Bishop Schneider’s advice to Parents

+AMDG+

In a recent article Bishop Schneider has acknowledged the fears and the reality of what is to come – the ‘sexual anarchy’ which will be disguised as gender rights, and marriage equality. We fear for our children.

The insane laws are coming fast – here in this country, they have tried to bring in a programme of education  to apply to schools called ‘Safe Schools”. It is meant to be an anti-bullying strategy – but of course it entailed things hidden from the eye. Fortunately Christian groups brought it to the public’s attention, and it has been amended somewhat. The good news is that it is optional, but a list was published and 2 schools that have taken it on are actually “catholic”.

Bishop Schneider has laid out a survival plan for Catholic parents who find themselves in a secular, relativistic, and hostile environment but who simply want to raise their children to become future citizens of heaven.

Bishop Schneider said that to survive in a heretical wasteland, Catholic parents must:

  1. See persecution as a grace from God for becoming purified and strengthened, not simply as something negative.
  2. Become rooted yourself in the Catholic faith through study of the Catechism. 
  3. Protect your family’s integrity above all else.
  4. Catechize your children as your first duty.
  5. Pray with your children daily, such as litanies and the Rosary.
  6. Turn your home into a domestic church.
  7. In the absence of a priest and Sunday Mass, make spiritual communion.
  8. Withdraw your family from a parish spreading error and attend a faithful parish, even if you have to travel far.
  9. Withdraw your children from school if they are encountering immoral danger in sex-ed.
  10. If you cannot withdraw your children, establish a coalition of parents to fight for that right.
  11. Fight for parental rights using available democratic tools.
  12. Be prepared for persecution in protecting your children (see first point).

The bishop said that being a Catholic “family” in the truest sense of the word is the key to survival. 

See the whole article at https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/video-bishop-schneider-12-steps-to-surviving-as-a-catholic-family-in-a-mora

‘Pope’ (mis)quotes Jesus Christ in order to justify the desecration of the Holy Eucharist

Unbelievable news today people. ‘Pope’ Francis this morning misquoted Jesus Christ in the Santa-Marta-chapel in Rome in order to defile the Holy Eucharist. Jorge Bergoglio stated that Jesus Christ Himself would have admitted adulterers to the Blessed Sacrament.

Read the full story here:  ‘Pope’ (mis)quotes Jesus Christ in order to justify the desecration of the Holy Eucharist

 

Pope video for May: ”I will be forgotten about and then despised…”

+AMDG+

Mary-help-of-Christians Latest insults:

The latest pope video for the month of May, (2016)

the month which is dedicated to Our Lady –  has nothing to do with Our Lady. She is ignored and rejected. The fact that this video on women was released this month is an insult to Our Blessed Mother, and to Jesus, who sees Bergoglio (supposed vicar of Christ) rejecting His Mother and instead promoting a worldly view of women and general worldly problems. The video has nothing to do with prayer, and steers away from the Faith into the political and worldly arena.

The Pope video” has appeared for the month of May. Its title is: Respect for Woman. This video is presented as a means of spreading the intentions of the “Apostleship of Prayer.” If there is something that Francis doesn’t mention, it’s prayer; and even less, topics such as God, eternal salvation, grace and sin…without mentioning the commandments or things of the sort.

“What could be better than using the month of Mary to encourage “women’s rights” Francis had pondered. We are already aware that these monthly intentions are “universal”, for everyone. In reality, rather than “intentions” they are “programs” of conduct, ethical guidelines that fit in with any religion or “god” as we have already analyzed in the previous videos”

 See full article at: https://en.denzingerbergoglio.com/2016/05/14/a-new-video-and-new-profanations

Previous insults:

Bergoglio’s prayer intentions for May, 2015:

“That, rejecting the culture of indifference, we may care for our neighbours who suffer, especially the sick and the poor.” On his twitter account during the entire month of May, there is not one reference to the blessed Virgin Mary or the Rosary! And on the video website of the Vatican Television center (CTV), there is not a single video of Bergoglio praying the Rosary in 2015!

From the Book of Truth – The Virgin Mary  –   on April 14th 2013: “Anyone in my Son’s Church on earth, who leads the people, who cannot recite the Holy Rosary before his congregation, does not come from God.”

In August of 2015 :

On the Feast of the Assumption – there was no mention made of  a liturgical event on the Day of the Assumption. See     http://w2.vatican.va/content/liturgy/en/events/year.dir.html/2015/.html

Also see: http://biblefalseprophet.com/2015/08/10/why-is-there-no-public-celebration-scheduled-for-the-feast-of-the-assumption/

On December 8th   2015 – the Feast of the Immaculate Conception:

Again there was no mention of Our Lady. Instead  there was a public profanation of the the Vatican – a Sacred Space – in the form of a light show portraying environmental concerns, with cleverly hidden images of pagan gods. This was meant to be in support of “Laudato Si” – a so-called encyclical, with no mention of God, the Creator, but a good introduction to the new One World Government/Church which is on the horizon.

From the Book of Truth:

February 12th 2014:

“Soon, the “Hail Mary” prayer will not be heard inside or outside of my Son’s Church. Much disapproval will be shown to those who visit my holy Shrines and Marian groups will be criticised for many reasons, all without cause.

Any admission regarding the authenticity of apparitions involving me, the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God, will not be heard. All references to me will soon be frowned upon by a newly revamped shell of my Son’s Church on Earth. Devotions to me will be stopped in many churches, under the newly appointed regime to be introduced in the future. I will be forgotten about and then despised, by those who will claim to represent a new modern, all-inclusive church, which will bear little resemblance to the Church created upon the Rock, by my Son’s beloved apostle Peter.”

+AMDG+

Evil intent: Amoris Laetitia Part 2

+AMDG+

“So we won’t speak plainly, … then I will draw out the conclusions.

(See previous post Evil intent: Amoris Laetitia Part 1)

Some examples of the evil intent of this papacy:

1.Explosive language pertaining to homosexualiy was allowed to be presented at the synod. These suggest ideas which oppose Church teachings: CCC: #2357; Gen.19 13: Story of Lot and city of Sodom; (Ezek. 16:50); (Lev. 18:22, 20:13); (Rom. 1:26–28, 32); and (1 Cor.6:9–10). 

2. Admission by (pope) Francis: Deliberately NOT speaking plainly regarding Communion for divorced and remarried.(See Evil intent: Amoris Laetitia Part1) Jerusalem Bible: Matthew5:37All you need to say is ‘Yes’ if you mean yes or ‘No’ if you mean no; anything more than this  comes from the evil one.”

 

3. Despite the final Synodal Relatio affirming that marriage is for one man and one woman, it inserted paragraphs that support homosexual unions.

4. Pope videospagan images projected onto the Vatican on the feastday of the Immaculate Conception; the ‘I believe in love, (no mention of God)all religions are equal video- contrary to the teachings of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

5. Washing the feet on Holy Thursday of women and Moslems, etc are a direct insult and put- down of the dignity and role of the priesthood. It denigrates the meaning and symbolism of the ceremony.

6. #Amoris Laetitia ¶3 Each country/region can seek solutions better suited to its culture/traditions/local needs  [aka protestant style federation of (40000+) churches, no central church magisteriurm, relativism] (TTcrusader                  

7. #AmorisLaetitia ¶301 “It can no longer simply be said that all those in any irregular situations are living in a state of mortal sin “ [ie adulterers (divorced/remarried), sodomites, fornicators are not in a state of mortal sin, sin does not exist, and the 6th commandment is washed away] (TTcrusader)

8. #AmorisLaetitia footnote #351 “In certain cases this can include the help of the sacraments” [ie adulterers (divorced/remarried), sodomites, fornicators may  receive holy communion] (TTcrusader)

9. #Amoris Laetitia uses half- quotes from Encyclicals to suit his own purposes. E.g. ‘ a statement from Familiaris Consortio of John Paul II which notes that that there can be situations “where, for serious reasons, such as the children’s upbringing, a man and woman cannot satisfy the obligation to separate.” The rest of the statement was deliberately omitted. “they ‘take on themselves the duty to live in complete continence, that is, by abstinence from the acts proper to married couples.” See : http://voiceofthefamily.com/key-doctrinal-errors-and-ambiguities-of-amoris-laetitia/ 

10. #Amoris Laetitia not only uses half-quotes but twists them by inserting footnotes: e.g. Amoris Laetitia has not only eliminated reference to “complete continence” from the quotation from John Paul II, but has actually inserted a footnote suggesting that “complete continence” might, in some cases, not in fact be possible or even desirable.See: http://voiceofthefamily.com/key-doctrinal-errors-and-ambiguities-of-amoris-laetitia/

11. Pope Francis uses words originally written about married couples and applying them to those living in adultery. E.g. Footnote, no. 329 originally from (Gaudium et Spes, No. 51). Instead of “But where the intimacy of married life is broken off, its faithfulness can sometimes be imperilled and its quality of fruitfulness ruined, for then the upbringing of the children and the courage to accept new ones are both endangered”(Gaudium et spes) he states “In such situations, many people, knowing and accepting the possibility of living ‘as brothers and sisters’ which the Church offers them, point out that if certain expressions of intimacy are lacking, ‘it often happens that faithfulness is endangered and the good of the children suffers’.”

See http://voiceofthefamily.com/key-doctrinal-errors-and-ambiguities-of-amoris-laetitia/

“…the Pope intentionally manipulated the synodal process — against the will of the Bishops –to get an outcome that he knew would not be otherwise acceptable.” 

See   http://www.onepeterfive.com/pope-speaking-plainly-communion-divorced-messy/

Evil intent: Amoris Laetitia Part 1

 +AMDG+

“If we speak explicitly about communion for the divorced and remarried,” said Archbishop Forte, reporting a joke of Pope Francis, “you do not know what a terrible mess we will make. So we won’t speak plainly, do it in a way that the premises are there, then I will draw out the conclusions.

Background:

On May 3rd, Forte proclaimed on the Italian news website, Zonalocale.it, “Not a new doctrine, but the merciful application of that ‘old winethat, as is known, is always the best.”

 “Forte was the man personally chosen by Pope Francis as the Special Secretary for the synods on marriage and family, and he is widely believed responsible for the  insertion of the explosive language  pertaining to homosexuals in the 2014 Synod’s mid-term relatio.

Conclusion:

What is most important to note is …that the Pope intentionally manipulated the synodal process — against the will of the Bishops –to get an outcome that he knew would not be otherwise acceptable.

Above excerpts  from “Forte: Pope Did Not Want to Speak “Plainly” Of Communion for Remarried”.  See   http://www.onepeterfive.com/pope-speaking-plainly-communion-divorced-messy/

Comment

“Pope Francis made this statement as “a joke” as reported by his friend, Bruno!! What an awful “Joke” which was not a joke at all because he did it. It shows evil intent. (Donna Liane)

He was laughing at his own cunning (can only come from one place) strategy and at us! Who else could twist the truth in such a manner? This strategy is diabolical because it puts man above God. We can already see the potential damage to the Sacraments of Marriage, Eucharist and Penance; the challenges against the 10 commandments (denial of existence of sin);the “no-one will be condemned forever” theory which means commit all the mortal sins you like.

Pretty soon, we will be told that we don’t need confession, that Jesus didn’t need to die on the Cross; and that one religion is as good as another (Wait! Didn’t he already say that?) – pope video

Talk about Vatican II and the ripple effect of all the changes that were not intended in the document — you haven’t seen anything yet!

Don’t forget the messages in the Book of Truth: Stock up on Bibles, Crosses and Crucifixes, Rosaries, Seals, scapulars and anything that is holy and of Christ – because they won’t be available. As people wake up to the truth, these things will be in demand.  (Remnant Survivor)

God bless

Should our churches have high altars?

+AMDG+

What Vatican II says about Altars and Tabernacles:

“Altars for Mass ‘facing the people’ were not mentioned in any of Vatican II’s 16 documents.  Nor, as Msgr Klaus Gamber proves in The Reform of the Roman Lituirgy, Its Problems and Background, was there such a practice in the early Church. Similarly, Fr Josef A. Jungman S.J. said  “The claim that the altar of the early Church was always designed to celebrate facing the people, a claim made often and repeatedly, turns out to be nothing but a fairy tale” – quoted from AD2000, November, 1998.

Moreover, the priest facing the people over the altar may actually be hindering active participation in that the laity have become spectators and the Mass reduced to interpersonal relationships with the priest. See CNCC no.152 pp.10-11, September 29th, 1997, for “Mass ‘facing the people’ or ‘leading them to the Altar’.”

The latest word on the placement of the tabernacle comes from the Catechism of the Catholic Church §1183. “The tabernacle is to be situated in churches in a most worthy place with the greatest honour. The dignity, placing, and security of the Eucharistic tabernacle should foster adoration before the Lord really present in the blessed Sacrament” cf  §1379. N.B. The CCC makes no mention of side-chapels for parish churches.

 Source: Newsletter Cardinal Newman Catechist Centre No. 161 p.5; 5th April, 1999. Editor/author The Rev. B.J.H. Tierney.

A Personal reflection

(From Remnant Child of Mary  who attends the Novus Ordo Mass, as well as the Traditional Mass when she can):

When the priest faces the altar, he prays with us and for us, as one of us, before Almighty God. I feel in reverence and awe of God, as I should – and my prayers and thoughts are ordered and directed to Him. 

Even when the priest faces us for the homily and Gospel– proclaimed to us, by him- again, it is appropriate. Afterwards, we all turn back to God, to Whom the Praise is owed. There is a joint sense of holiness and humility as we join together in prayer and attitude  not a sense of he (the priest) is up there and we just have to watch and give an occasional response- towards a man who is not God, and not above us. In this latter case (the Novus Ordo Mass), we are disconnected from the altar, as if it is a table,  and distracted- by the man looking back at us. Not deliberately so but lacking a more compelling concrete image, it occurs and so all we can do is close our eyes and try to imagine  it all in our minds.

 By contrast, at the high altar we see a man with altar servers and acolytes postured in the most reverent way towards God the Most Holy, his attention never straying elsewhere, fixed on the cross, the altar, the prayers of the Mass and the Sacred Species. 

And all this can be theorized as promoting worship, in one direction or another, depending on the underlying beliefs and interests but NOTHING can substitute for the difference in experience, no matter what the explained intention of moving the altar was. It has to be experienced (without prejudice) to be understood. 

Cardinal Ratzinger: The Church does not require Dismantled High Altars

Michael Davies, (an Irishman) wrote to Cardinal Ratzinger requesting clarification about a problem in his local parish where the bishop wanted to remove the “exquisitely beautiful high altar” and “ the Blessed Sacrament demoted to the side altar of our lady”. The letter was dated 12th June 1996. Cardinal Ratzinger’s letter was “published in full in The Nationalist of 10 January 1997” after a court case.

Part of the letter states:

 “With respect to the placement of the tabernacle, the instruction Interoecimenici  (26.9.1964) par 95, which implemented the decisions of Sacrosanctum Concilium, states quite clearly that the Blessed Sacrament be reserved on the high altar, a possibility envisaged also by Eucharisticum mysterium (25.5.67) par 54….

It is certainly true that a great number of churches since the second Vatican Council have been rearranged; such changes, while inspired by the liturgical reform, cannot however be said to have been required by the legislation of the Church….”

Source:  AD2000 magazine, October 1998 p.10

Another personal reflection:

I have always loved my Catholic Faith.  I remember the Latin Mass from  my teenage years, but then spent about 30 years being very involved in my local Novus Ordo parish.  I began to question some of the things which were being done in the name of Liturgy. One day, I started searching for answers. I was led by Providence, to the Traditional Latin Mass. It was new in our area. I felt right at home from the beginning. I still had my old Missal, and surprisingly, my husband and children also accepted it immediately. My husband and I felt right at home.

I would still (and still do, occasionally) attend a Novus Ordo Mass. One day, I had to take my granddaughter to Mass, as her mum was away. I took her to the parish where she and her mum usually attend, and which is a fairly conservative parish. It was Sunday evening, and after Communion there was a reflection (a meditation with  liturgical movement). At the time I thought that it was tasteful and thought that it was good for the teenagers to be so involved. I had no problem with what they were wearing or their demeanour. I said to myself “ It’s funny. At one stage,  I would have been really impressed, but today I feel nothing.” It didn’t move me. I wondered why it was so. Almost immediately, I heard a little voice (my guardian angel?) saying: “This Mass pleases the senses and the Traditional Latin Mass pleases the soul.” This made sense to me immediately. I understood! This explanation hit the nail on the head.  (Remnant Survivor)

Vatican II Reforms: Appeasement of the Disobedient- the Ripple Effect

+AMDG+

A number of the reforms after the Vatican Council were authorized, but not by Vatican II. (See previous posts entitled “Which Changes did Vatican II authorize? Parts 1,”… 2 and … 3 “respectively.) Many of these “were authorized only after stubborn disobedience”.

“For instance, Pope Paul VI, in his Memoriale Domini of 29th May, 1969, allowed national Conferences of Bishops to ask him for permission to legitimate ‘Communion in the Hand’. But in this very document the Pope recorded that two thirds of the world’s bishops were against it! Clearly, it would NOT have been approved by Vatican II. The dissenters learnt their lesson: ‘disobey long enough and you’ll get what you want’. “(Newsletter of Cardinal Newman Catechist Centre: No 161; 5th April, 1999; p. 5,   Editor -The Rev. B.J.H. Tierney.)

Communion in the Hand was first introduced by Protestant reformers in the 16th century to give credit to their disbelief in the ‘Real Presence’, and also the Catholic priesthood. In the 1960’s , Holland – under the influence of Protestantism, (without permission), adopted this practice and began to spread its errors around the world. After a survey of the world’s bishops in response to this problem, Pope Paul VI said : “From the responses received, it is thus clear that by far the greater number of bishops feel that the present discipline [i.e., Holy Communion on the tongue] should not be changed at all, indeed that if it were changed, this would be offensive to the sensibility and spiritual appreciation of these bishops and of most of the faithful.”

Although  the pope would not authorize Communion in the hand. He was, however, open to bestowing an indult –under certain conditions:

first, an indult could not be given to a country in which Communion in the hand was not an already established practice;

second, the bishops in countries where it was established must approve of the practice “by a secret vote and with a two-thirds majority.”

Beyond this, the Holy See set down seven additional regulations; failure to maintain these regulations could result in the loss of the indult. The first three regulations concerned:

1) respecting the laity who continue the traditional practice (of receiving kneeling and on the tongue),

2) maintaining the laity’s proper respect of the Eucharist, and

3) strengthening the laity’s faith in the real presence.   See more at: (http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/03/truth-about-communion-in-hand-while.html  )

As we can see, all the rules were disregarded, and what should have been the exception, spread like wildfire.

Needless to say, this practice led to other abuses:

the taking away of the altar rails, where one would kneel to receive Communion;

No Communion plate, leading to fragments being dropped and scattered on the floor;

This, together with the abandonment of many of the other  liturgical signs such as extraordinary ministers and acolytes – all of whom could now touch and handle, not only the Sacred Host and Precious Blood, but also the Sacred vessels;

Less bells being rung to alert us to the Mystery taking place;

Shaking hands, turning around and speaking, RIGHT AFTER the Consecration (the most solemn part of the Mass); etc

  These all led to a relaxation and loss of belief in the real presence The sense of the Sacred has been lost – people gossip before Mass begins, they don’t genuflect before the tabernacle; quite often you can’t even SEE the tabernacle. Jesus, Who is present is ignored and very little respect or acknowledgement of His presence is given. Not many people can be seen praying before Mass – (it’s too noisy anyway!) It’s all very sad! Poor Jesus!!!

The proposals of Amoris Laetitia, therefore make me shiver in my boots! Haven’t they learned their lesson?  – Or perhaps they have. For the changes which will now come into effect – the sky is the limit!

QUOTES about Communion in the hand:

Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith, secretary of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments, (to)  recently suggest(ed)  the policy of giving Communion in the hand be revised or “abandoned altogether.” It is Archbishop Ranjith’s belief that the introduction of this practice after Vatican II has resulted in indifference, outrages and sacrileges toward our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament, causing great harm to both the Catholic Church and to individual souls. (See the full article at: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=8616  )

Pope John Paul  II:

It is not permitted that the faithful should themselves pick up the consecrated bread and the sacred chalice, still less that they should hand them from one to another.”  , Inaestimabile Donum (April, 1980) –

. In Dominicae Cenae (Feb. 1980), he stated: “To touch the sacred species and to distribute them with their own hands is a privilege of the ordained.”

Padre Pio — St. Pio of Pietrelcina :

— Received Only on the Tongue, and never said a Novus Ordo Mass.

St Thomas Aquinas:

“. . . out of reverence towards this Sacrament, nothing touches it, but what is consecrated; hence the corporal and the chalice are consecrated, and likewise the priest’s hands, for touching this Sacrament. Hence, it is not lawful for anyone else to touch it except from necessity, for instance, if it were to fall upon the ground, or else in some other case of urgency” (Summa Theologiae, III, 82, 3).

Pope Benedict XVI (quoting St Augustine):
Encyclical Sacramentum Caritatis, no.66  (“Sacrament of Love”), teaches:

 “No one eats that flesh without first adoring it; we should sin were we not to adore it” (Enarrationes in Psalmos 98, 9).

Kneeling indicates and promotes the adoration necessary before receiving the Eucharistic Christ.” 

( See more at: http://www.vatican.va/news_services/liturgy/details/ns_lit_doc_20091117_comunione_en.html )

Which changes did Vatican authorize? Part 3.

1. Changes authorized in the Sacraments of Initiation

i) Revised rites for Baptism and Confirmation SC§§62, 66-71 (but with entire new rites for just 3 particular cases §§68, 69)

ii) Vernacular can be used, 63

iii) Catechumenate restored, §64

iv) Parents’ and godparents’ roles SC §67

v) Baptismal water may be blessed each time, SC §70

vi) Confirmation renewal of baptismal promises and within Mass, SC §71

vii) No changes in First Holy Communion at all.

2. Changes not authorized in the Sacraments of Initiation:

i) Baptism:  Option of total immersion for adults and children

ii) Confirmation ‘form’ (formula) changed to “N. Be sealed with the Gift of the Holy Spirit” as in the Eastern Rites.

iii) Priests may give Confirmation to catechumens and converts.*

This Website editor’s note: *( Note that priests now (at least here, in this country) routinely administer Confirmation regularly to all – not just to converts and catechumens -(with the permission  of the bishop, when  the Bishop cannot make it to all the parishes). In fact, we consider it a privilege, if the Bishop; is able to do the Confirmation himself.)

3. Changes contrary to Vatican II:

i) Invalid Baptismal formulas without ‘Father’ and ‘Son’ or said by others as priest pours water.* ii) Some absurdities with RCIA: sending catechumens out at the Offertory (and catechists even missing Mass!); failure to instruct them in Confession.

iii) First Communion without first Confession contra  CCC  §145;

iv) First Communion delayed a year or two contra Cod of Canon Law c. 914 (cf. c.11).**

This Website editor’s note: *i) A few years ago, in another State, it was found that a priest had, for 20 years, been baptizing “In the name of the Creator, the Redeemer and the Sanctifier”. All these people had to be recalled and rebaptised.

iv) ** I made my First Communion at the Age of Reason i.e. at 7 yrs of age. My children and grandchildren were all at least 8 years old at First Confession, which is often up to a year before First Communion and often there is no ‘Second Confession’ before the Sacrament of First Communion.!) I have heard even of First Communion before First Confession.!!!

 

Further posts : From Fr Tierney discussing some of the points as listed in “Which Changes did Vatican authorize? Parts 1, 2 and 3

Which Changes did Vatican II authorize? Part 2

+AMDG+

This information is from Newsletter of Cardinal Newman Catechist Centre: No 161; 5th April, 1999. Editor and Director -The Rev. B.J.H. Tierney.) Fr. Tierney at the time was Assistant priest in a Novus Ordo parish..

Summary of the Changes: in the celebration of Mass.

  1. Changes authorized by Vatican II
  2. Changes authorized but NOT by Vatican II
  3. Changes CONTRARY to Vatican II

N.B. ‘SC ‘ refers to “Sacrosanctum Concilium” – chiefly concerned with the Council’s  “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy” of 1963

1. Changes authorized by Vatican II in the celebration of Mass:

These only and nothing else:

i) Rite of Mass to be revised… with active participation, i.e laity to join in responses and chants SC§36(2) and SC§50

ii) Bible Readings revised and spread over several years – SC§24 and SC§51.

iii) Homily emphasized SC§52

iv) Prayer of the faithful emphasized SC§53

v) Vernacular for Bible Readings and Prayers of the Faithful, also for People’s parts permitted – SC§54 and SC§36 (2)

vi) Holy Communion from Hosts consecrated at Mass; and, on special occasions, under both Kinds.

vii) Word and Eucharist: two parts of one whole – SC§56

viii) Concelebration – SC§57 and SC§58.

2. Changes authorized in the celebration of Mass, but not by Vatican II:

i) An entire New Rite of the Mass ( not a revision): replacement rites for the Offertory; Communion and a Penitential Rite replacing ‘the prayers at the foot of the altar’.

ii) Mistranslations (official!) of Latin texts.

iii) Bible readings with skipped verses

iv) A third Bible reading on Sundays, etc

v). Offertory processions – some prior to VCII?

vi) Words of Consecration changed *

vii) The Roman Canon said aloud.

viii) New Eucharistic Prayers added : Nos. 2, 3, 4: Children’s Eucharistic Prayers (x3); Penitents (x20; Swiss (x3)

ix) Memorial acclamations at Consecration

x) Communion standing up

xi) Communion in the hand

xii) Communion from Extraordinary Ministers

xiii) Indiscriminate use of both Kinds (i.e. Blessed Host and the Precious blood)

xiv) Reduced ‘active participation’ by way of bodily gestures: fewer genuflections, much less kneeling, fewer Signs of the Cross, only one ‘beating the breast’, etc.

xv) Saints’ dates changed

xvi) Altar girls and feminisation of the sanctuary.

3. Changes contrary to Vatican II

i) Disbelief in the Real Presence, i.e. ‘belief in the real absence’

ii) Altar breads sometimes with illegal or invalid ingredients

iii) Sense of the Sacred violated by ‘studied casualness’, idle chatter and no sacred silences.

iv) Texts altered or manufactured

v) Laity joining in the priest’s parts: doxology, Eucharistic Prayer, even the consecration!

vi) No Communion plate and enforced communion in the hand.

vii) No translations of Entrance, Offertory and Communion psalms,  nor of Offertory verses.

viii) Banal music, and ugly furnishings, vessels and investments, etc.

ix) No Latin responses or Gregorian chant taught to laity : cf SC§54 and SC§114 (and no. 6 para therein).

x) Extraordinary Ministers used routinely, without necessity.

  1. xi) Dancing girls, antics, clowns.

This Website editor’s note::  Re vi) Words of Consecration changed *: Since the time this was published, the Reform of the Reform, which took years to complete, has been instigated. The words of consecration (…for many)  and ( …with your spirit); etc. The sad part, we all know, that with current events, the “reform of the Reform” will all have been for nothing!

Next post: Changes from Vatican II: Part 3

Which Changes did Vatican II authorize? – Part 1

+AMDG+

(This information is from Newsletter of Cardinal Newman Catechist Centre: No. 161; 5th April, 1999. Editor and Director -The Rev. B.J.H. Tierney.) Fr. Tierney was in a Novus Ordo parish as Assistant priest at the time.

Summary of the Changes: in church buildings.

  1. Changes authorized by Vatican II
  2. Changes authorized but NOT by Vatican II
  3. Changes CONTRARY to Vatican II

N.B. ‘SC ‘ refers to “Sacrosanctum Concilium” – chiefly concerned with the Council’s  “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy” of 1963

  1. Changes authorized by Vatican II to church buildings:

No changes to church buildings were commanded, or mentioned, or were legitimate developments from it.

Rather, a statement of principles to ensure ‘active participation’ SC§124 para. 3. (* See more info in a following post).

And that the most noble standards be upheld SC§128.

2. Changes to church buildings – authorized, but NOT by Vatican II:

These were separate developments authorized by the Roman Curia or the Pope.

  1. i) Altar for “Mass facing the people”
  2. ii) Tabernacle oftendethroned’ and the priest’s chair sometimes ‘enthroned’

iii) Baptismal Font moved onto the sanctuary.

  1. iv) Pulpit sometimes remodelled as a table.
  2. v) Confessional rooms ‘face to face’ sitting (!)

3. Changes contrary to Vatican II:

These changes were not authorized at all but brought in by the whim of priests and parishes, contra SC§22(3)

  1. i) Buildings banal or even ugly.
  2. ii) Altar rails, kneelers, statues removed, contra SC§126.

iii) Overhead projectors and screens lacking ‘artistic merit’, SC§124.

 

Next post: Which Changes did Vatican II authorize? – Part 2