I am a diocesan priest of 37 years and have offered the traditional Roman Rite of Mass since my ordination. At first I jumped through all of the hoops that the modernist church required including the taking exams and applying for indults etc. I am not doing ANY of that any more. I continue to offer the Traditional Rite of Mass outside the constraints of the diocese and chancery structures and feel perfectly justified in doing so, since the diocesan powers that be, like pope Bergoglio himself, are not and have never been of good will concerning the matter. The Traditional Roman Rite of Mass is not the private possession of any certain pope or bishop, but of Jesus Christ and His Church! Ave Maria!

@7oneofseven

4 сағат бұрын

Amen. I pray for our faithful priests daily.

Hello from Canada. Very interesting and intelligent discussion! Thanks gentlemen.

Post Vat II canonizations are just LAUGHABLE! Tks!, Dr. K.

The thing with the death penalty is that Francis easily could have had his cake and ate it too. He could have said that it remains morally permissible, but it is so difficult to obtain adequate certainty of guilt, and there are so many alternative punishments available that it is rarely a prudent sentence. Kinda like just war--there is such a thing, but most wars we see don't qualify. In other words, yu don't have to modify the catechism just to say the Vatican generally discourages capital punishment in MOST cases.

This show is winning me back.

Thanks gentlemen. Great conversation

Dr. K is a vigorous proponent of the Second Vatican teaching on the ministry of bishops.

@brianmurphy9570

Күн бұрын

At least he gets some things right

I agree with Archbishop Vigano because, at some point, we'll have to stand up for Christ and the Faith He founded. I don't believe he is a conspiracy theorist as it's plain to see the number of doctrinal errors & heterodoxy committed by the Vatican under this pontificate alone

@revelation1215

21 сағат бұрын

I believe that God is testing all of us. He wants to see who is and who is not willing to stand up for truth so that when the judgment comes, there can be no doubt as to which side we served and were judged accordingly and rightfully.

I love listening to both of you talking, and separately teaching; please don’t stop! Remind us over and over that only God and the Magisterium are where we go for truth, not just anyone we happen to like or who agrees with us. By the way, is it likely that Rome is taking lessons from Washington DC?

Bishop Torres of Puerto Rico? Where is he? What of Cardinals Burke and Mueller? Why do we need councils such as USCCB or CCCB?

And the correct Catholic response is NO

The method described for gathering for Mass in these times when so much has to be done secretly reminds me of Mass being celebrated In wilderness areas in the Penal Law period of Irish history two hundred years ago.

YIKES!!!

???If a TLM ban is implemented, the bishops would be free not to obey, correct??? The law would be unconstitutional and the bishop wouldn’t be required nor should he since it is a part of Tradition similar to Sacred Scripture….The Pope really couldn’t lawfully punish him because it wouldn’t be just, correct?? Unsure if you can address my question. Thank you.

@frederickjones532

Күн бұрын

As St Paul said of St Peter "I wistood him to his face for he was wrong".

So the answer is yes, in this case. Thank you. May God always be with you both.

Talk about tradition, the Pope just announced he will go to Turkey in 2025 celebrate the 1700 anniversary of the council of Nicaea. Comments!

@patrickparsons2378

2 күн бұрын

Bergoglian photo-op. Rather ridiculous given that he denies everything in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.

@Runsfrombears

8 сағат бұрын

Yeah prolly will be visiting more mosques and Imams than anything else there

Makes sense. Overeach in the Papacy. (Power trip?)

@frederickjones532

Күн бұрын

Look at Pastor Aeternus Vatican I for the limits of Papal infallibility, or Newman "Letter to the Duke of Norfolk".

Yes!

Peter Kwasniewski is saying that a Bishop rules his diocese like a monarch and the Pope does not have a right to remove him? By Canon Law a Pope can appoint a Bishop to any diocese he sees fit and he can remove a bishop from governing a diocese for what ever reason within canon law he wants to. Does Peter Kwasniewski know Canon Law? It appears not! A PhD in Philosophy does not qualify someone as knowledgeable about canon law.

Bishops need to jump on this before they're overeach (powertrip) goes too far.

Were not Catholic Monarchs throughout history the usual appointers of bishops? Popes got the job with the advent of democracies.

@femaleKCRoyalsFan

2 күн бұрын

Don’t forget somebody gave an award as “defender of the faith” to Henry the eighth. then he betrayed Thomas More after Thomas More warned him that divorce was a sin

@Hope_Boat

2 күн бұрын

Orthodox here. No. The popes did not appoint the bishops until after the Gregorian Reformation in the 11th century. The Church was not a monarchy before the schism.

@frederickjones532

2 күн бұрын

@@Hope_Boat Duffy tells us that Catholic Monarchs were still appointing as late as the 19th century.

@pavelrazamazov2672

2 күн бұрын

@@Hope_Boatsure it is.

@user-tv6vv5rb8v

2 күн бұрын

No they weren't throughout history. There was a fierce struggle though, sometimes they wanted to appoint, sometimes they just wanted a veto, sometimes they won sometimes they lost. Arguably its still ongoing. China has won that issue with this "pope".

If pope Francis asked evety bishop to bring in a pachamama statue into the diocese cathedral and install it in place of a sacred heart of Jesus statue or picture, the bishops have an obligation to say NO.

@didymussumydid9726

2 күн бұрын

They’ve already been doing that since montini and roncalli, with the theological idols of freemasonry

@femaleKCRoyalsFan

2 күн бұрын

​@@didymussumydid9726In this case I mean a literal statue like what was present in the Vatican gardens

@Hope_Boat

2 күн бұрын

_Applauding in Greek_

@didymussumydid9726

2 күн бұрын

@@femaleKCRoyalsFan I understand, but adding an idol or taking an idol away doesn’t fundamentally change the circumstances. They replaced the worship of god and almost all the bishops went along with it when they should have said “no!”

@joejohn1492

2 күн бұрын

It was a statue of the BVM, but then you know that by now so you are just being a sedevecantist

Vigano Vini Vici!

Vatican II gave more authority and discretion to individual bishops, as to what they allow within their diocese. Francis' dictatorial centralisation is AGAINST Vatican II.

Obviously no.

No I believe Vigano would be dead if he went to Rome….sounds crazy, but we see it.

@CatholicMailman

Күн бұрын

Just like Cardinal Pell?

Better question: What actual relevance does Vatican II have today? For the most part? It seems the issues addressed were very pertinent for the 1950s and 1960s. Not so much now. For the most part. So much so that the Lituegy - Taylor made for that generation - fails to resonate with the faithful today. For the most part. What is it that bishops are ignoring or rejecting? Most of the Vatican II documents are merely modes operandi documents that do not demand ascent of faith. They contain no doctrine that require ascent like Unitatis Red., or Nostrae Aetate, etc

Didn't Bergoglio just get a 'blessing' from 100 Buddhists? Only Our Lord can give a blessing - either directly or through His priests. I consider Bergoglio to be an apostate.

@Hope_Boat

2 күн бұрын

As an orthodox I approve that message.

Your position is incoherent. You say, you recognize the authority of the scoundrels, then claim the right to ignore their authority. Vigano, at least, has a coherent position that these criminals do not have legitimate authority, so we need not listen to them and are obligated to save the Church from them. Bergoglio and his friends will dismantle the church, which, Vigano claims was Bergoglio’s intention all along and why he cannot be pope. That position appears to align with a spiritual reality and is a coherent basis for refusing to obey Bergoglio, a false pope. Your position is to come up with reasons to refuse to obey a legitimate pope, which is far more dangerous to the future of the church and a lot closer to Protestantism than Vigano’s position. If we are in a position where we decide whether to obey a legitimate authority, how do we claim to truly be under that authority? Maybe we should stop pretending there is no solution to a false papacy and that such a thing is not possible, and instead recognize the reality that people thought was not possible? The man who does not claim to be Vicar of Christ is not a true pope, but a usurper, and that is why we need not obey him. You don’t help matters by buying into this charade and creating reasons to ignore the authority of a true pope. You only aid him in dismantling the Church.

But the Pope is working toward new world order. Tradition needs to go. His view.

No

At time 36:15, your history is badly mistaken. You say the Anglican Reformation comparison is invalid based on the "The State" having issued the order rather than the Bishops. You forget that all but TWO of the Bishops of England (Saints More and Fisher, martyrs) capitulated to the tyranny of Henry VIII, and by 1549 the Latin Mass had been banned by those Legitimate Universal Pastors in favor of Cranmer's new worship service: vernacular, versus-populum and non-sacrificial. Then, as now, the Bishops capitulated to the "head" of their church.

@femaleKCRoyalsFan

2 күн бұрын

Fisher was the Bishop; Thomas More was a lay person (he was married)

@peternelson9259

2 күн бұрын

@@femaleKCRoyalsFan Heh, that's right, good point. But who was the other Bishop, then? Because I remember the TWO from some other source.

@giovanniserafino1731

2 күн бұрын

English Bishops , priests and clergy were required by “the state” to recognize Henry as the “ Head of the Church” in England, and Anne Boleyn as his legitimate wife and Queen. From that time forward “the state” ( monarch and parliament, ) controlled church property, liturgy and discipline. Clergy who did not conform were deprived of their office, put into prison, and some lost their lives. For all practical purposes, it was a state run church and the bishops had very little to say in what went on in it.

@peternelson9259

2 күн бұрын

@@giovanniserafino1731 Yes, precisely. But that doesn't change the fact that the Bishops were all ordained, prior to the break with Rome, by the Catholic Church, according to tradition. Following Mr. Sammon's logic they were therefore the people's "Legitimate Universal Pastors". And those Legitimate Universal Pastors ordered their people to give up the traditional Latin mass. The situation in modern times is all too similar, and the detail of whether the impetus for betrayal comes from violent tyrants (kings or communists) or non-violent tyrants (clericalist ideologues) doesn't seem to me to be all that relevant. Part of the problem here is our tendency to telegraph the modern notion of "separation of church and state" backwards in time to the late middle ages. The Church and State were intimately intertwined then, so distinguishing between "The State" vs. "The Church" in that historical context is always going to lead to confusion. Though that's a very different topic, to be sure. Sorry for the rabbit hole, heh.

@giovanniserafino1731

2 күн бұрын

@@peternelson9259 Discussion is always good. As I’m sure you know, most of the laity rejected the protestant schismatic Edwardian Ordinal of 1549 and “Communion Service “ written by the heretic Cramner and wanted their Latin Mass back. Unfortunately, most of the clergy, fearful of the state, did not return to the Latin Mass. It wasn’t until the reign of Queen Mary Tudor that public Latin Mass returned, and then only for a short time. Of course, the Latin Mass continued “underground” and in secret for many years. We may be returning to those days very soon.

I agree that the pope has no authority to abrogate the Traditional Roman Rite. Who does Bergoglio think he is?!...the Holy Ghost? This isn't the 1960s!

This video is the definition of legalism.

@sliglusamelius8578

Күн бұрын

Canon law is legalism, so what?

@frederickjones532

Күн бұрын

@@sliglusamelius8578 Judges 17:6 Condemns lawlessness "There was no King in Israel and every man did that which was right in his own eyes."

@sliglusamelius8578

Күн бұрын

@@frederickjones532 Ok, so what is your point? I accept the law of God and I accept that there is canon law, I do not accept the idea that the pope is a dictator, one who ignores canon law 915, and one who receives blessings from Buddhist monks.

@frederickjones532

Күн бұрын

@@sliglusamelius8578 Newman thought that the properly informed conscience was supreme. The Pope is the guide to the meaning of tradition, he is not tradition itself ( as Pius IX maintained ) and he certainly can make mistakes except when speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith and morals. Liberius and Honorius were heretics.

We orthodox are ignoring the Vatican since 1054 and focus of the conservation of the orthodox faith. As a result we did a better job maintaining the creed, the sacraments, the divine liturgy, the sacred art (iconography) the sacred architecture, the Eucharist, the confidence of the orthodox nations and our consistency. What was the justification of the rise of the pontifical monarchy again? Hmmm. if I remember well he was supposed to be a guarantor of orthodoxy : _we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff._ (Unam Sanctam 1302). That worked well did it? Orthodoxy is relevant. Pontifical monarchy? Not so much. Kyrie eleison. IC XC NI KA

@sergesavard636

2 күн бұрын

You also allow divorce, and deny the Assumption, you also have your own divisions between Moscow and Constantinople, along with those follow the old calendar ..Kyril is pawn of Putin as well.. things are not perfect in the East either.

@Hope_Boat

2 күн бұрын

@@sergesavard636 I will not enter into an explanation on why this is not relevant. Just a few words. We are not a political party. It does not matter who's the head of the Church. We don't submit to him. He's a servant who washes our feet. Concerning divorce, as for many other things we hold the position of the Apostles from which you deviated and you now think we are the ones who changes. No. Read the bible. _I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery._ Matthew 19:9 Read st John Chrysostom : Divorce was always possible in case of fornication of the one spouse and no repentance possible because it's the duty of the Church to save the other soul.

@guineapig0199

2 күн бұрын

Our Lady of Fatima asks Catholics to pray for the conversion of Russia. Our current crisis is probably chastisement for not heeding her other requests. But she said, "In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph." This is probably not the best time for the Orthodox Church to reconcile but we will continue to pray for them. There is a small remnant who remain true to the Sacred Traditions, Sacred Scriptures, and Magisteriums before 1958.

@Hope_Boat

Күн бұрын

@@guineapig0199 A conversion of Russia to what? The Novus Ordo world religion? Russia was baptised in the 10th century and needs no conversion. Stop being arrogant. Rome is piling up heresies ever since the Great Schism. You went from extreme brutality to extreme tolerance. You have no guidance because you follow a man. Not Christ. You end up with a ruined Church , no correct liturgy, no correct sacraments, ill inspired art, new age architecture, debauchery within the clergy, persecution of traditionalists, worship of idols on your altars, kissing of the Quran, washing of the feet of Muslims and insyead of wpndering why all this is happening you pray for orthodox Russia to 'convert' into that desaster? That's insane. The pre 1958 dogmas you pretend to save have been proven false. Where happened to 'the Roman Church will never err in all perpetuity'? What happened to 'The Roman Pontiff holds the imperial Insignia and all princes are to kiss his feet '? What happened to "no salvation outside the Roman Church '? The only thing Rome holds to is the necessity to submit to the Roman Pontiff which was never part of the orthodox faith in the first place. Christ never said we shall submit to the first among us. He said the exact opposite: Do not lord it over the nations like the kings who pretend to be benefactors. Luke 22:24-26 The first is like the youngest (primus inter pares). Stop inventing stuff and return to what the Lord taught us. Kyrie eleison ☦

This podcast should bring back Jimmy Akin; the Church doesn’t teach what Kwasniewski thinks.

@femaleKCRoyalsFan

2 күн бұрын

I’m sorry, but I have stopped listening to Jimmy Akin. I’d rather listen to Dr. K

@ryanb4780

2 күн бұрын

@@femaleKCRoyalsFan I'm sorry you feel that way. I always encourage people to listen to both sides, but at the end of the day, we follow the Magisterium of the Church, not the magisterium of theologians and apologists.

@jasong7128

2 күн бұрын

@ryanb4780 what is the Magisterium? The DDF+Pope?

@ryanb4780

2 күн бұрын

@@jasong7128 No. The Magisterium is the teaching authority of Christ exercised through the Pope and Bishops in union with the Pope.

@Sahuayoc8490

2 күн бұрын

@@ryanb4780yea but when they contradict the previous magisterium and so on what do you think is the criteria? Can God be bound by man? Answer, no, the Holy Ghost guided Tradition, you’re not getting it, Tradition is what God Gave us not this pope or that and that’s the problem with Modernism or neo modernism that holds (erroneously) that “living tradition is held by evolution” again, can God Change? no, God doesn’t Change and popes can disobey God obviously, there’s Peter and Simon son of Jonah, man and man under Grace, this second one is subject to Truth in order to hold the promises, Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ, yesterday and today; Jesus Christ forever. James 1:17 Every excellent gift and every perfect gift is from above, descending from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor any shadow of alteration. Same holds to little truths that come from that first Truth, if obstinate man wants humanism and not Grace (Truth) then the binding (moral binding) is not binding no more for we must obey God before man in order to be under obedience to God that gave men that power from above, and did so as to keep order, not disordered society which is the Church not so as to man do whatever arbitrarily but to hold strong Tradition that we received for our sanctification Ephesians 4:13 until we all meet in the unity of faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God, as a perfect man, in the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ. 14 So may we then no longer be little children, disturbed and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by the wickedness of men, and by the craftiness which deceives unto error.15 Instead, acting according to truth in charity, we should increase in everything, in him who is the head, Christ himself.

Cue all the keyboard warriors with their: "I'm with VIGANO! Now we KNOW Dr. K. isn't a REAL Trad!". Bc ... Almost NO ONE can make distinctions anymore.

@EpoRose1

2 күн бұрын

That road is going to end with “NO ONE is a REAL trad but ME!!”

@christopherfeeney1962

Күн бұрын

@@EpoRose1 BINGO

@sliglusamelius8578

Күн бұрын

@@EpoRose1your road ends with "obey the pope". Silly.

I will follow the bible and only follow sound doctrine and dogma!!!! I will never follow anyone who contradicts the bible!! Francis said on Easter Sunday that jesus christ death on the cross was a failure!! That's hericy!! Jesus christ death on the cross is God's core plan of salvation!!!

@Hope_Boat

2 күн бұрын

_I will follow the bible and only follow sound doctrine and dogma!!!! I will never follow anyone who contradicts the bible!!_ as we orthodox said 1000 years ago. Better sooner that later. Better later than never.

@patrickparsons2378

2 күн бұрын

​@@Hope_Boatthe so-called'Orthodix' never claimed anything of the sort in the C11th. The Ohotion Schism of the C9th AD and the Kerularian Schism of the mid-1050s0 Had nothing to do with the Bible but everything to do with the arrogance and ambition of uncanonically elected patriarchs of Constaninople. In the case of Michael Kerularios (who ended up in prison for deposing an emperor), his suppression of the Latin Rite in the city and condemnation of the Latin as a azymites was complete nonsense with no foundation. Kerularios was desperate to exercise authority over the other patriarchates, especially Alexandria and the Church in Southern Italy. He managed to completely scupper the Papal-Byzantine alliance against the Normans. However, there was no formal schism. The claims of the Eastern Greek church to eternal orthodoxy is quite laughable. The iconclast heresy is a case in point: the East went heretic and the Latin Church remained orthodox and protected refugee iconophile monks.

@Hope_Boat

2 күн бұрын

@@patrickparsons2378 We are not Pepsi-Cola. Stop reacting like Coca-Cola. We don't try to steal you market shares. You have a problem and we have the solution. If you are confortable with the current state of affairs in your Church, fine. It's none of our business. You have been busy insulting orthodoxy since 1054. We are neither tired nor vindictive. You can go for another millennium if you wish. God bless you. Kyrie eleison.☦

What does Kwasniewski say regarding Donum Veritatis. That document seems to suggest Kwasniewski is guilty of the sin of public dissent.

@CrisisMag

2 күн бұрын

Kinda sad that your first instinct is to try to find a way to silence Dr. K rather than engage his arguments. The Church shouldn’t be run like the Soviet Union.

@ryanb4780

2 күн бұрын

@CrisisMag Sorry, but if Kwasniewski is preaching contrary to the Magisterium, that's called dissent. I'm honestly trying to find Kwasniewski's explanation of Donum Veritaris and how it fits in with his understanding of "true obedience," but I can't find anything. As far as I can tell, he's promoting grave sin. And to compare the Papal Magisterium's rulings on a particular form of the Roman Rite to the Soviet Union is just grotesque. There is nothing "tradional" about a lay person (even a theologian) making himself the Magisterium and deciding which traditions are Sacred and which are not. Contrary to what Schneider states, he and Kwasniewski are fundamentally Protestant in their ecclesiology: namely, they make themselves their own Magisterium, and have the audacity to presume to know more than the Vicar of Christ, the visible head of Christ's Magisterium.

@ryanb4780

2 күн бұрын

@@CrisisMag It's tragically sad that you and many other Catholics, who claim to value tradition, would rather give ascent of will and mind to a Magisterium of theologians over and against the Magisterium instituted by Christ.

@MystieK_

2 күн бұрын

there approach to Church teaching of Truth vs Legend is if the Truth doesn't align with my Legend choose the Legend. The Magistrium should bend to their will not the other way around. They are the True Catholics not the Pope God gave the authority.

@guineapig0199

2 күн бұрын

​@@ryanb4780Is this current Magisterium really a Magisterium instituted by Our Lord Jesus Christ? Will Our Lord Jesus Christ instruct His Magisterium to violate the First Commandment?

The answer is no. It's prideful to go against the head of the Church. Only time we were to do that is if we were asked to do something grieviously wrong Scripture tells us God prefers obedience rather than our own sacrifice.

@sliglusamelius8578

Күн бұрын

You can't be serious. He's not supposed to be the dictator he turned himself into, it's horrible.

@EpoRose1

Күн бұрын

What would be a “grievous wrong” that would constitute that?

@ryans339

19 сағат бұрын

@@sliglusamelius8578 I am. I think you caught up too much in this, were being victimized mentality. Listen, what did Jesus say? He said in the gospel to follow what ever the scribes and pharisees say for they sit on the seat of Moses, just not to do what they do. The Pope has the authority given by God to do certain things. In this case it's not a sin, it just not what you want. If he were telling you to sin, that would be a different story. So, yes I am serious, are you? Or do you follow your own will?

@ryans339

18 сағат бұрын

@@EpoRose1 Anything that is a sin. This is not a sin. Its just not what you want.

@sliglusamelius8578

16 сағат бұрын

@@ryans339 He can't bless sin. Period.

1) It seems duplicitous for Peter Kwasniewski to talk about a bishop defending his flock arguing that his flock "don’t deny the validity of the Novus Ordo" when he has argued numerous times now that one need not attend a NOM even when it's the only option 2) Bishop Schneider needs to stop writing that a Pope cannot change the Nicene Creed because, I'm sure he's well aware, a Pope did that already

@JackGordone

2 күн бұрын

Cite with quotes where Kwasnieski said any such thing. I call bushwa on your allegation.

@TSliw

2 күн бұрын

@@JackGordone "there cannot be sufficient probability of a Novus Ordo Mass that fulfills the conditions necessary for obligatory Divine Worship" Peter Kwasniewski, Sanctus Ranch, Pipe Creek, TX, on April 28, 2024. this can be viewed at 39 minutes on the video he posted to his own youtube channel under the title "When the Sunday Mass Obligation Binds and Ceases to Bind". "If one is doubtful about the lawfullness of the New Rite one has an obligation to clear them and in the mean time avoid attending it. Speaking for myself, when I tried to clear up my own doubts the things I learned only intensified them. Hence, I personally would not attend the Novus Ordo even if it were the only liturgy available" at about 51 : 30 of the same lecture Edit: “Numerous” may have over sold it but this does seem to be his current position which he expresses publicly his own doubts, presenting himself as an expert, planting those doubts in others, etc

@EpoRose1

2 күн бұрын

Bishop Schneider didn’t say a pope couldn’t change the Nicene Creed, he said a pope can’t “abrogate” (cancel, forbid) the Nicene-Constantinople Creed.

@TSliw

2 күн бұрын

@@EpoRose1 “abrogate or substitute a new formula” was the quotation

@JackGordone

Күн бұрын

@@TSliw You misunderstand what he actually said and try unsuccessfully to make out that he promulgates a general rule for the faithful. Read what he said more carefully. "I PERSONALLY...." is not in any way a blanket statement including others.

People are trying to rationalize disobedience to the pope, and may I say, tacitly, calling into question the validity of the new mass, despite anything they may say otherwise. The old mass is being used as a club, both to bang on the new mass, to provide a place for dissenting priests, and as a club of membership. It is being used to divide by some who attend it, and by the pope who is annoyed with its misuses. None of that makes all the crazy things acceptable, but, it kind of explains some things, IMHO. The pass given to countless others, like Germany, Rupnik, and the like, are another matter. The crazy needs to stop, whether it is screwy Jesuits, promoters of gay weddings, fat bottomed morons kneeling before an idol in a garden, or "rad trad" BS. It all needs to stop. Start with oneself.

@acrxsls1766

18 сағат бұрын

There is no "new Mass", only the TLM. V2 was an abomination by all measures, and it was a hostile takeover by Masons to destroy the Church from within - and your comment proves they're winning.

Traditional Catholic... This is a misnomer really. The Novous Ordo is the latin rite today. The Latin church is all over the world. The various other rites of the Catholic Church serve their local communities unlike the Latin rite that serves the globe. Look at how the church is flourishing in Africa and South East Asia. The old version of the Latin rite (TLM) should be kept for Europe and America. This would end up as a division from the rest of the world if we do not have a rite that unites us the way the Novous Ordo does it the TLM did. Also the TLM could have just been vernacularised to help with the missions outside of Europe and America.

No worshiping of Mary, no fake rosary, no false Latin Mass, no bits of cloth or bones...

@sergesavard636

2 күн бұрын

go back to your prot site and have your "personal relationship"

@poetmaggie1

2 күн бұрын

God gave us His guideline, the problem is people don't want to believe or accept these standards. Who are we to decide that God's Church is off the rails and people have to leave it and change those rules. The Queen Mother is always honored in worldly kingdoms, The rosary begging her to Pray For Us is valid, The Latin Mass may have been said in Hebrew and Greek and some other languages but Latin finally becoming the official one for the Vatican to make matters more official and clear. Those trying to get rid of the Latin are also trying to destroy the Clearity. You are very confused. God gave the Jews guideline and when Christ established his Church for the entire world He gave us Guide lines and only Catholic Tradition has kept that Tradition Pure, if there is confusion it is because some men have chosen to make confusion God is the Same, His Church is the Same, He even Promised it is the Same.

???If a TLM ban is implemented, the bishops would be free not to obey, correct??? The law would be unconstitutional and the bishop wouldn’t be required nor should he since it is a part of Tradition similar to Sacred Scripture….The Pope really couldn’t lawfully punish him because it wouldn’t be just, correct?? Unsure if you can address my question. Thank you.

@joejohn1492

Күн бұрын

The TLM is not part of Sacred Tradition, it is part of tradition.Also, the Popes actions are governed by canon law but the pope can change canon law as he sees fit. The TLM evolved from the initial practice of the Apostles, undergoing it greatest changes after the church was made the official religion of the entire Roman Empire. The council of Trent mandated that the form of the mass as used in Rome must be used in all of the west and suppressed about 50 forms of the Roman Rite then in use in the west. Finally, the TLM and the Novo Ordo are both valid forms of the current Roman Rite