Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
January 11, 2010

With Perfection Staring Directly At Them

by Thomas A. Droleskey

With perfection staring directly at them in the early part of the Twentieth Century, the leading revolutionaries of the Liturgical Movement desired to change the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church in order to use it as a vessel to communicate one Modernist proposition after another, including the false ecumenism that was condemned in no uncertain terms by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos, January 6, 1928, a false ecumenism that was seen by Father Maximilian Kolbe, M.I., as the greatest threat to the Reign of the Immaculata:

"Only until all schismatics and Protestants profess the Catholic Creed with conviction, when all Jews voluntarily ask for Holy Baptism – only then will the Immaculata have reached its goals.”

In other words” Saint Maximilian insisted, “there is no greater enemy of the Immaculata and her Knighthood than today’s ecumenism, which every Knight must not only fight against, but also neutralize through diametrically opposed action and ultimately destroy. We must realize the goal of the Militia Immaculata as quickly as possible: that is, to conquer the whole world, and every individual soul which exists today or will exist until the end of the world, for the Immaculata, and through her for the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.” (Father Karl Stehlin, Immaculata, Our Ideal, Kansas City, Missouri, Angelus Press, 2007, p. 37.)


Yet it was after the death of Pope Pius XII, who, sadly, authorized changes to the Sacred Liturgy of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church in the 1950s that were proposed to him by Fathers Annibale Bugnini, C.M., and Ferdinando Antonelli, O.F.M., that some of the aging champions of the Liturgical Movement and its goal of false ecumenism expressed the hope that the "election" of Angelo Cardinal Roncalli would "consecrate" their concept of ecumenism and result in the furtherance of the liturgical revolution (see the late Father Didier Bonneterre's The Liturgical Movement: Roots, Radicals, Results). These revolutionaries accomplished their objectives.

The results of the liturgical revolution that saw an incorporation of Protestant and even Talmudic elements in the Novus Ordo worship service have been devastating to the Catholic Faith as God Himself is offended every time this false form of worship is "presented" and as very large numbers of Catholics attached to the conciliar structures have lost the sensus Catholicus to such an extent that they can't even recognize apostate acts, such as esteeming the symbols of false religions and the praising of the ability of false religions to "contribute" to the building of the "better world," when they are right in front of f them. These things are not "accidents" that were somehow unintended by the liturgical "renewal," as it is called in conciliar circles. These things were intended so that the new liturgy could communicate a new religion, conciliarism.

Giovanni Montini/Paul VI spoke of the progressive nature of the revolution that he helped to bring to fruition when he issued his decree on April 3, 1969, officially promulgating the Novus Ordo worship service, going to great lengths to explain how the changes made in the 1950s were meant to lead to the "new Mass" even though, of course, revolutionaries such as Bugnini and Antonelli and company could have had no idea how very successful they would have been when the first sets of changes were made in the 1950s under Pope Pius XII:

This renewal has also shown clearly that the formulas of the Roman Missal ought to be revised and enriched. The beginning of this renewal was the work of Our predecessor, this same Pius XII, in the restoration of the Paschal Vigil and of the Holy Week Rite, which formed the first stage of updating the Roman Missal for the present-day mentality. (Giovanni Montini/Paul VI, April 3, 1969.)


Quite contrary to the assertions made in the past few years by Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI and that are being made at present by his chief liturgist, "Monsignor" Guido Marini, the "fathers" of the liturgical "renewal" did not want "continuity" with the Immemorial Mass of Tradition. They desired a complete break, and they told us that this was their intention before Bugnini's Consilium had held even one meeting and they told us that they had made that break after the Consilium had planned the "new liturgy" with the help of six liberal Protestant "observers" (who made their "observations" during coffee breaks that were then read into the record by bishop-members of the committee as their own remarks once the official proceedings has resumed). The contention of "continuity" that Ratzinger/Benedict has been making since he issued Summorum Pontificum on July 7, 2007, and that his current master of ceremonies, "Monsignor" Marini, is making at present (see Papal liturgist endorses 'reform of the reform' of the liturgy) is an exercise in rank positivism as the planners of the "new liturgy" told us exactly what they wanted do, and "continuity" was not part of their agenda:

We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren that is for the Protestants." (Annibale Bugnini, L'Osservatore Romano, March 19, 1965.)

"[T]he intention of Pope Paul VI with regard to what is commonly called the Mass, was to reform the Catholic liturgy in such a way that it should coincide with the Protestant liturgy.... [T]here 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" (Dec. 19, 1993), Apropos, #17, pp. 8f; quoted in Christian Order, October, 1994. (Jean Guitton, a close friend of Giovanni Montini/Paul VI. The quotation and citations are found in Christopher A. Ferrara and Thomas E. Woods, Jr., The Great Facade, The Remnant Publishing Company, 2002, p. 317.)

Let it be candidly said: the Roman Rite which we have known hitherto no longer exists. It is destroyed. (Father Joseph Gelineau, an associate of Annibale Bugnini on the Consilium, 1uoted and footnoted in the work of a John Mole, who believed that the Mass of the Roman Rite had been "truncated," not destroyed. Assault on the Roman Rite)


The late Monsignor Klaus Gamber, who was not a traditionalist himself as he was in favor of some liturgical changes to the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, discussed the truly revolutionary nature of the liturgical "reforms" wrought by the Consilium in his The Reform of the Roman Liturgy:

Not only is the Novus Ordo Missae of 1969 a change of the liturgical rite, but that change also involved a rearrangement of the liturgical year, including changes in the assignment of feast days for the saints. To add or drop one or the other of these feast days, as had been done before, certainly does not constitute a change of the rite, per se. But the countless innovations introduced as part of liturgical reform have left hardly any of the traditional liturgical forms intact . . .

At this critical juncture, the traditional Roman rite, more than one thousand years old and until now the heart of the Church, was destroyed. A closer examination reveals that the Roman rite was not perfect, and that some elements of value had atrophied over the centuries. Yet, through all the periods of the unrest that again and again shook the Church to her foundations, the Roman rite always remained the rock, the secure home of faith and piety. . . .

Was all this really done because of a pastoral concern about the souls of the faithful, or did it not rather represent a radical breach with the traditional rite, to prevent the further use of traditional liturgical texts and thus to make the celebration of the "Tridentime Mass" impossible--because it no loner reflected the new spirit moving through the Church?

Indeed, it should come as no surprise to anyone that the prohibition of the traditional rite was announced at the same time as the introduction of the new liturgical texts; and that a dispensation to continue celebrating the Mass according to the traditional rite was granted only to older priests.

Obviously, the reformers wanted a completely new liturgy, a liturgy that differed from the traditional one in spirit as well as in form; and in no way a liturgy that represented what the Council Fathers had envisioned, i.e., a liturgy that would meet the pastoral needs of the faithful.

Liturgy and faith are interdependent. That is why a new rite was created, a rite that in many ways reflects the bias of the new (modernist) theology. The traditional liturgy simply could not be allowed to exist in its established form because it was permeated with the truths of the traditional faith and the ancient forms of piety. For this reason alone, much was abolished and new rites, prayers and hymns were introduced, as were the new readings from Scripture, which conveniently left out those passages that did not square with the teachings of modern theology--for example, references to a God who judges and punishes.

At the same time, the priests and the faithful are told that the new liturgy created after the Second Vatican Council is identical in essence with the liturgy that has been in use in the Catholic Church up to this point, and that the only changes introduced involved reviving some earlier liturgical forms and removing a few duplications, but above all getting rid of elements of no particular interest.

Most priests accepted these assurances about the continuity of liturgical forms of worship and accepted the new rite with the same unquestioning obedience with which they had accepted the minor ritual changes introduced by Rome from time to time in the past, changes beginning with the reform of the Divine Office and of the liturgical chant introduced by Pope St. Pius X.

Following this strategy, the groups pushing for reform were able to take advantage of and at the same time abuse the sense of obedience among the older priests, and the common good will of the majority of the faithful, while, in many cases, they themselves refused to obey. . . .

The real destruction of the traditional Mass, of the traditional Roman rite with a history of more than one thousand years, is the wholesale destruction of the faith on which it was based, a faith that had been the source of our piety and of our courage to bear witness to Christ and His Church, the inspiration of countless Catholics over many centuries. Will someone, some day, be able to say the same thing about the new Mass? (Monsignor Klaus Gamber, The Reform of the Roman Liturgy, p. 39, p. 99, pp. 100-102.)


No amount of cosmetic changes to that which has been from its outset a revolution against the Catholic Faith and has proved itself to be a veritable Trojan Horse containing endless manner of possibilities for blasphemy and sacrilege that has pitted Catholic against Catholic and has opened up so many hundreds of millions of Catholics to the anti-Incarnational errors of Modernity and Modernism as never before, anti-Incarnational errors that are reflected in the very ethos of a "Mass" that is premised upon the hideous contention that signs of outward penance "belong to another age in the history of the Church:"

The same awareness of the present state of the world also influenced the use of texts from very ancient tradition. It seemed that this cherished treasure would not be harmed if some phrases were changed so that the style of language would be more in accord with the language of modern theology and would faithfully reflect the actual state of the Church's discipline. Thus there have been changes of some expressions bearing on the evaluation and use of the good things of the earth and of allusions to a particular form of outward penance belonging to another age in the history of the Church. (Paragraph 15, General Instruction to the Roman Missal, 1997.)


Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI's and Guido Marini's own views on Mass offered in conversus Domini do not reflect a desire to restore the expressions of the Catholic Faith that are contained in Ordinary and the Collects of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, but represent instead a desire to make it more possible for there to be a greater sense of "decorum" in what purports to be the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church, a sense of decorum that is to be found in various liturgies of Anglo-Catholics who are part of the "worldwide Anglican Communion" but who nevertheless lack an adherence to the Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ has entrusted exclusively to His Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication. Ratzinger/Benedict's desire for "decorum" is a matter of personal "taste," not a matter that he sees is essential for the transmission of the Faith as he has presided over abominable "liturgies" in his capacity as the conciliar "pontiff," "Benedict XVI."

How can a "reform" of that which was a revolutionary break with the Catholic Faith and thus an offense to God represent any kind of progress when the closest thing to Heaven itself, the beauty and glory and the perfection of the unvarnished Immemorial Mass of Tradition is staring one right in the face?

Moreover, the talk of the "reform of the reform," which is designed to appeal to the "Anglo-Catholics" who are considering "converting" to the conciliar structures as they retain their own liturgical rites that were condemned as heretical by Pope Saint Pius V in Regnans Excelsis, March 5, 1570, and to the Orthodox and to Bishop Bernard Fellay, the Superior-General of the Society of Saint Pius X, comes at quite a high price: acceptance of the Novus Ordo once and for all from those who want to remain attached to the "extraordinary form of the Roman Rite," that is, the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition that was promulgated by Angelo Roncalli/John XXIII in 1961 and 1962.

Priests and presbyters in the Motu communities must remain silent in the face of what at least some of them know for a fact to be the apostasies and blasphemies and sacrileges of concilairism.

They must remain mute about the true intentions of those who planned the conciliar revolution.

They must remain mute as God Himself is blasphemed by their "pontiff" when he esteems the symbols of false religions and as he enters places of false worship, each of which belongs to the devil himself.

They must remain mute when their "pope" praises religious liberty and separation of church and state and when he says that "peace" consists in the "coexistence" of different religions according to the model of pluralism extant in the United States of America.

They must remain mute when Ratzinger/Benedict gives "papal" voice to the condemned Modernist proposition that dogmatic statements formulated in the past under the infallible protection and guidance of God the Holy Ghost were conditioned by the historical circumstances in which they were written and can thus be examined in a different light at a different time without breaking "continuity" with the past.

There is indeed a very high price to be paid for being part of the apostasies and blasphemies and sacrileges of the counterfeit church of concilairism. As more and more priests in the Society of Saint Pius X are discovering as their leaders move closer to their own kind of "rapprochement" with the One World Ecumenical Church of conciliarism, Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI, having already pacified vthe voices of priests/presbyters in the Motu communities, will not rest until all traditionally-minded voices attached to the structures of conciliarism have been silent, permitting him to do such things as enter synagogues and praise a dead reigion that is in league with the devil with complete and utter impunity.

No one who is part of the counterfeit church of conciliarism and who chooses to be silent about the apostasies and blasphemies and sacrileges of conciliarism can excuse themselves before God by saying it was not their "responsibility" to speak out, that to speak out might cost Catholics access to the modernized version of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition, that to speak out might cost them their own clerical careers. No, Pope Leo the Great spoke very eloquently about the fact that there is no excuse for one to be silent in the face of blasphemy:

But it is vain for them to adopt the name of catholic, as they do not oppose these blasphemies: they must believe them, if they can listen so patiently to such words. (Pope Saint Leo the Great, Epistle XIV, To Anastasius, Bishop of Thessalonica, St. Leo the Great | Letters 1-59 )


The bishops and priests of the Society of Saint Pius X and the priests and presbyters in the Motu communities and in the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism who know that the Novus Ordo is offensive to God have no excuse before Him. And they will have no excuse at all if they remain silent after Ratzinger/Benedict's upcoming visit to the Talmudic synagogue in Rome, which will be yet another reaffirmation of a false, superseded religion that has the power to save no one. 

"Reform of the reform"? Those committed to concilairism need to convert to the Catholic Faith. No "reform" of a revolutionary break with the Faith that has served as singular vessel of apostasy and sacrilege can ever replace the perfection of the Immemorial Mass of Tradition.

Father Louis Campbell, the pastor of Saint Jude Shrine in Stafford, Texas, explained the horrors of the Novus Ordo worship service as follows in the sermson he delivered on the Feast of the Holy Family yesteday:

We come to know God by becoming a part of His family. God has made special arrangements for us, so that we can join His family and thus find our way to Heaven. He has sent His Divine Son, Jesus Christ, to die for our salvation, and to give us the holy sacraments, and especially the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Religion always involves ceremonies and rituals, in which a sacrifice is offered to God in worship and atonement for sin. But it must be the Sacrifice God accepts, and the religion He instituted, not something we have fabricated for ourselves. 


The Mass is not entertainment which one can take or leave as one pleases. Take it and win; leave it and lose. The worry of the Novus Ordo is that their Mass will become a bore, so they may have Folk Masses, with guitars and drums and a group in jeans cavorting in front of the congregation. Or they have Polka Masses, Mariachi Masses, Clown Masses, etc. The priest, or presider as they call him, tries to be innovative and creative. He may be a joker, counting on good looks and personality to keep the people engaged in the action. But it is all to no purpose. The New Mass ends up by being boring anyway, and the people drift away.


Not so with the Latin Mass as it has come down to us from the time of the Apostles. It is infinitely pleasing to God, and certainly not a bore to those who know what it means. There is no need to go to great lengths to make it more pleasing or interesting. What can be more interesting than “The most beautiful thing this side of heaven” (As it was described by Fr. Frederick Faber)? When we really know that the Mass is the greatest thing that happens in this world, we can’t be bored. We are drawn in by the holiness and mystery of the Holy Sacrifice.


And it doesn’t matter what the priest looks like, or if he has no special talents. He may not be a George Clooney or a Robin Williams. He is not there to entertain, but to offer the one, pure, holy and acceptable Sacrifice to God the Father, through Jesus Christ the Son.

As I have tried to make clear in each of my articles, good readers, we must be earnest about the sanctification of our own daily lives. We must be brutally honest with ourselves about our sins, conscious of the fact that our own sins have worsened the state of the Church Militant on earth and of the world-at-large. Our Lady asked Jacinta and Francisco Marto and Lucia dos Santos to live penitentially as they prayed their Rosaries to console the good God and to make reparation for their sins and those of the whole world. Our Lady's Fatima Message to the children in the Cova da Iria in 1917 is her message to us in 2009. We must pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, accept with joy and with gratitude each of the sufferings and calumnies and difficulties that come our way as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.

The path to Heaven can be trod only by those who are willing to bear the Cross and to lift it high in their daily lives. We must remember this as we cling to true bishops and true priests in the Catholic catacombs who make no concessions to conciliarism whatsoever, consider it our privilege to hear the Immemorial Mass of Tradition offered at their hands, seeking only to live in such a way that we will be ready at all times to die in a state of Sanctifying Grace as a member of the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.

It's the Faith that matters, the entire Faith without any compromises, now and for all eternity.

Viva Cristo Rey! Vivat Christus Rex!

Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?


Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!


Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints


© Copyright 2010, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.