Cessation of the Continual Sacrifice

 © Copyright 2009, T. Stanfill Benns ( All emphasis within quotes is the author’s unless indicated otherwise.)

The alarming trend now evident among some Tradtionalists today (usually Feeneyites) is to extend the “papal heresy” epidemic back to Pope St. Pius X or Pope Pius IX on (the pretext that he was a Mason as a youth); and some even believe that because the doctrine on baptism of desire was “forged” into the Council of Trent documents we have not had a true Pope since these times. This is an outright falsehood, but enemies of the Church have used it to their advantage. If Holy Scripture as interpreted by the Church was revered and understood, there would be no question that the real problems began with Roncallis’s reign and continue to the present, despite all protestations to the contrary.

Rev. Hugh Pope declares that the Book of Daniel must be considered prophetic from a doctrinal point of view. It also is the unanimous opinion of theologians that the Book of Daniel is the basis for the Apocalypse. Here we speak of Holy Scripture that has been rightly interpreted by those who, before the death of Pope Pius XII, wrote under the supervision of scriptural scholars and ecclesiastical superiors. The necessary interconnection between the cessation of the Holy Sacrifice, the appearance of the abomination and the fulfillment of prophecies found in St. John’s Apocalypse will be explained below.

What is the abomination of desolation?

Many “false prophets” claiming to rightly interpret Scripture in the end-times have identified Antichrist as the false popes in Rome and Conclavist popes yet have failed miserably to follow the visions of Daniel in their entirety. As a result, they also have failed to demonstrate the existence of the Catholic faith within them by adhering strictly to the words of God and His Son, always interpreted and taught by the Church in the same manner, (Pope St. Pius X’s Oath Against Modernism). Clearly Pope Paul IV interprets the abomination of desolation as Antichrist; also heretics, apostates and schismatics parading as true Catholics. This also is the opinion of St. Bernard, the last Father of the Church. He teaches that it is an anti-pope reigning as a true pope who alone can merit the terrible title Antichrist. In supporting Pope Innocent II, St. Bernard wrote to Hildebert, archbishop of Tours: “Behold, Innocent the Christ, the anointed of the Lord, is ‘set for the fall and the resurrection of many.’ For they that are of God willingly adhere to him, whilst opposed to him stand Antichrist and his followers. We have seen ‘the abomination of desolation standing in the holy place,’ (Matt. 34:15)…He has seated himself in the Chair of Peter. The holy place he covets, not for its holiness, but for its height. He has, I say, got possession of the holy place [but] not through the merit of his life. The election whereof he boasts is but a cloak for his malice. To call it an election at all is an impudent lie.” (Rev. Albert J. Luddy, The Life and Teachings of St. Bernard).

So both Paul IV in Cum ex Apostolatus Officio and St. Bernard, the last Father of the Church agree: there is no doubt about the meaning of the abomination. Paul IV’s Bull is unmistakably infallible, even by more modern standards. And yet those calling themselves Catholics today have managed to separate the inseparable — the abomination and the cessation of the continual Sacrifice. There is a very obvious reason for this, seen in the end of Daniel’s book where he unmasks the priests of Bel. And that reason has to do with false priests misleading the faithful concerning the efficacy and licitity of their ministrations. (That the constant teaching of the Church and Canon Law forbids such priests to function can be seen by consulting the many other works on this site.) It is important to point out that this defection was intimated in Daniel 9:27: “…the victim and the Sacrifice shall fail.” Christ will not bless the works of those interdicted by His Church with His presence at their sacrifices. And those appearing to sacrifice offer only an offense to God, according to St. Thomas Aquinas.

This failure to properly understand Holy Scripture has wrought much confusion concerning where the Church stands prophecy-wise and how we must conduct ourselves in these difficult times. Being a prophetic work binding doctrinally, since the books of Holy Scripture have been defined and promoted for belief by the Church, Daniel must be read and understood not in a past sense or a sense in the distant future, but as a prophecy applying, in each of its parts, to these days in which we live. This is the common teaching of Scripture commentators and scholars. To do otherwise is to discredit this holy book that tells us so much about the Apocalypse. Clearly many today believe that the false popes in Rome and the Conclavist “popes” either are individually Antichrists or that Paul 6 was Antichrist and the system lives on. All this is well and good providing they also attribute to the Man of Sin the title of individual Antichrist. In the 1940s, Michael J. Gruenthaner, S.J., in his “Antichrist in the Scriptures,” (Homiletic and Pastoral Review) wrote: “Modern theologians regard it as certain that Antichrist will be an individual human being endowed with the qualities outlined (in St. John and St Paul).” Gruenthaner further stated: “In view of the unanimous consent of the Fathers and theologians, it would be imprudent to deny that the doctrine of an individual Antichrist is contained either implicitly or explicitly in Scripture.”

But here Gruenthaner is mistaken; it is far more than just imprudent to hold an opinion contrary to the unanimous opinion of the Fathers. Although he is correct in stating that the Fathers unanimously agree that Antichrist is an individual person based on the Scripture texts, he should have gone on to note that such a unanimous opinion constitutes a rule of faith in interpreting Holy Scripture. Rev. J. C. Fenton, a professor of moral theology at the Catholic University in the 1950’s, commented: “The Council of Trent (DZ 786) identified the unanimous teaching of the Fathers with the interpretation of the Church itself as the standard for correct interpretation of Holy Scripture,”(Concept of Sacred Theology). Both Fenton and Henry Cardinal Manning explained that for such opinions to be unanimous, the consent of every Father is not necessary. Fenton further stated that such an opinion constitutes “a rule of faith” according to the Council of Trent and cannot be questioned. “The synod declares that no one who relies on his own judgment in matters of faith and morals, which pertain to the upbuilding of the Christian doctrine, and that no one who distorts the Sacred Scripture, according to his own opinions, shall dare to interpret the said Sacred Scriptures contrary to the sense which is held by holy mother Church, whose duty it is to judge regarding the true sense and interpretation of holy Scriptures, or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers…,” (DZ 786). That the Sacrifice will indeed fail also is the unanimous opinion of the Fathers, as Cardinal Manning explained in his “The Present Crisis of the Holy See.” Those counting themselves members of the remnant Church should heed well the clear words of this Canon. Below we will explore further how the Church interprets the abomination of desolation and the cessation of the Continual Sacrifice.

Different aspects of the abomination 

The abomination of desolation, Daniel tells us, stands in the holy place where it ought not to be. In its literal sense, the abomination of desolation is “an idol set up in the sanctuary of the Jewish Temple,” (footnote to Douay-Rheims Bible). Scriptural scholars unanimously apply all the prophecies of Daniel to the Church at the time of Antichrist; therefore the abomination of desolation in Christian times must be an idol set up in the sanctuary of Catholic Churches. The Catholic Encyclopedia (Vol. 1) reports that this term can be taken in a concrete form as well, “referring to a person, a ‘ravager,’ or even as a participal noun, (he) ‘that maketh desolate.’” The Latin root of desolation means to forsake, and Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary defines desolate as “deprived of inhabitants, laid waste, left alone, forsaken.” Both the Old and New Testament treat of this great dishonor to God, and apply the word abomination to several different types of serious sin. Proud, deceitful men; wicked shepherds, liars, detractors, idolaters; and those engaging in forbidden sexual relations are referred to as abominations. Especially intended as abominable in the Scripture texts is any unclean or unworthy sacrifice, or an acceptable sacrifice offered before idols. Also in Vol. I, The Catholic Encyclopedia defines Antichrist as (a) one directly opposed to Christ (b) “one resembling Christ in appearance and power” and finally (c) “a king who reigns during an interregnum” (!) Neither Roncalli nor Montini ever ascended the papacy, as Cum ex… demonstrates, yet they reigned supreme over Rome and the world. This is clearly a revival of pagan Rome and the powers of the ancient Caesars.

We have, of course, Pope Paul IV’s official definition of the abomination of desolation in “Cum ex…” confirming that of St. Bernard. And we also have St. Augustine’s teaching that individual Christians become antichrists whenever they retain the name Catholic yet knowingly and willfully adhere to some heresy and break the Commandments, which also is confirmed by Pope Paul IV in Cum ex… St. Augustine taught that all those who pretend to remain Catholic while holding to heresy fulfill St. John’s definition of antichrist as one who “denieth the Father and the Son,” (City of God; l Pet. 2:22; 2 Pet, 2:l). This principle also is reflected in Church discipline, (Canon 1325, defining heresy). Christ was sent to earth by God, the Father and transmitted all earthly power to St. Peter. Therefore, to deny papal authority involves denial of the Trinity Who established it. This, of course, is heresy; and EVERY heresy is an abomination because it makes desolate the truth. Holiness and Catholicity are two of the four marks by which the Church is recognized. The abomination (heresy) stands in the holy place (the Church) every time a Catholic falls into heresy.

Priests become abominations in God’s eyes whenever they defile the sanctuary by celebrating Mass in a state of mortal sin, too hastily, or without reverence and when they exercise their faculties to celebrate Mass while under excommunication, suspension, interdict or irregularity, (St. Thomas, Summa Theologica, 1, Q. 82, A9). In his sermon on Sts. Peter and Paul, St. Anthony of Padua wrote: “[The priest neglectful of his flock] is an idol, because he has hands for heaping up riches, but not for soothing the scars which remain from Christ’s wounds…The praise of God is not heard from his lips. What is there in common between the Church of Christ and such a rotten image?” Wicked priests can, of course, connive their way into the episcopacy. As bishops they are then even greater abominations because they can mislead priests and the flocks entrusted to them. The higher their office, the greater is the abomination; this we learned in the commentary on “Cum ex…”

The greatly esteemed priest Rev. Kenelm Vaughan, in his The Divine Armory lists both Christ’s and Daniel’s prophecies under the heading: “False Christs in the Temple of Christ.” Further down, under the heading “Names and Types of the False Christs” he lists alongside the appropriate Scripture passage: “Bread idols, bread of lying, bread of wickedness, wheat bringing forth thorns, profitless wheat, vine without grapes, wine of iniquity, bitter wine, the wine of the condemned, the two iniquities [bread and wine], Maozim who our fathers knew not (Dan. 11:38), a strange god, idols without life, an idol moving the God of the Eucharist to jealousy, altars unto sin, a sin graven on the horns of the altar, sin of the sanctuary, unacceptable holocaust, a conspiracy, vain sacrifices, throne of iniquity, sin of the desolation (Dan. 8:13), falsehood personified, a lying vision, the abomination of desolation, (Dan. 11:31).” These are only some of the types listed by Rev. Vaughan. It is obvious that what he here refers to is the abomination of the NOM and other illicit celebrations of Mass and Sacraments, where true hosts are never consecrated owing to invalid orders, invalid matter, invalid consecration form, and/or masses offered in communion with any one of the antipopes. But also included in this category is the abomination of fruitless and offensive sacrifices offered by excommunicated and suspended priests. In both types of services, another problem is widespread: the adulteration of flour used for hosts and the wine used in the Sacrifice, which the Church has subjected to strict regulations for validity. As Holy Scripture proclaims “Obedience is better than sacrifices.”

Daniel mentions the appearance of the abomination of desolation and the cessation of the perpetual sacrifice in almost the same breath. Certainly the temple sacrifice ceased at the time of the Machabees following the advent of Antiochus. So too did the prophets no longer visit Israel, although the Machabeus family provided leadership and a sort of lay priesthood for the remaining faithful Jews. In short, the Old Testament times foreshadowed our own times, when Catholics would be sore beset both by the absence of a true pope and the loss of the Tridentine Mass. It is no mere coincidence that the Archangel Michael, mentioned in Dan. 12:1 and elsewhere, is both the guardian of the Holy Eucharist and the protector of the papacy. The two are inextricably entwined as we have demonstrated on many occasions, although the deliberate use of this archangel’s name to intimate the fulfillment of prophecy on the part of one Conclavist usurper is nothing but a most wicked prevarication.

To continue our examination of the abomination of desolation, Rev. Haydock, in his commentary on Daniel 9:27 said some interpret the desolation to be the crimes of the Jews and the blood shed by the Zealots. Others, the ensigns and standards of the pagan Roman soldiers posted in the temple under Titus. Certainly the crimes, especially of high-placed Catholics, fouled the Churches they later entered without benefit of public penance or denunciation of their deeds. This went on for decades, long before the subversion of the Church was evident. Modern-day Zealots might be interpreted as those who bomb abortion clinics or take justice into their own hands, calling to mind the Gunpowder Plot against Queen Elizabeth — the acts of “Catholic” terrorists, as it were. (and others, such as certain right-wing political activists who affiliate themselves in any way with anti-Semitic, neo-Nazi groups.) The ensigns and standards of the Romans and the setting up of Caesar in the temple by Pilate are especially telling, symbolizing, perhaps, the democratization of the Catholic Church, particularly in America. This began in the late 19th century, with the advent of the Americanist heresy condemned by Pope Leo XIII.

Haydock then went on to explain that theologians distinguish three separate periods of desolation: the profanation of the temple under Antiochus, the destruction of the temple by the Romans in 70 A.D., and the last near the end of the world, at the time of Antichrist. Haydock stated in his commentary on Matt. 24:15 that complete fulfillment of the temple profanations and cessation of the Jewish sacrifice in the Old Testament will be realized only with Antichrist’s reign, when the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is suspended. St. Jerome wrote as follows on this topic: “It is possible to apply this text easily to either the Antichrist, to the statue of Caesar which Pilate placed in the Temple or even to the equestrian statue of Hadrian, which down to this present day stands on the very site of the holy of holies. In the Old Testament, however, the term abomination is applied deliberately to idols. To identify it further, ‘of desolation,’ is added to indicate that the idol was placed in a desolate or ruined temple. The abomination of desolation can be taken to mean as well every perverted doctrine. When we see such a thing stand in the holy place, that is in the Church and pretend it is God, we must flee…,” (Breviary Lesson for the 24th and Last Sunday after Pentecost).

It was St. Jerome who taught that everything contained in the Old Testament only prefigures what appears in the New Testament. Following Vatican II, the “temples” or churches were stripped of all their former beauty and “modernized” in the headlong rush into hedonism that followed the false council. And Daniel’s prophecy fully anticipated V2, for he predicts that Antichrist “will confirm the covenant with many” (Dan. 9:27), and this covenant can only be the agreements made with non-Catholic religions concerning ecumenism. Roncalli and Montini knew that modernizing the churches was a necessary preparation for the setting up of bread idols and the Novus Ordo liturgy, also the new rite of ordination/consecration, to fulfill their role in prophecy. For many years Tridentine Masses were held in rented hotel rooms, private homes and other places not sanctioned by ecclesiastical authority, and even churches bought or built by them could never attain the status of a Catholic parish. It also should be understood that, in a very real sense, in the course of illicit Masses — even when the valid consecration of the Eucharist truly occurs — the consecrated host becomes an idol of defiance, the bread of disobedience, being administered against the wishes of the Church and the will of Christ Himself. The papacy took precedence over the Mass but the Mass could not licitly be celebrated outside the jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff. This is because it is the pope alone who assigns bishops to administer dioceses, archdioceses; to erect seminaries and direct bishops to validly and licitly call men to the priesthood and train them, and who subsequently delegates the necessary jurisdiction to pastors of parishes and/or the priests they ordain.

Another instance of idol worship can be seen in the adulation of Roncalli, Montini et al by their “People of God” groupies. These antipopes are and were idols in the sense that they deliberately cultivated and maintained a movie-star-type persona unknown to the papacy prior to 1959. The forms used in the prophetic books are not limited to one meaning, but can refer to several things at once without injuring any particular interpretation. St. Jerome said the prophecies have many meanings, and each word can be interpreted in various ways to arrive at these meanings.

That Father of the Church John Cassian said in his Conferences: “For sometimes when a difference of opinion is expressed on one and the same subject, either view may be considered reasonable and be held without injury to the faith either firmly, or doubtfully, i.e., in such a way that neither is full belief nor absolute rejection accorded to it, and the second view need not interfere with the former, if neither of them is found to be opposed to faith: as in the case: where Elias came in the person of John, (Matthew 11:14) and is again to be the precursors of the Lord’s Advent: and in the matter of the Abomination of Desolation‚ which stood in the holy place, by means of that idol of Jupiter which, as we read, was placed in the temple in Jerusalem, and which is again to stand in the Church through the coming of Antichrist, (See Daniel 9:27; 2 Machabees 4:2; Matthew 24:15ff); and all those things which follow in the Gospel, which we take as having been fulfilled before the captivity of Jerusalem and still to be fulfilled at the end of this world. In which matter neither view is opposed to the other, nor does the first interpretation interfere with the second.”

“The ‘abomination of desolation’ has been wrought in many Catholic churches by heretics and apostates who have broken altars, scattered relics of martyrs and desecrated the Blessed Sacrament. At the time of the French Revolution a lewd woman was seated upon the altar of the cathedral in Paris and worshipped as the goddess of reason. Such things but faintly foreshadow the abominations that will desecrate churches in those sorrowful days when Antichrist will seat himself at the altar to be adored as God,” (Rev. E.S. Berry, The Apocalypse of St. John, 1906)

Instead of referring to the abomination where it is mentioned in St. Matthew, St. Luke writes: “When you shall see Jerusalem surrounded by an army…” The literal interpretation of this verse, which we are bound to consider first, is something Catholics today can envision as an imminent event. Taken metaphorically, with Jerusalem symbolizing the Church, it is an interpretation that could be taken just as easily. Truly the Church has been encompassed on all sides for quite some time now. And if one considers the plight of the Novus Ordos church at present, the Enemy seems intent on pulling down even the façade the world yet believes is the Catholic Church. With the Jews determined to rebuild their temple on the Islamic Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem, with many today even saying prophecies are being fulfilled that indicate the arrival of the Jewish Messiah, it is not difficult to envision how a battle to the death over this historic religious site could bring armies from all over the world to fight the battle of Armageddon. So there are several points to consider in evaluating the meaning of the abomination.

The cessation of the Continual Sacrifice

In Daniel 11:31, we read that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass will cease. This prophecy does not just pertain to the Jewish sacrifice, for Christ reiterated the prophecy in Matthew 24:15. That the Sacrifice would be suspended, as Christ Himself was suspended for three hours from the Cross was intimated to the Fatima children according to Swiss author Michael Motet. When the angel appeared prior to the apparitions of Our Blessed Mother, he ordered the children to bow down and adore the host suspended above the chalice while reciting prayers of reparation. In 1970, one year after the cessation of the Mass, Robert Bergin issued his first edition of These Apocalyptic Times. The book sold so many copies it quickly ran to additional printings. The 1970’s marked an increased interest in Vatican II changes and prophecies related to those changes. There was a continuing interest in Fatima, especially among those rejecting the NOM and the changes legislated at the false Vatican 2 council. Bergin’s book, issued by Fatima International, touched on the Fatima Secret. So it can be assumed that this book was widely read by Catholics exiting the V2 church.

Bergin tells us in Chapter Five, entitled “Persecution”: “Some interpret the reference in 2 Thessalonians — Antichrist showing himself in the temple of God as though he were God — to mean Antichrist will seize St. Peter’s and usurp the papal see.” He then quotes Cardinal Manning’s The Present Crisis of the Holy See: “The Holy Fathers who have written upon the subject of Antichrist and the prophecies of Daniel — all of them unanimously — say that in the latter end of the world, during the reign of Antichrist, the Holy Sacrifice of the altar will cease.” He fails to mention, however, that the Council of Trent has determined that when the Fathers unanimously agree on a point of Holy Scripture, as explained above, they cannot be mistaken. This is supported by the teaching of Henry Cardinal Manning, in his “The Present Crisis of the Holy See Tested by Prophecy”: When…was the Church of God ever in a weaker condition? And from whence…is deliverance to come? Is there on earth any power to intervene? Not one; and it is foretold it should be so. Neither need we desire it; for the will of God seems to be otherwise.”

If elsewhere Manning has said that the Pope will rule possibly from exile, and regardless of how bad things may get shall always be infallible in faith, yet this is only his opinion based on the indefectibility of the Church. No one ever believed it would become so bad that there would be no Roman Pontiff, nor scarcely any hope of ever attaining one. And yet if the sacrifice ceases, he who withholdeth is removed, and the abominations set up, how can it not be as St. Francis de Sales, that great Doctor of the Church, explained: the Church will for that time no longer be visible? Christ rebuked St. Peter for cutting off the ear of Caiphas’ servant, and His words to Peter were the prelude to His physical Passion, as well as the Passion of the Church: “How then can the Scriptures be fulfilled, that so it must be done?” Following that, Peter denied Him and all the apostles save St. John the Divine ran away. The Scriptures must be fulfilled; we must see that only God can determine the time when the cup wanting to the Passion of His Church is completely full.

Manning undoubtedly was aware of St. Francis de Sales and St. Alphonsus’ teaching that the Sacrifice would cease in the latter days. St. Francis writes: “The revolt and separation must come…the Sacrifice shall cease and…the Son of Man shall hardly find faith on earth…All these passages are understood of the affliction which Antichrist shall cause in the Church…But the Church… shall not fail, and shall be fed and preserved amidst the deserts and solitudes to which She shall retire, as the Scripture says, (Apoc. Ch. 12),” (The Catholic Controversy). In his The Holy Eucharist, St. Alphonsus stated that: “It is true [the Mass] will cease on earth at the time of Antichrist: the Sacrifice of the Mass is to be suspended…according to the prophecy of Daniel, (Dan. 12:11).” St. Alphonsus goes on to explain, however, that in reality the Sacrifice and priesthood never will cease since “the Son of God, Eternal Priest, will always continue to offer Himself to God, the Father, in Heaven as an Eternal Sacrifice.” And it is only at this altar, in the privacy of their homes, that those who strive to keep the faith without recourse to unlawful pastors wish to honor Him.

It is no coincidence that the reign of Angelo Roncalli brought with it moral and spiritual disaster worldwide. This perversion has risen to frightening proportions since then, for seven devils even worse than the first now reign in Christ’s Church. Why? Because the men claiming the chair reserved for Christ’s Vicar since the death of Pope Pius XII Oct. 9, 1958 are all usurpers; and those false popes elected since 1990 by Conclavists have only brought further scandal and ruin to the Church, only in a different way than the others. By bringing this message closer to home, God wished to clearly demonstrate that He also has removed the papacy and the hierarchy from our midst as a punishment, since Mass, Sacraments and papacy/hierarchy must be seen as one, unbroken unity. It is not for man to try and interfere with this two-fold punishment. We have been sent into captivity as the Israelites of old, and God alone will decide when that banishment shall end and He will receive us once again.

Consequences of fruitless sacrifices

So can we be surprised, seeing how unworthy men, many not even certainly priests, have mishandled holy things, that God would not soon hear our prayers and alleviate our misery? Hear what Canon Arvisenet, speaking to seminarians and priests as Christ, tells those who unworthily conduct public ceremonies: “How long will you dishonor me? How long will you trample underfoot the faith and piety of my people? How long will My flock cry out in indignation: Where is their God? Can we believe that He will come down on their altar? Will He not destroy those who have violated his sanctuary…Let fire come from thy tabernacle and devour them, and let them expire before thy face. They have taken away faith by living, let them restore it by dying,” (Epitome of the Priestly Life). So the very thing which deprives us of the Mass deprives us still of the papacy. For as the prophet Daniel said: the Continual Sacrifice was taken away because of sins; Melanie stated that Our Lady of La Salette said the predicted punishments would come because of wicked priests. Now the papacy can only be certainly exercised by he who has the fullness of the priesthood. This supreme office is the symbol of Christ’s universal teaching authority; the Mass and the papacy are the intertwined symbols of Catholic unity. So when both fail (at least apparently), no surer indication of God’s will could exist. The absence of the Mass and Sacraments can be rightly interpreted as a punishment; we are at the empty tomb of Our Lord and know not where the Enemy has laid Him.

It is only during the reign of Antichrist that the Sacrifice will cease; that, as St. Francis de Sales teaches, the Church will be seen going into the desert and exiting from it. This unanimous opinion of the Fathers cannot be questioned. We know who the Man of Sin is because he suspends the Continual Sacrifice in addition to fulfilling all the other Scriptural prophecies predicting his apostasy. Paul 6’s very identity as Antichrist is entirely dependent on this act. Yet how many refuse to believe that he was indeed the Antichrist despite incontrovertible proofs? And how many insist that God could never be so unmerciful as to allow the Sacrifice to cease, depriving them of the “graces” they demand? This despite the indication of God’s signified will to the contrary in making this cessation the unanimous opinion of the Fathers. It even seems that certain clerics deliberately set out to see that this prophecy was not fulfilled, therefore allowing it to appear that we were not in the “end times” proper. This they did by using Scriptural and private prophecy to shore up their right to operate without the necessary jurisdiction. And if the objection is made that we are maligning and persecuting them then again we must resort to Scripture to prove that on numerous occasions God spoke through His prophets to chastise the Levitic priests. In the New Testament it is Christ Himself who condemns the Pharisees. Ignoring and defying God’s written word as the Church Herself teaches it is to be understood is a damnable offense, especially seeing the many souls lost to the Church in the process. In Cum ex…, Pope Paul IV warned against this very consequence.

These clerics defend themselves by maintaining that Daniel’s prophecy only means the Holy Sacrifice will cease publicly, insisting that the Masses of various post-V2 sects are “private.” Canon Law defines a public act as the knowledge of 10 people in a small community concerning the occurrence of a certain event or display. Most Mass centers have at least this many in attendance, and far more in larger communities. Moreover, such centers are advertised as public places of worship, both in the phone books, “parish bulletins” and in newspapers and newsletters, and in this way reach far more people than just these 10. They usually offer regular, not sporadic services; and certainly not the infrequent, hit-and-miss services one would find in a catacomb-type existence. Those might be termed “private” when the time and location were known only to a trusted few here and there. But masses celebrated by the “Traditional” sects are not private. Daniel did not say that the Continual Sacrifice would almost cease, or that it would seem to cease. Nor did the Fathers say that it would be celebrated even in a limited way, even for a “privileged few.”

This absolute connection of cessation and abomination is further confirmed by the antipopes’ conciliatory dialogue with Freemasons, Communists, pagans and Protestants, and other non-Catholics, seen only after the accession of these imposters to the papal throne. As Rev. Denis Fahey, quoting the Fathers and scholastics pointed out, the reign of Antichrist will be marked by the manifest “proscription of Christian teaching and obligatory teaching of error,” (The Kingship of Christ and the Conversion of the Jewish Nation). Leon de Poncins devoted an entire book to the whitewash of Freemasonry, begun by apostate Jesuits in the 1950s but succeeding only after the death of Pope Pius XII. “The campaign for closer relations between Freemasonry and the Church remained quiescent while Pius XII was Pope; obviously…the Progressives, who by this time enjoyed a considerable influence in the Church realized that they had little chance of success during the Pope’s lifetime. With the accession of Pope John 23 and the growth of the new conceptions of ecumenism, which followed this event, something like an explosion took place. A sudden flowering of works devoted to Freemasonry blossomed forth from a variety of authors…in favor of a reconciliation between the Catholic Church and Freemasonry,” (Freemasonry and the Vatican).

In 1974, the “Sacred Congregation” under Paul 6 reviewed Canon 2335 and concluded that this Canon, excommunicating Catholics who became Freemasons, no longer automatically forbade Catholics from joining secret societies; they could join as long as such societies were not openly hostile to the Church. This was speciously decided on the basis of one absent comma in the 1917 Code. It was decided despite the constant teaching of the Popes from the 18th century on that all secret societies plot against the Church, either openly or secretly, as both Popes Leo XII and XIII attested in Quo graviora and Humanum genus. When Paul 6 dared to distort the meaning of this Canon, one Mason stated publicly, “There must be hundreds of Masons all over the world who have played some part in the achievement of this end,” (The Brotherhood, by Stephen Knight). And even when JP2 later moderated the softening of Can. 2335 in 1981, the damage already was done. All this was accomplished only through the fulmination of “lying wonders,” the antipopes reigning in “the Temple of God” with all the appearances of God-sanctioned authority, when such authority is utterly lacking. This open teaching of error was never manifest until the reign of John 23 as de Poncins affirms. He quotes numerous decisions from pre-1959 Popes to substantiate this. So while there are many who falsely aver that the Popes prior to 1959 prepared the way for this doctrinal deviation, no proof of their endorsement of Freemasonry or the other above-mentioned evils can be produced.

And then of course, as de Poncins and many others have fully documented, John 23 and Paul 6 openly schemed with the Jews to so arrange and conduct V2 that the resulting remodeled “church” could in no way offend their beliefs. The often quoted article in Look magazine” printed in the 1960s, “How the Jews Changed Catholic Thinking” offers clear testimony to this. The Jews demanded and received the removal of any reference to their guilt in Christ’s death, openly stated during Good Friday services. Part of what Paul 6 said in the rewritten schema on the Jews — that the Jews of yesterday and today, as a whole, cannot be blamed for Christ’s death and are not to be reviled or persecuted by Catholics — was only a reiteration of the teachings of Mit brenunder sorge and Pope Pius XI’s “lost encyclical,” other papal documents and Rev. Denis Fahey demonstrate this clearly. It is Paul 6’s insistence that the Jews not be considered as reprobate, i.e., incapable of salvation that compromised the faith. Already John 23 had removed reference “perfidious” (unbelieving) Jews in the Good Friday liturgy. Paul 6 strengthened this decision of his predecessor by further revisions, calling for the removal of any references to the “conversion of the Jews,” the existence of a “veil over their hearts” and the need for deliverance “from their darkness.” And this contrary to the commonly accepted interpretation of these Scriptural passages as indicative, at least, of the complicity of the Jewish elders in Christ’s crucifixion.

Instead Paul 6 called them “People of Abraham…beloved of God,” and inferred, contrary to the clear teaching of Holy Scripture and the Church for 2,000 years, that the Jews could anticipate salvation without benefit of conversion. And certainly JP2 strengthened this teaching beyond the Jews’ fondest dreams. This is a clear denial of Scriptural truth. It is contrary to the truths of faith prescribed by Pope St. Pius X in his Oath Against Modernism which reads, in part: “With a firm faith I believe that the Church, guardian and mistress of the revealed word, was instituted proximately and directly by the true and historical Christ Himself, while he sojourned among us, and that the same was built upon Peter, the chief of the apostolic hierarchy, and his successors till the end of time…I accept sincerely the doctrine of faith transmitted from the apostles through the orthodox fathers, always in the same sense and interpretation, even to us…” And from the Council of Trent: “…No one who distorts the Sacred Scripture, according to his own opinions, shall dare to interpret the said Sacred Scriptures contrary to the sense which is held by holy mother Church, whose duty it is to judge regarding the true sense and interpretation of holy Scriptures, or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers…,” (DZ 786). Not only did Paul 6 deny the clear words of Holy Scripture in his pronouncement on the Jews, he also broke with the unanimous opinion of the Fathers and the common and constant teaching of his predecessors, violating that “same sense and interpretation” ever maintained by the continual magisterium.


Antichrist scarcely would be the horror Holy Scripture portrays if he did not end the Sacrifice altogether. And just because the faithful today insist on having that which is forbidden doesn’t mean that this prophecy has not come to pass. Antichrist was to teach error as truth, and as shown above that is precisely what John 23, Paul 6 and their successors did. It is said that in the time of Antichrist many will be given the “operation of error to believe lying” (2 Thess. 2:10), and that even the elect will be deceived. Certainly Rev. Vaughan has demonstrated that the Israelites, prefiguring Catholics, were seduced by “lying visions” and “vain sacrifices;” He especially demonstrates the operation of error in quoting Ezech. 13:19: “They violated Me among my people for a piece of bread, telling lies to My people that believe lies.” God’s Church does not just encompass all those who followed Jesus, but all those born from the time of Adam and Eve to the present-day elect. This is the basis of Pope Pius XI’s reference to the faithful as “spiritual Semites” in his encyclical “Mit brennunder sorge.” Those who fail to learn from the sins committed by the Israelites and the just punishments they suffered for their sins are doomed to repeat them. And repeat them they have, right down to the crossing of the “Ts” and the dotting of the “I’s” in the word Antichrist.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.