Matt, please have Fr. Chad Ripperger on as a guest. He knows every aspect of the TLM what the counsuls are permitted to do or not. Much will be clarified. He’s a walking encyclopedia!

I go to an FSSP church for my confessions, and when the priest gives you absolution in the Latin, sounds awesome!

@lucidlocomotive2014

7 ай бұрын

I love how he starts giving the absolution while I am saying the act of contrition. It just shows that the church used to act more like they really believe this stuff is real. The penitent doesn’t need to hear and understand the words of the absolution, because the priest is performing a real sacrament and the grace of the sacrament is where the real true benefit and value come from. It’s the same concept for the use of Latin and the silent/whispered consecration and gospel reading. We developed this idea that value is only derived from tangible value such as learning something, or hearing a story or something, whereas the old rite believed truly that there was powerful supernatural grace being imparted on the people and that was the primary value happening and it was treated as real and serious!

@franciscomendes3433

7 ай бұрын

@@lucidlocomotive2014o wouldn’t said that better!

@Mark3ABE

7 ай бұрын

I can remember when the Priest stopped using Latin in saying the words of absolution. The words, now in English, which struck me particularly, were “now, whatever good you do, whatever evil you suffer…..” The purpose of language is to communicate.

@lucidlocomotive2014

7 ай бұрын

@@Mark3ABE that’s one of the purposes of language. And the priest still communicates with you in the traditional form of confession. He can still say those words to you, he just does the actual sacramental part at the end in Latin

You forget the lack of silence in the novus ordo! Its hard to pray after communion with people singing the 70s pop

@robertajaycart3491

7 ай бұрын

Go to adoration

@amberclear7016

7 ай бұрын

There's no "pop" music at any Ordinary Form I go to.

@popebenedict7615

7 ай бұрын

​@@amberclear7016 music at NO is pop. Think Eagles wings, Gather us in, Etc. Awful music

@user-pg5xt4bq4w

7 ай бұрын

I have to agree the NO is to busy and all the responses I like to pray, and meditate on the Passion of Our Lord but it is very difficult with all the responses and the chatter of the laity

@alonsoACR

7 ай бұрын

​@@popebenedict7615Sounds like an American problem. My bishop would never allow it, especially not at the Feast.

I’m not a TLM radical, but even I know that the readings are an offering to God. That’s why the gospel is accompanied with torches during the Alleluia. The congregation would understand that it isn’t read because “now it’s time for a bible story.” That can happen at home. An annointed deacon reads it, because it’s an offering, not story time.

@mlp023

7 ай бұрын

What's a tlm radical?

@TheGringoSalado

7 ай бұрын

@@mlp023a Catholic..you know someone who tries to follow the teaching of the Faith.

@littlerock5256

7 ай бұрын

@@mlp023

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

​ @TheGringoSalado Riiight, because exclusively attending the TLM is essential to being a Catholic.

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

​@@littlerock5256 Probably a radical traditionalist.

I have to disagree most FSSP priests know Latin pretty well. And the readings are repeated in vernacular on Sundays, just not at Low Mass sometimes.

@davidrojas6457

7 ай бұрын

How you could think "most FSSP priests" is a level of metric that would be relevant to the entire scale of the whole Catholic church is beyond me.

@christophergrillo5099

7 ай бұрын

@@davidrojas6457 that's not what I said, but do know their seminaries have long waiting lists unlike most diocese across the world. Once upon a time all Catholic priests knew basic Latin.

@TheGringoSalado

7 ай бұрын

@@christophergrillo5099 There is an obvious refusal to see and acknowledge what stands before us. We are lost without tradition, floundering without tradition, and losing millions without tradition.

As one who grew up only knowing the NO, and have recently been going to TLM, why does it seem people at NO show up without any care, reverence, or knowledge of what’s truly happening? And why is this a good thing, is what I would ask bishops?

@alonsoACR

7 ай бұрын

That has been a problem since pre-Vatican II times. In fact it's one of the explicit reasons why it was called, most Catholics were just going through the motions.

@Montfortracing

7 ай бұрын

It's not really a problem because of the Novus Ordo, but more of the fact that the Novus Ordo inherited an already apathetic modern laity. But it doesn't help that we went thru that post Vatican II period where almost anything went in NO liturgies and the bishops didn't do anything about them. Then fast forward to today, and the way most NO Masses are done are still bad. I do think it's slowly changing though. Bit by bit more Novus Ordo parishes are changing their church architecture and changing their liturgies and homilies for the better.

Glad to see Matt is waking up to the nature of the liturgical crisis, not just that there is a crisis.

4:02 We have no idea why we’re at mass. We’re there for God, not to be entertained, for a bible study. 5:40 Top down changes by Liberals

@davidrojas6457

7 ай бұрын

Imagine equating wanting to intelligently discern the Word of God within the context of the liturgy with wanting "to be entertained". Must be fun to live in your world.

@TheGringoSalado

7 ай бұрын

@@davidrojas6457 guitars and banjos etc in an episcopal mimicked service?? Or an ancient liturgy passed down for ~1,500 years ??

@alonsoACR

7 ай бұрын

​@@TheGringoSalado As a Hispanic, I'm hurt you think the acoustic guitar isn't fitting for God. The instrument was used for just that since the Middle Ages. Also please, the traditional Masses of the Early Church did include ""Bible study"" it was the time when the priest would read scripture and then make a homily. A priest should teach at church. That's the classical, traditional position.

@TheGringoSalado

7 ай бұрын

@@alonsoACR you’re being silly. Love you hermano

My dude, as stated in another comment, the readings are OFFERED TO GOD. I'd say there is value in that! In other words, it's not "just mumbling." Many TLMs read the readings again in English for the benefit of the congregation.

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

Why not just read them in the vernacular once? An offering to God is received chiefly on the purity of heart with which it is offered and not the language.

@CatholicTraditional

7 ай бұрын

@@StoaoftheSouthIf properly implemented, at Low Mass and/or Missa Cantata, the priest was supposed to still whisper the Epistle in Latin while a lector would read it aloud from the pulpit. If the Gospel is still chanted in Latin, it would be reread in English before the Sermon.

@davidrojas6457

7 ай бұрын

So if the readings are supposed to ONLY be an offering to God and that SHOULD be sufficient, why bother reading them again in English?

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

@CatholicTraditional you could also just chant it in English

@cfban

7 ай бұрын

​​@@StoaoftheSouthand you could just get a shower at home instead of sprinkling holy water. Right? Why was the Mass in Latin for 1500 years? Why did the Church do that? Explain to me why the Church was wrong to use Latin for 1500 years. Latin is a sacred language. It sets the Liturgy apart from the noise of the world, and from even our own thoughts and day to day conversation. It minimizes our input and connects us to the Church and her history much more than English or any other vernacular language will ever do.

Read Sacrosanctum Concilium. The Novus Ordo Mass is clearly not in conformity with Vatican II. To say otherwise is a lie.

@cfban

7 ай бұрын

Unfortunately it is consistent with Va II if you twist the words enough. The documents of Va II were intentionally made to sound good but remain ambiguous precisely to do what they did. Sacrosanctum Concilium was also Bugnini's work. He knew what he was doing. He weaseled his way into getting his vision approved by the unsuspecting bishops. We need to correct and clarify Sacrosanctum Concilium as much as we need to eradicate the NO Mass.

@timmoore9736

7 ай бұрын

You are so sadly mistaken. The documents of Vatican 2 were never meant to be a complete, line by line direction; they were to be a general direction to change, which change was to be decided after the Cu=ouncil ended - and what was prepared and decided was approved at the highest levels. 2,860 bishops from around the world attended one or more sessions of Vatican 2. 2,147 signed the document on the liturgy; 4 did not. As in, the vast majority of bishops present at that time signed it. 4 did not. That is less than two tenths of one percent. Did they all know what changes would be proposed? There were a tremendous amount of conversations before, during the sessions and at the time the doicuemnt was submitted to a vote, and all knew that it would be work to be accomplished after the Council. The conspiritorialists who want to damn Archbishop Bugnini with faint praise spin conspiracies out of thin air, theories which have about as much weight as the air in which they are spun.

@ReformedSauron

7 ай бұрын

It's not in the Vatican II constitution, which is deathly concerning.

@LooweeCalma

4 күн бұрын

How about the GIRM 3ed?

I get the animosity for "guitar mass," but as a liturgical musician who plays guitar, I will simply point out that we are a small cou try parish who has no other options. I even tried to find an organ teacher so I could learn, but there were no teachers to be found. I do my best to at least choose songs that aren't garbage, which drastically decreases my choices, but guitar is our only option. All I'm saying is that when you go to a Novus Ordo parish with guitar music, maybe give a little grace. The liturgical iconoclasm of the last few decades has left many parishes with a dearth of musicians and insufficient funds to search elsewhere.

@alonsoACR

7 ай бұрын

What's wrong with acoustic guitar in mass? It has been used for worship since its invention. I'm not sure what you're looking for, and me being Hispanic means our tastes and what we consider holy may be different, but you may try to look up how we use the acoustic guitar in the Hispanic world. I actually find two things you said very fascinating. First, that you have the freedom to choose different songs. Most places I've been to the lyrics are regulated, the idea that people can just write their own music without supervision worries me that you may accidentally include heresy in the lyrics. Second, that you consider the guitar improper, we've used it for religious music since the Middle Ages with no issue. Ok, it wasn't used for mass back then, but we didn't find it irreverent per se. King Alfonso X personally authored over 400 songs to the Virgin (Cántigas de Santa María), all with the ancestor instruments of the guitar. Also common were translated Gregorian chants in the guitar. We have the same problem regarding organs, the vast majority of us can barely afford the pews as is. I've seen organs in the large parishes, but an acoustic guitar (or just a cappella) seems to be the norm in every smaller parish I visited. The acoustic guitar is, after all, a Spanish instrument. And it's appropriate! Again, don't be ashamed to use it! Try to keep the guitar light. Guitar in the background, voice in the forefront. How noticeable the guitar is should depend on how many sing. I barely know any guitar myself, sorry if I couldn't help much. For reference, some very common things you'll hear in our parishes are Tú Reinarás, Oh Buen Jesús, Pescador de hombres. Those are the first that came to mind. I wish I could help you more. But my main point is that the acoustic guitar isn't inherently unfitting.

@randyladiski3743

7 ай бұрын

@alonso19989 My wife is from Costa Rica, so I'm very familiar with the implementation of guitar in the Mass in Latino culture. My point was in reference to its implementation, specifically in American liturgies. In the U.S., guitar masses tend to be hokey and not well done, as it does not arise naturally out of our culture. It often seems like an appropriation or a misguided attempt to appeal to people's subjective preferences. With that being said, I should point out that the purpose of my post was to NOT be so hard on American parishes that employ the guitar. Also, in reference to choosing musoc for Mass, we're not allowed to just play anything we want. We have a select list of songs approved for Mass. It just so happens that I personally am not fond of most of them.

@anabellanootebos3732

4 ай бұрын

@randyladiski3743 have you considered singing some Gregorian Chant a cappella, in lieu of guitar? It seems daunting to learn at first, but becomes more and more compelling and beautiful as you delve deeper into the ancient melodies!

@randyladiski3743

4 ай бұрын

@anabellanootebos3732 I'd love to, but I'm actually a co-music director with someone who routinely chooses many of the traditional "guitar mass" songs. It's not entirely up to me, and we still have hymnals without a lot of great options. Maybe in the future, I can work toward that

Matt: when this was going on was there any intervention? Richard: No Ottavani Intervention: Am I a joke to you?

This response section has me understanding the Vatican’s campaign against TLM much better. You all need a reality check: reverent NO masses exist. If I was exposed to this level of stupidity, judgement, and poor argumentation when I was reverting it would have made it a lot more difficult. Some grace will go a long way with you all 🙏

Vatican II DID NOT CHANGE THE liturgy. That came afterwards gradually.

@ReformedSauron

7 ай бұрын

Nothing in Vatican II concretes the Novos Ordo mass either. It's not in its constitution.

@ReformedSauron

7 ай бұрын

True. I'd say it opened the door.

No more guitars as mass

The implementation of the Council wasn't managed well? The implementation of communism was never properly managed either. Hmmm. If only we could perfectly implement it, it would just be perfect, don't ya think?

@jeremysmith7176

7 ай бұрын

Nicea wasn't implemented well and the Arian Heresy persisted for a long time after that council.

The Missal is how I know what is being prayed. I am actively involved in the liturgy by using my missal.

My understanding of the readings is that they are not meant simply for the absorption of the people. They are also propitiatory prayers for the Church (living and deceased), and were part of the sacrifice so someone decided they should be done at the altar. I am not necessarily against a reform of that, but we should just keep in mind that the priest is not simply reading the readings for the people there to hear

The epistle and gospel can be read in english as per the 1962 Missal Dominus vobiscum

I really like Richard. He seems like a good guy.

Pushing back: The Novus Ordo readings are dreadful selections of inspired texts. The second reading doesn't pair with the Gospel and the first reading, and the two-year/three-year cycles are beyond human frameworks of time. This is apart from cutting out crucial selections like 1 Cor 11:27, which is present in the RCL. Dobszay, who was no trad, said as much in his two books---which also suggest a solution. Don't be lazy and defensive. If it is impossible for a liturgy to be bad, then it was impossible for reform to be necessary in the first place. There are real issues which really must be addressed.

@Davidjune1970

7 ай бұрын

Disagree, you clearly don’t read them if you think that. The typology is clear. What is not clear is just how much people in TLM understand about the weekly message as the vast majority of the laity don’t understand latin and are just watching and hearing but not understanding. Church is about more than a ritual observed., it’s hearing and understanding God’s word. If you cannot do that then you are missing the most important aspect of the entire preparation for the Eucharist. Jesus spoke in a language that the audience understood. He even faced them. The apostles also stood and faced their audience and spoke in a language they understood. The bible clearly outlines that the first masses taught the gospel and celebrated Eucharist.

@Gratiamtuam

7 ай бұрын

@@Davidjune1970 the whole three year lectionary is a mess. You have to wait three years before you hear the same passage as a Sunday mass goer, and some of the most important verses and contexts are omitted for the ‘modern palette’. Then here you go presenting the TLM as just some show people watch on Sunday mornings. Do you not think the priest preaches on the readings? It really sounds like you’ve never been to the TLM or even know anyone who’s been to one with all these strawmen you’re putting together. You make a heap of assumptions with no basis. If it were true that the vernacular is better to pray in at Holy Mass, then why is it so often that I see parishoners leave early at the Novus Ordo? They clearly understood the readings right? They heard the prayers right? A true balanced opinion (not yours) knows that distracted and improperly disposed catholics will not benefit in either mass. But one mass grew from the treasures of the church and nourished the saints of the western church. The other was an experiment of scholastics who made a cheap imitation of the early church, instead making something that would be alien to them.

@Gratiamtuam

7 ай бұрын

⁠@@Davidjune1970 to your last point: Jesus and the Apostles preached the vernacular. The priests at latin mass preach in the vernacular. Jesus and the Apostles as with the Jews of their time worshiped in the temple - in HEBREW, which was not the vernacular.

@benabaxter

7 ай бұрын

@@Davidjune1970 Your disagreement makes a claim that really isn't even a question of debate. The second readings are on their own cycle. This is how they were designed. This is on purpose. From the USCCB Web Site: "The second reading is usually from one of the epistles, a letter written to an early church community. These letters are read semi-continuously. Each Sunday, we pick up close to where we left off the Sunday before, though some passages are never read." From Franciscan Media: "On Sundays, the first reading is from the Old Testament and is coordinated thematically with that day’s Gospel. The second reading, a continuous one from other New Testament books, is not coordinated with that day’s Gospel and first reading." This is boilerplate. But you don't have to be blackpilled. It is better to avoid the issue at all if you aren't already in on it.

@Davidjune1970

7 ай бұрын

@@Gratiamtuam the liturgy focuses the readings from a different gospel each year so you end up going through more of the bible. I have been to TLM. My parents even grew up with TLM and they prefer NO because even though they both were actually taught Latin in school … you can understand way more when mass is in English. Those who I know that go to TLM … they admit they can’t hear it all. They also admit they don’t understand everything either and it’s for the witnessing of the mystery. The times I went to TLM … I saw people with heads buried in missals trying to follow along so they could read in English where the priest was … not the most respectful way to pay attention to mass (NO missal they actually tell you not to follow the missal during mass but to focus on what the priest is saying … not being lost reading along). You seem to be stuck thinking some middle aged tradition is more important than the actual gospel and readings itself. You also seem to be stuck on the psalms being sung in Latin with you not understanding a single word. While those who hear it in English know exactly what the psalm is saying that ties into the readings and gospel. Do I care if you go to TLM? No I don’t … worship however you want to. But don’t bash NO for being irreverent when you don’t even know what is being said every mass because you don’t know Latin vs those who hear all the readings, psalms and gospel in English.

As radtrads should watch how they talk about the NO and avoid calling it derogatory names and putting themselves in a schismatic mindset, so should people watch how they talk about the TLM. Just because you have a choice to not attend it doesn't mean that the gloves are off and you can talk about it as though it's an old edition of a novel that has continually been re-edited and re-published. The way some people talk about it is pretty unbecoming and makes our Church's history (and world history, for that matter) incomprehensible. If people were just in utter confusion and priests didn't really care, and the people felt left out and distant because of ad orientem and such, how do we explain the plethora of saints who were nourished by that liturgy? How do we explain the English martyrs? How to we explain the exporting of the faith to the New World and having it stick?

Agree and disagree, I don’t think Latin should’ve or needed to be totally gutted from the mass. We as Roman (Latin) Catholics should know some Latin, in fact it should be expected of us as it always had been. The music is also just a disaster.

@PadraigTomas

7 ай бұрын

The music in my church is a miserable experience that must be endured. If circumstances allowed, I would only attend novus ordo masses with no music.

@MrMustang13

7 ай бұрын

@@PadraigTomas I agree. I believe that only hymns and chants are the only appropriate forms of music as the rest just become performative and inappropriate.

@dianneraimondi8382

7 ай бұрын

the idea that bugnini, a freemason was in charge says it all and presents pope Paul 6th as very incompetent.

@AppealToHeaven

7 ай бұрын

​@@MrMustang13Amen

@AppealToHeaven

7 ай бұрын

​@@PadraigTomasditto. For years I would only attend my parish 0700 Mass as it's the only one without music, as I mulled it over and over, "what constitutes proper worship?" Through the education received by Mass of The Ages, good spiritual Direction, and Pope Francis' heavy-handedness towards Tradition - OUR Tradition - I found my way to our Archdiocese's TLM and am so grateful. It literally forms a person, makes one a better Catholic for one with eyes to see, ears to hear, and heart to love. Latin over time can be learned. I relish the time to do so. And if the hierarchy restricts it further, I'm thankful we have ICKSP FSSP and SSPX all here within 40 mins drive (depending).

What you are missing is the Mass of the Council was the Mass of Pius V. The Council requested a simplification of the Mass that was already there. In no sense did the Coucnil envision that Paul VI would in an unprecedented abuse of papal power without any justification in the Church's history APPOINT A COMMITTEE to CREATE a new rite ex nihilo. Trent did not do this. In addition Trent permitted the continuance of any rite that was more than 200 years old. 85 percent of the previous prayers of the Mass, standardized by Pius V have disappeared. Look to the offertory prayers of the Vetus Ordo and compare them with the Novus Ordo. The other remaining prayers suffered rewriting to make them more acceptable to modern sensibilities, and we all know that that means. The Council asked for a simpler, if you will, adaption of the Mass that was there. What we got was a new rite, the Novus Ordo. This New Rite was never shown to the Council and they never had any say in its creation, nor did they have the chance to give their approval. Quite frankly to say the NO is the Mass desired by VII is a boldfaced lie. Any of the Council's general desires for a reform of the Mass could have been carried out on the historic Mass of the Church without the disruption and spiritual damage done to the church by the imposition of the NO on a church that was blindsided , and caught by surprise by the disingenuous narrative that we had imposed upon us. The double talk continues while Francis blathers that the NO is the unique rite of the Latin Church permitting wild variations in the name of acculturation, while banning, for less than honest reasons the one variation that has the most claim to orthodox historicity in terms of rubrics and theology. So you wonder why the Church is in her present mess and in a state of self selective schism? In the Church's new animal farm all animals can self select their worship except some animals have a greater right to self selection in the way they worship than others.

@davidrojas6457

7 ай бұрын

No worries, mate, I forget to take my pills sometimes too.

@JohnFDonovan-by1nt

7 ай бұрын

I presume your comment is the classic way of avoiding any serious discussion of content. Would I notice a difference in your response, would there be greater intellectual clarity and engagement if you did take your pills?

@Gratiamtuam

7 ай бұрын

@@davidrojas6457 a shame that you’d rather resort to uncharitable comments that contribute nothing then say anything at all.

@Rich_Tea2

5 ай бұрын

It is my understanding that the Mass if Pius V was implemented in order to counteract what was being implemented by Protestants (at least some of whom were former Catholic clergy). Up until that point each diocese had their own (valid) Latin rite and at least some of these were allowed to continue after the Council of Trent (kzread.info/dash/bejne/amGnx5JvZpeZj6g.html). This last bit relates to the 200 year old rites mentioned above. I'm not sure that the NO rite was made up ex nihilo - from what I understand Catholics in the 700s (slightly before the Council of Trent) would recognise it (kzread.info/dash/bejne/iqSXy6uLhsTgY9o.html - said about 10 minutes in).

@Gratiamtuam

5 ай бұрын

@@Rich_Tea2 The Missal promulgated by Pius V after Trent was to codify (standardise) the use of Rome throughout the western church, save for those uses (of the same rite) which had historical basis. A small point, but the 700s were not slightly before the Council of trent. 800 years is between them, and there was considerable amount of (legitimate) development had occurred. However, even if you take the mass of the 700's and compared it to the NO, i do not see how they would recognise much of the innovation e.g. (vernacular, multiple eucharistic prayers, the manner of receiving the eucharist - communion in the hand was not the same at it is now, non clerics being lectors, the offertory prayers, the proper prayers etc.)

I could see a good "Church English" translation on the Trent Missal. But I think any Mass in public needs to be spoken, except for those quiet prayers. And I think for Feria days, a shorter Eucharistic Prayer be used. But a much better transition of the ANAPHORA II we have now.

No guitars and drums at Mass please!

The readings of the gospel and the epistle are read as an offering to God read in Latin. They are not directed towards us. How does he not know this?

the readings ad orientum are a prayer of the priest to God

Can the instructions on the Liturgy, like using Latin and that Gregorian chants be changed or they are like the rules like only men can be priests that can't?

Gotta say, the problems you have with NO seem exclusively american. I can't speak for every country in Europe, but in Spain, NO masses are done with utmost respect and reverence. Even when there's guitar in the choir, the songs are beautiful.

I love Novus Ordo. Great for evangelization. ReachING all part of the world and within your country. Like God reaching out to you face to face whatever it ends. Its humbling Mass and yet so deep. It started with NO until we wanted to level up to Traditional Mass TLM to avoid noises and chaos mix with holy and sinners. What is weird is when you are into it, you will hate the NO where you started and thinks tranditional is perfect. Now you are full blown Rad trads. I would rather be with the reverent NO mass with all of the true humble people who are sinners, poor, holy and charitable rich people than the hard core traditional mass. I love Vatican 2

@cfban

7 ай бұрын

Many of us fell away from the Faith when going to the NO, and found our way back to Christ through tradition. It was not because we didn't want to mingle with sinners (what a nasty accusation to make). It's because in tradition we found a refuge from our own sins and the noise of the world that we simply didn't find in the NO. Vatican II was a grave mistake, and the subsequent reforms were a disaster.

@popebenedict7615

7 ай бұрын

Great for evangelizing? Is that why the church is bleeding out?

@timmoore9736

7 ай бұрын

@@popebenedict7615 If you want to blame the Ordinary form for the Church bleeding out, then you will have to come up with a rational answer as to why the mainline Protestant churches have been bleeding even faster. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc is a classic failure in logic.

@bv5278

7 ай бұрын

What is the Mass? Do you know it is the sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary only without the blood? We all get that we’re sinners at both forms of the Mass that has nothing to do with it. It’s what is more clearly being offered in a reverent way to God and it’s in the TLM where this is more evident. Many people are NO are lukewarm and indifferent it seems

@Consume_Crash

7 ай бұрын

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you implying that one reason people go to TLM is because they think they are holy and don't want to associate with sinners? And that people who go to the TLM are not humble or charitable?

It our fault as the laity if there are problems. We are 99%. We in the common priesthood need to charitably keep our ministerial priests accountable - I am my father’s keeper. If there’s a liturgical abuse, fix it. With love, but fix it. It won’t go away until you fix it. It might take weeks. It might take different approaches. It might take more prayer. Whatever it takes, fix it. Find the way that works to fix it. Meanwhile, let it sanctify you as you carry that cross. Honey gets more flies than vinegar so try to use honey. Also, there are sheep, sheep dogs, shepherds, and wolves. Be a sheep dog and help the sheep and shepherds by barking at the wolves.

"...Pete Seeger is to have pride of place...." written nowhere in the documents of VC2

@mattymuso2108

7 ай бұрын

How can I like this a hundred times?

Maybe the key is for people to stop demanding the TLM, and instead, work to make the "Novus Ordo" Mass as reverent as it was intended to be in the first place. Furthermore, if you really believe in the Real Presence and you think that your local N.O. parish is offering mass irreverently, why not specifically attend that mass to make reparation for the irreverence there and intercede for those who do not know better? Furthermore: Driving far away to find a TLM is kind of like abandoning Jesus in your local territory, no? I know of a number of parishes that have brought back reverence including altar rails at parishes that were once very lax. But now when the the bishops are calling to promote the Real Presence, it would be a good time to start!

I think the OF Missal should have been approved by the Bishops of the Latin Rite as a body. Now, what about the Missal of Trent? Did the LR bishops come back and approve it? And is there a place to go to compare the pre-QUO PIRIUM and QUO PIRIUM Missals. One on one side, the newer on.thr other.

Amazing, reminds me of the Michael Foley interview from the Mass of the Ages. The Mass is offered to God and not the people

Ok, the Bishop could get some very good lay persons who know the Liturgical Rules correctly to do "secret shopping" and visit the parish Masses.

It got stuck there. For too many decades, I had to grow up in it.

In the fourth century, as the Church became established in the West, there was a movement in favour of having the Sacred Scriptures and the Mass in the vulgar tongue. Many were shocked at using anything but the holy Greek language. Well educated Romans spoke Greek, rather than the vulgar tongue of the man in the street. Eventually, common sense prevailed and the Scriptures and the Liturgy were translated into the vulgar tongue. The Latin Bible is still called the “Vulgate”. So, Vatican II adopted the same approach. Despite protests about dropping the once vulgar, now holy, Latin, the vulgar tongue was introduced, once more, for the Scriptures and the Liturgy. In the fourth century, for those shocked at the change from “holy” Greek, the “Kyrie” was retained in Greek. It would be a nice touch if the “Kyrie” could be in Greek again. It is a language Jesus and the Apostles would have heard, even if they didn’t actually speak it. Possibly, we could also have a little Aramaic - the language which Jesus actually spoke. Or even Hebrew - if any language is truly a “holy” language, it is Hebrew. When Almighty God spoke to Moses on the mountain, it would have been in Hebrew.

@DominicMazoch

7 ай бұрын

I think the Words of Institution should be done, if possible, in HEBREW!

@Kjt853

7 ай бұрын

Some will probably want my head on a platter for saying this, but there’s nothing intrinsically sacred about Latin. The Scriptures and liturgy were translated into Latin so that *more* people would understand them, not just an educated elite. I’ve heard it said that the Latin that the liturgy was translated into was not common, everyday “street” Latin. That may be true, but Elizabethans didn’t go around speaking in blank verse and exalted metaphors - that didn’t stop Elizabethans who spoke common, everyday “street” English from understanding Shakespeare.

The reading seems to be an offering because is to be read for the living and the dead... So if the offering is made in latin, on the altar with the back in the people, it seems to be fitting, that the readings would be done in the same manner, even if in in the Solemn mass they are done by subdeacon and deacon, they were still being said on the altar by low voice. It seems to me hard to imagine, that there was anything unnecessary in the old rite (not the 1962, which already has some trimmings done, but the versions before: "pre-55" missals...

@alonsoACR

7 ай бұрын

Readings in the vernacular with a homily for them was staple in the Early Church. Latin has a special place in the Roman Rite but it shouldn't be used to the detriment of the religious education of the faithful.

@branislavjeriga6762

6 ай бұрын

@@alonsoACR mass is not catechesis though... It is a sacrifice as seems to be also that the readings are sacrifice, offering. So it is not to the people. It is read for living and the dead...

There is one thing I think should be done. From Ash Wednesday until.the beginning of the Mass on Holy Thursday might, the organ should be silent. Exceptions only for St. Joseph, Annunciation, Rose.Sunday, and the great procession of Palm Sunday.

@Gratiamtuam

7 ай бұрын

In the older liturgical law, the organ is silent during lent, advent, and penitential days (unless accompanying singing, never alone) and during passiontide (the last week of lent as well as holy week) the organ was forbidden, only to sound on Maundy Thursday and again at the Gloria of the Easter Vigil (as you’ve already said)

@DominicMazoch

7 ай бұрын

​@@GratiamtuamEmber days? OK.

This man is so frustrating. He's basically just gaslighting. I don't need people lecturing me about how good the Novus Ordo is, when they themselves don't even attend the Novus Ordo.

@ReformedSauron

7 ай бұрын

Most going to the Latin mass today started out in Novos Ordo. So yeah... he's likely done both, ergo he can tell you what he very well likes.

@cfban

7 ай бұрын

@@ReformedSauron he doesn't currently go to the NO, though. He goes to the Anglican Ordinariate. I'm sick and tired of these "celebrity Catholics" who tell us to stop complaining about the NO, and who chastise us for wanting the TLM, when they themselves won't get anywhere near the NO.

@cfban

7 ай бұрын

@@ReformedSauron judging by your other comments, I don't think that we disagree on this. Maybe you misunderstood me? I'm talking about the Dr DeClue fellow, not about Matt Fradd.

Odd. With the possibility exception of St. Dominic, Our Lady spoke to her children not just in the native language, but in the local dialect. At Lourdes, OL.did not proclaim she said the Immaculate Conception in Latin. And that became an ANATHEMA statement of our faith. Or as at Guadalupe, 'icons" the Aztec could understand that their religion ead false. Is OL trying to tell us something?

Is there any video or other source that discusses the liturgical changes of the mass "as the council intended" in a positive light? Everything is overwhelming negative. Don't get me wrong, I attend the TLM and much prefer it. That being said I believe some good came out of VII, especially as it pertains to the Liturgy of the Word. It would seem to me that some of the changes were not "changes" per se but a revitalization of the original intent of particular points of the Liturgy so that they could better be comprehended and celebrated with integrity to the rite itself.

Latin is a sacramental like holy water, the devil hates latin more than vernacular tongues, (from what I have heard in exorcisms). So, it was a supergoal for the devil when latin was taken away in the Novus Ordo, even during the consecration of the host.

@DoctorDewgong

7 ай бұрын

It's also a sacred language: one that was written on the cross itself. And using a language different from our vernacular one sets a perfect distinction between the speech of daily life and the speech set aside for worship of God.

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

You're treating Latin like it is a magical language. Prayer derives its power from God, not some essential quality that it has.

@Michael-bk5nz

7 ай бұрын

As a kid i had a priest tell me (jokingly I should add) that Latin is the only language God can understand, so if you pray in English, the angels have to translate your prayers into Latin before God can hear it, that was a silly joke to explain Latin to kids, let's not take that attitude for real as adults

@universeman657

7 ай бұрын

@@StoaoftheSouthlanguages can be sacred, just like a sacramental object.

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

@universeman657 Then there can be any number of sacred languages? No?

You need to have Father Mawdsley on.

🙏🙏🙏

The priest is praying to God…get a missal. This guy is whack!

Thank you for pushing back in this Matt. This gentleman was frustratingly weak in his positions which really does nobody any good.

Won't say humble, I'd say very mushy about the rice in the church.

@Georgemoore-hl2ff

7 ай бұрын

Hi Dianne🌹🌹 How are you doing?

There are a whole lot of Catholics in the world that don’t know Latin. I think learning Latin parts would be great but the rest of the Holy Mass (example theEucharistic Prayer) should be in their own language. They would be able to understand what is being said. Having the translation available can still be very distracting and difficult trying to keep up with the priest and still pray with your heart. Some people really really have a hard time with learning a different language. Of course if you teach the language when people are young it is easy, but there a a lot of people in the world that aren’t young anymore and have a hard time with languages. So now if you want all Latin at every Mass everywhere ,then honestly you will have to have to wait until younger generation learns it. I think God would want even the most simple to participate at Mass with a loving heart.

@Gratiamtuam

7 ай бұрын

If anything the Eucharistic prayer should be in Latin! It (as with all the prayers) are for God, not us. And praying in union with the entirety of the Roman church (our mother rite), it makes sense to do this in Latin. You’re absolutely right about a lot of Catholics not knowing latin. But this is a result of us abandoning it! And the simplicity is not lost in the Latin Mass, rather, even one who doesn’t comprehend everything knows the great sacrifice before them because the traditions of the church display this great mystery even in the simple low mass. God bless

I’ve never seen a parish that does NO who does Gregorian Chant or teaches any of the responses in Latin nor what they mean. Poor implementation isn’t even a proper word. More like wholesale disregard for the liturgy from Vatican2. Just saying

@HawkOni

6 ай бұрын

Then you haven’t been exposed to a good variety of NO. The ones near me are all reverent and do incorporate chants and Latin responses. NO masses in Latin are also not unheard of, and I’ve been to multiple states/diocese with that as an option.

We are caving to the lowest common denominator. Let's face it... Latin: optimus semper triumphas

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

Sed credo lingua anglicorum melior est. Super lingua romanorum omnibus diebus.

@Kjt853

7 ай бұрын

@@StoaoftheSouthTibi adsentior. Ego latinam septem annos studui. Ego quoque credo lingua anglicorum melior est!

@K5RTO

7 ай бұрын

tu dicis anglicus melius sed non omnis homo loquitur anglicus. si magni libri nostri de latino translati sunt, singulae translationes temporis impressionibus maculata sunt. Post paucos centum annos opus vetustum propter amentes polticas tendentium intercidit. @Quedije @Kjt853

@delsydebothom3544

7 ай бұрын

@@StoaoftheSouth Quid de lingua Anglica tibi plus placet?

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

@@Kjt853 Et no agnosco loquare latine, neque scribire in haec lingua.

I guess Our Lord's exorcisms in the Gospels did not work because He most likely used Hebrew.

@DoctorDewgong

7 ай бұрын

Strawman much?

@davidrojas6457

7 ай бұрын

What do you mean? His exorcisms were explicitly in Greek 😂

5:30 Is it just me, or is there something kind of scandalous about so flippantly suggesting an approved sacred rite of the Church was guided in design by a demonic spirit? I mean…that’s still the Mass you’re talking about. Even despite the abuses we’ve seen within it, shouldn’t a Catholic have a bit more respect?

The Novus Ordo Mass is not consistent with Vatican II. It was created by a Freemason named Bugnini who wanted to make the Mass acceptable to Protestants. The priest, rather than Christ in the Eucharist became the focus and they emphasized the Mass as a meal and not a sacrifice. For a good documentary on what happened, check out the Mass of the Ages, Part II, the perfect storm. The Novus Ordo is far worse than Vatican II, and the modernists called it a conquest of the Latin Church, which, it was.

@StoaoftheSouth

7 ай бұрын

The Roman Rite is Catholic. Protestants still think the mass is too Catholic. The Eucharist is still the central focus of the liturgy if you celebrate the mass the way it was intended and not according to the spirit of the age. Why must we have such a hard time trusting the Church?

@davidrojas6457

7 ай бұрын

I highly recommend you look into the concept of a "theological censor".

@josephcillojr.7035

7 ай бұрын

@@davidrojas6457 I highly recommend you not to make recommendations, and instead, seek the truth.

@cfban

7 ай бұрын

Unfortunately it is consistent with Va II if you twist the words enough. The documents of Va II were intentionally made to sound good but remain ambiguous precisely to do what they did. Sacrosanctum Concilium was also Bugnini's work. He knew what he was doing. He weaseled his way into getting his vision approved by the unsuspecting bishops.

@timmoore9736

7 ай бұрын

Bishop Bugnini did not create the Ordonary Form of the Mass; it was a committee and he was the Secretary of the Committee. As to making the Mass acceptable for Protestants, that is an outright lie; teh movement for a vernacular liturgy goes back to 1615 when Pope Paul V aloowed the Mass to be celebrated in Chinese. In 1631 preists in Georgia (the country, not a state) were allowed full vernacular in either Georgain or Armenian. The matter of the vernacular became a football kicked back and forth after Trent; movements to widen the use of vernacular translations (for the laity) were allowed and then forbidden, then brought back again, most of which appears to be concerns more agaisnt Prtoestants than for laity. The only people who play the "not consistent with V2" card are those who want little or no vernacular, know little or no history, and forget that the Mass was celebratee throughout the world in native languages until, as time passed by, it became the province of the clergy.

After the council bishops did not implement the new rite of mass off of the Vatican 2 documents, rather the General Instruction for the New Rite. This document (read the first edition) explains the new formula and rubrics but also the new “spirit” of the church. Spoiler alert: it’s pretty Protestant.

1:34 “unnecessarily repetitious” is craaaazzzy. Repeating important prayers 3 times for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is unnecessary repetition? Yikes. “Lord I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof. But only say the word and my soul shall be healed”

Gregorian chant was struggling along for some time before Vatican 2 ocurred. And post - Vatican 2, I have heard several times choirs slaughtering it (I sang in a children's choir starting in the late 1950's. At that same time, I was taught to use a missal - and was the only one in my grade class who had one; my youngest brother (8 years behind) cannot remember any of his classmates having one. Basically they were all taught to be bumps on a log endruing the Mass. Providing the whole Mass in the vernacular gets back to what the Church was in the early centuries (and it was not always in Latin - e.g. the eastern Churches). Implementation came down with a ton of bricks, extremely poorly presented (and for that I blame the bishops) as it could hve been disseminated over several years. But then, here we are. As a parting shot about Gregorian chant, given that extremely few people in the 1950s and 1960s spoke Latin, it is wonderful to listen to - but no one knows what is actually being sung. I listen to it on Pandora, for the esthetic value, and after both high school and college latin, I don't know what they are singing. I just miss the ebb and flow that was part of what Gregorian chant was meant to be.

@DoctorDewgong

7 ай бұрын

The school children at my parish sing Gregorian chant at mass with no problem. It is one of the easiest forms of music to sing. They know exactly what the words mean because they are the ordinary of the Mass (Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus, Credo, Pater Noster, Agnus Dei). Anyone over the age of 6 can achieve what V2 wanted us to know in Latin

@mattymuso2108

7 ай бұрын

It's really not hard to learn the ordinary of the Mass in Latin. Pope Paul the VI released Jubilate Deo in 1974 to the bishops of the world in order to provide a resource so that the faithful could learn their participation of the mass IN LATIN. Remember that in the past, the 'vernacular' was typically a second language to most of it's speakers anyway, and the version they chose for liturgy in all the Eastern Rites was of a solemn/scholarly character which is as easy to understand as Shakespearean English is to us.

@delsydebothom3544

7 ай бұрын

Sadly, I think the way Latin was taught in the 20th century tended to produce more failures than successes. It was taught as a literary language, and even then more as a code than as an actual language. The resources for acquiring it as a conversational, spoken language are so much better now.

@timmoore9736

7 ай бұрын

@@DoctorDewgong Well, hopefully they have a music director who actually knows chant. Having heard more than one choir where the director had no clue, my experience since, say, 1975 has been painful listening.

@davidrojas6457

7 ай бұрын

Poor implementation and stewardship does not diminish the value of a thing. The Church explicitly states that chant and Latin should be preferred for the Roman Liturgy, so any other opinions we might have should be secondary to that.

Really...are we still arguing on these kind of topics? can you do some topics and discussions about the roots of Charismas and how we Catholics can defend our faith when pagans and atheism claims Christmas was came from pagan tradition? Thanks.

@ReformedSauron

7 ай бұрын

They are speaking on it because it is now relevant thanks to recent Francis moves.

Odd. On the day of Pentecost, all in.the upper room, including the THEOTOKOS received the gift of Languages. Maybe, just maybe, we would be better off not fighting the Holy Spirit. You know, the forgotten Person of the Trinity.

@DominicMazoch

7 ай бұрын

​@@Faith436If that the case, the Language should have been set by the Apostles when the order of Deacons was established.

@Consume_Crash

7 ай бұрын

Was the Church, guided by the Holy Spirit, in error when Latin was the standard language in the liturgy in the West?

@bernarddavis9579

6 ай бұрын

@@Consume_Crash It chose that the common language of the people of the time which was understood by them should replace Greek, the traditional language of the church at the time.

@Consume_Crash

6 ай бұрын

@@bernarddavis9579 So was the Church in error because it stuck with the Latin language in liturgy and other such things for so long?

This guy talks outta the wrong end.

Worst guest ever.

TLM is overrated