@thesaxonstandard2936 A number of viewers have expressed this sentiment and I would enjoy reading your fleshed out thoughts on the topic. In my reading, the origin of a distinct Anglican liturgy was Cranmer's attempt to "Calvinize" the traditional Latin Liturgy. I'm not too familiar with the overall history of the Anglican liturgy, though I did become Anglican for one year before reverting and I am somewhat familiar with the 2 current liturgies in the book of common prayer. Would you say there have been substantial Anglican developments in the liturgy of England that were not mere subtractions of disntinctly Catholic theology from the Sarum usage of the 16th century? I'm not asking that to frame a debate, I'm genuinely curious. In your estimation, if there were an Anglican Rite with orthodox Catholic theology, what distinctions would be noticeable from the Novus Ordo liturgy as celebrated in England?
As a Latin in Rite and Ethnicity/Culture , Child of Sanctvs Petrvs , I pray my brothers from other Apostles maintain not only the Faith in Christ and the Unity with the rest of the Church but also that they maintain their cultural and ethnic identity in the Rites and Traditions that have been established so long ago .And I also pray for the intercession of Saint James the Lesser , Bishop of Judea , that a Hebrew Rite may be established so that Jews may be within Christ Jesus and maintain their identity and practices while within the Church .
Please have a detailed video about the Sarum Use or Rite, the Western Sarum Use or Rite of the ROCOE, etc. I was taught that the Sarum Use or Rite existed before Augustine came from Rome to Canterbury.
I’d be interested in a video that goes over the expression of spirituality that remain distinct to each of these rites, a simple distinction is the Rosary of the Latin rite and the chotki that is seen more in the various Eastern rites, as it can also help us to value and embrace the devotions that help us be true to our celebrated rites
Wouldn't it be more clear to refer to them as 24 churches sui iuris as opposed to rites? Usually, we use the term "rite" to denote a liturgical rite (which I think number 8), as opposed to an autonomous administrative apparatus, because multiple of these sui iuris churches use the same rite.
@ZeDocta1 I've seen the term rite used in different ways. My understanding is that a distinction can be made between rites which have a different official language and different episcopal head. Since the many Byzantine bodies celebrate the same liturgy but have different episcopal heads and different official languages, they can be called distinct rites which are a part of the same liturgical family.
@historiaecclesiastica That is a fair argument, just a different way of expressing it than I am used to. In the East, I think they use terms like Slavonic-Byzantine rite to refer to the liturgies of the Slavic churches so I see what you mean. God bless and thank you for the reply.
If all texts and rubrics are the same I fail to see why being under different Jurisdictions would differentiate them into distinct Rites. At most we would just have distinct Usages, but still the same Rite. And if difference in official language means different Rites then there would have been two Latin Rites, one in Croatia with slavonic and another in the rest of the Western Church with latin.
Yes, but there’s 6. Latin, Byzantine, Armenian, Coptic, East Syriac, West Syriac. Then there’s little r rites within those (like Mozarabic in Latin, Slavic in Byzantine etc.)
In 1994, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity issued a document which recognized the validity of the Assyrian Mass Church of the East despite the fact that its Eucharistic Prayer, the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, does not contain the Institution Narrative (the portion of the prayer that contains the lines, “This is my body” and “This is my blood.”) Catholic theology had long regarded the Institutional Narrative as an absolutely necessary condition for the validity of the Mass - the 15th century Council of Florence, for example, referred to the words of the Institution Narrative as the “form of this sacrament.” This declaration had the express endorsement of two popes - the sitting pontiff at the time, John Paul II, and the future Pope Benedict XVI.
*Note: A.D. comes before the year not after, e.g. "A.D. 79" NOT "79 A.D."* A.D. can be rendered as "(In the) year (of the) Lord." (1) Latin has no definite article. (2) Latin has a synthetic grammar (i.e. uses infections instead of prepositions. English is analytic which means it tends to use prepositions.)
Unfortunately the novus ordo breviary is a deficient version of the breviary which seems to follow the pattern of every single thing that came out of the novus ordo system all just happen to be objectively deficient when compared with every Traditional Catholic Original.
Nonsense. Everything in the Novus Ordo was taken from tradition, and some things even from the early Church. It is not deficient in the slightest. And to believe so is to claim that the Church has failed by erring in faith, morals, and worship - which the Holy Ghost would not allow by Christ's promise.
@@vivacristorey4363 The New Offertory wasn't taken from tradition at all. They abolished the traditional prayers and created new ones on the spot. Not only that but they created new prayers that removed the explicit mentions to the Sacrifice of the Mass from the Offerings of Host and Chalice, now called Offerings of Bread and Wine.
@@igorlopes7589 Your statements are misleading. Lets address them. Yes, the offertory and all the prayers of the mass were taken from tradition. They didn't abolish any prayers. They put a liturgy together and had decide, from the vast treasures of tradition, which prayers and practices would be in this form of the mass and which ones would be omitted, as was there authority to do. I'm not sure what you mean by prayers being created on the spot. I'm fairly certain that all the prayers were put together after consulting what we know about Church history, especially the early Church liturgy. You are claiming that the omission of words is malicious. Nonsense. Christ runs His Church you know. The word "sacrifice" and "chalice" is in the liturgy many times. Both words are even in at least one of the Eucharistic prayers. I have the book if you'd like me to quote it. I'm not sure why you have an issue with the words "bread" and "wine". Those are the substances being offered and quite literally a requirement for the consecration to be valid. We've got to get our information from trustworthy sources, not snake oil salesman who accuse the magisterium of being fallen and evil simply for clicks.
@richardbergmark6722 Hello Richard, please just become a member and shoot me an email with the titles of any slideshows you'd like to have sent over. The email is on an announcement accessible to the members on my channel.
Thanks for this video and for all the research that went into it! I'd like to offer a few corrections. Most Eastern Catholics find the term "Uniate" to be offensive. It should not be used in referring to those sui juris churches which reestablished union with the Holy See. Also, the Maronite Catholic Church is the largest expression of the West Syriac Catholic tradition. Its patriarch is one of the Catholic Patriarchs of Antioch. He adds the name of Peter to his own name upon election, out of respect for the Apostle Peter, who established Christianity in Antioch. The Maronite Church did not develop from the Melkite Church which has its own Patriarch of Antioch, and follows the Byzantine liturgical rite. The Maronites, over the centuries, have maintained unbroken union with the Holy See.
Sorry mate, the tens of thousands of Catholics murdered by that megalomaniac Henry 8th would disagree with your assumptions. The Cof E is undeniably now one of the 40,000 protestant churches ( or assemblies).
An idiotic logic. Why should the restriction of a very enriched and old Usage be ignored just because there are other enriched and old Rites in the East??
I'm genuinely impressed. With all this, throttling TLM for the sake of "unity" while we have so many rites (and some new one was recently announced???) sounds not right.
@@Corpoise0974 Pope St. Leo didn’t divide anything, you just left the Church. “The Church of Rome, which is the principal Church, in which the tradition of the apostles has always been preserved…” St. Cyprian of Carthage, On the Unity of the Church
A few things. They were not removed as you can still see them in all Catholic bibles. They are at this time omitted from the Divine Office. Priests are still free to recite them but it is not obligatory. The Pope, and to some degree the bishops, always have had the right to decide what prayers the divine office contains and doesn't contain. Everything to be asked for is found in the Our Father prayer. The theme of a psalm is found in one verse. That is why Jesus recited one verse of the psalm when on the Cross to represent the entire psalm. Since when did the pope have imperium? Since it was given to him by Christ in the gospels. Ever since then he has had it.
The slide you have for the West Syriac Church is of a Byzantine bishop and priests. The vestments are not West Syriac nor is the sanctuary a West Syriac sanctuary.
You can't treat this topic leaving out the Apostolic Tradition of the the Orthodox. As the variety comes mainly from the other apostolic Sees, eg. Constantinople, Alexandria, Damascus etc. Before 1054 the church was one and Peter recognized his counterparts, the successor of Andrew etc. So you cant present this as folcloristic variety. Constantinople has the celebration rite of Saint Chrisostom! Remember JPII gave the reliquies back to Bartholomew who is the 274 successor of St. Andrew? So go back to history and check again. As your approach is wrong.
This is from a EWTN article before the Eritrean Church separated from the Ethiopian Church which numbered the Churches rites at 23. Could you please provide the Catechism paragraph number? I'm interested in reading that. www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/why-so-many-rites-in-the-church-4827
What rites? Christ did not institute any rites or rituals/ sacraments. As against the 613 laws he gave only one commandment of love! The law is written in each one's heart. Why all these rites, denominations, groups and complications? The only ritual Christ commanded is to remember his sacrifice on the cross when the family assembles at the table for a meal.
I think the existing rite of the ordinariate was just the Anglification of its mother-Roman rite, so when Pope Benedict considered those Anglicans who wanted cross the Tiber and return to the fold, he wise had the existing Anglican Rite, made a few revisions, and used it for the liturgy of the newly formed Anglican Ordinariate. This has made it less abrupt and easily adaptable for converting Anglicans and Episcopalians.
@@JoseMariadeManila-g3f The Anglican would actually be part of the Latin Rite, of which the Roman is the largest. So not technically part of the Roman Rite directly.
@@PalermoTrapani - Latin is synonymous to Roman, and the Anglican rite was originally the Anglified or Enlighcised Roman rite so it basically is the Roman Rite translated into English. In a way, it preserved most of the Roman Rite more than the Novus Ordo did, including the solemn chants which you can no longer hear in Roman Rite - Novus Ordo Masses. But yes, you can also take it as a recension of the Roman Rite if you see it like the Mozarabic, Gallican, and Ambrosian Rites. But you can not say it was not part of the Roman Rite from where it originated.
@@JoseMariadeManila-g3f Yes, it is a manner of speaking. The Roman Rite is specifically the Liturgy of the Church of Rome in that context and the most used Liturgical Rite of the Catholic Church in the West. All other Latin-Western Rites are related to the Roman Rite and were adapted to particular regions. So the Mozarabic in Spain, which is similar to the Gallican Rite that use to celebrated in France are similar, so is the Bregan in Portugal and all the Rites adapted from the Roman Rite celebrated in the Religous Orders such as the Norbertine, Dominican, Benedectine Carmelite, etc. The Anglican is as you say the Anglican/English adaptation of the Roman Rite.
Many eastern churches who come to communion and then latinized by force. A horrible deed by the latin rite. Force all eastern churches to go back to their original traditions and gestures.
Wow. I learned so much from this. Thank you. A few possible corrections: there are other groups in the Latin rite that are in schism which you did not mention; including: the SSPX, the Old Catholics, the Society of St Pius V, the Resistance (led in part by Vigano), and the Sedevacantists. I am not a fan of the term "traditional Latin Mass". Both the new form and the old form in the Latin rite have taken everything in it from the traditions of the Church. And some things in the new form come from the early Church. What I mean is, that when people refer to the old form as "traditional" it implies that the new one is not - and this sets up bad ideologies. I am not saying that to be rude. It is rather that these ideologies is what pushes Rome to suppress the old form. I traditionalists reform their way of speaking it could prevent further suppression. But if they double down it will be nothing but a self-fulfilled prophecy.
@@luizfilipecouto1030 Sorry, but I disagree. The term Mass of the Ages" has the exact same problems as calling it the "TLM". Mass of the ages is a beautiful term if applied to any liturgy - meaning all of them. The problem is that when traditionalists refer to the extraordinary form as the Mass of the Ages, they are claiming that it deserves that title more than any other liturgy. The Mass of the Ages documentary is made up entirely of propaganda and has been disproven and torn apart by Catholic historians who have reviewed it. The guy who made said documentary probably had good intentions. Regardless, instead of simply showing the beauty of the extraordinary form and how it has helped many of the faithful, he attacked the ordinary form and promoted outrageous conspiracy theories as though they were fact. Doing that causes a lot of damage. And that ideology of demonizing other liturgies is the exact reason why Rome is suppressing the old form. It is a self-fulling prophecy. If they truly submit to Rome, then they need to stop with the bashing of the mainstream liturgy. It is much more fruitful to work with those who wish to promote beauty in any form of the Mass. With all due respect, many who fall in love with the old form of the Mass end up becoming misled by diabolical ideologies. And it is unfortunately because many who promote the old form are literally using it as a means to cause rebellion. And that is exactly what the document suppressing the old form states.
There are only 1.6 million Melkites but the Antiochian Orthodox Church of 4.3 million is a "breakaway sect." Aren’t you Roman Catholics the ones who are always making the argument that your Church is correct because it has the most people? 😂
@@vivacristorey4363 That’s exactly my point. Whenever I argue with Roman Catholics about theology they seem to think they’re right because they have bigger numbers.
@WanderingThief Classic tu quoque fallacy, lol. Besides, your original comment is just as applicable to Orthodoxy. The original patriarchates of Antioch and Alexandria went into schism, and both Catholics and Orthodox consider the patriarchs that replaced them the legitimate ones even though they were a minority of the population. This is still the case today; the Coptic church, the original Alexandrian Patriarchate, is far larger than the Greek Orthodox one, yet I'm sure the Eastern Orthodox would say theirs is legitimate and numbers don't matter. Pretty silly argument.
@@ZeDocta1 Pointing out an inconsistency on how the “numbers” argument is used is not a tu quoque. My intention was not to make that argument, but to show how dumb it is. You’re misinterpreting what I said. I don’t think that numbers have anything at all to do with who’s correct. Are you not able to understand what an internal critique is? I’m pointing out that the group of people who often rely on the dumb numbers argument here have to admit that it’s complete BS.
Are you trying to develop your comment? would be charitable is its for "conversation and try of conversion", otherwise, people will see it just another prideful post, which, i guess, its not the case, at least i dont want to jugde you with 7 words sentence.
Talking about diversity... What defines heresy Vs diversity? As a baptised Lutheran protestant European, what is the catholic views on the Anglican and other types of diverse approaches to the bible and it's currently, still changing, diverse readings and iterations.. is it an expression of gods love of human diversity? Or is it simply something that should still be considered as distortion, exclusion and even possibly evil?
Hello, thank you for your comment. Here is a link to a short video that describes the 4 Marks of the Church, the traditional Catholic means of determining whether a distinct ecclesial body is a rite or body of the one true Church or else is a schismatic or heretical sect. th-cam.com/video/yI6bNh1Uok8/w-d-xo.html
Corrigendum at 4:40 officium is Latin, not Greek, and it means "duty, obligation; office, service; favor, kindness". The Greek word for "work" is ἔργον (ergon), whence we derive words like energy or erg. I wonder if your translation of officium as "work" comes from confusing the translation of liturgy, which derives from the Greek λειτουργία, ("public duty or service"), which is a compound word deriving from λήϊτος ("public") and ἔργον ("work").
The Bible is the inspired word of God 1 Timothy 2:5 “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;” Luke 1:46-47 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: 1 Corinthians 10:4 “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.” 1 Samuel 2:2 “There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God. Mark 7:7. “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.” 2 Timothy 2:15 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” 1 Timothy 4:3 “Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” 2 Timothy 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. 1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. 1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Tit 1:7 - For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; Hosea 6:6 “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.” Rev 3:16 - So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. Better to be a born again Christian and find a good home Bible study group.
i hope one day there will be an Anglican Rite.
@thesaxonstandard2936 A number of viewers have expressed this sentiment and I would enjoy reading your fleshed out thoughts on the topic. In my reading, the origin of a distinct Anglican liturgy was Cranmer's attempt to "Calvinize" the traditional Latin Liturgy. I'm not too familiar with the overall history of the Anglican liturgy, though I did become Anglican for one year before reverting and I am somewhat familiar with the 2 current liturgies in the book of common prayer. Would you say there have been substantial Anglican developments in the liturgy of England that were not mere subtractions of disntinctly Catholic theology from the Sarum usage of the 16th century? I'm not asking that to frame a debate, I'm genuinely curious. In your estimation, if there were an Anglican Rite with orthodox Catholic theology, what distinctions would be noticeable from the Novus Ordo liturgy as celebrated in England?
@@historiaecclesiastica look into the ordinatiate of our lady of walsingham/ ordinariate of the chair of st peter.
There is! The ordinariate chair of St Peter.
Praying for the Restoration of Traditional Latin Mass
Yessss!
As a Latin in Rite and Ethnicity/Culture , Child of Sanctvs Petrvs , I pray my brothers from other Apostles maintain not only the Faith in Christ and the Unity with the rest of the Church but also that they maintain their cultural and ethnic identity in the Rites and Traditions that have been established so long ago .And I also pray for the intercession of Saint James the Lesser , Bishop of Judea , that a Hebrew Rite may be established so that Jews may be within Christ Jesus and maintain their identity and practices while within the Church .
Proud to be a Catholic. I'm part of Syro-Malabar rite 🤗
I am a "Roman", but love the Chaldean, Ukrainian, and Ruthenian Rites. I was able to attend a Chaldean Mass in Baghdad. Unforgettable.
Your channel is awesome.
Please have a detailed video about the Sarum Use or Rite, the Western Sarum Use or Rite of the ROCOE, etc. I was taught that the Sarum Use or Rite existed before Augustine came from Rome to Canterbury.
Thanks for your great work, best wishes for the future.
Please correct me if I’m wrong. I believe it’s not 24 Rites, rather it is:
- 6 Rites (Canon 28)
- 24 [Sui iuris] Churches (Canon 27 & 112)
Thank you for your videos! Very informative.
I’d be interested in a video that goes over the expression of spirituality that remain distinct to each of these rites, a simple distinction is the Rosary of the Latin rite and the chotki that is seen more in the various Eastern rites, as it can also help us to value and embrace the devotions that help us be true to our celebrated rites
Wouldn't it be more clear to refer to them as 24 churches sui iuris as opposed to rites? Usually, we use the term "rite" to denote a liturgical rite (which I think number 8), as opposed to an autonomous administrative apparatus, because multiple of these sui iuris churches use the same rite.
@ZeDocta1 I've seen the term rite used in different ways. My understanding is that a distinction can be made between rites which have a different official language and different episcopal head. Since the many Byzantine bodies celebrate the same liturgy but have different episcopal heads and different official languages, they can be called distinct rites which are a part of the same liturgical family.
@historiaecclesiastica That is a fair argument, just a different way of expressing it than I am used to. In the East, I think they use terms like Slavonic-Byzantine rite to refer to the liturgies of the Slavic churches so I see what you mean. God bless and thank you for the reply.
If all texts and rubrics are the same I fail to see why being under different Jurisdictions would differentiate them into distinct Rites. At most we would just have distinct Usages, but still the same Rite. And if difference in official language means different Rites then there would have been two Latin Rites, one in Croatia with slavonic and another in the rest of the Western Church with latin.
Yes, but there’s 6. Latin, Byzantine, Armenian, Coptic, East Syriac, West Syriac. Then there’s little r rites within those (like Mozarabic in Latin, Slavic in Byzantine etc.)
Great video. Cool to see a fellow metro Detroit person who is so knowledgeable. What do you think of the Amazonian Rite that is coming?
7 rites, 24 sui juris Churches*
UNITY IN DIVERSITY. I BELIEVE IN ONE CATHOLIC APOSTOLIC CHURCH. marvelous. JESUS LIVES.
In 1994, the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity issued a document which recognized the validity of the Assyrian Mass Church of the East despite the fact that its Eucharistic Prayer, the Anaphora of Addai and Mari, does not contain the Institution Narrative (the portion of the prayer that contains the lines, “This is my body” and “This is my blood.”)
Catholic theology had long regarded the Institutional Narrative as an absolutely necessary condition for the validity of the Mass - the 15th century Council of Florence, for example, referred to the words of the Institution Narrative as the “form of this sacrament.”
This declaration had the express endorsement of two popes - the sitting pontiff at the time, John Paul II, and the future Pope Benedict XVI.
here in Shillong Archdiocese India we are Roman Catholic Latin Rite. no problem whatever rite, being human being is all the same. God Bless Humanity.
In the discussion about the different Rites of the Catholic Church, the English subtitle spell “rites” with “rights.”
*Note: A.D. comes before the year not after, e.g. "A.D. 79" NOT "79 A.D."*
A.D. can be rendered as "(In the) year (of the) Lord."
(1) Latin has no definite article.
(2) Latin has a synthetic grammar (i.e. uses infections instead of prepositions. English is analytic which means it tends to use prepositions.)
Thank you, sir! ❤✝️
Unfortunately the novus ordo breviary is a deficient version of the breviary which seems to follow the pattern of every single thing that came out of the novus ordo system all just happen to be objectively deficient when compared with every Traditional Catholic Original.
Nonsense. Everything in the Novus Ordo was taken from tradition, and some things even from the early Church. It is not deficient in the slightest. And to believe so is to claim that the Church has failed by erring in faith, morals, and worship - which the Holy Ghost would not allow by Christ's promise.
@@vivacristorey4363No
@@vivacristorey4363 The New Offertory wasn't taken from tradition at all. They abolished the traditional prayers and created new ones on the spot. Not only that but they created new prayers that removed the explicit mentions to the Sacrifice of the Mass from the Offerings of Host and Chalice, now called Offerings of Bread and Wine.
@@igorlopes7589 Your statements are misleading. Lets address them.
Yes, the offertory and all the prayers of the mass were taken from tradition.
They didn't abolish any prayers. They put a liturgy together and had decide, from the vast treasures of tradition, which prayers and practices would be in this form of the mass and which ones would be omitted, as was there authority to do.
I'm not sure what you mean by prayers being created on the spot. I'm fairly certain that all the prayers were put together after consulting what we know about Church history, especially the early Church liturgy.
You are claiming that the omission of words is malicious. Nonsense. Christ runs His Church you know. The word "sacrifice" and "chalice" is in the liturgy many times. Both words are even in at least one of the Eucharistic prayers. I have the book if you'd like me to quote it.
I'm not sure why you have an issue with the words "bread" and "wine". Those are the substances being offered and quite literally a requirement for the consecration to be valid.
We've got to get our information from trustworthy sources, not snake oil salesman who accuse the magisterium of being fallen and evil simply for clicks.
Very much enjoyed your channel.
Proud Latin Rite Catholic. Great video!
There is no latin rite!
@@alexpanagiotis4706:
Actually, the Latin Rite just happens to be the Largest.
@@alhilford2345 There is no latin rite.
The "latin rite" is a creation of western middle ages and has nothing to do with the old Roman Liturgy.
Thank you for your excellent work! How can I get a copy of these slides emailed to me?
@richardbergmark6722 Hello Richard, please just become a member and shoot me an email with the titles of any slideshows you'd like to have sent over. The email is on an announcement accessible to the members on my channel.
Thanks for this video and for all the research that went into it! I'd like to offer a few corrections. Most Eastern Catholics find the term "Uniate" to be offensive. It should not be used in referring to those sui juris churches which reestablished union with the Holy See.
Also, the Maronite Catholic Church is the largest expression of the West Syriac Catholic tradition. Its patriarch is one of the Catholic Patriarchs of Antioch. He adds the name of Peter to his own name upon election, out of respect for the Apostle Peter, who established Christianity in Antioch. The Maronite Church did not develop from the Melkite Church which has its own Patriarch of Antioch, and follows the Byzantine liturgical rite. The Maronites, over the centuries, have maintained unbroken union with the Holy See.
As an Anglican branch theory guy this video is very interesting lol
Could you please explain what that theory is on the pinned comment to this video? I'm not familiar with this.
Sorry mate, the tens of thousands of Catholics murdered by that megalomaniac Henry 8th would disagree with your assumptions. The Cof E is undeniably now one of the 40,000 protestant churches ( or assemblies).
Very great video!
Thank you for this video!
Awesome video!
Thanks for this lecture. Since there are so many rites let’s not fuss about the restriction of the Latin mass.
What? It's still sad to see a beautiful thing be practically done away with.
An idiotic logic. Why should the restriction of a very enriched and old Usage be ignored just because there are other enriched and old Rites in the East??
I'm genuinely impressed. With all this, throttling TLM for the sake of "unity" while we have so many rites (and some new one was recently announced???) sounds not right.
21:50 a small correction. You’ve accidentally used a picture of Syro-Malabar clergy for the Chaldean Catholic Church.
Thank you for pointing that out.
What about the Ordinariate? Or is that under Latin Rite??
It‘s so sad to see that so many of these schismatic bodies have still persisted…
They aren't schismatic. They subscribe fully to the magisterium's authority.
@@MatthewBrender-g6vI mean the „Orthodox“
Pope Leo I divided the Church, we Copts waiting for the Roman church to condemn the heretical tome.
@@Corpoise0974 Pope St. Leo didn’t divide anything, you just left the Church.
“The Church of Rome, which is the principal Church, in which the tradition of the apostles has always been preserved…”
St. Cyprian of Carthage, On the Unity of the Church
Read the Chieti document and Alexandria document
Diversity is essential. Compare a jungle to a monocrop.
So easy to stray outside the jurisdiction of rome
At 3:00 you showed a picture of the Orthodox Patriarchs of Jerusalem and Moscow.
Thanks !
Did I miss something or have you omitted the Sarum Rite?
That is considered a "usage" once common in England rather than a distinct rite.
@@historiaecclesiastica True, but it informs the Ordinariate usage, which should be listed along with the other sub-categories in the Latin-rite, no?
Hmm, the "imprecatory" psalms were removed by Pope Paul VI. Since when does a pope have such 'imperium'? This is more Spirit of Vat 2 nonsense.
A few things. They were not removed as you can still see them in all Catholic bibles. They are at this time omitted from the Divine Office. Priests are still free to recite them but it is not obligatory. The Pope, and to some degree the bishops, always have had the right to decide what prayers the divine office contains and doesn't contain.
Everything to be asked for is found in the Our Father prayer. The theme of a psalm is found in one verse. That is why Jesus recited one verse of the psalm when on the Cross to represent the entire psalm.
Since when did the pope have imperium? Since it was given to him by Christ in the gospels. Ever since then he has had it.
The slide you have for the West Syriac Church is of a Byzantine bishop and priests. The vestments are not West Syriac nor is the sanctuary a West Syriac sanctuary.
wouldnt the celtic rites come under st john and peter
Where is our chapter hero!?
You can't treat this topic leaving out the Apostolic Tradition of the the Orthodox. As the variety comes mainly from the other apostolic Sees, eg. Constantinople, Alexandria, Damascus etc. Before 1054 the church was one and Peter recognized his counterparts, the successor of Andrew etc. So you cant present this as folcloristic variety. Constantinople has the celebration rite of Saint Chrisostom! Remember JPII gave the reliquies back to Bartholomew who is the 274 successor of St. Andrew? So go back to history and check again. As your approach is wrong.
👍👍👍
There aren’t 24 rites. There are 24 distinct churches, but 8 rites. Read your catechism.
This is from a EWTN article before the Eritrean Church separated from the Ethiopian Church which numbered the Churches rites at 23. Could you please provide the Catechism paragraph number? I'm interested in reading that. www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/why-so-many-rites-in-the-church-4827
What rites? Christ did not institute any rites or rituals/ sacraments. As against the 613 laws he gave only one commandment of love! The law is written in each one's heart. Why all these rites, denominations, groups and complications? The only ritual Christ commanded is to remember his sacrifice on the cross when the family assembles at the table for a meal.
Why is the Anglican Ordinariate not a separate rite?
It is part of the Roman Rite.
I think the existing rite of the ordinariate was just the Anglification of its mother-Roman rite, so when Pope Benedict considered those Anglicans who wanted cross the Tiber and return to the fold, he wise had the existing Anglican Rite, made a few revisions, and used it for the liturgy of the newly formed Anglican Ordinariate. This has made it less abrupt and easily adaptable for converting Anglicans and Episcopalians.
@@JoseMariadeManila-g3f The Anglican would actually be part of the Latin Rite, of which the Roman is the largest. So not technically part of the Roman Rite directly.
@@PalermoTrapani - Latin is synonymous to Roman, and the Anglican rite was originally the Anglified or Enlighcised Roman rite so it basically is the Roman Rite translated into English. In a way, it preserved most of the Roman Rite more than the Novus Ordo did, including the solemn chants which you can no longer hear in Roman Rite - Novus Ordo Masses. But yes, you can also take it as a recension of the Roman Rite if you see it like the Mozarabic, Gallican, and Ambrosian Rites. But you can not say it was not part of the Roman Rite from where it originated.
@@JoseMariadeManila-g3f Yes, it is a manner of speaking. The Roman Rite is specifically the Liturgy of the Church of Rome in that context and the most used Liturgical Rite of the Catholic Church in the West. All other Latin-Western Rites are related to the Roman Rite and were adapted to particular regions. So the Mozarabic in Spain, which is similar to the Gallican Rite that use to celebrated in France are similar, so is the Bregan in Portugal and all the Rites adapted from the Roman Rite celebrated in the Religous Orders such as the Norbertine, Dominican, Benedectine Carmelite, etc. The Anglican is as you say the Anglican/English adaptation of the Roman Rite.
St. Peter had no "latin rite"
Many eastern churches who come to communion and then latinized by force. A horrible deed by the latin rite. Force all eastern churches to go back to their original traditions and gestures.
Come back to the true Catholic Church. Orthodoxy
😂😂😂
@@LaurenceNaseb-si7nl 1 bishop left the pentarchy, 4 remained which one of those sounds like a derangement fueled by pride?
Wow. I learned so much from this. Thank you.
A few possible corrections: there are other groups in the Latin rite that are in schism which you did not mention; including: the SSPX, the Old Catholics, the Society of St Pius V, the Resistance (led in part by Vigano), and the Sedevacantists.
I am not a fan of the term "traditional Latin Mass". Both the new form and the old form in the Latin rite have taken everything in it from the traditions of the Church. And some things in the new form come from the early Church. What I mean is, that when people refer to the old form as "traditional" it implies that the new one is not - and this sets up bad ideologies. I am not saying that to be rude. It is rather that these ideologies is what pushes Rome to suppress the old form. I traditionalists reform their way of speaking it could prevent further suppression. But if they double down it will be nothing but a self-fulfilled prophecy.
Mass of the Ages is better
@@luizfilipecouto1030 Sorry, but I disagree. The term Mass of the Ages" has the exact same problems as calling it the "TLM". Mass of the ages is a beautiful term if applied to any liturgy - meaning all of them. The problem is that when traditionalists refer to the extraordinary form as the Mass of the Ages, they are claiming that it deserves that title more than any other liturgy. The Mass of the Ages documentary is made up entirely of propaganda and has been disproven and torn apart by Catholic historians who have reviewed it.
The guy who made said documentary probably had good intentions. Regardless, instead of simply showing the beauty of the extraordinary form and how it has helped many of the faithful, he attacked the ordinary form and promoted outrageous conspiracy theories as though they were fact. Doing that causes a lot of damage. And that ideology of demonizing other liturgies is the exact reason why Rome is suppressing the old form. It is a self-fulling prophecy. If they truly submit to Rome, then they need to stop with the bashing of the mainstream liturgy. It is much more fruitful to work with those who wish to promote beauty in any form of the Mass.
With all due respect, many who fall in love with the old form of the Mass end up becoming misled by diabolical ideologies. And it is unfortunately because many who promote the old form are literally using it as a means to cause rebellion. And that is exactly what the document suppressing the old form states.
@@luizfilipecouto1030 Also, I love your pic by the way.
@ Novus Ordo has a lot of problems. Benedict XVI hymself knew that! Vetus Ordo can be used.
@@vivacristorey4363 Thank you Brother! God Bless you!
There are only 1.6 million Melkites but the Antiochian Orthodox Church of 4.3 million is a "breakaway sect." Aren’t you Roman Catholics the ones who are always making the argument that your Church is correct because it has the most people? 😂
schism is not about numbers
@ Exactly my point. Whenever I argue with Catholics they seem to think that they’re right because there are over 1 billion Catholics in the world
@@vivacristorey4363 That’s exactly my point. Whenever I argue with Roman Catholics about theology they seem to think they’re right because they have bigger numbers.
@WanderingThief Classic tu quoque fallacy, lol.
Besides, your original comment is just as applicable to Orthodoxy. The original patriarchates of Antioch and Alexandria went into schism, and both Catholics and Orthodox consider the patriarchs that replaced them the legitimate ones even though they were a minority of the population.
This is still the case today; the Coptic church, the original Alexandrian Patriarchate, is far larger than the Greek Orthodox one, yet I'm sure the Eastern Orthodox would say theirs is legitimate and numbers don't matter.
Pretty silly argument.
@@ZeDocta1 Pointing out an inconsistency on how the “numbers” argument is used is not a tu quoque. My intention was not to make that argument, but to show how dumb it is. You’re misinterpreting what I said. I don’t think that numbers have anything at all to do with who’s correct. Are you not able to understand what an internal critique is? I’m pointing out that the group of people who often rely on the dumb numbers argument here have to admit that it’s complete BS.
Yea uniting with the wicked isn't good
Are you trying to develop your comment? would be charitable is its for "conversation and try of conversion", otherwise, people will see it just another prideful post, which, i guess, its not the case, at least i dont want to jugde you with 7 words sentence.
23 denomination.
24 Rites
What?
Talking about diversity... What defines heresy Vs diversity? As a baptised Lutheran protestant European, what is the catholic views on the Anglican and other types of diverse approaches to the bible and it's currently, still changing, diverse readings and iterations.. is it an expression of gods love of human diversity? Or is it simply something that should still be considered as distortion, exclusion and even possibly evil?
Hello, thank you for your comment. Here is a link to a short video that describes the 4 Marks of the Church, the traditional Catholic means of determining whether a distinct ecclesial body is a rite or body of the one true Church or else is a schismatic or heretical sect. th-cam.com/video/yI6bNh1Uok8/w-d-xo.html
Corrigendum at 4:40 officium is Latin, not Greek, and it means "duty, obligation; office, service; favor, kindness". The Greek word for "work" is ἔργον (ergon), whence we derive words like energy or erg. I wonder if your translation of officium as "work" comes from confusing the translation of liturgy, which derives from the Greek λειτουργία, ("public duty or service"), which is a compound word deriving from λήϊτος ("public") and ἔργον ("work").
Thank you - that was a slip of the tongue, my mistake.
The Bible is the inspired word of God
1 Timothy 2:5 “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;”
Luke 1:46-47 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Savior
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
1 Corinthians 10:4 “And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.”
1 Samuel 2:2 “There is none holy as the LORD: for there is none beside thee: neither is there any rock like our God.
Mark 7:7. “Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.”
2 Timothy 2:15 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”
John 14:6 “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”
1 Timothy 4:3 “Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”
2 Timothy 3:15 “And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.”
Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
1 Timothy 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; 2 Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; 3 Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.
1Ti 3:2 - A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
Tit 1:7 - For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God;
Hosea 6:6 “For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.”
Rev 3:16 - So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
Better to be a born again Christian and find a good home Bible study group.
Yes.
The Holy Bible is a beautiful Catholic book.