Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

“On March 25, 1963 kids were uneasy”

May 20th, 2010, Promulgated by Choir

In grade school, I was taught by the School Sisters of Notre Dame. They taught us many useful things, but most important of these was our Catholic faith. Getting to heaven was the major reason we were born, ultimately to be with God in heaven.

Practicing our Catholic Faith, and the frequent reception of the sacraments and attendance at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, would give us the necessary graces (actual and sanctifying), to get us to heaven. Our minds and bodies were fresher and more alert in the morning, so each day we had to attend 8 a.m. Mass and the off to school to study the truths of our Catholic faith.

I distinctly remember Sister Meinulpha (and the priests too) telling us that the Church never changes quickly; it changes slowly and with good reason as it use prudential judgment and the wisdom contained in its vast 2,000 years of tradition to guide any change that might happen. She further instructed us that where the Holy Ghost is present there is gentleness, meekness and humility. If that is not the case, beware of a false outcome.

These very major points were not lost on me (I believed everything the Sisters told me) when I started seeing the upheaval after Vatican II. I smelled a rat. So I was always skeptical of the Council, because it didn’t seem to square with what the Sisters and priests had taught us about change. They wouldn’t lie. It was breaking a commandment to lie.

Kids like a secure environment. When that changes, most kids tend to get uneasy. On March 25, 1963 kids were uneasy. The Sisters changed from their old habit to a modified habit. We knew it was coming. The 12 Sisters filed from the convent to church for 8 a.m. Mass. The door opened and for the first time we saw the Sisters in their “new and modified” habits. We didn’t pay attention to the Mass much that day, because part of the environment was changed. The Sisters knew that.

In school, after Mass, they let us ask questions. Sister told us about obedience and we should always be obedient to the Church and her traditions. Out of the 60 kids in class, the majority did not like the new habits. A few said “it looks so different”. A few didn’t care much. Guess which group I was in?

In retrospect, it seemed that on that day the old world was tossed aside and the new world had to be embraced, however reluctantly. Remember we were 13/14 years old then, but well formed enough in the Catholic faith, to know that our Catholic traditions ran deep in the faith.

I have linked below to a video the Sisters made about the change of their habits. If I haven’t adequately expressed myself, please forgive me. I smelled a rat in 1963 and in all those years after with the changes that Vatican II never even came close to suggesting, I smelled an even “bigger rat”. It’s getting better with Pope Benedict, but we have a long ways to go to return to the Catholic heritage and traditions that are our birthright. Long live Catholic Tradition! Long live Pope Benedict!

So now, Vatican II opened on October 11, 1962 and within a little over 5 months the Sisters had their new habits made and donned. Seems like they went a bit too fast into change.


9 Responses to ““On March 25, 1963 kids were uneasy””

  1. Anonymous says:

    1963 was a very bad year for the Church.

    'Former vatican insider Malachi Martin's asserted that a "Satanic Enthronement ceremony" took place in the Vatican in 1963. The result of this ritual meant the Vatican manifested what clerics referred to as the 'Superforce." Martin had first made reference to a diabolic rite held in Rome in his 1990 non-fiction best-seller about geopolitics and the Vatican, The Keys of This Blood, p 632 where he wrote:

    "Most frighteningly for [Pope] John Paul [II], he had come up against the irremovable presence of a malign strength in his own Vatican and in certain bishops' chancelleries. It was what knowledgeable Churchmen called the 'superforce.' Rumors, always difficult to verify, tied its installation to the beginning of Pope Paul VI's reign in 1963. Indeed Paul had alluded somberly to 'the smoke of Satan, which has entered the Sanctuary'… an oblique reference to an enthronement ceremony by Satanists in the Vatican."

  2. Anon: Didn't a parallel Satanic enthronement happen somewhere in the Carolinas at about the same time? I vaguely remember something like that.

  3. Anonymous says:

    When John F. McManus, for The New American, June 9, 1997, asked Father Martin if the Black Mass in South Carolina had actually happened, it led to an enlightening Q and A:

    McManus: Your book begins with a vivid description of a sacrilegious "Black Mass" held in 1963 in Charleston, South Carolina. Did this really happen?

    Martin: Yes it did. And the participation by telephone of some high officials of the church in the Vatican is also a fact. The young female who was forced to be a part of this satanic ritual is very much alive and, happily, has been able to marry and lead a normal life. She supplied details about the event.?

    McManus: In addition?you depict numerous other cardinals and bishops in a very bad light. Are these characterizations based on fact?

    Martin: Yes, among the cardinals and the hierarchy there are satanists, homosexuals, anti-papists, and cooperators in the drive for world rule.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Isn't this all a bit much? Satanic possession of clerics in the Vatican? The slight change of a sister's head dress the work of Satan?

    Malachi Martin has been discredited on so many issues on so many fronts, it's not even funny anymore that anyone would take what he writes seriously.

    Vatican Council II was a council of the Church summoned by a validly elected pope. Over 2,800 bishops of the world participated. You think the devil inspired all of these men to do what they did?

    Sisters changing habits has happened since sisters and nuns appeared. There are many books written on how the orders would change the design, fabric, color, etc. of their habits about every seventy or eighty years. Even Pius XII gave special permission to a Dominican order to wear "street clothes" while teaching, an experiment. This happened long before Vatican II.

    While I can understand not liking women religious out of religious habit or the liturgical changes of Vatican II, to go as far as to insinuate that this church council, its participants and two or three of the subsequent popes since are instruments of Satan or satanic power is really all too much.

  5. Anonymous says:

    I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this "smoke of Satan, which has entered the Sanctuary". Father Groeschel mentioned this briefly during one of his radio talks. If you're interested, do some research on Bella Dodd.

    You can start here:

  6. Anonymous says:

    "…insinuate that this church council, its participants and two or three of the subsequent popes since are instruments of Satan or satanic power is really all too much."

    Not all participants, but the liberals who took part were trying to change (some say destroy) the Roman Catholic Church. This could be taken as a traditional vs. liberal fight, a "good versus evil" clash , the evil being Satan.

    Pope John XXIII was too naive to realize until it was too late what the liberals were planning to do the Mass and the Church.

    When he opened the Second Vatican Council on October 11, 1962, Pope John XXIII charged the Council Fathers "that the Sacred Deposit of Christian Doctrine should be guarded and taught more efficaciously [with a] renewed, serene, and tranquil adherence to all the teachings of the Church in their entirety and preciseness, as they still shine forth in the acts of the Council of Trent and the First Vatican Council."

    In fact, the Second Vatican Council was apparently a great disappointment to the pope. According to Anne Muggeridge, (the daughter-in-law of the famous British Catholic convert and journalist Malcolm Muggeridge), in "The Desolate City", John Cardinal Heenan of Westminster reported that when, during the rebellious first session of the Council, the pope realized that the papacy had lost control of the process, he attempted to organize a group of bishops to try to force it to an end.

    Malcolm Muggeridge, who reported from Rome on the Second Vatican Council for the British Broadcasting Corporation, considered Pope John "politically naive and unduly influenced by the handful of 'liberal' clerics with whom he is in close contact." In a 1985 interview, he gave his assessment of the pope thus:

    "Really Pope John — who was built up as a saintly and perfect pope, the good man of our time — whether consciously or unconsciously, did more damage to the Church than possibly any other individual man had ever done in the whole of its history…. It seemed almost as though Pope John was operating on behalf of the devil without being in any way conscious of it."

  7. Anonymous says:

    I'd like names. I want the Bishops, cardinals, priests and Deacons who are connected to this satanic movement to be outed. To much has gone on.

  8. Ben Anderson says:

    on a similar note, I was listening to the radio the other day and some lady was talking about how stalin how gotten lots and lots of his people (priests, bishops, cardinals) to infiltrate the Catholic Church. Supposedly they were atheist/communists trying to destroy her. Their ultimate goal was the papacy, but obviously never made it that far.

  9. Hey K Ben — that lady may have been talking about AA-1025. If I can find it, you can borrow it. You could read it in a couple of hours.

Leave a Reply

Log in | Register

You must be logged in to post a comment.

-Return to main page-