The following examination of the Novus Ordo Missae is intended to prove that the very foundation of the Novus Ordo is based upon heresy.  

Definition of Sacrilege :

A sacrilege is the violation, profanation, or desecration of any person, place, or thing, which is sacred and consecrated to God.

Obviously the adoration of God is sacred, and of the utmost importance, and as the Mass is the most perfect way in which one can adore Him (being, as it is, the unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary), to desecrate or profane it is certainly a sacrilege, as we're sure the reader will agree. But is the Novus Ordo Mass sacrilegious? Let us examine it closer: IF there were something inherently offensive to God in the Novus Ordo (we're not talking about the sinfulness and/or extra-rubrical actions of the priest, we're talking about those things which are inherent in the Novus Ordo itself), it would then be sacrilegious as the Mass, which is supposed to be the highest, most perfect and sacred act of adoration which man can perform, would then be profaned.

Regardless of whether or not there is a valid consecration, if there were something inherently offensive to God in the Mass it would be sacrilegious. For instance, in a Satanic Black Mass there is a valid consecration: but all agree that to attend such a travesty would be the grossest act of sacrilege imaginable.

But does the New Mass contain such "offenses" to God? Let’s see...

Definition of Heresy :

Heresy is the denial of divinely established Truth, and/or the affirmation of error in place of that Truth.

Our Blessed Lord has declared in the plainest language in Sacred Scripture that He is the Truth (St. John 14:6). Consequently, as heresy is the denial of Truth, heresy is a denial of Christ. Our Blessed Savior has further declared that, if anyone denies Him, He will deny them before His Father in Heaven (St. Matthew 10:33).

Everyone, including the Protestant, agrees that the denial of Christ is evil, and undoubtedly offensive to God. If one were to attempt to worship and adore God while at the same time denying Him, one would be engaging in the fruitless effort of making a "house divided against itself" stand, something which Jesus assures us is impossible;( Matthew 12:25) such a thing would be the grossest hypocrisy, and a grave sin on the part of those who participate in the denial. The adoration, by the act of denial of Christ, would then be profaned and desecrated.

The Ultimate Crime? —

It is a fact, and we shall prove it here, that the New Mass is founded upon heresy, contains heresy, and is conducive to nothing but heresy. Thus, as heresy is a denial of Christ, and as the denial of Christ is a great sin, and as to deny Him while "adoring" Him is clearly a profanation and violation of the most perfect act of worship man can perform (i.e., the Mass), we must conclude that the New Mass is a sacrilegious event, and consequently mortally sinful for those who attend it.

Keeping that in mind, let us proceed. The fact that the very foundation of the New Mass is the product of at least three condemned heresies is incontestable. Assuredly there will be those of bad-will and dishonest tendencies who will disagree with this premise, but we are confident that there is no one who can refute the arguments presented here - including Shawn -, we invite them to try, however.

Modernism —

The Heresy of Modernism holds that truth and the doctrines of the Church change with the times, are subject to changing interpretations, and that new doctrines and understandings can and do arise from man’s intellect and will, regardless of what God has revealed.

Condemned: First Vatican Council; (Dnz. 1800, 1818) Pope St. Pius X ("Pascendi Dominici Gregis" Sept. 8, 1907. Dnz 2071-2109; "Lamentabili", July 6, 1907 Dnz. 2001-2065a)

Proof: "Revising the pre-existing text [of the Mass] becomes more delicate when faced with the need to update content or language, and when all this affects not only the form, but also doctrinal reality. This [revision] is called for in light of the new view of human values, considered in relation to and as a way to supernatural goods... Expressions recalling positions or struggles of the past are no longer in harmony with the Church’s new positions. An entirely new foundation of Eucharistic theology has superseded devotional points of view or a particular way of venerating and invoking the Saints. Retouching the text [of the Mass], moreover, was deemed necessary to bring to light new values and new perspectives" (These words were written by Fr. Carlo Braga, assistant to Msgr. Annibale Bugnini)

In other words, with the New Mass the innovators are clearly attempting to "overwrite" Catholicism with Modernism. The "content" of the Mass has been "updated" to reflect the new "doctrinal reality" of the Modernists. Now, the focus has been shifted from God to "new human values". No longer does the Mass represent a strong fortress against the errors of the Protestants and other heretics; now, the Mass has been altered, and those statements which are offensive to non-Catholics, or "which no longer are in harmony with the Church’s new positions" have been sliced off. And, what is even more frightening, with the New Mass is introduced "an entirely new foundation of Eucharistic theology!" How brazen the heretics are!

If nothing else, this alone should convince the reader that, as this is the foundation upon which the New Mass was built and created, the pillar upon which it stands, it certainly could not have come from the "pillar and ground of Truth", but must of come from the "the father of lies".

Finally, as Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci observed in their "Short Critical Study of the New Order of Mass":

"The innovations in the Novus Ordo and the fact that all that is of perennial value finds only a minor place--if it subsists at all--could well turn into a certainty the suspicion, already prevalent, alas in many circles, that truths which have always been believed by the Christian people can be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine to which the Catholic faith is bound forever." ("The Ottaviani Intervention", Cardinal A. Ottaviani and Cardinal A. Bacci. Tan Books and Publishers, p. 27-28)

This is a perfect description of Modernism: truths that have always been believed can be changed or ignored.

The Heresy of Americanism —

The heresy of Americanism attempts to "water down" the "hard sayings" of Christ and His Church, so as to make them less "threatening" or offensive to non-Catholics.

Condemned: Pope Leo XIII (The Encyclical Testem Benevolentia Nostrae Concerning New Opinions, Virtue, Nature and Grace, with Regard to Americanism. Pope Leo XIII, January 22,)

Proof: "We must strip from our Catholic prayers and from the Catholic liturgy everything which can be the shadow of a stumbling block for our separated brethren, that is for the Protestants " (Annibale Bugnini, 33^rd degree Freemason and co-author of the New Mass. L’Osservatore Romano, 19 March, 1965)

If the author of a certain book were to approach you and say: "We must strip from our books and articles everything which can be a shadow of a stumbling block for those who don’t patronize our works", we can rest assured that this author certainly intends to incorporate this view into his own writings. Of course, even had Bugnini, the author of the New Mass, never uttered this statement, the fact that everything in the Mass which is a stumbling block for "our separated brethren" HAS been removed, speaks volumes. It is for this reason that Bro. Max Thurian, one of the six Protestant divines who participated in concocting the New Mass, was able to say: "With the new liturgy, non-Catholic communities will be able to celebrate the Lord’s Supper with the SAME PRAYERS AS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH!"( From the pamphlet: "62 Reasons Why We Cannot Attend the New Mass", compiled by the priests of the Diocese of Campos, Brazil) Indeed, this is certain proof that, not only has the heresy of Americanism been adopted and incorporated in the New Mass, but the fact that non-Catholics can use the SAME prayers without being offended proves that the New Mass can NOT be an unequivocal profession of the Catholic Faith. Therefore, since we pray as we believe (lex orandi, lex credendi), we cannot pray with the New Mass in Protestant Fashion and still believe as Catholics. This also proves that the New Mass has implicitly (if not explicitly) abandoned the Catholic dogma that the Mass is the unbloody Sacrifice of Calvary (Session XXII, Canon I, Council of Trent) — The logic follows thus: IF this dogma is offensive to non-Catholics, then the New Mass certainly cannot be affirming it clearly, as the Protestants have no problem using our prayers for their "Lord’s Supper." Let it also be noted that an implicit denial of a Catholic Truth is far more dangerous than an explicit one; just as a wolf in sheep’s clothing is far more lethal than one who doesn’t bother to disguise himself.

The Heresy of Ecumenism —

The heresy of Ecumenism attempts to unite all religions at the expense and sacrifice of religious truth.

Condemned: Pope Pius XI (The Encyclical Mortalium Animos, On Fostering True Religious Unity. Pope Pius XI, January 6, 1928).

Proof: One of the most striking proofs of the ecumenical nature of the New Mass is found in the fact that six Protestant ministers [Dr. George, Canon Jasper, Dr. Shepherd, Dr. Kunneth, Dr. Smith, and Brother Max Thurian ( Itináraires, December 1973 Issue.)] participated in its fabrication. It is important to note here that they didn’t merely "observe", as some claim, but that they had an active place in the Concilium, which was responsible for drawing up the New Mass. In 1967, Cardinal W. W. Baum, who was executive director of the American Catholic Bishop’s Commission on Ecumenical Affairs, admitted in the June 27, issue of The Detroit News:

"They (the six Protestant ministers) are not simply there as observers, but as consultants as well, and they participate fully in the discussions on Catholic liturgical renewal. It wouldn’t mean much if they just listened, but they contributed."

Thus, from the outset, ecumenism has dominated the atmosphere of the New Mass. Here are a number of revealing statements from various individuals concerning this issue.

The December 22, 1972 issue of The London Catholic Herald quoted a prominent Anglican minister as stating:

"Today’s liturgical study has brought our respective liturgies to a remarkable similarity, so that there is very little difference in the sacrificial phrasing of the prayer of oblation in the Series Three (Anglican "Mass") and that of Eucharistic Prayer II in the Missa Normativa (New "Mass")"

It is interesting to note that, as the New "Mass" is so "similar" to the Anglican "Mass", what are we Catholics to say of the hundreds of Martyrs in England during the Protestant Revolt who shed their blood, endured great hardships and trials, and even lost their very lives because they refused to attend the Anglican "Mass"? Now, as if the blood of these martyrs were worthless, we dare to conform the Catholic Mass to that of the Anglicans! (It is worth noting that the Anglican "Mass" of the 16^th century is far more orthodox and reverent than that of the 20^th century, having undergone several "revisions" and "renewals") Are we not, in all truth, declaring by this action that these holy martyrs shed their blood for NOTHING? Such a position is clearly a violation of the first commandment — degrading and blaspheming the saints, their lives and their martyrdoms in such a manner is hardly something that is pleasing to God.

The Anglican Bishop of Southwark has stated on several occasions that he greatly admires the N.O. Mass, uses it himself, and would like to see it generally available to Anglicans at least as an alternative. He has also "concelebrated" Mass with Catholic priests when traveling on the continent! (The Catholic Herald, 15 December, 1972).

Perhaps what is even more revealing concerning the "ecumenical" nature of the New Mass is a key statement from M. G. Siegvalt, a professor of dogmatic theology in the Protestant faculty at Strasbourg: "... nothing in the renewed Catholic Mass need really trouble the Evangelical Protestant "( Le Monde, 22 November, 1969).

Who can honestly say that the New Mass is orthodox, when even the heretics find it acceptable? Evangelicals are known for their strong opposition to the idea of the Mass being the Sacrifice of Calvary. If this New Mass doesn’t even "trouble the Evangelical Protestant", can we truly believe that the New Mass is unequivocal when it comes to the dogma of the sacrificial nature of the Mass?

As if in answer to this question, Jean Guitton, a close friend of Pope Paul VI and a lay-observer at Vatican II, quoted a Protestant journal as praising the manner in which the new Eucharistic prayers had "dropped the false perspective of a sacrifice being offered to God" (La Croix, 10 December, 1969).

Even the Protestants can see that the New Mass no longer clearly professes itself to be a sacrifice. This becomes even more evident when we consider the fact that most "Catholics" today deny the sacrificial nature of the Mass. We see clearly the ravages of the heresy of Ecumenism: rather than preach the dogma of the sacrificial nature of the Mass clearly and unequivocally, the reformers have succeeded in nearly expunging this idea from the New Liturgy.

In 1970, a French Protestant theologian wrote:

"If one takes account of the decisive evolution of the Eucharistic liturgy of the Catholic Church, of the option of substituting other Eucharistic prayers for the Canon of the Mass, of expunging (l’ effacement) of the idea that the Mass is a sacrifice, and of the possibility of receiving communion under both kinds, then there is no further justification for the Reformed Churches forbidding their members to assist at the Eucharist in a Catholic Church" (Le Monde, 10 September, 1970).

We see that the ecumenical gestures of the revolutionaries have "payed off", not only in the sense that the N.O. Liturgy is non-offensive to Protestants and other heretics, but also insofar as it "caters" to the "common celebration of the Eucharist" between both Catholics and non-Catholics. But to what extent? We ask the reader to examine the following brief list, then ask himself the question: Is the New Liturgy a Catholic Mass or a Protestant service?

One can easily see that the heresy of ecumenism has dictated most, if not all the "changes" in the Mass.

"Christian unity" at the expense of Catholic Truth — downgrading (Americanism) and expunging (Ecumenism) Catholic doctrines concerning the Holy Sacrifice (among other doctrines), simply for the sake of making Protestants "feel at home"; who can deny that the New Mass is steeped in these heresies?

As a closing comment to this section, let us hear the words of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, which were recorded in the May, 1974 issue of World Trends:

"All these changes [in the Mass] have but one justification, an aberrant senseless ecumenism that will not attract a single Protestant to the Faith but will cause countless Catholics to lose it, and will instill total confusion in the minds of many more who will no longer know what is true and what is false"

With thousands of Catholics leaving the Church annually, and even fewer entering her, we cannot help but wonder at how prophetic the archbishop’s words were.