ALL SOULS’ DAY AND THE MODERNIST RADICAL INVERSION OF LITURGICAL THEOLOGY

  

A self-refuting document: it claims Catholicity while teaching modernist new order innovations... 

Preamble: 

The “Liturgical Guidelines” attached above , dated 29th of October, 2025, makes it's readers believe the following things amongst others:

• That it was issued by the Catholic Sacreteriat of Nigeria.
• That it's motive is to ensure a “unified and meaningful” celebration in accordance with the norms of the Catholic Church. 
• That in the Catholic Church “All Souls Day” supersedes Sunday liturgy. 
• That the use of purple for All Souls Day is in accordance with the liturgical norm of the Catholic Church.

But when one examines the third and fourth points in the light of the second, it becomes obvious that such a guideline couldn't possibly come from a “Catholic Sacreteriat”. 

“All Souls’ Day supersedes the 31st Sunday in Ordinary Time?!”

Such words may sound harmless, yet they reveal a deep rupture in the spirit of Catholic worship.

To faithful souls formed by the ancient Missal, this announcement marks more than a scheduling change — it marks a radical inversion of theology.

For centuries the Church taught with her calendar, her colors, and her chants.

Every Sunday, every feast, every shade of vestment was a lesson in divine truth.

But in the new “Ordinary Time,” much of this sacred order has been turned upside down.

Examination of The Claims

(a) The Claim of Authenticity (“Catholic Secretariat”)

The title “Catholic Secretariat of Nigeria” gives an appearance of official ecclesiastical authority. But under closer scrutiny, the liturgical errors and doctrinal deviations in the document betray a Modernist and post-Vatican II spirit, incompatible with the norms of the true Catholic Church as defined before the 1960s revolution.

The real Catholic Church, faithful to the Roman Missal of St. Pius V and its subsequent authentic revisions, could never publish a guideline contrary to universal and immemorial liturgical law.

Hence, while the body may call itself Catholic, its principles reveal it to be an arm of the Modernist Conciliar Synodal sect, not the true visible Church of Christ.

(b) The Motive of “Unity and Meaningfulness”

The phrase “unified and meaningful celebration” sounds quite appealing. But it is a typical Modernist slogan, borrowed from the deviated liturgical movement. It places the “meaningfulness” of worship in human sentiment and communal participation, rather than in the objective adoration of God and the propitiatory Sacrifice of Christ.

The true motive of the liturgy, as taught by Pope Pius XII in Mediator Dei, is the glorification of God and the sanctification of souls, not a “meaningful experience” fashioned to the tastes of the faithful.

“It is neither wise nor laudable to reduce everything to antiquity or to innovations for the sake of novelty.” (Mediator Dei, n. 63)

Therefore, any document using such ambiguous Modernist language exposes itself as not Catholic in spirit nor intention.

(c) The Assertion that All Souls’ Day Supersedes Sunday Liturgy

“All Souls’ Day supersedes the 31st Sunday in Ordinary Time"?

No. In the Catholic Church there is no “ordinary time.” Sunday is not an “ordinary” day.

• It is the Lord’s Day — Dies Dominica — the weekly Easter.
• It is the day of the Resurrection, radiant with Alleluias, a foretaste of Heaven itself.
• No day of mourning could ever replace it.

Thus, in the Traditional Roman Rite, when All Souls’ Day (November 2) fell on a Sunday, it was transferred to Monday.

The Church prayed for her departed, but only after she had sung the victory of her Risen Lord.

“The joy of the Resurrection yields to no mourning,” 

 teaches the Catholic rubrics.

Hence, any statement that “All Souls’ Day supersedes Sunday liturgy” is false according to authentic Roman rubrics. It reflects modernist liturgical tampering introduced under modernist Papal Impostor, “Paul VI” — not the norms of the Catholic Church, but of the Synodal Novus Ordo establishment.

During a requiem Mass on the day of the  death of a faithful... 

(d) The Claim that Purple Vestments Accord with Catholic Norms

In wanting to make "purple" the uniform color for All Souls Day the Modernist Secretariat of Nigeria misleads it's deluded audience on two counts, at least: 

• It pretends to be speaking the mind of the Catholic Church, on the one hand
• And, in the other hand, it makes it seem as though  using any other color is not in conformity with the "norms" of the modernist impostor church it promotes. 

In the Traditional Roman Rite, the priest on All Souls’ Day appeared at the altar clothed in black —the solemn, silent color of grief purified by faith.

Before the liturgical chaos of the 1960s, the Roman Missal gave one clear command:

 “The color black is used in Masses of the Dead and on All Souls’ Day.” — Rubricae Generales Missalis Romani, XX, 4 (Typical Edition, 1948)

There were no options.

• Not violet.
• Not white.
• Not “whatever the bishop prefers.”

Only black — because only the truth of death could call souls to pray for mercy.

Fr. Nicholas Gihr, writing before the Modernist Council, explained:

“The color black is a sign of mourning and sorrow. It vividly reminds the faithful of the mournful condition of the soul separated from the body and awaiting purification.”—  The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, ch. 31

Black reminded the living that we must one day give account.

• It reminds us that Purgatory is real, that prayer is necessary, and that the Church weeps for her children until they are washed in the Precious Blood.
• It is never the color of despair — it is the color of truth and mercy.
• It reminds both priest and people of death, judgment, and mercy, and turned their hearts to the Crucified.
• It is not despairing black, but believing black —the black of the earth from which the lily of resurrection will spring.

The Modernist Turn

The Modernist "General Instruction" to it's Missal states that:

“Besides violet, white or black vestments may be worn at funeral services … according to local custom.”— GIRM, no. 346 (e)

So, at best, making purple the uniform color in Nigeria only conforms partly to the norm allowing options according to local customs. That norm is certainly not Catholic. 

Pope Pius XII warned precisely against such tendencies:

“They corrupt the meaning of sacred rites and symbols under pretext of adapting them to the needs of the people.” (Mediator Dei, n. 63)

Meanwhile, to impose violet as the exclusive color violates even the Modernist’s own rule of flexibility! Or does it not? 

In practice, however, the Modernist liturgists, uneasy with reminders of guilt and eternity, have  abandoned black vestments altogether. They prefer white or violet, under the pretext of “Christian optimism.”

Death, once faced with the Cross and penance, is now bathed in sentimental brightness or sentimental hope.  In their zeal to seem “hopeful,” they forgot that true hope is born from truth —and that truth begins by acknowledging the reality of death and the need for reparation.

It is important to note that this change was no accident — it was the symptom of a theology that wanted comfort without contrition, and hope without purification.

Yes. Long before the Modernist Council, Pope Pius XII condemned those who wished to banish black and penance from the liturgy. In his encyclical Mediator Dei (1947), he warned:

“There are some who are bent on the elimination of black from the liturgical colors as a sign of mourning. Such innovators do not understand the meaning of sacred symbols, nor do they respect the venerable traditions of the Church.” — Mediator Dei, §63 (emphasis added)

The Pope foresaw the danger: men who would strip the altar of its tears and paint over the Cross with false cheer.

Pius XII foresaw that tampering with vestments and sacred signs would lead to a loss of faith in the unseen realities they express — sin, judgment, and the need for redemption.

He warned that to strip the liturgy of its solemn symbols was to strip the soul of its sense of the sacred.

And what he feared came to pass:

When, in practice, black was banished, the doctrine it silently preached began to fade.

For centuries, the black vestments of Requiem Masses had taught even the simplest soul that death is not the end, that sin leaves a wound, and that the dead need our prayers.

When that color disappeared from the altar, so too did the sense of Purgatory in the minds of men.

No longer seeing the priest vested in mourning for the departed, the faithful ceased to think of the Church Suffering — those souls awaiting purification in the fire of divine love.

• When the altar lost its black, the people lost their memory of the need for reparation, of Masses offered for the dead, of souls pleading for help.
• Bright colors spoke only of Heaven, and the modern world, already drunk with self-assurance, forgot that few go straight there.

Thus, the fading of black was not an artistic change, but a theological loss —a silence where once the Church had spoken most eloquently of mercy, justice, and hope beyond the grave.

The Inversion of order and in Practice

The reformers of the Novus Ordo flattened the majestic order of the Church’s year.

• No longer “Sundays after Pentecost,” but “Ordinary Time.”
• No longer firm hierarchy of feasts, but an open field of “options.”
• The sanctuary became a workshop of human preference instead of divine instruction.

So, in that wonderland one hears:

 “All Souls’ Day supersedes [the 31st] Sunday in Ordinary Time.”

• The Lord's Day, the day of Resurrection replaced by mourning;
• Black, the color of contrition, replaced by white, the color of triumph, or purple, color of hope.
• The divine order overturned by pastoral novelty.
• What was once a fixed catechism in color, time, and rite has become an open field of options.
• What was once the Church’s language of truth has become a language of convenience.

It is not merely the rubrics that have changed — it is the spirit.

• The true Roman spirit said: Lex orandi, lex credendi — the law of prayer is the law of belief.
• The modern spirit says instead: Lex sentimenti — the law of feeling.

In this change to the "law of sentiment" a reversal of order is evident:

In the Traditional Faith 

• The Lord’s Day is supreme, never displaced. 
• Black teaches man to fear sin and pray for mercy.
• The liturgy is received, not invented.
• The focus is on God’s glory and judgment.

While in the Modernist Reform

• Sunday can be replaced by any “pastoral observance.”
• White conceals sorrow under empty cheer.
• The liturgy is managed and redesigned.
• The focus drifts to man’s comfort and emotion.

This is why the Church always teach:

 “The liturgy is the guardian of faith.”

Change the liturgy — and the faith it teaches begins to fade.

Summing Up: Logical Incoherence of the Document

If the second claim — that the guideline seeks to ensure conformity with the norms of the Catholic Church — were true, then the third and fourth points could never stand.

For those points contradict the very norms they pretend to uphold.

Hence, the document is self-refuting:

• It claims Catholicity while teaching modernist Novus Ordo innovations.
• It pretends to unity while severing itself from Roman tradition.
• It claims fidelity to Church norms while denying the mind of the Church expressed for centuries.

Thus, the so-called “Liturgical Guidelines” cannot have originated from a true Catholic Secretariat, because:

• It contradicts the authentic liturgical law of the Church.
• It manifests the Modernist spirit condemned by St. Pius X and Pius XII.
• It promotes practices foreign to the Roman Rite.

Therefore, its true origin lies not in the Catholic Church, but in the Conciliar counterfeit which has usurped her name and institutions after a period of subtle but calculated infiltration, by all means diabolical.

All who lay claim to the Catholic name, so noble a title, must be taught to know that 

• black, not purple or any other color, is the liturgical color of All Souls’ Day; 
• that the Sunday takes precedence in the ancient rubrics; 
• and that any body promoting otherwise cannot claim Catholic authority.