The Mass Explained: "Active Participation"
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 янв 2025
- Sign up today:
catholicproduc...
The Mass Explained Video Series: This video series is included with your subscription to The Mass Readings Explained. Dr. Pitre spends over 50 videos covering the Biblical, Traditional, and mystical meanings of the words, ceremonies, languages, gestures, postures, orientation, music, and signs of the Roman Catholic liturgy. From the Ancient Church through the Medieval Church, from the Council of Trent through Vatican II, explore the practice, purpose, and development of the Holy Mass.
Topics covered will be the traditional and biblical roots of each part of the Mass, the changes that have taken place over the history of the Roman Rite in particular, the question of Latin and the vernacular, orientation of the priest, liturgical vestments, concelebration, liturgical music, and much more.
Sign up today:
catholicproduc...
I have saved this to watch later. Anything from Dr Pitre is gold
Sure is!!
That's gold jerry!
It is my only RUclipsr that I give a like before watching the video
Why not start watching it now?
You are 100% correct I can't get enough of his content
Love this series! I've noticed my children are so much more engaged in liturgical worship than protestant singing and teaching services. Even my child with significant autism and intellectual disabilities has learned to say, "And with your spirit." It's beautiful.
From the Philippines: thank God for helping us understand the Mass. God bless Dr
Pitre.
So good! I love my Church :)
This is the response from Dr Kwasniewski: Thanks. You won't be surprised to hear that many are asking me for a response. I'm working on it, but such things take time, and I don't have the platform, reach, or funding that Brant has.
His presentation is a combination of truths and misunderstandings, which lead him to derive faulty conclusions. This is particularly true about the directionality of the readings, on which I have given a lecture
I plan to publish the text of this at my Substack soon. My argument does not rest on history (after all, what people did 1000 or 1500 years ago is not necessarily what is best for us to do today), but on fittingness, on mystagogical symbolism, which oddly he ignores.
I've already addressed the meaning of active participation in several places.
Thanks for getting a response from Peter K. I am sure there is more to this than the initial impression that we are left with.
I would love a convo between Pitre and Kwasnieski
@@josephclark1431 seriously. Dr. K is probably the foremost contemporary expert. The man has contributed the bulk of the TLM apologia and corpus of literature. To ignore him as a source in this discussion is criminal.
@PiusPaladin 1000%
Dr K would run circles around Pitre as would Michael Davies if he was alive.
Davies and Dr K specialise in the Old Rite. I love reading Pitre but he is no expert on the liturgy. Read Michael Davies Cranmers Godly Order and his Pope Paul's New Mass. All of Dr K's books are brilliant as well. @Lucylou7070
@@anthonyjones866 how do you know my good man that a response is pending?
Very enlightening. A great history lesson.
The Holy Mass is sacrificial (the unbloody re-presentation of Christ's sacrifice on the Cross), and it takes place on an altar, not at the "Lord's table." The Eucharist is a Sacrament, a sign of our crucified Lord's presence for our sanctification, and not just a meal. The Mass should be the highest form of worship that we give to God, and not centered on active participation like the new Mass, which is more horizontal than vertical.
In the Traditional Mass, our participation is reverent, penitential, and contemplative, more spiritual with less external activity, as it was before the new version was implemented. And I especially appreciate the care shown toward the Holy Eucharist, which I seldom see in the modern parishes.
So, the original Christians were wrong when they were all actively participating in the liturgy?
@@stooch66 They were all actively participating in confession in the early Church too. It was public, penances were extremely severe and public as well. Should we go back to that as well? The early Church made the first errors that needed correction, one of them was a disregard for the sanctity of the Eucharist spilling and fumbling all over the place. We are now back to that in the Novus Ordo. And I'm sure it's just another of the "errors" that occurred but St. Paul's warning in 1 Corinthians that those who eat and drink the body and blood of the Lord unworthily eat and drink their damnation which is read 3 times a year in the TLM was removed from the readings in the Novus Ordo.
"But what I've been seeing since the 1960's keeps getting farther away from the true Catholic Liturgy and has too many novelties,..." You clearly didn't watch this video.
@@gerardmcgorian7070
My comment was based on my experiences and not just opinions. I don't have any PhD's, but I certainly experienced the way we worshipped and Catholic teaching before and after the Council, and the results we can see today from the changes that were made. I'm especially tired of hearing what the early Christians supposedly did, in order to justify the novelties that are being promoted.
Dr. Pitre should mention the High Mass, the Solemn High Mass, and the more silent Low Mass in the Traditional Latin Rite. All three are offered with the reverence and dignity that we owe to God, and are not intended to "fit with the times" or to satisfy our personal preferences.
@@gerardmcgorian7070
Furthermore, the arguments about how early Christians worshipped are the same ones that Protestants and Mormons use to justify their own beliefs.
TLM: bow towards priest as he enters and leaves, cross yourself at the asperges me, kneel ,cross yourself at absolution after the confiteor, strike your breast at the Creed, stand, sit or kneel depending on the type of mass low, high during the readings. Bow to the altar boy who incenses the congregation, genuflect at the "Iet homo factus est" and the Last Gospel "Et Verbum Caro Factum Est" receive the Eucharist on the tongue, while kneeling from the priest with a paten. Reverence the Eucharist briefly and lower your head at the consecration.
How many of those many traditions have been expunged in the Novus Ordo in favor of "active participation?"
"Active participation" at the Novus Ordo is just loosey goosey ever changing behaviors that devolve into chaos.
Actually, at my parish, we do all of these things. We celebrate Mass using the Ordinary Form. Some receive on the tongue and some in the hand.
Oh dear!! 🤦
And beating your breast at the agnus dei and other times.
What's really lost is the expressions of piety. Participation is not piety. Some are ashamed to express piety. And before anyone says it - true piety, not for show. Begging God for His mercy and praising Him for His goodness. Not just participation for participation's sake..
Beware the yeast of the pharisees
Receiving in the hand is a documented fact *all* throughout early Church history. The radtrads believe the NO is inferior and a heresy? But the only evidence they have of those claims are gestures? Even though they don’t realize the same gestures are at the NO Mass? Look at @30:30 and @44:44 again.
He is fantastic!😊❤
Dr Pitre's content reignited my love for my faith
This is outstanding and timely. The Francisan to Trent info is very interesting and explains much. So...we need some balance between the TLM and NO. And reverence. Sounds great...let's do it.
I feel like I need a Catholic Ceasar Milan to clicker train me. I'd been away from the Catholic Church for 40 years and even using 'The Word Among Us' mass reading, I'm terribly lost. This will be my 1st Sunday Mass using the St. Joseph Sunday Missal and Hymnal and I'm hoping I connect more dots.
I do share your lessons to my fellow catholics as well as Protestant here in Malawi allocated in south east Africa
I'm going to listen to this a couple of times than I'm going to listen to Anthony Cekada on his book " work of Human Hands " a couple of times.
@@brendanryan1852 I’ve read Work of Human Hands. It’s the best book on the subject. I started watching this and intended to make it all the way through but couldn’t.
We’re so back
Yes, we are!!
“Now pause there for a second”
Lol. You can't be this desperate to not even hear a counter arg
Excellent presentation. Well done!
How we’ve missed Dr Pitre. I hope this series will be very useful for our advent preparations ❤️
Why was the Offertory removed and replaced with a prayer from the Talmud?
Good to see on this topic. Praise the Lord Jesus Christ.
Thanks
Just my two cents but since I've started attending the TLM exclusively "active participation" has taken on a whole new meaning. I never wish to return to the Mass of Paul VI as I find it jarring, distracting, and difficult to pray. I pray the Roman Rite is reformed back to its former glory 🙏
Very difficult to pray at the Novus Ordo. Bombarded by noise.
I've experienced the same thing. I am more engaged at TLM, not less. I'm certainly open to the idea that some adjustments were appropriate. But what we received was something of a revolution rather than evolution. Also I feel like this video isn't quite reflective of the reality of the way the old rite is celebrated today. For instance, at every high mass I've attended, the priest does indeed address the people at critical moments such as the Orate Fratres. And there's certainly a proclamation of the readings along with a sermon. My own parish is full, with robust attention and response to the elements of the mass. The novus ordo at this parish is also reverent and beautiful, with altar rails and ad orientem. However, my family finds it jolting and difficult to attend your average novus ordo mass in the area. There are so many distractions! In short, something is amiss and I'm glad the topic is being explored at length...from every angle.
@@brennan77The most essential thing that’s missing in the novus ordo is the Offertory. It has been replaced with a prayer from the Talmud.
And yet, if you all took a few minutes to really listen to this, it is clear that the “novus ordo” is actually the traditional mass. We were always meant to be a community that prayed together. We were not meant to be an audience at a mass that others performed.
I say this as a serious traditionalist. I believe the Church is correct in reforming the mass. I also believe that many have gone too far.
However, the Tridentine mass was the rupture, not the novus ordo. We are praying the mass today much more closely to the original mass than the “TLM” ever did.
You can argue that it is not as beautiful, but you can’t argue that it is not traditional.
@ The Tridentine Mass was a rupture? From what?
Excellent overview … thank you … Merci!
"Recently" St. Pius X when talked about active participation was not in the same way the Vatican II and Post Vatican II liturgist talk about.
Pope St Pius X laid the groundwork and Vatican 2 expanded upon it. What's your point?
Pius X's emphasis is certainly on lay participation through singing in Tra le sollecitudini (which is one of the reasons Vatican II called for chant to be set to simpler settings as is found in abundance in the "product" of Vatican II that we can all point to: The Roman Missal of Paul VI, which was heavily influenced by the involvement of, and, obviously, officially promulgated by Pope St. Paul VI).
However, the liturgical movement of the late-19th through 1st half of the 20th century (composed predominately of many brilliant and faithful priests and monks [these are legit liturgical scholars reading the primary sources and making critical editions]) was effectively adopted as a framework by the Church in Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, and Paul VI, in which one can see a clear line of -- what one might call -- "organic development" in restorations to the laity (among other restorations) as they had belonged to them (in East and West) for the first millennium. You see these changes, by the way, happening well before Vatican II making clear that it is not *merely* interior participation that the Church is pursuing (though it goes without saying interior participation is essential as well). Fr. Seasoltz's (O.S.B.) compilation, The New Liturgy, A Documentation 1903-1965, is a fantastic primer to check out where what flowered at the Council and in the Missal of Paul VI jumps out at you through the "organic" changes leading up to Vatican II in the first half of the 20th century.
Gregory VII (11th century) and Pius V (16th century) appealed (in one phrase/sense or another) to restoring "the Missal itself to the original form and rite of the holy Fathers" (Pius V, Quo Primum Tempore). But these Supreme Pontiffs meant very different things even though they were trying to achieve similar goals according to their stated intentions. For one thing, manuscripts simply were not present at the time of Gregory VII that Pius V was using (and vice versa). Pius V's missal, so it seems, used few sacramentaries from the Franco-Roman Gregorian Family no earlier than the ~12th century and a modern 16th century papal chapel ordo for its rubrics and yet still claimed be pursuing "the original form and rite of the holy Fathers" (Worth noting is that between Trent and Vatican II and significant amount of ancient and medieval manuscripts were unearthed between these two time periods, many thanks to the liturgical movement, which made this stated goal even more possible, while also evading the error of "senseless and exaggerated antiquarianism" that Pius XII spoke of in Mediator Dei and something Paul VI was well aware of). With that said, we wouldn't disregard Pope St. Pius V's phrase of trying to get back to the original form and rite of the Holy Fathers simply because Gregory VII said as much in the 11th century but with different results and/or possibly meaning different things to a certain degree.
It is important to keep in mind that the *living* magisterium has always maintained authority to guide the liturgy as she deems fit through expansions, omissions, rearrangements, and so forth. As Trent said (no differently than Vatican II), "The Church may, according to circumstances, times and places, determine or change whatever *she may judge* most expedient for the benefit of those receiving them or for the veneration of the sacraments; and this power has always been hers” (Session 21, Chapter 2).
As Catholics, we stand with the Council of Trent (not to mention other ecumenical councils like Constance (1439), Vatican I (1870) and venerable Popes like Gregory I, Gregory VII, Paul III, Pius V, Pius IX, Leo XIII, Pius X, and Pius XII [among others] who all affirm what Trent states above well before Vatican II).
God bless.
@@justsomevids4541 My observation is that many modern liturgists (or modernists) have a mistaken notion of active participation. For example, it seems that for them, the laity participate together with the priest in the liturgy and the holy sacrifice, with the priest being only the "president". This comes along with the reform movement that is influenced by new theologies and progressive and liberal ideas that were previously condemned but prevailed in Vatican II, and the church hierarchy has the power to make changes but always based on sacred tradition and the lex orandi lex credendi of the church as always. The principles that moved these changes are very similar to those of the French Revolution - equality, fraternity and liberty, and we see this in the parishes here in Brazil, where the two-thousand-year-old tradition is not respected and a "new tradition" was created with these principles.
@@RarmCangaceiroYou are very intelligent. You really know the subtlety and clandestine moves of the Post-conciliar clerics
@@RarmCangaceiro Whereas there are always some who misunderstand and misinterpret, the general thrust of your comment is wrong.
The gathered Assembly DOES participate with the priest in the Liturgy and Holy Sacrifice, through the common priesthood of all believers, and part of the role of the priest IS to preside, but not only that. Only the priest, for example, may pray the Eucharistic Prayer and, through doing so, the words are efficacious.
Thank you very much for this explanation. Appreciated. God bless.
Thank you! Very enlightening.
Do we have to sing the protestant songs that now part of Mass?
Thank you for this explanation! I was ignorant about these facts about old liturgy origin. I can see now what was wrong and why the Church wanted to fox it. My prayers to all you from Quito, Ecuador. 🇪🇨
Thank you, Dr. Pietre, for addressing this topic. I lived through the transformation of the Latin mass during that period. This aspect of “active” participation was much needed. My recollection of participation prior to VCII, was that of an observer. The altar servers gave the responses, the choir sang the hymns but we had no participation other than to observe. In fact, it was not uncommon to see women with their rosaries, prayinhg during the mass.
The changes, gradually implemented post VCII, transformed the liturgy, bringing it to life. I vividly recall the introduction of paper missals indicating the parts of the mass and highlighting the responses to be made by the laity. It wasn’t long before we were encouraged to sing with the choir. We, of course, knew these hymns. This active participation by the laity brought the mass to life.
Other changes were not as well received. Many of us were shocked to see lay people distributing communion; worse still, it was in the hand. I have attended divine liturgy in an Eastern Catholic church which retains communion on the tongue distributed by a priest andor a deacon. No one doubts the real presence when the consecrated host is treated with great respect.
God bless you and your ministy.
I'm still not comfortable receiving Holy Communion from an EM. I try to get in the line with the priest.
@@jhamberg8968
I will only receive holy communion from a priest who has consecrated hands, on the tongue and on my knees. Call me a rigid Traditional Latin Catholic, but I would rather be rigid than be sorry. Pax Domini.
The Church has allowed Communion in the hand, off and on throughout it's history. There's no reason not to receive this way as long as it's done correctly.
If you’re not worthy enough to receive our Lord in your hand, then what makes you holy enough to receive Him on your tongue and ingest Him?
@@vinb2707:
How else are we to eat His flesh ?
“The Liturgical Movement had in fact been attempting…to teach us to understand the Liturgy as a living network of tradition that had taken concrete form, that cannot be torn apart into little pieces, but that has to be seen and experienced as a living whole. Anyone who, like me, was moved by this perception in the time of the Liturgical Movement on the eve of the Second Vatican Council can only stand, deeply sorrowing, before the ruins of the very things they were concerned for.” - Cardinal Ratzinger, 2004
Thank you!
In my experience, most of the TLM congregations, incl. diocesan, FSSP, SSPX, SSPV, and ICK, have adopted many of the recommendations of Sacrosanctum Concillium (1963).
This is my experience too. The priests of any of these groups do excellent jobs educating their faithful on the Mass and how to actually actively participate in the true sense of the expression. That combined with the immense amount of catechetical material that now exists for the TLM.
"...most of the TLM congregations...have adopted many of the recommendations of Sacrosanctum Concillium (1963)."
Just a quick question (and I mean it respectfully) since you've pro-actively come to the channel and mentioned this: Are the SSPX celebrating [1] precisely the form of the Mass (according to the 1962 Missal) that Sacrosanctum Concilium explicitly directed to be reformed, revised, and restored, or [2] are they not?
Setting aside whether or not any particular sheep disagrees with or disregards every single Supreme Pontiff since Vatican II on the correspondence of the Missal of Paul VI with the decrees of Sacrosanctum Concilium, and setting aside the dangers that lurk when one constantly equivocates between the (potentially) anthropocentric and "self-enclosed-circle" notion of "my experience" of the Missal of Paul VI and the Missal itself as contained between its two covers, which order of Mass are the SSPX using?
@@CatholicProductions The SSPX rigidly follows the 1962 missal in my experience. The ED groups receive indults to offer the pre-55 liturgies and I find that they like to synchronize these rites and those of the 62 which leads to some confusion and honestly in some cases abuses.
I think this question also needs to be looked at in light of Summorum Pontificum in which the 62 missal was enshrined as the so called Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite and held in high esteem by Pope Benedict as well as a number of cardinals. At the end of the day I don't disagree the liturgy needed a level of reform but the Mass of Paul VI objectively mutilated the organically developed Roman Rite and made it nearly unrecognizable (both aesthetically and substantially). You need to have a dialogue with contemporary liturgical scholars and honestly have conversation about this. The aforementioned Dr. Kwasnieski in this thread has done all of the scholarship and mythbusting
@@CatholicProductions Dr Pitre, here's short answer off top of my head. Background: I attend a diocesan hybrid TLM/Novus Ordo parish, and the missals used are 1945 (TLM Holy Week), 1962 for TLM, and current USSCB. I also very occasionally (when traveling) attend both FSSP and SSPX which uses 1962 Roman Missal. Reminder of timeline: SSPX was established 1970, seven years after Sacrosanctum concilium (SC) was issued, so many of the SC recommendations were already baked in.
For example, regarding SSPX masses (as well as others mentioned above) the Sunday low masses and all high/sung masses include an additional vernacular reading to the congregation & homily. High masses typically include following lay responses, such as kyrie eleison, gloria (alternate chanting b/w choir & lay), Lord I am not worthy (this is in the 1945 missal), Our Father prayer (various levels of lay involvement), And with your spirit, creed (alternate chanting b/w choir & lay), etc. Sunday TLM masses typically have print-outs the daily readings (Propers) in English translation.
Generally when one is learning the TLM he is more intellectually or visually engaged while learning the theology of the TLM mass, rubrics and latin prayers. Gradually he is able to be more actively engaged in a deeper level of the mind & soul (eg. meditative prayers of adoration, contrition, thanksgiving & petition, rosary, personal offerings, etc.).
FWIW, I heard it said, but can't verify its source, that Holy Writ is a gift from God that the priest offers back to God, therefore he priest faces the Tabernacle (or altar) when reading. Then after this offering, the priest faces the congregation to read the vernacular translation.
Joe, I am not Dr. Pitre. I work at Catholic productions. Thank you for your response.
[[and the missals used are 1945 (TLM Holy Week)]]
So, your bishop has been permitted to allow for the use of the pre 1962 and pre 1955 Holy Week ceremonies at your parish?
[[1962 for TLM]]
Yes, I think this is my point. This is precisely the order of Mass called to be reformed at the last ecumenical council, so I'm not all too sure how we can then say we're implementing Sacrosanctum Concilium while we are attending the very ordo SC called to be revised and restored.
[[ the Sunday low masses and all high/sung masses include an additional vernacular reading to the congregation & homily]]]
Does the missal have the additional fare of scripture that Sacrosanctum Concilium explicitly called for? Does the missal have the specific rubrics for the people to follow that Sacrosanctum Concilium explicitiy called for? I get what you are saying but we could list a litany of specific explicit things the council called for that are exactly the same as before the Council...because this is precisely the order of Mass that was called to be revised. De facto, one cannot implement Sacrosanctum Concilium whilst celebrating the 1962 Missal, right?
[[Generally when one is learning the TLM he is more intellectually or visually engaged while learning the theology of the TLM mass, rubrics and latin prayers. Gradually he is able to be more actively engaged in a deeper level of the mind & soul (eg. meditative prayers of adoration, contrition, thanksgiving & petition, rosary, personal offerings, etc.). ]]
The fundamental problem here is that people did say and could have said the same thing about the Mass and changes to the Mass that have taken place with constancy through the history of the Church. For example (these are just three), Gregory I was critiqued by his contemporaries for his changes and simplifications (even adding words to the Canon after Pope Vigilius said the anaphora was from apostolic tradition); Radulph de Rivo complains about the simplified form of the Mass that eventuated into the 1570 Missal (as briefly mentioned in the video); and then people resisted the implementation (both bishops, particularly in France, and priests in Spain and Germany) of the Missal of Pius V, wanting to keep their "traditions," whether it be particular prayers, invocations, gestures or calendrical celebrations. While one can respectfully not like some changes or prefer something over another, it doesn't follow that we can ignore the call of the last Ecumenical Council, right?
John Paul II spoke about this quite well:
"“Fidelity too implies the observance of the liturgical norms laid down by ecclesiastical Authority and therefore has nothing to do with the practice either of introducing innovations of one's own accord and without approval or of obstinately refusing to carry out what has been lawfully laid down and introduced into the sacred rites” (Pope John Paul II, Urbi et Orbi (Sistine Chapel), October 17, 1978).
“Obedience to the teachings of the Second Vatican Council is obedience to the Holy Spirit. ...Obedience to the Holy Spirit is expressed in the authentic carrying out of the tasks indicated by the council.... These tasks cannot be treated as though they did not exist. It is not possible to claim to make the Church go back so to speak, along the path of human history" (Speech by Pope John Paul II to Participants in the Plenary Meeting of the Sacred College of Cardinals, Synod Hall (Monday, November 5, 1979).
I want to give you and this RUclips channel my all for thankful to this.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia admits that “the Mass of today differs greatly from the very simple ceremony followed by Christ and his apostles. By observing the Mass frequently, even daily, Christendom has veered from what Jesus intended and has made it a common event!”
Wonderful! It is best to be really INFORMED. Thanks Dr. Pitre!
So it was the Franciscans all along!
Not costantine? 😂
The Paul the VI mass is too open to liturgical abuse. Active Participation from what has resulted has been disastrous. I would bet that the clergy that voted for the reforms, had they seen the outcome would have voted against it .
You need to read more about all of the abuses that took place before Vatican II. It is not the form that allows for abuse, it is those who perform it.
The 1962 missal can have the same amount of abuse. The only reason it doesn’t is because those who attend it and perform it are not looking to abuse it. That wasn’t the case in the 50s. Back then, many priests scrambled through it and gave little care for the rubrics. It is not the form, it is the people.
@@stooch66I doubt they had clown, guitar and chicken dance masses. A quick search on RUclips shows the blasphemous displays have germinated from within the Paul vi mass 😢
How come it's so hard to find a reverent NO that follows the guidelines of Vatican II? This is the real problem. I can't stomach your typical NO.
All the new mass has done is filled it with so much noise and 2 sessions of announcements that you have no time for personal prayer and silent meditation.
It’s called Adoration. The church is always open and 99%a of the time it’s in silent reverence.
Did you watch the video?
I attended Novus Ordo "Masses" at different parishes for 13 years, and it was like being in a different church until I finally found the TLM where I go to now.
All the new mass has done is evangelize the entire continent of Africa.
Stop being so Americo-centric. Christ is universal.
So happy to see a new video, especially on the Mass.
thank you so very much 🥰🙏✝️❤️
A time during the mass where reverent silence should be written into the rubric is the distribution of Holy Communion; some quieter contemplative music would be ok, though.
Reverent silence can be achieved at any time of the day. Why can’t people be reverent during hymnal music at Mass that give thanks and worship? People who want absolute silence after the Eucharist are allowed to stay after Mass too.
@lilyd5596 it can be. But when do you say reverent silence should occur during mass?
I should also point out that the Church prescribes reverent silence during the mass in Sacrosanctum Concilium, and JPII, Benedict XVI, and Francis have called for it during the mass.
great background info.
I'm so glad you have new videos now! ❤
Closed captions please 🙏 ty
Praying the most Holy rosary of the blessed virgin Mary for Israel MAGA and the traditional Latin mass no damn masks no hijabs and no more medical malfeasance God bless y'all
Didn't Pope Pius XII introduce a Dialogue Mass in which the laity could learn the responses and participate?
I read ordo Romanus I and I don’t see anything about communion STANDING
In fact, it says the pope himself did not communicate from his own hand, but rather from another bishop and the same with all of the other clergy
I’m not sure what this means other than deep reverence
Thank you for a very thorough explanation of the development of the Liturgy.
For all who are in full communion with the Catholic Church, no explanation is necessary. For those NOT in communion, no explanation is possible.
Liturgy(Leitourgia) is public service before this word was adopted by the Church; and public service denotes participation, not simply observance.
We’re not “observing” we are participating mentally. Prayer is mental. Just because you can’t hear us talking doesn t mean we’re not doing something. You don’t walk into a library with people reading silently and accuse them of merely “observing” the books. Who would just stare at a book?Or an art gallery with crowds silently enjoying the art as merely “observing” the art. Prayer is sometimes mental and that’s how we do it to create a veil of sacred silence. Something we can’t do at an NO with all its talking and no time for silent prayer.
@@donb2063 The Sacrifice of the Mass is public worship, where the whole community (ecclesia) gather as one Church.
Individual prayer is something that our Lord indicated we do in our private room - many may consecrate a Holy Hour first thing in the morning to read Scared Scripture, say the Holy Office, spend time in ordinary or meditative or contemplative prayer. Pray the Rosary while commuting or finding quiet moments throughout the day.
The new order (Novus Ordo) has returned to the essence of first century customs and traditions, even approving appropriate inculturalization, which would have been the norm in the first century.
Katholikos, is universal, of the whole and embraces unity. And unity should not be confused with uniformity.
+Pax Christi
@@chrissobolewski5509 read the OP again. the OP claims that we’re merely “observing”. No. We’re not standing around watching a performance. We’re not bystandersWe are participating-mentally, silently. We are praying together-silently. I made no mention of individual prayer. Are you assuming all silent prayer is private prayer? And all public prayer is vocal prayer? Why can’t public prayer be in silence? We are praying together- just silently. Public prayer can be silent prayer not mere “observance”
@@donb2063 I acknowledge how hard it is to accept that the TLM calls upon the laity to devout observance while the NO has elevated the Sacrifice of the Mass to active participation.
If you can acknowledge that Christianity is not a new religion, but a fulfilment of Judaism (Jesus was an observant Jew) and the Church founded on Pentecost primarily upon Jewish converts and later Gentiles, the assembly (Hb qahal) or (Gk synagogue) also later used to indicate a place of meeting, those assembled participated in the prayers, psalms, read from the Scriptures (scrolls), lifted their voices as ONE people. The psalms are hymns, many musical instruments are mentioned; an aside, David danced before the Ark of the Covenant.
There is time for silent prayer, for meditative prayer, for contemplative prayer.
Latin, as beautiful and mystical as it is, means nothing if the laity do not understand the rubrics or liturgy - and this was the case for many of the faithful since 1570’s. Latin was not the native tongue of the people - only clerics and aristocracy had command thereof. Therefore the Missal was introduced so that people could follow in their vernacular while the rubrics and prayers were in Latin.
Without a Missal, the entire Mass would be a mystery, oft shrouded behind a screen - hence the bells and smells.
An ecclesia is an assembly of people and a liturgy (Leituorgia) is a public service - whereas public we pray together with the Church.
Open your horizons to the history of the Church from the 1st century and reflect with an open and enquiring mind the changes in Sacrosanctum Concillium, read the footnotes and references.
+Pax Christi
I have attended both forms of the Mass and generally consider the suppression of the TLM as nothing short of cultural theft. I wonder, however, how much of the reverance found at the TLM vs the NO has to do with the fact that those who attend the TLM are already inclined to reverence and generally strong believers. If the TLM were the "ordinary form" and all Catholics, including those who have no real idea why they are there (the situation prior to VII), how reverent would it be? In otherwords, is TLM fundamentally the cause of belief and reverence or is it just correlation (self-selection) since the wishy-washy can just head down to their local NO?
Lex orandi lex credendi
Perhaps, but in my case and my spouse who recently converted, it was the traditional form that "taught / showed" us how to be reverent. We didn't start reverent. We learn by example
I've often thought the same thing. The Mass is the same no matter what form you go to if approved by Holy Mother Church. If you look at the laity, their lack of zeal and reverence, you shouldn't conclude that the N. O Mass is not valid.
Dr Pitre, have you heard of this cool new thing called Deacons?
Active participation is present in the ancient rite there is nothing in the new that is superior to the old.
+JMJ The best example of active participation is the Traditional Latin Mass.
Do you listen to what he is saying?
@johnosumba1980 +JMJ. Yes.
I participate much more actively at the TLM than the NO. The NO is just distracting and jarring
You really do not understand the Catholic meaning of Traditional
@andrewelliott1939 +JMJ I wouldn't say that. I have 50 years of actual experience in the New Order and 16 in the TLM. The NO is a massive failure and spiritual disaster by every metric. As a result of it, the Church itself needs to be evangelized before Bergoglio can pretend to evangelize others. He still harbors sex offenders. I would say it is you who lack understanding. Get educated. Pray for understanding--a gift of the Holy Ghost conferred at Confirmation. Pray for the Church. Go to Confession. Attend the Traditional Latin Mass. Dominus vobiscum.
Great information! I learned a lot! Thank you for your teaching !
Brilliant work Dr. Pitre, as always!
That sure is a one-sided view of liturgical development. Unfortunately, it doesn't represent the balanced view of what actually happened, and/or the "why", throughout the centuries.
It's also funny that although the rubrics of the TLM don't require participation...to the devout Catholic, we participate as the Holy Spirit inspires us regardless of the rubrics telling us to do it. At the TLM I follow the rubrics and also say the Confiteor along with the servers, I say the Kyrie Eleison with the servers, I say the Gloria, I actually read the readings and Gospel and listen to the Priest read them again in reverence, there is a Homily, I say the Creed, I say the Orate Fratres, I say the Sursum Corda along with the servers, I say the Sanctus, I say the Pater Noster, I say the Agnus Dei along with the servers, I say the "Lord I am not worthy" prayer along with all the kneeling, bowing, genuflection and reverence called for in the Mass. And I do all that through the Holy Spirit's influence upon my heart in Love of Christ, and not because some liturgical document tells me to.
The Novus Ordo no more guarantees the devout piety of the laity through "active participation" than the TLM does. In fact it's much worse in promoting devotion in the laity than the TLM.
The problem with the Novus Ordo is that there is no separation between the devout layman and the insincere majority, who walk not after Christ but after the world and flesh. I would much prefer that the insincere had a free choice to go get a cup of coffee than to be forced to pretend a devotion to Christ that they do not believe, or live. The Novus Ordo rubrics, in trying to force devotion where it doesn't actually exist in the heart of the layman, actually makes their faith worse by deceiving them that they are living in Christ. The Novus Ordo fools the laity, and even some Priests, into believing they are walking in Christ when in actuality, they are serving the flesh and the world thinking they are living in Christ. The rubrics of the Novus Ordo actually promote and perpetuates this deception upon, and within, the laity, and even the Priesthood. I served over half a decade leading the Novus Ordo Mass in the music ministry. I've seen it, I know it...there is a deception that must be defeated.
This is why the Church is in the State that it is in. It is why the USCCB found it necessary to have a Eucharistic Revival in a Church where a majority of the laity that have lost the faith. It is why the beliefs in actual Catholic teachings held in tradition, are widely rejected in the Novus Ordo lay, and even some Priestly, communities (I'm looking at you Fr. Martin, S.J. and his ilk.) It is why the moral foundation of lay Catholics in Novus Ordo communities are greatly slanted toward service to, and attempts to be a friend to, the world and sin.
It is why recent polls of lay Catholic beliefs show that 89% of Novus Ordo Catholics believe in the use of contraceptives. It's why 51% of Novus Ordo Catholics believe in abortion. It's why 67% of Novus Ordo Catholics believe G@y M@rr1@ge is acceptible. It's why only 25% of professed Novus Ordo Catholic attend weekly Mass.
In the end, the Novus Ordo changes by post Vatican 2 prelates, created a massive deception within the laity and priesthood. A deception that hides the service of sin in the laity and Priesthood, with a blanket/facade of apparent righteousness. Sound familiar? It's the old Martin Luther argument that Christ only puts a blanket of righteousness upon the believer to make them appear righteous before God and their fellow Christians, when in reality they are ravenous wolves.
In the end, Christ actually told us how to identify the the true believers in Christ. You will know them by their fruits. And the fruits of the Novus Ordo show the quality of that liturgy. The fruits of the TLM show it's quality. And if you compare those qualities against scripture and the traditional teachings of the Church, you can easily discern which liturgy is the one God works more successfully through, unto the laity's sanctification. Hint, it's not the Novus Ordo.
You seem to forget that the people who attend Mass, whether it's the N.O. or the TLM, are choosing to be there to seek God and to worship him as he ordained. Everyone is at a different place in their journey. We have to meet people where they are as Jesus taught us. We should be praying for them (and for ourselves) to grow in holiness. I hope you receive this comment with the charity with which it is given, but you seem so prideful. I'm reminded of the parable of the Pharisee and Tax Collector.
On another note, you lay all of the irreverence found at NO parishes on the form of Mass, but I think that blame is misplaced. I think an argument can be made that poor catechesis is the culprit.
@@jeneriss Thanks for your comment. It's interesting that you seem to have not recognized the pride presented in this video, but suggest pride in my defense of Christ's work in me.
Regardless, my admonitions were in opposition to ideas and concepts that were espoused in this video. The suggestion in this video is that there is some sort of deficiency in the traditional Mass that was corrected by the Novus Ordo, is laughable to me. I simply have not experienced these two liturgies the way it is described in this video. I have worked in the Novus Ordo for over half a decade many years ago, I was heavily involved in the Novus Ordo and the communities in which it exists, and I've been involved in the TLM and the communities in which it exists. There's a difference, and I'm witnessing to that difference.
I've certainly met devoted Christians in my Novus Ordo experience, but the frequency of those people and encounters are vastly diminished than the frequency of devout people and experiences I've had in the TLM. It's to the point where I'd say that if someone is a devout Christian in the NO community, they are devout despite the NO liturgy, not due to its inherent qualities. And the poll results I mentioned in my original comment proves this out.
Secondly, my defense of the TLM was not a work of pride, it was a work of truth against false representations and inferences in this video. Inferences that tried to represent that the TLM does not inspire participation or proper worship of God. That it somehow was, and is, a deficient form of liturgy from what existed in ancient times. That the TLM was brought into the Church by a short-sighted, if not corrupt, process of adoption through Franciscan missionaries. All those implied accusations of deficiency, are false in my experience. My witnessing of my experience in the TLM and the devotion and participation that it inspires in me, is not to my glory, but to the glory of God that works in me through worship in the TLM. It is not a sin of pride to Glory in God, or his works in us (1 Cor 1:31.)
Thirdly, I was also pointing out that this assumption that forcing "active participation" in the rubrics of the Mass somehow will lead to a higher incidence of devotional faith in Christ, is a farce. And the Novus Ordo laity shows this to be true. Just look at the moral trends of Novus Ordo communities since that liturgy has come to the Church. It has been a disaster! Now look at the moral trends of TLM communities since that liturgy has come back to the Church alongside the Novus Ordo. There's no comparison when measured against long-established moral truths from Catholic tradition. It's not even a close, not one moral measure tilts in the Novus Ordo's favor. This is how you will know them...by their fruits.
Finally, I agree that we are certainly meant to meet unbelievers where they are in sin, but we NEVER lead them into a service to God that promotes, perpetuates or leaves then stationary in their sin. Those that are mature in Christ, which is presumably our Priests, Bishops, Cardinals and the Pope, should call everyone toward maturity in Christ and the perfection of their faith, not to leave them where they stand to wallow in their sins before God, or worse yet, lead them into sin. This would not be charity, it would actually be hate toward those people who have a sincere desire to walk in Christ, but a Church that will not teach them in ways of love of God, neighbor and of righteousness through the influences of the Holy Spirit.
The core problem with the NO vs. the TLM is that the NO is much more oriented toward people and less toward God. The reason this is a bad idea, and why it was scrapped in the history of liturgical development in the Church that gave us the original Latin Mass, was not because of some random selection of liturgical forms by Franciscan missionaries, it was intentional in order to prevent exactly what is happening in the Church today. Which is the unqualified use of laity within sacred spaces and functions in the sacraments of the Church. I know this is true because I was a leader (i.e. guitar, piano, voice) in multiple choirs at a Novus Ordo parish before I was even baptized into the Church. How does that happen?
How could anyone, prior to Baptism, prior to confirmation and prior to any sanctification, prior to a completed Catholic education in the faith, be allowed to serve in the music ministry, one of the most sacred functions within the Mass? And although I was probably at a high level of devoutness for a catechumen at the time, I was not spiritually ready to fill such an important role in the liturgy. It still baffles me how that can happen. And I know I'm not the only one.
Heck, a few months ago when attending a Novus Ordo Mass, I saw a lay minister of the Eucharist try to give someone a sacramental blessing in lieu of communion. That lay minister had no more faculties to give that man a sacramental blessing than the guy would have received if he just knelt down and prayed himself. This level of lack of understanding of the sacred aspects of the Mass and faith is all over the Novus Ordo liturgy.
At the TLM the respect of sacred spaces and sacred functions, is everywhere. From the moment you enter the Church you have silence, prayer, contemplation and meditation in the presence of God. The entire experience is oriented toward God, and not people. Not even the choir or musicians are visible to the laity in the pews. The choir is not performing for us, they are performing for God in hopes that their music will inspire God's work in us through the experience of Christ's sacrifice in the Mass. And when Mass is over, there is no applause given to the choir, as if they just finished a performance to us. The purpose of the Mass is to worship and glorify God, not to give even one ounce of God's glory to the choir or music ministers.
Now, I can go into even more details of why laity in sacred spaces and functions in the mass is a terrible idea. Why sacred functions should only be performed by Priests who have theoretically gone through proper faith formation and clerical development. But I don't have time to write a book here. Needless to say, this is one of many major issues within the Novus Ordo liturgy.
The fact is that the difference in what these two liturgical forms inspire people in their faith development and sanctification, is stark. The NO needs massive reformations to turn it back to an orientation in alignment toward Christ, with the preservation of the sacred and reverent worship of God. Vatican 2 never asked, or intended, that the liturgy be turned into what it has become. I've read the documents, I know the differences of what is in Vatican 2 documents and what was promulgated by prelates after Vatican 2. They're not the same!
All that I say here is in charity to those who have lost their way in Christ within all Catholic communities, NO and TLM alike. These people, who are lukewarm Catholics aligned to the world, are at risk of divine consequences. My desire to see the Church reform the liturgy is for all those that think that contraception, or abortion, or SS marriage, and any other immoral behavior is okay. It's for the Priests, Bishops, Cardinals and the Pope that think that the changes in the Church that tries to befriend the world is okay (James 4:4). It's to all those Catholics that think that "all religions lead to God" (John 14:6, Acts 4:12). Scripture and Church tradition clearly show that none of these beliefs, and many more found in the Church today, are profitable toward the salvation of anyone, and all of it has the high risk of leading souls unto perdition. It is by charity that I have to say these things in hopes that someday, the Church will return to what is best for every single person in the Body of Christ.
If you want to understand what has happened in regard to the Latin rites in Catholicism, I would suggest everyone start with the three part RUclips video series titled "Mass of the Ages". (ruclips.net/video/-mIM_CrCYY4/видео.html)
@@jeneriss The Mass is a form of catechesis. The theology behind the NO Mass is deficient.
Thanks for the presentation. Having said all this, there is no reason V2 couldn't have just made small reforms to enhance the rubrics around active participation rather than create an entire new liturgy that has so thoroughly devolved over the decades that your average N.O. today has no resemblance to, and is not faithful to, neither the foundational reforms laid out in Sacrosanctum Concilium nor--in many cases--the GIRM. This talk is basically an academic discourse on how great "unicorn" N.O. masses are.
You’re not well informed
@krayze03 Precisely. Nobody can discuss this topic without opening the can of worms that is the Concilium and learning how the Roman Rite was stripped of all of its glory. While it is true the Rite needed a level of reform I feel this is being completed now by the FSSP, ICKSP, and SSPX who all say their masses with precision and beauty as well as educate their faithful on the principles of true active participation with the liturgy.
the "unicorn" NO is the future of liturgy in the Church
but this will only happen after many decades
@mousakandah5188 The unicorn NO is a LARP of the pre concilar Roman Rite. If your going to dress the NO up in all the smells and bells might as well use the superior Missal and translate parts of it into the desired language. The Western Orthodox actually would have a better example as they basically celebrate the TLM according to its rubrics just in vernacular.
@30:30 and @44:44
How is the NO an “entire new liturgy?”
To know what participation of the laity should mean read a preconcilliar missal.
31:45 Dr Pitre reads "...and sit at the Sacring..." while the text states "...and kneel..." Was this accidental or a deliberate effort to avoid/cancel "kneeling" at Mass? So many priests today refuse to accept kneeling while receiving our Lord on the tongue. They refuse to give Holy Communion on the tongue or if they do it is with reluctance and with trembling hands as well. There is a Monsignor at my church who even tells you off if you bow before receiving our Lord. There is also a heavy emphasis not to kneel at the consecration. So, at the mostly white congregation/Mass, very few kneel while at the majority mixed non-white congregation/Mass 5km away, very few (mostly white) remain standing/do not kneel
So, is Dr Pitrie also part of this effort to scrub kneeling entirely from the Mass? And it seems to be a pattern here - the West stand, the rest kneel.
Sounds like the modern Roman Mass straight out of the book of Revelation. Great job Dr Pitre
Im sure the pre Quo Primum peps felt the same. 🤷🏽♂
The problem now is one of expectation. Most Catholics don't have a personal devotion so they come to Mass for what they should be doing at home. And I get that for those who are spiritually weak, the support of group prayer helps.
Maybe the weekday Masses can go back to being a personal devotional. But weekend Masses no. Have we really understood what it means to come into the presence of the Almighty God and exalt Him to the highest heavens
I don't like singing. Do I need to do it?
The problem between the NO and the TLM, I will take the TLM anytime. It's not that I am lazy. In the tridentine mass, the congregation is in full paerticipation. I simply cannot tolerate drums, electric guitars and popular music as an example of participation. I have been able to find a NO that is reverent, the music is quiet and beautful. The priest cares about the liturgy more than being popular. My faith hasa been grately enriched by the TLM.
So…. These arrangements were valid in the 80’s and 90’s but the fruits have not blossomed. Time has proven this experiment a flop the let the fresh air in the Church. To the point that growth in the church attendance is now closing parishes to boost numbers. While the info is laid out very well and seems to give a glimmer of hope for V2, it don’t change that the hierarchy has abandoned its post and the ranks are filled with perverts, thieves, cowards, and yes men. We as the Catholic Church need to realize our errors before it’s too late.
Pope Benedict XVI realized and tried to correct with SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM. They are trying to suppress it again but at least many have been enlightened with the beauty of the Latin Mass so the spark will always be there.
Wonderful explanation .
The translation you are using is incomplete at least, for in Latim we read: "... et ideo in tota actione pastorali, per debitam institutionem, ab animarum pastoribus est sedulo adpetenda". All the phrase is translated by "before all else"???
Correct, the Latin should be properly translated (concerning active participation) as "is to be given the greatest attention" not "is to be considered before all else." Big difference.
Thank you, God bless
thank GOD (and dr. pitre). excited to listen to this 🙏
Active participation ? Like hugging, shaking hands, waving during the Agnus Dei? Or running out the door after receiving the Eucharist ?
It seems you didn’t listen to what he is saying.
@johnosumba1980 they usually don't listen to the content and just jump on any chance to hate that they can get. I used to desire to attend a TLM but the rad trads have ruined it for me. If the TLM forms rad trads I want no part of it. I am afraid I will end up bent on hate like them.
@@johnosumba1980I was thinking exactly the same thing. Amazing how many people don’t listen to the content and then make irrelevant comments. I expect better from catholics especially those who take the faith and liturgy seriously.
Wow didn’t know the pope outlined that people are supposed to wave & leave early as part of the NO liturgy, lol.
Why do radtrads believe the NO is inferior and a heresy? What’s their evidence the tlm is superior? It seems they are choosing to leave the true Catholic Church over (incorrectly perceived) gestures at Mass.
Do they not know that liturgy has changed many times throughout history? Some people even left the church believing the Latin Mass was heresy.
Being a true Catholic requires one to accept all Catholic dogmas. Including the current pope and Mass.
Otherwise, it’s no different than being a Protestant.
Look at @30:30 and @44:44 again.
He explained what it is. He didn't say anything about 'running out the door' which in any case is inappropriate: the Mass isn't over until the Mass is over. If that was a usual occurrence, then the priest should say something or place articles in the bulletin on a monthly basis.
There is barely any silence in today's Mass, and if we're going to have the readings read to the laity, it would be great if we could at least use dignified language.
11:14 youre misrepresenting what is understood as the Universal Priesthood by the Church. This is typical of modernists. Take what the Church says and apply a modern twist to it. The Catholic Encyclopedia actually addresses this verse specifically
"But the very text shows that the Apostle meant only a figurative priesthood, since the "spiritual sacrifices" signify prayer and the term "royal" (regale, basileion) could have had but a metaphorical sense for the Christians. The Gnostics, Montanists, and Catharists, who, in their attacks on the special priesthood, had misapplied the metaphor, were just as illogical as the Reformers, since the two ideas, real and figurative priesthood, are quite compatible. It is clear from the foregoing that the Catholic clergy alone are entitled to the designation "priest", since they alone have a true and real sacrifice to offer, the Holy Mass."
How old are you? The Catholic Encyclopedia? I mean, are you referring to the 1907 edition, or, you know, the "updated" 1912 version? 😉
@gerardmcgorian7070 why does my age matter? Why do you think the substance changed between the 2 editions? Why can you not comment on the substance of what I said?
@@RanCham727 The "substance of what you said" is nonsense, that's why? See the book he's holding in his hand in the vid? That's called "The Documents of the Second Vatican Council". We're talking about the XXI Ecumenical Council, i.e., the highest teaching authority in this Catholic Church, not a badly written, ill-informed "Catholic" Encyclopedia written in 1907 by a crew of third-rate American theologians. Brant is't "misrepresenting" the Universal Priesthood, as the COUNCIL understands it, you and your "Catholic" Encyclopedia are. Or do you think a book written 50 years BEFORE the Council is reflecting its teaching? There, now I've commented on the "substance" of what you said. If you don't want to follow the teaching of this Church's Council... go somewhere else.
Very interesting. This is something every Catholic should watch especially the TLM fundamentalists claiming its been done for close to 2000 years.
We claim it because it's true. The TLM is timeless, and not subject to "changing to fit the times."
Attend TLM and I am very sure you don't want to go back to NO. When I first attended TLM in 2020 when NO churches closed its doors, I went to TLM, my first time. Since then I didn't want to go back to NO which is 5 minutes drive away from my place while TLM is an hour drive away from my place.
Pitre's repeated emphasis on the full CONSCIOUS participation of the lay faithful in the Mass is, like the post-council's expressed intention, predicated on the idea that consciousness perfects and completes the soul's participation in sacramental mysteries. But the Mass is called the "Mysteries" precisely because consciousness must be transcended by communal worship. The individual's communion with Christ is perfected at the Mass only because he or she is subordinated to the Prayer of His Body, the communal Church, wherein each soul comes to individual holiness and saving affirmation by reflex of the Church, his Body and Bride, being preoccupied by the Paschal Prayer and the Trinitarian discourse. Consciousness must participate of course, and from time to time it emits its Amen, But the best Amen of the conscious mind comes late in the day of grace and on-going conversion. "Let all mortal flesh keep silent" is the ancient and venerable attitude of true worship, "Be still and know that I am God", is the best posture. Without it, consciousness gets in the way of grace; or worse, bores the affects and dulls the intellect., making the Mass odious to the faithful.
"Hence, Venerable Brethren, springs that ridiculous proposition of the Modernists…according to which religious consciousness is given as the universal rule, to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and to which all must submit, even the supreme authority of the Church, whether in its teaching capacity, or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy.…"
-Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), 8
@@CatholicProductions So you're agreeing with him then?
@@pjm001 To the degree he refrains and rejects the action of anyone lecturing the Church as to how she should oversee the liturgy based upon their particular opining about her lawful decisions, so as to avoid [a] being categorized a modernist by the pope who popularized the aforesaid term and [b] standing in opposition to every Council and Pope for the last 900 years (and a smattering of papal documents prior) that has explicitly commented on the matter, yes.
@@CatholicProductions So Dr Pitre is wrong then? By the way, there are Catholic scholars who argue that what St Pius X meant by "active" participation, is better translated as "actual" participation... in other words pray the Mass!
I'm all for the priestly active participation of the people, but this is extremely difficult with the priest facing the people during the liturgy of the Eucharist. Ad orientum readily facilitates the active one body (head and members) sacrificial offering to the Father as opposed to the passive spectating of the people merely watching the priest make the consecration.
Most Catholics unfortunately do not even know that they are to worship God by offering their sacrifice, and facing the people implies this passive participation.
In the Novus Ordo the constant required responses are tiring to me .There is almost no silence either which disturbs my peace , praying, and meditation .Why are we trying force everyone to say and do the same thing at the time .Approx. 70 % Novus Ordo that attend don’t believe in the real Presence of Jesus’s in the Eucharist .That doesn’t sound like very good “active participation “ .
Your peace, praying and meditation at Mass is a community issue not completely private. After receiving communion there is private time as there is before and after Mass if we want it. Of course, if people are rushing in and rushing out, that doesn't work.
It's exhausting. I always leave more exhausted than before.
@@RexJudaeorum How old are you, 90? Lol.
If you arent old or sick then you are very weak man, start training something and change diet.
you can be in silence after the Mass.
Active participation in Mass and praying to God with the priest and the rest of community is great, its in the Church Bible and tradition.
Love Love Dr. Brant! So excited for this!
Thank you. I'm a new Catholic converted from being a protestant pastor. You have cleared a lot of things up for me. God bless you✝️
How do you attain salvation?
How does the recent man-created Dispensationalism obtain salvation? Where's ur folks RUclips channels?
@@essafats5728 thanks for asking. Believe and trust solely in the gospel of Christ - 1 COR 15:1-4. Don’t add or take away from the gospel! Amen
@@essafats5728 David Reid is a good one to learn from if you want to learn the Bible rightly divided - 2 TIM 2:15. Amen
@@essafats5728 also the “right divider”
All I got from this is nobody is celebrating the Mass correctly. Each version is not right or wrong going of church policies . What I did learn is many parishes are not properly catechized.
This is very enlightening and helps me better understand the tension between the TLM and the Novus Ordo. Thank you!
Tension arises from lack of obedience.
The problem is, all this about the active and full participation could be done without creating a new liturgy, creating completely new Lectionary, writing all these new orations to replace the ancient ones, shortening prayers, adding newly written Eucharistic Prayers, cancelling prayers and ceremonies, making simplifications etc. etc.
As a matter of fact the liturgical movement in the early 20th century was already working on the active participation of the faithful in the frames of the old liturgy.
Older traditions could be restored, as they were done historically, without all this novelty rooted in 1960s sensibilities. But what's funny, while the reformers were referring to the older customs from the first millenium, at the same time they got rid of many such customs that actually did survive in the liturgy since ancient times up to the half of the 20th century.
There is so much liturgical richness that was completely lost after the reform, both in the Mass as well as the Divine Office and other Sacraments. Instead of making new, simplified things it would be much better if all this treasure would be made more accessible to the faithful, first of all by bringing the solemn celebration of Mass to its proper place instead of the Low Masses that were the most common and by putting greater emphasis to the beauty of liturgy, the gregorian chant and cantors, which also was partially started already since St. Pius X, and is done today in the TLM movement, but I would say there is still much to do.
I suspect most of the Catholics that are content with the new liturgy don't really know about all that was lost along with it.
The biggest problem is that traditionalism has turned old rite into a kind of a novelty.
I've attended the mass in southern california for 80 years i find the Novus Ordo much more rewarding and the congregation more aware and participant. I don't know what all you complainers are talking about. Are you demanding God show up the way you want? Better to show up and receive God the way He shows up.
The irony of this comment is hilarious
Wow.. excellent Dr
Agree totally. A friend had asked me to watch with her a program called Mass of the Ages, but given this it is not.
So what Dr. Petrie is trying to say is that the novus ordo mass is more traditional than the traditional Latin mass
So are you saying Quo Primum was not promulgated in 1570 and there was no traditions prior to it?
Thank you
Novus Ordo
Doxology and Great Amen:
I envision Jesus, all our souls united with Him, being offered to God the Father!
Colossians 3:3
“For you have died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God.”
“Through Him, and with Him, and in Him,
O God, almighty Father,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
all glory and honor is yours,
for ever and ever! AMEN!”
Just wondering where sincere, legitimate and authentic 'active participation' begins and ends--- interpretative/ native/ current dances... secular pop music... light and sound shows... all active/ no one passive.
Thank you, Doc. I needed a shot of scripture in the morning. It's good for the body. 😂
Ok so all this active participation was called for in 1958 in De musica sacra et sacra liturgia but apparently never happened? I'm good with the active participation on the Novus Ordo but then the rest of SC was never put in force by keeping chant and Latin as stated. Oooh that awful music and songs! Bring back the reference and music and Latin and all the incense etc just like at St John Cantius in Chicago and I'm 100% in! Oh plus all the beautiful humble prayers that were used.
Incense was never at all the Masses, and only what would have been called the High Mass and is used at the Mass at the N.O.
Viva Cristo Rey!
Very good. How can we have this copy
Of course the comments are full of TLM ultra zealots. Not hearing anything on this video
It's good to know Dr. Pitre is back.
The Latin traditional Saint Andrew Daily Missal is the fulfillment of active participation of laity desired by Pope St Pious X without changing the content of the liturgy like the modernist pope Paul 6
@mylipsread: Yes, Humanae Vitae: The barefaced badge of a modernist pope (who, like Pope St. Pius X, is a saint as well).
Providentially, Pope St. Pius X did give us a distinctive, visible quality of modernism as it pertains to the liturgy:
"Hence, Venerable Brethren, springs that **ridiculous proposition of the Modernists** …according to which religious consciousness is given as the universal rule, to be put on an equal footing with revelation, and to which all must submit, **even the supreme authority of the Church**, whether in its teaching capacity, **or in that of legislator in the province of sacred liturgy**.…"
-Pope St. Pius X, Pascendi Dominici Gregis (1907), 8.
I expected Dr. Pitre to speak about the Quo Primum of St. Pope Pius V. which codified and promulgated the Traditional Latin Mass. He tacitly and subtly avoided because he knows the Bull was the last nail on the coffin, a nail that precludes any further panel-beating and tinkering with the Holy Mass.
This selected forgetfulness (amnesia) of his leaves much to be suspected.
He may have wanted to prevent sounding like Quo Primum coming off like a modernest of its day. Change is difficult in every era. 🤷🏽♂
Michael, thank you! Dr Pitre, as well as Catholic Productions, provides a treasure chest of knowledge and understanding which seems to have no bottom! I will watch this many times. Why was this not the practice in the East in the first millennium?
Brilliant Brant has hit the target again! Thank you from New Zealand. I will be using this video in my RCIA class. It is the best explanation I have seen about how the Church celebrated the Eucharist in the first Millennium and how and why the Latin Mass developed and why Vatican II made the liturgical changes it did. We need to remember so we can explain to others when asked.
No matter the academic argument you make, it will fail to inculcate zeal in your RCIA class. The Novus Ordo is as Pope Benedict XVI described it when he was head of the CDF. "a banal, on the spot liturgy put together by a committee." Read Mediator Dei and ratioallize the condemnation of "senseless antiquarianism" by Pius XII.
This series is included with access to the videos explaining the weekly readings. Outstanding resources!
Dr. Pitre, thanks . question, it seems to me the the oriental Orthodox Church is still following the old tradition. When I visited their churches during Mass, nobody is paying attention, priest are just reciting the gospel but the faithful is just on their own. Am I right?
Not "just" the sacrifice of Christ? "Just"? As in, "well, maybe something can be missing to that"?
Should someone notify St. Paul about this?
"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church...." (Colossians 1:24)
Translated: "They have taken all of your freedom away in the Novus Ordo." That's why it's so banal, oppressive and 80% of baptized Catholics have rejected it.
Lost my faith in the 70s NO, found it in the TLM.
@@GenX-Trad Same here. I found the TLM in 2002 and there is no going back to the Novus Ordo. It's actually a difficult and painful experience to attend a Novus Ordo even a "conservative" one. I just wind up praying for the end of the Novus Ordo in the Church for all time. There's probably only a few decades of it left anyway.
@@gerry30 the five Sunday Masses at my traditional parish are packed, standing room only. I agree..prayer and time and we’ll see the Tridentine Mass restored. It’s about sacrifice and worship, not the man-centered ideal of the NO.
So, all modern saints came from the TLM; no one from the Novus Ordo?
So utterly simplistic and wrong an understanding of the Mass and the current state of the Church in the west. It is directly BECAUSE of the liturgical reforms of the Liturgy of Holy Mass that the Church has grown in new countries.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Vat.2 Devils!