Enforced Novos Ordo

Multiple Authors

It seems that many Catholic are forced into following the reforms of Vatican Council II and therefore because Catholic clergy are expected to follow their bishops there is no other way but for the Catholic Church to update itself. Why not, perhaps this is for its own good?


It seems that many Catholic are forced into following the reforms of Vatican Council II and therefore because Catholic clergy are expected to follow their bishops there is no other way but for the Catholic Church to update itself. Why not, perhaps this is for its own good?


As far as I can see, the traditionalist are trying to resist the changes brought about by the Vatican II in any way they can. However, they have no moral ascendency to this because even these few bishops and priests are duty bound to obey their superiors as representative of Christ in the apostolic succession. Their possible disobedience are envisaged as a diabolical stance against the Pope. The Vicar of Christ on earth and the college of cardinals and the duly designated bishops who comprise apostolic sucession.

It’s quite hard to understand the stance of these so-called traditionalists because the Catholic Church needed updating already since Trent in the middle ages. Of course with newly found truths in the sciences as well as the reality of changes in modern human experience, it is only natural that the Catholic church become more responsive and relevant to the true human religious experience. Therefore, it is only punctual and necessary that John XXIII should call for a council that will listen to the spiritual needs of the world rather than isolate the church further by reflecting upon itself with irrelevance, unresponsiveness and the back of historicity. La consonance with this need, Giovanni Montini later Paul VI led the council into needed reforms with the able help of Augustin Cardinal Bea who worked on Ecumenism and Annibale Cardinal Bugnini who updated the Liturgy. Consequently, the Paul VI Novos Ordo Missal became wildly available as the new mass that would unite all Catholics and allow those even outside the church to understand it more.


It is sad to see that there is too much resistance even for a positive change to take place. In fact, we have seen the cry for change in the very core of the church itself. Consider the fact, that many of these who sought for change are even religious such as the Jesuits Karl Rahner, Henri de Lubac and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Marie-Dominique Chenu and Edward Schillebeeckx who are Dominicans. Moreover, so many things have changed already. Consider psychiatry, there was a time when being gay, lesbian, bisexual or transsexual were considered mental health problems. In the new light of behavioral science, these so-called aberrations are now simply considered lifestyles.

Moreover, in the light of existential philosophy men’s yearning for power and pleasure, watered down before as a singular search for truth is emphasized such that unpleasurable and unnecessary feeling of guilt are set aside in modern guidance counseling knowledgeable of the fact that the counselee should find support in the counselor. It is therefore not surprising that the modern priest is no longer at the altar for an irrelevant sacrifice. He is now there as a president of a friendly gathering, ready to make things easier and more pleasant as a facilitator and when not saying mass even a counselor for those with anxieties, and even one of the boys to bring about camaraderie.


The buildings and church equipment should be relevant to the times. This is why there is no more need for a communion rail to draw the line between what is heavenly or earthly. Also, the altar that makes the priest turn his back to the people is already outdated. Now, the altar table is there for the taking of the meal and for the priest to preside for the memorial gathering. The tabernacle may occupy a place at the side and the pulpit is already irrelevant. Hence, even the costly adoration chapels may best be utilized as the parish religious store for people nowadays are so busy with so many things to do and a time for adoration besides the mass is already superfluous.


The Catholic laity should therefore hasten to listen to the updated bishops whose main intention is harmony and unity within the church! Yes, it is called the Church militant but why should we quarrel among ourselves when there are rules already clearly defined.

Only the anarchist type and those who thrive in chaos as radical minds would still want to disobey their bishops. Indeed, if the faithful insist on this impertinent behavior, they may be declared as schematic and are liable for excommunication. They have already heard bishops who insists on tradition, especially the Latin Mass of the Middle Ages, treated this way and so, therefore the laity better abide.

But rather we say, the stand of the hardliner traditionalists is correct and especially those by their bishops who are defending the good, true and beautiful being true successors of the apostles. For the church magisterium since Trent could not be changed by the so-called need for updating nor the outcry even by the religious for relevant reforms. Have you forgotten that He is the way, whether goes your pastoral detour? Have you forgotten that HE is the Truth, why then should you change what is True. Even the ancient law of Opposites of Plato dictates; if you change the True, it could only become False.

All the changes instituted by the Herodians no matter how great are simply irrelevant. The Faith of the people is unaffected by these superfluous handworks, and all the offices given to the Novos Ordo priest are irrelevant to his true calling as a priest. A priest is one who makes a Sacrifice to God as a mediator between God and men. If one ordained as a priest does not make the Perpetual Sacrifice, he has set aside his priesthood simply to become a social worker. Worst, if he acts as a counselor taking sinful aberrations and permissions as simple lifestyles then he is helping the devil making the person erode his consciousness so that the sacrament of penance is no longer necessary. But woe to those who have removed all respect to His Real Presence, I am sure the King will remember you for your disrespect and irreverence.

But since the college of cardinals and the chancery of the Bishop seem to be the determinants of this clash, may we offer a more determining factor, the Throne of the Vicar of Christ, the Seat of the Papacy. Let me then state the reasons why we do not have to follow the Pope especially when he is culpable or in errors.

  1. Francis’ papacy is focused on being pastoral, not on being theological. That being his emphasis, we may not follow his style of shepherding.
  2. John XXIII violated the 1960 seal of the Secret of Fatima when he had it opened the year before it was granted. He then have it kept and claim that it does not refer to his papacy even referring to the visionaries as prophets of doom. Why should a pope disobey the instructions of the Virgin Mary?
  3. Paul VI anathemized himself by violating canon law by removing the offices of the subdeacon, acolyte, exorcist and porter. The canon law stipulated that anyone who will remove said offices will be anathemized. That is being handed to the devil.
  4. Paul VI himself said that Vatican II does not claim to pronounce any dogmatic claim, but simply an orientation to a pastoral means which is updating the church (aggiornamento)
  5. The La Sallette prophecy states that the papal Throne will be reached by evil and Rome will go back to its pagan ways.
  6. John Paul II’s Code of Canon Law became too relaxed that some priestly abuses are no longer punishable. (1917 vs 1983)
  7. John Paul II’s new Roman Ritual for Exorcism was grossly altered when it came out in 1985. It did not consult active and real exorcist of the Catholic church but simply ignored them as a “Superstitious Lot” The result is a weak instrument against the devil because its proponents never had any exorcism in their life as priests thus making the devil stronger over Catholic laity and others afflicted as office of exorcism is removed and even statues of St. Michael were removed from churches.
  8. Pope Francis is observed as bent on implementing the Sankt Gallen Mafia agenda as he was elected because of the latter’s intercession. Francis did not take time to answer dubias raised to him by his traditionalist co-bishops (He is Bishop of Rome) but promptly answers modernist tendencies with apparent support if not affirmation.
  9. Pope Francis allowed the Pachemama in Vatican and had rites with other religious leaders to show ecumenism.
  10. Pope Francis heretically taught that nothing can ever separate a faithful from his church, not even death. Yes, the romantic part is enduring but a Catholic who apostasize, is schematic, or is a blasphemer surely can not belong to the church anymore. And so here we boldly tells you that we may not follow a bishop, a cardinal and even pope who teaches heresy. Even if the Vatican II Popes are declared saints, Catholic militants should be wary because the new Canon Law is so relaxed that it is easier to be declared a saint. In fact, in the mass for the canonization of said saints the antiphon sung in Latin called for Lucifer, the morning star who is the father of Jesus! It is short of declaring that Satan is God the Father!

Recent Posts

The Sanhedrin was the forum for the pharisees, who believed in the resurrection and in angels, and the saducees, who are akin to new theories and philosophies. All beliefs and philosophies concerning God and His creation are allowed to be expressed here.
Copyright © 2021-2023. The Sanhedrin. All rights reserved. Powered by STUDIO EL CID and Ron Mendoza Media