The Devil's Strategy And Eucharistic Piety in the Ecumenical Mess

Preamble

    There is rather an endless tug-of-war between the conservatives and the liberals and progressives within the confines of the Modernist robber church occupying Catholic buildings. To be sure, this breeds both laughter and pity in one with an informed Catholic Common Sense: laughter - when one considers that the conservatives are bent on making the ecumenical mess Catholic by all means (like adorning a pig with lipstick, expecting it to remain thus made-up without returning to the mud, and like on insisting on placing order for a healthy poison…); pity - when one considers that the majority of the conservative ilk are blinds led by the blind. 

Lipstick on a pig:
a type for the nostalgia of Conservatives
 stuck in the modernist impostor church
occupying Catholic buildings
on making the ecumenical mess Catholic by all means... 

    Recently, one stuck in the Modernist robber church who clings to the Catholic name and is intent on seeing everything Catholic about the ecumenical mess wrongly called the new order of the Mass, or the ordinary form of the Mass in the Roman Rite, blamed the devil for his strategy of ruing effective preparation on account of which he makes its attendants not to have an active participation. The "Catholics" thus preyed upon by the devil, are said by this fellow to receive 'communion' but "do not understand the great things happening therein". They "receive communion as though it is normal bread and never get transformed". They are said to be "only Catholics in name and are far from being Catholics in fact". 

    More so, on account of the devil's strategy, the author wonders little why the worship sessions in the Modernist robber church, which he identifies as "Masses", "are becoming places of entertainment, self-centered worship, stripped of the awe and ardor that ordinarily permeate the sacrificial nature of the Catholic Mass".

    In the "awe and ardor" clause, one gleans a nostalgia that is quite understandable. Now, to the extent the so-called "new order of the Mass" is the starting point in preaching Eucharistic Piety, what is really the devil's strategy: to rue the preparation process of those who attend it; Or to make those of conservative bent intent on seeing it to be a "Catholic Mass" which must be imbued with "awe and ardor" reflective of the "great things" intrinsically characteristic of Catholic Mass? It is this question that we will attempt to address here… 

The Disjunctive Conjunction "Or" and the Emphatic Conjunction "That is" and the Essence of the So-called New Order of the Mass:

In basic grammar, a disjunctive conjunction indicates a contrast or alternative between words, clauses, etc. Thus, the two or more parts of a sentence joined by a disjunctive conjunction hold true as alternatives one to another, though no two parts may hold true at the same time. Classic examples could be: "either Kofi or Koku may go"; "your action is either morally good or evil", etc.

   Now, according to one translation, in describing the ecumenical impiety falsely called the "new order of the Mass", the Modernist liturgical wreck-novators, helped by six Protestant clerics, have this to say in their "General Introduction to the Roman Missal" (GIRM): 

"At Mass or the Lord’s Supper the People of God is called together, with a Priest presiding and acting in the person of Christ, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord or Eucharistic Sacrifice"...  (GIRM, #27)

   In an explicitly ecumenical spirit, this description allows that the ecumenical service could be either seen as "Mass" or "the Lord's Supper". This alternative viewpoint depends on whether the person identifies as a Catholic or Protestant, and both would be right in each case. 

    Meanwhile, from the official translation the emphatic conjunction "that is" was used thus:

At Mass, that is, the Lord’s Supper, the People of God is called together, with a priest presiding and acting in the person of Christ, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord, the Eucharistic Sacrifice.

By way of synthesis, to the Modernists, the "Mass" re-presents the Lord's Supper. This affirmation is ecumenically acceptable as opposed to the ecumenically unacceptable Catholic doctrine that Mass re-presents the Sacrifice of the Cross in an un-bloody manner. 

    Now, while "the Lord's Supper" can have an Orthodox meaning, it must be noted that Protestants, led by apostate Luther, adopted it:

• to deny, without any apology, that the Mass was a true, unbloody Sacrifice of the real Body and Blood of Christ,
• to distinguish their communion services from the Catholic Mass,
• and to emphasize that their service is nothing more than a simple memorial meal. 

    Also, having equated "Mass" with "the Lord's Supper" with undertones of ambiguity - always to pay lip service to the conservatives, the ecumenical motive for such an equation demanded the systematic removal of liturgical doctrines and gestures presupposing the Catholic idea of Mass, -the same principles and gestures removed by apostate Luther in concocting what he termed the "evangelical Mass". 

    Thus, while the ecumenical service is acceptable to a conservative Modernist, liberal/progressive Modernist (Protestants within the walls) and a Protestant outside the walls, to Catholics simply so, it is essentially protestant and therefore constitutes false worship, a new religion, absolutely preposterous and unacceptable, worthy of nothing but an anathema. 

 

When pitiful conservatives stuck
in the quicksand of modernist impiety clamor
 for a 'reverent Mass' while referring to the ecumenical mess,
think of a 'healthy poison'... and understand the misnomer...   

The Wonder of a Eucharistic Piety in a Conservative Modernist

    Having seen that the New "Mass" and Protestant "Lord's Supper" are one and the same thing, on what grounds could a Catholic-like sense of Eucharistic piety subsist in the nostalgic conservatives? We find the explanation in the Modernist notion of faith. 

    To the Modernists, faith has nothing to do with yielding to "God the revealer full submission of intellect and will" as the Catholic Faith requires. On the contrary, it is a sentiment of the heart, a religious sense, which originates from man's need for the divine and is brought forth by a religious experience which surpasses all rational experience. This Modernist faith does not conform to an objective divine reality but imposes its own fantasy on reality and this projected reality must be true since it is a product of the sentiments of the person experiencing it. This faith is akin to Protestant confidence and affirmation which what you believe becomes true to you, not that you believe because it is true.

    Thus, while, helped by six Protestant clerics outside the walls, Modernists have removed every idea of sacrifice, Transubstantiation, Real Presence etc., in order to concoct the ecumenical service, they insist on using Catholic terms as alternatives to Protestant terms. That being so, while in reality it is nothing but ordinary bread that is received in the ecumenical service, the conservatives reading those Catholic terminologies conceives those ideas [ideas of Sacrifice, Transubstantiation, Real Presence…] and force them onto the ecumenical mess: and this is no little a violence. 

    Now, the progressives and liberals, knowing exactly that what they get is what they see -ordinary bread and wine; treat it as such, having no qualms of conscience. Knowing that their assembly is man-centered and meant to meet the needs of modern man, they are ever evolving in their attempt to make it more and more pleasing and consoling to modern man as such: modern man whose interest is only sustained by something energetically entertaining and forcefully indulging to his five senses. 

    But the conservatives, fooled by the lip service paid them by means of the use of Catholic terminologies, one the one hand, accuses the progressives and liberals of being irreverent and guilty of sacrilege; on the other hand, they are filled with a nostalgia for an outward manifestation of the sentiments of awe and ardor which they experience as they contemplate those terms bespeaking a Catholic reality -a reality indeed great and tremendous. What a great deception: but "Who hath believed our report?" (Isaias. 53:3)

The Devil in the Details 

    An average student of ecclesiastical history will recall apostate Luther saying of himself that during his time spent in solitude (in the wake of his revolt) he "was holding conferences with infernal spirits for the abolition of the Mass". 

• After such conferences with infernal spirits, he came to the conclusion that "we can believe without heresy that real bread is present on the altar". For which reason he insisted on "communion " in the hand…

• After such conferences with infernal spirits, he came to the conclusion that "the Mass is nothing but the words of Christ "take and eat", "take and drink"...: I.e. it is simply a memorial narrative of the words of Christ and nothing more - no consecration takes place, no Transubstantiation… He came to the conclusion that the Mass is an act of praise and Thanksgiving: not a good work, a sacrifice of expiation…

• After such conferences with infernal spirits, he came to the conclusion that the Sacrament of Orders was invented by the Pope's Church -that Catholic priests have no special powers to effect consecration and Transubstantiation; and that, the character of priesthood is infused in all mankind as the soul into the body: thus for him, the people gathered celebrate the evangelical Mass, with someone simply delegated to preside as a man of order and discipline…

• After such conferences with infernal spirits he came to the conclusion that, while the Catholic Mass, which he called "cult", was formerly meant to render homage to God, his evangelical Mass shall be directed to man in order to console him and enlighten him; whereas the sacrifice held a pride of place (in the Catholic Mass), the sermon will be the most important part of his evangelical Mass… 

In these and all that pertain to the Protestant impiety championed by apostate Luther, we see, as a renowned author puts it, a collection of past heresies into a great pandemonium called "Protestantism". 

    Now, Pope St. Pius X tells us that Modernism is the "synthesis of all heresies", and that Modernists continue on the path begun by the Protestants, and that this path is headed to atheism (Pascendi, # 39). Logically continuing on the path of Protestantism, though intent on remaining inside the walls of the Church:

• Modernists revised the Rites of all the Sacraments, and in so doing rendered the Rite for Episcopal Consecration absolutely null, utterly void in the Catholic sense of making a Bishop. It is in no way an accident that the promulgation of this revised Rite of Episcopal Consecration came first, and then the ecumenical service. With no intention to make a Bishop in the Catholic sense, and thus no intention to make Priests for the sacrifice of the Mass in the Catholic sense, the stage was set for the introduction of the ecumenical mess. 

• In the ecumenical service, just like in apostate Luther's communion service, the people, exercising their priesthood, celebrate while a nominal 'ministerial priest', robed with something that camouflages as Catholic Priestly vestments, presides, playing the role of a man of order and discipline for the assembly.

    Now, though their liberal counterparts have seen to it to be well documented, with the help of six Protestant clerics, that their assembly is exactly the same as Luther's evangelical Mass (recall the disjunctive conjunction "or" and the emphatic conjunction "that is"), avid "conservatives', having no love of the truth and thus no interest in informing their conscience, continue to see it as a Catholic Mass -the so-called ordinary form of…you know what! 

    Also, concerned Catholics with informed Catholic Common Sense have strived to awaken such as are yet able to recognize the ecumenical mess for what it really is, the reward they get is their being tagged "deluded", "rigid", "heretics", "fundamentalists", "schismatics", "clericalists", the list goes on…

    Who, taking into consideration the fine details of our analysis thus far, cannot see the devil's strategy at work? What strategy? To keep the avid conservatives in the Modernist robber church who clings tenaciously to the Catholic name fooled into calling the ecumenical mess a Catholic Mass so as to hasten the normalization of atheism to which the path first taken by Protestants and continued by Modernists is headed. 

    Thus fooled and bent on satisfying their need for something Characteristically Catholic, the pitiful conservatives imagine Sacrifice, Transubstantiation and Real Presence where none of these realities exist. They receive a mere bread (piously kneeling) believing it to be the Holy Eucharist. They worship an ordinary bread (genuflecting and prostrating) as if it were the Blessed Sacrament. What a great deception: but we ask again "Who hath believed our report?" (Isaias. 53:3)

    On the flip side of the coin, the liberals give no sign of any belief whatsoever, and correctly so, that their assembly is a sacrifice in the Catholic sense, nor do they pretend to suggest that any vestige of the idea of Transubstantiation and Real Presence subsists in their assembly: exercising their cherished priesthood they dance and clap, eat and drink (with their own hands, and standing) and merry round and round and round... 

In Fine

    Many, in their days of utter blindness concerning the whole truth about Vatican II and it's aggiornamento in doctrine, worship and discipline, wondered why what they read either in the lives of the Saints or books written by Saints about the beauty, awe and ardor of the Mass was never part of their own experience in participating in what they knew, but falsely so, to be the "new order of the Mass". 

    However, having love of the truth, and willing to fully submit their intellect and will to the Church teaching on the authority of God, it is often the edifying story that a rudimentary intellectual exposition to the fact of the substantial difference between the modernist ecumenical mess and the Catholic Mass was sufficient to undeceive them, and being thus undeceived, fleeing they fled the assembly of Modernist impiety without looking back. 

    That goes to show, as St. Thomas Aquinas puts it, that "to one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible".