House of Prayer – Den of Dancing…

 Click here to read The Remnant’s exhortation to the Society of St Pius X, to regularize now!


Would YOU attend a Mass celebrated by any of the priests in this video?  It’s true that the dancing took place after Mass, but, still.  Makes one think, does it not. If this is how they treat the House of God at any time, never mind straight after Mass, what is their “take” on the Holy Sacrifice?  “It is written: My house shall be called the house of prayer, but you have made it a  den of thieves” (Matthew 21:13)

75 responses

      • Nor me. Not in a million years.

        Yet, there can be no doubt that many, if not the vast majority, of the diocesan Catholics today would sit tight, even if that scandalous irreverence were taking place just before the Consecration: “Mass is Mass” they’d say with their usual lack of any remote semblance of Catholicity. “And I can’t go to the SSPX – cos, aren’t they unfaithful, even if they’re not in schism?”

        Truly, one couldn’t make it up, could one?

        • I have walked-out of diocesan Masses on a number of occasions. The problem being you have no knowledge what you might face when attending a strange church.

        • Editor

          It would be difficult for them to sit tight with that sort of music going on.

          Even I had difficulty from preventing myself from doing a bit of tap-dancing during the music.

          I don’t know whether a den of iniquity or a hell-hole is the correct word to describe it, or both.

  1. It is, not to put too fine a point on it, irreverence bordering on sacrilege, whether before Mass, during Mass or after Mass.

    In the prayers for the blessing of a Church the following is read by the Bishop: “Terrible is this place; ot os the House of God and the Gate of Heaven…” Terrible in this context means awesome, hallowed, holy. And these clowns are dancing around like Pentecostals. They simply don’t have the Catholic Faith, simple as that.

    • Athanasius, you have hit the nail on the head.

      But examples of this sort of behaviour abound. An Italian friend of mine last year was hot under the collar because of a video showing a bishop breaking into song whilst celebrating a wedding, and I am not referring to his singing of the Preface. The thing was even more scandalous since the bishop in question claims to be a theologian, but it seems to be utterly lost on him that the real protagonist of the liturgy is Christ.

      The vast majority of Catholics have no conception of the primacy of grace as one of the most fundamental concepts of their religion. When the primacy belongs not to grace, it belongs to the individual will and results in the exaltation of the individual at the expense of God which is the essence of pride.

      The old liturgy, of course, revolves around the primacy of grace. This is why it puts the celebrant firmly in his place, subordinating his personality to that of Christ or, better, insisting that the priest become one with Christ.

      The so-called liturgical reform has a lot to answer for.

      • The old liturgy, of course, revolves around the primacy of grace. This is why it puts the celebrant firmly in his place, subordinating his personality to that of Christ or, better, insisting that the priest become one with Christ.


    • YOU, Athanasius, mean?

      I don’t believe that, and I didn’t, not even when your mother told me that when your suit needed cleaned you donated it to a charity shop – and bought it back when they had cleaned and pressed it. 😀

      • Prognosticum

        I agree entirely with your assessment, although I can well understand why others are more nervous about such an eventuality.

      • Editor

        Is that my mother giving my secrets away again? Did she not tell you that it cost extra for the charity shop to ave the suit cleaned due to the abnormal depth of the pockets?

  2. I don’t have the stomach to watch these pagan fools. In fact, I’d seriously doubt whether any of their Masses are even valid, if they think that Mass is a prelude to a party.

    Meanwhile, I’m not sure what The Remnant is saying with that little article. It’s not up to the SSPX to regularize – so don’t give the “Resistance” any fodder, Mr. Matt!

  3. Call it ‘regularization’ or what you will, but Bishop Fellay will get a far more generous settlement out of Pope Francis than he would have done out of Benedict.

    You see, Francisis is much more of a classical liberal than many of his backers and followers who have a tendency to liberal fascism. For him, the principle of live and let live is non-negotiable. Not only, I know for a fact that he has expressed appreciation for the pastoral zeal of more than one Fraternity priest.

    I myself cannot wait since I have a feeling that the ‘regularization,’ or call it what you will, of the Fraternity has the potential for immense good in the Church.

    • Prognosticum,

      I suspect Pope Francis’ alleged “live and let live” liberalism has been expressed in the presence of an FSSP priest – his comments are generally tailored to the expectations of his audience. I can think of nothing he has said in any of his multifarious interviews and off the cuff statements that is anything but insulting to “traditionalists”.

  4. When priests stop being an Alter Christus they generally take on the role of Court Jester, as they try to entertain and hold the attention of a largely gormless, fickle and ill-instructed laity. So they have to resort to more and more zany pranks in order to entertain and remain ‘relevant’. That’s showbiz, I guess. Pathetic. And it’s always the oldies that lap it all up. Most young people squirm with embarrassment at this sort of thing.

  5. Regarding the Michael Matt piece:

    1: was he perhaps being sarcastic?;

    2: a very ‘long-spoon’ is a prerequisite in dealing with Franciscus and his cohorts;

    3: the greater part of the European Low Country episcopate is already in de facto schism;

    4: the diocesan Church in the UK is falling apart, with ‘managed decline’ being the order of the day and search for vocations giving way to “lay participation” and movement to permanent deacon/married clergy format.

    So with what would SSPX be ‘joining’?

    • Sixupman,

      Yes, I believe Michael Matt was being sarcastic/satirical.

      However, it’s really your concluding question that gives fodder to the Resistance (to nothing) brigade who have left the SSPX claiming they are modernist (!)

      You see, if the Society were regularized right now and permitted to continue “as is” then their churches would be packed and the work of restoring the Faith would begin. As it is, with this “wait till Rome ‘converts'” mentality, the Society will have played a minor role in the work, not of restoration, but of preservation. Not the same thing.

      • But the diocesan hierarchies and their respective curiae are intent on building a different church. Perhaps three bishops might be receptive to SSPX and facilitate integration. The rest and like leaning clergy would preach and defend themselves against SSPX. In relatively recent times did not Salford Diocese [my own] not interject in SSPX attempting to acquire an redundant CofE – to replace their less than pre-possessing chapel. Are they going to offer SSPX one of the churches they are intent upon closing – I think not!

        All Traditional Orders and Traditional diocesan clergy should co-operate to create a sound base upon which to counter the attacks upon them. FFI?

        • Sixupman,

          We’ve talked about this before and highlighted the problem which is that those “traditional” Orders and clergy are only tolerated because they are not causing waves and if they DO start to make waves then, voila! End of their story!

          A priest said to me not very long ago, that it’s only when everyone of the “traditionalist” clergy come out openly and speaks his mind, puts the Traditional Faith first and refuses any longer to go along with the revolution, that (a) they will be truly at peace and (b) they can begin to make a real difference.

          In other words, he was saying, in essence, that trying to keep a foot in both camps doesn’t work. Even if one foot is mostly in the “traditionalist” camp.

          I tend to agree with him, although I do have sympathy for those priests who are torn, trying to change things quietly in their parishes while awaiting that call to see the Bishop, from the perspective of his plush carpet, if you get my sardonic drift!

          • Editor,

            I used to have one foot in the Novus Ordo, one foot in Tradition, one foot in the New Age movement, and one in Protestantism! No wonder I have trouble dancing!!

        • Sixupman, far be it from me to whitewash the former Bishop of Salford, but in the matter of the proposed acquisition of St. George’s C of E Church by the SSPX he didn’t have to do anything. The Anglican Bishop of Manchester, Chairman of the CCJ, was dead set against the sale and managed that without help. He addressed a meeting of the City Council and told them all about ‘SSPX antisemitism’ with his desired result that many of them submitted hate-filled letters to the C of E Commissioners objecting to the sale. I have the file of documents, as I attended the meeting held to deal with the matter in London and had asked to speak for the SSPX case. Present at the meeting was a Jewish gentleman who spoke against the sale, speaking passionately about his family and the Holocaust and against bringing these anti-Semitic evil people into Manchester. I was able tell the meeting that SSPX had been in Manchester unnoticed for some years, that I attended and had never heard an anti-Semitic word in the chapel where a little group met every Sunday to worship our God. One of the Commissioners then said to the Jewish gentleman “So they are already in Manchester and have caused no harm. What do you have to say to that?” The reply, to some intaking of breath among the Commissioners was, and I quote, “I won’t now feel safe until they are ALL out of this country”. I waited with some impatience for the minutes of the meeting to come out, as a solicitor I contacted regarded it as a hate speech and said that the decision could be challenged, but guess what? In an otherwise flawless set of minutes the Jewish gentleman’s outburst and my bit about it were omitted. Thank you BP. Williamson. SSPX will never now be able to buy an unused Anglican Church, and we always knew the Catholic ones would be sold as mosques rather than to the SSPX.

        • In the proposed “decentralised church” of Franciscus, the onus would be with the National Bishops’ Conferences. What price their co-operation for SSPX, or the other Tradtional Orders for that matter?

          • Sixupman

            Not necessarily. If it was a personal prelature, diocesan bishops would find themselves quite restricted from acting negatively.

        • Prognosticum

          I agree again. I feel sure the SSPX would draw many priests and laity, and even some prelates. I suspect a good many “conservative” prelates who sat on the fence before Francis have had their eyes well and truly opened to the poison of Modernism now. We see this especially in the very positive remarks of such as Bishop Schneider and Cardinal Burke regarding the SSPX. They were more reticent before.

          • Athanasius,

            I have a priest friend who tells me that the question which has most occasioned a crisis of conscience in him in the course of his priesthood is when a young man moots his desire to become a priest.

            Knowing the paucity of what was on offer in the U.K. in terms terms of the diocesan priesthood, he would in the past often seek to sway them to consider if their vocation was not to the religious life. Latterly, he has sought to steer them in the direction of traditionalist orders. I am convinced that if the SSPX were ‘regularized,’ it would be a pole of attraction of very significant magnitude.

            Of course, it all depends on the settlement which Francis is willing to accord, but on that front I am cautiously optimistic.

            As for the opposition of the modernists, notwithstanding the Francis phenomenon–which I consider to be an anachronism, a throwback to the late 1960s which flies in the face of history, not so much a paradigm shift as a spiteful kick in the shins to the already existing paradigm–they are rather a spent force, intellectually as well as numerically. Just look at the Church in Scotland. In twenty years time, just what is going to be left?

            It is to me beyond belief that the current hierarchy and the upper echelons of the clergy cannot see that the future of the Church in Scotland is intrinsically bound up with its reconnecting with Catholic tradition, doctrinally, liturgically and spiritually. But, incredible as it may seem, many of them would rather stare oblivion in the face than start thinking outside the comfort zone of episcopal groupthink (a misnomer if ever there was one, given that the hierarchy has long been divested of any strategic thought and vision).

            I see this drama of decay being played out in my own parish week after week. It is still one of the busiest parishes in the diocese, but numbers have fallen significantly in recent years as the older generation dies off and young people, such as there are, lapse into the secularised lifestyle from which their Catholic schooling has afforded them very little protection. The priest is a good man in his own way, always very ‘busy’ which is probably why he never seems to find the time to prepare his Sunday homily. Weekday Mass is over in less than fifteen minutes; Sunday Mass in less than twenty-five. The Sunday homily rarely extends beyond three minutes and even less rarely is inspired by the readings. The need to contribute to the economic needs of the parish is a recurrent theme, but I have been present on many a First Sunday of Advent in which Advent has not been mentioned at all, except perhaps in some ill-judged, moralistic swipe at the materialistic horror of Black Friday.

            The bottom line is that in this parish there is no provision for the transmission of the faith beyond what is offered to those attending Catholic schools. The only religious formation on offer are the Scripture readings of the Lectionary enveloped in the thinnest gruel of a minimalist interpretation of the post-Vatican II liturgy (already by itself highly minimalist). The principal force in parish life, beyond the workings of the Spirit which, thank God, is always present to the Church, is inertia as the older generation remains miraculously– and I use the term advisedly– anchored to a practice of the faith learnt in childhood.

            Now, how is it that the parish priest cannot see that he is prosecuting a policy which not only is sowing the seeds of the parish’s destruction, but may very well be destroying souls? I would bet my bottom dollar, much as it pains me to say so, that within the next twenty years–probably sooner– the parish will have been closed and sold off. What was it Our Lord says about the salt which when it loses its taste cannot be made salty again?

            The writing is on the wall. It will be tradition or oblivion.

            I was speaking recently to a priest whose order offers the old Mass exclusively. Thus he finds himself as the only traditionalist priest in a sea of Novus Ordo priests. And his reaction? He feels so sorry for them. He says that most of them are depressed, not least because their formation has given them not only very little in terms of arms with which to combat the onslaught of the world, but, worse, even less in terms of a theological analysis by which to understand the power of evil. They see change and decay all around them, when, according to the spirit of Vatican II in which they were formed, the world should by now have embraced Christianity, especially the Catholic Church. Let us remember that synodolatry is nothing but the nth form of idolatry.

            Here endeth this nocturnal rant.

            • The writing is on the wall. It will be tradition or oblivion.

              Exactly. And even if every prelate alive came to his sense tomorrow, there would likely still be a wait before we started to see the fruits of this change.

              This is because many clergy have for decades now denigrated and attacked the traditional expression of the faith and so many people are de facto indoctrinated against it.

  6. No, I wouldn’t attend such a “Mass” and if I inadvertently found myself at one, I’d leave as soon as I sussed the shenanigans.

    I first experience such a “Mass” as a child in Lourdes in 2000. My parents brought us to a chapel facing the grotto where a Mass was scheduled. The building was like a theatre complete with sloping seats. On the “stage” were dozens of priests and bishops. From the start the “audience” rocked and gyrated in the aisles and then the clergy joined in the swaying and gyrating. It was awful. My dad said: “look at our bishop! He’s all flushed with animation and is getting his fix.” I didn’t really understand but dad marched all 7 of us out the door. Almost 16 years on and it’s even worse.

    • Helen,

      I would have to leave right away as well. I also can’t believe you were at such a Mass in Lourdes of all places! That’s terrible. Your dad sounds like one of the real old school Catholics.

      • I remember being at Sunday Mass some years ago when the celebrant left that sanctuary just before the sermon and came back with golf clubs and a ball. He then tapped the ball around in front of the altar before swiping it out of sight.he was trying to say something about taking the long view.

        I was stunned and the only thing that kept me from walking out was my teem age son who begged me not to. That priest was the diocesan youth leader and has since left the church. If any of these crazy folk in the video really believed in the Real Presence they would never behave in such a way.

        • May I also ask your prayers please bloggers I am in hospital with a badly infected leg after some sort of insect bite.

          Nearly three weeks now and progress is slow.

          At least it makes a good Lent en penance!


          • Christina

            I do hope your recovery speeds up! I will certainly pray for it (have you tried Manuka honey?). A relative of a friend of mine is seriously ill with mouth cancer and has suffered terrible infections; in despair the hospital advised the honey and the infection cleared up.

            • That was Christiana, not I. But I join in my very best wishes, Christiana I had something like that years ago and it turned incredibly nasty for a long, long time. You are certainly in the best place for treatment.

              • Thank you Christina. We are always going to get mixed up I am afraid. I was let out of hospital yesterday after nearly three weeks with dressings to be done by district nurses. Long haul I fear but it is good to be home. Thankyou everyone for prayers.

          • Christiana,

            I will certainly say a prayer for you. On a practical note as well, try applying Manuka honey to the wound. That’s what nurses sometimes use to help heal sebaceous cysts.

  7. Therese

    Snap! I had no idea you were writing about Manuka honey at the same time I was. Now there has to be a message there for Christiana, surely?

  8. Athanasius

    Let’s hope it works for Christina, or we might have to refund her the cost of the jar, and I know that’ll be a blow to your Lenten wallet discipline…..

    • Christiana,

      I will certainly remember you in my prayers, for what they are worth… and dare I suggest some Gale’s Honey… lovely on toast, they tell me, with coffee!

      I’m sorry for teasing – couldn’t resist, in light of the marketing already going on for Manuka honey. I think Therese and Athanasius should both be looking for jobs in advertising!

      Get well soon, and in the meantime, be assured of our thoughts and prayers.

      God bless.

    • Therese

      Yes, I think that stuff costs about £10 for a small jar. That would sure deplete my wallet, which only looks fat because it contains a signed photograph of the hunchback of Notre Dame.

  9. I have seen some dreadful liturgical abuses in the short time I have been a Catholic, but this is the most abominable spectacle I have ever witnessed. The preceding Mass will have been invalid. If they are that permissive about gyrating and cavorting in front of the Altar of God and show His Real Presence in the Tabernacle such disrespect, then their intention in performing the Sacrifice must be defective. Not that I’m a mind reader but that’s what we have to assume. Those Priests were dancing in a very sexual and suggestive way. Very worldly and dangerous given certain scandals.

    • And the fact that they were all making the same movements at the same time indicates it was choreographed and rehearsed. These people have too much time on their hands.
      But sadly, I have personally witnessed even worse than this. I infiltrated the notorious ‘rave’ Masses in the Westminster Diocese back in the 1990’s to get evidence of what was going on. What occurred at those evil events made the above video look like an SSPX Solemn High Mass, believe me . . . incidentally, one of the priests who ‘celebrated’ one of those shocking and blasphemous Masses was called Fr Stephen de Kerdrel. I heard he now says the TLM but I don’t know if that is true. Perhaps someone else might be able to verify that.

  10. This kind of this kills me and so I have avoided watching the video.

    (I already have acid indigestion just from glancing at the static image at the start screen!)

    It is genuinely troubling to me that people might think this approach was a good idea; its beyond bizarre and you wonder who exactly it is they think they are appealing to?

    I tend to think “was God second choice? Did they really want to be a presenter on Top of the Pops, or Children’s Hour?”

  11. definitely not – its the kind of thing Basil Loftus would no doubt advocate and endorse. There is a more worrying trend in these types of videos, perhaps defined by a liberal agenda or the sexuality of those present. there always seems to be the undercurrent of homosexuality connected with liberals

    • That always strikes me, Steve. An absence of ‘manliness’ seems to be generally characteristic of the post-conciliar priesthood compared to the pre-conciliar, and sadly it often seems that fidelity to tradition is no safeguard against clerical effeminacy. I suppose we must look beyond what happened in the seminaries in the immediate aftermath of Vat.II to wider societal change.

      • Christina,
        Sadly, that’s not entirely true , but the manifest explosion of liberalism within the current crop must have evolved as the seminaries weakened. I have a NO priest friend who maintains “white cuffs shiny watch shiny shoes “are key indicators oh and the ring on the finger of the leaning shall we say. These types of videos only add insult to injury and certainly don’t foster an authentic liturgy of any kind
        I notice some were suggesting well at least not during Mass. It’s the disregard for sacred vestments the prayers of which are said as the priest vests for
        mass- they talk of or pealing for battle and protection and sacrifice not of dancing in staged moves
        It’s the lack of understanding that is most distressing – the vestments are meant to reveal something of the action in the mass not the action on the dance floor

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: