I am writing this series of articles because 38 years ago, I too once adhered to the invalidity and the Sedevacantist mindset. In early 1969, while a seminarian at St. John’s Seminary in Camarillo, CA, I received a copy of QVM. Having read it over and over many times, I became mentally saturated with all its elements, and as a result, ultimately became convinced of its conclusion: the new Mass was definitely invalid and to attend it would be a mortal sin. The Sedevacantist mindset soon logically followed; after all, how can a true pope promulgate an invalid mass, the consequences of which would constitute idolatry—worshiping mere bread.

Having left the seminary, I soon became friends with Pat Omlor and spent much time discussing the validity thesis with him, in order to perfect its arguments and to rebut its critics. But in 1971 something providential happened. Having already begun to sense a certain problem with one aspect of the thesis, namely the res sacramenti issue (article #3), I fortuitously came upon a statement by the great American theologian, Fr. Emmanuel Doronzo OMI, which jolted my former self-assuredness.

To paraphrase Doronzo: Before the time of the Council of Trent, the vast majority of theologians followed St. Thomas in denying that only the words “This is My Blood” suffice for the validity of the wine. However, after the time of the Council that position shifted dramatically, and today virtually no one follows this position.

What? After the Council of Trent, theologians en masse abandoned Thomas on this issue? What caused such a shift? After all, the Council of Trent consulted Thomas’s works as the authority second only to Scripture itself. It would be a year before I discovered the answer to the Trent-Aquinas conundrum, and it was that discovery which will constitute the subject matter of the second article.

• In article one, I will discuss the position of St. Thomas Aquinas regarding the
consecration of the wine.

• In article two, I will deal with the Catechism of the Council of Trent and its
treatment of the words of consecration of the wine, to see if it confirms, as alleged
by Omlor, the position of St. Thomas Aquinas.

• In article three, I will deal with the papal bull Apostolicae Curae as it relates, as
again alleged by Omlor, to the doctrine of the res sacramenti, and how it pertains
to the words of consecration.

• Lastly, in article four, I will deal with the allegation that “for all men” constitutes
a bogus translation of the words of consecration.

My hope is that by showing the errors of Mr. Omlor’s position, traditional Catholics will unite and fight for tradition for the right reasons, armed with the right arguments and to fight the real enemies of the Church instead of each other.