Another good video against the new mass. 

Great video.

To accept the Novus Ordo "consecration of the wine" as valid, one must believe that the traditional, infallible Roman Catholic Magisterium (Innocent III et al) have erred concerning the words actually spoken by Jesus at the Last Supper. 

The Novus Ordites side with the Protestants and Greeks against Roman Tradition, claiming that Jesus did not actually say the words "the mystery of faith."

As Peter Dimond points out, in the traditional Roman Missal, the Catholic Church states that JESUS SAID the phrase translated as "the mystery of faith." Here are the words from the traditional Missal:

"In like manner, after He had supped, taking also this excellent chalice into His holy and venerable hands, also giving thanks to Thee, He blessed and gave It to His disciples saying: "Take and drink ye all of this, FOR THIS IS THE CHALICE OF MY BLOOD, OF THE NEW AND ETERNAL TESTAMENT: THE MYSTERY OF FAITH: WHICH SHALL BE SHED FOR YOUR AND FOR MANY UNTO THE REMISSION OF SINS. As often as ye shall do these things, ye shall do them in memory of Me."

The question is whom do you believe? Which side do you fall on? EITHER you believe the Roman Catholic Church when it says that Jesus said the words "the mystery of faith" at the Last Supper OR you believe the Protestants and Greeks that the Roman Catholic Church erred when it said that Jesus actually said those words.

If you take the side of the true Roman Catholic Church, then you should believe that the removal of the words "mysterium fidei" from "the form" of the Sacrament, invalidates the consecration of that sacramental species, precisely as St. Pius V said it would in De defectibus.

20. Defects on the part of the form may arise if anything is missing from the complete wording required for the act of consecrating. Now the words of the Consecration, which are the form of this Sacrament, are:

HOC EST ENIM CORPUS MEUM, and HIC EST ENIM CALIX SANGUINIS MEI, NOVI ET AETERNI TESTAMENTI: MYSTERIUM FIDEI: QUI PRO VOBIS ET PRO MULTIS EFFUNDETUR IN REMISSIONEM PECCATORUM

If the priest were to shorten or change the form of the consecration of the Body and the Blood, so that in the change of wording the words did not mean the same thing, he would not be achieving a valid Sacrament. If, on the other hand, he were to add or take away anything which did not change the meaning, the Sacrament would be valid, but he would be committing a grave sin.

If you claim that the Roman Catholic Church erred in the claim that Jesus actually said the words "the mystery of faith," then you are anathematized by the Council of Trent, Session XXII:

CHAPTER IV

On the Canon of the Mass. And whereas it beseemeth, that holy things be administered in a holy manner, and of all holy things this sacrifice is the most holy; to the end that it might be worthily and reverently offered and received, the Catholic Church instituted, many years ago, the sacred Canon, so pure from every error, that nothing is contained therein which does not in the highest degree savour of a certain holiness and piety, and raise up unto God the minds of those that offer. For it is composed, out of the very words of the Lord, the traditions of the apostles, and the pious institutions also of holy pontiffs.

CANON VI.--If any one saith, that the canon of the mass contains errors, and is therefore to be abrogated; let him be anathema.

Great video.

To accept the Novus Ordo "consecration of the wine" as valid, one must believe that the traditional, infallible Roman Catholic Magisterium (Innocent III et al) have erred concerning the words actually spoken by Jesus at the Last Supper. 

The Novus Ordites side with the Protestants and Greeks against Roman Tradition, claiming that Jesus did not actually say the words "the mystery of faith."

As Peter Dimond points out, in the traditional Roman Missal, the Catholic Church states that JESUS SAID the phrase translated as "the mystery of faith." Here are the words from the traditional Missal:

First of all, you need to stop lumping "the Greeks" in with Protestants, as if they were somehow opposed to "Roman Tradition".  Secondly, the statement made by Innocent III was not infallible.  Innocent III also issued a few douzies in his day, like when he claimed that the consecration was valid even if the priest merely thought the words of consecration (for which he was rightly taken to task by St. Thomas Aquinas).  Thirdly, I believe he said that mysterium fidei was of Apostolic Tradition in the Roman Church, not that Our Lord necessarily stated those words.

I believe that the consecration would have remained valid had the mysterium fidei been simply removed, but the fact that it was moved and re-defined as referring not to the consecration but to the Life, Death, and Resurrection of Our Lord makes it extremely problematic.  That's to say nothing about the rest of the NO Missal, which absolutely guts references to "sacrifices" and, most significantly, removes the Catholic offertory, replacing it with a тαℓмυdic table blessing.

My point was that the Roman Missal itself states that Jesus said the words "the mystery of faith." Here again are the translated words from the Roman Missal:


The Latin word for "saying" is "dicens." And the speaker of those words is clearly Jesus Christ. He is being quoted in that formula.

So the Church, through the Roman Missal, has stated infallibly that Jesus actually said those sentences, which include the words "the mystery of faith."

If you are saying that Our Lord did not "necessarily" speak those words, then are you not also saying that the Church, through the Roman Missal, is possibly propagating a falsehood, through the prayer of the priest, in the most solemn part of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass?

Either Jesus said those words or he did not. The Roman Catholic Church says that Jesus said them. I say he said them. What do you say?

Dear Angelus,

This is exactly the problem of modernism in a nutshell. How much can be parsed and dissected, so that it can be altered? And since in one way or the other it had been altered, can that alteration now be justified? The mystery is taken out of the Faith, and the Faith becomes a belief; one of many, a religious freedom.

The Eastern churches, the Uniates, understood that not everything needs to be scientifically explained and categorized. Let us pray they withstand the onslaught of the Novus Ordo, if it is not already too late.

Thank you for your comments.