The following is an effort to correct and counter faith-destroying statements from the author of the Eleison Comments blog. I will not name the bishop so as not to embarrass him. I suspect that at one time or other you have run across this blog and considered it worth reading. I also have read it from time to time. Catholic Candle even reprinted one issue. However, not all that is published in Eleison is worth reading. In fact, some articles sow doubt and confusion that harm souls.

That harm is the reason for this article.

I will not republish these Eleison Comments (E.C.) articles here because I don’t want to be guilty of spreading further doubt and confusion. I will point out the problems and errors in the articles.

Traditional Catholics have always clearly known to stay far away from the Novus Ordo Missae (N.O.M.) because it subverts one’s Faith and greatly offends our Lord. The E.C.’s author says the opposite, viz., that Catholics should attend the N.O.M. if they perceive that it helps them spiritually.

He has since refused to admit that his advice is evil. In fact, he is doubling down on his ill-advised counsel by claiming there are miracles connected to the Novus Ordo. The devil himself works these “miracles” and, of course, they were not (and could not be) approved by the prudent pre-Vatican II Church. The devil loves false “apparitions” and “miracles,” for by them he occasionally can undermine the faith of immense crowds, lead them into disobedience to the Church’s hierarchy, or even into schism, and distract them from their duties of state. Archbishop Lefebvre publicly denounced the widespread tendency of today’s credulous Catholics to run after such phenomena of doubtful origin. Angelus, May 1979, article: “Dubious Devotions”. Obviously the Church must, and does, regulate discipline with great care in such a dangerous domain. Canon 1399 §5 (pre-Vatican II code) forbids priests and faithful to publish, read, possess, sell, translate, or distribute any books or other publications (e.g., papers, magazines, pamphlets) which treat of new apparitions or miracles, unapproved by the Church.

Why would this Traditional leader speak so recklessly (i.e., citing supposed “miracles” connected to the Novus Ordo, to imply that Christ approves of people attending the N.O.M.), if this leader wasn’t trying to regain credibility with his confrères, heedless of how many trusting souls might take his advice and lose their souls. This is self-interest, not doing his duty.

Let us pray hard for this bishop. He has worked hard to save souls in the past and we need him very much in the Resistance Movement.

Of course, he must retract his advice about attending the Novus Ordo.