Thanks for the presentation. Having said all this, there is no reason V2 couldn't have just made small reforms to enhance the rubrics around active participation rather than create an entire new liturgy that has so thoroughly devolved over the decades that your average N.O. today has no resemblance to, and is not faithful to, neither the foundational reforms laid out in Sacrosanctum Concilium nor--in many cases--the GIRM. This talk is basically an academic discourse on how great "unicorn" N.O. masses are.
@krayze03 Precisely. Nobody can discuss this topic without opening the can of worms that is the Concilium and learning how the Roman Rite was stripped of all of its glory. While it is true the Rite needed a level of reform I feel this is being completed now by the FSSP, ICKSP, and SSPX who all say their masses with precision and beauty as well as educate their faithful on the principles of true active participation with the liturgy.
@@josephclark1431 seriously. Dr. K is probably the foremost contemporary expert. The man has contributed the bulk of the TLM apologia and corpus of literature. To ignore him as a source in this discussion is criminal.
TLM: bow towards priest as he enters and leaves, cross yourself at the asperges me, kneel ,cross yourself at absolution after the confiteor, strike your breast at the Creed, stand, sit or kneel depending on the type of mass low, high during the readings. Bow to the altar boy who incenses the congregation, genuflect at the "Iet homo factus est" and the Last Gospel "Et Verbum Caro Factum Est" receive the Eucharist on the tongue, while kneeling from the priest with a paten. Reverence the Eucharist briefly and lower your head at the consecration. How many of those many traditions have been expunged in the Novus Ordo in favor of "active participation?" "Active participation" at the Novus Ordo is just loosey goosey ever changing behaviors that devolve into chaos.
Just my two cents but since I've started attending the TLM exclusively "active participation" has taken on a whole new meaning. I never wish to return to the Mass of Paul VI as I find it jarring, distracting, and difficult to pray. I pray the Roman Rite is reformed back to its former glory 🙏
Excellent job of explaining the importance of what was given to us at Vatican 2. There may be abuses, but at the same time it has opened the door to a laity that is being drawn into relationship with the priest, their faith and most importantly to God Himself. Those who fully reject Vatican 2 as heretical, cut themselves off from the Church because they no longer accept what The Spirit through the Magisterium was looking to accomplish.
Thank you, Dr. Pietre, for addressing this topic. I lived through the transformation of the Latin mass during that period. This aspect of “active” participation was much needed. My recollection of participation prior to VCII, was that of an observer. The altar servers gave the responses, the choir sang the hymns but we had no participation other than to observe. In fact, it was not uncommon to see women with their rosaries, prayinhg during the mass. The changes, gradually implemented post VCII, transformed the liturgy, bringing it to life. I vividly recall the introduction of paper missals indicating the parts of the mass and highlighting the responses to be made by the laity. It wasn’t long before we were encouraged to sing with the choir. We, of course, knew these hymns. This active participation by the laity brought the mass to life. Other changes were not as well received. Many of us were shocked to see lay people distributing communion; worse still, it was in the hand. I have attended divine liturgy in an Eastern Catholic church which retains communion on the tongue distributed by a priest andor a deacon. No one doubts the real presence when the consecrated host is treated with great respect. God bless you and your ministy.
@@jhamberg8968 I will only receive holy communion from a priest who has consecrated hands, on the tongue and on my knees. Call me a rigid Traditional Latin Catholic, but I would rather be rigid than be sorry. Pax Domini.
The Church has allowed Communion in the hand, off and on throughout it's history. There's no reason not to receive this way as long as it's done correctly.
@johnosumba1980 they usually don't listen to the content and just jump on any chance to hate that they can get. I used to desire to attend a TLM but the rad trads have ruined it for me. If the TLM forms rad trads I want no part of it. I am afraid I will end up bent on hate like them.
@@johnosumba1980I was thinking exactly the same thing. Amazing how many people don’t listen to the content and then make irrelevant comments. I expect better from catholics especially those who take the faith and liturgy seriously.
Pius X's emphasis is certainly on lay participation through singing in Tra le sollecitudini (which is one of the reasons Vatican II called for chant to be set to simpler settings as is found in abundance in the "product" of Vatican II that we can all point to: The Roman Missal of Paul VI, which was heavily influenced by the involvement of, and, obviously, officially promulgated by Pope St. Paul VI). However, the liturgical movement of the late-19th through 1st half of the 20th century (composed predominately of many brilliant and faithful priests and monks [these are legit liturgical scholars reading the primary sources and making critical editions]) was effectively adopted as a framework by the Church in Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, and Paul VI, in which one can see a clear line of -- what one might call -- "organic development" in restorations to the laity (among other restorations) as they had belonged to them (in East and West) for the first millennium. You see these changes, by the way, happening well before Vatican II making clear that it is not *merely* interior participation that the Church is pursuing (though it goes without saying interior participation is essential as well). Fr. Seasoltz's (O.S.B.) compilation, The New Liturgy, A Documentation 1903-1965, is a fantastic primer to check out where what flowered at the Council and in the Missal of Paul VI jumps out at you through the "organic" changes leading up to Vatican II in the first half of the 20th century. Gregory VII (11th century) and Pius V (16th century) appealed (in one phrase/sense or another) to restoring "the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers" (Pius V, Quo Primum Tempore). But these Supreme Pontiffs meant very different things even though they were trying to achieve similar goals according to their stated intentions. For one thing, manuscripts simply were not present at the time of Gregory VII that Pius V was using (and vice versa). Pius V's missal, so it seems, used few sacramentaries from the Franco-Roman Gregorian Family no earlier than the ~12th century and a modern 16th century papal chapel ordo for its rubrics and yet still claimed be pursuing "the original form and rite of the holy Fathers" (Worth noting is that between Trent and Vatican II and significant amount of ancient and medieval manuscripts were unearthed between these two time periods, many thanks to the liturgical movement, which made this stated goal even more possible, while also evading the error of "senseless and exaggerated antiquarianism" that Pius XII spoke of in Mediator Dei and something Paul VI was well aware of). With that said, we wouldn't disregard Pope St. Pius V's phrase of trying to get back to the original form and rite of the Holy Fathers simply because Gregory VII said as much in the 11th century but with different results and/or possibly meaning different things to a certain degree. It is important to keep in mind that the *living* magisterium has always maintained authority to guide the liturgy as she deems fit through expansions, omissions, rearrangements, and so forth. As Trent said (no differently than Vatican II), "The Church may, according to circumstances, times and places, determine or change whatever *she may judge* most expedient for the benefit of those receiving them or for the veneration of the sacraments; and this power has always been hers” (Session 21, Chapter 2). As Catholics, we stand with the Council of Trent (not to mention other ecumenical councils like Constance (1439), Vatican I (1870) and venerable Popes like Gregory I, Gregory VII, Paul III, Pius V, Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, and Pius XII [among others] who all affirm what Trent states above well before Vatican II). God bless.
@@justsomevids4541 My observation is that many modern liturgists (or modernists) have a mistaken notion of active participation. For example, it seems that for them, the laity participate together with the priest in the liturgy and the holy sacrifice, with the priest being only the "president". This comes along with the reform movement that is influenced by new theologies and progressive and liberal ideas that were previously condemned but prevailed in Vatican II, and the church hierarchy has the power to make changes but always based on sacred tradition and the lex orandi lex credendi of the church as always. The principles that moved these changes are very similar to those of the French Revolution - equality, fraternity and liberty, and we see this in the parishes here in Brazil, where the two-thousand-year-old tradition is not respected and a "new tradition" was created with these principles.
@@RarmCangaceiro Whereas there are always some who misunderstand and misinterpret, the general thrust of your comment is wrong. The gathered Assembly DOES participate with the priest in the Liturgy and Holy Sacrifice, through the common priesthood of all believers, and part of the role of the priest IS to preside, but not only that. Only the priest, for example, may pray the Eucharistic Prayer and, through doing so, the words are efficacious.
A time during the mass where reverent silence should be written into the rubric is the distribution of Holy Communion; some quieter contemplative music would be ok, though.
In fact, it says the pope himself did not communicate from his own hand, but rather from another bishop and the same with all of the other clergy I’m not sure what this means other than deep reverence
I really appreciate your efforts! Just a quick off-topic question: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). How should I go about transferring them to Binance?
In my experience, most of the TLM congregations, incl. diocesan, FSSP, SSPX, SSPV, and ICK, have adopted many of the recommendations of Sacrosanctum Concillium (1963).
This is my experience too. The priests of any of these groups do excellent jobs educating their faithful on the Mass and how to actually actively participate in the true sense of the expression. That combined with the immense amount of catechetical material that now exists for the TLM.
Translated: "They have taken all of your freedom away in the Novus Ordo." That's why it's so banal, oppressive and 80% of baptized Catholics have rejected it.
@@GenX-Trad Same here. I found the TLM in 2002 and there is no going back to the Novus Ordo. It's actually a difficult and painful experience to attend a Novus Ordo even a "conservative" one. I just wind up praying for the end of the Novus Ordo in the Church for all time. There's probably only a few decades of it left anyway.
@@gerry30 the five Sunday Masses at my traditional parish are packed, standing room only. I agree..prayer and time and we’ll see the Tridentine Mass restored. It’s about sacrifice and worship, not the man-centered ideal of the NO.
So utterly simplistic and wrong an understanding of the Mass and the current state of the Church in the west. It is directly BECAUSE of the liturgical reforms of the Liturgy of Holy Mass that the Church has grown in new countries. Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Just wondering where sincere, legitimate and authentic 'active participation' begins and ends--- interpretative/ native/ current dances... secular pop music... light and sound shows... all active/ no one passive.
So…. These arrangements were valid in the 80’s and 90’s but the fruits have not blossomed. Time has proven this experiment a flop the let the fresh air in the Church. To the point that growth in the church attendance is now closing parishes to boost numbers. While the info is laid out very well and seems to give a glimmer of hope for V2, it don’t change that the hierarchy has abandoned its post and the ranks are filled with perverts, thieves, cowards, and yes men. We as the Catholic Church need to realize our errors before it’s too late.
Pope Benedict XVI realized and tried to correct with SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM. They are trying to suppress it again but at least many have been enlightened with the beauty of the Latin Mass so the spark will always be there.
Ok so all this active participation was called for in 1958 in De musica sacra et sacra liturgia but apparently never happened? I'm good with the active participation on the Novus Ordo but then the rest of SC was never put in force by keeping chant and Latin as stated. Oooh that awful music and songs! Bring back the reference and music and Latin and all the incense etc just like at St John Cantius in Chicago and I'm 100% in! Oh plus all the beautiful humble prayers that were used.
The Paul the VI mass is too open to liturgical abuse. Active Participation from what has resulted has been disastrous. I would bet that the clergy that voted for the reforms, had they seen the outcome would have voted against it .
Anytime I listen to Dr Pitre my eyes keep open up againand again and it's yet to reach it's max 😂. Such an eye opener, however there were further extensive changes which were subtly implemented which has caused great scandal to the faith
Dr. Pitre, thanks . question, it seems to me the the oriental Orthodox Church is still following the old tradition. When I visited their churches during Mass, nobody is paying attention, priest are just reciting the gospel but the faithful is just their on their own. Am I right?
Can not argue with Brant Petri - but In My Opinion it is not necessary for me to know the ( different or wrong ) ways it was done in the past, but - - - HOW are we supposed to celebrate the Mass today !
Brilliant Brant has hit the target again! Thank you from New Zealand. I will be using this video in my RCIA class. It is the best explanation I have seen about how the Church celebrated the Eucharist in the first Millennium and how and why the Latin Mass developed and why Vatican II made the liturgical changes it did. We need to remember so we can explain to others when asked.
No matter the academic argument you make, it will fail to inculcate zeal in your RCIA class. The Novus Ordo is as Pope Benedict XVI described it when he was head of the CDF. "a banal, on the spot liturgy put together by a committee." Read Mediator Dei and ratioallize the condemnation of "senseless antiquarianism" by Pius XII.
Because we lack teaching unfortunately. If we had proper teaching there wouldn't have been protastentism and/or schism and apostasy. But cannot blame all on the church, even the believer should do their part in informing themselves.
You should actually read Pius X. Saying he called for active participation in this way is untrue. That said I think Vatican II is correct and Pius X was wrong.
I have saved this to watch later. Anything from Dr Pitre is gold
Sure is!!
That's gold jerry!
It is my only UA-camr that I give a like before watching the video
Why not start watching it now?
You are 100% correct I can't get enough of his content
Thanks for the presentation. Having said all this, there is no reason V2 couldn't have just made small reforms to enhance the rubrics around active participation rather than create an entire new liturgy that has so thoroughly devolved over the decades that your average N.O. today has no resemblance to, and is not faithful to, neither the foundational reforms laid out in Sacrosanctum Concilium nor--in many cases--the GIRM. This talk is basically an academic discourse on how great "unicorn" N.O. masses are.
You’re not well informed
@krayze03 Precisely. Nobody can discuss this topic without opening the can of worms that is the Concilium and learning how the Roman Rite was stripped of all of its glory. While it is true the Rite needed a level of reform I feel this is being completed now by the FSSP, ICKSP, and SSPX who all say their masses with precision and beauty as well as educate their faithful on the principles of true active participation with the liturgy.
the "unicorn" NO is the future of liturgy in the Church
but this will only happen after many decades
Dr Pitre's content reignited my love for my faith
I would love a convo between Pitre and Kwasnieski
@@josephclark1431 seriously. Dr. K is probably the foremost contemporary expert. The man has contributed the bulk of the TLM apologia and corpus of literature. To ignore him as a source in this discussion is criminal.
@PiusPaladin 1000%
Dr K would run circles around Pitre as would Michael Davies if he was alive.
TLM: bow towards priest as he enters and leaves, cross yourself at the asperges me, kneel ,cross yourself at absolution after the confiteor, strike your breast at the Creed, stand, sit or kneel depending on the type of mass low, high during the readings. Bow to the altar boy who incenses the congregation, genuflect at the "Iet homo factus est" and the Last Gospel "Et Verbum Caro Factum Est" receive the Eucharist on the tongue, while kneeling from the priest with a paten. Reverence the Eucharist briefly and lower your head at the consecration.
How many of those many traditions have been expunged in the Novus Ordo in favor of "active participation?"
"Active participation" at the Novus Ordo is just loosey goosey ever changing behaviors that devolve into chaos.
Actually, at my parish, we do all of these things. We celebrate Mass using the Ordinary Form. Some receive on the tongue and some in the hand.
Oh dear!! 🤦
Just my two cents but since I've started attending the TLM exclusively "active participation" has taken on a whole new meaning. I never wish to return to the Mass of Paul VI as I find it jarring, distracting, and difficult to pray. I pray the Roman Rite is reformed back to its former glory 🙏
We’re so back
Yes, we are!!
“Now pause there for a second”
Excellent job of explaining the importance of what was given to us at Vatican 2. There may be abuses, but at the same time it has opened the door to a laity that is being drawn into relationship with the priest, their faith and most importantly to God Himself.
Those who fully reject Vatican 2 as heretical, cut themselves off from the Church because they no longer accept what The Spirit through the Magisterium was looking to accomplish.
Thank you, Dr. Pietre, for addressing this topic. I lived through the transformation of the Latin mass during that period. This aspect of “active” participation was much needed. My recollection of participation prior to VCII, was that of an observer. The altar servers gave the responses, the choir sang the hymns but we had no participation other than to observe. In fact, it was not uncommon to see women with their rosaries, prayinhg during the mass.
The changes, gradually implemented post VCII, transformed the liturgy, bringing it to life. I vividly recall the introduction of paper missals indicating the parts of the mass and highlighting the responses to be made by the laity. It wasn’t long before we were encouraged to sing with the choir. We, of course, knew these hymns. This active participation by the laity brought the mass to life.
Other changes were not as well received. Many of us were shocked to see lay people distributing communion; worse still, it was in the hand. I have attended divine liturgy in an Eastern Catholic church which retains communion on the tongue distributed by a priest andor a deacon. No one doubts the real presence when the consecrated host is treated with great respect.
God bless you and your ministy.
I'm still not comfortable receiving Holy Communion from an EM. I try to get in the line with the priest.
@@jhamberg8968
I will only receive holy communion from a priest who has consecrated hands, on the tongue and on my knees. Call me a rigid Traditional Latin Catholic, but I would rather be rigid than be sorry. Pax Domini.
The Church has allowed Communion in the hand, off and on throughout it's history. There's no reason not to receive this way as long as it's done correctly.
Thanks
So it was the Franciscans all along!
Not costantine? 😂
Thank you. I'm a new Catholic converted from being a protestant pastor. You have cleared a lot of things up for me. God bless you✝️
How do you attain salvation?
Active participation ? Like hugging, shaking hands, waving during the Agnus Dei? Or running out the door after receiving the Eucharist ?
It seems you didn’t listen to what he is saying.
@johnosumba1980 they usually don't listen to the content and just jump on any chance to hate that they can get. I used to desire to attend a TLM but the rad trads have ruined it for me. If the TLM forms rad trads I want no part of it. I am afraid I will end up bent on hate like them.
@@johnosumba1980I was thinking exactly the same thing. Amazing how many people don’t listen to the content and then make irrelevant comments. I expect better from catholics especially those who take the faith and liturgy seriously.
From the Philippines: thank God for helping us understand the Mass. God bless Dr
Pitre.
Closed captions please 🙏 ty
Good to see on this topic. Praise the Lord Jesus Christ.
"Recently" St. Pius X when talked about active participation was not in the same way the Vatican II and Post Vatican II liturgist talk about.
Pope St Pius X laid the groundwork and Vatican 2 expanded upon it. What's your point?
Pius X's emphasis is certainly on lay participation through singing in Tra le sollecitudini (which is one of the reasons Vatican II called for chant to be set to simpler settings as is found in abundance in the "product" of Vatican II that we can all point to: The Roman Missal of Paul VI, which was heavily influenced by the involvement of, and, obviously, officially promulgated by Pope St. Paul VI).
However, the liturgical movement of the late-19th through 1st half of the 20th century (composed predominately of many brilliant and faithful priests and monks [these are legit liturgical scholars reading the primary sources and making critical editions]) was effectively adopted as a framework by the Church in Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, and Paul VI, in which one can see a clear line of -- what one might call -- "organic development" in restorations to the laity (among other restorations) as they had belonged to them (in East and West) for the first millennium. You see these changes, by the way, happening well before Vatican II making clear that it is not *merely* interior participation that the Church is pursuing (though it goes without saying interior participation is essential as well). Fr. Seasoltz's (O.S.B.) compilation, The New Liturgy, A Documentation 1903-1965, is a fantastic primer to check out where what flowered at the Council and in the Missal of Paul VI jumps out at you through the "organic" changes leading up to Vatican II in the first half of the 20th century.
Gregory VII (11th century) and Pius V (16th century) appealed (in one phrase/sense or another) to restoring "the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers" (Pius V, Quo Primum Tempore). But these Supreme Pontiffs meant very different things even though they were trying to achieve similar goals according to their stated intentions. For one thing, manuscripts simply were not present at the time of Gregory VII that Pius V was using (and vice versa). Pius V's missal, so it seems, used few sacramentaries from the Franco-Roman Gregorian Family no earlier than the ~12th century and a modern 16th century papal chapel ordo for its rubrics and yet still claimed be pursuing "the original form and rite of the holy Fathers" (Worth noting is that between Trent and Vatican II and significant amount of ancient and medieval manuscripts were unearthed between these two time periods, many thanks to the liturgical movement, which made this stated goal even more possible, while also evading the error of "senseless and exaggerated antiquarianism" that Pius XII spoke of in Mediator Dei and something Paul VI was well aware of). With that said, we wouldn't disregard Pope St. Pius V's phrase of trying to get back to the original form and rite of the Holy Fathers simply because Gregory VII said as much in the 11th century but with different results and/or possibly meaning different things to a certain degree.
It is important to keep in mind that the *living* magisterium has always maintained authority to guide the liturgy as she deems fit through expansions, omissions, rearrangements, and so forth. As Trent said (no differently than Vatican II), "The Church may, according to circumstances, times and places, determine or change whatever *she may judge* most expedient for the benefit of those receiving them or for the veneration of the sacraments; and this power has always been hers” (Session 21, Chapter 2).
As Catholics, we stand with the Council of Trent (not to mention other ecumenical councils like Constance (1439), Vatican I (1870) and venerable Popes like Gregory I, Gregory VII, Paul III, Pius V, Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, and Pius XII [among others] who all affirm what Trent states above well before Vatican II).
God bless.
@@justsomevids4541 My observation is that many modern liturgists (or modernists) have a mistaken notion of active participation. For example, it seems that for them, the laity participate together with the priest in the liturgy and the holy sacrifice, with the priest being only the "president". This comes along with the reform movement that is influenced by new theologies and progressive and liberal ideas that were previously condemned but prevailed in Vatican II, and the church hierarchy has the power to make changes but always based on sacred tradition and the lex orandi lex credendi of the church as always. The principles that moved these changes are very similar to those of the French Revolution - equality, fraternity and liberty, and we see this in the parishes here in Brazil, where the two-thousand-year-old tradition is not respected and a "new tradition" was created with these principles.
@@RarmCangaceiroYou are very intelligent. You really know the subtlety and clandestine moves of the Post-conciliar clerics
@@RarmCangaceiro Whereas there are always some who misunderstand and misinterpret, the general thrust of your comment is wrong.
The gathered Assembly DOES participate with the priest in the Liturgy and Holy Sacrifice, through the common priesthood of all believers, and part of the role of the priest IS to preside, but not only that. Only the priest, for example, may pray the Eucharistic Prayer and, through doing so, the words are efficacious.
A time during the mass where reverent silence should be written into the rubric is the distribution of Holy Communion; some quieter contemplative music would be ok, though.
I read ordo Romanus I and I don’t see anything about communion STANDING
In fact, it says the pope himself did not communicate from his own hand, but rather from another bishop and the same with all of the other clergy
I’m not sure what this means other than deep reverence
But when do they bring in the clowns before or after the consecration of the Eucharist?
Thank you for that thoughtful, considered and helpful comment.
Not!
Thank you very much for this explanation. Appreciated. God bless.
I really appreciate your efforts! Just a quick off-topic question: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (alarm fetch churn bridge exercise tape speak race clerk couch crater letter). How should I go about transferring them to Binance?
In my experience, most of the TLM congregations, incl. diocesan, FSSP, SSPX, SSPV, and ICK, have adopted many of the recommendations of Sacrosanctum Concillium (1963).
This is my experience too. The priests of any of these groups do excellent jobs educating their faithful on the Mass and how to actually actively participate in the true sense of the expression. That combined with the immense amount of catechetical material that now exists for the TLM.
I'm so glad you have new videos now! ❤
Wonderful! It is best to be really INFORMED. Thanks Dr. Pitre!
Translated: "They have taken all of your freedom away in the Novus Ordo." That's why it's so banal, oppressive and 80% of baptized Catholics have rejected it.
Lost my faith in the 70s NO, found it in the TLM.
@@GenX-Trad Same here. I found the TLM in 2002 and there is no going back to the Novus Ordo. It's actually a difficult and painful experience to attend a Novus Ordo even a "conservative" one. I just wind up praying for the end of the Novus Ordo in the Church for all time. There's probably only a few decades of it left anyway.
@@gerry30 the five Sunday Masses at my traditional parish are packed, standing room only. I agree..prayer and time and we’ll see the Tridentine Mass restored. It’s about sacrifice and worship, not the man-centered ideal of the NO.
So, all modern saints came from the TLM; no one from the Norvus Ordo?
So utterly simplistic and wrong an understanding of the Mass and the current state of the Church in the west. It is directly BECAUSE of the liturgical reforms of the Liturgy of Holy Mass that the Church has grown in new countries.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
+JMJ The best example of active participation is the Traditional Latin Mass.
Do you listen to what he is saying?
@johnosumba1980 +JMJ. Yes.
I participate much more actively at the TLM than the NO. The NO is just distracting and jarring
You really do not understand the Catholic meaning of Traditional
Just wondering where sincere, legitimate and authentic 'active participation' begins and ends--- interpretative/ native/ current dances... secular pop music... light and sound shows... all active/ no one passive.
It's good to know Dr. Pitre is back.
So…. These arrangements were valid in the 80’s and 90’s but the fruits have not blossomed. Time has proven this experiment a flop the let the fresh air in the Church. To the point that growth in the church attendance is now closing parishes to boost numbers. While the info is laid out very well and seems to give a glimmer of hope for V2, it don’t change that the hierarchy has abandoned its post and the ranks are filled with perverts, thieves, cowards, and yes men. We as the Catholic Church need to realize our errors before it’s too late.
Pope Benedict XVI realized and tried to correct with SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM. They are trying to suppress it again but at least many have been enlightened with the beauty of the Latin Mass so the spark will always be there.
How we’ve missed Dr Pitre. I hope this series will be very useful for our advent preparations ❤️
Ok so all this active participation was called for in 1958 in De musica sacra et sacra liturgia but apparently never happened? I'm good with the active participation on the Novus Ordo but then the rest of SC was never put in force by keeping chant and Latin as stated. Oooh that awful music and songs! Bring back the reference and music and Latin and all the incense etc just like at St John Cantius in Chicago and I'm 100% in! Oh plus all the beautiful humble prayers that were used.
Brilliant work Dr. Pitre, as always!
Thank you
🙏🏻❤️🙏🏻❤️🙏🏻❤️
The Paul the VI mass is too open to liturgical abuse. Active Participation from what has resulted has been disastrous. I would bet that the clergy that voted for the reforms, had they seen the outcome would have voted against it .
The whiter the hair the more the wisdom 😂
Thank you, God bless
Wow.. excellent Dr
The only thing one should understand about Vatican 2 is that it was the spawn of hell
Vatican II is a modernist institution and the novus ordo mass is a protestantized mass.
So happy to see a new video, especially on the Mass.
thank you so very much 🥰🙏✝️❤️
1
James White hmm hmm hmm😅 James F White.
This series is included with access to the videos explaining the weekly readings. Outstanding resources!
thank GOD (and dr. pitre). excited to listen to this 🙏
Anytime I listen to Dr Pitre my eyes keep open up againand again and it's yet to reach it's max 😂. Such an eye opener, however there were further extensive changes which were subtly implemented which has caused great scandal to the faith
Aha moments
Thank you, Doc. I needed a shot of scripture in the morning. It's good for the body. 😂
Dr. Pitre, thanks . question, it seems to me the the oriental Orthodox Church is still following the old tradition. When I visited their churches during Mass, nobody is paying attention, priest are just reciting the gospel but the faithful is just their on their own. Am I right?
Can not argue with Brant Petri - but In My Opinion it is not necessary for me to know the ( different or wrong ) ways it was done in the past, but - - - HOW are we supposed to celebrate the Mass today !
Amen. On point. We'll said. I am still curious but agree completely with your statement.
Brilliant Brant has hit the target again! Thank you from New Zealand. I will be using this video in my RCIA class. It is the best explanation I have seen about how the Church celebrated the Eucharist in the first Millennium and how and why the Latin Mass developed and why Vatican II made the liturgical changes it did. We need to remember so we can explain to others when asked.
No matter the academic argument you make, it will fail to inculcate zeal in your RCIA class. The Novus Ordo is as Pope Benedict XVI described it when he was head of the CDF. "a banal, on the spot liturgy put together by a committee." Read Mediator Dei and ratioallize the condemnation of "senseless antiquarianism" by Pius XII.
Wow. Why is this not common knowledge?
Because we lack teaching unfortunately. If we had proper teaching there wouldn't have been protastentism and/or schism and apostasy.
But cannot blame all on the church, even the believer should do their part in informing themselves.
You should actually read Pius X. Saying he called for active participation in this way is untrue. That said I think Vatican II is correct and Pius X was wrong.
What do you think both of the different interpretations are?