Call to Prayer to Avert Black Mass

This is not a hoax. Things are really, really bad out there in Leftwingland.

August 4, 2014
The Memorial of St. John Vianney

Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

By now you are probably aware that a Satanic group has scheduled a so-called Black Mass for Sunday, September 21 at the Civic Center Music Hall in Oklahoma City.

Even though tickets are being sold for this event as if it were merely some sort of dark entertainment, this Satanic ritual is deadly serious.  It is a blasphemous and obscene inversion of the Catholic Mass.  Using a consecrated Host obtained illicitly from a Catholic church and desecrating it in the vilest ways imaginable, the practitioners offer it in sacrifice to Satan.  This terrible sacrilege is a deliberate attack on the Catholic Mass as well as the foundational beliefs of all Christians.  It mocks Our Lord Jesus Christ, whom we Catholics believe is truly present under the form of bread and wine in the Holy Eucharist when it has been consecrated by a validly ordained priest.

In spite of repeated requests, there has been no indication that the City intends to prevent this event from taking place.  I have raised my concerns with city officials and pointed out how deeply offensive this proposed sacrilegious act is to Christians and especially to the more than 250,000 Catholics who live in Oklahoma.  I am certainly concerned about the misuse of a publicly supported facility for an event which has no other purpose than mocking the Catholic faith.  I am especially concerned about the dark powers that this Satanic worship invites into our community and the spiritual danger that this poses to all who are involved in it, directly or indirectly.  Since it seems this event will not be cancelled, I am calling on all Catholics of the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City to counteract this challenge to faith and decency through prayer and penance.

Specifically, I am asking that the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel be included at the conclusion of every Mass, beginning on the Feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord (August 6) and continuing through the Feast of the Archangels (September 29).  I invite all Catholics to pray daily for divine protection through the intercession of this heavenly patron who once defeated Lucifer in his rebellion against the Almighty and who stands ready to assist us in this hour of need.

Secondly, I am asking that each parish conduct a Eucharistic Holy Hour with Benediction to honor Christ’s Real Presence in the Holy Eucharist, between the Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (August 15) and September 21, to avert this proposed sacrilege.

Finally, I invite all Catholics, Christians and people of good will to join me in prayer for a Holy Hour, outdoor Eucharistic Procession and Benediction at St. Francis of Assisi Church in Oklahoma City at 3:00 p.m. on Sunday, September 21, the day of the proposed sacrilege.  We will pray to avert this sacrilege and publicly manifest our faith in the Lord and our loving gratitude for the gift of the Holy Eucharist, the source and summit of our lives.

A printable version of the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel is available in English, Spanish and Vietnamese on the archdiocesan website (  If you have not yet done so, I urge you to contact the Office of the Mayor, the Honorable Mick Cornett, to express your outrage over this offensive and blasphemous sacrilege and this misuse of a tax-supported public space.

Commending our efforts to the Lord through the loving intercession of Mary, the Mother of God, I am

Sincerely yours in Christ,

Most Reverend Paul S. Coakley
Archbishop of Oklahoma City


My comment: I am unfamiliar with all the points of doctrine severing Protestant, Mormon, and Catholic. I assume all of you believe in angels, and take the visions of St John of the Apocalypse seriously. If so, please help your Christian brethren against our mutual foes, and join us in prayer and fasting.

 by Reni Guido
St. Michael the Archangel,
defend us in battle.
Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray,
and do thou,
O Prince of the heavenly hosts,
by the power of God,
thrust into hell Satan,
and all the evil spirits,
who prowl about the world
seeking the ruin of souls. Amen..

You fans of heroic fantasy, I think it only fair to tell you that the things you only read about in books like mine, we Catholics live. All Christians are called upon to wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.

(The high places do not refer to heaven. The High Places are the groves where the environmentalists of the ancient world, slaves of Moloch, slew children and burned them or offered their blood to the roots of sacred trees.)



  1. Comment by The Next-to-Last Samurai:

    They want attention and publicity. Don’t give them either. I can assure you that in Oklahoma, this event is not likely to come off.

    • Comment by Sean Michael:

      Dear Next-to-Last-Samurai:

      I disagree because only by first prayer and then pressure can such blasphemies be called off. It is esp. outrageouse that OKLAHOMA CITY is allowing public property to be used for the mocking of God and the Catholic Church.

      The Most Holy Eucharist, when celebrated by a validly ordained priest, is when Our Lord becomes truly present body and soul, humanity and divinity, under the forms and appearances of bread and wine. It is esp. outrageous and heinous blasphemy and sacrilege to defile the consecrated Host for the worship of Satan.

      So yes, we should pay attention to these Satanists when they seek to publicly mock and defile the Mass and the Catholic Church in a Black Mass!

      Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks

  2. Comment by distractedbrony:

    I live in Oklahoma City. Thank you for posting on this. It has been a shock and a wake-up call for me to learn that something like this could happen so close to home.

  3. Comment by VaidLeVey:

    They do this because they know that Christians are Meek, Christian will protest, but be non-violent about it. You don’t see the Satanists do a ‘Black Adhan’ (Muslim call to prayer.) My best guess is to do that, you bow facing west (with your rear towards Mecca) and roll around in bacon.

    Hmmmmmm, bacon.

  4. Comment by Patrick Hadley:

    Of course, this will not be seen as “hate”. Not like, say, burning a Koran.

  5. Comment by Joe Katzman:

    The theology is different for me, and for Muslims, but I don’t think this will please them either. Prayer has its place, and should be done, but deterrence comes from direct confrontation. And the group handling that should invite the local mosques. That, and make sure there are people with SLR cameras taking pics of those who go in. Then post them online with both Christian and Muslim denunciations underneath. No threats, but the message will get through.

    Why do I get the feeling that it sucks to be the dragon at the bottom? But that’s only because someone showed up to fight (Michael?)

  6. Comment by bear545:

    A little off topic, but I do like that painting of St Michael (at least, I hope that’s what it is) at the bottom. It is probably a mistake on my part, but when I think of Michael the image I get is a kind of superhero, or a supernaturalhero, if you will. Most of the paintings I see of him portray his as a kind of high minded eunuch.

    Having said that, I will add this to my list of intentions when I pray for God’s help against a growing list of horrors in this world. “Give me an army saying the Rosary and I will conquer the world.” Pius IX. Time to get a combat rosary.

  7. Comment by Zaklog the Great:

    As a free-speech near-absolutist, I can’t consistently ask the government to stop this. As a Christian, I can certainly ask God to intervene, though.

    (Largely in reaction to the increasingly censorious policies of the Left. I don’t know what other stance can consistently be held to oppose them.)

    • Comment by Sean Michael:

      Zaklog the Great:

      But it’s the CITY GOVERNMENT of Oklahoma City which is offering PUBLIC property to be used for this blasphemy. Isn’t that the STATE showing its hostility to the Catholic Church? I say we can and should pressure Oklahoma City to cancel this Black Mass. It would not be an attack on free speech!

      Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks

      • Comment by Zaklog the Great:

        You know they say arguing against the undefinition of marriage is “hate speech”, right? Regarding public facilities, an important part of free speech is viewpoint neutrality. If a group in favor of defending marriage wanted to use this space, but leftists were trying to block it, and we had succeeded in getting the government to kick out these people as hateful, what kind of argument would we have left?

        • Comment by Sean Michael:

          Hi, Zaklog the Great!

          I have to concede you raise a good point. Altho I fail to see how a Black Mass is meant to BE anything but hateful and mocking. I still believe Catholics can and should pray for this abomination to be cancelled. And even to respectfully PETITION that it be cancelled. After all, the right to address petitions pointing out abuses and the way to correct them is also a consitutional right.

          Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks

          • Comment by Zaklog the Great:

            Altho I fail to see how a Black Mass is meant to BE anything but hateful and mocking.

            A. That’s exactly what leftists would say about many of our causes, such as defending the definition of marriage.

            B. Hatred & mockery are still constitutionally protected speech (and should be), provided there is no incitement to violence.

            It does occur to me, though, that there is one other legal remedy I might be able to support. If this is genuinely what its intended participants say it is, the entire thing is centered around theft. There is no legitimate way for them to obtain a consecrated host that I’m aware of. I suspect it would be easy enough to get the same thing before the ceremony. After all, the RCC must buy it from somebody, and someone else could purchase the same physical item. But a consecrated host would have to be stolen. Thus, this event is all based upon a crime. On those grounds, I would feel comfortable asking the government to intervene.

            • Comment by TimP:

              I’m not convinced. It seems to me that there is a difference between the Government not banning something and the Government providing facilities for something.

              I can’t imagine that the Oklahoma City government would be willing to hire out their hall for a Koran burning (which would be the actual equivalent; not something like a pro-traditional marriage rally).

              I don’t want to ban hate speech, but I wouldn’t want my government spending my taxes on providing a pulpit for it.

              Of course after you add in the fact that they are stealing and destroying other people’s property in a deliberate attempt to hurt them [at least so they claim]. Which makes it more like claiming to have stolen some Korans from various local Muslims and then booking a council hall to hold Koran burning. Any council that even thought of allowing that would be roundly lambasted in the media. (It would probably make the news here in Australia even)

              • Comment by Zaklog the Great:

                I’m not convinced. It seems to me that there is a difference between the Government not banning something and the Government providing facilities for something.

                Yes, but when government facilities are concerned, viewpoint neutrality is an important part of free speech. If you keep a group out of a public space because you don’t like what they say, you have no right to complain if they keep people you agree with out because they don’t like what you have to say.

                I can’t imagine that the Oklahoma City government would be willing to hire out their hall for a Koran burning

                Yes, but that has more to do with A) cowardice and B) unwillingness to treat Muslims like adults with normal moral responsibility.

                (which would be the actual equivalent; not something like a pro-traditional marriage rally).

                Again, I am not by any means endorsing this point of view, I am just saying what leftists would likely say about the issue.

                As I said, if this event genuinely is what it claims, then it centers around stolen property, which is sufficient reason for a secular government to say they will have no part of it, even if only by providing space. I would ask the city to distance themselves on those grounds.

                I myself oppose it on other grounds entirely, but I can’t simply abandon my principles anytime it’s convenient. If I did that, I guess I’d shortly be a leftist.

            • Comment by Sean Michael:

              Hi, Zaklog the Great,

              That makes sense, pointing out to Oklahoma City that it should not be aiding and abetting theft. And that would be good grounds for the city to cancel this blasphemy.

              Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks

  8. Comment by AurinimusRex777:


    John, I believe you once wrote, and I’m paraphrasing, that Nietzsche could not complete a syllogism to save his life. Could you elaborate on that and your distaste for his ideas?


  9. Comment by distractedbrony:

    I posted about this topic on a small group forum, and asked for the prayers of my fellow Christians. The responses I have gotten have been dumbfounding.

    Apparently free speech exists only to protect minorities…

    The difference between someone mocking Christianity and someone mocking Islam, Judaism, or some other religion is that Christianity is by far the dominant religion in the United States. No amount of mocking or anti-Christian speeches is going to change that. On the other hand, those other religions are genuinely at risk if people started going after them.

    As the majority religion, Christianity occupies the position of being an acceptable target due to the fact that people know it’s not going to actually be harmed by that kind of talk. In a country like Iraq where Christians are a minority, it would be different.

    …Satanists are not actually Satanists…

    You do realize satanists don’t actually worship satan right? They don’t even think he exists. They just think if faced with the genocidal maniac depicted in the bible, the only right thing to do would be to rebel and so they embody that spirit. (edit: as well as disagreeing with the “turn the other cheek” attitude in favor of swift vengeance)

    …the group holding the Black Mass is not actually Satanic…

    Also, linking to a church for Angra Mainyu and calling it a satanic church? That’s as accurate as calling the scientologists a christian organization. Before you get all upset because someone incorrectly mentioned the name “satan” and sent you on a prayer request drive, maybe you should try thinking more and reacting less.

    …it is unfitting for Christians to waste valuable time in prayer…

    Feel free to love God all you want, but if you really want to be seen in a better light by people like those going out and making fun of the Eucharist, than you might want to consider showing a little more compassion towards less fortunate human beings who don’t have the luck of being omnipotent deities and genuinely need love and empathy to ever have a chance of making it in this world.

    Stop getting angry over every single slight that people throw at you. Turn the other cheek for once and let it slide. Help the poor and ethnic/religious minorities instead of constantly trying to harm and ostracize them. Instead of silencing criticism and mockery of Christianity, make that criticism unnecessary.

    Serve Christ by fighting for justice and equality, not by praying because some people are insulting you.

    …rational skepticism should make us doubt whether Christ approves or disapproves of Black Masses…

    I understand you just fine, but I only have your word that Jesus is offended by this Black Mass. For all I know, he finds it hilarious and is actually down on Earth in human form to attend it himself. Short of Jesus coming down from the heavens and telling me how mad he is about the Black Mass, I can only know for sure that you personally are offended.

    …and the only rational conclusion from the evidence is that the Satanist leader who claims to have a consecrated Host is just lying about it to make Catholics angry.

    If it were legitimate, why bother hiding nearly everything about how it was acquired? The whole point of their ritual is to upset people as much as possible, and proof that the wafer in question is indeed sanctified and carried out of a Catholic Mass would do more towards that end.

    For all I know, the unidentified “friend” was an online retailer of sacramental goods; from there, it’s easy enough to spin an over-wordy advertisement amounting to “approved by archbishop X of archdiocese Y for use in the sacrament of holy communion” (or whatever they say) into “legitimate sanctified eucharist.”

    • Comment by Sean Michael:


      I agree, the responses you got from merely asking alleged fellow Christians to pray for the cancellation of this abomination defiling the Blessed Sacrament were indeed dumbfounding! I would add disgusting, outrageous, sickening, etc.!

      The conclusion I draw is that many people think the Catholic Church has no right to defend herself or to protest against such blasphemies defiling the Eucharst.

      Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks

    • Comment by KokoroGnosis:

      As a minor point, there is a variety of “atheist” Satanist that views Lucifer as a symbol of rebellion against oppression. However, I thought that the Harvard folks were the “atheist” Satanists (ademonist? amalist?) and the Oklahoma folks were the religious ones. In any regard, they’re both aggressive idiots.

      Also, it doesn’t, frankly, matter whether the host is consecrated or unconsecrated. I’m a Protestant that hasn’t gone Catholic yet because I don’t know whether or not I buy transubstantiation (And cuz you Catholic folks are all crazy papist mariolaters! ;) ). Even if the host is not consecrated, even if it is and transubstantiation is just a crazy idea left over from the early church that got made official, the intent remains to mock our Lord. It’s not unforgivable, and I pray they repent and come to known the Lord they mock, but it’s still blasphemy. But I’m preaching to the choir.

      • Comment by distractedbrony:

        >As a minor point, there is a variety of “atheist” Satanist that views Lucifer as a symbol of rebellion against oppression. However, I thought that the Harvard folks were the “atheist” Satanists (ademonist? amalist?) and the Oklahoma folks were the religious ones. In any regard, they’re both aggressive idiots.

        This is what I have read, as well. Although, it is hard to tell whether this particular satanist believes in transubstantiation or not. For instance, he says this:

        “My question is, why is a piece of bread that some man said some words over so sacred?”

        I, frankly, don’t have enough patience with morons to allow me to study satanism in any detail. The fact that they serve the father of lies makes pinning them down especially difficult.

      • Comment by Sean Michael:

        Hi, Kokoro:

        I have to disagree with one point you raised. It does matter if the host these Satanists claimed to have obtained was consecrated or not. Catholics believe Our Lord MEANT it when He said “this is My blood,…My body.” And that when a validly ordained priest consecrates the bread and wine at Mass, Christ becomes truly present under the forms/appearances of that bread and wine. That is, transubstantiation.

        And I do agree that the intent of these Satanists is mockery and blaspheming of Our Lord

        Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks

        • Comment by KokoroGnosis:

          I am well aware of what Catholics feel Jesus meant. My point is, whether or not Jesus is in there, the mockery and scorn remains the same. We should be just as offended by an unconsecrated host as a consecrated one.

          • Comment by Sean Michael:

            Hi, Kokoro!

            Of course I agree! The intent of these Satanists is mockery and blasphemy. But even lapsed Catholics can get angry about defilings of the Blessed Sacrament.

            Sincerely, Sean M. Brooks

          • Comment by Mary:

            That’s not what we FEEL He meant. That’s what we THINK He meant.

          • Comment by John C Wright:

            But in this case, as a matter of fact, the Satanists have a consecrated host. One cannot perform a proper Black Mass without a properly consecrated host to desecrate. The Satanists seem to recall something the Protestants forget.

            • Comment by Stephen J.:

              I seem to recall reading that the Real Presence is considered to depart the Host after a few days if the Host is not consumed in a proper act of Communion. If this is true, it would suggest that — if these Satanists take their theology seriously enough to care about this — any Host they may have already stolen will not in fact still be the Body by this scheduled event, which in turn suggests that in order to carry off their blasphemy successfully they would have to steal a Host no more than a day or three in advance of the actual ceremony. Perhaps someone could recommend to the Archbishop that he put a directive to all Oklahoma parishes conducting mass for the week before September 21 to require that all Hosts be placed directly in the mouth by the priest, and that no requests to receive the Host in the hand can be honoured; ask for a few volunteers to monitor the returning communicants to make sure nobody removes the Host from their mouth on the way back down to their seat, or to watch for people who leave the church immediately after Communion rather than staying for the closing prayers, and perhaps this could be averted.

              Now all of that assumes that the planners of this particular event do in fact wish to commit real blasphemy against the Real Presence, understand the theology properly, and are willing to go to these lengths. I have to admit that were I in the shoes of such individuals and it became clear we hadn’t managed to steal a true Host in time, I would just use an ordinary wafer and go ahead anyway — I certainly can’t imagine calling the event off and refunding all the ticket money on the grounds of missing one component the audience wouldn’t know for a fake anyway. But even if the ritual performance of the blasphemy can’t be stopped, if a real Host can be kept out of these idiots’ hands for just those few critical days, the actual spiritual horror might be prevented.

              • Comment by Mariana Baca:

                The host remains consecrated as long as it is incorrupt: in other words, as long as the host appears to be bread, it is consecrated. If it is dissolved in water, ground up to minuscule particles, digested, or starts to decompose, it ceases to be consecrated because it has ceased to be the same object.

                Communion in the mouth does not prevent stealing the host. All it takes is a fairly dry tongue and to remove it discreetly after receiving. Do you think nobody stole hosts hundreds of years ago when Black Masses first started as a thing?

    • Comment by John C Wright:

      And to this folks mock the Catholics for the Spanish Inquisition. This sounds like one of the times when we need one. It is not the Satanists that bother me as much as the apologist for Satanism, who defends it on such spurious grounds.

  10. Comment by Seymour Butz:

    Wow. To think that I was once gullible enough to defend the Black Mass under ‘freedom of religion’. Well, today I learned a valuable lesson about not taking progressives at face value when they plead a Constitutional defence: check under the bed of their argument and you might just find a stolen, desecrated host — fighting words if ever I heard them. Vox was right: we on the Right have to stop bending over backwards to find principled reasons for tolerating degeneracy, or they will be exploited without being reciprocated.

  11. Comment by robertjwizard:

    One of the things I find appalling about this is the blatant double standard. The people who proclaim this a matter of free speech for the satanists, would be up in arms about the violation of the separation of church and state if it were a Christian gathering. Note: they would promptly disappear and lose speech if it were Muslims.

    I believe the council woman who says they fear legal action if they cancelled it. It would probably be financed by the Freedom From Religion Foundation – the fine folks who brought Satan to a Bremerton, WA Navy run hospital.

    I signed a petition at TFP Student Action if anyone is interested in signing as well.

    The only thing I am confused by is the person running this attention-whore-mass tried a couple of years ago to do the same thing in another satanic group, but they booted him out after they learned he was a registered sex offender. Why kick him out? You’re satanists.

  12. Comment by JoeCool:

    Remember that time the president called a southern protestant minister to ask him not to burn a Qur’an? Good times.

  13. Comment by Gary Black:

    That second painting is really cool. I wonder how much it would commission an artist to paint something like that on a wall in my office. Something that will scare my kids.

    Leave a Reply