I'm 28. I became a Catholic when I was 22 (grew up Episcopalian). I never new Catholicism before Vatican II, but I am enthralled by the beauty and solemness of the Tridentine Mass. I sense that many other young Catholics feel the same way.
It's funny that a lot of young Converts never knew of the original mass, but have this inherent instinctive idea of it. Almost as if it was familiar when they finally went to one. I wonder if this had something to do with older media preserving this depiction.
i don't. Most of it is silent and wihout any participation by the congregation. I'm glad Pope Fracis has banned it exceptin a very few designated churches.
I also joined the church at age 21 from a protestent background. I felt I had finally found the God give moral authority on earth to live as Christ taught us. About six months later I attended my first TLM. The reverence and deference of both the clergy and laity overwhelmed me. It's not just the art and spectacle, it's God infront of your eyes. It's the priest praying with the people, not turning his back on the crucifix to pray at the people. My home parish has a dwindling population of septuagenarians and older, whereas when I attend St Clements Parish in Ottawa, the church is full to bursting with young and old alike. Vatican II no doubt did some good things, but in removing centuries of beautiful worship and reforming into something that really can't draw a crowd is sad for the body of Christ. There is nothing in the Novus Ordo mass that makes me feel like I'm about to receive the most gracious gift of all time the was saying "Domine non sum dignus" and then kneeling to recieved the Lord.
I am 88. I lived and worked in Rome during the Council, and in the late 1960’s worked as a translator in the Vatican. I think the decisions have largely not been implemented as intended, and this rests largely on the shoulders of some bishops not being courageous and firm enough, and many priests not studying the documents enough. +
Not least updating scholasticism in the light of the fact that, “the human race is passing from a rather static concept of the order of things to a more dynamic, evolutionary one" (G&S 5), yet staying faithful to "the doctrine of the Church concerning God, man and the world" (G&S, 62).
@@tomgreene1843 I guess you and I belong precisely in that bracket. It took Vatican II to say that it is the bounden duty of each baptized to promote the faith. I do believe more number of the laity is equipped today than earlier but the fact is also that they are only like drops in the ocean. Bishops indeed have their role. But let all and each Catholic assume and fulfill their role too. Bishops, Priests/religious and Laity, let's all embrace our own duty while praying earnestly and supporting each other generously.
As a late 20s cradle Catholic in South Africa, I wouldn't look at Africa as a positive simply because of numbers. The church is becoming a product of the era. Allow the TLM to live freely alongside the Novus Ordo
That can't happen as people have grown bored with the commkn banality of the Novus Ordo as it is done in 95% of parishes. The TLM parishes are growing and that is a major problem for the "Spirit of Vatican II" types.
exactly, the part he left out is that the church is currently restricting it's tradition. If the novus ordo works for people in africa that's great, but if the Traditional Latin Mass is also bringing people to Christ why block that?
As a Ugandan myself, I find that many Western people are misinterpreting the stats from Africa. Many people don't go to Mass because they recognise the physical reality of Jesus in the Eucharist. Many of them go for Mass for the social vibe and entertainment. The choir is an essential part of the NOM in Africa. If the choir is magnificent, people will come for Mass. And they will leave without knowing what the Mass is about. The Priests' homilies are not about sin and Hell and eternal salvation, they're not even about the Eucharist. They tend to mostly be about politics and social issues and money. Many of our Priests are living in sin. Many Catholics are receiving the Eucharist sacrilegiously. Few people go for confession at least once a month. Many Catholics also pray from evangelical churches. They need to listen to serious African Catholics concerning the state of the Church in Africa, and not just draw their own abstract conclusions from the statistics presented to them.
@@justinreany1514 indeed this is true except that the 60's rite appeals to a lot of old people, while the revived old.rite around here attracts many young adults and families,.also older people from tough circumstances, who are looking for that deeper order and spiritual beauty. Its a generational divide.
Why does the Pope put so much emphasis on suppressing the Tridentine Mass? I don't understand. Wouldn't it be more logical to allow both forms of the mass and for Catholics to choose which one brings us closer to the Church?
He wants to quash *anything* and everything that is holy, faithful to the Church/Christ, which preaches in and out of season, all of which modernists, which he himself is, deem ''rigid''.
@@phoenixaz8431a pope is not able to squash the holiness of the church. Hence he can’t possibly be the pope. He is the vicar of satan not the vicar of Christ.
I'm reading G.K. Chesterton's collected writings right now - "Heretic, Orthodoxy, and The Everlasting Man" Two points - 1. whether in the US, in Germany, or in South Korea when the Priest said Dominus vobis cum, I knew the response was Et cum spiritu tuu. So, I could actively participate in Mass wherever I was stationed. 2. I feel like the focus of attention (adoration) has shifted from the Eucharist (which we all faced together) to the priest.
Omg silly arguments. 1. I have been to Novus Ordo mass in English, Latin, Spanish, Korean, Italian…the point of it is that I respond in my language, but clearly, the reason I respond at the right time is because the order of the mass is exactly the same no matter the language. Just because we changed the responses from Latin to vernacular doesn’t mean you can’t just walk into a Chinese mass right now and be able to respond. 2. The focus is still on Jesus (Eucharist). Again, having the knowledge of where he is and acknowledging his presence helps in these situations. The priest facing out to the people just calls people to be a part of the worship.
@@krishyyfan5153 Didn't forget, was never taught that and can't find it in the current catechism - would you be kind enough to provide the paragraph number for that, thanks in advance
@@ntmn8444 Help me understand, is this response Christian love and teaching as per the faith or mockery and divisive (silliness)? Just trying to put it in the right bucket - spirit inspired or not?
I remember being in grade school when the changes started. The third statement of this discussion is exactly what happened in my head! Growing up from around a 10 year old as life was getting tough (so I thought as a 10+ year old) being in a Catholic grade school I always felt that the church was this solid reliable stalwart. Then the changes started, then more and more...threw me for a loop from which I never recovered.
Same experience. If anything I now loathe the Catholic Church top to bottom. So corrupt, hypocritical, homosexuality and pedophilia run rampant, watered-down treatment of pro-abortion laity and worse open-arms embrace of pro-abortion Catholic politicians by the Pope. It is worse now than when Luther and the Protestant Reformation.
I went to a catholic all-girls boarding school in the mid seventies, and they didn’t even OFFER Latin class! I was SO disappointed, as I’m really good at learning languages… I came to dislike the vernacular, as we have lost our sacred language !
"Look at the votes," but did the Council Fathers know what they were signing up for? The implementation turned out to be far more radical than the changes the documents mandated.
I'm 56, and my older sister and I attended Catholic school (a small school, K-8). During a discussion, we both agreed that neither of us learned anything about our faith. I don't even remember being taught how to go through the Bible. My knowledge has come from my searching and reading and finding informative videos such as Word on Fire. I would often hear others say, "Oh, you were born after Vatican II." This comment seemed to me as if they were saying that I wasn't educated properly in the faith. I didn't even know how to pray a rosary. I asked a close friend in my early 20's. It was embarrassing. Seriously, where did the ball get dropped?
I am 70 - raised in Catholic school through High School and didn't come to know my faith until the new Catechism. I was in my 20's when Vatican II became commonly implemented throughout the church. I think that the Catechism is the crowning glory of Vatican II
The post V II leadership permitted the misinterpretation of the teachings and practices of the Council. As a result we lost the sense of the sacred that had been a Hallmark of Roman Catholicism.
I'm sorry you had that experience. My Catholic school experience in the 1960s was the opposite. It was grounded in our faith and gave me a foundation that has carried me through life (I'm 66, so I guess big changes occurred during that 10 year difference in our educations.). I will be forever grateful to the Sisters of Mercy who shepherded my K-8 education.
@bobtosi9346 So V II was implemented after 1967? I was in elementary school through the 1970's. So if I was born before V II, it didn't happen until 1980; if I read your statement correctly.
Why did the church abandon the use of wearing their “religious dress”. As a doctor an order of nuns came to my office regularly. They complained that they didn’t get respect on the street or in stores. That didn’t get a discount in stores 31:0131:01 anymore. I told them because you’re not wearing your habit anymore. How would people know who you are? Then there wasn’t any interest joining their order any more.
To the question of "religious dress," it seems to me that the habit shows the secular public that one is in the Service of the Lord. I taught at a convent boarding school, and the majority of the sisters in the convent there were dressed like anyone's elderly aunt in her house frock. Several sisters who were involved with the actual school wore veils and street-length habits. In the convent's museum, there were scratchy-looking wool habits and wimples that had to be starched and crimped with an iron tool. It is easy to see why those were shed like last year's leaves. But the moderate, probably permanent-press, updated habits and short veils impart respect and recognition. Why not???
I love listening to how clearly you state things! I was 6 years old when the council started. I don't remember the traditional Latin Mass. My father is Catholic and my mother Lutheran, but neither one knew very much about Christianity apart from going to Church on Sunday and sending us to CCD. My father is also retired Army, so I lived in many different places and catechesis wasn't strong. I used to complain to my husband about our lack of knowledge of our faith and he reminds me always that things happen in God's time. It's easy to blame it on the council,, but when I read the documents of Vatican II, I found them beautiful. God put me in a diocese that offered ongoing faithful education. My own children and now my grandchildren are growing in the faith of the Church. They are loving God with their hearts and their minds. I do see them as the fruit of the council; not a blind faith in repetitive traditions, but a constant learning and growing in relationship with Jesus Christ.
@@tick5485 you should consider what you think of children. What are they? From where and to where they go? If you see chindren as a necessary part of they parents (because without one of them, or if the conceptuon was in another time: that child would never existed, would be another person). By the same token: love meets rules. You would never be a good oarent if you see your child going to a bad path without any warning or help to prevent it from those with more experience. Of course, all people are diferent (and also similar in other ways), maybe your child is somewhat diferent from you and will reach another places, another groups, etc. OK, that's part of a child which came from they parents e grow to become independent. But, all this beeing said, if you truly belive in the truth of Christ and His Church. There is nothing more important than to guide your offspring to Jesus. That's what the ateists and the weak of faith amd heart don't get it. If a religious person truly believe, she must preach to her child, that's the same to the ateist to defend his secular moral principles or any other teaching any parent in any point of the globe would do: the best they can to help the child to be incredible.
I grew up before Vatican 11, and there were very many knowledgeable and devout people then too. My generation grew up in the primary grades with one book: "The Baltimore Catichetism ", and I feel it presented a very good grounding in the basics of the faith. Many people went to daily Mass and Communion. Parents were obliged to send their kids to the Parish grades school and tuitions were very inexpensive. The most it cost in the school I attended as a child was $30.00 a year for one child, and for each additional child it was cheaper still. If you had more than three, they attended free. So all families could be assured that their kids would get 9 years (including kindergarten) of solid training in the faith. Most kids and the families were devout back then, and were very well behaved.. There was a great devotion to Mary too. We had "May Processions" each year and paraded around the grounds singing songs to mary and placing a crown of flowers on her statue's head. The whole school and the parents of the students attended.. Not all parents could send their kids to Catholic high schools in my area, outside a large city, but my parish had a Junior Newman Club, Junior Sadality, and kids could be members of adult choirs. I"m sure there were other There were retreats for teenagers, as well as adult retreats. These were things I attended as a kid. There were plenty of ways to connect with the parishes back then that kept members connect to their faith and parish families. .
@@grandmajoyce2 oh yes, I do believe that. And my father was faithful in bringing us to Church and to CCD. He just didn't have a deep knowledge of faith or of the Bible and couldn't answer my questions. I don't think he grew up in a community like yours. And because my father was in the military, I didn't experience a consistent parish life. God does work things out for us in the end. You are very blessed to have grown up in that environment.
@@tick5485 actually we used to think like this as kids, challenging everything. Catechism was taught at school but seemed to us absurd and out of touch. I totally get why V2 had to happen, but youth emancipation in the Sixties was a Sixties thing. The children at my TLM church do well with locally run Catechism, as a foil to the baleful influence of secular society which itself tries to indoctrinate children to atheist ways of thinking
Right on! We went to ccd and mass. Not enough $to send 5 kids to private school. We were military too. Mom and Dad didn't go but their friends went. I could always ask them a question
I attended the Novus Ordo modern Catholic Church for 25 years, to help my wife raise our kids Catholic. I never converted to Catholicism. The services were light & almost silly, the priests told jokes, the music "ministry" was pop & amateurish, the deacons held communion, girl alter-servers, etc. Once I tried the Latin Traditional Mass, I saw something that was reverent, spiritual, & serious. Just what I needed. I'm in the process of converting now....but not for the Novus Ordo. It's an embarrassment.
Unfortunately, the current management wants to stamp out the TLM as quickly as possible so that they can insist on continuing to do the things that go horribly until they magically start going right, and as a very smart Jewish man once said, that is the definition of insanity.
Welcome Home ! The changes to the liturgy after the Council were a catastrophic mistake. It’s a huge reason why 80% of Baptized Catholics in the US don’t attend. The Good Bishop is right about the cultural upheavals in the 1960s. But that is all the more reason why the Church needed to stay a strong Bulwark of truth and double down on the sense of the sacred in her liturgy. The Faithful needed a strong anchor to cling to through those turbulent times. Just the opposite happened.
Bishop Barron, I just heard you say that the Council was not a failure , but that it was poorly implemented. I am curious as to what you think were those aspects that were poorly implemented and what as the new bishop of your diocese can you change to reflect the intentions of the Council.
The truth is there was NOTHING in VII that was mandatory as it was only ecumenical. But that was intentional so it could later be "implemented" in whatever way the heretics behind VII wanted.
My husband and I, and therefore our four living children, wouldn’t be Catholic today without the videos of Bishop Barron. We converted in 2020. We are very traditional people: we homeschool our children, we live on a homestead in rural Appalachia, my husband works from home, and our family hierarchy is very traditional. But we have always loved, from the first simply military mass we attended on a base in Germany, vernacular masses. We love and value the TLM too, but we don’t have a special preference for it. That is pretty surprising to the people who meet us! But mass isn’t really an exercise in culture or personality. I don’t know what the answers to all this are, I am not about to argue with the authority of the church. That’s what I was accepting when I became Catholic, after all. I am no great theologian, only a simple homeschooling mother, but I am a lover and student of history, and through that lens I do know that our entire culture and the “west” as a whole have decided that God is an unnecessary, antiquated notion no longer needed. And I think that would be the case even if V II had never occurred. My daily act of radical subversion to this is to try to love my family. Changing diapers, washing dishes, doing our taxes, taking care of the farm animals. I can’t change the world. All I can hope to do is work and pray, pray and work, and by the grace of God the vapor of this life will end with our reunification with Him. Pray for our Church, pray for the Pope, our Bishops, our countries. And love our families & communities.
People are heading for and packing the Catholic Churches offering the Traditional Latin Mass, because as soon as they enter the Church, they are greeted with the feeling within, of total love, devotion, honor, respect, for our Lord. The quietness of the worshippers, as they kneel and pray, pray their Holy Rosaries, before the Mass has begun, reminds us, as to why we are there. The women wearing their chapel veals and the men dressed neatly is another way respect is shown to our Lord. Kneeling and receiving the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity on the tongue, as to not receiving in the hand, where partials of our Lord land on the floor and are trampled and stepped on, does not occur when receiving our Lord on the tongue. These faithful knowing that, Jesus cannot be taken, if we are not in the state of grace. I could go on and on. The TLM Masses are packed and growing, because people have found what they were searching for, Jesus. Where Novus Ordo Masses are offered with the same love, respect, honor and devotion, Churches are growing with the faithful!.
My friend, you actually understand what it means to be Catholic better than most of these comments. Finally! A kindred spirit. I actually reverted to Catholicism around the same time as your conversion. I don’t feel robbed, I don’t feel any type of way toward any specific mass. My focus has been on learning and mastering what Jesus taught.
As a Catholic, I particularly have nothing against the Second Vatican Council. I really don't know much about it. I just love Jesus Christ and concentrate a lot on staying on track.
It would be alright if they would just offer both masses. There's no reason why a church can't offer both NO and TLM. Many elderly people long deeply for the mass they remember as a child, it feels cruel for the Pope to continue restricting the availability of TLM
I was 10 years old in 1962. It seems to me that before Vatican II the sermons that I remember were always telling us what not to do so we would not go to Hell and since Vatican II we hear what to do to go to Heaven.
I went to the N.O. for over 20 years. Getting to heaven was mentioned maybe 3 times. Every sermon was "how was your walk with Jesus this week"? Hell was never mentioned.
@@jamesMartinelli-x2t This. All our Sermons now are "be nice to people". We briefly had a younger, more trad priest at our Parish who came from an Ordinariate parish. He gave a lengthy sermon on adultery and specifically, the modern scourge of Pornography. After mass it was nothing but grumbling from baby boomers about how it was "inappropriate". Sorry, but last I checked his job is to save souls and that industry is absolutely crushing a generation of young people right now.
I converted to Catholicism 2 years ago and I guess I can humbly say I am a Vatican ll success story. If my local diocese or Parish priest had made me feel unwelcome I would have just turned around and left because I was very emotionally battle scarred at the time and needed love from the Church.
@@wildplumbeauty I’m glad you have become Catholic, that’s awesome! As far as feeling unwelcome, I don’t think it’s the case that the church wasn’t welcoming before Vatican 2, we certainly had converts before the 1970s
The reason we resist it is mainly what it did to the Mass...for most people this is their rock...and the new Mass it just too different from the old...The new Mass and the way it is celebrated is in conflict with the pre Conciliar Mass... There is too much that came out of Vatican II that conflicts with pre Conciliar teachings and that is not addressed by the Church...Allowing that conflict to fester and harden is a mistake...stating we " can't go back" flies in the face of Vatican II which tells us we are going back indeed to a time at the beginning of the Church...the way things were in antiquity....
The bogus ordo is not merely different, it is full of heresy. Consider that every priest ordained has their hands consecrated to God. Why? Because they are to perform the recreation of the Sacrifice that transforms bread and wine into the physical body and blood of Jesus. Therefore, they are the ONLY person worthy of touching our Lord's body in the delivery of Communion. The bogus ordo also totally changed the focus from being focused on God to focusing on man by separating the altar from the tabernacle and by turning the priest to face the people rather than face God. Then it allows people to receive God in their hands which is sacrilege, and enables particles of His precious body to fall onto the ground and be trampled by people, another sacrilege.
I appreciate the discussion about a lack of oversight with implementation. I’ve recently been appointed to our parish pastoral council and my prayer is that we will address this issue (refreshing the liturgy with guidance from Sacrosanctum Concilium) as well as a focus on Sacred music..
I'm a new Catholic and I was certainly drawn in by the Latin mass. The younger generation that has any interest in converting is yearning for what they lacked: tradition, heritage, stalwart leadership in faith, and an general agnosticism towards the spirit of the age. We were raised in a secular, atheistic culture that robbed us of the sacred and we want it back. Although I don't understand fully all the implications of Vatican II, I know that the mass as it stands has some challenges for younger converts like me. The aesthetics are often not austere, not holy. We want to worship God and we want to enter a holy space where we can leave the world behind to focus of the mass and the prayers of the church. For us, that does mean a certain nod to the past, not the past of the 1960's but the long past, the eternal. Guitar strumming and cajon beat boxes will never invoke this for us. Maybe for our parents it makes them feel more close to the mass, but for us and for any generations after, it is just corny, and fundamentally secular. I think Brian Holdsworth made this point, if you allow one generation to define the aesthetic, it will ultimately end up outdated and be in constant need of updating. This is what Tradition is supposed to solve. While I think I understand the intention was to bring the mass back down to the laity and allow more opportunities for them to participate and bring their modern lives to the table, this was a big error. What was not understood was just how corrupt the lay culture had become and how manipulated it is now. It is not a real, organic, culture. It is the result of decades of cultural warfare, propaganda, "public relations", and nihilistic deconstruction philosophies. Ethnicity has been replaced by consumer choice. It's would be one thing if, say, a pre-modern Irish folk style was injected into the mass music in Ireland; that was a real culture that still possessed the ability to invoke the sacred. Not to mention, the musical culture (I harp on that because I am in the music ministry) that came in in the 60's was fundamentally rooted in a radical "freedom" movement that cannot coexist within the church. In fact, a reaction to this movement is largely what is bringing new converts in. I think there is still an opportunity to correct the missteps. Maybe it starts with admitting the short-sightedness and optimism of the 60's, and let's have a collective reality check about where the world is, and more importantly, where our souls really are 60 years later. Hindsight is 20/20 and there's no reason why we can't start steering the church back into a more appropriate synthesis of tradition and participation. If you want to save souls, you have to be honest about the state they are in.
Thank you Bishop for not denying us the possibility of either mass. They are both part of our faith, both part of our heritage. Both express vital truths. Thank you for not bashing Vatican II and the Novus Ordo, and thank you for not eradicating the Traditional Latin Mass. You are a voice of reason for me and you always inspire me to be a better Catholic. Thanks Bishop
TLM people are so attached to their issue, to the exclusion of everything else, even to the point of denying the Council. Pope Francis is correct to provide a corrective to the off the hook proliferation of their divisive behavior.
The worst thing about the New Mass is its truncated nature. The dismissal comes too soon after Communion, with hardly any time for reflection. Many people walk out immediately afterwards.
Personally I wouldn’t be against making the Novus Ordo its own liturgical tradition. Having a simplified, stripped down liturgy to lower the culture shock for Protestant converts is actually a pretty brilliant idea for helping bring people back to The Church. The problem is it’s trying to replace The Roman Rite and claim it’s actually a successive evolution of it, when it just isn’t. At least not as it has been implemented.
@@Photo513Graphy They damn well should be considering that the Liturgy is the foundation of worship. Poor liturgy weakens faith, you should be heavily invested in it. It’s an absurd notion that defending THE Liturgical Tradition that built this Church is somehow a bad thing.
Vatican 2 is not what the churches are doing today. St Paul the 6th would be super upset if he saw how the masses, mostly empty, are. The only churches I see growing are the TLM masses where most of them I barely can find a space to sit if I come slightly late. NO and TLM are the same in terms of giving the sacraments. However, I dont see why a lot of the things were done away from the old mass, because those things are what keep you looking forward to God, such as first friday and saturday devotion or teachings of fatima or the scapular.
You are mistaken about the sacraments. In order to be valid and licit, sacraments must adhere to the Traditional Magisterium in form, matter, and intent. Clearly the form of the liturgy has changed significantly, and while the matter may be appropriate, the intent is open to question as the 1983 Code of Canon law changed much of what is considered valid and licit.
Was it a failure? Judge for yourself by the subsequent metrics. EVERY index, the number of faithful, of religious, of seminarians, parishes, marriages, baptisms, etc., every one save the number of permanent deacons, has precipitously declined, plummeted in fact. If the word 'failure' has any meaning at all, Vatican Council II was a catastrophic failure. I'm 80 years old, a Catholic since birth, and all I see around me is spiritual decay, confusion, outright heresy, and division. So, yes, it was an ill-conceived, massive failure.
I just entered the Church but its took the Sacredness away for the Mass. I normally go to the NO but i will go to the FSSP every so often. Maybe we should also be learning some songs in Aramaic?
The TLM should not be restricted. TLM parishes are thriving. Embrace the tradition for those who want it. Vatican II did need to happen, but we should have never lost the reverence of our faith. Novus Ordo can be reverent, I've seen it.
Well said! However we NEED bishops (like Barron) who DEMAND that Novus Ordo be reverent. It starts with every SINGLE Diocese and parish bringing back the Sacraments, RECONCILIATION, as JOB number 1.
The fruit has been pretty rotten! I have read the octet of the Council and many if the docs are quite nice and beautiful. Others are purely speculative and have no binding authority on the faithful such as Nostrae Aetate.
Bring back the good, true and beautiful. When the NO Mass is so frequently conducted in a cheap manner, it severely undermines the Church. Church discipline is required to make the NO everything it is supposed to be ASAP! I have never been to a NO (it could be my area!) that can match a chanted TLM. The TLM Mass I attend has a huge amount of converts and is growing.
Your prayers are needed, the current fellow in charge of liturgical matters in Rome has a deep, inexplicable and unabashed hatred for the Latin mass, so they from the rumors, I hear, intend to release a apostolic constitution heavily restricting it.
The Mass was severely injured by the ‘Peter, Paul and Mary folk music’. It’s became a distraction, especially when the music was played or sang poorly.
Sacrosanctum Concilium did not need to implement the novus ordo missæ by itself. All the Council had to do was authorize change- even radical adaptation, as it explicitly does- and assign the changes to some unknown groups in the future. Sacrosanctum Concilium didn't need to prescribe the novus ordo itself, because it literally wrote a blank check for those who would implement it. Read it.
@@ryanautrey2269 I think the greatest thing that church leaders can learn from Vatican II is that they really need to be more specific, firm, and clearly stated when it comes to future documentation.
Thank you Bishop Barron and Brandon Vogt. This is a hot topic in my family. So many young people seem to prefer TLM. I certainly do understand their criticisms and concerns of NO. HOWEVER, I LOVE that they want to return to The Church and follow the faith! I do not really understand why Parishes can't have a Latin Mass at 9am and NO at the other times. I also recall my mother, father, Grandmother, and numerous Irish aunts and uncles arguing about Vatican II which I did not understand as a child. I'm going to have to watch/ listen to this again, but I appreciate you addressing this issue. Would you do a Part II (yup, I saw it) and address the concerns of Mass of the Ages?? Please. please. My son believes every word in Mass of the Ages.
I experienced the transition or changes after Vat. II in the Phils. We learned a lot from it. It's a gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church. Thanks be to God!🙏
Maybe!? Not maybe. Definitely! People do not believe as they used to when I was a child and adolescent. People were not taught the faith after Vatican II . Good catechesis ceased.
Cardinal George once said that, with the exception of inventing lots of jobs for lay people to do during Mass, we have not even begun to have any interior active participation, desired by the Council. And when it comes to the task of the laity to sanctify the temporal order, we have not begun that either.
I converted to Catholicism the year before marrying in 1967. Our church was still having Latin masses and I would quietly say the Mass along with priest. It was rather strange switching over to English
Idk about that, you have to consider how the Church was boosted by the navigations and the sheer power of the globe-spanning Portuguese and Spanish empires, both elements that the Church lost over time, the Church by the time of Vatican II had basically lost all of the official government recognitions it once enjoyed.
So also thought some of the apostles and disciples of Christ about Jesus' death on the Cross. Still others have said the same about the Bible or the Catholic religion or even it's denominational offshoots. Vatican II is steeped in tradition while at once fair in reasonable changes such as with masses said in a given culture's local language. Having said that, as with Catholics at any time, mortals can mis-interpret and mis-apply or simply fail to apply what they should from Vatican II. The main point is: don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's easy to do when frustrated, but it's an over-reaction. Blessings upon you.
@@sikobaya9298 Excellent point, but it can be so hard when one may be right at the surface level and intellectual pride blind-sides it. That's why prayers are in order to foster the requisite humility to dislodge and un-coil pride from one's intellect.
Yes, without question. Video over after 10 secs. 80% of people I know have no faith or completely lost the Catholic Faith, 10% are seriously questioning or doubt etc and the remaining 10% are trying to figure out what happened and doing their best to hold their head above water.
I was 7 when Vatican II came about. I loved the Latin masses. I have always felt bad to this day they removed that from Mass. Back then, you could attend Mass in any country and be able to participate. Now, unless you happen to speak the language of the country you are visiting, you silently participate. Sad.
Not just Catholicism my friend. I asked my Protestant sister why she doesn't go to Church. Her response was that she hasn't found one that meets her needs yet. I get it! To agree! But talk about a secular world. The notion that, "I will go to Church if I can find one that meets and bends to my need." Religion, in general, is under fire and failing. But I guess that has been the case since it's inception. Even before Christianity. The nature of man in full display.
Yes. Even worse for protestants. The church I gree up in now hangs gay pride flags out in front. Makes me weep. I've turned to Catholic mass instead. Please don't let that die too. My heart couldn't take it. Fight to keep your beautiful traditions alive.
In order to know if the growth of the church in Africa and Asia was due to Vatican, it must be taken into account the population growth of those continents and know whether the growth is proportional or not to that. For example, between 1980 and 2015, population in Africa grew from (roughly) 476 million to 1182 million - this means an increase of approximately 2,48x. For the same period of time, the number of catholics in Africa increased by 2.38x. These are rough estimates, and even though the growth rate of catholics in Africa appears lower than the population growth of that same continent given these numbers, during the same time period, the benefit of the doubt should be given, but there are no doubts that if it isn't lower, then it is at least proportionate. Therefore, given this, how can one infer from this that the church in Africa grew because of the second Vatican council, while at the same time, and as of right now, we are witnessing a monumental decline in the number of catholics in the countries who were mostly catholic (over 95% of the total population) before the second Vatican council was implemented?
Very helpful insights from our Bishop. I was 6 when the Council began, and my formative years as a Catholic were lived in the implementation of the Council teachings. We talked out Faith matters in our home, and we were a family where reflection on the news, politics, philosophy and the connection between Faith and Culture were ever part of the discourse. Even as a child, it seemed clear to me that the tensions over implementation were not about the vernacular Liturgy, or fasting or taking Communion by the hand. The tension was in the diametric perceptions of what needed to change, and what could not change. A large number of Catholics wanted the Church to liberalize teachings on divorce, birth control, premarital cohabitation, women clergy, female altar servers, etc etc etc. All the same gender and sexual liberty issues we still grapple with today (though fewer then). Those Catholics wanted the Church to get on board with modernity. Vatican II DID NOT DO SO. But because certain practices had been altered, some given more to diocesan level discretion, they saw these as cracks in the wall; not a "red light" in front of their agenda, but a "yellow light", which left them discretion on how to interpret Church Law. The Council did not go where they wanted, but they thought that the changes that were made left open a window for more liberal interpretation and more freewheeling practice. These things I clearly perceived as underway by the time I was just 12. The Bishop naturally looks back on the Council and ensuing years from an ecclesiastical framework. My experience and views were formed at "ground zero", so to speak. What went wrong after the Council wasn't the Council's fault. It was as much a sociological as an ecclesiastical phenomenon. The question before the house remains: Is the Church to transform the World, or will the World co-opt the Church? Thankfully, the Council said, the former. Dogma is universal, customs local. The Council never misled the Faithful, but some of the Faithful twisted the teachings to sound like what they wanted to hear. That is my abiding recollection.
Thanks for your insight. As a convert i 2021 and born in 73 in Protestant country (Norway) I doubt I would have found my way to the Church without V2. I am reading all the V2-documents now, and I see only good things there. I think God challenges each and every person in various ways - unfortunately many couldn’t handle it. Besides, all churches in the West have declined - but I do believe our Church will now turn the tide.
Nice reply, well thought out. I'm about the same age as you and recollect that even at my Catholic school, all manner of changes were being made by liberal thinkers that did things "in the spirit of Vatican II" that were clearly at odds with Church teachings on all the subjects you listed. I think the idea of "change" took hold and allowed those that wanted to co-opt the Church got their proverbial foot in the door. I like your insights and totally agree with you.
Yes, my recollections are similar to yours and I watched everything unfold within the same age bracket as you. I was in Catholic elementary school at the time and had a close-up view. I remember welcoming the change to the vernacular in Mass because new understandings opened up to me. The first "folk" Mass, however, with guitar music was a shocker, and not a welcome one. Today, I appreciate how chant and Latin prayers are integrated into the Mass in my local parish.
One of the enduring effects of the Council was to seem to put a stamp of approval on the end of the Church's missions. If the Church suddenly approved of religious freedom (as put forth in Dignitatis Humanæ), then the missions would shift from proselytism to defending other religions. If the Church seemed to abandon opposition to other religions, now the emphasis would be on unity with them. Can the Church forget who she is? Can it be the case that the Church of Christ is truly divided between Catholic, Orthodox, and protestant? Or is the Church truly One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic; while the protestants and schismatic "Orthodox" are unfortunately cut off from the Church? Is it as Francis said?... that good Lutherans have the true faith of Christ? ... that proselytizing the "Orthodox" is a grave sin? Is he not basing these outrageous claims on the teachings of the Council? Yes, the Council did it's utmost to neuter the true mission of the Catholic Church.
Vatican II was supposed to be pastoral, but it did nothing to improve opportunities for single Catholics to meet the opposite sex. Today Europe faces demographic winter, and the Pope has managed to notice it. Could you please comment on this.
I didn’t know that was the purpose of an ecumenical council. If you attend Mass regularly, becoming involved in your local parish might be a way to meet a likeminded person of the opposite sex.
@@dotkom9382 Knowing what I know now, I would suggest that if opportunities to meet the opposite sex are scarce, then go and have a word with your parish priest. We are heading for demographic winter if you don't do that. Indeed there may be parish activities to join in, or there may not. There may be a neighbouring parish with more to offer. The social club in your own parish may be a men-only club, but the club in a neighbouring parish may offer better opportunities to meet the opposite sex. Consider joining pilgrimages and other activities. Generally put yourself in circulation. Perhaps your parish priest will have some useful suggestions to make. I am at loss to see the point of Vatican 2 if there wasn't any improvement in this area. The Pope is practically admitting this. It did nothing for those of us who like attending Nuptial Masses.
Not a catholic but i am 29 and came to faith in christ over the last 10 years. I think a big answer to why did we resist vatican 2 is that with so much hatred for the traditions of the west in the west, to have the traditions of a pillar of the west change is terrifying. I have found my way to joy and peace in my life through finding the traditions of the west and this is why i see the latin mass more appealing as someone interested on the outside.
You, my friend, are in the line of thought with Christ’s true bride, the Church, and you are hearing the Lord’s voice loud and clear. Let him take you by the hand, and he’ll lead you home. He’s waiting for you in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
@@falcon6173 The Holy language of Pontius Pilate, which Jesus never spoke. 🙏 We remember that the important thing is not so much the precious perfume, but rather the fancy chunky bottle in which it is contained. 🙏
kristoferjhess. The Vatican 2 changes in tone and behavior described by Bishop Barron are all negative. Look to the Latin Mass and traditional Catholicism. Much of what is offered by local Novus Ordo parishes is diluted and sometimes not orthodox.
I’ve got an idea re: not going back to mid-20th century Catholic Church in America: competition. Let the offering of the Mass as it was offered in mid-20th century America compete against the Novus Ordo. Let the faithful choose. This is a similar response to those who say we can never go back to a gold standard. I say, let gold compete against fiat and let Americans decide. Let all be decided in true freedom and under the banner of Heaven.
I've been suggesting this for years, let each parish offer both rites and let's see which rite draws more attendees. If the Tridentine Rite is no "threat" which is the Church terrified at its concelebration? Well said, Harry.
I went to Catholic school in the 80s, and in religion lessons the stress was always on Vatican II. Of my 30 or so classmates not a one still attends mass. I do. I attend the TLM.
A lot of people are talking about the later implementations of V2. The best documentary i have seen on this so far are the videos from Mass of the Ages. It goes over very well the changes that occurred.
For most people, the context of Catholicism does not extend much beyond the boundaries of their parish, and is limited to Sunday Mass. When liturgy became so silly and trivialized, it would be hard to expect people to take anything seriously
Your Grace, just a moment of gratitude for your compassionate “apologetics” (I suppose), providing wisdom and comfort to passionate believers. I hope the Spirit will guide your voice and your energy to connect us - and be echoed about. And with your Spirit.
As a convert I came into the Church long after Vatican II so know no other form of catholisism. I pose this thought, if Vatican II had not happened, what would our Church look like today? Would it be "failing" even worse or growing world wide as even North American's seem to be falling away. A very good friend who is protestant has voiced the same concerns (fears) about his Christian denomination. It's becoming a secular world I fear.
Modern Catholics would all be excomunicated by Pius XII. Roman Catholicism is dead and the "church" of vatican II is a heretical sect which promotes NOACHISM instead of Catholicism. Everything you hear about Catholicism after 1960 is false we do not have a Pope and only baptism is the valid sacrament.
That's a very good question. As the good Bishop pointed out, it is a logical fallacy to state that since B came after A, B must have been caused by A. We will never know whether church attendance, missionary outreach, etc. would have been better or worse without Vatican II. Some will wonder how things could possibly be worse than they are now, but anyone who's been paying attention will know that things could always be worse. I, for one, think that things would have been worse if VII hadn't happened, but that's only my opinion.
no, without Vatican II the Catholic Church would be strong and vigorous and attracting converts (i'm a convert too and thank God I discovered the TLM).
Thank you for sharing. Vatican II made it possible for us Christians who are not priests to become a house keeper to people from other nations with elders who were offering us tea and toast in a home where they were continuing to offer coins to idols without risking later being false accused of that being an occasion for sin. Without us feeling the need there to be within ourselves and in the expressions on our faces while turning down their offer to sit down with them in dialogue while regarding them there always as being only pagans to be avoided altogether as much as possible. Without us feeling afraid of later being false accused of trying to become a Roman Catholic priest too. How can we help people to become interested in becoming Christians while not neglecting the tabernacle without Vatican II?
People are leaving the Church, not because of Vii, but because the Church has left them. . . ceased speaking to the deepest longing of the human heart.
Why does it seem like the most devout crowd (as a whole) is attending the Latin mass? Im not saying that from an absolutist perspective, of course there’s devouts in the modern… but in my experience it seems like the Latin massers often know the faith more intellectually and connected it to their lives more spiritually.
What an amazing discussion! Thank you Bishop Barron! I appreciate you reframing the question and putting it on the dissenters. The cure for this resistance and dissent to VII and the Magesterium is Obedience and we need a whole lot more of it.
@Tercio Novohispano I dont call anyone dissenters for preferring one form of the Mass over another. I also never claimed Vatican II didn't have flaws in terms of ambiguous language or imprudent statements. My problem (The Church's problem) is when people claim a validly promulgated Eccumenical Council is erroneous and should be done away with. That is horrendous ecclesiology and should always be condemned. I also have problems with people saying since most of the new teachings are not defenitive , we don't need to adhere to them. That completely bypasses the authentic Magesterium, which is still authoritative even when not defining something. This may be brash but sometimes a parent needs to spank their kids because they aren't obeying them. Discipline is not a bad thing, it is a tool of charity and clarity to Discipline. To not do so would be to confirm the spiritual children of the Church to sin.
The historic Protestant churches also declined in the west and boomed in Africa in the last half of the 20th century; so it seems that Vatican 2 was not really responsible for either the decline or the growth, but other factors entirely
I was born into and raised in Vatican II in the 70’s in Rural Ireland and I left my faith after my teens in the 80’s until 19 years ago - I came back to my faith but was horrified by what I found there, having recalled my childhood with the Nuns and the Divine Office in Latin (I even knew all the Christmas Carols in Latin, only to rediscover them later on) but in my 20’s I’d attended a Traditional Latin Mass and I loved it - after I came back to my faith after prompting from my Muslim friends here in the U.K. after 23 years, I sought out the TLM and during Covid I’d even taught myself to pray the Rosary in Latin - I’d never really understood the issues for a long time with the various Vatican II Popes, but under Pope Francis, I gradually began to understand that he was destroying the church and the faith which made me even more committed to the TLM having done so much research and reading, as I saw Vatican II becoming ever more woke and taking the church in the wrong direction - so Vatican II was a huge mistake that even Cardinal Ratzinger (later on Pope Benedict XVI) realised that he could not stop, despite initially supporting it, so he eventually resigned from the Papacy, which was a watershed moment for me in terms of my commitment to TLM
Brothers and sisters! Spread the mission! Bring people to God! Be prepared for discussions and arguments! Share the Word on Fire mission! We are to spread the gospel and truth throughout a world that rejects it!
I having been a Catholic before Vatican ll, I will just say you know a tree by its fruit. The Church today is even less than a shadow of its former self only wreckage left behind.
I’d love to see Bishop Barron engage with Timothy Flanders on Vatican 2. Flanders is very nuanced in his praise and critique. It would be engaging with the best of the trad side. And the good bishop likes to engage with the best.
I was born when traditional Latin mass was still practiced in Philippines, I remember seeing more people then in church than now, we go as a family even if church was farther. I now live in America, I was introduced back to the TLM during the pandemic, and it opened my eyes. TLM is centered on Jesus Christ, His Passion Death and Resurrection, His Presence in the Holy Eucharist, and receive Him in the tongue, we still confess where the priest don’t see us. The new mass, although it has the same parts, each church differs in the execution of some parts. I don’t know if we’re still focused on Christ or are we more focused on the beautiful songs, or the beautiful voice of the singers, or the programs being offered, some people are even following what the priest is saying, like literally memorized. I just visited the Philippines and the church now closer to us, I saw fewer people in the time slots that I went to, the front pews are just empty. Our parish has a lot of programs that requires people who are very very poor to give up some needs to be able to give something to church programs so they won’t hear something from people “close” to the church. I don’t think that’s a good way to evangelize, I think it will make them stop going to church
It was a complete failure. We let the communists and Freemasons change the faith to be more Protestant and worldly. “Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock.”
It was definitely a failure. “By its fruits you shall know them.” It destroyed a lot of families’ faith. I know that more than 80,000 priests left the priesthood because they refused to celebrate the New Mass. Thank you God for allowing me to revert to the Latin Mass during lockdown. I will never look back.
I think it was a failure. I have never seen honest and convincing arguments against traditionalist objections, and I am not just talking about the TLM, but everything. I believe the biggest problem for Vatican 2 is past Popes before the council, and holy saints and doctors of the church. It is all there for us to read. They spoke with extreme precision and clarity. An argument for Vat 2 letter of council may be argued, but that letter is not lived reality for 99.9% of catholics. Gregorian chant has pride and place, for example. When you read Pope Leo XIII, Pius X, Pius XI and others, there are serious warnings for the Church, and it is obvious we did not heed those warnings but let our guard down and here we are. A Pope like St. Pius X or doctor and saint like Alphonsus Ligouri, holds serious weight. In my opinion, these great men do not seem to mesh well with Congar and the like. I will stick with tradition and great saints and doctors of the Church because it is safe.
Bishop Barron, I love your podcast. I am 58 years old and a convert to the Catholic Church going intense years. If no for changes in vernacular I not speaking Latin would not have been able to comprehend any of the mass. I and my wife love the Catholic Church! I knew when entering it was filled with imperfect people such as myself, but where else would I go to meet and receive the Lord Jesus Christ!!!
This was great, thank you. I particularly enjoyed the comments on the Universal Church and the role of the Church outside of Europe in evangelization. As a tiny example, I am very grateful for the influence of a quiet academic from Tanzania who briefly worked as a priest in a north Dublin parish. A short conversation when preparing for my father's funeral some years ago led me to the St Augustine's Confessions. This among other things has been important in my slow and faltering return to faith.
I am in America and the priests from African countries I have encountered have been powerful men of God and huge evangelizers in the parishes. They're stronger speakers with better written homilies and energetic and encouraging and often able to speak without notes quoting memorized Scripture with chapter and verse.
I am 79 years old and I stopped going to Mass because of Vatican II. I hate the changes that were made. The way I feel is that I know things in the world had to change but why does religion have to be one of changes? I did come back and I’m a practicing Catholic now, but I still wish that the Mass was like it was when I was a kid. It all started with the guitar Mass and I believe it has gone downhill ever since. Like I say I go to Mass now, but I still wish it was like it was when I was a kid. If I want to go to a Latin mass, I have to go 25 miles out of my way. The Latin Mass should be celebrated in every church along with the new Mass. Please excuse me for saying, but I believe that Vatican II was initiated by communist influence.
Bishop Barron has stated that V2 itself wasn't a failure, but rather the way in which it was implemented was a failure. Curious to see if his opinion has changed.
@@folofus4815 A huge difference. One requires us to just revisit what the council actually said. The other requires a brand new council, and throws a spanner in the works for all ecumenical councils. Look at the voting record during V2. Are we really sure 90%+ of the bishops were wrong?
@@Tttb95 I’m not saying there was any doctrinal error propagated by the council, I’m saying that insofar as what the goals of what the council set out to do, it failed. That doesn’t mean the documents are heresy, but it does mean it was a fruitless endeavor
My 2c as a young guy (34) converted from a protestant denomination. V2 gave us mass in the vernacular. That only happened a few hundred years too late! haha. It got us a new emphasis on the laity studying scripture. Such a good thing. We got a new emphasis on evangelization which Jesus asked us to do. It focused on building community relationships - nowadays we have ACTS retreats and tons of great stuff. BUT, V2 did mess one really big thing up. The church in the west is in decline (except Africa) especially where the V2 implimentation has been "strange"... We can't hide that elephant in the room. SO, perhaps not in the documents themselves is there anathema, but in the spirit that came out from it something went terribly wrong. I think what went most wrong was - we abandoned our tradition and tried to hide who we are in the name of ecumensim. Then we lost belief in the real presence of the eucharist. When we lost that, we lost clarity of truth and wisdom which comes from God through the eucharist and everything has snowballed from there in the church. Protestants lost that belief early on regarding the eucharist and immediately splintered into hundreds of denominations if you look at the history and timing of it all. As soon as they denied the real presence, division ensued. Here is an idea Bishop Barron. On special church days, holy days of obligation for example..lets take mainstream new-order churches and do a latin mass at them, with all the incense and prayers and traditional hymns. Let only the priest give the eucharist, and have people line up on their knees around the raised steps of the altar to receive it. In every church where the architecture is still reasonably feasible to do this kind of mass of course (one of the churches I go to is an octagon like a synagogue so you couldn't really do it there, but most churches you could still flip the altar around and just let the priest do his best and GO FOR IT! And let your average mainstream catholic attend it give them a little pamphlet so we and the priest can all butcher Latin together and stumble through the prayers. Get the choir together a couple extra times to practice some traditional hymns and chants. YOU WILL PACK THE CHURCH OUT THE DOORS I PROMISE YOU! I don't understand why Rome and the USCCB can't see this. Its like an obsessive love with the new mass and pride and denial that the old mass has anything to offer us spiritually - thats its like a dead stick in the mud. Just the opposite is true we should be promoting it! Just give it a chance! Attending latin mass was like a spiritual mega BOOSTER for me in my life (and all the young guys I've seen discover it!) Not every mass has to be a latin mass, but expose the laity to it at least once or twice a year, give them that connection to their ancestors and the history of the church and MANDATE hat it be done in every parish at least once a year. It will change everything! You should try it Bishop Barron - you are the big boss dawg now up there in Minnesota! You should do it and see what happens! My hunch is if you are the first one to give it a shot I bet you will pack the house it'll probably end up in the news all over the country and a lot of other Bishops are gonna start trying it too if they see you do it. And at the very least you will certainly put a big ol' grin on JPII and Pope Benedict's face in heaven. Thats worth something! Shalom!
pjburges. You have many good thoughts. Learn the Latin Mass and its theology of the Sacrifice of the Cross. The Novus Ordo removes many prayers, has the Priest turned away from God, focuses on the people and makes the Mass a community meal. Look to tradition.
So is the thesis then that the implementation of the Council was a failure, not the council itself? I understand the distinction there, but it begs the question of how do we correct the failed/improper implementation. I also wonder how it is so that the bishops/priests that were themselves present and authored the council documents did such a terrible job of then implementing those documents. How do we have a document like sacrosanctum concilium which is almost immediately contradicted in nearly every parish Mass.
Talking about impact of the Vatican II on the Africa - I'm all about the inclusion, give the people their rites, I'm extremely happy that they are devoted Catholics. But at the same time when everyone's culture started being included post Vatican II reforms stripped Europe out of its traditions. Europe grew up on the latin civilisation, those are our ancestors, my grandparents still remember Latin Mass. It's quite ironic that the Vatican II reforms were about opening the church for everyone except the people who want to cultivate European traditions...
Vatican II reached out to modernity and modernity didn’t reach back. Vatican II turned Catholicism beige. The church may have declined to the same numbers it is today but there would be adoration for the Eucharist and the sacraments would be revered.
To be fair though, the decrease started before Vatican II and sped up in the 60s before the council was even done. Virtually every other religious group in the West suffers as well in the 60s, indicating that it was not a problem just affecting Catholics. I do agree that the implementation did result in some disasters that we are still struggling with today. Many councils in the past were like this though and I am sure that things will be straightened out by the Lord in due time.
@@nick.s.c3102 liberal Jewish communities are emptying out. The Orthodox are growing. Mainline Protestant denominations are emptying out. Evangelical churches are growing. Novus Ordo parishes are emptying out. Vetus Ordo parishes are being suppressed to prevent them from growing any further. I'm noticing a common thread.
@@carissstewart3211 Actually Novus Ordo Churchs are growing massively in Africa, China, the Philipines, etc... In the west Latin Mass Churches are still not growing enough to keep the number of Catholics up.
@@anonymous-pi3oz Probobly not. I think other issues are what causes the decrease of practicing Catholics. Many ex-Cartholics become Evangelicals, Jehovas Witnesses, LDS, atheists, agnostics, etc... Almost none are going to the Eastern Orthodox, SSPX, Orientals, etc. This shows pretty conclusively that people are not leaving because the liturgy is not traditional enough but for other reasons.
"We have to be in engagement with the culture that's actually there." What if there's an ever-growing cry from within that culture for the beautiful Latin Mass? Do we engage with that, or suppress it and brush it off as some cooky, ultra-conservative fringe?
Thank you very much Bishop for at last being someone who on social media openly answers these questions about Vatican Council II. Most people don't know the history and books fail to tell us the feelings and reactions in the world around the councils. It is clear that in time we'll see the goodness of Vatican II. Last comment, the Church of Latin America blossomed as fruit of the council bringing the new breath of fresh air that was so needed for us. The people of God had at last a place in the Church and made us experience and live the love and presence of God.
And what changes were those that “should have been implemented?” Perhaps I already know your answer…let me be the first to inform you…the truth never changes. EVER. Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.,
@@falcon6173 Your presumption is very arrogant. I meant the failure of priestly celibacy. Orthodox priest are responsible. Thousands of Catholic faithful have left Rome. Divorce and remarriage is a reality. Birth control is a reality.
I'm 28. I became a Catholic when I was 22 (grew up Episcopalian). I never new Catholicism before Vatican II, but I am enthralled by the beauty and solemness of the Tridentine Mass. I sense that many other young Catholics feel the same way.
Good on God and on you!
It's funny that a lot of young Converts never knew of the original mass, but have this inherent instinctive idea of it. Almost as if it was familiar when they finally went to one.
I wonder if this had something to do with older media preserving this depiction.
be careful not to confuse appreciation of art with religion
i don't. Most of it is silent and wihout any participation by the congregation. I'm glad Pope Fracis has banned it exceptin a very few designated churches.
I also joined the church at age 21 from a protestent background. I felt I had finally found the God give moral authority on earth to live as Christ taught us. About six months later I attended my first TLM. The reverence and deference of both the clergy and laity overwhelmed me. It's not just the art and spectacle, it's God infront of your eyes. It's the priest praying with the people, not turning his back on the crucifix to pray at the people.
My home parish has a dwindling population of septuagenarians and older, whereas when I attend St Clements Parish in Ottawa, the church is full to bursting with young and old alike.
Vatican II no doubt did some good things, but in removing centuries of beautiful worship and reforming into something that really can't draw a crowd is sad for the body of Christ. There is nothing in the Novus Ordo mass that makes me feel like I'm about to receive the most gracious gift of all time the was saying "Domine non sum dignus" and then kneeling to recieved the Lord.
I am 88. I lived and worked in Rome during the Council, and in the late 1960’s worked as a translator in the Vatican. I think the decisions have largely not been implemented as intended, and this rests largely on the shoulders of some bishops not being courageous and firm enough, and many priests not studying the documents enough. +
Could not agree more....no adult faith promotion .
Not least updating scholasticism in the light of the fact that, “the human race is passing from a rather static concept of the order of things to a more dynamic, evolutionary one" (G&S 5), yet staying faithful to "the doctrine of the Church concerning God, man and the world" (G&S, 62).
@@tomgreene1843
I guess you and I belong precisely in that bracket. It took Vatican II to say that it is the bounden duty of each baptized to promote the faith.
I do believe more number of the laity is equipped today than earlier but the fact is also that they are only like drops in the ocean. Bishops indeed have their role. But let all and each Catholic assume and fulfill their role too. Bishops, Priests/religious and Laity, let's all embrace our own duty while praying earnestly and supporting each other generously.
That must have been an amazing experience! Hopefully the Church will implement V2 more faithfully.
@@fr.hughmackenzie5900 Ah the Scholastics...Aquinas had a great and subtle intellect.....some of those who wrote /write about him did not.
As a late 20s cradle Catholic in South Africa, I wouldn't look at Africa as a positive simply because of numbers. The church is becoming a product of the era. Allow the TLM to live freely alongside the Novus Ordo
That can't happen as people have grown bored with the commkn banality of the Novus Ordo as it is done in 95% of parishes. The TLM parishes are growing and that is a major problem for the "Spirit of Vatican II" types.
exactly, the part he left out is that the church is currently restricting it's tradition. If the novus ordo works for people in africa that's great, but if the Traditional Latin Mass is also bringing people to Christ why block that?
As a Ugandan myself, I find that many Western people are misinterpreting the stats from Africa. Many people don't go to Mass because they recognise the physical reality of Jesus in the Eucharist. Many of them go for Mass for the social vibe and entertainment. The choir is an essential part of the NOM in Africa. If the choir is magnificent, people will come for Mass. And they will leave without knowing what the Mass is about. The Priests' homilies are not about sin and Hell and eternal salvation, they're not even about the Eucharist. They tend to mostly be about politics and social issues and money. Many of our Priests are living in sin. Many Catholics are receiving the Eucharist sacrilegiously. Few people go for confession at least once a month. Many Catholics also pray from evangelical churches. They need to listen to serious African Catholics concerning the state of the Church in Africa, and not just draw their own abstract conclusions from the statistics presented to them.
Great point... and some very insightful comments that followed it. Thank you. This vid was disappointing. Very!
@@justinreany1514 indeed this is true except that the 60's rite appeals to a lot of old people, while the revived old.rite around here attracts many young adults and families,.also older people from tough circumstances, who are looking for that deeper order and spiritual beauty. Its a generational divide.
Why does the Pope put so much emphasis on suppressing the Tridentine Mass? I don't understand. Wouldn't it be more logical to allow both forms of the mass and for Catholics to choose which one brings us closer to the Church?
He wants to quash *anything* and everything that is holy, faithful to the Church/Christ, which preaches in and out of season, all of which modernists, which he himself is, deem ''rigid''.
Because he and his "group" hate the Latin Mass and perhaps have lost the faith and is tending towards a non-catholic type mass as other religions.
@@phoenixaz8431a pope is not able to squash the holiness of the church. Hence he can’t possibly be the pope. He is the vicar of satan not the vicar of Christ.
He's controlled by outside influences. Benedict was forced out.
@@floydm.4159 Much like Biden after the debate debacle.
And he announced it, as it were :
*Pray for me that I might not flee for fear of the wolves*
"By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?" (Matt 7:16)
I'm reading G.K. Chesterton's collected writings right now - "Heretic, Orthodoxy, and The Everlasting Man" Two points - 1. whether in the US, in Germany, or in South Korea when the Priest said Dominus vobis cum, I knew the response was Et cum spiritu tuu. So, I could actively participate in Mass wherever I was stationed. 2. I feel like the focus of attention (adoration) has shifted from the Eucharist (which we all faced together) to the priest.
TOTALLY agree.
Omg silly arguments. 1. I have been to Novus Ordo mass in English, Latin, Spanish, Korean, Italian…the point of it is that I respond in my language, but clearly, the reason I respond at the right time is because the order of the mass is exactly the same no matter the language. Just because we changed the responses from Latin to vernacular doesn’t mean you can’t just walk into a Chinese mass right now and be able to respond. 2. The focus is still on Jesus (Eucharist). Again, having the knowledge of where he is and acknowledging his presence helps in these situations. The priest facing out to the people just calls people to be a part of the worship.
did you forget that the priest is an ALTER CHRISTUS??.... He becomes a living sacrament when he celebrates the Mass... 🙄....
@@krishyyfan5153 Didn't forget, was never taught that and can't find it in the current catechism - would you be kind enough to provide the paragraph number for that, thanks in advance
@@ntmn8444 Help me understand, is this response Christian love and teaching as per the faith or mockery and divisive (silliness)? Just trying to put it in the right bucket - spirit inspired or not?
I remember being in grade school when the changes started. The third statement of this discussion is exactly what happened in my head! Growing up from around a 10 year old as life was getting tough (so I thought as a 10+ year old) being in a Catholic grade school I always felt that the church was this solid reliable stalwart. Then the changes started, then more and more...threw me for a loop from which I never recovered.
Same experience. If anything I now loathe the Catholic Church top to bottom. So corrupt, hypocritical, homosexuality and pedophilia run rampant, watered-down treatment of pro-abortion laity and worse open-arms embrace of pro-abortion Catholic politicians by the Pope. It is worse now than when Luther and the Protestant Reformation.
I went to a catholic all-girls boarding school in the mid seventies, and they didn’t even OFFER Latin class! I was SO disappointed, as I’m really good at learning languages… I came to dislike the vernacular, as we have lost our sacred language !
@@johnfisher247I agree. I feel sorry for all the traditional Catholic folks. Seems like all their heritage and tradition is being stripped from them.
Vatican II: "Lets change the Mass so that more people come!" How did that work out?
"Look at the votes," but did the Council Fathers know what they were signing up for?
The implementation turned out to be far more radical than the changes the documents mandated.
they really didn't know
Did they know in Vatican I? Many bishops opposed it
I'm 56, and my older sister and I attended Catholic school (a small school, K-8). During a discussion, we both agreed that neither of us learned anything about our faith. I don't even remember being taught how to go through the Bible. My knowledge has come from my searching and reading and finding informative videos such as Word on Fire. I would often hear others say, "Oh, you were born after Vatican II." This comment seemed to me as if they were saying that I wasn't educated properly in the faith. I didn't even know how to pray a rosary. I asked a close friend in my early 20's. It was embarrassing. Seriously, where did the ball get dropped?
I am 70 - raised in Catholic school through High School and didn't come to know my faith until the new Catechism. I was in my 20's when Vatican II became commonly implemented throughout the church. I think that the Catechism is the crowning glory of Vatican II
The post V II leadership permitted the misinterpretation of the teachings and practices of the Council. As a result we lost the sense of the sacred that had been a Hallmark of Roman Catholicism.
If you’re 56 you were born before V2 went through
I'm sorry you had that experience. My Catholic school experience in the 1960s was the opposite. It was grounded in our faith and gave me a foundation that has carried me through life (I'm 66, so I guess big changes occurred during that 10 year difference in our educations.). I will be forever grateful to the Sisters of Mercy who shepherded my K-8 education.
@bobtosi9346 So V II was implemented after 1967? I was in elementary school through the 1970's. So if I was born before V II, it didn't happen until 1980; if I read your statement correctly.
Why did the church abandon the use of wearing their “religious dress”. As a doctor an order of nuns came to my office regularly. They complained that they didn’t get respect on the street or in stores. That didn’t get a discount in stores 31:01 31:01 anymore. I told them because you’re not wearing your habit anymore. How would people know who you are? Then there wasn’t any interest joining their order any more.
Are we participating for (mostly) our benefit, or to participate in, at God's invitation, the saving work of His Son both for others and ourselves?
To the question of "religious dress," it seems to me that the habit shows the secular public that one is in the Service of the Lord. I taught at a convent boarding school, and the majority of the sisters in the convent there were dressed like anyone's elderly aunt in her house frock. Several sisters who were involved with the actual school wore veils and street-length habits. In the convent's museum, there were scratchy-looking wool habits and wimples that had to be starched and crimped with an iron tool. It is easy to see why those were shed like last year's leaves. But the moderate, probably permanent-press, updated habits and short veils impart respect and recognition. Why not???
I love listening to how clearly you state things! I was 6 years old when the council started. I don't remember the traditional Latin Mass. My father is Catholic and my mother Lutheran, but neither one knew very much about Christianity apart from going to Church on Sunday and sending us to CCD. My father is also retired Army, so I lived in many different places and catechesis wasn't strong. I used to complain to my husband about our lack of knowledge of our faith and he reminds me always that things happen in God's time. It's easy to blame it on the council,, but when I read the documents of Vatican II, I found them beautiful. God put me in a diocese that offered ongoing faithful education. My own children and now my grandchildren are growing in the faith of the Church. They are loving God with their hearts and their minds. I do see them as the fruit of the council; not a blind faith in repetitive traditions, but a constant learning and growing in relationship with Jesus Christ.
@@tick5485 you should consider what you think of children. What are they? From where and to where they go?
If you see chindren as a necessary part of they parents (because without one of them, or if the conceptuon was in another time: that child would never existed, would be another person). By the same token: love meets rules. You would never be a good oarent if you see your child going to a bad path without any warning or help to prevent it from those with more experience.
Of course, all people are diferent (and also similar in other ways), maybe your child is somewhat diferent from you and will reach another places, another groups, etc. OK, that's part of a child which came from they parents e grow to become independent.
But, all this beeing said, if you truly belive in the truth of Christ and His Church. There is nothing more important than to guide your offspring to Jesus. That's what the ateists and the weak of faith amd heart don't get it. If a religious person truly believe, she must preach to her child, that's the same to the ateist to defend his secular moral principles or any other teaching any parent in any point of the globe would do: the best they can to help the child to be incredible.
I grew up before Vatican 11, and there were very many knowledgeable and devout people then too. My generation grew up in the primary grades with one book: "The Baltimore Catichetism ", and I feel it presented a very good grounding in the basics of the faith. Many people went to daily Mass and Communion. Parents were obliged to send their kids to the Parish grades school and tuitions were very inexpensive. The most it cost in the school I attended as a child was $30.00 a year for one child, and for each additional child it was cheaper still. If you had more than three, they attended free. So all families could be assured that their kids would get 9 years (including kindergarten) of solid training in the faith. Most kids and the families were devout back then, and were very well behaved.. There was a great devotion to Mary too. We had "May Processions" each year and paraded around the grounds singing songs to mary and placing a crown of flowers on her statue's head. The whole school and the parents of the students attended.. Not all parents could send their kids to Catholic high schools in my area, outside a large city, but my parish had a Junior Newman Club, Junior Sadality, and kids could be members of adult choirs. I"m sure there were other There were retreats for teenagers, as well as adult retreats. These were things I attended as a kid. There were plenty of ways to connect with the parishes back then that kept members connect to their faith and parish families. .
@@grandmajoyce2 oh yes, I do believe that. And my father was faithful in bringing us to Church and to CCD. He just didn't have a deep knowledge of faith or of the Bible and couldn't answer my questions. I don't think he grew up in a community like yours. And because my father was in the military, I didn't experience a consistent parish life. God does work things out for us in the end. You are very blessed to have grown up in that environment.
@@tick5485 actually we used to think like this as kids, challenging everything. Catechism was taught at school but seemed to us absurd and out of touch. I totally get why V2 had to happen, but youth emancipation in the Sixties was a Sixties thing. The children at my TLM church do well with locally run Catechism, as a foil to the baleful influence of secular society which itself tries to indoctrinate children to atheist ways of thinking
Right on! We went to ccd and mass. Not enough $to send 5 kids to private school. We were military too. Mom and Dad didn't go but their friends went. I could always ask them a question
I attended the Novus Ordo modern Catholic Church for 25 years, to help my wife raise our kids Catholic. I never converted to Catholicism. The services were light & almost silly, the priests told jokes, the music "ministry" was pop & amateurish, the deacons held communion, girl alter-servers, etc. Once I tried the Latin Traditional Mass, I saw something that was reverent, spiritual, & serious. Just what I needed. I'm in the process of converting now....but not for the Novus Ordo. It's an embarrassment.
Unfortunately, the current management wants to stamp out the TLM as quickly as possible so that they can insist on continuing to do the things that go horribly until they magically start going right, and as a very smart Jewish man once said, that is the definition of insanity.
Welcome Home ! The changes to the liturgy after the Council were a catastrophic mistake. It’s a huge reason why 80% of Baptized Catholics in the US don’t attend. The Good Bishop is right about the cultural upheavals in the 1960s. But that is all the more reason why the Church needed to stay a strong Bulwark of truth and double down on the sense of the sacred in her liturgy. The Faithful needed a strong anchor to cling to through those turbulent times. Just the opposite happened.
I agree
100%
💯
Bishop Barron, I just heard you say that the Council was not a failure , but that it was poorly implemented. I am curious as to what you think were those aspects that were poorly implemented and what as the new bishop of your diocese can you change to reflect the intentions of the Council.
The truth is there was NOTHING in VII that was mandatory as it was only ecumenical. But that was intentional so it could later be "implemented" in whatever way the heretics behind VII wanted.
My husband and I, and therefore our four living children, wouldn’t be Catholic today without the videos of Bishop Barron. We converted in 2020.
We are very traditional people: we homeschool our children, we live on a homestead in rural Appalachia, my husband works from home, and our family hierarchy is very traditional. But we have always loved, from the first simply military mass we attended on a base in Germany, vernacular masses. We love and value the TLM too, but we don’t have a special preference for it. That is pretty surprising to the people who meet us! But mass isn’t really an exercise in culture or personality. I don’t know what the answers to all this are, I am not about to argue with the authority of the church. That’s what I was accepting when I became Catholic, after all. I am no great theologian, only a simple homeschooling mother, but I am a lover and student of history, and through that lens I do know that our entire culture and the “west” as a whole have decided that God is an unnecessary, antiquated notion no longer needed. And I think that would be the case even if V II had never occurred.
My daily act of radical subversion to this is to try to love my family. Changing diapers, washing dishes, doing our taxes, taking care of the farm animals. I can’t change the world. All I can hope to do is work and pray, pray and work, and by the grace of God the vapor of this life will end with our reunification with Him. Pray for our Church, pray for the Pope, our Bishops, our countries. And love our families & communities.
I agree the decline in church attendance etc, would have continued with or without V II
I agree.
@@anonymous-pi3ozSecularism is the order of the day. Lord, have mercy.
People are heading for and packing the Catholic Churches offering the Traditional Latin Mass, because as soon as they enter the Church, they are greeted with the feeling within, of total love, devotion, honor, respect, for our Lord. The quietness of the worshippers, as they kneel and pray, pray their Holy Rosaries, before the Mass has begun, reminds us, as to why we are there.
The women wearing their chapel veals and the men dressed neatly is another way respect is shown to our Lord.
Kneeling and receiving the Body, Blood Soul and Divinity on the tongue, as to not receiving in the hand, where partials of our Lord land on the floor and are trampled and stepped on, does not occur when receiving our Lord on the tongue. These faithful knowing that, Jesus cannot be taken, if we are not in the state of grace.
I could go on and on.
The TLM Masses are packed and growing, because people have found what they were searching for, Jesus.
Where Novus Ordo Masses are offered with the same love, respect, honor and devotion, Churches are growing with the faithful!.
My friend, you actually understand what it means to be Catholic better than most of these comments. Finally! A kindred spirit. I actually reverted to Catholicism around the same time as your conversion. I don’t feel robbed, I don’t feel any type of way toward any specific mass. My focus has been on learning and mastering what Jesus taught.
We have a lot of very conservative African priests in our diocese in Pennsylvania. Thank God for them.
As a Catholic, I particularly have nothing against the Second Vatican Council. I really don't know much about it. I just love Jesus Christ and concentrate a lot on staying on track.
It would be alright if they would just offer both masses. There's no reason why a church can't offer both NO and TLM. Many elderly people long deeply for the mass they remember as a child, it feels cruel for the Pope to continue restricting the availability of TLM
Instead of examining the zeitgeist through the lens of Catholic teaching, the Church is doing the opposite.
I was 10 years old in 1962. It seems to me that before Vatican II the sermons that I remember were always telling us what not to do so we would not go to Hell and since Vatican II we hear what to do to go to Heaven.
I went to the N.O. for over 20 years. Getting to heaven was mentioned maybe 3 times. Every sermon was "how was your walk with Jesus this week"? Hell was never mentioned.
@@jamesMartinelli-x2t This. All our Sermons now are "be nice to people". We briefly had a younger, more trad priest at our Parish who came from an Ordinariate parish. He gave a lengthy sermon on adultery and specifically, the modern scourge of Pornography. After mass it was nothing but grumbling from baby boomers about how it was "inappropriate". Sorry, but last I checked his job is to save souls and that industry is absolutely crushing a generation of young people right now.
Well, just look at the fruits. Did we see the promised revitalization in the church, or a decline?
Actually just read the Catholic church is the only one that's growing.
@@robertsullivan4773 The Catholic Church is growing because of the massive birthrate in Africa, not because of anything having to do with Vatican 2
@@folofus4815 didn't say it did, but it is growing.
I converted to Catholicism 2 years ago and I guess I can humbly say I am a Vatican ll success story. If my local diocese or Parish priest had made me feel unwelcome I would have just turned around and left because I was very emotionally battle scarred at the time and needed love from the Church.
@@wildplumbeauty I’m glad you have become Catholic, that’s awesome! As far as feeling unwelcome, I don’t think it’s the case that the church wasn’t welcoming before Vatican 2, we certainly had converts before the 1970s
Vatican II worked for me. I'm now a kingdom's servant, I'm now a Lord's mighty warrior. God bless
Bishop Robert Barron, I am from IL and lived in Mundelein, born in Joliet. I pray unceasingly for IL and my family, friends, and all who live there.
The reason we resist it is mainly what it did to the Mass...for most people this is their rock...and the new Mass it just too different from the old...The new Mass and the way it is celebrated is in conflict with the pre Conciliar Mass... There is too much that came out of Vatican II that conflicts with pre Conciliar teachings and that is not addressed by the Church...Allowing that conflict to fester and harden is a mistake...stating we " can't go back" flies in the face of Vatican II which tells us we are going back indeed to a time at the beginning of the Church...the way things were in antiquity....
The bogus ordo is not merely different, it is full of heresy. Consider that every priest ordained has their hands consecrated to God. Why? Because they are to perform the recreation of the Sacrifice that transforms bread and wine into the physical body and blood of Jesus. Therefore, they are the ONLY person worthy of touching our Lord's body in the delivery of Communion. The bogus ordo also totally changed the focus from being focused on God to focusing on man by separating the altar from the tabernacle and by turning the priest to face the people rather than face God. Then it allows people to receive God in their hands which is sacrilege, and enables particles of His precious body to fall onto the ground and be trampled by people, another sacrilege.
I appreciate the discussion about a lack of oversight with implementation. I’ve recently been appointed to our parish pastoral council and my prayer is that we will address this issue (refreshing the liturgy with guidance from Sacrosanctum Concilium) as well as a focus on Sacred music..
I'm a new Catholic and I was certainly drawn in by the Latin mass. The younger generation that has any interest in converting is yearning for what they lacked: tradition, heritage, stalwart leadership in faith, and an general agnosticism towards the spirit of the age. We were raised in a secular, atheistic culture that robbed us of the sacred and we want it back. Although I don't understand fully all the implications of Vatican II, I know that the mass as it stands has some challenges for younger converts like me. The aesthetics are often not austere, not holy. We want to worship God and we want to enter a holy space where we can leave the world behind to focus of the mass and the prayers of the church. For us, that does mean a certain nod to the past, not the past of the 1960's but the long past, the eternal. Guitar strumming and cajon beat boxes will never invoke this for us. Maybe for our parents it makes them feel more close to the mass, but for us and for any generations after, it is just corny, and fundamentally secular. I think Brian Holdsworth made this point, if you allow one generation to define the aesthetic, it will ultimately end up outdated and be in constant need of updating. This is what Tradition is supposed to solve. While I think I understand the intention was to bring the mass back down to the laity and allow more opportunities for them to participate and bring their modern lives to the table, this was a big error. What was not understood was just how corrupt the lay culture had become and how manipulated it is now. It is not a real, organic, culture. It is the result of decades of cultural warfare, propaganda, "public relations", and nihilistic deconstruction philosophies. Ethnicity has been replaced by consumer choice. It's would be one thing if, say, a pre-modern Irish folk style was injected into the mass music in Ireland; that was a real culture that still possessed the ability to invoke the sacred. Not to mention, the musical culture (I harp on that because I am in the music ministry) that came in in the 60's was fundamentally rooted in a radical "freedom" movement that cannot coexist within the church. In fact, a reaction to this movement is largely what is bringing new converts in.
I think there is still an opportunity to correct the missteps. Maybe it starts with admitting the short-sightedness and optimism of the 60's, and let's have a collective reality check about where the world is, and more importantly, where our souls really are 60 years later. Hindsight is 20/20 and there's no reason why we can't start steering the church back into a more appropriate synthesis of tradition and participation. If you want to save souls, you have to be honest about the state they are in.
Thank you Bishop for not denying us the possibility of either mass. They are both part of our faith, both part of our heritage. Both express vital truths. Thank you for not bashing Vatican II and the Novus Ordo, and thank you for not eradicating the Traditional Latin Mass. You are a voice of reason for me and you always inspire me to be a better Catholic. Thanks Bishop
TLM people are so attached to their issue, to the exclusion of everything else, even to the point of denying the Council. Pope Francis is correct to provide a corrective to the off the hook proliferation of their divisive behavior.
The worst thing about the New Mass is its truncated nature. The dismissal comes too soon after Communion, with hardly any time for reflection. Many people walk out immediately afterwards.
@@Photo513Graphy exactly. You hit the nail on the head.
Personally I wouldn’t be against making the Novus Ordo its own liturgical tradition. Having a simplified, stripped down liturgy to lower the culture shock for Protestant converts is actually a pretty brilliant idea for helping bring people back to The Church. The problem is it’s trying to replace The Roman Rite and claim it’s actually a successive evolution of it, when it just isn’t. At least not as it has been implemented.
@@Photo513Graphy
They damn well should be considering that the Liturgy is the foundation of worship. Poor liturgy weakens faith, you should be heavily invested in it. It’s an absurd notion that defending THE Liturgical Tradition that built this Church is somehow a bad thing.
We torn up our beautiful churches organs for guitars and dancing with a piece of plywood where the high alter used to be
Vatican 2 is not what the churches are doing today. St Paul the 6th would be super upset if he saw how the masses, mostly empty, are. The only churches I see growing are the TLM masses where most of them I barely can find a space to sit if I come slightly late. NO and TLM are the same in terms of giving the sacraments. However, I dont see why a lot of the things were done away from the old mass, because those things are what keep you looking forward to God, such as first friday and saturday devotion or teachings of fatima or the scapular.
Do you think the number of Church attending catholics would have remained the same or increased, if vatican II never happened?
@@anonymous-pi3oz It would have likely decreased because of the zeitgeist, but it wouldn't have been the utter catastrophe we're witnessing.
You are mistaken about the sacraments. In order to be valid and licit, sacraments must adhere to the Traditional Magisterium in form, matter, and intent. Clearly the form of the liturgy has changed significantly, and while the matter may be appropriate, the intent is open to question as the 1983 Code of Canon law changed much of what is considered valid and licit.
Was it a failure? Judge for yourself by the subsequent metrics. EVERY index, the number of faithful, of religious, of seminarians, parishes, marriages, baptisms, etc., every one save the number of permanent deacons, has precipitously declined, plummeted in fact. If the word 'failure' has any meaning at all, Vatican Council II was a catastrophic failure. I'm 80 years old, a Catholic since birth, and all I see around me is spiritual decay, confusion, outright heresy, and division. So, yes, it was an ill-conceived, massive failure.
I just entered the Church but its took the Sacredness away for the Mass. I normally go to the NO but i will go to the FSSP every so often. Maybe we should also be learning some songs in Aramaic?
The TLM should not be restricted. TLM parishes are thriving. Embrace the tradition for those who want it. Vatican II did need to happen, but we should have never lost the reverence of our faith. Novus Ordo can be reverent, I've seen it.
Well said! However we NEED bishops (like Barron) who DEMAND that Novus Ordo be reverent. It starts with every SINGLE Diocese and parish bringing back the Sacraments, RECONCILIATION, as JOB number 1.
Heresy, as in all things n-o, cannot be reverent if one knows Catholic doctrine.
There were some good intentions- but ultimately terrible consequences
the collapse in Britain started in 1960
The fruit has been pretty rotten! I have read the octet of the Council and many if the docs are quite nice and beautiful. Others are purely speculative and have no binding authority on the faithful such as Nostrae Aetate.
Brett Gurda You are so right!!!
@@justinreany1514 You are SO right!!
There were terrible consequences from TRENT.
Thank you Bishop Robert. You open so much up for us. 🙏
Bishop is awesome
The lack of agitation in Bishop Barron, is positively telling.
Imagine, a council thinking they can improve the Mass better than the Holy Spirit. The level of hubris is astounding
Whom do you think guides the magisterium?
Bring back the good, true and beautiful.
When the NO Mass is so frequently conducted in a cheap manner, it severely undermines the Church.
Church discipline is required to make the NO everything it is supposed to be ASAP!
I have never been to a NO (it could be my area!) that can match a chanted TLM. The TLM Mass I attend has a huge amount of converts and is growing.
Your prayers are needed, the current fellow in charge of liturgical matters in Rome has a deep, inexplicable and unabashed hatred for the Latin mass, so they from the rumors, I hear, intend to release a apostolic constitution heavily restricting it.
The Mass was severely injured by the ‘Peter, Paul and Mary folk music’. It’s became a distraction, especially when the music was played or sang poorly.
Sacrosanctum Concilium did not need to implement the novus ordo missæ by itself. All the Council had to do was authorize change- even radical adaptation, as it explicitly does- and assign the changes to some unknown groups in the future. Sacrosanctum Concilium didn't need to prescribe the novus ordo itself, because it literally wrote a blank check for those who would implement it. Read it.
@@ryanautrey2269
I think the greatest thing that church leaders can learn from Vatican II is that they really need to be more specific, firm, and clearly stated when it comes to future documentation.
Thank you Bishop Barron and Brandon Vogt. This is a hot topic in my family. So many young people seem to prefer TLM. I certainly do understand their criticisms and concerns of NO. HOWEVER, I LOVE that they want to return to The Church and follow the faith! I do not really understand why Parishes can't have a Latin Mass at 9am and NO at the other times. I also recall my mother, father, Grandmother, and numerous Irish aunts and uncles arguing about Vatican II which I did not understand as a child. I'm going to have to watch/ listen to this again, but I appreciate you addressing this issue. Would you do a Part II (yup, I saw it) and address the concerns of Mass of the Ages?? Please. please. My son believes every word in Mass of the Ages.
Have a listen to Allegri's MISERERE....and see what it invokes for you and your son.
I experienced the transition or changes after Vat. II in the Phils. We learned a lot from it. It's a gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church. Thanks be to God!🙏
Maybe!? Not maybe. Definitely! People do not believe as they used to when I was a child and adolescent. People were not taught the faith after Vatican II . Good catechesis ceased.
Cardinal George once said that, with the exception of inventing lots of jobs for lay people to do during Mass, we have not even begun to have any interior active participation, desired by the Council. And when it comes to the task of the laity to sanctify the temporal order, we have not begun that either.
I converted to Catholicism the year before marrying in 1967. Our church was still having Latin masses and I would quietly say the Mass along with priest. It was rather strange switching over to English
The Council of Trent was always accepted and loved.
Idk about that, you have to consider how the Church was boosted by the navigations and the sheer power of the globe-spanning Portuguese and Spanish empires, both elements that the Church lost over time, the Church by the time of Vatican II had basically lost all of the official government recognitions it once enjoyed.
The Orthodox Church hasn’t changed and they are doing well. People want Tradition.
The question isn’t even worth asking.. it is a failure!
So also thought some of the apostles and disciples of Christ about Jesus' death on the Cross.
Still others have said the same about the Bible or the Catholic religion or even it's denominational offshoots.
Vatican II is steeped in tradition while at once fair in reasonable changes such as with masses said in a given culture's local language.
Having said that, as with Catholics at any time, mortals can mis-interpret and mis-apply or simply fail to apply what they should from Vatican II.
The main point is: don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's easy to do when frustrated, but it's an over-reaction. Blessings upon you.
To be so closed minded as to refuse to even think about a question... I will pray for you.
@@sikobaya9298 Excellent point, but it can be so hard when one may be right at the surface level and intellectual pride blind-sides it. That's why prayers are in order to foster the requisite humility to dislodge and un-coil pride from one's intellect.
If Vatican II was a success we woudn't even be asking the question of whether it was a failure or not
As a 26 yr old catholic, bring back TLM
It is here if you look. And it is growing despite everything Bergoglio is doing to destroy it.
@miketrrtx471 who is Bergoglio
Yes, without question. Video over after 10 secs. 80% of people I know have no faith or completely lost the Catholic Faith, 10% are seriously questioning or doubt etc and the remaining 10% are trying to figure out what happened and doing their best to hold their head above water.
I was 7 when Vatican II came about. I loved the Latin masses. I have always felt bad to this day they removed that from Mass. Back then, you could attend Mass in any country and be able to participate. Now, unless you happen to speak the language of the country you are visiting, you silently participate. Sad.
Not just Catholicism my friend. I asked my Protestant sister why she doesn't go to Church. Her response was that she hasn't found one that meets her needs yet. I get it! To agree! But talk about a secular world. The notion that, "I will go to Church if I can find one that meets and bends to my need." Religion, in general, is under fire and failing. But I guess that has been the case since it's inception. Even before Christianity. The nature of man in full display.
Yes. Even worse for protestants. The church I gree up in now hangs gay pride flags out in front. Makes me weep. I've turned to Catholic mass instead. Please don't let that die too. My heart couldn't take it. Fight to keep your beautiful traditions alive.
Not just a failure, but an absolute abysmal failure that they refuse to admit.
so the Holy Spirit did wrong? that's literally what you are saying?
Correct
In order to know if the growth of the church in Africa and Asia was due to Vatican, it must be taken into account the population growth of those continents and know whether the growth is proportional or not to that. For example, between 1980 and 2015, population in Africa grew from (roughly) 476 million to 1182 million - this means an increase of approximately 2,48x. For the same period of time, the number of catholics in Africa increased by 2.38x. These are rough estimates, and even though the growth rate of catholics in Africa appears lower than the population growth of that same continent given these numbers, during the same time period, the benefit of the doubt should be given, but there are no doubts that if it isn't lower, then it is at least proportionate.
Therefore, given this, how can one infer from this that the church in Africa grew because of the second Vatican council, while at the same time, and as of right now, we are witnessing a monumental decline in the number of catholics in the countries who were mostly catholic (over 95% of the total population) before the second Vatican council was implemented?
Very helpful insights from our Bishop. I was 6 when the Council began, and my formative years as a Catholic were lived in the implementation of the Council teachings. We talked out Faith matters in our home, and we were a family where reflection on the news, politics, philosophy and the connection between Faith and Culture were ever part of the discourse. Even as a child, it seemed clear to me that the tensions over implementation were not about the vernacular Liturgy, or fasting or taking Communion by the hand. The tension was in the diametric perceptions of what needed to change, and what could not change. A large number of Catholics wanted the Church to liberalize teachings on divorce, birth control, premarital cohabitation, women clergy, female altar servers, etc etc etc. All the same gender and sexual liberty issues we still grapple with today (though fewer then). Those Catholics wanted the Church to get on board with modernity. Vatican II DID NOT DO SO. But because certain practices had been altered, some given more to diocesan level discretion, they saw these as cracks in the wall; not a "red light" in front of their agenda, but a "yellow light", which left them discretion on how to interpret Church Law. The Council did not go where they wanted, but they thought that the changes that were made left open a window for more liberal interpretation and more freewheeling practice. These things I clearly perceived as underway by the time I was just 12. The Bishop naturally looks back on the Council and ensuing years from an ecclesiastical framework. My experience and views were formed at "ground zero", so to speak. What went wrong after the Council wasn't the Council's fault. It was as much a sociological as an ecclesiastical phenomenon. The question before the house remains: Is the Church to transform the World, or will the World co-opt the Church? Thankfully, the Council said, the former. Dogma is universal, customs local. The Council never misled the Faithful, but some of the Faithful twisted the teachings to sound like what they wanted to hear. That is my abiding recollection.
Thanks for your insight. As a convert i 2021 and born in 73 in Protestant country (Norway) I doubt I would have found my way to the Church without V2. I am reading all the V2-documents now, and I see only good things there. I think God challenges each and every person in various ways - unfortunately many couldn’t handle it. Besides, all churches in the West have declined - but I do believe our Church will now turn the tide.
That's amazing reflection and genuine sharing. Thanks for it.
Nice reply, well thought out. I'm about the same age as you and recollect that even at my Catholic school, all manner of changes were being made by liberal thinkers that did things "in the spirit of Vatican II" that were clearly at odds with Church teachings on all the subjects you listed. I think the idea of "change" took hold and allowed those that wanted to co-opt the Church got their proverbial foot in the door. I like your insights and totally agree with you.
Yes, my recollections are similar to yours and I watched everything unfold within the same age bracket as you. I was in Catholic elementary school at the time and had a close-up view. I remember welcoming the change to the vernacular in Mass because new understandings opened up to me. The first "folk" Mass, however, with guitar music was a shocker, and not a welcome one. Today, I appreciate how chant and Latin prayers are integrated into the Mass in my local parish.
One of the enduring effects of the Council was to seem to put a stamp of approval on the end of the Church's missions. If the Church suddenly approved of religious freedom (as put forth in Dignitatis Humanæ), then the missions would shift from proselytism to defending other religions. If the Church seemed to abandon opposition to other religions, now the emphasis would be on unity with them. Can the Church forget who she is? Can it be the case that the Church of Christ is truly divided between Catholic, Orthodox, and protestant? Or is the Church truly One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic; while the protestants and schismatic "Orthodox" are unfortunately cut off from the Church? Is it as Francis said?... that good Lutherans have the true faith of Christ? ... that proselytizing the "Orthodox" is a grave sin? Is he not basing these outrageous claims on the teachings of the Council? Yes, the Council did it's utmost to neuter the true mission of the Catholic Church.
"Was Vatican II a failure?"
is like the questions,
"Was the French Revolution a failure?" or
"Was the Bolshevik Revolution a failure?".
The implementation was a complete failure
The masons, who pushed all the changes of VII, would call it a success.
There are way too many "cafeteria Catholics" who would NOT adjust and adapt nowadays.
Vatican II was supposed to be pastoral, but it did nothing to improve opportunities for single Catholics to meet the opposite sex. Today Europe faces demographic winter, and the Pope has managed to notice it. Could you please comment on this.
Hey, David, We might have to wait for a social council.
I didn’t know that was the purpose of an ecumenical council. If you attend Mass regularly, becoming involved in your local parish might be a way to meet a likeminded person of the opposite sex.
@@dotkom9382 Knowing what I know now, I would suggest that if opportunities to meet the opposite sex are scarce, then go and have a word with your parish priest. We are heading for demographic winter if you don't do that. Indeed there may be parish activities to join in, or there may not. There may be a neighbouring parish with more to offer. The social club in your own parish may be a men-only club, but the club in a neighbouring parish may offer better opportunities to meet the opposite sex. Consider joining pilgrimages and other activities. Generally put yourself in circulation. Perhaps your parish priest will have some useful suggestions to make.
I am at loss to see the point of Vatican 2 if there wasn't any improvement in this area. The Pope is practically admitting this. It did nothing for those of us who like attending Nuptial Masses.
I didn't know that. I love white catholic girls they're so beautiful inward and outward.
when will Catholics get with the programme ?? Maybe ask Bishops!! So much that the council never discussed we find today.
Let's make a new rule: you can only criticize yourself and your own religion.
What do you mean “get with the program?”
Whose program? That of the masons who forced the heretical changes after VII?
Not a catholic but i am 29 and came to faith in christ over the last 10 years. I think a big answer to why did we resist vatican 2 is that with so much hatred for the traditions of the west in the west, to have the traditions of a pillar of the west change is terrifying. I have found my way to joy and peace in my life through finding the traditions of the west and this is why i see the latin mass more appealing as someone interested on the outside.
You, my friend, are in the line of thought with Christ’s true bride, the Church, and you are hearing the Lord’s voice loud and clear. Let him take you by the hand, and he’ll lead you home. He’s waiting for you in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
@@falcon6173 The Holy language of Pontius Pilate, which Jesus never spoke. 🙏
We remember that the important thing is not so much the precious perfume, but rather the fancy chunky bottle in which it is contained. 🙏
Open your heart to the truth of the Catholic Mass. There you will find God waiting for you with open arms.
If not now, then when?
God is waiting…
kristoferjhess. The Vatican 2 changes in tone and behavior described by Bishop Barron are all negative. Look to the Latin Mass and traditional Catholicism. Much of what is offered by local Novus Ordo parishes is diluted and sometimes not orthodox.
Bishop Barron: “We think in centuries; we take a very long view.”
Previous popes watching the Vatican II unfold: 👀
I’ve got an idea re: not going back to mid-20th century Catholic Church in America: competition. Let the offering of the Mass as it was offered in mid-20th century America compete against the Novus Ordo. Let the faithful choose. This is a similar response to those who say we can never go back to a gold standard. I say, let gold compete against fiat and let Americans decide.
Let all be decided in true freedom and under the banner of Heaven.
I've been suggesting this for years, let each parish offer both rites and let's see which rite draws more attendees. If the Tridentine Rite is no "threat" which is the Church terrified at its concelebration? Well said, Harry.
The End of Religious Art, or a Massive almost extinctive trend of it says a lot of the state of affairs of the Church.
It appears that some jimmies are about to be rustled
I went to Catholic school in the 80s, and in religion lessons the stress was always on Vatican II. Of my 30 or so classmates not a one still attends mass. I do. I attend the TLM.
A lot of people are talking about the later implementations of V2. The best documentary i have seen on this so far are the videos from Mass of the Ages. It goes over very well the changes that occurred.
They make a lot of dubious claims. I don’t buy it.
@@ntmn8444 care to be more specific?
Just keep it very simple. After the change vs before change. It’s obvious NO was designed to have its intended effect.
For most people, the context of Catholicism does not extend much beyond the boundaries of their parish, and is limited to Sunday Mass. When liturgy became so silly and trivialized, it would be hard to expect people to take anything seriously
Your Grace, just a moment of gratitude for your compassionate “apologetics” (I suppose), providing wisdom and comfort to passionate believers. I hope the Spirit will guide your voice and your energy to connect us - and be echoed about. And with your Spirit.
I think the analogy to Nicaea is so on point.
As a convert I came into the Church long after Vatican II so know no other form of catholisism. I pose this thought, if Vatican II had not happened, what would our Church look like today? Would it be "failing" even worse or growing world wide as even North American's seem to be falling away. A very good friend who is protestant has voiced the same concerns (fears) about his Christian denomination. It's becoming a secular world I fear.
Modern Catholics would all be excomunicated by Pius XII. Roman Catholicism is dead and the "church" of vatican II is a heretical sect which promotes NOACHISM instead of Catholicism. Everything you hear about Catholicism after 1960 is false we do not have a Pope and only baptism is the valid sacrament.
That's a very good question. As the good Bishop pointed out, it is a logical fallacy to state that since B came after A, B must have been caused by A. We will never know whether church attendance, missionary outreach, etc. would have been better or worse without Vatican II. Some will wonder how things could possibly be worse than they are now, but anyone who's been paying attention will know that things could always be worse. I, for one, think that things would have been worse if VII hadn't happened, but that's only my opinion.
no, without Vatican II the Catholic Church would be strong and vigorous and attracting converts (i'm a convert too and thank God I discovered the TLM).
The gates of hell won’t prevail against the church. Even if there is only 5 people in the world that still hold on to the true faith.
Thank you for sharing. Vatican II made it possible for us Christians who are not priests to become a house keeper to people from other nations with elders who were offering us tea and toast in a home where they were continuing to offer coins to idols without risking later being false accused of that being an occasion for sin. Without us feeling the need there to be within ourselves and in the expressions on our faces while turning down their offer to sit down with them in dialogue while regarding them there always as being only pagans to be avoided altogether as much as possible. Without us feeling afraid of later being false accused of trying to become a Roman Catholic priest too. How can we help people to become interested in becoming Christians while not neglecting the tabernacle without Vatican II?
People are leaving the Church, not because of Vii, but because the Church has left them. . . ceased speaking to the deepest longing of the human heart.
Exactly.
Why does it seem like the most devout crowd (as a whole) is attending the Latin mass? Im not saying that from an absolutist perspective, of course there’s devouts in the modern… but in my experience it seems like the Latin massers often know the faith more intellectually and connected it to their lives more spiritually.
What an amazing discussion! Thank you Bishop Barron! I appreciate you reframing the question and putting it on the dissenters. The cure for this resistance and dissent to VII and the Magesterium is Obedience and we need a whole lot more of it.
@Tercio Novohispano I dont call anyone dissenters for preferring one form of the Mass over another. I also never claimed Vatican II didn't have flaws in terms of ambiguous language or imprudent statements. My problem (The Church's problem) is when people claim a validly promulgated Eccumenical Council is erroneous and should be done away with. That is horrendous ecclesiology and should always be condemned. I also have problems with people saying since most of the new teachings are not defenitive , we don't need to adhere to them. That completely bypasses the authentic Magesterium, which is still authoritative even when not defining something.
This may be brash but sometimes a parent needs to spank their kids because they aren't obeying them. Discipline is not a bad thing, it is a tool of charity and clarity to Discipline. To not do so would be to confirm the spiritual children of the Church to sin.
Thanks to Bishop Barron for reading my books!
The historic Protestant churches also declined in the west and boomed in Africa in the last half of the 20th century; so it seems that Vatican 2 was not really responsible for either the decline or the growth, but other factors entirely
I was born into and raised in Vatican II in the 70’s in Rural Ireland and I left my faith after my teens in the 80’s until 19 years ago - I came back to my faith but was horrified by what I found there, having recalled my childhood with the Nuns and the Divine Office in Latin (I even knew all the Christmas Carols in Latin, only to rediscover them later on) but in my 20’s I’d attended a Traditional Latin Mass and I loved it - after I came back to my faith after prompting from my Muslim friends here in the U.K. after 23 years, I sought out the TLM and during Covid I’d even taught myself to pray the Rosary in Latin - I’d never really understood the issues for a long time with the various Vatican II Popes, but under Pope Francis, I gradually began to understand that he was destroying the church and the faith which made me even more committed to the TLM having done so much research and reading, as I saw Vatican II becoming ever more woke and taking the church in the wrong direction - so Vatican II was a huge mistake that even Cardinal Ratzinger (later on Pope Benedict XVI) realised that he could not stop, despite initially supporting it, so he eventually resigned from the Papacy, which was a watershed moment for me in terms of my commitment to TLM
Brothers and sisters! Spread the mission! Bring people to God! Be prepared for discussions and arguments! Share the Word on Fire mission! We are to spread the gospel and truth throughout a world that rejects it!
I having been a Catholic before Vatican ll, I will just say you know a tree by its fruit. The Church today is even less than a shadow of its former self only wreckage left behind.
I’d love to see Bishop Barron engage with Timothy Flanders on Vatican 2. Flanders is very nuanced in his praise and critique. It would be engaging with the best of the trad side. And the good bishop likes to engage with the best.
Flanders is the best. City of God vs. City of Man is a masterpiece. He is a keen intellect who is not swept away by his opinions.
I was born when traditional Latin mass was still practiced in Philippines, I remember seeing more people then in church than now, we go as a family even if church was farther. I now live in America, I was introduced back to the TLM during the pandemic, and it opened my eyes. TLM is centered on Jesus Christ, His Passion Death and Resurrection, His Presence in the Holy Eucharist, and receive Him in the tongue, we still confess where the priest don’t see us. The new mass, although it has the same parts, each church differs in the execution of some parts. I don’t know if we’re still focused on Christ or are we more focused on the beautiful songs, or the beautiful voice of the singers, or the programs being offered, some people are even following what the priest is saying, like literally memorized. I just visited the Philippines and the church now closer to us, I saw fewer people in the time slots that I went to, the front pews are just empty. Our parish has a lot of programs that requires people who are very very poor to give up some needs to be able to give something to church programs so they won’t hear something from people “close” to the church. I don’t think that’s a good way to evangelize, I think it will make them stop going to church
It was a complete failure. We let the communists and Freemasons change the faith to be more Protestant and worldly.
“Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock.”
This is QAnon style thinking
@@anonymous-pi3oz ROFLMAO! You are lost.
It was definitely a failure. “By its fruits you shall know them.” It destroyed a lot of families’ faith. I know that more than 80,000 priests left the priesthood because they refused to celebrate the New Mass. Thank you God for allowing me to revert to the Latin Mass during lockdown. I will never look back.
I think it was a failure. I have never seen honest and convincing arguments against traditionalist objections, and I am not just talking about the TLM, but everything. I believe the biggest problem for Vatican 2 is past Popes before the council, and holy saints and doctors of the church. It is all there for us to read. They spoke with extreme precision and clarity. An argument for Vat 2 letter of council may be argued, but that letter is not lived reality for 99.9% of catholics. Gregorian chant has pride and place, for example. When you read Pope Leo XIII, Pius X, Pius XI and others, there are serious warnings for the Church, and it is obvious we did not heed those warnings but let our guard down and here we are. A Pope like St. Pius X or doctor and saint like Alphonsus Ligouri, holds serious weight. In my opinion, these great men do not seem to mesh well with Congar and the like. I will stick with tradition and great saints and doctors of the Church because it is safe.
Bishop Barron, I love your podcast. I am 58 years old and a convert to the Catholic Church going intense years. If no for changes in vernacular I not speaking Latin would not have been able to comprehend any of the mass. I and my wife love the Catholic Church! I knew when entering it was filled with imperfect people such as myself, but where else would I go to meet and receive the Lord Jesus Christ!!!
You could use a missal, the TLM provides the reverence and quiet missing from the NO.
Arguably, more people understood the Holy Mass more when it was solely in Latin than they do now.
This was great, thank you. I particularly enjoyed the comments on the Universal Church and the role of the Church outside of Europe in evangelization. As a tiny example, I am very grateful for the influence of a quiet academic from Tanzania who briefly worked as a priest in a north Dublin parish. A short conversation when preparing for my father's funeral some years ago led me to the St Augustine's Confessions. This among other things has been important in my slow and faltering return to faith.
I am in America and the priests from African countries I have encountered have been powerful men of God and huge evangelizers in the parishes. They're stronger speakers with better written homilies and energetic and encouraging and often able to speak without notes quoting memorized Scripture with chapter and verse.
Come spread the Faith in Africa. Particularly in West Africa where Islam is the main religion.
I am 79 years old and I stopped going to Mass because of Vatican II. I hate the changes that were made. The way I feel is that I know things in the world had to change but why does religion have to be one of changes? I did come back and I’m a practicing Catholic now, but I still wish that the Mass was like it was when I was a kid. It all started with the guitar Mass and I believe it has gone downhill ever since. Like I say I go to Mass now, but I still wish it was like it was when I was a kid. If I want to go to a Latin mass, I have to go 25 miles out of my way. The Latin Mass should be celebrated in every church along with the new Mass. Please excuse me for saying, but I believe that Vatican II was initiated by communist influence.
Bishop Barron has stated that V2 itself wasn't a failure, but rather the way in which it was implemented was a failure. Curious to see if his opinion has changed.
At that point, what difference does it make?
@@folofus4815
It makes a lot of difference
Because if the Universal Magisterium teaches Heresy then Catholicism is falsified
@@MZONE991 Saying the council failed to achieve its goals isn’t saying that the council promulgated heresy
@@folofus4815 A huge difference. One requires us to just revisit what the council actually said. The other requires a brand new council, and throws a spanner in the works for all ecumenical councils. Look at the voting record during V2. Are we really sure 90%+ of the bishops were wrong?
@@Tttb95 I’m not saying there was any doctrinal error propagated by the council, I’m saying that insofar as what the goals of what the council set out to do, it failed. That doesn’t mean the documents are heresy, but it does mean it was a fruitless endeavor
The good shepard. Thank you Bishop🙏🏻
My 2c as a young guy (34) converted from a protestant denomination. V2 gave us mass in the vernacular. That only happened a few hundred years too late! haha. It got us a new emphasis on the laity studying scripture. Such a good thing. We got a new emphasis on evangelization which Jesus asked us to do. It focused on building community relationships - nowadays we have ACTS retreats and tons of great stuff. BUT, V2 did mess one really big thing up. The church in the west is in decline (except Africa) especially where the V2 implimentation has been "strange"... We can't hide that elephant in the room. SO, perhaps not in the documents themselves is there anathema, but in the spirit that came out from it something went terribly wrong. I think what went most wrong was - we abandoned our tradition and tried to hide who we are in the name of ecumensim. Then we lost belief in the real presence of the eucharist. When we lost that, we lost clarity of truth and wisdom which comes from God through the eucharist and everything has snowballed from there in the church. Protestants lost that belief early on regarding the eucharist and immediately splintered into hundreds of denominations if you look at the history and timing of it all. As soon as they denied the real presence, division ensued. Here is an idea Bishop Barron. On special church days, holy days of obligation for example..lets take mainstream new-order churches and do a latin mass at them, with all the incense and prayers and traditional hymns. Let only the priest give the eucharist, and have people line up on their knees around the raised steps of the altar to receive it. In every church where the architecture is still reasonably feasible to do this kind of mass of course (one of the churches I go to is an octagon like a synagogue so you couldn't really do it there, but most churches you could still flip the altar around and just let the priest do his best and GO FOR IT! And let your average mainstream catholic attend it give them a little pamphlet so we and the priest can all butcher Latin together and stumble through the prayers. Get the choir together a couple extra times to practice some traditional hymns and chants. YOU WILL PACK THE CHURCH OUT THE DOORS I PROMISE YOU! I don't understand why Rome and the USCCB can't see this. Its like an obsessive love with the new mass and pride and denial that the old mass has anything to offer us spiritually - thats its like a dead stick in the mud. Just the opposite is true we should be promoting it! Just give it a chance! Attending latin mass was like a spiritual mega BOOSTER for me in my life (and all the young guys I've seen discover it!) Not every mass has to be a latin mass, but expose the laity to it at least once or twice a year, give them that connection to their ancestors and the history of the church and MANDATE hat it be done in every parish at least once a year. It will change everything! You should try it Bishop Barron - you are the big boss dawg now up there in Minnesota! You should do it and see what happens! My hunch is if you are the first one to give it a shot I bet you will pack the house it'll probably end up in the news all over the country and a lot of other Bishops are gonna start trying it too if they see you do it. And at the very least you will certainly put a big ol' grin on JPII and Pope Benedict's face in heaven. Thats worth something! Shalom!
pjburges. You have many good thoughts. Learn the Latin Mass and its theology of the Sacrifice of the Cross. The Novus Ordo removes many prayers, has the Priest turned away from God, focuses on the people and makes the Mass a community meal. Look to tradition.
A good tree will never bear bad fruit. Likewise, a bad tree will never bear good fruit. By their fruits, you will know them - The Lord Jesus.
So is the thesis then that the implementation of the Council was a failure, not the council itself? I understand the distinction there, but it begs the question of how do we correct the failed/improper implementation. I also wonder how it is so that the bishops/priests that were themselves present and authored the council documents did such a terrible job of then implementing those documents. How do we have a document like sacrosanctum concilium which is almost immediately contradicted in nearly every parish Mass.
Talking about impact of the Vatican II on the Africa - I'm all about the inclusion, give the people their rites, I'm extremely happy that they are devoted Catholics. But at the same time when everyone's culture started being included post Vatican II reforms stripped Europe out of its traditions. Europe grew up on the latin civilisation, those are our ancestors, my grandparents still remember Latin Mass. It's quite ironic that the Vatican II reforms were about opening the church for everyone except the people who want to cultivate European traditions...
Vatican II reached out to modernity and modernity didn’t reach back. Vatican II turned Catholicism beige. The church may have declined to the same numbers it is today but there would be adoration for the Eucharist and the sacraments would be revered.
I was attracted to the title and had to endure three minutes of updates on Bishop Barron's reading list. 🙄
Yes, If the implementation was a failure, it was a failure, every single statistic has gone down significantly expect annulments
To be fair though, the decrease started before Vatican II and sped up in the 60s before the council was even done. Virtually every other religious group in the West suffers as well in the 60s, indicating that it was not a problem just affecting Catholics. I do agree that the implementation did result in some disasters that we are still struggling with today. Many councils in the past were like this though and I am sure that things will be straightened out by the Lord in due time.
@@nick.s.c3102 liberal Jewish communities are emptying out. The Orthodox are growing. Mainline Protestant denominations are emptying out. Evangelical churches are growing. Novus Ordo parishes are emptying out. Vetus Ordo parishes are being suppressed to prevent them from growing any further.
I'm noticing a common thread.
@@carissstewart3211 Actually Novus Ordo Churchs are growing massively in Africa, China, the Philipines, etc... In the west Latin Mass Churches are still not growing enough to keep the number of Catholics up.
Do you think the statistics would have gone up, after the 60s if only Latin Mass was allowed?
@@anonymous-pi3oz Probobly not. I think other issues are what causes the decrease of practicing Catholics. Many ex-Cartholics become Evangelicals, Jehovas Witnesses, LDS, atheists, agnostics, etc... Almost none are going to the Eastern Orthodox, SSPX, Orientals, etc. This shows pretty conclusively that people are not leaving because the liturgy is not traditional enough but for other reasons.
Yes. Next question.
"We have to be in engagement with the culture that's actually there." What if there's an ever-growing cry from within that culture for the beautiful Latin Mass? Do we engage with that, or suppress it and brush it off as some cooky, ultra-conservative fringe?
Splendid response in this talk...it is about being open minded.
"Open minded"??? Open-mindedness leads to contraception, same-sex marriage, abortion.
Thank you very much Bishop for at last being someone who on social media openly answers these questions about Vatican Council II. Most people don't know the history and books fail to tell us the feelings and reactions in the world around the councils. It is clear that in time we'll see the goodness of Vatican II.
Last comment, the Church of Latin America blossomed as fruit of the council bringing the new breath of fresh air that was so needed for us. The people of God had at last a place in the Church and made us experience and live the love and presence of God.
I for one appreciate going to Mass and actually understanding what is going on in English.
In many ways yes. It changed things that didn't need to be changed. And failed to change things that truly needed to be changed. ❗❗❗
And what changes were those that “should have been implemented?” Perhaps I already know your answer…let me be the first to inform you…the truth never changes. EVER. Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.,
@@falcon6173 Your presumption is very arrogant. I meant the failure of priestly celibacy. Orthodox priest are responsible. Thousands of Catholic faithful have left Rome. Divorce and remarriage is a reality. Birth control is a reality.
God Bless you Bishop!