Featured Post

The 2017 "Let Them Be For Signs" Series

I've decided to make this year's ongoing astronomical discussion an official series.  So, for your convenience, links to articles...

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

Bp. Konderla Cancelled Vespers & Ad Orientum At Start of Bishopric

The Okie Traditionalist has recently attained the first public response from Bishop Konderla of Tulsa in regards to the removal of a society of exorcists and a community of nuns.

This, in and of itself, is a shame. It is a shame that it took the active prodding of an online blogger to elicit a response from our local shepherd. How regrettable that the bishop could not have come out and stated his intentions to the local community.

On the other hand, if a bishop plans to make unpopular moves against his predecessor's work, it's rare that he ever announces such manuvers.

The letter has been published with permission from the bishop:
Dear Joseph,

Thank you for your inquiry. No, I do not disapprove of the Latin mass and the people attached to it. It would be erroneous to read such disapproval into decisions the diocese has made regarding the two religious communities. Merry Christmas to you and yours. 
Bishop David Konderla
Diocese of Tulsa

If it is true that the expulsion of the exorcists and nuns does not reveal Bishop Konderla's disapproval of Tradition, perhaps the following fact does: I've confirmed this week that, as soon as Bishop Konderla took office, Vespers was cancelled at the downtown cathedral. Furthermore, the Novus Ordo Mass at the cathedral is no longer celebrated Ad Orientum, as it was with Bishop Slattery. The priest, once again, faces the congregation.

The Body of Christ is not a special little meal that we all eat together at a dinner table. We do not huddle around the Eucharist and have supper. The Eucharist is one of the most important sacraments of the Church, and everyone ought to be oriented towards it, including the priest.

The Body of our Lord is to be on an altar, not a crude dinner table. The altar should rest in a sanctuary, not a stage. We all face Him because we are all in prayer to Him. The entire congregation is to be oriented towards Christ, not towards the priest who is pretending to be a public speaker or comedian in an amphitheater.

This is what a Mass is
Furthermore, if everyone is not in a state of grace, then not everyone should be going up to receive Communion. Ann Barnhardt puts a finer point on this. Here is a lengthy quote from her:

"Remember: the purpose of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is TO WORSHIP GOD by offering to Him the Once and For All Sacrifice of His Son on Calvary. The Once For All Sacrifice of Calvary is miraculously and supernaturally made present in time at every Mass, and the immolation of The Sacrifice fo the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is effected when the Priest consumes the consecrated Host and the Precious Blood.

"The only person that MUST receive the Eucharist, and, in fact, MUST receive the Eucharist under BOTH SPECIES, is the priest celebrant. PERIOD.

"Because the Church has been infiltrated by Freemasons, Communists and sodomites, most Catholics today think that the entire point of the Mass is for them to march up to the front of the Church and receive Holy Communion, which they believe to be a mere symbol. This is HUMANISM--the cornerstone of Freemasonry. Catholics today have been taught for the past fifty years BY THE RUBRICS OF THE NOVUS ORDO MASS ITSELF that THEY are the center and focus of the Mass, that the Mass is celebrated FOR THEIR BENEFIT, and that the point of the Mass is the distribution of Holy Communion TO THEM. This is why the "Shared Meal" motif--by far the LEAST theologically important aspect of the Mass, behind the SACRIFICIAL and NUPTIAL aspects, has been pushed relentlessly by the satanic infiltrators, and the Mass qua Sacrifice was intentionally hidden from the people by stripping nearly every mention of SACRIFICE from the text of the Novus Ordo itself. After all, one cannot be said to have participated in a meal if one has not eaten--or so the infiltrators would have everyone believe, and sadly, almost all today in the western Church do. Most Catholics today think that there is really no point in going to Mass if one does not receive Holy Communion--because they believe the Mass is all about THEM. When they see the Novus Ordo elevation, with the priest FACING THEM and holding up the consecrated HOST and Chalice TOWARD THEM, they think that the Holy Sacrifice is being offered exclusively TO THEM. It doesn't even occur to most of them that the Body and Blood of Christ is being OFFERED TO GOD."

Catholics used to understand this. But now, thanks to the infiltration of modernist thinkers, a great amount of men have been brought into the priesthood not understanding this way of thinking, and the majority of the laity do not even care to grasp it.

Make no mistake, the Novus Ordo needs to be done away with for all time. It is a novelty that was conceived by and for Protestants and Freemasons. The Catholic Church has no business converting Her ways to accomodate the heretics who are in an open protest against Her. It is up to those on the outside of the Church to adopt Her practices.

Finally, many people who have graduated from Texas A&M have high praise for Bp. Konderla's pro-life stance. However, just because a priest or bishop is pro-life does not mean that they are right on every other issue. Simply opposing murder does not indicate that a priest will not be a modernist. Disgust at ripping babies out of mothers wombs does not mean a priest is incapable of opposing the Catholic practices that existed before the 20th Century.

There have been a handful of respondents on either Facebook or other venues that have heaped praise upon Bishop Konderla. One comment I recently read states that "He's a living saint!" I cannot see how. Oklahoma has been wrestling with an outburst of blatant Satanism, and the bishop is dismantling the apparatus that has been constructed to fight it.

In fact, I would be interested in hearing a statement from Bishop Konderla about what he intends to do in order to combat this spate of Satanic activity. If Bishop Emeritus Slattery's team of exorcists was such a bad idea, what is Bp. Konderla's alternative?

In the meantime, no more Vespers.  I can only imagine the sorrow of Bishop Emeritus Slattery as he watches his successor undo everything he built up.


  1. Is this strike three??? You can't make this stuff up.

  2. To be fair, Bishop Slattery was the only one at the cathedral celebrating mass ad orientem. The other priests have always faced the people, and I don't believe their Masses have changed since the new bishop took over.

    Bishop Konderla was asked when he spoke at "Wednesday's at the Cathedral" if he would follow Bishop Slattery's lead on ad orientem and he said no, but there are places you can go in the diocese if that is your preference, particularly the TLM. Also said he prefers uniformity in the diocese in that the priest should face the people.

    I believe it is true that he has done away with solemn vespers on the last Sunday of each month, but the Cathedral parish brought vespers back for advent.

    1. Do you attend the cathedral?

      Bishop Slattery celebrated Mass ad orientem at the main Sunday Mass at the cathedral for years, as the bishop, setting the example. He gave interviews calling for a restoration of this practice in line with liturgical tradition. As the bishop, he was teaching this not as a personal preference, but as one of the main customs of the Roman rite (and all other liturgical rites).

      So you witnessed Bishop Konderla saying he wants all his priests when saying the New Mass to face the people, otherwise it is not in uniformity with the rest. That's his policy. That contradicts his predecessor, not to mention Pope emeritus Benedict XVI who called for a return to ad orientem.

      By the way, Fr. Davison says the New Mass ad orientem, so he would be going against the new bishop's preference?

      And why would he do away with Vespers? Is that too traditional?

      I'm flabbergasted.

    2. Also said he prefers uniformity in the diocese in that the priest should face the people.

      He wants his priests to be "uniformly" wrong.

  3. How about Bishop Slattery offering Mass ad orientem and Vespers?

    1. Anybody have contact with Bishop-emeritus Slattery, know how to get ahold of him? For the love of God!

    2. I highly doubt that Bishop Emeritus Slattery would give an interview of any kind. Not only would he likely be penalized in some way, but his personal character is probably against saying anything publicly bad against his successor.

      That being said, I would still like to visit with the man during another one of those Trad guy nights out. Perhaps he'd have some kind of advice. More than anything, I'd like his insight.

  4. I do not live in Oklahoma or the Midwest, but looking up Bishop Slattery's bio online, I was surprised to see that he had been bishop of Tulsa since 1993. After 23 years, how come Bishop Slattery did not build up a traditional clergy in the diocese? A traditional clergy that would have carried on.

    1. Very fair point. It seems like tradition-minded priests in the diocese are few and far between, and that certain non-tradition-minded priests are behind the reversal of Bishop Slattery's restorations under the new bishop.

  5. Ann Barnhardt is probably the most reliable Catholic authority in the United States.

    1. I disagree because she is Novus ordo.

    2. It's a sad state of affairs when any Catholic takes Ann Barnhardt as their Catholic standard, and I'm sure Ann would be the first one to tell you - don't do that.


    3. You're saying this on the blog of a guy who calls himself a Toxic Trad. I mean...I boast about being one of the Dread Ilk, and a Vile Faceless Minion. I'm a radical alt-Right blogger.

      If you want "Catholic standard," then go check out Catholic Answers. They'll give you all the milquetoast pablum you could ask for.

  6. Bishop Slattery had to deal with many a priest on the verge of revolt. He could have mandated ad orientem but as he said to one priest, if I did that there would be open revolt. In this diocese we know some of these places. Church of the Resurection which is known around the diocese as Insurrection is a good example. I personally was at the RCIA class in Muskogee at St. Joseph's when during the class on the Credo, the priest there taught heresy, Arianism. Oklahoma has had only one good Bishop and he just retired.

    By the way, the cigars and whiskey were great! Again soon chaps.

    1. After 23 years in charge, I would think he could have recruited traditional orthodox men to the priesthood that would have changed the orientation of the clergy. Besides solid seminarians, in this age of apostasy and emergency, a bishop needs to be ruthless with clerical appointments. Pushing bad old priests into early retirement and promoting newer priests to be pastors sooner than usual. An emergency is an emergency. A bishop should also look into importing traditional religious orders and incardinating priests from other dioceses that have been marginalized by their bishops.

    2. Agreed, but Bishops who do that go the way of Italian bishop Mario Oliveri or Paraguayan bishop Rogelio Livieres Plano; they are targeted, attacked, and removed.

    3. He wasn't consecrated in the traditional rite of holy orders,thus he is not a valid Roman Catholic Bishop.
      He has zero interest in keeping the true Catholic faith alive.

  7. Leave the Novus Ordo

  8. I would expect any new Bishop appointed by Francis to be an arch-liberal destroyer. Francis makes John Paul II look like a traditionalist.

    1. Francis is just more open & honest about his blasphemy heresy and apostasy.(as opposed to Paul 6th-JP2-Benedict XVI)

    2. Traditio has an article about this Bishop. Go to their daily commentaries for January 10th.

    3. I just saw that, Matthew:


      But it's inaccurate. Bishop Konderla has yet to ban Latin Mass. And he has yet to relegate all of the Traditionalists of Tulsa to one, particular, run-down building. I'm not saying he won't. But he has not done that.

      It would be more accurate to say that Bishop Konderla has marched in lock-step with the presbyteral council that has been advising him. He and they are of one mind, it seems.

      I know for a fact that Bishop Emeritus Slattery was frequently at odds with the liberal faction of this city. He butted heads with the presbyteral council. But with Bishop Konderla, they have their man.

      But no...no banning of TLM yet.