Novus Ordo Watch

Monday, May 31, 2004
Come to think of it...
If the Novus Ordo "Mass" is the highest form of prayer for the Neo-Catholics (in the Catholic Church, the Holy Mass is the highest form of prayer), then we surely don't want to know what their lower forms of prayer look like....

Saturday, January 31, 2004
Spiritual Homicide

(Careful: the following linked pictures contain ladies with revealing clothing.)

Did you see the pictures of a typical Novus Ordo "retreat" here: Note especially the modesty in dress those teenagers manifest (esp. the ladies) and what they learn this way about holy things and reverence, modesty, and chastity. I do not mean to blame them but the Novus Ordo religion which tolerates or even teaches them these things. The truth is that those youngsters are being killed spiritually. Their souls are in such need of the truth about matters religious and holy, and what they are receiving is nothing short of pathetic, banal, and dumb.

What do I mean? Well, things like "Bubble Prayer" (check this out here), for instance, or "Circle Time" (here). Who in his right mind would want to be a part of something like this? Especially as they are maturing and growing into adulthood, people are coming to understand what is mature and what is childish, what is proper to a serious adult and what is silly. It is no wonder that what the Novus Ordo gives these teenagers turns them off. Any surprise why no one wants to be a priest in that religion? Who can blame them? What young lad wants to spend his time playing "human tossing" or "face painting" or engaging in "circle time"? Yet, this is what they are taught to associate with "Catholicism," with religion, with spirituality. Teaching them wrong spirituality is worse than teaching them no spirituality at all. What the Novus Ordos are doing here is commit spiritual homicide! They are stealing from these teenagers their proper spiritual care! They are killing their spiritual potential!

Look at how they dress for and assist at what they are told is the Holy Catholic Mass (here). Outrageous! These folks can read between the lines. If you can dress like that for Mass, if you can sit there like this and participate in the Holy Mass like that, then, really, the Holy Mass is no big deal. It's a fun gathering where we think about Jesus and pray a little and sing some songs and share a meal. That's it. Forget about the majestic and glorious Sacrifice of Calvary being repeated in a mystical manner on the altar! Forget about the Infinite Greatness of Almighty God. He becomes a "buddy," your "friend."

These youngsters aren't stupid. They can tell that if you say that at the Holy Mass, the priest makes present the Body and Blood of Christ and then treats it with such little respect, it cannot really be Christ's Body and Blood, and even if it is, then that simply isn't a big deal.

There's one more thing that needs to be mentioned. If you look at those pictures, esp. the face painting, human tossing, etc., you will see how scandalously inviting of impurity it is. Any normal male in his teens who gets a chance to lie next to a teenage girl, in shorts and a tanktop, sorry, but he will not be able to help having impure thoughts. These are occasions of sin the Novus Ordo leadership is putting those teenagers in! Which young lady won't be confronted with the desire to commit this or that sin as she paints a good-looking guy's face? Which young gentleman won't feel something as he lies down next to that pretty lady? (She may be the same one, by the way, who will give him "Communion" the next day, see here).

Lastly, don't be surprised if there is fornication (or other sexual perversion) taking place at those "retreats." During the day, both parties are given ample opportunity to develop and harbor lustful feelings. And at night, well, let me just say this: I myself attended one of those "retreats," a "confirmation retreat," actually, when I was still Novus Ordo. Whether sex actually took place or not, I do not know, but I know that girls were in the guys' bedroom and vice versa. One or two guys in particular stated that they were intending to fornicate.

This, dear reader, is the fruit of the Novus Ordo religion.

Wednesday, November 12, 2003
Three Cheers for Clarity and Courage!

After our post yesterday re: Fr. Echert and his somewhat generic response on EWTN's Q&A forum with regard to the Fatima shrine desecration, we received an email from Fr. Echert himself. With his permission, we share it with you:



Thank you for pointing out my failure to be specific, with regards to the "Fatima" question on the EWTN site. My initial choice to respond generically was based upon my uncertainty of the accuracy of the article, so outrageous is the proposal. I have since then modified my response, which may be of interest to you:

Father Echert


Father's new and updated response clearly and unambigously condemns the future plans for the descration of the Fatima shrine. Much to our delight, his response even cites from Mortalium Animos, the most clear, most relevant, yet most-ignored encyclical on ecumenism of the 20th century.

God bless you, Father Echert - may your tribe increase.

Tuesday, November 11, 2003
Tell it Like it Is, Already

The latest from the EWTN expert panel has left the NovusOrdoWatch team confused. Since EWTN has a tendency to mysteriously delete these kinds of Q&A entries, we've posted the entire exchange below, for the sake of historical record:



I am going to attach an article from the Portugal News on what appears to be an ecumenical revamping of the shrine at Fatima. Please see the questions following the article. By the way, the article can be found at:

I am going to assume that the content of the article is accurate although I can't find much commentary on it over the internet. I sent a copy to Raymond Arroyo at the World Over News....maybe he can bring some attention to this.

[article snipped]

I know this is a long article so I will ask two short but maybe not so simple questions:

Q1.) Does scripture or tradition permit such a thing as this? How do we as Catholic Christians build something and then allow and it sounds like even encourage pagans to pray to their gods in the structure?

Q2.) How does a lay Catholic go about stopping something like this? I am asking this assuming that the plans to have an interfaith shrine at Fatima go against both scripture and tradition.



Answer by Fr. John Echert on 11-11-2003:

I am opposed to any inter-religious or ecumenical efforts which fail to operate under the explicit and manifest principles that salvation is possible only through Jesus Christ and within the Catholic Church. There can be no compromise on these absolute truths of the Faith, and there is no room for dialogue on any alternative. We do others a great disservice, which further puts at risk salvation, if we affirm them in the errors of false religions.


Excuse me, Fr. Echert: that wasn't the question. No one asked for your general sentiments regarding interreligious and ecumenical activities - your inquirer asked specifically: "Does scripture or tradition permit" this Fatima debacle? More specifically, "How does a lay Catholic go about stopping" the Fatima plans?

Note that the questions were very specifically directed towards the plans for the Fatima shrine. Note also that Fr. Echert's answer was very generic: "I am opposed to any inter-religious or ecumenical efforts which fail to operate under the explicit and manifest principles that salvation is possible only through Jesus Christ and within the Catholic Church."

Yes, that's wonderful, Fr. Echert, but will you go the extra step towards clarity and say whether or not you believe the plans for the Fatima shrine are a concrete example of "inter-religious or ecumenical efforts which fail to operate under the explicit and manifest principles that salvation is possible only through Jesus Christ and within the Catholic Church?"

Or do you, Fr. Echert, while generally condemning anti-Christian/anti-Church interreligious efforts, believe that Fatima does not fall into this category?

Is that why you failed to give concrete advice to your inquirer as to "How... a lay Catholic" might "go about stopping something like this?"

We have one of two things happening here: on the one hand, perhaps Father does condemn the Fatima debacle in his heart, but cannot condemn it publicly for fear of swift Vatican-administered retribution; on the other hand, perhaps Father doesn't see any problem with the Fatima plans, but knows how indefensible they are from an orthodox Catholic perspective, and so has chosen to talk around and above his inquirer's real questions.

In either case, it's time the "conservatives" took a firm stance on this issue. So far we've had nothing but (stunned?) silence from their camp. Perhaps they are in high-level meetings, trying desperately to cobble together some kind of defense. Perhaps they are, for the first time, facing the New Church Monster right in the face, and they don't know how to run. But the time has come (and is long overdue) for the conservative camp to declare their position: whose side are you on with regard to the Fatima issue? Answer the questions already, and tell it like it is - or find yourself guilty of "sinning by silence" (c.f. any Traditional catechism).

Thursday, November 06, 2003
The Deeper You Dig, the Worse it Gets

An astute reader notified us that there is, in fact, more to the Liturgical Lunacies we described below (see "Deep Rot in Monterey," 11/5/03) than we realized at first.

You'll remember, this was the Monterey, CA Diocese's "Liturgical Conference," which featured a priest who said, "we've all had our Immaculate Conceptions," and a sister who said, "I find the theology behind [Indulgences] problematic."

This catastrophic conference, which was intended to educate liturgists of various parishes on how to create "revitalized" liturgies that "pull us out of our comfort zones," was presided over by one Bishop Ryan. Bishop Ryan, who said at the conference, "Anytime we greet, receive, or catechize anyone in our parish, we receive Christ."

He presided over the conferences liturgies, which featured liturgical dancers who wore "Mardi Gras-style masks," and started "a liturgical conga line which all were directed to follow."

Ok, now that you a good and thorough idea of what kind of nonsense this Bishop was allowing, especially in the area of liturgical experimentation, here's the Relevant Part [TM] for you and I:

Bishop Ryan is the president of the of the California Bishops Conference and
a member of the USCCB Liturgy Committee.

This man has his hands in the Liturgical Pie that millions of Catholics partake of all over this nation in the Novus Ordo Mess.

This man's ideas help to shape the American Rite of the Novus Ordo, and will continue to do so.

'Nuff said.

From the "This is so Ridiculous, it Must be a Hoax" Department:

An article ran in the 11/1/03 of a Portugal newspaper entitled, Fatima to Become Interfaith Shrine.

We here at NOW are stunned.

Everyone knows that Fatima is the watershed issue in the Game of Ecumenism today. No, strike that. Hardly anyone knows this anymore, because the Vatican Storefront has been so persistently chipping away at the Fatima cult that rare is the Catholic who knows what (or where) Fatima is.

Well, in case you didn't know, Our Lady appeared at Fatima to make known to the world a few basic things about the coming 20th and 21st century (you'll pardon the somewhat crude summary and paraphrase here): Sinners are going to hell left and right because no one is praying for them; Russia is a garbage pit of error, but they are the key to the world's future; the Holy Father (along with all his bishops) must consecrate Russia (specifically) to the Immaculate Heart; once Russia is consecrated, She will convert, and the world will have peace; if Russia is not converted, the world will slowly but surely embrace Her God-less errors, there will be many wars, and a number of nations will simply be blown off the face of the earth; pray the Rosary every single day for the conversion of sinners.

Ever since the 1960s, this message has been systematically stifled - why? Because the heart of this message - that Russia needs "conversion" to the Catholic Faith - is 100% opposed to the new "ecumenical orientation" of the Vatican Storefront. On the contrary, say our princes and bishops, we must specifically avoid trying to convert other religions, ESPECIALLY the Orthodox (that includes Russia, you know).

And so how significant is it that the very shrine built to honor this heretofore-unheeded message of Our Lady is about to be turned into another Epicenter of Ecumania?

There are a number of striking facts about this development:

1) News of the shrine's impending aggiornamento was delivered by Vatican delegates... at a UN-inspired, "interfaith" congress. That's right, the UN, which has become the official Vatican Storefront's replacement plan for Our Lady of Fatima. Both promised world peace - only one will deliver.

2) The congress was held during October, in Fatima. October - ring any bells? It's the traditional month of the Rosary, which Our Lady of Fatima asked us to pray every day. It's also the last month in which Our Lady appeared to the seers of Fatima. October 13th, in fact - exactly 153 days from her first appearance, on May 13th. Hint: if you don't see the significance here, count the number of "Hail Mary's" on a traditional, 15-mystery Rosary.

3) The paper which reported this news was a little too blunt. Without the benefit of Vatican spin-doctors who have to make it sound like they're not really saying what they are saying, the paper brazenly announced, "the Shrine is to be developed into a centre where all the religions of the world will gather to pay homage to their various gods." Yes, you read that right: various gods.

4) As the paper reports, a hindu representative at the congress "described how already in the Far East millions of Hindus are getting 'positive vibrations' from visiting Marian shrines without endangering their faith." Well, Deo Gratias! As long as their faith isn't being endangered in any way... but still, we can't count on that. We should revisit some of these Marian shrines and tone them down so that we can GUARANTEE no one's faith is endangered.

5) Monsignor - if we can really call him that - Guerra had some interesting insights: "the very fact that Fatima is the name of a Muslim and Mohammed's daughter, is indicative that the Shrine must be open to the co-existence of various faiths and beliefs." He concludes from this little historical fact that, "we must assume that it was the will of the Blessed Virgin Mary that this comes about this way." Now how did I just know that someone was going to make that whole Fatima-Mohammed connection someday? I mean, Jack Chick has been harping on it for years, trying to prove how the Jesuits control the Muslims AND the Fatima cult - but I never thought I'd see a Monsignor try to make anything of the connection, much less a heavenly mandate for false Ecumenism.

6) Monsignor - if we can call him that - also had some friendly names for Traditionalists who oppose the "interfaith" congress, and he shared those names with his fellow congress cronies: "old fashioned, narrow minded, fanatic extremists and provocateurs." Tsk, tsk. Now where's the Spirit of Assisi in that remark?

7) And speaking of the Jesuits, "Jesuit theologian Father Jacques Dupuis, was insistent that the religions of the world must unite. 'The religion of the future will be a general converging of religions in a universal Christ that will satisfy all', he said." From the horse's mouth, folks: the future religion will not be Catholic, it will be a "general converging of religions in a universal Christ," a Christ who does not offend anyone, but "will satisfy all." What happened to the Christ who called Himself a "stumbling stone," and a "rock of offense?" God help us, we're only months away from seeing the One World Religion of the Last Days.

8) The "Jesuit" Devil goes on: "the Holy Spirit is operating and present in Buddhist, Hindu and other sacred writings of Christian and non-Christian faiths as well." The Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the Lord and Giver of Life... is "operating and present" in the "sacred" writings of Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.? The Koran is inspired?

9) This bastard Son of Loyola continues: "this is nothing more than a diversified form of sharing in the same mystery of salvation. In the end it is hoped that the Christian will become a better Christian and each Hindu a better Hindu." Now, wait. Before you flog the low-man on the totem pole, realize something: this is the gospel of John Paul 2, and it is also the gospel of the nun from Calcutta that John Paul 2 just beatified.

10) The report continues, "An official statement put out by the Congress called for a non-proselytising approach by all religions." Ah yes, what ecumenical plans would be complete without the obligatory obliteration of the Great Commission? The Congress stated that "No one religion can irradiate another." Note: the word "conversion" and the idea behind it has been replaced with the terms "endangering another's faith" and "irradiation." The Congress continues, "What is needed is that each religion be true to its faith integrally and treat each religion on the same footing of equality with no inferior or superiority complexes." Farewell, Mortalim Animos, we hardly knew thee.

11) Finally, the Congress indicated that the shrine of Fatima is not the only shrine that must undergo aggiornamento: "Delegates agreed that religious shrines, including Fatima, should be revamped every 25 years to reflect modern day trends and beliefs." How does one "revamp" a Marian shrine so that it reflects "modern day beliefs?" I shudder to think... but we won't have to wonder for long. We're about to find out, in a very tangible way.

Vere, Madrid, Keating, Akin, Pacheco, and McElhinney: won't you help us understand what this all really means?

Our Lady of Fatima... help us. Ora pro nobis.

Wednesday, November 05, 2003
Deep Rot in Monterey

The San Francisco Faith ran an article that is so revolting, so offensive to pious ears, for the first time in a long time, I don't even need to provide commentary. I'm just going to quote from the article, and let you experience the full rush of the rot. I call this "XTreme Catechesis."


""Wrapped in Mystery" was the theme of the annual Monterey diocese's liturgical conference held at Madonna del Sasso church in Salinas on September 23."

"The liturgical dancers all wore black pants and shirts with white Mardi Gras-style masks (very mysterious)."

"After the opening liturgy, we went to the parish hall to hear Father Mike Miller, from Sacred Heart parish in Salinas, deliver a talk."

""It" seemed to be Father's "fresh" and "re-vitalized" way of referring to God."

"Our tradition believes in infant baptism because you learn at a small age basic faith in 'it.'"

"When you go in front of the Blessed Sacrament, 'it' comes out."

"Turning to the Nicene Creed, Miller said it "more or less" declares that "Jesus Christ is true 'it' of true 'it,' begotten not made, consubstantial with 'it.'"

"All the Church mysteries, all the natural mysteries, all the 15 and 20 mysteries of the rosary are all expressions of God."

"For instance, we've all had our Immaculate Conceptions. We were conceived immaculate in the mind of God. God's picture of us is immaculate."

"The mystery comes to Catholics and non-Catholics, and to atheists -- because 'it' is universal love."

"We should not," he said, "over-plan or over-choreograph our liturgies. We need to allow them a little wiggle room."

"[Bishop] Ryan sternly warned that if "there is no welcome of others, [then there is] no welcoming of the Father, the Son, or the Spirit... Anytime we greet, receive, or catechize anyone in our parish, we receive Christ. This is what it means to be a parish. We all are transforming the Body of Christ along with the bread and wine."

"Sister set the tone for her talk by beginning with the questions: how can we "revitalize our parishes such that they transcend the narrowness of our own parochial interests?" "How could the Liturgy pull us out of our comfort zones?"

"When discussing the long meetings of preparation for the conference, Sister Boys stated she is not one for indulgences in the Church. "I find the theology behind them problematic," she said."

"We live in a culture of absolutes where everyone pretends they have an answer to almost every perplexing circumstance."

"...she was not at all certain about what we should be certain. "If you knew," she said, "why would you need faith? Certitude and faith do not belong on the same page."

"Fundamentalism, she said, "also seems to assume that because revelation is fixed and utterly clear, the tradition must be handed on without change. Change is to pervert the tradition."

"Simply repeating formulae from era to era does not ensure that their meaning will remain fresh."

"The Catholic Church in particular," she said," must be on watch against patterns of thought that disparage people of other faiths.... And here is a way of looking at liturgy as a counter to this."

"Are we not obliged to push beyond formulas that may once have been appropriate for us as children but are no longer able to engage us as adults?"

"Having learned of the death of Martin Luther King, Jr., in Memphis, Tennessee, she said she was drained of all her energy. At Mass, she said, "just after the priest said, 'this is my blood' -- in a gesture, who knows how or why it happened, he accidentally knocked over a chalice, which in turn knocked over the rest of them. The blood splattered to the ground. The juxtaposition of the blood shed for us, for the greater humanity in our world in Memphis Tennessee that afternoon. That was a mystery no liturgy planner can or would make. From that point forwards, whatever Eucharist meant, it had to do with my life force, not just Jesus'. "

"Sister quoted Frederick Buechner's "wonderful" definition of the Bible: "A disorderly collection of books, which are often tedious, barbaric, obscure, and teeming with contradictions and inconsistencies. It's a swarming composite of a book. An Irish stew of poetry and propaganda, law and legalism, myth and murk, history and hysteria, hopelessly associated with tub-thumping evangelism and dreary piety, super-annuated superstition, blue-nosed moralizing with ecclesiastical authoritarianism and crippling literalism."

Sister finally instructed us, "Don't talk to God with piety, talk to God with honesty."

"The grand finale began with a musical reprise. The liturgical dancers processed around the periphery of the church, starting a liturgical conga line which all were directed to follow."

One sister. One priest. One bishop.

How likely is it that any of them will receive any sort of rebuke from the Vatican Storefront? 0%.

Wednesday, October 22, 2003
Halloween Mass and Under-Educated Priests

"Pastor Brian Joyce" (that's "Fr. Joyce" to you old pre-Vatican II dinosaurs) published a letter to his parishoners on the parish website for the week of 10/19/03. A few paragraphs are of special interest. Regarding John Paul II, "Pastor Brian" says:

"As the first Pope ever to visit a Jewish Synagogue in Rome, to publicly pray at the Western Wall in Jerusalem and to visit a mosque in Morocco, he twice convened the leaders of other world religions to pray together in Assisi and together to denounce acts of war and terrorism carried out in the name of religion."

Get that? He "twice convened the leaders of other world religions to pray together in Assisi." As one astute visitor to the Novus Ordo Watch site pointed out, it seems poor Pastor Brian didn't get the memo: the world religions did not "pray together" in Assisi, they "came together to pray."

Of course, if even parish priests, who are supposed to be "in the know," are getting confused as to what really happened in Assisi, one wonders exactly how the common layman is supposed to naturally grasp the finer nuances of this event that neo-Catholic apologists insist should be clear. If even Pastor Brian mistakenly thought the religious leaders were actually praying together at Assisi, what about the millions of faithful Catholics all over the world? And Traditionalists are being scoffed at for taking offense to the scandal?

Pastor Brian ends his parish letter with the following fun tid-bit:

"Next weekend we celebrate Halloween with special costumed liturgies at 5:00 pm Saturday and 9:15 am Sunday. Young and old are invited to wear their favorite Halloween costumes."

You can either laugh or cry, I guess. Or just puke. I'm trying to envision now the sight of hundreds of becostumed folks, making their way to the front of the Sanctuary to present themselves to Our Holy Savior dressed as... you name it. Dracula? Frankenstein? The Wolf-Man? How about a zombie, a witch, a goblin, a ghoul, or (gasp) Britney Spears?

How do you spell reverence?

Welcome to the "fun church."