- Sexual Pleasure and the Various Sexual Acts in Marriage
- Most Holy Family Monastery Heresies, Contradictions and Lies Exposed!
- Antipope Francis approves of Atheism, False religions, and Homosexuality, teaching that they all saves a person!
- The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II
- Natural Family Planning, the Marital Sexual Act, and Procreation
- Sinful sexual pleasure and lust within marriage exposed
- Foreplay is intrinsically evil and a mortal sin against the natural law
- Masturbation is intrinsically evil and a mortal sin against the natural law
- About sinful sexual thoughts and fantasies inside and outside of the marital act
- Kisses and touches performed for sensual motives are condemned as mortal sins by the Catholic Church
- About Receiving the Sacraments From Heretics and Prayer in Communion with Heretics
- SSPX and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre Exposed!
- SSPV, Bishop Clarence Kelly and The Daughters of Mary Exposed
- The amazing lies, heresies and contradictions of Peter and Michael Dimond of Most Holy Family Monastery caught on tape and writing exposed
- Chastity and Virginity increases one’s chance of reaching Heaven according to the Holy Bible
Novus Ordo Mass / Novus Ordo Missae (New Order of the Mass; Mass of Paul VI) Definition and Meaning
Mass is the term used of the celebration of the Eucharist in the various liturgical rites of the Catholic Church, and other religious and protestant traditions.
Novus Ordo Missae is Latin for New Order of the Mass, also called the Novus Ordo Mass; it refers to the New Mass of Paul VI promulgated on April 3, 1969.
The Traditional Latin Mass, the most holy act of worship of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, was codified by Pope St. Pius V in his Bull Quo Primum in 1570.
The Tridentine Mass is a term used for Mass celebrated in Latin in accordance with the successive forms of the Roman Missal from its December 5 1570 promulgation by Pope Pius V, implementing a decision of the General Council, held in Trent, Italy.
In his famous Bull Quo Primum, Pope St. Pius V forbade changing the traditional Latin Mass.
Pope St. Pius V, Quo Primum Tempore, July 14, 1570: “Now, therefore, in order that all everywhere may adopt and observe what has been delivered to them by the Holy Roman Church, Mother and Mistress of the other churches, it shall be unlawful henceforth and forever throughout the Christian world to sing or to read Masses according to any formula other than this Missal published by Us… Accordingly, no one whosoever is permitted to infringe or rashly contravene this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, direction, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree, and prohibition. Should any venture to do so, let him understand that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.”
Yet on April 3, 1969, Paul VI replaced the Traditional Latin Mass in the Vatican II churches with his own creation, the New Mass or Novus Ordo. Since that time, the world has seen the following in the Vatican II churches which celebrate the New Mass or Novus Ordo:
The world has seen Clown Masses, in which the “priest” dresses as a clown in utter mockery of God.
The world has seen a priest dressed as Dracula; in a football jersey accompanied by cheerleaders; a cheese-head…
…driving a Volkswagen down the aisle of church as the people sing hosanna. There have been disco Masses…
...gymnastic performances during the New Mass; balloon Masses; Carnival Masses;
…nude Masses, at which scantily clad or nude people take part. The world has seen juggling Masses, at which a juggler performs during the New Mass.
The world has seen priests celebrate the New Mass with Dorito Chips;
…with Mountain Dew; on a cardboard box; with cookies; with Chinese tea accompanied by ancestor worship; with a basketball as the priest bounces it all over the altar; with a guitar as the priest plays a solo performance. The world has witnessed the New Mass with a priest almost totally nude as he dances around the altar or with other high-wire abominations…
The world has seen New Masses with priests dressed in native pagan costumes;
…with a Jewish Menorah placed on the altar;
…with a statue of Buddha on the altar; with nuns making offerings to female goddesses; with lectors and gift bearers dressed up as voodoo Satanists. The world has seen the New Mass at which the performer is dressed in a tuxedo and tells jokes. The world has seen rock concerts at the New Mass;
…guitar and polka New Masses;
…a puppet New Mass; a New Mass where the people gather round the altar dressed as devils;
…a New Mass where people perform lewd dances to the beat of a steel drum band. The world has seen a New Mass where nuns dressed as pagan vestal virgins make pagan offerings.
The world has also seen New Masses incorporating every false religion. There have been Buddhist New masses;
…Hindu and Muslim New Masses;
…New Masses where Jews and Unitarians offer candles to false gods. There are churches where the entire congregation says Mass with the priest;
…where the priest sometimes talks to the people instead of saying Mass.
What we have catalogued is just a tiny sampling of the kind of thing that occurs in every diocese in the world where the New Mass is celebrated, to one degree or another. Our Lord tells us, “By their fruits you shall know them” (Mt. 7:16). The fruits of the New Mass are incalculably scandalous, sacrilegious and idolatrous. This is because the New Mass itself, is a false, invalid Mass and an abomination.
Even an organization which defends the New Mass was forced to admit the following about the typical New Mass – i.e., the New Mass normally offered in the churches (without even necessarily considering the aforementioned abominations and sacrileges that are commonplace): “Most of the New Masses we’ve attended… are happy-clappy festivities, the music is atrocious, the sermons are vacuous, and they are irreverent...” (New Oxford Review, Berkeley, CA, November, 2006, “Notes.”)
What is Vatican II?
Vatican II was a council that took place from 1962-1965. Vatican II was a false council that constituted a revolution against 2000 years of Catholic teaching and Tradition. Vatican II contains many heresies that were directly condemned by past popes and infallible councils. Vatican II attempted to give Catholics a new religion. In the period following Vatican II, massive changes in every aspect of Catholic Faith ensued, including the implementation of a New Mass.
(To learn what really happened to the Catholic Church after the Vatican II revolution, please consult this book: The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II - [LINK TO SECTION])
One of the most controversial outcomes following on as a result of the Second Vatican Council was the usurpation of the Tridentine Mass in the Latin Church and its replacement with the Novus Ordo in 1969, which was radically different in orientation. This destroyed the most significant act of public worship for religious. Its primary creator was “Cardinal” Annibale Bugnini who was the Secretary of the Pontifical Preparatory Commission on the Liturgy at the Second Vatican Council and has been accused of being a freemason.
“Catholic Marriages” in England & Wales, 1913-2010.
Notice a dive after the Second Vatican Council & the Masonic Novus Ordo mass was introduced?
The destructive legacy of the Second Vatican Council hit Europe the hardest and gave the traditional enemy; the Jew and the Anglo liberal (best summarised by the worldview of groups like Amnesty International) free reign to push their agendas, including the murder of children in the Abortion Holocaust, the destruction of families through widespread divorce and the toleration of completely alien religions.
This has also led to the degeneration of culture in much of the formerly Catholic world generally, including also the arts, architecture and standards in the media, which have become pornographic.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion: “When the time comes finally to destroy the papal court the finger of an invisible hand will point the nations towards this court. When, however, the nations fling themselves upon it, we shall come forward in the guise of its defenders as if to save excessive bloodshed. By this diversion we shall penetrate to its very bowels and be sure we shall never come out again until we have gnawed through the entire strength of this place.”
—Protocol #17, We Shall Destroy the Clergy.
The Figures on the post-Vatican II decline
The figures on the post-Vatican II decline were summarized by Pat Buchanan in a Dec. 11, 2002 article called “An index of Catholicism’s decline” on Townhall. Pat Buchanan was drawing on the research of Kenneth Jones’ work, Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II.
“While the number of priests in the United States more than doubled to 58,000, between 1930 and 1965, since then that number fallen to 45,000. By 2020, there will be only 31,000 priests left, and more than half of these priests will be over 70.
“-- Ordinations. In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained in the United States. In 2002, the number was 450. In 1965, only 1 percent of U.S. parishes were without a priest. Today, there are 3,000 priestless parishes, 15 percent of all U.S. parishes. -- Seminarians. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians dropped from 49,000 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the 600 seminaries that were operating in 1965 have now closed.
“-- Sisters. In 1965, there were 180,000 Catholic nuns. By 2002, that had fallen to 75,000 and the average age of a Catholic nun is today 68. In 1965, there were 104,000 teaching nuns. Today, there are 8,200, a decline of 94 percent since the end of Vatican II.
“-- Religious Orders. For religious orders in America, the end is in sight. In 1965, 3,559 young men were studying to become Jesuit priests. In 2000, the figure was 389. With the Christian Brothers, the situation is even more dire. Their number has shrunk by two-thirds, with the number of seminarians falling 99 percent. In 1965, there were 912 seminarians in the Christian Brothers. In 2000, there were only seven. The number of young men studying to become Franciscan and Redemptorist priests fell from 3,379 in 1965 to 84 in 2000.
“ -- Catholic schools. Almost half of all Catholic high schools in the United States have closed since 1965. The student population has fallen from 700,000 to 386,000. Parochial schools suffered an even greater decline. Some 4,000 have disappeared, and the number of pupils attending has fallen below 2 million -- from 4.5 million. Though the number of U.S. Catholics has risen by 20 million since 1965, Jones' statistics show that the power of Catholic belief and devotion to the Faith are not nearly what they were.
“ --Catholic Marriage. Catholic marriages have fallen in number by one-third since 1965, while the annual number of annulments has soared from 338 in 1968 to 50,000 in 2002.
“ -- Attendance at Mass. A 1958 Gallup Poll reported that three in four Catholics attended church on Sundays. A recent study by the University of Notre Dame found that only one in four now attend. Only 10 percent of lay religious teachers now accept church teaching on contraception. Fifty-three percent believe a Catholic can have an abortion and remain a good Catholic. Sixty-five percent believe that Catholics may divorce and remarry. Seventy-seven percent believe one can be a good Catholic without going to mass on Sundays. By one New York Times poll, 70 percent of all Catholics in the age group 18 to 44 believe the Eucharist is merely a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus.
“At the opening of Vatican II, reformers were all the rage. They were going to lead us out of our Catholic ghettos by altering the liturgy, rewriting the Bible and missals, abandoning the old traditions, making us more ecumenical, and engaging the world. And their legacy? Four decades of devastation wrought upon the church, and the final disgrace of a hierarchy that lacked the moral courage of the Boy Scouts to keep the perverts out of the seminaries, and throw them out of the rectories and schools of Holy Mother Church. Through the papacy of Pius XII, the church resisted the clamor to accommodate itself to the world and remained a moral beacon to mankind. Since Vatican II, the church has sought to meet the world halfway. Jones' statistics tell us the price of appeasement.” (Pat Buchanan, “An index of catholicism’s decline,” Townhall News, Dec. 11, 2002)
The Great Apostasy
The Great Apostasy in the Bible and the writings of the Catholic Prophets prophesied the almost complete destruction of the Catholic Faith and morals that we are now living through
St. Paul, in his epistles to the Romans and St. Timothy speaks of the prophesied great loss of faith during the Great Apostasy and the accompanying evil fruits (sins of immorality).
2 Timothy 3:1-5 “Know also this, THAT IN THE LAST DAYS, shall come dangerous times. Men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, haughty, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, wicked, without affection, without peace, slanderers, incontinent, unmerciful, without kindness, traitors, stubborn, puffed up, and lovers of pleasure more than of God: Having an appearance indeed of godliness but denying the power thereof. Now these avoid.”
1 Corinthians 11:16-19 “But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the church of God. Now this I ordain: not praising you, that you come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all I hear that when you come together in the church, there are schisms among you; and in part I believe it. For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you.”
Douay-Rheims & Haydock Bible Commentaries explains First Corinthians 11: “Ver. 19. There must be also heresies: By reason of the pride and perversity of man’s heart; not by God’s will or appointment; who nevertheless draws good out of this evil, manifesting, by that occasion, who are the good and firm Christians, [and who are not,] and making their faith more remarkable. (Challoner) --- The providence of God draweth good out of evil, but woe to the man, says the Scripture, by whom scandal cometh, such as sects and heresies. Hence St. Augustine, chap. viii. de vera relig. says: ‘Let us use heretics not so as to approve their errors, but to make us more wary and vigilant, and more strenuous in defending Catholic doctrine against their deceits.’”
Catholic Prophecy also foretold that there would be a Great Apostasy and a counterfeit Church in the Last Days. Catholic prophecy and the New Testament paint a picture of the last days as a massive spiritual deception aimed to deceive those who intend to practice the true faith (the Catholic Faith), and which leaves the Earth with almost no one maintaining the true faith. So it is not at all impossible or strange that God would allow such a deception to occur. In fact, it was specifically predicted to occur. Did not Our Lord Himself prophesy that the true Faith would be almost extinguished when he comes back the second time to judge the living and the dead? Yes he did. “But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on Earth?” (Luke 18:8)
The exact same message is heard in the Church approved Revelation and Prophecy of Our Lady of La Salette, which prophesies the exact same situation, warning us that: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Anti-Christ… the Church will be in eclipse [meaning that the Catholic Church will not be visible to most men due to something being in its way (i.e., the Vatican II sect) obscuring its sight].” (Our Lady of La Salette, Sept. 19, 1846)
Henry Edward Cardinal Manning, The Present Crisis of the Holy See, 1861, London: Burns and Lambert, pp. 88-90: “The apostasy of the city of Rome from the vicar of Christ and its destruction by Antichrist may be thoughts so new to many Catholics, that I think it well to recite the text of theologians of greatest repute. First Malvenda, who writes expressly on the subject, states as the opinion of Ribera, Gaspar Melus, Biegas, Suarrez, Bellarmine and Bosius that Rome shall apostatize from the faith, drive away the Vicar of Christ and return to its ancient paganism. … Then the Church shall be scattered, driven into the wilderness, and shall be for a time, as it was in the beginning, invisible hidden in catacombs, in dens, in mountains, in lurking places; for a time it shall be swept, as it were from the face of the earth. Such is the universal testimony of the Fathers of the early Church.”
Thus, this is the kind of spiritual deception we’re talking about here—that would occur in the last days, in our days. Mortal sins such as NFP (which is no different from artificial contraception in intent), and other sins, especially sexual sins, and immodest dress, are undoubtedly major causes for why most people have been entirely abandoned by God.
2 Peter 2:1-5 “But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not. For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but delivered them, drawn down by infernal ropes to the lower hell, unto torments, to be reserved unto judgment: And spared not the original world, but preserved Noe, the eighth person, the preacher of justice, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly.”
In the Gospel, Jesus Christ not only informs us that in the last days the true faith would hardly be found on the Earth, but that “in the holy place” itself there will be “the abomination of desolation” (Mt. 24:15), and a deception so profound that, if it were possible, even the elect would be deceived (Mt. 24:24). St. Paul says that the man of sin will sit “in the temple of God” (2 Thess. 2:4). The Apocalypse describes in detail the Whore of Babylon, a false bride (i.e. a Counter Church) which arises in the last days in the city of seven hills (Rome) and which spreads spiritual fornication all over the Earth. The fact that the last days are characterized by a spiritual deception intending to ensnare Catholics proves, rather than disproves, the authenticity of the Catholic Church.
For more information, please consult the texts: The Great Apostasy and a counterfeit Church predicted in the New Testament and in Catholic Prophecy; and: Is the Vatican II sect the Whore of Babylon prophesied in the Apocalypse?
These articles gives the stunning evidence that the Vatican II sect, a counterfeit Church which opposes the true Catholic Church in the last days, is the Whore of Babylon prophesied in Apocalypse chapters 17 and 18.
Pope Leo XIII’s Supernatural Revelation is also a great example and proof that the Vatican II Church is not the Catholic Church: Pope Leo XIII’s supernatural experience and Original Prayer to St. Michael prophesying an apostasy in Rome in the last days
Mass of Paul VI
Now, Paul VI was the man who claimed to be the head of the Catholic Church from June 21, 1963 to August 6, 1978. He was the man who promulgated the Second Vatican Council and the New Mass. Paul VI solemnly ratified all 16 documents of Vatican II. It is not possible for a true Pope of the Catholic Church to solemnly ratify teachings that are heretical. The fact that Paul VI did solemnly ratify the heretical teachings of Vatican II proves that Paul VI was not a true pope, but an antipope.
It’s important to keep in mind that Paul VI was the one who gave the world the New Mass, the other new “sacraments,” and the heretical teachings of Vatican II (i.e. religious liberty, salvation outside the Church, esteem for false religions, prayer and divine worship with false religions, NFP, etc). If you go to the New Mass or embrace the teachings of Vatican II, the confidence that you have that these things are legitimate is directly connected to the confidence that you have that Paul VI was a true Catholic Pope.
You can read an expose of the amazing heresies of Antipope Paul VI in the article: The Heresies of Paul VI. The article will show, from his official speeches and writings, that Paul VI was a complete apostate who was not even remotely Catholic. All of the official speeches and writings of the men who claim to be pope are contained in the Vatican’s weekly newspaper, L’ Osservatore Romano. The Vatican has reprinted issues of their newspaper from April 4, 1968 to the present. From those speeches, one will see that Paul VI was not a true pope because of the irrefutable and undeniable evidence that he was a complete heretic and an apostate.
The New Mass is the Abomination of Desolation – and the Four Vatican II Antipopes parallel the Four False High Priests at the time of the Abomination of Desolation in the Machabees
By Bro. Michael Dimond, O.S.B., Bro. Peter Dimond, O.S.B. and an Anonymous Biblical Scholar [with slight modifications by ProphecyFilm.com]
Introductory Note: This article was originally published in the year 2000. (It has been slightly edited for the internet and we have added numerous things since then). Recent developments, including John Paul II recently being struck so that he could not speak a word or give order concerning the Vatican, and then dying almost immediately after this event in great torment, have proven that this article paralleling the Four False High Priests at the time of the Abomination of Desolation in the Machabees with the Four Vatican II Antipopes was accurate and correct.
1 Machabees 9:55 “At that time Alcimus was struck: and his works were hindered, and his mouth was stopped, and he was taken with a palsy, so that he could no more speak a word, nor give order concerning his house. And Alcimus died at that time in great torment.”
John Paul II was struck so that he could not speak a word and then died in great torment, just like Alcimus
AARON BROWN, CNN ANCHOR, April 5, 2005: “… The pope's doctor gave an interview to an Italian newspaper. In that interview he said, quote, "The pope passed away slowly, with pain and suffering which he endured with great human dignity." And then the doctor added that for the last couple of days, the pope was in fact unable to speak at all.”
“In Visible Pain and Unable to Speak, John Paul II Gives Easter Blessing in Silence.”
Internal Vatican sources have also confirmed that John Paul II actually died on April 1, not April 2; but that John Paul II’s death on April 1 “could not be announced because considerable work had to be done to make the body (the face in particular) presentable due to the agony” of John Paul II’s “final sufferings.” (Remnant report.) This is more striking confirmation of the amazing parallels between the four false High Priests of the Machabees and the four Vatican II Antipopes.
Recently [in 1999], a Biblical Scholar shared some of the insights and discoveries that he has made over the past 30 years. This article is a collection of what is, in our opinion, some of his most interesting information. Much of what is contained in this article is the fruit of his over 30 years of study. However, out of respect for his request, his name remain anonymous.
In the New Testament Our Lord Jesus, in response to the very explicit question “Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?” (Matt. 24:3), gives very explicit answers, contained in what are referred to as the eschatological discourses. Now we hold that some of the forms of our sacraments were given by Christ to the apostles generally, and others “in specie.” In the same way, it is possible that the signs Jesus enumerates are “general,” but it is also possible that one or more of the “signs” are absolutely “specific” in nature.
One of the signs is in Matt 24:15, with the parallel passage in Mark 13:14, “When you therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth, let him understand” is deserving of extreme scrutiny.
Firstly, several conclusions are inescapable:
1. Christ is confirming and certifying Daniel as an authentic prophet.
2. Christ is telling one, if one thinks one is in the last days, to read canonical Daniel which for the Catholic includes what the Protestants exclude and refer to as the “additions to Daniel.”
3. The “the abomination of desolation” (whatever that is for the moment), is an end time sign, and capable of being seen, and it will stand in the “Holy Place” (for the moment, wherever that is.)
4. Unless we take Our Lord’s statement as unnecessary, the abomination of desolation is a defined thing; otherwise you would have Jesus telling us to look for something that we can’t find. Therefore, what precisely we are to look for, the “abomination of desolation,” must absolutely be knowable, or if it were not, the statement would minimally be unnecessary. And that can’t be the case. In the divine economy, God would not possibly tell us to watch or look for something that we can’t find.
5. The nativity stories of Matthew and Luke each relate facts and events that are not in evidence in the others Gospel. In the same way it would be a mistake to take Christ’s statement “spoken of by Daniel the prophet” as a limiting one; i.e., that the only statements in Sacred Scripture relating to or permitting us to identify the “abomination of desolation” are contained in Daniel.
6. It is known that the term “abomination of desolation” appears in 1 and 2 Machabees, which are in the Catholic Bible. It is known, and has always been held by the Fathers, that Daniel who was carried away in the deportations that preceded Jerusalem’s fall to the Babylonians c. 585 B.C., prophesied the “abomination of desolation” that occurred during the apostasy of the Jews and their hierarchy that began in reality with the ascension to the throne of Antiochus IV Epiphanes in 175 B.C., and which is recorded in the books of the Machabees. While the command of Christ to read Daniel is explicit, I would state that in light of the foregoing it is implicit that Christ is admonishing us to read the Machabees for the selfsame reasons we are told to read Daniel.
7. It is inescapable from the previous statement that Christ is telling us that Daniel prophesied at least two time periods that would contain the “abomination of desolation”: one at the time of the Machabees; and one in the very last days. I say at least two because there are those that argue that there was a third (by no means certain) at the time of the 1st Jewish revolt 66 A.D.- 73 A.D.; but that time is not reported in Sacred Scripture whereas the other, the Machabees, is recorded in Scripture.
8. The next statement relates to “he that readeth, let him understand” (Mark 13:12; Matt 24:15). What does Christ mean by this?
Our statements in this regard can’t be as certain as those that have preceded them. The super majority opinion of Catholic exegetes (those who interpret scripture) over time would, I think, be described as follows:
Christ is telling the reader to look for a hidden fulfillment or replication of the 1st time of the “abomination of desolation.” The end time “abomination” will not replicate exactly the prior one in every respect, but will so substantially resemble the first one as to be recognizable to those who are looking with eyes of FAITH.
9. The 1st “abomination of desolation” comes in a certain context described among other places in 1 and 2 Machabees; but it is also described by Josephus, whose works contain extensive material on the time of the Machabees. It would be a mistake to take Jesus’ statement to read Daniel (explicit), and Machabees (implicit) as limited to reading the material only for references to what the “abomination of desolation” is, rather than the entirety of events, persons, etc. that describe the context of the 1st abomination, in order to recognize the 2nd at the time of the end.
10. As to the “standing in the Holy Place” or the parallel passage in Mark, “standing where it ought not,” we will hold this for later. But I think the answer will be self evident.
As for the period of the Machabees (implicit), I would recommend to the reader that he read 1 and 2 Machabees, together with all the footnotes in the Challoner Douay-Rheims Bible, 1 and 2 Machabees in the Jerusalem and/or the New Jerusalem Bible together with all the notes, the commentary on the Machabees in the Jerome Biblical Commentary, the two volumes on the Machabees in the Anchor Bible series. Drawing on that material I think I can make the following statements:
The “Abomination of Desolation” is an OBJECT: a 2nd altar ERECTED “upon” (1 Macc 1:57) and “over against” (1 Macc 1:62) the altar of God, in the Jewish temple, as an integral part of a false and idolatrous worship form introduced in substitution of the true sacrifice, at a general time of apostasy of Jewry from their received faith.
From the adjectives “UPON” and “OVER AGAINST” that are used to describe the placement of the idolatrous 2nd altar, in relation to the true altar, we can discern several things: the shape of the true altar could not simply be horizontal, i.e., a “slab” because then the 2nd altar would have simply been placed “UPON” the original. The words “OVER AGAINST” are the scriptural way of describing two objects being brought in proximity vertically to one another. Simply put, the “shape” of the 1st altar (the true altar) must have been such that the false altar could be said to be placed both “UPON” (horizontal) and “OVER AGAINST” (in proximity to, on a vertical basis) the original altar.
See the picture below for an illustration.
Some modern texts do not capture or translate the words “upon” and “over against” properly. In this case we believe that Bishop Challoner (whose translation of the Douay-Rheims Bible is used by most English-speaking Catholics) has correctly translated St. Jerome’s supra “upon” and his contra “over against.”
One possible example of the cross sectional shape of the true 1st altar would be a capital “L.” If one erected a free standing “TABLE” on the horizontal line of the capital “L” (the original altar) the table could correctly be said to be “UPON” the original altar and also “OVER AGAINST” the original altar, because the original altar has a “VERTICAL” aspect (the vertical line of the capital “L”) which the “TABLE’S” (second altar) vertical aspect is in proximity to.
To carry the analogy a bit further, the typical cross-sectional pre-conciliar Roman Rite altar could be described as the original capital “L” of our example, with a few further modifications: the bottom horizontal line of the “L” is very long and we add to the top of the vertical line of the “L” a horizontal “CAP” or line. Why so? The horizontal “CAP” of the vertical line of the capital “L” is the area on which rests (rested) the tabernacle, and on which the priest offered the unbloody sacrifice, and the vertical line of the “L” is the leading vertical edge of that part of the “ALTAR.” But where does the long horizontal line of the capital “L” come from?
In the Roman Rite, the “altar rail” separates the altar from the rest of the Church. When you step on the other side of the altar rail, you are literally on the altar. The “iconostasis” (icon screen separating altar from main body of church) in the Oriental rites of the Church is functionally performing exactly the same function in the “EAST” as the altar rail did in the “WEST,” that is, separating the altar from the rest of the Church. Further proof that the area between the altar rail and vertical leading edge of the “altar” is also the “altar”: when someone comes to the rectory inquiring over the whereabouts of Father “X”, some of us reply, “he’s on the altar”! Now is he standing on the horizontal plane on which the tabernacle rests? Obviously not. But nonetheless, we say “he’s on the altar” because he is in fact standing in the aforementioned area set apart by the altar rail.
Now, if as part of a new cult and worship form you erect a “table” (read 2nd altar) between the vertical edge of the original altar and the altar rail, for the 1st and only time in Catholic history, you will have replicated the abomination of desolation in the Machabees; for the Table in the Novus Ordo is directly “upon” (1 Macc 1:57) the true Roman Rite altar because it sits on top of the horizontal plane of the altar, and “over against” (1 Macc 1:62) the true Roman Rite altar because the table stands in proximity to the vertical aspect of the altar.
Returning to the Machabees: we are told that the time period of the persecution and apostasy began with the commencement of the reign of Antiochus “in the year 137” B.C. (1 Macc 1:11). We know from Babylonian archival material that Antiochus began to reign “in the sixth month” of the Seleucid year 137. The persecution period ended with the death of Simon, the last of five sons (the Machabees) of the priest of Modin, “in the 11th month of the year 177” (1 Macc 16:14). So the period of persecution lasted some 40 years and five months. It is worthy of note, I think, to mention at this point, that Christ in the eschatological discourse says: “This generation will not pass away.....” A biblical generation is known to be reckoned as being 40 years long. Anyone familiar with the existing material (which material is clearly pre-Christian) of the Essene sect of the Jews knows that the material speaks constantly of the last battle in the history of the world being 40 years long.
In a prophecy about the last days, Saint Bridget of Sweden, known to have the prophetic charism, states that the last battle in the history of the world will be forty years long. Further, she makes the following incredible prophesy:
“In the year 1980 the wicked will prevail. They will sacrilegiously profane and defile the churches by erecting in them altars to idols and to Anti-Christ, whom they will worship and attempt to force others to do the same.” 
I wonder what that could be? Whatever it is, it is now in our past. (Idolatry includes any worship of God that is inauthentic.) Of note is the fact that my “Catholic” Almanac reports that the “Apostolic Constitution” on the Novus Ordo Missae was signed by Paul VI on April 3, 1969 (which was Passover in that year) and that the Novus Ordo was made mandatory in its final form on December 1st, 1974. Now our current reckoning has a strange anomaly; there is no year -0-. We proceed directly and immediately from December 31st, 1 B.C. to January 1st, 1 A.D. This is to say that B.C. events are 1 year less removed from us than the sum total of the two integers. The majority opinion on the year of Christ’s birth is that it occurred 2 to 3 years prior to Herod the Great’s death. Herod’s death date is one of the most certain in all of antiquity, owing to Josephus who states that it took place in the 36th year of Herod’s reign, contemporaneously (at the same time) with a lunar eclipse visible from Jerusalem, which event was followed closely by a Passover. The date of that eclipse and Herod’s death is Tuesday March 13th 4 B.C. at about 1:28 A.M. (Julian Calendar). Further, the triple conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the constellation of Pisces in 7 B.C. is understood by the majority of the scholarly community to meet Matthew’s account of the “star” of Bethlehem. This would place the 1980th anniversary of the NATIVITY in our year 1974 A.D. Interesting....minimally for some of us who still have regard for private revelation.
For those into detail, the evidence is that “Dennis the little” who is responsible for giving us our present year reckoning, intended to make year 1 of the Christian era the first full year following the year that saw the event of the Nativity of Christ. If the year 7 B.C. was the year that indeed contained the event of the Nativity, 6 B.C. would be the year that Dennis intended (although he didn’t accomplish it) to be year 1, and December 31st 1974 would be the end of the year of Christ 1980. There are some versions of the aforementioned prophecy of Saint Bridget that start, “In the year of Christ 1980...” as though Saint Bridget were drawing a distinction between the true year 1980 and our year 1980, which are not the same.
But, returning to the period of the Machabees, the Jews become tired of being set apart and desire to be like the pagans around them. While having religious liberty from their pagan overlords, they willingly forfeit that liberty and ask to be made a pagan city complete with idolatrous worship. We are talking about what is called religious syncretism. “Jews themselves were in the forefront of the syncretism.” “They changed their constitution which constituted an abandonment of their covenant with Yahweh.” “The Holy of Holies ceased being a CENTRAL part of Jewish worship.” The Holy of Holies, by the way, was known to be associated with the Divine presence, known as the Shekinah, which Divine presence was almost sacramental in nature. Similarly, our tabernacles, which contained the Divine presence in a sacramental manner, were, in the post-Vatican II period, removed from their central locations on our altars. In many cases they were moved to the side, and some were even placed in the sacristy.
“At no time in Jewish history were women involved in Jewish liturgical practices except at the time of the ‘Abomination of Desolation’; and then they were all over the altar” (commentary on 2 Mac. 6:4).
“…And women thrust themselves of their own accord into the holy places, and brought in things that were not lawful. The altar was also filled with unlawful things, which were forbidden by the laws. And neither were…the solemn days of the fathers observed…” (2 Mac 6:4)
The renegade or apostate Jews fortified and occupied the City of David in Jerusalem which they made their citadel, or ACRA. “The City of David at the time of the Machabees was known to occupy THE LARGE WESTERN HILL.” Because this is a central point, I would refer the reader to confirm this for himself in either the Jerusalem or the New Jerusalem Bible, both of which contain footnotes on the city of David.
“The district called at that time the City of David occupied Jerusalem’s western hill.” 
The adjective “Large” for the western hill appears in the more extensive commentaries on the subject.
Now the Fathers held that the possibility exists that the fact that there are various texts of some of the books of the Bible may indeed be a product of Divine providence. The book of Daniel comes down to us in two forms, the Greek and Masoretic or Hebrew. They are not identical. The Masoretic text of Daniel 9:27 has a critical difference between that of the Greek. It states that the “Abomination of Desolation” will be on a “wing of the temple.”
“And on the wing of the Temple will be the disastrous abomination” (Dan. 9:27, Jerusalem Bible; also see the note on this verse in the Haydock Bible).
Now, St. Hilary, doctor of the Church, discourses on 2 Thessalonians chapter 2 and the Antichrist. He states that the “Temple of God” (2 Thessalonians 2:4) is clearly the Church. But what about the “WING”? Could it be that the “Abomination of Desolation,” which will be seen in the Church, will only be in a portion of the Church, the “New Jerusalem”, and if so what portion?
The word “WING” was used by the ancients in much the same way as we use it: the west WING of a hospital, for example. Only one scriptural citation is necessary to prove the point: “....and the right WING of his army with them” (1 Machabees 9:1).
Now the renegade and apostate Jews made the City of David, which occupied the LARGE WESTERN HILL in Jerusalem, their Citadel.
Isn’t it interesting that the New Mass, which has a table, a 2nd altar as an integral part of its worship, is only present in the Roman Rite, which is the large western portion (fully 98%) of Catholicism, as distinct from the Eastern or Oriental WING, which still uses its old sacramental forms, including the MASS, and no new 2nd altar!
Four False High Priests, Four False Popes?
What about the Jewish Hierarchy at the time of the Machabees? Onius III is the last apparent and VALID high priest at the time of the apostasy. He is succeeded by his brother, Jason, who procures the office of the High Priesthood by fraud (2 Macc 4:6-8), and who begins the religious syncretism (2 Macc 4:9-13). He is known, according to the author of the two volume series on the Machabees (Anchor Bible), as the equivalent of “King Johnny.” He also introduces the wearing of the “broad brimmed petasos” (a hat). The author of 2 Machabees (remember inspiration and inerrancy) says that Jason was “an impious wretch and no priest” (2 Macc 4:13). Jason is followed by Menelaus who also acquires the High Priesthood by fraud (2 Macc 4:23-25). Moreover, Menelaus introduces the “imposed cult,” a false sacrifice, with the assistance of the secular arm King Antiochus, who enforces the false sacrifice. Therefore, the second false High Priest of the four, Menelaus, imposes the false sacrifice. And, as the reader should know, it was Paul VI, the second Vatican II Antipope, who instituted the New Mass (a false sacrifice). Menelaus is succeeded by his brother, Lysimachus, who reigns very briefly and dies a violent death: “and as for the sacrilegious fellow, they slew him beside the treasury” (2 Macc 4:42). Some translations say: “they slew him over the treasury.”
Warren H. Carroll, The Founding of Christendom, p. 236: “He sent his brother Lysimachus to take enough treasury from the Temple in Jerusalem to make up what was lacking, and the people of Jerusalem rose up and killed Lysimachus.” (Christendom Press, 1985)
Anyone who has read the book In God’s Name by David Yallop (on the death of John Paul I) knows that the entire book on the death of John Paul I is about the Vatican treasury. The author presents a compelling case that John Paul I, the third Vatican II Antipope, was killed precisely because he may have wanted to give away money from the Vatican treasury which caused a great problem for certain individuals. The parallel to Lysicmachus (the third false high priest at the time of the Abomination of Desolation in the Machabees) is startling.
After Lysimachus’ death, Menelaus resumes his “priesthood,” but is ultimately slain (2 Macc 13:7). He is said to be a “sacrilegious wretch,” a “transgressor of the law” (2 Macc 13:6-7). “He had committed many sins against the Altar of God” (2 Macc 13:8).
The last of these four false High Priests is Alcimus, who in some respects is the most dangerous of the lot because his act is the best. He obtains the appointment as reported in 2 Macc 14:3-4; but he had “willfully defiled himself in the time of the mingling with the heathens, seeing that there was no safety for him, nor access to the altar” (2 Macc 14:3). Bishop Challoner, who is famous for his scriptural notes, states that Alcimus, “for his apostasy here mentioned, was incapable of the High Priesthood....as Menelaus had been before him....yet neither of them was truly High Priest....mingling with heathens, that is, in their idolatrous worship” (2 Macc. 14:3, Douay-Rheims note).
Alcimus is an apostate, one of the renegade Jews. “And there came to him the wicked and ungodly men of Israel: and Alcimus was at the head of them, who desired to be made high priest” (1 Macc 7:5). He is at the HEAD of the wicked and ungodly of Israel, and procures the office from the hand of DEMETRIUS, an office which he cannot hold because of his apostasy. I said that he was the best act of the lot. The author of the Anchor Bible Series reports that he has the people of Israel so “conned,” that he is referred to by them as “Alcimus the Pious.”
It is not my intention to write a commentary on the Machabees, but merely to point out certain parallels with our own age. The syncretism begins with the election of Angelo Roncalli, who takes the name John XXIII. He reports, after his election, and with sarcasm, that his file has been marked “suspected modernist,” as though this were a big joke. Pope Saint Pius X calls Modernism “The Synthesis of All Heresies.” In the magazine, 30 Days, several years ago, the head of the Italian Freemasons proclaimed that John XXIII was one of their number, an active member! The Grand Master of the Grand Orient of Italy stated: “As for that, it seems that John XXIII was initiated (into a Masonic Lodge) in Paris and participated in the work of the Istanbul Workshops.”  I have also seen a sworn affidavit of one of “Cardinal” Roncalli’s (John XXIII’s) French Government body guards, assigned to protect him during the years when he was in France in an official Vatican capacity. He swears that he escorted Roncalli to the Masonic Lodge with great frequency. Now I ask, how does someone who is outside the community (membership in Freemasonry is the subject of automatic major excommunication) HEAD THE COMMUNITY? This is a contradiction in terms.
It may be mere coincidence, but just as Jason (1st false High Priest in the Machabees), nicknamed “King Johnny” (from commentary on Anchor Bible series) introduced the wearing of the broad brimmed hat, does anyone remember John XXIII and the “sombrero” hat he started wearing?
1st Abomination 2nd Abomination
Jason – False High Priest #1 John XXIII – False Pope #1
Menelaus – False High Priest #2 Paul VI – False Pope #2
Lysimachus – False High Priest #3 John Paul I – False Pope #3
Alcimus – False High Priest #4 John Paul II – False Pope #4
"At that time Alcimus was struck: and his works were hindered, and his mouth was stopped, and he was taken with a palsy, so that he could no more speak a word, nor give order concerning his house. And Alcimus died at that time in great torment." (1 Machabees 9:55)
"What is it that hath been? the same thing that shall be. What is it that hath been done? the same that shall be done. Nothing under the sun is new, neither is any man able to say: Behold, this is new: for it hath already gone before, in the ages that were before us." (Ecclesiastes 1:9-10)
The Abomination Occupies the Western Wing
In the first abomination, starting with Jason, none of these men were true High Priests (2 Macc. 4:13). They obtained the office by fraud and/or were incapable of the High Priesthood due to their apostasy (2 Macc. 14:3, Douay-Rheims note). Similarly, the four mentioned “popes” of the current apostasy obtained their office by fraud and are incapable of the High Priesthood (pontificate) due to their public heresy and apostasy (Canon 188.4, 1917 Code of Canon Law). They are Antipopes. It is interesting to note that Pope Boniface II, in 531, refers to Popes as “high priests of the Apostolic See.” (Denz. 200b)
In the same scriptural note (2 Macc. 14:3), Challoner explains how the true High Priesthood lay with the Machabees: “...the true high priesthood was amongst the Machabees, who were also of the stock of Aaron, and had strictly held their religion, and were ordained according to the rites commanded in the laws of Moses.” The Machabees held strictly to the traditional faith, and ordained men according to the Traditional Rite.
Likewise the true Priesthood exists in those who hold fast to the religion that has been delivered to them, and ordain and consecrate according to the Traditional Rite. Those who have retained the traditional rituals, but yet do not retain the traditional faith or are associated with the abominable Vatican II/New Order Church, do not possess the true faith.
Marie Julie Jahenny, the famous Briton stigmatist, heard Satan say to Christ, “For a time I will be Master of all things, everything will be under my control, even your temple and all your people.” A few further excerpts from Marie, “and will continue implacably to obtain the cessation of Holy Mass...” On March 29, 1879: “the abandoned Church will be without its Supreme Head who governs and directs it.”
On May 10, 1904, Marie Julie Jahenny was told: “I give you a warning. The disciples who are not of My Gospel are now working hard to remake according to their ideas, and under the influence of the enemy of souls, a Mass that contains words which are odious in My Sight. When the fatal hour arrives where the Faith of my priest is put to the test, it will be these texts that will be celebrated, in the second period. The first period is the one of my priesthood, existing since me. The second is the one of the persecution, when the enemies of the Faith and of the holy religion will impose their formulas in the book of the second celebration. Many of my holy priests will refuse this book, sealed with the words of the abyss. Unfortunately, amongst them are those who will accept it.” On the same day she was told: “the dispersion of the pastors...who will be replaced by others, formed by hell, initiated in all vices, all iniquities, perfidious,....new preachers of new sacraments, new temples....”
The New Mass is without question the Abomination of Desolation predicted by Our Lord as one of the primary signs of the end of the world.
ALL THE WORLD IS MADE MAD WITH THE WINE OF THE WRATH OF HER FORNICATION
The whore of Babylon sits on seven hills. Biblical exegetes generally states that it is ROME, “the great city” of the Apocalypse.
“In the Apocalypse, Babylon is used figuratively for Rome, a city of idolatrous cults, dissolute vices and political oppression.”
Saint Peter himself, writing in his first epistle, refers to Rome by its code name, Babylon.
“The Church that is in Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you: and so doth my son Mark.” (1 Peter 5:13)
Saint Peter is writing from Rome, yet he calls it Babylon. He does this to identify what Ecclesiastical Rome will become at the time of the end, a whore – who has abandoned the faith of Christ, and fornicated with false gods and idolatrous worship, just as the true Church of the Old Testament was called a “whore” for partaking in inauthentic worship. (The true Catholic Church, in Her official teaching, remains immaculate, and will remain immaculate forever, for it is the one and only true Church, the Church established by Jesus Christ. It is the Vatican II sect that is a whore.) Moreover, fornication in Sacred Scripture is used almost exclusively for spiritual fornication: the chasing after false gods, idolatrous worship. Now the part of the consecration that has been changed in a false and heretical manner is the WINE portion of the consecration. The New Mass has changed the words of Jesus Christ in the consecration of the wine from:
“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”
“This is the chalice of my blood, of the new and eternal testament: which shall be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven”
However, because one cannot consecrate one species without the other (Saint Thomas Aquinas), the inauthentic wine portion invalidates both species. It is not an accident that the Apocalypse, in speaking of the whore of Babylon, states repeatedly, “all the world is made mad with the WINE of the wrath of her fornication.”
Apocalypse 18:3 "Because all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her."
Apocalypse 14:8 "And another angel followed, saying: That great Babylon is fallen, is fallen; which made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication."
Apocalypse 16:19 "And great Babylon came in remembrance before God, to give her the cup of the wine of the indignation of His wrath."
Apocalypse 17:1-2 "Come, I will shew thee the condemnation of the great harlot, who sitteth upon many waters. With whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication; and they who inhabit the earth, have been made drunk with the wine of her whoredom."
The Vatican II Church has committed spiritual fornication, typified by the inauthentic worship that characterizes the sacrilegious and false New Mass. Moreover, the heads of the Vatican II Church have prayed and mingled with every false creed on the face of the planet; and, as a result, they commit a sin that is most offensive to God and a violation of the first commandment. It was in order to avoid this sin that (approximately) the first 30 popes suffered cruel martyrdoms. It was in order to avoid this sin that heroic young girls, like Saint Philomena, endured the most hideous of tortures and millions of Christians were hung and beheaded – the sin of praying with false religions and paying homage to false gods. As a result of this spiritual fornication (e.g., false ecumenism), the Vatican II Church is guilty of the blood of the saints. Read the word of God about the whore of Babylon:
“And in her was found the blood of the prophets and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.” (Apoc. 18:24)
To the extent that Rome loses the faith, and hence by definition allies herself or indeed becomes the enemy of the true Church, it becomes guilty of the blood of the very prophets and saints of the true Church of all time. Just as Our Lord was placed in the hands of His enemies during His Passion, Our Lord allows the buildings and infrastructure of His Church to be placed in the hands of its enemies during its passion.
On June 30, 1968, the Vatican II sect adopts a new ritual for ordaining priests, as well as a new manner of consecrating bishops, “The fullness of orders.” The new manner is essentially and materially an Anglican ritual, which ritual (the Anglican ritual) was declared by Pope Leo XIII, to not confect the Sacrament of Orders. I am reminded of the “Testimony of Moses” which contains the following line: “in the last days there will be slaves about my altar who are not true priests but slaves.....” We have seen the fruits of their fraudulent “Orders”: pedophiles, homosexuals, and lecherous men, among other things.
Daniel gives the date of the New Mass
Christ and the Mass are inextricably linked. And the prophet Daniel’s prophecy is bound up with the “going forth” of the word, as we will see. So we must ask: when is the “going forth” of the word in the New Testament? Christ’s commands at the Ascension are for the Apostles to begin first at Jerusalem, then Judea and Samaria, then the rest of the world. St. Paul is truly the apostle of the Gentiles. The “going forth” of the Faith out of Jerusalem and Judea starts in reality with St. Paul’s conversion. At the time of St. Stephen’s martyrdom, there is a general persecution and dispersal except for the Apostles who remain at Jerusalem.
Acts 8:1 “And at that time there was raised a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all dispersed through the countries of Judea, and Samaria, except the apostles.”
Why? It is because the “going forth” to the balance of the world awaits St. Paul’s conversion. But when does St. Paul’s ministry start? It could only start with the event of his conversion. Prior to that he has aligned himself with the enemy. The internal evidence of Acts and the Pauline epistles places the martyrdom of St. Stephen in the winter of 36/37 A.D – that is, between the winter solstice of 36 A.D. and the spring equinox of 37 A.D.
Jerusalem Bible, Chronological Table- “36-37, winter (?), martyrdom of Stephen and dispersion of part of the community. A little later, conversion of PAUL. Cf. Acts 9:1+” 
St. Paul is present at the death of St. Stephen, by his own admission he “held the coats” for those doing the stoning and he was “consenting” to the death of St. Stephen.
Catholic Biblical Encyclopedia, New Testament: “In 36 he (St. Paul) witnessed with approval the stoning of the first martyr, Stephen (Acts 7, 58, 60)...”
Many theologians believe that St. Stephen’s martyrdom and prayer was the efficient cause of St. Paul’s conversion. His conversion is said (unanimously) to have occurred very shortly after the death of St. Stephen in 37 A.D.
“It is believed that he (St. Stephen) won the grace of conversion for the vehement Saul, who was among those responsible for the death of the first martyr (Acts 22, 20; 7, 60). His death was followed by a persecution of the Church at Jerusalem, and the Christians were dispersed.” 
Now the prophet Daniel speaks of the death or “cutting off” of the Messiah and the “cessation of the daily sacrifice” of the Mass, and his prophecies are all time oriented. In Daniel chapter 9 we have Daniel’s famous prophecy of “weeks.” In that prophecy, each day is generally (and has always been) understood to equal 1 year. The so-called “day for a year” principle.
Daniel 9:25-26 “Know thou therefore, and take notice: that from the going forth of the word, to build up Jerusalem again, unto Christ the prince, there shall be seven weeks, and sixty-two weeks: and the street shall be built again, and the walls in straitness of times. And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain: and the people that shall deny him shall not be his. And a people with their leader shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be laid waste, and after the end of the war the appointed desolation.”
The seven weeks are not repeated the second time, but the time interval is clearly intended to be the sum of seven weeks plus sixty two weeks, i.e., 69 weeks until the “slaying” or, as some translations have it, the “cutting off” of the Messiah or the cutting off of the Mass.
69 weeks equal 483 days (69 x 7). Based on the day for a year principle, the 483 days or 69 weeks equal 483 years.
The final piece of the puzzle is “fourfold”.
In Jewish law, the perpetrator of the theft of a sheep must make restitution fourfold.
Exodus 22:1 “If any man steal an ox or a sheep, and kill or sell it: he shall restore five oxen for one ox, and four sheep for one sheep.” 
In the same way King David, when he steals Uriah the Hittite’s wife and causes him to be murdered, is told a parable by Nathan the Prophet. The parable is about a rich man who upon encountering a stranger does not give him sheep of his own flock, despite the fact that he has plenty, but rather takes the single ewe lamb of a poor man and dresses it for the stranger. And hearing this,
“David’s anger being exceedingly kindled against that man, he said to Nathan: As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this is a child of death. He shall restore the ewe fourfold, because he did this thing, and had no pity.” - 2 Kings 12:5-6
So the penalty for theft is fourfold.
In the story of Zachaeus, Zachaeus says to Jesus: “Behold Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor, and if I have taken anything from a man by fraud, I restore him fourfold.” - Luke 19:8
Lastly, and most importantly, is the curse pronounced on the whore of Babylon.
“Render to her as she also hath rendered to you; and double unto her double according to her works:” - Apoc. 18:6
Double unto double is fourfold.
The penalty for the theft of a Lamb, for fraud (a false sacrifice) is fourfold.
Therefore: 4 (fourfold) x 483 years = 1932 years.
1932 years + 37 A.D. (St. Paul’s conversion and the “going forth” of Daniel 9) = 1969 A.D.
Christ was slain on a Passover. Therefore, the Mass would also be slain on a Passover. The date of the Apostolic Constitution of Paul VI for the New Mass was Passover April 3, 1969. The New Mass is the Abomination of Desolation – the Abomination of Desolation that was predicted by Daniel and mentioned by Our Lord (Matt. 24:15) as one of the signs of the end.
More Parallels with the Machabees
“Traditional” Bishop Rifan Takes Part in the Abominable New Mass
1 Machabees 1:50-51 “And the king sent letters... that they… should… let their souls be defiled with all uncleanness, and abominations to the end that they should forget the law, and should change all the justifications of God.”
In Campos, Brazil there exists a prominent “traditional” group of priests that was started many years ago by the late Bishop Castro De Mayer. The group goes by the name “The Society of St. John Vianney.” Bishop Castro De Mayer, who started the group, had been a friend of Bishop Marcel Lefebvre, and was present when Bishop Lefebvre consecrated the four Bishops of the Society of St. Pius X in 1988. The Campos group of priests held a position that is similar to the SSPX: it was independent of the Novus Ordo dioceses, even though it was definitely not Sedevacantist and always recognized Antipope John Paul II as the Pope.
The Campos group remained independent of the Novus Ordo “Bishops,” even though it recognized them as the legitimate hierarchy, because it criticized as unacceptable many aspects of the New Mass and the Vatican II religion. In fact, years ago the Campos group published a pamphlet called “62 Reasons Why In Conscience, We Cannot Attend the New Mass.” Having discouraged people from attending the New Mass, the Campos group’s position was not compatible with approval by the apostate Novus Ordo Bishops. As long as they held to such a position, they would have to continue operating independently of John Paul II and the Novus Ordo Bishops.
But, in 2002, the Society of St. John Vianney (SSJV) changed its views. Perhaps perceiving the fundamental contradiction, and the schismatic attitude, in its position – and in the position of the SSPX – namely, to operate completely independent of the hierarchy it recognizes as the true Catholic hierarchy (when, in truth, it shouldn’t recognize them as the true hierarchy at all), the SSJV came to apostate Rome and John Paul II to be “reconciled.” Antipope John Paul II and his “Cardinals” agreed to give the SSJV an “Apostolic Administration” whereby they would be fully “reconciled” and “recognized” by John Paul II and the Novus Ordo sect, as long as the SSJV agreed to accept the validity of the New Mass and that Vatican II is a true Council – and, of course, that John Paul II is Pope. The full “reconciliation” of this “traditionalist” group with the Novus Ordo sect was praised by many false traditionalists who believed that this group would get the “best of both worlds” (according to them) – i.e., it would maintain its “traditionalism” while also being recognized by Antipope John Paul II, their “Pope.” The heretics Chris Ferrara and Thomas Woods expressed their approval of the development with the SSJV in their heretical book, The Great Façade.
Christopher Ferrara and Thomas Woods, The Great Façade, p. 403: “One encouraging development occurred early in 2002: the erection of an apostolic administration for the traditionalist Society of St. John Vianney (SSJV), an order of priests in Campos, Brazil. The Pope granted to these priests the very canonical structure we here suggest, permitting them to work and to expand without (it would seem as of this writing) the consent of the local diocesan bishop… It is highly significant for our thesis that in order to be ‘reconciled’ with Rome and ‘end the schism,’ SSJV had merely to affirm what it never denied in the first place: that John Paul II is the Pope, that the Mass of Paul VI (when correctly celebrated according to the proper intention) is valid, that Vatican II is a Council of the Church, and that open questions are to be studied with humility and charity.…” (emphasis mine)
Please notice how inextricably bound up are 1) acceptance that John Paul II is the Pope and 2) the acceptance of Vatican II and the New Mass. If you accept # 1, then you must accept # 2, as this instance proves again. Vatican II is the official Council and teaching of the “Church” of John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francic I etc.; and the New Mass is an official rite of the “Church” of John Paul II, Benedict XVI, Francic etc. That is why John Paul II and his apostate “Bishops” will not recognize those persons who don’t accept the legitimacy and validity of these two things as “Catholics in full communion” with them. That is precisely why the SSJV had to accept these things to get full “approval” from the Vatican II sect.
So, in 2002, the SSJV completely sold its soul and gave in to apostate Rome. Though the SSJV did not yet celebrate the New Mass, some predicted that it would only be a short time before its priests did. (But after already having recognized that the New Mass is a legitimate rite that may be attended, why would they be opposed to offering it themselves?) The selling-of-their-souls out to the New Mass would not come in the future when they finally offered it; it already came when they accepted it as legitimate.
Thus, on September 8, 2004, the apostate Bishop Rifan of the SSJV carried his heretical position to its logical conclusion and he concelebrated an invalid New Mass, which adulterated the words of Christ (using “shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven” in the Consecration) – and contained numerous other abominations, including laywomen giving out the Novus Ordo cookie; a speech by a Marxist; and other pagan-like abominations so common at the Novus Ordo.
All of this is strikingly reminiscent of the story in the Machabees. In the books of the Machabees, we are told the story of how the wicked King Antiochus took over the children of Israel, imposed upon them a new religion of idolatry, changed their traditions, and forced them to accept the new religion. There are striking parallels to our own situation in this history, including in regard to compromising false traditionalists.
1 Machabees 1:41 ff. “Her sanctuary was desolate like a wilderness, her festival days were turned into mourning, her sabbaths into reproach, her honors were brought to nothing… And King Antiochus wrote to all his kingdom, that all the people should be one: and every one should leave his own law. And all nations consented, according to the word of King Antiochus. And many of Israel consented to his service [read: the New Mass], and they sacrificed to idols, and profaned the Sabbath. And the king sent letters… that they… should forbid holocausts and sacrifices [read: the Traditional Mass]… and let their souls be defiled with all uncleanness, and abominations to the end that they should forget the law, and should change all the justifications of God [read: the immodesty and sexual immorality prevalent among self-professed Christians that makes them forget about God’s Holy Laws]… Then many of the people were gathered to them that had forsaken the law of the Lord: and they committed evils in the land: And they drove away the people of Israel into lurking holes, and into the secret places of fugitives [read: independent of the dioceses]. On the fifteenth day of the month, Casleu, in the hundred and forty-fifth year, king Antiochus set up the abominable idol of desolation upon the altar of God [read: the New Mass], and they built altars throughout all the cities of Juda round about…”
Those who resisted the new religion were led by Judas Machabeus and his supporters; and they made no compromise with the wicked usurpers. But some of the Machabees were led to their deaths by being deceived by the “peaceable” words spoken by the supporters of King Antiochus. Please read the following and tell me if it is not a description of the SSJV and the SSPX and like-minded false traditionalists, who listen to the “peaceable words and deals” offered to them by the apostate “Bishops” in Rome, such as Ratzinger, Castrillon-Hoyos, etc. – and are led to their spiritual deaths as a result.
1 Machabees 7:10-17 “And they arose, and came with a great army into the land of Juda: and they sent messengers, and spoke to Judas and his brethren with peaceable words, deceitfully. But they [Judas and his brethren] gave no heed to their words: for they saw that they were come with a great army. Then there assembled to Alcimus and Bacchides a company of the scribes, to require things that are just: And first the Assideans, that were among the children of Israel, and they sought peace of them. For they said: One that is a priest of the seed of Aaron is come [read: a dignitary of the Vatican], he will not deceive us. And he spoke to them peaceably: and he swore to them, saying: We will do you no harm, nor your friends [read: we will allow you to keep your traditional Mass, just accept us]. And they believed him. And he took threescore of them, and slew them in one day…”
We see that Bishop Rifan of the SSJV is one such victim. But here are the words of a recent interview of Bishop Fellay of the SSPX, regarding his continuing discussion with “reconciling” with Rome [read: King Antiochus].
The Angelus, August 2004, pp. 2-3: “Q. In this interview for Latin Mass Magazine, Cardinal Castrillon-Hoyos does more than just stretch out a hand to the faithful attached to Tradition, he affirms that the Holy Father holds his arms open. Aren’t you touched by such a generous offer? [Bishop Fellay’s Answer]: I am very much touched by this gesture and do not doubt the generosity behind it…”
Notice how similar Bishop Fellay’s attitude is to that of the compromising Machabees. Rome “does more than just stretch out a hand to the faithful attached to Tradition… Aren’t you touched by such a generous offer?” “I am,” says Bishop Fellay. (If Bishop Fellay were Catholic, he would denounce the Novus Ordo Bishops and John Paul II as heretics who possess no authority to offer anyone anything.)
We see that the people who wanted to compromise with the representatives of Antiochus – the people who listened to their “peaceable” words and believed them to be their friends – were slain, just like the false traditionalists of the SSJV, the SSPX, etc. are spiritually slain by obstinately recognizing as Catholics, rather than denouncing as apostate non-Catholics, John Paul II (Benedict XVI, Francis I etc.) and his Novus Ordo Bishops. [One also cannot ignore the absurdity of a group like the SSPX “making deals” with the hierarchy it recognizes as the “Catholic hierarchy.” This shows again that the SSPX is schismatic; they won’t submit to the hierarchy they think (wrongly) is the “Catholic hierarchy” until the “hierarchy of the Catholic Church” gives the SSPX what it wants! Any sincere person who considers this carefully will see how absurd it is.]
 Father Culleton, The Reign of the Antichrist, Tan Books and Publishers, Rockford, IL., p. 139.
 The Jerusalem Bible, 1 Machabees chapter 1, footnote i.
 Giovanni Cubeddu, 30 Days, Issue No. 2-1994., p. 25.
 John E. Steinmueller, S.T.D., S.Scr.L. and Kathryn Sullivan, R.S.C.J., Ph.D., Catholic Biblical Encyclopedia New Testament, New York City, 1949. Joseph F. Wagner, Inc., p. 58.
 The Jerusalem Bible., Chronological Table, p. 468.
 Catholic Biblical Encyclopedia New Testament, p. 487.
 Ibid., p. 610.
 Also in Jerusalem Bible as Exodus 21:37
The Liturgical Revolution – A New Mass
“Truly, if one of the devils in C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters had been entrusted with the ruin of the liturgy he could not have done it better.”1
THE NEW MASS VS. THE TRADITIONAL MASS
When the New Mass came out in 1969, Cardinals Ottaviani, Bacci, and some other theologians wrote to Paul VI about it. Keep in mind that what they said about the New Mass concerns the Latin Version, the so-called “most pure” version of the New Mass. Their study is popularly known as The Ottaviani Intervention. It states:
“ The Novus Ordo [the New Order of Mass] represents, both as a whole and in its details, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as it was formulated in Session 22 of the Council of Trent.”4
They could clearly see that the Latin version of the New Mass was a striking departure from the teaching of the Council of Trent. Of the twelve offertory prayers in the Traditional Mass, only two are retained in the New Mass. The deleted offertory prayers are the same ones that the Protestant heretics Martin Luther and Thomas Cranmer eliminated. The New Mass was promulgated by Paul VI with the help of six Protestant Ministers.
The six Protestant Ministers who helped design the New Mass were: Drs. George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian.
Paul VI even admitted to his good friend Jean Guitton that his intention in changing the Mass was to make it Protestant.
Jean Guitton (an intimate friend of Paul VI) wrote: “The intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the [New] 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.”5
Paul VI removed what was too Catholic in the Mass in order to make the Mass a Protestant service.
A study of the propers and orations of the Traditional Mass versus the New Mass reveals a massacre of the Traditional Faith. The traditional Missal contains 1182 orations. About 760 of those were dropped entirely from the New Mass. Of the approximately 36% which remained, the revisers altered over half of them before introducing them into the new Missal. Thus, only some 17% of the orations from the Traditional Mass made it untouched into the New Mass. What’s also striking is the content of the revisions that were made to the orations. The Traditional Orations which described the following concepts were specifically abolished from the New Missal: the depravity of sin; the snares of wickedness; the grave offense of sin; the way to perdition; terror in the face of God’s fury; God’s indignation; the blows of His wrath; the burden of evil; temptations; wicked thoughts; dangers to the soul; enemies of soul and body. Also eliminated were orations which described: the hour of death; the loss of heaven; everlasting death; eternal punishment; the pains of Hell and its fire. Special emphasis was made to abolish from the New Mass the orations which described detachment from the world; prayers for the departed; the true Faith and the existence of heresy; the references to the Church militant, the merits of the saints, miracles and Hell.6 One can see the results of this massacre of the Traditional Faith from the propers of the New Mass.
The New Mass is fraught with sacrileges, profanations and the most ridiculous abominations imaginable because it reflects a false religion which has abandoned the traditional Catholic Faith.
The false religion the New Mass reflects is one reason why it is completely empty; it is why the fruits are utterly desolate, barren and almost unspeakably bad. The religion practiced at the churches where the New Mass is said, simply put, is a complete sacrilege and an empty celebration of man.
Even Dietrich von Hildebrand, a supporter of the Vatican II religion, said about the New Mass:
“Truly, if one of the devils in C.S. Lewis’ The Screwtape Letters had been entrusted with the ruin of the liturgy, he could not have done it better.”7
With the exception of a single genuflection by the celebrant after the consecration, virtually every sign of respect for the Body and Blood of Christ which characterized the Traditional Mass has either been abolished or made optional for the New Mass.
It’s no longer obligatory for the sacred vessels to be gilded if they are not made of precious metals. Sacred vessels, which only the anointed hands of a priest could touch, are now handled by all.
The priest frequently shakes hands before distributing the host.8 The General Instruction for the New Mass also declares that altars no longer need to be of natural stone; that an altar stone containing the relics of martyrs is no longer required; that only one cloth is required on the altar; that it is not necessary to have a crucifix or even candles upon the altar.9
Not even one of the mandatory requirements developed over 2,000 years to ensure that the altar is of fitting dignity has been retained in the New Mass.
When the Protestants split from the Catholic Church in England in the 16th century, they changed the Mass to reflect their heretical beliefs. The altars were replaced by tables. Latin was replaced by English. Statues and icons were removed from the churches. The Last Gospel and the Confiteor were abolished. “Communion” was distributed in the hand. Mass was said out loud and facing the Congregation. Traditional music was discarded and replaced with new music. Three-fourths of the priests in England went along with the New Service.
This is also precisely what happened in 1969, when Paul VI promulgated the New Mass, the Novus Ordo Missae. The similarities between the 1549 Anglican Prayer Book and the New Mass are striking. One expert noted:
“ The extent to which the Novus Ordo Mass departs from the theology of the Council of Trent can best be gauged by comparing the prayers which the Consilium removed from the liturgy to those removed by the heretic Thomas Cranmer. The coincidence is not simply striking – it is horrifying. It cannot, in fact, be a coincidence.”10
In order to emphasize their heretical belief that the Mass is not a sacrifice, but just a meal, the Protestants removed the altar and put a table in its place. In Protestant England, for example, “On November 23, 1550 the Privy Council ordered all altars in England destroyed and replaced by communion tables.”11
A Vatican II church with a Protestant-like table for its new Protestant “Mass”
The chief Protestant heretics declared: “The form of a table shall more move the simple from the superstitious opinions of the popish Mass unto the right use of the Lord’s Supper. For the use of an altar is to make sacrifice upon it: the use of a table is to serve men to eat upon.” 12 The Welsh Catholic martyr, Richard Gwyn, declared in protest against this change: “In place of an altar there is a miserable table, in place of Christ there is bread.”13
And St. Robert Bellarmine noted: “…when we enter the temples of the heretics, where there is nothing except a chair for preaching and a table for making a meal, we feel ourselves to be entering a profane hall and not the house of God.”14
Just like the new services of the Protestant revolutionaries, the New Mass is celebrated on a table.
The 1549 Anglican Prayer Book was also called “The Supper of the Lord, and the holy Communion, commonly called the Mass.” 15 This title emphasized the Protestant belief that the Mass is just a meal, a supper – and not a sacrifice. When Paul VI promulgated the General Instruction for the New Mass, it was entitled exactly the same way. Its title was: “The Lord’s Supper or Mass.”16
The 1549 Anglican Prayer Book removed from the Mass the psalm Give Judgment for me, O God, because of its reference to the altar of God. This psalm was also suppressed in the New Mass.
The 1549 Anglican Prayer Book removed from the Mass the prayer which begins Take away from us our sins, because it evokes sacrifice. This was also suppressed in the New Mass.
The prayer which begins We beseech Thee, O Lord, refers to relics in the altar stone. This prayer has been suppressed in the New Mass.
In the 1549 Anglican Prayer Book the Introit, Kyrie, Gloria, Collect, Epistle, Gospel and Creed were all retained. They have all been retained in the New Mass.
The equivalent to the Offertory Prayers: Accept, O holy Father…O God, Who has established the nature of man…We offer unto Thee, O Lord…In a humble spirit…Come, Thou Sanctifier, almighty… and Accept, most holy Trinity, were all suppressed in the 1549 Anglican Prayer Book. They have all been suppressed in the New Mass, except for two excerpts.
In the 1549 Anglican Prayer Book, the Lift up your hearts dialogue, Preface and Sanctus were all retained. They have been retained in the New Mass.
The Roman Canon was abolished by the 1549 Anglican Prayer Book. It has been retained only as an option in the New Mass.
Arch-heretics of the
Thomas Cranmer (left) and Martin Luther (right)
In fact, the Novus Ordo Mass also removed the traditional Good Friday prayer for the conversion of the Jews. This prayer has been replaced with a prayer, not that the Jews convert, but that they “grow” in faithfulness to His covenant! Thus, there is an expression of apostasy right in the official Good Friday prayer of the New Mass. It’s a promotion of Judaism and the heresy that the Old Covenant is still valid.
Two different Good Friday prayers for the Jews for two different religions
On Good Friday, the Novus Ordo religion prays: “for the Jewish people, the first to hear the word of God, that they may continue to grow in the love of his name and in faithfulness to His covenant.”
But the Catholic Church prays on Good Friday: “for the perfidious Jews: that Our Lord and God may lift the covering off their hearts, so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ Our Lord.”
The 1549 Anglican Prayer Book abandoned the discipline of the Roman Rite in distributing Communion under one kind and gave Communion under both kinds. At the New Mass Communion under both kinds is distributed in many places in the world.
The 1552 version of the Anglican Prayer Book instructed that Communion was to be given in the hand to signify that the bread was ordinary bread and that the priest did not differ in essence from a layman.18
The New Mass implements Communion in the hand in almost every place in the world, and it even goes farther than Cranmer by allowing communicants to stand and receive from a lay minister.
The prayers in the Traditional Mass which begin with: What has passed our lips as food and May Thy Body, O Lord, which I have eaten both make explicit reference to the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Both have been suppressed in the New Mass.
The prayer which begins May the tribute of my worship be pleasing to thee, most holy Trinity, was the least acceptable prayer after Communion to all the Protestants, because of its reference to propitiatory sacrifice. Martin Luther, and Cranmer in his Anglican Prayer Book, suppressed it. Following their lead, it was suppressed in the New Mass.
Now to the Last Gospel. If the Last Gospel, which closes the Traditional Mass, had been included in the New Mass, then the New Mass would have clashed with the pattern of Protestant services, which conclude with a blessing. So it was not included in the New Mass.
The prayers after the Traditional Mass, the Leonine Prayers, including the Hail Mary; the Hail Holy Queen; the O God our refuge; the prayer to St. Michael; and the appeal to the Sacred Heart, formed, in practice, an important part of the liturgy. Five prayers less compatible with Protestantism could hardly be imagined. They have all been suppressed in the New Mass.
Considering all of this, even Michael Davies agreed: “It is beyond dispute that… the Roman Rite has been destroyed.”19
Besides the fact that the New Mass is a Protestant service, there is also the fact that the Novus Ordo churches bear a striking and undeniable resemblance to Freemasonic lodges. Look at the pictures. Here is a Freemasonic lodge:
And here is a Novus Ordo church:
The two are almost indistinguishable; the focus of both is on man, with the Presider’s Chair in the middle and a circular emphasis. Perhaps this is because the primary architect of Paul VI’s New Mass was Cardinal Annibale Bugnini, who was a Freemason.
Annibale Bugnini, primary architect of the New Mass and a Freemason
“Cardinal” Annibale Bugnini was Chairman of the Consilium which drafted Paul VI’s New Mass. Bugnini was initiated into the Masonic Lodge on April 23, 1963, according to the Masonic Register in 1976. 20
In addition to all of these problems with the New Mass, there is one that looms even larger. The biggest problem with the New Mass is that it is not valid. Jesus Christ is not present in the New Mass because the New Mass has altered the very words of consecration.
PROOF THAT THE NEW MASS IS NOT VALID – THE WORDS OF CONSECRATION HAVE BEEN CHANGED
A sacrament is said to be valid if it takes place. The Sacrament of the Eucharist is valid if the bread and wine become the actual Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ. In order for any sacrament to be valid, matter, form, minister and intention must be present.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, 1439: "All these sacraments are made up of three elements: namely, things as the matter, words as the form, and the person of the minister who confers the sacrament with the intention of doing what the Church does. If any of these is lacking, the sacrament is not effected."21
The problem with the validity of the New Mass comes with the form, those words necessary to confect the Sacrament of the Eucharist. The form necessary to confect the Eucharist in the Roman Rite was declared by Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441: “…the holy Roman Church, relying on the teaching and authority of the apostles Peter and Paul… uses this form of words in the consecration of the Lord's Body: FOR THIS IS MY BODY. And of His blood: 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.”22
In Pope St. Pius V’s Decree De Defectibus, we find the same words repeated:
Pope St. Pius V, De Defectibus, chapter 5, Part 1: "The words of Consecration, which are the FORM of this Sacrament, are these: 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. Now if one were to remove, or change anything in the FORM of the consecration of the Body and Blood, and in that very change of words the [new] wording would fail to mean the same thing, he would not consecrate the sacrament.”23
This teaching appeared in the front of every Roman Altar Missal from 1570 to 1962. We can see that the same words mentioned by the Council of Florence are declared to be necessary by Pope St. Pius V. This is why all of these words of consecration are bolded in Traditional Roman Altar Missals, and why the Roman Missal instructs priests to hold the chalice until the completion of all these words.
Pope St. Pius V’s teaching states that if the words of consecration are changed so that the meaning is altered, the priest does not confect the Sacrament. In the New Mass the words of consecration have been drastically changed, and the meaning has been altered.
First, the original Latin version of the New Mass has removed the words mysterium fidei – “the mystery of Faith” – from the words of consecration. This causes a grave doubt, because “mysterium fidei” is part of the form in the Roman Rite. Though the words “mysterium fidei” are not part of some of the Eastern Rite formulas of consecration, they have been declared to be part of the Roman Rite. They are also found in some Eastern Rites. Pope Innocent III and the Canon of the Mass also tell us that the words “mysterium fidei” were given by Jesus Christ Himself.
Pope Innocent III, Cum Marthae circa, Nov. 29, 1202, in response to a question about the form of the Eucharist and the inclusion of ‘mysterium fidei’: "You have asked (indeed) who has added to the form of words which Christ Himself expressed when He changed the bread and wine into the Body and Blood, that in the Canon of the Mass which the general Church uses, which none of the Evangelists is read to have expressed... In the Canon of the Mass that expression, ‘mysterium fidei,’ is found interposed among His words... Surely we find many such things omitted from the words as well as from the deeds of the Lord by the Evangelists, which the Apostles are read to have supplied by word or to have expressed by deed... Therefore, we believe that the form of words, as they are found in the Canon, the Apostles received from Christ, and their successors from them."24
The words “the mystery of faith” in the consecration are a clear reference to the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. These words were also removed by the heretic Thomas Cranmer in his 1549 Anglican Prayer book because of their clear reference to the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.25 When words are removed from a rite because the meaning they express contradicts the intended meaning of the rite, a doubt is caused. More could be said on this matter, but we must now move to the crushing blow to the validity of the New Mass.
In almost all vernacular translations of the New Mass in the world, the words of consecration read as follows:
FORM OF CONSECRATION IN THE NEW MASS
“For this is my body. For this is the chalice of my blood, of the new and eternal testament. It shall be shed for you and FOR ALL SO THAT SINS MAY BE FORGIVEN.”
The words “for you and for many unto the remission of sins” have been changed to for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven. The word “many” has been removed and replaced with the word “all.” This huge change invalidates all the New Masses. First, the word many was used by Jesus to institute the sacrament of the Eucharist, as we see in Matthew 26:28: “For this is my blood of the new testament, which shall be shed for many unto remission of sins.” The words used by Our Lord, “for many unto remission of sins,” represent the efficacy of the blood that Jesus shed. Jesus’s blood is effective for the salvation of many, not all men. In the process of explaining this, The Catechism of the Council of Trent specifically states that Our Lord did not mean “all” and therefore didn’t say it!
The Catechism of the Council of Trent, On the Form of the Eucharist, p. 227: "The additional words for you and for many, are taken, some from Matthew, some from Luke, 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 has 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 and 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."26
As we can see, according to The Catechism of the Council of Trent the words “for all” were specifically not used by Our Lord because they would give a false meaning.
St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Treatise on the Holy Eucharist: "The words for you and for many are used to distinguish the virtue of the Blood of Christ from its fruits: for the Blood of Our Savior is of sufficient value to save all men but its fruits are applied only to a certain number and not to all, and this is their own fault...”27
The use of “all” changes the meaning of the form of consecration. No one, not even a pope, can change the words that Jesus Christ specifically instituted for a sacrament of the Church.
Pope Pius XII, Sacramentum Ordinis (# 1), Nov. 30, 1947: "…the Church has no power over the 'substance of the sacraments,' that is, over those things which, with the sources of divine revelation as witnesses, Christ the Lord Himself decreed to be preserved in a sacramental sign..."28
Since “all” doesn’t mean the same thing as “many,” the sacrament is not confected in the New Mass.
Pope St. Pius V, De Defectibus, chapter 5, Part 1: "The words of Consecration, which are the FORM of this Sacrament, are these: 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. Now if one were to remove, or change anything in the FORM of the consecration of the Body and Blood, and in that very change of words the [new] wording would fail to mean the same thing, he would not consecrate the sacrament." 29
ANOTHER ANGLE TO THIS ISSUE ABSOLUTELY PROVES THAT THE NEW MASS IS INVALID
There is another angle to this issue that we must now examine. In his famous Bull, Apostolicae Curae in 1896, Pope Leo XIII teaches:
Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, Sept. 13, 1896: “All know that the sacraments of the New Law, as sensible and efficient signs of invisible grace, must both signify the grace which they effect and effect the grace which they signify.”30
If it does not signify the grace which it effects and effect the grace which it signifies it is not a sacrament – period. So, what is the grace effected by the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist?
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” On the Eucharist, 1439: “Finally, this is a fitting way to signify the effect of this sacrament, that is, the union of the Christian people with Christ.”31
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Pt. III, Q. 73, A. 3: “Now it was stated above that the reality of the sacrament [of the Eucharist] is the unity of the mystical body, without which there is no salvation…”32
As the Council of Florence, St. Thomas Aquinas, and many other theologians teach, the grace effected by the Eucharist is the union of the faithful with Christ. St. Thomas calls this grace “the unity of the Mystical Body.” The grace effected by the Eucharist (the union of the faithful with Christ or the unity of the Mystical Body) must be carefully distinguished from the Eucharist itself: the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ.
Since the union of the faithful with Christ is the grace effected by the Sacrament of the Eucharist – or what is also called the reality of the Sacrament or the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist – this grace must be signified in the form of the consecration for it to be valid, as Pope Leo XIII teaches. Okay, so we must look at the traditional form of consecration and find where this grace – the union of the faithful with Christ – is signified.
The traditional form of consecration, as declared by Pope Eugene IV at the Council of Florence and Pope St. Pius V in De Defectibus, is as follows:
“FOR THIS IS MY BODY. 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.”
Note again: we are looking for that part of the form which signifies that the person who receives this sacrament worthily becomes united or more strongly united with Jesus Christ and His Mystical Body.
Do the words “OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT” signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body? No. These words do not signify the Mystical Body, but rather they contrast the temporary and prefiguring sacrifices of the Old Law with the eternal and propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
Do the words “THE MYSTERY OF FAITH” signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body? No. These words signify the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, as Innocent III teaches; they do not signify the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ.
Do the words “WHICH SHALL BE SHED” signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body? No. These words denote true sacrifice.
The only words left in the form of consecration are: “FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS.”
The remission of sins is necessary for incorporation into the Mystical Body, and remission of sins is an indispensable component of true justification, by which one is fruitfully united to Jesus Christ. The words “for you and for many” denote the members of the Mystical Body who have received such remission.
The words “FOR YOU AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS” are the words in the form of Consecration which signify the union of the faithful with Christ/the union of the Mystical Body of Christ, which is the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist.
Now, if we look to the Novus Ordo form of consecration, do we find the Mystical Body/the union of the faithful with Christ (the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist) signified? Here is the form of consecration in the New Mass or Novus Ordo:
New Mass form: “This is my body. This is the cup of my blood, of the new and eternal testament. It shall be shed for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven.”
Is the union of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ signified by the words “for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven”? No. Are all men part of the Mystical Body? No. Are all men part of the faithful united with Christ? No. We can see very clearly that the New Mass or Novus Ordo most certainly does not signify the union of the Mystical Body (the grace proper to the Sacrament of the Eucharist), and therefore it is not a valid sacrament!
One does not have to say anything more… the New Mass is not valid!
Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, 1896: “All know that the Sacraments of the New Law, as sensible and efficient signs of invisible grace, must both signify the grace which they effect and effect the grace which they signify.”33
Pope Leo XIII, Apostolicae Curae, 1896: “That form cannot be considered apt or sufficient for a Sacrament which omits that which it must essentially signify.”34
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, “Exultate Deo,” 1438: “…this is a fitting way to signify the effect of this sacrament, that is, the union of the Christian people with Christ.”35
To further prove the point, we should note that in all the formulas of consecration in the liturgical rites of the Catholic Church, whether it is the Armenian Liturgy, the Coptic Liturgy, the Ethiopic Liturgy, the Syrian Liturgy, the Chaldean Liturgy, etc. the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body is signified in the form of consecration. No liturgy that has ever been approved by the Church fails to signify the union of the faithful with Christ.
Here are the portions of the forms of consecration of the Wine used in Eastern Rites which signify what the Traditional Mass does and what the New Mass doesn’t: the union and members of the Church
THE ARMENIAN LITURGY: “….shed for you and for many for the expiation and forgiveness of sins.”
Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified by the words “for you and for many for the expiation and forgiveness of sins.”
THE BYZANTINE LITURGY: “… shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified.
THE CHALDEAN LITURGY: “…shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sins.”
Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified.
THE COPTIC LITURGY: “…shed for you and for many unto the forgiveness of sins.”
Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified.
THE ETHIOPIC LITURGY: “… shed for you and for many for the forgiveness of sin.”
Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified.
THE LITURGY OF MALABAR: “… shed for you and for many for the remission of sins.”
Note that the union and members of the Mystical Body are signified.
THE MARONITE LITURGY: (this form is identical to that which was always used in the Roman Rite)
The formula of consecration in all Catholic liturgies signifies the union of the faithful with Christ/the Mystical Body of Christ, as we can see. The New Mass, which says, “for you and for all so that sins may be forgiven,” does not signify the Mystical Body, since all do not belong to the Mystical Body. Thus, the New Mass does not signify the grace which the Eucharist effects. It is not valid.
Therefore, a Catholic cannot attend the New “Mass” under pain of mortal sin. Those who persist in doing so are committing idolatry (worshipping a piece of bread). Jesus Christ is not present there. The host is merely a piece of bread, not Our Lord’s Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. The Church has always taught that to approach a doubtful sacrament (which employs doubtful matter or form) is mortally sinful. In fact, Pope Innocent XI, Decree of the Holy Office, March 4, 1679,36 even condemns the idea that Catholics can receive "probable" sacraments. And the New Mass is not merely doubtful, it is invalid, since it does not signify the grace it is supposed to effect. It is actually worse than a Protestant service; it is an abomination, which falsifies the words of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Faith.
Note: At the time we are writing this there is some talk that the Vatican, in order to deceive traditionalists back into the Counter Church and the false New Mass, is planning to correct the “for all” error in the form of consecration. The fact that the Vatican is going to do this proves that “for all” gives, as we’ve said, a false signification. Even if they do this, a Catholic would still have to avoid all New Masses under pain of mortal sin because the New Mass itself is a non-Catholic service, it would still be missing the words “mysterium fidei” in the consecration, and most of the “priests” celebrating it are invalid anyway (as the next section proves).
Endnotes for Section 9:
1 The words of Dietrich Von Hildebrand, who was, nevertheless, a supporter of the Vatican II religion but felt compelled to make such a statement about the New Mass. Quoted by Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, Kansas City, MO: Angelus Press, 1980, p. 80.
2 Pope St. Pius V, Bull Quo Primum, July 14, 1570.
3 New Oxford Review, Berkeley, CA, November, 2006, “Notes.”
4 The Ottaviani Intervention, Rockford, IL: Tan Books.
5 Rama Coomeraswamy, The Problems with the New Mass, Tan Books, p. 34.
6 Fr. Anthony Cekada, The Problems With the Prayers of the Modern Mass, Tan Books, 1991, pp. 9-13.
7 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, Kansas City, MO: Angelus Press, p. 80.
8 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, p. 126.
9 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, p. 395.
10 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass.
11 Warren H. Carroll, A History of Christendom, Vol. 4 (The Cleaving of Christendom), Front Royal, VA: Christendom Press, 2000, p. 229.
12 Michael Davies, Cranmer’s Godly Order, Fort Collins, CO: Roman Catholic Books, 1995, p. 183.
13 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, p. 398.
14 Octava Controversia Generalis. Liber Ii. Controversia Quinta. Caput XXXI.
15 Michael Davies, Cranmer’s Godly Order, p. 65.
16 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, p. 285.
17 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, p. 320.
18 Michael Davies, Cranmer’s Godly Order, p. 210.
19 Michael Davies, Pope Paul’s New Mass, p. 504.
20 Also discussed in Pope Paul’s New Mass, pp. 102; 504-505.
21 Denzinger, The Sources of Catholic Dogma, B. Herder Book. Co., Thirtieth Edition, 1957, 695.
22 Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils, Vol. 1, p. 581; Denzinger 715.
23 A common translation, found in many publications, of the Latin words from the Roman Altar Missal, in De Defectibus, Chap. 5, Part 1.
24 Denzinger 414-415.
25 Michael Davies, Cranmer’s Godly Order, p. 306.
26 The Catechism of the Council of Trent, Tan Books, 1982, p. 227.
27 St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Treatise on The Holy Eucharist, Redemptorist Fathers, 1934, p. 44.
28 Denzinger 2301.
29 A common translation, found in many publications, of the Latin words from the Roman Altar Missal, in De Defectibus, Chap. 5, Part 1.
30 Denzinger 1963.
31 Denzinger 698.
32 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, Allen, TX: Christian Classics, Pt. III, Q. 73, A. 3.
33 Denzinger 1963.
34 The Great Encyclical Letters of Pope Leo XIII, Tan Books, 1995, p. 401.
35 Denzinger 698.
36 Denzinger 1151.
The Heresies of Antipope Francis
And for those still doubting whether the Vatican II antipopes are really antipopes, here is some great evidence that proves that they are total heretics and apostates. Anyone who, after seeing this evidence, obstinaterly continues to regard Francis as Pope, or who continues to go the churches in communion with him, will lose their souls.
Francis’ Heresies on Atheism and Atheists
Antipope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium (# 254), Nov. 24, 2013: “Non-Christians [such as pagans and atheists], by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”… to the sacramental dimension of sanctifying grace... to live our own beliefs.”
It is infallibly taught in Sacred Scripture that everyone above the age of reason can know with certainty that there is a God. They know this by the things that are made: the trees, the grass, the sun, the moon, the stars, etc. Anyone who is an atheist or agnostic (who believes that God does not exist or is unknowable) is without excuse. The natural law convicts him. This is a revealed truth of Sacred Scripture.
Creation itself bears witness that there is a God, that is, a living, omnipotent and intelligent Being who created it. The apostle Paul wrote to the saints in Rome that since the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities – His eternal power and Godhead – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made (Romans 1:20); and David said that the heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament shows His handiwork (Psalm 19:1). Therefore, since the existence of God is so clearly witnessed by His works, those who deny His existence are without excuse. “The fool has said in his heart, ‘there is no God’” (Psalm 53:1).
God defined infallibly, based on Romans 1, that the one true God can be known with certitude by the things which have been made, and by the natural light of human reason.
Romans 1:19-21: “Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of Him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; His eternal power also, and divinity: SO THAT THEY ARE INEXCUSABLE.”
Yet, the Vatican II sect and Francis officially teaches that one can be an atheist through no fault of his own and that atheists can be excused and saved:
Vatican II document, Lumen Gentium # 16: “Nor does divine providence deny the helps that are necessary for salvation to those who, through no fault of their own, have not yet attained to the express recognition of God yet who strive, not without divine grace, to lead an upright life.”
Vatican II is teaching here that there are some people who, THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN, have not yet attained to the express recognition of God. In other words, there are people who, through no fault of their own, don’t believe in God (i.e., are atheists). This is heresy.
St. Paul teaches that atheists are inexcusable because God’s creation proves His existence. Vatican II and Francis, on the contrary, teaches that atheists can be excused and saved. This causes us to ask, “What bible was Vatican II and Francis using?” It must have been the revised satanic edition. Their statement about those who don’t acknowledge God is not only condemned by St. Paul, but also by Vatican Council I. Vatican I dogmatically defined the principle set forth in Romans 1 – which directly contradicts the teaching of atheism, agnosticism, Antipope Francis and the Vatican II sect.
Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, On Revelation, Can. 1: “If anyone shall have said that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, cannot be known with certitude by those things which have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema.”
Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Session 3, On God the Creator, Can. 1: “If anyone shall have denied the one true God, Creator and Lord of visible and invisible things: let him be anathema.”
Vatican II and Francis falls directly under these anathemas by its heretical teaching above.
Yet despite this dogmatic teaching based on Romans 1, in On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13 Francis says he respects atheists and doesn’t try to convert them. He also says that their “life is not condemned”:
“I do not approach the relationship in order to proselytize, or convert the atheist; I respect him… nor would I say that his life is condemned, because I am convinced that I do not have the right to make a judgment about the honesty of that person… every man is the image of God, whether he is a believer or not. For that reason alone everyone has a series of virtues, qualities, and a greatness of his own.” (Francis, On Heaven and Earth, pp. 12-13)
In contrast to Francis, the Council of Florence dogmatically defined that any individual who has a view contrary to the Catholic Church’s teaching on Our Lord Jesus Christ or the Trinity, or any one of the truths about Our Lord or the Trinity, is rejected, condemned and anathematized by God.
Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Bull Cantate Domino, 1442, ex cathedra: “… the holy Roman Church, founded on the words of our Lord and Savior, firmly believes, professes and preaches one true God, almighty, immutable and eternal, Father, Son and Holy Spirit… Therefore it [the Church] condemns, rejects, anathematizes and declares to be outside the Body of Christ [and of God], which is the Church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views.”
An atheists interviewed Francis for the Italian newspaper The Republic. The interview was published on October 1, 2013. Francis directly told the atheist that he has no intention of trying to convert him. Francis rejects proselytism four different times in this interview. Francis declared: “Proselytism is solemn nonsense, it makes no sense.”
Now, our Lord commanded the apostle to go and proselytize, to go and teach. He said: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commended you.” (Matthew 28:19)
How clear is that? And what’s really outrageous about this statement is that he’s essentially spitting on and mocking the martyrs, who suffered, died, were tortured, for teaching, preaching and spreading the true faith; and this apostate has the nerve to call it a solemn nonsense. That anyone claiming to be the Pope says such an evil statement, is incredible.
Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum (# 13), June 29, 1896: “Therefore if a man does not want to be, or to be called, a heretic, let him not strive to please this or that man… but let him hasten before all things to be in communion with the Roman See.”
Pope Pius IV, profession of faith, Council of Trent, ex cathedra: “This true Catholic faith, outside of which no one can be saved… I now profess and truly hold…”
The Catholic Church infallibly teaches that atheists are condemned and that they must be converted to the Catholic faith for salvation. Yet, Antipope Francis is dominating the headlines around the world with his assertion that people don’t need to believe in God to get to heaven.
Antipope Francis, Evangelii Gaudium (# 254), Nov. 24, 2013: “Non-Christians [such as atheists and pagans], by God’s gracious initiative, when they are faithful to their own consciences, can live “justified by the grace of God”, and thus be “associated to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ”… to the sacramental dimension of sanctifying grace... to live our own beliefs.”
Some may argue that when Francis continued in his Evangelii Gaudium, saying: “they [false religions, practices and beliefs] can be channels which the Holy Spirit raises up in order to liberate non-Christians from atheistic immanentism or from purely individual religious experiences” -- that this means they will be converted. But we already know he doesn’t believe the Catholic Faith is necessary for salvation, and that he rejects proselytizing atheists; so that is not what he means. He is just saying it could happen - “they can” - not that it will, which is why he said: they can be justified if they follow their conscience. And then he ended saying: “which can help us better to live our own beliefs.” (Evangelii Gaudium, # 254)
His position is of course, heresy and apostasy. He made a similar statement in an open letter to the founder of the newspaper La Repubblica.
Statements like this only confirm what we’ve documented about the Vatican II antipopes, and what was proven in the video “What Francis Really Believes.” I’ve read Francis’ entire letter. The headlines accurately reflect what Antipope Francis wrote in his Evangelii Gaudium.
Concerning atheists, Francis wrote:
“First of all, you ask if the God of Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that - and this is fundamental - God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience. In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil. The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.” (“Pope” Francisco writes to La Repubblica: “An open dialogue with non-believers”, 2013/09/11/)
Here Francis clearly indicates that people who don’t believe in God can be forgiven and saved if they obey their own conscience and follow what they perceive to be good; and later in his “Evangelii Gaudium” (254) he confirmed that this indeed was what he meant. So don’t allow any liar to claim that Francis’ statement has been misrepresented. It has not been misrepresented as Francis himself confirmed.
That’s an astounding heresy because it’s a basic dogma of Catholicism that faith is necessary for salvation. This is a fundamental issue. As Hebrews 11:6 says, “…without faith it is impossible to please God.”
The dogma of the Church, that no one can be justified, saved or pleasing to God without faith was taught throughout history and solemnly declared by the Council of Trent and Vatican I. Both Councils repeated the truth of Hebrews 11:6. Of course, it’s also a dogma that one must have the Catholic faith to be saved, and that no one can be saved outside the Catholic Church. These truths have been defined by many popes.
Francis’ heresy trashes and denies all of those proclamations, but it gets even worse, because there are specific dogmatic definitions against the notion that atheists can be excused or saved.
Based on Romans 1:20, which teaches that all who deny the existence of God are inexcusable, Vatican I solemnly declared in Canon 1, On Revelation, “If anyone shall have said that the one true God, our Creator and Lord, cannot be known with certitude by those things which have been made, by the natural light of human reason: let him be anathema.”
Therefore, the position that atheists can be excused for not recognizing what is clear from the natural light of human reason, namely, that there is a God, is an anathematized heresy.
In Canon 1, On God the Creator, Vatican I also declared, “If anyone shall have denied the one true God, Creator and Lord of visible and invisible things, let him be anathema.”
That means that anyone who denies God or His existence, is specifically anathematized.
Francis’ statements rejects these dogmatic definitions, in addition to all the others previously mentioned. People need to recognize the significance of this heresy.
The truth that one must have faith is a basic and fundamental teaching of Christianity. His statement that people can be saved without faith is equivalent to denying Jesus is God, that Mary is the Mother of God, or that Jesus rose again. They are all basic dogmas.
He has openly repudiated the teaching of Christianity, the necessity of faith. He is a complete heretic, not that more proof was required, but Francis’ statement in the interview, and later confirmed in his “Apostolic Exhortation” addressed to the “universal Church,” is another proof that he is not the pope, but a heretical non-Catholic antipope.
The organization he represents, the Vatican II sect, is not the Catholic Church, but the End Times Counter Church.
Francis’ Heretical Teaching on Homosexual “Civil Unions” and Homosexuality
As we will see, Francis says he respects those who favor the abomination of same sex “marriage”, and says he never was disrespectful to sodomites and perverts. Francis also says he does not “judge” homosexuals and that a person who is gay can have “good will”.
Discussing homosexuals (people in general and clergy), Francis said in July 2013:
“If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge them?”
Francis claims to be the first Judge in the Catholic Church, a pope, and yet says “who am I to judge” homosexuals. It is shocking and a total inversion of Catholic morals… It is not surprising that Francis believes such horrible things when he idolizes man.
Also notice the following interesting statements Francis makes about gay “marriage” and homosexuals.
Francis, On Heaven and Earth, p. 117: “When the head of the Government of the City of Buenos Aires, Mauricio Macri, did not appeal the judge’s opinion right away authorizing a [same-sex] wedding, I felt that I had something to say, to inform; I saw myself with an obligation to state my opinion. It was the first time in eighteen years as bishop that I criticized a government official. If you analyze the two declarations that I formulated, at no time did I speak about homosexuals nor did I make any derogatory reference toward them… Macri told me that these were his convictions; I respected him for that, but the head of the Government does not have to transfer his personal convictions to law. In no moment did I speak disrespectfully about homosexuals…”
Here we see that Francis says he respects those who favor the abomination of same sex “marriage”, and that he never was disrespectful to sodomites and perverts.
Francis also mentions how he allowed the pro-gay “marriage” supporting president of Argentina, Nestor Kirchner, to preside over a “Catholic” memorial service to honor deceased “Catholic priests” and seminarians:
Francis, Conversations, p. 145: “I even asked him to preside over the ceremony when he arrived at the church…”
Later when the apostate president died, Francis immediately offered a public “requiem mass” for him.
Francis also allowed politicians who are vocal pro-abortion and gay “marriage” supporters to receive “communion” at his installation “mass”.
LifeNews, Mars 20, 2013: “Pro-abortion Biden and Pelosi Received Communion at Mass for Antipope Francis - The communion issue was exacerbated when, despite their pro-abortion views, Vice President Joe Biden and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi both received communion at the Mass to celebrate Pope Francis’ inauguration. Biden’s office confirmed to the Washington Times that he had received communion and reporters in the White House presidential reporting pool confirmed in an email to LifeNews that Pelosi had received it as well. … “At a Mass during which our new Pope emphasized the duty public officials – and all the rest of us – have to protect the weakest among us, Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi have the audacity to receive Communion while publicly renouncing their responsibility to protect the weakest among us.”
It has now also been documented and confirmed that Francis favored homosexual civil unions when he was in Argentina. He just didn’t want a homosexual civil union to be called a marriage.
CNN, March 21, 2013: “Behind closed doors, pope supported civil unions in Argentina, activist says - Less than an hour after he fired off an angry letter to Catholic Church leaders about their handling of Argentina’s same-sex marriage debate, Marcelo Marquez says his phone rang. … "He [Francis, then the “archbishop” of Buenos Aires] told me. … ‘I’m in favor of gay rights and in any case, I also favor civil unions for homosexuals, but I believe that Argentina is not yet ready for a gay marriage law," said Marquez, a gay rights activist, a self-described devout Catholic and a former theology professor at a Catholic seminary.”
HuffingtonPost, March 20, 2013: “Pope Francis Advocated For Civil Unions For Gay Couples In 2010 As Argentina’s Cardinal Bergoglio - Pope Francis supported civil unions for gay couples as recently as 2010. … As Argentina’s legislature debated President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner’s bill to allow gay marriage, Francis -- then known as Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio -- suggested to his bishops that the Church support civil unions as a compromise of sorts. At the time, civil unions were already legal in parts of Argentina ABC noted. Civil unions were the “lesser of two evils,” said Sergio Rubin, authorized biographer for then-Cardinal Bergoglio, according to The New York Times. “He [Bergoglio] wagered on a position of greater dialogue with society.”
It has also been reported that Francis still favors homosexual civil unions as “Pope”.
DailyMail, March 10, 2014: “Pope to stop condemning same-sex civil partnerships hints leading cardinal in move which could be step towards Catholic gay marriage - Pope Francis has suggested that the Vatican could support gay civil unions in the future, according to one of the church’s most senior cardinals. Cardinal Timothy Dolan said that the pontiff wants the Catholic Church to study same-sex unions, ‘rather than condemn them’. Cardinal Dolan told American television that Francis wants church leaders to ‘look into it and see the reasons that have driven them.’ … In an interview to mark his first year in the church’s top job, Pope Francis last week reaffirmed the Vatican’s opposition to gay marriage but indicated that some types of civil unions could be acceptable to the church. The Pope restated the church’s teaching that ‘marriage is between a man and a woman,’ but added ‘We have to look at different cases and evaluate them in their variety.’ Some countries justify civil unions as a way to provide the same economic and legal rights to cohabitating couples as those who are married, the Pope said in the interview with Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera. … Francis’ comments are the first time that a Pope has indicated even tentative acceptance of civil unions, according to Vatican watchers. … In recognition for the perceived change in stance Francis appeared on the cover of gay magazine The Advocate as their person of the year.”
Sergio Rubin is an Argentine journalist and authorized biographer of Francis. He wrote (in 2010) the only biography of Jorge Bergoglio (now Antipope Francis) available at the time of his election. Rubin testified that while taking a strong stand against same-sex marriage, Bergoglio raised the possibility in 2010 with his bishops in Argentina that they support the idea of civil unions as a compromise position. On Gay Unions, a Pragmatist Before He Was a Pope. The article went on to say that “a majority of the bishops voted to overrule him”.
In addition to Marquez and Rubin’s testimonies, two other Argentine journalists and two senior officials of the Argentine “bishops conference”, supported Rubin’s account:
NCR Online, Apr. 12, 2013: “On March 19, The New York Times reported that when Argentina was gearing up for a bitter national debate on gay marriage in 2009 and 2010, Bergoglio quietly favored a compromise solution that would have included civil unions for same-sex couples. … On this score, I was told by three sources in Argentina that the Times basically got it right: Bergoglio did, in fact, favor civil unions. That was confirmed on background by two senior officials of the bishops’ conference in Argentina, both of whom worked with Bergoglio and took part in the behind-the-scenes discussions as the conference tried to shape its position. "Bergoglio supported civil unions," one of those officials told me. Mariano de Vedia, a veteran journalist for La Nación, has covered church/state issues in Argentina for years and said he could confirm Bergoglio’s position had been correctly described in the Times account. Guillermo Villarreal, a Catholic journalist in Argentina, said it was well known at the time that Bergoglio’s moderate position was opposed by Archbishop Héctor Rubén Aguer of La Plata, the leader of the hawks.”
This is heresy. It means that Francis approved perverted and abominable sexual behavior that is condemned in Scripture and Catholic teaching. His stance is no different at all from endorsing abortion under the condition that the state does not give abortion special or privileged status by using state funds for it.
All of this without a doubt proves that Francis is certainly not a Catholic. He’s not a pope, he’s not a lover of truth and of the true God, he’s not honest, he’s not seeking to convert souls to the one true faith, etc. As he cannot defend openly gay pseudo-marriage, he uses relativism to defend the “gay agenda”, reducing the issue of homosexuality to the mere political lobby. “If a person is gay and seeking God, who am I to judge her?”, says Antipope Francis.
Since Francis idolizes man, it’s no wonder he endorses such blasphemies and perversions. One hear the “You can’t judge!” heresy so many times it makes one sick. Heretics love this evil phrase and will recite it every time someone charitably rebukes their sinful lifestyle. They don’t seem to grasp the fact that God has already judged (Leviticus 20:13; 1 Corinthians 6:9).
More on Francis’ Heresies on Homosexuals and Homosexuality
Antipope Francis recently gave a shocking interview to the editor of the so-called Jesuit journal, La Civilta Cattolica. He was interviewed by Antonio Spadaro on behalf of La Civilta Cattolica, Thinking Faith, America and several other major Jesuit journals around the world. The interview was conducted in Italian. After the Italian text was officially approved, a team of five independent experts were commissioned to produce the English translation, which is also published by America.
On p. 7 of the interview, Francis is talking about homosexuals. He says:
“In Buenos Aires I used to receive letters from homosexuals persons who are ‘socially wounded’ because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this. During the return flight from Rio de Janeiro I said that if a homosexual person is of good will and is in search of God, I am no one to judge.” He goes on to say, “it is not possible to interfere spiritually in the life of a person.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 7.
He then re-quotes something he said previously about homosexuals:
“A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: “‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 8.
This is wicked heresy! First he says, he’s “no one to judge” and that “the church does not want to do this [that is, condemn the homosexuals].” That’s interesting because the First Vatican Council declared that a Pope (a true Pope) is the supreme judge of the faithful. Francis doesn’t judge or condemn anyone because he’s not a Catholic and he’s not the Pope. Also, to say that the Church does not condemn homosexuals is equivalent to saying that God does not condemn homosexuals. There is no difference between the two.
Second, he’s discussing homosexuals. He says he’s no one to judge, and he teaches that God and the Church doesn’t condemn them or reject them. That indicates quite clearly, that homosexuals could be justified despite their wickedness and abominable behavior. And, we know Francis is including active homosexuals in his comments, because he makes no distinction between people who merely consider themselves to have a homosexual orientation, and those who engage in homosexual behavior.
Indeed, we know he’s talking about those who engage in homosexual acts because Francis refers to homosexuals who have claimed to him that they feel excluded. That obviously includes active homosexuals. In fact, in this very context Francis speaks of confession. “This is also the great benefit of confession as a sacrament: evaluating case by case and discerning what is the best thing to do for a person who seeks God and grace.” Thinking Faith, Sept. 19, 2013, p. 8.
The Vatican II sect would only consider homosexual acts, not the homosexual orientation, matters for confession (both are equally wrong, however).
Antipope John Paul II, New Catechism, #2357: “Homosexuality… Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.”
And Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) and John Paul II both approved of the following statement concerning homosexuality:
“Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts “as a serious depravity... (cf. Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10). This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly [homosexuality] are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered”. …
The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, in the Audience of March 28, 2003, approved the present Considerations, adopted in the Ordinary Session of this Congregation, and ordered their publication.
Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, June 3, 2003, Memorial of Saint Charles Lwanga and his Companions, Martyrs.
Joseph Card. Ratzinger
(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons, nr. 4, 2003)
By the way, Scripture is quite clear that the homosexual orientation is unnatural and results from mortal sin, idolatry and apostasy. See Romans chapter 1.
Romans 1:26-27: “For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.”
People can be delivered from it by the grace of God. See Overcoming Homosexuality.
Francis then speaks in the very same context of gay “marriage”. That obviously refers to, and includes practicing homosexuals. Francis also says in this very context, “that we must consider their situation” and look upon things with “mercy” which come in the context of his reference to confession, and which can only have meaning if he’s referring to practicing homosexuals, since the Vatican II sect would only consider homosexual acts, not the homosexual orientation, matters for confession.
Francis also applied his comments to both “homosexual persons” and to “homosexuality.”
Read carefully in context, there is no doubt that Francis’ teaching that he does not judge, condemn or reject homosexuals or homosexuality including practicing homosexuals. That is totally evil and it is heresy.
Based upon Sacred Scripture, the Church has always taught that those who practice homosexuality, and have a homosexual orientation are condemned, judged and rejected.
1 Corinthians 6:9 explicitly teaches that homosexuals are rejected from the Kingdom of God and Romans 1:32 teaches that “not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them… are worthy of death.” That means they are rejected and condemned, the opposite of what Francis teaches.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10: “Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, Nor the effeminate, nor sodomites [homosexuals], nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.”
Romans 1:32: “Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.”
So not only the people who are homosexuals are worthy of death, but also those who promote this sinful lifestyle! So this is a clear warning that homosexuals are judged and that they will be judged.
Pope St. Pius V, Horrendum Illud Scelus, August 30, 1568: “We establish that any priest or member of the clergy, either secular or regular, who commits such an execrable crime [the homosexual vice against nature], by force of the present law be deprived of every clerical privilege, of every post, dignity and ecclesiastical benefit, and having been degraded by an ecclesiastical judge, let him be immediately delivered to the secular authority to be put to death, as mandated by law as the fitting punishment for laymen who have sunk into this abyss.” (In Bullarium Romanum, Rome: Typographia Reverendae Camerae Apostolicae, Mainardi, 1738, chap. 3, p. 33)
Francis’ position is heretical. It constitutes a new false Gospel.
The Church calls homosexuals out of their wickedness and out of their perversion. It calls them to convert. But as they are, they are in a state of condemnation.
1. The Great Apostasy and a counterfeit Church predicted in the New Testament and in Catholic Prophecy
Luke 18:8- “But yet the Son of man, when he cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?”
In the Gospel, Our Lord Jesus Christ informs us that in the last days the true Faith would hardly be found on the earth. He tells us that “in the holy place” itself there will be “the abomination of desolation” (Mt. 24:15), and a deception so profound that, if it were possible, even the elect would be deceived (Mt. 24:24).
Matthew 24:15- “When therefore you shall see the abomination of desolation, which was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place: he that readeth let him understand.”
Matthew 24:24-25- “For there shall arise false Christs and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Behold I have told it to you, beforehand.”
2 Thess. 2:3-5- “Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt [apostasy] first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God. Remember you not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?”
In 1903, Pope St. Pius X thought that he might be seeing the beginning of the evils which will fully come to pass in the last days.
Pope St. Pius X, E Supremi (# 5), Oct. 4, 1903: “… there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may already be in the world the ‘ Son of Perdition’ of whom the Apostle speaks (2 Thess. 2:3).”1
The New Testament tells us that this deception will happen in the very heart of the Church’s physical structures, in “the Temple of God” (2 Thess. 2:4) and “in the holy place” (Mt. 24:15). It will arise because people receive not the love of the truth (2 Thessalonians 2:10).
In 2 Thessalonians 2, St. Paul speaks of the last days being characterized by a great apostasy that will be the worst ever – even worse than was experienced in the Arian crisis in the 4th century, in which an authentically Catholic priest was hardly to be found.
Fr. William Jurgens: “At one point in the Church’s history, only a few years before Gregory’s [Nazianz] present preaching (A.D. 380), perhaps the number of Catholic bishops in possession of sees, as opposed to Arian bishops in possession of sees, was no greater than something between 1% and 3% of the total. Had doctrine been determined by popularity, today we should all be deniers of Christ and opponents of the Spirit.”2
Fr. William Jurgens: “In the time of the Emperor Valens (4th century), Basil was virtually the only orthodox Bishop in all the East who succeeded in retaining charge of his see… If it has no other importance for modern man, a knowledge of the history of Arianism should demonstrate at least that the Catholic Church takes no account of popularity and numbers in shaping and maintaining doctrine: else, we should long since have had to abandon Basil and Hilary and Athanasius and Liberius and Ossius and call ourselves after Arius.”3
St. Gregory Nazianz (+380), Against the Arians: “Where are they who revile us for our poverty and pride themselves in their riches? They who define the Church by numbers and scorn the little flock?”4
If the Arian crisis – just a prelude to the Great Apostasy – was this extensive, how extensive will the Great Apostasy foretold by Our Lord and Saint Paul be?
Prophecy of St. Nicholas of Fluh (1417-1487): “The Church will be punished because the majority of her members, high and low, will become so perverted. The Church will sink deeper and deeper until she will at last seem to be extinguished, and the succession of Peter and the other Apostles to have expired. But, after this, she will be victoriously exalted in the sight of all doubters.”5
St. Paul further says that this apostasy will result in a man sitting in the temple of God and “shewing himself as if he were God.” Later in this book, we prove that this is exactly what has happened by a man sitting in St. Peter’s Basilica declaring that he and everyone else is God.
Fr. Herman Kramer was a Catholic priest who spent 30 years studying and writing a book on the Apocalypse. In his book, he wrote the following about St. Paul’s prophecy concerning the Antichrist sitting in the Temple of God.
“St. Paul says that Antichrist ‘sitteth in the temple of God’… This is not the ancient Temple of Jerusalem, nor a temple like it built by Antichrist, as some have thought, for then it would be his own temple… this temple is shown to be a Catholic Church, possibly one of the churches in Jerusalem or St. Peter’s in Rome, which is the largest church in the world and is in the full sense ‘The Temple of God.’”6
Notice that Kramer says that “the Temple of God” probably refers to St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.
Pope Pius XI, Quinguagesimo ante (#30), Dec. 23, 1929: “… such a great number of them came to the Basilica of St. Peter’s for the jubilee of indulgence that We have probably never seen that great temple so crowded.”7
The Catholic Encyclopedia article on “Antichrist” indicates that St. Bernard believed that the Antichrist would be an antipope:
“ ...St. Bernard speaks in the passage of the Antipope [as the Beast of the Apocalypse].”8
Bl. Joachim (d. 1202): “Towards the end of the world, Antichrist will overthrow the pope and usurp his see.”9
But whether or not one believes that the Antichrist will be an antipope, it has definitely been prophesied that the forces of Antichrist will overtake Rome in the final days. On Sept. 19, 1846, Our Lady of La Salette prophesied that Rome would lose the Faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist in a final days apostasy from the one true Catholic Faith.
Our Lady of La Salette, Sept. 19, 1846: “Rome will lose the Faith and become the seat of the Anti-Christ… the Church will be in eclipse.”
This startling prophecy coincides with the prophecies in Sacred Scripture (Apocalypse 17 and 18), which inform us that the city of seven hills (Rome) will become a harlot (a counterfeit Bride of Christ), which will commit spiritual fornication (idolatry) and tread upon the blood of the saints (false ecumenism). The great harlot prophesied in the Bible is not the Catholic Church; it is a counterfeit Catholic Church, an apostate, phony Bride which arises in the last days to deceive Catholics and eclipse the true Church which has been reduced to a remnant. In this book we will bring forward the overwhelming, undeniable, irrefutable evidence from doctrinal grounds and unassailable facts that the “Church” which has arisen with the Second Vatican Council (1962-) is not the Catholic Church all, but rather massively fraudulent Counter-Church which denies fundamental teachings the Catholic Church.
We will show that the men who imposed this new Vatican II religion and the New Mass were not Catholics at all, but manifest heretics preaching a new religion.
In fact, any doubts about the authenticity of Our Lady’s message at La Salette will be obliterated by a careful examination of the evidence in this book. Among other things, this book will document that the Vatican now teaches that Jews are perfectly free not to believe in Jesus Christ.
This may startle some, but this is a fact. Without even considering all of the other apostasy which we will cover in this book, this fact proves that Our Lady’s words have come true: Rome (not the Catholic Church) has lost the Faith (given way to a non-Catholic, counterfeit sect) and become the seat of the Antichrist.
In late 2001, the Pontifical Biblical Commission released a book entitled The Jewish People and the Holy Scriptures in the Christian Bible. The book argues that the Jews’ continued wait for the Messiah is validated and justified by the Old Testament. “The expectancy of the Messiah was justified in the Old Testament,” papal spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls explained, “and if the Old Testament keeps its value, then it keeps that as a value, too. It says you cannot just say all the Jews are wrong and we are right.” Asked by reporters whether his statements might be taken to suggest that the Messiah may not in fact have come, Navarro-Valls replied, “It means it would be wrong for a Catholic to wait for the Messiah, but not for a Jew.” This means that the Vatican now holds that the Jews are perfectly free to reject Christ; this is the teaching of the Vatican II “popes.”
Rome has lost the Faith and become the seat of the Antichrist.
1 John 2:22 – “Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son.”
But how did this come about, and what are Catholics to do about it? This book will endeavor to answer both of those questions in detail.
Endnotes for Section 1 :
1 The Papal Encyclicals, by Claudia Carlen, Raleigh: The Pierian Press, 1990, Vol. 3 (1903-1939), p. 6.
2 William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, Vol. 2, p. 39.
3 William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 3.
4 William Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, Vol. 2, p. 33.
5 Yves Dupont, Catholic Prophecy by Yves Dupont, Rockford, IL: Tan Books, 1973, p. 30.
6 Fr. Herman Kramer, The Book of Destiny, Tan Books, 1975, p. 321.
7 The Papal Encyclicals, Vol. 3 (1903-1939), p. 351.
8 The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume 1, “Antichrist,” Robert Appleton Co. 1907, p. 561.
9 Rev. Culleton, The Reign of Antichrist, Tan Books, 1974, p. 130.
Pope Leo XIII
Pope Leo XIII’s Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel is prophetic. Composed over 100 years ago, and then suppressed, Pope Leo XIII’s original Prayer to St. Michael is a very interesting and controversial prayer relating to the present situation in which the true Catholic Church finds itself. On September 25, 1888, following his morning Mass, Pope Leo XIII became traumatized to the point that he collapsed. Those in attendance thought that he was dead. After coming to consciousness, the pope described a frightful conversation that he had heard coming from near the tabernacle. The conversation consisted of two voices – voices which Pope Leo XIII clearly understood to be the voices of Jesus Christ and the Devil. The Devil boasted that he could destroy the Church, if he were granted 75 years to carry out his plan (or 100 years, according to some accounts). The Devil also asked permission for “a greater influence over those who will give themselves to my service.” To the Devil’s requests, Our Lord reportedly replied: “you will be given the time and the power.”
Shaken deeply by what he had heard, Pope Leo XIII composed the following Prayer to St. Michael (which is also a prophecy) and ordered it to be recited after all Low Masses as a protection for the Church against the attacks from Hell. What follows is the prayer (note especially the bolded portions), followed by some of our comments. The prayer was taken from The Raccolta, 1930, Benziger Bros., pp. 314-315. The Raccolta is an imprimatured collection of the official and indulgenced prayers of the Catholic Church.
"O Glorious Archangel St. Michael, Prince of the heavenly host, be our defense in the terrible warfare which we carry on against principalities and Powers, against the rulers of this world of darkness, spirits of evil. Come to the aid of man, whom God created immortal, made in his own image and likeness, and redeemed at a great price from the tyranny of the devil.
"Fight this day the battle of the Lord, together with the holy angels, as already thou hast fought the leader of the proud angels, Lucifer, and his apostate host, who were powerless to resist thee, nor was there place for them any longer in Heaven.
"That cruel, that ancient serpent, who is called the devil or Satan, who seduces the whole world, was cast into the abyss with his angels. Behold, this primeval enemy and slayer of men has taken courage. Transformed into an angel of light, he wanders about with all the multitude of wicked spirits, invading the earth in order to blot out the name of God and of his Christ, to seize upon, slay and cast into eternal perdition souls destined for the crown of eternal glory. This wicked dragon pours out, as a most impure flood, the venom of his malice on men of depraved mind and corrupt heart, the spirit of lying, of impiety, of blasphemy, and the pestilent breath of impurity, and of every vice and iniquity.
"These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety, with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.
"Arise then, O invincible Prince, bring help against the attacks of the lost spirits to the people of God, and give them the victory. They venerate thee as their protector and Patron; in thee holy Church glories as her defense against the malicious power of hell; to thee has God entrusted the souls of men to be established in heavenly beatitude. Oh, pray to the God of peace that He may put Satan under our feet, so far conquered that he may no longer be able to hold men in captivity and harm the Church. Offer our prayers in the sight of the Most High, so that they may quickly conciliate the mercies of the Lord; and beating down the dragon, the ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, do thou again make him captive in the abyss, that he may no longer seduce the nations. Amen.
"Behold the Cross of the Lord; be scattered ye hostile powers. The Lion of the tribe of Judah has conquered, the root of David. Let thy mercies be upon us, O Lord.
"As we have hoped in thee. O Lord, hear my prayer. And let my cry come unto thee.
"Let us pray.
"O God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, we call upon thy holy name, and as suppliants we implore thy clemency, that by the intercession of Mary, ever Virgin immaculate and our Mother, and of the glorious Archangel St. Michael, thou wouldst deign to help us against Satan and all other unclean spirits, who wander about the world for the injury of the human race and the ruin of souls. Amen."
As one who reads the prayer (especially the bolded portion) can see, Pope Leo XIII seemed to foresee and predict the great apostasy; and he seemed to pinpoint that this apostasy would be led from Rome – Rome which alone is “the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world.” Pope Leo foresaw that this place (Vatican City in Rome), where had been set up the Chair of Peter by the first Pope, St. Peter himself, would become the throne of Satan’s abominable impiety, with the “iniquitous design that when the Pastor (the true Pope) has been struck, the sheep (the Catholic faithful) may be scattered.” These are Pope Leo XIII’s words.
Pope Leo XIII was not predicting the defection of the Catholic Church (which is impossible, as the gates of Hell can never prevail against the Church [Mt. 16]), nor the defection of the Chair of Peter (which is also impossible), but rather he was predicting the implementation of an apostate, counterfeit Catholic religion from Rome, in which “the pastor” (the true pope) is replaced by a usurping antipope (as has occurred at times in Church history), with the iniquitous design that “the sheep may be scattered.”
Pope Leo’s prayer also foresaw that Satan’s impure apostates would lay impious hands “on the Church’s most sacred possessions.” What are the Church’s most sacred possessions? The most sacred possessions of the Church are those things which Christ entrusted to Her: namely, the deposit of faith (with all of its dogmas) and the seven sacraments instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Therefore, Pope Leo’s prayer foretold the attempted destruction of the deposit of faith with Vatican II and the new sacramental rites of the Vatican II Church. Both of these will be covered in detail in this book. We will see that Paul VI’s laying of impious hands on the Church’s seven sacramental rites beginning in April of 1969, which produced an invalid New Mass, an invalid New Rite of Ordination, and gravely doubtful rites of Confirmation and Extreme Unction, fulfilled Pope Leo’s prediction to the letter.
In 1934, Pope Leo’s striking prayer (given above) was changed without explanation. The key phrase referring to the apostasy in Rome (the Holy Place, where the See of Peter has been set up for the light of the world) was removed. Around the same time, the use of Pope Leo XIII’s longer Prayer to St. Michael after each Low Mass was replaced by a shorter prayer, the now famous abbreviated Prayer to St. Michael. This prayer goes as follows:
“ St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil; may God rebuke him, we humbly pray; and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.”
There is nothing wrong with this prayer to St. Michael; in fact, it is very good and efficacious. However, the point is that it’s not the longer Prayer to St. Michael that Pope Leo XIII composed. The shorter prayer was, in the view of many, promoted as a substitute, so that the faithful would be unaware of the incredible content of the longer prayer, as described above. If the longer Prayer to St. Michael had been recited at the end of every Low Mass and not suppressed in 1934, how many millions more would have been stirred to a resistance when they encountered the attempted new post-Vatican II religion that we will cover in this book? How many would have seen through the systematic dismantling of the traditional Catholic Faith after Vatican II?
Pope Leo XIII’s longer Prayer to St. Michael also fits perfectly with Our Lady of La Salette’s famous appearance and prediction in 1846: “Rome will lose the faith and become the Seat of the Antichrist... the Church will be in eclipse.” Pope Leo’s words suggest that Antichrist himself, or at least the forces of Antichrist, would set up their seat in Rome: “In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter… they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety…”
Another photo of John Paul II at his 1986 interreligious prayer service in Assisi, Italy – something totally condemned by the Catholic Church (more on this in the section on John Paul II)
Lucia, Francisco and Jacinta of Fatima
Fr. Mario Luigi Ciappi, papal theologian to Pope Pius XII: “In the Third Secret [of Fatima] it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
The message and miracle of Our Lady of Fatima in 1917 is one of the greatest events in the history of the Catholic Church. Since the miracle at Fatima, which occurred on Oct. 13, 1917, was predicted to take place in advance, and was fulfilled in the presence of almost 100,000 people, it’s probably the greatest miracle in Catholic history outside the Resurrection. The Fatima miracle and message also bear tremendous significance for our topic: The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II. Beginning on May 13, 1917, the Mother of God appeared six times to Jacinta (age 7), Francisco (age 9) and Lucia (age 10) in Fatima, Portugal. The Blessed Virgin told the children to pray the Rosary every day; she showed them a vision of Hell; and she made prophecies about World War II and the expansion of Communism (“the errors of Russia”), among other things.
The Vision of Hell shown by Our Lady of Fatima to the children: “As the Lady spoke the last words, she opened Her hands once more, as She had done the two previous months. The rays [of light] appeared to penetrate the earth, and we saw, as it were, a vast sea of fire. Plunged in this fire, we saw the demons and the souls [of the damned]. The latter were like transparent burning embers, all blackened or burnished bronze, having human forms. They were floating about in that conflagration, now raised into the air by the flames which issued from within themselves, together with great clouds of smoke. Now they fell back on every side like sparks in huge fires, without weight or equilibrium, amid shrieks and groans of pain and despair, which horrified us and made us tremble with fright (it must have been this sight which caused me to cry out, as people say they heard me). The demons were distinguished [from the souls of the damned] by their terrifying and repellent likeness to frightful and unknown animals, black and transparent like burning coals. That vision only lasted for a moment, thanks to our good Heavenly Mother, Who at the first apparition had promised to take us to Heaven. Without that, I think that we would have died of terror and fear.”
“You see Hell, where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them God wishes to establish in the world the devotion to my Immaculate Heart,” Our Lady said.
The Fatima children shortly after the vision of Hell… one can see in their terrified countenances the truth of their words: that they would have died of fright at the vision of Hell if they had not been promised Heaven
On July 13, 1917, Our Lady also told the children that on Oct. 13, 1917 she would work a miracle that all would have to believe:
“Lucia said, ‘I wish to ask you to tell us who you are, and to perform a miracle so that everyone will believe that you have appeared to us!’
‘Continue to come here every month,’ answered the Lady. ‘In October I will tell you who I am and what I wish, and will perform a miracle that everyone will have to believe.’” (Our Lady of Fatima, July 13, 1917)
Since the children had announced months in advance of Oct. 13 that the Lady would work a miracle, 70,000 to 100,000 people gathered at Fatima on Oct. 13 to see the miracle that was predicted to take place. There were also many nonbelievers who came to scoff when the predicted miracle didn’t occur. However, as even the secular press confirmed, the Miracle of the Sun – as it’s now known – did occur, just as it was predicted by the children and by Our Lady of Fatima. It stunned the gathered multitude, converted hardened unbelievers, including atheists and Freemasons, and confirmed thousands in the Catholic Faith.
Above: the stunned crowd at Fatima on Oct. 13, 1917 witnessing the predicted miracle by Our Lady of Fatima
What was the Miracle of the Sun that so stunned and converted the enraptured audience of 70,000-plus at Fatima on Oct. 13, 1917? A brief examination of the miracle and its significance will go a long way in revealing: The Truth about What Really Happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II.
“The sun stood forth in the clear zenith like a great silver disk which, though bright as any sun they had ever seen, they could look straight at without blinking, and with a unique and delightful satisfaction. This lasted but a moment. While they gazed, the huge ball began to ‘dance’ – that was the word all the beholders applied to it. Now it was whirling rapidly like a gigantic fire-wheel. After doing this for some time, it stopped. Then it rotated again, with dizzy, sickening speed. Finally there appeared on the rim a border of crimson, which flung across the sky, as from a hellish vortex, blood-red streamers of flame, reflecting to the earth, to the trees and shrubs, to the upturned faces and the clothes all sorts of brilliant colors in succession: green, red, orange, blue, violet, the whole spectrum in fact. Madly gyrating in this manner three times, the fiery orb seemed to tremble, to shudder, and then to plunge precipitately, in a mighty zigzag, toward the crowd.
“A fearful cry broke from the lips of thousands of terrified persons as they fell upon their knees, thinking the end of the world had come. Some said that the air became warmer at that instant; they would not have been surprised if everything about them had burst into flames, enveloping and consuming them.”
“All over Portugal, in fact, the anti-clerical press was compelled to bear witness of the same sort. There was general agreement on the essentials. As Dr. Domingos Pinto Coelho wrote in O Ordem, ‘The sun, sometimes surrounded with crimson flames, at other times aureoled with yellow and red, at still other times seemed to revolve with a very rapid movement of rotation, still again seeming to detach itself from the sky, to approach the earth…’”
During the miracle the sun was seen to be speeding toward the earth and the people thought the end of the world had come. The significance should be obvious: Fatima was an apocalyptic sign; it was a sign that the end was near, that the events which would precede the culmination of the world and the Second Coming of Jesus Christ were to begin. Men must amend their lives before the end of the world really came.
Based on some of these considerations, many have concluded that Our Lady of Fatima is the woman clothed with the sun described in chapter 12:1 of the Apocalypse:
“And a great sign appeared in heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.” (Apocalypse 12:1)
The Fatima seers also reported that Our Lady was made all of light – she was more brilliant than the sun. The evidence is very strong that Our Lady of Fatima was the woman clothed with the sun prophesied in the Apocalypse, chapter 12. In fact, there is a stunning confirmation that Our Lady’s appearance at Fatima was the fulfillment of the prophecy in the Apocalypse about the woman clothed with the sun.
The Masonic Daily Paper, O Seculo, stunningly confirms without even knowing it that Our Lady was the woman clothed with the sun of the Apocalypse 12:1
The Miracle of the Sun worked by Our Lady of Fatima was reported by anti-Catholic papers throughout Portugal. The liberal, Masonic and anti-clerical daily of Lisbon, O Seculo, had its Editor in Chief, Avelino de Almeida, on hand to report on the event. To his credit, he honestly reported on the solar prodigy. What we want to draw to your attention is the title of his article which was published in O Seculo on Oct. 15, 1917. Giving an account of the extraordinary event at Fatima on Oct. 13, his article in O Seculo of October 15 was entitled:
“How the sun danced in broad daylight at Fatima. The apparitions of the Virgin. – The sign of Heaven. – Thousands declare it a miracle. – War and peace.’’
Please notice that the Masonic, anti-clerical daily of Lisbon described the event of Fatima and the Miracle of the Sun as “The sign of Heaven.” Does that sound familiar?
Apocalypse 12:1- “And a great sign appeared in Heaven: A woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.”
Are we to believe that the Masonic newspaper of Lisbon had Apocalypse 12:1 in mind when publishing this article shortly after the solar prodigy in 1917? Were the anti-clericals considering the possibility that Our Lady’s appearance constituted the woman clothed with the sun and the “sign of Heaven” described in the Bible? Of course not; not even Catholics at that time had connected Fatima with the woman clothed with the sun, let alone the anti-clericals who didn’t even believe in Sacred Scripture or probably didn’t even know about the prophecy in Apoc. 12:1! This headline, therefore, is an unknowing confirmation, by a public and anti-Catholic source, that Our Lady of Fatima and her miracle on Oct. 13 were indeed the sign prophesied in Apocalypse 12:1!
It’s almost as if one were to ask God the question: Lord, how will we know when the great “sign of heaven,” which you predicted in Apocalypse 12:1, will occur? And the Lord responded: just read the headline in the Masonic newspaper, for when this sign will occur it will be reported even in it.
This stunning fact not only serves to confirm that Our Lady of Fatima is the woman clothed with the sun of Apoc. 12:1, but also further confirms the authenticity of the Catholic Faith and Sacred Scripture.
Therefore, to finally round out our point about Fatima and its relevance to what has happened to the Catholic Church after Vatican II, we can say: since Fatima was the sign prophesied in Apoc. 12:1, this means that we are in the Apocalyptic era, the last days of the world.
Fatima, the sign of Apoc. 12:1, and the great red dragon (Communism), the sign of Apoc. 12:3, both come on the scene in 1917
Lending further support to the idea that Fatima was the “sign” of Apocalypse 12:1 is the fact that the Apocalypse speaks of the “great red dragon” just two verses later. Scripture seems to indicate that the two will come on the scene at the same time.
Apocalypse 12:3- “And there was seen another sign in Heaven: and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns: and on his heads seven diadems: And his tail drew the third part of the stars of Heaven, and cast them to the Earth…”
Many commentators consider the “great red dragon” to be Communism, since Communism is undeniably associated with red, and was responsible for the murder of over 20 million people in Russia alone. Under Vladimir Lenin, the Bolsheviks took over Russia for Communism – gaining the significant victory which would make Communism a world power – on Nov. 7, 1917, immediately after the appearances of Our Lady in Fatima, which had warned of the spread of “the errors of Russia.” Even today we speak of Communist China as “Red China.” The Communist revolution in China was launched in celebratory fashion by men with “Enormous red banners, tens of thousands of red flags, and masses of red balloons flew over them.” The evidence that the “great red dragon” describes the Communist Empire is quite strong.
It’s also very interesting that the great red dragon drew the third part of the stars of Heaven:
Apocalypse 12:3- “And there was seen another sign in Heaven: and behold a great red dragon… And his tail drew the third part of the stars of Heaven, and cast them to the Earth…”
Is it just a coincidence that Communism, at its height, held a third of the world in its grasp?
Warren H. Carroll, The Rise and Fall of the Communist Revolution, p. 418: “As Joseph Stalin walked into the Valley of the Shadow of Death, the international communist movement which he led held a third of the world in its grasp.”
Sister Lucia of Fatima told Fr. Fuentes in 1957 that we are in the last times
One of the three visionaries of Fatima, Sr. Lucia, told Fr. Fuentes in 1957:
"Father, the Most Holy Virgin did not tell me that we are in the last times of the world but she made me understand this for three reasons. The first reason is because she told me that the Devil is in the mood for engaging in a decisive battle against the Virgin. And a decisive battle is the final battle where one side will be victorious and the other side will suffer defeat. Hence from now on we must choose sides. Either we are for God or we are for the Devil. There is no other possibility.
“The second reason is because she said to my cousins as well as to myself that God is giving two last remedies to the world. These are the Holy Rosary and Devotion to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. These are the last two remedies which signify that there will be no others. “The third reason is because in the plans of Divine Providence, God always, before He is about to chastise the world, exhausts all other remedies. Now, when He sees that the world pays no attention whatsoever then, as we say in our imperfect manner of speaking, He offers us with a certain trepidation the last means of salvation, His Most Holy Mother. It is with a certain trepidation because if you despise and repulse this ultimate means we will not have any more forgiveness from Heaven because we will have committed a sin which the Gospel calls the sin against the Holy Spirit. This sin consists of openly rejecting with full knowledge and consent, the salvation which He offers. Let us remember that Jesus Christ is a very good Son and that He does not permit that we offend and despise His Most Holy Mother. We have recorded through many centuries of Church history the obvious testimony which demonstrates, by the terrible chastisements which have befallen those who have attacked the honor of His Most Holy Mother, how Our Lord Jesus Christ has always defended the honor of His Mother."
As discussed already, the main feature of the end times is an apostasy from the Catholic Faith. In “the holy place” itself (Rome) there will be “the abomination of desolation” (Mt. 24:15), and a deception so profound that, if it were possible, even the elect would be deceived (Mt. 24:24). The New Testament tells us that this deception will happen in the very heart of the Church’s physical structures, in “the Temple of God” (2 Thess. 2:4). It will arise because people receive not the love of the truth (2 Thessalonians 2:10). That is precisely why the very last words that Our Lady of Fatima gives us in the great secret of July 13, 1917 are:
“In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be preserved, etc.”
These are the last words given before the undisclosed third secret of Fatima. From this scholars of Fatima have concluded that the third secret undoubtedly deals with a massive spiritual crisis and apostasy from the Catholic Faith among those who purport to hold positions of authority in the Church.
Since we don’t have the complete sentence of Our Lady’s last words of the July message, we cannot say for sure what they mean; but the sentence could be: “In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be preserved in a faithful remnant…” Or: “In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be preserved until the Great Apostasy…” Or: “In Portugal the dogma of Faith will always be preserved among those who heed my warnings…” The third secret undoubtedly deals with the present apostasy of the Vatican II sect. We will document this apostasy in great detail in this book.
As cited at the beginning of this section,“Fr.” Mario Luigi Ciappi, the papal theologian to Pope Pius XII, stated:
“In the Third Secret it is foretold, among other things, that the great apostasy in the Church will begin at the top.”
Another “cardinal” of the Vatican II Church incredibly admitted that the Third Secret deals with the post-Vatican II apostasy.
“Cardinal” Silvio Oddi:“… the Third Secret [of Fatima]… is not about a supposed conversion of Russia…. but regards the ‘revolution’ in the Catholic Church.”
Testimonies that Heaven asked that the third secret of Fatima be revealed by 1960 at the latest
Canon Galamba: “When the bishop refused to open the letter, Lucy made him promise that it would definitely be opened and read to the world either at her death or in 1960, whichever would come first.” (La Verdad sobre el Secreto de Fatima, Fr. Joaquin Alonso, Spanish Edition, pp. 46-47)
John Haffert: “At the bishop’s house (in Leiria), I sat at the table on his right, with the four Canons. During that first dinner, Canon Jose Galamba de Oliveira turned to me when the bishop had left the room momentarily and asked: “Why don’t you ask the bishop to open the Secret?” Endeavoring not to show my ignorance concerning Fatima—which at that time was almost complete—I simply looked at him without expression. He continued: "The bishop can open the Secret. He doesn’t have to wait until 1960.” (Dear Bishop! John Haffert, AMI 1981, pp. 3-4)
Cardinal Cerejeira: In February 1960 the Patriarch of Lisbon reported the directions which the Bishop of Leiria “has passed on to him” on the subject of the Third Secret: “Bishop da Silva enclosed (the envelope sealed by Lucy) in another envelope on which he indicated that the letter had to be opened in 1960 by himself, Bishop Jose Correia da Silva, if he was still alive, or if not, by the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon.” (Novidades, February 24, 1960, quoted by La Documentation catholique, June 19, 1960, col. 751)
Canon Barthas: During his conversations with Sister Lucy on October 17-18, 1946, he had the opportunity to question her on the Third Secret. He writes: “When will the third element of the Secret be revealed to us?” Already in 1946, to this question Lucy and the Bishop of Leiria answered me uniformly, without hesitation and without comment: “In 1960.” And when I pushed my audacity so far as to ask why it was necessary to wait until then, the only response I received from either one was: “Because the Blessed Virgin wishes it so.” (Barthas, Fatima, merveille du XXe siecle, p. 83. Fatima-editions, 1952)
The Armstrongs: On May 14, 1953, Lucy received a visit from the Armstrongs, who were able to question her on the third Secret. In their account published in 1955, they confirmed that the third Secret “had to be opened and divulged in 1960.” (A. O. Armstrong, Fatima, pilgrimage to peace, The World’s Work, Kingswood, Surrey, 1955)
Cardinal Ottaviani: On May 17, 1955, Cardinal Ottaviani, Pro-Prefect of the Holy Office, came to the Carmel of Saint Teresa at Coimbra. He interrogated Lucy on the third Secret; and in his conference of 1967 recalled: “The message was not to be opened before 1960. I asked Sister Lucy, ‘Why this date?’ She answered, ‘Because then it will seem clearer (mais claro).’” (La Documentation catholique, March 19, 1967, col. 542)
Father Joaquin Alonso, official archivist of Fatima: “Other bishops also spoke—and with authority—about the year 1960 as the date indicated for opening the famous letter. Thus, when the then titular Bishop of Tiava, and Auxiliary Bishop of Lisbon asked Lucy when the Secret was to be opened, he always received the same answer: in 1960.” (La Verdad sobre el Secreto de Fatima, Fr. Joaquin Alonso, Spanish Edition, p. 46)
Father Joaquin Alonso: “When Don Jose, the first Bishop of Leiria, and Sister Lucy agreed that the letter was to be opened in 1960, they obviously meant that its contents should be made public for the good of the Church and the world.” (ibid., p. 54)
Father Fuentes: Father Fuentes interviewed Sister Lucy on December 26, 1957, who told him: “Father, the Most Holy Virgin is very sad because no one has paid attention to Her Message, neither the good nor the bad. The good continue on their way but without giving any importance to Her Message… I am still not able to give any other details because it is still a secret. According to the will of the Most Holy Virgin, only the Holy Father and the Bishop of Fatima are permitted to know the Secret, but they have chosen not to know it so that they would not be influenced. This is the third part [third Secret] of the Message of Our Lady which will remain secret until 1960.” (La Verdad sobre el Secreto de Fatima, Fr. Joaquin Alonso, Spanish Edition, p. 103-104)
F. Stein: “The testimonies which have announced the revelation of the Secret for 1960 are of such weight and so numerous that in our opinion, even if the ecclesiastical authorities of Fatima [in 1959 the experts themselves were still unaware that Rome had taken the Secret from the Bishop of Leiria over two years previously] had not yet resolved to publish the Secret in 1960, they would now see themselves forced to do so by the circumstances.” (Mensagem de Fatima, July-August, 1959)
Father Dias Coelho: “… we can use, as an unquestionable fact, this assertion of Dr. Galamba de Oliveira (in 1953) in Fatima, Altar do Mundo: ‘The third part of the Secret was sealed in the hands of His Grace the Bishop of Leiria, and will be opened either after the seer’s death or at the latest in 1960.’” (L’Homme Nouveau, No. 269, November 22, 1959)
All testimonies and statements reveal clearly that Heaven wanted the third secret of Fatima revealed to the whole world no later than 1960, because it would be clearer then.
Why would the third secret of Fatima be clearer in 1960?
It was on Jan. 25, 1959 that John XXIII announced that he had a special inspiration to suddenly call a new ecumenical council. (Jan. 25, by the way, was the same day on which the unknown light that illuminated the world prior to World War II lit up the skies of Europe. This unknown light that appeared on Jan. 25, 1938 was predicted by Our Lady of Fatima as a warning that God was going to punish the world with the things that were revealed in the second part of the secret. Was the fact that John XXIII called Vatican II on a Jan. 25 a warning about the coming punishment described in the third secret?)
This council called by John XXIII in 1959 would turn out to be Vatican II, the disastrous results of which are the subject of this book. Is the calling of this council in 1959 the reason that Our Blessed Mother requested the third secret of Fatima to be revealed by 1960? Was she directly warning us of the apostasy that would result from this council, which truly gave birth to a new, phony Counter-Catholic Church, as we will see in this book? Truly, the only major sign that had occurred by 1960, in regard to the tremendous apostasy we are now living through that would makes things “clearer,” was that John XXIII had announced his intention to call a new council in 1959. In our view, it’s quite obvious that the third secret of Fatima deals with the apostasy resulting from a false council; otherwise the third secret wouldn’t make more sense in 1960, as Our Blessed Mother said it would.
Endnotes for Section 3:
 Ciappi’s personal communication to a Professor Baumgartner in Salzburg, cited in The Devil’s Final Battle, compiled by Paul Kramer, Good Counsel Publications, 2002; also cited by Father Gerard Mura, “The Third Secret of Fatima: Has It Been Completely Revealed?”, the periodical Catholic (published by the Transalpine Redemptorists, Orkney Isles, Scotland, Great Britain), March 2002
 William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, Doubleday Reprint, 1990, p. 81.
 William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, p. 80.
 William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, pp. 145-146.
 William Thomas Walsh, Our Lady of Fatima, p. 148.
 Portuguese Newspaper, O Seculo, Oct. 15, 1917.
 Warren H. Carroll, The Rise and Fall of the Communist Revolution, Front Royal, Virginia: Christendom Press, p. 93.
 Warren H. Carroll, The Rise and Fall of the Communist Revolution, p. 538.
 Warren H. Carroll, The Rise and Fall of the Communist Revolution, p. 418.
 Sr. Lucy’s interview with Fr. Fuentes, quoted in The Whole Truth About Fatima by Frere Michel de la Sainte Trinite, Buffalo, NY:Immaculate Heart Publications, Vol. 3, p. 503 ff.
 Ciappi’s personal communication to a Professor Baumgartner in Salzburg, cited above.
 Silvio Oddi, The Meek Watchdog of God, Rome: Progetto Museali Editore, 1995, pp. 217-218.