Just because it's a valid Council doesn't mean it's a good Council. Vatican II was "pastoral" in nature as John XXIII stated in his opening speech. It's a series of policy initiatives which have no guarantees of success from the Holy Spirit and have no irreversible declarations. Everything about Vatican II can be undone and most of it should be undone. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in Principles of Catholic Theology wrote of Vatican II's potential to fail to produce good fruit, "“Not every valid council in the history of the Church has been a fruitful one; in the last analysis, many of them have been a waste of time.”
Never been to a Latin Mass. The only thing close to me within an hour is the SSPX. Can’t do that. It’s sinful I hear. The Bishops and Seattle don’t want anybody to go to SSPX. So I’m stuck in this place of obedience to the church. I don’t have the money or lifestyle to move my family to a place close to a traditional mass. Is it really that crucial for salvation? Is there no way to be holy and work on our saint hood in the ON Mass? I’m so tired of this fighting going on in our church over which mass is right. What would Jesus have to say about all this?
Mass is Mass. You don't need to go to a Traditional Latin Mass to get the Eucharist, which is the most important thing in the Christian life. Don't worry about going if you can't.
It would be presumptuous for me to speak for Jesus and God, but Paul would say stop with the petty quarrels and follow with informed obedience the authority Jesus has given his Catholic Church. That means the Latin Mass is not more reverent and holy than NO by nature when Jesus is the center of Mass not the way the Mass is said in Latin and adorned in the way TLM offers. Jesus tells us “now is the time when all shall worship God in Spirit and Truth.” Mass is only holy because of the disposition of the heart and the Truth with the bare minimum core structure of Liturgy of the Word teaching the people and Liturgy of the Eucharist. NO can be 30 minutes minimum or longer depending on the options. TLM is by default longer. 2 different rites but equal in nature.
Plus the SSPX are in error and heresy thus not in Communion with Rome universally because the SSPX are sedevacantists against the promise of Jesus to be with the Catholic Church until the end of the Age and promising to not let it fall into error or heresy including the lie of broken apostolic successions with the papacy in the SSPX. The believe after Pius the X the Catholic Church ended and they have all authority as a remnant over the popes hence sinful rebellion against Jesus’s authority in the Catholic Church and now a new variation saying Francis. This is the heresy of Sedevacantism as they also hold TLM to be the only valid Mass as well.
@jamesforeman3096 . I'm agree with you on this. For us who have been raised outside the Western cultural sphere (I live in Asia), Novus Ordo are more relevant considering we use different languages. And you can see the fruits, despite we are minority in our country (3%), we can send our priests to every corner of the world. One even ended up in Curia.
If your faith depends on the specific rite you participate in, you have lost the plot. The issue of lack of reverence, gaslighting about breaks with the pass, and now 60 years of failures as their fruit are the issues we need to address. If those three were fixed but I could never listen to another TLM I would do so in a heartbeat. This more than just what rite makes me feel better, we have constant and consistent data of countries becoming more protestant and more irrelegious, and all we want to do is shrug and yell at people pointing this out to shut up.
"I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy..." Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's autobiography. What you've made is kind of a strawman argument. Nobody who attends the TLM rather than the Novus Ordo would hold that the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom would damage their faith. But with the introduction of an intrinsically unstable liturgy in the Latin rite, acknowledging the maxim Lex Orendi, Lex Credendi and correlating that to an ecclesial crisis isn't losing the plot. For instance, the removal of any reference to 1 Corinthians 11:29 "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord." in the Novus Ordo, when it's given 3 times a year in the TLM would contribute to that lack of reverence and lack of belief in the real presence.
Attending Latin Mass regularly at an Sspx chapel just recently. Substantial sermons, devout congregants, blessing of items after Mass. It's far from my house, it takes effort and sacrifice.
@@DRAGNFLY Your typical Novus Ordo mass IS materially in full communion and the odds are greater that they have more dangerous teachings, outright heresy in many cases and less Catholic teachings. I spent 7 years going to an SSPX chapel and in the subsequent 18 years of going to diocesan TLMs and the occasional Novus Ordo, the SSPX was by far the most theologically accurate and had the most devout behaviors and participation.
@@gerry30 perhaps that's true, but the SSPX's official stance is that a person should commit mortal sin by skipping Mass if there is no TLM in their area, even if there is a Novus Ordo. That's not Catholic teaching. They call the N.O. inherently evil, and they doubt the sainthood of certain canonized saints. That's not Catholic teaching.
@@DRAGNFLY Going backwards from your points, canonizations are not acts of infallibility and the loosening of the investigations can lead one to a doubt on veracity. Padre Pio is probably a slam dunk but Paul VI and John Paul II? Lives of heroic virtue? I hope they made it to Heaven but they were terrible, scandalous Popes. Re: Novus Ordo being evil. According to Thomas Aquinas, Evil is by definition a deprivation of the good. So, if the Novus Ordo is built on depriving the Latin Rite of many of the goods of the TLM, these would be evil acts committed by the designers on the faithful. This subject came up when the SSPX met with Cardinal Castrillon and Castrillon described the Novus Ordo as lacking to Bishop Fellay and Fellay reminded him of the Thomistic definition of evil. And whether one attends a Novus Ordo or skips the Novus Ordo would depend on how sacrilegious it is and a person's prudential judgement. The SSPX priests differ on this and cannot impose anything upon the faithful. If you get to the point where the matter has been compromised with the parish "recipe" for bread, you would engaging in material idolatry and the Mass would be invalid anyway. Now, you also have priests in the Novus Ordo who promote homosexuality openly and have gay "couples" preaching form the pulpit on Fathers Day admitting to secret ceremonies being conducted in the Novus Ordo parishes. Should you condone that level of blasphemy and sacrilege with your presence? Most of the time when I go to a Novus Ordo, I will silently read the prayers of the TLM and pray for the restoration of the parish. I usually never take Communion because of the irreverence shown to our Lord in the distribution. If it's really bad, I leave at that point since I've witnessed the priest consume the Eucharist and with that I've fulfilled my obligation.
I enjoyed going to my nearest Latin Mass but for me it's not all or nothing. I have a beautiful home parish and the NO Mass is offered very reverently. Nothing crazy. I find it more fulfilling for me because I'm not stressing out driving an hour away and sifting through my Missal.
it wasn't malice. people were not loving the latin mass. there was little participation and people were bored. my parents grew up going and said no one had any idea what was going on or being said. priests latin gotten worse with time. the bishops all were excited about a revised roman missal. maybe they went to far, maybe a lot of the traditional elements need to be restored in the new mass but its not going anywhere.
@@joseph_mta5840 No, it was malice. Your parents don't know what they're talking about. My family was rightin the middle of it all. I was baptized in the old and hit first grade with the Novus Ordo. Nobody was expecting a Novus Ordo and everyone was expecting according to Sacrosanctum Consilium Chant having pride of place, the laity were to be taught the Latin and recite in the form of the dialogue mass in the place of the alter boys and subdeacons and only a few elements were to be translated into the vernacular. You can listen to the post 1965 English translations of parts of the mass and simply hear the difference in the prayers. The news reports of the day show that people were not impressed with the Novus Ordo when it came out, 80% of baptized Latin Rite Catholics have rejected the Novus Ordo, most by simply ignoring the faith or apostasizing or a small percentage going Eastern or TLM. And of the remaining regular attendees of the Novus Ordo only 30 percent or so believe in the Real Presence. This was all warned about by the pre-conciliar Popes and when John XXIII got elected all talk of the enemies of the Church without and within the Church ceased and now, people are shocked and think you're a conspiracist for simply repeating what every Pope from Gregory XVI till John XXIII pointed out plainly.
latin mass: speaking in tongues? pomp and ceremony, nostalgia. mystics? so many fancy words here requiring a dictionary. kissing an altar? "noble simplicity"> 2 cor. 11:3
This priest is an amazing confessor. He does an amazing Latin mass as well. Good homilies, amazing insight. Love this guy
I appreciate TLM more now than ever! It's more reverent, and all the glory goes to God. Thank you, Fr. Keith!
I love the TLM. But I attend and most importantly, I don't criticize the novus ordo. The Vatican 2 IS a valid council!
Just because it's a valid Council doesn't mean it's a good Council. Vatican II was "pastoral" in nature as John XXIII stated in his opening speech. It's a series of policy initiatives which have no guarantees of success from the Holy Spirit and have no irreversible declarations. Everything about Vatican II can be undone and most of it should be undone. Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger in Principles of Catholic Theology wrote of Vatican II's potential to fail to produce good fruit, "“Not every valid council in the history of the Church has been a fruitful one; in the last analysis, many of them have been a waste of time.”
Never been to a Latin Mass. The only thing close to me within an hour is the SSPX. Can’t do that. It’s sinful I hear. The Bishops and Seattle don’t want anybody to go to SSPX. So I’m stuck in this place of obedience to the church. I don’t have the money or lifestyle to move my family to a place close to a traditional mass. Is it really that crucial for salvation? Is there no way to be holy and work on our saint hood in the ON Mass? I’m so tired of this fighting going on in our church over which mass is right. What would Jesus have to say about all this?
Mass is Mass. You don't need to go to a Traditional Latin Mass to get the Eucharist, which is the most important thing in the Christian life. Don't worry about going if you can't.
It would be presumptuous for me to speak for Jesus and God, but Paul would say stop with the petty quarrels and follow with informed obedience the authority Jesus has given his Catholic Church. That means the Latin Mass is not more reverent and holy than NO by nature when Jesus is the center of Mass not the way the Mass is said in Latin and adorned in the way TLM offers. Jesus tells us “now is the time when all shall worship God in Spirit and Truth.” Mass is only holy because of the disposition of the heart and the Truth with the bare minimum core structure of Liturgy of the Word teaching the people and Liturgy of the Eucharist. NO can be 30 minutes minimum or longer depending on the options. TLM is by default longer. 2 different rites but equal in nature.
Plus the SSPX are in error and heresy thus not in Communion with Rome universally because the SSPX are sedevacantists against the promise of Jesus to be with the Catholic Church until the end of the Age and promising to not let it fall into error or heresy including the lie of broken apostolic successions with the papacy in the SSPX. The believe after Pius the X the Catholic Church ended and they have all authority as a remnant over the popes hence sinful rebellion against Jesus’s authority in the Catholic Church and now a new variation saying Francis. This is the heresy of Sedevacantism as they also hold TLM to be the only valid Mass as well.
You're not missing much, the Latin mass is exhausting. People who romanticize is tend to be deeply pharisaical
@jamesforeman3096 . I'm agree with you on this. For us who have been raised outside the Western cultural sphere (I live in Asia), Novus Ordo are more relevant considering we use different languages. And you can see the fruits, despite we are minority in our country (3%), we can send our priests to every corner of the world. One even ended up in Curia.
If your faith depends on the specific rite you participate in, you have lost the plot. The issue of lack of reverence, gaslighting about breaks with the pass, and now 60 years of failures as their fruit are the issues we need to address. If those three were fixed but I could never listen to another TLM I would do so in a heartbeat. This more than just what rite makes me feel better, we have constant and consistent data of countries becoming more protestant and more irrelegious, and all we want to do is shrug and yell at people pointing this out to shut up.
"I am convinced that the ecclesial crisis in which we find ourselves today depends in great part upon the collapse of the liturgy..." Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's autobiography. What you've made is kind of a strawman argument. Nobody who attends the TLM rather than the Novus Ordo would hold that the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom would damage their faith. But with the introduction of an intrinsically unstable liturgy in the Latin rite, acknowledging the maxim Lex Orendi, Lex Credendi and correlating that to an ecclesial crisis isn't losing the plot. For instance, the removal of any reference to 1 Corinthians 11:29 "For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh judgment to himself, not discerning the body of the Lord." in the Novus Ordo, when it's given 3 times a year in the TLM would contribute to that lack of reverence and lack of belief in the real presence.
Latin mass for the win🎉
Attending Latin Mass regularly at an Sspx chapel just recently. Substantial sermons, devout congregants, blessing of items after Mass. It's far from my house, it takes effort and sacrifice.
Be careful with SSPX. They're not in full communion with Rome and they have some dangerous teachings
@@DRAGNFLY Really???
@@DRAGNFLY Your typical Novus Ordo mass IS materially in full communion and the odds are greater that they have more dangerous teachings, outright heresy in many cases and less Catholic teachings. I spent 7 years going to an SSPX chapel and in the subsequent 18 years of going to diocesan TLMs and the occasional Novus Ordo, the SSPX was by far the most theologically accurate and had the most devout behaviors and participation.
@@gerry30 perhaps that's true, but the SSPX's official stance is that a person should commit mortal sin by skipping Mass if there is no TLM in their area, even if there is a Novus Ordo. That's not Catholic teaching. They call the N.O. inherently evil, and they doubt the sainthood of certain canonized saints. That's not Catholic teaching.
@@DRAGNFLY Going backwards from your points, canonizations are not acts of infallibility and the loosening of the investigations can lead one to a doubt on veracity. Padre Pio is probably a slam dunk but Paul VI and John Paul II? Lives of heroic virtue? I hope they made it to Heaven but they were terrible, scandalous Popes. Re: Novus Ordo being evil. According to Thomas Aquinas, Evil is by definition a deprivation of the good. So, if the Novus Ordo is built on depriving the Latin Rite of many of the goods of the TLM, these would be evil acts committed by the designers on the faithful. This subject came up when the SSPX met with Cardinal Castrillon and Castrillon described the Novus Ordo as lacking to Bishop Fellay and Fellay reminded him of the Thomistic definition of evil. And whether one attends a Novus Ordo or skips the Novus Ordo would depend on how sacrilegious it is and a person's prudential judgement. The SSPX priests differ on this and cannot impose anything upon the faithful. If you get to the point where the matter has been compromised with the parish "recipe" for bread, you would engaging in material idolatry and the Mass would be invalid anyway. Now, you also have priests in the Novus Ordo who promote homosexuality openly and have gay "couples" preaching form the pulpit on Fathers Day admitting to secret ceremonies being conducted in the Novus Ordo parishes. Should you condone that level of blasphemy and sacrilege with your presence? Most of the time when I go to a Novus Ordo, I will silently read the prayers of the TLM and pray for the restoration of the parish. I usually never take Communion because of the irreverence shown to our Lord in the distribution. If it's really bad, I leave at that point since I've witnessed the priest consume the Eucharist and with that I've fulfilled my obligation.
I wish the Father had expanded on what he likes about the NO
I enjoyed going to my nearest Latin Mass but for me it's not all or nothing. I have a beautiful home parish and the NO Mass is offered very reverently. Nothing crazy. I find it more fulfilling for me because I'm not stressing out driving an hour away and sifting through my Missal.
The answer to "why in the world would this be changed?..." is simple. Malice.
it wasn't malice. people were not loving the latin mass. there was little participation and people were bored. my parents grew up going and said no one had any idea what was going on or being said. priests latin gotten worse with time. the bishops all were excited about a revised roman missal. maybe they went to far, maybe a lot of the traditional elements need to be restored in the new mass but its not going anywhere.
@@joseph_mta5840 No, it was malice. Your parents don't know what they're talking about. My family was rightin the middle of it all. I was baptized in the old and hit first grade with the Novus Ordo. Nobody was expecting a Novus Ordo and everyone was expecting according to Sacrosanctum Consilium Chant having pride of place, the laity were to be taught the Latin and recite in the form of the dialogue mass in the place of the alter boys and subdeacons and only a few elements were to be translated into the vernacular. You can listen to the post 1965 English translations of parts of the mass and simply hear the difference in the prayers. The news reports of the day show that people were not impressed with the Novus Ordo when it came out, 80% of baptized Latin Rite Catholics have rejected the Novus Ordo, most by simply ignoring the faith or apostasizing or a small percentage going Eastern or TLM. And of the remaining regular attendees of the Novus Ordo only 30 percent or so believe in the Real Presence. This was all warned about by the pre-conciliar Popes and when John XXIII got elected all talk of the enemies of the Church without and within the Church ceased and now, people are shocked and think you're a conspiracist for simply repeating what every Pope from Gregory XVI till John XXIII pointed out plainly.
Who is this priest?
Fr. Keith Kenny of the Phoenix diocese!
@CameronRiecker thank you :)
send in the clowns....
latin mass: speaking in tongues?
pomp and ceremony, nostalgia. mystics? so many fancy words here requiring a dictionary.
kissing an altar? "noble simplicity"> 2 cor. 11:3