Bishop Rifan of Campos concelebrates the Novus Ordo

DICI ^ | November 6, 2004 | Fr. Joel Danjou

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

It is beyond doubt, Bishop Rifan did take active part in the New Mass. I watched the 3-hour video tape. This Mass was of the most modern and of an extreme liturgical poverty in spite of the presence of the cardinal representing the Pope. This cardinal was beside often hesitating, not guessing what one or the other of the assistant priests or bishops or the acolytes would be doing next. The miraculous statue was brought at the beginning of the ceremony in a spectacular procession recalling how 3 fishermen miraculously drew in this little 36 cm-high statue in 1717. A beautiful procession indeed, but not suited to a church. Imagine a boat with three fishermen coming up the aisle all the way to the sanctuary… One of the fishermen then placed the statue on its pedestal after having shown it to the different rows of the faithful… each time to the general clapping of hands.

When it was time for the epistle, the governor of Sao Paulo, (center-right politically), came forward to read it.

For the crowning of the statue, a woman – seated next to the bishops in the sanctuary during the ceremony – fetched the statue and presented it to the cardinal to be crowned. Once the statue was crowned, she presented it several times to the clergy and the faithful who were warmly applauding, while confetti were raining down on the heads of the cardinal and the bishops in the sanctuary.

At the offertory, two young acolytes came to pour the wine to be consecrated into the chalices as casually as if they were pouring themselves a glass of water.

The words of consecration pronounced aloud by cardinal de Araújo Sales were, of course, those saying : "…shed for you and for all." The eucharistic prayer n° 2 had been chosen by the bishop.

Then one could see Bishop Rifan joining the bishops’ procession to communicate at the altar. As for the communion of the faithful, no priest or bishop were seen distributing it.

However, at least three women were giving communion… and we saw priests (maybe even bishops) receiving communion from one of them!

Immediately after the Postcommunion, Petrus Ananias, minister for social development (Marxist Workers’ Party), representing Mr. Lula, president of the Republic, began some kind of sermon-discourse from the very sanctuary. All the bishops sat there without flinching! He praised the ecumenical trend of his party, made reference to Jacques Maritain and stated that democracy had evangelical roots, that Our Lady of Aparecida was in solidarity with the movement of liberation and emancipation, and that she was a figure even more human than the Virgin of the Gospels because she was black… and so on, and so forth!

There seems to be marked uneasiness in Campos on this subject because today a priest from Rio who asked about this concelebration to a priest from Campos received as answer that it was not a concelebration but a bishops’ meeting at the shrine of Our Lady of Aparecida.

It is difficult not to speak of lie!

Indeed, CNBB, the Brazilian National Conference of Bishops, announced the following on its website on September, 8: "Hoje, dia 8 de setembro, às 9h, no Santuàrio Nacional, solene concelebração eucarística presidida pelo enviado especial do Papa. Dom Eugênio de Araújo Sales, e concelebrad pelo Núncio Apostólico, Dom Lorenzo Baldisseri, pelo arcebispo de Aparecida, cardeais, arcebispos, bispos e presbíteros – Today, 9/8/04, at 9:00 am, at the national shrine, solemn eucharistic concelebration presided by the special envoy of the Pope, Dom E…, and concelebrated by the Apostolic Nuncio, Dom L. B…, by the Archbishop of Aparecida, the cardinals, archbishops, bishops and priests."

What remains of the booklet published by the priests of Campos : "62 Reasons Why In Conscience, We Cannot Attend the New Mass."?

Fr Joël Danjou, Prior in Santa Maria, Brazil

date : 6/11/2004

[AlbionGirl]

The only one that seems clear to me is the definition of schismatic.

But the definition of heretic seems to conflate atheism and subterfuge, and I was always under the impression that a heretic professed a different take on the Church's Commandments, and was likely inclined toward revolt. But the 'unbelief' part I don't fully get.

And likewise I thought an apostate preached contra Church doctine, but didn't necessarily turn away from God, per se.

Thanks for the info, but I'm still confused.

Unrelated, but perhaps not totally, on another thread a picture was posted of the Mass with acutal clowns in attendance. Is that an act of apostasy, paganism, heresy or nothing at all?

[ArrogantBustard]

"Paganism, in the broadest sense includes all religions other than the true one revealed by God, and, in a narrower sense, all except Christianity, Judaism, and Mohammedanism. The term is also used as the equivalent of Polytheism."

Quoted from and linked to the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia.

[ArrogantBustard]

The "Clown Mass" is at the very least an act of gross disobedience and disrespect.

Check the Catholic Encyclopedia at www.newadvent.org for detailed discussion of Apostacy, Heresy, and Schism.

[AlbionGirl]

Thank you!

[AlbionGirl]

A while back I asked you to comment on the Pope's declaration concerning the Eucharistic year, and your reply was moving and full of common sense too.

I don't know about him teaching heresy necessarily, but that's mostly due to my own ignorance, and the knowledge of that ignorance prevents me from taking a stand one way or another as far as that goes.

But I have to say that some of the words he chooses appear to me like signposts of misdirection. For example, in the piece on the Eucharist that I questioned you on, he used the word inauthentic regarding receiving the Body and Blood of Christ. A word that in a discussion of the Holy Eucharist and its magnitude seems inappropriate to me, and fraught with a likelihood of facile and erroneous judgements and/or pronouncements.

Another word that he seems to be enamored with is Humanism. Another signpost to me that says, wrong way, that this is the kind of language used by many who wish to elevate man at the expense and lessening of the Almighty God. And I'm not implying that is the Pope's intent. Intentions might be good, pure, wonderful and every other superlative I can think of, but that doesn't change the signpost from wrong way to right way.

Sometimes, when I read his writings, something seems off. I'm just not educated enough to always put it into words. And while it possibly could be my pride, I don't really think it is, because when that certain something seems off, it seems off in an alarm like fashion, not a condemnatory (sp?;word?) one.

[Tantumergo]

"You actually believe this?"

Do you not think it reasonable that in the sheer volume of words which he has written and uttered (but more dangerously had written for him), that he would make some mistakes?

On top of that there is failure to correct his underlings when they promote false doctrine in their capacity as his representatives.

He is not divine after all!

[St.Chuck]

Do you not think it reasonable that in the sheer volume of words which he has written and uttered (but more dangerously had written for him), that he would make some mistakes?

Well congratulations. You've proffered an entirely original justification to doubt the pope's orthodoxy. Volume.

[Tantumergo]

"Another word that he seems to be enamored with is Humanism. Another signpost to me that says, wrong way, that this is the kind of language used by many who wish to elevate man at the expense and lessening of the Almighty God."

Interesting that you should pick up on that - I too get the deepest sense of foreboding when prelates prate on about "humanism" and the glories of man - there are grave dangers inherent in it.

One of JPII's favourite stock phrases from Vat II is when he quotes Gaudium et Spes to the effect that "man is the only creature which God made for his own sake". He probably was the original author of it as it pops up in his speeches and writings all the time.

Unfortunately, it implies some kind of necessity in God to create man and flatly contradicts Scripture which testifies that God made ALL things for His own sake!

I'm sure his intentions and motives must be good, but its like he doesn't always think through the consequences of what he says and does.

[Tantumergo]

"You've proffered an entirely original justification to doubt the pope's orthodoxy. Volume."

Would you question St. Augustine's orthodoxy? No? - and yet he wrote a volume entitled "Retractions".

Just because people write and say some heretical things, it does not make them formal heretics.

[St.Chuck]

I doubt St. Augustine attributes any mistakes he may have made to his prolificacy. Anyway, you create an argument for a minimum age requirement for the papacy. Anyone under eighty might have too much to say.

[AlbionGirl]

I'm sure his intentions and motives must be good, but its like he doesn't always think through the consequences of what he says and does.

That phrases it just about right.

Another thing that was written about the Pope recently by someone (John Allen, I think?) who is really in his corner stated that this Pope had no interest in ordinary governance. And while I see the tedium involved in ordinary goverance, how does a Pope escape that responsibility without risking the danger of a Church becoming ungovernable?

Finally, I have another question for you. When Christ advised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church, what was he really getting at?

I can't believe that meant that the Church would necessarily be free of heretical and even evil clergy, but that inspite of all that could be hurled against it, it would never die. He would always provide an outlet, a remnant for the Faithful to flock to. Is that your understanding?

[AlbionGirl]

Do you not think it reasonable that in the sheer volume of words which he has written and uttered (but more dangerously had written for him), that he would make some mistakes?

Very well put.

[Land of the Irish]

If you have another objection, by all means, I do wish to hear it.

For starters:
Altar girls, Communion in the Paw, women and male lay readers, Eucharistic Ministers, Ascension Sunday, general absolution in ordinary times, the New American Bible, the New Cathechism, the New Rosary, the New Liturgical calendar, Interfaith "Masses", Queer "Masses", Clown "Masses".

Here's 62 more:

62 Reasons Why...
In Conscience, We Cannot Attend the New Mass

Compiled by the priests of the diocese of

CAMPOS, BRAZIL

The Traditional Mass	The New Mass
2,000 years of venerable usage Tried and True	Fabricated in 1969 Experimental
Clearly a Sacrifice An Altar, A Priest	Clearly a Meal A Table
Centred on God Structured for reverence	Centred on Man Loose structure invites abuses
Completely Catholic One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic	Half Protestant Lacks all Four Marks
Codified at Council of Trent By a Pope Saint (Pope St. Pius V)	Contrived For approval of six Protestant ministers
Fruitful! Multitudes of saints, martyrs, religious vocations!	Barren! Empty seminaries, decreased Mass attendance, massive defections!
TRADITIONAL MASS Never Abrogated by Holy Mother Church!	The New Mass An Experiment That Failed!

---

 Note: all quotes followed by an asterix "_*" are from the Letter of Cardinals A. Ottaviani and A. Bacci to Pope Paul VI, dated September 25,
1969 enclosing "A Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae."

1. Because the New Mass is not an unequivocal Profession of the Catholic Faith (which the traditional Mass is), it is ambiguous and Protestant. Therefore since we pray as we believe, it follows that we cannot pray with the New Mass in Protestant Fashion and still believe as Catholics!

2. Because the changes were not just slight ones but actually "deal with a fundamental renovation ... a total change ... a new creation." (Msgr. A. Bugnini, co-author of the New Mass)

3. Because the New Mass leads us to think "that truths ... can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic Faith is bound forever." *

4. Because the New Mass represents "a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Mass as formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent" which, in fixing the "canons," provided an "insurmountable barrier to any heresy against the integrity of the Mystery." *

5. Because the difference between the two is not simply one of mere detail or just modification of ceremony, but "all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place (in the New Mass), if it subsists at all." *

6. Because "Recent reforms have amply demonstrated that fresh changes in the liturgy could lead to nothing but complete bewilderment in the faithful who already show signs of uneasiness and lessening of Faith." *

7. Because in times of confusion such as now, we are guided by the words of our Lord: "By their fruits you shall know them." Fruits of the New Mass are: 30% decrease in Sunday Mass attendance in U.S. (NY Times 5/24/75), 43% decrease in France (Cardinal Marty), 50% decrease in Holland (NY Times 1/5/76).

8. Because "amongst the best of the clergy the practical result (of the New Mass) is an agonising crisis of conscience..." *

9. Because in less than seven years after the introduction of the New Mass, priests in the world decreased from 413,438 to 243,307 -- almost 50%! (Holy See Statistics)

10. Because "The pastoral reasons adduced to support such a grave break with tradition ... do not seem to us sufficient." *

11. Because the New Mass does not manifest Faith in the Real Presence of our Lord -- the Traditional Mass manifests it unmistakably.

12. Because the New Mass confuses the REAL Presence of Christ in the Eucharist with His MYSTICAL Presence among us (proximating Protestant doctrine).

13. Because the New Mass blurs what ought to be a sharp difference between the HIERARCHIC Priesthood and the common priesthood of the people (as does Protestantism).

14. Because the New Mass favours the heretical theory that it is THE FAITH of the people and not THE WORDS OF THE PRIEST which makes Christ present in the Eucharist.

15. Because the insertion of the Lutheran :"Prayer of the Faithful" in the New Mass follows and puts forth the Protestant error that all the people are priests.

16. Because the New Mass does away with the Confiteor of the priest, makes it collective with the people, thus promoting Luther's refusal to accept the Catholic teaching that the priest is judge, witness and intercessor with God.

17. Because the New Mass gives us to understand that the people concelebrate with the priest -- which is against Catholic theology!

18. Because six Protestant ministers collaborated in making up the New Mass: George, Jasper, Shepherd, Kunneth, Smith and Thurian.

19. Because just as Luther did away with the Offertory -- since it very clearly expressed the sacrificial, propitiatory character of the Mass -- so also the inventors of the New Mass did away with it, reducing it to a simple Preparation of the Gifts.

20. Because enough Catholic theology has been removed that Protestants can, while keeping their antipathy for the True Roman Catholic Church, use the text of the New Mass without difficulty. Protestant Minister Thurian (co-consulter for the 'New Mass' project) said that a fruit of the New mass "will perhaps be that the non-Catholic communities will be ale to celebrate the Lord's Supper using the same prayers as the Catholic Church." (La Croix 4/30/69)

21. Because the narrative manner of the Consecration in the New Mass infers that it is only a memorial and not a true sacrifice (Protestant Thesis)

22. Because by grave omissions, the New Mass leads us to believe that it is only a meal (Protestant doctrine) and not a sacrifice for the remission of sins (Catholic Doctrine).

23. Because the changes such as: table instead of altar; facing people instead of tabernacle; Communion in the hand, etc., emphasize Protestant doctrines (e.g., Mass is only a meal; priest only a president of the assembly; Eucharist is NOT the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus Christ, but merely a piece of bread, etc.)

24. Because Protestants themselves have said "the new Catholic Eucharistic prayers have abandoned the false (sic) perspective of sacrifice offered to God." (La Croix 12/10/69)

25. Because we are faced with the dilemma: either we become Protestantized by worshipping with the New Mass, or else we preserve our Catholic Faith by adhering faithfully to the traditional Mass, the "Mass of All Time."

26. Because the New Mass was made in accordance with the Protestant definition of the Mass: "The Lord's Supper or Mass is a sacred synaxis or assembly of the people of God which gathers together under the presidence of the priest to celebrate the memorial of the Lord." (Par. 7 Intro. to the New Missal, defining the New Mass, 4/6/69)

27. Because by means of ambiguity, the New Mass pretends to please Catholics while pleasing Protestants; thus it is "double-tongued" and offensive to God who abhors any kind of hypocrisy: "Cursed be ... the double-tongued for they destroy the peace of many." (Sirach 28:13)

28. Because beautiful, familiar Catholic hymns which have inspired people for centuries, have been thrown out and replaced with new hymns strongly Protestant in sentiment, further deepening the already distinct impression that one is no longer attending a Catholic function.

29. Because the New Mass contains ambiguities subtly favouring heresy, which is more dangerous than if it were clearly heretical since a half-heresy half resembles the Truth!

30. Because Christ has only one Spouse, the Catholic Church, and her worship service cannot also serve religions that are at enmity with her.

31. Because the New Mass follows the format of Cranmer's heretical Anglican Mass, and the methods used to promote it follow precisely the methods of the English heretics.

32. Because Holy Mother Church canonized numerous English Martyrs who were killed because they refused to participate in a Mass such as the New Mass!

33. Because Protestants who once converted to Catholicism are scandalised t to see that the New Mass is the same as the one they attended as Protestants. One of them, Julien Green, asks: "Why did we convert?"

34. Because statistics show a great decrease in conversions to Catholicism following the use of the New Mass. Conversions, which were up to 100,000 a year in the U.S., have decreased to less than 10,000! And the number of people leaving the Church far exceeds those coming in.

35. Because the Traditional Mass has forged many saints. "Innumerable saints have been fed abundantly with the proper piety towards God by it ..." (Pope Paul VI, Const. Apost. Missale Romanum)

36. Because the nature of the New Mass is such as to facilitate profanations of the Holy Eucharist, which occur with a frequency unheard of with the Traditional Mass.

37. Because the New Mass, despite appearances, conveys a New Faith, not the Catholic Faith. It conveys Modernism and follows exactly the tactics of Modernism, using vague terminology in order to insinuate and advance error.

38. Because by introducing optional variations, the New Mass undermines the unity of the liturgy, with each priest liable to deviate as he fancies under the guise of creativity. Disorder inevitably results, accompanied by lack of respect and irreverence.

39. Because many good Catholic theologians, canonists and priests do not accept the New Mass, and affirm that they are unable to celebrate it in good conscience.

40. Because the New Mass has eliminated such things as: genuflections (only three remain), purification of the priests fingers in the chalice, preservation from all profane contact of priest's fingers after Consecration, sacred altar stone and relics, three altar clothes (reduced to one), all of which "only serve to emphasize how outrageously faith in the dogma of the Real Presence is implicitly repudiated." *

41. Because the traditional Mass, enriched and matured by centuries of Sacred Tradition, was codified (not invented) by a Pope who was a saint, Pius V; whereas the New Mass was artificially fabricated by six Protestant ministers and a 33rd degree Freemason, i.e., Msgr. A Bugnini who was later exiled from the Vatican because of his ties with Freemasonry.

42. Because the errors of the New Mass which are accentuated in the vernacular version are even present in the Latin text of the New Mass.

43. Because the New Mass, with its ambiguity and permissiveness, exposes us to the wrath of God by facilitating the risk of invalid consecrations: "Will priests of the near future who have not received the traditional formation, and who rely on the Novus Ordo Missae with the intention of 'doing what the Church does,' consecrate validly? One may be allowed to doubt it!" *

44. Because the abolition of the Traditional Mass recalls the prophecy of Daniel 8:12: "And he was given power against the perpetual sacrifice because of the sins of the people" and the observation of St. Alphonsus de Liguori that because the Mass is the best and most beautiful thing which exists in the Church here below, the devil has always tried by means of heretics to deprive us of it.

45. Because in places where the Traditional Mass is preserved, the Faith and fervor of the people are greater. Whereas the opposite is true where the New Mass reigns (Report on the Mass, Diocese of Campos, ROMA, Buenos Aires #69, 8/81)

46. Because along with the New Mass goes also a new catechism, a new morality, new prayers, new Code of Canon law, new calendar, -- in a word, a NEW CHURCH, a complete revolution from the old. "The liturgical reform ... do not be deceived, this is where the revolution begins." (Msgr. Dwyer, Archbishop of Birmingham, spokesman of Episcopal Synod)

47. Because the intrinsic beauty of the Traditional Mass attracts souls by itself; whereas the New Mass, lacking any attractiveness of its own, has to invent novelties and entertainments in order to appeal to the people.

48. Because the New mass embodies numerous errors condemned by Pope St. Pius V at the Council of Trent (Mass totally in vernacular, words of Consecration spoken aloud, etc. See Condemnation of Jansenist Synod of Pistia), and errors condemned by Pope Pius XII (e.g., altar in form of table. See Mediator Dei).

49. Because the New Mass attempts to transform the Catholic Church into a new, ecumenical church embracing all ideologies and all religions -- right and wrong, truth and error -- a goal long dreamt of by the enemies of the Catholic Church.

50. Because the New Mass, in removing the salutations and final blessing when the priest celebrates alone, shows a denial of, and disbelief in the dogma of the Communion of Saints.

51. Because the altar and tabernacle are now separated, thus marking a division between Christ in His priest-and-Sacrifice-on-the-altar, from Christ in His Real Presence in the tabernacle, "two things which of their very nature, must remain together." (Pius XII)

52. Because the New Mass no longer constitutes a vertical worship between God and man, but rather a horizontal worship between man and man.

53. Because the New Mass, although appearing to conform to the dispositions of Vatican Council II, in reality opposes its instructions, since the Council itself declared its desire to conserve and promote the Traditional Rite.

54. Because the Traditional Latin Mass of Pope St. Pius V has never been legally abrogated and therefore remains a true rite of the Roman Catholic Church by which the faithful may fulfil their Sunday obligation.

55. Because Pope St. Pius V granted a perpetual indult, valid "for always," to celebrate the Traditional Mass freely, licitly, without scruple of conscience, punishment, sentence or censure (Papal Bull "Quo Primum")

56. Because Pope Paul VI, when promulgating the New Mass, himself declared. "The rite ... by itself is NOT a dogmatic definition ..." (11/19/69)

57. Because Pope Paul VI, when asked by Cardinal Heenan of England, if he was abrogating or prohibiting the Tridentine Mass, answered: "It is not our intention to prohibit absolutely the Tridentine Mass."

58. Because "In the Libera Nos of the New Mass, the Blessed Virgin, the Apostles and all the Saints are no longer mentioned; her and their intercession thus no longer asked, even in time of peril." *

59. Because in none of the tree new Eucharistic Prayers (of the New Mass) is there any reference ... to the state of suffering of those who have died, in none the possibility of a particular Memento, thus undermining faith in the redemptive nature of the Sacrifice.*

60. Because we recognise the Holy Father's supreme authority in his universal government of Holy Mother Church, but we know that even this authority cannot impose upon us a practice which is so CLEARLY against the Faith: a Mass that is equivocal and favouring heresy and therefore disagreeable to God.

61. Because, as stated in Vatican Council I, the "Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter, that by His revelation they might make new doctrine, but that by His assistance they might inviolably keep and faithfully expound the revelation or deposit of Faith delivered through the Apostles." (Dnz 3070)

62. Because heresy, or whatever clearly favours heresy, cannot be a matter for obedience. Obedience is at the service of Faith and not Faith at the service of obedience! In this foregoing case then, "One must obey God before men." (Acts 5:29) 

 * Letter of Cardinals A. Ottaviani and A. Bacci to Pope Paul VI A Critical Study of the Novus Ordo Missae."
 

 

Voltar à página principal

[Tantumergo]

"Finally, I have another question for you. When Christ advised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church, what was he really getting at?"

The key is in the word "prevail" which means overcome or conquer. He promised that the Gates of Hell would never win out against the Church - but that does not mean that they won't have a bl###y good try.

"He would always provide an outlet, a remnant for the Faithful to flock to. Is that your understanding?"

Yes, more or less. Scripture indicates that many will be lost in great apostasies, but that there will always be a remnant who remain faithful. The successor of Peter will be one of them.

[k omalley]

"When Christ advised that the Gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church, what was he really getting at?"

I have thought about this question as well, and I keep hearkening back to the Arian heresy when it seems that there was only a tiny remnant of true believers left on this earth. So it has to mean that the Church will never die, not that there won't be heretical bishops and priests, and that huge numbers of Catholics won't lose their faith or be led astray.

My knowledge of Church history is superficial, and I often wonder how many faithful parishes there were during those times, and what did the few faithful Catholics do about worship?

[AlbionGirl]

My knowledge of Church history is superficial, and I often wonder how many faithful parishes there were during those times, and what did the few faithful Catholics do about worship?

It would be fascinating (and maybe even comforting) to know, wouldn't it? Hope all is well with you, K, and love your tagline, it is sheer beauty!

[Land of the Irish]

The key is in the word "prevail" which means overcome or conquer. He promised that the Gates of Hell would never win out against the Church - but that does not mean that they won't have a bl###y good try.

If I may add another keyword, Christ specified "Church" not papacy.

[Maximilian]

You've proffered an entirely original justification to doubt the pope's orthodoxy. Volume.

I'm sure Tantumergo would be glad to admit that it's not entirely original. Many article have been written on the fact that JPII has buried the faithful under a mountain of paper. But somehow this continual churning of forests to print more documents never seems to come up with one that will stop the continuous slide into destruction -- and even worse -- irrelevancy. Even JPII is now realizing that the Catholic Church has made itself entirely irrelevant (i.e. his recent comments on the EU).

[sempertrad]

Stephen Hand of TCRNews came up with "integrist"

Stephen Hand of TCRNews is wrong.

Take it up with him

Not interested. But I suppose if I depended on him to tell me what to call Traditional Catholics and learned he was wrong, I'd want to let him know if only to spare him further embarrassment.

[Tantumergo]

"I'm sure Tantumergo would be glad to admit that it's not entirely original. Many article have been written on the fact that JPII has buried the faithful under a mountain of paper."

I had rather assumed that St.Chuck was being a little sarcastic with me so didn't respond to that point directly!

However, you are correct - it has been noted by many people that JPII has been one of the most prodigious Popes in history. There have been many good things in there as well - if only he could get his brother bishops to read it and act on it, the Church would at least be in a better condition than we currently are.