The catechumenate, permanent diaconate, centralized role of bishop in the eucharistic celebration, not to mention our theology of ordination (drastically different from the Middle Ages), Eucharist as a meal (places specifically in the Jewish tradition of memorial), the greater use of Scripture in liturgies (central to the early Church but faded away in the Middle Ages), the sign of peace, praying in the vernacular, and the restored order of the sacraments of initiation (Baptism, confirmation, Eucharist. This was switched as recently as the early 1900s and switched back at Vatican II for adults). I also wrote a blog post on the subject: breakinginthehabit.org/2017/09/25/what-was-vatican-ii/
Breaking In The Habit you do realize that there's more Scripture read in the Latin Mass than the Novus Ordo Missale? What you're presenting here is false, on almost every point.
Liturgy in the language of the various localities around the world. Before Latin became a "dead" language and then memorialized in our Roman Catholic Church, it was the lingua franca-understood by just about everybody-west of Moscow and north of sub-Saharan Africa. The only reason-k-now-that people at the Holy Sacrifice have their noses in missalettes, IMO, is that the speakers/readers aren't doing a good vocal job.
I live in a Southeast Asian country and came from a devout Muslim family. I decided to take RCIA some time ago and your channel has helped me a lot to learn. Thank you.
As a young 18 year old Christian, I think it’s kind of sad that the church has drifted away from it’s traditional routines. Sure of course God doesn’t need us to look very “religious,” but from my understanding these things are supposed to help us understand what’s sacred and beautiful in the eyes of God and lead us to a deeper relationship and encounter with him. With regards to the mass and the sacraments, I think they should all be said in the vernacular because how are people supposed to understand the mass with first understand its meaning but the form that it was originally practiced as well as what the sanctuary was supposed to look should be retained. However it is what it is, but I do think God is still working in the church regardless of these changes and what matters is that the church continues to keep its fundamental doctrines which is the most important 👍🏻 Update: My understanding of the Mass now, I think with things like “Eucharistic Minsters”, Communion on the Hand, “Altar Girls, and others are abuses against the Liturgy. With rapid decline in the Church, I wonder if without the changes made in V2 how things would be right now. Perhaps decline of the faithful wouldn’t be too far and the integrity of the sacramental life of the Church. Especially the Pope and the liberal clergy we have now, what they’re doing really is disturbing. In conclusion, I would say we really should go back to tradition and abandon all these crimes against the Bride of Christ. However, I don’t think being a sedevacantist or saying the current Pope is not “Pope.” will solve anything. But fighting for the restoration of Traditional Catholicism in the Church is certainly something I believe needs to happen now!
Sven Skender if it weren’t for V2 we would have people entering religious life more than now. The traditional Mass is growing and the modernist church is shrinking.
@@ElstonTrant So the church has to be made "relevant" with contemporary poison? The true church of Christ surely doesn't need this. Also, I wouldn't quite agree on the last thing you said. Pretty much all European Orthodox countries are still Orthodox, with growing communities.. There have been built and reopened tens of thousands of new churches in the last couple decades. On the other hand, the Catholic church is quite litterally dying out. Walk into any catholic service in Western Europe and you'll see the average age of the attendents is 70 years old. Every other day a Catholic church is closed. The ones that remain wave rainbow flags in defeat. It's not that this makes me happy, but you seem to have an incorrent view on things.
sorry this video was a bit of a bummer - you need to clarify which traditions were supposedly restored. I have come across this argument a few times but I have a hard time believing it
Jose Castro That’s it other than that everything was watered down and made it harder to become a Catholic. To get Baptism now you need to go through all these classes which are often led by some woman with a Karen cut
Thanks for your comment, but I beg to differ on at least one of those terms. The life of Jesus, captured in the four Gospels, represents a major reform of then existing Jewish life, theology, and society. He changed laws, social statuses, understandings of God, understandings of salvation, rituals, and central identity. How is he not a reformer?
I understand what u mean. I believe ArchBishop Lefebrve was reffering to His Church. Meaning Jesus. If we look back to Pope Gregory XVI Papal Encyclical "Mirari Voss" on liberalism. He said, " The Catholic Church needs no innovations,not even of words." We must ask the question,was he wrong ? Was Vatican II really necessary ? What are the fruits of Vatican II ? Are more Catholics going to Mass ? Are more Church`s opening or closing ? Are there more converts than those leaving the faith ? I was raised in the novous ordo Church. But after going to the Latin Mass. I can see why the Church is in the shape its in. Don`t get me wrong I like the novous ordo. But if the Church is gonna be "revived"its gonna happen through tradition. "Religious indifferentism is a pernicious error damning souls." Pope Gregory XVI Mirari Voss
Catherine Holmes the future is in the past. I can’t follow Rome or any liberal modernist. That’s why I’m a Sedevacantis. What? The Church had it wrong for 1960 years? We needed Vatican 2 ? And the change in the Mass and some of the Rites ? I think not. There is a special grace in the Latin Mass. that you can even hear in the homilies of the Priests.
chris purcell the future is in the past..agreed..but you can not leave the Church or deny its leadership..even when things look as bleak as they do now..THAT is what luther did..As much chaos as we have in the Catholic Church today..it is nothing compared to the Protestant churches...why??..Because falsehoods can not survive that long in the Church..the truth flushes them out..we have gone through MANY heresies in the Church..this modernist carp ( see what i did there..wink...wink..)..is just the latest in a long line of evil that has tried and failed to destroy the Church..and like all the rest..it will fail..
The only thing I'm iffy on about Vatican II is the liturgical reform. Don't get me wrong, I don't reject Vatican II in any way, shape, or form, there are just some preferences I have. I do not believe the Novus Ordo is invalid or anything like that: I don't know why they touched the liturgy as much as they did. Why create a new "form" of the Roman Rite? Why not just create a vernacular translation of the Extraordinary Form? Also, why did so many awful practices come up that weren't even supported by the council? Why did priests start saying mass behind the altar when it's not mentioned anywhere in the documents? Why was Communion allowed in the hand when the majority of Bishops at the council voted against such an idea? I don't know the answers to these, but what I do know is that the large traditional movement in Holy Mother Church works complimentary to the more modern Catholics we have, not contrary. My dream is to become a Dominican Friar and be a bi-ritual priest so that I can say the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite as well as the Dominican Rite (which is similar to the EF)
Hi billy bob, I think you ask completely legitimate questions and I respect the way you've done so. A few things in response: 1) This is the normal process of the Church and has happened on multiple occasions. When the Tridentine mass was being formed in the 16th century, the bishops did not take the old right and cosmetically modify it, they made wholesale changes. The same happened in the early middle ages wit the Germanization of the liturgy. The reason for this is either because the past no longer expresses the present or older, more authentic, prayers have been found and want to be incorporated. This is the case for both Trent and Vatican II (our Eucharistic prayers are different because we discovered some from the early Church). 2) We need to remember that for much of our Church history, and to a small extent now, there have always been multiple approved liturgies at one time. In the early Church, there was no official liturgy. In the early middle ages (before Germanization), there was a different liturgy in each country. Prior to Trent, the regional differences had become very great, with multiple sacramentaries. Sometimes people feel that Vatican II is a betrayal because we're throwing away what we've always done, but really, it's simply redoing what has repeated itself 4-5 times throughout history: oscillating from a very strict, uniform observance to a very flexible, universal observance. 3) Finally, specifically for Vatican II, a new form was necessary because the old form no longer expressed our theology. The old form had no participation from the laity. There was little variation from week to week (with only one yearly cycle.) Scripture was not very present. Ancient rites, including the sign of peace, the presentation of the gifts, homily, distribution under both kinds, and gloria were all limited or completely suppressed. The vernacular was but a small change compared to some of the bigger things that were necessary, and so a new form had to be created. 4. As for people not following the directives, why does anyone not follow the rules? I don't know. It's always been the case, and it's unfortunate.
Actually there weren't 'wholesale changes' to the Mass at Trent. Pope St Pius V only codified the liturgy which already had a millennium of history behind it. He didn't rewrite it as the committee established after VII did with the help of 6 Protestant ministers with the aim of making it 'more acceptable to the Protestants' as the head of the committee, Archbishop Bugnini is quoted as saying - two rather different movements I'd suggest! Don't take my word for it though, it's all history now which can be learnt for those who really won't to know the truth. VII wasn't a reform, it was a revolution and were all paying the price now, empty pews, seminaries and no discernible difference in morality between Catholics and non-Catholics. The Council Fathers were seduced into confirming to the world and to question this is considered largely taboo, but there are people out there who have so I'd encourage you to read them. God bless!
billy bob this SHOULD change your mind: *_THE EXTREME OATH OF THE JESUITS - Warning!! a MOST vile excerpt.._* (What your Jesuit Pope and hopes you never find out) "...I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poniard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus..." 👑 May the ONE and ONLY Heavenly Father , the Most High have mercy on us all: HalleluYAH!
billy bob With all due respect, I think Vatican II is a good way to promote our faith. Yes, I can see how it might be difficult for older people to accept it, especially when they lived in between 2 types of approaching the Mass and Eucharist. However, I can see, as a younger generation, that a form of Mass, where the spiritual leader faces the crowd and more laity has a chance to participate with the priest besides communion, and in which the language is more understandable and connectable to the people on the pews, and with prayers and a promotion to talk to people and promote peace, while staying true and valid to the basis of our beliefs, I see Vatican II as a great opportunity in this new age of modern world.
What kills me as well the church seems to want to help everyone but Catholics. I once went into a Catholic Charities and it had a bunch of Baptist’s with the workers and Receptionists pretty much all Baptist’s. They also had the same time have the nerve to talk about Catholics. The only Catholics I see get hired within the church at are pro illegal immigration workers. The shelters are mostly single Baptist women. Catholic Schools like DePaul which is a Catholic college the Priests allow the school to be run by Catholics and Atheists well the Priests take nice cushy trips to France to their winery well they neglect their flocks. Having Catholic speakers speak at a catholic school is at this point not allowed as the school apologized for a nun coming to speak about catholic values
Thank you Brother Casey for everything. From your disciplined, devoted and ascetic life to your unbridled love for Christ and his church. You're an amazing and special young man indeed. I love your enlightening channel and shall keep you in my prayers. God Bless.
My friend, VAII was the coming-out party of modernism that lays waste the Church as we speak. Just look all around you. I suggest that you read Archbishop Vigano's recent assessment of things.
Father, only 5 years later...I did not receive a vocation as you were blessed, I had 12 years of Catholic school...not like the Catholic education that you have had...please, please advise re the "Catacomb Documents" that were signed in the Vatican, underneath the Vatican? During Vatican II? Please understand that we need the traditions as established by Our Lord (directed to Peter.)
This is a good bird's eye view but it glosses over the impact of the misinterpretations of Vatican II that led to much disillusionment of Roman Catholics. That in of itself would deserve a few videos with Casey's capable handling of the topic.
Casey folks are starting to appreciate your content so hopefully the 'future' handling of how some folks misunderstood the import of Vatican II will be sooner rather than later. You offer a lot to folks who need guidance from someone easy to relate to.
The bishops who initiated the Vatican II false teachings, rebelled against Almighty God. In Nostra Aetate they honor the Muhammad gang of murderers, they are anti-Christs who state that Our Lord Jesus was NOT crucified. . Our Lord Jesus Is Truth.
Vatican II wasn’t misinterpreted. It was intended to be interpreted that way by the liberals who hijacked the council, in line with the Jews and Freemasons.
“On the other hand, Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments which derive from our common heritage and which are to be found among our separated brothers and sisters who bear witness to Christ, even at times fo the shedding of their blood.” - Paul VI, Unitatis Redintegratio, No. 4, Nov. 21, 1964 “Therefore, it (the Holy Roman Church) condemns, reproves, anathematizes and declares to be outside the body of Christ, which is the church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views.” - Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441
To friends who may be bummed out as well, I hope we realize that not all social and disciplinary crises in the Church can be traced to Vatican II, even if the council is responsible to some degree. We're going through major issues as Christ's faithful that are affecting communities around the world long before Vatican II came about. Let's not polarize this, let's repent, pray, and come together. Championing reform is not about submitting to the world's ways, and championing tradition is not about turning a blind eye to the needs of each age and culture.
My only criticism of the Vatican Council II is the fading away of Latin language in priests today. Fine, you preach in English but as a priest you should be able to speak fluent Latin. Latin is the language of the church but less than one percent of the priest today speak it. Also the second Vatican Council resulted in the falling out of exorcist priest today. Father Gabrielle Amort addressed this serious situation in the church today. Demonic possession today is rapidly increasing in number especially in the US. Killing twenty, thirty people in the mall or in the park with automatic rifle is NOT mental illness. It is diabolical influence. These criminals need more than psychiatrist. They need a priest.
You give *way* too much credit to the council! Haha you think that an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church caused the whole world had a mental breakdown? I think a better reading of history would recognize the effect that World War II had on dismantled the psyche of our world: a generation after the end of the war societal structures, norms, family dynamics, race relations, Sunday attendance, sexual ethics, nuclear arms races, and wealth inequality turned the world on its head. The Second Vatican Council did not cause the problems you see today, it *salvaged* what faith was left of the world and made it possible for the Church to navigate such a changing world! Because, really, look at the fact of the matter: the population of the Church has exploded worldwide since the second Vatican Council. While most other Churches are shrinking, the Catholic Church continues to grow. Not in Europe and North America, but in Latin America, Asia, and Africa, the Church is stronger than it has ever been.
@@BreakingInTheHabit I can attest to this as an Asian Catholic, lover of both Novus Ordo and TLM haha I commend you, Fr. Casey, for your work and patience in evangelization. Never stop dialoguing with others!
I am a baby boomer. Grew up in the Church. I think the Catholic Church have done a good job . However, with any large institution, their are few bad apples. I was their when the Mass was in Latin. I think changing it to English was a good thing. I would like to see Priests being able to marry Giving them that option would bring in more Priests. However, that comes with issues because how does a Priest balance his family with his ministry. It will be a real challenge. They will need to be very defined work loads and time set aside for family life. Most successful ministries work night and day. So, I do get the fact it’s better for a Priest to be single. However, a shortage of Priests need to be dealt with. There are some men that prefer to be single. They can dedicate their full lives to their calling. I think the religious should have that option. Perhaps, their should call Vatican III and get more men to serve and loosen up the restrictions. The Catholics do allow some married priests coming from other denominations.
I still abstenate from meat on fridays, pray in latin and recite the St Michael prayer at the end of Mass, Vatican 2 is what it is, but Im still praying like its 1100, Deus Vult.
those two ideas you presented are diametrically opposed. were they “catching up with the times” or “returning to old principles”? They’d only be the same if the old was becoming new again but that’s also a bold statement, yet that claim wasn’t made
Of source Sunday trading laws, Sporting Sundays and all the other demands placed on modern life had nothing to do with any of it. That all these opportunities that appeared was pure happenstance.
This was so interesting! Thanks for making this video! I'm a rather young Catholic so I'm not familiar with the traditions that were stated in the video like veils and side altars so I was wondering if you had any time to make a video about that? Again, awesome video!
Thanks! While some of those traditions are interesting, I think there are so many living traditions worth talking about first! If you would like to read more about them, there is plenty of information online.
Emily Standige St. Paul still says in Corinthians chapter 11 that women should cover their heads when they pray. Mass is the most sacred prayer of all.
“It follows that these separated churches and communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have, by no means been deprived of significance and important in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ had not refrained from using them as means of salvation …” - Paul VI, Unitatis Redintegratio, No. 3, Nov. 21, 1964 “Since however there is for both regulars and seculars, for superiors and subjects, for exempt and non-exempt, one universal Church, outside of which there is no salvation …” - Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne
If you're a young catholic looking to grow your faith. You're better off listening to the channel "Sensus Fidelium" Fr. Wolfe and Fr Ripperger are phenomenal!
What’s crucial when seeing this or any Council is a trust and hope in the Holy Spirit, so that in any period of reform we read a deep sense of continuity; what Pope Benedict XVI would call the “hermeneutic of continuity”. VII’s docs are truly beautiful, I think they should be read with great reverence and docility of spirit. It is also true that if the wrong hermeneutic is embraced (one of rupture and suspicion) a dangerous spirit will take hold and do grave damage. Some claim doctrines changed when nowhere in VII such a thing was claimed. In fact, in Gaudet Mater Ecclesia the opening discourse to the council, St John XXIII makes this abundantly explicit and says that doctrine ought to be taught with the same accuracy as in Trent and VI! How beautiful that our Holy Father should recall the same spirit of those two councils! Elsewhere, the documents often recall the profound continuity in the reform it was seeking. Some of the fruits of VII have been liturgical, all while respecting the magnificence and evangelical power of the Mass of St Pius V which happily is free to be celebrated today (well the modified version by John XXIII, often called the TLM), and also my personal favorite, eventually: the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Honestly guys, the CCC is a gift to us that I think previous generations could only dream of. We’re so so lucky and blessed to be born in a period where such a marvellous and also quite authoritative document exists! Deacon Casey, would you consider making a vid, or even a series, on how the CCC was made? Even just learning about how it came to be is a real eye opener...a lot of interesting twists and turns in the “sausage making process”. But ultimately, a great product!
Hello - I was called an "apostate" for defending the traditionalist position (preferring the Latin Mass and offering respectful criticism of changes in the liturgy) by a viewer and my post was deleted. I am open to changing my mind and would have appreciated dialogue. In the age of dialogue where we'll dialogue with every other religion under the sun, but only silence, or hurl proverbial stones at other Catholics, honest and open dialogue on internal issues would be a great way for us to solve our disagreements. Instead all we get on both sides are ad hominem attacks (calling traditionalists "schismatics", "radicals", "fundamentalists", "apostates", or "extremists" isn't an argument - Besides if defending tradition is what makes one an apostate then it follows all of our ancestors before 1960 were apostates too. Thus either the Catholic Faith is false or this kind of rebuke is unjust). God bless. Most Holy Mother of God, pray for us.
Here the point is very simple. Christ founded a Church and gave His authority to the Church to govern it. Christ never established a rite, or a norm. It is the Church who uses the authority to do that with the guidence of the Holy Spirit. We belive in the Church, and that is what we profess in our Creed.
What do you mean the "traditional" way. Do you mean the liturgy that was created in 1571? Because there are recovered aspects of today's liturgy that are far older than that. In many ways, today's liturgy encompasses the oldest traditions we've ever had in a liturgy.
Breaking In The Habit you mean so we should create a new of its own ? Why change a mass that’s over 400 years old ? What traditions were bright back ? The Latin mass is what brought Catholics together All I see from these novus ordo masses is modern music and almost as a social event instead of worshipping god it feels like a Protestant church and sermon than a mass. , why couldn’t we have just incorporated the old tradition we have lost into the Latin mass ? Why create a whole new reform ? People are leaving the church on mass because we are now going against our own doctrine and conforming to everyone instead of everyone confirming to god ? Jesus was not making compromises when he mounted the cross , the 2 Vatican just caused more division in the events and actions after , the fact the order of Malta banned the Latin mass shows this and created division god bless brother , hopefully we can all come back to tradition, the Latin mass is what brought me back to the church and for millions of other young Catholics we want it .
While not the most acceptable practice within the liturgy, it is hardly an excommunicable offense. When we say someone is excommunicated, we are literally saying that they are "outside communion" with the rest of us. That is a grave status, one that can only be reached by immense acts of evil or heresy. What he did in this video was not even bad enough to make the mass invalid, let alone excommunicate him. Now, was he reprimanded by his bishop? I'm not sure, but that is much more likely.
@@BreakingInTheHabit While ideally one wouldn't be excommunicated except for heresy or acts of evil, there have been saints who have been excommunicated as well (e.g. St. Joan of Arc and St. Athanasius the Great). A contemporary who was automatically excommunicated, at least according to the letter of the law, was Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the 4 bishops he consecrated. Those latter bishops are no longer excommunicated. I'm sure in time Archbishop Lefebvre will no longer be recognized as excommunicated as time goes on. An anonymous Cardinal even dared to say that Archbishop Lefebvre will one day be recognized as a Doctor of the Church! At the very least he has been very misunderstood. Time will tell. God bless
A few thoughts come to mind: the catechumenate, permanent diaconate, centralized role of bishop in the eucharistic celebration not to mention our theology of ordination (drastically different from the Middle Ages), Eucharist as a meal (places specifically in the Jewish tradition of memorial), the greater use of Scripture in liturgies (central to the early Church but faded away in the Middle Ages), the sign of peace, praying in the vernacular, and the restored order of the sacraments of initiation (Baptism, confirmation, Eucharist. This was switched as recently as the early 1900s and switched back at Vatican II for adults).
“For several reasons, the Church recognized that it is joined to those who, though baptized and so honored with the Christian name, do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve communion under the successor of St. Peter.” - Paul VI, Lumen Gentium, No. 15, Nov. 21, 1964 “There are other, almost countless, proofs drawn from the most trustworthy witnesses which clearly and openly testify with great faith, exactitude, respect and obedience that all who want to belong to the true and only Church of Christ must honor and obey this Apostolic See and Roman Pontiff.” - Pope Pius IX, April 8, 1862
@@ComicRaptor8850 Paul VI said that the Church (the Catholic Church) is "joining" non-Catholic "Christians" who "do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve communion under the successor of St. Peter." Non-Catholics, such as Protestants, do not honor the successors of St. Peter. Neither do the Orthodox, who elect their own "Patriarch" in defiance of the successor of St. Peter, who is the Pope. That is contradictory to what Pope Pius IX (and all the popes prior to Vatican II) claimed. As he said, those "who want to belong to the true and only Church of Christ must honor and obey this Apostolic See and Roman Pontiff." The other "Christian" religions don't do that. Martin Luther called the pope "evil" and as I mentioned earlier, the Orthodox rebel against the Pope by electing their own "Patriarch." In simple terms, since the 1960s, Catholics have been led to believe that all the religions need to unite as one and therefore, other "Christian" religions (and tragically, even pagan religions), which were previously denounced by the Catholic Church, are now "respectable" and even "good." That is a false teaching, which sadly, the modernists have been repeating over and over again for nearly 60 years. Prior to Vatican II, the only way to salvation was the Catholic faith. Yes, it sounds rather blunt and brutal, but in the end, the dogma is the dogma ("For I am the Lord, and I change not: and you the sons of Jacob are not consumed." - Malachi 3:6; "Every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor shadow of alteration." - James 1:17 If you look closely (and you can find previous statements from just about any pope online - even the ones from many centuries ago), you will discover that the contradictions are overwhelming. Although it may seem cold or harsh, the pre-Vatican II popes made it clear: You are either in or you're out. In other words, you are part of the Church of Christ, which is the Catholic Church, or you are on the road to perdition. Alas, this channel and many modernists are simply dismissing such teaching. Vatican II wants to give you the impression that everyone goes to heaven and not to worry. That's a dangerous trap that so many people find extremely enticing. For example: “There is a hell, but it could be empty." - Hans von Balthasar If such a statement sounds intriguing (which does for supporters of this channel), consider the following: "Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!" - Matthew 7:13-14 “Even if the true Church of Christ were reduced to a handful of true believers, they would remain the true Church of Christ on Earth.” - St. Athanasius
If priests or even bishops were taking actions in direct contradiction of Vat 2 then why were they not held accountable? If that guy with the water gun is acting against the council's decisions was he dealt with by those with authority to do so? There seems to be a total lack of accountability in the Catholic Church for these "rogue" clergymen and prominent laity such as politicians that promote anti-Catholic teachings.
This is not my original comment, but it is excellent so I will repost it. Here is a short summary of the errors of Vatican II and how they contradict Church teaching.. Vatican II errors Vatican II teaches: Error #1: The "aim" of the liturgical reform is to "promote union" with heretics and schismatics. (SC 1) Catholic Church teaches: St Alphonsus Liguori in his Theologia Moralis. This doctor of the church writes, ‘It is not permitted to be present at the sacred rites of infidels and heretics in such a way that you would be judged to be in communion with them.’ Pope Pius XI recalled in the 1928 encyclical Mortalium Animos, ‘[the] Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics.’ Vatican II teaches: Error #2: The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass should be within "the people's powers of comprehension and should not require much explanation." (SC 34) Catholic Church teaches: "If anyone says that the Rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the Canon is pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned, or that the Mass ought to be celebrated in the vernacular only..let him be anathema." [Canon 9, Session XXII, Sept. 17, 1562] "THE LANGUAGE PROPER TO THE ROMAN CHURCH IS LATIN. HENCE IT IS FORBIDDEN TO SING ANYTHING WHATEVER IN THE VERNACULAR IN SOLEMN LITURGICAL FUNCTIONS- MUCH MORE TO SING IN THE VERNACULAR THE VARIABLE OR COMMON PARTS OF THE MASS AND OFFICE." (INTER SOLLICITUDINES, 1920 A.D.) -POPE ST. PIUS X Vatican II teaches: Error #3: A "radical adaptation of the liturgy [to the culture and tradition of peoples] is needed." (SC 40) Catholic Church teaches: "If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church customarily used in the solemn administration of the Sacraments may be despised or omitted by the ministers without sin and at their pleasure, or may be changed by any pastor of the churches whomsoever to other new ones, let him be anathema." (Session 7, Canon 13 council of Trent) Pope Pius V on the Latin Mass: “Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us.” -Pope Pius V Encyclical: Quo Primum: July 14, 1570. Vatican II teaches: Error #4: The Church of Christ merely "subsists" in the Catholic Church. (LG 8) Catholic Church teaches: Following all his predecessors, Pius XII teaches on two occasions, in Mystici corporis and in Humani generis that the Church of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are strictly identical. Only the Catholic Church is the Church willed by Christ, because only the Catholic Church is governed by the Vicar of Christ, who causes the social order willed by Christ to reign. Outside of that government the administration of the sacraments is sterile and the reading of Sacred Scripture degenerates into intellectual and moral anarchy. Vatican II teaches: Error #5: Christ uses heretical and schismatic communities as "means of salvation." (UR 3) Catholic Church teaches: “There is no entering into salvation outside the Catholic Church, just as in the time of the Flood there was not salvation outside the Ark, which denotes the Church.” - St. Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274) Vatican II teaches: Error #6: The "liturgical actions" of the heretics provide "access to the community of salvation." (UR 3) Catholic Church teaches: "No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the Name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church." St. Augustine (354-430), Bishop and Doctor of the Church Vatican II teaches: Error #7: "Catholics must esteem the truly Christian endowments" to be found among the heretics as "a help to our own edification" (UR4) Catholic Church teaches: "It is absurd for a heretic to say that he believes in Jesus Christ. To believe in a person is to give our full consent to his Word & to all he teaches. True Faith, therefore, is absolute belief in Jesus Christ & in all he taught. Hence he who does not adhere to all that Jesus Christ has prescribed for our salvation, has no more the doctrine of Jesus Christ & of His Church than the pagans, Jews, & Turks have." -St Thomas Aquinas Vatican II teaches: Error #8: Christ has made the Jews of our time "one in Himself' with gentiles "by His cross." (NA4) Catholic Church teaches: Matthew 10:33 “But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny[or reject] him before My Father in heaven. “Do not add to your sins by saying that the Covenant is both theirs and ours. Yes it is ours, but they (Jews) lost it forever.” -St. Barnabas Vatican II teaches: Error #9: Muslims "along with us adore the one God... the Creator of heaven and earth." (LG 16, NA 4) Catholic Church teaches: Nicene Creed “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.” Psalm 96:5 “all the gods of the infidels are demons, the LORD made the heavens.” Vatican II teaches: Error #10: Tradition developes in the Church as she "moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth." (DV 8) Catholic Church teaches: “Progress of dogmas is, in reality, nothing but corruption of dogmas... I absolutely reject the heretical doctrine of the evolution of dogma, as passing from one meaning to another, and different from the sense in which the Church originally held it.” -Pope St. Pius X Vatican II teaches: Error #11: The "right to religious freedom"is based in the "dignity of the human person" and remains for those who neglect-their "obligation to seek the truth." (DH 2) Catholic Church teaches: Freedom of religion sets value to false religions. Countries must promote the Catholic religion. Catholic supremacy overall. Cardinal Ottaviani, set forth the question correctly: "Just as the civil power considers it right to protect its citizens from the seductions of error ... so it may also regulate and moderate the public expression of other forms of worship and defend its citizens against the diffusion of false doctrines which, in the judgment of the Church, endanger their eternal salvation". Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura (#’s 3-6), Dec. 8, 1864, ex cathedra: “From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our predecessor, Gregory XVI, an insanity, NAMELY, THAT ‘LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE AND WORSHIP IS EACH MAN’S PERSONAL RIGHT, WHICH OUGHT TO BE LEGALLY PROCLAIMED AND ASSERTED IN EVERY RIGHTLY CONSTITUTED SOCIETY… But while they rashly affirm this, they do not understand and note that they are preaching liberty of perdition… Therefore, BY OUR APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, WE REPROBATE, PROSCRIBE, AND CONDEMN ALL THE SINGULAR AND EVIL OPINIONS AND DOCTRINES SPECIALLY MENTIONED IN THIS LETTER, AND WILL AND COMMAND THAT THEY BE THOROUGHLY HELD BY ALL THE CHILDREN OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AS REPROBATED, PROSCRIBED AND CONDEMNED.” Vatican II teaches: Error #12: "All things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown." (GS 12) Catholic Church teaches: Human beings are incomplete without God “Enough about the rights of man, let the world hear something about the rights of God.” Pope Leo XIII “It was pride that changed angels into devils; it is humility that makes men as angels.” -Saint Augustine “You must ask God to give you the power to fight against the sin of pride which is your greatest enemy-the root of all that is evil, and the failure of all that is good. For God resists the proud.” -Saint Vincent de Paul These errors must be resisted because they contradict the divine law of the Church. No authentic ecumenical council of the Catholic Church could possibly teach these errors.
7/18/18 I watch and re-watch these videos Bro. Casey and never get tired of them. I receive a better understanding of what took place then and now, and you do an amazing job of explanation in all your video's. Keep up the great work of the Church and of Jesus Christ. I know your going to make an amazing and spirit filled Priest. God Bless and Thank you.
1:56 Honest question: Why is "church" capitalized in the first and third appearances, but not in the second? It seems to concede that the "church" as a congregation of the faithful is different from "the Church," meaning the Catholic Church. Is that accepted doctrine? It is an important part of Hans Kueng objections to Catholicism, but it seems odd to see it implicitly approved. Am I reading too much into this? FULL DISCLOSURE= I am an atheist, but my question is raised in good faith -if you excuse the pun. I am legitimately interested in the Catholic position around this issue. Thanks in advance.
For anyone wondering, the normative language of Novus Ordo is actually Latin, and its normative music is Gregorian Chant. In Summorum Pontificum, Benedict XVI precisely laid the foundation for mutual enrichment of both the older and newer rites, the two learning from each other, and I agree. That's precisely what should happen, not a competition. Vatican II's wonky implementation by some clergy caused a lot of issues, but its teaching is sound. In the context of Catholic communities around the world (not just the West), it led to great evangelization. The Church has been fighting issues that began even before Vatican II. We have a disciplinary and catechical problem, not so much liturgical. Where I am, Novus Ordo masses are beautiful, solemn, and packed even as they have a 21st century character, AND there is also a lovely Latin mass following. So yes, mutual enrichment, not competition or narrow ideas of liturgy.
Yeah, it's definitely a topic that could be stretched into a lot more videos. Maybe I'll see how I can incorporate more of the documents in the future.
@@BreakingInTheHabit Thanks. After seeing your "Understanding the Mass" series get traditionalist comments, this could be a good time to clarify further...
Respectfully, most of this is pretty hackneyed. "The old, defensive Church," "rediscovery of traditions of Early Church," etc. As you state, most of the revolutionary changes were not of the Council itself, but were done after the fact by a small group of people, and not in accord with the desires of the Faithful. As such, they are able to be rejected without rejecting the Council per se, troublesome as many of its pronouncements were.
Heres a fun fact for you. Rad trads attack Vatican 2 like there is no tomorrow.... When in fact the real issue is with vatican 1 but they wouldnt know that because they have never read vatican 2, they have only eisegetically read parts of it out of context and the proof is them being literally wrong about it.
We give praise to the Holy Spirit for enlightening the Cardinals who brought us Pope Francis from Argentina. May God continue to guide him as he works to implement the teachings of Vatican II.
“First of all, you ask if the God of the Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that - and this is fundamental - God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their conscience. In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil. The goodness of the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.” - Francis, 2013 “But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him.” - Hebrews 11:6
@@John-jf8lw -- The writer of the Book of Hebrews was a bigot. And narrow-minded. Just imagine trying to "put limits" on God! How dare he! (or she). That's not the God I know..... or Good Pope Francis.
@@markmh835 St. Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews. 🙂 "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also." - 1 John 2:23 "He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth." - Matthew 12:30 "He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God." - John 3:18 "Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me." - John 14:6 "But they said: Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." - Acts 16:31
@@John-jf8lw -- St. Paul most certainly did NOT write the Book of Hebrews. This was conclusively determined by the 1960s and accepted by the vast majority of Biblical scholars by the 1970s. The writing style of the Book of Hebrews (in the original Greek, of course) is entirely different from all of St. Paul's other known writings. Moreover, the earliest existing copies of manuscripts of the Bible (in the Vatican and the British Museum) do not have Paul's name on Hebrews. Some scribe wrongly added St. Paul's name to Hebrews centuries later. Therefore, we do not know the author of the Book of Hebrews. Any Bible which still prints Paul's name with Hebrews (and there are very few) is obviously very old and out of date. It appears that you are still using the King James translation. It has beautiful poetic English -- but it is a terrible translation from the original Greek. Please obtain a more modern and accurate translation of the Holy Bible. It will be a revelation of what the Good Book accurately says! You seem to like to quote the Bible; you might as well do it accurately.
@@markmh835 Martin Luther didn't like Hebrews either. The 60s and 70s' "theologians," along with Vatican II, had many revolutionary teachings (that contradicted previous Church teachings). For instance: “Moreover, some and even most of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give to the Church itself, can exist outside the the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit and visible elements too.” - Paul VI, Unitatis Redintegratio, No. 3, Nov. 21, 1964 “With faith urging us, we are forced to believe and to hold the one holy Catholic Church and that apostolic and we firmly believe and simply confess this (Church) outside which there is no salvation nor remission of sin …” - Pope Boniface VIII, ex cathedra bull, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302 Don't let yourself be influenced by the "modernists." The 73 books of the Bible are inspired works. Consider Pope Leo XIII's statements (along with Pope Agatho) ... “Pope Agatho: ‘Nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.’” “The liberty of thinking and publishing whatsoever each one likes, without any hindrances, is not in itself an advantage over which society can wisely rejoice. On the contrary, it is the fountainhead and origin of many evils.” “These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on Her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.” - An excerpt from the original version of the St. Michael the Archangel prayer “The Church in respect of its unity belongs to the category of things indivisible by nature, though heretics try to divide it into many parts.” - Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, No. 4, June 29, 1896 “The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.” - Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896 “In this wise, all cause for doubting being removed, can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by the very fact falling into heresy?-without separating himself from the Church?-without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching? For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others.” “But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.” - Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896
March 16, 2016 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- On March 16, speaking publicly on a rare occasion, Pope Benedict XVI gave an interview to Avvenire, the daily newspaper of the Italian Bishops' Conference, in which he spoke of a “two-sided deep crisis” the Church is facing in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Benedict reminds us of the formerly indispensable Catholic conviction of the possibility of the loss of eternal salvation, or that people go to hell: The missionaries of the 16th century were convinced that the unbaptized person is lost forever. After the [Second Vatican] Council, this conviction was definitely abandoned. The result was a two-sided, deep crisis. Without this attentiveness to the salvation, the Faith loses its foundation.He also speaks of a “profound evolution of Dogma” with respect to the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church. This purported change of dogma has led, in the pope's eyes, to a loss of the missionary zeal in the Church - “any motivation for a future missionary commitment was removed.” Pope Benedict asks the piercing question that arose after this palpable change of attitude of the Church: “Why should you try to convince the people to accept the Christian faith when they can be saved even without it?” As to the other consequences of this new attitude in the Church, Catholics themselves, in Benedict's eyes, are less attached to their Faith: If there are those who can save their souls with other means, “why should the Christian be bound to the necessity of the Christian Faith and its morality?” asked the pope. And he concludes: “But if Faith and Salvation are not any more interdependent, even Faith becomes less motivating.”
First, I want to strongly recommend that you look to other media for your information about Catholicism. This site is a fringe group that offers a very narrow perspective on Catholic life and often distorts the authority and message of the hierarchy. For what it's worth. Second, I think there is a lot of truth in what Pope Benedict is saying here, but look at what he is actually saying. He is speaking of a world AFTER Vatican II, not a world BECAUSE of Vatican II. The world after Vatican II is also the world after World War II, the most cataclysmic event in human history. It is a world of great secularization. It is a world of free dissemination of information (hence this UA-cam Channel and LifeSiteNews) that is not always accurate or authoritative. To blame the world on the changes made at Vatican II gives way too much credit to the council and the Church to affect world history. My response would be that Vatican II, given its willingness to work with the world and update its language to be with the world, is in a better position to preach Jesus Christ now than it would have been if we had continued with our previous rhetoric until today.
Thanks for shedding light on that article, Br. Casey. I'm sorry for tossing it out there without an intro. As you well know, the Vatican II docs are a hot topic for some Catholics. Portions of those documents were worded in a way that could easily be misinterpreted, especially by people without seminary training. A friend of mine -a former aspiring Capuchin- told me that, as per Vatican II, you can be saved through any religion or church denomination. Does the post-Vatican II Church advocate universalism? Obviously not. But that's the way my friend and many others perceive it. That's the way I saw it when I was still a Protestant exploring Catholicism. Thankfully I know better now, after reading a few Catholic apologists. You're right, as a result of Vatican II the church is in a better position to evangelize the world. She needed to open her windows and let some fresh air in. So keep up the good work Br. Casey. This world needs more young people like you.
Thank you Father. Very informative video. I should mention that Mother used to be a practicing Catholic. But the Vatican 2 document caused my Mother to lose her faith. She became an atheist. She thought well if man could change the laws God then what does it matter?
I'm very sorry to hear that. That, unfortunately, was a major misconception of the council. People say the externals change so much and didn't understand what was going on that they thought the essence of the Church was changing, which it was not. Too often we associate our expression of faith with the very faith itself, thinking that if the expression changes (which it inevitably has to over time) that somehow the faith itself is changing. Luckily, we believe in a loving and merciful God who understands us and has patience with us.
As I child my Catholic mother would take me and my siblings to church. It was the traditional form. As an adult not having been in church since I was nine, I convince my brother to go with me to church, for old times sake. We dressed in suits as we remembered the men wearing in church, but what we encountered was a bebops slut festival. Never went back. If that is the novus orda, you can keep it, it's an abomination.
I'm also not in agreement with man being able to change the laws of God. I'm a Catholic and with the changing times I feel like the society is pressuring the church to bend its laws (i.e. same-sex marriage) when it should never conform to the whims of man and it's us who should follow the laws. Just because some things are becoming more mainstream it doesn't make them right.
@@daryla7825 My friend, don't give up on the True Church. Tribulations are part of its glorious history. Take your brother with you to a Traditional Latin Mass, there must be one close to you, and you will not regret.
I went through Catholic school from 1972-1983. I had only two years where Catholicism was even taught. One was a pre Vatican Council 2 nun, the other was my Seventh grade teacher. We had new nuns that had guitar/folk masses singing pop music. I went to De Lassalian Christian Brothers school where at the end we were asking if had any Catholicism. Interesting that at school mass, non Catholics were receiving communion. The staff seemed more interested in either discussing Buddhism or explaining what protestant denominations believed. The administration went out of their way to recruit football players, and hire teachers without credentials. I am still Catholic today, not because of Vatican Council 2, but in spite of it. I am thinking of joining a Uniate Church, such as the Maronites or Assyrian Chaldean Catholics, as they are strong on fellowship, have clergy leading by example, and are more consistent. I think the Jesuits are a bunch of pretentious, elitists that give Catholics a bad name. The Jesuits are more interested in having their schools win at sports, than being truly Catholic.
I have a question that no one has ever been able to answer: Why was the Roman Rite the only part of the Catholic Church to be affected? Byzantine's, and others have not changed at all. It seems as if the Roman Rite was watered down to make it more Protestant to welcome other faiths. We lost our identity as Catholics. I lived through the Council & saw the Church diminish afterward. There is less catechesis now than before. Many Catholics do not even believe int the Real Presence. This is extremely sad. I often wonder how many souls have been lost because of Vatican II.
A consideration of Vatican II using the concepts of genus and species. Without getting into the historical background, inner workings and doctrinal details of the Vatican II documents and rather relying on what most Catholics know about it the following analogy I think is most revealing: Aristotle says that the natural way of learning and coming to know things is from the generic to the more specific. Just as when we see something moving in the distance we first identify it as a body and then as it moves closer an animal and even closer a man and finally as this particular person Socrates. Now it needs to be understood that there is a difference between our knowledge of a thing and the thing itself. Our knowledge is always more generic than the thing itself existing in reality which is very specific. If someone were to give the definition of the species of a thing instead of giving the definition of the genus of that thing one would give a more precise and fuller account of the thing. In other words the more specific our knowledge becomes of something the closer our knowledge resembles the thing. The truer our knowledge is, in the sense of having more truth - adeguatio res et intellectus. This is the natural way man comes to know. To try to move in the opposite direction is unatural and against human nature. To try to forget what one already KNOWS about something in order to know it more generically is an act of violence against oneself. It would entail force that goes against one's own nature. Now what is more generic and less specific is more universal. Whereas as what is more specific is more exclusive. In the same way when one says the word animal it can apply to many things. Where when one says man it excludes many things and applies to just one type of animal. Now things that exist in reality ARE NOT generic they are specific. The Church founded by Our Lord is a real existing reality. It is something specific with its own essential elements and properties. Now the Councils, pronouncements and doctrines through the ages became more and more specific. The Church's awareness of itself approached more and more the reality of its own being. It is impossible to move in the other direction. In other words it is impossible to move from a specific knowledge to a more general confused knowledge. A generic knowledge of anything is always more confused than a specific one, just as knowing something only in so far as it is an animal is more confused than knowing it specifically: a man. Instead our knowledge specifies as we gain acquantaince and experience of a thing. This should.not be confused with the knowledge particular persons had of the Church. Ofcourse the apostles and early Christians had a very specific knowledge of the Church. However the Church's formulated doctrine was not as specific. Throughout the centuries this doctrine became better formulated and more specific. This was neccesary especially to rule out heresy and error. A more generic knowledge on the other hand is more open to heresy and error. Now, in order for Vatican II to be less divisive, open to non Catholics and ALSO IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE CONSENSUS AMONGST THE COUNCIL FATHERS, THE COUNCIL HAD TO REVERSE THE NATURAL PROCEDURE AND PROCLAIM SOMETHING MORE GENERIC THAN PREVIOUS COUNCILS. Now one could argue that the council taught no error. Entering into this debate is not easy and not for the most of us. However knowing that the council purposefully decided to be less specific and more generic is known by all of us. Can we say that a generic knowlwdge of a thing is deficient compared to a fuller specific knowlwdge of a thing? Trying to go against oneself and forget what one once knew creates the impression that one must have been wrong once upon a time. Because why else would one try to forget what once knew? Especially if what one once knew one used to think was valuable and true, a treasure to be safeguarded. How many people do we know who have used Vatican II to look back and interpret older Councils? Anything more specific than the Council is frowned upon as superfluous and outdated. But does truth age? Never the less can we blame them for acquiring this habit when this is a natural consequence of artificially regressing and not progressing in knowledge? Of trying to be less specific and more generic. Ask any good attorney or advocate; the truth is in the details. Become less specific and you loose the case. Unless one is hiding something. In conclusion: In any art, science, law, doctrine, description or definition the more specific take precedence over any less specific alternative of it.
In a way, Vatican II is as if the Catholic Church try to "reform" itself (note that i use quotation marks because it's certainly not a reformation for those who don't think it's a reformation).
The Church under Vatican 2 is a kind of parallel church that shouldn't exist. Like the world was suddenly flipped on its side and the one we are living in now is a kind of alternate reality.
Precisely. There is often one Latin mass rite at a church (or local area) per weekend, with 4-5 Novus Ordo masses at every Church in the diocese. That one Latin mass may be mostly full, but there are only 500 Churches in the United States that actually offer one (many of which not even on a weekly basis), whereas there are 17,000 parishes offering the Novus Ordo. That's A LOT more people who prefer the Novus Ordo, showing how small of a minority this movement is.
Breaking In The Habit my parish is the only parish in Dallas Texas that only does a Latin mass , actually more and more people are coming and we are building a cathedral because we are over full , Novus ordo masses are dying out , people don’t ever go to them , the reason we are a minority is because the lack of latin masses , we are the only ones who do it , all the other parishes in the entire metroplex don’t have any Latin services , novus ordo masses have an Abismal attendance rate than Latin ones , the lack of availability is the reason why of pure numbers people go to novus ordo because that’s the only mass they can find and of pure ignorance, A LOT of people don’t even know the Latin mass exist , we need to go back to tradition
@@BreakingInTheHabitI did not *prefer* the Novus Ordo Mass. I thought there was only 1 kind of Mass. I did not even know of the existence of the TLM until a couple of years ago! Now that I know of the TLM, I attend that Mass. And there are many of us who are young who are discovering the TLM!
@@BreakingInTheHabit A lot of it has to do with a misunderstanding of the Latin Mass and unfamiliarity with that spirituality. My 33 year old wife grew up a cradle Catholic and didn't even know the Latin Mass existed or was still something preferred by some people. So, I don't think it's fair to say that it is expressly "preferred" by the majority because most are either ignorant of it as an option entirely or they grew up with a bias against it from their parents. Moreover, we can agree that just because something is popular it doesn't mean it's what should be done.
I attended a Latin Mass once in Manila... I may not understand what it is but one things for sure my soul did... But thank you Father Casey for the info...
Recaptured the original traditions of the Church especially from the Last Supper and the Breaking of Bread by the Apostles and St Paul. In the Last Supper of Our Lord, Jesus' willing to share with us his Body and Blood. The Apostles and St Paul also did the same way sharing a one bread and one cup as a form of a real traditional Mass. The Latin Mass so called today a Traditional Mass is because passed on and developed in the 15th Century. Why Latin Mass regarded as a Traditional Mass? I still don't know. Why not the very Last Supper of Our Lord? Is the Last Supper of Our Lord not a Traditional Mass? What about the Apostles and Paul? What about the early Church Mass? Recaptured the Original traditions of the Church is one of the perfect explanation of Vatican 2. Thank you Fr Casey.
The word of God does not change...and will never change. God Jesus Christ and His teachings have never changed we humans are the only ones who want to change it, who want to fix it to our on beliefs or what is convinient to us sinners. Some of us think that killing unborn babies is fine and cool....and this is a woman's right. Others think that two women can get married, and two men can be married or that today I am a woman...and tomorrow I can transform to a man.......and the list goes on....and on. For those of us who truly believe and try our very best to follow the law of God because at the end of my life the only one who can save my soul from burning in HELL is GOD, and not humand kind or pleasing human kind. The only one that I tried to please every single day of my life is GOD. God bless you. and peace be with you. God give us the strength to resist this evil wicked world. OMG...
God has, and will continue to reveal himself, and his truths to select individuals until the earth is dead. These revelations are meant to be shared. Sadly, since the beginning, and, until the end of time, many messengers will continue to be persecuted. We are ALL his children. Love ALL your brothers and sisters!
Talmot of JMMANUEL which says that Jesus Christ was god. Get the copy of Talmot of Jmmanuel published by Almanac with 3500 pages and were distributed to the entire Europians countries including those countries headed by Kings and Queens and even the Catholic head the Vatican. That's why the Vatican issued this Vatican 2. With these books circulated in Europe were highly read. Now this were the Vatican 2 was issued.
i mean that Jesus Christ is not god. He was not god. Jmmanuel (Jesus Christ)was a Pheleades from constellation Phealedes while Mama Mary the mother from LYRA a star system. Read the book Talmot of JMMANUEL.
Breaking In The Habit OK you might take offence to this next question and I'm sorry if it offends you but what do you say to people who say Satan entered the Vatican in October 1962?
Vatican I was an ecumenical council in 1869-70, cut short by war in Europe. The main doctrine to come out of the council was Papal Infallibility, and the focus was very anti-modernity.
@@BreakingInTheHabit Would that the anti-modernity sentiment had been continued! Modernity was born out of Masonic liberalism, a rebellion against the Old World Order of Catholicism.
I am glad that Vatican II allowed Mass to be spoken in a local language. It allows lay people to better understand the word of God. In my home state of California there are many parishes that still offer Latin Mass for traditionalists.
Why the heck did we need Vatican 2? More watering down of tradition.... The Pope just said all paths lead to God, so I'm sure the Gaia worshippers are super happy for validation of their death cult. Great Job Vatican! Keep watering stuff down! You are to understand God on HIS terms not the other way around.
@@johnjames9359 I disagree. Worshipping an object is idolatry. Jesus Christ showed us all how to live. What does the Earth show you? Why not worship the moon? Or Uranus? 😆 It's all Gaia nonsense for control of you and the Earth. There's one born every minute.....
Thank you for this video. I was considering converting to Catholicism but the more I looked into the modern church and Vatican II the more I was repelled. It seems that the Church is in a state of submitting to globo homo even harder and harder as time passes.
Have you looked into SSPX? They say the Traditional Latin Mass. They retain the Catholic traditions & how the Mass was said for the past 500 years.A lot of Catholics are questioning Vatican II as well.
Thank you for that explanation! I do not agree with some of the things I have heard some priests say in the name of "Spirit of the Council"! I want to agree with as much as I can of what the Pope say's for example, but simply do not. I am trying ,to "to thine own self be true", as well as, "come, let us reason together", while asking God to correct me if I am wrong about my reasoning, so I can update my understanding. Thanks again. Praise be to God.
This just proves that the Catholic Church is alive. It’s developing Body of Christ. It undergoes radical changes to fit what the current situation requires but it is always within the light of the gospels.
Wow all this are great revelation to the world, those with ears should hear and cross to the light instead of wandering in darkness, me am an adventist......
A few thoughts come to mind: the catechumenate, permanent diaconate, centralized role of bishop in the eucharistic celebration not to mention our theology of ordination (drastically different from the Middle Ages), Eucharist as a meal (places specifically in the Jewish tradition of memorial), the greater use of Scripture in liturgies (central to the early Church but faded away in the Middle Ages), the sign of peace, praying in the vernacular, and the restored order of the sacraments of initiation (Baptism, confirmation, Eucharist. This was switched as recently as the early 1900s and switched back at Vatican II for adults).
@@BreakingInTheHabit All this theology....backed by very little action. Why is the Catholic Church sitting on an absolute fortune ( £15 billion ) at last 'count', while children starve in Yemen? What do you think Jesus would say to you if he returned tomorrow? Do you think he would be happy with Vatican? Have a blessed & truthful day.
@@yvonnemccalla7282 this "absolute fortune" is not cash that can be simply given away, it is in property, churches, art, livelihood of preists and the religious. Don't talk about something you know nothing about: the art, churches, property(like hospitals and orphanages), and wages for the preist are all for the glorification of God. In the OT the Israelites, both rich and poor, donated to the building of the temple of God: did God not care for the poor then? You simply overlook the countless works of Charity done by the catholic church(one of the biggest charities in the world) and yet you want to sell what is glorifying God so that it can be given to the poor? Didn't Judas Iscariot advocate for the same thing?
@Cardboard Cape -- So? Well to begin with, Trump was the LEAST Christian president the USA president ever had. Lying, cheating, philandering, false witness? -- exactly which of the "7 deadly sins" did he NOT commit. And yet, I remain shocked at the number of so-called Christians and Catholics who supported this failed TV reality show host as president. And among the Catholic supporters of Trump, virtually all of them are extreme right- wingers --- and exactly the type to be opposed to Vatican Council II and Pope Francis, and supporters of the obsolete Tridentine Mass. I know that paints with a broad brush, but seriously there are very few exceptions.
Love you kid but this video is wrong. Show me the documents. Aggornamento theology is why we are experiencing the relativism we see in today's catholics. Characterizing the Church as turned in on itself is a short cited description.
The documents, as you wish: www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm I have read them, I recommend that you do too. As far as your other claim, I beg to differ. Most theologians and philosophers point to World War II as the most cataclysmic event to faith in world history. What Vatican II did was salvage what was a world already hemorrhaging faith, and was probably the thing that saved us from complete annihilation. A pre-Vatican II church would have faired much worse in today’s world. The fruit of Vatican II is the largest number of converts in 1500 years, a Church that has been able to adapt to the ever-changing world and remain afloat, the greater inclusion of our brothers and sisters in the southern hemisphere to the greater benefit of being truly "catholic," and a laity that is more involved than it ever has been, producing the greatest fruit the Church has ever seen in terms of liturgical involvement, social charity and justice, literacy in theological matters, and engagement with the outside world. I'm confused by your statement because by most accounts the Church is the healthiest it has ever been.
Again brother with respect it's clear you're use drunk the Kool Aid here, by almost any metric the Church is in crisis. There is so much evidence for this if you want to see it and I prayerfully recommend you do and be challenged that the Church you see today by and large is incongruous with the Faith held universally before VII.
What “traditions” were restored?
The catechumenate, permanent diaconate, centralized role of bishop in the eucharistic celebration, not to mention our theology of ordination (drastically different from the Middle Ages), Eucharist as a meal (places specifically in the Jewish tradition of memorial), the greater use of Scripture in liturgies (central to the early Church but faded away in the Middle Ages), the sign of peace, praying in the vernacular, and the restored order of the sacraments of initiation (Baptism, confirmation, Eucharist. This was switched as recently as the early 1900s and switched back at Vatican II for adults).
I also wrote a blog post on the subject: breakinginthehabit.org/2017/09/25/what-was-vatican-ii/
Breaking In The Habit - was Truth restored all? Truth, not "faith".
Breaking In The Habit do you even know what you're saying? Eucharist as a meal? Are you serious?
Breaking In The Habit you do realize that there's more Scripture read in the Latin Mass than the Novus Ordo Missale? What you're presenting here is false, on almost every point.
Liturgy in the language of the various localities around the world. Before Latin became a "dead" language and then memorialized in our Roman Catholic Church, it was the lingua franca-understood by just about everybody-west of Moscow and north of sub-Saharan Africa. The only reason-k-now-that people at the Holy Sacrifice have their noses in missalettes, IMO, is that the speakers/readers aren't doing a good vocal job.
It was actually a response to the common criticism held by Atheists at the time: "If the Vatican is so good, why isn't there a Vatican 2?"
Vatican 3 Return of the TLM
I live in a Southeast Asian country and came from a devout Muslim family. I decided to take RCIA some time ago and your channel has helped me a lot to learn. Thank you.
I'm guessing you're from Indonesia?
Hi! Glad to have you! I hope you’re happy❤
God protect you
This video popped up a day after I asked my father what Vatican 2 was. Perfect timing
Excellent! For more information, you can read the corresponding blog post: breakinginthehabit.org/2017/09/25/what-was-vatican-ii/
Your phone is listening
Google is listening
Woah. Perfect timing
@@shaskins15 you don't even have to talk just think
As a young 18 year old Christian, I think it’s kind of sad that the church has drifted away from it’s traditional routines. Sure of course God doesn’t need us to look very “religious,” but from my understanding these things are supposed to help us understand what’s sacred and beautiful in the eyes of God and lead us to a deeper relationship and encounter with him. With regards to the mass and the sacraments, I think they should all be said in the vernacular because how are people supposed to understand the mass with first understand its meaning but the form that it was originally practiced as well as what the sanctuary was supposed to look should be retained. However it is what it is, but I do think God is still working in the church regardless of these changes and what matters is that the church continues to keep its fundamental doctrines which is the most important 👍🏻
Update: My understanding of the Mass now, I think with things like “Eucharistic Minsters”, Communion on the Hand, “Altar Girls, and others are abuses against the Liturgy. With rapid decline in the Church, I wonder if without the changes made in V2 how things would be right now. Perhaps decline of the faithful wouldn’t be too far and the integrity of the sacramental life of the Church. Especially the Pope and the liberal clergy we have now, what they’re doing really is disturbing. In conclusion, I would say we really should go back to tradition and abandon all these crimes against the Bride of Christ. However, I don’t think being a sedevacantist or saying the current Pope is not “Pope.” will solve anything. But fighting for the restoration of Traditional Catholicism in the Church is certainly something I believe needs to happen now!
Without these changes, Catholic Church will be museum like most of Ortodox Churches in Europe today!!!
Sven Skender if it weren’t for V2 we would have people entering religious life more than now. The traditional Mass is growing and the modernist church is shrinking.
@@ElstonTrant Most Catholic churches in Europe are empty too.
@@ElstonTrant So the church has to be made "relevant" with contemporary poison? The true church of Christ surely doesn't need this. Also, I wouldn't quite agree on the last thing you said. Pretty much all European Orthodox countries are still Orthodox, with growing communities.. There have been built and reopened tens of thousands of new churches in the last couple decades. On the other hand, the Catholic church is quite litterally dying out. Walk into any catholic service in Western Europe and you'll see the average age of the attendents is 70 years old. Every other day a Catholic church is closed. The ones that remain wave rainbow flags in defeat. It's not that this makes me happy, but you seem to have an incorrent view on things.
Sure go back to killing non religious scientists
sorry this video was a bit of a bummer - you need to clarify which traditions were supposedly restored. I have come across this argument a few times but I have a hard time believing it
Jose Castro That’s it other than that everything was watered down and made it harder to become a Catholic. To get Baptism now you need to go through all these classes which are often led by some woman with a Karen cut
"Our Lord is neither liberal or reformer." ArchBishop Lefebvre
Thanks for your comment, but I beg to differ on at least one of those terms. The life of Jesus, captured in the four Gospels, represents a major reform of then existing Jewish life, theology, and society. He changed laws, social statuses, understandings of God, understandings of salvation, rituals, and central identity. How is he not a reformer?
I understand what u mean. I believe ArchBishop Lefebrve was reffering to His Church. Meaning Jesus. If we look back to Pope Gregory XVI Papal Encyclical "Mirari Voss" on liberalism. He said, " The Catholic Church needs no innovations,not even of words." We must ask the question,was he wrong ? Was Vatican II really necessary ? What are the fruits of Vatican II ? Are more Catholics going to Mass ? Are more Church`s opening or closing ? Are there more converts than those leaving the faith ? I was raised in the novous ordo Church. But after going to the Latin Mass. I can see why the Church is in the shape its in. Don`t get me wrong I like the novous ordo. But if the Church is gonna be "revived"its gonna happen through tradition. "Religious indifferentism is a pernicious error damning souls." Pope Gregory XVI Mirari Voss
Breaking In The Habit So..does this mean you are in favor of these liberal reforms that are trying to destroy the Catholic Faith..
Catherine Holmes the future is in the past. I can’t follow Rome or any liberal modernist. That’s why I’m a Sedevacantis. What? The Church had it wrong for 1960 years? We needed Vatican 2 ? And the change in the Mass and some of the Rites ? I think not. There is a special grace in the Latin Mass. that you can even hear in the homilies of the Priests.
chris purcell the future is in the past..agreed..but you can not leave the Church or deny its leadership..even when things look as bleak as they do now..THAT is what luther did..As much chaos as we have in the Catholic Church today..it is nothing compared to the Protestant churches...why??..Because falsehoods can not survive that long in the Church..the truth flushes them out..we have gone through MANY heresies in the Church..this modernist carp ( see what i did there..wink...wink..)..is just the latest in a long line of evil that has tried and failed to destroy the Church..and like all the rest..it will fail..
The only thing I'm iffy on about Vatican II is the liturgical reform. Don't get me wrong, I don't reject Vatican II in any way, shape, or form, there are just some preferences I have. I do not believe the Novus Ordo is invalid or anything like that:
I don't know why they touched the liturgy as much as they did. Why create a new "form" of the Roman Rite? Why not just create a vernacular translation of the Extraordinary Form? Also, why did so many awful practices come up that weren't even supported by the council? Why did priests start saying mass behind the altar when it's not mentioned anywhere in the documents? Why was Communion allowed in the hand when the majority of Bishops at the council voted against such an idea?
I don't know the answers to these, but what I do know is that the large traditional movement in Holy Mother Church works complimentary to the more modern Catholics we have, not contrary. My dream is to become a Dominican Friar and be a bi-ritual priest so that I can say the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite as well as the Dominican Rite (which is similar to the EF)
Hi billy bob, I think you ask completely legitimate questions and I respect the way you've done so. A few things in response:
1) This is the normal process of the Church and has happened on multiple occasions. When the Tridentine mass was being formed in the 16th century, the bishops did not take the old right and cosmetically modify it, they made wholesale changes. The same happened in the early middle ages wit the Germanization of the liturgy. The reason for this is either because the past no longer expresses the present or older, more authentic, prayers have been found and want to be incorporated. This is the case for both Trent and Vatican II (our Eucharistic prayers are different because we discovered some from the early Church).
2) We need to remember that for much of our Church history, and to a small extent now, there have always been multiple approved liturgies at one time. In the early Church, there was no official liturgy. In the early middle ages (before Germanization), there was a different liturgy in each country. Prior to Trent, the regional differences had become very great, with multiple sacramentaries. Sometimes people feel that Vatican II is a betrayal because we're throwing away what we've always done, but really, it's simply redoing what has repeated itself 4-5 times throughout history: oscillating from a very strict, uniform observance to a very flexible, universal observance.
3) Finally, specifically for Vatican II, a new form was necessary because the old form no longer expressed our theology. The old form had no participation from the laity. There was little variation from week to week (with only one yearly cycle.) Scripture was not very present. Ancient rites, including the sign of peace, the presentation of the gifts, homily, distribution under both kinds, and gloria were all limited or completely suppressed. The vernacular was but a small change compared to some of the bigger things that were necessary, and so a new form had to be created.
4. As for people not following the directives, why does anyone not follow the rules? I don't know. It's always been the case, and it's unfortunate.
Actually there weren't 'wholesale changes' to the Mass at Trent. Pope St Pius V only codified the liturgy which already had a millennium of history behind it. He didn't rewrite it as the committee established after VII did with the help of 6 Protestant ministers with the aim of making it 'more acceptable to the Protestants' as the head of the committee, Archbishop Bugnini is quoted as saying - two rather different movements I'd suggest! Don't take my word for it though, it's all history now which can be learnt for those who really won't to know the truth. VII wasn't a reform, it was a revolution and were all paying the price now, empty pews, seminaries and no discernible difference in morality between Catholics and non-Catholics. The Council Fathers were seduced into confirming to the world and to question this is considered largely taboo, but there are people out there who have so I'd encourage you to read them. God bless!
Thank you for the reply, Brother Casey!! It's very helpful
billy bob this SHOULD change your mind: *_THE EXTREME OATH OF THE JESUITS - Warning!! a MOST vile excerpt.._*
(What your Jesuit Pope and hopes you never find out)
"...I furthermore promise and declare that I will, when opportunity present, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do, to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth; and that I will spare neither age, sex or condition; and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics, rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against the walls, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race. That when the same cannot be done openly, I will secretly use the poisoned cup, the strangulating cord, the steel of the poniard or the leaden bullet, regardless of the honor, rank, dignity, or authority of the person or persons, whatever may be their condition in life, either public or private, as I at any time may be directed so to do by any agent of the Pope or Superior of the Brotherhood of the Holy Faith, of the Society of Jesus..."
👑 May the ONE and ONLY Heavenly Father , the Most High have mercy on us all: HalleluYAH!
billy bob With all due respect, I think Vatican II is a good way to promote our faith. Yes, I can see how it might be difficult for older people to accept it, especially when they lived in between 2 types of approaching the Mass and Eucharist. However, I can see, as a younger generation, that a form of Mass, where the spiritual leader faces the crowd and more laity has a chance to participate with the priest besides communion, and in which the language is more understandable and connectable to the people on the pews, and with prayers and a promotion to talk to people and promote peace, while staying true and valid to the basis of our beliefs, I see Vatican II as a great opportunity in this new age of modern world.
What kills me as well the church seems to want to help everyone but Catholics. I once went into a Catholic Charities and it had a bunch of Baptist’s with the workers and Receptionists pretty much all Baptist’s. They also had the same time have the nerve to talk about Catholics.
The only Catholics I see get hired within the church at are pro illegal immigration workers.
The shelters are mostly single Baptist women. Catholic Schools like DePaul which is a Catholic college the Priests allow the school to be run by Catholics and Atheists well the Priests take nice cushy trips to France to their winery well they neglect their flocks.
Having Catholic speakers speak at a catholic school is at this point not allowed as the school apologized for a nun coming to speak about catholic values
Thank you Brother Casey for everything. From your disciplined, devoted and ascetic life to your unbridled love for Christ and his church. You're an amazing and special young man indeed. I love your enlightening channel and shall keep you in my prayers. God Bless.
My friend, VAII was the coming-out party of modernism that lays waste the Church as we speak. Just look all around you. I suggest that you read Archbishop Vigano's recent assessment of things.
I bet the Third Secret calls the Council into Question!!!
Father, only 5 years later...I did not receive a vocation as you were blessed, I had 12 years of Catholic school...not like the Catholic education that you have had...please, please advise re the "Catacomb Documents" that were signed in the Vatican, underneath the Vatican? During Vatican II? Please understand that we need the traditions as established by Our Lord (directed to Peter.)
This is a good bird's eye view but it glosses over the impact of the misinterpretations of Vatican II that led to much disillusionment of Roman Catholics. That in of itself would deserve a few videos with Casey's capable handling of the topic.
That is a great idea! Maybe some time in the future.
Casey folks are starting to appreciate your content so hopefully the 'future' handling of
how some folks misunderstood the import of Vatican II will be sooner rather than later.
You offer a lot to folks who need guidance from someone easy to relate to.
The bishops who initiated the Vatican II false teachings, rebelled against Almighty God. In Nostra Aetate they honor the Muhammad gang of murderers, they are anti-Christs who state that Our Lord Jesus was NOT crucified.
.
Our Lord Jesus Is Truth.
Vatican II wasn’t misinterpreted. It was intended to be interpreted that way by the liberals who hijacked the council, in line with the Jews and Freemasons.
“On the other hand, Catholics must gladly acknowledge and esteem the truly Christian endowments which derive from our common heritage and which are to be found among our separated brothers and sisters who bear witness to Christ, even at times fo the shedding of their blood.”
- Paul VI, Unitatis Redintegratio, No. 4, Nov. 21, 1964
“Therefore, it (the Holy Roman Church) condemns, reproves, anathematizes and declares to be outside the body of Christ, which is the church, whoever holds opposing or contrary views.”
- Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, Cantate Domino, 1441
To friends who may be bummed out as well, I hope we realize that not all social and disciplinary crises in the Church can be traced to Vatican II, even if the council is responsible to some degree. We're going through major issues as Christ's faithful that are affecting communities around the world long before Vatican II came about. Let's not polarize this, let's repent, pray, and come together. Championing reform is not about submitting to the world's ways, and championing tradition is not about turning a blind eye to the needs of each age and culture.
My only criticism of the Vatican Council II is the fading away of Latin language in priests today. Fine, you preach in English but as a priest you should be able to speak fluent Latin. Latin is the language of the church but less than one percent of the priest today speak it. Also the second Vatican Council resulted in the falling out of exorcist priest today. Father Gabrielle Amort addressed this serious situation in the church today. Demonic possession today is rapidly increasing in number especially in the US. Killing twenty, thirty people in the mall or in the park with automatic rifle is NOT mental illness. It is diabolical influence. These criminals need more than psychiatrist. They need a priest.
Isn’t it clear that the council did not work as intended, even if you agree with its reforms, judging by the scandals, mass loss of the faithful etc?
You give *way* too much credit to the council! Haha you think that an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church caused the whole world had a mental breakdown? I think a better reading of history would recognize the effect that World War II had on dismantled the psyche of our world: a generation after the end of the war societal structures, norms, family dynamics, race relations, Sunday attendance, sexual ethics, nuclear arms races, and wealth inequality turned the world on its head. The Second Vatican Council did not cause the problems you see today, it *salvaged* what faith was left of the world and made it possible for the Church to navigate such a changing world!
Because, really, look at the fact of the matter: the population of the Church has exploded worldwide since the second Vatican Council. While most other Churches are shrinking, the Catholic Church continues to grow. Not in Europe and North America, but in Latin America, Asia, and Africa, the Church is stronger than it has ever been.
@@BreakingInTheHabit I can attest to this as an Asian Catholic, lover of both Novus Ordo and TLM haha
I commend you, Fr. Casey, for your work and patience in evangelization. Never stop dialoguing with others!
I am a baby boomer. Grew up in the Church. I think the Catholic Church have done a good job . However, with any large institution, their are few bad apples. I was their when the Mass was in Latin. I think changing it to English was a good thing. I would like to see Priests being able to marry Giving them that option would bring in more Priests. However, that comes with issues because how does a Priest balance his family with his ministry. It will be a real challenge. They will need to be very defined work loads and time set aside for family life. Most successful ministries work night and day. So, I do get the fact it’s better for a Priest to be single. However, a shortage of Priests need to be dealt with. There are some men that prefer to be single. They can dedicate their full lives to their calling. I think the religious should have that option. Perhaps, their should call Vatican III and get more men to serve and loosen up the restrictions. The Catholics do allow some married priests coming from other denominations.
That’s would be terrible it would bring it terrible priests dealing with family issues
I still abstenate from meat on fridays, pray in latin and recite the St Michael prayer at the end of Mass, Vatican 2 is what it is, but Im still praying like its 1100, Deus Vult.
those two ideas you presented are diametrically opposed. were they “catching up with the times” or “returning to old principles”? They’d only be the same if the old was becoming new again but that’s also a bold statement, yet that claim wasn’t made
I believe in orthodox Christianity, but I enjoy your church to certain degree.
The. Churches where full before Vatican II now they are empty.
Not at all biased, most experts on religion say Vatican II damaged the Church and it effected the congregations turnout to Mass.
Idk where. Where I live you can’t even find a seat. At least not until this pandemic.
Of source Sunday trading laws, Sporting Sundays and all the other demands placed on modern life had nothing to do with any of it. That all these opportunities that appeared was pure happenstance.
This was so interesting! Thanks for making this video! I'm a rather young Catholic so I'm not familiar with the traditions that were stated in the video like veils and side altars so I was wondering if you had any time to make a video about that? Again, awesome video!
Thanks! While some of those traditions are interesting, I think there are so many living traditions worth talking about first! If you would like to read more about them, there is plenty of information online.
Emily Standige St. Paul still says in Corinthians chapter 11 that women should cover their heads when they pray. Mass is the most sacred prayer of all.
“It follows that these separated churches and communities as such, though we believe them to be deficient in some respects, have, by no means been deprived of significance and important in the mystery of salvation. For the Spirit of Christ had not refrained from using them as means of salvation …”
- Paul VI, Unitatis Redintegratio, No. 3, Nov. 21, 1964
“Since however there is for both regulars and seculars, for superiors and subjects, for exempt and non-exempt, one universal Church, outside of which there is no salvation …”
- Pope Clement V, Council of Vienne
If you're a young catholic looking to grow your faith. You're better off listening to the channel "Sensus Fidelium" Fr. Wolfe and Fr Ripperger are phenomenal!
What’s crucial when seeing this or any Council is a trust and hope in the Holy Spirit, so that in any period of reform we read a deep sense of continuity; what Pope Benedict XVI would call the “hermeneutic of continuity”.
VII’s docs are truly beautiful, I think they should be read with great reverence and docility of spirit. It is also true that if the wrong hermeneutic is embraced (one of rupture and suspicion) a dangerous spirit will take hold and do grave damage. Some claim doctrines changed when nowhere in VII such a thing was claimed. In fact, in Gaudet Mater Ecclesia the opening discourse to the council, St John XXIII makes this abundantly explicit and says that doctrine ought to be taught with the same accuracy as in Trent and VI! How beautiful that our Holy Father should recall the same spirit of those two councils! Elsewhere, the documents often recall the profound continuity in the reform it was seeking.
Some of the fruits of VII have been liturgical, all while respecting the magnificence and evangelical power of the Mass of St Pius V which happily is free to be celebrated today (well the modified version by John XXIII, often called the TLM), and also my personal favorite, eventually: the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Honestly guys, the CCC is a gift to us that I think previous generations could only dream of. We’re so so lucky and blessed to be born in a period where such a marvellous and also quite authoritative document exists!
Deacon Casey, would you consider making a vid, or even a series, on how the CCC was made? Even just learning about how it came to be is a real eye opener...a lot of interesting twists and turns in the “sausage making process”. But ultimately, a great product!
History shows massive decline in Church attendance happened all over Europe after this. Why?
ua-cam.com/video/dVFyJGO08dw/v-deo.html
@@BreakingInTheHabit Thank you Father.
Hello - I was called an "apostate" for defending the traditionalist position (preferring the Latin Mass and offering respectful criticism of changes in the liturgy) by a viewer and my post was deleted. I am open to changing my mind and would have appreciated dialogue. In the age of dialogue where we'll dialogue with every other religion under the sun, but only silence, or hurl proverbial stones at other Catholics, honest and open dialogue on internal issues would be a great way for us to solve our disagreements. Instead all we get on both sides are ad hominem attacks (calling traditionalists "schismatics", "radicals", "fundamentalists", "apostates", or "extremists" isn't an argument - Besides if defending tradition is what makes one an apostate then it follows all of our ancestors before 1960 were apostates too. Thus either the Catholic Faith is false or this kind of rebuke is unjust). God bless. Most Holy Mother of God, pray for us.
I just wish we had the option of going to the Traditional Latin Mass or the Novus Ordo. Both valid and everyone is happy.
there are churches that give latin mass weekly. google it for your area
Yes! Me too. But not the muppet suits and water pistols though. Mass should always be reverent.
What about Vatican II saying Muslims share a right of salvation because they say they’re worshipping the God of Abraham yet deny Christ?
Here the point is very simple. Christ founded a Church and gave His authority to the Church to govern it. Christ never established a rite, or a norm. It is the Church who uses the authority to do that with the guidence of the Holy Spirit. We belive in the Church, and that is what we profess in our Creed.
I like the mass to be in latin rite and traditional way
What do you mean the "traditional" way. Do you mean the liturgy that was created in 1571? Because there are recovered aspects of today's liturgy that are far older than that. In many ways, today's liturgy encompasses the oldest traditions we've ever had in a liturgy.
Breaking In The Habit you mean so we should create a new of its own ? Why change a mass that’s over 400 years old ? What traditions were bright back ? The Latin mass is what brought Catholics together All I see from these novus ordo masses is modern music and almost as a social event instead of worshipping god it feels like a Protestant church and sermon than a mass. , why couldn’t we have just incorporated the old tradition we have lost into the Latin mass ? Why create a whole new reform ? People are leaving the church on mass because we are now going against our own doctrine and conforming to everyone instead of everyone confirming to god ? Jesus was not making compromises when he mounted the cross , the 2 Vatican just caused more division in the events and actions after , the fact the order of Malta banned the Latin mass shows this and created division god bless brother , hopefully we can all come back to tradition, the Latin mass is what brought me back to the church and for millions of other young Catholics we want it .
@@BreakingInTheHabit The Tridentine liturgy was not created in 1571. It developed over the centuries, but it is about 1400-1600 years old.
It was the collapse of the church. The church fell away from God but they're still rich. It will be restored when Jesus comes. 2033.
What ancient documents were discover between Vatican 1 and 2? Having trouble finding info on this.
The ones that the freemasons made up and inserted
did the priest get excommunicated for spraying water with a water gun
While not the most acceptable practice within the liturgy, it is hardly an excommunicable offense. When we say someone is excommunicated, we are literally saying that they are "outside communion" with the rest of us. That is a grave status, one that can only be reached by immense acts of evil or heresy. What he did in this video was not even bad enough to make the mass invalid, let alone excommunicate him. Now, was he reprimanded by his bishop? I'm not sure, but that is much more likely.
thank you brother casey keep on preaching the truth
hope so that was disgraceful behaviour.
@@BreakingInTheHabit While ideally one wouldn't be excommunicated except for heresy or acts of evil, there have been saints who have been excommunicated as well (e.g. St. Joan of Arc and St. Athanasius the Great). A contemporary who was automatically excommunicated, at least according to the letter of the law, was Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the 4 bishops he consecrated. Those latter bishops are no longer excommunicated. I'm sure in time Archbishop Lefebvre will no longer be recognized as excommunicated as time goes on. An anonymous Cardinal even dared to say that Archbishop Lefebvre will one day be recognized as a Doctor of the Church! At the very least he has been very misunderstood. Time will tell. God bless
What specifically were the 1500-2000 year old traditions restored by 2nd Vatican Council? Thank you!
A few thoughts come to mind: the catechumenate, permanent diaconate, centralized role of bishop in the eucharistic celebration not to mention our theology of ordination (drastically different from the Middle Ages), Eucharist as a meal (places specifically in the Jewish tradition of memorial), the greater use of Scripture in liturgies (central to the early Church but faded away in the Middle Ages), the sign of peace, praying in the vernacular, and the restored order of the sacraments of initiation (Baptism, confirmation, Eucharist. This was switched as recently as the early 1900s and switched back at Vatican II for adults).
“For several reasons, the Church recognized that it is joined to those who, though baptized and so honored with the Christian name, do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve communion under the successor of St. Peter.”
- Paul VI, Lumen Gentium, No. 15, Nov. 21, 1964
“There are other, almost countless, proofs drawn from the most trustworthy witnesses which clearly and openly testify with great faith, exactitude, respect and obedience that all who want to belong to the true and only Church of Christ must honor and obey this Apostolic See and Roman Pontiff.”
- Pope Pius IX, April 8, 1862
@@John-jf8lw how do those two quotes contradict one another (as it seems you're implying)?
@@ComicRaptor8850 Paul VI said that the Church (the Catholic Church) is "joining" non-Catholic "Christians" who "do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve communion under the successor of St. Peter." Non-Catholics, such as Protestants, do not honor the successors of St. Peter. Neither do the Orthodox, who elect their own "Patriarch" in defiance of the successor of St. Peter, who is the Pope.
That is contradictory to what Pope Pius IX (and all the popes prior to Vatican II) claimed. As he said, those "who want to belong to the true and only Church of Christ must honor and obey this Apostolic See and Roman Pontiff." The other "Christian" religions don't do that. Martin Luther called the pope "evil" and as I mentioned earlier, the Orthodox rebel against the Pope by electing their own "Patriarch."
In simple terms, since the 1960s, Catholics have been led to believe that all the religions need to unite as one and therefore, other "Christian" religions (and tragically, even pagan religions), which were previously denounced by the Catholic Church, are now "respectable" and even "good." That is a false teaching, which sadly, the modernists have been repeating over and over again for nearly 60 years. Prior to Vatican II, the only way to salvation was the Catholic faith. Yes, it sounds rather blunt and brutal, but in the end, the dogma is the dogma ("For I am the Lord, and I change not: and you the sons of Jacob are not consumed." - Malachi 3:6; "Every best gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no change, nor shadow of alteration." - James 1:17
If you look closely (and you can find previous statements from just about any pope online - even the ones from many centuries ago), you will discover that the contradictions are overwhelming. Although it may seem cold or harsh, the pre-Vatican II popes made it clear: You are either in or you're out. In other words, you are part of the Church of Christ, which is the Catholic Church, or you are on the road to perdition.
Alas, this channel and many modernists are simply dismissing such teaching. Vatican II wants to give you the impression that everyone goes to heaven and not to worry. That's a dangerous trap that so many people find extremely enticing. For example: “There is a hell, but it could be empty." - Hans von Balthasar
If such a statement sounds intriguing (which does for supporters of this channel), consider the following:
"Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it!"
- Matthew 7:13-14
“Even if the true Church of Christ were reduced to a handful of true believers, they would remain the true Church of Christ on Earth.”
- St. Athanasius
If priests or even bishops were taking actions in direct contradiction of Vat 2 then why were they not held accountable? If that guy with the water gun is acting against the council's decisions was he dealt with by those with authority to do so? There seems to be a total lack of accountability in the Catholic Church for these "rogue" clergymen and prominent laity such as politicians that promote anti-Catholic teachings.
This is not my original comment, but it is excellent so I will repost it.
Here is a short summary of the errors of Vatican II and how they contradict Church teaching..
Vatican II errors
Vatican II teaches:
Error #1: The "aim" of the liturgical reform is to "promote union" with heretics and schismatics. (SC 1)
Catholic Church teaches:
St Alphonsus Liguori in his Theologia Moralis. This doctor of the church writes, ‘It is not permitted to be present at the sacred rites of infidels and heretics in such a way that you would be judged to be in communion with them.’
Pope Pius XI recalled in the 1928 encyclical Mortalium Animos, ‘[the] Apostolic See has never allowed its subjects to take part in the assemblies of non-Catholics.’
Vatican II teaches:
Error #2: The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass should be within "the people's powers of comprehension and should not require much explanation." (SC 34)
Catholic Church teaches:
"If anyone says that the Rite of the Roman Church, according to which a part of the Canon is pronounced in a low tone, is to be condemned, or that the Mass ought to be celebrated in the vernacular only..let him be anathema." [Canon 9, Session XXII, Sept. 17, 1562]
"THE LANGUAGE PROPER TO THE ROMAN CHURCH IS LATIN. HENCE IT IS FORBIDDEN TO SING ANYTHING WHATEVER IN THE VERNACULAR IN SOLEMN LITURGICAL FUNCTIONS- MUCH MORE TO SING IN THE VERNACULAR THE VARIABLE OR COMMON PARTS OF THE MASS AND OFFICE."
(INTER SOLLICITUDINES, 1920 A.D.)
-POPE ST. PIUS X
Vatican II teaches:
Error #3: A "radical adaptation of the liturgy [to the culture and tradition of peoples] is needed." (SC 40)
Catholic Church teaches:
"If anyone says that the received and approved rites of the Catholic Church customarily used in the solemn administration of the Sacraments may be despised or omitted by the ministers without sin and at their pleasure, or may be changed by any pastor of the churches whomsoever to other new ones, let him be anathema." (Session 7, Canon 13 council of Trent)
Pope Pius V on the Latin Mass:
“Let all everywhere adopt and observe what has been handed down by the Holy Roman Church, the Mother and Teacher of the other churches, and let Masses not be sung or read according to any other formula than that of this Missal published by Us.” -Pope Pius V
Encyclical: Quo Primum: July 14, 1570.
Vatican II teaches:
Error #4: The Church of Christ merely "subsists" in the Catholic Church. (LG 8)
Catholic Church teaches:
Following all his predecessors, Pius XII teaches on two occasions, in Mystici corporis and in Humani generis that the Church of Christ and the Roman Catholic Church are strictly identical. Only the Catholic Church is the Church willed by Christ, because only the Catholic Church is governed by the Vicar of Christ, who causes the social order willed by Christ to reign. Outside of that government the administration of the sacraments is sterile and the reading of Sacred Scripture degenerates into intellectual and moral anarchy.
Vatican II teaches:
Error #5: Christ uses heretical and schismatic communities as "means of salvation." (UR 3)
Catholic Church teaches:
“There is no entering into salvation outside the Catholic Church, just as in the time of the Flood there was not salvation outside the Ark, which denotes the Church.” - St. Thomas Aquinas (1226-1274)
Vatican II teaches:
Error #6: The "liturgical actions" of the heretics provide "access to the community of salvation." (UR 3)
Catholic Church teaches:
"No man can find salvation except in the Catholic Church. Outside the Catholic Church one can have everything except salvation. One can have honor, one can have sacraments, one can sing alleluia, one can answer amen, one can have faith in the Name of the Father and the Son and of the Holy Ghost, and preach it too, but never can one find salvation except in the Catholic Church."
St. Augustine (354-430), Bishop and Doctor of the Church
Vatican II teaches:
Error #7: "Catholics must esteem the truly Christian endowments" to be found among the heretics as "a help to our own edification" (UR4)
Catholic Church teaches:
"It is absurd for a heretic to say that he believes in Jesus Christ. To believe in a person is to give our full consent to his Word & to all he teaches. True Faith, therefore, is absolute belief in Jesus Christ & in all he taught. Hence he who does not adhere to all that Jesus Christ has prescribed for our salvation, has no more the doctrine of Jesus Christ & of His Church than the pagans, Jews, & Turks have."
-St Thomas Aquinas
Vatican II teaches:
Error #8: Christ has made the Jews of our time "one in Himself' with gentiles "by His cross." (NA4)
Catholic Church teaches:
Matthew 10:33
“But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny[or reject] him before My Father in heaven.
“Do not add to your sins by saying that the Covenant is both theirs and ours. Yes it is ours, but they (Jews) lost it forever.” -St. Barnabas
Vatican II teaches:
Error #9: Muslims "along with us adore the one God... the Creator of heaven and earth." (LG 16, NA 4)
Catholic Church teaches:
Nicene Creed
“I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets. I believe in one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.”
Psalm 96:5
“all the gods of the infidels are demons, the LORD made the heavens.”
Vatican II teaches:
Error #10: Tradition developes in the Church as she "moves forward toward the fullness of divine truth." (DV 8)
Catholic Church teaches:
“Progress of dogmas is, in reality, nothing but corruption of dogmas... I absolutely reject the heretical doctrine of the evolution of dogma, as passing from one meaning to another, and different from the sense in which the Church originally held it.”
-Pope St. Pius X
Vatican II teaches:
Error #11: The "right to religious freedom"is based in the "dignity of the human person" and remains for those who neglect-their "obligation to seek the truth." (DH 2)
Catholic Church teaches:
Freedom of religion sets value to false religions. Countries must promote the Catholic religion. Catholic supremacy overall.
Cardinal Ottaviani, set forth the question correctly: "Just as the civil power considers it right to protect its citizens from the seductions of error ... so it may also regulate and moderate the public expression of other forms of worship and defend its citizens against the diffusion of false doctrines which, in the judgment of the Church, endanger their eternal salvation".
Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura (#’s 3-6), Dec. 8, 1864, ex cathedra: “From which totally false idea of social government they do not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our predecessor, Gregory XVI, an insanity, NAMELY, THAT ‘LIBERTY OF CONSCIENCE AND WORSHIP IS EACH MAN’S PERSONAL RIGHT, WHICH OUGHT TO BE LEGALLY PROCLAIMED AND ASSERTED IN EVERY RIGHTLY CONSTITUTED SOCIETY… But while they rashly affirm this, they do not understand and note that they are preaching liberty of perdition… Therefore, BY OUR APOSTOLIC AUTHORITY, WE REPROBATE, PROSCRIBE, AND CONDEMN ALL THE SINGULAR AND EVIL OPINIONS AND DOCTRINES SPECIALLY MENTIONED IN THIS LETTER, AND WILL AND COMMAND THAT THEY BE THOROUGHLY HELD BY ALL THE CHILDREN OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AS REPROBATED, PROSCRIBED AND CONDEMNED.”
Vatican II teaches:
Error #12: "All things on earth should be related to man as their center and crown." (GS 12)
Catholic Church teaches:
Human beings are incomplete without God
“Enough about the rights of man, let the world hear something about the rights of God.” Pope Leo XIII
“It was pride that changed angels into devils; it is humility that makes men as angels.” -Saint Augustine
“You must ask God to give you the power to fight against the sin of pride which is your greatest enemy-the root of all that is evil, and the failure of all that is good. For God resists the proud.” -Saint Vincent de Paul
These errors must be resisted because they contradict the divine law of the Church. No authentic ecumenical council of the Catholic Church could possibly teach these errors.
7/18/18 I watch and re-watch these videos Bro. Casey and never get tired of them. I receive a better understanding of what took place then and now, and you do an amazing job of explanation in all your video's. Keep up the great work of the Church and of Jesus Christ. I know your going to make an amazing and spirit filled Priest. God Bless and Thank you.
1:56 Honest question: Why is "church" capitalized in the first and third appearances, but not in the second? It seems to concede that the "church" as a congregation of the faithful is different from "the Church," meaning the Catholic Church. Is that accepted doctrine? It is an important part of Hans Kueng objections to Catholicism, but it seems odd to see it implicitly approved. Am I reading too much into this?
FULL DISCLOSURE= I am an atheist, but my question is raised in good faith -if you excuse the pun. I am legitimately interested in the Catholic position around this issue. Thanks in advance.
How hasn't Fr. Casey aged in 4 years and I'm over here looking 10 years older and 20 lbs heavier
I wonder if in my life time i will live to see a vatican III
An abomination!
7-19-21 The Pope has just announced the Latin Mass should not be practiced. Lose our tradition we lose our uniqueness .
Vatican II strikes me as a mistake...
The church should make both masses available so we can pick between the two to attend each week
Try searching a TLM in your area.
Blank Blank since I live in the Middle East no TLM here just the novus ordo
For anyone wondering, the normative language of Novus Ordo is actually Latin, and its normative music is Gregorian Chant. In Summorum Pontificum, Benedict XVI precisely laid the foundation for mutual enrichment of both the older and newer rites, the two learning from each other, and I agree. That's precisely what should happen, not a competition.
Vatican II's wonky implementation by some clergy caused a lot of issues, but its teaching is sound. In the context of Catholic communities around the world (not just the West), it led to great evangelization. The Church has been fighting issues that began even before Vatican II. We have a disciplinary and catechical problem, not so much liturgical. Where I am, Novus Ordo masses are beautiful, solemn, and packed even as they have a 21st century character, AND there is also a lovely Latin mass following. So yes, mutual enrichment, not competition or narrow ideas of liturgy.
I still think this needs a series of its own Brother... 😀
What were reformed? What were removed? What were brought back? Why? What could be done now?
Yeah, it's definitely a topic that could be stretched into a lot more videos. Maybe I'll see how I can incorporate more of the documents in the future.
@@BreakingInTheHabit Thanks. After seeing your "Understanding the Mass" series get traditionalist comments, this could be a good time to clarify further...
I would like a new more in-depth video on Vatican II
1:07 EXCOMMUNICATE EXCOMMUNICATE EXCOMMUNICATE!
Respectfully, most of this is pretty hackneyed. "The old, defensive Church," "rediscovery of traditions of Early Church," etc. As you state, most of the revolutionary changes were not of the Council itself, but were done after the fact by a small group of people, and not in accord with the desires of the Faithful. As such, they are able to be rejected without rejecting the Council per se, troublesome as many of its pronouncements were.
Heres a fun fact for you. Rad trads attack Vatican 2 like there is no tomorrow.... When in fact the real issue is with vatican 1 but they wouldnt know that because they have never read vatican 2, they have only eisegetically read parts of it out of context and the proof is them being literally wrong about it.
@@jonathansoko1085 no lol. There is nothing wrong with Vatican 1 other than that it was cut short.
We give praise to the Holy Spirit for enlightening the Cardinals who brought us Pope Francis from Argentina. May God continue to guide him as he works to implement the teachings of Vatican II.
“First of all, you ask if the God of the Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that - and this is fundamental - God’s mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their conscience. In fact, listening and obeying it, means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil. The goodness of the wickedness of our behavior depends on this decision.”
- Francis, 2013
“But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him.”
- Hebrews 11:6
@@John-jf8lw -- The writer of the Book of Hebrews was a bigot. And narrow-minded. Just imagine trying to "put limits" on God! How dare he! (or she). That's not the God I know..... or Good Pope Francis.
@@markmh835 St. Paul wrote the Book of Hebrews. 🙂
"Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father. He that confesseth the Son, hath the Father also."
- 1 John 2:23
"He that is not with me, is against me: and he that gathereth not with me, scattereth."
- Matthew 12:30
"He that believeth in him is not judged. But he that doth not believe, is already judged: because he believeth not in the name of the only begotten Son of God."
- John 3:18
"Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me."
- John 14:6
"But they said: Believe in the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."
- Acts 16:31
@@John-jf8lw -- St. Paul most certainly did NOT write the Book of Hebrews. This was conclusively determined by the 1960s and accepted by the vast majority of Biblical scholars by the 1970s. The writing style of the Book of Hebrews (in the original Greek, of course) is entirely different from all of St. Paul's other known writings. Moreover, the earliest existing copies of manuscripts of the Bible (in the Vatican and the British Museum) do not have Paul's name on Hebrews. Some scribe wrongly added St. Paul's name to Hebrews centuries later.
Therefore, we do not know the author of the Book of Hebrews. Any Bible which still prints Paul's name with Hebrews (and there are very few) is obviously very old and out of date. It appears that you are still using the King James translation. It has beautiful poetic English -- but it is a terrible translation from the original Greek. Please obtain a more modern and accurate translation of the Holy Bible. It will be a revelation of what the Good Book accurately says! You seem to like to quote the Bible; you might as well do it accurately.
@@markmh835 Martin Luther didn't like Hebrews either. The 60s and 70s' "theologians," along with Vatican II, had many revolutionary teachings (that contradicted previous Church teachings). For instance:
“Moreover, some and even most of the significant elements and endowments which together go to build up and give to the Church itself, can exist outside the the visible boundaries of the Catholic Church: the written word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit and visible elements too.”
- Paul VI, Unitatis Redintegratio, No. 3, Nov. 21, 1964
“With faith urging us, we are forced to believe and to hold the one holy Catholic Church and that apostolic and we firmly believe and simply confess this (Church) outside which there is no salvation nor remission of sin …”
- Pope Boniface VIII, ex cathedra bull, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302
Don't let yourself be influenced by the "modernists." The 73 books of the Bible are inspired works. Consider Pope Leo XIII's statements (along with Pope Agatho) ...
“Pope Agatho: ‘Nothing of the things appointed ought to be diminished; nothing changed; nothing added; but they must be preserved both as regards expression and meaning.’”
“The liberty of thinking and publishing whatsoever each one likes, without any hindrances, is not in itself an advantage over which society can wisely rejoice. On the contrary, it is the fountainhead and origin of many evils.”
“These most crafty enemies have filled and inebriated with gall and bitterness the Church, the spouse of the Immaculate Lamb, and have laid impious hands on Her most sacred possessions. In the Holy Place itself, where has been set up the See of the most holy Peter and the Chair of Truth for the light of the world, they have raised the throne of their abominable impiety with the iniquitous design that when the Pastor has been struck, the sheep may be scattered.”
- An excerpt from the original version of the St. Michael the Archangel prayer
“The Church in respect of its unity belongs to the category of things indivisible by nature, though heretics try to divide it into many parts.”
- Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, No. 4, June 29, 1896
“The practice of the Church has always been the same, as is shown by the unanimous teaching of the Fathers, who were wont to hold as outside Catholic communion, and alien to the Church, whoever would recede in the least degree from any point of doctrine proposed by her authoritative Magisterium.”
- Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896
“In this wise, all cause for doubting being removed, can it be lawful for anyone to reject any one of those truths without by the very fact falling into heresy?-without separating himself from the Church?-without repudiating in one sweeping act the whole of Christian teaching? For such is the nature of faith that nothing can be more absurd than to accept some things and reject others.”
“But he who dissents even in one point from divinely revealed truth absolutely rejects all faith, since he thereby refuses to honour God as the supreme truth and the formal motive of faith.”
- Pope Leo XIII, Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896
this goes hard bro, ong 😤🙏🙏
March 16, 2016 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- On March 16, speaking publicly on a rare occasion, Pope Benedict XVI gave an interview to Avvenire, the daily newspaper of the Italian Bishops' Conference, in which he spoke of a “two-sided deep crisis” the Church is facing in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. Pope Benedict reminds us of the formerly indispensable Catholic conviction of the possibility of the loss of eternal salvation, or that people go to hell: The missionaries of the 16th century were convinced that the unbaptized person is lost forever. After the [Second Vatican] Council, this conviction was definitely abandoned. The result was a two-sided, deep crisis. Without this attentiveness to the salvation, the Faith loses its foundation.He also speaks of a “profound evolution of Dogma” with respect to the Dogma that there is no salvation outside the Church. This purported change of dogma has led, in the pope's eyes, to a loss of the missionary zeal in the Church - “any motivation for a future missionary commitment was removed.” Pope Benedict asks the piercing question that arose after this palpable change of attitude of the Church: “Why should you try to convince the people to accept the Christian faith when they can be saved even without it?” As to the other consequences of this new attitude in the Church, Catholics themselves, in Benedict's eyes, are less attached to their Faith: If there are those who can save their souls with other means, “why should the Christian be bound to the necessity of the Christian Faith and its morality?” asked the pope. And he concludes: “But if Faith and Salvation are not any more interdependent, even Faith becomes less motivating.”
First, I want to strongly recommend that you look to other media for your information about Catholicism. This site is a fringe group that offers a very narrow perspective on Catholic life and often distorts the authority and message of the hierarchy. For what it's worth.
Second, I think there is a lot of truth in what Pope Benedict is saying here, but look at what he is actually saying. He is speaking of a world AFTER Vatican II, not a world BECAUSE of Vatican II. The world after Vatican II is also the world after World War II, the most cataclysmic event in human history. It is a world of great secularization. It is a world of free dissemination of information (hence this UA-cam Channel and LifeSiteNews) that is not always accurate or authoritative. To blame the world on the changes made at Vatican II gives way too much credit to the council and the Church to affect world history. My response would be that Vatican II, given its willingness to work with the world and update its language to be with the world, is in a better position to preach Jesus Christ now than it would have been if we had continued with our previous rhetoric until today.
Thanks for shedding light on that article, Br. Casey. I'm sorry for tossing it out there without an intro. As you well know, the Vatican II docs are a hot topic for some Catholics. Portions of those documents were worded in a way that could easily be misinterpreted, especially by people without seminary training. A friend of mine -a former aspiring Capuchin- told me that, as per Vatican II, you can be saved through any religion or church denomination. Does the post-Vatican II Church advocate universalism? Obviously not. But that's the way my friend and many others perceive it. That's the way I saw it when I was still a Protestant exploring Catholicism. Thankfully I know better now, after reading a few Catholic apologists.
You're right, as a result of Vatican II the church is in a better position to evangelize the world. She needed to open her windows and let some fresh air in. So keep up the good work Br. Casey. This world needs more young people like you.
Thank you Father. Very informative video. I should mention that Mother used to be a practicing Catholic. But the Vatican 2 document caused my Mother to lose her faith. She became an atheist. She thought well if man could change the laws God then what does it matter?
I'm very sorry to hear that. That, unfortunately, was a major misconception of the council. People say the externals change so much and didn't understand what was going on that they thought the essence of the Church was changing, which it was not. Too often we associate our expression of faith with the very faith itself, thinking that if the expression changes (which it inevitably has to over time) that somehow the faith itself is changing.
Luckily, we believe in a loving and merciful God who understands us and has patience with us.
As I child my Catholic mother would take me and my siblings to church. It was the traditional form.
As an adult not having been in church since I was nine, I convince my brother to go with me to church, for old times sake. We dressed in suits as we remembered the men wearing in church, but what we encountered was a bebops slut festival. Never went back. If that is the novus orda, you can keep it, it's an abomination.
I'm also not in agreement with man being able to change the laws of God. I'm a Catholic and with the changing times I feel like the society is pressuring the church to bend its laws (i.e. same-sex marriage) when it should never conform to the whims of man and it's us who should follow the laws. Just because some things are becoming more mainstream it doesn't make them right.
@@daryla7825 My friend, don't give up on the True Church. Tribulations are part of its glorious history. Take your brother with you to a Traditional Latin Mass, there must be one close to you, and you will not regret.
I went through Catholic school from 1972-1983. I had only two years where Catholicism was even taught. One was a pre Vatican Council 2 nun, the other was my Seventh grade teacher. We had new nuns that had guitar/folk masses singing pop music. I went to De Lassalian Christian Brothers school where at the end we were asking if had any Catholicism. Interesting that at school mass, non Catholics were receiving communion. The staff seemed more interested in either discussing Buddhism or explaining what protestant denominations believed. The administration went out of their way to recruit football players, and hire teachers without credentials. I am still Catholic today, not because of Vatican Council 2, but in spite of it. I am thinking of joining a Uniate Church, such as the Maronites or Assyrian Chaldean Catholics, as they are strong on fellowship, have clergy leading by example, and are more consistent. I think the Jesuits are a bunch of pretentious, elitists that give Catholics a bad name. The Jesuits are more interested in having their schools win at sports, than being truly Catholic.
Thank you Fr Casey for making this video ! ( then Bro Casey) Great info 😇😇
Waiting for Vatican 3.
People and Catholics need to hear this to understand exactly what you said. Thanks for sharing this.
I have a question that no one has ever been able to answer: Why was the Roman Rite the only part of the Catholic Church to be affected?
Byzantine's, and others have not changed at all.
It seems as if the Roman Rite was watered down to make it more Protestant to welcome other faiths. We lost our identity as Catholics. I lived through the Council & saw the Church diminish afterward.
There is less catechesis now than before. Many Catholics do not even believe int the Real Presence. This is extremely sad. I often wonder how many souls have been lost because of Vatican II.
Br Cole, you still haven't answered my question?
What is the painting at 2:14 of? liked to know so that i can make not of this in my religion class...
A consideration of Vatican II using the concepts of genus and species.
Without getting into the historical background, inner workings and doctrinal details of the Vatican II documents and rather relying on what most Catholics know about it the following analogy I think is most revealing:
Aristotle says that the natural way of learning and coming to know things is from the generic to the more specific. Just as when we see something moving in the distance we first identify it as a body and then as it moves closer an animal and even closer a man and finally as this particular person Socrates.
Now it needs to be understood that there is a difference between our knowledge of a thing and the thing itself. Our knowledge is always more generic than the thing itself existing in reality which is very specific. If someone were to give the definition of the species of a thing instead of giving the definition of the genus of that thing one would give a more precise and fuller account of the thing. In other words the more specific our knowledge becomes of something the closer our knowledge resembles the thing. The truer our knowledge is, in the sense of having more truth - adeguatio res et intellectus.
This is the natural way man comes to know. To try to move in the opposite direction is unatural and against human nature. To try to forget what one already KNOWS about something in order to know it more generically is an act of violence against oneself. It would entail force that goes against one's own nature.
Now what is more generic and less specific is more universal. Whereas as what is more specific is more exclusive. In the same way when one says the word animal it can apply to many things. Where when one says man it excludes many things and applies to just one type of animal. Now things that exist in reality ARE NOT generic they are specific.
The Church founded by Our Lord is a real existing reality. It is something specific with its own essential elements and properties.
Now the Councils, pronouncements and doctrines through the ages became more and more specific. The Church's awareness of itself approached more and more the reality of its own being. It is impossible to move in the other direction. In other words it is impossible to move from a specific knowledge to a more general confused knowledge. A generic knowledge of anything is always more confused than a specific one, just as knowing something only in so far as it is an animal is more confused than knowing it specifically: a man. Instead our knowledge specifies as we gain acquantaince and experience of a thing. This should.not be confused with the knowledge particular persons had of the Church. Ofcourse the apostles and early Christians had a very specific knowledge of the Church. However the Church's formulated doctrine was not as specific. Throughout the centuries this doctrine became better formulated and more specific. This was neccesary especially to rule out heresy and error. A more generic knowledge on the other hand is more open to heresy and error.
Now, in order for Vatican II to be less divisive, open to non Catholics and ALSO IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE CONSENSUS AMONGST THE COUNCIL FATHERS, THE COUNCIL HAD TO REVERSE THE NATURAL PROCEDURE AND PROCLAIM SOMETHING MORE GENERIC THAN PREVIOUS COUNCILS.
Now one could argue that the council taught no error. Entering into this debate is not easy and not for the most of us. However knowing that the council purposefully decided to be less specific and more generic is known by all of us. Can we say that a generic knowlwdge of a thing is deficient compared to a fuller specific knowlwdge of a thing? Trying to go against oneself and forget what one once knew creates the impression that one must have been wrong once upon a time. Because why else would one try to forget what once knew? Especially if what one once knew one used to think was valuable and true, a treasure to be safeguarded.
How many people do we know who have used Vatican II to look back and interpret older Councils? Anything more specific than the Council is frowned upon as superfluous and outdated. But does truth age? Never the less can we blame them for acquiring this habit when this is a natural consequence of artificially regressing and not progressing in knowledge? Of trying to be less specific and more generic. Ask any good attorney or advocate; the truth is in the details. Become less specific and you loose the case. Unless one is hiding something.
In conclusion:
In any art, science, law, doctrine, description or definition the more specific take precedence over any less specific alternative of it.
In a way, Vatican II is as if the Catholic Church try to "reform" itself (note that i use quotation marks because it's certainly not a reformation for those who don't think it's a reformation).
The Church under Vatican 2 is a kind of parallel church that shouldn't exist. Like the world was suddenly flipped on its side and the one we are living in now is a kind of alternate reality.
Traditional vs Modern
Just look at the attendance rate of novus ordo and Latin masses and the age of the people
Precisely. There is often one Latin mass rite at a church (or local area) per weekend, with 4-5 Novus Ordo masses at every Church in the diocese. That one Latin mass may be mostly full, but there are only 500 Churches in the United States that actually offer one (many of which not even on a weekly basis), whereas there are 17,000 parishes offering the Novus Ordo. That's A LOT more people who prefer the Novus Ordo, showing how small of a minority this movement is.
Breaking In The Habit my parish is the only parish in Dallas Texas that only does a Latin mass , actually more and more people are coming and we are building a cathedral because we are over full , Novus ordo masses are dying out , people don’t ever go to them , the reason we are a minority is because the lack of latin masses , we are the only ones who do it , all the other parishes in the entire metroplex don’t have any Latin services , novus ordo masses have an Abismal attendance rate than Latin ones , the lack of availability is the reason why of pure numbers people go to novus ordo because that’s the only mass they can find and of pure ignorance, A LOT of people don’t even know the Latin mass exist , we need to go back to tradition
@@BreakingInTheHabitI did not *prefer* the Novus Ordo Mass. I thought there was only 1 kind of Mass. I did not even know of the existence of the TLM until a couple of years ago! Now that I know of the TLM, I attend that Mass. And there are many of us who are young who are discovering the TLM!
@@BreakingInTheHabit A lot of it has to do with a misunderstanding of the Latin Mass and unfamiliarity with that spirituality. My 33 year old wife grew up a cradle Catholic and didn't even know the Latin Mass existed or was still something preferred by some people. So, I don't think it's fair to say that it is expressly "preferred" by the majority because most are either ignorant of it as an option entirely or they grew up with a bias against it from their parents. Moreover, we can agree that just because something is popular it doesn't mean it's what should be done.
I attended a Latin Mass once in Manila... I may not understand what it is but one things for sure my soul did... But thank you Father Casey for the info...
Recaptured the original traditions of the Church especially from the Last Supper and the Breaking of Bread by the Apostles and St Paul. In the Last Supper of Our Lord, Jesus' willing to share with us his Body and Blood. The Apostles and St Paul also did the same way sharing a one bread and one cup as a form of a real traditional Mass. The Latin Mass so called today a Traditional Mass is because passed on and developed in the 15th Century. Why Latin Mass regarded as a Traditional Mass? I still don't know. Why not the very Last Supper of Our Lord? Is the Last Supper of Our Lord not a Traditional Mass? What about the Apostles and Paul? What about the early Church Mass? Recaptured the Original traditions of the Church is one of the perfect explanation of Vatican 2. Thank you Fr Casey.
The word of God does not change...and will never change. God Jesus Christ and His teachings have never changed we humans are the only ones who want to change it, who want to fix it to our on beliefs or what is convinient to us sinners. Some of us think that killing unborn babies is fine and cool....and this is a woman's right. Others think that two women can get married, and two men can be married or that today I am a woman...and tomorrow I can transform to a man.......and the list goes on....and on. For those of us who truly believe and try our very best to follow the law of God because at the end of my life the only one who can save my soul from burning in HELL is GOD, and not humand kind or pleasing human kind. The only one that I tried to please every single day of my life is GOD. God bless you. and peace be with you. God give us the strength to resist this evil wicked world. OMG...
Can you make a video on breakaway Anti-Vatican 2 Churchs ?
God has, and will continue to reveal himself, and his truths to select individuals until the earth is dead. These revelations are meant to be shared. Sadly, since the beginning, and, until the end of time, many messengers will continue to be persecuted. We are ALL his children. Love ALL your brothers and sisters!
So when will they anounce Vatican III?
I enjoy your teaching style.....thanx Father!
I still think vat.2...was the worst thing for the catholic church...some how I have no memory of any latin... n the going of the habits...was sad
thats cause ur an out of touch boomer. vatican 2 is proof god is real.
The Roman Catholic had undergone so many controversies but most important was they found out the Book Talmot of JM
Talmot of JMMANUEL which says that Jesus Christ was god. Get the copy of Talmot of Jmmanuel published by Almanac with 3500 pages and were distributed to the entire Europians countries including those countries headed by Kings and Queens and even the Catholic head the Vatican. That's why the Vatican issued this Vatican 2. With these books circulated in Europe were highly read. Now this were the Vatican 2 was issued.
i mean that Jesus Christ is not god. He was not god. Jmmanuel (Jesus Christ)was a Pheleades from constellation Phealedes while Mama Mary the mother from LYRA a star system. Read the book Talmot of JMMANUEL.
Gentle and honest. Thank you.
When will Islam be brought up to date?
just Saoirse Probably going to want to ask a Muslim about that.
But you personally do you think the korans teachings is right for today's times?
just Saoirse It’s really not my place to comment one way or another. I am not a Muslim and I have never studied the Quran.
Also, it’s not really a fair comparison. Vatican II updated the practice of the Church, not the interpretation of the Bible.
Breaking In The Habit OK you might take offence to this next question and I'm sorry if it offends you but what do you say to people who say Satan entered the Vatican in October 1962?
what is vatican 1?
Vatican I was an ecumenical council in 1869-70, cut short by war in Europe. The main doctrine to come out of the council was Papal Infallibility, and the focus was very anti-modernity.
@@BreakingInTheHabit Would that the anti-modernity sentiment had been continued! Modernity was born out of Masonic liberalism, a rebellion against the Old World Order of Catholicism.
I am glad that Vatican II allowed Mass to be spoken in a local language. It allows lay people to better understand the word of God. In my home state of California there are many parishes that still offer Latin Mass for traditionalists.
4:50 is gold. I like what your said. God bless you brother.
Why the heck did we need Vatican 2? More watering down of tradition....
The Pope just said all paths lead to God, so I'm sure the Gaia worshippers are super happy for validation of their death cult. Great Job Vatican! Keep watering stuff down!
You are to understand God on HIS terms not the other way around.
There's worse things to worship than earth.
@@johnjames9359 I disagree.
Worshipping an object is idolatry.
Jesus Christ showed us all how to live. What does the Earth show you?
Why not worship the moon?
Or Uranus? 😆
It's all Gaia nonsense for control of you and the Earth.
There's one born every minute.....
@@johnjames9359 Really? All sounds like NWO propaganda to me. Earth worship fits good for the Club of Rome....
Thank you for this video. I was considering converting to Catholicism but the more I looked into the modern church and Vatican II the more I was repelled. It seems that the Church is in a state of submitting to globo homo even harder and harder as time passes.
Have you looked into SSPX? They say the Traditional Latin Mass. They retain the Catholic traditions & how the Mass was said for the past 500 years.A lot of Catholics are questioning Vatican II as well.
What were the teachings pushed in the counsel?
Literally just had a lecture on this in my theology class
The Catholic Church turned Jesus into somebody to wait for instead of someone to emulate
But what about the 3rd secret of Fatima which warned about Vatican ii?
Vatican II.
This time it's personal.
Thank you for that explanation! I do not agree with some of the things I have heard some priests say in the name of "Spirit of the Council"! I want to agree with as much as I can of what the Pope say's for example, but simply do not. I am trying ,to "to thine own self be true", as well as, "come, let us reason together", while asking God to correct me if I am wrong about my reasoning, so I can update my understanding. Thanks again. Praise be to God.
Did Vatican ll do way with the vieling or covering of the head of women in the church ?
Thank you so much, this video was so helpful!
A shell of its old self. It’s really sad what happened to the Latin mass and the old church.
This just proves that the Catholic Church is alive. It’s developing Body of Christ. It undergoes radical changes to fit what the current situation requires but it is always within the light of the gospels.
Wow all this are great revelation to the world, those with ears should hear and cross to the light instead of wandering in darkness, me am an adventist......
Br. Casey, thanks for making this video. Which previously lost ancient traditions are you speaking of?
A few thoughts come to mind: the catechumenate, permanent diaconate, centralized role of bishop in the eucharistic celebration not to mention our theology of ordination (drastically different from the Middle Ages), Eucharist as a meal (places specifically in the Jewish tradition of memorial), the greater use of Scripture in liturgies (central to the early Church but faded away in the Middle Ages), the sign of peace, praying in the vernacular, and the restored order of the sacraments of initiation (Baptism, confirmation, Eucharist. This was switched as recently as the early 1900s and switched back at Vatican II for adults).
Wow! Thanks so much.
Anderson Bush please don't believe any of this nonsense.
@@BreakingInTheHabit All this theology....backed by very little action. Why is the Catholic Church sitting on an absolute fortune ( £15 billion ) at last 'count', while children starve in Yemen? What do you think Jesus would say to you if he returned tomorrow? Do you think he would be happy with Vatican? Have a blessed & truthful day.
@@yvonnemccalla7282 this "absolute fortune" is not cash that can be simply given away, it is in property, churches, art, livelihood of preists and the religious. Don't talk about something you know nothing about: the art, churches, property(like hospitals and orphanages), and wages for the preist are all for the glorification of God. In the OT the Israelites, both rich and poor, donated to the building of the temple of God: did God not care for the poor then? You simply overlook the countless works of Charity done by the catholic church(one of the biggest charities in the world) and yet you want to sell what is glorifying God so that it can be given to the poor? Didn't Judas Iscariot advocate for the same thing?
Good lesson 👏👏🏾👏🏻👏🏿👏🏽👏🏼
This doesnt help explain it to me at all.
Its amazing that the Traditional Latin Mass is growing. At my FSSP parish there are NINETY , thats 90 young men training to be altar boys
All no doubt tRump supporters, I'm sure. 😒👎🙏
@Cardboard Cape -- So? Well to begin with, Trump was the LEAST Christian president the USA president ever had. Lying, cheating, philandering, false witness? -- exactly which of the "7 deadly sins" did he NOT commit.
And yet, I remain shocked at the number of so-called Christians and Catholics who supported this failed TV reality show host as president. And among the Catholic supporters of Trump, virtually all of them are extreme right- wingers --- and exactly the type to be opposed to Vatican Council II and Pope Francis, and supporters of the obsolete Tridentine Mass. I know that paints with a broad brush, but seriously there are very few exceptions.
Me as a catholic can say Vatican 2 is the worst thing happened to the Catholic Church
You really need to add closed captions. The automatic ones don't know Latin
Love you kid but this video is wrong. Show me the documents. Aggornamento theology is why we are experiencing the relativism we see in today's catholics. Characterizing the Church as turned in on itself is a short cited description.
The documents, as you wish: www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/index.htm I have read them, I recommend that you do too.
As far as your other claim, I beg to differ. Most theologians and philosophers point to World War II as the most cataclysmic event to faith in world history. What Vatican II did was salvage what was a world already hemorrhaging faith, and was probably the thing that saved us from complete annihilation. A pre-Vatican II church would have faired much worse in today’s world.
The fruit of Vatican II is the largest number of converts in 1500 years, a Church that has been able to adapt to the ever-changing world and remain afloat, the greater inclusion of our brothers and sisters in the southern hemisphere to the greater benefit of being truly "catholic," and a laity that is more involved than it ever has been, producing the greatest fruit the Church has ever seen in terms of liturgical involvement, social charity and justice, literacy in theological matters, and engagement with the outside world. I'm confused by your statement because by most accounts the Church is the healthiest it has ever been.
Again brother with respect it's clear you're use drunk the Kool Aid here, by almost any metric the Church is in crisis. There is so much evidence for this if you want to see it and I prayerfully recommend you do and be challenged that the Church you see today by and large is incongruous with the Faith held universally before VII.
Yeah, comes from the liberals of the Council that wanted to embrace modernity.
I'm curious as to those ancient documents they discovered
thanks for your material brother. may we grow as good christian catholics.
If a Catholic is a vegetarian, then no eating meat on Friday is a no brainer.
The Catholic Is a vegetarian.
AMAZING! AMEN.