I knew a man who like me was a child of R.C. parents in the early 1960's. He told me that in 1964 his family went to Church every Sunday, but that by 1970 they had decided it was all b.s. The entire family ceased going to Church. Not he nor one of his siblings continued in the Faith, This was a large family, and including current grand-children approximately 20 people have been alienated from the Faith. How many times has that happened? My own parents continued in the Faith but detested the liturgical changes, the modish priests who quickly replaced our traditional ones, the lunacy of their preaching, the bankrupting of our parish through hare-brained renovations, the ridiculous hymns and the discouragement of such innocent groups as the Altar and Rosary societies. The catastrophic history of the Church has to be partly attributed to all the Popes of my lifetime. That John, Paul and John-Paul are made saints actually shakes my own faith since clearly they were not. To admire Benedict is to be blinded by scholarly fog. Francis is the cancerous growth which has emerged from the popes and prelates of 70 years.
Yes, and wasn’t Bergoglio’s choice of name studied propagandizing? That is, to join the name of the much loved Catholic saint of sacrifice and charity to his own program of Marxist and modernist revisionism.
Dr. Kwasniewski, as always, puts the truth and the crux of the matter into perfect words. Indeed, the Chutch should have held firm, like the parents that guard the hearth and home, knowing the wayward youngsters will return home when they’ve sown their wild oats, and if she didn’t do it then, she must do it now. Instead, the Church said if you can’t beat ‘em, join’em, and it’s been a disaster.
You, of comforters the best; You, the soul’s most welcome guest; Sweet refreshment here below; In our labor, rest most sweet; Grateful coolness in the heat; Solace in the midst of woe.
Heal our wounds, our strength renew; On our dryness pour your dew; Wash the stains of guilt away: Bend the stubborn heart and will; Melt the frozen, warm the chill; Guide the steps that go astray.
A really informative and uplifting discussion. Over the past two years I have learned a great deal from Dr. Kwasniewski on the liturgy and the Church; incredible. Having said this, Dr. Moynihan to his great intellectual and pastoral credit and spirit, always asks the appropriate (objective) questions to draw out the truth from any conversation and from any guest. He has taught me to question using one's reason, seeing all sides and that it must be done in charity. Often, just to help those of us who cannot ask some of these questions, Dr. Moynihan will humbly ask questions on viewers/listeners behalf, when one very well knows (given Dr. Moynihan's educated, holy, giving life) that Dr. Moynihan already knows the answer. Mr. Gaspers is as always, too, a wealth of knowledge and of a clear, consistent perspective; he is great. Though I always get the feeling if he ever really "let's go" of his very patient demeanor, you will get the full bandwidth of his prowess, lol! Thanks to all of you.
I know a family who has left the Church for the Eastern Orthodox-like jumping from the frying pan into the fire. The errors of Amortis Letitia came from the Eastern Orthodox!!
Sicily is wonderful. Went there on a 6 week trip. Saw Monreale, Erice, Selinute, the giant Greek temple ruins, Syracuse, Aetna, all the while with beautiful wildflowers in April.
I used to believe in mutual enrichment of the 2 liturgies but that was before I started attending the TLM more than once a year. Now that I've been attending TLM exclusively for over a year, i understand these are two different liturgies entirely. The prayers are different - even in the Divine Office! With the TLM i finally WANT to be a better Catholic in a way i never did before. Return to Tradition!
Totally agree with Dr Kwasniewski that Latin in the Mass must remain sacrosanct. This does not in any way obstruct translation into any if the various world languages.
Yes, gentlemen, I share your observations about the problems which beset Catholicism (not to mention the rest of Christendom) over the past 60 plus years, but from the perspective of a deep believer growing up in a family of non-practicing (and often Christian-mocking, especially of Catholicism) Protestants. We lived in a neighborhood of practicing and faithful Catholics. The lack of catechism, however, among both parents and children of these Catholic families was readily apparent, even to my teenage sensibilities and understanding. Because I grew up in this context, now, as a convert to Catholicism, I've had the benefit of living the stark difference between Protestantism and Catholicism, and all of the attendant miss-apprehensions Protestants have toward Catholicism (which are alive and prevalent today and to which Protestants still cling) as well as those of faithful Catholics who didn't then and still don't know the very religion in which they were privileged to grow up. As a result, the corruption that has infiltrated the Church down to its marrow is all they (and non-Catholics alike) have been able to grasp and understand. It's a genuinely tragic state of affairs for all. To throw away religion, as so much of our generation has done, is to throw away the very scaffolding upholding the foundation of right and moral (not to mention joyful) living, handed to us over the centuries by our Father. As a result, what I'm witnessing is that people are bereft, but have no idea why. They are moving through their lives in a state very similar to shell shock. I don't think that is over-stating the realities of it all. One of the greatest difficulties is that these suffering souls have no idea they've been engaged and immersed in a war all these years, and are therefore insensible to the nature and depths of their war wounds. I often wonder if the mindset of the collective is not unlike that of the people of Israel, in the darkest depths of their slavery, right before Moses liberated them. They obviously knew they were enslaved, but once liberated, even they had no notion of the extent of their own bondage, and how deeply it penetrated their entire ways of being. Thank you all for all you do, it is such critical work. I pray for you daily. God Bless you.
The Apostles taught by what we call catechism. They repeated over and over the same truths until everyone was established in the message they taught. In 2 Peter 1:12-13 Peter says “I am continually recalling the same truths to you, even though you already know them and firmly hold them. Paul in Colossians 1:28-29 says ‘We thoroughly train and instruct everyone to make them all perfect in Christ. The result being that they turned the world upside down. The present conciliar church couldn’t turn a pancake. A one year cycle should be sufficient
Last week I prayed with two million lovers of God, hearing a liturgy entirely unchanged for a thousand years, with not the least sign of feminism or wokery or perverse desires. I was in Mecca.
My concern, is the readings from the scriptures being ...form want of a better word ...Diluted ....if it has the possibility 2 offend certain cultural sensitivities.
50:13 That defeats the fundamental unity that the Tridentine Rite provides & represents. The point is that anywhere in the state/province/country/world could walk into a CC & know exactly what was going on. It united Catholics all over the world in a very special way. Just as the Byzantine Catholics use ecclesiastical Greek. It is the sacred language of the church. I don't know how much easier & accessible it can get when missals with Latin in one colum & vernacular translation is provided if one wishes to follow along. Treating modern people like less than children who can't learn or adapt anything is ridiculous... especially as many languages are already descended from Latin. People would be surprised how much Latin they actually know from everyday language.
There is a very easy answer concerning Ratzinger. The man was a modernist through and through whose faith experience had more exposure to the one true faith than a man like Bergoglio. It is not reaspnable to consider Ratzinger a Catholic, let alone a Pope of the Catholic Church.
Before the Novus Ordo was implemented, Catholics had been participating in the traditional Mass for more than 1600 years with great joy and love of Christ.
@@Marcia-fw3wz In Sub-Saharan Africa? No that is not true. While Apostolic Christianity reached Ethiopia, Northern Sudan near Egyptian border and the Horn of Africa due to those areas having contact with Egypt, which had been Hellenized by Alexander the Great and part of the Roman empire just before the time of Christ, Apostolic Christianity never really effectively evangelized the West, Central, Eastern (non Horn) and South Africa really until the 20th century and most of that growth has happened post Vatican II when the Catholic Church allowed the Roman Missal of 1970 to be celebrated in the vernacular of the local languages so that the Catholic Church could evangelize head to head with the various protestant ecclesial communities who were using Sola Scriptura and having their worship services in the local languages.
@@matthewschmidt5069 I mean all 23 rites of the one Catholic Church, Eastern and Western. Protestants also celebrate their services with great reverence and love of Christ, but there are many variations of Protestant beliefs and practices, and only one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church. Besides, many Catholics in Africa are traditional, not Novus Ordo.
Dr. Peter Kwasniewski: Regarding whether the Vatican II Council was Pastoral or Authoritative in its teaching (Dogmatic), Pope Paul VI stated: "But one thing must be noted here, namely, that the teaching authority of the Church, even though not wishing to issue extraordinary dogmatic pronouncements, has made thoroughly known its authoritative teaching on a number of questions". (Address of Pope Paul VI at the Last General Meeting of the Second Vatican Council, 7 December 1965). Accordingly, Vatican II must be considered dogmatic & authoritative.
Hence the conclusion of sedevacante. For Vatican II and its interpretation and implementation created a religion incompatible with the Catholic faith (most obviously with respect to ecclesiology and religious liberty). Thus, the new religion, not being compatible with Catholicism cannot be a work of the Church (unless one wishes to say the Church is defectible). Since the religion is not a work of the Church, the entity promulgating the religion cannot be the Catholic Church (for if it were so then the Catholic Church is not only capable of defecting but also never had the 4 marks of the Church essentially, only accidentally at best). Therefore, the heads of this entity promulgating the new religion, which is notnthe Catholic faith, cannot simultaneously be the heads of this entity AND heads of the Catholic Church (unless, as some who wish to rethink the papacy, are willing to toss out the Church's teaching on the Papacy, especially Pastor Aeternus and say that a man need not be a member of the Catholic Church (see Mystici Corporis on the criteria) to be made or stay on as Pope)
How can so many of the Church's Magisterial teachings and practices for nearly 2000 years be so radically changed in such a short time, and still be considered authoritative without being divisive? That isn't what Jesus intended when He instituted the Church, and it sounds more Protestant than Catholic.
No, there are 3 levels of Magisterial teaching 1) Infallible Magisterium, which can be exercised A) ex cathedra or B) by Supreme Magesterium of the Pope in union with all the Bishops via an Ecumenical Council, which Vatican II very effectively harmonized the Conciliar view that had been hanging around since the Council of Constance (1414-1418) and Haec Sancta which stated a Council could be > than the Pope. Vatican II said while a Pope is not > than a Council, a Council can't be greater than the Pope either, 2) Ordinary Magisterium and 3) Authoritative Magisterium. Authoritative Magisterium is a valid exercise of the Papal Magesterium and while it requires the faithful the give Assent of the Mind and Will, Authoritative teachings are in fact non binding. Now, that does not mean I should go to my local Parish and create schism by rejecting Vatican II. However, one can hold that a future Council (Vatican III) could review the texts of Vatican II and rewrite them, amend some and actually throw some out. So the Church could go back and revisit the Liturgy again and Reform it and that would be perfectly within a future Pope's authority and would not invalidate anything in Vatican II since it be what Pope Paul VI said, there was nothing Dogmatic in it.
They will not fix the mass even in generations since neither the old mass nor the new are what was supposed to develop and the parties for the old mass are stuck in 1960 something and the parties in the new mass are stuck in 1984 Orwellian style. Plus, the new mass can be celebrated/offered in quite beautiful and inspiring ways, even though it often is done poorly. I was there when they essentially destroyed the mass in the sense that they had less than zero regard for the centuries old lived Catholic sensibilities and norms at mass and at church itself. The "new" mass originally had some Latin in it, gone was chant, and from that it went further afield into the cold; over the years there has been some recovery with the words, including the Confiteor, and with your spirit, and also the prayer of the centurion, along with "consubstantial" - they still have problem with the use of "men" in some prayers preferring "people". Men will return as the awakening to people on other planets will mean the definition of man and men will take on much more important meanings, as will the incarnation and the humanity of the Savior. The appreciation for God as God and His immense gift to mankind will be more amazing and more profound as we uncover the vastness of the universe and our smallness in it. But I digress. Keeping the outer space theme, let me say, that NO forced return or edict by any pope or council will bring about proper and needed reform in the new mass, nor the very much needed evolution in the old mass. Neither forms are what they should be, and that is not admitted by anyone I have heard, least of all here. The old mass is NOT it, the new mass is NOT it, there IS a problem. The first step, don't hold your breath for it, is an admission by the highest leaders of the church, pope included, that the "reform" of the mass was actually an abuse of the people of God in the WAY it was done, and in the outcomes. The continuing lax practices of the rite are shameful, the loss of the sense of the sacred is a grave wound, the ripping out and sanitizing every sweet thing was and is criminal. The people are now used to this poorly executed ham-handed liturgy which is under constant attack as a play thing for whomever is in charge of the music and such other committees of whichever Orwellian organ one wishes to consider. Nonetheless, the lifeboat for some in the old mass is NOT the ship either they nor others need to be in as we should ALL await the mass that is neither the old nor the new, but an improved mass in which the crustations, and there are crustations, of the old are removed, and in which the informality and experimentation of the new are removed. The way forward is indeed a "new" mass. At this point such is not possible because fans of the old mass are super locked into it, usually, and have developed a habit of denigrating basically anything new. Those in the new mass do not have any concept of what was lost, what might be gained, and have near zero familiarity with Latin and are unlikely to "put up with it", for them the old mass is a trip to Mars. I think it is a reach to assume, as was suggested, that "after a few times" they will settle in, as though it is an acquired taste, that is a big assumption, which he bases on his captive children, he mistakes the cultural situations that exist. Besides, the good doctor, it seems to me, is himself locked into his way in such a way that he, at least to me thinks the old mass is just fine. Well I was there in the old days, and no it is not just fine, it just is NOT. So, don't hold your breath, don't get locked into a liturgical box, nor for that matter a Jesuit box of any kind. As for papal pronouncements and infallibility- Franky is the Genessis of a whole new theological self-inflicted crisis of "making a mess" - which, in my mind, long long after I and anyone reading this is dead, will be sorted out, and at that point it is moot, and may as well be taken that way now if one gets smart and decides he should start living in eternity now as opposed to the navel gazing moment of men in skirts, popes in gardens with statues from the Amazon and fat-bottomed morons kneeling before it, or even contradictory "teachings' with space aliens supposedly doing their own Naval-gazing while the Navy gazes back. You can't write this stuff, and then we have Akita. Ever notice how God speaks softly and if you don't listen you miss it? I mean He's a one-on-one God, person to person, not usually a Madison Avenue intervention. So, live in eternity and the eternal now as best you can while being in the passing now.
Countless Catholics disagree, the Tridentine Rite didn't need any changes. No one asked for the changes that were heaped upon our churches & it's removal decimated entire swaths of Catholic areas. They(we) thought the church had been sold to a different "sect", it was an unnecessary, unmitigated disaster for those who lived through it & countless who found out that what was supposed to be their Sacred Heritage had been taken from them. It's no wonder why the CC has & is hemorrhaging members to Orthodoxy, which uses ecclesiastical Greek & some Latin, & is proud of it. They cherish their Divine Liturgy & it's passing on to future generations, while Catholics are stuck wallowing in an entirely manufactured "crisis" for 60+ years.
@@Vexx_Line_ Indeed there was damage to the people of God by the changes made in the mass. Nonetheless, changes were and are needed in that form of the mass, but not as drastic as those that occurred. I know of no hemorrhage of Catholics to churches in the east, it would make no sense since to do so is to be far more not Catholic than the allegations against the new mass. I think it far more accurate, however, to say that scandal brings division and there is indeed much scandal within the Catholic Church which has contributed to confusion, alienation and people leaving. prevalent
Dr, K. Is the greatest theological mind in the Church today! A true gift to all believing Catholics.
I knew a man who like me was a child of R.C. parents in the early 1960's. He told me that in 1964 his family went to Church every Sunday, but that by 1970 they had decided it was all b.s. The entire family ceased going to Church. Not he nor one of his siblings continued in the Faith, This was a large family, and including current grand-children approximately 20 people have been alienated from the Faith. How many times has that happened? My own parents continued in the Faith but detested the liturgical changes, the modish priests who quickly replaced our traditional ones, the lunacy of their preaching, the bankrupting of our parish through hare-brained renovations, the ridiculous hymns and the discouragement of such innocent groups as the Altar and Rosary societies. The catastrophic history of the Church has to be partly attributed to all the Popes of my lifetime. That John, Paul and John-Paul are made saints actually shakes my own faith since clearly they were not. To admire Benedict is to be blinded by scholarly fog. Francis is the cancerous growth which has emerged from the popes and prelates of 70 years.
Francis is truly a cancer. He has ruined a wonderful name, the name of the poverello, a name I gave my firstborn. It’s outrageous.
Yes, and wasn’t Bergoglio’s choice of name studied propagandizing? That is, to join the name of the much loved Catholic saint of sacrifice and charity to his own program of Marxist and modernist revisionism.
Facts!
I have recently returned to the Church after about 30 years. However, I am a member of a parish that offers only the Latin mass, God bless our bishop.
Three brilliant minds and beautiful souls..thank you for sharing this excellent discussion.
This is the fruit of truly seeking the truth. Thank you.
Tremendous discussion! Thank you!
Please do have Dr. K back on.
Wonderful talk. Thank you.
Dr. Kwasniewski, as always, puts the truth and the crux of the matter into perfect words. Indeed, the Chutch should have held firm, like the parents that guard the hearth and home, knowing the wayward youngsters will return home when they’ve sown their wild oats, and if she didn’t do it then, she must do it now. Instead, the Church said if you can’t beat ‘em, join’em, and it’s been a disaster.
You, of comforters the best;
You, the soul’s most welcome guest;
Sweet refreshment here below;
In our labor, rest most sweet;
Grateful coolness in the heat;
Solace in the midst of woe.
Heal our wounds, our strength renew;
On our dryness pour your dew;
Wash the stains of guilt away:
Bend the stubborn heart and will;
Melt the frozen, warm the chill;
Guide the steps that go astray.
Thank you gentlemen! Excellent discussion!
I greatly lament my lack of formation in the old Rite of Mass.
Gentlemen, what an excellent conversation! God bless you all!
The only way for The Church to get back on track is to completely discard the ENTIRE novus ordo system. All of it.
Really great! Thank you very much!
A really informative and uplifting discussion. Over the past two years I have learned a great deal from Dr. Kwasniewski on the liturgy and the Church; incredible. Having said this, Dr. Moynihan to his great intellectual and pastoral credit and spirit, always asks the appropriate (objective) questions to draw out the truth from any conversation and from any guest. He has taught me to question using one's reason, seeing all sides and that it must be done in charity. Often, just to help those of us who cannot ask some of these questions, Dr. Moynihan will humbly ask questions on viewers/listeners behalf, when one very well knows (given Dr. Moynihan's educated, holy, giving life) that Dr. Moynihan already knows the answer. Mr. Gaspers is as always, too, a wealth of knowledge and of a clear, consistent perspective; he is great. Though I always get the feeling if he ever really "let's go" of his very patient demeanor, you will get the full bandwidth of his prowess, lol! Thanks to all of you.
Great talk as always!❤️🙏
I know a family who has left the Church for the Eastern Orthodox-like jumping from the frying pan into the fire. The errors of Amortis Letitia came from the Eastern Orthodox!!
Deo gratias!
Sicily is wonderful. Went there on a 6 week trip. Saw Monreale, Erice, Selinute, the giant Greek temple ruins, Syracuse, Aetna, all the while with beautiful wildflowers in April.
it s real pleasure hear you
Wonderful discussion. Thank you all so very much. God bless your work in uniting the faith.
Love this❤
I used to believe in mutual enrichment of the 2 liturgies but that was before I started attending the TLM more than once a year. Now that I've been attending TLM exclusively for over a year, i understand these are two different liturgies entirely. The prayers are different - even in the Divine Office! With the TLM i finally WANT to be a better Catholic in a way i never did before. Return to Tradition!
Totally agree with Dr Kwasniewski that Latin in the Mass must remain sacrosanct. This does not in any way obstruct translation into any if the various world languages.
Yes, gentlemen, I share your observations about the problems which beset Catholicism (not to mention the rest of Christendom) over the past 60 plus years, but from the perspective of a deep believer growing up in a family of non-practicing (and often Christian-mocking, especially of Catholicism) Protestants. We lived in a neighborhood of practicing and faithful Catholics. The lack of catechism, however, among both parents and children of these Catholic families was readily apparent, even to my teenage sensibilities and understanding. Because I grew up in this context, now, as a convert to Catholicism, I've had the benefit of living the stark difference between Protestantism and Catholicism, and all of the attendant miss-apprehensions Protestants have toward Catholicism (which are alive and prevalent today and to which Protestants still cling) as well as those of faithful Catholics who didn't then and still don't know the very religion in which they were privileged to grow up. As a result, the corruption that has infiltrated the Church down to its marrow is all they (and non-Catholics alike) have been able to grasp and understand. It's a genuinely tragic state of affairs for all.
To throw away religion, as so much of our generation has done, is to throw away the very scaffolding upholding the foundation of right and moral (not to mention joyful) living, handed to us over the centuries by our Father. As a result, what I'm witnessing is that people are bereft, but have no idea why. They are moving through their lives in a state very similar to shell shock. I don't think that is over-stating the realities of it all. One of the greatest difficulties is that these suffering souls have no idea they've been engaged and immersed in a war all these years, and are therefore insensible to the nature and depths of their war wounds. I often wonder if the mindset of the collective is not unlike that of the people of Israel, in the darkest depths of their slavery, right before Moses liberated them. They obviously knew they were enslaved, but once liberated, even they had no notion of the extent of their own bondage, and how deeply it penetrated their entire ways of being.
Thank you all for all you do, it is such critical work. I pray for you daily. God Bless you.
The Apostles taught by what we call catechism. They repeated over and over the same truths until everyone was established in the message they taught. In 2 Peter 1:12-13 Peter says “I am continually recalling the same truths to you, even though you already know them and firmly hold them. Paul in Colossians 1:28-29 says ‘We thoroughly train and instruct everyone to make them all perfect in Christ. The result being that they turned the world upside down. The present conciliar church couldn’t turn a pancake. A one year cycle should be sufficient
Which is how I learnt Catechism throughout my school days.
"Timeless vs time bound."
That's it. No more arguments.
5:37 same happened with liberal arts education. Tradition thrown out replaced with whim
Amazon sells the "Red Booklet." That's how I got mine.
If they keep changing the liturgies and teachings, Catholicism could become just another denomination of Christianity.
Last week I prayed with two million lovers of God, hearing a liturgy entirely unchanged for a thousand years, with not the least sign of feminism or wokery or perverse desires. I was in Mecca.
The Novus Ordo is The Nauseous Ordo
My concern, is the readings from the scriptures being ...form want of a better word ...Diluted ....if it has the possibility 2 offend certain cultural sensitivities.
50:13 That defeats the fundamental unity that the Tridentine Rite provides & represents. The point is that anywhere in the state/province/country/world could walk into a CC & know exactly what was going on. It united Catholics all over the world in a very special way. Just as the Byzantine Catholics use ecclesiastical Greek. It is the sacred language of the church.
I don't know how much easier & accessible it can get when missals with Latin in one colum & vernacular translation is provided if one wishes to follow along.
Treating modern people like less than children who can't learn or adapt anything is ridiculous... especially as many languages are already descended from Latin. People would be surprised how much Latin they actually know from everyday language.
There is a very easy answer concerning Ratzinger. The man was a modernist through and through whose faith experience had more exposure to the one true faith than a man like Bergoglio. It is not reaspnable to consider Ratzinger a Catholic, let alone a Pope of the Catholic Church.
Dr. K visit Africa. We all agree its the most traditional place in the world, and they celebrate the Novus Ordo with great joy and love of Christ.
Before the Novus Ordo was implemented, Catholics had been participating in the traditional Mass for more than 1600 years with great joy and love of Christ.
@@Marcia-fw3wz You mean the Roman Rite?
@@Marcia-fw3wz In Sub-Saharan Africa? No that is not true. While Apostolic Christianity reached Ethiopia, Northern Sudan near Egyptian border and the Horn of Africa due to those areas having contact with Egypt, which had been Hellenized by Alexander the Great and part of the Roman empire just before the time of Christ, Apostolic Christianity never really effectively evangelized the West, Central, Eastern (non Horn) and South Africa really until the 20th century and most of that growth has happened post Vatican II when the Catholic Church allowed the Roman Missal of 1970 to be celebrated in the vernacular of the local languages so that the Catholic Church could evangelize head to head with the various protestant ecclesial communities who were using Sola Scriptura and having their worship services in the local languages.
@@matthewschmidt5069
I mean all 23 rites of the one Catholic Church, Eastern and Western. Protestants also celebrate their services with great reverence and love of Christ, but there are many variations of Protestant beliefs and practices, and only one, holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church. Besides, many Catholics in Africa are traditional, not Novus Ordo.
@@Marcia-fw3wz Cool. The Church can't harm us so I love the Missal of 1962 and Missal of 1970
Dr. Peter Kwasniewski: Regarding whether the Vatican II Council was Pastoral or Authoritative in its teaching (Dogmatic), Pope Paul VI stated:
"But one thing must be noted here, namely, that the teaching authority of the Church, even though not wishing to issue extraordinary dogmatic pronouncements, has made thoroughly known its authoritative teaching on a number of questions". (Address of Pope Paul VI at the Last General Meeting of the Second Vatican Council, 7 December 1965).
Accordingly, Vatican II must be considered dogmatic & authoritative.
Hence the conclusion of sedevacante.
For Vatican II and its interpretation and implementation created a religion incompatible with the Catholic faith (most obviously with respect to ecclesiology and religious liberty). Thus, the new religion, not being compatible with Catholicism cannot be a work of the Church (unless one wishes to say the Church is defectible).
Since the religion is not a work of the Church, the entity promulgating the religion cannot be the Catholic Church (for if it were so then the Catholic Church is not only capable of defecting but also never had the 4 marks of the Church essentially, only accidentally at best).
Therefore, the heads of this entity promulgating the new religion, which is notnthe Catholic faith, cannot simultaneously be the heads of this entity AND heads of the Catholic Church (unless, as some who wish to rethink the papacy, are willing to toss out the Church's teaching on the Papacy, especially Pastor Aeternus and say that a man need not be a member of the Catholic Church (see Mystici Corporis on the criteria) to be made or stay on as Pope)
How can so many of the Church's Magisterial teachings and practices for nearly 2000 years be so radically changed in such a short time, and still be considered authoritative without being divisive? That isn't what Jesus intended when He instituted the Church, and it sounds more Protestant than Catholic.
Your conclusion is illogical.
No, there are 3 levels of Magisterial teaching 1) Infallible Magisterium, which can be exercised A) ex cathedra or B) by Supreme Magesterium of the Pope in union with all the Bishops via an Ecumenical Council, which Vatican II very effectively harmonized the Conciliar view that had been hanging around since the Council of Constance (1414-1418) and Haec Sancta which stated a Council could be > than the Pope. Vatican II said while a Pope is not > than a Council, a Council can't be greater than the Pope either, 2) Ordinary Magisterium and 3) Authoritative Magisterium.
Authoritative Magisterium is a valid exercise of the Papal Magesterium and while it requires the faithful the give Assent of the Mind and Will, Authoritative teachings are in fact non binding. Now, that does not mean I should go to my local Parish and create schism by rejecting Vatican II. However, one can hold that a future Council (Vatican III) could review the texts of Vatican II and rewrite them, amend some and actually throw some out. So the Church could go back and revisit the Liturgy again and Reform it and that would be perfectly within a future Pope's authority and would not invalidate anything in Vatican II since it be what Pope Paul VI said, there was nothing Dogmatic in it.
@@Marcia-fw3wz
Bugnini sleight of hand, allowed by Paul VI.
They will not fix the mass even in generations since neither the old mass nor the new are what was supposed to develop and the parties for the old mass are stuck in 1960 something and the parties in the new mass are stuck in 1984 Orwellian style. Plus, the new mass can be celebrated/offered in quite beautiful and inspiring ways, even though it often is done poorly.
I was there when they essentially destroyed the mass in the sense that they had less than zero regard for the centuries old lived Catholic sensibilities and norms at mass and at church itself. The "new" mass originally had some Latin in it, gone was chant, and from that it went further afield into the cold; over the years there has been some recovery with the words, including the Confiteor, and with your spirit, and also the prayer of the centurion, along with "consubstantial" - they still have problem with the use of "men" in some prayers preferring "people". Men will return as the awakening to people on other planets will mean the definition of man and men will take on much more important meanings, as will the incarnation and the humanity of the Savior. The appreciation for God as God and His immense gift to mankind will be more amazing and more profound as we uncover the vastness of the universe and our smallness in it. But I digress.
Keeping the outer space theme, let me say, that NO forced return or edict by any pope or council will bring about proper and needed reform in the new mass, nor the very much needed evolution in the old mass. Neither forms are what they should be, and that is not admitted by anyone I have heard, least of all here.
The old mass is NOT it, the new mass is NOT it, there IS a problem.
The first step, don't hold your breath for it, is an admission by the highest leaders of the church, pope included, that the "reform" of the mass was actually an abuse of the people of God in the WAY it was done, and in the outcomes. The continuing lax practices of the rite are shameful, the loss of the sense of the sacred is a grave wound, the ripping out and sanitizing every sweet thing was and is criminal. The people are now used to this poorly executed ham-handed liturgy which is under constant attack as a play thing for whomever is in charge of the music and such other committees of whichever Orwellian organ one wishes to consider.
Nonetheless, the lifeboat for some in the old mass is NOT the ship either they nor others need to be in as we should ALL await the mass that is neither the old nor the new, but an improved mass in which the crustations, and there are crustations, of the old are removed, and in which the informality and experimentation of the new are removed.
The way forward is indeed a "new" mass. At this point such is not possible because fans of the old mass are super locked into it, usually, and have developed a habit of denigrating basically anything new. Those in the new mass do not have any concept of what was lost, what might be gained, and have near zero familiarity with Latin and are unlikely to "put up with it", for them the old mass is a trip to Mars. I think it is a reach to assume, as was suggested, that "after a few times" they will settle in, as though it is an acquired taste, that is a big assumption, which he bases on his captive children, he mistakes the cultural situations that exist. Besides, the good doctor, it seems to me, is himself locked into his way in such a way that he, at least to me thinks the old mass is just fine. Well I was there in the old days, and no it is not just fine, it just is NOT.
So, don't hold your breath, don't get locked into a liturgical box, nor for that matter a Jesuit box of any kind. As for papal pronouncements and infallibility- Franky is the Genessis of a whole new theological self-inflicted crisis of "making a mess" - which, in my mind, long long after I and anyone reading this is dead, will be sorted out, and at that point it is moot, and may as well be taken that way now if one gets smart and decides he should start living in eternity now as opposed to the navel gazing moment of men in skirts, popes in gardens with statues from the Amazon and fat-bottomed morons kneeling before it, or even contradictory "teachings' with space aliens supposedly doing their own Naval-gazing while the Navy gazes back.
You can't write this stuff, and then we have Akita. Ever notice how God speaks softly and if you don't listen you miss it? I mean He's a one-on-one God, person to person, not usually a Madison Avenue intervention. So, live in eternity and the eternal now as best you can while being in the passing now.
Countless Catholics disagree, the Tridentine Rite didn't need any changes. No one asked for the changes that were heaped upon our churches & it's removal decimated entire swaths of Catholic areas. They(we) thought the church had been sold to a different "sect", it was an unnecessary, unmitigated disaster for those who lived through it & countless who found out that what was supposed to be their Sacred Heritage had been taken from them.
It's no wonder why the CC has & is hemorrhaging members to Orthodoxy, which uses ecclesiastical Greek & some Latin, & is proud of it. They cherish their Divine Liturgy & it's passing on to future generations, while Catholics are stuck wallowing in an entirely manufactured "crisis" for 60+ years.
@@Vexx_Line_ Indeed there was damage to the people of God by the changes made in the mass. Nonetheless, changes were and are needed in that form of the mass, but not as drastic as those that occurred.
I know of no hemorrhage of Catholics to churches in the east, it would make no sense since to do so is to be far more not Catholic than the allegations against the new mass.
I think it far more accurate, however, to say that scandal brings division and there is indeed much scandal within the Catholic Church which has contributed to confusion, alienation and people leaving.
prevalent