The Latin Mass/Old Rite Mass is the only valid Mass in the UK. And that's if the priest is validly ordained in the first place!

 I was baptised in Blackheath in the Old Rite Latin Mass.

 It was during a time of growing upheaval in the Catholic Church - when the Second Vatican Council was underway, and the  conciliar eruption was simmering like a volcano, waiting to explode onto the world - the eruption began in earnest after the close of the Council on 8th December 1965, 3 years after it started. The church had been well and truly infiltrated by freemasons right up to the highest levels of the church, including pope John 23rd. Freemasonry was always banned in the Church - under pain of excommunication. The nuns at my mother's school in Shaftesbury told the girls that the freemasons get the devil out of the box. That's very apt.

One of the disastrous results of this heinous council was the change to the ancient Mass, from Latin to the vernacular. This was under the guise of making the mass more attractive to Protestants and other denominations. Of course, during the Reformation - the Church of England changed the Latin mass to the vernacular, and the modern mass is akin to the protestant church service. The Latin Mass never went away during the Reformation, it went underground and brave priests were hunted down and martyred if they were caught saying the ancient Mass. That's why there are priest holes in country houses.

Back to the modern council - the Latin Mass went from Latin to the vernacular in around 1969.

My mother describes the changes as - 

'One Sunday we had Latin Mass, and the following Sunday we had guitars".

A handful of brave cardinals did not accept the New Mass - and one of them was the late Archbishop Lefebvre. He refused the say the new mass, as he said it was protestant, and probably invalid. He started the Society of St Pius X, which was to preserve the ancient rite of the Mass. 

Around about the same time as the modern 'mass' was in force, pope Paul 6th decided to change the episcopal rite of ordination - and this, according to Archbishop Lefebvre, made the rite at best - dubious. The implications were massive, because, if the newly ordained bishop was only dubiously ordained, it rendered the priests he was ordaining as dubious too! Just think about that - over many decades of using the new rite, eventually all priests would only be dubiously ordained. If their ordinations are invalid, it invalidates their sacraments! How terrible is that! The modern day Confirmation rite is also dubious and it's a good idea to get a conditional confirmation by a valid bishop.

God obviously used Archbishop Lefebvre to preserve the ancient Mass, and not only that - he ordained 4 bishops in the ancient rite, so that they could validly ordain new priests. The brave Archbishop was excommunicated by pope John-Paul 2. 

Out of the SSPX, came the Sedevacantist movement, which holds that all the popes since John 23rd are invalid, as is the Second Vatican Council. 

I studied Vatican 2 at Maryvale Institute in Birmingham in the early 2000s. What stuck me was the duplicitous language of the documents - and the slippery language used. It was Cardinal Kasper who said in an interview, that the wording of the council documents was deliberately done, to make the documents ambiguous! That my dear people should make you flee from the modern catholic church as fast as possible. Compare the slippery language to the Vatican 1 council of 1870, and you see that the 1870 documents are black and white - no ambiguity anywhere!

If you want the true valid Mass you need to do your homework! Find a Latin Mass -  but more importantly, find out whether the priest was ordained in the new or ancient rite. Many so called conservative  priests say the old Latin Mass, but their ordinations are dubious and therefore you might not be attending a valid Mass!

IF YOU GENUINELY LOVE THE TRUE CATHOLIC FAITH YOU REALLY NEED TO WAKE UP TO THE DISASTROUS VATICAN 2 AND ONLY ATTEND A VALID LATIN MASS. 

If you are a priest reading this - ask yourself - was I ordained properly or not? if not - please get conditionally ordained asap. 

To all the Catholic clergy in the world - November 2020

 The Covid-19, or Corona Virus situation has led to public masses being banned in various parts of the world, including here in the UK - as from 5th November, for 28 days or 1 month.

During the English Reformation, the Catholic mass was also banned, and the people were forced to attend the new Protestant services, under pain of heavy fines for non compliance. The true mass went underground and many priest hidey holes were made, to protect the priests from the authorities.

So it looks as though the Catholic masses will have to go back to the catacombs, and be held in secret, at secret locations and indeed, there may have to be safe priest holes for brave priests.

Now - as you probably know, I am a follower of the late Archbishop Lefebvre, who started the SSPX, as he believed the changes to the holy mass in 1969 were illegal. He had sound theological training to stick to his case. He  felt the new rites were (and still are ) at best, doubtful, including the new rites of ordination. If he is proved right, then there are many priests and bishops etc, who may not even be validly ordained, so their sacraments could be nil and void. This is a bad situation.

If you are a priest or bishop in the Novos Ordo, and you are worried about the validity of your ordinations, you should seek a valid ordination from a validly ordained bishop. The ones I know of who are validly ordained - ie - in the old rite, by a validly ordained bishop, are in the SSPX or some Sedevacantist groups, who were also ordained validly in the old rite. Their ordination lineage can be traced back to valid bishops. To all clergy in the Novos Ordo, please flee from this dubious church. Pray about it. 

So that is the situation we face. It’s grim but we all have recourse to the rosary and holy medals and the scapular. Say the full rosary every day.

Novos Ordo Watch website

After the ambigous document which Pope Francis produced in early April 2016, something occurred to me. Popes are not supposed to produce ambigous documents - popes are meant to clarify teachings not muddy the waters. Many church men and well known Catholic journalists are doing flip flops trying to explain this document - "Amoris Laetitia". It's civil war in the Catholic Church and it's going to get nasty. Cardinal Burke says this document is not part of the infallible teaching office, so basically he is saying in the politest way, that we can ignore this document. Other cardinals like Shonborn are saying that it is a marvellous radical departure and a "linguistic event" - whatever that means! 

Of course Vatcan 2 was a language event too. If you read the documents you will notice they are written in a new language, and indeed these can be read in both a heterodox way and an orthodox way - think of the 2 pronged fork analogy.

 But church documents should be clear NOT ambiguous. Before Vatican 2, church documents were crystal clear. I urge readers to compare documents before and after 1962.

A very good website has many good articles about the changes in the church since the close of the Second Vatican Council. It is called Novos Ordo Watch.

Before this awful document came out I would have hesitated to promote this website, but after much prayer and discernment I am going to put the address here. I have to admit I don't know what's going on in the Catholic Church - are the liberals right? I don't know, they might be. Are the conservatives right? I don't know, they might be. Are the SSPX right? I don't know, they might be. Are the sedevacantists right? I don't know, they might be. But all I do know, is that God has allowed this confusion and infighting in His Church for a considerable amount of time, for reasons I don't know why, but hopefully one day we will know the reasons. I cling to the daily rosary and my scapular medal and pray pray pray for this diabolical confusion to end.

novosordowatch.org

Another good one is padrepioandchiesaviva.com

Anonymous comments are not usually printed.

Things are hotting up in the Church - watch this!

Even the established EWTN TV channel is talking about fishy goings on in the Vatican, as seen in their interview with investigative journalist Edward Pentin - author of the No1 Amazon bestseller under Catholic books. He also writes a column for the UK Catholic Herald and The National Catholic Register.

This short clip explains quite a lot 

http://youtu.be/L2vpcgRBpXA

The Archbishop Schneider Interview - on the errors of Vatican 2

THE ARCHBISHOP SCHNEIDER INTERVIEW - June 2013

On UTube you can watch a superb interview which was conducted by Michael Voris in Rome, June 2013. It is well worth watching and all you need do is go to the UTube website and put Archbishop Schneider in the search box.

I took notes while I watched it and here are the salient points.

Archbishop Athanasius Schneider is the Archbishop of Kazakhstan. His name is interesting and rather significant (in my opinion). It was St Athanasius who fought the Arian Heresy of the 3rd Century, and while the majority of Catholics fell for the Arian heresy, Athanasius was banished for his views and he was literally "contra mundum". But St Athanasius was proved right in the end. Basically the Arian heresy was started by a man called Arius, who said that Jesus Christ was a lesser being than God - in other words, he denied the divinity of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

Archbishop Schneider is the author of a little book called "Dominus Est" - a really good book, and available on Amazon. Written in 2010, he is arguing for the case of stopping the modern practice of receiving Holy Communion in the hand. He strongly puts forward the case of receiving on the tongue. It is interesting to witness that Pope Francis will only give Holy Communion on the tongue - there is a UTube video showing him pointing to the mouth of a communicant extending his hands. The communicant understands immediately and receives in the correct manner.

Archbishop Schneider is in his early 50s, and in the interview, he exudes a rare holiness - an aura which really holy people seem to have. His eyes were alert and lit up and clearly he has a great love of the Catholic Faith. He has concerns though and I am listing them here.

Now his concerns are about the Vatican 2 documents. He says there are some confusing aspects and a lack of precision in the documents. Interestingly enough Cardinal Kasper gave an explosive interview in April 2013, where he admits that some of the formulas (of Vatican 2) were deliberately worded so that they could be widely interpreted. He even calls them "compromise formulas". The Kasper interview was published in the Vatican newspaper - The "Osservatoro Romano". Archbishop Schneider describes these Vatican 2 formulas as ambiguous statements and he is urging Pope Francis to clarify them as a matter of acute importance, because erroneous interpretations have been, and are still taking place. It has had a catastrophic effect on Holy Mother Church - with the shameful lapsation rate in the western world.

He says the Council did not add new doctrines, but the lack of clarity is a real problem and must be corrected. Pope Emeritus Benedict was known to say that the Council needs interpreting in the light of Tradition. He said this in 2005.

He mentions "Lumen Gentium" and the part on Collegiality. He says it isn't clear enough. Pope Paul 6th ordered a note which was added to the end of the document and it needs to be read. 

Point 16 - "Lumen Gentium" is an ambiguous expression regarding the One God, and how Catholics and Muslims worship the same God. This he says is erroneous because the Trinity is at the core of Christian belief, and muslims don't recognise the Trinity. They regard Jesus as a good prophet and certainly not God the Son, Second Person of the Blessed Trinity.

Point 12 -  "Gaudiem et Spes" says all things on earth are directed to man as their aim and summit. The Archbishop says this is incorrect theology because all things are aimed at God and for the glory of God. This subtle mistake he claims, is part of the crisis in the Church for the last 50 years - as it is anthropocentric (meaning man-centred). The sin of Adam and Eve was anthropocentric. This 'man-centred' theology has led to erroneous catechisms and sacramental courses, which have decimated the faith of many Catholics.

"Dignitiatis Humanae" (on religious liberty) is not one of the 4 main Constitutions of the Council, but lower down the scale. He says this document has been interpreted wrongly, leading to the erroneous thinking that all religions are equal. There is only 1 Truth,1 Church and we say this in the Creed every Sunday. The Holy See recognises other religions and got to the position of 'tolerating' other religions - because practically speaking Christians have to live side by side with all sorts of religions. Pius 12th even spoke of the "Theory of tolerance of other believers". 

The encyclical - "Dominus Jesus" - did clarify this and confirms the Catholic Church as the One True Church. I remember when this encyclical came out and the howls that came out of "The Tablet" - possibly the most protesting of Catholic publications - so protesting in fact - that it could be described as Protestant. Interestingly enough the readership of The Tablet is mostly Anglican. And they relish it with great delight. Good on ya Ms Pepinster!

The Archbishop says that if a nation is mostly Catholic, it is better to have a Catholic state. This, he says is NOT discriminatory either. Indeed, he says Catholics should desire a Catholic state.

I really recommend dear reader, that you look at the full interview. Archbishop Schneider speaks beautiful English too. 

I really hope that the Archbishops's concerns will be taken seriously by the hierarchy, and that his little tome "Dominus Est" will be widely read. He has written a sequel but there is no (as yet) English translation.

Pondering all this - in the light of the bomshell admission by Cardinal Kasper (2013 in the Observatoro Romano - the official Vatican newspaper) about the deliberate "compromise formulas" in the concilliar documents- I do have to sympathise with Archbishop Lefevre. I just wonder if he will be proved right in the end, now all these 'snippets' of information are coming out.  Also - Pope Francis says there is a masonic lobby in the Vatican - Archbishop Lefevre mentioned clerical masons by name. He was correct on that score anyway. You know - it does make one wonder if the SSPX are the equivalent of St Athanasius. One day the Truth will out. As I finish this, it seems that the SSPX are currently being offered an olive branch to come on board with NO need to sign anything. Now that is interesting. Watch this space!

And this is what Cardinal Ratzinger had to say in 1988 to the Bishops of Chile