Pax Orbis

First published in English in 1983, “60 Reasons” was written by a group of priests to explain why they refused to celebrate the Novus Ordo. A short background to the English edition is given below, followed by the text itself. Thanks to Silvester D. McLean of the traditionalist journal “Catholic”, for this unique and valuable article. {NOTE: This article has been updated to correct some typographical errors.}

Background to the English version by Silvester D. McLean

Father Patrick Fox C.M. was ordained to the priesthood on 30 November, 1939, the Feast of Saint Andrew. The 40th anniversary of his ordination was marked in 1980 by the people of his Mass Centre at East Lindfield in Sydney and the Greythorn Mass Centre in Melbourne. They presented him with a ticket to Europe. Whilst there he went to Lourdes where he met some of the priests from the Diocese of Campos in Brazil. These priests, with their Bishop, Antonio de Castro Meyer, had rejected the Novus Ordo Missae (NOM) from its inception on the First Sunday of Advent, 1969.

The Campos priests gave Father Fox a document titled “A Question of Faith” which was 60 reasons why they would not celebrate the new Mass. On his return, Father Fox had this document translated from the Portuguese by Geoffrey Hull, Professor of Languages, at the University of NSW. It was originally published in English in Catholic, the Australian Traditional journal, in two parts, in July and August 1983.

Later, it was published as a pamphlet by the Saint Thomas Aquinas Seminary in the USA, as “62 Reasons” and eventually ran to around a million copies. It is still relevant today as a cogent argument against the Novus Ordo Missae.

Father Fox fought the good fight for over 65 years until his death in 2006. He is buried at Holy Cross Seminary, Goulburn, NSW.

“60 Reasons” by the priests of Campos

1. Because the New Mass is equivocal and ambiguous. It can be used also by Protestants. We pray in a manner reflecting our belief. However, this service is not an unequivocal profession of faith, but an ambiguous one, and our faith cannot be at once Catholic and Protestant.
2. Because the Immemorial Mass was not simply ‘touched up’ by the reforms. Rather, there has been a “radical restoration, one might almost say a total transformation and, in certain details, a completely new creation.”¹
3. Because these changes in the Mass lead one to think “that the Faith, always believed by the Christian people, can be changed or distorted, without infidelity to the sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic Faith is bound in perpetuity.” ²
4. Because, in reality, the New Mass “represents, both in its entirety and in particular points, a striking departure from the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass as formulated in Session XXII of the Council of Trent, which, by fixing in a definitive manner the ‘canons’ of the rite, erected an insurmountable barrier against any attempt to attack the integrity of the Magisterium.” ³
5. Because we are not dealing here with small or trifling alterations, simple modifications of ceremonies. Rather “the novel elements in the New Mass constitute material referring to perennial truths which are enunciated in a vague or diluted manner, when, indeed, these references can be found.” ⁴
6. Because “the recent reforms have shown society that the new changes in the liturgy lead to a total disorientation of the faithful, who already show signs of religious indifference and weakening faith”. ⁵
7. Because, since the reform of the liturgy, there have been a lessening of the faith and a cooling of the fervour of the faithful, and statistics show that there has been a considerable drop in Sunday Mass attendance: thus, for example, Time magazine (24/5/76) notes a fall of 30%; in France, according to Cardinal Marty, a decrease of 43%; in Holland, according to Time (5/1/76) a decrease of 50%.
8. Because, since the introduction of the New Mass, “many of the clergy have undergone an agonizing crisis of conscience, of which we have innumerable and daily testimonies”.⁶ Priests wish to remain faithful to the Mass of their ordination.
9. Because, since the introduction of the New Mass, according to Vatican statistics the number of priests in the world has decreased in just seven years by almost 50% (413,438 priests in 1969 against 243,307 priests in 1976: a drop of exactly 41.15%). More coincidence? Show us the optatam totius Ecclesiae renovationem (the desired renewal of the whole Church.)
10. Because “the pastoral reasons adduced to support this most serious break (with the tradition of the Mass) have no real value in the face of doctrinal reasons and seem by no means convincing.”⁷
11. Because the New Mass does not evince nearly as clearly as does the Traditional Mass in the Real Presence of Our Lord.
12. Because the New Mass somehow confuses the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist with His presence in the words of Scripture and His presence among the faithful: an approximation to Protestant teaching.
13. Because the New Mass facilitates the confusion of the hierarchical priesthood with the priesthood of the faithful as taught by Protestants.
14. Because the New Mass favours the Protestant theory that it is the faith of believers, and not the words of the priest, that bring about the Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
15. Because of the restoration of the Prayer of the Faithful along Lutheran lines. This type of prayer, to quote the Lutheran minister Thomas Reed, emphasizes” the exercise of the sacerdotal role by the whole assembly of the faithful” (Protestant teaching). ⁸
16. Because the New Mass has, in Lutheran fashion, suppressed the Confession (Confiteor) of the priest, keeping only the Confession of the whole assembly praying together with the priest.
17. Because the New Mass gives the impression that the faithful are concelebrants with the priest, a notion contradictory to Catholic teaching.
18. Because six Protestant ministers collaborated in its compilation. Their names are: Dr Georges, Canon Jasper, Dr Shepherd, Dr Konneth, Dr Smith and Br. Max Thurian.
19. Because just as Luther abolished the Offertory because it expressed unequivocally the sacrificial and propitiatory nature of the Mass, so also the New Mass has reduced the Offertory to a simple preparation of gifts.
20. Because Protestants can celebrate without embarrassment or scruple their “Lord’s Supper” using the text of the New Mass. This means that they can use the New Mass without ceasing to be Protestants and without sacrificing their Protestant faith! Max Thurian, of the Protestant community of Taize, has said that one of the fruits of the New Mass “will be perhaps that non- Catholic communities will be able to celebrate the Lord’s Supper with the same prayers as the Catholic Church.” Theologically this is a possibility. ⁹
21. Because the new narrative style of the Consecration induces one to believe that it is a question of memorial of the Last Supper and not a true Sacrifice. (Protestant theory)
22. Because, through serious omissions, it raises the thought that the celebration is just a meal or a sacrifice of thanksgiving and not a propitiatory sacrifice in remission of sins (the former interpretations of the Eucharist being Protestant.)
23. Because, as a result of all this, Protestants have maliciously remarked that “the new Catholic Eucharistic prayers have abandoned the false idea of a sacrifice offered to God.” And this is not all. “The renewed Mass now contains nothing that can possibly perturb the evangelical Christian.” ¹⁰
24. Because therefore, in not accepting the New Mass, one resolves simply and effectively the dilemma of either becoming Protestant with the New Mass or preserving the Catholic Faith with the Traditional Mass.
25. Because with the many innovations it has occasioned, such as altars shaped like tables, Mass facing the people, Communion standing and in the hand, the New Mass has not only given free rein to abuses, but favours the Protestant teaching that the Mass is only a meal and that the priest is merely the president of the assembly.
26. Because the New Mass was drawn up in conformity with a Protestant definition of the Mass. “The Lord’s Supper or Mass is the sacred assembly of the People of God who come together, presided over by a priest, to celebrate the memorial of the Lord.” ¹¹
27. Because the New Mass cannot please God, who detests deceit and duplicity, characteristics of the new rite which aim to please both Catholics and Protestants, though mainly the latter.
28. Because whoever assists at the New Mass, especially when accompanied by modern hymns with a strongly Protestant flavour (not to mention guitars), has given the clear impression of attending a Protestant prayer meeting, service or Eucharist.
29. Because, being ambiguous and fostering heresy, it is worse than something explicitly heretical, since it is much more deceptive. The most obnoxious counterfeit coin is the one that has turned up most often with the real ones.
30. Because the Holy Mass is the sacrifice of the Bride of Christ, which is the Catholic Church. Consequently she cannot be at once the Bride of Christ and the Bride of other churches and sects opposed to Christ; that would be offensive to Christ and His Bride.
31. Because the New Mass follows the same format as the Protestant Masses of Cranmer, one of the founders of Anglicanism. Even the methods used to impose the New Mass of today resemble those of this English heresiarch. Realizing this, the English episcopate petitioned the Holy See for permission to continue the use of the Roman Missal of St. Pius V. ¹²
32. Because the Church has canonized several English martyrs who died rather than accept a Mass very similar to the New Mass, viz. the Anglican “Holy Communion” service.
33. Because many Protestant converts to Catholicism have been scandalized to see in the New Mass the same ‘mass’ that they attended as Protestants. One of these (Julian Green) was driven to ask: “What did we convert for? “
34. Because, according to statistics, there has been, since the reforms, a great decline in conversions to Catholicism and a growth of Protestants sects. Thus for example in the United States, conversions which once amounted to some 100,000 per year have today dropped to less than 10,000. (as of 1982)
35. Because no saint has yet celebrated or attended this Mass, (as of 1982) whereas the Traditional Mass has yielded a harvest of saints, as testified by Paul VI himself: “As a channel of God’s grace, this Missal has richly nourished the piety of innumerable saints.” ¹³
36. Because, by contrast, the New Mass is proving to be the instrument of ever greater deviations from, and more frequent profanations of the Most Holy Eucharist and of the sanctuary. This was unknown in the days of the Traditional Mass. To this we have the unwitting testimony of Cardinal Renard, Archbishop of Lyons in France: “Frequently Masses are celebrated with insufficient reverence, for instance without vestments, without the Creed or the Pater Noster, with invented Canons, or simply without prayers in the context of a secular meal. There are also cases of concelebration by lay people or married (and laicized) priests; priests failing to purify the chalice at the end of Mass, or letting particles of the consecrated bread fall all over the table or altar.” ¹⁴
37. Because the New Mass is in essence modernistic: despite appearances, it is the vehicle of a new faith. It follows perfectly the modernist tactic of playing with ambiguities and imprecise terms in order to spread error.
38. Because it does not constitute a factor of unity in the liturgy as did the Traditional Mass, but rather fosters confusion and pluralism. In fact, every priest now celebrates the Mass of his fancy under the pretext of creativity. Thus the new ‘order’ of Mass deserves to be called a new ‘disorder’, since it has consistently produced just this. In reality the rubrics of the New Order of Mass are not strictly observed anywhere.
39. Because many theologians, canon lawyers and respected priests have rejected the New Mass and have stated that in conscience they cannot celebrate it.
40. Because, the elimination of many genuflections (only three remain), the purification of the priest’s fingers in the chalice, the preservation of his fingers from all profane contact after the Consecration, the altar stone and its relics, the three altar cloths (reduced to one), and of many other things, points unmistakably to an implicit repudiation of faith in the dogma of the Real Presence.¹⁵
41. Because it is a Mass artificially fabricated and not a Mass enriched and perfected by a centuries-old tradition as was the rite codified (and not simply invented) by St. Pius V.
42. Because the approved vernacular translations of the New Mass have only multiplied and worsened the errors already contained in the new Latin missal, emphasizing more than ever its modernistic nature.
43. Because in the light of all the errors and ambiguities of the rite, the New Mass easily runs the risk of being celebrated invalidly, thus causing the Church to be deprived of the True Sacrifice and us to be exposed to the wrath of God. It seems, then, that the New Mass forebodes a great chastisement from God. Cardinals Ottavianni and Bacci stated in their critical examination of the new liturgy: “Will those priests who, in the near future, will not have received the traditional formation and who will rely on the New Order of Mass and the Institutio generalis to do what the Church intends be able to consecrate validly? It does not seem unreasonable to doubt this.”
44. Because the Mass is the Church’s most beautiful and valuable asset. Hence the devil has always sought, by means of heretics, to deprive the world of the Mass, making them precursors of the Antichrist who will above all seek to abolish and shall, in fact, abolish the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, as a punishment for the sins of men, according to the prophecy of Daniel, 8, 12: “And he was given power against the perpetual sacrifice because of the sins of the people.” ¹⁶
45. Because in those places where the Traditional Mass has been preserved, the faith and fervour of the faithful are greater in contrast to what remains in places where the New Mass reigns supreme.¹⁷
46. Because along with the New Mass appeared the new catechism, the new morality, new ideas and styles of preaching, the new calendar – in short, a new church. The New Mass is one of the manifestations of the new church and the focal point of religious liberalism. “The liturgical reform is, in a very real sense, the key to aggiornamento (modernization of the Church). Do not be deceived: this is the starting point of the Revolution.” ¹⁸
47. Because it is a Mass bristling with novelties springing from the various moods and tastes of the celebrant, from the spontaneous responses of young people, etc. Because of the lack of any attractive content (only the Traditional Mass is attractive in itself), novelties must be invented to attract and entertain the congregation.
48. Because it puts into practice errors already condemned by the Council of Trent (e.g. Masses completely in the vernacular, the Consecration read aloud), by Pius VI (the same, in his condemnation of the Synod of Pistoia) and Pius XII (who condemned in Mediator Dei such things as altars made in the shape of tables).
49. Because the New Mass has fulfilled the great Judeo-Masonic wish to transform the Catholic Church into a new ecumenical church embracing all ideologies and religious, truth and error. Symptomatic in this regard is the statement of Bishop Duschak as early as 5/11/62: “When asked whether this proposal to introduce an ecumenical Mass came from his priests, he answered: ‘No, I even find they they are opposed to it, as are numerous bishops. But if it could be put into practice, I believe that they would eventually accept it.’ ” ¹⁹
50. Because it impugns the dogma of the Communion of Saints in prescibing the suppression, when the priest is celebrating alone, of all the greetings and the final blessing; and of the Ite Missa est even in Masses where a server is present.²⁰
51. Because it gives more prominence to the altar than to the tabernacle. It is now recommended that the Blessed Sacrament be reserved in a separate place, as if it were some relic, so that the when people enter the church it is no longer the tabernacle that greets them, but a simple and bare table.²¹
52. Because the new rite of Mass no longer constitutes a vertical cult turning man heavenwards towards God, but rather is content to orient man towards man. In other words the new church is the religion of man. What has become of the Glory of God?
53. Because the New Mass, supposedly obeying the directives of the Second Vatican Church²², is in reality opposed to its decisions, since this same council declared that the Church wishes to preserve and promote the traditional rites.
54. Because the Traditional Mass, known as the Rite of St. Pius V, was not legally abrogated in accordance with the canonical regulations still in force (cf. Canons 22 and 30).
55. Because Pope St Pius V granted a perpetual indult (which to date has not been revoked), valid for all time, for the celebration of Mass according to his missal, freely and licitly, without any scruple of conscience and without the possibility of incurring any penalty, sentence or censure. ²³
56. Because Paul VI, in promulgating the New Mass, chose not to invoke his pontifical infallibility. It was he himself who declared in his speech of 19/11/69 in reference to the new Ordo: “The rite and the relevant rubrics are not in themselves a dogmatic definition; they are susceptible of theological qualifications of a different kind …”
57. Because Paul VI, in a reply to Cardinal Heenan of England, who had asked him directly whether or not he had prohibited the Tridentine Mass, stated that “it was not his intention to prohibit absolutely the Tridentine Mass.” ²⁴
58. Because, although we acknowledge the supreme authority of the Pope and his universal rule in the Church, as well as the authority of the bishops, we know that his authority may not be invoked to impose on us an equivocal and quasi-heretical Mass displeasing to God.
59. Because the First Vatican Council defined that “the Holy Ghost was not promised to the successors of St. Peter so that they, under the revelation of the Spirit, might preach new doctrines, but so that with His help they might preserve reverently and expound faithfully the Deposit of Faith, which is Revelation as inherited from the Apostles” (D. 3070). We have demonstrated above that the New Mass does propagate a new teaching.
60. Because heresy and its promulgation cannot be matters of obedience. Obedience is service to the Faith and not Faith at the service of obedience. In that case “one must obey God before men” (Acts. 5:29).

Therefore, the acceptance or otherwise of the New Mass constitutes a grave question of conscience. Eternal salvation is at stake.

The Priests of Campos, Brazil (circa 1982-83)

Objection to 60 Reasons

Some will say to us: But the Pope himself celebrates the New Mass and orders its celebration!

We reply: It has already been shown how the First Vatican Council fixed the limits of the infallible magisterium of the Pope. He can impose nothing opposed to the age-old tradition of the Church.

Thus the Sixth Ecumenical Council (Third Council of Constantinople) anathmatized Pope Honorius because he favoured the fomented heresy. Pope St. Leo II mad a similar condemnation, stating

“We anathematize Honorius, who did not illumine this Apostolic Church with the teaching of apostolic tradition, but by a sacriligeous betrayal allowed the unsullied apostolic faith received from his predecessors to be sullied… He did not extinguish, as befitted his authority, the growing flame of heresy, but nurtured it by his negligence.” (Denz. Sch. 563 an- 561).

Compare also the Sixth Ecumenical Council’s judgement of the letter of Pope Honorius and Patriarch Sergius: “Having ascertained that they are in complete disagreement with the apostolic dogmas and the definitions of the holy Councils and of all the reputable Fathers, and that on the contrary, they followed the false teachings of the heretics, we reject them absolute and deplore them as harmful to souls” (Denz-Sch. 550).

Moreover, the infallible Church canonized two saints who, in order to keep the faith, refused to follow the orientation of Pope Honorius: Saint Maximus and Saint Sophronius.

ENDNOTES

1. The words of Mgr. Annibale Bugnini, considered one of the compilers of the New Mass. ↩︎
2. Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci in a letter to Pope Paul VI. ↩︎
3. ibid ↩︎
4. ibid ↩︎
5. ibid ↩︎
6. ibid ↩︎
7. ibid ↩︎
8. Translator’s note: There can be, however, no possible objection to a Bidding Prayer in which general intercessions are read or sung by the priest or deacon in the manner of ektenies of the Eastern Rites. It is the Prayer of the Faithful led by lay people that is criticised here ↩︎
9. La Croix, 30/5/69 ↩︎
10. Siegevalt, Professor of Dogma at the Protestant Faculty of Strasbourg. ↩︎
11. No. 7 of the Institutio of 6/4/69. ↩︎
12. Cf. contemporary news items in the religious and secular press. ↩︎
13. Missale Romanum, Apostolic Constitution on the New Mass by Pope Paul VI ↩︎
14. Vinson, Messes de l’Antichrist, p. 4. ↩︎
15. Cf. The Ottaviani Intervention of Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci. ↩︎
16. words of St. Alphonsus Liguori, quoted by Georges Vinson, Messes de l’Antichrist, P. 1. ↩︎
17. Report on the Holy Mass in the Diocese of Campos presented to James Cardinal Knox, published in the journal Roma Buenos Aires, No. 69, August, 1981, p. 29. ↩︎
18. declaration of Mgr. Dwyer, Archbishop of Birmingham, in his capacity of spokesman of the Episcopal Synod. ↩︎
19. cited by Fr Ralph Wiltgen in The Rhine flows into the Tiber, p. 37-39 ↩︎
20. The Ottaviani Intervention. ↩︎
21. ibid ↩︎
22. The post-conciliar Church ↩︎
23. Bull Quo Primum. ↩︎
24. Cardinal Heenan in a letter to Houghton Brouw, President of the Latin Mass Society. ↩︎