A brilliant, insightful and eloquent exegesis of Modernism versus Traditionalism and its foundational role in the current crisis of the Church. When I get into arguments over particular issues in the Church today with liberal Catholics - from the TLM versus the NO to gender roles to sacred architecture to the Vatican China deal to whatever the latest bad move made by Mr Bergoglio is - I just stop midway into the conversation and say, allright... let's talk the real issue... Modernism versus orthodoxy. We won't agree, but at least we start to have a real argument about causes rather than effects.
I am a catechumen entering the church, and I must admit to feeling upset and confused as I learned more about Vatican II and the Crisis in the church. I also saw firsthand eucharistic abuses and religious indifferentism at my local novus ordo parish. All of this made me doubt if Catholicism really was Christs church. Thanks to your videos and others I now feel like I have a pathway to holding on to the true Catholic faith while rejecting modern errors. You made me realize that the church doesn't have to be this way, we can remain faithful to what has been handed down for centuries. Thank you and God Bless.
Deo gratias that I have been able to help you in this way. Your final statement is a perfect expression of the truth: "the church doesn't have to be this way, we can remain faithful to what has been handed down for centuries." And it is a great honor that God has chosen us and called us to do exactly this at this difficult time.
I'm sorry you experienced that. In my country, I've not experienced that. Very reverent and beautiful and blessed that I've had good faithful Priests. Especially during the Sacrament of Eucharist.
@@c.Ichthys I was confirmed into the church last easter! Now I go to a beautiful TLM in a small parish in the country since Traditiones Custodes cancelled the TLM in my hometown.
I’ve tried reading Pascendi before. Easily the most dense text I’ve ever picked up. St. Pope Pius X and his assistants were no slouches. They were prescient, erudite scholars formed in the greatest intellectual tradition in world history. No sociological think tank could hold a candle to the crack team of scholars in the papal court of Pius X. They knew exactly what they were dealing with.
Peter Kwasniewski please look at the role of Postmodernism/Post-structuralism in our church, or be instrumental in setting up a multi-disciplinary group studying this praxis, "the how of the what", please! I will briefly illustrate why po mo is the second grindstone on top of the modernist first, grinding us down relentlessly, for so many generations now. Over your shoulder as you lectured we saw Sandro Botticelli's sublime Madonna and Child with the Young John the Baptist, this picture would melt the hardest of hearts. now contrast it to the debased values of the contemporary art world, demonstrated in any random piece, and we now have a picture painting a thousand words of what we have lost. Having spent 3 years enduring formal art theory indoctrination, which gave me a lifelong fascination for forensically picking apart the whole edifice of modernist and pomo lies, I have no bafflement or demoralisation over what is happening in our precious church, as the art world is continuously illustrating what is buried in screeds of dense obscurantist texts that the Church issues. It even explains the architectural ugliness foisted upon us which crushes the soul. The pachamama goddess of destruction, the smudging ceremonies of shamanism, are justifiable under pomo, it is a tacit signal that there are no more metanarratives, just intertextuality, death of god and the death of the author. Translation: there is no more ultimate good, just a marxist struggle of ideas and subjective interpretation. I will play this lecture over many times for my pleasure and education, thank you for the gift, however l believe that naturally being outraged is wearing many of us down. Following on from the conclusion of the quote "the smoke (as in smokescreen) of Satan has now entered the church", perhaps we should scornfully dismiss in turn their disdainful slurs like "hysterical rigid protestant" for instance, as being a simplistic name calling designed to demoralise, as they are just projections, or just plain acting the goat. They are a lofty refusal to engage. Which foreshadows tyranny.
The Heavenly Father exhorts: "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. HEAR HIM!" [Matt 17: 5]. His own Mother entreats: "Do whatever He tells you." [John 2: 5]. Jesus is the One to hear and obey, NOT the modernists.
Funny that the Novus Ordo church never speaks of Modernism, yet one bishop on Catholic Answers Live said "the Modernists WON at Vatican II..." I heard this as it occurred and there was ZERO response to that bold admission by the CA host. I tried looking for that interview which is on UA-cam however, I wonder if that statement was deleted.
One often hears it said that the Modernists were wrong in their method or in the radicality of their positions, but that they perceived some defects that needed to be remedied and had some good ideas. Presumably the bishop who said they won meant that, via the nouvelle theologie, the "true ideas" and "good intentions" of the Modernists prevailed at Vatican II. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but only that it's likely to be what the bishop meant.
Great speech. Only one clarification: John XXIII was not a devout traditional Pope who had the bad idea of summoning a Council and was surprised by the modernist revolution. The Council was summoned only to implement the revolution and John XXIII was aware and part of the plan to deliver this revolution. Read "the undermining of the Catholic Church"
I recognize there were problems with John XXIII. Nevertheless, we must also recognize that he was cut from traditional cloth, so to speak. www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/03/remembering-real-john-xxiii.html www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/04/john-xxiii-in-his-own-words-2-mass-and.html www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/04/john-xxiii-in-his-own-words-3-devotion.html www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/04/john-xxiii-in-his-own-words-4-defense.html
Recently, I had a written "back and forth" with Bishop Barron - as I noticed that in a couple of instances, he was not using the word "REASONABLE" - as in "We can have a REASONABLE hope that all men are saved". I was hoping that he was rethinking - or at least softening his position. I think that his response to me (below) is very dangerous to the souls of many - along with other statements which he has made. His statement defies Scripture. I don't think that he should be promoted in any way at this time . Please note his use of the words "grounded ", "warranted ", etc. This was his response: Bishop Robert Barron ".. And no, I haven't changed my mind in regard to the reasonability of our hope. I have explained again and again that I mean our hope is grounded, warranted, not merely a wild hope against hope."
His age. Both of them, on reflection. With modern medicine people are living longer. Perhaps much longer than they can serve as pontiff. These are real issues we have to deal with. I’m not knowledgeable about these Vatican matters but what are the plans in place should one get too old / infirm / lack capacity (ie severe stroke) to serve as pontiff? Do we actually have them? If not, shouldn’t we? Because I’m not completely certain our one there right now is fully there. I really don’t know hence the question.
The person who was supposed to show up with a tripod failed to show up, so a poor young lady had to sit and hold her camera the entire time. I felt sorry for her arm! God bless her.
I don't know. I remain unconvinced that Ratzinger was wrong in his synthesis RotR approach. As you said, reform in the church is often in fits and starts like during the counter-reformation. Modernism, of course, is a very different foe, and like you said pervades the church, sickening it from within. So it's to be expected that there will be struggles internally for quite some time. I live in a diocese where the TLM and even ad orientem are suppressed, but I see this as temporary. In a way, it is a good exercise in the virtue of obedience. Even TC doesn't contradict Vatican II. There are folks out here that do lean toward a prideful disobedience justified by a defense of Tradition. Perhaps TC is meant to ferret them out? I do think it's clear that the NO is here to stay, but that the rite will be reformed with perhaps a Novus Ordo Missae of 2035 or 2050 looking much more like a 1962/1970 hybrid of some sort. What am I missing?
JMJ+ I think you are missing quite a lot. It might be helpful to you to listen to the seminars by Fr. Gregory Hesse. Vatican II was never something to be obeyed as Dogma. Even Pope Paul VI said it was going to cause such a disaster within and without of the Church that we might not recover from it. And yet, he pushed it forward anyway with the hope of changing it. Unfortunately, he died by dubious means, prior to that occurrence.... Those who ignore the Commandments of GOD ALMIGHTY, the complete teaching of JESUS CHRIST, the prayers and Sacraments that JESUS instituted, and work to destroy the Deposit of Faith along with its people are responsible for teaching far too many that Hell is a good place....you will like it. How many souls have been lost between the excommunication of Martin Luther and your proposed 2050? The Novus Ordo is not a new Mass. It's a sure fire way to lose one's Supernatural Faith and one's soul, which actually belongs to GOD, in what is not a Mass in which GOD is offering GOD to GOD. It is a new religion in which man is worshiped, not GOD. If you listen and research a bit more, you will find that the whole Sacrament has been gutted and Consecration of the Host is seldom accomplished. Therefore, as JESUS said, few will find HIS Way, HIS Truth, and HIS Life. That gathering, becomes both invalid and illicit. What I'm telling you is true, but you should not merely accept what I say. You need to go back, read the actual documents, search the Catechism of Trent and / or Baltimore, and listen those who were actually present at the council, and other conferences. That is the only way to intellectually form your conscience. You must be prepared to accept some very hard truths....just as JESUS said, and St. Peter, himself, had trouble coming to terms with. GOD bless, Mary keep, and St. Joseph protect you. amen
I recommend reading “Work of Human Hands” and “The Destruction of the Roman Rite” You will discover that the NO was fabricated in 1969 by a committee with the intent to replace Catholic with Protestant doctrine and theology. The innovators believed the Mass was CORRUPTED. They admitted all these in writing and speech, and were very open about it. Why this happened is the question. Did God abandon His Church for 2K years only to rescue it in 1969, or did He permit us - like the prodigal son - to wander into darkness (i.e. to have our will) to teach us a lesson.
Any and all Clergy, who Sexually Abused, Covered Up or Ignored said Abuse, even at the direction or suggestion of his superior officer, is Guilty of Failing to be a Father and of hiding in Cowardice behind Obedience, turned into a False Idol, which is thought to Save one from Judgement, but merely renders one a Willing Accomplice.
I would recommend reading my forthcoming book from TAN, which goes more deeply into your questions. tanbooks.com/products/books/tan-books/coming-soon/the-once-and-future-roman-rite-returning-to-the-traditional-latin-liturgy-after-seventy-years-of-exile/
I recommend to persons interested in the topic of this video that you take a look at the Wikipedia item entitled Modernism in the Catholic Church. Why get stuck with a one-sided UA-cam video? (Top) Dimensions of the controversy over modernism Terminology History of the modernist controversy Toggle History of the modernist controversy subsection Pre-history: 19th century intellectual ferment The beginning of the modernist controversy under Leo XIII Marie-Joseph Lagrange Duchesne and Loisy The climax of the controversy under Pius X In America Post-history in the 20th and 21st centuries Notable persons involved in the Modernist controversy In popular culture See also References Bibliography External links Modernism in the Catholic Church
@@dannydoj Is the faith really reduced to mere words on a page? That's pretty sad. Even so, what about Fratelli Tutti? It's humanism that has officially entered into the ordinary universal magesterium. Or Nostra Aetate and all the ecumenism with non-Catholics which is a clear contradiction with pre-VII Catholicism? Muslims worship the same God as Roman Catholics despite denying Christ is God? They don't worship the Trinity - but rather a Unitarian false god. An Antichrist religion does not adore the one true God - Rome says they do (clearly an error). Or how about Dignitatis Humanae - another clear contradiction with pre-VII Catholicism that can only be remedied with mental gymnastics? All of this must be accepted by all with their full intellect and will whether one agrees with it or not. As Pope Pius IX said, "I am Tradition." Who are lay people to question the Pope's judgment of Tradition when he himself is the living embodiment of it?
Indefectibility means that the Magisterium has never formally and unequivocally embraced and enforced heresy or vice on the faithful. That's the minimal definition and it is not hard to defend. A maximalist notion of indefectibility, on the other hand, is impossible to defend at this point.
@@DrKwasniewski Thank you for your reply. I personally think that the Council of Florence, Vatican I, and Vatican II are manifestly heretical relative to the 1st millennium. However, I do think that within the 2nd millennium paradigm of the Latin Church, it is possible to explain away anything and every difficulty with technical nuances and distinctions in terminology. The problem with this is that we humans are so good at rationalizing away error, especially under the coercive pressure of “submit [to heterodoxy] or you’re in mortal sin and will be damned” - an existential gun to your head. Consequently, one is forced to rationalize away the discontinuities between various periods in history like: pre-Gregorian Reforms and post-Gregorian Reforms, before communing infants and after banning them from Communion, before leavened bread and after unleavened bread, before opposing the filioque in the Creed [in Rome] and after accepting the filioque in the Creed, pre-Renaissance and post-Renaissance (scholastic moral theology and art), and pre-Vatican I and post-Vatican I (papal mythology), and pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II (the enthronement of modernism). The reality is that Rome has been modernist for far longer than merely the last 60 years, but more like 1000 years. That doesn’t mean it’s all bad - there have been many holy and pious individual Roman Catholics. But the Roman See desperately needs to come back in communion with the Catholic Church of the Orthodox Faith or she’ll continue down this path of going from one novelty to the next until she’s absolutely unrecognizable (i.e. if she isn’t there already). Even then, she will still have apologists to defend her. I get it, but at some point one needs to call a spade-a-spade.
Illya2 ... see here, this is how much I didn’t know, I thought the fact the communion host was unleavened was a practical issue and not a doctrinal one (less fluffy and more compact, like a biscuit). When you look at the gospels, clearly 3 of them are seders and John is not. I had no idea about this, nor the other reforms, 1. Where can I formally look this up (easy digestible, preferably objective source). 2. I have heard about heliocentricity being declared heretical. Was this ever the case? I don’t mean to sound “modern”, I suspect my generation of critical thinking probably is the result of the church being what it is now (secular, profane) but *surely there is some balance* ? I don’t know, I really don’t know anymore except that it hurts.
Nope , not true. The errors of Men , be it the Pope , or any of the Catholic Clergy , cannot touch the Divine nature of Christ Jesus Truth , HIS Catholic Church . However, those Men who are deceptive within their Clerical positions , will answer to God .
You make the error of assuming the Church = bishops & popes. The Church is NOT its hierarchy. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ of which YOU too are a member. YOU are the Church. YOU can and must make the difference.
Great talk. Probably needs to be seen more. I am ignorant of many things and I would like to know what I don’t know. C time stamp 40 mins. I was under the impression that killing was always wrong from the Ten Commandments. Were you implying it was ever right? The action in it of itself, I would have thought, like the moloch ritual is always wrong?
The problem is, someone was supposed to show up with a tripod, and he failed to show. So this poor young lady was left holding the phone the entire time. As I recall, that's what happened.
No wonder I felt my hands got tired too 🤣 If that's a young lady then that's all good. I just imagined an overweight dude out of breath just by holding the camera. Thanks for the video.
This is very confusing to me. Are you accusing Francis of heresy in Amoris Lætitia and on the death penalty? Is this compatible with Vatican I and papal infallibility? And are you also accusing an ecumenical council of being heretical, or at the very least destructive?
That Francis is responsible for propounding erroneous opinions (which are at least materially heretical) is argued in detail and rigorously in two books: aroucapress.com/defending-the-faith www.amazon.com/Road-Hyperpapalism-Catholicism-Disintegration-Chronological/dp/1990685129 This is certainly compatible with Vatican I: www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2017/02/peter-says-no onepeterfive.com/disputed-questions-on-papal-infallibility-part-1/ onepeterfive.com/spirit-vatican-one-post-revolutionary-political-problem/
A brilliant, insightful and eloquent exegesis of Modernism versus Traditionalism and its foundational role in the current crisis of the Church. When I get into arguments over particular issues in the Church today with liberal Catholics - from the TLM versus the NO to gender roles to sacred architecture to the Vatican China deal to whatever the latest bad move made by Mr Bergoglio is - I just stop midway into the conversation and say, allright... let's talk the real issue... Modernism versus orthodoxy. We won't agree, but at least we start to have a real argument about causes rather than effects.
Thank you, Dr. K!
Best Catholic channel on UA-cam. Pascendi basically describes the current state of the Church
EXCELLENT SUMMARY OF MODERNISM WHICH IS BASED ON AGNOSTICISM (AND ULTIMATELY ATHEISM).
I am a catechumen entering the church, and I must admit to feeling upset and confused as I learned more about Vatican II and the Crisis in the church. I also saw firsthand eucharistic abuses and religious indifferentism at my local novus ordo parish. All of this made me doubt if Catholicism really was Christs church. Thanks to your videos and others I now feel like I have a pathway to holding on to the true Catholic faith while rejecting modern errors. You made me realize that the church doesn't have to be this way, we can remain faithful to what has been handed down for centuries. Thank you and God Bless.
Deo gratias that I have been able to help you in this way. Your final statement is a perfect expression of the truth: "the church doesn't have to be this way, we can remain faithful to what has been handed down for centuries." And it is a great honor that God has chosen us and called us to do exactly this at this difficult time.
I'm sorry you experienced that. In my country, I've not experienced that. Very reverent and beautiful and blessed that I've had good faithful Priests. Especially during the Sacrament of Eucharist.
@@c.Ichthys I was confirmed into the church last easter! Now I go to a beautiful TLM in a small parish in the country since Traditiones Custodes cancelled the TLM in my hometown.
@@Numenorean921 welcome "home" and God bless you.
Thank you for your words. A very useful lecture which i shall ponder. I do not wish to be a modernist in any way at all.
I’ve tried reading Pascendi before. Easily the most dense text I’ve ever picked up. St. Pope Pius X and his assistants were no slouches. They were prescient, erudite scholars formed in the greatest intellectual tradition in world history. No sociological think tank could hold a candle to the crack team of scholars in the papal court of Pius X. They knew exactly what they were dealing with.
Thanks Dr K. I appreciate your work.
Thanks for watching!
Humility and Honesty are Fraternal Twins, walking together, Arm in Arm.
"HEAVEN AND EARTH WILL PASS AWAY, BUT MY WORD WILL NOT PASS AWAY" [Matt 24: 35] DOES NOT SOUND LIKE "EVOLVING" TRUTH!
Peter Kwasniewski please look at the role of Postmodernism/Post-structuralism in our church, or be instrumental in setting up a multi-disciplinary group studying this praxis, "the how of the what", please!
I will briefly illustrate why po mo is the second grindstone on top of the modernist first, grinding us down relentlessly, for so many generations now. Over your shoulder as you lectured we saw Sandro Botticelli's sublime Madonna and Child with the Young John the Baptist, this picture would melt the hardest of hearts. now contrast it to the debased values of the contemporary art world, demonstrated in any random piece, and we now have a picture painting a thousand words of what we have lost.
Having spent 3 years enduring formal art theory indoctrination, which gave me a lifelong fascination for forensically picking apart the whole edifice of modernist and pomo lies, I have no bafflement or demoralisation over what is happening in our precious church, as the art world is continuously illustrating what is buried in screeds of dense obscurantist texts that the Church issues. It even explains the architectural ugliness foisted upon us which crushes the soul.
The pachamama goddess of destruction, the smudging ceremonies of shamanism, are justifiable under pomo, it is a tacit signal that there are no more metanarratives, just intertextuality, death of god and the death of the author.
Translation: there is no more ultimate good, just a marxist struggle of ideas and subjective interpretation.
I will play this lecture over many times for my pleasure and education, thank you for the gift, however l believe that naturally being outraged is wearing many of us down.
Following on from the conclusion of the quote "the smoke (as in smokescreen) of Satan has now entered the church", perhaps we should scornfully dismiss in turn their disdainful slurs like "hysterical rigid protestant" for instance, as being a simplistic name calling designed to demoralise, as they are just projections, or just plain acting the goat. They are a lofty refusal to engage. Which foreshadows tyranny.
Wonderful talk; well written and spoken and - unfortunately - quite on point.
Every Catholic needs to her this!FIAT FIAT FIAT
Wonderful clarity. Thanks.
What a great talk! Congratulations!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you for this excellent talk! May God bless you!
Thanks for listening.
God Bless. ✝️
The Heavenly Father exhorts: "This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased. HEAR HIM!" [Matt 17: 5]. His own Mother entreats: "Do whatever He tells you." [John 2: 5]. Jesus is the One to hear and obey, NOT the modernists.
That's what I loved about the Faith. It was so reasonable.
It still is; yet one will not find the reasonableness in the progressives and modernists.
Excellent. A great speech to have in the back pocket.
Excelente
Very good.
Funny that the Novus Ordo church never speaks of Modernism, yet one bishop on Catholic Answers Live said "the Modernists WON at Vatican II..." I heard this as it occurred and there was ZERO response to that bold admission by the CA host. I tried looking for that interview which is on UA-cam however, I wonder if that statement was deleted.
One often hears it said that the Modernists were wrong in their method or in the radicality of their positions, but that they perceived some defects that needed to be remedied and had some good ideas. Presumably the bishop who said they won meant that, via the nouvelle theologie, the "true ideas" and "good intentions" of the Modernists prevailed at Vatican II. I'm not saying that's a good thing, but only that it's likely to be what the bishop meant.
In the book of Joel chapter 2: 25-32, God alone restores not man.
The Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ.
Prots seething is always so sweet to see
Protestant Opposition and Rebellion, as opposed to Modernist Subversion and Betrayal. Luther V. Loisy.
Great speech. Only one clarification: John XXIII was not a devout traditional Pope who had the bad idea of summoning a Council and was surprised by the modernist revolution. The Council was summoned only to implement the revolution and John XXIII was aware and part of the plan to deliver this revolution. Read "the undermining of the Catholic Church"
Wrong. Angelo Roncalli was naive not nefarious. He was a holy man who never wanted doctrine and morals to change as he stated a number of times.
I recognize there were problems with John XXIII. Nevertheless, we must also recognize that he was cut from traditional cloth, so to speak.
www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/03/remembering-real-john-xxiii.html
www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/04/john-xxiii-in-his-own-words-2-mass-and.html
www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/04/john-xxiii-in-his-own-words-3-devotion.html
www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/04/john-xxiii-in-his-own-words-4-defense.html
@@dannydoj roncalli was a freemason in the french grand orient who was already practicing ecumenism in orthodox Bulgaria and Muslim turkey.
Recently, I had a written "back and forth" with Bishop Barron - as I noticed that in a couple of instances, he was not using the word "REASONABLE" - as in "We can have a REASONABLE hope that all men are saved". I was hoping that he was rethinking - or at least softening his position.
I think that his response to me (below) is very dangerous to the souls of many - along with other statements which he has made. His statement defies Scripture. I don't think that he should be promoted in any way at this time . Please note his use of the words "grounded ", "warranted ", etc. This was his response:
Bishop Robert Barron
".. And no, I haven't changed my mind in regard to the reasonability of our hope. I have explained again and again that I mean our hope is grounded, warranted, not merely a wild hope against hope."
Black red lavender
Benedict must be a Modernist since he does nothing to stop Francis.
He's getting close to a hundred years old
His age.
Both of them, on reflection.
With modern medicine people are living longer.
Perhaps much longer than they can serve as pontiff.
These are real issues we have to deal with.
I’m not knowledgeable about these Vatican matters but what are the plans in place should one get too old / infirm / lack capacity (ie severe stroke) to serve as pontiff?
Do we actually have them? If not, shouldn’t we? Because I’m not completely certain our one there right now is fully there.
I really don’t know hence the question.
excellent speaker, but lousy cameraman. Makes me dizzy trying to watch it and it keeps moving around.
The person who was supposed to show up with a tripod failed to show up, so a poor young lady had to sit and hold her camera the entire time. I felt sorry for her arm! God bless her.
I don't know. I remain unconvinced that Ratzinger was wrong in his synthesis RotR approach. As you said, reform in the church is often in fits and starts like during the counter-reformation. Modernism, of course, is a very different foe, and like you said pervades the church, sickening it from within. So it's to be expected that there will be struggles internally for quite some time. I live in a diocese where the TLM and even ad orientem are suppressed, but I see this as temporary. In a way, it is a good exercise in the virtue of obedience. Even TC doesn't contradict Vatican II. There are folks out here that do lean toward a prideful disobedience justified by a defense of Tradition. Perhaps TC is meant to ferret them out? I do think it's clear that the NO is here to stay, but that the rite will be reformed with perhaps a Novus Ordo Missae of 2035 or 2050 looking much more like a 1962/1970 hybrid of some sort. What am I missing?
The future belongs to God, not us mere mortals. In hoc signo vinces ✝
JMJ+ I think you are missing quite a lot. It might be helpful to you to listen to the seminars by Fr. Gregory Hesse. Vatican II was never something to be obeyed as Dogma. Even Pope Paul VI said it was going to cause such a disaster within and without of the Church that we might not recover from it. And yet, he pushed it forward anyway with the hope of changing it. Unfortunately, he died by dubious means, prior to that occurrence.... Those who ignore the Commandments of GOD ALMIGHTY, the complete teaching of JESUS CHRIST, the prayers and Sacraments that JESUS instituted, and work to destroy the Deposit of Faith along with its people are responsible for teaching far too many that Hell is a good place....you will like it. How many souls have been lost between the excommunication of Martin Luther and your proposed 2050? The Novus Ordo is not a new Mass. It's a sure fire way to lose one's Supernatural Faith and one's soul, which actually belongs to GOD, in what is not a Mass in which GOD is offering GOD to GOD. It is a new religion in which man is worshiped, not GOD. If you listen and research a bit more, you will find that the whole Sacrament has been gutted and Consecration of the Host is seldom accomplished. Therefore, as JESUS said, few will find HIS Way, HIS Truth, and HIS Life. That gathering, becomes both invalid and illicit. What I'm telling you is true, but you should not merely accept what I say. You need to go back, read the actual documents, search the Catechism of Trent and / or Baltimore, and listen those who were actually present at the council, and other conferences. That is the only way to intellectually form your conscience. You must be prepared to accept some very hard truths....just as JESUS said, and St. Peter, himself, had trouble coming to terms with. GOD bless, Mary keep, and St. Joseph protect you. amen
I recommend reading “Work of Human Hands” and “The Destruction of the Roman Rite” You will discover that the NO was fabricated in 1969 by a committee with the intent to replace Catholic with Protestant doctrine and theology. The innovators believed the Mass was CORRUPTED. They admitted all these in writing and speech, and were very open about it. Why this happened is the question. Did God abandon His Church for 2K years only to rescue it in 1969, or did He permit us - like the prodigal son - to wander into darkness (i.e. to have our will) to teach us a lesson.
Any and all Clergy, who Sexually Abused, Covered Up or Ignored said Abuse, even at the direction or suggestion of his superior officer, is Guilty of Failing to be a Father and of hiding in Cowardice behind Obedience, turned into a False Idol, which is thought to Save one from Judgement, but merely renders one a Willing Accomplice.
I would recommend reading my forthcoming book from TAN, which goes more deeply into your questions.
tanbooks.com/products/books/tan-books/coming-soon/the-once-and-future-roman-rite-returning-to-the-traditional-latin-liturgy-after-seventy-years-of-exile/
I recommend to persons interested in the topic of this video that you take a look at the Wikipedia item entitled Modernism in the Catholic Church. Why get stuck with a one-sided UA-cam video?
(Top)
Dimensions of the controversy over modernism
Terminology
History of the modernist controversy
Toggle History of the modernist controversy subsection
Pre-history: 19th century intellectual ferment
The beginning of the modernist controversy under Leo XIII
Marie-Joseph Lagrange
Duchesne and Loisy
The climax of the controversy under Pius X
In America
Post-history in the 20th and 21st centuries
Notable persons involved in the Modernist controversy
In popular culture
See also
References
Bibliography
External links
Modernism in the Catholic Church
I don't mind anyone reading more about the subject. Never said my presentation was comprehensive.
If Rome has embraced modernism, doesn’t this invalidate a Church that claims it’s indefectible?
No formal heresy has been declared at Rome.
@@dannydoj Is the faith really reduced to mere words on a page? That's pretty sad. Even so, what about Fratelli Tutti? It's humanism that has officially entered into the ordinary universal magesterium. Or Nostra Aetate and all the ecumenism with non-Catholics which is a clear contradiction with pre-VII Catholicism? Muslims worship the same God as Roman Catholics despite denying Christ is God? They don't worship the Trinity - but rather a Unitarian false god. An Antichrist religion does not adore the one true God - Rome says they do (clearly an error). Or how about Dignitatis Humanae - another clear contradiction with pre-VII Catholicism that can only be remedied with mental gymnastics? All of this must be accepted by all with their full intellect and will whether one agrees with it or not. As Pope Pius IX said, "I am Tradition." Who are lay people to question the Pope's judgment of Tradition when he himself is the living embodiment of it?
Indefectibility means that the Magisterium has never formally and unequivocally embraced and enforced heresy or vice on the faithful. That's the minimal definition and it is not hard to defend. A maximalist notion of indefectibility, on the other hand, is impossible to defend at this point.
@@DrKwasniewski Thank you for your reply. I personally think that the Council of Florence, Vatican I, and Vatican II are manifestly heretical relative to the 1st millennium. However, I do think that within the 2nd millennium paradigm of the Latin Church, it is possible to explain away anything and every difficulty with technical nuances and distinctions in terminology. The problem with this is that we humans are so good at rationalizing away error, especially under the coercive pressure of “submit [to heterodoxy] or you’re in mortal sin and will be damned” - an existential gun to your head. Consequently, one is forced to rationalize away the discontinuities between various periods in history like: pre-Gregorian Reforms and post-Gregorian Reforms, before communing infants and after banning them from Communion, before leavened bread and after unleavened bread, before opposing the filioque in the Creed [in Rome] and after accepting the filioque in the Creed, pre-Renaissance and post-Renaissance (scholastic moral theology and art), and pre-Vatican I and post-Vatican I (papal mythology), and pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II (the enthronement of modernism). The reality is that Rome has been modernist for far longer than merely the last 60 years, but more like 1000 years. That doesn’t mean it’s all bad - there have been many holy and pious individual Roman Catholics. But the Roman See desperately needs to come back in communion with the Catholic Church of the Orthodox Faith or she’ll continue down this path of going from one novelty to the next until she’s absolutely unrecognizable (i.e. if she isn’t there already). Even then, she will still have apologists to defend her. I get it, but at some point one needs to call a spade-a-spade.
Illya2 ...
see here, this is how much I didn’t know, I thought the fact the communion host was unleavened was a practical issue and not a doctrinal one (less fluffy and more compact, like a biscuit).
When you look at the gospels, clearly 3 of them are seders and John is not.
I had no idea about this, nor the other reforms,
1. Where can I formally look this up (easy digestible, preferably objective source).
2. I have heard about heliocentricity being declared heretical. Was this ever the case?
I don’t mean to sound “modern”, I suspect my generation of critical thinking probably is the result of the church being what it is now (secular, profane) but *surely there is some balance* ?
I don’t know, I really don’t know anymore except that it hurts.
False bishops, false pope, false, end-times, counterfeit church
Nope , not true.
The errors of Men , be it the Pope , or any of the Catholic Clergy , cannot touch the Divine nature of Christ Jesus Truth , HIS Catholic Church .
However, those Men who are deceptive within their Clerical positions , will answer to God .
You make the error of assuming the Church = bishops & popes. The Church is NOT its hierarchy. The Church is the Mystical Body of Christ of which YOU too are a member. YOU are the Church. YOU can and must make the difference.
Great talk. Probably needs to be seen more.
I am ignorant of many things and I would like to know what I don’t know. C time stamp 40 mins.
I was under the impression that killing was always wrong from the Ten Commandments.
Were you implying it was ever right?
The action in it of itself, I would have thought, like the moloch ritual is always wrong?
The sixth commandment in English should really read, "Thou shalt not murder". Which is not exactly synonymous with, "Thou shalt not kill".
@@-GodIsMyJudge- what’s the Hebrew verb?
What kind of cameraman is that? A great video ruined by a horrible camera work
The problem is, someone was supposed to show up with a tripod, and he failed to show. So this poor young lady was left holding the phone the entire time. As I recall, that's what happened.
No wonder I felt my hands got tired too 🤣 If that's a young lady then that's all good. I just imagined an overweight dude out of breath just by holding the camera. Thanks for the video.
This is very confusing to me. Are you accusing Francis of heresy in Amoris Lætitia and on the death penalty? Is this compatible with Vatican I and papal infallibility? And are you also accusing an ecumenical council of being heretical, or at the very least destructive?
That Francis is responsible for propounding erroneous opinions (which are at least materially heretical) is argued in detail and rigorously in two books:
aroucapress.com/defending-the-faith
www.amazon.com/Road-Hyperpapalism-Catholicism-Disintegration-Chronological/dp/1990685129
This is certainly compatible with Vatican I:
www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2017/02/peter-says-no
onepeterfive.com/disputed-questions-on-papal-infallibility-part-1/
onepeterfive.com/spirit-vatican-one-post-revolutionary-political-problem/