalice of salvation, entreating Thy mercy that our offering may ascend with a sweet fragrance in the sight of Thy divine Majesty, for our own salvation, and for that of the whole world. Amen
With a humble spirit and with a contrite heart, may we find favor with Thee, O Lord: and may our sacrifice be so offered in Thy sight this day as to please Thee, O Lord God
Come Thou, Sanctifier, Almighty and Everlasting God, and bless  this sacrifice which is prepared for the glory of Thy holy Name.
I will wash my hands among the innocent, and I will compass Thine Altar, O Lord.
That I may hear the voice of praise, and tell of all Thy wondrous works.
I have loved, O Lord, the beauty of Thy house, and the place where Thy glory dwelleth.
Take not away my soul, O God, with the wicked, nor my life with men of blood.
In whose hands are iniquities, their right hand is filled with gifts.
But as for me, I have walked in my innocence; rescue me, and be gracious to me.
My foot hath stood in the straight way; in the churches I will bless Thee, O Lord.
Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.

Receive, O Holy Trinity, this oblation which we make to Thee in memory of the Passion, Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord Jesus Christ; and in honor of Blessed Mary ever Virgin, of blessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, of these and of all the Saints. May it be to their honor, and to our salvation, and may they whom we commemorate here on earth deign to intercede for us in heaven. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
V. Pray, brethren, that my Sacrifice and yours may become acceptable to God the Father Almighty.
R. May the Lord accept this Sacrifice at thy hands, to the praise and glory of His Name, for own benefit and for that of all His holy Church.
The reason given, was that these prayers were “recently” added to the Mass. These prayers were added to the Mass 1100-1200 AD, eight or nine hundred years ago. The real reason is because these prayers are totally irreconcilable with the “New Religion.”

Now, let us see what they really have against these prayers:

1. They are silent prayers of the priest, which is incompatible with the new “communal” spirit.
2. It is a prayers clearly to be said by the priest, and it is a also clear that he is about to do something that is his to do, as a priest. – not a communal act.
3. It also makes clear that he intends to offer a sacrifice. – not a meal.
4. The priest claims he is “unworthy” to offer Mass; in the “new religion” everyone is worthy of everything.
5. There is great emphasis on sin: the priest mentioning his “countless sins, transgressions and failings.”
6. There is special attention given to “all faithful Christians,” in the “new religion” there is no such distinction: all are equally good no matter what.
7. The faithful departed are prayed for, which brings in the doctrine of purgatory which is decidedly disliked.
8. The Incarnation is again mentioned.
9. The Blessed Virgin Mary is mentioned.

Presentation of the Gifts / Preparation of the Altar:

December 31, 2009 – Springfield – Staff photo by Michael S. Gordon – Fr. David Joyce J. Joyce, left, pastor of Our Lady of Hope Church accepts the offertory gifts for the last mass ever there from Maryellen Papianou of Ludlow, center, and Linda M. Ingalls of Springfield. The Mass was dedicated to the memory of their grandparents, Lyman and Julie McKenzie of Springfield.

This novel little “ceremony” is what basically replaced the Offertory.

Priest:  Blessed are you, Lord, God of all creation. Through your goodness we have this wine to offer, fruit of the vine and work of human hands. It will become our spiritual drink.
All: Blessed be God for ever.
What is being implied by this “ceremony” is that the people are doing the offering, not the priest. Also notice, how extra homage to Man is thrown in.

The Preface
V. World without end.
R. Amen.
V. The Lord be with you.
R. And with thy spirit.
V. Lift up your hearts.
R. We have lifted them up to the Lord.
V. Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
R. It is right and just.
It is truly meet and just, right and availing unto salvation that we should at all time and in all places give thanks unto Thee, O holy Lord, Father almighty and everlasting God. Who with Thine only-begotten Son and the Holy Ghost art one God, one Lord; not in the oneness of a single person, but in the Trinity of one substance. For that which we believe from Thy revelation concerning Thy glory, that same we believe also of Thy Son, and of the Holy Ghost, without difference or separation. So that in confessing the true and everlasting Godhead, we shall adore distinction in persons, oneness in being, and equality in majesty. Which the angels and archangels, the cherubim also and the seraphim do praise nor cease to cry out as with one voice saying:
Holy, holy, holy etc…
It is truly right and just, our duty and salvation, always and everywhere to give you thanks, Father most holy, through your beloved Son, Jesus Christ, your Word through whom you made all things, whom you sent as our Savior and Redeemer, incarnate by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin. Fulfilling your will and gaining for you a holy people, he stretched out his hands as he endured his Passion, so as to break the bonds of death and manifest the resurrection. And so, with the Angels and all the Saints we declare your glory, as with one voice we acclaim:
Holy, holy, holy etc…


Canon 6: If anyone says that the Canon of the Mass contains errors and therefore should be abrogated, let him be anathema.

In the Canon of the true Mass there are six prayers before the Consecration and seven prayers following it.

(Te Igitur) Most merciful Father, we humbly pray and beseech Thee, through Jesus Christ Thy Son, Our Lord, to accept and to bless these  gifts, these  presents, these  holy unspotted Sacrifices, which we offer up to Thee, in the first place, for Thy Holy Catholic Church, that it may please Thee to grant her peace, to preserve, unite, and govern her throughout the world; as also for Thy servant N. . . . our Pope, and N. . . . our Bishop, and for all orthodox believers and all who profess the Catholic and Apostolic faith.
In communion with, and honoring the memory in the first place of the glorious ever Virgin Mary Mother of our God and Lord Jesus Christ: next that of Thy blessed Apostles and Martyrs, Peter and Paul, Andrew, James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Thaddeus, Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian, and of all Thy Saints. Grant for the sake of their merits and prayers that in all things we may be guarded and helped by Thy protection. Through the same Christ our Lord. Amen.
Now, it is left to the decision of the “president” whether to make mention of the names of certain saints, particularly the Apostles and the Roman martyrs. In “Eucharistic Prayer, Form Number One,” for instance, brackets thus enclose the names of the following saints:
…We honor Joseph, her husband, the apostles and martyrs Peter and Paul, Andrew, (James, John, Thomas, James, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Simon and Jude; we honor Linus, Cletus, Clement, Sixtus, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lawrence, Chrysogonus, John and Paul, Cosmas and Damian) and all the saints.
The real reason, of course, is “ecumenical”: Protestants generally recognize the Apostles, the Evangelists, St. Stephen and St. Barnabas, because their names are in the Bible. Almost all reference to the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, has been removed from the “New Mass”.
O LORD, we beseech Thee, graciously to accept this oblation of our service and that of Thy whole household. Order our days in Thy peace, and command that we be rescued from eternal damnation and numbered in the flock of Thine elect. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
QUAM OBLATIONEM Humbly we pray Thee, O God, be pleased to make this same offering wholly blessed , to consecrate  it and approve  it, making it reasonable and acceptable, so that it may become for us the Body  and Blood  of Thy dearly beloved Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.
Whenever the priest does not choose to recite “Eucharistic Prayer, Form Number One,” all thirteen of these prayers are thereby omitted. This means his “mass” has no Canon at all. But this is not the end of it.

The translation of these prayers into the vernacular is so garbled that even when “Eucharistic Prayer, Form Number One” is used, it is still nothing but an paraphrase.

“Eucharistic Prayer, Form Number One,” is given the self-contradictory subtitle “the Roman Canon.” The word “canon” mean a rule a ruler, a standard or measure, etc. It refers, therefore, to something fixed, and unchangeable.

In the “Novus Ordo”, “Eucharistic Prayer, Form Number One” is not the “Roman Canon” because it has been changed, both in the Latin and in the translation. It is therefore a crooked rule. But calling it a “canon” is equivalent to saying: This is the Eucharistic Prayer of the Mass; all other forms are fraudulent, unacceptable, forbidden—including the “Eucharistic Prayers, Forms Number Two, Three, and Four.”

This variation in the canon would be the first such attempt in over 1,300 years. This was a violation of a most sacrosanct tradition.

The reasons given were purely nonsense: the need for variety, the advantage of accentuating various aspects of the mystery of the Eucharist etc.

The real reason was to destroy the Mass itself.
In the True Mass the fact of the validity of the consecration is self-evident. The dominant concern and prayer is that the Act and those who are celebrating it may be found worthy by Him to Whom it is offered.
As he ascends to the altar, the priest prays: “Take away from us our iniquities, we beseech Thee, O Lord, that with pure minds we may worthily enter into the holy of holies.” During the Offertory, the celebrant asks that the chalice “ascend in the sight of Thy divine majesty with a sweet savor” Then he bows low and begs: “In the spirit of humility and with a contrite heart receive us, O Lord, and grant that the sacrifice which we offer this day in Thy sight, may be pleasing unto Thee, O Lord God.” (As noted before, all these prayers have been suppressed in the “Novus Ordo.”)
The Orate Fratres invites the people: “Pray, Brethren, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God the Father almighty.”
The “reform” of the liturgy is claimed to be a restoration of primitive forms of the old Roman Church. Yet the “reform” makes optional the recitation of the ancient Canon, whose unvariable and unchangeable nature was completely characteristic of the Roman tradition. A more specific instance of the same thing is the leaving to the mood of the celebrant whether he will say the fifth prayer of the Canon, the Quam Oblationem. This prayer has a repetitive, legal style about its formation. And to add further emphasis to its thought, the priest makes five signs of the cross over the sacred species, soon to be transubstantiated.
Which oblation do Thou, O God, vouchsafe in all things to bless, approve, ratify, make worthy and acceptable: that it may become for us the Body and Blood of Thy most beloved Son our Lord Jesus Christ.


The most daring act of all, was to lay hands on the actual words of the Form of Consecration.
If anyone adds or takes away anything (from the form of Consecration of the Body and the Blood,) even if he does not change the meaning of the form, he does confect (the Sacrament), but he sins grievously. Missale Romanum.
A serious violation of the law of the Church is mortally sinful and renders the Mass sacrilegious.
The changes made in the Canon were made to transform the Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ present on the altar into a mere memorial supper. This was done by fusing the Words of Consecration into the preparatory prayer, Qui Pridie, the removal of the words “mysterium fidei” from the Consecration Form of the wine, and the replacement of the sentence which begins “Haec Quotiescumque”

Pope Francis, holding a calice made from the wood of rickety fishing boats that migrants typically arrive on, leads a mass during his visit to the island of Lampedusa, a key destination of tens of thousands of would-be immigrants from Africa, on July 8, 2013. Pope Francis called for an end to “indifference” to the plight of refugees on Monday on a visit to an Italian island where tens of thousands of migrants from Africa and the Middle East first reach Europe. AFP PHOTO / ANDREAS SOLARO / AFP PHOTO / ANDREAS SOLARO

The Qui Pridie is called an epiclesis.
Epiclesis and Consecration Form from the Roman Canon
Qui, pridie quam pateretur, accepit panemIn sanctas ac venerabiles manus suasEt elevates oculis in caelum ad te Deum Patrem suum omnipotentem, tibi gratias Agens, benedixit, fregit, deditqueDiscipulis suis, dicens: Accipite, etManducate ex hoc omnes.
Simili modo postquam cenatum Est, accipiens et hunc praeclarumCalicem in sanctas ac venerabilesManus suas; item tibi gratias agens,Benedixit, deditque discipulis suis, dicens:Accipite, et bibite ex eo omnes.
Haec Quotiescumque feceritis, in mei Memoriam facietis.

Correct Translation
Who the day before He suffered took bread into His holy and venerable hands, and with His eyes lifted up to heaven, unto Thee, God, His almighty Father, giving thanks to Thee, He blessed, broke and gave it to His disciples, Saying: Take and eat ye all of this,
In like manner, after He had supped,taking also this excellent chalice, into His holy and venerable hands, and giving thanks to Thee, He blessed and gave it to His disciples, saying: Take and drink ye all of this,
As often as ye shall do these things, ye shall do them in remembrance of Me.
Narratio Institutionis of the Novus Ordo Missae
(“Narrative of the Institution”)
Qui, pridie quam pateretur, accepitpanem in sanctas ac venerabiles manussuas, et elevates oculis in caelumad te Deum Patrem suum omnipotentemtibi gratias agens benedixit, fregit,deditque discipulis suis, dicens:
Simili modo, postquam cenatum est, accipiens et hunc praeclarum Calicemin sanctas ac venerabiles manus suas,item tibi gratias agens benedixit, dededitque discipulis suis, dicens:
Faulty Translation
The day before he suffered he took bread in his sacred hands and looking up to heaven, to you, his almighty Father, he gave you thanks and praise. He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said: Take this, all of you, and eat it; this is my body which will be given up for you.3 When supper was ended, he took the cup. Again he gave you thanks and praise, gave the cup to his disciples, and said: Take this, all of you, and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new And everlasting covenant. It will be shed for You and for all men so that sins may be forgiven. Do this in memory of me.
The Qui Pridie and the Form of Consecration in the True Mass are, neither singly nor taken together, a mere narration of the event of the Last Supper. The Qui Pridie is the setting and the preparation for pronouncement of the Consecration formula, as well as the prayer wherein the celebrant bears witness to the essential unity of the institution of the Sacrament with the Sacrifice of the Cross.
In the Qui Pridie, the Last Supper is mentioned to remind us of the priest’s intention of repeating that act by which Christ transubstantiated the bread and wine.
The Form of Consecration is not a prayer of the priest. Rather, it is the evocation of a direct act from God Himself. At this point, the priest speaks as if he were Christ Himself, and Christ acts through the priest’s will and words both as the Consecrator and the Oblation, the Eternal High-Priest and the Saving Victim.
In the “Qui Pridie”, the obvious emphasis is on the fact that the priest intends to do what Christ did at the Last Supper, namely, consecrate the offerings, change them into His Body and Blood.
In the “Epiclesis” of the “New Mass” the emphasis has been shifted, even though the words used are generally the same. Here there is nothing left to indicate that the “president” is actually consecrating, or intends to. The “president” is merely telling what happened at the Last Supper. Nor is he telling of the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Our Lord; he is telling of the eating and drinking of bread and wine.
Let us look closely at the English of the “New Mass”: The Latin text of the “Narratio” has three sentences; its English has six. They have divided the text into shorter sentences not only reducing it to nothing more than a narrative, but also, changing the meaning of the words. The first sentence contains a reference to the suffering of Christ (in passing, “gratias agens,” does not mean “he gave thanks and praise,” but, “giving thanks”). Then the second sentence is entirely new: “He broke the bread, gave it to his disciples, and said: Take this, all of you, and eat it: this is my body which will be given up for you.”
In the True Mass, the priest says, “Take and eat ye all of this, FOR THIS IS MY BODY.” The omission of the word, “for” and the stopping of the sentence with the colon, make the words this and it of the “faulty” translation refer to their antecedent, bread.
The identical distortion is committed in the fourth sentence with reference to the wine. This sentence reads: “Again he gave you thanks and praise, gave the cup to his disciples, and said: Take this, all of you, and drink from it: this is the cup of my blood, the blood of the new and everlasting covenant.” Here again the Latin word “enim” (“for”) is not translated; a colon is put in its place. The result is that the clauses of the sentence are separated completely. The words this and it refer to the wine, not to the “cup of my blood.”
Now consider how the “Narratio” in the “Novus Ordo” is printed (Latin text.) The words “ACCIPITE ET MANDUCATE EX HOC OMNES” (“Take this, all of you, and eat it”) are given the same bold capitalization as the words of consecration, “HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM,” (“this is my body”). It is the same with the words “ACCIPITE ET BIBITE EX EO OMNES:” (“Take this, all of you, and drink from it:”), as also with the words which in liturgical terms are called the Anamnesis: “HOC FACITE IN MEAM COMMEMORATIONEM.” (“Do this is memory of me.”). The reason for the bold and enlarged capitals is the Missale Romanum of St. Pius V is the need to separate them from the Epiclesis and the Anamnesis, and to indicate that they are the Form of Consecration. This very purpose is undeniably negated in the “Novus Ordo;” instead, the capitalization of the words which speak of taking and eating, taking and drinking have the double effect of fusing the words of consecration into the Narration, and, at the same time, of heightening the importance of the idea of eating and drinking of -not, the Body and Blood of Christ,- but of the bread and wine, which the demonstratives and pronouns logically and grammatically refer to. As we shall see when we discuss the change of the words of the Anamnesis, “Haec Quotiescumque feceritis, in mei memoriam facietis” (“As often as ye shall do these things, ye shall do them in remembrance of Me”) to “HOC FACITE IN MEAM COMMEMORATIONEM” (“Do this in memory of me”), the effect is the very same. And that effect is the complete eradication of the Form of Consecration.
This corresponds exactly with the “wishes” of Paul VI himself as he expressed them in his “decree” Missale Romanum:
“However, for pastoral reasons, and in order to facilitate con- celebration, we have ordered that the words of the Lord ought to be identical in each formulary of the Canon. Thus, in each Eucharistic Prayer, we wish that the words be pronounced thus: over the bread: Accipite et manducate ex hoc omnes: Hoc est enim Corpus meum, quod pro vobis treadetur; over the chalice: Accipite et bibite ex eo omnes: Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei novi et aeterni testamenti, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum. Hoc facite in meam commemorationem. (Appendix II, par. 6).”
Note how Paul VI does not to refer to the words quoted above as the “Form of Consecration,” instead, they are described as “the words of the Lord”. Neither here nor anywhere else in his Apostolic Constitution does he refer to Transubstantiation. From beginning to end, his emphasis is on the “readings” of the new “missal,” with which the people will “nourish themselves day by day.”
The two main reasons the he gives for so radical an alteration in the very center of the “mass,” are “for pastoral reasons, and in order to facilitate concelebration.”
What could these “pastoral reasons” be?, And how does the complete deformation of the Form of Consecration serve to “facilitate concelebration?”
“Mysterium Fidei”
Why was the “Mysterium Fidei” taken from the hitherto inviolable Consecration Form of the wine?
The excuse given is that this phrase in the True Mass is an interruption in the narrative of the consecration of the wine. It is a break in the thought, they say; it is not scriptural.
However, liturgical usage pre-dates the Scriptures. In all the known liturgies the core of the Mass is formed by the narrative of institution and the words of consecration. The texts of the account of institution, among them in particular the most ancient, are never simply a Scripture text restated. They go back to pre-biblical tradition. The Holy Eucharist was celebrated long before the New Testament was written.
That the words “mysterium fidei” are an essential part of the Form of Consecration is not in any way open to question. Consider the following Monitum from the Holy Office in 1958:
This Supreme Sacred Congregation has learned that in a certain translation of the New Order of Holy Week into the vernacular, the words “mysterium fidei” in the form of the consecration of the chalice are omitted. It is also reported that some priests omit these words in the very celebration of Mass.
Therefore this Supreme Congregation gives warning that it is impious to introduce a change in so sacred a matter and to mutilate or alter editions of liturgical books. (cf. Can. 1399, 10).
Bishops therefore, in accordance with the warning of the Holy Office of 14 February, 1958, should see to it that the prescriptions of the sacred canons on divine worship be strictly observed, and they should be closely watchful that no one dare to introduce even the slightest change in the matter and form of the Sacraments A Monitum of the Holy Office dated July 24, 1958, Acta Apostolicae Sedis. Vol. 50, p. 536.
Clearly the removal of this phrase is a very serious violation of the law of the Church.
If anyone adds or takes away anything (from the form of Consecration of the Body and the Blood,) even if he does not change the meaning of the form, he does confect (the Sacrament), but he sins grievously. Missale Romanum.
A serious violation of the law of the Church is mortally sinful and renders the Mass sacrilegious.
By the removal of the words “mysterium fidei”, the forms of Consecration have been made part of the Last Supper narrative.
The consecration formulae are now pronounced by the priest as part of a historic narration, and no longer expresses a categorical affirmation on the part of Him in Whose Person the priest acts: “Hoc est Corpus meum” (This is my Body”) (and not: “Hoc est Corpus Christi” (This is the Body of Christ.”)
In the “Novus Ordo” the intention of re-enacting the Sacrifice of the Cross in an unbloody manner is deliberately not in evidence.

“Hoc Quotiescumque”
The words, “As often as you shall do these things, you shall do them in memory of Me,” have been changed. Notice the difference in the two Latin words which begin each of the sentences under study:
Missale Romanum: “Haec quotiescumque feceritis…” (“as often as you shall do these things…”)
Novus Ordo Missae: “Hoc facite…” (“Do this…”)
“These things” refers to all the things which Christ our Lord and the Apostles, are doing, that is, His taking bread, giving thanks, etc., and their eating of what He calls His Body; and His taking the chalice, and the rest, and their drinking of His Precious Blood. Christ is telling them to do all “these things”, to use these elements, to use these words, to eat and drink, all in memory of His eminent self-oblation for the remission of the sins of “the many.”
The singular demonstrative, “hoc” (“this”), in the “New Mass” formula cannot be taken necessarily to mean the same thing. It could easily refer only to what the Apostles themselves were doing, namely, eating and drinking: “Take and eat…” “take and drink…” “Do this…” The idea of a mere commemorative meal can easily be inferred. In the context of all the other anti-sacrificial and anti-sacramental maneuvers in the “New Mass,” it is impossible not to infer exactly this meaning.

“Pro Multis”
The English version of the “New Mass” has a purposeful “mistranslation”: “pro multis”, (for many) has been changed into “for all men”. The Latin of the “Novus Ordo” corresponds with that of the Missale Romanum: both have “pro multis,” which means “for many”. If one wishes to say “for all men” in Latin, he must say “pro omnibus.” The same forgery is found in all the translations, not just the English one.
The rendering of “pro multis” as “for all men” is a most serious mutilation of the meaning of the words of Consecration.
The Form of Consecration was expressly determined by the Council of Florence in the year 1442. Its pronouncement was as follows:
Since the decree of the Armenians given above does not set forth the form of words which the most holy Roman Church has been always wont to use for the consecration of the Body and Blood of the Lord, it having been confirmed by the teaching and by the authority of the Apostles Peter and Paul, we judged it should be inserted herewith. In the consecration of the Body of the Lord this form of words is used: “Hoc est enim corpus meum;” and in that of the Blood: “His est enim calix sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti, mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in Remissionem peccatorum.” (For this is the Chalice of my Blood, of the new and eternal testament: the mystery of faith: which shall be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins.). Enchiridion Symbolorum. Cc. Florentinum: Decr. Pro Jacobitis. P. 341, No. 1352.
It is on the basis of this decree that the Missale Romanum of Pope St. Pius V commands priests to adhere to this Form most strictly. In the chapter entitled “De Defectibus” (“Concerning Defects”):
Wherefore the words of Consecration, which are the Form of this Sacrament, are these: Hoc est enim Corpus meum; and Hoc est enim Calix Sanguinis mei, novi et aeterni testamenti: mysterium fidei: qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in Remissionem peccatorum (For this is my Body; and: For this is the Chalice of my Blood, of the new and eternal testament: the mystery of faith: which shall be shed for you and for many unto the remission of sins) If anyone removes or changes anything in the Form of Consecration of the Body and Blood, and by this change of words does not signify the same thing as these words do, he does not confect the Sacrament. 53. Missale Romanum. Desclee, De Defectibus. Ch. V, Par. 1.
And the next sentence says by doing this “he would sin grievously.”
In explanation of the necessity of the words of this Form, the Catechism of the Council of Trent says:
The additional words for you and for many, are taken, some from Matthew (26:28), some from Luke (22:20), but were joined together by the Catholic Church under the guidance of the Spirit of God. They serve to declare the fruit and advantage of His Passion. For if we look to its value, we must confess that the Redeemer shed His blood for the salvation of all; but if we look to the fruit which mankind have received from it, we shall easily find that it pertains not unto all, but to many of the human race. When therefore (our Lord) said: For you, He meant either those who were present, or those chosen from among the Jewish people, such as were, with the exception of Judas, the disciples with whom He was speaking. When He added, And for many, He wished to be understood to mean the remainder of the elect from among the Jews or Gentiles. With reason, therefore, were the words for all not used, as in this place the fruits of the Passion are alone spoken of, and to the elect only did His Passion bring the fruit of salvation. And this is the purport of the Apostle when he says: “Christ was offered once to exhaust the sins of many” (Heb. 9:28); and also of the words of Our Lord in John: “I pray for them, I pray not for the world, but for them whom thou hast given me, because they are Thine” (John 17: 9) Catechism of the Council of Trent,
The words, for you and for many are considered to be essential for the act of Consecration, because they are part of what is called the “res sacramenti” of the Form, which refers to the purpose and end of the sacrament, that for which the particular graces of the Sacrament will be granted. In the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the res sacramenti is those words of the formula which indicate the redemption of them who will be saved through the Sacrifice of Christ and through union with His Mystical Body.
The excuse given for this unimaginable travesty is unbelievably absurd:
The translation of the English of the “mass” was produced by the International Committee on English in the Liturgy (ICEL). Their justification for translating pro multis as “for all men” derives from the curious researches of a rationalist, Lutheran Scripture “scholar” whose name was Joachim Jeremias of the University of Gottingen. This man has it that for these two thousand years, the words of Our Lord at the Last Supper have been misrepresented! Quoting Dr. Jeremias, ICEL explains:
Neither Hebrew nor Aramaic possesses a word for ‘all’. The word rabbim or “multitude” thus served also in the inclusive sense for ‘the whole’, even though the corresponding Greek and Latin appear to have an exclusive sense, i.e., ‘the many’ rather than ‘the all’. The Roman Canon in English Translation. An ICEL booklet citing The Eucharistic Words of Jesus by J. Jeremias (New York. 1966. pp. 179-182, 299)
Jeremias claims to have found this out all by himself- altogether by himself – for absolutely no one else knows about it not even the Hebrews, nor the Arameans, (because they do have words for “all” and “many.”) Our Lord spoke Aramaic. The word He would have used for all in this language is: kol, or kolla: the word He would have used for many is: ‘saggi’an.
Even though St. Matthew and St. Mark both spoke Aramaic, they are both supposed to have made the identical error. Supposedly no one in the Apostolic Church caught the mistake. Nor did any of the early Church Fathers, none of the Doctors of the Church, none of the Popes, not one of the great Schoolmen of the Middle Ages, no one in the whole world except Joachim Jeremias. His theory would mean that Our Lord Jesus Christ did not have a way, could not devise a way, to say “all,” and that He had to be satisfied with saying “many” and waiting two thousand years for Dr. Jeremias to explain it for Him.
His explanation would mean, of course, that the word should be “all,” not “many”, in the following scriptural passage: “for all will come in my name saying: I am Christ: and they will seduce all.” (Mt. 24-5).
Of course, this is all a ruse. The real reason was, of course, to implant the idea, that all men will be saved.
This translation “error” is yet another sacrilege of immeasurable proportion.

Immediately after the “Hoc facite” appears what is called an “acclamation.” The priest says to the people, “Let us proclaim the mystery of faith,” and they respond, “Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again.” The words were chosen in reminiscence of the passage in St. Paul:
“This do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me, For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall shew the death of the Lord, until he come.” 1 Corinthians 11: 25-26
This timing is a maneuver to deny to the Real Presence. Without a break, the expectation of Christ’s second coming at the end of time is proclaimed at precisely the moment when He is (supposedly) actually present on the altar – as if the second coming, and not this, were the true coming.
The following prayer, was made optional, it only exists in “Eucharistic Prayer Form I”
Deign to look upon them with a favorable and gracious countenance, and to accept them as Thou didst accept the offerings of Thy just servant Abel, and the sacrifice of our Patriarch Abraham, and that which Thy high priest Melchisedech offered up to Thee, a holy Sacrifice, an immaculate Victim.
To us also Thy sinful servants, who put our trust in the multitude of Thy mercies, vouchsafe to grant some part and fellowship with Thy holy Apostles and Martyrs: with John, Stephen, Matthias, Barnabas, Ignatius, Alexander, Marcellinus, Peter, Felicitas, Perpetua, Agatha, Lucy, Agnes, Cecilia, Anastasia, and all Thy Saints. Into their company we beseech Thee admit us, not considering our merits, but freely pardoning our offenses. Through Christ our Lord.
Now, It is left up to the “president” to decide if he wants to invoke the intercession of certain saints, particularly the Apostles, and martyrs.
The real reason, of course, is “ecumenical”: Protestants generally recognize the Apostles, the Evangelists, St. Stephen and St. Barnabas, because their names are in the Bible.
The Rite of Peace
The Rite of Peace of the “New Liturgy” is given out as a revival of the ancient rite of the Kiss of Peace, as it was performed in the Early Church, a vestige of which remains in Solemn High Masses in the Roman Liturgy. The great emphasis placed upon it indicates its importance in the plan.
Shortly after the Our Father, the people are instructed, according to the Monthly Missalette, to “express wishes of peace and love toward one another in words and gestures of our own choosing.” 59. Monthly Missalette. J.S. Paluch Co., Inc. Chicago. June, 1971, p. 28.
What is wanted is a warm embrace. A hand-shake is accepted, but it is not exactly in the spirit of the thing. In some places, there is much kissing. They should make the rounds, get acquainted with strangers. It should be a kind of “happy hour” without the drinks; each should be overjoyed to see his brothers and sisters and indicate as much.
The Communal spirit is not only being symbolized, but actually put into practice and learned in the doing.
All barriers which divide those present must be allowed to fall. The greeting of peace is to be given to all present. Special efforts should be made to make non-Catholics feel included. Likewise, the fact that some in the congregation may be living in mortal sin, should not be allowed to interfere. What is important is that everyone present give himself to his brothers and sisters and allow the natural communication of peace to flow from each into all. Everyone should cast aside his own timidity, self-consciousness, and selfishness. He must, as it were, hand himself over to the community, allow himself to become a part of it, make himself an ingredient in the communal blend.

This is what the “new liturgy” means. Things should be kept moving; the people should be kept singing. The guitar is decidedly the best instrument for the melody line, though, of course, the prolonged beating of drums excites people.
It is good if there are multi-colored banners around; pictures and posters chosen by participants help to create atmosphere, help everyone to relate to each other. All the senses should be appealed to. Get as many people as possible involved in the decorating; it doesn’t matter if it is poor art, so long as it is the work of the people.
At the Penitential Rite, all confess to each other. Each person must overcome any hesitancy about being at complete ease during “mass.” The climax comes when they have their meal together. And all the while let the music continue to play upon them, soothe and refresh and stimulate them…..
According to the Code of Canon Law, only those who are in good standing in the Church should be allowed to participate in liturgical functions, that is, fulfill a role in the ceremonies. It was for just such reasons that the kiss of peace ceased to be given among the lay people in the traditional Liturgy. Rather than violate the truth and the spirit of the ceremony on the one hand, and rather than be forced to exclude particular individuals on the other, it was found necessary so to abbreviate it.
They claimed to be restoring this rite to its ancient usage. It served their purpose not to recall that “in the Early Church” only believers were permitted to attend the Mass proper. As time went on, it was found advisable to have the men and women take separate places, the men on the one side, the women on the other. In those days, according to the true spirit of worship, there was nothing casual about the rite.
The peace of Christ cannot exist between His friends and those who, for whatever reason, refuse to accept His total sovereignty over them. The undeniable implication of the Rite of Peace in the “New Liturgy” is that no supernatural basis for peace, charity, or fraternity exists. It is no accident that while all the merry-making is taking place, Christ is supposed to be on the “altar” alone and unattended and forgotten. This “rite” falsely suggests that all the feigned and forced friendliness is in honor of Christ, Who is (allegedly) physically present on the “altar.” But what this rite really does is, pit his neighbor against Christ. It says in effect that those present are failing in love if, during these most precious and solemn moments, when Jesus Christ is present, they do not turn their attention away from Him and give it to their brothers and sisters. At just the time when every mind and heart should be bent on the adoration of Christ present on the altar and preparation for Holy Communion, all are socializing with each other! The “liturgists” call this a symbolic action. It is that indeed; it is an incomparable symbol of scorn for Jesus Christ and those who adore Him.
This is also a form of Revolutionary “Sensitivity Training”, which refers to contrived situations in which people, knowingly or otherwise, are subjected to a process of “depersonalization,” or “communization.” In such situations, they are seduced into saying and doing things which go counter to their own personal beliefs, clear knowledge, and natural inclinations. They are cornered into violating their own personalities and consciences.
The Revolution would have us renounce our Faith, our need of Christ and of His Sacrifice, even our inner spiritual selves and our individualities. Such a renunciation is necessary in order that we become the complete possession of the community.
They cannot permit anyone to be alone. In the traditional Liturgy, the Church has arranged periods of silence. It exhorts him who comes to Mass to search his soul, to admit his sinfulness, to express his sorrow, to implore God for strength, light, charity, and peace, for all that is necessary to serve Him. The time after the Our Father is to be spent preparing for the great moment of Holy Communion.
According to the thinking embodied in the “New Mass,” charity and communal harmony require you to busy yourself doing something with everyone else – sing along, march around, listen to the commentator, go here, go there. In the Rite of Peace, all are saying, “peace, peace.” But there is no peace. It is not allowed.
Ten prayers have been deleted, including the following:

May this mingling and hallowing of the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ help us who receive it unto life everlasting. Amen
Deliver us , we beseech the O Lord, from all evils, past, present and to come. And by the intercession of the blessed and glorious Mary, ever a virgin, Mother of God, and of of thy holy Apostles, Peter and Paul, of Andrew and all the saints, graciously grant peace in our days, that through the help of thy bountiful mercy we may always be free from sin and secure from all disturbance.


Deliver us, Lord, from every evil, and grant us peace in our day. In your mercy keep us free from sin and protect us from all anxiety as we wait in joyful hope for the coming of our Savior, Jesus Christ.

The priest’s “Lord I am not worthy”, as well as all of the following prayers, were deleted:

O Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, Who, by the will of the Father and the co-operation of the Holy Ghost, hast by Thy death given life to the world: deliver me by this, Thy most sacred Body and Blood, from all my iniquities and from every evil; make me cling always to Thy commandments, and permit me never to be separated from Thee. Who with the same God, the Father and the Holy Ghost, livest and reignest God, world without end. Amen.
Let not the partaking of Thy Body, O Lord Jesus Christ, which I, though unworthy, presume to receive, turn to my judgment and condemnation; but through Thy mercy may it be unto me a safeguard and a healing remedy both of soul and body. Who livest and reignest with God the Father, in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end. Amen
I will take the Bread of Heaven, and will call upon the name of the Lord.
May the Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ preserve my soul unto life everlasting. Amen.
What return shall I make to the Lord for all the things that He hath given unto me? I will take the chalice of salvation, and call upon the Name of the Lord. Praising, I will call upon the Lord: and I shall be saved from mine enemies
May the Blood of Our Lord Jesus Christ preserve my soul unto life everlasting. Amen.

COMMUNION of the faithful


DELETED: I confess to Almighty God, to blessed Mary ever Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the Saints, and to you brethren, that I have sinned exceedingly, in thought, word and deed: through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault. Therefore I beseech blessed Mary ever Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the Saints, and you Father, to pray to the Lord our God for me.
May Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you your sins, and bring you to life everlasting.
R. Amen
May the Almighty and Merciful Lord grant you pardon,  absolution, and full remission of your sins

Ecce Agnus Dei
Behold the Lamb of God, behold Him Who taketh away the sins of the world.
Lord, I am not worthy that Thou shouldst enter under my roof; but only say the word, and my soul shall be healed. (repeated three times)
This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Happy are those who are called to his supper.
All: Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed.
May the Body of Our Lord Jesus Christ preserve your soul unto life everlasting. Amen.
Communion Minister:  The body of Christ.    Communicant:  Amen.
Communion Minister:  The blood of Christ.   Communicant:  Amen.
DELETED: Grant, O Lord, that what we have taken with our mouth, we may receive with a pure mind; and that from a temporal gift it may become for us an everlasting remedy.
DELETED: May Thy Body, O Lord, which I have received and Thy Blood which I have drunk, cleave to my very soul, and grant that no stain of sin be found in me; whom these pure and holy mysteries have renewed. Who livest and reignest world without end. Amen.
The Placeat, which in the True Mass the priest recites just before the final blessing, was also discarded
May the lowly homage of my service be pleasing to Thee, O Most Holy Trinity; and do Thou grant, that the sacrifice which I, all unworthy, have offered in the sight of Thy Majesty may be acceptable to Thee, and through Thy bountiful mercy, may it be a propitiation for me and for all those for whom I have offered it. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
The priest has offered the Sacrifice in fulfillment of a divinely-imposed duty. And the manner of its offering has not been according to his own devising, but according to the long-hallowed law of the Church. It was for him to “make the Sign” of the Sacrifice, as the law required. He was assured that thereby the Divine Majesty would be suitably worshiped and the fruits and graces would be bestowed in return. It was by this obedience that the Act of the Mass was accomplished. A serious violation of the law of the Church is mortally sinful and renders the Mass sacrilegious.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was made nothing that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men: and the Light shineth in darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. This man came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through Him might believe. He was not the Light, but was to bear witness of the Light. That was the true Light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world. He was in the world, and the world was made by Him, and the world knew Him not. He came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, to them He gave power to become the sons of God; to them that believe in His name: who are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. AND THE WORD WAS MADE FLESH, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.
The Last Gospel, the magnificent Prologue of the Gospel of St. John, was taken out; The true reason was the vicious repugnance which Revolutionaries feel for the very mention of the Incarnation and the Divinity of Our Lord. This triumph, indeed, was one of their most symbolic victories. For the same reason the genuflection was taken from the Creed at the words, “And was made flesh by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man”.


Serving God in Truth

Serving God in Truth As they say, "the path to hell is paved with good intentions." It is not enough to have...

Mission Statement

About Mission Statement The purpose of this website is to show the way of a life lead in accord for...

About Us

This website is the joint effort of myself, Amanda Schmitt and my fiancé, Dustin Harwick. The body of the website...


Books Denzinger The Sources of Catholic Dogma Buy now on Amazon Read more Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma Buy now on...