NOVUS ORDO SERVICE: A
PROTESTANTIZED LITURGY OF THE COUNTER-CHURCH
INTRODUCTION
It is my contention that the Second Vatican Council(1962-65)
was a robber council, hijacked by the worst enemies of the Church—Communists,
Freemasons and Protestants—using modernist clerics as a front. It inaugurated
the general apostasy at the topmost echelons of ecclesiastical power. The new
mass, or novus ordo, or people’s mass or mass of Paul V1 as it is variously
called is the liturgical expression of this spirit of rebellion. Within the
Catholic Church in the 1960s. It is NOT the Catholic Mass but a half-Catholic
and half-Protestant service designed to lead unsuspecting Catholics into the
ecumenical new world order. In this paper, I intend to prove that the novus
ordo mass is the triumph of the religion of Martin Luther—the German
arch-heretic who inaugurated Protestantism in the 16th century.
1.1 MARTIN
LUTHER
Martin Luther was born on November 10, 1483 and died on
February 18, 1546. He had a difficult childhood. His father, John Luther, was a
homicide who fled with his family to escape justice. His father was given to
high bouts of anger. At one time he beat Martin so much that the boy became a
fugitive. His mother was not better. She, ‘in her inflexible rigor flogged him,
until the blood flowed, on account of a worthless little nut.’(See Patrick F.
O’Hare. The Facts About Luther. Rockford, Illinois: Tan Books, 1987, P.41) He
also attended a school where his teachers were very severe in their
punishments. He himself relates having been beaten 15 times in succession
during the course of one morning. This severity, he said, shattered his nervous
system for life. On account of poverty he was obliged to sing in the streets
and collect alms. Eventually he joined the Augustinian Order but remained
subject to fits of despair and melancholy. He admits becoming a Religious out
of despair, not out of religious fervour and love of God, nor out of a desire
for perfection.
To worsen his case, Luther never had a spiritual director to
whom he could open up his conscience and get good counsel. Not that there was a
lack of spiritual directors. The problem was that Luther did not even trust
God, talk less of a fellow human. He saw in himself nothing but sin, and in God
nothing but anger and revenge. He was a victim of extreme scrupulousness. When
he entered Religious life his father who knew his son’s temperament rebuked him
saying: ’God grant it may not prove a delusion and a diabolical spectre’(Ibid.
P.43). In later life these words of his father worried Luther.
Before he broke with the Church, Luther’s spiritual life
suffered a diminution. He began to go for days and weeks without praying his
breviary. He celebrated Mass without devotion. He grew indifferent to good
works and failed to keep monastic discipline. Hear his own words:
From misplaced reliance on my righteousness, my heart became
full of distrust, doubt, fear, hatred and blasphemy of God. I was such an enemy
of Christ that whenever I saw an image or a picture of Him hanging on His
Cross, I loathed the sight and I shut my eyes and felt that I would rather have
seen the devil. My spirit was completely broken and I was always in a state of
melancholy; for, do what I would, my ‘righteousness’ and my ‘good works’
brought me no help or consolation. (Ibid. P.51)
His former pupil, Oldecop, declares of him: ‘He never learnt
to live at peace, and being disputatious, he was always desirous of coming off
victor in differences of opinion and liked to stir up strife...by nature proud
and audacious.’ (Ibid. Pp.58-59)
1.2 LUTHER’S
REBELLION
In 1517 Pope Leo X granted indulgences to all who would
contribute to the rebuilding of St. Peter’s basilica and sent the Dominican
priest, Fr. John Tetzel, to preach it. It is necessary to state here that Fr.
Tetzel was a faithful Dominican, an exemplary priest and a Catholic theologian.
Three things are to be considered in every mortal sin: 1. Its guilt. 2. Its
eternal punishment. 3. Its temporal punishment. The first two are forgiven by
the sacraments of baptism and penance as ordinary channels of pardon. The third
is expiated by our sufferings and penances, or by remission or commutation
through an indulgence.
Luther denied this essential teaching of the Church as well
as other things. Fr. Tetzel’s preaching on indulgences only provided an
occasion of open rebellion to an already rebellious mind. Another point to bear
in mind is that Martin Luther, whom his old pupil, Oldecop had already defined
as ‘by nature proud and audacious,’ would still have rebelled against the
Church if no indulgence had been promulgated or if Fr. Tetzel had never been
born.
Luther published his rejection of Catholic teaching in 95
statements. These propositions were studied by theologians and their
conclusions submitted to Pope Leo X. In 1520 the Pope issued his ‘Exsurge
Domine’ in which he condemned in 41 propositions the errors of Luther.
He was invited to recant and return to the Church but he refused, referring to
those who condemned his propositions as ‘buffoons and earthworms.’ He publicly
burnt the papal bull, ‘Exsurge Domine,’ in addition to the
works of St. Thomas Aquinas and other Catholic theologians on December 10,
1520. From then on he usurped the authority of the Catholic Church, dispensed
himself from his priestly and monastic vows, dispensed the gullible nun,
Katherine von Bora from her vows and married her, and dispensed Phillip of
Heese to commit bigamy in exchange for protection of Protestantism. Luther
rejected ecclesiastical hierarchy, devotion to Our Blessed Mother and the
saints, freewill, the place of good works in our salvation, the necessity of
penance and sacrifice, and Tradition(teachings of the Church not specifically
mentioned in scripture). He rejected the deutero-canonical books of the bible
which the Church had approved as inspired since the Council of Carthage in 397,
and made nasty comments about the books of Job, Esther and Ecclesiastes. In the
New Testament he rejected the Letter to the Hebrews, the Letter of St. James
and the Apocalypse of St. John.
In denying freewill Luther described man as a horse who is
always at the mercy of the rider. The rider could be God or Satan. Man is a
beast of burden, subject to inexorable predestination. Hear his own words:
It is written on the hearts of men that there is no freedom
of the will...all takes place in accordance with inexorable necessity...It is
either God or the devil that rules; man has no freedom of choice and is
absolutely devoid of responsibility for his acts. Having lost freewill, man
cannot observe the precepts of the Decalogue; he cannot master his passions; he
must sin as long as he lives...As God pushes him, then he does something not
through freewill, but by the power of God; and when the devil pushes him, then
he does something not through freewill but by the power of Satan who takes
possession of him. When the devil takes possession of some man or leaves him,
it is only by that arbitrary will by which God wills that a certain number
shall be damned and a certain number shall be saved. Then the conclusion is
simply this: that those who are to be saved are to be saved without any regard
to their good works and that they will be saved; that there is nothing in
heaven or earth that can keep them from being saved. Why, then, should they
undertake to do anything themselves? It matters not to them; they will be saved
anyway, whatever they do. And, as for those unfortunate ones who are left
behind and are to be damned, how idle for them to kick against the arbitrary
decree! They must perish anyway, and as they must perish, they ought to say to
themselves: ‘Let us eat and drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die.’(Ibid. Pp.269-270)
Are you surprised? Hold your breath until you read what this
apostate taught about the Holy Mass.
2.0 LUTHER’S TEACHINGS ON THE MASS
In the first place Luther did not accept the Catholic
teaching on the priesthood as a sacrament conferring an indelible character on
the recipient, and making him essentially different from the lay person. He
said the Catholic priesthood is a creation of Satan, and insisted that
everybody is a priest. According to him:
The first wall built by the Romanists is the distinction
between the clergy and the laity. It is pure invention...a piece of deceit and
hypocrisy that the pope or bishop anoints, confers the tonsure, ordains,
consecrates, and prescribes garb different from that of the laity...Whoever
comes out of the water of baptism can boast that he is already a consecrated
priest, bishop and pope.(T.C. Tappert, ed. Selected Writings of Martin Luther.
Vol.1, P.263-265)
Having rejected the Catholic teaching on the priesthood
Luther consequently rejected priestly celibacy. So he married. He called on his
followers to join hands with him to overthrow the Mass, saying:
When the Mass is overthrown, I think that we will see the
overthrow of the papacy! Because it is on the Mass, as on a rock, that the
papacy rests, with its monasteries, its bishops, its colleges, its altars, its
ministries, its doctrine...All of these will collapse when that sacrilegious
and abominable Mass collapses. (Quoted by D. Raffard de Brienne. Lecture
et Tradition, No. 101 of May/June 1983, P.4)
Thus Luther rejected the sacrificing priesthood, the
sacrifice of the Mass and the doctrine of Transubstantiation. In line with his
diabolically-inspired beliefs, he reformed the Catholic Mass to create a new
liturgy for the use of his deluded congregation. The following are some of the
changes he effected in his new mass or novus ordo, and how his successors who
were admitted to have a say in the renovation of Catholic liturgy after Vatican
11 succeeded in admitting them into mainstream Catholic worship. The following
comparism will prove the point already made again and again, that the novus
ordo mass, or the mass of Vatican 11, also called the mass of Paul V1 is the Mass
of the heresiarch, Martin luther.
|
CHANGES MADE BY MARTIN LUTHER
|
CHANGES MADE IN THE NEW MASS
|
|
1.Luther
rejected the words, ‘sacrifice of propitiation or expiation’ in defining the
Mass. For him, Mass is a sacrifice of praise, of thanksgiving, but NOT an
expiatory sacrifice which recreates the sacrifice of Calvary and applies its
merits. For him, Mass is only a memorial of the last supper. The English
heretic and imitator of Luther, and the brain behind the change of religion
in England, Thomas Cranmer in his new Book of Common Prayer of 1549 called it
‘Lord’s supper or Mass.’
|
Paul V1
General Instruction to the Novus Ordo Mass avoids calling the Mass a
propitiatory sacrifice. It skilfully avoided using traditional terminology in
defining the Mass and , like Thomas Cranmer, calls it, ‘Mass or Lord’s
supper.’
|
|
2.He
replaced altars with tables, suppressed the altar- stone and put one altar
cloth instead of three.
|
Novus
Ordo has done the same
|
|
3.Suppression
of the distinction between the priest and the laity. According to him, ‘all
of us alike are priests, and we all have the same authority in regard to the
word and the sacraments.’(Quoted by Michael Davies. The Order of Melchizedek.
Devon: Augustine Publishing, 1979, P.7) Thus he opened up to the laity
functions formerly reserved to the laity.
|
Novus
Ordo has also blurred the distinction between the ordained priest and the
laity. Thus lay people now perform communion services on the novus ordo table,
do the readings, distribute communion or give the same to themselves, and use
the sanctuary as a stage for entertainment.
|
|
4.Accordingly,
Luther’s and Cranmer’s ordination rites deleted every reference to the fact
the newly ordained receives special power to offer the propitiatory sacrifice
of the Mass to Almighty God for the living and the dead. According to the
Anglican, Canon E.E. Escourt: ‘That all the faithful are priests, and can
offer spiritual sacrifices to God, and that there is no other priesthood or
sacrifice instituted by Christ in the Church; and that the office of
ministers in the Church is to preach and dispense sacraments, not to offer
sacrifice... that in such ordination, the charge given to those admitted to
the ministry ought not to be to sacrifice for the living and the dead, but to
teach the gospel and administer the sacraments.’(Ibid.P.9-10)
|
In 1968
Paul V1 introduced a new rite of ordination in which every reference to the
fact that the newly ordained is given the power to offer propitiatory
sacrifice of the Mass to Almighty God for the living and the dead were
carefully deleted. The new rite of ordination uses terminology acceptable to
Martin Luther, Thomas Cranmer and the mainline Protestants.
|
|
5.Abolition
of prayers at the foot of the altar(Psalm 42) since it has reference to
‘altar.’ Luther hated the word ‘altar’ since it refers to a place where
sacrifice is offered.
|
The New
Mass did the same.
|
|
6.Abolished
the old division of the Mass into Mass of Catechumens and Mass of the
Faithful. He changed it into Liturgy of the Word and Liturgy of the
Eucharist. Then he placed greater emphasis on the homily. According to him:
‘The cult was formerly meant to render homage to God; henceforth it shall be
directed to man in order to console and enlighten him. Whereas the sacrifice
formerly held pride of place, henceforth the most important will be the
sermon.’(Quoted by Leon Christiani. Du Lutheranisme auprotestantisme.
Paris: 1910, P.312)
|
The
Novus Ordo did the same.
|
|
7.Suppressed
confession to the saints in the Confiteor.
|
Did the
same
|
|
8.Suppressed
the two prayers said by the priest as he ascends the altat: ‘Aufer a nobis,’ and ‘Oramus Te.’
|
Did the
same
|
|
9. Luther abolished the offertory prayers
since they unequivocally express the expiatory and propitiatory aims of the
sacrifice.
|
Novus
Ordo did the same. In their place we were given ambiguous formulars which
claim that the bread will become ‘our bread of life’ and the wine will become
‘our spiritual drink.’ These are non-commital statements acceptable to
Protestants. For Thomas Cranmer,Christ’s presence was only spiritual: ‘For
figuratively He is in the bread and wine, and spiritually He is in them that
worthily eat and drink the bread and the wine, but really, carnally, and
corporally He is in heaven.’(Quoted by Michael Davies. Cranmer’s Godly Order. Devon: Augustine Publishing, 1976)
|
|
10.Abolition
of a major part of the canon and retention of only the essential passages
that emphasise the Mass as a narrative of the last supper. To emphasise this
he added: ‘Which will be given up for you’ and deleted ‘Mysterium fidei’ and
‘pro multis.’
|
Novus
Ordo has done the same, turning the Eucharistic prayer into a memorial of the
last supper. The words of consecration are recited in the context of a
narrative of a past event which we are simply commemorating. This is not
Catholic teaching. It is Protestant and has been borrowed from the
arch-heretic, Luther.
|
|
11. In
addition to suppressing the altar-stone and using a single altar cloth,
Luther also introduced Mass facing the people, the large host remaining on
the paten rather than on the corporal, introduction of ordinary bread, and
use of sacred vessels of less noble substance. According to Luther, food is
served on a plate but a sacrifice is offered on a corporal. There fore he
left the host on the paten since Mass for him is only a common meal, a
fraternal sharing, a memorial of the Lord’s supper, not a sacrifice.
|
Novus
Ordo did the same.
|
|
12.
Luther denied transubstantiation and the Real Presence. So he introduced
communion under both kinds, taken in the hand, standing, lay distributors,
all aimed at emphasizing the denial of dogma.
|
Novus
Ordo has done the same. Today many Catholics have lost their faith since the
new Mass. In the words of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre: ‘All of these changes
which comprise the new liturgy of the Mass are truly of perilous consequence,
especially for younger priests. Not having been nourished with the doctrines
of the Sacrifice, of the Real Presence, of Transubstantiation, these no
longer have any significance for young priests who, as a result, soon lose
the intention to perform what the Church performs. Consequently, they no longer
celebrate valid Masses.’(Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Luther’s Reforms and the
Modern Mass. Florida: CTC Books, 1993,P.16)
|
|
13.
Luther launched the saying of Mass in vernacular.
|
The
Novus Ordo did the same.
|
|
14.
After communion he and Cranmer removed the prayers recited during the
ablutions: ‘Quod ore sumpsimus’ and ‘Corpus Tuum.’
|
Novus
Ordo did the same.
|
|
15.
Luther also removed the ‘Placeat tibi’ in which the priest thanks God for the
sacrifice just offered, before giving the final blessing.
|
Also abolished.
|
|
16.
Luther’s services end with a blessing and omit the Last Gospel.
|
The
Novus Ordo did the same.
|
2.1 PRO—LUTHERANISM OF FALSE SHEPHERDS
Vatican 11 even went further than Luther. We have witnessed
the abandonment of the clerical/religious dress, widespread marriages of
priests and religious, concubinage, unnatural lust, suppression of the
distinction between priests and laity, sharing of liturgical functions,
abolition of Tonsure of seminarians and the Minor Orders(Porter, Exorcist,
Lector and Acolyte), and the sub-diaconate, creation of a married diaconate,
the acceptance of Protestant ministers into the Church without requiring them
to formally abjure their errors etc. All these goes to prove that the Novus
Ordo service is NOT the Roman Catholic Mass, canonized by Pope St. Pius V in
1570.
The false shepherds of the Vatican 11 counter-Church have not
only adopted heretical teachings of apostates, but have also gone out of their
way to praise and rehabilitate them. Prayers asking God for the conversion and
return of heretics and schismatics to the true Catholic faith has been
suppressed. Efforts targeting Protestants and Greek and Russian Orthodox for
conversion is officially discouraged. The false prophets of the Vatican 11
counter-Church, notably Paul V1, John Paul 11 and Benedict XV1 teach that
Protestants are Christians, have elements of salvation in their communities and
can be saved outside the Catholic Church. In a 1992 Instruction on the
Implementation of Ecumenism approved by John Paul 11, Catholics are asked to
rejoice in the grace of God in Protestants, to pray with Protestants, to use
the same churches and lend Catholic Churches to Protestants for their
functions. They are also encouraged to remove the Blessed Sacrament from such
churches so as not to offend Protestants! Joint translations of the bible by
Protestant and Catholic scholars is encouraged. Seminary formators are reminded
to teach ecumenism in the seminaries and to allow Protestant scholars to teach in
Catholic seminaries. Dialogue and ecumenical convergence has replaced
conversion of heretics and schismatics. In his encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam(Aug.6,
1964) Paul V1 defined the new orientation of the Vatican 11 counter-church as
follows: ‘The church must enter into a dialogue with the world in which she
lives. The church becomes word; the church becomes message; the church becomes
conversation.’
On the occasion of his visit to Frankfurt, Germany, John Paul
11 said: ‘Today I come to you about the spiritual heritage of Martin Luther; I
come as a pilgrim.’ On December 11, 1983 celebrations to mark the 500
anniversary of Luther’s birth was held by Lutherans. John Paul 11 went to a
Lutheran church in Rome and participated actively in their service. Bear in mind
that in Catholic teaching it is a grave sin against the faith to participate
actively in the prayers of non-Catholics. But John Paul 11 had no qualms about
this because he neither held nor preached the integral Catholic faith. While
inside the church of heretics, John Paul participated in the recitation of a
prayer composed by Luther. And this was not all. He sent a message of
congratulations to Lutherans through Cardinal Willebrands, President of the
Congregation for Christian Unity. In this message...(hold your breath)... John
Paul 11 called Martin Luther a ‘religious genius.’ Luther, a ‘religious
genius’? This same Luther who called the Catholic Mass an abomination, and said
it is erroneous and impious to offer or apply the merits of the Mass for sins, the
reparation of sins or for the dead. This same Luther who made the following
comments about the Catholic hierarchy:
Whoever shall assist and lend his personal influence, means
and reputation that the episcopate be destroyed and the rule of bishops exterminated,
is a beloved son of God, a true Christian, an observer of God’s commandments
and wars against the ordinance of the devil.’(Patrick O’Hare. Op.Cit. P.218)
How can this Martin Luther be a ‘religious genius’? This same
Luther who by his own works and teachings was a malicious falsifier of God’s
truth, a blasphemer, a libertine, a revolutionist, a hater of religious vows, a
disgrace to the clerical calling, an enemy of domestic felicity, the father of
divorce, the advocate of polygamy and the propagator of immorality and open
licentiousness. According to Luther:
They are fools who attempt to overcome temptations by
fasting, prayer and chastisement. For such temptations and immoral attacks are
easily overcome when there are plenty of maidens and women.(Op.Cit. P.316)
But do not be surprised. John Paul 11 praised Luther because
he was suffering from diabolical disorientation. He was blinded by the evil
spirit of Vatican 11. This evil spirit of Vatican 11 can possess even the best
persons and prevent them from seeing the truth. Those who continue to patronize
the new mass, inspired as it is by the spirit of Martin Luther which is no
other than the spirit of Satan, will also suffer this same spiritual blindness.
They will lose their Catholic faith as many have already done, and become
Protestants of the worst kind. This is because the corruption of the bet is the
worst. The novus ordo is no Catholic Mass at all. It is a service created,
favoured and sponsored by freemasons, aimed at preparing Catholics to accept
the new world order ruled by the antichrist. In this new world order nothing is
sacred, immutable, permanent. In it truth and morality change. In this new
world order everything is open to innovation. The powers of darkness rejoice
and are literally giving one another pats on the back because of the new mass.
Today many novus ordo Catholics have been accustomed, because of the new mass
and other changes imposed since Vatican 11 to accept that nothing is stable.
Everything is subject to change: Scripture, Tradition, Dogma, Morality and so
on. That Martin Luther, a man used by the devil to lead away many souls from
the true faith and set them on the path of hell can receive praises from the
highest places in the Church, and his programme for the demolition of the
Church baptised and accepted by infiltrators masquerading as churchmen should
be an eye-opener that there is really fire on the mountain. All is not well. It
is the time of darkness. You must run for your dear life. Luther has been praised by other
churchmen even before John Paul so the rot has gone deep. Fr. Yves Congar was a
French Dominican who invented the term, ‘living tradition.’ This is a coded
language used by the Gnostics of the conciliar church such as Paul V1, John
Paul 11 and Benedict XV1 to imply that nothing is permanent; everything is
subject to change. Paul V1 for instance said: ‘One must break with the habitual
attachment to what one used to designate as the unchangeable tradition of the
Church.’ Fr. Congar was a theological expert at Vatican 11 and generously
advised many of the bishops on the path of doom they eventually followed. Hear
what he said of Martin Luther:
Luther is one of the greatest religious geniuses of all
history. I would place him on the same plane as St. Augustine, St. Thomas
Aquinas, or Pascal. In a certain sense, he is even greater.(Cf. Le
Monde, of March 29, 1975)
These comments of Fr. Congar and his contributions towards
erecting the counter-church of Vatican 11 proves that he is a good Gnostic; an
enlightened ‘Catholic’ of the twentieth century. And for this John Paul 11
rewarded him by making him a Cardinal!
2.2.
CONCLUSION
Do you still doubt me?
Rev.
Fr. Gregory Chukwudi Obih.
Jan.13,
2010
