Tuesday, September 1, 2009

The Novus Ordo Church and Sincere Belief in “Feelings”

By: Dr. J. P. Hubert

One of the more remarkable characteristics of the conciliar (Novus Ordo) church is its lack of defined creedal elements. Unlike the True (Traditional) Church of Jesus Christ which had very precisely articulated doctrines and dogmas to which every member in good standing was to give complete assent of their intellect and will, the revolutionary post-Vatican II “church” has virtually no doctrines which must be believed.[1] It seems that any sincerely held albeit temporary sentiment is acceptable to the conciliar hierarchy, no matter how preposterous it may be when compared to Traditional orthodox Roman Catholic teaching. The Novus Ordo church is one which like modern philosophy in general is characterized by “feelings” which by their very nature are fleeting. That being the case there is no role for dogma/doctrine.

The sad reality is that there are no uniquely Catholic doctrines which every conciliar “Catholic” is required to embrace. Some readers find that statement inferiorating but when the conciliar Vatican fails to properly discipline “Catholic” theologians such as Hans Kung, Raymond Brown, Karl Rahner etc. for holding and promulgating doctrinal views[2] which are completely contradictory--to what has always and everywhere been believed[3] by the True Church--the conclusion is unavoidable.

The Novus Ordo (conciliar) church instead seems to be oriented toward providing a “communal experience” devoid of strict doctrinal belief where people gather together to help each other successfully negotiate the challenges of life. It appears designed to help people "feel" better here and now, not prepare for the afterlife. Rather than preaching a profound conversion through which the person becomes truly transformed in Christ, the conciliar church more or less accepts the sinful condition of modern man as inevitable/unchangeable thus emptying the Gospel of its power. Hence it does not preach the need for repentance of sin and conversion to the True Church of Christ.

The Novus Ordo Missae is not oriented to proper worship of God either but in a sort of perverse sense elevates the importance of man while deprecating that of God. The entire focus is horizontal in orientation from person to person rather than vertical from person to God. Those who remember attending the pre-Vatican II Tridentine Latin Mass of St. Pius V are well aware of this radical difference in dimension and orientation. In that regard the Novus Ordo is best described as having a complete absence of sacrality. There is simply no sense of the sacred in the “New Mass” no matter what language it is performed in.

Even if it were possible to demonstrate to their satisfaction that there is a deposit of Divinely Revealed truth which characterizes the Roman Catholic faith, would those who embrace the conciliar church be willing to subject themselves to its demands in faithful obedience?[4] If one may judge from anecdotal evidence, it would seem not. Moreover, the revolutionary changes in “Catholic” morality alone should be enough to establish that the conciliar church preaches another gospel since Christ’s test is that we shall “know them by their fruits.”[5]

Perhaps the best proof that the conciliar church preaches another gospel is the fact that of those doctrines and dogmas which have not been completely abrogated in the wake of Vatican II, there has been no attempt on the part of the hierarchy to enforce them. In fact the very opposite is true. Traditional doctrines/dogmas are ignored while those prelates who espouse heterodox notions have been elevated to a position of prominence in the conciliar church. This must be intentional. It simply could not be by accident.

To be continued...


1. Many of the Traditional Doctrines and Dogmas remain “on the books” but are completely ignored.
2. E.g. rejecting the divinity of Christ, His bodily resurrection from the dead, the virginal conception and birth of Christ etc. The list of other high ranking prelates and Theologians who promulgate these ideas is too extensive to outline.
3. As articulated in the Vincentian Canon.
4. Would those who currently benefit emotionally, financially, politically, socially etc. from their membership in the conciliar church be willing for the sake of the truth to reject it as an imposter if evidence clearly demands it? Obviously such a decision is extremely difficult for anyone to make but if Christ is the Truth and we have Faith in Christ, would we not be required to do so?
5. Members of the conciliar church hierarchy and those self-professed and famous members of the laity almost to a fault either embrace moral doctrines which contradict established Traditional Catholic teaching or fail to repudiate them. Sociological studies document that conciliar "Catholics" have the same incidence of morally illicit behaviors as do those of the secular population in terms of e.g. divorce, abortion, contraception, adultery, fornication, sodomy etc.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Right on.

What/Where is the Roman Catholic Church?

In light of Traditional Catholic dogma/doctrine, how should the Second Vatican Council be viewed ? Is it consistent with Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition and prior Magisterial teaching?

What explains the tremendous amount of "bad fruit" which has been forthcoming since the close of the Council in 1965? “By their fruits you shall know them” (Matt. 7:16)

This site explores these questions and more in an attempt to place the Second Vatican Council in proper perspective.