Yes I went to a Christian church for the first time with a friend, not sure which denomination but it really did feel like it was just a show or like a concert and then some random guy came on to give a motivational speech. I really wouldn’t even call it church. It made me really appreciate Mass and Catholic traditions
It is strange, I came back to my Presbyterian church after years of agnosticism, and it was unrecognizable. Same church, same people, but everything that made us who we were was abandoned. 18th and 19th century hymns had been replaced by awful music from the last decade. I joined the Orthodox Church, initially, because I just wanted a church that I could give to my children.
@@genesis204 I wouldn't say there was no struggle, but I was coming back to the Presbyterian church. I probably stayed 2 years before I really understood how much it had changed from when I was younger. I think a lot of it was the influence of churches like Tim Keller's and the racial reconciliation movement that was picking up steam at the time.
I was working for Tim Keller’s church (Redeemer) when I realized that Catholicism was the true church. Oh boy. Many of my bosses were former Catholics. There was a lot of anti Catholicism and it was hard but it was good. I studied everyday. The elders didn’t even believe in baptism as anything more than a symbol. Calvin’s sacramental theology is so convoluted that you have to really have your yes be yes or your no be no when it comes to the Eucharist.
Interesting things happen in usa. Their governments are rotten but common people are coming to finally see the Orthodox Church and eventually convert. This makes my soul so happy ❤️☦️ Pray for you.
If you think that's beautiful, wait until you go to an Orthodox Liturgy... it's over 1000 years older than the Traditional Latin Mass and was never not used because the Church never needs anything to rise again. It always is.
I went to my buddy's evangelical church when I was reborn in January 2020. Pastor was great. But then noticed people coming to church in flip flops and shorts. The new pastor had a baseball cap while he gave the sermon. And the more I got into the biblical.truth and reeducated myself on Christianity, the more I was drawn back to my orthodox roots.
@@mastershake4641 in those days everyone wore sandals. The pastor had a baseball cap on. And a Chicago bears shirt. I get it. Be comfortable. Come as you are. But the tone of the church and society is set by those who lead it. Hence the screwy and culturally weak society we have in America
Love you Jonathan I listen to all the time I happen to be Catholic but I don’t think there’s too much difference between our face and I love all the symbolism. Thank you so much.
The comment about the altar being higher than the seats was particularly compelling. May our services never become cheap entertainment. I find that when I have attended orthodox services, there are some people genuinely reverent towards God. As Jonathan is saying, oriented towards that which is higher. But there are others who worship the symbols themselves instead of the living God who these symbols represent. There was a time before the Church developed this universal symbolic language. In fact, there were several hundred years. There was something else, not the architecture and design, that drew people. Something much more powerful, in fact, the very thing that the symbols point to. It was the evidence of the presence of God amongst a people. It was lives transformed, the dead raised, the truth proclaimed with boldness, entire cities upside down. Is this the result you see in your churches and in your cities? The only hope we have to see the world changed today is for God Himself to wake us up and fill us with the same boldness and anointing of His Spirit to proclaim the truth
A few years ago I went to the Holy Trinity Brompton service in Kensington, London. It's the church where the pastor originated the Alpha Course. I was shocked to be there on a sunny autumn Sunday morning and see that the pulled blinds down over all the beautiful stained glass windows to make the space dark, then they lit it with coloured lights like a nightclub to make it 'cool' for all the youth.
I wasn’t either, but they are both Christian and the addition of Jordan Peterson (close friend to Jonathan) to the Daily Wire makes sense to me how this would come about.
"But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” John 4:23-24
One thing we need to keep doing, no matter if we agree on things completely or not, is we MUST keep the discussion going, reaching out to each other in love and charity.
Worship renewal is often a function of rediscovering the ancient. Worship isn't expressive OR consumptive. It's both. We receive and we respond. We are taken, blessed, broken, and given.
I LOVE this video. It´s definitely true that many churches lack devotion through art, especially the architecture. I find it sad, honestly. We admire the romanesque and gothic churches but we don´t seem to truly learn from them.
There's truth in what is being said, but it's warped. Matthew 23 addresses this clearly, they sit on the seat of Moses in their whitewashed walls while having dead bones in their catacombs.
Amen! The way we worship indeed does effect how we live. I remember the “Vatican2” changes that started unfolding in the Catholic Church I attended growing up. The beautiful statues, pictures, and painted ceilings were all covered over with blue and gold that resembled clouds…all those beloved faces of saints I literally looked up to when I was a little kid were gone. The crucifix on the altar and it’s accompanying statues of Mother Mary and Saint John were painted a strange pallid color. Those changes very demonstrably drained the blood from the worship. Eventually, I stopped attending mass, and joined other Christians in worship. I still carry the original space in my heart, and that has led to a lovely freedom to be in communion with the Lord wherever I go. Still, I miss the solemn beauty of the old ways.
Its no excuse to leave mass though, the sacraments retain the same efficacy regardless of the beauty of the place. There were times Christians worshipped in hiding, in the lowliest of places, so we cant abandon the mass because we got an ugly church. We should even give thanks for an ugly church and a non ideal priest, as God let us partake of the Eucharist. Embrace the cross, better times will come.
The beauty is still in the Catholic Church. Leaving the one true church founded by Christ over some external things is very problematic on your part. ...You obviously never understood that we are there for the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ made present in the holy Eucharist. The paint colors are ultimately irrelevant. Furthermore- most Catholic Churches beat every other church in beauty (and reverence) hands down -as it is. Peace.
I just saw this now. I listen to Jonathan a lot. I once in a while listen to you Michael. But I’m glad you two are talking. This is very cool. We need to bring people together in these discussions. I love it I love it. Thank you.
I've heard women notice these kind of subtleties but hardly ever men speak of this reflection... Unless it was a negative issue and someone doing/placing/saying something incorrectly in the church... Just because it was untraditional (I grew up Protestant). But to speak about giving space meaning and giving tradition meaning through the love of Christ is beautiful. I'm truly amazed at this dialogue and presentation. Thank you for leading properly as men.
I noticed the lack of harmony in my local church . The walls are pale lilac and the carpet is sky blue and red. I find it distracting because God is beauty so churches need to be beautiful even if there is little budget at the moment.
Love this! I think it's so true - a sacramental worldview is the only way to truly see the truth, goodness, and beauty of life. And it starts with church.
as an architect I agree y 100% on the importance of aesthetics, and the philosophy behind beauty, as a christian I'm not necessarily inclined to believe the physical church HAS to be beautiful in order for people to be able to worship truly. The LDS church has without a doubt taken this advice as priority, they build the most opulent churches/temples as an end to attract people, but salvation and real worship isn't there.
Totally appreciate and understand the points made here. I will say that the use of the word "ugly" is mighty strong when talking about a group of people praising God. There is so much division between denominations and I don't think we have enough shared understanding of eachothers faiths to say anything downgrading because we all feel closer to God in different ways. We are all praising God and that is beautiful. Physical reminders of beauty to honor Him are another way people show praise. But God doesn't need to be physically represented for us to feel close to Him. He is in us. A room full of people is beautiful because it's a room full of God's children. ❤
My father left my grandmother's episcopal church to become a new age baptist. It was completely unrecognizable and it steered me away from the religion. I've only gone back to the episcopal church in reverence to my grandparents, and I did not regret it. The choir and liturgy give so much gravity to the worship that it makes me feel proud to be there. This "new age" crap is far too accessible. It is devoid of personality.
I've recently become a big fan of Jonathan, and I totally get where he is coming from in regards of the preservation of the symbolic holiness that is lost in most modern churches. But I also think it's important to understand the need for bridges to Jesus. For people that have grown in secular modern culture and are trying to get back to Jesus, or even more so, for those who are coming to Christ for the first time, the imposing feeling of dark cathedrals and ancient sacred art may feel too distant or too orthodox for what they are used to. For example, I live in Mexico and decided to take my 3yo daughter to church for the first time, we visited the most important church in our region, a 1700 Neo Gothic cathedral full of saints and monuments, the mass felt heavy, and she was mostly scared. That brought me back to the time when I decided to leave my faith at 17. I was raised catholic, and as a teenager I felt the church was too monolithic, unable to connect with kids like me. I loved God but had tons of issues with the priests at my school and their contradictions, while I was also drawn into music and other secular things that were more appealing to me at the time. That lead me to sex, drugs, rock and new age for 25 years. As a grown man, I now understand that it was very selfish and egotistical to expect the institution to adapt to my personal needs and culture, and I should have never went astray from God due to my fallout with the institution (I've repented), but if we are honest, a lot of young people leave the faith because of that very reason. Hence, I get why some people may feel more attracted to churches where there's modern architecture, lively music, younger people, a pastor that has a wife and a job and may be more relatable to you than a roman catholic or orthodox priest. As I get back in touch with Jesus, I wonder how important it is to make God more relatable for modern people that are seeking him, I feel that as long as these bridges genuinely take us to the word of God and the connection the Holy Spirit, they are a blessing.
Any worship where you feel the presence of God is good, doesn’t matter what it may look like to other people. Those filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost were mocked because they looked strange to others, as the Bible says rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep. There is a proper time for all different kinds of interactions with God, sometimes it moves you to silent sobbing, sometimes to joyful shouting, but it is all true worship if done in spirit and in truth. There is no point or excuse for looking at another and telling them that there is only one way of worshipping God, and that all others are improper. Or to hold up human traditions on a pedestal, stating they are a more true form of religious practice.
The TLM Catholic FSSP, is so beautiful. More beautiful than anything protestantism could come up with. Because the TLM is tradition, it has existed since St. Peter was pope. And now he's buried in the Basillica of Vatican City. Catholicism is the true church that Jesus started. Do only Catholics go to Heaven? I don't know, but I know that if someone studies church history and decides to reject the Catholic church anyway even after knowing the truth. They are rejecting Jesus in the Eucharist and the Holy Spirit himself.
I know Johnathan you have been making this point over and over again but somehow in this clip is was more clear an precise than ever before. Very interesting that it happened in this setting with this host. Thank you.
@@SeekJesusFindLife no one said Mary is God, she is nothing without the Grace of God filling her. Why do you ask anyone to pray for you? You shouldn’t, according to your own logic, just ask the Lord Jesus Himself. This is essentially the same argument you’re making. We ask, because the Holy Scriptures tell us: “The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.” (James 5:16). The Holy Saints are not only righteous by fallen man’s standards, but are perfected by the power of the Holy Spirit. The prayers of the saints is an integral part of our faith, as written in Revelation Chapter 5 verse 8: “And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, *which are the prayers of the saints* .”
I’m a bit split on this topic. On the one hand, I have a sense of apprehension on how the orientation of our modern churches has possibly played a part in disposing us to a celebrity culture that is unfit and unbecoming in the church. Also, as an artist and someone who feels deeply fed by acts of meaning, I would love nothing more than to make my local church beautiful in a way that focuses attention towards Christ and what is heavenly and good and perfect. This is also something that draws me to sacrament / sacramental living. On the other hand, I also feel apprehensive of these things becoming requirements of true worship. I think it might be more important to remember that where two or three are gathered in Christ’s name, there he is in our midst. I have been in many, many places that weren’t even a building and experienced holy communion, true worship. I feel that these days it is more important than ever to remember that what Christ did was make a people to dwell in. That was what he always wanted. In doing this, he shifted true worship away from a physical place. Also, at its beginnings, much of the early church met in houses. It was very community, people oriented. This seems to fit more with the biblical focus of true worship being a people who follow and embody Christ, both in their personal and corporate life together. Having our spaces be extremely intentional I think is beautiful. The Hebrew word for worship means to prostrate oneself, and that to me means the whole of oneself laid at the feet of the one you worship, so I think how we do everything, even orient our buildings, would ideally reflect this way of living. I also think it could help us in where we are straying in our culture and draw our focus more toward Christ, I really do. But I don’t think it is what scripture tells us is required for true worship, and I don’t want to see us start confusing that. I think these things can definitely be held in tension, but that’s the warning I feel along with my agreements.
Practices that remind us of the mystery of Christ and the new life he has given are certain to edify believers, strengthening them for the fight in this world. But when a practice becomes too 'me' centered and not Christ centered, then it has gone off the tracks.
@@jonnbobo Biblical Christianity. Paul uses the word mystery numerous times. That's because it is impossible for the human mind to fully understand the eternal God and how he has saved us. Isaiah 55: 8-9, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."
@@jonnbobo Put faith in Christ, stick to the scriptures, love all people especially your brothers and sisters in Him, and listen to the Spirit as he changes your life. Leave the denominational stuff to the Lord. He is the judge. Not us.
@@stephenbailey9969 I agree with your general thought, but living in ignorance is not what we're asked to do. If it's not your calling that's okay, but lukewarm worship of the Truth you are proclaiming is also a no-go... Paul not only preached tolerance for multiple denominations, but he also said to use scripture to discern, strengthen, and rebuke... there is a spiritual battle, so pt on the armor of God my friend.
Great chat! I'm glad to be an Anglican that holds to many of the same ideas of worship you guys espoused! If you're going to church to consume anything but the body and blood of our lord, you're selling yourself short, and denying God the worship he deserves!
Your Church exists because some guy wanted a baby boy. The Roman Pagan Church added tenants of Christianity because they didn't want to lose an empire.... hmmm... I think you're right, that's about the same actually.
@@jonnbobo Sorry, that's not the Anglicanism I'm talking about. There was an Anglo church long before the Pagan Romans showed up, long before the Monarchy existed.
@@johnsmoth7130 noppers, people in "Roman Britain typically believed in a wide range of gods and goddesses, and worshipped several of them, likely selecting some local and tribal deities as well as some of the major divinities venerated across the Empire." The Roman Pagan occupation lasted from AD 43 to AD 410.... right on time my friend.
@@johnsmoth7130 I believe it; Orthadox is the Eastern Roman Pagan Church, the Byzantine Empire... so that makes sense. "Robert Byron, one of the first 20th century Philhellenes, argued that the greatness of Byzantium lay in what he described as 'the Triple Fusion': that of a Roman body, a Greek mind and an oriental, mystical soul." So, yeah, pretty darn pagan.
I spent over 20 years as a Protestant church worker doing multiple ministries in different denominations, and what I’ve found, among many other things, is that Protestantism inevitably leads to celebrity worship. There’s no getting around it. And the nature of celebrities is to do fan service. I eventually converted to the Orthodox faith to save myself.
@CJ P. Really? So you gave celebrities up who don't claim to be Christ incarnate for a Pope who does... and a Pope the world leader's venerate and respect higher than any celebrity? Interesting
@@jonnbobo Orthodoxy is the Church Christ founded. No getting around it. Rome innovated and left and protestants reacted to that innovation with their own innovations.
@@NavelOrangeGazer hahahahahah Sorry buddy, the roman pagan church started Orthodoxy and Roman Catholic... There were plenty of Christian groups that did not exist under the Roman pagan church, but they got killed for a 1000 years.
@@jonnbobo all those groups literally didn't preach Christ. But some weird kind of gnosticism, arianism or Nestorianism. Basically a different Gospel than those of Christ. Your "secret hidden church" is just that. A nonexistent heretical non-apostolic sects of groups that go from ridiculous teachings to abominable beliefs.
I agree with some of the points made here but I think there’s two rather crucial points missing from their conversation. 1. Finances. Most churches can barely afford to buy/rent church building, let alone design it to their liking. This is rather a modern Western viewpoint and as an artist myself I understand the reasoning but one needs to consider practicality. Many churches also reuse spaces for economical reasons. This can lead to certain design choices the church never intended on making rather than any subtle philosophical design choices. 2. Aesthetic is a fairly modern concern. Before the Catholic Church emerged as one of the dominant branches of Christianity, there were House churches and very humble church buildings. Yes, aesthetics can and do matter, but they have always been meant to be a reflection of the attitude of the heart posture towards God and often in our modern age the concern is having a building to worship in rather than that building’s design saying something about respect towards God. That having been said, I think churches that could afford to might consider being more aesthetically tasteful and purposeful in how they choose to create their areas of worship. Just my two cents
I’ve been to a few churches and only really felt a deeper connection to the orthodox one. The other ones felt a little like some other activity than worship and reflection. Unfortunately it’s too far away for me to attend regularly.
this was interesting to listen to tbh. my church meets in a high school. aesthetically speaking the high school is in places grimy, in places tacky and overall fairly worn down. The high school hall is the place in which we worship, sing and gather for sermon lessons. The chair we sit on are bright blue and plastic, they are by all means pretty ugly and tacky. The worship team sets up mics and music sheet stands and their are cables and wires all over the floor. I dont feel all these parts take away from the worship in spirit, since many of us are looking up, gazing upwards, closing eyes, and listening intently to the Word, the psalms. But I do agree with a lot of what Jonathan P has to say on this subject! Theres something about being housed under the roof of finely crafted/designed architecture; from all thats inside the building, the arrangement of the chairs, the design of the doors and windows, to the ceiling and structure itself. Seems like all these things are important. Just like the enviroment in a mc donalds has a purpose and effect. So a building in which you worship, as a church, has a purpose and effect. Right? The building in which we gather to worship might be arranged in a way to help draw our attention to the speaker, the worship singers. Are we sitting in rows or in a circle? Aesthetic qualitative arrangements clothe us, make us feel cared for, safe and the hope is for a sacred space on earth. It's not merely ornamental/decorative, since many places can be like that in the world.
This might also be something more America. What i mean is in Portugal and in Switzerland, the priest doesn't say jokes during the homily. I don't say it never happened but for the vast most part it is very serious.
“Lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi.” The law of prayer is the law of belief is the law of life. How you pray effects what you believe and how you live.
I love the Traditional Latin Mass but, it is disturbing to me when many that go to the Traditional Latin Mass, constantly put down the Regular Mass, so therefore it seems to me there is something wrong and divisive.
"There’s an old saying, “familiarity breeds contempt,” that could apply in this case. Uzzah, having been around the ark in his own home, could very likely forget the holiness that it represented. There are times when we, too, fail to recognize the holiness of God, becoming too familiar with Him with an irreverent attitude. Third, the account tells us the oxen stumbled. The cart didn’t fall and neither did the Ark, just as the boat carrying Jesus and the disciples rocked fiercely in the storm, though it wasn’t necessarily in danger of sinking (Matthew 8:24-27). And yet, just as with the disciples who failed to put their faith in their Master, Uzzah, for a moment, felt it was his responsibility to save the integrity of God, and that our almighty God somehow needed Uzzah’s assistance. He presumed that, without his intervention, God’s presence would be dealt a blow. As Job asks, “Can you fathom the mysteries of God?” (Job 11:7). “His greatness no one can fathom” (Psalm 145:3). “His understanding no one can fathom” (Isaiah 40:28). Moses lost his right to enter the promised land because he felt his intervention was needed when he struck the rock, instead of speaking to it as God had commanded (Numbers 20:7-12). We need to listen carefully to what God has to say to us, and in obedience strive to do all He commands. Yes, God is loving and merciful, but He is also holy and He defends His holiness with His power, and affronts to His holiness sometimes bring about His holy wrath. “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:31)."
The question becomes, do we come to church to worship God or do we come to church to worship humanity. I think we need to humble ourselves and turn our orientation back to worshipping God and then the love for each other will follow by His gift of grace. Just a thought.
As a christian, Protestant to be specific though I never refer to myself as such this is a very good refreshing conversation Well there's multiple reasons why I'm not Roman Catholic or Eastern orthodox, nevertheless I appreciate art and aesthetics and creativity. Everyone does ultimately as we all look at sunsets and not cow manure and say one is beautiful and the other is not. Sadly though and the western church especially America in the last 200 years it's increasingly become anti-art anti-intellectual and anti-creativity in any capacity. Incredibly utilitarian. This is wrong. We need to move past it and get back to where we should be with the reverence and awe of the local church being good and proper designed well and putting effort into it. Spending energy and time and money on things to look beautiful because God is worth it. Not because the beauty is in and of itself. Citing Christ and the apostles when they look at the temple and are so mystified by it Jesus condemns them. But did God condemn the temple? For its beauty? No because that era was closed. God destroyed the temple cuz he was no longer needed. Not because it was beautiful and we shouldn't be there
There's also reasons you're not Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist etc. Does this not communicate something to you, or are the religious this oblivious? It's 2022 and people of faith continue to be irrational..it's quite unsettling.
If you are struggling with life and wondering which church is the true church. Pray the Rosary and ask Mama Mary for help in leading you to her son, Jesus. The Rosary brought me closer to Jesus and rescued me from bad anxiety and near depression.
There is a crisis of worship and attention in the Western World. Particularly, as an American, I can say that we have lost touch with our bodies. We don't listen to our flesh or trust it. We scrutinize and demand it to obey the necessities of this "civilized world" we've built around us. Thank you so much and the fruits of your labor Jonathon will help future generations return to a spiritually honest life.
We need to listen to the Word of God, never trust our flesh. I challenge you to read the entire new testimate and pray you come to know Christ. I don’t believe you will find a single verse that points to trusting in your flesh. Galatians 5:24 would be a great place to start.
@@jordynferrari4161 What did those first Christians do in the hundreds and hundreds of years before there was a Christian Bible, or New Testament for that matter? What did they do when the story of the woman who was caught in adultery was added (it wasn't in the earlier manuscripts). Which Lord's Prayer did they say? (There are 2 and part of a third in there, all different)
@@frankherbert6476 it doesn’t matter variation in a prayer. The early Christian’s had at least a few of Paul’s letters and did not rely on their own understanding. All of his letters condemn the flesh. Even then they had to trust in God’s word and the wisdom of early church leaders like Paul. They also had the Holy Spirt which leads and guides against the evil of the flesh. You receive the Holy Spirit when being born again. Jesus said you must be born again! Are you born again?
@@jordynferrari4161 You're missing my entire point. I hope I don't come across harsh here, but really to illicit some thought. The early Christians didn't all have them, until one church decided that they were worth sending....remember, they were sent to specific communities for specific reasons. Not like there was a Lifeway at every corner. My point is that we here in the west, looking through our lenses, only see "God's word" as the Bible. The Word, the Logos is Christ. My point was that the disciples didn't go around writing down everything Jesus said. They experienced Him. The early Christians, for over a thousand years after, had the life of the Faith. This wasn't them sitting in a chair with a bible and a highlighter, walking out later asking each other "How did you feel about church today?" We seem to reduce the God of the cosmos to a series of intellectual propositions. If I "think" this and "feel" that then I'll be "saved" and "go to heaven".... You're correct, Paul and the others picked specific people to be bishops, laying hands and breathing on them. For example, Polycarp, Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome were all appointed by Paul, Peter, and John. You can read their writings-they predate the New Testament-and see how they worshipped, how they lived and expected their flock to live. They in turn chose their descendants, laying hands and breathing on them. The church of Antioch's current successor is in Damascus. On "A street called Straight". Built on Ananias' house. Maybe there's a bit more out there than me interpreting scripture on my own and deciding what it means. That's why we have 40,000+ different registered denominations, to include denominations of 1, all thinking they have cracked the code. And I need some clarification; what exactly do you mean by "born again"? And where did you get that meaning/interpretation from? Also, what is your thoughts on the Rapture? My point about the Lord's prayer is that you, me, and all of Christendom all say the same version because it was said-really sung-in worship centuries before folks in authority added it to the list of important documents to read (as well as leaving a different version in as well)
@@frankherbert6476 I hear your point and you are obviously well read. My biggest concern is that I’m not sure if you understand the gospel message which was at the core of every early church and thus have not been born again. My interpretation of being born again is taken exactly as scripture says: “Jesus answered, “Truly I tell you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Whatever is born of the flesh is flesh, and whatever is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I told you that you must be born again. The wind blows where it pleases, and you hear its sound, but you don’t know where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”” John 3:5-8 CSB. There’s not room for interpretation or translation you can go back to the original Greek manuscripts and read word for word what Jesus said. As far as the rapture… all I know if that the Bible says he will come again. You seem to be really into church history and history of scripture. I recommend watching Mike Winger’s playlist here on TH-cam. You can find it by searching for Evidence for the Bible Mike Winger. It’s a series of 20 videos and it’s pretty great.
I am a Roman Catholic catechumen and, I'm in a vulnerable transition period so, go easy on me: what makes the traditional liturgical rites the preferred for so many traditional Christians I see online compared to the reformed Roman Rite? Is it only the problem of liturgical abuses? Does the Novus Ordo have to be stripped bare of liturgical art, and symbolism? Is there any goodness in the motivation behind the liturgical reformists to inject more participation from the laity?
Hello! First: welcome home, much success on your journey! I'm a somewhat fresh convert too. About a year now, so I get your confusion with the stuff you can find online. Novus Ordo can be very reverent. It can be in a beautiful old Church, with loads of statues and paintings on the wall, with huge organs playing each sunday, classical bells ringing over the landscape before mass and the incense is rising to heaven with our prayers. I'm blessed to have such a Church as my home parish. Ok, we do incense on special occasions mostly. But it's there! Or you can celebrate the Novus ordo in a barewalled industrial compex looking Church, which was the case in a franciscan nun monastery I was able to spend a week with. The nuns wanted to really concentrate on the Word alone, without distraction. So they kept things quite bare. Almost a bit bleak. That is not my preferrence, I'm so glad I have my beautiful Church at home, but still they were having very reverent, beautiful masses. Christ was there too! I never had the opportunity to witness latin mass. Or to see the 'pop guitar' NO masses some of my american brothers and sisters write about, they don't seem to exist here in switzerland. Which brings me to the conclusion, that the liturgical abuses in the US are more of a cultural thing than the fault of a new form of mass itself. Still a problem, but not a reason to throw a whole form of mass out of the window.😊 I hope I could give some insight with what little knowledge I could gather. Take care, pray, never take your eyes off from Jesus! 😊
Oh, almost forgot: The participation from the laity was brought back into mass so the lay people, which are Church too, get more conscious of their own pastoral role within the Church. To bring up attentiveness and personally, I think it symbolises the whole back and forth between us Christians and God. We gift ourselves to him, and he makes us better, and gifts us ourselves back, but more whole. And we gift ourselves again to him, he makes us better and gifts us back. It's a constant giving from both sides (but of course, he gives infinitely more than we do), and this is how we can become holy. And I think the ordinary form with the regular answers and formulas seems to mimick this like a metaphor.
@@MrsYasha1984 Yes, you have given some valuable insight. I'm very grateful to you for taking the time to share and answer. God-willing, I never want to flee from the Roman Church even if there is dissatisfaction or abuse. I want to be like St. John in the Gospel when after news of the Lord's resurrection, he and St. Peter rush to the tomb. Even though John, the beloved disciple, the one who lay on Christ's heart, gets to the tomb first, he waits on Peter, the rock, before going in. I do wonder if that's the best attitude for the mystics, as well as, those who love tradition, beauty, and doctrinal purity, who are feeling like the leadership is taking it away; don't rebel. Submit, for the sake of the Lord and His Gospel, trusting in the hierarchy of authority established by the Head of the Church, Christ Jesus. Idk. Just a thought c:
@@williamseay9252 Ultimately you are at Mass for the Eucharist-the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ whereby when you receive Him- His DNA mixes with yours to transform you. Every valid and licit Mass has the same Christ made present on the altar- ...whether it’s a Novus Ordo Mass, TLM, Charismatic, NeoCat - or any of the 23+ Eastern Catholic rites etc. There are many modern Pharisees online who try to denigrate one Mass, or rite, over another. Don’t fall for this. There is no more grace in one parish over another so long as it’s valid (permitted) or licit (in communion with Rome/Vatican). It’s the same Christ on the altar. Just pray- and have joy and don’t allow the joyless online cults to suck you into their diabolical web. Peace in Christ. “The Will of the authorities is the Will of God.” -St. Padre Pio
My advice to all Catholics is to know your faith and its history with a ruthless pursuit of the truth. That requires time and effort. Understand how and why the new Mass was created and know the differences between it and traditional liturgies of the East and West. The traditional Latin mass has much more in common with the eastern Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom than with the Novus Ordo. Vatican 2 essentially laid the foundation for a new Faith with an emphasis on appealing to Modern man. That was the stated goal of its architects. To understand and appreciate these differences and the goals of the "reformers" does not make one a Pharisee but rather an educated Catholic. After 30 years in the novus ordo, I made a conscious decision to leave it behind. We must all pray and discern God's will for our lives and that includes how we worship Him.
Not every parish has the funds to build an ornate building. A church is not "better" or "more holy" because of its architecture. The early church met in rented rooms, houses, even schools.
In your quest to reintroduce the old traditional "Christian" visual language, just keep in mind as part of the process those excesses which led to it being reacted against in the first place. By "traditional Christian" you mostly mean Catholic. I can concede to that usage to a great degree, but just remember that the reaction away from the art forms current in late-medieval Christianity was not originally a reaction away from Christianity itself. In fact, in regards to ecclesial art, it was a move back to a focus on Christian truth and away from what were seen as the excesses of art and *mere* traditional expression that distracted from the important things. So, in your work reinvigorating traditional Christian art, just remember the places where your forebears went wrong. For instance, the form was always supposed to serve to communicate the idea. So, don't ever let mere forms of visual expression get in the way of the *ideas* of Christianity. A faith whose God-man-founder led a life of simple service and humble sacrifice in spite of His divine nature and He and His apostles taught a faith that was bold it its simplicity, majestic in its humility, and revolutionary in its timelessness, for that faith to wrap itself in gilt sculpture, baroque architecture, and an impenetrable visual jargon is hypocritical. To be good Christian images, they must first be good images...good communicators of the *ideas* they exhibit. Using an ancient visual language which no one understands is not better than continually reinventing whatever visual language which will best communicate the ideas which are Christianity. So, however you utilize the old language, it must be done in a way that is at least as communicative to the audience as more contemporary images. They also should not preach values which God Himself does not preach. Material wealth, exclusivity, human hierarchy and authority, materialism, anti-materialism, unbiblical practices, the idolization of human figures, etc. are all things that have been communicated strongly by traditional "Christian" art of the past. So, moving forward, you would have to use this language while discernedly discarding much of the vocabulary and usage. The reason such traditions largely didn't remain popular into the present was first due to Christians who would rather remove themselves all together from the corrupted human art traditions which had adhered to Christianity over the centuries and hold tightly to the written word and the ideas themselves which that Word presented. Those communities each then produced certain aesthetic styles and traditions of their own, but each much more safe and restrained than the old Catholic art traditions which had become corrupted and even corrupting. It was only then that rationalists, materialist/humanists, and secular artists began taking the fore in the visual realms. My point is to remember that a non-preference for "traditional Christian" (ie. Catholic and Orthodox) art styles is not necessarily anti-Christian and a resurrgence of them isn't necessarily what's best for the Faith and human souls. If we focus on...oh I don't know...immortal souls, divine doctrine, and conforming ourselves to to the likeness of Christ...things like the "visual language" would take care of themselves. The best way to make American culture Christian, is to make Americans actual Christians. Then the culture would be taken care of. If your work aids in that process by the meaningful communication of ideas, then that's a good thing. If it's a distraction from them, then it's...well...a distraction. [Edited for spelling]
No, this is not true, Christianity is not about ideas, they are incidental to the faith, Christianity is about the hypostatic union of God and man through the Person of Christ and participation in the Divine through this hypostatic union. Through the icon we give due reverence to the prototype and the prototype bestows grace upon the faithful; it facilitates the personal relationships within the communion of the saints and with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The holy icons, like the precious and life-giving cross and the holy gospels are instruments of Grace. Furthermore, the idea that the holy icons 'didn't remain popular into the present' is simply flat out wrong. While there was a brief period back in the 8th and 9th centuries when vile heretics, the iconoclasts, led by men of great power but of little faith did assail the holy icons and did desecrate the monasteries; the faithful never gave into their wickedness and suffered all forms of persecution and even martyrdom to defend the holy images from these servants of the Evil One. In the end, Glory be to God, the Empress-Saint Theodora overthrew the iconoclastic emperors and forbade in law any who would defile the sacred images from ever again sitting upon the imperial throne. And from that day we have, every year on the first Sunday of Lent, processed around the city with our Icons in celebration of the Triumph of Orthodoxy and the victory of St. Theodora over the iconoclasts and their being cast out of the Holy Churches and into the fires of hell, wherein we decree even down to this present day: 'To those who mock and blaspheme the holy icons which the Holy Church receiveth, in remembrance of the works of God and of His saints, to inspire the beholders with piety, and to incite them to imitate their examples, and to those who say that they are idols, ANATHEMA!'
@@costakeith9048 , 1. I get my definitions regarding Christianity from...Christian Scripture. How is Christianity spoken of in the Christian Scripture? It is called a "way," "doctrine," "witness," "testimony," "good news," etc. What was Paul's constant concern regarding the faith? That people have their mind right. That they "have the mind of Christ," that instead of conforming to the world, they "renew their minds," etc. We are saved from our just deserts (eternal seperation from God, "the wages of sin is death...") by putting our faith in who Christ is and what He has done...ie. ideas. Accepting them and acting upon them in faith. You are arguing, it seems to me, that we are saved via the veneration of objects which, besides appearing nowhere in the Scriptures left to us by Christ and the Apostles, seems far more heretical to me than saying we are required to believe true things about God, Christ, and ourselves. Of course Christianity is a set of ideas! True ideas about the reality of our situation. 2. I am not saved by the cross. The cross was a couple of rough wooden beams. I'm saved by what One *did* on the cross; by the reality of a situation that I have come to accept. Physical objects themselves mean nothing next to the truths that may be connected with them. God revealed Himself utterly through the Son, and the Son is revealed to us through the Word made available to us (a written work made up of ideas to be understood and believed) and by the ministry of His Holy Spirit. So, if I wish to know God via the ways He has actually provided, should I A) stare at a wooden painting and pray to it's subject through it; or B) mediate on the Word with the activity of the Spirit-led understanding and pray to the Father in the name of the Son by the power of the Spirit? You can keep all the physical objects. Give me the content of the Word and a place to pray and I am in the very presence of the Father in His Holy Temple by the work of the Sacrifice of the One High Priest who has forever torn down the veil and made a way for me into the Most Holy Place of Heaven (read Hebrews). You can fight over splinters of wood and gilded paintings all you like. Scripture, Christ, and the Apostles are unconcerned by such things, thus so am I. 3. I was not even speaking primarily against the silly Eastern practice of icons, but of the general usage of Christian imagery in history. 4. If you would like to argue against anything I have said, I challenge you to do so based on the Word and the truths (ideas) found therein rather than on pat definitions from human tradition (which are also ideas). If we, as Christians (though you likely don't consoder me one because I'm outside of your particular hierarchy) are to have meaningful discussion, we must share a basic reference point. If it's not the Bible, I'm not interested, so save your effort.
@@jameswoodard4304 'Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.' Your ideas bring you no closer to salvation than the devil himself and his knowledge of God is far deeper and more complete than yours; if ideas are salvific, then the demons will be saved before you are. If you are not saved by the cross, then you are not saved. 'For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.' You do not preach the cross, but you preach the wisdom of words, you think words and ideas will save you, they will not, only the precious and life-giving cross will save you. Did St. Paul not say, 'I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.' This is what faith is, faith is not an idea or a concept, it is not learning or reasoning, faith is being crucified with Christ and living in Christ. This is how you are saved, you must be Crucified with Christ, you must be buried with Him in Baptism, and you must be raised again with Him. For there is only One True Word, One True Idea, One True Logos, for it is written 'In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.' The only True Word, the Divine Logos, is not an idea or imagining of man, it's not something you can learn or understand or comprehend through earthly logic and reasoning; it is a Person, it is Jesus Christ, and you can only know him through communion with Him. You speak of ways and gospels and witnesses, but did not our Lord plainly say: 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me.' Christ is the Way, Christ is the Witness, Christ is the Gospel, these are not ideas, these are a Person. And you must be in communion with this Divine Person, you must Eat his Body and drink His Blood, you must become one with Him if there is to be any life in you. And, finally, the 7th Holy and Ecumenical council is a council of the universal and undivided Church, accepted by east and west alike, this is the normative practice throughout the entire Church and you cannot be a Christian without accepting it. You come here and preach a false and novel gospel, entirely divorced from all that came before and ignorant of the Scriptures and the working of the Holy Spirit in Christ's Church. You need to repent of this wickedness and be baptized into the Holy Church of Christ and live in obedience to the teachings of the Holy Spirit as manifested through the saints if you are to be saved.
Well, the building is the Temple. The question is what should that temple contain? An altar, a tabernacle, a Priest offering a sacrifice (in this case Christ’s sacrifice in the Eucharist as He commanded)?? Not lights, smoke, loud rock music, even if it is worship music and most definitely not a podium! Now if the people are “the church” are you saying if those people die, the church dies? No of course not! Because we are part of the church but not ONLY what makes a church.
Christ's first two laws: 1 Love god with all your heart 2. love thy neighbor as yourself Every other law is relationally dependent on these two. When a person follows these two laws, every other law that they hypothetically break is de facto broken out of weakness(including ignorance), not neglect, which is therefore not a sin (as you attribute innocence to children). This is why Nietzsche said all values are relational. It is a trinity between you, God, and neighbor. Its also why the categorical imperative (or any form of unconditional duty ethic rituals that are debased from the first two laws) is seriously dangerous; if your decisions aren't made solely for the power that you believe they will have (pragmatism in the most real sense) then you aren't actually making the decision. The entire idea of Christ's teachings is that love is the pattern of worship.
We don’t know what love is until we see it embodied in Christ and the Saints. This is the very Reality that is brought to us front and center in every Orthodox Divine Liturgy.
Excellent point! We must will according to the law of love, which is the harmonious relationship of all things to God. Believe, and “thine eye is single,” but if your will be divided, “how great is that darkness!”
How about Silence and Stillness? If someone cant just sit alone for a half hour or hour without grasping or pushing away thoughts, without needing some mantra or prayer rope, if you cant just sit. Surely i don't give a damn what you think reality is or is not.
Who is the other Orthodox icon carver? I’m assuming Pageau was referring to himself as one of the two icon carvers he could count on two fingers. Who is the other?
In Catholicism, the collapse of architecture, music, and general reverence...collectively was a major component of why I left. Simultaneously with the decline of those elements, was also the decline of the priesthood. I have found that 99% of priests fall into one of two categories, either (1) those who are leftist activists (e.g. promoting abortion) or (2) those who are nihilistic or otherwise completely apathetic. I do believe that the Latin Mass needed an important facelift. However, apparently all those who set about that facelift had no concept of liminal space. As for music, I'll leave it to Thomas Day, and his book "Why Catholics Can't Sing", as the proper commentary. If the Latin Mass were merely changed to be (1) at least 50% in the local language and (2) shifted into significantly more antiphonal structures (thereby involving the congregation more in the substance of the mass)....then I think it would have become even more glorious. However, there is still the root issue...why did the priesthood lose its zeal? Every attempt I had ever made to help a "liturgical committee" or a priest move in a better, more sacred direction, was always met with ridicule or apathy.
God doesn't allow something to stand forever in place of Him. Because He by His nature is supreme, and the very fabric of time bends to His will. That is why through whatever means art is always forgotten, the graven images always reduced to dust. God covered the whole earth with water erasing such things, and someday he will do it with fire. In the meantime waring factions have destroyed most images, God can allow evil to do His will while simultaneously judge and punisher of said evil. For the most part humanity has always sought to worship that which God uses in the physical world, much like the serpent that healed the sick in the desert. It also, was removed because the people made it an object of worship after the miracle for hundreds of years. 2 Kings 18:4 He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan. The Satanic church has stained glass windows and crosses, but is not worshiping Jesus. So to the Catholics, and so the world. Jesus is not the cross. He is not made of wood and carved into what we can hang. Jesus is God alimighty, and someday all will know that. No image is needed. Romans 1:20 King James Bible For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:. Jesus is the Way, the Gospel. The Gospel needs no image. Jesus saves , although we cannot see Him. Making crosses and stained glass is a waste of time. Getting the Gospel preached is the only work we are called to do with the Lord, not paint pictures lol.
Ha! Seems very philosophical but tell that to the apostles who prayed in the upper room. I don’t think the Holy Spirit was concerned with how “High” the architecture was.
I agree with he says. But I m thinking: Jesus and the first church were just normal dressed, they were meeting in normal houses. The majestic temple was destroyed by Romans and they were meeting in regular houses with regular dressing. Jesus never never said anything about the external dress
Attend it, get to know the priest and community and support it financially (but just the parish, not Francis, i.e. I don't give if it's a Francis collection, but they do tell you before hand).
The early church met in houses. Church is the people gathering to worship God no1 not about the building… orientation to God is about our heart condition, the space can help this process but more importantly is seeking Gods will and allowing the Holy Spirit to correct and guide us. Mathew 18 v20 For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
You seem to be falling in a somewhat gnostic sensibility, in which all that it matters is spirit. I don't think that's the right approach to these issues. While the spiritual is more important, what we do with our bodies, our enviroment and our time all ought to be in consonance with our faith. If God is truly the first thing, then we should act and live like He truly is the first, most glorious Person, and our temples should reflect that. Also the ancient church met in houses yes... Houses that, according to archeology, were reporpused to be churches, and had altars and likely even art. Not at all typical houses.
@@siruristtheturtle1289 Gnostic 😂 I couldn’t be further from this doctrine… Jesus taught the disciples to preach the good news… not to build amazing buildings (nothing wrong with amazing buildings though). It’s more important to fill any building with believers than have them empty..
@@robbokeysAgain, failing to grasp the point: What Jonathan is pointing out here is that many church buildings are in fact build and oriented towards the spectacle and the preacher as the center of it, which, while understandable in certain context, it predisposes the individual towards incorrect worship attitudes. Sure, a simple building is better than no church, but a building oriented correctly is better than both.
7:20 could not agree more about the hymns. My mom was Presbyterian and I spent a lot of time in Southern Baptist churches as well, and the vast majority of hymns they used were cheesy-sounding hymns from the 50s and 60s. I can't put my finger on _why_ they sound so lame, but there's just something about them that I can't stand. I started attending a nearby Catholic church back in April, and I had this pre-conceived notion that they were going to be singing Latin hymns or doing Gregorian chants or something. I was very disappointed when I discovered that they're using the same dumb types of hymns as every Protestant church. Everything else about the church is great, the deacons and priests are all super nice and I just started RCIA, but the music grates on me. Fortunately there is a traditional church here in town that does Latin mass. They also have mass in Swahili once a month, which sounds pretty interesting. I haven't had the opportunity to go there yet, but I will.
Well, which came first? The symbols or the substance? Went to a Greek Orthodox Church in my town where they had all these “symbols” but their Theology was abhorrent and the spirit was devoid of any real sense of what we were supposedly there for. It was the worship of Tradition rather than God or Christ. The same goes with every Roman Catholic Church or service I have entered in to. Granted, the Evangelical Church is as backslidden as any of these but building great edifices and wearing suits and ties won’t change the real problems.
Took my family out if a charismatic cultured church and went to reformed. The attempts at conjuring emotional experiences of the charismatic styled churches always irked me, and it wasnt until i went to this reformed church where we sung gospel oriented hymns, that actual, honest emotions followed.
Orthodox pomp and ceremony are just a form of mystification to evoke certain feelings of awe and give power to the priest. It's entertainment under another name.
@@joshuaparsons887 More like their own personal enrichment. The pretended ghost-cajoler would naturally be held in dread awe and reverence by his credulous dupes, and would gain enormous respect and prestige; he could quit the drudgery of hunting and fishing for his precarious living, and let the awed and believing members of the clan keep him in food and idle ease: here the first social parasite. This is priestcraft -by whatever name and in whatever age and guise pursued. Joseph Wheless. Forgery in Christianity (Kindle Locations 49-51). Kindle Edition.
I quite like modern worship songs 🤭 i also like listening to Assyrian Orthodox Chanting though, there's something otherworldly about it. I think there's a place for both joyful and contemplative worship. I agree about the churches though, don't get me started on how hideous modern architecture is 😂 i think building beautiful churches is a type of worship too that the protestant have stopped doing for some reason, i think protestant forebares saw them as excesses and distractions from truth, but not if you consider the architecture as a form of worship, thats beautiful
The church is the people? As God provides a simple supper we give thanks, as God provides a Michelin five star three course meal we give thanks. We should be grateful to the Lord whatever His provision, because He knows best and as a good Father does not leave us without. Should I look over at my neighbour, who gives thanks to God for what they receive, in disdain at the meal that God provides? If I do that I relegate God’s provision to only my way. Our Father meets, provides for His people through Jesus Christ, our Lord and King, so let us not have tones of disdain towards God’s provision no matter how elaborate, plain or in between. No provision is more or less righteous, if a community/individual has asked and received this in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Enjoy, appreciate, share and be thankful for all that God has provided, His mercies never come to an end they are new every morning.
Ok ask yourself this question? In the last hundred years or so, did God work to bless the world through cultures that had faith traditions where the churches were drowning in theatrical costumes and iconography. Or ones where they cast off a lot of that impenetrable stuff and had a plainer, stripped down faith tradition and actually spoke to the hearts of the congregation instead of droning liturgy? Britain and America stripped a lot of that heavy stuff away and had a simplified faith tradition and they exploded with Godly energy and exported faith, democracy, human rights, modern medicine, education etc to the world and transformed it. And all the orthodox type cultures in Christendom stagnated. Sure, the Catholic church did and still does a lot of aid and missionary work but it was the protestant drive that changed the world.
Why do you, Mr. Pageau, use the moniker "christian" when the more accurate, more representative, and more truthful, symbol is "Catholic"? Pax Christi in regno Christi
“Your church should at least be nicer than your house” This is problematic. It is easy for everything down to my local Masonic temple to be nicer than my house. However, I live in an area where Orthodoxy is both the oldest religion and one of the smallest. On account of that, while we have several Orthodox churches, they’re small, 100+ year old colonial buildings that, while still unique and beautiful, are not necessarily “nice” in the sense of roominess or comfort, and sometimes even maintenance. While I agree in principle, the church should first be right, second, be adequate to the needs of the congregation, and third, be nice. I’d rather gain Heaven from the doctrine of a shack than gain hell from the doctrine of a mansion. Of course, the fruit of the church will be reflected in its material condition, but when rightness comes in minority, the congregation is small, then the giving, and the building it can afford, may not have the curb appeal desired.
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
Yes I went to a Christian church for the first time with a friend, not sure which denomination but it really did feel like it was just a show or like a concert and then some random guy came on to give a motivational speech. I really wouldn’t even call it church. It made me really appreciate Mass and Catholic traditions
It's all a show
@@EmJay2022 what does that even mean
@@dr.watson2037 Whether it be light shows and motivational speeches or traditional Latin liturgy in the end they're all just a show.
@@EmJay2022 what do you mean with "just a show"?
@@dr.watson2037 "Just a show", as in its a business. They have to cater to the lowest common denominator or else people won't come back.
It is strange, I came back to my Presbyterian church after years of agnosticism, and it was unrecognizable. Same church, same people, but everything that made us who we were was abandoned. 18th and 19th century hymns had been replaced by awful music from the last decade. I joined the Orthodox Church, initially, because I just wanted a church that I could give to my children.
How did you go from reformed to orthodoxy with seemingly no struggle?
@@genesis204 I wouldn't say there was no struggle, but I was coming back to the Presbyterian church. I probably stayed 2 years before I really understood how much it had changed from when I was younger. I think a lot of it was the influence of churches like Tim Keller's and the racial reconciliation movement that was picking up steam at the time.
I am leaving the Presbyterian Church in part for the same reason.
@@genesis204 you really don't.
I was working for Tim Keller’s church (Redeemer) when I realized that Catholicism was the true church. Oh boy. Many of my bosses were former Catholics. There was a lot of anti Catholicism and it was hard but it was good. I studied everyday. The elders didn’t even believe in baptism as anything more than a symbol. Calvin’s sacramental theology is so convoluted that you have to really have your yes be yes or your no be no when it comes to the Eucharist.
“Your church should be nicer than your house.” Dang. I heard that.
It's awesome that Jonathan is gaining some broader recognition outside of the Orthodox world. People need to hear what he has to say.
Interesting things happen in usa. Their governments are rotten but common people are coming to finally see the Orthodox Church and eventually convert. This makes my soul so happy ❤️☦️ Pray for you.
Would love more explicitly Orthodox Christian exposure on Daily Wire. Love Knowles and Pageau.
The Orthodox Church isn't Zionist, and most inside her are Anti-Zionist, so I doubt you'll see anyone beyond Pageau
Traditional Latin Mass is so beautiful and reverent; it will rise like a Phoenix one day. Thank you Mr. Pageau
If you think that's beautiful, wait until you go to an Orthodox Liturgy... it's over 1000 years older than the Traditional Latin Mass and was never not used because the Church never needs anything to rise again. It always is.
the latins are not orthodox
Where was it before the Council of Trent?
@@heftymagic4814 the eastern “orthodox” are not orthodox and also not Catholic. They are Schismatics
Orthodox do not like
Jonathan Pageau is Orthodox, I invite anyone watching this to go visit your local Orthodox parish.
The Russian one or the Greek one? Kirill says the Greek patriarch is schismatic.
@@johnsix.51-69 both schism is temporary and is not dogmatic, unlike the Roman Catholics
@@gregcoogan8270 By my knowledge Catholic Church and Orthodox Church is not is schism anymore though there is a divide in Doctrinal matter
@@delvingeorge2807 Rome is still in schism and there are major doctrinal differences.
@@johnsix.51-69 lololol so sad
I went to my buddy's evangelical church when I was reborn in January 2020. Pastor was great. But then noticed people coming to church in flip flops and shorts. The new pastor had a baseball cap while he gave the sermon. And the more I got into the biblical.truth and reeducated myself on Christianity, the more I was drawn back to my orthodox roots.
You realize Jesus wore sandals too right?
@@mastershake4641 in those days everyone wore sandals. The pastor had a baseball cap on. And a Chicago bears shirt. I get it. Be comfortable. Come as you are. But the tone of the church and society is set by those who lead it. Hence the screwy and culturally weak society we have in America
@@mastershake4641 sandals, not flipflops 😊
@@mastershake4641 The King can do whatever he wants, you aren't the King. Show some respect.
@@paulhagen1002 Who are you again?
This is Jonathan Pageau, welcome to the symbolic world.
❤️🔥
Love you Jonathan I listen to all the time I happen to be Catholic but I don’t think there’s too much difference between our face and I love all the symbolism. Thank you so much.
This interview is worth at least 5 different clips!
The comment about the altar being higher than the seats was particularly compelling. May our services never become cheap entertainment.
I find that when I have attended orthodox services, there are some people genuinely reverent towards God. As Jonathan is saying, oriented towards that which is higher. But there are others who worship the symbols themselves instead of the living God who these symbols represent.
There was a time before the Church developed this universal symbolic language. In fact, there were several hundred years. There was something else, not the architecture and design, that drew people. Something much more powerful, in fact, the very thing that the symbols point to. It was the evidence of the presence of God amongst a people. It was lives transformed, the dead raised, the truth proclaimed with boldness, entire cities upside down. Is this the result you see in your churches and in your cities?
The only hope we have to see the world changed today is for God Himself to wake us up and fill us with the same boldness and anointing of His Spirit to proclaim the truth
A few years ago I went to the Holy Trinity Brompton service in Kensington, London. It's the church where the pastor originated the Alpha Course.
I was shocked to be there on a sunny autumn Sunday morning and see that the pulled blinds down over all the beautiful stained glass windows to make the space dark, then they lit it with coloured lights like a nightclub to make it 'cool' for all the youth.
Michael Knowles? Wasnt expecting this. You know, the interview seems to work really well. It draws out some well-connected thoughts from Jonathan.
I wasn’t either, but they are both Christian and the addition of Jordan Peterson (close friend to Jonathan) to the Daily Wire makes sense to me how this would come about.
Why is it unexpected, Michael is Catholic.
"But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for the Father is seeking such to worship Him. God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” John 4:23-24
One thing we need to keep doing, no matter if we agree on things completely or not, is we MUST keep the discussion going, reaching out to each other in love and charity.
!
Worship renewal is often a function of rediscovering the ancient. Worship isn't expressive OR consumptive. It's both. We receive and we respond. We are taken, blessed, broken, and given.
I LOVE this video. It´s definitely true that many churches lack devotion through art, especially the architecture. I find it sad, honestly. We admire the romanesque and gothic churches but we don´t seem to truly learn from them.
There's truth in what is being said, but it's warped. Matthew 23 addresses this clearly, they sit on the seat of Moses in their whitewashed walls while having dead bones in their catacombs.
Amen! The way we worship indeed does effect how we live. I remember the “Vatican2” changes that started unfolding in the Catholic Church I attended growing up. The beautiful statues, pictures, and painted ceilings were all covered over with blue and gold that resembled clouds…all those beloved faces of saints I literally looked up to when I was a little kid were gone. The crucifix on the altar and it’s accompanying statues of Mother Mary and Saint John were painted a strange pallid color. Those changes very demonstrably drained the blood from the worship. Eventually, I stopped attending mass, and joined other Christians in worship. I still carry the original space in my heart, and that has led to a lovely freedom to be in communion with the Lord wherever I go. Still, I miss the solemn beauty of the old ways.
It’s in Orthodox today. More so than in the Catholic Churches prior to its pulling meaning & beauty from their churches
Its no excuse to leave mass though, the sacraments retain the same efficacy regardless of the beauty of the place. There were times Christians worshipped in hiding, in the lowliest of places, so we cant abandon the mass because we got an ugly church. We should even give thanks for an ugly church and a non ideal priest, as God let us partake of the Eucharist. Embrace the cross, better times will come.
The beauty is still in the Catholic Church. Leaving the one true church founded by Christ over some external things is very problematic on your part.
...You obviously never understood that we are there for the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ made present in the holy Eucharist.
The paint colors are ultimately irrelevant. Furthermore- most Catholic Churches beat every other church in beauty (and reverence) hands down -as it is. Peace.
Go to a Latin Mass! It's all still there....don't leave Jesus in the Eucharist.
Why leave the Eucharist for protestant concerts?
I just saw this now. I listen to Jonathan a lot. I once in a while listen to you Michael. But I’m glad you two are talking. This is very cool. We need to bring people together in these discussions. I love it I love it. Thank you.
I've heard women notice these kind of subtleties but hardly ever men speak of this reflection... Unless it was a negative issue and someone doing/placing/saying something incorrectly in the church... Just because it was untraditional (I grew up Protestant). But to speak about giving space meaning and giving tradition meaning through the love of Christ is beautiful. I'm truly amazed at this dialogue and presentation. Thank you for leading properly as men.
I noticed the lack of harmony in my local church . The walls are pale lilac and the carpet is sky blue and red. I find it distracting because God is beauty so churches need to be beautiful even if there is little budget at the moment.
Love this! I think it's so true - a sacramental worldview is the only way to truly see the truth, goodness, and beauty of life. And it starts with church.
as an architect I agree y 100% on the importance of aesthetics, and the philosophy behind beauty, as a christian I'm not necessarily inclined to believe the physical church HAS to be beautiful in order for people to be able to worship truly. The LDS church has without a doubt taken this advice as priority, they build the most opulent churches/temples as an end to attract people, but salvation and real worship isn't there.
Totally appreciate and understand the points made here. I will say that the use of the word "ugly" is mighty strong when talking about a group of people praising God. There is so much division between denominations and I don't think we have enough shared understanding of eachothers faiths to say anything downgrading because we all feel closer to God in different ways. We are all praising God and that is beautiful. Physical reminders of beauty to honor Him are another way people show praise. But God doesn't need to be physically represented for us to feel close to Him. He is in us. A room full of people is beautiful because it's a room full of God's children. ❤
My father left my grandmother's episcopal church to become a new age baptist. It was completely unrecognizable and it steered me away from the religion. I've only gone back to the episcopal church in reverence to my grandparents, and I did not regret it. The choir and liturgy give so much gravity to the worship that it makes me feel proud to be there. This "new age" crap is far too accessible. It is devoid of personality.
I've recently become a big fan of Jonathan, and I totally get where he is coming from in regards of the preservation of the symbolic holiness that is lost in most modern churches. But I also think it's important to understand the need for bridges to Jesus. For people that have grown in secular modern culture and are trying to get back to Jesus, or even more so, for those who are coming to Christ for the first time, the imposing feeling of dark cathedrals and ancient sacred art may feel too distant or too orthodox for what they are used to. For example, I live in Mexico and decided to take my 3yo daughter to church for the first time, we visited the most important church in our region, a 1700 Neo Gothic cathedral full of saints and monuments, the mass felt heavy, and she was mostly scared. That brought me back to the time when I decided to leave my faith at 17. I was raised catholic, and as a teenager I felt the church was too monolithic, unable to connect with kids like me. I loved God but had tons of issues with the priests at my school and their contradictions, while I was also drawn into music and other secular things that were more appealing to me at the time. That lead me to sex, drugs, rock and new age for 25 years. As a grown man, I now understand that it was very selfish and egotistical to expect the institution to adapt to my personal needs and culture, and I should have never went astray from God due to my fallout with the institution (I've repented), but if we are honest, a lot of young people leave the faith because of that very reason. Hence, I get why some people may feel more attracted to churches where there's modern architecture, lively music, younger people, a pastor that has a wife and a job and may be more relatable to you than a roman catholic or orthodox priest. As I get back in touch with Jesus, I wonder how important it is to make God more relatable for modern people that are seeking him, I feel that as long as these bridges genuinely take us to the word of God and the connection the Holy Spirit, they are a blessing.
great interview - thank God for the TLM and the Eastern Rite Church
There is no one eastern rite church. Lol
@@mariorizkallah5383 Melkite Greeks and Chaldeans… there’s more than no eastern rite
Refreshing beyond belief. Thank you!
This interview is SO important and SO needed!!! Excited beyond words for the rest of this! Peace be with you both!
Any worship where you feel the presence of God is good, doesn’t matter what it may look like to other people. Those filled with the Spirit on the day of Pentecost were mocked because they looked strange to others, as the Bible says rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep. There is a proper time for all different kinds of interactions with God, sometimes it moves you to silent sobbing, sometimes to joyful shouting, but it is all true worship if done in spirit and in truth. There is no point or excuse for looking at another and telling them that there is only one way of worshipping God, and that all others are improper. Or to hold up human traditions on a pedestal, stating they are a more true form of religious practice.
The TLM Catholic FSSP, is so beautiful. More beautiful than anything protestantism could come up with. Because the TLM is tradition, it has existed since St. Peter was pope. And now he's buried in the Basillica of Vatican City. Catholicism is the true church that Jesus started. Do only Catholics go to Heaven? I don't know, but I know that if someone studies church history and decides to reject the Catholic church anyway even after knowing the truth. They are rejecting Jesus in the Eucharist and the Holy Spirit himself.
What a great guest, Michael Corleone was great here
Great clip, Jonathan! Not sure why this is just now showing up in my feed, but pleased I caught it.
I know Johnathan you have been making this point over and over again but somehow in this clip is was more clear an precise than ever before. Very interesting that it happened in this setting with this host. Thank you.
Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, ora pro nobis peccatoribus, nunc et in hora mortis nostrae. Amen.
Why ask Mary when you have Jesus. Mary is not God.
@@SeekJesusFindLife no one said Mary is God, she is nothing without the Grace of God filling her. Why do you ask anyone to pray for you? You shouldn’t, according to your own logic, just ask the Lord Jesus Himself. This is essentially the same argument you’re making. We ask, because the Holy Scriptures tell us: “The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.” (James 5:16). The Holy Saints are not only righteous by fallen man’s standards, but are perfected by the power of the Holy Spirit. The prayers of the saints is an integral part of our faith, as written in Revelation Chapter 5 verse 8: “And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, *which are the prayers of the saints* .”
I’m a bit split on this topic. On the one hand, I have a sense of apprehension on how the orientation of our modern churches has possibly played a part in disposing us to a celebrity culture that is unfit and unbecoming in the church. Also, as an artist and someone who feels deeply fed by acts of meaning, I would love nothing more than to make my local church beautiful in a way that focuses attention towards Christ and what is heavenly and good and perfect. This is also something that draws me to sacrament / sacramental living. On the other hand, I also feel apprehensive of these things becoming requirements of true worship. I think it might be more important to remember that where two or three are gathered in Christ’s name, there he is in our midst. I have been in many, many places that weren’t even a building and experienced holy communion, true worship. I feel that these days it is more important than ever to remember that what Christ did was make a people to dwell in. That was what he always wanted. In doing this, he shifted true worship away from a physical place. Also, at its beginnings, much of the early church met in houses. It was very community, people oriented. This seems to fit more with the biblical focus of true worship being a people who follow and embody Christ, both in their personal and corporate life together. Having our spaces be extremely intentional I think is beautiful. The Hebrew word for worship means to prostrate oneself, and that to me means the whole of oneself laid at the feet of the one you worship, so I think how we do everything, even orient our buildings, would ideally reflect this way of living. I also think it could help us in where we are straying in our culture and draw our focus more toward Christ, I really do. But I don’t think it is what scripture tells us is required for true worship, and I don’t want to see us start confusing that. I think these things can definitely be held in tension, but that’s the warning I feel along with my agreements.
Jonathan Pageau…SO Important
This was so brilliant, thank you.
Love love love Jonathan Pageau.
Glad to watch it. 😊 Thanks Jonathan and Michael.
So many people have asked me about my church just bc they have seen some pictures I’ve posted 🤣It truly draws people in.
Practices that remind us of the mystery of Christ and the new life he has given are certain to edify believers, strengthening them for the fight in this world.
But when a practice becomes too 'me' centered and not Christ centered, then it has gone off the tracks.
"Mystery" tell me you're Catholic without telling me you're telling me you're Catholic.
@@jonnbobo Biblical Christianity. Paul uses the word mystery numerous times.
That's because it is impossible for the human mind to fully understand the eternal God and how he has saved us.
Isaiah 55: 8-9, "For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."
@@stephenbailey9969 I'm aware of the biblical use of mystery. I'm also aware of the Roman Pagan Church usage of it too.
@@jonnbobo Put faith in Christ, stick to the scriptures, love all people especially your brothers and sisters in Him, and listen to the Spirit as he changes your life.
Leave the denominational stuff to the Lord. He is the judge. Not us.
@@stephenbailey9969 I agree with your general thought, but living in ignorance is not what we're asked to do. If it's not your calling that's okay, but lukewarm worship of the Truth you are proclaiming is also a no-go... Paul not only preached tolerance for multiple denominations, but he also said to use scripture to discern, strengthen, and rebuke... there is a spiritual battle, so pt on the armor of God my friend.
Great chat! I'm glad to be an Anglican that holds to many of the same ideas of worship you guys espoused! If you're going to church to consume anything but the body and blood of our lord, you're selling yourself short, and denying God the worship he deserves!
Your Church exists because some guy wanted a baby boy. The Roman Pagan Church added tenants of Christianity because they didn't want to lose an empire.... hmmm... I think you're right, that's about the same actually.
@@jonnbobo Sorry, that's not the Anglicanism I'm talking about. There was an Anglo church long before the Pagan Romans showed up, long before the Monarchy existed.
@@johnsmoth7130 noppers, people in "Roman Britain typically believed in a wide range of gods and goddesses, and worshipped several of them, likely selecting some local and tribal deities as well as some of the major divinities venerated across the Empire." The Roman Pagan occupation lasted from AD 43 to AD 410.... right on time my friend.
@@jonnbobo there were bishops from Britain at some of the early Orthodox ecumenical councils, but ok.
@@johnsmoth7130 I believe it; Orthadox is the Eastern Roman Pagan Church, the Byzantine Empire... so that makes sense. "Robert Byron, one of the first 20th century Philhellenes, argued that the greatness of Byzantium lay in what he described as 'the Triple Fusion': that of a Roman body, a Greek mind and an oriental, mystical soul."
So, yeah, pretty darn pagan.
Love this and these ideas about art and meaning. ❤
I spent over 20 years as a Protestant church worker doing multiple ministries in different denominations, and what I’ve found, among many other things, is that Protestantism inevitably leads to celebrity worship.
There’s no getting around it.
And the nature of celebrities is to do fan service.
I eventually converted to the Orthodox faith to save myself.
No, protestants don't refer to themselves as protestant. So instead of celebrity worship you traded it for pagan god's. Good to know
@CJ P. Really? So you gave celebrities up who don't claim to be Christ incarnate for a Pope who does... and a Pope the world leader's venerate and respect higher than any celebrity? Interesting
@@jonnbobo Orthodoxy is the Church Christ founded. No getting around it. Rome innovated and left and protestants reacted to that innovation with their own innovations.
@@NavelOrangeGazer hahahahahah Sorry buddy, the roman pagan church started Orthodoxy and Roman Catholic... There were plenty of Christian groups that did not exist under the Roman pagan church, but they got killed for a 1000 years.
@@jonnbobo all those groups literally didn't preach Christ. But some weird kind of gnosticism, arianism or Nestorianism.
Basically a different Gospel than those of Christ.
Your "secret hidden church" is just that. A nonexistent heretical non-apostolic sects of groups that go from ridiculous teachings to abominable beliefs.
I was so happy to see this conversation on Michael Knowles’s podcast. Well done. 👍🏼
I agree with some of the points made here but I think there’s two rather crucial points missing from their conversation. 1. Finances. Most churches can barely afford to buy/rent church building, let alone design it to their liking. This is rather a modern Western viewpoint and as an artist myself I understand the reasoning but one needs to consider practicality. Many churches also reuse spaces for economical reasons. This can lead to certain design choices the church never intended on making rather than any subtle philosophical design choices. 2. Aesthetic is a fairly modern concern. Before the Catholic Church emerged as one of the dominant branches of Christianity, there were House churches and very humble church buildings. Yes, aesthetics can and do matter, but they have always been meant to be a reflection of the attitude of the heart posture towards God and often in our modern age the concern is having a building to worship in rather than that building’s design saying something about respect towards God. That having been said, I think churches that could afford to might consider being more aesthetically tasteful and purposeful in how they choose to create their areas of worship. Just my two cents
Thank you Jonathan. I'm happy to have found you.
I’ve been to a few churches and only really felt a deeper connection to the orthodox one. The other ones felt a little like some other activity than worship and reflection. Unfortunately it’s too far away for me to attend regularly.
I love your talks Jonathon, especially if there is art or picture with it even. Greater
this was interesting to listen to tbh. my church meets in a high school. aesthetically speaking the high school is in places grimy, in places tacky and overall fairly worn down. The high school hall is the place in which we worship, sing and gather for sermon lessons. The chair we sit on are bright blue and plastic, they are by all means pretty ugly and tacky. The worship team sets up mics and music sheet stands and their are cables and wires all over the floor. I dont feel all these parts take away from the worship in spirit, since many of us are looking up, gazing upwards, closing eyes, and listening intently to the Word, the psalms. But I do agree with a lot of what Jonathan P has to say on this subject! Theres something about being housed under the roof of finely crafted/designed architecture; from all thats inside the building, the arrangement of the chairs, the design of the doors and windows, to the ceiling and structure itself. Seems like all these things are important. Just like the enviroment in a mc donalds has a purpose and effect. So a building in which you worship, as a church, has a purpose and effect. Right? The building in which we gather to worship might be arranged in a way to help draw our attention to the speaker, the worship singers. Are we sitting in rows or in a circle? Aesthetic qualitative arrangements clothe us, make us feel cared for, safe and the hope is for a sacred space on earth. It's not merely ornamental/decorative, since many places can be like that in the world.
All of that is found in an Orthodox Church
This might also be something more America.
What i mean is in Portugal and in Switzerland, the priest doesn't say jokes during the homily. I don't say it never happened but for the vast most part it is very serious.
Love yall together!
“Lex orandi, lex credendi, lex vivendi.”
The law of prayer is the law of belief is the law of life. How you pray effects what you believe and how you live.
Michael Knowles? Unexpected, but welcome.
I love the Traditional Latin Mass but, it is disturbing to me when many that go to the Traditional Latin Mass, constantly put down the Regular Mass, so therefore it seems to me there is something wrong and divisive.
"There’s an old saying, “familiarity breeds contempt,” that could apply in this case. Uzzah, having been around the ark in his own home, could very likely forget the holiness that it represented. There are times when we, too, fail to recognize the holiness of God, becoming too familiar with Him with an irreverent attitude.
Third, the account tells us the oxen stumbled. The cart didn’t fall and neither did the Ark, just as the boat carrying Jesus and the disciples rocked fiercely in the storm, though it wasn’t necessarily in danger of sinking (Matthew 8:24-27). And yet, just as with the disciples who failed to put their faith in their Master, Uzzah, for a moment, felt it was his responsibility to save the integrity of God, and that our almighty God somehow needed Uzzah’s assistance. He presumed that, without his intervention, God’s presence would be dealt a blow. As Job asks, “Can you fathom the mysteries of God?” (Job 11:7). “His greatness no one can fathom” (Psalm 145:3). “His understanding no one can fathom” (Isaiah 40:28). Moses lost his right to enter the promised land because he felt his intervention was needed when he struck the rock, instead of speaking to it as God had commanded (Numbers 20:7-12). We need to listen carefully to what God has to say to us, and in obedience strive to do all He commands. Yes, God is loving and merciful, but He is also holy and He defends His holiness with His power, and affronts to His holiness sometimes bring about His holy wrath. “It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:31)."
The question becomes, do we come to church to worship God or do we come to church to worship humanity. I think we need to humble ourselves and turn our orientation back to worshipping God and then the love for each other will follow by His gift of grace. Just a thought.
As a christian, Protestant to be specific though I never refer to myself as such this is a very good refreshing conversation
Well there's multiple reasons why I'm not Roman Catholic or Eastern orthodox, nevertheless I appreciate art and aesthetics and creativity. Everyone does ultimately as we all look at sunsets and not cow manure and say one is beautiful and the other is not. Sadly though and the western church especially America in the last 200 years it's increasingly become anti-art anti-intellectual and anti-creativity in any capacity. Incredibly utilitarian. This is wrong. We need to move past it and get back to where we should be with the reverence and awe of the local church being good and proper designed well and putting effort into it. Spending energy and time and money on things to look beautiful because God is worth it. Not because the beauty is in and of itself. Citing Christ and the apostles when they look at the temple and are so mystified by it Jesus condemns them. But did God condemn the temple? For its beauty? No because that era was closed. God destroyed the temple cuz he was no longer needed. Not because it was beautiful and we shouldn't be there
There's also reasons you're not Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist etc.
Does this not communicate something to you, or are the religious this oblivious? It's 2022 and people of faith continue to be irrational..it's quite unsettling.
Lets explore the concept of REST
If you are struggling with life and wondering which church is the true church. Pray the Rosary and ask Mama Mary for help in leading you to her son, Jesus. The Rosary brought me closer to Jesus and rescued me from bad anxiety and near depression.
Brother Jonathan l watched your some videos of symbols of spiritual world. It is absolutely correct. Also it is very useful for me.
There is a crisis of worship and attention in the Western World. Particularly, as an American, I can say that we have lost touch with our bodies. We don't listen to our flesh or trust it. We scrutinize and demand it to obey the necessities of this "civilized world" we've built around us. Thank you so much and the fruits of your labor Jonathon will help future generations return to a spiritually honest life.
We need to listen to the Word of God, never trust our flesh. I challenge you to read the entire new testimate and pray you come to know Christ. I don’t believe you will find a single verse that points to trusting in your flesh. Galatians 5:24 would be a great place to start.
@@jordynferrari4161 What did those first Christians do in the hundreds and hundreds of years before there was a Christian Bible, or New Testament for that matter? What did they do when the story of the woman who was caught in adultery was added (it wasn't in the earlier manuscripts). Which Lord's Prayer did they say? (There are 2 and part of a third in there, all different)
@@frankherbert6476 it doesn’t matter variation in a prayer. The early Christian’s had at least a few of Paul’s letters and did not rely on their own understanding. All of his letters condemn the flesh. Even then they had to trust in God’s word and the wisdom of early church leaders like Paul. They also had the Holy Spirt which leads and guides against the evil of the flesh. You receive the Holy Spirit when being born again. Jesus said you must be born again! Are you born again?
@@jordynferrari4161 You're missing my entire point. I hope I don't come across harsh here, but really to illicit some thought. The early Christians didn't all have them, until one church decided that they were worth sending....remember, they were sent to specific communities for specific reasons. Not like there was a Lifeway at every corner. My point is that we here in the west, looking through our lenses, only see "God's word" as the Bible. The Word, the Logos is Christ. My point was that the disciples didn't go around writing down everything Jesus said. They experienced Him. The early Christians, for over a thousand years after, had the life of the Faith. This wasn't them sitting in a chair with a bible and a highlighter, walking out later asking each other "How did you feel about church today?" We seem to reduce the God of the cosmos to a series of intellectual propositions. If I "think" this and "feel" that then I'll be "saved" and "go to heaven".... You're correct, Paul and the others picked specific people to be bishops, laying hands and breathing on them. For example, Polycarp, Ignatius of Antioch and Clement of Rome were all appointed by Paul, Peter, and John. You can read their writings-they predate the New Testament-and see how they worshipped, how they lived and expected their flock to live. They in turn chose their descendants, laying hands and breathing on them. The church of Antioch's current successor is in Damascus. On "A street called Straight". Built on Ananias' house. Maybe there's a bit more out there than me interpreting scripture on my own and deciding what it means. That's why we have 40,000+ different registered denominations, to include denominations of 1, all thinking they have cracked the code.
And I need some clarification; what exactly do you mean by "born again"? And where did you get that meaning/interpretation from? Also, what is your thoughts on the Rapture?
My point about the Lord's prayer is that you, me, and all of Christendom all say the same version because it was said-really sung-in worship centuries before folks in authority added it to the list of important documents to read (as well as leaving a different version in as well)
@@frankherbert6476 I hear your point and you are obviously well read. My biggest concern is that I’m not sure if you understand the gospel message which was at the core of every early church and thus have not been born again. My interpretation of being born again is taken exactly as scripture says: “Jesus answered, “Truly I tell you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. Whatever is born of the flesh is flesh, and whatever is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not be amazed that I told you that you must be born again. The wind blows where it pleases, and you hear its sound, but you don’t know where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”” John 3:5-8 CSB. There’s not room for interpretation or translation you can go back to the original Greek manuscripts and read word for word what Jesus said. As far as the rapture… all I know if that the Bible says he will come again. You seem to be really into church history and history of scripture. I recommend watching Mike Winger’s playlist here on TH-cam. You can find it by searching for Evidence for the Bible Mike Winger. It’s a series of 20 videos and it’s pretty great.
The Novus Order is to be in Latin and the rubrics still assume the priest is facing the altar. "Say the black do the red."
Excellent palaver in both perspectives.
So, so good!!!
Ave Christus Rex
Ave Maria.
Please Pray for the Restoration of Traditional Latin Mass in the Western rite of Catholic church
Thank the Lord that He doesn’t look at the outwards appearance but He looks at the heart. Please study the Protestant Reformation.
They don't like protestants. JP comes from a protestant background.
One time that you are not right. Shame, but doesn t matter. Love you.
I am a Roman Catholic catechumen and, I'm in a vulnerable transition period so, go easy on me: what makes the traditional liturgical rites the preferred for so many traditional Christians I see online compared to the reformed Roman Rite? Is it only the problem of liturgical abuses? Does the Novus Ordo have to be stripped bare of liturgical art, and symbolism? Is there any goodness in the motivation behind the liturgical reformists to inject more participation from the laity?
Hello! First: welcome home, much success on your journey!
I'm a somewhat fresh convert too. About a year now, so I get your confusion with the stuff you can find online.
Novus Ordo can be very reverent. It can be in a beautiful old Church, with loads of statues and paintings on the wall, with huge organs playing each sunday, classical bells ringing over the landscape before mass and the incense is rising to heaven with our prayers.
I'm blessed to have such a Church as my home parish. Ok, we do incense on special occasions mostly. But it's there!
Or you can celebrate the Novus ordo in a barewalled industrial compex looking Church, which was the case in a franciscan nun monastery I was able to spend a week with. The nuns wanted to really concentrate on the Word alone, without distraction. So they kept things quite bare. Almost a bit bleak. That is not my preferrence, I'm so glad I have my beautiful Church at home, but still they were having very reverent, beautiful masses. Christ was there too!
I never had the opportunity to witness latin mass. Or to see the 'pop guitar' NO masses some of my american brothers and sisters write about, they don't seem to exist here in switzerland. Which brings me to the conclusion, that the liturgical abuses in the US are more of a cultural thing than the fault of a new form of mass itself. Still a problem, but not a reason to throw a whole form of mass out of the window.😊
I hope I could give some insight with what little knowledge I could gather.
Take care, pray, never take your eyes off from Jesus! 😊
Oh, almost forgot:
The participation from the laity was brought back into mass so the lay people, which are Church too, get more conscious of their own pastoral role within the Church. To bring up attentiveness and personally, I think it symbolises the whole back and forth between us Christians and God.
We gift ourselves to him, and he makes us better, and gifts us ourselves back, but more whole.
And we gift ourselves again to him, he makes us better and gifts us back. It's a constant giving from both sides (but of course, he gives infinitely more than we do), and this is how we can become holy.
And I think the ordinary form with the regular answers and formulas seems to mimick this like a metaphor.
@@MrsYasha1984 Yes, you have given some valuable insight. I'm very grateful to you for taking the time to share and answer.
God-willing, I never want to flee from the Roman Church even if there is dissatisfaction or abuse. I want to be like St. John in the Gospel when after news of the Lord's resurrection, he and St. Peter rush to the tomb. Even though John, the beloved disciple, the one who lay on Christ's heart, gets to the tomb first, he waits on Peter, the rock, before going in.
I do wonder if that's the best attitude for the mystics, as well as, those who love tradition, beauty, and doctrinal purity, who are feeling like the leadership is taking it away; don't rebel. Submit, for the sake of the Lord and His Gospel, trusting in the hierarchy of authority established by the Head of the Church, Christ Jesus.
Idk. Just a thought c:
@@williamseay9252 Ultimately you are at Mass for the Eucharist-the body, blood, soul and divinity of Christ whereby when you receive Him- His DNA mixes with yours to transform you.
Every valid and licit Mass has the same Christ made present on the altar-
...whether it’s a Novus Ordo Mass, TLM, Charismatic, NeoCat - or any of the 23+ Eastern Catholic rites etc.
There are many modern Pharisees online who try to denigrate one Mass, or rite, over another. Don’t fall for this. There is no more grace in one parish over another so long as it’s valid (permitted) or licit (in communion with Rome/Vatican). It’s the same Christ on the altar.
Just pray- and have joy and don’t allow the joyless online cults to suck you into their diabolical web.
Peace in Christ.
“The Will of the authorities is the Will of God.” -St. Padre Pio
My advice to all Catholics is to know your faith and its history with a ruthless pursuit of the truth. That requires time and effort. Understand how and why the new Mass was created and know the differences between it and traditional liturgies of the East and West. The traditional Latin mass has much more in common with the eastern Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom than with the Novus Ordo. Vatican 2 essentially laid the foundation for a new Faith with an emphasis on appealing to Modern man. That was the stated goal of its architects. To understand and appreciate these differences and the goals of the "reformers" does not make one a Pharisee but rather an educated Catholic. After 30 years in the novus ordo, I made a conscious decision to leave it behind. We must all pray and discern God's will for our lives and that includes how we worship Him.
This interview just reminds me of Jean Baudrillard's theories
Not every parish has the funds to build an ornate building. A church is not "better" or "more holy" because of its architecture. The early church met in rented rooms, houses, even schools.
So good!
In your quest to reintroduce the old traditional "Christian" visual language, just keep in mind as part of the process those excesses which led to it being reacted against in the first place. By "traditional Christian" you mostly mean Catholic. I can concede to that usage to a great degree, but just remember that the reaction away from the art forms current in late-medieval Christianity was not originally a reaction away from Christianity itself. In fact, in regards to ecclesial art, it was a move back to a focus on Christian truth and away from what were seen as the excesses of art and *mere* traditional expression that distracted from the important things.
So, in your work reinvigorating traditional Christian art, just remember the places where your forebears went wrong.
For instance, the form was always supposed to serve to communicate the idea. So, don't ever let mere forms of visual expression get in the way of the *ideas* of Christianity. A faith whose God-man-founder led a life of simple service and humble sacrifice in spite of His divine nature and He and His apostles taught a faith that was bold it its simplicity, majestic in its humility, and revolutionary in its timelessness, for that faith to wrap itself in gilt sculpture, baroque architecture, and an impenetrable visual jargon is hypocritical.
To be good Christian images, they must first be good images...good communicators of the *ideas* they exhibit. Using an ancient visual language which no one understands is not better than continually reinventing whatever visual language which will best communicate the ideas which are Christianity. So, however you utilize the old language, it must be done in a way that is at least as communicative to the audience as more contemporary images.
They also should not preach values which God Himself does not preach. Material wealth, exclusivity, human hierarchy and authority, materialism, anti-materialism, unbiblical practices, the idolization of human figures, etc. are all things that have been communicated strongly by traditional "Christian" art of the past. So, moving forward, you would have to use this language while discernedly discarding much of the vocabulary and usage.
The reason such traditions largely didn't remain popular into the present was first due to Christians who would rather remove themselves all together from the corrupted human art traditions which had adhered to Christianity over the centuries and hold tightly to the written word and the ideas themselves which that Word presented. Those communities each then produced certain aesthetic styles and traditions of their own, but each much more safe and restrained than the old Catholic art traditions which had become corrupted and even corrupting.
It was only then that rationalists, materialist/humanists, and secular artists began taking the fore in the visual realms.
My point is to remember that a non-preference for "traditional Christian" (ie. Catholic and Orthodox) art styles is not necessarily anti-Christian and a resurrgence of them isn't necessarily what's best for the Faith and human souls.
If we focus on...oh I don't know...immortal souls, divine doctrine, and conforming ourselves to to the likeness of Christ...things like the "visual language" would take care of themselves.
The best way to make American culture Christian, is to make Americans actual Christians. Then the culture would be taken care of.
If your work aids in that process by the meaningful communication of ideas, then that's a good thing. If it's a distraction from them, then it's...well...a distraction.
[Edited for spelling]
*aesthetic
I’m kidding.
This is a fantastic comment. Well said.
@@JoshuaKayle ,
Hah! You should have seen it before I edited it.
Thanks.
No, this is not true, Christianity is not about ideas, they are incidental to the faith, Christianity is about the hypostatic union of God and man through the Person of Christ and participation in the Divine through this hypostatic union. Through the icon we give due reverence to the prototype and the prototype bestows grace upon the faithful; it facilitates the personal relationships within the communion of the saints and with our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The holy icons, like the precious and life-giving cross and the holy gospels are instruments of Grace.
Furthermore, the idea that the holy icons 'didn't remain popular into the present' is simply flat out wrong. While there was a brief period back in the 8th and 9th centuries when vile heretics, the iconoclasts, led by men of great power but of little faith did assail the holy icons and did desecrate the monasteries; the faithful never gave into their wickedness and suffered all forms of persecution and even martyrdom to defend the holy images from these servants of the Evil One. In the end, Glory be to God, the Empress-Saint Theodora overthrew the iconoclastic emperors and forbade in law any who would defile the sacred images from ever again sitting upon the imperial throne. And from that day we have, every year on the first Sunday of Lent, processed around the city with our Icons in celebration of the Triumph of Orthodoxy and the victory of St. Theodora over the iconoclasts and their being cast out of the Holy Churches and into the fires of hell, wherein we decree even down to this present day: 'To those who mock and blaspheme the holy icons which the Holy Church receiveth, in remembrance of the works of God and of His saints, to inspire the beholders with piety, and to incite them to imitate their examples, and to those who say that they are idols, ANATHEMA!'
@@costakeith9048 ,
1. I get my definitions regarding Christianity from...Christian Scripture. How is Christianity spoken of in the Christian Scripture? It is called a "way," "doctrine," "witness," "testimony," "good news," etc.
What was Paul's constant concern regarding the faith? That people have their mind right. That they "have the mind of Christ," that instead of conforming to the world, they "renew their minds," etc.
We are saved from our just deserts (eternal seperation from God, "the wages of sin is death...") by putting our faith in who Christ is and what He has done...ie. ideas. Accepting them and acting upon them in faith.
You are arguing, it seems to me, that we are saved via the veneration of objects which, besides appearing nowhere in the Scriptures left to us by Christ and the Apostles, seems far more heretical to me than saying we are required to believe true things about God, Christ, and ourselves.
Of course Christianity is a set of ideas! True ideas about the reality of our situation.
2. I am not saved by the cross. The cross was a couple of rough wooden beams. I'm saved by what One *did* on the cross; by the reality of a situation that I have come to accept. Physical objects themselves mean nothing next to the truths that may be connected with them.
God revealed Himself utterly through the Son, and the Son is revealed to us through the Word made available to us (a written work made up of ideas to be understood and believed) and by the ministry of His Holy Spirit. So, if I wish to know God via the ways He has actually provided, should I A) stare at a wooden painting and pray to it's subject through it; or B) mediate on the Word with the activity of the Spirit-led understanding and pray to the Father in the name of the Son by the power of the Spirit?
You can keep all the physical objects. Give me the content of the Word and a place to pray and I am in the very presence of the Father in His Holy Temple by the work of the Sacrifice of the One High Priest who has forever torn down the veil and made a way for me into the Most Holy Place of Heaven (read Hebrews). You can fight over splinters of wood and gilded paintings all you like. Scripture, Christ, and the Apostles are unconcerned by such things, thus so am I.
3. I was not even speaking primarily against the silly Eastern practice of icons, but of the general usage of Christian imagery in history.
4. If you would like to argue against anything I have said, I challenge you to do so based on the Word and the truths (ideas) found therein rather than on pat definitions from human tradition (which are also ideas). If we, as Christians (though you likely don't consoder me one because I'm outside of your particular hierarchy) are to have meaningful discussion, we must share a basic reference point. If it's not the Bible, I'm not interested, so save your effort.
@@jameswoodard4304 'Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.' Your ideas bring you no closer to salvation than the devil himself and his knowledge of God is far deeper and more complete than yours; if ideas are salvific, then the demons will be saved before you are.
If you are not saved by the cross, then you are not saved. 'For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.' You do not preach the cross, but you preach the wisdom of words, you think words and ideas will save you, they will not, only the precious and life-giving cross will save you. Did St. Paul not say, 'I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.' This is what faith is, faith is not an idea or a concept, it is not learning or reasoning, faith is being crucified with Christ and living in Christ. This is how you are saved, you must be Crucified with Christ, you must be buried with Him in Baptism, and you must be raised again with Him.
For there is only One True Word, One True Idea, One True Logos, for it is written 'In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.' The only True Word, the Divine Logos, is not an idea or imagining of man, it's not something you can learn or understand or comprehend through earthly logic and reasoning; it is a Person, it is Jesus Christ, and you can only know him through communion with Him. You speak of ways and gospels and witnesses, but did not our Lord plainly say: 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no one cometh unto the Father, but by me.' Christ is the Way, Christ is the Witness, Christ is the Gospel, these are not ideas, these are a Person. And you must be in communion with this Divine Person, you must Eat his Body and drink His Blood, you must become one with Him if there is to be any life in you.
And, finally, the 7th Holy and Ecumenical council is a council of the universal and undivided Church, accepted by east and west alike, this is the normative practice throughout the entire Church and you cannot be a Christian without accepting it. You come here and preach a false and novel gospel, entirely divorced from all that came before and ignorant of the Scriptures and the working of the Holy Spirit in Christ's Church. You need to repent of this wickedness and be baptized into the Holy Church of Christ and live in obedience to the teachings of the Holy Spirit as manifested through the saints if you are to be saved.
The Church is the people not the building.
Well, the building is the Temple. The question is what should that temple contain? An altar, a tabernacle, a Priest offering a sacrifice (in this case Christ’s sacrifice in the Eucharist as He commanded)?? Not lights, smoke, loud rock music, even if it is worship music and most definitely not a podium!
Now if the people are “the church” are you saying if those people die, the church dies? No of course not! Because we are part of the church but not ONLY what makes a church.
@@atgredchurch being the people doesn’t die, because those who are born again and part of the body of Christ,never actually dies
Christ's first two laws: 1 Love god with all your heart 2. love thy neighbor as yourself
Every other law is relationally dependent on these two. When a person follows these two laws, every other law that they hypothetically break is de facto broken out of weakness(including ignorance), not neglect, which is therefore not a sin (as you attribute innocence to children).
This is why Nietzsche said all values are relational. It is a trinity between you, God, and neighbor. Its also why the categorical imperative (or any form of unconditional duty ethic rituals that are debased from the first two laws) is seriously dangerous; if your decisions aren't made solely for the power that you believe they will have (pragmatism in the most real sense) then you aren't actually making the decision. The entire idea of Christ's teachings is that love is the pattern of worship.
We don’t know what love is until we see it embodied in Christ and the Saints. This is the very Reality that is brought to us front and center in every Orthodox Divine Liturgy.
@@lornadoone8887 You know what love is when you are a child, this is nonsense.
Excellent point! We must will according to the law of love, which is the harmonious relationship of all things to God. Believe, and “thine eye is single,” but if your will be divided, “how great is that darkness!”
@@smurfe2126 no, children don't "know what love is." And replacing the "trinity" with other members is pagan garbage.
You need to prove god first. What is it with religious people? Do you guys not comprehend basic logic?
Bring back the Latin mass 🙏
How about Silence and Stillness? If someone cant just sit alone for a half hour or hour without grasping or pushing away thoughts, without needing some mantra or prayer rope, if you cant just sit. Surely i don't give a damn what you think reality is or is not.
"Worship" = mental captivity
Who is the other Orthodox icon carver? I’m assuming Pageau was referring to himself as one of the two icon carvers he could count on two fingers. Who is the other?
There's a Romanian Monk in Britain or Ireland I think.
In Catholicism, the collapse of architecture, music, and general reverence...collectively was a major component of why I left. Simultaneously with the decline of those elements, was also the decline of the priesthood. I have found that 99% of priests fall into one of two categories, either (1) those who are leftist activists (e.g. promoting abortion) or (2) those who are nihilistic or otherwise completely apathetic.
I do believe that the Latin Mass needed an important facelift. However, apparently all those who set about that facelift had no concept of liminal space. As for music, I'll leave it to Thomas Day, and his book "Why Catholics Can't Sing", as the proper commentary. If the Latin Mass were merely changed to be (1) at least 50% in the local language and (2) shifted into significantly more antiphonal structures (thereby involving the congregation more in the substance of the mass)....then I think it would have become even more glorious.
However, there is still the root issue...why did the priesthood lose its zeal? Every attempt I had ever made to help a "liturgical committee" or a priest move in a better, more sacred direction, was always met with ridicule or apathy.
I don’t view modernity as evil. It is interesting to think about church service as consumption.
God doesn't allow something to stand forever in place of Him. Because He by His nature is supreme, and the very fabric of time bends to His will. That is why through whatever means art is always forgotten, the graven images always reduced to dust. God covered the whole earth with water erasing such things, and someday he will do it with fire. In the meantime waring factions have destroyed most images, God can allow evil to do His will while simultaneously judge and punisher of said evil.
For the most part humanity has always sought to worship that which God uses in the physical world, much like the serpent that healed the sick in the desert. It also, was removed because the people made it an object of worship after the miracle for hundreds of years.
2 Kings 18:4
He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.
The Satanic church has stained glass windows and crosses, but is not worshiping Jesus. So to the Catholics, and so the world. Jesus is not the cross. He is not made of wood and carved into what we can hang. Jesus is God alimighty, and someday all will know that.
No image is needed.
Romans 1:20
King James Bible
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:.
Jesus is the Way, the Gospel. The Gospel needs no image. Jesus saves , although we cannot see Him. Making crosses and stained glass is a waste of time. Getting the Gospel preached is the only work we are called to do with the Lord, not paint pictures lol.
Ha! Seems very philosophical but tell that to the apostles who prayed in the upper room. I don’t think the Holy Spirit was concerned with how “High” the architecture was.
I agree with he says. But I m thinking: Jesus and the first church were just normal dressed, they were meeting in normal houses. The majestic temple was destroyed by Romans and they were meeting in regular houses with regular dressing. Jesus never never said anything about the external dress
What can we do to save the TLM?
Attend it, get to know the priest and community and support it financially (but just the parish, not Francis, i.e. I don't give if it's a Francis collection, but they do tell you before hand).
The early church met in houses. Church is the people gathering to worship God no1 not about the building… orientation to God is about our heart condition, the space can help this process but more importantly is seeking Gods will and allowing the Holy Spirit to correct and guide us.
Mathew 18 v20 For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”
You seem to be falling in a somewhat gnostic sensibility, in which all that it matters is spirit. I don't think that's the right approach to these issues.
While the spiritual is more important, what we do with our bodies, our enviroment and our time all ought to be in consonance with our faith. If God is truly the first thing, then we should act and live like He truly is the first, most glorious Person, and our temples should reflect that.
Also the ancient church met in houses yes... Houses that, according to archeology, were reporpused to be churches, and had altars and likely even art. Not at all typical houses.
@@siruristtheturtle1289 Gnostic 😂 I couldn’t be further from this doctrine…
Jesus taught the disciples to preach the good news… not to build amazing buildings (nothing wrong with amazing buildings though).
It’s more important to fill any building with believers than have them empty..
@@robbokeysAgain, failing to grasp the point: What Jonathan is pointing out here is that many church buildings are in fact build and oriented towards the spectacle and the preacher as the center of it, which, while understandable in certain context, it predisposes the individual towards incorrect worship attitudes.
Sure, a simple building is better than no church, but a building oriented correctly is better than both.
For some reason I have a notification for a non-existing response from you. Did you deleted the comment?
Entertainment kills love because it causes people to think that love is a feeling instead of actions. It also crowds out the time for actions.
7:20 could not agree more about the hymns. My mom was Presbyterian and I spent a lot of time in Southern Baptist churches as well, and the vast majority of hymns they used were cheesy-sounding hymns from the 50s and 60s. I can't put my finger on _why_ they sound so lame, but there's just something about them that I can't stand. I started attending a nearby Catholic church back in April, and I had this pre-conceived notion that they were going to be singing Latin hymns or doing Gregorian chants or something.
I was very disappointed when I discovered that they're using the same dumb types of hymns as every Protestant church. Everything else about the church is great, the deacons and priests are all super nice and I just started RCIA, but the music grates on me. Fortunately there is a traditional church here in town that does Latin mass. They also have mass in Swahili once a month, which sounds pretty interesting. I haven't had the opportunity to go there yet, but I will.
Lots of Evangelical worship music is cringe for very good reason.
Maybe read Hugh Nibley
Well, which came first? The symbols or the substance? Went to a Greek Orthodox Church in my town where they had all these “symbols” but their Theology was abhorrent and the spirit was devoid of any real sense of what we were supposedly there for. It was the worship of Tradition rather than God or Christ. The same goes with every Roman Catholic Church or service I have entered in to. Granted, the Evangelical Church is as backslidden as any of these but building great edifices and wearing suits and ties won’t change the real problems.
How do you know anything about Christ without tradition?
Took my family out if a charismatic cultured church and went to reformed. The attempts at conjuring emotional experiences of the charismatic styled churches always irked me, and it wasnt until i went to this reformed church where we sung gospel oriented hymns, that actual, honest emotions followed.
Orthodox pomp and ceremony are just a form of mystification to evoke certain feelings of awe and give power to the priest. It's entertainment under another name.
So we're the priests in the temple just doing it for entertainment?
@@joshuaparsons887 More like their own personal enrichment.
The pretended ghost-cajoler would naturally be held in dread awe and reverence by his credulous dupes, and would gain enormous respect and prestige; he could quit the drudgery of hunting and fishing for his precarious living, and let the awed and believing members of the clan keep him in food and idle ease: here the first social parasite. This is priestcraft -by whatever name and in whatever age and guise pursued.
Joseph Wheless. Forgery in Christianity (Kindle Locations 49-51). Kindle Edition.
I quite like modern worship songs 🤭 i also like listening to Assyrian Orthodox Chanting though, there's something otherworldly about it. I think there's a place for both joyful and contemplative worship. I agree about the churches though, don't get me started on how hideous modern architecture is 😂 i think building beautiful churches is a type of worship too that the protestant have stopped doing for some reason, i think protestant forebares saw them as excesses and distractions from truth, but not if you consider the architecture as a form of worship, thats beautiful
The church is the people? As God provides a simple supper we give thanks, as God provides a Michelin five star three course meal we give thanks. We should be grateful to the Lord whatever His provision, because He knows best and as a good Father does not leave us without. Should I look over at my neighbour, who gives thanks to God for what they receive, in disdain at the meal that God provides? If I do that I relegate God’s provision to only my way.
Our Father meets, provides for His people through Jesus Christ, our Lord and King, so let us not have tones of disdain towards God’s provision no matter how elaborate, plain or in between. No provision is more or less righteous, if a community/individual has asked and received this in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Enjoy, appreciate, share and be thankful for all that God has provided, His mercies never come to an end they are new every morning.
Lex orandi lex credendi.
Ok ask yourself this question? In the last hundred years or so, did God work to bless the world through cultures that had faith traditions where the churches were drowning in theatrical costumes and iconography. Or ones where they cast off a lot of that impenetrable stuff and had a plainer, stripped down faith tradition and actually spoke to the hearts of the congregation instead of droning liturgy?
Britain and America stripped a lot of that heavy stuff away and had a simplified faith tradition and they exploded with Godly energy and exported faith, democracy, human rights, modern medicine, education etc to the world and transformed it. And all the orthodox type cultures in Christendom stagnated.
Sure, the Catholic church did and still does a lot of aid and missionary work but it was the protestant drive that changed the world.
Why do you, Mr. Pageau, use the moniker "christian" when the more accurate, more representative, and more truthful, symbol is "Catholic"? Pax Christi in regno Christi
Jonathan writes fantasy stories? Are they for sale?
“Your church should at least be nicer than your house”
This is problematic. It is easy for everything down to my local Masonic temple to be nicer than my house. However, I live in an area where Orthodoxy is both the oldest religion and one of the smallest. On account of that, while we have several Orthodox churches, they’re small, 100+ year old colonial buildings that, while still unique and beautiful, are not necessarily “nice” in the sense of roominess or comfort, and sometimes even maintenance.
While I agree in principle, the church should first be right, second, be adequate to the needs of the congregation, and third, be nice. I’d rather gain Heaven from the doctrine of a shack than gain hell from the doctrine of a mansion.
Of course, the fruit of the church will be reflected in its material condition, but when rightness comes in minority, the congregation is small, then the giving, and the building it can afford, may not have the curb appeal desired.