Therefore, the 2nd Pope John 23 DISOBEYED the Council of Trent, Quo Primum Tempore, Rubricae Generales Missalis, De Defectibus, plus other laws on the Mass by corrupting the Missale Romanum which is the Missal in which The Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Mass was RESTORED (NOT destroyed as it was later by the anti-Catholic "Concilium" of Synod Vatican 2) by the Council of Trent with Pope Pius IV and which actual Missal was published by Pope Saint Pius V in 1570, by Jolly John's tyrannical insertion of the holy name of Saint Joseph into the Canon of the Mass.

This "trial balloon", which sacrilegiously used Saint Joseph as the proverbial whipping boy by this alleged very high-ranking member of the Freemasons, was an experimental test precedent which foreshadowed the forthcoming total destruction of the integrity of the Ontological and Metaphysical Essences, not only of the Canon of the Mass, but also of the rest of the Mass, by the public, automatically Excommunicated heretics, Paul 6 and JP-2, which birthed the notorious God-condemned "Abomination of Desolation", the New "supper mass meal" of Paul 6 and the many Satanic versions of it by the Hegelian dialectician, Pope JP-2.

---

Part Two - Additional Considerations

Roman Catholic Pope, Pius XII [Eugenio Pacelli, Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], cites "the well-known and venerable maxim, Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi" -- let the rule for prayer determine the rule of belief [45]" (Roman Catholic Pope, Pius XII, Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], Encyclical MEDIATOR DEI, ON THE SACRED LITURGY, # 48, Thursday, November 20, 1947 A.D.).

This is sometimes expressed as simply: Lex orandi, lex credendi.  The law of praying is the law of believing, i.e. you express by a public, exterior liturgical act of worship the interior beliefs of your faith.

Thus, you pray what you believe and you believe what your pray.

An earlier writer likewise refers to this axiom: "Being fully aware of the necessary connection between faith and worship, between lex orandi, lex credendi [the law of praying is the law of believing], they [the 16th  Century Protestants of England] corrupted the Liturgical Order in many ways to suit the errors of the reformers, under the pretext of restoring it to its primitive form. Thus, in the whole Ordinal, not only is there no clear mention of the sacrifice, of consecration, of the priesthood, and of the power of consecrating and offering sacrifice, but, as We have just stated, every trace of these things, which had been in such prayers of the Catholic Rite, as they had not entirely rejected, was deliberately removed and struck out" (Roman Catholic Pope, Leo XIII, Gioacchino Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903], Papal Bull APOSTOLICAE CURAE, Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders, # 23, Tuesday, September 15, 1896 A.D.).

Today some of these same observations can be applied to the official public liturgy which is used by the Vatican 2 church!  Based upon the principle of lex orandi, lex credendi, the Vatican 2 church uses a modernized, updated, synthesized 16th Century Protestant Supper-Meal, somewhat similar to the Protestant "suppers" made up in the 16th Century, especially in England and Germany which were condemned by the Roman Catholic Council of Trent in Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562 A.D.

Based upon the basic, objective principles of Catholic traditional teaching in the areas of theology, church history, liturgy, and church law as explained herein, as well as various dogmatic teachings, the Vatican 2 church can NOT consider itself, NOR call itself, the "Catholic" Church, NOR can it call itself the “Roman Catholic” Church, NOR can any of its members, whether clergy, religious or laity, in Truth, call themselves "Catholic" or “Roman Catholic”, be they clergy, religious or laity!  On the basis of LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI they are ALL De Facto PROTESTANTS, whether they know it or not!!!  Are YOU a member of the PROTESTANT Vatican 2 church?!

The logical question arises as to whether or not the principle of Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi, a.k.a. lex orandi, lex credendi, can or even should be applied to the so-called "Missals of John 23"?!

The answer should be self-evident?  YES!  But, if further proof is still needed, please consider the following.

Jesus Christ perfectly instituted the Ontological and Metaphysical Essences of the Mass.  But Christ also instructed the Apostles how to offer Mass, as proven above.  The immediate successors of the Apostles and the Bishops the Apostles Consecrated, as well as their Disciples and the Bishops they, in turn, Consecrated, seem to have been aware of this.

Apostolic Tradition clearly indicates that the original Missal and Ritual, which some perhaps identify with the term “the ancient codices”, reflect what Christ dictated to the Apostles, which is what the Apostles handed down to their successors.  One of these successors was Saint Clement I [c. 88 A.D. - c. 97 A.D.], who wrote in part:

“WE MUST DO ALL THE THINGS THAT THE LORD TOLD US TO DO at stated times, IN PROPER ORDER.  For HE COMMANDED that the offerings  and services [i.e. the Mass] should be performed not rashly nor in disorder, but at fixed times and hours.  And He Himself by His most high will arranged where and by whom they should be celebrated, so that everything should be done piously ACCORDING TO HIS COMMAND” (Saint Clement I [c. 88 - c. 97], EPISTOLA AD CORINTHIOS 40, 1-3; Jacques Paul Migne [1800 - 1875], PATROLOGIA GRAECA, published in 161 volumes, Volume 1, Column # 290; emphasis added).

Therefore, in conclusion, the so-called Missals of John 23 are NOT "missals" of the Catholic Church nor of the Roman Catholic Church in virtue, not only of the various Laws against changing the Missal and the Rite of the Mass, but also in virtue of the theological principle of Legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi, a.k.a. Lex orandi, lex credendi.

The Missals of John 23 are missals of the Vatican 2 church, NOT the Catholic Church and NOT the Roman Catholic Church!

In Anglo-Saxon English this means that Roman Catholic Bishops and Priests can NOT use the Missals of John 23 and still remain Roman Catholic Bishops and Priests because the Missals of John 23 are NOT the Missal of the Roman Catholic Church.

Juridically, Roman Catholic Bishops and Priests who use one or more of the Missals of John 23 are automatically Excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church and must seek absolution from Censure from a valid Bishop or Priest of a Catholic or Roman Catholic Church who does not use any of the Missals of John 23 and who is otherwise not a member of the Vatican 2 church.

Theologically, any valid Bishop or Priest who uses any of the Missals of John 23 DOES NOT offer a VALID Mass because of, among other reasons, defect of intention!  Remember that the intention for offering a valid Mass must be a PROPER Intention, NOT an IMPROPER Intention!  Now the PROPER Intention is to do what the Church does, namely the CATHOLIC Church, NOT the Vatican 2 Church!

But it is a contradiction of terms for a Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest to use a missal from a non-Catholic Church because, to do so, publicly states to the whole world, that such a Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest has apostatized from the Roman Catholic Church by de facto accepting the beliefs of a NON-Catholic Church by using one of the missals or prayer books of a NON-Catholic Church, in this case one of the Missals of John 23.

The use of any such "missal" or "prayer book" by any Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest, besides publicly stating that said Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest has been automatically excommunicated in virtue of his public acceptance of, and overt act of, or belief in, the heresy of false ecumenism, also commits a Mortal Sin by using any of the Missals of John 23 every time he does so!

Any Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest who uses any of the Missals of John 23 has also de facto publicly renounced the Profession of Faith and the Oath Against Modernism which was originally taken by said Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest in accordance with the Codex Iuris Canonici of the Roman Catholic Church, because such a Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest de facto accepts the attacks against the Catholic Rite of Mass by the numerous Protestant Churches whose theology was condemned by the Council of Trent because these Protestant Churches do NOT believe that the Mass is a Sacrifice - only a meal, hence no Transubstantiation, etc., etc. , e.g. a Methodist Church, a Lutheran Church, an Anglican Church or a Vatican 2 church!  Such an ex-Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest is also suspected of the heresy of Modernism, the Censure for which is automatic Excommunication:

"Moreover, in order to check the daily increasing audacity of many Modernists who are endeavoring by all kinds of sophistry and devices to detract from the force and efficacy not only of the Decree Lamentabili Sane Exitu (the so-called Syllabus), issued by Our Order by the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition on July 3 of the present year, but also of Our Encyclical letters Pascendi Dominici Gregis given on September 8 of this same year, We do by Our Apostolic Authority repeat and confirm both that Decree of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and those Encyclical Letters of ours, adding the penalty of Excommunication against their contradictors, and this We Declare and Decree that should anybody, which may God forbid, be so rash as to defend any one of the propositions, opinions or teachings condemned in these documents he falls, ipso facto, under the Censure contained under the chapter Docentes of the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis, which is the first among the Excommunications Latae Sententiae, simply reserved to the Roman Pontiff. This Excommunication is to be understood as salvis poenis, which may be incurred by those who have violated in any way the said documents, as propagators and defenders of heresies, when their propositions, opinions and teachings are heretical, as has happened more than once in the case of the adversaries of both these documents, especially when they advocate the errors of the Modernists that is, the synthesis of all heresies."  (Pope Saint Pius X, Giuseppe Sarto [Tuesday, August 4, 1903 - Thursday, August 20, 1914], Motu Proprio, PRAESTANTIA SCRIPTURAE SACRAE, Monday, November 18, 1907).

The Roman Catholic Pope Leo XIII , Gioacchino Vincenzo Pecci [Wednesday, February 20, 1878 - Monday, July 20, 1903] explained the principle of defect of intention at length in his Papal Bull APOSTOLICAE CURAE, Declaration of the Invalidity of Anglican Orders [Tuesday, September 15, 1896 A.D.].  You will find the full text for Apostolicae Curae at:  http://catholic.shrineofsaintjude.net/homec015.html

Therefore, the Missals of John 23 are really only used by conservative ex-Roman Catholic Bishops and Priests and conservative Vatican 2 church Bishops and Priests!  Sad to say, but it seems that most of the Clergy of the Vatican 2 church are, at best, only Laymen wearing Roman Collars due to their own invalid ordinations to the Priesthood in the anti-Catholic Vatican 2 church which expresses Protestant theology by its usage of Protestant supper meals, etc.

---

The Last Gospel

It is Our understanding that at least one or more of the Missals of John 23 no longer have the Last Gospel!

The prayers of this liturgical Rite of the Catholic Mass, i.e. The Ancient Roman Rite, primarily the Quam Oblationem and the Supplices Te Rogamus, help to provide the Mass Celebrant, who is a member of the Catholic Church, or at least of the Roman Catholic Church, with a Proper Intention.

His internal intention is verified by the external act of his genuflections - acts of adoration of Jesus Christ as God - at the Double Consecration.  His internal belief in the Mystery of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and in the Mystery of Christ’s Hypostatic Union of God and Man is verified by the external act of his genuflection at the Et Verbum Caro Factum Est. (And the Word Was Made Flesh) near the end of the Last Gospel which is the beginning of the Gospel of Saint John.

The Last Gospel was originally inserted into the Mass to reveal Bishops and Priests who were in fact secret heretics who did not believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ, e.g. Cathars, Albigensians, etc.

If there was no Sacrifice, there could be no Victim, but the immolation of the Victim can only be accomplished by the use of the concomitant conjunction of the Proper Matter, Form and Intention, not in a single Consecration of but one species, but only by the Double Consecration of both species.

Therefore, Roman Catholic Bishops and Priests who use any one of the Missals of John 23 are, at the very least, suspected of being either a Cathar or Albigensian heretic!

Summary

In summary, it is extremely dangerous for anyone to use any of the Missals of John 23 and the use of any one of them is a public declaration that such a Bishop or Priest has de facto, automatically joined the Vatican 2 church by this free act of the will and thus is an EX-Roman Catholic Bishop or Priest who, if he desires to leave the Vatican 2 church, must receive absolution from the censures he has automatically incurred by so doing!

---

Laws on the Mass
Part One

Brief Excerpts of Some Laws which
Forbid Changing the Mass or the Missal

1. Pope St. Clement I [c. 88- c. 97]: “Take care not to deviate from the established rule of (liturgical) service” (EPISTOLA AD CORINTHIOS 40,1; Jacques Paul Migne [1800 - 1875], PATROLOGIA GRAECA, published in 161 volumes, Volume 1, Column 290).

2.  Pope Innocent I [Saturday, December 22, 401 - Sunday, March 12, 417]:  “Who does not know that what has been handed down by Peter, the Prince of the Apostles to the Roman Church is still observed unto this day and MUST BE OBSERVED BY ALL” (LETTER TO DECENTIUS, Bishop of Gubbio).

3.  Council of Florence [1438 A.D. - 1445 A.D.]: “Julius, the 2nd Pope after Blessed Sylvester, says: ‘According to the command of the Canons, the Lord’s Chalice should be offered with wine mixed with water.’”

The Council of Florence then gives the exact Form of words for the Double Consecration:

 “But since in the above written decree of the Armenians the form of the words, which in the Consecration of the Body and Blood of the Lord the Holy Roman Church confirmed by the teaching and authority of the Apostles had always been accustomed to use, was not set forth, We have thought that it ought to be inserted here.

In the Consecration of the Body, the Church uses this form of words:

HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM.

In the Consecration of the Blood the Church uses the following form of words:

HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI:  MYSTERIUM FIDEI: QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM”

(Promulgated by Pope Eugene IV, Gabriele Condulmer [Thursday, March 3, 1431 - Tuesday, February 23, 1447] with the Council of Florence, DECREE FOR THE ARMENIANS, EXULTATE DEO, Friday, November 22, 1439 A.D.).

This was later reaffirmed by the Council of Trent in its official Catechism:

“This form of consecration having been observed by Christ the Lord has been always used by the Catholic Church. The testimonies of the Fathers, the enumeration of which would be endless, and also the decree of the Council of Florence, which is well known and accessible to all, must here be omitted, especially as the knowledge which they convey may be obtained from these words of the Saviour: Do this for a commemoration of Me.[Luke 22:19] For what the Lord enjoined was not only what He had done, but also what he had said; and especially is this true, since the words were uttered not only to signify, but also to accomplish” (Catechism of the Council of Trent, Part II, The Sacraments, The Sacrament of the Eucharist,  ¶ 49).

It then gives the same Form for the words of the Double Consecration as given by Eugene IV, Gabriele Condulmer [Thursday, March 3, 1431 - Tuesday, February 23, 1447] with the Council of Florence, quoted above.

4.  Council of Trent [1545 A.D. - 1563 A.D.].

Session 22, 1562 A.D. “The Holy, Ecumenical and General Council of Trent, lawfully assembled...teaches and lays down, under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, the following doctrine about the Eucharist as a true and unique SACRIFICE and declares that this doctrine is to be preached to the Faithful...This Sacrifice is truly propitiatory...by this oblation the Lord is appeased...THE SACRED CANON [of the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Mass) IS FREE FROM ALL ERROR and contains nothing that does not raise to God the minds of those who offer this Sacrifice...in all Churches in all places THE ANCIENT [Roman] RITE approved by the Holy Roman Church...IS TO BE OBSERVED...”

“Canon I.  If anyone says that in the Mass a true and real Sacrifice is not offered to God; or, that to be offered is nothing else but that Christ is given us to eat. Let him be anathema.”

“CANON II.  If any one saith, that by those words, Do this for the commemoration of Me [Luke 22: 19], Christ did not institute the Apostles Priests; or, did not ordain that they, and other Priests should offer His own body and blood. Let him be anathema.”

“Canon III.  If anyone says that the Sacrifice of the Mass is merely an offering of praise and thanksgiving, or that it is simply a memorial [commemoration] of the Sacrifice consummated on the cross, but not a propitiatory Sacrifice; or, that it profits him only who receives; and that it ought not to be offered for the living and the dead for sins, pains, satisfactions, and other necessities. Let him be anathema.”

“CANON IV.  If any one says that, by the Sacrifice of the Mass, a blasphemy is cast upon the most Holy Sacrifice of Christ consummated on the cross; or, that it is thereby derogated from.  Let him be anathema.”

“CANON V.  If any one says that it is an imposture to celebrate Masses in honour of the Saints, and for obtaining their intercession with God, as the Church intends. Let him be anathema.”

“Canon VI.  IF ANYONE SAYS THAT THE CANON OF THE [Ancient Roman Rite of the] MASS CONTAINS ERRORS AND THEREFORE SHOULD BE ABROGATED [ABOLISHED]. LET HIM BE ANATHEMA.”

“CANON VII.  If any one says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church makes use of in the celebration of Masses, are incentives to impiety, rather than offices of piety.  Let him be anathema.”

“CANON VIII.  If any one says that Masses, wherein the Priest alone communicates Sacramentally, are unlawful, and are, therefore, to be abrogated [abolished].  Let him be anathema.”

“Canon IX. IF ANYONE SAYS THAT THE  [Ancient] RITE OF THE ROMAN CHURCH,  according to which a part of the Canon and the words of Consecration are pronounced in a low tone, IS TO BE CONDEMNED; or, that the mass ought to be celebrated in the vulgar  tongue only [i.e. not in Latin but in the vernacular languages]; or, that water ought not to be mixed with the wine that is to be offered in the chalice, for that it is contrary to the institution of Christ. LET HIM BE ANATHEMA” (Session 22, Monday, September 17, 1562 A.D.; emphasis added).

5.  Pope Saint Pius V, Antonio-Michele Ghislieri [Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572].

A)  QUO PRIMUM TEMPORE.  [Tuesday, July 14, 1570 A.D.]  This Bull was inserted at the very beginning of the Missal - MISSALE ROMANUM - to be used in offering the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Mass, a Missal which did away with all of the unlawful additions which had been made to it since the 6th Century, or earlier.  Therefore, it should be self-evident that because of the great importance of this restored Missal, prefaced by the very important legal document Quo Primum Tempore, We must at least briefly quote from said historically important legal document which can not be abolished by anyone who still wants to remain a member of the Roman Catholic Church!

“...besides other decrees of the sacred Council of Trent, We were instructed...that in the Church there be...only ONE RITE for the celebration of Mass...Let all men everywhere embrace and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church...let not Masses be sung cr read according to any rite [formula] other than that of the Missal published by Us.  This ordinance applies henceforth afterwards and forever...by this present Constitution, henceforth valid in perpetuity, We order and enjoin that this, Our recently published Missal [of the Ancient Roman Rite], must never be added to, that none of it be omitted, and that none of it be changed under penalty of our displeasure.”

“...in virtue of our Apostolic authority...this Missal is hereafter to be followed absolutely without any scruple of conscience or fear of incurring any penalty, judgment or censure and may freely and lawfully be used...This present document [litterae] can NOT be revoked or modified, but always remains fixed and valid and is able to retain its full force...”

“In order that [this Missal] be preserved incorrupt in the whole world and kept free from flaws and errors...the penalty for nonobservance for printers...will be...for others...the penalty is excommunication latae sententiae...”

“Therefore, no one whatsoever is permitted to alter this letter or heedlessly dare to go contrary to this notice of Our permission, statute, ordinance, command, precept, grant, indult, declaration, will, decree and prohibition.”

“SHOULD ANYONE, however, PRESUME TO COMMIT SUCH AN ACT, HE SHOULD KNOW THAT HE WILL INCUR THE WRATH OF ALMIGHTY GOD and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul” (Saint Pius V, Antonio-Michele Ghislieri [Friday, January 7, 1566 - Monday, May 1, 1572], Papal Bull QUO PRIMUM TEMPORE of Tuesday, July 14, 1570 A.D.; emphasis added).

B) De Defectibus V. In addition to Quo Primum Tempore, Saint Pius V also inserted a number of rubrical laws into the MISSALE ROMANUM which are to be obeyed when using the MISSALE ROMANUM.  For example, in obedience to the Councils of Florence and Trent, Saint Pius V very clearly sets forth the EXACT words to be used for the FORM of the Double Consecration. Please note the actual text is given below on the Laws on the Mass, Part Two.

6.   Pope Benedict XIV, Prospero Lambertini [Wednesday, August 17, 1740 - Wednesday, May 3, 1758].

A)  QUANTA CURA.  Benedict XIV requires “that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass be celebrated with due reverence” (Encyclical QUANTA CURA, Friday, June 30, 1741 A.D.).

B) CUM SICUT.  Regarding the Mass, “Our Predecessor, Saint Leo the Great, stated that there were CERTAIN LAWS WHICH UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WHATSOEVER COULD BE CHANGED” (Letter CUM SICUT, Saturday, September 1, 1742 A.D.; emphasis added).

7.  Pope Gregory XVI, Bartolomeo Alberto-Mauro-Cappellari [Wednesday, February 2, 1831 - Monday, June 1, 1846].

CUM IN ECCLESIA.  “...they dare hold meetings...and talks about the reform of the Church... required...by the times in which we live...they are dangerous because...by pretending to want to rejuvenate and restore the Church, they deceive ordinary people...We...in the fullness of Our Apostolic authority, reprove, condemn...these works” (Encyclical, CUM IN ECCLESIA, Tuesday, September 17, 1833 A.D.; emphasis added).

8.  Pope Pius IX, Giovanni M. Mastai Ferretti [Tuesday, June 16, 1846 - Thursday, February 7, 1878] stated that “...under the false pretext of PURIFYING THE RITES and OF RESTORING THEM ...they...lay snares for the Faithful...and tear them away from...the Church and plunge them into heresy and schism” (Encyclical, OMNEM SOLICITUDINEM, Wednesday, May 13, 1874 A.D.).

9.  Pope Pius XII,  Eugenio Pacelli [Thursday, March 2, 1939 - Thursday, October 9, 1958], listed a number of errors to be found in the New Mass, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Rite [NOR], a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae of Paul 6, now formally and officially used by the Vatican 2 church.

He warned everyone about these errors.  We given Our comment(s) in brackets [].  He wrote in part:

“...one would be straying from the straight path were he to wish the Altar restored to its primitive table-form [the Novus Ordo Rite has just such a primitive table- the same thing the 16th Century Protestants used!];

were he to want black excluded as a color for the liturgical vestments [the Novus Ordo Rite now uses WHITE in place of black-black being a color forbidden in the Novus Ordo Rite!];

were he to forbid the use of sacred images and statues in Churches [since Synod Vatican 2  (Thursday, October 11, 1962 - Wednesday, December 8, 1965) most sacred images and statues have been thrown out of most churches and chapels and either hauled away to the local dump like a lump of unsightly dung or burned or buried!  In those places where statues are still to be found, most of them are done in a modernistic grotesque style which style is both repugnant and hideous and does everything it can to thwart true devotion and inspiration.  Such ugliness is symbolic, not of God Who is total Infinite Perfection and Infinite Truth and Beauty and His Angels and Saints who participate to various degrees in these attributes, but of the ugly Devil and his apostate followers.  Also, church walls that once were filled with paintings to foster inspiration have now been painted over!];

were he to order the crucifix so designed that the Divine Redeemer’s body shows no trace of His cruel sufferings [in those places where crucifixes have not been replaced by the bare Protestant-style cross which has removed the image of the Sacred Humanity of Christ from it, crucifixes in most places are called “The Risen Christ” because they show Christ as He was, not on Good Friday, the day He died on the Cross amid an ocean of sufferings, but rather the Christ of Easter in a glorified body-this amounts to a contradiction of terms since the cross is a symbol of suffering and the image of Christ suffering upon it is the real and total truth which simply reflects the teachings of Christ and His Apostles - to daily pick up our own cross and to follow Christ and to patiently bear whatever sufferings Christ sends us in imitation of Him, especially when He hung dying on the cross suffering for our sins because He loves each of us so very much!  Yet this wonderful love of the God-Man is conveniently ignored by the Gnostic “Resurrection” crucifix of the Vatican 2 church!  The juxtaposition of the great love of Christ and the depiction of the terrible sufferings He patiently and lovingly bore while hanging for three hours on the cross with the glory of Easter is a mixing of two distinct yet different symbols and mysteries which can only lead to total confusion in the minds of the young who were never taught to make these important distinctions!  A quick glance through the modernistically and diabolically ugly religious articles catalogs shows how popular this “Risen Christ” crucifix appears to be since one can seldom find a real crucifix in such catalogs anymore!];

and lastly were he to disdain and reject polyphonic music or singing in parts...[one can only reflect with sadness how the singing and music, which most of us took for granted prior to Synod Vatican 2 (Thursday, October 11, 1962 - Wednesday, December 8, 1965), is no longer to be found in the aftermath of the destruction of everything sacred by Vatican 2 - rather, it has been replaced by such things as “Polka Masses”, “Guitar Masses”, “Go-Go Masses”, “Circus Masses”, “Clown Masses”, etc.] (Pius XII, Encyclical, MEDIATOR DEI, Thursday, November 20, 1947, # 62).,

Conclusion - The Law of Praying

Pope Celestine I [Saturday, September 10, 422  - Tuesday, July 27, 432 ] taught the basic principle: LEGEM CREDENDI LEX STATUIT SUPPLICANDI. [The Liturgical form of prayer becomes the standard of Faith.]  This is sometimes shortened to simply LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI:  The Law of Praying is the Law of Believing.  In other words, by a public, exterior liturgical act of worship you express your interior beliefs of your faith.

Therefore, you pray what you believe and you believe what you pray. But since the New Mass, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae of Paul 6, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Rite or NOR, contains only PROTESTANT theology, this means that “Catholics” who “pray the NOR”, pray not what “Catholics” are required to believe, but rather what Protestants believe! Sooner or later, gradually at first, such “Catholics” slowly become Protestantized!

This process is so subtle that such “Catholics” do not even realize it.  However, people that know such “Catholics” are able to see how their Vatican 2 church “Catholic” relative or friend has changed into a Protestant!  We have heard stories about this from concerned Catholics back over 30 years ago when it was already happening!

Theological Perspective From the Angelic Doctor

Over the last 32 years, various people have complained to Us about these laws of the Catholic Church and the Roman Catholic Church.  Although they have been unable to disprove them, no matter how hard they have tried to do it, some of these people, in sheer desperation, have switched from the subject under discussion, namely, ecclesiastical jurisprudence, to that of theology.  So, unable to discredit the above laws, they then try to claim that the changes made to the essential substance in the Form of the Double Consecration found in the New Mass, the Novus Ordo Rite, a.k.a. the Novus Ordo Missae of Paul 6,  Giovanni Battista Montini [Friday, June 21, 1963 - Sunday, August 6, 1978], do not invalidate the New Mass used in the Vatican 2 church.

On this subject, please refer to Our book entitled:  SECRET 7 - MASS CONFUSION and also Our booklet entitled: “The Validity of the Ancient Roman Rite of the Catholic Mass and The Invalidity of the New Mass, the Novus Ordo Missae”.

For the present time, We limit Ourself to a brief response against one argument in favor of the theological validity of the New Mass.  The New Mass has a butchered “form” for the Consecration of the Most Precious Blood.  In the vernacular translations, the Latin pro multis [for many] has been changed to “for all men” which, in doing research on this subject many years ago, We personally heard one President of the Assembly (that’s the term the Vatican 2 church uses for whoever does the NOR - the Novus Ordo Rite) say: “for all men, women, children, cats and dogs”!

Both the vernacular translations and the Latin version of NOR have a mutilated “form” which omit Mysterium Fidei, Mystery of Faith, which Christ Himself instituted as part of the valid Form in the Consecration of the Most Precious Blood. Mysterium Fidei, by the way, states what happens, namely Transubstantiation, during the Consecration!  The Consecration is thereby changed from an ACT OF TRANSUBSTANTIATING  to an ACT OF NARRATING AN HISTORICAL EVENT!

Pope Innocent III, Lotario Dei Conti Di Segni [Thursday, January 8, 1198 - Saturday, July 16, 1216] wrote:

“You have asked [indeed] who has added to the form of the words which Christ Himself expressed when He changed the bread and wine into the Body and Blood, that in the Canon of the [Ancient Roman Rite of] Mass which the general [Western] Church uses, which none of the Evangelists is read to have expressed...

In the Canon of the [Ancient Roman Rite of] Mass that expression, MYSTERIUM FIDEI, is found interposed among His words...

Surely we find many such things omitted from the words as well as from the deeds of the Lord by the Evangelists, which the Apostles are read to have supplied by word or to have expressed by deed...

From the expression, moreover, concerning which your brotherhood raised the question, namely MYSTERIUM FIDEI, certain people have thought to draw a protection against error, saying that in the Sacrament of the Altar, the truth of the Body and Blood of Christ does not exist, but only the image and species and figure, inasmuch as Scripture sometimes mentions that what is received at the Altar is Sacrament and Mystery and Example.  But such run into a snare of error, by reason of the fact that they neither properly understand the authority of Scripture, nor do they reverently receive the Sacraments of God, equally ‘ignorant of the Scriptures and the power of God’ (Matthew 22:29)...

Yet MYSTERIUM FIDEI is mentioned, since something is believed there other than what is perceived; and something is perceived other than is believed.  For the species of bread and wine is perceived there, and the truth of the Body and Blood of Christ is believed and the power of unity and of love...  (Innocent III, Lotario Dei Conti Di Segni [Thursday, January 8, 1198 - Saturday, July 16, 1216], LETTER-CUM MARTHAE CIRCA, To John, the Archbishop of Lyons, Friday, November 29, 1202 A.D.)

Paul 6 and his 6 Protestant buddies who actively helped to modernize, update and synthesize the 16th Century Protestant Supper Memorial Meals dropped Mysterium Fidei-totally denying Transubstantiation! Only the Protestant heresy of a Supper Memorial Meal is left, not with a consecratory act, but a mere quasi-Biblical historical narrative of what happened almost 2,000 years ago!

This Photograph was taken on Friday, April 10, 1970 A.D. in the Vatican.  These very active SIX PROTESTANTS are, from left to right:   1) Dr. George; 2) Canon Jasper; 3) Dr. Shephard; 4) Dr. Konneth; 5) Dr. Smith; and, 6) Brother Max Thurian (in white), who is standing next to Vatican 2 pope, Paul 6 (in white).

These SIX PROTESTANTS represent the following Protestant organizations:  The World Council of Churches, the Church of England, the Lutheran Church, and, the Protestant Community of Taize.  One argument which tries to retain the theological validity of this “form”has been to claim that not all of the words instituted by Jesus Christ, the Eternal High Priest, the Divine Logos, the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity, Who “hath done all things well” (Mark 7:37), are needed.

On the contrary, We reply with the Angelic Doctor:  “Some have maintained that the words THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD alone belong to the substance of the Form, but not those words which follow. Now this is incorrect because the words which follow them are determinations of the predicate, that is, Christ’s Blood. Consequently, they [i.e. the words which follow] belong to the integrity of the expression” (Saint Thomas Aquinas, O.P., [b. 1225 A.D. in Rocca Secca, Naples, Italy - d. 1274 A.D. in Fossa Nuova, Italy], Doctor of the Church, SUMMA THEOLOGICA III, 78, 3).

---

Laws on the Mass
Part Two
De Defectibus V
Concerning Defects
as found in the Pre-Vatican 2
MISSALE ROMANUM

---

PART V

DEFECTS WHICH MAY OCCUR IN
CELEBRATING MASS

(The numbers at the side correspond to the numbering in the Missale Romanum,
and are given here to facilitate easy cross-reference for comparison to the original Latin text.)

INTRODUCTION

1.  The priest who is about to celebrate Mass should take every precaution to ensure that none of the requisites for the consecration of the Sacrament of the Eucharist shall be wanting.

Defects may arise in respect of the materials to be consecrated, in respect of the formula to be used, and in respect of the consecrating minister. If any one of these, namely, right materials, right formula and intention, and priestly ordination of the Celebrant, is lacking, then there is no Sacrament. When these are forthcoming, whatever other defects there may be, the Sacrament is truly present.

Other defects which may occur in celebrating Mass, although they will not invalidate the Sacrament, may nevertheless give rise to sin or scandal.

Chapter I

Defective Materials

II. Defects may arise in respect of the materials if any requisite is lacking. It is requisite that the bread shall be wheaten, and the wine made from the juice of the grape. For such materials to be consecrated, they must be in the Celebrant's presence at the time of consecration.

(A) Defective Bread

III. 1. If the bread is not wheaten; or if so much other grain is mixed with the wheat that the bread is no longer wheaten; or if it is otherwise adulterated, the Sacrament is not consecrated.

III. 2. If it has been made with rose-water, or other distillation, it is doubtful whether it is consecrated.

III. 3. If it has begun to go mouldy, but is not yet bad; also if it is not unleavened, according to the practice of the Latin Church, it is consecrated, but the Celebrant commits a mortal sin.

III. 4. If the Celebrant discovers before the consecration that the host is corrupt or not wheaten, he should put aside that host, take another, and after offering it, at least mentally, continue from the place where he left off.

III. 5. If he makes the discovery after consecration, even though not until he has consumed that host, he should take another, offer it, and begin again from the consecration, that is, from the words: Qui pridie quam pateretur. If he has not yet consumed the former host, he should do so after receiving the Body and Blood, or give it to some one else to consume, or reverently reserve it somewhere. If he has consumed it, he should nevertheless consume the consecrated one as well; for the rule that the Sacrament must be completed is of more importance than the rule that it must be received fasting.

III. 6. If he makes this discovery after receiving the Blood, he must again take fresh bread, and wine with water. After offering them, the priest should consecrate, beginning at the words: Qui pridie etc. He should then immediately consume both, and go on with the Mass, so that the Sacrament may not remain incomplete, and that due order may be kept.

III. 7. If the consecrated host should disappear, either from some chance cause such as wind, or by a miracle, or from being consumed by some animal, and cannot be recovered; then another must be consecrated, after first being offered, beginning at the passage: Qui pridie quam pateretur.

(B) Defective Wine

IV. 1. If the wine has become mere vinegar, or wholly bad, or has been made from sour or unripe grapes, or has been mixed with so much water that the wine is adulterated; the Sacrament is not consecrated.

IV. 2. If the wine has begun to go sour, or bad, or is to a marked extent acid, or is unfermented grape-juice, or has been mixed with rose-water or some other distillation; the Sacrament is consecrated, but the Celebrant commits a mortal sin.

IV. 3. If the Celebrant discovers before the consecration of the Blood, even though he has already consecrated the Body, that the wine or water or both are not in the chalice, he must immediately take wine and water, and after offering them, proceed to consecrate, beginning at the words: Simili modo etc.

IV. 4. If he discovers after the words of consecration that water and not wine has been put into the chalice, he must put the water into some other vessel, then put wine with water into the chalice, and consecrate it, beginning at the words: Simili modo etc.

IV. 5. If he makes this discovery after receiving the Body, or the unmixed water, he must again take another host to consecrate, and also wine and water in the chalice, offer both, consecrate them, and receive them, notwithstanding that he will have broken his fast. Or, if the Mass is being celebrated in a public place, where a number of people are present, he may, to avoid scandal, take only the wine mixed with water, offer it, consecrate it, and immediately consume it, "thereafter continuing the Mass.

IV. 6. If he discovers, either before or after the consecration, that all the wine is sour, or otherwise bad, the same rule will hold good; he must proceed as if he had discovered that no wine, or only water, had been put into the chalice (see §§ 3 and 4 above).

IV. 7. If the Celebrant remembers that he has put no water in: then if the chalice has not yet been consecrated, he must immediately put water in, and say the words of consecration; but if the chalice has been consecrated, he is not to do so, for the water is not essential to the Sacrament.

IV. 8. If by reason of defective bread or wine the requisite materials are altogether unobtainable; then, if the Body has not yet been consecrated, he must proceed no further. If after the consecration of the Body, or even of the wine, he discovers that one element is defective, even though already consecrated; then, if the requisite material is absolutely unobtainable, he must proceed and finish the Mass, omitting however all words and actions relating to the defective element; but if it can be had by waiting awhile, he should wait, so that the sacrifice may not be left incomplete.

Chapter II

Defective Formula

V. 1. Defects may arise in respect of the formula, if anything is wanting to complete the actual words of consecration. The words of consecration, which are the formative principle of this Sacrament, are as follows: Hoc est enim Corpus meum; and: Hic est enim calix Sanguinis mei, novi et æterni testamenti; mysterium fidei, qui pro vobis et pro multis effundetur in remissionem peccatorum.  If any omission or alteration is made in the formula of consecration of the Body and Bloody, involving a change of meaning, the consecration is invalid. An addition made without altering the meaning does not invalidate the consecration, but the Celebrant commits a mortal sin.

V. 2. If the Celebrant cannot remember whether he has said the usual words of consecration, he is not on that account to be disturbed. But if he knows for certain that he has omitted something essential to the Sacrament, i.e. the formula of consecration, or part of it, he must repeat the formula, and go on with the Mass from that point. If he is doubtful, and yet thinks that very probably he has omitted something essential, he should repeat the formula conditionally, though the condition need not be expressed. But if it was something inessential, he need not repeat it, but should go on with the Mass.

Chapter III

Defects in the Celebrant

VI. Defects may arise in respect of those things requisite in the Celebrant. These are: first, intention; then spiritual disposition; bodily disposition; proper dress; and due performance of the actual ministry.

(A) Defective Intention

VII. 1. Since intention is required, in the following cases there is no consecration; (a) if the Celebrant does not intend to consecrate, but only to make a pretense of doing so; (b) if any hosts remain forgotten on the altar, or part of the wine or a host is out of sight, when he intends to consecrate only what he sees; (c) if the Celebrant, with eleven hosts before him, intends to consecrate only ten, without deciding which ten he means to consecrate. The case is different if he thinks there are ten, and means to consecrate all that he has before him; in that  case all are consecrated. Accordingly, every priest should always have this intention, namely, to consecrate all the hosts which are before him for consecration.

VII. 2. If the priest thinks that he is holding one host, but after the consecration discovers that two were stuck together, he should consume both together at the Communion. If he discovers, after receiving the Body and Blood, or even after the ablution, some other consecrated fragments, large or small, he should consume them, for they belong to the same sacrifice.

VII. 3. If an entire consecrated host is left over, he should put it with the others in the tabernacle. If he cannot do this, he should leave it lying on the corporal, suitably covered, for the priest who follows him to consume with the other host which he will consecrate. If neither of these courses is possible, he should reserve it suitably in the chalice or on the paten until it can be put into the tabernacle, or consumed by some one else. If it cannot be suitably reserved, he may consume it himself.

VII. 4. If the priest is distracted at the moment of consecration, so that his intention ceases to be actual, nevertheless, so long as he came to the altar with a virtual intention, that is, an intention of doing what the Church does, the Sacrament is consecrated. He should, however, take care to make his intention actual as well as virtual.

(B) Defective Spiritual Disposition

VIII. 1. If a priest celebrates who is suspended, excommunicated, unfrocked, irregular, or otherwise canonically impeded, his consecration of the Sacrament is valid, but he commits a mortal sin, both by receiving Communion unworthily, and also by exercising priestly functions, which have been forbidden to him.

VIII. 2. Any priest who, having access to a suitable confessor, celebrates in mortal sin, commits a grave sin.

VIII. 3. If a priest who, in case of necessity, not having access to a suitable confessor, celebrates in mortal sin, without contrition, he commits a grave sin. Not, however, if he is contrite; but even so, he must confess as soon as possible.

VIII. 4. If the priest remembers during the actual celebration of Mass that he is in mortal sin, he should make an act of contrition, at the same time resolving to confess and make satisfaction.

VIII. 5. Similarly, if he remembers that he is excommunicate, or suspended, or that the place is under interdict, he should make an act of contrition, and resolve to seek absolution. If, however, in the above cases, the consecration has not yet taken place, and there is no danger of scandal, he must discontinue the Mass he has begun.

(C) Defective Bodily Disposition

IX. 1. No one who has not fasted from midnight, even if he has taken only water,, or other drink or food, and that by way of medicine, and in the smallest quantity, may communicate or celebrate.

IX. 2. If food or drink has been taken before midnight, there is no sin, even though sleep has not followed, or the food remains undigested. It is, however, sometimes advisable to abstain on account of the mental disturbance, which takes away devotion.

IX. 3. If particles of food remaining in the mouth are swallowed, they do not impede Communion, since they are swallowed not as food, but as saliva. The same principle holds good if in washing the mouth a drop of water is unintentionally swallowed.

IX. 4. If several Masses are celebrated in one day, as at Christmas, the Celebrant should wash his fingers at each Mass in a clean vessel, but drink the ablution at the last Mass only.

IX. 5. If an emission has occurred during the night, either as a result of previous thought which was a mortal sin, or because of over-indulgence in food or drink, the priest must abstain from Communion and celebration, unless his confessor thinks otherwise. In case of doubt whether there was mortal sin in the preceding thought, it is advisable to abstain from celebrating, except in case of necessity. If it is certain that there was no mortal sin in the thought, or that there was no thought at all, but the trouble was due to a natural cause or to a diabolic illusion, the priest may communicate and celebrate; unless he is so troubled in mind on account of the bodily disturbance that it seems better to abstain.

Chapter IV

Defects Arising in the Actual Ministry

X. 1. Defects may also arise in the actual ministry, if any of its requisites are wanting, as in the following cases: if the celebration takes place in an unblessed place, or one not approved by the bishop, or on an unconsecrated altar, or on one not covered with the three cloths; if no wax candles are lit; if it is not the proper time for celebrating, which is commonly from dawn to noon; if the Celebrant has not said at least Matins and Lauds; if any of the priestly vestments are lacking; if the priestly vestments and the altar cloths have not been blessed by a bishop, or by some one else having the authority to bless them; if there is no cleric or other man to serve the Mass, or if some one serves who should not, such as a woman; if there is no proper chalice and paten (the chalice should have a cup of gold or silver or tin, and not of brass or glass); if the corporals are not clean (they should also be of linen, not decorated in the middle with silk, and blessed by a bishop or by someone else having the authority to bless them); if the priest celebrates with covered head, without a dispensation; if there is no Missal, even though he may know by heart the Mass he intends to say.

X. 2. If the church is violated while the priest is celebrating, and before he reaches the Canon, the Mass should cease; but not if he has already passed the Canon. If there is danger of an invasion by the enemy, or of flooding, or of the collapse of the building where Mass is being celebrated, before the consecration the Mass should cease; after consecration the priest may hasten to receive the Sacrament, leaving out everything else.

X. 3. If the priest becomes gravely ill, or faints, or dies, before the consecration, the Mass is left. If the Body only has been consecrated, not the Blood, or if both have been consecrated, another priest should continue the Mass from the point where it was interrupted, and in case of necessity a priest who is not fasting. If the first Celebrant does not die, but is ill, and yet able to communicate, and there is no other consecrated host, the priest who takes over the Mass should divide the host, and give one part to the sick priest, receiving the other half himself. If the priest dies when the formula of the consecration of the host has been half-said, the Mass need not be continued, since no consecration has taken place. If he dies when the formula of the consecration of the Blood has been half-said, another priest should continue the Mass, and repeat over the same chalice the complete formula from the words; Simili modo, postquam cœnatum est, or he may pronounce the complete formula over another prepared chalice, and receive the host of the first priest, and the Blood consecrated by himself, and then the remaining half-consecrated chalice.

X. 4. Anyone who, apart from such cases of necessity, does not receive the entire Sacrament, commits a mortal sin.

X. 5. If a fly, or spider, or anything else falls into the chalice before the consecration, the priest should throw the wine into a suitable place, and put other wine, mixed with a little water, into the chalice, offer it, and continue the Mass. If a fly or anything of the kind falls in after the consecration, and it is an occasion of nausea to the priest, he should take it out and wash it with wine, and after Mass burn it, and put the ashes and wine into the sacrarium. But if it is not an occasion of nausea, and involves no other risk, he should drink it with the Blood.

X. 6. If anything poisonous, or likely to cause vomiting, falls into the chalice, the consecrated wine must be put aside in another chalice, and other wine and water taken and consecrated afresh. After Mass, the Blood should be kept, placed on linen cloth or cotton wool until the wine has dried up; then the cotton wool should be burnt, and the ashes thrown into the sacrarium (or piscina).

X. 7. If anything poisonous touches the consecrated host, the priest should consecrate another, and receive it in the manner prescribed. The first one should be kept in the tabernacle apart, until the element is decayed, when it should be put into the sacrarium.

X. 8. If in receiving the Blood the fragment of the host remains in the chalice, the priest should draw it with his finger to the brim of the chalice, and consume it before washing his fingers; or he may pour in wine and so consume it.

X. 9. If the priest makes the discovery before consecration that the host is broken, but not so as to be evident to the people, he should consecrate that host; but if it would cause scandal to the people, he should take another and offer it; and if the host had already been offered, he should consume it after the ablution. If it is discovered before the offering that the host is broken, he should take another that is unbroken, if this can be done without scandal or overmuch delay.

X. 10. If through cold or through carelessness the consecrated host falls into the chalice, nothing need be repeated on that account; the priest should go on with the Mass, perform the ceremonies and usual crosses with the rest of the host, which is not wet with the Blood, if he can do so conveniently. But if the whole host has become wet, he should not take it out, but say everything omitting the crosses, and receive the Body and Blood together, crossing himself with the chalice, and saying: Corpus et Sanguis Domini nostri, etc.

X. 11. If in winter-time the Blood should become congealed in the chalice, the chalice should be wrapped in hot cloths. If this is of no avail, it should be placed in boiling water near the altar, until it liquifies, but no water must be allowed to get into the chalice.

X. 12. If through negligence any of the Blood of Christ is spilt, and it falls on the ground or on the table of the altar, it should be soaked up with a Purificator, and the place itself washed with another cloth, preferable another Purificator, a part of which has been dipped in clean water, and afterwards both Purificators rinsed three times, clean water which is thrown into the sacrarium after each of the three rinsings.  If it falls on the altar-stone, the priest should follow the previous procedure, making sure the spot is washed thoroughly, and the ablution thrown into the sacrarium. If on the altar linen, and it soaks through to the second or third cloths, the cloths should be thrice washed where the drop fell, with the chalice underneath, and the water of the washing thrown into the sacrarium. If on the corporal alone, or on the priest's vestments, they must be washed in the same way, and the ablution thrown into the sacrarium. If on the cloth or carpet underfoot, that too must be well washed in the manner just described.

X. 13. If it should happen that all the Blood is spilt after the consecration: any that remains, however little, should be swallowed, and the priest should deal with the rest in accordance with the above directions. If none at all remains, he should take wine and water again, and consecrate them, from the words: Simili modo, postquam cœnatum est, etc., after first offering the chalice.

X. 14. If the priest vomits the Eucharist, and the elements appear in their entirety, he should reverently swallow them, unless to do so will provoke nausea; in which case, the consecrated elements should be carefully separated, put in some place until they are decayed, and afterwards thrown into the sacrarium. If the elements are not apparent, the vomit should be burnt, and the ashes thrown into the sacrarium.

X. 15. If the consecrated host, or any particle of it, falls on the ground, it should be reverently taken up, and the place where it fell washed and slightly scraped, the dust or scraping being put into the sacrarium. If it falls outside the corporal on the altar cloth, or otherwise on any linen, such cloth or linen should be carefully washed, and the water used for washing thrown into the sacrarium.

X. 16. Finally, defects may arise in the actual ministry, if the priest is ignorant of the rites and ceremonies to be observed therein, all of which have been fully described in the above Rubrics.