Sunday, July 18, 2021



From the time I was baptized in early January of 1954 until about 1966 with its interim Roman Missal, the only Mass I experienced was the Tridentine Mass. From Advent of 1969 until September of 2007, I only experienced the 1970 and future editions of the Roman Missal. Since 2007 until this day, I have celebrated both the Tridentine Mass and the Post Vatican II Mass. No matter the form of the Mass I celebrated both forms informed the other and enriched the other in my mind and personal spirituality.

The 1970 Roman Missal when celebrated with dignity and reverence brings forward in the very same doctrinal and dogmatic way the one Sacrifice of the Risen Lord and the real presence of the Risen Lord under the sacramental “accidents” of Bread and Wine. 

Both Masses have the Liturgy of the Word and prayers offered to God. 

If I were to return to only celebrating or attending the reformed or revised Mass of the post Vatican II Church, I would be spiritually nourished and experience what God desires for the Church and me, eternal salvation in Christ and the Liturgy of the heavenly banquet. 

While I have my personal tastes, likes and dislikes and can be fickle in those sentiments or eclectic, in humility I would accept only one form of the Mass that the Church allows. It is called holy obedience tinged with sacrifice which might lead to a purification of my sin of pride in terms of what I want and desire. 

Someone once said that the theme song of hell is “I Did It My Way.”

When it comes to the Mass, maybe one door will be closed, but the Mass will continue, Christ’s one Sacrifice will be made present as well as our Risen Lord, Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity. It doesn’t get any better than that. 


Tom Marcus said...

Father, since you are so determined to continue your practice of "spanking" Traditionalists and "coloring-in" the lines of the dishonest caricatures of Traditionalists by people like M.T., I think it's time that we all confront what too many people are afraid to admit. Valid or not, the NOVUS ORDO ITSELF WAS A HUGE BLUNDER.

• A contrived Mass concocted by a committee filled with Protestants
• NOT even called for by Vatican II
• Consistently violates Sacrosantcum Concilium
• Designed so that the Mass would no longer "offend" Protestants
• Designed under the leadership of a highly questionable (and likely Freemasonic) bishop
• Responsible for an almost immediate logarithmic drop in Mass attendance that continues decades later
• "Flexible" rubrics responsible for countless liturgical abuses and sacrilege
• "Entry Point" for the Protestant-style Communion in the hand, another source of multiple sacrileges

Father, one might question whether Paul VI had the right do impose this upon the Church, but in the end, we can all agree that we obeyed him and that this Mass is valid. But let's also be honest enough to admit that our sensibilities have been dumbed-down and conditioned to accept this status quo, simply because that which, Benedict XVI assured us WAS NEVER ABROGATED, was forcibly taken away in a manner that was unquestionably unjust.

Yeah, the Novus Ordo is valid. We can be fed by its minimalist style of worship, just as every prisoner can be fed by a daily diet of beans, bread, water and a vitamin pill.

Take a teenager to a TLM and they will, at least, notice something incredible going on. Take a teenager to a Novus Ordo and you'll hear snickering. They KNOW the 70's are over.

You KNOW we are "settling" in a Church that ought to be thriving.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Tom, I don't agree with your caricature and elitism and it is this kind of thinking which is not just present with you but with many others that has led to what Pope Francis has done. You and others like you will have to take credit for that and apologize to the thousands of other faithful Catholics who prefer the Tridentine Mass but also respect the post Vatican II Mass and the One made present there, for the pope's reaction to such trash as you propose. I will not post any other comments from you or anyone else with these kinds of heretical/schismatic sentiments.

Tom Marcus said...

Father, I obey my Sunday obligation and attend the Novus Ordo almost all of the time, as I have done since it was introduced.

I accept that it is valid.

I do not deny the Real Presence in that Mass. I simply believe that the Real Presence deserves better.

I simply brought up several historical and provable points about the Mass.

How does that make me a heretic or a schismatic?

How about specifically pointing out where I am wrong, rather than cancelling me?

Merely silencing the debate won't make the questions go away.

Tom Marcus said...

And Father, if you actually think the pope restricted the TLM because of Traditionalists "bad attitudes", I fear we have to disagree. I still contend he has intended to do this all along and for far deeper reasons complaints about "Traditionalist Elitism". Traditionalists could have been as innocent and pleasant as angels and this still would have happened.

Again, if I am so wrong, then instruct me. Give me the specifics of where I am "elitist" and "schismatic". I would hope you would want to save my soul, not cancel it.

Tom Marcus said...


I am not the kind of person who would attack or insult a priest and I certainly do not wish to do so to you. Please forgive me for offending you.

However, I cannot help but wonder just WHAT I have written that has offended you. Your act of cancelling me looks more like you don't want to debate any of my points, so you are choosing to say you are offended so that you don't have to bother.

Please prove me wrong.

davis Byrd Longsorth said...

what is Pope Benedict thinking about this?

Anonymous said...

The honest truth is that what the pope has done was to symbolically spit in the face of people he despises, namely Catholics who believe everything the Church has ever taught. Ok. I can take a punch.

And the big pink elephant in the room is money. Who is going to support what left in the Novus Ordo church. The People who attend a Novus Ordo parish will shrink to almost nothing within the next 10 - 15 years, if it takes that long. All these modernist clerics live like kings or should I say queens. Doesn’t Wuerl get 2 million dollars a year? And for what. What about the rest of them. Money dries up. Traditional Catholics are VERY generous but that is gone now.

Traditional Catholics will find a way to attend the Latin Mass regardless of Francis. And their numbers will grow. So until a real reformer in the Church appears the Church will be split. And Cardinals like Burke and Sarah who occasionally voice a little concern but back down are worthless. We need a John the Baptist. And that’s not happening anytime soon. So the Church will continue to become a place of rigidity and confusion. The church in Germany will continue down the road of heresy and nothing will be down. Because they have all the money.

The first reading for today’s Novus Ordo mass speaks perfectly right to Francis. But his heart is hardened. His decisions no longer bother me at all. Do your best Francis. I am not leaving the one True Catholic Church. I’m staying. I will never bend to Novus Ordoism though. It’s God’s Church and He is in charge and Francis will be dead soon. And then who gets the last laugh. All will be restored in God’s good time.

Anonymous said...

"A contrived Mass concocted by a committee filled with Protestants" is NOT an "historical" and "provable" "fact."

First, is it LOADED with inneuendo, hinting at subterfuge and dishonesty on the part of the participants.

Other assertions are equally non-historical, such as:

"Designed under the leadership of a highly questionable (and likely Freemasonic) bishop."

"Someone wrote that that someone thought that someone had heard that some bishop might have been a Freemason" does not equal an historical/proveable fact.

Jody Peterman said...

Fr. McDonald:

You are a good holy priest but your response Tom Marcus is laughable. You just basically said Tolkien, Agathie Christie, Michael Davies, Padre Pio, most of the Priest of the Fraternity of St Peter and Institute of Christ the King, HALF of the 30% who believe in the real presence, and Josef Ratzinger all have heretical sentiments.

Michael Davies was a prophet and predicted this mess 100% going back to the 1970's. It all came true. Read Ratzinger's Spirit of the Liturgy again please. You must have forgotten 1/3 of what he said.

Can you tell me which bullet points are not true? I am confident i could prove every assertion he makes in a court of law between the use of VII documents, encyclicals and statistical data.

• A contrived Mass concocted by a committee filled with Protestants
• NOT even called for by Vatican II
• Consistently violates Sacrosantcum Concilium
• Designed so that the Mass would no longer "offend" Protestants
• Designed under the leadership of a highly questionable (and likely Freemasonic) bishop
• Responsible for an almost immediate logarithmic drop in Mass attendance that continues decades later
• "Flexible" rubrics responsible for countless liturgical abuses and sacrilege
• "Entry Point" for the Protestant-style Communion in the hand, another source of multiple sacrileges

And give me a break on the apology. We all knew Francis was bringing the HAMMER from day one. Our traditional friends in South America called this on day one. Rorate Caeli ran several articles at the beginning of his papacy predicting this.

Idols on altars and radical liberals like Bernadine, McCarrick, Gregory, Cupich, are the new orthodox.

Good Men like Tom Marcus and Cardinal Burke express heretical sentiments. We are in a Civil War for the heart of the Church and the good are called bad and the bad are called good.

John Nolan said...

Fr Allan,

May I make a few points regarding the Council and the new Mass?

1. The rite that was more or less complete by 1967, promulgated in 1969 and made effective in 1970 was in conformity with Sacrosanctum Concilium. The much-quoted article 23 is irrelevant. The reformers argued that their innovations were 'genuinely and certainly' required for the good of the Church, and Paul VI agreed.

2. The interim rite in use from late 1964 to mid-1967 was not the 'true Mass of the Council'. It was simply the first stage in the reform, and Inter Oecumenici made this clear. The further revision in May 1967 marked the definitive replacement of the Roman Rite by a radically new one. It was a trial run for the Novus Ordo, which was already in existence (the Missa Normativa).

3. Paul VI's famous allocution of Advent 1969 comes across as somewhat strange in that he spends most of it lamenting what will be lost (including Latin and most of the corpus of Gregorian Chant) regardless of the fact that most parishes had ditched Latin and Chant some years ago, and most of the Gregorian repertoire was to survive unscathed in the reformed Graduale Romanum of 1974. Nevertheless he stressed that the Mass he was introducing was that willed by the Council.

By the way, if you assume that PF has simply acted out of pique because people have criticized him, then you do him no favours and make his Motu Proprio look even more dubious. Nothing Tom Marcus has written is remotely heretical or schismatic, although one may argue with some of his propositions. If you are going to censor individuals because of their 'kind of thinking' you are on a slippery slope.

Chip said...

I have been to bunches of Masses worldwide and nationwide in my military/govt career.

As a rule, I have seen far far fewer (to zero) folk at the new Mass praying before/after Mass or rapt in seeking God during Mass nor will those others there allow them to do so, while have always seen more such folk at the old Mass....but never large numbers.

Both rites heavily infested with cultural/ethnic magic cookie consumer types far more worried as to following a specific book/rite and not messing up by standing/kneeling at wrong time, as if a coordinated swim team competition and not wishing to lose points.

Neither group there to actually pray, nor them and their families caring if anyone else able to pray, either. Both Masses have struck me often as guilty of participating in organized sacrilege.

I also have been to amazingly prayerful/spiritual Masses both old and new, and why I became Catholic in the first place, fleshing out the ancient doctrines and showing they lived, while also saying very few of those in the new Mass, and more of them in the old Mass, but never that great a number in the latter.

The problem in the Church is not the rite, but in the people, to include bishops and priests, with them all fixated on only their performative function rather than fostering and developing and living a loving of their God, and God the center of their lives and not the world. It is the pharisees vs sadducees otherwise and in the main. The latest papal fiat only more empty petty vindictiveness along those lines and more a political struggle.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

DBL, I wonder too and my heart aches for what should have been his legacy and yes I agree that Pope Francis has overreacted and over corrected. He could have given a much better way forward, but it is what it is. I suspect we'll know Pope Benedict's feeling after he died.

Tony V said...

Look, anyone who knows the first thing about church history knows that we've had lots of bad popes. Is it that surprising that we've got a bad one now? Fr McDonald is entitled to his opinion and has his practicalities to deal with, including his bishop. Personally, if I were a priest I would ignore this pope. Catholicism isn't a slavish devotion to a at least, it never was till 1870.

John Nolan said...

Not long ago I applied to Pope Francis a comment that was originally made by Lord Randolph Churchill about WE Gladstone, viz. that he was 'an old man in a hurry'.

I suspect that Traditionis Custodes was written some time ago and would have been released after Benedict XVI's death. However, Francis's health issues (which would have been known before he was booked into surgery) raised the real possibility that his predecessor might outlive him, so the publication date was brought forward.

I've no proof, of course, but it's a plausible scenario.

Chip said...

Mr. Nolan, I am prone to agree for another reason, if, fact, Benedict is not now bedridden and unconscious.

Otherwise, I DO believe the plan was to do this after Benedict had passed to his just reward, as the optics of doing this while he still lived are just terrible on the heals of the anniversary of Benedict's document and these folk ARE sensitive to PR of such magnitude, with such a face slap to a highly regarded man who still lives.

And blunder it was, as they know, but were willing to accept the damage anyhow.

SOMEthing surely pushed them.

Chip said...

Now, that comment as to the PR disaster of the timing is based upon the assumption that nobody could be so callous and stupid unless forced by time constraints,

HOWEVER, this papacy has set a record for callous and stupid for the modern age, so, anything is possible. We both may be way off base by imputing rationalism or even basic human respect to this group, where it has been in so short supply for its entire run already.

Anonymous said...

Tony V. Aren't you a seminarian?

Are you aware of how utterly incompatible your suggestion that priests should ignore the pope is with Catholic doctrine?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Frmjk, I think this TV lives in the UK but not UK ptiesr whom I am sure you know.

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Fr. ALLAN McDonald - I have never met, nor do I know, UK Priest. Neither do I use "UK Priest" when I post on this blog.

Why is it so hard for you and your ardent supporters to wrap your heads around the fact that there are many who share my positions, and that every post that challenges your thoughts or assertions doesn't come from me?

It's not what you know, it's WHO you know.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

It would be helpful, though, given the fact that you do post under your name, to do so consistently that way rather than using other handles and then there would be no confusion with multiple handles but your own name.

Pierre said...

It is apparent that Father Kavanaugh’s views are not shared by many here other than maybe Mark Thomas. We know Father Kavanaugh is heavily invested in the liturgical failure and is incapable of change in stark contrast to Fathers McDonald and Fox who are the true liberals in their generosity and willingness to examine what has gone wrong these last 60 years

Pierre said...

Father McDonald,

The other handles are to give Father Kavanaugh plausible deniability if the bishop comes calling

Fr. Michael J. Kavanaugh said...

Helpful for what?

I think it would be helpful if people responded to ideas or statements made, not to the person who makes them.

For example, you might say, "(Consistent name), I don't agree with your position and here's why..." rather than, "(Consistent Name), you are a modernist idiot who is nothing more than a lily-livered, Masonic-inspired, Church-hating nincompoop!"

And I note there are LOTS of Anonymous posters who agree with you who are not, then, challenged to post with identifying monikers.

Anonymous said...

If Father K were to suffer an unfortunate accident and break both his hands, I have no doubt the majority of annoying argumentitive posts would stop, and perhaps even a few of the outrageous posts on the extreme right side of things, trolls play both sides to wreck discussion areas and make the whole thing look bad, which is their purpose, to destroy the place.

Perhaps he would be so gracious as to arrange such, just to prove us wrong....take one for the team, so to speak.

Chip said...


The anon post as to Father K being a hero to me if he took one for the team was by me, forgot to enter name.

The blog admin has access to post ISPs/OSs and etc and a log can be kept showing where similar suspect posts originate. Ditto as for them originating on known masked sites, ditto for them originating from servers maintained by Diosav.

With all the suspected multiple posting under a variety of names, trolls always screw up sooner or later in their arrogance and rush to be clever, and post on a server linked to other posts, and tied also to other posts. They may be hidden now, but were sloppier in the past, and that data is there.

The blog admin can then take this to suchlike the diocese tech support etc and get such embarassing behavior for the diocese shut down. The info needed to do so IS there and can be put together if the blog admin is willing to do so.

Anonymous said...

Chip - I have spoken with Fr. Kavanaugh. He has no intention of "taking one for the team."

He suspects you are unhappy that he does not share your desire for this blog to be an echo chamber where no one disagrees with traditionalist positions, with hateful comments directed toward the Holy Father, where priests are encouraged to be openly disobedience to the Pontiff, and where accusations of heresy fly right and left from those wholly incapabable of making such judgments.

Good luck with that.

Anonymous said...

Tom Marcus it looks like you have been given the boot but if you are still reading remember what happened to you here in the future when TLM goes underground. There will be faithful priests that will offer to celebrate TLM in diocese where bishops are anti Tradition and hostile. It will be word of mouth only to protect from the cancel culture that you experienced here. There are a lot of Kens and Karens among the liberals so when we are blessed with such a priest keep it quiet!

Pierre said...

Anonymous K at 1:25,

People who refer to themselves in the third person have issues. You have directed plenty of hateful comments toward President Trump.

Chip said...

Ha! Like I said, all it takes is some legwork. A pattern WILL show, beyond happenstance, shared services, ISPs, anon surfing site URLs etc, and it will be consistant over years of posts stored.

It need not be anything close to provable in a court of law or somesuch, we are only talking credible and even likely, and beyond any manner of random chance.

Employers are MOST sensitive to employees making them look bad, especially when made widely public, such as lists of suspect troll posts sharing multiple ISPs with an employee are handed out in parking lots, stuck under windshields, etc. And there is nothing libelous or illegal as to disseminating such information, and then the questioning phone calls to employers for comment are made.

All it takes is legwork.

No desire for an "echo chamber", a false equivalent statement on your part with typical weasel obfuscation. All which is desired is to have folk stop trolling the site under numerous false names seeking to damage or destroy the comment section.

In any case, a private forum is not subject to any rights of posters whatsoever, and is a dictatorship where the owner can execute offenders at will.

It is a credit, I suppose, to the blog owner that he does not ruthlessly suppress any even SUSPECT troll post in the first place, which I honestly wish he had done long ago, as good folk have been run off right and left by the shear nastiness, and he has essentially allowed the troll to win. All I can guess is that he has better things to do than keep up with posts and their sources and content.

Were it my site, I would show you how the game was REALLY played, and you would be learning firsthand what the word "repercussions" meant in all its technicolor splendor.

Chip said...

Father Troll, just to illustrate just how vulnerable you have made yourself through your obsession with messing up this blog through your barrages of anon/alternate name posts, do you remember the news stories at covid outbreak tracing the migration of spring breakers? Via their always handy devices?

Location services are cheap and can happily place any known number or device over time, including alternate device locations for troll posts, whether a desktop or handheld. Have you been careful to always COMPLETELY disable location services on every device? Do you even know how?

Even if you do, and do so now, you have not always known or done so, and we are talking looong history and patterns which matter here, damning history which can place you in the vicinity of transmission locations and terminals at same time posts have been made when combined with data logs, operating systems, devices.

I would LOVE to have access to the site logs for a week or month and go back and back in the Wayback Machine, Sherman, and nail your miserable hide to the door. I would look on it as an act of charity in getting a mentally ill person the treatment they need while protecting innocents with whom they are now allowed to interact on a regular basis as someone they think they can trust.

Chip said...

And, oh my doodness, Fadder Puddytat, if it showed use/locations of devices owned/operated by fellow employees, implicating them, showing an internal conspiracy to disrupt/damage a fellow employee's website!

AND these ties all put out in public!

oh, my DOODNESS!!!

Anonymous said...

Chip - We await the result of your sleuthing with bated breath. May St. Sherlock guide your investigations.

I think the Blog Owner is level-headed and does not possess your flair for gross exaggeration. He has his own style for that, of course, but that comes as no BLOCKBUSTER.

UK-Priest said...

Fr K - I suggest you download a VPN app to anonymise your data and prevent against tracking, like I do.

Fr McD - Are you really going to allow Chip’s comments which include threats of harassment remain on your blog? I mean, REALLY???

Pierre said...


Something to hide? Should the Secretary of the USCCB who just resigned done that?

UK-Priest said...

Pierre - No I have nothing to hide. I just object to intrusions into my privacy and wish to avoid malware and other hacking attempts to prevent fraud on my bank accounts and credit cards. It’s standard internet security advice in modern times.

BTW - I don’t like your tone so quit the insinuations!

Pierre said...


LOL! You realize “liberals” are the ones violating your privacy!