1969: The Substitution That Made Abolition Unnecessary

Fearing that the Latin Mass may be abolished is a medicine after death. Since 1969, it was already treated as expendable… 

Prologue : No Quarter for Nostalgia

"Plans to abolish Latin Mass would be diabolical”; “banning or suspending the Traditional Latin Mass can only be inspired by the devil” 

These are words attributed to the conservative modernist nominal “Cardinal” Sarah, who passes for a revered spokesman of the conservative neotrads within the Modernist ecumenical synodal Pan-Religious impostor church occupying Catholic buildings. 

His words reveal both the tragic and absurd phenomenon of conservative neotrads expecting sympathy from their modernist masters/ comrades who openly despise what they love. They plead for space from men who see Tradition not as a treasure, but as a nuisance; an outdated relic, a stumbling block to ecumenism, an obstacle to their beloved, and irreversible, aggiornamento.

But, you see? This hope is pure illusion. Modernism does not make peace with permanence. A liturgy that teaches, judges, and condemns by its very clarity cannot be “included” without being neutralized. The Traditional Mass is tolerated only so long as it is being prepared for burial.

Here lies the hard lesson: Tradition is not preserved by permission but by fidelity. It does not survive by compromise, but by confession. It does not beg a future—it stands as a verdict.

When the nominal “Cardinal” Sarah warns that abolishing the Latin Mass would be diabolical, the traditional Catholic responds soberly:

The diabolical act did not begin with abolition. It began with substitution in 1969. 

One would wish that the conservative neotrads and their spokesmen listen to the voice of informed Catholic common sense! 

 A Reminder: The Devil Does Not Destroy; He Replaces

We learn this lesson from Scripture and Tradition: the diabolical method is rarely open annihilation.

It is counterfeiting.

• Not atheism, but false worship
• Not open rebellion, but obedient-looking disobedience
• Not clear-cut rupture, but so-called “organic development” that quietly inverts.

Thus, the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae in 1969 was already the decisive diabolical act. Take it or leave it. 

The mindset was:

“If we make the new Mass normative, the old Mass will die naturally.”

Key tactics:

• Declare the new Mass the ordinary form
• Remove the old Mass from seminaries
• Omit it from official formation

When nostalgic outcry arose against the so-called “normative” Mass, they offered to allow a version of the Latin Mass to survive only as an exception, creating the appearance of continuity while ensuring progression towards extinction.

Why They Shied Away From Explicit Abolition And Would Do Still

The radical modernists understood, and understand still, that explicit suppression would:

• Provoke resistance
• Raise theological red flags
• Force a debate about limits of authority
• Expose discontinuity

So the preferred method is bureaucratic gradual erasure, not confrontation; eclipse, not abolition. 

Noteworthy is that uncompromising Catholics who recognized the practical abolition have been unrelenting in unmasking the rupture. Unfortunately, the majority prefers to listen to the Modernist impostors with their choiced strategy, duplicity.

You see? 

• The ancient Mass [ forged by centuries of saints, martyrs, monks, and confessors ] was not refuted as heretical.
• It was simply declared pastorally insufficient, and by “pastoral”, we must understand ecumenism and its parent, modernism. 
•  Not Reformed, But Disarmed

We are often told the new mass is a reformed version of the Old Mass even though the “Ottaviani Intervention” definitively exposed that lie. 

Traditional theology does not view the Mass primarily as a communal meal or pedagogical tool.

The Mass is:

• A propitiatory sacrifice
• Offered to God, not to man
• In continuity with Calvary made present

The Traditional Mass expresses this in gesture, silence, direction, language, and immutability.

The Novus Ordo, however, from a traditional lens, systematically:

• Reduced sacrificial language
• Multiplied options (the enemy of reverence)
• Multiplied "real presences"
• Shifted orientation versus populum
• Replaced sacral silence with constant speech
• Opened the sanctuary to improvisation

As obvious, none of this denies the Sacrifice explicitly.

But it muffles it, just like incense replaced with air freshener.

An unmistakable pattern confirms the principle: the devil need not destroy belief; only make it optional.

The Indult Latin Mass: A Cage Which Sarah Won’t Have Taken Away. 

From what we have seen already, the indult Latin Mass is not a gift.

• It is a reservation.
• A tolerated exception.
• A controlled enclave.
• A museum exhibit with guards.

Why is it a trap?

Because:

• It reframes Tradition as a preference, not a norm
• It places the Mass of the Ages under permission
• It trains the faithful to say:

 “We are allowed to exist — for now.”

Tradition becomes something one must request, justify, and defend —instead of something the Church must hand on intact.

Thus the faithful are slowly catechized:

• The old Mass is beautiful, but unnecessary.
• The new Mass is sufficient, but banal.

And once that lesson is learned, abolition becomes easy.

Yes, The indult is not mercy. It is containment. Based on this scheme: 

• The old Mass is tolerated temporarily
• Only for the elderly or “nostalgic”
• Under restrictive conditions

With the expectation of eventual disappearance

Indults serve to:

• Isolate traditionalists
• Prevent martyrdom narratives
• Keep opposition manageable

What Sarah and his admirers fear is that the duration of the toleration of the Latin Mass seems to be elapsing. 

The Real Diabolical Abolition Happened in Souls

In all this, one thing stands true: the feared abolition happened, not in judicial terms but spiritual.

The Roman Rite formed:

• Priests who feared God
• Laity who knew they were at Calvary
• A sense of the sacred that shaped entire civilizations

After 1969:

• Vocations collapsed in once strongly Catholic populations.
• Belief in the Real Presence plummeted
• Reverence evaporated
• The sanctuary became a stage
• Man replaced God at the center.

And that inversion is what tradition calls diabolical.

Why Abolition Is Only the Final Act

Abolishing the Latin Mass outright would be brutal to the Modernist agenda.

But unnecessary.

Once the deluded masses are convinced that:

• Tradition is optional
• Liturgy is adaptable
• Worship must reflect modern sensibilities

…the war is already won.

The devil smiles 

• not when altars are smashed,
•  but when they are redesigned.

Conclusion: 

From the traditional Catholic perspective:

What nominal “Cardinal” Sarah fears for tomorrow has already happened since 1969, being systematically executed. 

The indult Mass is a bait, a trap, to control the narrative.

Fearing that the Latin Mass may be abolished is a medicine after death. Since 1969, it was already treated as expendable.

And what is treated as expendable, is on its way to being extinct, however slowly, but surely. 

Needless to say, this drama holds true only within the Modernist ecumenical synodal Pan-Religious impostor church occupying Catholic buildings. The Catholic Church moves on, unperturbed by the modernist scheming. Uncompromising Catholics, fully aware of their right, are well acquainted with the fact that that Church neither needs permission to act in her own self survival, nor do Catholics need permission from the most pernicious of the adversaries of the Church to be Catholic. 

The traditional Catholic Mass, unchanged and unchaining, continues to form:

• Priests who fear God
• Laity who know they are at Calvary
• A sense of the sacred that is shape entire civilizations from modern "catacombs". 

This is certain: Tradition survives precisely because it is received and guarded, not managed, engineered, or administered by committees. It survives because it submits men to God, not because it is managed by men who submit God to secular one-world policy.