AUSSIE HERO-PRIEST REFUSED TO SAY THE NO MASS

 

To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address, FB Messenger or X.

 

Leo with his new ferula (Pastoral Staff): a Bent Cross with Ascending Christ ‘No Longer Bound By the Nails of the Passion’

 

"Synodality,"said Bishop Athanasius Schneider today, "is such a cheap, poor church life, centred on yourself." Synodality is a bitter fruit of the Novus Ordo Mass, the Mass of Vatican II, which as +Schneider says, "was invented".

The Church is crying out for hero-priests to resist the tsunami of sodomy, scandal and corruption now engulfing Leo's counterfeit, conciliar Vatican establishment. But such priests are now nowhere to be found. We must go back to the 1980's to find one Father Buckley, who left his parish in Townsville, Queensland because he could not, in conscience, say the New Mass. He refused to obey his bishop's insistence that he not say the Mass in Latin. 

The reason why hero-priests are missing in action is simply that the Novus Ordo does not want heroes. It cannot breed heroes. It prefers a Protestant banquet to the Catholic sacrifice and suffering of Calvary in the Vetus Ordo, the old Mass which bred red martyrs as well as white, like Father Buckley, RIP. 

Last Sunday a Latin Massgoer, advised by her confessor to avoid the Novus Ordo Mass as a danger to faith, drove quite some way to a NO parish, hoping to pray in the Blessed Sacrament chapel and then join the Communion queue to receive on the tongue, on her knees. She'd discovered the chapel at length, tucked in a corner, on a previous visit and been told that the Marists there were now giving Communion on the tongue.

The sound of the congregation praying the "Our Father" was her cue to emerge into the nave. Casing the joint she saw four or five lay people distributing the Sacred Host while the elderly priest sat watching in his 'presider's chair'. Feeling, in her chapel veil, somewhat the cynosure of all eyes she made a quick decision to return to the chapel and make a spiritual Communion. 

The Church's perennial teaching, throughout the millennia until Vatican II, has been that only the consecrated hands of a priest may touch the Sacred Host. Our reader had once been an 'Eucharistic Minister' herself but had gradually felt impelled to resign. 

She now believes that 'EMHCs' giving Communion into the hands of people who most likely have not confessed for months if not years (think of those Communion queues at Christmas) is the chief source of lack of reverence for our Eucharistic Lord and the consequent fall in Mass attendance. Not to mention the state of souls who commit sacrilege by receiving in a state of serious sin (and who by dying in that state merit Hell for all eternity). 

Was our reader being a liturgical snob, or was she right to be so uncompromising in her refusal to condone what she sees as abuse of the Blessed Sacrament? Asking for a friend ...

 

Father Buckley was a hero-priest from Queensland, Australia. He left his Townsville Parish after he refused to give an undertaking to his Bishop that he would not say the Mass in Latin. He lived privately in Beaudesert until his death on June 10, 1988.

 

This article was first printed by the Brisbane Courier-Mail. “Catholic” obtained the rights to republish the article during the 1980’s and it is republished here with permission. 

 

As the “dissident Priest” referred to in your article “Latin Masses held secretly in homes” CM., September 1) I wish to state briefly why I say only the supposedly banned Latin Tridentine Mass and not the New Mass in English. The language, English or Latin, really has little to do with it.

 

Before I was ordained a Priest in 1948, I took an oath, as did all Priests up till 1967, to be loyal to “all the doctrines handed down, defined and explained by the sacred canons and ecumenical councils, and especially those of the holy Council of Trent.”

 

The Tridentine Mass was the Mass ordered by the Council of Trent. It was guaranteed valid by Pope St. Pius V. And every priest of the Latin rite in perpetuity was ordered by the Bull Quo Primum,“by virtue of Our Apostolic Authority,” never to use a different rite of Mass – precisely to keep out of the Mass for all time any heresy or error in doctrine such as had been condemned by the Council of Trent.

 

“At no time in the future can a Priest, whether secular or religious, ever be coerced into using any other way of saying Mass.

 

“And so as to preclude once and for all any scruples of conscience and fear of ecclesiastical penalties and censures, we hereby declare that it is in virtue of Our Apostolic Authority that we decree and enjoin that this our present order and decree is to last in perpetuity, and can never be legally revoked or amended at some future date.”

 

From the Bull “Quo Primum,” July 14, 1570

 

What stronger language could the Church use to make certain that I remain loyal to the Mass for which I was ordained, and which I am directed and privileged to say?

 

 

Pope Pius V by Bartolomeo Letterini 
SOURCE

 

If I could honestly evade that direction, to which as I’ve bound myself by oath, I would still have several reasons why I could not say the New Mass in English — not, that is, in conscience.

 

The New Mass or Novus Ordo Missae was examined in detail by a group of Catholic theologians in Rome in 1969. On their behalf Cardinal Ottaviani wrote to Pope Paul VI condemning it on 27 counts as being simply not a Catholic Mass.

“It teems with insinuations or manifest errors against the integrity of the Catholic religion.

“It has no intention of presenting the Faith as as taught by the Council of Trent, to which nonetheless the Catholic conscience is bound forever. 

“It will thoroughly please all these these groups, in the Church, corrupting its organism, assaulting its doctrinal, liturgical, moral and disciplinary unity, in a period of spiritual crisis that is without precedent.”

 

In spite of this condemnation, Pope Paul allowed the New Mass to replace the certainly valid age-old sacrifice of the Mass.

 

Are we to believe that the approval of a Pope can change heresy into orthodoxy? This has never been Catholic teaching. Non-Catholic theologians in their turn satisfied themselves that it (the New Mass) is no longer the Mass of former times.

 

Dr. Max Thurian of Taize Lutheran Centre in France, as quoted in La Croix of May 30, 1969 said: “It is now theologically possible for Protestants to use the same Mass as Catholics.”

 

 It is a fact that Protestants in England do use the New Mass as their own service. As reported in the English Catholic Herald December 15, 1972, the then Anglican Bishop of Southwark (Dr. M. Stockwood) stated on several occasions that he greatly admired the New Mass, and used it himself. He had also “concelebrated” Mass with Catholic Priests, when travelling on the continent.

 

So non-Catholics are satisfied there has been an essential change in the Mass. They have good reason for so thinking.

 

 

A woman 'concelebrates' at a NO parish in Switzerland

When the New Mass was being composed in Rome in 1967, six Protestant clergymen, by invitation of Pope Paul, took an active part in it. One of them was the above-mentioned Dr Max Thurian. So we can see why he made the statement he did. He knew at first-hand.

 

Even if I could somehow get around those objections to saying the New Mass, I would be in trouble when I actually came to say it. Because I know that I would deliberately have to go along with falsifying Christ’s words in the Consecration of the Mass.

In the New Mass in English, Christ is made to say that His Blood would be shed “for you and for all men.”¹ Any Bible, Catholic or Protestant, will tell you that His words were “for you and for many.” It may seem only a small thing, the change of just one word.

 

Actually, it changes Christ’s whole meaning, as theologians have proved and as the Council of Trent (again) stated. Anyway, it’s a forgery, to be found nowhere but in the New Mass in the vernacular. So again I’m stopped from using the New Mass, if I’ve any sort of conscience at all.

 

Leonine Prayers 
SOURCE

Of course, like most Priests, I was ‘conned’ for years into accepting the New Mass — until I got the above information which has been carefully not brought to general notice.

 

Since secrecy surely has something to hide, but why, if it’s really the Church acting? It’s just not the Catholic way.

 

Anyway, has the “old Latin Mass” the Tridentine Mass, been banned? Certainly not by Pope Paul. In the official document promulgating the New Mass, there is not one legal phrase making the New Rite compulsory or forbidding the old Latin Mass.

 

And in December, 1971, writing to the late Cardinal Heenan, the Pope said he would not forbid the use of the Tridentine Roman Missal. So if the Bishops have banned it, they have apparently gone over the head of the Pope.

 

Finally, if I am a dissident Priest, a “rebel”, then I am only rebelling against those who are, in fact if not in intention, themselves rebels.

Rebels against the oath they took to protect the Catholic Faith whose centre is the Mass which they have now put out of their lives.

 

I am not ashamed to be my kind of rebel! 

1. The words of consecration were corrected from ‘you and for all men’ back to the correct ‘ for you and for many’ by Pope Benedict XVI in 2012 ↩︎

---

“Catholic” was an Australian traditionalist newspaper which ran from 1982 to 2000. It was edited by Silvester Donald McLean, and featured articles from Michael Davies, Yves Dupont and other prominent writers of the time. Pax Orbis is honoured to have access to the Catholic archives.Not ashamed to be my kind of rebel! – Pax Orbis

 

The Infant Jesus of Prague



Most Holy Infant Jesus of Prague, come to rescue your Church