But What About the Unicorn Novus Ordo?

[@polemeros]

On a more substantial note. The Novus Ordo is the product of intellectuals. Intellectuals often misunderstand the nature of how religion is experienced by ordinary people. Ordinary folks experience their religion as an integral ecosystem and they do so semi-consciously and mostly unconsciously. As they should. When you upend an entire ecosystem overnight, the results will always be bad. I am an old man so I experienced both the overwhelming numinosity of the old rite as well as the large number of Masses that were perfunctory, hurried and soulless. But the ecosystem was intact. It no longer is. Intellectuals tell people that even if everything looks and sounds and feels and moves very differently, it's still the same. Only intellectuals think that way because they live in their heads. Real people don't. And the results have been predictably chaotic.

[@uscatholicam]

This is a brilliant observation.

[@myleshagar9722]

English, in itself, is a relatively cool, aloof language and carries within it all the Rationalism and Puritanism of it's culture of origin.

[@polemeros]

@@myleshagar9722 Shakespeare would beg to differ.

[@johnmossfordmacgregor973]

Well put

[@adamziccardi2578]

this is remarkably insightful. thank you for sharing.

[@KyleWhittington]

This was really well done. One thing that often gets lost in this conversation is that multiple things can be true at the same time. The TLM is beautiful. The Novus Ordo is capable of being celebrated well. The Novus Ordo is almost never celebrated well. The Novus Ordo is in desperate need of reformation even when celebrated well. The best Novus Ordo does not compare to the best Solemn High Mass (and it's not particularly close). All of these things are true. Once again, good job.

[@atrifle8364]

If you have not read "The Pope, The Council, and The Mass" by Likoudis/Whitehead, I highly recommend it. If we went back to using the Missal of 1962 as the Roman Rite, we'd get the results found pre-Vatican II. That is at times speed running daily Masses, mostly low Masses with contemporary hymns, slurred and indifferent Latin, and the faithful doing anything else but pay attention to the Mass. Saying Rosaries instead of paying attention was quite popular apparently. It would be Father James Martin still, but in Latin intermixed with "On Eagles Wings" I will take the poorly said and imperfect Masses that people might engage with and are expected to engage with. Some of the best Masses I have been to have been in student centers, in gyms, etc. There is nothing wrong with Masses that are just whatever musical instruments we have, with whatever stuff we have because it's time to love Jesus again. Yes, regular parishes with regular parishioners and more resources should do more. But there's something to be said in understanding that our worship will never be good enough on earth. God really is taking us as we are and is asking us to do the same of our brethren.

[@elcidcampeador9629]

We do not need the Novus Ordo

[@elcidcampeador9629]

@@atrifle8364 Have you ever been to a latin mass? What garbage are you spewing?

[@atrifle8364]

​@@elcidcampeador9629- We need the Church and her guidance.

[@davidmcpike8359]

@@atrifle8364 I go to the New Mass and I've taken to reading my Bible (in silent but decisive Latin) instead of paying attention, indeed as an intentional distraction, because what goes on at the New Mass is just so often painfully banal and awful and wrong.

[@CroElectroStile]

I’m not a “rad trad”-just an ordinary Catholic from Europe. I keep hearing traditionalists criticize the Novus Ordo Mass, and honestly, it puzzles me. My job is fixing church organs, so I’ve been in thousands of churches across Europe, attending Masses everywhere from small villages to big cities. What I see are beautiful, holy, and reverent liturgies in historic churches adorned with icons, stained glass, and traditional European art-beautiful vestments, and a pace that follows the rubrics, not the bland modernism people complain about. So when you said my perspective is merely anecdotal, it immediately raised red flags, because I know for certain you haven’t attended as many Masses as I have. Given my work, I’m literally accommodated by priests and sometimes nuns, seeing firsthand how they live, operate, and celebrate Mass Here’s the truth: abuses aren’t everywhere. They’re mostly clustered in a few big-city parishes, largely a leftover issue from the 1970s, when generations of poorly formed clergy and certain prelates often ignored the manualist tradition, chasing speculative nouvelle théologie, which is notoriously pliable. But HONESTLY, I’ve worked all over Germany for example a country most often brought up as the liberal hellhole, and in smaller towns and countryside churches, you’ll find stunning, reverent liturgies untouched by the so-called “abuses.” The idea that the entire Novus Ordo is compromised simply doesn’t hold up, especially when you look at places like Eastern Europe - Now maybe your whole video is talking about US, and this is fine, I think you should point that out then, this is the one place I didn't work, I did work in Asia and South America and I never stumbled upon a modernist ugly church where priests play the guitar, have a sermon on tolerance and something lgbtq whatever and sends a woman to offer the Eucharist lol, now if irreverent ugly NO' are rampant in US you should point out that i'ts a US problem not an NO problem. Surprising as it might sound, I actually prefer the Novus Ordo Mass. There's something powerful about seeing a whole congregation sing hymns honoring Mary as the protector of their country-be it in Spanish, Italian, French, Hungarian, Slovenian, German, Croatian etc. These hymns are often centuries-old, written by local saints or theologians, and they make the Mass feel like it belongs to that community, deeply rooted in their culture and history. To me, that’s a richness the uniformity of Latin doesn’t capture-it’s more like a genuine interaction with the faith that respects the uniqueness of each place.

[@isaiasabades1166]

I was looking for somebody who professed the same view as a I do, thank you, dissing the NO and post vatican II is a product of only centering oneself around scandal, i wonder if the same people that say these things now wouldnt have made the mistake that lutherans or orthodox did when our Holy Catholic Church had bigger problems.

[@danielbroache]

I’m not as well traveled as you but I can say in the Eastern US bland NO masses are very common. It’s as though the lowest possible effort is given for beauty. We got a new, young priest who wanted to include more chant and latin during the mass. The older people complained so it stopped and they went back to the monotone speaking. I have attended beautiful NO masses in our area but they’re still plagued with the indifference of the boomer generation. Our parish used to do several feast day processions every year, now it’s down to one. Everyone is infected with apathy and it’s no wonder because the parishes in our area are full of grey hair and few young families. All these confirmations every year are kids from Christmas Catholic families who you never see again. We started attending a Diocesan TLM close to us and it has given us so much HOPE.

[@CroElectroStile]

@@danielbroache I'm truly glad you've found a place where the Mass is igniting your love for the Lord. Others, however, may be drawn to different forms of worship. I once spoke with a young Catholic who regularly attends a Mass I initially found challenging-a charismatic service within the Church that was far from traditional. You’d be hard-pressed to recognize the altar, as it’s simply a wooden table, and all the music is led by guitar. Yet, this young man thrives in that environment. He loves the lively music and finds traditional Marian hymns, Gregorian chant, and the ordered pace of the Novus Ordo uninspiring. From what I understand, one of the beautiful aspects of the Church in the US is the variety it offers-something you might not find in Europe. You can choose from charismatic gatherings, reverent Novus Ordo parishes, more modern expressions, the Traditional Latin Mass, or the Byzantine rite. My conversation with that young Catholic gave me a new perspective: each of these communities praises the Lord in its way, different flavors that are allowing people to freely and deeply give themselves to God. Despite these differences, they all share the core similarities that bind us together, especially the Eucharistic sacrifice, which remains the center of the Mass. God bless!

[@bruno-bnvm]

The orations are inferior of themselves there are a lot of things wrong with the new rite, not just literal abuses. INVESTIGATE

[@krzysztof5090]

but in how many places have you seen ad orientem? altar rails? comunion on tongue while kneeling? in how many places have you heard gregorian chant? I guess that I've not attended so many churces as you but I've been to masses in Portugal, Croatia, Peru, Spain and Denmark. I'm polish so I've seen many masses celebrated in many churches in my country too. And you're right - not a single mass I experienced was bluntly modernist but there were nowhere close to the indult TLM I attend either. Especially considering things that I indicated at the begninng. Not to mention the fact that TLM is not only about the aesthetics - it's also about rubrics and orations.

[@PiusPaladin]

An observation that onced moved me: The Unicorn NO is no more than a liturgy that conforms to the whims of the celebrant. The Tridentine Mass conversly demands the celebrant to conform to its rubrics.

[@Timidor23]

The Novus Ordo is based on the original Catholic liturgy that predates Tridentine Mass

[@PiusPaladin]

No it doesn't. That argument has been shredded by several Liturgical scholars. Try again. ​@Timidor23

[@Timidor23]

@@PiusPaladin Incorrect. The early liturgy was in the vernacular, included readings at one end, a holy kiss between participants (today's sign of peace) and the Eucharist at the other end

[@PiusPaladin]

@Timidor23 What I said isn't incorrect just because you say it is. The liturgy of the Early Christians still is something being studied and in the end will likely be an unsolved mystery. Despite any of these inclusions in the liturgy they were done away with by way of gradual reform and organic development. To return to them abruptly and without the disposition of the Faithful is a grave abuse, and arguably the heresy of antiquarinism described in Pius XII's Mediator Dei. The Roman Rite was at its zenith following Pius V's Quo Primum and little reform was needed from thence forth once it was formally codified and ratified by the papal magisterium.

[@Timidor23]

@@PiusPaladin Everything I said is well documented, which is enough to confirm I'm right. These radtrads just fetishize the Medieval aesthetic.

[@sackettsnodgrass9260]

My parish, Basilica of Sts. Peter and Paul in Chattanooga, TN, has an excellent NO mass. We also offer the TLM every Sunday as well.

[@williamjohnson3093]

“Unicorn” Novus Ordo masses are becoming more and more common , it shows that there is a strong revival in the church right now.

[@richardbohler8980]

There IS a reverent Novus Ordo, and it is celebrated at my parish. Except for Sundays, we have no option to attend a TLM. The best we can do for the Novus Ordo is to provide an actual Communion RAIL, sung Latin Agnus Dei, Sanctus, and a selection of traditional hymns (both Latin and English) from the St. Michael's hymnal. All this is combined with good preaching. Because of Traditiones custodes, our Bishop is hamstrung as to what he can allow, and we are so very grateful that he's making the best allowance for traditional Catholics that he can. Walk a mile in his shoes.

[@JeremiahAlphonsus]

Reverence in any Novus Ordo is lipstick on a pig. The thing is an intentionally Protestantized abomination. Hence Antipope Francis loves it but hates the “traditional” (i.e., actual) Mass of the Roman Rite. Anyone who knows and loves actual Catholicism avoids every Novus Ordo like the plague, just as anyone who knows and loves actual Catholicism would never dream of being in communion with Antipope Francis and the counterfeit church he leads.

[@tinkthestrange]

I thought multiple popes and Vatican II said that the Tlm couldn’t be eradicated.

[@atrifle8364]

Does it matter that my converted husband feels left out during all the Latin? Or that I get exhausted from the attempt to sing or pray in Latin? Do people who want to interact with the liturgy count?

[@JeremiahAlphonsus]

@ It’s not about you. Jettison your narcissism.

[@atrifle8364]

@@JeremiahAlphonsus - Are you asking me or the OP? Quite often traditionalists don't seem to consider the needs of others. That's why I asked if my husband and I counted for anything. God does not need Mass. We need to interact with the Mass for our benefit.

[@samtemporary]

Two summers ago I went to a Latin immersion course for a week at a Benedictine monastery in Alabama (if you know, you know). The TLM wasn't permitted for various reasons. However, the unicorn N.O. was permitted, and it was our daily Mass (with the Sunday Mass being the "high" or sung Mass). It was celebrated as reverently as you could possibly get in that situation, chant and all. The average Catholic would walk in and think it was the TLM rather than an N.O. "by the book". Even the homily was in Latin (for academic reasons). I'm well aware of the Ottiovani Intervention and his serious misgivings about the N.O. "by the book", and I agree with them. However...if his concerns were all addressed and incorporated into the N.O., the result would be what I believe the Council Fathers were probably thinking when they were being presented with certain changes. What we have now in the N.O. is a disaster - the statistics don't lie - and the unicorn N.O. still contains the issues Card. Ottiovani had; using EP 1, ad orientem, Latin, incense, chant, etc., doesn't change the fundamental problems. Advocating for a unicorn N.O. as a compromise is a waste of effort; you might as well advocate for the 1965 Agatha Christie Indult instead - at least the early transitional Missals retained most of the TLM elements. Of course, none of this touches on the other sacraments that were destroyed...erm..."revised", calling the entire post-Conciliar structure into question (I'm not advocating one way or the other - I'm just saying the "question" does exist, like it or not). Quite honestly, in my humble keyboard warrior's opinion, more effort should be placed by all Trad groups to return to all the pre-55 books, with an updated calendar to take into account any new saints, and the pre-48 breviary. I know the SSPX (which originally used the transitional Missal before settling on the 1962 books) wanted to do the least harm while retaining the most traditional version of the liturgical practices possible, but if you were going to go back - then go back. Using the 62 books leads to individual priests and Trad groups bouncing around the pre-55 and 62 Missals (we've all seen this during Holy Week), using breviaries from 1964 all the way back to the early 1900s, calendars with 54/62 feasts, etc. Talk about schizophrenia! How are the laity supposed to keep it all straight? I propose a council of all the Trad groups (Ecclesia Dei communities, Indult (diocesan), independent, religious orders, etc.) to at least open a dialogue about which liturgical books we can all agree to use. Right now, we look like the Western version of the Orthodox.

[@johnwayne3085]

I've been collecting pre NO missals and books from Ebay lately. St.PiusX saw this coming.

[@peterzinya1]

What ever you do, dont seek the risen Lord.

[@tanael]

28:54 Precisely. As someone who spent his formative Catholic years in a parish with a "dual-rite" priest who we helped enrich the NO as much as possible, it is an inherently unstable proposition, especially when said priest celebrates purely at the (dis)pleasure of the bishop. After fifteen glorious years, the bishop seet him to the absolute hinterlands, to be the vicar of a Hispanic-only mission church, and scattered the little latin-mass community that had slowly grown there.

[@johnplowright]

Thank you for this, as its tone was far more constructive than many I've seen. My background has not prepared me at all for this TLM vs. NO debate and often left me baffled since I converted as a result of attending services at a Norbertine Abbey whose Masses were very revenant and then spent much of my life as a Catholic in Germany and Japan were again the Mass was done in a way that led participants into a deep sense of worship. Now, living in the US, I can better understand the sentiment, but given my background, I attributed the problem to the informal, Hollywood-focused culture of the States and not a problem with the NO rite itself. The one thing I struggle to understand is that when discussing the "proper" Roman rite, proponents of the TLM do not discuss the Church's celebration of the Mass before Trent. As someone interested in Church history, I find that the state of practices pre-Trent seems to undermine the idea that there was a singular "proper" unaltered traditional form of celebration of the Lord's supper. For example, until the 5th century, the liturgy in the Christian world was primarily celebrated in Greek, Aramaic, or Hebrew - a tradition still encouraged by the 4 of the 5 ancient Pentarchial Sees. Rome was the only Church at that time that shifted the language of worship to the common vernacular at the time - i.e., Vulgate Latin, which, ironically enough, from which the English word vulgar is derived. As the earliest proponent of the 5 central churches use of the then vernacular, why is it odd or unusual to think Rome would not do so again as Latin fell out of use as a common language in the West - As the pioneer of the use of the vernacular among the 5 ancient Pentarchy churches, it would strike me as a breach of Tradition for them not to have done so as the use of Latin declined. If they could translate the liturgy into a latin as vulgar as Latin in the 5th centrury, why not English, Germany, Korean etc. today? Proponents of the TLM also seem to ignore the variety of liturgies widely celebrated before Trent. As a former Anglican, I am most familiar with the Sarum rite, but I know there were other regional variants in use and that at the time of Trent, there were even multiple versions of the Roman rite itself. Several religious orders also had unique rites, some of which persist today under a "grandfather clause" granted then by both the Council of Trent and Vatican II - the Norbertines being an example. One of the most striking examples is that Milan was one of the few regional rites exemption from the move to uniformity called from by Trent and Vatican II. As the Primate of Italy, one would expect the Pope could have easily imposed their compliance - but did not. I know this issue is the focus of just the Latin rite, which accounts for most Christians in communion with Rome. Still, the 23 other separate legal churches in full communion with Rome all use liturgies that differ from the Latin rite. One would expect that had the Council of Trent determined that the TLM was the one and only proper way to celebrate the Lord's supper, it would have been imposed across all the various western monastic communities and notable exceptions granted to places like Milian , but would also have been imposed on all of the other 23 churches in communion with Rome. All of this leaves me baffled as to why this is such an issue for Catholics. Poorly and irreverently celebrated liturgies are undoubtedly a problem that must be addressed. Still, throughout the entire history of the Church, God's One Holy, catholic, and apostolic Church has always had different approaches to how they celebrated the Lord's Supper and maintained respect and acceptance of each profoundly - i.e., they are in "communion" with each other. I appreciate that people are missing the TLM. Anglicans went through a similar issue when the Book of Common Prayer of 1929 was altered. But I worry that much of the NO vs. TLM discussion is not just understandable nostalgia - at times, it feels schematic as a radical breach with holy Tradition that is more than 500 years old and turn a blind eye the fully "catholic" rites of the exemption religious orders and the other 23 church in communion with us. Having left my protestant heritage given the shallow rootedness of their theological assertions, which lacked a clear continuity to the preceding 1500 of church tradition, I am baffled to see strong proponents of the TLM, who are otherwise seemingly orthodox Catholics, seem willing to make a similar error, turning a blind eye to a far richer and varied tradition of the Church. I'd love to hear your thoughts to better understand what I might be missing - particularly how the short sightedness of what strict advocates of the TLM is not schamtic in nature. It often seems that the most extreme proponents of the TLM hold the current Pope with excessive contempt that makes me wonder what they think holds the church together if not Tradition and the authority of the magisterium ... or more personally put that in my desire to seek firmer ground than my Protestian past provided, I've arrive back were I started. Many thanks in advance - John

[@atrifle8364]

As one of those dastardly (and accidental) Vatican II apologists, you are on the right track. More upvotes if I could. The "TLM" discussion, really the Missal of 1962 is limited to primarily the US, UK, France and handful of first world locales. Most global Catholics are scratching their heads over this one, perfectly content with the liturgy that speaks in their language. Ironically the discussion itself is modernist in nature. TLM advocates are usually rejecting the two councils that address modernism, Vatican I and II. Here, we have a Catholic arguing with a pope about the Pope's direct responsibilities. He's also 2nd guessing a whole ecumenical council, that on the balance was a lot like the Council of Trent, which also produced a new liturgy and new approach for a new age. As a revert/cradle Catholic, the discussion is genuinely tiring. Out of everything in my childhood, it was the guitar Masses with reception in the hand only in a gym that probably formed me best. The everyday and every Sunday Masses that now feed me and my faith are never "good enough" in this world of forever needing lengthen our Gregorian chant. There's a great deal of pride and anger built into the discussion that goes unchecked for the next tiny point about Latin and/or liturgical practices. This discussion is much better than most, but it's pretty far into minute details that belong to the clerics, not the faithful.

[@ryanscottlogan8459]

The Novus Ordo can be offered with great reverence and beauty.Offering the Mass with the Roman Canon with the Kyrie sung in Greek and the Sanctus,Gloria and Agnus Dei sung in Latin.Eliminating lay Eucharistic ministers and offering communion to the congregation while kneeling.If you saw the recent mass offered by Archbishop Broglio on Divine Mercy Sunday in Stockbridge,MA.Mass is also offered this way at the Shrine of the Blessed Sacrament in Alabama and St Michaels’s Monastery in California.This is the direction many young priests are headed.Is it a replacement for the TLM no but it is a great improvement from what we have now in 98% of American parishes.

[@dannyharvanek3908]

READ - Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI Book by Anthony Cekada - then decided

[@atrifle8364]

Have you read "The Pope, The Council, and The Mass" by Likoudis/Whitehead?

[@TheJelanii]

I thought it was interesting you mentioned the 1% unicorn mass situation and I have to say it has increased SUBSTANTIALLY since ~2014 when i started paying attention. Im in the military and have been living in Japan, California, Oklahoma and currently Maryland. When i was in California, and getting married, around 2014 we had a scandal at our parish and i essentially sought refuge to the FSSP Chaplaincy in Fresno. There was no other option i was willing to take. In 2016 when i got order to OKC i went to St Damiens (FSSP) and the local NO priest (from St Monicas) was covering down for our parish priest. The NO priest would also celebrate the TLM but his NO back then was a unicorn mass. Then in 2022 i had some training in Pensacola, FL and attended various parishes. I went to St Stephens (TLM) and St Thomas More (NO) and found yet again ANOTHER Unicorn mass. NOW im in St. Marys County in Maryland and MOST of the parishes in my area have no "altar girls" ad orientum, mostly latin, recpetion exclusively on the tongue, altar rails, (one priest even distributes communion by intiction). Our lady star of the sea, st johns, and St josephs. It is AMAZING to me that at every station i saw more and more "Reverent/Unicorn" NO. Anecdotally, they are there and over the last decade those parishes are thriving (and they are all administrated by Father Young Trads). Would love to hear from other old heads like me if they have a similar experience! I see the light at the end of the tunnel though (glad trad).

[@dyamineu5246]

As a "trad" Catholic, I believe that the issues with the NO and the TLM said by ecclesia dei communities (and all those who are rallied to the current Rome) is not simply a question of form and mater, but most importantly a question of ministry which was redefined in the second Vatican council. There is always a non-negligeable doubt on the validity of the sacraments. This is not a way to bash the many good hearted faithfuls or priest, but when you accept modernism (a heresy condemned by the first Vatican council and a number of Popes) you cannot claim fullness of faith.

[@PiusPaladin]

@@dyamineu5246Good comment; I've known many TLM saying priests who preach garbage doctrine from the pulpit and conversly many holy NO priests who are closet trads

[@rushmonk3545]

Byzcath revert here. I was scandalized and almost fell away from the church during my reversion because of the typical novus ordos. Went to a few, and couldn’t tolerate the liturgical changes from being raised TLM under ten years old, and understanding Catholics professed true presence. Seemed self evident to me that they didn’t, unfortunately. Almost ended up orthodox because of it. Thankful I found an amazing Byzantine community. I’ve been to the better part of a dozen parishes/masses locally, I think. I’m still waiting to stumble upon the one that feels duly reverent to me. I think it’s a problem with the Roman bishop/archbishop. Pray for your bishops.

[@IslandHome-o5v]

On this very day in 1969 and Fast of Christ the King we had the first novus ordo Mass inflicted on us in our parish. When we gathered outside when it was over we were a group in shock. Some were scandalized others angry and others confused and tearful. This of course got back to the parish priest and the following week we were given a sermon on obedience to the Holy Father. Some stopped going Mass forthwith, and other carried on until the liturgical experimentation started and then decided that they had enough. I was one of them. After ten years in the wilderness I found a chapel of the SSPX. I have not been present at a novus ordo Mass for more than forty five years. Rome does not want the traditionalist and I don’t want they novus ordo messes.

[@rushmonk3545]

@@IslandHome-o5v thank you for sharing your own story. May God have mercy on us all. Oh my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell. Lead all souls to heaven, especially those most in need of thy mercy.

[@richard8242]

@@rushmonk3545 Amen

[@peterzinya1]

@@IslandHome-o5v Yeah, so how are these religions treating you? All the while Jesus is standing at your door knocking. Try opening to him.

[@taffyr2242]

@@IslandHome-o5vthank you for sharing your story.

[@NotevenTony]

From the orthodox side, I’m so sorry about those commenters. They don’t represent us. Heck, a lot of them haven’t even been to a liturgy, and they all need to go to confession.

[@Joe-b3b4v]

Incredible! You made priceless distinctions and wound up at the necessary conclusion.

[@mendaliv]

At least with Cantius, it seems like the only reason they do their unicorn NO is because Cupich forces them to do so.

[@vinnyfrancone3567]

For what it’s worth “St Mary of Petpetual Help” in Chicago near 32nd/Morgan would also qualify as a unicorn. It was featured in the documentary “Mass of the Ages #1. Latin masses were suspended there by CDL Cupich. It used to be Latin mass and NO. Now it’s NO twice Sunday with one heavily Latinized. Both are very reverent. And the NO there has always been reverent. So much so that when I attend anywhere else aside from Cantius I feel like I’m at a Protestant mass.

[@Mulatto.Macchiato]

What about validity? Despite the rare unicorn mass, what is to be said about even its validity and although it may be a reverent attempt is it valid? Not all sedes are home aloners, the CMRI or those who attend SGG make a good argument against it ever being valid in the first place.

[@illyb514]

Well, there really aren’t too many Catholics who are serious about their faith who could argue with that. You just about summed it up. I don’t think I’ve ever heard such a clear analysis and comparison.

[@bthemedia]

I finally found one of these in Indianapolis, Indiana (at least as orientum, Eucharist received kneeling at altar rails & reverent - Holy Rosary Church) and was quite impressed with it, every seat packed and a great gateway for N.O. Catholics who appreciate following along in English and seeing such a beautiful and reverent service. It’s about as inspiring as seeing the TLM for the first time.

[@fotisvon9943]

15:20 where do you pull these elements from? what makes them essential?

[@YouTubedoesntneedhandles]

His rectum

[@ZeDocta1]

I was gonna say the same. The offertory as essential? The offertory prayers as we know it didn't exist at all for centuries until the high middle ages. EDIT: I found where he got it from; looks like an article from Peter Kwasniewski: rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2020/09/two-forms-of-roman-rite-liturgical-fact.html?m=1

[@Altare_Dei]

I made the side-by-side. The intention you deduced was definitely my view when making that video, though it has since evolved as I have learned more about the liturgy. I entirely agree with the point you make here.

[@geraldmay9408]

I'm a traditional minded Catholic, but I always found it interesting that Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in the first years of the founding of the SSPX at Econe allowed the seminarians to attend a Novus Ordo in Latin and ad Orientum, celebrated by a pius monk at a nearby monastery.

[@Corpoise0974]

SSPX has no faculties.

[@lewehleweh9198]

it looks like his view gradually changes. It makes sense if he gave the benefit of doubt towards the NO in earlier times, a faithful NO back then still carry a lot of traditional piety and norms. Unfortunately, even some conservative NO today keep unwanted novelties like female server and Eucharistic minister

[@randomperson5817]

What am I supposed to do? The nearest catholic church to me that I can safely access celebrates novus ordo mass, but the priests and deacons are dedicated and sincere. Although it is not very reverent I enjoy going. Am I culpable as a christian for going? Or am I an innocent sheep who should look with an open heart at what this fallen world has to offer me.

[@randomperson5817]

I agree with traditionalists and wish every mass were a TLM. I would obediently attend and have no qualms with the sacred mass. The entitlement for people who complained about it! But as a beggar and a sinner, who am I to demand a higher mass? I'm not even worthy of an irreverent novus ordo. Who are we to demand anything.

[@chainsawlightning4515]

The most important thing is that you go to Mass. It would be better if it were more reverent, but the most important thing is that you must receive the Holy Eucharist. All this other stuff is secondary to that. It's like choosing what to eat. If you have few options, then you should eat what you can so that you don't starve. If you have many options, you should choose what is healthiest. In the same way, if you have one parish near you, go to that one. Your soul needs spiritual food. However, if you have multiple options, only then should you start being picky. While reverence is good for your spiritual health, it pales in comparison to the positive effect of the Eucharist.

[@NotreDame4_Life-jk2gh]

People think things such as: "If I were the Bishop I would straighten things out,” this is the product of sin, you cannot be consumed by anger.

[@jurgendaams6957]

I hear mass every sunday: Latin novus ordo, sung by the priests and a Gregorian choir. Very reverential, very beautiful and in a beautiful neo- gothic church De Krijtberg in Amsterdam.

[@Vinsanity997]

Don’t doubt your audience, I agree 100%

[@jcers]

An absolutely pitch-perfect take. As someone who has spent dozens of hours preparing a set of instructions for priests on exactly how to conduct a “Unicorn Novus Ordo”, it becomes immediately clear from doing so how much this isn’t what the designers of the rubrics intended on a general level. It was to be permitted, perhaps for monastic settings, or certain parishes of “backwardists” (in the words of Pope Francis), but was never expected to be the norm. The norm, from the rubrics, is what we got. The rubrics themselves are at times shoddy, poorly-written, and unclear as to what to do, _especially_ if one is trying to do the “more traditional” or “more reverent” option provided. The other thing one will notice when these options are implemented is the sheer damage done to something I call “liturgical momentum” as compared to the Mass of the Roman Rite. The traditional Mass’ elements just have a flow that truly conveys the unicity of the act of prayer that is the holy liturgy, with its multiple layers of simultaneous actions allowing for a liturgy that never feels as though it has an “intermission”, save for perhaps the homily. This is a feeling I also get when attending the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. Everything in the liturgy feels as though they truly form a singular action, which ultimately assists greatly in prayer for those assisting, as the continual progression towards the climax at the consecration fosters a contiguous meditation on the liturgical action (this structure is even mirrored within the Roman Canon itself microcosmically, with its largely mirrored signs of the Cross, signification of prayers on opposite sides of the “pyramid”, with the Qui pridie & Simili modo forming the peak). The priest seemingly going about his business & “ignoring” the changes Introit and Kyrie gives a highly theocentric focus to his action, only saluting the people with a Dominus vobiscum after the entirety of the introductory rites. By contrast, the Novus Ordo forces itself into a sequential, linear, segmented formulation to ensure maximum immediate verbal intelligibility and has “icebreakers” (such as the Dominus vobiscum practically starting the Mass, not to mention the permitted space for the priest to “in the briefest of words, introduce the faithful to the Mass of the day”) or “pacebreakers” to make sure that the faithful don’t go too long without verbal participation (such as the moving of the Mysterium fidei so to adjoin to it a “memorial acclamation”) that serve this purpose. Even in many of the best parishes, the ceremonies have a sense of artificiality to them that I’m not sure can be overcome. In the average parish, this is magnified significantly. A few additional comments I had when viewing: 5:36 even these places don’t do things correctly. I have not seen them observe the correct degrees for a sung Mass given in Musicam sacram, nor does the celebrant genuflect when crossing the Blessed Sacrament (long story short, read GIRM 233 from the 1969 & 1975 Latin editions and compare to 274 in the 2002) 15:55 I agree, and strengthen the claim. Not only does he take the liturgy according to structure and not according to content of elements, but his view of structure is much more akin to that of combinations of elements than of permutations. The order of elements can be changed without change of value upon evaluation. At the level of abstraction he (and any who claims that the NO is properly in continuity with the historical Roman Rite) operates at, it becomes nigh impossible to distinguish between uses of a rite and the original rite, or even two different rites entirely. Once again, a fantastic video. I’m really hoping that the quality of liturgical discourse continues to improve in Catholic spheres. Videos like this are sure to be a step in the right direction.

[@femaleKCRoyalsFan]

Well, according to a Shel Silverstein poem, the unicorn refused to get on noahs ark so I don’t think a unicorn novus ordo exists

[@monicamohan4720]

All that I know is that, after years of attending the NO, I still did not have that connection with Jesus that I had heard about and longed for. After that first TLM that I believe I was called to, everything changed. It wasn't the "bells and whistles "...far from it. I didn't know the language, didnt know when to sit or stand and the chanting seemed to on forever...but there is something inherent in the TLM that cemented a connection within me with Jesus.

[@bwstv321]

For those that have a Unicorn mass... what do you do when the priest is reassigned and the new pastor tears everything that was built apart? (Rural parish, nearest latin mass is 100 miles one way)

[@jabelltulsa]

Side quest: saecula saeculorum doesn’t mean world without end.

[@TheDarkRobloxian]

Actually, it does! Sort of. You know how 'epiousion' gets reduced to '(lechem) chukki.' It's a similar thing: "World without end" is probably the most accurate way to capture "Olam va'Ed."

[@atrifle8364]

English has lost a meaning of forever, which is not a synonym for eternity. It is forward until something changes. Thus semper refers to time, like nunc, etc. Secular seaculorum must then deal with outside of time, which English has to kulge, aka world without end.

[@Rose-gk9zk]

No matter how pretty and "reverent" you make it, the Novus Ordo still has a meal prayer from the Talmud instead of an Offertory. It can't be fixed without a major re-write of its missal.

[@mousakandah5188]

it's still a reverent offertory prayer just because you find a better and richer prayer, that doesn't make it non-reverent.

[@MelancholicHiraeth]

​@@mousakandah5188this isn't a matter of aesthetic reverence, the Mass is a sacrifice.

[@trad-lite]

St. Peter’s in Omaha, Nebraska is a certified unicorn.

[@damienparoski2033]

This was a very well thought-out video. I think it should also be pointed out that diocesan priests do you have to show obedience to their local Bishops in how they say the Mass. Many do not have the ability to say the Mass in the desired manner of the faithful. I think another thing that is often forgotten is the human factor in those who are going to either the Traditional Latin Mass or the Novus Ordo Mass. Many attended due to how they feel about it and lack the spiritual maturity to fully embrace the Joy that is at a Mass. This is just based on my experience when dealing with the varied communities revolving around the forms of the Mass. Once again thank you for a well thought out presentation!

[@patrickmcguire628]

Thank you. Very thoughtful, very well done. I was an altar boy beginning in the third grade, in 1959. I can assure you that the TLM at that time often did not meet the highest standard. So there was also a "unicorn" TLM. Just consider that I did not learn Latin until High School (Galia tres partae divisa est) , I memorized the TLM responses phonetically. Not very reverent. Because they are now suppressed with their own liturgical sub-culture, there is undoubtedly a much much higher incidence of "unicorn" TLM's than ever before. I would love to see a conversation between you & Dr Brant Pitre. PS - vulgarity, though very common, is always irreverent

[@MrAnomic]

There's a lot more than the liturgy that's wrong with the post conciliatory Church. The NO liturgy is the symptom of the moral and theological decay that came to the Church after Vatican 2. Still, the liturgy probably undermines the visible aspects of the faith the most, but the new theology of the Church after V2 is the root of most of the problems in the Church. Especially in the ecumenical areas which are so severely undermining and dividing the modern Church away from 2000 years of consistent theological development. I don't think anything has a chance of authoritative correction until there is either a Holy Pope, or a new Vatican 3 council controlled by the young clergy who seem to be more inclined to follow, and understand, sacred tradition. That was a beautiful and inspirational prayer, btw. Touched on a lot of important points about what it means to be living in the Spirit of Christ, and a hope that the Pope will live in it as well.

[@peterzinya1]

We cant go to heaven without the pope.

[@MrAnomic]

@@peterzinya1 I think you're confused. Our salvation is not directly dependent on any other people or personalities (Acts 10:34, Rom 2:11, Eph 6:9, Col 3:25, 1 Peter 1:17, etc.) other than God. The Church was created to offer channels for grace that flow from God to Christ's believers through the sacraments and by declaring the truth of the Gospel to the world, such that we actually conform to the will of God. It's very difficult, and in most cases impossible, under other potential channels of grace, to conform to the will of God. Especially without the use of the sacraments and God's graces that flow through them. And even though it's very difficult, I imagine it's not impossible if God wills it to an individual person. With God, all things are possible, even if they are very unlikely. With that said, salvation is not dependent on these specific channels of grace, as it is not the channels, or their temporal mechanisms, that save us. God has proven that he also can convey channels of grace all on his own too, without the Church, if he wants to. Who are we to tell God how he can bring people to Christ and the perfection of faith? We are no one, and nothing, next to God. With that said, you are saved, and justified, by your faith in Christ, not your faith in the Pope. And the quality of that faith will be judged (Rev 20:12) by the totality of the good works you have done by cooperating with God's will, by the influences of the Holy Spirit, toward those works God has made for, and commanded, us to do (Eph 2:10, 1 Tim 6:18, 2 Tim 3:17, etc.) Francis simply does not walk much in the Spirit. Those that follow his teachings will find it hard to find their way to the kingdom because much of what he teaches is confusing and wrong. The fact is that every Pope since, and during, Vatican 2 have failed at perfectly walking in the Spirit, to various degrees, as well. Their missteps have caused great confusion in the Church, to the destruction of many a believer's faith and ability to walk in God's will. Simply put, you can go to heaven without the Pope. What you can't do, is go to heaven without a perfected faith in Christ/God and shewn through your will to follow and love Christ in all things that you do.

[@peterzinya1]

@@MrAnomic Oh, Ok, thanks. I dont need the pope to get to heaven. Thats nice to know.

[@cynthiahelmich3762]

GREAT VIDEO!

[@bdok7607]

thank you for this . I recently had to explain to my wife why I will not attend semi-unicorn mass (ad populum via local bishops decree). But I couldn't explain it, except my "spidey" sense, and it's a N.O. in disguise which I felt is worse than plain express meal service n.o. mass. I never thought about "roman" of Roman Catholic. I need to learn more on "roman-rite". p.s. myrtle beach St. Andrew has semi-unicorn mass..this priest tried very hard to bring trad mass but bishop had other ideas

[@leoniea138]

We must stop sugar coating the issues of the day (* in general *)...let's just look at facts....

[@Maddogmjd1900]

Sacred Heart, Grand Rapids, MI does it very well!!!! For us converts who have only been in the desert the entire time (after we joined the church), these unicorn Novus Ordo's are like a drop of water to a dehydrated dying soul. The Lord uses everything at his fingertips to bring a soul back to him and these provide very necessary redirections to lost souls.

[@trad-lite]

St. Mary’s in Michigan is a certified unicorn.

[@johnbrion4565]

Do you respond to comments. I have a question about TLM.

[@leoniea138]

Now this is how I see all this . 1610 Our Lady of Good Success ....why are we not paying attention. Our Lady told us what was coming ....here we are . We were baptized back in the the day .Latin Mass . Then came V 11 and Our lives changed and our church and society , just everything changed ....we did not know that our Latin Mass Church is still in existence . We were not given a choice . We just found ourselves with novus ordo . We don't even recognize our church anymore ....how sad ...but what do we do now .....we can only look at the good Bishops to bring us back to the promised land .

[@NotreDame4_Life-jk2gh]

If you do not listen to the councils or the popes then who are you, if you deny the authority of the magisterium. Do you not observe all the precepts of the Church and the penalties of canon law. If so you shouldn’t speak such ill words of this.

[@orchardofelias]

The question really is... is the Novus Ordo ever licit?

[@atrifle8364]

It's always licit, because of Peter.

[@oyster4942]

Would the Latin Novus Ordo at St. Micheals Abbey in Orange County, CA be considered a Unicorn Novus Ordo?

[@ryanscottlogan8459]

Yes and it is offered beautifully.

[@andrewhollingsworth9441]

I have not been to Mass at the Oxford Oratory but I would be surprised if you did not find 11.00 Mass at the London Oratory equally acceptable and probably the principal Mass at the other British Oratories.

[@aloyalcatholic5785]

I think I agree with pretty much all of this. What I see is that the reformers of the liturgy had a kind of contempt for the vetus ordo. Therefore, you ended up with what we commonly get with the novus ordo. Thus they are so violently different in how they are commonly celebrated. This was due to historical trends and ideology. Its that contempt they had for the past that really gets to the root of so many of the issues in the church. This might seem like Captian Obvious stuff, but I feel we trads need to engage with the normies and neo cons as to why they get so triggered by tradition instead of just falling into our own little forts. I thought the Mass of the Ages was cringe originally when it came out, but I understand now why they made some of the choices they made.

[@russellpierce-y1g]

I see your well articulated point

[@john-paulgies4313]

"Let them be turned backward, and blush for shame that desire evils to me: Let them be presently turned away blushing for shame that say to me: 'Tis well, 'tis well. Let all that seek thee rejoice and be glad in thee; and let such as love thy salvation say always: The Lord be magnified. But I am needy and poor; O God, help me. Thou art my helper and my deliverer: O lord, make no delay." (Ps. 69:4-6)

[@josefjung6946]

I disagree with the statement that reverence has nothing to do with the text. If the text does not contain the same respect as it used to, is more worldly and watered down, the reverence is also different.

[@regandonohue3899]

Nah. The prayer USC wrote seems pretty reverent to me. You can write things reverently, what you're referring to I suspect is a different aspect.

[@mousakandah5188]

reverence has to do with the deposition of your heart and soul to God it has nothing to do with words a pious Saint can say the name "Jesus" with more reverence than an unserious sinner praying all mysteries of the rosary chanted in Gregorian.

[@atrifle8364]

The unicorn Masses before Vatican II were the solemn high Masses of the Liturgy of 1962. Most Masses before Vatican II were low Masses with contemporary hymns. The complaint offered here about less than perfect Masses is a perpetual one. Let the sheep into the sheepfold and it gets messy fast. There are highly scholarly works placing Vatican II in it's liturgical and historical context. ("The Pope, The Council, and the Mass" by Likoudis/Whitehead is one.) Spread the solemn high Mass to the faithful and we'll get everything being objected to here or worse. That's because it actually existed in 1948. It's about understanding history. The vast majority of bickering about liturgy does not understand that there was no utopia in 1950.

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

19:45 No YOU missed the entire point along with her.

[@TheLeonhamm]

Note well, this rhinoceros .. was .. the Mass orginally accepted by both the Latin Mass Society and the incipient SSPX (c. 1968-71/ 73 CE) - an odd version of the AD 1967 reduction of the AD 1965 hack-job on the AD 1961 revision of some refomulations from AD 1955/ 50, still (more or less) 'present' in the Missal of St Paul VI. It was also, believe it or not, intended still to be the preferred form used on Sundays' Sung (old-time 'High') Parish Mass and for specific formal occasions (requiring greater attention or .. respect); for the rest, the Read (aka 'Low') Mass was not meant to use the longer Roman Canon (or even its heavily excisable form) = the swiflty ubiquitous Eucharist Prayer II* still in use (with or without faux Peter, Paul and Mary tribute band accompaniments, however, the old piously devotional hymns were still a standard ornamentation before 1975 CE .. when loathing of them among the clergy drove them out). 1975 CE and its reworkings of the vernacular versions (especially French and English) had the specific aim of making them more .. erm .. Common (e.g. the Campaign for Plain English); the Thous and Thees, -ths and -sts, already on the chopping block were vigorously expelled (even, where possible from the simple prayers, Our Father, Hail Mary); as were all unncessary adornments, signs or .. reverences - even where the rubrics might have suggested them, turning to the people, blessing incense, sprinkling holy water. The vulgarisation of the Mass via the death of a thousand variations was, therefore, an official choice, also authoritatively imposed, and requiring episcopal control over all and any 'Latinisation'; thus, ending the Mass of 1971 in Latin - or, horror of horrors, an application to implement the Agatha Christie Indult - was the purposeful plan, not an accidental mishap or abuse (even down to refusing any advertisement of the said Latin Masses; which should sound familiar once again); the rhinoceros became not only an endangered species of Mass it became a myth: the unicorn (then shockingly: Dominicae Cenae, Vicesimus Qunintus Annus, Quattuor Abhinc Annos, Varietates Legitimae, Ecclesia Dei, Liturgicam Authenticam et al, now defunked), this was, officially, no longer just about liturgy, form, traditon, reformation or reverrence it was about .. 'us'. 'I would like to ask forgiveness—in my own name and in the name of all of you, venerable and dear brothers in the Episcopate—for everything which, for whatever reason, through whatever human weakness, impatience or negligence, and also through at times partial, one-sided and erroneous application of the directives of the Second Vatican Council, may have caused scandal and disturbance concerning the interpretation of the doctrine and the veneration due to this great sacrament. And I pray the Lord Jesus that in the future we may avoid in our manner of dealing with this sacred mystery anything which could weaken or disorient in any way the sense of reverence and love that exists in our faithful people.' St John Paul II, Address to the Italian Bishops Episcopal Conference 'ad limina apostolorum' December 4, 1981. Hmmmm? Keep the Faith; tell the truth, shame the devil, and let the demons shriek. God bless. ;o) * Like the Old Low Mass forms this EP II could be packaged into a twenty-five minute bundle. Recall, up until the mid 1970s working Catholics often sought to attend .. shock, horror, probe .. Daily Mass, before going to work, etc. Indeed, some kind priests would offer the Mass in the evenings for those duty-bound to work shifts (even in the days of the twelve hour fast) - this was (as I recall it) usually calm, quiet, and very reverent .. for all concerned (offered by older priests).

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

The NO has 4 Eucharistic prayers not nine.

[@shpeale]

The Missed at my NO parish has 9.

[@MrMPHazell]

No. In fact, the 2008 Missale Romanum (editio typica tertia emendata) contains a total of ten Eucharistic Prayers: EPs I-IV, EPs I-II for Reconciliation, EPs I-IV for Use in Masses for Various Needs (I will grant that these latter can be seen as four variations of one EP, but your assertion is still wrong). If you count the optional EPs for Masses with Children, then that's another three to the total. And some regions have even more: for example, the Dutch translation of the Missal has EPs V-VI alongside the 'standard' four, plus another for optional use in marriages.

[@petardraganov3716]

This is the first of your videos I've seen and I find the argument pretty cogent. I'm not sure what that would look like in my case, but I would definitely support the TLM over a unicorn NO at this point. On a separate note, I got whiplash hearing your diction switch from "brain fart" to "acrimony " and "elucidate" in 3 seconds. You used a few bad words you didn't need to at the start of the video. You might as well have cut them not only for people who might get easily put off, but for the simple stylistic coherence of the piece.

[@wVc5150]

Well said.

[@RedFox-c5l]

Walking on the body and blood of christ with the host in the hand

[@notsparctacus]

Why not Mass according to the rubrics of Tres Abhinc Annos?

[@jep6752]

20:29 - I also saw that video years ago 😂

[@jstantongood5474]

also the use of eucharistic prayer 1 .

[@markscannell865]

It is best to ignore Timidor23 in the comments section. The guy is nothing more than a troll.

[@Marine_Veterano]

St Joseph Pomona California 11am Mass

[@Lee-zt9vl]

Well done

[@albertbeaulac5700]

"...that led to its extensive use; it was the exalted position of the see that used it. The Roman Rite was adopted throughout the West because the local bishops, sometimes kings or emperors, felt that they could not do better than use the rite of the chief bishop of all, at Rome. And this imitation of Roman liturgical practice brought about in the West the application of the principle (long admitted in the East) that rite should follow patriarchate. Apart from his universal primacy, the pope had always been unquestioned Patriarch of the West. It was then the right and normal thing that the West should use his liturgy. The irregular and anomalous incident of liturgical history is not that the Roman Rite has been used, practically exclusively, in the West since about the tenth or eleventh century, but that before that there were other rites in the pope's patriarchate. Not the disappearance but the existence and long toleration of the Gallican and Spanish rites is the difficulty." Catholic Encyclopedia, Roman Rite

[@OniLeafNin]

I am trying to understand why your 9 markers of the Roman rite are objectively true, and not simply a matter of personal opinion. Some of those things though historical, are not essential, and developed later, they are merely accidental. The essential, not the accidental, are markers of value for substance. The ordinary form may be ordinary, indeed it may seem unremarkable in some ways, (like a child born in poverty outside in the cold) but it remains the fruit of a ressourcement, it remains in the words of the pope, “apostolic”. Though the liturgy is not perfect this side of heaven, I pray it will grow ever more so as priests are ordained who long for liturgy which reflects the splendor of the source and summit of our faith.

[@ConfessionsofAConvert]

Great video.

[@uscatholicam]

@@ConfessionsofAConvert thanks bro ✊

[@Sahuayoc8490]

Thanks for the effort and input of this great video. Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam. 🙏

[@marcokite]

@@uscatholicam - Come home to Orthodoxy bro!!! Yes!! AUTOCEPHALY IS GREAT! It worked for the Apostles and the Church Fathers and for the Church of the first thousand years! Autocephaly has retained the ancient Eucharistic Liturgy in Orthodoxy. 'Papal supremacy' has given the RCC the Lutheran Communion service of Paul VI, not to mention the Synod on sinodality. Come home to Orthodoxy ☦☦☦☦☦☦☦

[@glennb2819]

Good points Good content. I didn't even know that there are unicorn novus ordo masses. As far as I am concerned, the Novus Ordo is a cheap copy of the roman rite, a counterfeit if you will.

[@simonewilliams7224]

Novus Ordo should Never have happened, simply just a translation in part into a vernacular.

[@simonewilliams7224]

Liturgy, words matter.

[@lewehleweh9198]

As much im sympathetic to your cause, most of TLM are only available in western countries. The rest of the world only have NO, so reverent NO is the only thing that we can hope for..

[@georgios3333]

The liturgy has develop and install times. It is not the purview of bishops, including the Bishop of Rome to alter. It was.Hubis On the part of paul v

[@setonixI]

Then who developed it if not the Bishops, guided by the Holy Spirit? Do changes just happened. Did Quo Primum just happened or was a concious choice?

[@martyfrank]

I haven't read all of the comments so maybe someone has already said this. The other big problem with the unicorn NO is the doubt over the validity of the celebrant to offer any mass since the changes made to the sacrament of Holy Orders. Most priests and bishops who celebrate the TLM have had themselves at the very least conditionally re-ordainred/ re- consecrated. Therefore even if the unicorn NIObis valid there is the doubtful validity of the celebrant still lingering.

[@peterzinya1]

Validity of celebrants. Jesus spoke of little else.

[@dyzmadamachus9842]

I hope you get something out of constantly doubting the Church. Otherwise it's just miserable.

[@peterzinya1]

@@dyzmadamachus9842 The CC has spread enough misery around the world and continues to do so. The USA has been making "The Church" pay for its crimes reaching billions in payouts, thats billions with a B.

[@martyfrank]

​@@dyzmadamachus9842 I get nothing out of it. I'm saying that there is a legitimate concern about the validity of the new consecration rite just as there was a genuine concern about the validity of the NO especially when the words of consecration were mistranslated until Benedict XVI rectified the matter. The problems with the new consecration rite has never been rectified. However if you are fine with not having certainty about the validity of your sacraments then who am I to judge.

[@wolfstainjitsu]

There is no reason to doubt. Saint Pius X and most of teologians agreen that the esencial is wording: "this is my body, this is my blood". Everything else is accesory even the ignorance or the believes of the priest.

[@StAnthonyPaduaRadTrad]

Put a unicorn on a pig and it’s still swine

[@geraldfitzpatrick5294]

I assist at Latin Mass. If the priest would face the tabernacle and pray the Mass of the Faithful in Latin at a NO, that would be best 😊

[@RadTradX]

It would be best if they just kept the Mass the same. It is a mortal sin to do it another way according to Quo Primum

[@Leocomander]

@@RadTradXYeah this is a bad take. A Pope can’t bind another Pope on disciplinary matters and a priest celebrating a liturgy that has been validly promulgated by the Church is not a *mortal sin*.

[@firebearfl643]

Provided the tabernacle is still in the sanctuary.

[@huongmai9521]

@@Leocomander the key word is “validly”

[@RadTradX]

@@Leocomander that is completely heretical and you should depart from your liberalism. Yes a pope can bind and you should think about becoming Catholic

[@davegaetano7118]

It really doesn't matter much what one may think about the Traditional Latin Mass as long as one continues to recognize Bergoglio as a valid pope.

[@TheDarkRobloxian]

As much suspicion regarding the election as one might reasonably and even validly bear, and as many canonical self-excommunications as a pope may traipse into, that does not change the fact that the overwhelming consensus of the Magisterium acknowledges him. The long list of Popes includes the gravedigging, simonious, and even heretical; it's not the procedure of saints to respond to crime by crime, and schism remains grave error.

[@jstantongood5474]

old st patricks in New York city.

[@Marybell11]

It doesn't matter how reverent the Novus Ordo priest tries to be, because it's always the Dan Schutte songs chosen by the irreverent music director and the boomers who won't turn off their cell phones that remind me where I am.

[@brianmurphy9570]

I'm searching for the Unicorn TLM where people don't dump on the NO

[@stevedoetsch]

No idea what you're even talking about since there is no TLM where they dump on the novice ordo because that is not part of the rubrics of the mass. What you've said is absolutely incoherent.

[@rx0102]

NO dumping on TLM leads to the derailing of the lives of children who have no other truly faithful education option except parish schools/co-ops when their parish is destroyed. TLM dumping on NO leads to...people just going to the TLM. Not equal.

[@bruno-bnvm]

They are not taking dumps on the NO they are raising a flag about a problem in the church. If you loved the church you must understand

[@brianmurphy9570]

@@stevedoetsch You know exactly what I'm talking about

[@benabaxter]

Paul-AYNE, not Paul-EEEN Therefore: You lose. Apropos of your recent post

[@uscatholicam]

@@benabaxter 😂🫠

[@BrianBenson-rc9mu]

The Vatican 2 teaches doctrines condemned by the Catholic Church.

[@IslandHome-o5v]

I was reading through the encyclical Mortalium Animos of Pope Pius XI promulgated in 1928. Some of the very things he warned about, especially false ecumenism in the pursuit of the unity of all Christian Churches, are the very things that are being foisted on us since Vatican 2.

[@harrisonsamson]

Such as?

[@BrianBenson-rc9mu]

@@harrisonsamson What's wrong with Vatican II? FAQs 1. What is wrong with the Second Vatican Council? The Second Vatican Council taught doctrines which had been already condemned by the Church, and enacted disciplines which are contrary to the Church's teaching and constant practice. 2. What doctrines did it teach which were already condemned? There are four major errors concerning: (1) the unity of the Church; (2) ecumenism; (3) religious liberty; (4) collegiality. 3. What false doctrine does it teach concerning the unity of the Church? Vatican II teaches heresy concerning the unity of the Church, namely that the Church of Christ is not exclusively identified with the Catholic Church, but merely subsists in it. This heretical doctrine is contained principally in Lumen Gentium, and its heretical meaning is confirmed in statements of Paul VI and his successors, particularly in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, in the 1992 Statement concerning Church and Communion, and in the Ecumenical Directory. It is contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church, contained principally in Satis Cognitum of Pope Leo XIII, Mortalium Animos of Pope Pius XI, Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII, and in the condemnations of the "Branch Theory" made by the Holy Office under Pope Pius IX. 4. What false doctrine does it teach concerning ecumenism? The teaching of Vatican II concerning ecumenism, which states that non-Catholic religions are a "means of salvation," is overtly heretical. This doctrine directly contradicts the teaching of the Church that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, called by Pope Pius IX "a most well-known Catholic dogma." In addition, the ecumenical practices which have resulted from this heretical doctrine are directly contrary to Mortalium Animos of Pope Pius XI. 5. What false doctrine does it teach concerning religious liberty? The teaching of Vatican II on religious liberty, contained in Dignitatis Humanae, nearly word for word asserts the very doctrine which was condemned by Pope Pius VII in Post Tam Diuturnas, by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos, by Pope Pius IX in Quanta Cura, and by Pope Leo XIII in Libertas Praestantissimum. The teaching of Vatican II on religious liberty also contradicts the royalty of Jesus Christ in society as expressed in Quas Primas of Pope Pius XI, and the constant attitude and practice of the Church with regard to civil society. 6. What false doctrine does it teach concerning collegiality? The teaching of Vatican II concerning collegiality alters the monarchical constitution of the Catholic Church, with which she was endowed by the Divine Savior. The doctrine of Vatican II, confirmed by the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which states that the subject (the possessor) of the supreme authority of the Church is the college of bishops together with the pope, is contrary to the defined doctrine of the Council of Florence and of Vatican I. 7. What is wrong with the disciplines which have emanated from Vatican II? The 1983 Code of Canon Law contains the heresy of Vatican II concerning the Church, mentioned above. It also permits sacrilege to the Blessed Sacrament, by approving of its reception by non-Catholics, which is a mortal sin, and permits communicatio in sacris (common public worship) with non-Catholics, which is a mortal sin. In addition, the Ecumenical Directory of 1993 permits ecumenical practices which have always been taught by the Church to be mortally sinful. 8. What does all this mean? It means that Vatican II and its subsequent reforms have given us a new religion, a religion which is substantially different from the Roman Catholic Faith founded by Christ. The reformers have substantially altered the three main components of religion: doctrine, worship, and discipline. The result is that the reformers are promoting a religion of ecumenism in place of the Roman Catholic religion, which has always taught that it alone is the one, true Faith, and that all other religions are false. The Vatican II religion teaches doctrines which have been condemned by the Church in the past. It has instituted rites and disciplines which are Protestant in nature. As a result, the religion which Catholics find in their local parishes and schools, although in name Catholic, is a new, non-Catholic religion already condemned by the Catholic Church. 9. Could it be that you are merely giving a bad interpretation to Vatican II? No. The heretical nature of this council is confirmed by: the doctrinal interpretation given to Vatican II by Paul VI and his successors in their decrees, encyclicals, catechisms, etc.; the series of abominations perpetrated by John Paul II against the First Commandment of God, in the form of ecumenical ceremonies which constitute false worship, even to pagan deities in some cases; the alteration of the Sacred Liturgy in such a way that the Catholic Mass has been replaced by a Protestant supper service; the tampering with the matter and form of the sacraments so that many of them, but most notably the Holy Eucharist and Holy Orders, labor under doubt or invalidity; the promulgation of disciplines, especially the 1983 Code of Canon Law and the Ecumenical Directory, which approve of sacrilege against the Holy Eucharist and the Sacrament of Matrimony, and which demonstrate heresies concerning the unity of the Church as their theoretical basis; the scandalous mockery made of the Sacrament of Matrimony by the granting of annulments for spurious reasons, constituting an abandonment of the sacred doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage; the fact that John Paul II is in communion with manifest heretics, has openly declared himself to be in communion with non-Catholic sects, and has recognized an apostolic mission in schismatic and Lutheran bishops, all of which destroys the unity of faith. He has even kissed the Koran, which explicitly denies the Incarnation and the Trinity. He has also publicly prayed that St. John the Baptist protect Islam.

[@dyzmadamachus9842]

The same group of ppl underlying that Vatican II was not a doctrinal council now claiming it taught false dogma. Can't make that up.

[@BrianBenson-rc9mu]

@@harrisonsamson What's wrong with Vatican II? FAQs 1. What is wrong with the Second Vatican Council? The Second Vatican Council taught doctrines which had been already condemned by the Church, and enacted disciplines which are contrary to the Church's teaching and constant practice. 2. What doctrines did it teach which were already condemned? There are four major errors concerning: (1) the unity of the Church; (2) ecumenism; (3) religious liberty; (4) collegiality. 3. What false doctrine does it teach concerning the unity of the Church? Vatican II teaches heresy concerning the unity of the Church, namely that the Church of Christ is not exclusively identified with the Catholic Church, but merely subsists in it. This heretical doctrine is contained principally in Lumen Gentium, and its heretical meaning is confirmed in statements of Paul VI and his successors, particularly in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, in the 1992 Statement concerning Church and Communion, and in the Ecumenical Directory. It is contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church, contained principally in Satis Cognitum of Pope Leo XIII, Mortalium Animos of Pope Pius XI, Mystici Corporis of Pope Pius XII, and in the condemnations of the "Branch Theory" made by the Holy Office under Pope Pius IX. 4. What false doctrine does it teach concerning ecumenism? The teaching of Vatican II concerning ecumenism, which states that non-Catholic religions are a "means of salvation," is overtly heretical. This doctrine directly contradicts the teaching of the Church that there is no salvation outside the Catholic Church, called by Pope Pius IX "a most well-known Catholic dogma." In addition, the ecumenical practices which have resulted from this heretical doctrine are directly contrary to Mortalium Animos of Pope Pius XI. 5. What false doctrine does it teach concerning religious liberty? The teaching of Vatican II on religious liberty, contained in Dignitatis Humanae, nearly word for word asserts the very doctrine which was condemned by Pope Pius VII in Post Tam Diuturnas, by Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos, by Pope Pius IX in Quanta Cura, and by Pope Leo XIII in Libertas Praestantissimum. The teaching of Vatican II on religious liberty also contradicts the royalty of Jesus Christ in society as expressed in Quas Primas of Pope Pius XI, and the constant attitude and practice of the Church with regard to civil society. 6. What false doctrine does it teach concerning collegiality? The teaching of Vatican II concerning collegiality alters the monarchical constitution of the Catholic Church, with which she was endowed by the Divine Savior. The doctrine of Vatican II, confirmed by the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which states that the subject (the possessor) of the supreme authority of the Church is the college of bishops together with the pope, is contrary to the defined doctrine of the Council of Florence and of Vatican I. 7. What is wrong with the disciplines which have emanated from Vatican II? The 1983 Code of Canon Law contains the heresy of Vatican II concerning the Church, mentioned above. It also permits sacrilege to the Blessed Sacrament, by approving of its reception by non-Catholics, which is a mortal sin, and permits communicatio in sacris (common public worship) with non-Catholics, which is a mortal sin. In addition, the Ecumenical Directory of 1993 permits ecumenical practices which have always been taught by the Church to be mortally sinful. 8. What does all this mean? It means that Vatican II and its subsequent reforms have given us a new religion, a religion which is substantially different from the Roman Catholic Faith founded by Christ. The reformers have substantially altered the three main components of religion: doctrine, worship, and discipline. The result is that the reformers are promoting a religion of ecumenism in place of the Roman Catholic religion, which has always taught that it alone is the one, true Faith, and that all other religions are false. The Vatican II religion teaches doctrines which have been condemned by the Church in the past. It has instituted rites and disciplines which are Protestant in nature. As a result, the religion which Catholics find in their local parishes and schools, although in name Catholic, is a new, non-Catholic religion already condemned by the Catholic Church. 9. Could it be that you are merely giving a bad interpretation to Vatican II? No. The heretical nature of this council is confirmed by: the doctrinal interpretation given to Vatican II by Paul VI and his successors in their decrees, encyclicals, catechisms, etc.; the series of abominations perpetrated by John Paul II against the First Commandment of God, in the form of ecumenical ceremonies which constitute false worship, even to pagan deities in some cases; the alteration of the Sacred Liturgy in such a way that the Catholic Mass has been replaced by a Protestant supper service; the tampering with the matter and form of the sacraments so that many of them, but most notably the Holy Eucharist and Holy Orders, labor under doubt or invalidity; the promulgation of disciplines, especially the 1983 Code of Canon Law and the Ecumenical Directory, which approve of sacrilege against the Holy Eucharist and the Sacrament of Matrimony, and which demonstrate heresies concerning the unity of the Church as their theoretical basis; the scandalous mockery made of the Sacrament of Matrimony by the granting of annulments for spurious reasons, constituting an abandonment of the sacred doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage; the fact that John Paul II is in communion with manifest heretics, has openly declared himself to be in communion with non-Catholic sects, and has recognized an apostolic mission in schismatic and Lutheran bishops, all of which destroys the unity of faith. He has even kissed the Koran, which explicitly denies the Incarnation and the Trinity. He has also publicly prayed that St. John the Baptist protect Islam.

[@polemeros]

coup de grâce....pronounced coo de gras. not grah. That's for foie gras, fwah grah. (Old school teacher. Can't help myself.)

[@fotisvon9943]

you think the mass is cosplaying the mass? oof

[@yeshuadvargas5552]

The problem with this argument is that it ignores that the actual unicorn is a well celebrated Latin Mass. I've lived in Puerto Rico, Florida, Georgia and North Carolina. I've always found a reverent N.O. mass to attend at a reasonable distance. I've only found a well celebrated (not mumbled) latin Mass once here in NC. They don't even advertise it, you just have to be "in the know".

[@danielbroache]

They don’t advertise it because they aren’t allowed to. Same with our Diocesan TLM.

[@nealkriesterer]

Step 1 - Tell everyone who is interested in traditional liturgy to join a TLM community. Step 2 - Now that they all left for TLM, wonder why/make fun of normal parishes for not having traditional liturgies.

[@ZeDocta1]

Oh c'mon now, this has been a problem long before the Ecclesia Day communities and Summorum Pontificum. People who want a traditional liturgy are largely drowned out in their parishes by people who do not. In my old parish, for instance, we've had people suggest things as mild as altar rails and polyphony, and they were looked at like they were old cooks yelling at clouds. You can't blame people for seeking better liturgies elsewhere. Ultimately, the liturgy's celebration is the dominion of the priest, and if he doesn't care to change it, he won't.

[@miketrrtx471]

I just unsubscribed. Too much fallacy in your arguments. Pax Domini Sit Semper Vobiscum.

[@wolfox2008]

Can't you hear yourself? How ridiculous to call anything, but especially the order of the mass, a unicorn? I went to that mass at the Oxford oratory for 10 years. It was my parish church (I even served the old rite mass, not in public masses but in the chapel inside the presbytery). When I started going to that mass back in 2013, it wasn't ad orientem yet. That "evolution" came later. I'd think that the people at the oratory and at the parish would be horrified to hear you call it that. To call something 'unicorn' says a lot about the person who does it, doesn't it? All of this about the mass; I'd bet you're a convert.

[@mousakandah5188]

he is not wrong the Oxford Oratory Mass is something rare, that's why he calls it a "unicorn" vast majority of NO aren't like Oxford Oratory

[@michaelspeyrer1264]

This is a ridiculous argument.

[@ronvanwegen]

Um, what exactly is "this"? Every single sentence? That's absurd!

[@marcokite]

@@ronvanwegen - lol..well 'michaelspeyrer' has certainly convinced me!

[@marcokite]

Poor arguments in this video! Come home to Orthodoxy bros!!! Yes!! AUTOCEPHALY IS GREAT! It worked for the Apostles and the Church Fathers and for the Church of the first thousand years! Autocephaly has retained the ancient Eucharistic Liturgy in Orthodoxy. 'Papal supremacy' has given the RCC the Lutheran Communion service of Paul VI, not to mention the Synod on sinodality. Come home to Orthodoxy ☦☦☦☦☦☦☦

[@Corpoise0974]

Submit to the Pope, become Oriental Orthodox.

[@marcokite]

Better yet - become Orthodox. AUTOCEPHALY IS GREAT! It worked for the Apostles and the Church Fathers and for the Church of the first thousand years! Autocephaly has retained the ancient Eucharistic Liturgy in Orthodoxy. 'Papal supremacy' has given the RCC the Lutheran Communion service of Paul VI. Come home to Orthodoxy ☦☦☦☦☦☦☦

[@Corpoise0974]

@@marcokite The Byzantine liturgy is not traditional. The essence-energy distinction and theosis are polytheism.

[@garrett2209]

Came in thinking I would disagree, but you convinced me of your points