I go to the Latin mass because the novus ordo makes me want to rip my eyes out of my head. Furthermore Once I found the old mass, I started learning all about the churches relationship with Jews that has been left out post council. My 1962 missal kept it all in. Every Sunday during Lent I get lessons on the the churches relationship with the Jews. But I’m hiding at the TLM to avoid the Jew question? No. I’m hiding from Cat Stevens hymns and Eucharistic ministers dropping the host on the carpet and preaching on why we should support arming Ukraine indefinitely.
Shall I blame the Jews for those in the Church who gave me 1st Communion in 2nd grade, but withheld 1st Confession until 4th grade for crappy catechesis? Who were they trying to be in union with when they made us sit in cafeteria chairs and NOT kneel at all during Consecration? My kids brought me to the Latin Mass at ages 10 & 5, and I thank God everyday for it is the only thing that gave our family a standing chance in this culture war. Changed our lives & our perspective because of what it imparts on the human soul.
I had already made up my mind that I was going to disagree with EMJ on the topic of Latin Mass, but he has widened my perspective and now I hold a more charitable view on his position. Great interview.
I understand what Dr Jones is saying. But the novus ordo it's what actually brought consumerism. I've never seen two identical novus ordo masses. On the other hand tlm it's vastly more homogeneous, more universal.
@DukeLetoAtreides Pope Francis, even if he were to be an occult heretic, would still be the Pope and maintain the guidance of the Holy Ghost until he was declared a manifest heretic by Cardinals and/or Bishops. To think otherwise is heresy and puts you outside the Catholic Church because you reject the hierarchy of the Church.
Yes and no.He seems to make good points, but then he halls off and blames the victim-the young TLM family attending a legitimate parish in the Church, and trying to protect their kids from anti-Logos influences. It makes no sense.
@@anthonypuccetti8779 He is not correct on this issue. Pope Benedict, the supreme leader of the Catholic Church and vicar of Christ, lifted the excommunication of the four bishops of the SSPX because they were not properly or canonically excommunicated and they were not in schism. Pope Benedict would not have lifted the excommunication if the SSPX were in schism. Dr. EMJ, who I love and respect, is not the Pope and his pronouncements carry no canonical weight in such matters as schism. Pope Benedict wrote his Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum to return the TLM to the place of honour and eminence that it previously held and deserved. This Papal act was Christ's first step through the work of the Holy Spirit in maneuvering his Church away from the rocks of shipwreck back onto the correct course. Right now there is a fight on the bridge over the steering wheel between the forces of evil trying to slam the Barque of Peter back into the shark infested waters of shipwreck and the forces of good keeping the ship on the right course, while beginning to repair the holes in the hull.
@@rccyberwarrior2267 "Pope Benedict, the supreme leader of the Catholic Church and vicar of Christ, lifted the excommunication of the four bishops of the SSPX because they were not properly or canonically excommunicated and they were not in schism." No that isn't the reason. "Pope Benedict would not have lifted the excommunication if the SSPX were in schism." The SSPX is in schism. They refuse submission to the Roman pontiff and communion with those who are subject to him. Catechism 2089: "schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."
Aggressive tone betrays some kind of strange misalignement of logic in this discourse. More factual coherence, please. May be a bit of too much ego stands in the way of lucidity, sorry to say.
@Jose Luis Luna I like the man, and hate to state a critical opinion, but here he is particularly discombobulated; no rhyme or reason in his response on top of shouting.
The TLM parishes usually agree that most people have enough common sense to assess risk. It's the NO parishes run by women who bully the weak priests who get to feel important by forcing masks on people, communion in the hand, communion in plastic bags, etc because of their total embrace of the most extreme interpretation of the Narrative.
My very liberal diocese relaxed those restrictions but the truth of the matter is that they were trivial. If you do not think so you need to reflect on what real persecution entails. My point is that the Catholic Mass is not about our esthetic preferences but about our total dependence upon our Savior.
@@Tozniak In Ireland we were not able to attend mass for nearly a year. The Priests being more afraid of the virus than the rest of the population. Most priests believe in the vaccine and demand masks during mass & communion in the hand. The homily’s are mainly about “ doing the “right thing” and getting vaccinated,”or about how great scientists are in providing a cure. Prayers are for “those dying of Covid” Where do we stand there. ?
I am a convert. I came into the church 21 years ago in a Novus ordo parish. I now attend the TLM because the Douay Rheims has not been corrupted like the New American Bible.. The TLM has many times more reverence for God. We have a much holier mass. 100 % of our parish believes in the real presence. We have 30 young men who are altar servers (about 15 at one time). We have vocations that the Novus Ordo does not. We have Gregorian chant - the devil is afraid of Gregorian chant. The kinds of generalizations Dr. Jones is talking about do not hit home and have missed the mark.. He should read the book "The Popes Against Modern Errors - 16 Papal Documents". Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies. “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own household” (Matthew 10:34-36).
He should also read the Ottavianni Intervention and review what recent popes have said about the Society of Saint Pius X. There would be no Ecclessia Dei groups had it not been for the work of Lefebvre and the Society of Saint Pius X.
Most of the time I agree with Dr. Jones, but this hypothesis is utter nonsense. The only growing part of the Church is the traditional movement, to claim that we are embarrassed by the Gospel is absurd.
@@PM-nr1yo Yeah. The guy who wrote the book on Logos and is writing a book on the beauty of logos disses TLM, and wants us to obey the order to participate in the anti-logos NO. He supports Bergoglio spitting venom on our face because we have not been "charitable, " whatever that means. People who see the hand of God in history, and in this conflict, draw their strength from the faith of our fathers, not the limp mewings of the ecumenical modernists. I agree that this
Not true, he said that there is a fear to preach the Gospel. That is what he consistently said. Fear of embarrassing or upsetting the Jews. If you give into your fears when it comes to preaching the Gospel (of all things) you ARE an embarrassment.
The embarrassment of the Gospel line is specifically referring to the removal of passages about the Jews in the norvus ordo. You ought to grasp his points before pontificating
I have another possible explanation: Tridentine mass was killed because it was getting the faithful and Novus Ordo was losing the faithful, especially during covid. It reminds me story of Cain and Abel: "The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry and dejected. (...) Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let us go out in the field.” When they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him."
That pretty much sums up how I feel about this whole disastrous Traditionis Custodis business….. Very well put!!! Even though our brothers are coming for us, we shall prevail. I’m a little confused by Dr Jones. He ranted at the beginning, then later calmly applauded young Traditionalists……go figure……
How can the guy who wrote JRS, a book on Logos, and is currently writing a book on beauty as logos cone out in favor of the revolutionary, ugly NO rite, and dismiss the TLM, and mock the people who go to great efforts to faithfully attend it? I'm confounded.
He explained it here and in his debate with the late Michael Davies. “ you don’t debate doctrine with a schismatic.” If he did he would lose, as he lost vs Davies. His objection is instinctual, emotional, and comes out of fear. He says “nobody understood” back then but books were already published on the problems in 1967. As far as the RSP he himself was calling the sspx “nazis.” Jones has very strong liberal tendencies which are incongruous but nevertheless present, distorting his worldview.
@@didymussumydid9726 I did not know of the Davies debate. Thanks for the mention. I will check it out, and I hope it will help me to understand his position, as it seems he has a blind spot on this issue.
EMJ certainly has a brilliant mind but I sense a prideful streak which may be what’s clouding his vision on this issue. Ironic in that his career began because the modernist corruption of the Church a la V2 is what put an end to his teaching career. Yet somehow he categorizes “return to tradition “ with know-nothing ignorance. I think it’s a boomer thing. Moon landings and a better life through chemicals in every thing.
I love you Mike and appreciate your invaluable insight on many things but I have to disagree with you on this one. The Latin Mass movement represent a true renewal in a broken Church, not schism.
The one true Church can never be broken, or it was never the one true Church. (Maybe I'm just making a semantical correction here, and we both could agree that, using the analogy that Jones often uses of the Church being the boat in the storm, the boat perhaps needs some course correction to weather this current storm.)
@@jasonludwig2488 Yes whether the Church is broken or off course it definitely needs a renewal. (The Church as the Mystical Body of Christ is of course pure).
EMJ didn’t say the Holy Mass itself represents schism, but that distorted notions about it could LEAD to schism if one doesn’t understand the situation. The Gospel needs to be restored to the Church first and foremost. It’s been strangled in the cradle, just look around. You need to watch and listen again, only this time more carefully.
@@Steveorino123 Jones maintains that the SSPX is in schism, he doesn't hide it. The SSPX maintained the Latin Mass movement throughout the decades (not the FSSP or ICKSP). This is what I meant. The SSPX is not in schism. This is what needs to be fleshed out. I'm happy to debate the point.
Obedience and humility are of utmost importance in the spiritual life and in living a life of virtue. If the Church says we have a NO Mass, I go to the NO Mass. End of story.
EMJ makes connections that are deeply concerning however if you follow his research and the lens he views history through, it pieces together things that no one else talks about or sees, or has the courage to address. If you are going to say he's wrong, you have to say why, or you tend to look like someone who just doesn't like what he's saying.
Wether or not I agree with E. Michael Jones on everything, he is doing some amazing work. I absolutely love this guy, I wish I had the chance to meet him someday.
It need not be abrogated, since its promulgation was by those who utterly lack authority in the Church - by those outside the Church! It is null and void. The "church" whose official liturgy in the NO is not the Catholic Church. It is the novus ordo sect
@@snowy1634 The N O has led to millions of Catholics leaving Christ and His Church. The New Testament refers to the great apostasy for a reason (2 Thessalonians 2:3).
I suppose Jones disregards the warnings given by Saint Pius X that the modernists would attempt to subvert the church via the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita. And that modernism is the 'synthesis of all heresies'.
with time I came to realize that the real problem lies with Vatican I, not Vatican II. Too much power to one man, as Catholics we found ourselves in the position of putting all our eggs in one basket, giviing thus way to the subversion of the Church. In our "evolving" system it is the Pope that determines what tradition is. If we deny this, we basically become protestants.
@@veilofreality You are on right track, but continue more. Problem started more than one thousand yers ago when someone in Rome said - I am vicar of Christ, I am the head of the Church, I can judge anyone, but no-one can judge me.
1:41 there is provision within Canon Law to have non-geographical parishes. It is not true to say that there were many substantially different rites throughout Europe before Trent. The variations were so minor that most people, all laity, would not know the difference between them. What Pops St Pius V did was to standardise things by making the rite that was offered in Rome THE rite that was to be offered everywhere. Furthermore, if we need only one rite for the sake of unity then we need to abolish all the Eastern and Oriental rites ... As for the superiority of the ancient Roman Rite over Montini's Mass, yes, of course it is but Montini's Mass isn't going to be suppressed. It's more like a gastly sweater given you for Christmas. It should be left in a closet until it's finally forgotten many years from now.
What is the average Catholic supposed to do? They go to Mass and try to live Christian lives. Now the Latin Mass has been taken from them, while the leaders of the Church say that the gay couple next door is living a more "Christian" life than they are. I don't blame those who just want the Latin Mass back in hopes that at some point in the future the leaders of the Church will be Christian again.
I am very disappointed with this talk by EMJ. It is an incoherent rant and quite out of character but worst of all in spite of the lack of clarity he is obviously a believer in Vatican II which is a terrible disappointment.
Traditional Catholics should trust God. Leaving the church will only divert energy and embolden the enemies of the Faith. The Susans are dying out, we will replace them.
I look upon myself as a traditional Catholic, and I frequently attend a NO Mass. I prefer the TLM. I would never leave the Church. And neither would most of my fellow TLM attendees. I’ve never even considered that as an option.
The biggest issue for us trads was not really the language. It was the prayers, the reverence, the music, ad orientem, orthodoxy, sacred architecture, etc. The division EMJ describes is due to the fact that the Novus Ordo is a completely different mentality. What we got after V2 was like a new religion.
The problem is neither TLM, nor NO, they can co-exist. The real problem is Bergoglio and his hatred of Tradition and about schism, EMJ has forgotten two things that Bergoglio openly said: first that he is not afraid of schism, second that he may go down in history as the Pope under whom a great schism hit the Church. EMJ was disappointing this time, sorry to say.
@@emilbrusic6032 sorry, you are a fideist and montanist who commits the sin of blind obedience even if a prelate teaches what is contrary to the truths of Christ. And about judging, you seem to know more than a thing or two about it. Do you even know there were popes who for a time taught heresy? Of course you don't. Learn some Church history to stop embarrassing yourself. Unless of course you are capable of irony.
@@deusvult9837 I escaped couple years ago of RCC hell, and became Orthodox. And I was sedevacantist as probably you are. It is impossible to reform RCC because of papism, i.e. nobody can judge Roman pontiff, and he is infallible vicar of Christ, and if you do not obey him you will end in the Hell (Unam Sanctam - bull of pope Boniface VIII). You should obey him not only in Extraordinary Magisterium, but Ordinary as well. You do not have right to choose which Roman Pontiff is valid, you do not have right to cut communion with Him and not to finished in Hell. But if you were Orthodox, that is exactly written in 15th canon of ecumenical council in Constantinople which RCC rejects for obvious reason.
@@emilbrusic6032 never have been and never will be a sedevacantist or shift to Orthodox Church, much as I admire some of it. Will remain in my Catholic Church and fight for its Truth, as I'm doing.
@@deusvult9837 And that is because of pride. You can not admit that you, as your ancestors and my ancestors, have been fooled by this Satanic & Antichrist religion which put one man with little white hat as God who can not be judged by anyone, and who should be obeyed for everyone who wants to be saved. You prefer pride than the Truth.
I have to choose a mass where I don’t have to wear a mask and use holy water on entrance. This happens to be the TLM. What is schism now caused by. Is it scientism?
As a member of an FSSP parish, I have to say you’re being incredibly unfair and uncharitable towards us. No one I’ve talked to or know in our circles is a “know-nothing” who thinks it’s ALL about the Latin Mass. it’s one aspect of a larger modernist rot in the church. Francis and most of the cardinals are very left wing and modernist. Should we just blindly go along e their agenda in the name of unity? It’s a complex issue but to see you take the side of them against sincere Catholics who just want to practice the Mass in a reverential and sacred manner is sad. I love ya Dr Jones but you’re wrong on this.
Jones didn't say that about the FSSP, he said it about some stupid traditionalists. Francis isn't leftist. He has affirmed the necessity of the Church and the reality of satan and has rejected the ordination of women and blessing same sex unions. A leftist would not take those positions.
Pope St. Pius V didn't make a new rite but restored the Roman rite in which, as you admit, corruptions had taken place. Pius V also eliminated rites that couldn't show they were greater than 200 yrs old. This is not what Paul 6 did. He made a Protestant rite which is why you can't distinguish between the Novus Ordo, Lutheran, Episcopalian, .... Services.
E Michael Jones is so brilliant which makes his position on tradition in the church very hard to swallow! I am always shocked at his clutching of the new order rite. He is one of the precious few people whose life remained in tact through the tumultuous 60s 70s 80s 90s.. it is there for anyone with a brain to see and he has a very big brain! I just cannot understand how he continues to defend the circular churches, the priest dancing around on the altar, no confessional booth turned into a counseling session. Just dump the whole thing. Maybe his book on aesthetics will show him just how ugly the new order church really is. God bless.
Jones and Saint Paul understand that the most important thing is not logic but charity. He is not saying that you are wrong he is just saying that you should focus on charity.
@@guillermomarciano1390 I’ve purchased his books he’s a serious scholar. I think it’s more about his high intelligence.. but I’ve learned, painfully so, when smart people are duped, they almost can’t admit they’ve been wrong. and he’s wrong here. I’d write it off because he’s contributed so much to the Jewish question and I’m eternally grateful for this. But this is a critical error with far reaching implications. I pray he sees this truth ASAP
And you also don't have parish community life when you drive to ONE church an hour away that is the sole reverent Novus Ordo Mass without protestant or heretical music in the entire Archdiocese. I don't know many who have actually seen a Novus Ordo offered as V2 said it should have been.
Whoa. E Michael Jones is so off on this. You want to talk about revolutionary spirit? Look into the modernist revolutionaries who were in charge of dismantling the Roman Rite in the late 60s. Come Dr. Jones. I expect more from you.
To think that the Latin mass is a way of avoiding the JQ, yet the Novus Ordo is somehow “based” and addressing the JQ is just insane. Jones has lost the plot at this point
I admire Dr. Jones. A lot. But he´s way off about this issue. Archbishop Lefebvre was a hero and a saint. Dr. Jones debated Michael Davies years ago about these matters and Mr. Davies was the winner. That debate is available here on TH-cam.
Archbishop Lefebvre is probably a Saint. I have to thank him for FSSP. They are doing a good job. Probably SSPX should join them. All the reasons for SSPX not to be part of the church are logical they never look at charity because it's not their strength but the most important thing is charity according to a very logical Jones and a very saintly Paul.
Bishop Ngo Thuc ordained & consecrated using the traditional Rites in the early 80's. Bishop Thuc was the only traditional Bishop who consecrated Men who were ordained before Vatican 2.
Does the schism argument still stand if most bishops (even modernist friendly ones) don’t implement the moto proprio? Also Pope Benedict said the pope cannot forbid a rite that was fully approved in the past. It’s like saying we would be fine 100 yrs ago, but because it’s today- it’s forbidden. The church doesn’t work like that, thankfully.
@@didymussumydid9726 Ratzinger himself was a V II modernist before he became Pope and then tried to turn the ship around when he realized what was really going on. He tried to square the circle with Hermeneutic of Continuity, but it can't work because this new BS is too blatantly anti-Catholic.
I love E. Michael Jones and his very unique and insightful take on this. HOWEVER, -and i hate to be this guy, but i think this sheds some light in this situation- EMJ receives Holy Communion in the hand and walks while putting God on his tongue.
Is it a sin to receive Holy Communion on the hand? If it is, than the permission granted by the bishops is a grave sin. Is that what you are actually saying? Have the bishops committed grave sin in granting an indult for Holy Communion in the hand? If yes, where do you go from there? If the bishops are sinning in something like this, are they to be obeyed on anything? And so the schismatic thinking begins. As EMJ has pointed out in the most Catholic of ways, schism isn’t just a specific event or only an act like the consecration of the 4 bishops in 1988. It is a mindset that is deprived of charity towards members of the Mystical Body of Christ. EMJ has provided an excellent examination of conscience for all of us.
@@pancho5375 you are making lots of rash assumptions here without parsing out what the implications of my simple statement of fact are. Answer this question: does the way one receives Our Lord in Holy Communion matter?
@@pancho5375 It can be, its *not* intrinsically evil. However, it is objectively sacrilegious in 99.9% of cases. The context determines whether it is a personal sin or not. Im asking a different and more poignant question. Does it matter?
He loves and wants so much to be loyal to the church he will not believe the people representing the church are not catholic. They have to be catholic in his mind.
@@wn8963 to be catholic you have to believe what the church always and everywhere has taught. Just because you call yourself catholic or the world calls you Catholic. Your not Catholics if you do not believe and practice the Holy Catholic Faith. Wolf's in sheep's clothing
@@MarysLegion yes, and the greatest affront, heresy, prevalent by these groups that say they are traditionalists is in not believing in the Dogma: Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation. All the dogmas of the Church must be held - if even only one is not, you cannot be saved. The bishops and priests who say you can be saved by a "baptism of blood or desire" and do not need to be a member of the Church are teaching against this dogma! I'm hearing all the time from many, nearly all of the hierarchy in their teachings or preachings, that it is not stressed as to the absolute necessity to be baptized and be within the Catholic Faith to be saved! This has, and is, causing the faithful not to evangelize! This started even before V2 but has continued to be a norm since V2 with the popes, bishops and believed by the laymen. JP2 was a big proponent of this false ecumenism (please visit vaticancatholic TH-cam channel for details).
I've listened to this talk three times trying to better understand EMJ's angle. I think he dismisses the Occam's Razor interpretation of the motu proprio a little too easily, that it was a naked political attack on a growing trad faction in the church by a liberal Pope, in favour of one that weaves himself into having a central role to play in events, this time through the influence of his book the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit. EMJ has done this before, erroneously maintaining that the 'nofap november' phenomenon began in 2018 or so, prompted by his book Libido Dominandi when in fact it had existed for years previously. EMJ has a very mechanistic view of the Mass and the sacraments - if the priest is in Communion with Rome then the mass is valid, the Eucharist imparts grace and the liturgy is just a matter of personal taste. I think Jones underestimates the extent to which the TLM liturgy itself attracts people to the faith. EMJ is at his strongest here when decrying church shopping and prioritising liturgy aesthetics at the cost of schism - are Catholic communities strengthened when trads are driving away from their local parish to a TLM on the other side of town? His answer is no. EMJ's attitude is not that the NO is a great liturgy, but that it is a valid one, even if modernist in style and delivered by a liberal priest who countenances heresies. I would have liked him to explore the question of how faithful trad Catholics should relate to a Pope who appears to hate them. Do we just ignore him? But isn't that schismatic? The argument that trads saw themselves as attending a 'better' liturgy than the NO is a weak one. What then of those attending LGBTQ Mass? I'm sure they saw themselves as attending a better mass than a normal NO. I'm still not fully convinced by EMJ, I think his own desire to be at the center of things and fit things into his Hegelian Logos Catholic outlook might be colouring his interprestation, but I admire his determination to fight and speak the truth regardless of consequences.
That's a better way of saying it than I did... seems like only the areas he has explored and published - though they are many and well done IMO - can have any relevance on this issue. I understand the basic theme that he and Francis put across, i.e. that it's divisive for TLMers to co- exist with NOers. But that's not the fault of TLM or, hopefully, those who attend it. Rather, it's a direct outfall of the departure from tradition and embracing instead what is literally the exact same edits that Martin Luther and Cranmer foisted onto the liturgy, and for which BTW many English were martyred for refusing to attend. Why would Englishmen of the 16th century be so determined to avoid a liturgy as to risk and give up their lives in defense of TLM, and modern Catholics just go "ho hum, guess we're doin' this' now." ? Could those Englishmen have been a little more attuned to the meaning of the Mass and have a keener sense of the violations such changes do to it... than "modern" Catholics? Could modern Catholics have themselves so drunk in the modernism of Loisy, Jungmann and the French, German and Belgian nouveau theologie-ians, that they were desensitized to the control that the then 'masters of the universe' had already been working on the people? I.e. thru modernistic understandings of emphasis on man vs God with egalitarian democracy spread everywhere (esp w American Catholics w 200yrs of Amercanism under their belts), Hollywood corruption of the people's passions, undue emphasis on the 'dignity of man' ... EMJ has done very well to explain how they control people - but we are all infected with it, even he. Recall he says his experience w TLM culminated at 18yrs. In other talks he is candid abt a brief period of walking away from the Faith before a reversion. I assume the reversion did not incl regular attendance at TLM, and hence little motivation to apply his respectable powers of study and research into the deeper meaning of TLM. Again, the facts thing. Without the facts behind the meaning of the Mass you cannot appreciate why the resistance by a large minority to the NO, before and after it was promulgated. We need more than just any ol' valid Mass. After all, even black Masses are actually valid - and horribly illicit, sacriligious and blaspheming. I would argue that the average Catholic in modern times - then and now - rarely picks up a devotional, let alone history, book expressly explaining what the parts of the Mass are and how to grow a holier personal disposition in order to be able to receive proportionately more graces. Much of the real meaning of the Mass is obscured in the New Mass. Also, less graces are transmitted with the New Mass than with TLM. That much is obvious if you compare the fruits: larger,ore devout families, less divorce, more priestly and religious vocations in TLM communities. Declining Mass attendance in NO communities. Which is the REAL reason for the new Motu: the modernist old guard doesn't like it, feels threatened, knows their time is short. Hence the more desoerate actions With all due respect to His Holiness Pope Francis, on this he is wrong and not infallible.
The man really is a great man in my book, but nobody’s perfect. He can’t be right 100% of the time. I think he has a mental block where he refuses to acknowledge that the Church hierarchy could be (has been) infiltrated/compromised by nefarious, ungodly men. He makes some good points as always, but like I said, no one’s right all the time.
I was hoping for a coherent analysis, but all I got was him saying that if bergoglio spat venom in our face, we deserved it for not loving the revolutionary NO and it's numerous irreverent manifestations.
This is personal for him. His emotions get he best of him when he talks about Trads... But he has so much reverence for The Eastern Orthodox. Just watch his video with RooshV when roosh ask him about the Eastern Orthodox church...all EMJ could muster up is "Well, they're apostolic"....he doesnt even get this emotional about a L I T E R A L Schismatic church...he gets upset about a perceived, made up schism in his head about trads. It's sad. Pray for EMJ!!!
The attention to detail regarding the particularities of the rite of the mass is a way for us to express our love for God. Obedience to God’s commandments is how our love for Christ grows. The lackadaisical attitude of the Novus ordo Rite is what prevents it from receiving as much grace as it could. These questions about the liturgy cannot rest on peoples theories or opinions but must be focused on what brings the most glory to God since that’s the point of the whole act of worship. I was always taught that the definition of charity is love for God. If this definition is true the Novus ordo has far less charity Imbedded into it than does the traditional liturgy. Thus it is in an inferior form of the liturgy. Not to mention Dr. Jones that you will know a tree by it’s fruit.
Jones has no idea what he is talking about. He really needs to stick to just discussing the red sea pedestrians because on every other subject he has no clue what he is talking about.
@TheDarkTraveler All the references, all the citations, the complete lack of actual refutation won't convince someone who's at war with the incarnate resurrected Logos. Are you going to continue to project nosedevil fables? (Titus 1.14) That methodology of narrative deception is wearing off.
Jones is probably the most brilliant guy alive out there. But the great thing about him is that he is a good Catholic and he is telling you that this is not a about logic it is about faith, hope and charity.
Emj is a boomer, he’ll never see V2 as being the problem, only that it was “misinterpreted” thanks to the CIA and other characters. If that were true however, how come 60 years later, no modernist priest or bishop has come out to “correct” the misinterpretation? If you read certain parts of the documents, there are clear errors. Again, only a boomer who grew up in a NO mass will be blind to this, no other explanation. With that being said EMJ is a brilliant historian. But yes, don’t go looking for great takes when it comes to V2. A great interview in the YT channel “Vendee radio” challenged him a bit on that, would recommend.
@AJ Gentile His take on race is a little more nuanced than that, and in that area, I mostly agree with EMJ. From what I make of it, he makes the case that classifying yourself as "white" is a lost cause, because the elites have already weaponized that term, on top of it not really meaning much. If I tell a wignat a Jew is "white", even though they are pale as snow, the wignat will correct me and tell me "no, that person is an Ashkenazi jew". He contradicts his own worldview because in me calling a Jew white, the wignat goes for the ETHNICITY of that "white" Jew, which is what is actually real. This is what EMJ believes, or from what I can tell. Enlightenment, Materialist Europe has used the term white for a long time now, and in doing so, It only reduced an extremely diverse European people to skin color...much how we just classify all Africans as "black" even though they have different ethnicities. We reduced African ethnic identity and shot ourselves in the foot in doing the same to Europeans. In any case, the white hatred is real, and I get that, and that minorities are hate white americans. Jews saw the weakness i explained above and went for the jugular... I can go on, but I don't feel like expanding on the matter much more.
Another epic fail for the "other jonsey". Funny to hear jones talking about "the enemies of the Human Race" who, according to him, can be saved with a sprinkling of Holy Water.
@@brianfrakes2703 he says jews must accept baptism. accept with their hearts. if a jew is sprinkled with holy water, but does not accept baptism in his heart, and continues to practice the tenets of judaism, he remains a jew, and an enemy of the human race. such was the case during the spanish reconquista and subsequent inquisition. many jews claimed to convert, but simply did it to protect themselves.
I had left Christianity completely and come back after going to a latin mass out of curiosity. Its not that I won't attend a new mass, I have, but with the church declining in the US and West, and last year's Easter closures, the disproportionate attention this rounding error who attend the latin mass receives is absolutely bizarre. This is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Who profits from this, when the whole church in Germany - as I read anyway - is in schism over sodomy and female ordination? There are many more millions of Catholics in the German church than attending SSPX, FSSP, or ICKSP masses. Maybe Pope Francis actually loves the latin mass people more than he loves the Germans, so he is tougher on latin mass goers.
Also, summorum pontificum didn't introduce the "choosing of one's flavour the mass that best serves him". If you study any bit of church history after Vat II, you can CLEARLY see that all sorts of different rites and ways of saying the mass sprouted up in Western European countries and in America. Iirc, in the late 60s and 70s, France had an epidemic of priests saying mass whichever way they wanted; Paul VI knew about this. Also, you had bizarro Masses in the US like Clown Mass and Marijuana Mass. To say, again, that summorum pontificum started creating schism and people having a protestant like mind when it comes to the Mass is so off base it's astounding. I expected more from EMJ. I know that no man is 100% correct on everything, and no one should expect them to be, but this is gross misunderstanding. Also, Malachi Martin was not a bought and paid for agent lol. EMJ is the only person I have ever heard say that. Martin helped to shed a light on why we are in this situation in the first place. The problem is not that people want the latin mass, the problem is that the Church is not in a good state right now. The people want the TLM because they want to serve our Lord better. Not as a tool of revolution. This is just ridiculous.
It’s utterly amazing how pride can blind the man who open the eyes of so many. The exact issues of which he speaks about at every occasion possible are being addressed by the Latin mass traditionalists and yet he still cannot see that the Holy Spirit is working through the traditionalists . It’s incredibly confounding as another commentator noted. The smartest people are also the most stupid.
@@aceraphael I’m still a major fan of EMJ but he does have a proud streak. I’m sure I do as well but I realize I am not on his level of comprehension when it comes to historical background of these issues. However the TLM is the closest version we have of the Church’s patrimony so it should be supported rather than discredited. EMJ lost the debate with Michael Davies (still on YT) and he hasn’t gotten over that.
Jones says it’s not about doctrine, but about charity. Well, you can only have charity when you have the faith and you can only have the faith when you ascend to doctrine. And it is precisely this doctrine that is not preached by modernists.
What EMJ is saying seems to be a contradiction on the surface. But he makes me think and makes me pray. I appreciate that. Identifying the problem is the most important thing to find a solution. At least we are in agreement on that.
What seems like a contradiction? He isn't against the Latin mass he is against its weaponization by so called traditionalists and he is against schism and schismatic attitudes.
@@anthonypuccetti8779He has also said that Jesuits should be expelled from the church. In my personal interpretation he is saying the Pope will go to hell but we still need to stay in the church and obey him.
@@guillermomarciano1390 He thinks that the Jesuit order should be suppressed because it is promoting the acceptance of sodomy and is a tool of oligarchs. He hasn't suggested that the pope is going to hell although perhaps he might think that because of the pope's deviations and neglect of Church doctrine.
@@anthonypuccetti8779correct. I have heard him saying that the Jesuits should be expelled. "extra ecclesiam nulla salus" or as I would say: they should go to hell. Keep always in mine that Popes can go to hell and don't be harsh with people who don't want to go with him.
I respect Dr E Michael Jones, but it has to be asked;- "Has somebody from the TLM community got up too close to Dr E Michael Jones the wrong way?" TLM is not the enemy although the Priests and those in these communities may act like people under siege. There are hostilities from other Catholics, but it needn't be. I don't really understand Dr Jones' anti TLM stance, quite apart from it been started by a desire of the late Archbishop Lefebre to form a particular Society, the SSPX TO protect and continue the pre-Vatican II, celebration of the Old Mass Latin Liturgy. And how prophetic! The Latin Mass would have been totally lost to later generations of today's Catholics, including all the riches it contains. Let Dr E Michael Jones clap and raise his hands through a Novus Ordo Kumbuya Mass all he wants, but please, do not vilify others of our brothers and sisters in those TLM communities who choose to worship God in the Old Latin Liturgy. There is NO Vatican II Document which allowed the Novus Ordo Mass to replace the ordinary Latin Liturgy Mass. Therefore, the Latin Liturgy Mass is the normal way to celebrate the Mass.
He is not anti TLM. He literally said if the Church wanted to abolish the NO and have only the Tridentine, he would be perfectly find with that. Apparently you didn’t quite understand what he is saying here.
Dr Jones makes a number of non sequiturs not the least of which is the uncharitable mischaracterisation of the all TLM adherents and the value of the TLM to the Church, based apparently, on his conversations at St Stanislaw's. One other critical error he makes in his passion, is to excuse the divisions within the NOM church of nice who, and I 'm not being facetitious, out of a misguided sense of compassion, push a multitude of rites based on group politics and probably cultural compromises as well. The NOM as it is most widely practised, does not have the capacity to unite the Church and thus it has failed for 60years. When do you admit the error and go back to what works?
“... it shall be unlawful henceforth and forever throughout the Christian world to sing or to read Masses according to any formula other than this Missal published by us... this present constitution can never be revoked or modified, but shall forever remain valid and have the force of law...And If nevertheless, anyone would ever attempt any action contrary to this order of ours, handed down for all times, let him know that he has incurred the wrath of Almighty God and the Blessed apostles Peter and Paul.” Pope Pius V, Quo Primum, July 14, 1570.
Corroborates with Galatians 1:8: 'But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.'
I would have no idea who Tom Woods and Jeffrey Tucker were if you hadn't mentioned their names. I don't see how they represent those participating in the Latin Mass. I can't identify any Traditional Latin Mass people who support abortion. I can name some Catholics that do. Traditional Latin Mass attendees by in large believe in the real presence while the Novus Ordo attendees are less likely to do so. The same Priest, Bishop, or Pope offering Mass can obtain more graces for the participants through The Tradition Latin Mass than through the Novus Ordo.
God bless E Michael Jones, a wise and good soul. It is one thing to agree with him and another to disagree with him, but to listen to him and hear his wisdom and aged opinion is a mark of wisdom itself. One thing I can agree with him without doubt: The Revolution in the Church has caused schism and temptation of schism. I am fearful that the problem may be worse than his assessment, but I must concede that he is a wiser and more seasoned man than me, and I must sincerely digest and employ his evaluation. It may, in all likelihood, be more valid than my own.
Mike Jones showed me the most compelling argument for conversion, and so I did. But Mike Jones is still a crypto oligarch, he said himself that he attended the elite private high school in Philadelphia. Mike Jones's solution to modernism is: let it be, the Church will forget about it soon. That's not how you win over modernism, that's how you lose.
His approach to solving the problem of modernism has been to show that it's a psychological warfare attack by a hostile enemy, and to encourage people to know the enemy and fight the attacks, and don't turn against the Church because it's so battered after (at least) two thousand years of relentless attacks by that same enemy.
Supporting I s r a e l has been the downfall of humanity. Transhumanism is their game. Henry WELLCOME. Died 1939. His eugenics grows on, world wide. Pharma magnate. Wellcome Leap.
It will. But, so, so, so many have no idea they are being extinguished. Victims. Billions. It’s killing me. I’m doing all I can, do to get to them. God is calling upon us to act.
This is one of the most profound conversations I’ve heard in a looooong time. Will have to listen to this several times to fully absorb. Thank you gentlemen, God bless you both.
EMJ is extremely confused about this issue and is spreading his confusion. If you want clarity about modernism in the Church - the level of clarity which EMJ brings to the J question - listen to Bishop Sanborn. Reject modernism.
mons Lefebvre did consecrations because tradition and faith was in danger, he had every right to do it by canon law. Because JP2 was oppressive to tridentine rite and had that abomination in Assisi. Dr. Jones, the alternative was ordination in hand of modernists you criticize all the time, in other words, you condem legal antirevolutionary act against the same revolution you criticize all the time.
Sorry, counter revolution is impossible in papism. The Holly See is judge by no-one. That is root or fundament of papism, if you remove that, whole building of RCC is fallen apart.
@@lupus_croatiae Aha, to je znači odgovor na problem papizma :) Dobro znaš da osuđujem etnofiletizam SPC ili bilo čiji drugi, a ipak podmećeš. Ne misliš li valjda da je to dozvoljeno u obrani papizma?
@@emilbrusic6032 papizam kako ti to nazivaš je problem crotoličkih fanatika koji misle da je papa u svemu u pravu i ne razumiju razliku između blebetanja u avionu i nečega što je ex cathedra. A problem istočnjaka je što ste teološki polurazvijeni i vječito tražite cara da vam bude "papa namjesto pape" otkad su mongoloidi zauzeli Carigrad. Svaka čast ocu Rafajlu njega volim poslušati koji put. Ne znam dobro kakve poglede imaš jer te ne pratim, znam samo da si apostat s katoličanstva.
@@lupus_croatiae Ako misliš da si dužan biti poslušan rimskom papi samo u Izvanredovnom učiteljstvu, a ne u Redovnom, onda si u zabludi Kad papa nešto naloži bilo običnom eciklikom ili ex cathedra izjavom, papisti mu moraju biti poslušni. I ti ne odlučuješ što je tradicija i kako se tumače ex cathedra izjave, to je vrhovno pravo rimskog pape. I budući ovdje se komunicira na engleskom, molim te da slijedeći tekst objaviš na tom jeziku kako bi ga i drugi razumijeli. Očigledno je da si mi ono s popom Đujićem podmetnuo na našem jeziku jer misliš da nitko drugi ne će to razumijeti.
There always has been a multiplicity of rites. No one ever said, for 2000 years, that the Catholic church no longer had "unity" because of having more than one rite. Catholic means united. It doesn't mean "exactly the same". Jones is flat wrong.
Doc is right. The implementation was stuffed up. In hindsight the Popes decision to give them time was thrown back in their face. The new form is good and better - the vernacular was much better as is the degree of interaction!. Francis is now getting real. There is the opportunity for a high Mass still. Low mass plus banal songs and no sung liturgy is on the Bishops.
The satanists wanted the Catholic Church to abandon the unifying Latin Mass because (1) the devil hates Latin and the Latin mass; (2) they wanted to centralize control over Catholics by switching people to "global" use of English where they are masters of persuasion and propaganda; (3) they could not change Catholic doctrine in the Latin arena, but could easily do so in the vernacular arena through their entertainment and media hegemony (think Time magazine etc). Why do 70% of Catholics not believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist? The N O is not the true form, nor was it ever better than the TLM. The Holy Trinity allowed the lockdowns to bring the truth to light about the N O versus the TLM.
E.M. Jones has excellent analysis on most topics. However, because of an embrace of changes made in the Church, POST Vatican II, he seems to miss the coorelation between traditional liturgy & traditional universal Magisterium. They go hand in hand. Those Priests that say the TLM and expound full communion with the divorced & remarried, homosexual lifestyles, womans right to choose, do not survive very long. The correct formation must be pre Vatican II, not necessarily because of one single doctrine, but because without it, there is an extensiive break with traditional magisterial teaching. The "spirit" of Vatican II was & is real in that it shifted the Church off of its solid magisterial foundations. "How we worship is what we believe."
Dr. Jones is screaming too much! Dr. Jones stop banging on the table! All I got from this was a headache and a feeling of guilt for loving the latin mass. 😔
All I heard was a slew of ad hominem and straw man attacks. What I would like to know is "What's Eating Dr. Jones?" to parody an article for the current issue of CW Magazine. EMJ is too smart to make many of the logical fallacies he is falling into. There's some history behind this whole thing that we don't know about that is affecting Jones' reasoning.
Could it be that you become like what you fight, hate or dislike very strongly? It seems like he's the only one in the whole Catholic Church that's very, maybe extremely, preoccupied with the Jewish question. This is too much for one man. I will pray for Dr. Jones. I admire him so very much.
Mar Eden, weird, I posted a reply yesterday to you comment but it seems as though it has been removed. Anyway, My point was that I think EMJ being a pariah has had an effect on him. Deus Vult, his problem isn't with the TLM, it's with trads (which is obvious). He's painting with broad strokes all trads to fit this mold he has in his mind. A mold that no longer corresponds to reality mind you. He's stuck on something that happened in the past which is why he's operating out of the dated notion of the trad movement. Perhaps the debate with Davies is what he's stuck on.
The NO revisionists and Jesuits can have the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Fordham liberals in the minority of the Greek Orthodox Church in America. The Traditional Latin Mass people can work out a principled Communion with the majority of the traditional Eastern Orthodox Churches. A de facto schism already exists in both churches. I hope EMJ makes good decisions.
The Archbishop of Indianapolis has dispensed Holy Rosary parish from the papal requirement that the old rite not be celebrated in a parochial church. This is perfectly regular canonically for a local bishop to do in favor of the spiritual benefit of his people. Mr. Jones seems increasingly unbalanced.
I agree, this whole situation reminds me of Joseph being thrown into a pit, sold into slavery by his brothers. To be taken to Egypt to confront a hidden but bigger issue, to feed the people the bread of life. What they meant for evil, God used it for good.
Hi Doc, still loving stuff here on Hadrians Wall. But there is no way Archbishop Lefebvre had a schismatic mind set. He was promised a bishop, but the powers that be were stinging him along, so he consecrated 4 bishops. If we shouldn't follow Archbishop Lefebvre and the Latin Mass out of the church.... should we follow Pope John Paul in to the synagogue and the mosque and dance with animists at Assisi...... ??? You don't mention the abuse of the Novus Ordo in just about every parish on the planet. Why don't they say mass as laid out in Sacrosanctum Concilium...??? That's where a lot of the trouble comes from. Anyway loved your talk, even though I don't go along with all you say about the Latin Mass. PS, Dr Michael O'Carrol who was Archbishop Lefebvres theological adviser said on Irish TV 1988, that he didn't agree with the Archbishop on the consecrations, but O'Carroll would always defend the Archbishops honour, because he thought he was doing the right thing. The excommunication were lifted proving Lefebvre right. For what it's worth the FSSP and the institute of Christ the King should follow Lefebvre and ask the Pope for Bishops.... and consecrate them anyway. For thousands of years the Popes couldn't even if they wanted to, give permission for every bishop on the planet. Millions of Catholics don't listen to the Popes on birth control and we don't see them getting excommunicated.
I understand his point. Unity is more important than squabbling over differences. I don’t think he has a problem with tradition, I think his problem is the way this group is going about it and doesn’t get to the heart of the matter.
@@pjm001 for lasting and solid change to occur and to get right with God, you have to bring them to your side. We are our brothers keeper and we are responsible for our fellow Christians. If separation occurs you have lost any authority and credibility you have with NO Catholics. Just imagine how bad things would be for the faith if y’all weren’t there debating this and pushing this. They’d have no opposition and do whatever they wanted. Dr. EMJ is right, you have to do it within the group and I think you should. Look what happened to us crazy Protestant cousins of yours ;) we have like what, 100k different versions of Protestantism with absolutely no power to do anything in the nation we live all because we squabble over translations and interpretations. Don’t end up like that. That’s one of the things I admire about Catholics.y’all stick together even tighter than Mexicans do no matter what comes down the pike. Cheers and God bless.
Dr Jones has put the cart before the horse. The Tridentine Mass is objectively a higher form of worship perhaps because of the sinful behaviour of the modernists who wanted a protestantised N.O. mass (which nonetheless remains licit but is harder to say well) however the TLM was the armor that was required to keep the Church pure and focused on God instead of worshipping man. The church will always have its weaklands its mccarricks its bugninis its martinis and the St Gallen mafia; the most important antedote is the way we worship God.
Let’s face it! Jews need to convert! Jews are lost. OH NO! How mean how wrong. Everyone only the MODERNIST! Have had this soft change to “love love love” when the TRUTH! Needs to be said.
This dialodge has given me a brauder understanding of Church History, current political events, crazy trends in the church litergy, and a 500 year overview of Western history and contemporary culture.
If you pray the Liturgy of the Hours [the best thing to come out of Vatican II], you will come across 2 or 3 times in each volume, a declaration from the "Dogmatic Constitution of Vatican II" and my recollection is that EVERY time I find these, I am being told that Muslims can also go to Heaven and that Jews can as well...with all the concomitants that brings, such as not attempting to convert them, etc...EVERY RELIGION'S REASON FOR BEING IS THEIR THEOLOGY OF SALVATION...THAT is why I converted to Catholicism 17 years ago...Is it, therefore, surprising we are losing parishoners?...LUTHER SAID: "THE CATHOIC CHURCH MUST BE DESTROYED...BUT...WE WILL NOT DESTROY IT BY DESTROYING THE PAPACY...WE WILL DESTROY IT BY DESTROYING THE MASS"...Surely, pope Paul VI knew that, if I know it...so...WHY DID PAUL VI DESTROY THE MASS?...One must note, of course, that this came much later than Vatican II...The MASS FOR ALL TIME, as pope Pius V declared the Tridentine Mass ex Cathedra, insured that Luther's wet dream could never come true...What I do not understand is: WHY DID THIS CONTRADICTION TO PIUS V's INFALLIBLE DECLARATION NOT AUTOMATICALLY CAUSE PAUL VI TO LOSE HIS PAPACY?...Here's where Vatican II might enter the picture...The section labeled "Dignitatis Humanis" is the reason we please "the people" in the modern mass with whatever music they like on the radio, regardless of how offensive it is to God...so...the "dignity" of the people overrides the dignity of GOD???...I am a devout Traditional Catholic, because it is the low Latin Masses my Catholic Spanish aunts in Nicaragua used to sneak me into during the week [at age 3 to 5] that won me over from the Sunday Episcopal services my mom used to take me to...where the parishoners looked forward to the coffee and tea hour after mass, so they could socialize with their other English speaking friends...but...a child doesn't know he can convert...BTW...Nicaragua in the 50's was a Catholic dictatorship, so the Catholic church could be open 24/7, while the Episcopal chapel opened one hour a week...btw...In school, my Catholic classmates would reassure me that I would not go to Hell, because they loved me and were praying for me, because I was not Catholic...I TOOK THAT AS AN ACT OF LOVE..I WAS NOT OFFENDED BY THAT...Vatican II has turned Catholics against this Catholic teaching and has turned Catholics into Ecumenists instead...Even Mother Teresa once said "I PRAY FOR MUSLIMS TO BECOME BETTER MUSLIMS"!! ...The greatest music EVER WRITTEN was written for the Catholic Church and the Tridentine Mass...THE TRIDENTINE MASS IS THE MASS OF JESUS CHRIST...THE MODERN MASS IS THE MASS OF THE PEOPLE...NO MORE...NO LESS...!!!
In the document Lumen Gentium it says that the Church that Christ founded "subsists in" the Catholic Church. It's an ever so slight and subtle change from the previous understanding of the Church before Vatican 2 which posited that the Church founded by Our Lord "is" the Catholic Church. This is an example of how the Modernists operate, they introduce ambiguity in the language so that even if on the surface and on the whole everything said appears legitimate, what it does in actual fact, it allows two contradictory ideas to coexist with each other - the Church is the only vehicle of salvation, true, but it is also true that one can be saved through the Protestant, Buddhist, Pacha Mama worship or what have you - which violates the principle of non contradiction and ultimately undermines the very foundations on which the Catholic faith rests. Modernism was identified as the "synthesis of all heresies" by St Pius X and yet such a crucial piece of the puzzle is never ever even mentioned - let alone factored in - by Dr EMJ. For all his impressive knowledge, when it comes to the most relevant philosophical problem of our times the good doctor is in complete darkness.
![[Full Episode] MasterChef Junior Thailand มาสเตอร์เชฟ จูเนียร์ ประเทศไทย Season 3 Episode 9](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Jsjwpd_ER8g/mqdefault.jpg)
Lex orandi lex credendi. You make Protestant rite, people start to think like Protestants.
I go to the Latin mass because the novus ordo makes me want to rip my eyes out of my head. Furthermore Once I found the old mass, I started learning all about the churches relationship with Jews that has been left out post council. My 1962 missal kept it all in. Every Sunday during Lent I get lessons on the the churches relationship with the Jews. But I’m hiding at the TLM to avoid the Jew question? No. I’m hiding from Cat Stevens hymns and Eucharistic ministers dropping the host on the carpet and preaching on why we should support arming Ukraine indefinitely.
Shall I blame the Jews for those in the Church who gave me 1st Communion in 2nd grade, but withheld 1st Confession until 4th grade for crappy catechesis? Who were they trying to be in union with when they made us sit in cafeteria chairs and NOT kneel at all during Consecration?
My kids brought me to the Latin Mass at ages 10 & 5, and I thank God everyday for it is the only thing that gave our family a standing chance in this culture war. Changed our lives & our perspective because of what it imparts on the human soul.
I had already made up my mind that I was going to disagree with EMJ on the topic of Latin Mass, but he has widened my perspective and now I hold a more charitable view on his position. Great interview.
I understand what Dr Jones is saying. But the novus ordo it's what actually brought consumerism. I've never seen two identical novus ordo masses.
On the other hand tlm it's vastly more homogeneous, more universal.
And it was proven for 500 years.
@@TheNaKio it was codified 500 years ago after over a
1000 years of use
@DukeLetoAtreides Pope just this week made it absolutely clear that the SSPX are in schism. there is no confusion about that now.
@DukeLetoAtreides Pope Francis, even if he were to be an occult heretic, would still be the Pope and maintain the guidance of the Holy Ghost until he was declared a manifest heretic by Cardinals and/or Bishops. To think otherwise is heresy and puts you outside the Catholic Church because you reject the hierarchy of the Church.
I think consumerism existed before novus ordo lol….
Another question for Dr. Jones.
What role did the Jews and the Masons play in making of the New Mass?
Dr Jones, each day I pray for your discernment. I shall continue to do so. A little harder, though.
Yes and no.He seems to make good points, but then he halls off and blames the victim-the young TLM family attending a legitimate parish in the Church, and trying to protect their kids from anti-Logos influences. It makes no sense.
He's right
@@anthonypuccetti8779 He is not correct on this issue. Pope Benedict, the supreme leader of the Catholic Church and vicar of Christ, lifted the excommunication of the four bishops of the SSPX because they were not properly or canonically excommunicated and they were not in schism. Pope Benedict would not have lifted the excommunication if the SSPX were in schism. Dr. EMJ, who I love and respect, is not the Pope and his pronouncements carry no canonical weight in such matters as schism. Pope Benedict wrote his Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum to return the TLM to the place of honour and eminence that it previously held and deserved. This Papal act was Christ's first step through the work of the Holy Spirit in maneuvering his Church away from the rocks of shipwreck back onto the correct course. Right now there is a fight on the bridge over the steering wheel between the forces of evil trying to slam the Barque of Peter back into the shark infested waters of shipwreck and the forces of good keeping the ship on the right course, while beginning to repair the holes in the hull.
@@rccyberwarrior2267 "Pope Benedict, the supreme leader of the Catholic Church and vicar of Christ, lifted the excommunication of the four bishops of the SSPX because they were not properly or canonically excommunicated and they were not in schism."
No that isn't the reason.
"Pope Benedict would not have lifted the excommunication if the SSPX were in schism."
The SSPX is in schism. They refuse submission to the Roman pontiff and communion with those who are subject to him. Catechism 2089: "schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."
@@anthonypuccetti8779 Sorry but you are no cannon lawyer and your assertions are incorrect. Pope Benedict addressed the issue.
Aggressive tone betrays some kind of strange misalignement of logic in this discourse. More factual coherence, please. May be a bit of too much ego stands in the way of lucidity, sorry to say.
@Jose Luis Luna I like the man, and hate to state a critical opinion, but here he is particularly discombobulated; no rhyme or reason in his response on top of shouting.
I have to now make a choice of mass where I don’t have to wear a mask and can receive the Eucharist on the tongue.. this happens to be the TLM …
I go to an FSSP and it is lovely!
The TLM parishes usually agree that most people have enough common sense to assess risk. It's the NO parishes run by women who bully the weak priests who get to feel important by forcing masks on people, communion in the hand, communion in plastic bags, etc because of their total embrace of the most extreme interpretation of the Narrative.
@@chookiechooks politically incorrect but absolutely true. Either they’re run by women or by men that behave like such women.
My very liberal diocese relaxed those restrictions but the truth of the matter is that they were trivial. If you do not think so you need to reflect on what real persecution entails. My point is that the Catholic Mass is not about our esthetic preferences but about our total dependence upon our Savior.
@@Tozniak In Ireland we were not able to attend mass for nearly a year. The Priests being more afraid of the virus than the rest of the population. Most priests believe in the vaccine and demand masks during mass & communion in the hand. The homily’s are mainly about “ doing the “right thing” and getting vaccinated,”or about how great scientists are in providing a cure. Prayers are for “those dying of Covid” Where do we stand there. ?
I am a convert. I came into the church 21 years ago in a Novus ordo parish. I now attend the TLM because the Douay Rheims has not been corrupted like the New American Bible.. The TLM has many times more reverence for God. We have a much holier mass. 100 % of our parish believes in the real presence. We have 30 young men who are altar servers (about 15 at one time). We have vocations that the Novus Ordo does not. We have Gregorian chant - the devil is afraid of Gregorian chant. The kinds of generalizations Dr. Jones is talking about do not hit home and have missed the mark.. He should read the book "The Popes Against Modern Errors - 16 Papal Documents". Modernism is the synthesis of all heresies. “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and one's foes will be members of one's own household” (Matthew 10:34-36).
He should also read the Ottavianni Intervention and review what recent popes have said about the Society of Saint Pius X. There would be no Ecclessia Dei groups had it not been for the work of Lefebvre and the Society of Saint Pius X.
The Roman curia has the sole authority to decide the rite of the Mass.
No protestantism here.
Most of the time I agree with Dr. Jones, but this hypothesis is utter nonsense. The only growing part of the Church is the traditional movement, to claim that we are embarrassed by the Gospel is absurd.
Agreed. You'd think he support the liturgy which contains the passages he references rather than the one that expunged them.
@@PM-nr1yo Yeah. The guy who wrote the book on Logos and is writing a book on the beauty of logos disses TLM, and wants us to obey the order to participate in the anti-logos NO. He supports Bergoglio spitting venom on our face because we have not been "charitable, " whatever that means.
People who see the hand of God in history, and in this conflict, draw their strength from the faith of our fathers, not the limp mewings of the ecumenical modernists.
I agree that this
Not true, he said that there is a fear to preach the Gospel. That is what he consistently said. Fear of embarrassing or upsetting the Jews. If you give into your fears when it comes to preaching the Gospel (of all things) you ARE an embarrassment.
@@Tozniak I understand the points he makes. But on the specific issue of TLM he is incoherent. It's very strange.
The embarrassment of the Gospel line is specifically referring to the removal of passages about the Jews in the norvus ordo. You ought to grasp his points before pontificating
Based from beginning to end EMJ. A total legend.
I have another possible explanation: Tridentine mass was killed because it was getting the faithful and Novus Ordo was losing the faithful, especially during covid. It reminds me story of Cain and Abel: "The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry and dejected. (...) Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let us go out in the field.” When they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him."
Wow. Nice analogy.
That pretty much sums up how I feel about this whole disastrous Traditionis Custodis business…..
Very well put!!! Even though our brothers are coming for us, we shall prevail.
I’m a little confused by Dr Jones. He ranted at the beginning, then later calmly applauded young Traditionalists……go figure……
How can the guy who wrote JRS, a book on Logos, and is currently writing a book on beauty as logos cone out in favor of the revolutionary, ugly NO rite, and dismiss the TLM, and mock the people who go to great efforts to faithfully attend it? I'm confounded.
He explained it here and in his debate with the late Michael Davies. “ you don’t debate doctrine with a schismatic.” If he did he would lose, as he lost vs Davies. His objection is instinctual, emotional, and comes out of fear. He says “nobody understood” back then but books were already published on the problems in 1967. As far as the RSP he himself was calling the sspx “nazis.” Jones has very strong liberal tendencies which are incongruous but nevertheless present, distorting his worldview.
@@didymussumydid9726 I did not know of the Davies debate. Thanks for the mention. I will check it out, and I hope it will help me to understand his position, as it seems he has a blind spot on this issue.
@Delawanna He did, and Bill Marra was on that panel. Two great men, beside whom many of these current guys appear as peons.
EMJ certainly has a brilliant mind but I sense a prideful streak which may be what’s clouding his vision on this issue. Ironic in that his career began because the modernist corruption of the Church a la V2 is what put an end to his teaching career. Yet somehow he categorizes “return to tradition “ with know-nothing ignorance. I think it’s a boomer thing. Moon landings and a better life through chemicals in every thing.
Didymus Sumydid It is just the opposite. He is not liberal at all. He submits to authority.
EMJ take on “following the mass outside the church like Luther followed the Bible outside the church” is so brilliant
I love you Mike and appreciate your invaluable insight on many things but I have to disagree with you on this one. The Latin Mass movement represent a true renewal in a broken Church, not schism.
The one true Church can never be broken, or it was never the one true Church. (Maybe I'm just making a semantical correction here, and we both could agree that, using the analogy that Jones often uses of the Church being the boat in the storm, the boat perhaps needs some course correction to weather this current storm.)
@@jasonludwig2488 Yes whether the Church is broken or off course it definitely needs a renewal. (The Church as the Mystical Body of Christ is of course pure).
EMJ didn’t say the Holy Mass itself represents schism, but that distorted notions about it could LEAD to schism if one doesn’t understand the situation. The Gospel needs to be restored to the Church first and foremost. It’s been strangled in the cradle, just look around. You need to watch and listen again, only this time more carefully.
@@Steveorino123 Jones maintains that the SSPX is in schism, he doesn't hide it. The SSPX maintained the Latin Mass movement throughout the decades (not the FSSP or ICKSP). This is what I meant. The SSPX is not in schism. This is what needs to be fleshed out. I'm happy to debate the point.
Obedience and humility are of utmost importance in the spiritual life and in living a life of virtue. If the Church says we have a NO Mass, I go to the NO Mass. End of story.
Mr. Jones is a great writer and has brought many people into the Catholic Church. But he is completely wrong on this one.
Not only this. On the question of race he is positively idiotic.
Agreed.
I agree wholeheartedly.
State why he is wrong.
EMJ makes connections that are deeply concerning however if you follow his research and the lens he views history through, it pieces together things that no one else talks about or sees, or has the courage to address. If you are going to say he's wrong, you have to say why, or you tend to look like someone who just doesn't like what he's saying.
Wether or not I agree with E. Michael Jones on everything, he is doing some amazing work. I absolutely love this guy, I wish I had the chance to meet him someday.
The Novus Ordo needs to be abrogated...
It would be better to let it die.
It need not be abrogated, since its promulgation was by those who utterly lack authority in the Church - by those outside the Church! It is null and void. The "church" whose official liturgy in the NO is not the Catholic Church. It is the novus ordo sect
As Dr. Jones said - following the Mass out of the Church, just as the Prots followed the Bible out of the Church.
@@snowy1634 The N O has led to millions of Catholics leaving Christ and His Church. The New Testament refers to the great apostasy for a reason (2 Thessalonians 2:3).
I suppose Jones disregards the warnings given by Saint Pius X that the modernists would attempt to subvert the church via the Permanent Instruction of the Alta Vendita. And that modernism is the 'synthesis of all heresies'.
@Delawanna 👍
with time I came to realize that the real problem lies with Vatican I, not Vatican II. Too much power to one man, as Catholics we found ourselves in the position of putting all our eggs in one basket, giviing thus way to the subversion of the Church. In our "evolving" system it is the Pope that determines what tradition is. If we deny this, we basically become protestants.
@@veilofreality Papal Infallibility has been used only a scant few times
@Delawanna He is a perfectly programmed Opus Dei.
@@veilofreality You are on right track, but continue more. Problem started more than one thousand yers ago when someone in Rome said - I am vicar of Christ, I am the head of the Church, I can judge anyone, but no-one can judge me.
1:41 there is provision within Canon Law to have non-geographical parishes. It is not true to say that there were many substantially different rites throughout Europe before Trent. The variations were so minor that most people, all laity, would not know the difference between them. What Pops St Pius V did was to standardise things by making the rite that was offered in Rome THE rite that was to be offered everywhere. Furthermore, if we need only one rite for the sake of unity then we need to abolish all the Eastern and Oriental rites ... As for the superiority of the ancient Roman Rite over Montini's Mass, yes, of course it is but Montini's Mass isn't going to be suppressed. It's more like a gastly sweater given you for Christmas. It should be left in a closet until it's finally forgotten many years from now.
Dr. Jones seems to ignore the fact that the NO rite is schismatic!
Sad....
What is the average Catholic supposed to do? They go to Mass and try to live Christian lives. Now the Latin Mass has been taken from them, while the leaders of the Church say that the gay couple next door is living a more "Christian" life than they are. I don't blame those who just want the Latin Mass back in hopes that at some point in the future the leaders of the Church will be Christian again.
I am very disappointed with this talk by EMJ. It is an incoherent rant and quite out of character but worst of all in spite of the lack of clarity he is obviously a believer in Vatican II which is a terrible disappointment.
@Jamie Quite right too. A good shepherd will guide his flock who would otherwise fall prey to demagoguery.
Im constantly blown away at how priceless and valuable these discussions are to me spiritually and intellectually. Thankyou both.
Traditional Catholics should trust God. Leaving the church will only divert energy and embolden the enemies of the Faith. The Susans are dying out, we will replace them.
I agree. We need to hold on. Steady as She goes.
I look upon myself as a traditional Catholic, and I frequently attend a NO Mass. I prefer the TLM. I would never leave the Church. And neither would most of my fellow TLM attendees. I’ve never even considered that as an option.
The biggest issue for us trads was not really the language. It was the prayers, the reverence, the music, ad orientem, orthodoxy, sacred architecture, etc. The division EMJ describes is due to the fact that the Novus Ordo is a completely different mentality. What we got after V2 was like a new religion.
@DukeLetoAtreides Nice answer.
The problem is neither TLM, nor NO, they can co-exist. The real problem is Bergoglio and his hatred of Tradition and about schism, EMJ has forgotten two things that Bergoglio openly said: first that he is not afraid of schism, second that he may go down in history as the Pope under whom a great schism hit the Church. EMJ was disappointing this time, sorry to say.
Nobody can judge Holly See.
Sorry, but you have commit grave mortal sin in above text.
@@emilbrusic6032 sorry, you are a fideist and montanist who commits the sin of blind obedience even if a prelate teaches what is contrary to the truths of Christ. And about judging, you seem to know more than a thing or two about it. Do you even know there were popes who for a time taught heresy? Of course you don't. Learn some Church history to stop embarrassing yourself. Unless of course you are capable of irony.
@@deusvult9837 I escaped couple years ago of RCC hell, and became Orthodox. And I was sedevacantist as probably you are. It is impossible to reform RCC because of papism, i.e. nobody can judge Roman pontiff, and he is infallible vicar of Christ, and if you do not obey him you will end in the Hell (Unam Sanctam - bull of pope Boniface VIII). You should obey him not only in Extraordinary Magisterium, but Ordinary as well. You do not have right to choose which Roman Pontiff is valid, you do not have right to cut communion with Him and not to finished in Hell.
But if you were Orthodox, that is exactly written in 15th canon of ecumenical council in Constantinople which RCC rejects for obvious reason.
@@emilbrusic6032 never have been and never will be a sedevacantist or shift to Orthodox Church, much as I admire some of it. Will remain in my Catholic Church and fight for its Truth, as I'm doing.
@@deusvult9837 And that is because of pride. You can not admit that you, as your ancestors and my ancestors, have been fooled by this Satanic & Antichrist religion which put one man with little white hat as God who can not be judged by anyone, and who should be obeyed for everyone who wants to be saved. You prefer pride than the Truth.
I have to choose a mass where I don’t have to wear a mask and use holy water on entrance. This happens to be the TLM. What is schism now caused by. Is it scientism?
At my N.O. parish in Chicago the masks are gone and the Holy Water is back. There is also no vaccine checker. It’s all back to 2019.
@@richseng Good to hear.
Schism is caused by the SSPX and its supporters.
Dr. Jones arguments should lead him to the conclusion that the Novus Ordo is the the Problem!
And I was attending the Novus Ordo for the first 35 years of my life. My presence there certainly did NOT make it any better.
As a member of an FSSP parish, I have to say you’re being incredibly unfair and uncharitable towards us. No one I’ve talked to or know in our circles is a “know-nothing” who thinks it’s ALL about the Latin Mass. it’s one aspect of a larger modernist rot in the church. Francis and most of the cardinals are very left wing and modernist. Should we just blindly go along e their agenda in the name of unity? It’s a complex issue but to see you take the side of them against sincere Catholics who just want to practice the Mass in a reverential and sacred manner is sad. I love ya Dr Jones but you’re wrong on this.
Yep. I think there is a LOT of mischaracterization of FSSP and the like.
Bishop Lefebvre called the FSSP
"traitors."
Jones didn't say that about the FSSP, he said it about some stupid traditionalists. Francis isn't leftist. He has affirmed the necessity of the Church and the reality of satan and has rejected the ordination of women and blessing same sex unions. A leftist would not take those positions.
@@michaelshelbyedwards Jones didn't say anything against the FSSP.
@Eremias Ranwolf LOL
Finding this is like seeing an albino deer on 5th Avenue... it doesn’t happen in this age of puritanical censorship
Pope St. Pius V didn't make a new rite but restored the Roman rite in which, as you admit, corruptions had taken place. Pius V also eliminated rites that couldn't show they were greater than 200 yrs old. This is not what Paul 6 did. He made a Protestant rite which is why you can't distinguish between the Novus Ordo, Lutheran, Episcopalian, .... Services.
E Michael Jones is so brilliant which makes his position on tradition in the church very hard to swallow! I am always shocked at his clutching of the new order rite. He is one of the precious few people whose life remained in tact through the tumultuous 60s 70s 80s 90s.. it is there for anyone with a brain to see and he has a very big brain! I just cannot understand how he continues to defend the circular churches, the priest dancing around on the altar, no confessional booth turned into a counseling session. Just dump the whole thing. Maybe his book on aesthetics will show him just how ugly the new order church really is. God bless.
Jones and Saint Paul understand that the most important thing is not logic but charity. He is not saying that you are wrong he is just saying that you should focus on charity.
I think his problem isn’t with tradition but with it becoming a separatist movement.
@@misterknightowlandco he's an Opus Dei operative
@@guillermomarciano1390 Not logic but charity? He wrote a whole book on Logos!
@@guillermomarciano1390 I’ve purchased his books he’s a serious scholar. I think it’s more about his high intelligence.. but I’ve learned, painfully so, when smart people are duped, they almost can’t admit they’ve been wrong. and he’s wrong here. I’d write it off because he’s contributed so much to the Jewish question and I’m eternally grateful for this. But this is a critical error with far reaching implications. I pray he sees this truth ASAP
I think Fatima goes a little beyond private revelation . It was very public .
+/- 70,000 being present during the miracle of the Sun, that's pretty public I dare to say. Even secular newspapers publishing about it at the time.
And you also don't have parish community life when you drive to ONE church an hour away that is the sole reverent Novus Ordo Mass without protestant or heretical music in the entire Archdiocese.
I don't know many who have actually seen a Novus Ordo offered as V2 said it should have been.
Whoa. E Michael Jones is so off on this. You want to talk about revolutionary spirit? Look into the modernist revolutionaries who were in charge of dismantling the Roman Rite in the late 60s. Come Dr. Jones. I expect more from you.
To think that the Latin mass is a way of avoiding the JQ, yet the Novus Ordo is somehow “based” and addressing the JQ is just insane. Jones has lost the plot at this point
I admire Dr. Jones. A lot. But he´s way off about this issue. Archbishop Lefebvre was a hero and a saint.
Dr. Jones debated Michael Davies years ago about these matters and Mr. Davies was the winner. That debate is available here on TH-cam.
Archbishop Lefebvre is probably a Saint. I have to thank him for FSSP. They are doing a good job. Probably SSPX should join them. All the reasons for SSPX not to be part of the church are logical they never look at charity because it's not their strength but the most important thing is charity according to a very logical Jones and a very saintly Paul.
Bishop Lefebvre called the FSSP
"Traitors."
Bishop Ngo Thuc ordained & consecrated using the traditional Rites in the early 80's.
Bishop Thuc was the only traditional Bishop who consecrated Men who were ordained before Vatican 2.
The Liturgical Revolution series by Michael Davies will answer lots of questions about the reasons for the new rite.
Terrible commentary. Sadly EMJ keeps being awful on this topic. Still love the books though. Cheers.
He definitely has blinders. A lot of straw manning
Ha ha yep. Reading JRS red pilled me more than ever about the NO. Thanks Mike!
Does the schism argument still stand if most bishops (even modernist friendly ones) don’t implement the moto proprio?
Also Pope Benedict said the pope cannot forbid a rite that was fully approved in the past. It’s like saying we would be fine 100 yrs ago, but because it’s today- it’s forbidden. The church doesn’t work like that, thankfully.
Jones ignoring ratzinger a la carte when it suits him
@@didymussumydid9726 Ratzinger himself was a V II modernist before he became Pope and then tried to turn the ship around when he realized what was really going on. He tried to square the circle with Hermeneutic of Continuity, but it can't work because this new BS is too blatantly anti-Catholic.
I love E. Michael Jones and his very unique and insightful take on this. HOWEVER, -and i hate to be this guy, but i think this sheds some light in this situation- EMJ receives Holy Communion in the hand and walks while putting God on his tongue.
Is it a sin to receive Holy Communion on the hand? If it is, than the permission granted by the bishops is a grave sin. Is that what you are actually saying? Have the bishops committed grave sin in granting an indult for Holy Communion in the hand? If yes, where do you go from there? If the bishops are sinning in something like this, are they to be obeyed on anything? And so the schismatic thinking begins. As EMJ has pointed out in the most Catholic of ways, schism isn’t just a specific event or only an act like the consecration of the 4 bishops in 1988. It is a mindset that is deprived of charity towards members of the Mystical Body of Christ. EMJ has provided an excellent examination of conscience for all of us.
@@pancho5375 you are making lots of rash assumptions here without parsing out what the implications of my simple statement of fact are.
Answer this question: does the way one receives Our Lord in Holy Communion matter?
@@candelario4288 is it a sin? yes or no.
@@pancho5375 It can be, its *not* intrinsically evil. However, it is objectively sacrilegious in 99.9% of cases. The context determines whether it is a personal sin or not.
Im asking a different and more poignant question. Does it matter?
@@candelario4288 that is a category completely of your mind. I can see no further point to this discussion.
He loves and wants so much to be loyal to the church he will not believe the people representing the church are not catholic. They have to be catholic in his mind.
How can the church not be catholic?
@@wn8963 to be catholic you have to believe what the church always and everywhere has taught. Just because you call yourself catholic or the world calls you Catholic. Your not Catholics if you do not believe and practice the Holy Catholic Faith. Wolf's in sheep's clothing
@@MarysLegion yes, and the greatest affront, heresy, prevalent by these groups that say they are traditionalists is in not believing in the Dogma: Outside the Catholic Church There is No Salvation. All the dogmas of the Church must be held - if even only one is not, you cannot be saved. The bishops and priests who say you can be saved by a "baptism of blood or desire" and do not need to be a member of the Church are teaching against this dogma! I'm hearing all the time from many, nearly all of the hierarchy in their teachings or preachings, that it is not stressed as to the absolute necessity to be baptized and be within the Catholic Faith to be saved! This has, and is, causing the faithful not to evangelize! This started even before V2 but has continued to be a norm since V2 with the popes, bishops and believed by the laymen. JP2 was a big proponent of this false ecumenism (please visit vaticancatholic TH-cam channel for details).
I've listened to this talk three times trying to better understand EMJ's angle. I think he dismisses the Occam's Razor interpretation of the motu proprio a little too easily, that it was a naked political attack on a growing trad faction in the church by a liberal Pope, in favour of one that weaves himself into having a central role to play in events, this time through the influence of his book the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit. EMJ has done this before, erroneously maintaining that the 'nofap november' phenomenon began in 2018 or so, prompted by his book Libido Dominandi when in fact it had existed for years previously. EMJ has a very mechanistic view of the Mass and the sacraments - if the priest is in Communion with Rome then the mass is valid, the Eucharist imparts grace and the liturgy is just a matter of personal taste. I think Jones underestimates the extent to which the TLM liturgy itself attracts people to the faith. EMJ is at his strongest here when decrying church shopping and prioritising liturgy aesthetics at the cost of schism - are Catholic communities strengthened when trads are driving away from their local parish to a TLM on the other side of town? His answer is no. EMJ's attitude is not that the NO is a great liturgy, but that it is a valid one, even if modernist in style and delivered by a liberal priest who countenances heresies. I would have liked him to explore the question of how faithful trad Catholics should relate to a Pope who appears to hate them. Do we just ignore him? But isn't that schismatic? The argument that trads saw themselves as attending a 'better' liturgy than the NO is a weak one. What then of those attending LGBTQ Mass? I'm sure they saw themselves as attending a better mass than a normal NO. I'm still not fully convinced by EMJ, I think his own desire to be at the center of things and fit things into his Hegelian Logos Catholic outlook might be colouring his interprestation, but I admire his determination to fight and speak the truth regardless of consequences.
In this interview I found Dr. Jones very narcissistic.
That's a better way of saying it than I did... seems like only the areas he has explored and published - though they are many and well done IMO - can have any relevance on this issue.
I understand the basic theme that he and Francis put across, i.e. that it's divisive for TLMers to co- exist with NOers. But that's not the fault of TLM or, hopefully, those who attend it. Rather, it's a direct outfall of the departure from tradition and embracing instead what is literally the exact same edits that Martin Luther and Cranmer foisted onto the liturgy, and for which BTW many English were martyred for refusing to attend.
Why would Englishmen of the 16th century be so determined to avoid a liturgy as to risk and give up their lives in defense of TLM, and modern Catholics just go "ho hum, guess we're doin' this' now." ? Could those Englishmen have been a little more attuned to the meaning of the Mass and have a keener sense of the violations such changes do to it... than "modern" Catholics?
Could modern Catholics have themselves so drunk in the modernism of Loisy, Jungmann and the French, German and Belgian nouveau theologie-ians, that they were desensitized to the control that the then 'masters of the universe' had already been working on the people? I.e. thru modernistic understandings of emphasis on man vs God with egalitarian democracy spread everywhere (esp w American Catholics w 200yrs of Amercanism under their belts), Hollywood corruption of the people's passions, undue emphasis on the 'dignity of man' ...
EMJ has done very well to explain how they control people - but we are all infected with it, even he.
Recall he says his experience w TLM culminated at 18yrs. In other talks he is candid abt a brief period of walking away from the Faith before a reversion. I assume the reversion did not incl regular attendance at TLM, and hence little motivation to apply his respectable powers of study and research into the deeper meaning of TLM. Again, the facts thing. Without the facts behind the meaning of the Mass you cannot appreciate why the resistance by a large minority to the NO, before and after it was promulgated. We need more than just any ol' valid Mass. After all, even black Masses are actually valid - and horribly illicit, sacriligious and blaspheming.
I would argue that the average Catholic in modern times - then and now - rarely picks up a devotional, let alone history, book expressly explaining what the parts of the Mass are and how to grow a holier personal disposition in order to be able to receive proportionately more graces. Much of the real meaning of the Mass is obscured in the New Mass.
Also, less graces are transmitted with the New Mass than with TLM. That much is obvious if you compare the fruits: larger,ore devout families, less divorce, more priestly and religious vocations in TLM communities. Declining Mass attendance in NO communities.
Which is the REAL reason for the new Motu: the modernist old guard doesn't like it, feels threatened, knows their time is short. Hence the more desoerate actions With all due respect to His Holiness Pope Francis, on this he is wrong and not infallible.
The man really is a great man in my book, but nobody’s perfect. He can’t be right 100% of the time. I think he has a mental block where he refuses to acknowledge that the Church hierarchy could be (has been) infiltrated/compromised by nefarious, ungodly men. He makes some good points as always, but like I said, no one’s right all the time.
I honestly might be a bit tired but I can't follow a thing Mike us saying.
I was hoping for a coherent analysis, but all I got was him saying that if bergoglio spat venom in our face, we deserved it for not loving the revolutionary NO and it's numerous irreverent manifestations.
@@chookiechooks I’ve never seen a man who is both such a radical and a quietist simultaneously
@@didymussumydid9726 Interesting point.
I agree with you.
This is personal for him. His emotions get he best of him when he talks about Trads... But he has so much reverence for The Eastern Orthodox. Just watch his video with RooshV when roosh ask him about the Eastern Orthodox church...all EMJ could muster up is "Well, they're apostolic"....he doesnt even get this emotional about a L I T E R A L Schismatic church...he gets upset about a perceived, made up schism in his head about trads. It's sad. Pray for EMJ!!!
The attention to detail regarding the particularities of the rite of the mass is a way for us to express our love for God. Obedience to God’s commandments is how our love for Christ grows. The lackadaisical attitude of the Novus ordo Rite is what prevents it from receiving as much grace as it could. These questions about the liturgy cannot rest on peoples theories or opinions but must be focused on what brings the most glory to God since that’s the point of the whole act of worship. I was always taught that the definition of charity is love for God. If this definition is true the Novus ordo has far less charity Imbedded into it than does the traditional liturgy. Thus it is in an inferior form of the liturgy. Not to mention Dr. Jones that you will know a tree by it’s fruit.
Excellent.
Jones has no idea what he is talking about. He really needs to stick to just discussing the red sea pedestrians because on every other subject he has no clue what he is talking about.
@TheDarkTraveler
All the references, all the citations, the complete lack of actual refutation won't convince someone who's at war with the incarnate resurrected Logos. Are you going to continue to project nosedevil fables? (Titus 1.14) That methodology of narrative deception is wearing off.
Jones,as brilliant as he may be,is incorrect. V2 is the problem.
Jones is probably the most brilliant guy alive out there. But the great thing about him is that he is a good Catholic and he is telling you that this is not a about logic it is about faith, hope and charity.
Emj is a boomer, he’ll never see V2 as being the problem, only that it was “misinterpreted” thanks to the CIA and other characters. If that were true however, how come 60 years later, no modernist priest or bishop has come out to “correct” the misinterpretation? If you read certain parts of the documents, there are clear errors. Again, only a boomer who grew up in a NO mass will be blind to this, no other explanation.
With that being said EMJ is a brilliant historian. But yes, don’t go looking for great takes when it comes to V2. A great interview in the YT channel “Vendee radio” challenged him a bit on that, would recommend.
@@Linkgt I listened to that show on Vendee radio, they had same good tough questions.
@AJ Gentile His take on race is a little more nuanced than that, and in that area, I mostly agree with EMJ. From what I make of it, he makes the case that classifying yourself as "white" is a lost cause, because the elites have already weaponized that term, on top of it not really meaning much. If I tell a wignat a Jew is "white", even though they are pale as snow, the wignat will correct me and tell me "no, that person is an Ashkenazi jew". He contradicts his own worldview because in me calling a Jew white, the wignat goes for the ETHNICITY of that "white" Jew, which is what is actually real. This is what EMJ believes, or from what I can tell. Enlightenment, Materialist Europe has used the term white for a long time now, and in doing so, It only reduced an extremely diverse European people to skin color...much how we just classify all Africans as "black" even though they have different ethnicities. We reduced African ethnic identity and shot ourselves in the foot in doing the same to Europeans.
In any case, the white hatred is real, and I get that, and that minorities are hate white americans. Jews saw the weakness i explained above and went for the jugular... I can go on, but I don't feel like expanding on the matter much more.
@@Linkgt a minor point, EMJ says early in the interview he grew up with the TLM until he was a late teenager.
The schism happened with the violent implementation of the Novus.
The schism started with the SSPX
Thank you Peter. Many of us knew dr Jones would have this take and we’ve been anxious to hear it.
It is good see more and more people wrestling with the issues that most effect our souls.
Another epic fail for the "other jonsey". Funny to hear jones talking about "the enemies of the Human Race" who, according to him, can be saved with a sprinkling of Holy Water.
Confirmed.
@@brianfrakes2703 he says jews must accept baptism. accept with their hearts. if a jew is sprinkled with holy water, but does not accept baptism in his heart, and continues to practice the tenets of judaism, he remains a jew, and an enemy of the human race. such was the case during the spanish reconquista and subsequent inquisition. many jews claimed to convert, but simply did it to protect themselves.
@@brianfrakes2703 No, not according to Jones, but according to your strawman of him. Try again.
I had left Christianity completely and come back after going to a latin mass out of curiosity. Its not that I won't attend a new mass, I have, but with the church declining in the US and West, and last year's Easter closures, the disproportionate attention this rounding error who attend the latin mass receives is absolutely bizarre. This is making a mountain out of a mole hill. Who profits from this, when the whole church in Germany - as I read anyway - is in schism over sodomy and female ordination? There are many more millions of Catholics in the German church than attending SSPX, FSSP, or ICKSP masses. Maybe Pope Francis actually loves the latin mass people more than he loves the Germans, so he is tougher on latin mass goers.
Also, summorum pontificum didn't introduce the "choosing of one's flavour the mass that best serves him". If you study any bit of church history after Vat II, you can CLEARLY see that all sorts of different rites and ways of saying the mass sprouted up in Western European countries and in America. Iirc, in the late 60s and 70s, France had an epidemic of priests saying mass whichever way they wanted; Paul VI knew about this. Also, you had bizarro Masses in the US like Clown Mass and Marijuana Mass. To say, again, that summorum pontificum started creating schism and people having a protestant like mind when it comes to the Mass is so off base it's astounding. I expected more from EMJ. I know that no man is 100% correct on everything, and no one should expect them to be, but this is gross misunderstanding. Also, Malachi Martin was not a bought and paid for agent lol. EMJ is the only person I have ever heard say that. Martin helped to shed a light on why we are in this situation in the first place. The problem is not that people want the latin mass, the problem is that the Church is not in a good state right now. The people want the TLM because they want to serve our Lord better. Not as a tool of revolution. This is just ridiculous.
Agree. We are not the revolutionaries. We just want peace.
It’s utterly amazing how pride can blind the man who open the eyes of so many. The exact issues of which he speaks about at every occasion possible are being addressed by the Latin mass traditionalists and yet he still cannot see that the Holy Spirit is working through the traditionalists . It’s incredibly confounding as another commentator noted. The smartest people are also the most stupid.
okey bro. say that thing about pride again, this time holding a mirror.
@@aceraphael I’m still a major fan of EMJ but he does have a proud streak. I’m sure I do as well but I realize I am not on his level of comprehension when it comes to historical background of these issues. However the TLM is the closest version we have of the Church’s patrimony so it should be supported rather than discredited. EMJ lost the debate with Michael Davies (still on YT) and he hasn’t gotten over that.
Work of human hands
There can only be one (Mass), highlander.
Jones says it’s not about doctrine, but about charity. Well, you can only have charity when you have the faith and you can only have the faith when you ascend to doctrine. And it is precisely this doctrine that is not preached by modernists.
I like EMJ, but he is wrong about Vatican II and the SSPX.
The Novus Ordo offertory was derived from the Talmud.
What EMJ is saying seems to be a contradiction on the surface. But he makes me think and makes me pray. I appreciate that. Identifying the problem is the most important thing to find a solution. At least we are in agreement on that.
And that 👆 is the definition of charity, TradCats. Take note.
What seems like a contradiction? He isn't against the Latin mass he is against its weaponization by so called traditionalists and he is against schism and schismatic attitudes.
@@anthonypuccetti8779He has also said that Jesuits should be expelled from the church. In my personal interpretation he is saying the Pope will go to hell but we still need to stay in the church and obey him.
@@guillermomarciano1390 He thinks that the Jesuit order should be suppressed because it is promoting the acceptance of sodomy and is a tool of oligarchs. He hasn't suggested that the pope is going to hell although perhaps he might think that because of the pope's deviations and neglect of Church doctrine.
@@anthonypuccetti8779correct. I have heard him saying that the Jesuits should be expelled. "extra ecclesiam nulla salus" or as I would say: they should go to hell. Keep always in mine that Popes can go to hell and don't be harsh with people who don't want to go with him.
I respect Dr E Michael Jones, but it has to be asked;- "Has somebody from the TLM community got up too close to Dr E Michael Jones the wrong way?"
TLM is not the enemy although the Priests and those in these communities may act like people under siege. There are hostilities from other Catholics, but it needn't be.
I don't really understand Dr Jones' anti TLM stance, quite apart from it been started by a desire of the late Archbishop Lefebre to form a particular Society, the SSPX TO protect and continue the pre-Vatican II, celebration of the Old Mass Latin Liturgy. And how prophetic!
The Latin Mass would have been totally lost to later generations of today's Catholics, including all the riches it contains.
Let Dr E Michael Jones clap and raise his hands through a Novus Ordo Kumbuya Mass all he wants, but please, do not vilify others of our brothers and sisters in those TLM communities who choose to worship God in the Old Latin Liturgy.
There is NO Vatican II Document which allowed the Novus Ordo Mass to replace the ordinary Latin Liturgy Mass.
Therefore, the Latin Liturgy Mass is the normal way to celebrate the Mass.
He is not anti TLM. He literally said if the Church wanted to abolish the NO and have only the Tridentine, he would be perfectly find with that. Apparently you didn’t quite understand what he is saying here.
The younger generation of trads know about the Jews because of Bishop Williamson and Maurice Penay.
and EMJ
@@FrancisSpaghetti fair enough.
I really can't envision someone of E. Michael Jones' intellectual caliber regularly attending the jamboree hootenanny that is the modern Novus Oreo.
It’s like watching a battered spouse in denial.
SSPX is not in schism. Perhaps Dr. Jones should study the subject before he talks about it.
He's gaslighting?
When it comes to the movement to return to tradition, Dr. Jones has unfortunately internalized the commands of his oppressors.
Who? Who? Who? Qui?
Dr Jones makes a number of non sequiturs not the least of which is the uncharitable mischaracterisation of the all TLM adherents and the value of the TLM to the Church, based apparently, on his conversations at St Stanislaw's. One other critical error he makes in his passion, is to excuse the divisions within the NOM church of nice who, and I 'm not being facetitious, out of a misguided sense of compassion, push a multitude of rites based on group politics and probably cultural compromises as well. The NOM as it is most widely practised, does not have the capacity to unite the Church and thus it has failed for 60years. When do you admit the error and go back to what works?
“... it shall be unlawful henceforth and forever throughout the Christian world to sing or to read Masses according to any formula other than this Missal published by us... this present constitution can never be revoked or modified, but shall forever remain valid and have the force of law...And If nevertheless, anyone would ever attempt any action contrary to this order of ours, handed down for all times, let him know that he has incurred the wrath of Almighty God and the Blessed apostles Peter and Paul.”
Pope Pius V, Quo Primum, July 14, 1570.
Corroborates with Galatians 1:8:
'But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.'
Council of Trent
Session 7 Canon 13
I would have no idea who Tom Woods and Jeffrey Tucker were if you hadn't mentioned their names. I don't see how they represent those participating in the Latin Mass. I can't identify any Traditional Latin Mass people who support abortion. I can name some Catholics that do. Traditional Latin Mass attendees by in large believe in the real presence while the Novus Ordo attendees are less likely to do so. The same Priest, Bishop, or Pope offering Mass can obtain more graces for the participants through The Tradition Latin Mass than through the Novus Ordo.
Well, EMJ said that discussing Theology is USELESS because Trads are in schism, so none of that stuff matters in the first place....*Sarcasm*
The whole essence of his position comes down to aspirational “you’re just stupid if you want to attend Latin Mass”
No, it isn't, that is stupid. He approves the Latin mass, but he is against following the Latin mass out of the Church.
@@anthonypuccetti8779 Following the Latin mass brings one back to the true Church. Bishop Williamson was correct.
God bless E Michael Jones, a wise and good soul. It is one thing to agree with him and another to disagree with him, but to listen to him and hear his wisdom and aged opinion is a mark of wisdom itself. One thing I can agree with him without doubt: The Revolution in the Church has caused schism and temptation of schism. I am fearful that the problem may be worse than his assessment, but I must concede that he is a wiser and more seasoned man than me, and I must sincerely digest and employ his evaluation. It may, in all likelihood, be more valid than my own.
Been awhile since I have sat and listened to the man. The brutal truth. His perspective is tough,because he is tough. God bless Dr. E. Michael Jones.
Mike Jones showed me the most compelling argument for conversion, and so I did. But Mike Jones is still a crypto oligarch, he said himself that he attended the elite private high school in Philadelphia. Mike Jones's solution to modernism is: let it be, the Church will forget about it soon. That's not how you win over modernism, that's how you lose.
His approach to solving the problem of modernism has been to show that it's a psychological warfare attack by a hostile enemy, and to encourage people to know the enemy and fight the attacks, and don't turn against the Church because it's so battered after (at least) two thousand years of relentless attacks by that same enemy.
If that's what you got out of this talk you must be deaf.
@@yungearth2609 Right. Perfect example that you cannot argue doctrine with a scismatic.
You are the last person in the world that should speak for Dr. Jones. His position has never been 'let it be'.
you are deaf
He's is right.
Looks like its story time by Dr. Jones!!!
Supporting I s r a e l has been the downfall of humanity. Transhumanism is their game.
Henry WELLCOME. Died 1939. His eugenics grows on, world wide.
Pharma magnate. Wellcome Leap.
@@lindacianchetti3599 Exactly, but the pendulum is going to swing back with a vengeance!!! It's going to be beautiful!
It will. But, so, so, so many have no idea they are being extinguished. Victims. Billions. It’s killing me. I’m doing all I can, do to get to them. God is calling upon us to act.
@@lindacianchetti3599 Their immortal souls are much more important than their Earthly bodies.
This is one of the most profound conversations I’ve heard in a looooong time. Will have to listen to this several times to fully absorb.
Thank you gentlemen, God bless you both.
Membership in the Church requires baptism and profession of the Catholic faith. Pius XII Mystici Corporis -
EMJ is extremely confused about this issue and is spreading his confusion. If you want clarity about modernism in the Church - the level of clarity which EMJ brings to the J question - listen to Bishop Sanborn. Reject modernism.
Never seen Dr. Jones so agitated! He's trying to justify the unjustifiable.
mons Lefebvre did consecrations because tradition and faith was in danger, he had every right to do it by canon law. Because JP2 was oppressive to tridentine rite and had that abomination in Assisi. Dr. Jones, the alternative was ordination in hand of modernists you criticize all the time, in other words, you condem legal antirevolutionary act against the same revolution you criticize all the time.
Sorry, counter revolution is impossible in papism. The Holly See is judge by no-one. That is root or fundament of papism, if you remove that, whole building of RCC is fallen apart.
@@emilbrusic6032 kako ide brojanica za kanonizaciju popa Đujića? Emile otkači!
@@lupus_croatiae Aha, to je znači odgovor na problem papizma :) Dobro znaš da osuđujem etnofiletizam SPC ili bilo čiji drugi, a ipak podmećeš. Ne misliš li valjda da je to dozvoljeno u obrani papizma?
@@emilbrusic6032 papizam kako ti to nazivaš je problem crotoličkih fanatika koji misle da je papa u svemu u pravu i ne razumiju razliku između blebetanja u avionu i nečega što je ex cathedra. A problem istočnjaka je što ste teološki polurazvijeni i vječito tražite cara da vam bude "papa namjesto pape" otkad su mongoloidi zauzeli Carigrad. Svaka čast ocu Rafajlu njega volim poslušati koji put.
Ne znam dobro kakve poglede imaš jer te ne pratim, znam samo da si apostat s katoličanstva.
@@lupus_croatiae Ako misliš da si dužan biti poslušan rimskom papi samo u Izvanredovnom učiteljstvu, a ne u Redovnom, onda si u zabludi Kad papa nešto naloži bilo običnom eciklikom ili ex cathedra izjavom, papisti mu moraju biti poslušni. I ti ne odlučuješ što je tradicija i kako se tumače ex cathedra izjave, to je vrhovno pravo rimskog pape. I budući ovdje se komunicira na engleskom, molim te da slijedeći tekst objaviš na tom jeziku kako bi ga i drugi razumijeli. Očigledno je da si mi ono s popom Đujićem podmetnuo na našem jeziku jer misliš da nitko drugi ne će to razumijeti.
There always has been a multiplicity of rites. No one ever said, for 2000 years, that the Catholic church no longer had "unity" because of having more than one rite. Catholic means united. It doesn't mean "exactly the same". Jones is flat wrong.
What are these multiplicity of non-heretical rites , specifically?
@@jasonludwig2488 There is a thing called "Google".
@@laddacokolada16 Who asked you?
@@jasonludwig2488 Shall we start with the Byzantine Rite? There are about 30 more
@@adamleeham920 The Byzantine rite is distinctly not Roman Catholic. But, you have thirty more, so keep going.
I think E Michael Jones and Michael Voris are the same person. Obviously there’s some make-up involved.
😂😂😂
Good one; made me laugh! Love the original thought.
Doc is right. The implementation was stuffed up. In hindsight the Popes decision to give them time was thrown back in their face. The new form is good and better - the vernacular was much better as is the degree of interaction!. Francis is now getting real. There is the opportunity for a high Mass still. Low mass plus banal songs and no sung liturgy is on the Bishops.
The satanists wanted the Catholic Church to abandon the unifying Latin Mass because (1) the devil hates Latin and the Latin mass; (2) they wanted to centralize control over Catholics by switching people to "global" use of English where they are masters of persuasion and propaganda; (3) they could not change Catholic doctrine in the Latin arena, but could easily do so in the vernacular arena through their entertainment and media hegemony (think Time magazine etc). Why do 70% of Catholics not believe in the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist? The N O is not the true form, nor was it ever better than the TLM. The Holy Trinity allowed the lockdowns to bring the truth to light about the N O versus the TLM.
E.M. Jones has excellent analysis on most topics. However, because of an embrace of changes made in the Church, POST Vatican II, he seems to miss the coorelation between traditional liturgy & traditional universal Magisterium. They go hand in hand. Those Priests that say the TLM and expound full communion with the divorced & remarried, homosexual lifestyles, womans right to choose, do not survive very long. The correct formation must be pre Vatican II, not necessarily because of one single doctrine, but because without it, there is an extensiive break with traditional magisterial teaching. The "spirit" of Vatican II was & is real in that it shifted the Church off of its solid magisterial foundations.
"How we worship is what we believe."
Dr. Jones is screaming too much! Dr. Jones stop banging on the table! All I got from this was a headache and a feeling of guilt for loving the latin mass. 😔
Relegate him to the Fox News ghetto.
All I heard was a slew of ad hominem and straw man attacks. What I would like to know is "What's Eating Dr. Jones?" to parody an article for the current issue of CW Magazine. EMJ is too smart to make many of the logical fallacies he is falling into. There's some history behind this whole thing that we don't know about that is affecting Jones' reasoning.
Could it be that you become like what you fight, hate or dislike very strongly? It seems like he's the only one in the whole Catholic Church that's very, maybe extremely, preoccupied with the Jewish question. This is too much for one man. I will pray for Dr. Jones. I admire him so very much.
@@Surge_Sursus much as I admire EMJ, I think he has never recovered from the drubbing he got in his debate with Michael Davies years ago.
Mar Eden, weird, I posted a reply yesterday to you comment but it seems as though it has been removed. Anyway, My point was that I think EMJ being a pariah has had an effect on him.
Deus Vult, his problem isn't with the TLM, it's with trads (which is obvious). He's painting with broad strokes all trads to fit this mold he has in his mind. A mold that no longer corresponds to reality mind you. He's stuck on something that happened in the past which is why he's operating out of the dated notion of the trad movement. Perhaps the debate with Davies is what he's stuck on.
The NO revisionists and Jesuits can have the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Fordham liberals in the minority of the Greek Orthodox Church in America. The Traditional Latin Mass people can work out a principled Communion with the majority of the traditional Eastern Orthodox Churches. A de facto schism already exists in both churches. I hope EMJ makes good decisions.
The Archbishop of Indianapolis has dispensed Holy Rosary parish from the papal requirement that the old rite not be celebrated in a parochial church. This is perfectly regular canonically for a local bishop to do in favor of the spiritual benefit of his people. Mr. Jones seems increasingly unbalanced.
I agree, this whole situation reminds me of Joseph being thrown into a pit, sold into slavery by his brothers. To be taken to Egypt to confront a hidden but bigger issue, to feed the people the bread of life. What they meant for evil, God used it for good.
Hi Doc, still loving stuff here on Hadrians Wall. But there is no way Archbishop Lefebvre had a schismatic mind set. He was promised a bishop, but the powers that be were stinging him along, so he consecrated 4 bishops.
If we shouldn't follow Archbishop Lefebvre and the Latin Mass out of the church.... should we follow Pope John Paul in to the synagogue and the mosque and dance with animists at Assisi...... ???
You don't mention the abuse of the Novus Ordo in just about every parish on the planet. Why don't they say mass as laid out in Sacrosanctum Concilium...???
That's where a lot of the trouble comes from.
Anyway loved your talk, even though I don't go along with all you say about the Latin Mass.
PS, Dr Michael O'Carrol who was Archbishop Lefebvres theological adviser said on Irish TV 1988, that he didn't agree with the Archbishop on the consecrations, but O'Carroll would always defend the Archbishops honour, because he thought he was doing the right thing.
The excommunication were lifted proving Lefebvre right.
For what it's worth the FSSP and the institute of Christ the King should follow Lefebvre and ask the Pope for Bishops.... and consecrate them anyway. For thousands of years the Popes couldn't even if they wanted to, give permission for every bishop on the planet. Millions of Catholics don't listen to the Popes on birth control and we don't see them getting excommunicated.
I understand his point. Unity is more important than squabbling over differences. I don’t think he has a problem with tradition, I think his problem is the way this group is going about it and doesn’t get to the heart of the matter.
@@pjm001 for lasting and solid change to occur and to get right with God, you have to bring them to your side. We are our brothers keeper and we are responsible for our fellow Christians. If separation occurs you have lost any authority and credibility you have with NO Catholics. Just imagine how bad things would be for the faith if y’all weren’t there debating this and pushing this. They’d have no opposition and do whatever they wanted. Dr. EMJ is right, you have to do it within the group and I think you should. Look what happened to us crazy Protestant cousins of yours ;) we have like what, 100k different versions of Protestantism with absolutely no power to do anything in the nation we live all because we squabble over translations and interpretations. Don’t end up like that. That’s one of the things I admire about Catholics.y’all stick together even tighter than Mexicans do no matter what comes down the pike. Cheers and God bless.
His incoherence on this question is no surprise. He thinks there are Irish, Germans and Poles but no such thing as the White race. A dead end.
Dr Jones has put the cart before the horse. The Tridentine Mass is objectively a higher form of worship perhaps because of the sinful behaviour of the modernists who wanted a protestantised N.O. mass (which nonetheless remains licit but is harder to say well) however the TLM was the armor that was required to keep the Church pure and focused on God instead of worshipping man. The church will always have its weaklands its mccarricks its bugninis its martinis and the St Gallen mafia; the most important antedote is the way we worship God.
With all due respect to Dr. Jones. He's wrong about Tradition.
EMJ is a sorry sight here and, I am sorry to say, completely incoherent and way out of his depth.
Explain please
You might disagree with him but what he’s saying is completely comprehensible and logical.
gosh these comments. "EMJ is a legend when he says what i want him to say." 😅
Let’s face it! Jews need to convert! Jews are lost. OH NO! How mean how wrong. Everyone only the MODERNIST! Have had this soft change to “love love love” when the TRUTH! Needs to be said.
This dialodge has given me a brauder understanding of Church History, current political events, crazy trends in the church litergy, and a 500 year overview of Western history and contemporary culture.
Mr Jones is obviously quite hysterical and can’t explain the catholic tradition rationally
If you pray the Liturgy of the Hours [the best thing to come out of Vatican II], you will come across 2 or 3 times in each volume, a declaration from the "Dogmatic Constitution of Vatican II" and my recollection is that EVERY time I find these, I am being told that Muslims can also go to Heaven and that Jews can as well...with all the concomitants that brings, such as not attempting to convert them, etc...EVERY RELIGION'S REASON FOR BEING IS THEIR THEOLOGY OF SALVATION...THAT is why I converted to Catholicism 17 years ago...Is it, therefore, surprising we are losing parishoners?...LUTHER SAID: "THE CATHOIC CHURCH MUST BE DESTROYED...BUT...WE WILL NOT DESTROY IT BY DESTROYING THE PAPACY...WE WILL DESTROY IT BY DESTROYING THE MASS"...Surely, pope Paul VI knew that, if I know it...so...WHY DID PAUL VI DESTROY THE MASS?...One must note, of course, that this came much later than Vatican II...The MASS FOR ALL TIME, as pope Pius V declared the Tridentine Mass ex Cathedra, insured that Luther's wet dream could never come true...What I do not understand is: WHY DID THIS CONTRADICTION TO PIUS V's INFALLIBLE DECLARATION NOT AUTOMATICALLY CAUSE PAUL VI TO LOSE HIS PAPACY?...Here's where Vatican II might enter the picture...The section labeled "Dignitatis Humanis" is the reason we please "the people" in the modern mass with whatever music they like on the radio, regardless of how offensive it is to God...so...the "dignity" of the people overrides the dignity of GOD???...I am a devout Traditional Catholic, because it is the low Latin Masses my Catholic Spanish aunts in Nicaragua used to sneak me into during the week [at age 3 to 5] that won me over from the Sunday Episcopal services my mom used to take me to...where the parishoners looked forward to the coffee and tea hour after mass, so they could socialize with their other English speaking friends...but...a child doesn't know he can convert...BTW...Nicaragua in the 50's was a Catholic dictatorship, so the Catholic church could be open 24/7, while the Episcopal chapel opened one hour a week...btw...In school, my Catholic classmates would reassure me that I would not go to Hell, because they loved me and were praying for me, because I was not Catholic...I TOOK THAT AS AN ACT OF LOVE..I WAS NOT OFFENDED BY THAT...Vatican II has turned Catholics against this Catholic teaching and has turned Catholics into Ecumenists instead...Even Mother Teresa once said "I PRAY FOR MUSLIMS TO BECOME BETTER MUSLIMS"!! ...The greatest music EVER WRITTEN was written for the Catholic Church and the Tridentine Mass...THE TRIDENTINE MASS IS THE MASS OF JESUS CHRIST...THE MODERN MASS IS THE MASS OF THE PEOPLE...NO MORE...NO LESS...!!!
In the document Lumen Gentium it says that the Church that Christ founded "subsists in" the Catholic Church. It's an ever so slight and subtle change from the previous understanding of the Church before Vatican 2 which posited that the Church founded by Our Lord "is" the Catholic Church. This is an example of how the Modernists operate, they introduce ambiguity in the language so that even if on the surface and on the whole everything said appears legitimate, what it does in actual fact, it allows two contradictory ideas to coexist with each other - the Church is the only vehicle of salvation, true, but it is also true that one can be saved through the Protestant, Buddhist, Pacha Mama worship or what have you - which violates the principle of non contradiction and ultimately undermines the very foundations on which the Catholic faith rests. Modernism was identified as the "synthesis of all heresies" by St Pius X and yet such a crucial piece of the puzzle is never ever even mentioned - let alone factored in - by Dr EMJ. For all his impressive knowledge, when it comes to the most relevant philosophical problem of our times the good doctor is in complete darkness.