There were a number of parallels between Roman and Byzantine that I had wanted to mention but we ran out of time. For example, both Byzantine & Roman are full of Trinitarian doxologies and formulas, as well as confessions of the Divinity of Christ. They are thick with them. As I demonstrate with textual arguments in my book "Resurgent in the Midst of Crisis," in the chapter called "Offspring of Arius in the Holy of Holies," the Novus Ordo systematically purged these Trinitarian and Christological prayers and phrases -- almost as if an Arian had been assigned the task of making the liturgy "safer for Arianism." Granted, it is not Arian, but the difference between the traditional rites and the Novus Ordo is nothing less than shocking in this area. Again, just have a look at that chapter for the evidence. Another remarkable parallel between Byzantine & Roman is they way they handle great feasts. In the Eastern tradition, you have a Forefeast, the Feast, and the Afterfeast or Leavetaking. These correspond, in the West, to the Vigil, the Feast, and the Octave. The Roman calendar up until Pius XII was just as full of such features as the Byzantine. In 1955 the number of vigils and octaves was severely reduced by Pius XII, and in 1969 the ancient vigil and octave of Pentecost was abolished. Another parallel not noted often enough is the use of the Gloria. In the Roman Rite, the Gloria is said more often than not. Arguably it plays a role quite comparable to Justinian's Hymn ("Only-begotten Son") in the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom. In the modern rite of Paul VI, the Gloria was severely limited and is said now only on Sundays and "feasts" (meaning major feasts, not "memorials"). Similarly, the Divine Liturgy sings the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed every day, and, while the Roman Rite never did that, and only developed the custom of reciting the Creed rather late, by the 20th century the Creed was said about twice as many times as it is now said in the modern rite. The tendency of the East was always expansive: adding more and more to the liturgy. The West shows a similar tendency, albeit more slowly and more reservedly. Still, a simple comparison of the Roman Rite will show that it has more numerous and denser theological texts, like its Eastern counterparts. Nearly every step of the liturgical reform was, in fact, a profound movement AWAY from the Eastern tradition and the common elements the West shared with it already, which in many cases (e.g., seasons of fasting) turn out to be among the most ancient elements. Thus, the oft-stated view that the Novus Ordo was "enriched" by Eastern elements and by a restoration of ancient elements is simply false. The Easternisms that were introduced were precisely things that had never existed in the West (e.g., multiple anaphoras; epicleses), and the archaeologisms that were revived were the things (e.g., communion in the hand) that had been wisely overcome as the Church made progress in the faithful dispensation of the mysteries.
Regarding the Arian comments, remember that Catholicism teaches that the Unitarian god of Islam is the same as the Holy Trinity of divine revelation, given that Catholics and Muslims adore the same God, according to the magisterial teaching since Vatican II. It isn't perhaps surprising that less emphasis on the Trinity might arise from such speculative theological assertions.
@@gch8810 It does actually. Both Pope Pius X’s catechism and Vatican II both teach Catholics and Muslims worship the same God. Rome’s argument is that they’re the same God because they both profess there is one divine Essence and apparently that’s enough to say Muslim’s worship the same God as Catholics. This argument is absurd from an Orthodox perspective but so it goes.
Keep up the good work Dr K, and Tim. Thank you for defending tradition. Without it we wouldn’t be Catholic. Good point on the Eastern Catholic criticism, I have noticed certain TH-camrs attacking tradition lately
I can hardly wait to read the book and to know TAN published it. Years ago, I called TAN because it stopped selling Fr. Wathen's book "The Great Sacrilege," a book about the Novus Ordo, after Thomas Nelson retired. So the customer care person replied that her company is fully loyal to the Magisterium. Maybe now that company knows that the priest made some good points. I wish TAN would still see each book it sold when Mr. Nelson ran it.
So the graph around the 18:00 mark is interesting. Is it coincidence that rites and prayer decline and then stop shortly after the invention of the printing press? I think this something to ponder and worthy of discussion.
Brilliant discussion! I love the charts and tables. Is it possible to post pdf’s or links for the juicy screen shares? God bless you both for passionately defending our holy mass (TLM). 🙏📿❤️🩹
Isn't this an Epiclesis in the Roman Rite where the Holy Spirit [the Sanctifier] is Invoked over the sacrifice? Veni, sanctificátor omnípotens ætérne Deus: et béne ✠ dic hoc sacrifícium, tuo sancto nómini præparátum.- Come, O almighty and eternal God, the Sanctifier, and bless ✠ this Sacrifice, prepared for the glory of Thy holy Name.
Some make this claim (including Martin Mosebach), but two things may be said. First, it may be simply referring to the one and triune God as the sanctifier - this is not uncommon in older Latin prayers - as opposed to addressing the Third Person. Second, even if it were addressing the Spirit per se, it does not ask him to transform the gifts into the Body and Blood of Christ, which is what an epiclesis technically is.
You could add to the Bauer chart having laity reading the scripture vs. the priest. Especially walking in the sacred space. Also, Altar servers being exclusively male.
With this _two brothers and a stranger_ a concept in mind, how do we go back to where the Tridentine liturgy is the ordinary form of the church's worship? Reversing decades and decades of the Novus Ordo worldwide is going to be very difficult. PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM NOT IN ANY WAY QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF THE NOVUS ORDO.
It will indeed be difficult -- but no more difficult than undoing the evil effects of 50+ years of confusion and dilution ushed in by the Second Vatican Council.
I'd suggest translating the missal into all languages, and let each priest select whether to do it in Latin, the vernacular, or a mix. But above all, I'd make churches offer masses with the liturgy of hours as in monasteries. Having a mass at any time feels weird, though it might be necessary.
ADDENDUM: The diagram we discuss here, showing the crisscrossing lines marked A and B (signifying the Holy Spirit's activity in inspiring new rites and prayers and the Holy Spirit's activity in preserving rites and prayers already possessed by the Church), is not some kind of nutty theory that was cooked up yesterday (as the Novus Ordo's justification was). Rather, it is nothing but an attempt to put into a simple form the attitude and practice of the Church of all ages. Everyone, everywhere, took for granted that rites and prayers already in existence, already beloved by their familiarity, their customary usage, the holy men and women who prayed them, are what God wants for the Church, and what we must pass on to our descendents. Full stop. You do not find the revolutionary attitude of standing in judgment over rites and prayers and reconfiguring them from the ground up until the Protestant Revolt and, later, the Synod of Pistoia, and finally, the 20th century Liturgical Movement in its worst excesses. Hence, to defend what Paul VI did to the Roman Rite, you must disagree with everyone in Christendom for its entire duration. All that, just to shore up one pope's reputation or office? It's a bad bargain. Much better to see that the papal office is inherently receptive and conservative, and to conclude that Paul VI and other recent popes have been wretchedly bad popes (at least as far as liturgy is concerned). Now, the most common objection raised to the traditionalist position is: "Well, according to Auctorem Fidei [and other similar documents], the Church is always guided by the Holy Spirit in her discipline, so it can never be erroneous or harmful or problematic" (or some variation on that theme). Those who argue thus do not realize the trap into which they are falling. I have shown why in this article at 1P5.
The fact of the matter is V2 was Ecumenical and as LAY Catholics we are to obey and follow what was laid out there. Too many Trads forget the virtue of Obedience. After all the Roman Catholic Church and it's Theology is predicated on Hierarchy and a Hierarchy can only stand fully and in order if it's laymen Obey. Like many I prefer the TLM. I too share the distaste and disappointment of the "Spirit of V2" and it's dismal result for most Novus Ordo masses. They are not beautiful, reverent, or compelling. But many are and can be. Look up Latin Novus Ordo masses of St John Cantius and St Michael's Abbey. This as well as TLMs should be the model for our parishes. There is incense, high Latin gregorian chants, kneeling to receive the Eucharist on the tongue, and many still done Ad Orientem. Let go of your Pride brothers and sisters and hold fast to trusting in the Holy Spirit that what bears good fruit shall prevail whether it be TLMs, Reverent NO masses, or BOTH! Ave Christus Rex!
Even reverent Novus Ordos are inferior to Tridentine Masses. As the Novus Ordo was stripped of many of the prayers and forms of the traditional Roman Rite.
Novus Ordo in many ways is an older form of the Liturgy more reminiscent of the early Church. All Three liturgies are beautiful and one isnt a stranger. This attitude is just silly.
Being a troll myself, I assume you’re joking….but the sad truth is there actually are people who believe this, because this the line they were fed and they’ve never researched the facts.
@@TP-om8of lol its the exact opposite? those who watch guys like taylor marshall think they know the facts when they have no idea what they are talking about.
The claim that the Novus Ordo is "in many ways an older form of the Liturgy more reminiscent of the early Church" is false, and demonstrably so. Dr. K has dismantled this claim in many places: www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2018/11/the-continual-spectre-of-false.html www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2019/08/surprising-convergences-between-anti.html onepeterfive.com/gift-liturgical-traditional/ Once one recognizes that the truth is quite different -- that the Novus Ordo is a modern pastiche of redacted ancient and novel materials, having no real pedigree in the history of apostolic liturgies, then one realizes the extent to which it is a stranger, and estranges from the fullness of Catholic doctrine and devotion (in keeping with the axiom lex orandi, lex credendi).
La fraternidad de San pedro, son jeriacas de rito en latín, pero su ordenasio no son verdaderos son inválido, dicen la misa en latín, pero no hay gracia sobrenatural, y otra fraternidad de San pío X, si son ordenado con el rito apostólica de la Santa Madre iglesia católica apostólica tradicional de siempre eterna, pero hay un problema grande, que ellos están en comunión o acuerdos, con la gran secta iglesia protestantes, qué es la secta iglesia post conciliar Vaticano 11 romano de hoy apostata y cismatico, y que la sede de San Pedro, está ocupada, por los vicarios de Satanás, desde los años de 1958, y la iglesia romana, es la gran prostituta, y la gran ramera, son aquellos católicos tradicionalista de siempre eterna, que nacieron hantes de la nueva secta iglesia post conciliar Vaticano 11 romano de hoy apostata y cismatico, y todos los católicos del concilio de trento dogmática, y el concilio Vaticano 1, si están en comunión o acuerdos, con esta secta iglesia post conciliar Vaticano 11 romano de hoy, son herejes, y estos herejes, que tuvieron hijos que nacieron en los años de 1970, sus hijos nacieron protestantes, por culpa de sus padres, y estos herejes piensas que son todavía católicos,
There were a number of parallels between Roman and Byzantine that I had wanted to mention but we ran out of time.
For example, both Byzantine & Roman are full of Trinitarian doxologies and formulas, as well as confessions of the Divinity of Christ. They are thick with them. As I demonstrate with textual arguments in my book "Resurgent in the Midst of Crisis," in the chapter called "Offspring of Arius in the Holy of Holies," the Novus Ordo systematically purged these Trinitarian and Christological prayers and phrases -- almost as if an Arian had been assigned the task of making the liturgy "safer for Arianism." Granted, it is not Arian, but the difference between the traditional rites and the Novus Ordo is nothing less than shocking in this area. Again, just have a look at that chapter for the evidence.
Another remarkable parallel between Byzantine & Roman is they way they handle great feasts. In the Eastern tradition, you have a Forefeast, the Feast, and the Afterfeast or Leavetaking. These correspond, in the West, to the Vigil, the Feast, and the Octave. The Roman calendar up until Pius XII was just as full of such features as the Byzantine. In 1955 the number of vigils and octaves was severely reduced by Pius XII, and in 1969 the ancient vigil and octave of Pentecost was abolished.
Another parallel not noted often enough is the use of the Gloria. In the Roman Rite, the Gloria is said more often than not. Arguably it plays a role quite comparable to Justinian's Hymn ("Only-begotten Son") in the Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom. In the modern rite of Paul VI, the Gloria was severely limited and is said now only on Sundays and "feasts" (meaning major feasts, not "memorials"). Similarly, the Divine Liturgy sings the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed every day, and, while the Roman Rite never did that, and only developed the custom of reciting the Creed rather late, by the 20th century the Creed was said about twice as many times as it is now said in the modern rite. The tendency of the East was always expansive: adding more and more to the liturgy. The West shows a similar tendency, albeit more slowly and more reservedly. Still, a simple comparison of the Roman Rite will show that it has more numerous and denser theological texts, like its Eastern counterparts.
Nearly every step of the liturgical reform was, in fact, a profound movement AWAY from the Eastern tradition and the common elements the West shared with it already, which in many cases (e.g., seasons of fasting) turn out to be among the most ancient elements. Thus, the oft-stated view that the Novus Ordo was "enriched" by Eastern elements and by a restoration of ancient elements is simply false. The Easternisms that were introduced were precisely things that had never existed in the West (e.g., multiple anaphoras; epicleses), and the archaeologisms that were revived were the things (e.g., communion in the hand) that had been wisely overcome as the Church made progress in the faithful dispensation of the mysteries.
Regarding the Arian comments, remember that Catholicism teaches that the Unitarian god of Islam is the same as the Holy Trinity of divine revelation, given that Catholics and Muslims adore the same God, according to the magisterial teaching since Vatican II. It isn't perhaps surprising that less emphasis on the Trinity might arise from such speculative theological assertions.
@@iliya3110 Catholicism does not teach that.
@@gch8810 It does actually. Both Pope Pius X’s catechism and Vatican II both teach Catholics and Muslims worship the same God. Rome’s argument is that they’re the same God because they both profess there is one divine Essence and apparently that’s enough to say Muslim’s worship the same God as Catholics. This argument is absurd from an Orthodox perspective but so it goes.
Keep up the good work Dr K, and Tim. Thank you for defending tradition. Without it we wouldn’t be Catholic. Good point on the Eastern Catholic criticism, I have noticed certain TH-camrs attacking tradition lately
I can hardly wait to read the book and to know TAN published it. Years ago, I called TAN because it stopped selling Fr. Wathen's book "The Great Sacrilege," a book about the Novus Ordo, after Thomas Nelson retired. So the customer care person replied that her company is fully loyal to the Magisterium. Maybe now that company knows that the priest made some good points. I wish TAN would still see each book it sold when Mr. Nelson ran it.
+500 Internet points for Dr K for using the term 'orthobros'.
Very interesting conversation, gentlemen
So the graph around the 18:00 mark is interesting. Is it coincidence that rites and prayer decline and then stop shortly after the invention of the printing press? I think this something to ponder and worthy of discussion.
That was very informative, thanks.
Brilliant discussion! I love the charts and tables. Is it possible to post pdf’s or links for the juicy screen shares? God bless you both for passionately defending our holy mass (TLM). 🙏📿❤️🩹
The Maronite and Chaldean Rites resemble the nervous ordo more and more
I saw the title and thought that the podcast was going to open with a joke: ""Two Brothers and a Stranger walk into a bar....."
And what is your opinion of the Anglican Ordinariate?
A step-brother?
Isn't this an Epiclesis in the Roman Rite where the Holy Spirit [the Sanctifier] is Invoked over the sacrifice? Veni, sanctificátor omnípotens ætérne Deus: et béne ✠ dic hoc sacrifícium, tuo sancto nómini præparátum.- Come, O almighty and eternal God, the Sanctifier, and bless ✠ this Sacrifice, prepared for the glory of Thy holy Name.
Some make this claim (including Martin Mosebach), but two things may be said. First, it may be simply referring to the one and triune God as the sanctifier - this is not uncommon in older Latin prayers - as opposed to addressing the Third Person. Second, even if it were addressing the Spirit per se, it does not ask him to transform the gifts into the Body and Blood of Christ, which is what an epiclesis technically is.
@@peterkwasniewski9003 Thanks for your reply.
Tradicional in latín mass amén amén amén 🙏🐑 fssp
You could add to the Bauer chart having laity reading the scripture vs. the priest. Especially walking in the sacred space.
Also, Altar servers being exclusively male.
@1:12:40 Mr Flanders is wrong about Vatican 1. There would be no V2, no NO, without V1.
With this _two brothers and a stranger_ a concept in mind, how do we go back to where the Tridentine liturgy is the ordinary form of the church's worship?
Reversing decades and decades of the Novus Ordo worldwide is going to be very difficult.
PLEASE NOTE THAT I AM NOT IN ANY WAY QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF THE NOVUS ORDO.
It will indeed be difficult -- but no more difficult than undoing the evil effects of 50+ years of confusion and dilution ushed in by the Second Vatican Council.
I'd suggest translating the missal into all languages, and let each priest select whether to do it in Latin, the vernacular, or a mix.
But above all, I'd make churches offer masses with the liturgy of hours as in monasteries. Having a mass at any time feels weird, though it might be necessary.
The essence is that the Mass is the sacrifice surrounded by such beauty. Prayer, worship, real presence yes. Sacrifice most important, no?
Hearty loaf of home made bread versus Wonder Bread.
ADDENDUM:
The diagram we discuss here, showing the crisscrossing lines marked A and B (signifying the Holy Spirit's activity in inspiring new rites and prayers and the Holy Spirit's activity in preserving rites and prayers already possessed by the Church), is not some kind of nutty theory that was cooked up yesterday (as the Novus Ordo's justification was). Rather, it is nothing but an attempt to put into a simple form the attitude and practice of the Church of all ages. Everyone, everywhere, took for granted that rites and prayers already in existence, already beloved by their familiarity, their customary usage, the holy men and women who prayed them, are what God wants for the Church, and what we must pass on to our descendents. Full stop. You do not find the revolutionary attitude of standing in judgment over rites and prayers and reconfiguring them from the ground up until the Protestant Revolt and, later, the Synod of Pistoia, and finally, the 20th century Liturgical Movement in its worst excesses.
Hence, to defend what Paul VI did to the Roman Rite, you must disagree with everyone in Christendom for its entire duration. All that, just to shore up one pope's reputation or office? It's a bad bargain. Much better to see that the papal office is inherently receptive and conservative, and to conclude that Paul VI and other recent popes have been wretchedly bad popes (at least as far as liturgy is concerned).
Now, the most common objection raised to the traditionalist position is: "Well, according to Auctorem Fidei [and other similar documents], the Church is always guided by the Holy Spirit in her discipline, so it can never be erroneous or harmful or problematic" (or some variation on that theme).
Those who argue thus do not realize the trap into which they are falling. I have shown why in this article at 1P5.
Protestants were not reformers. They were Deformers.
The fact of the matter is V2 was Ecumenical and as LAY Catholics we are to obey and follow what was laid out there. Too many Trads forget the virtue of Obedience. After all the Roman Catholic Church and it's Theology is predicated on Hierarchy and a Hierarchy can only stand fully and in order if it's laymen Obey.
Like many I prefer the TLM. I too share the distaste and disappointment of the "Spirit of V2" and it's dismal result for most Novus Ordo masses. They are not beautiful, reverent, or compelling. But many are and can be. Look up Latin Novus Ordo masses of St John Cantius and St Michael's Abbey. This as well as TLMs should be the model for our parishes. There is incense, high Latin gregorian chants, kneeling to receive the Eucharist on the tongue, and many still done Ad Orientem. Let go of your Pride brothers and sisters and hold fast to trusting in the Holy Spirit that what bears good fruit shall prevail whether it be TLMs, Reverent NO masses, or BOTH!
Ave Christus Rex!
Even reverent Novus Ordos are inferior to Tridentine Masses. As the Novus Ordo was stripped of many of the prayers and forms of the traditional Roman Rite.
The NO was not “commanded” by V2. The NO came out of a committee a few years later.
Novus Ordo in many ways is an older form of the Liturgy more reminiscent of the early Church. All Three liturgies are beautiful and one isnt a stranger. This attitude is just silly.
Being a troll myself, I assume you’re joking….but the sad truth is there actually are people who believe this, because this the line they were fed and they’ve never researched the facts.
@@TP-om8of lol its the exact opposite? those who watch guys like taylor marshall think they know the facts when they have no idea what they are talking about.
@@lionheart5078 Yeah, right….
I get it. You’re being ironic. From one troll to another:! Good on ya, mate!
@@TP-om8of sure..
The claim that the Novus Ordo is "in many ways an older form of the Liturgy more reminiscent of the early Church" is false, and demonstrably so. Dr. K has dismantled this claim in many places:
www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2018/11/the-continual-spectre-of-false.html
www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2019/08/surprising-convergences-between-anti.html
onepeterfive.com/gift-liturgical-traditional/
Once one recognizes that the truth is quite different -- that the Novus Ordo is a modern pastiche of redacted ancient and novel materials, having no real pedigree in the history of apostolic liturgies, then one realizes the extent to which it is a stranger, and estranges from the fullness of Catholic doctrine and devotion (in keeping with the axiom lex orandi, lex credendi).
Tradicional in latín mass amén amén amén 🙏🐑 fssp
La fraternidad de San pedro, son jeriacas de rito en latín, pero su ordenasio no son verdaderos son inválido, dicen la misa en latín, pero no hay gracia sobrenatural, y otra fraternidad de San pío X, si son ordenado con el rito apostólica de la Santa Madre iglesia católica apostólica tradicional de siempre eterna, pero hay un problema grande, que ellos están en comunión o acuerdos, con la gran secta iglesia protestantes, qué es la secta iglesia post conciliar Vaticano 11 romano de hoy apostata y cismatico, y que la sede de San Pedro, está ocupada, por los vicarios de Satanás, desde los años de 1958, y la iglesia romana, es la gran prostituta, y la gran ramera, son aquellos católicos tradicionalista de siempre eterna, que nacieron hantes de la nueva secta iglesia post conciliar Vaticano 11 romano de hoy apostata y cismatico, y todos los católicos del concilio de trento dogmática, y el concilio Vaticano 1, si están en comunión o acuerdos, con esta secta iglesia post conciliar Vaticano 11 romano de hoy, son herejes, y estos herejes, que tuvieron hijos que nacieron en los años de 1970, sus hijos nacieron protestantes, por culpa de sus padres, y estos herejes piensas que son todavía católicos,