Wednesday of the Third Week in Lent
In vain do they worship Me, teaching doctrines and commandments of men (Mt. 15.9).
The prevalent opinion concerning the normative or the “ordinary” (Pope Benedict XVI, “Summorum Pontificum”) celebration of the New Rite of the “Mass” (the “Novus Ordo Missae”) in post-Vatican II parishes is that, by the so-called Apostolic Constitution “Missale Romanum” of Pope Paul VI issued on April 3, 1969, the said Roman Pontiff instituted the “Novus Ordo Missae” to replace the Traditional Latin Mass of the Roman Rite. Consequently, to refuse to offer this New “Mass” is a serious violation of Church law. And to question it on doctrinal grounds is tantamount to questioning the doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
Lie # 1: the exaggerated notion of Papal Infallibility by those prelates, clergymen, religious, and lay ‘commentators’ who claim to be ‘loyal’ to and in ‘full’ communion with the Holy See as regards the Papal pronouncements and acts bearing on the New ‘Catholic Order’ of Vatican II built on the New “Mass”* – that these must be unquestionably adhered to and irrevocably carried out.
* The Traditional Catholic Order of things has the Traditional Rite of Catholic Worship for its foundation: “lex orandi, lex credendi,” that is, how one prays shows what one believes.
On the contrary, they can never prove, by the same Papal document in that form originally issued in Latin, that Pope Paul Vi intended it as an irrevocable decree equal to or even greater than edict (the Papal Bull “Quo Primum”) of Pope St. Pius V who, claiming to be speaking in the capacity of the Supreme Legislator of the Church and exercising his Sovereign Apostolic Authority, ordained that the Traditional Latin Mass of the Roman Rite is the norm and ordinary form “in perpetuum” with the curse of the “wrath of the Almighty God and of the Apostles Peter and Paul” as the inevitable divine sanction against those who would impiously dare contravene his irrevocable Papal injunction.
The forgeries of the Vatican Press Bureau which came into the hands of the Freemasons [Annibale Bugnini, a Freemason in the trappings of a Catholic prelate, was running the Vatican Congregation for Divine Worship, cf., our post “The Catholic Sanctuary Prefigured in the Old Testament II“]:
a. Pope Paul’s “Missale Romanum” published in the official “Acta Apostolicae Sedis” (3 April 1969, Vol. LXI, N. 4, pp. 221-222) contains this Bureau’s insertion (2nd of the document’s last three paragraphs):
“Quae Constitutione hac Nostra praescripsimus vigere incipient a die XXX proximi mensis Novembris hoc anno, id est a Dominica I Adventus” (We order that this Constitution go into effect November 30th of this year , the first Sunday of Advent.).
That the above text was the Bureau’s insertion is made explicit first by the last paragraph following it:
“Nostra haec autem statuta et praescripta nunc et in posterum firma et efficacia esse et fore volumus…” (We wish that this our decreesand prescriptions may be firm and effective now [3 April 1969 perhaps].
Note how the second paragraph “orders” that the New Missal composed under the overseership of a Freemason was to become official November 30, 1969; whereas, the last paragraph “whishes” that the same bastard Missal prepared by a Freemason with the collaboration of Protestant ‘ministers’ be “firm and effective” April 3, 1969 (or, perhaps, earlier; the Popes normally indicate the date of effectivity but in this document, the “now” was not specified).
The point we’re making: the whole weight of Pope Paul’s published Act suppressing the Traditional Latin Mass and introducing a mere counterfeit “Mass”, having been designed, with its suitable “table” in its suitable refashioned sanctuary, by a Freemason rests on two or three recurring official terms:
i. “confidimus” (“we hope,” “we trust,” “we have confidence that,” “we wish”): “Haud secus Nos, etsi, deprae scripto Concilii Vaticani II, in Novum Missale legitimas varietates et aptationes ascivimus, nihilo tamen secus fore confidimus…” (“While leaving room in the New Missal, according to the order of the Second Vatican Council, for legitimate variations and adaptations, we hope…”).
ii. “volumus” (“we wish,” “we desire”), see the last paragraph quoted above.
Terms which do not carry with them a solemn ‘infallible’ tone of command to force the whole Latin Church to worship through the New “Mass” the alien ‘god’ of the New ‘Catholic Theology’. The New “Mass”, with the prevailing New ‘Catholic’ disorder built on it, is nothing but a ‘pet project’ in accordance with Pope Paul’s pastoral pleasures. The Freemasons running the Vatican Press Bureau found that the Roman Pontiff’s words necessary for the whole Latin Church to bow, in the name of “obedience”, to their idol under the appearance of a loving and merciful ‘god’ who “loves and heals unrepentant sinners” (cf., our post “The Ultimate Delusion of Vatican II ‘Catholicism’“), to be anything but weak and emaciated. These most impious people therefore tried to firm up with the phrase “we order” Pope Paul’s Act but did it in such a lousy and stupid manner as to effect a contradiction in the ‘official’ effectivity of the suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass in our sanctuaries, thinking that all Catholics must be as dumb as or dumber than they are. This, it highly seems, is the closest that Satan could get, in this end-times period, in his attempt to overturn the Church by capitalizing once more on the weakness of Cephas as he sift[ed] [him] as wheat (Lk. 22.31).
b. a mistranslation of the first of the last three paragraphs of Pope Paul’s document which was immediately sent around the world:
“Ad extremum, ex iis quae hactenus de novo Missali Romano exposuimus quiddam nunc cogere et efficere placet” (“Concerning all that we have just set forth regarding the New Roman Missal, We are now pleased to end by drawing a conclusion).
Whereas, the Freemason-run Vatican Press Bureau, after the most “perfidious” (the Traditional Roman Missal”) manner of the Synagogue of Satan (Apoc. 2.9; 3.9) – the mother of Freemasonry – rendered it: “In conclusion, we wish to give the force of law to all that we have set forth concerning the New Missal.” Hence, the second paragraph which “orders” the ‘official’ effectivity of the suppression of the Traditional Latin Mass on November 30, 1969 drew its “force” from the diabolical designs of those men of perdition – the “order” was not by the Roman Pontiff but by those subverted men of the Synagogue secretly entered in (Jude 1.4).
Lie # 2: “those who refuse to celebrate the New ‘Mass’ of Pope Paul VI constitute a serious violation of Church law.”
On the contrary, in the light of what have been presented
1. from the foregoing:
a. Pope Paul’s Consitution “Missale Romanum” resting on his mere personal “wish,” “hope,” and pleasure can never bind Catholic consciences under pain of eternal perdition. In fact, there are even no sanctions threatened by his Act.
b. The New “Mass” then and Pope Paul’s Constitution with which he tried to institute it does not involve Papal Infallibility. In fact, Pope Paul’s Constitution was null and void from the beginning by virtue of the irrevocable decree issued with an explicitly solemn exercise of Papal Infallibility by Pope St. Pius V.
Objection: a Pope is not bound by his predecessors; he can abrogate their Acts as the Popes in the past had already done.
We reply: Men of Faith are wont to be bound by the infallible and irrevocable teachings, judgments, and sentences of the Sovereign Pontiff as to be bound by the eternally valid teachings, judgments, and sentences of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Only those men who are of weak faith, or without faith and pretend to have it can protest that they are not bound by a mere man.
2. from our post, “The Ultimate Delusion of Vatican II ‘Catholicism'”: a Pope can never “order” Catholics to sin by transgressing the First Commandment, worshipping an alien ‘god’ through the New “Mass” or even attending such a sacrilegious rite.
Pope Paul VI, in instituting Bugnini’s New “Mass”, defied God in spite of His decree through the irrevocable injunction made by Pope St. Pius V concerning the perpetually normative celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass of the Roman Rite. It is not a violation of divine decrees and neither of Church laws then to refuse and even resist what Pope Paul VI merely wished to accomplish by his Act with which he defied God.