canadagirl1973 I think most are. Where in Canada are you? Here in Toronto we have some works of beauty 😀

Holy Faith TV JMJ ✝. Hi Holy Faith TV! (Side Note: You have a great channel too 🕊!) I live two hours away from T.O., but have never been to any of the Churches up there. We do have a Latin Mass which takes place at a Church located a half hour away from me. Would be nice to explore the beautiful Churches (with High Altars) located nearby and throughout Canada 🇨🇦 someday for sure!

canadagirl1973 if you are in the London area check out our admin Carl Vanderwouden's work. He has some amazing photography of churches throughout Ontario and Quebec. You can see his work on our Facebook page

Many churches will use new songs, though perhaps not out of a hymnal.

Pope Paul VI said the TLM.

St Peter said the Latin Mass? Really? Thats a bold statement if you want to claim our current Mass is not connected to the historical Masses. It clearly is more similar to the Latin Mass than anything the early Church did. They are all similar in the one way that matters, doing what Jesus said to do in memory of Him.

Same here. What if there is no TLM in my country at all. What is one supposed to do. Suffer throught the novous ordo?

Request a change through my bringing this up to your priests and bishops!!!

Of course not. Certain people's fixation with the Tridentine Mass is ludicrous. If we follow his reasoning then we are believing the Church only came into existence after Protestantism. The Tridentine form only lasted four hundred years. When you compare that to the 1600+ years since Christ that utilized other usages/forms/rites you realize they are pretty fixated on a Liturgy that was in some ways reactionary to Protestantism. It intentionally went over the top with opulence as a reaction to the Iconoclastic furor of Protestants. Thank God the participants in the Second Vatican Council realized that the Church was finally mature enough to not have every single Liturgy be an extravaganza. We no longer needed to show off for the sake of Protestants. The sacrament is meant for the whole of the Church. Let's call a spade a spade shall we. Such People really aren't Traditionalists- they are Tridentinists. The reject the very essence of the word Catholic. They reject universality in favour of particularity. Denial of the validity of the various rites and usages is a denial of the catholicity of the Church.

@@kitiowa That's hilariousley wrong on every level. It was not the belief of Lefebvre that any addition or subtraction of prayers from the Mass rendered it invalid (the SSPX regard the novos ordo as a valid mass) or even illicit. The problem Lefebvre had with the novos ordo was the purpose and nature of the changes, not the very fact they were changes. The intention of pope John 23rd was clear, to alter the liturgy to make it more "suitable" for the modern world and in order to make it acceptable to protestant denominations which is why 7 protestant ministers were assembled in the creating there- of. It is also a well known fact that the second eucharistic prayer was written in a hotel room.

@@danielwoulfe4280 You do understand how oxymoronic your post is right? It isn't illicit or invalid so he opposed it. (Let's not forget that many lackeys of SSPX do claim the Novus Ordo are invalid and illicit). So what you are saying is that Anti-Protestantism is supposed to be a determining factor in the rubrics of the liturgy of the Church. What POSSIBLE difference does it make if a eucharististic prayer was written in a hotel room?!?!?! SO WHAT? Luther's Mass or the Mass of the Anglican communion were actually closer to pre-Tridentine forms/usages than the Tridentine. It really is not some problem that Protestants were consulted or that the liturgy is meant to be pertinent to contemporary Christians. If it was not suitable to fashion the Mass for contemporaries then we would have never translated the liturgy into Latin in the first place for Westerners. How do you justify the Mass not being in the original Greek?

@@kitiowa Wrong again. You're accusation that Lefebvre opposed the Novos Ordo because it IS valid and licit is ludicrous at best, disingenous at worst. No the SSPX do regard the Novos Ordo as valid. Look at their website. They concede that all that is necessary for a valid consecration are the words "this is my body" and "this is my blood". They do, as I have pointed out believe it to be illicit. Your claims that the Traditional Mass was created after Protestantism are also incorrect. The tridentine mass was codified at the council of trent FROM OTHER EARLIER LITURGIES. It was a STANDARDISATION of the Roman Rite, not a new creation as your comments imply. You are also wrong when you assert that Anglican liturgies are more similar to the Mass codified at trent on multiple levels. Firstly, the SSPX (of whom I am no supporter by the way), do not oppose the minor additions of prayers since Trent. Secondly, the Anglican form of the mass differs greatly from the Traditional Mass, it is said in English; the very nature of the mass is regarded as something wholly different. It is regarded as more of a rendition of the Last Supper than of a Sacrifice.

@@kitiowa Simple. Because Christ through the tradition and magesterium of His Church has declared Latin the language of His church and the Mass. Christ is just as present in his Church as he was 2000 years ago.

Thank you for defending the Novus Ordo. There are too many arguments against the Novus Ordo and the Vatican II, makes me dizzy. Like....we get it...the Tridentine Mass was celebrated for a millennium...the center SHOULD always be the Eucharist. But I do agree with the fall out of the Church since the Novus Ordo inception at the same time. I went to an Episcopal Church just to visit and it was more demanding and disciplined or....high mass like than the regular Catholic Mass. It was interesting experience. I do believe we are at a cross roads, which way should the church go. People are leaving in droves and it's sad. Look at the state of the Irish Catholic Church. Ireland has almost completely irradicated Catholicism and it's very sad. I'd extend that to Europe in general. The Church NEEDS to be more aggressive I believe. So introducing the arguments against Vatican II and the Novus Ordo. If and when the New Mass goes away, I'll weep because it's meant so much to me growing up.

@Jong I think you are mistaking extraneous circumstances with rubrics that set the standard. The TLM rubrics and even the Novus Ordo rubrics are meant to describe standard use i.e. when everything is happening normally. During times of war or other extraneous circumstances, many dispensations would be given anyway. So the fact that the Novus Ordo prescribes minimalism or _ugliness_ in this regard is then a problem. You also have to realize that the beauty and tradition is not meant to take away the focus from the Eucharistic sacrifice. To the contrary, the beauty and tradition conveys the truths about the Eucharistic sacrifice even better. It is not a competition between tradition and beauty vs. Eucharistic sacrifice.

@tipofmytongue1024 I grew up with the Novus Ordo as well. In fact, I was one of the folks that thought the entire idea of using Latin and the priest facing the liturgical East instead of the faithful was moronic. I attended the TLM when I was older and honestly thought it was difficult for me to follow etc. But, what I have come to realize is that the liturgy is not a matter of preference. It is more of a matter of correct form of worship vs. incorrect form of worship, or efficacious form of worship vs. not so efficacious forms of worship. From that perspective, it was pretty clear what to choose. I continued to struggle my way through attending the TLM and today, I have come to appreciate and love what it offers. I still attend the Novus Ordo on weekdays and I am also better able to appreciate the deficiencies in it as well. So what I am trying to say is that what you feel in a sense is nostalgia. But, if you were to choose objectively, you will not find yourself missing the Novus Ordo.

Eufrosnia D I agree on this statement "You also have to realize that the beauty and tradition is not meant to take away the focus from the Eucharistic sacrifice".... but on this statement "So the fact that the Novus Ordo prescribes minimalism or ugliness in this regard is then a problem." As much as I want to comprehend from what source do you get this...Personally, I view the development of the Novus Ordo in light of Satan conversation in 1884 overheard by Pope Leo XIII...Satan was about to give-up he cannot penetrate the Vatican inside to destroy it (Mt16:18)...so Satan ask God for more power...the Novus Ordo is a way of giving Satan a hold in the church by dividing it, God allows this to keep Satan pursuing to destroy the Church as prophesied in 2Thess 2:1-11 without this passages Satan would voluntary go to hell remember he produces a lot of saints & martyrs already and, he is already defeated...but God has to Redeemed the Church(The Mystical Body) it has to suffer the same persecution, passions, crucifixion & death as Jesus Christ freely offered for our redemption, the Church in a Mysterious God's design has to follow the same path for a Glorious Church to emerge.After this final tribulation the Marriage of the Glorious Head(Jesus) is now ready to take on the Glorious Body(RCC). and the reign of Christ will starts...but how about Satan in the Thessalonian prophesy?...As much as I want to believe Satan can takeover the Seat of Peter, my faith tells me otherwise Mama Mary would come just when Satan was about to Seat...and infront of all the demons & wicked persons Satans proudhead will be crushed...the living of all faith who witness this victory will proclaim the 5th Dogma...'In the end My Immaculate Heart Will Triumph"..we don't see the big pictures God only reveals His plan to the humble"Godbless! S&IHMMP4us.Amen

Eufrosnia D plus one more thing for you to appreciate the Vatican II in its fullness not only the Novus Ordo...Satan in 1884 trembles in fear after seeing millions of people wearing the symbol of his defeat "The Miraculous Medal"...he wanted to clarify to God if he was about to destroy his reign as prohesied in Genesis 3:15...the 19th century is the Age of Mary...Satan and his demons know who Mary is AT THE FOOT OF THE CROSS?...the Woman...the Sovereign Queen of all angels...Satan is only a Cherub like Archangel Gabriel he must bow down to the Woman Crown with Twelve Stars w/ the moon under her feet...Queen of Heaven & Earth...but God said to Satan trembling in fear but still arrogant...calm down lonely creature your role is not yet complete you still have to destroy my Church remember 2Thess 2:1-11...Satan has to do God's bidding he is an ape of God remember CCC..but Satan said, ok give me more power and in 75 to 100 years I will destroy your Church...and so here we are 2017 is over but Satan has failed to destroy it...so were living now in the Time of Mercy...waiting for the Second Pentecost to equipped all the True Soldier of Christ for the Final Battle, as our beloved Pope Francis signal the start by praying the upgraded prayer "Our Father, DO NOT ALLOW US TO FALL UNDER A MILITARY ATTACK"..The RCC will be attack...but the Immaculate Heart will shines at it's brightest and blind Satan & all his cohorts.STAY IN THE ARK, you might be deceived to go to a counterfeit catholic church..S&IHMMP4us.Amen

I agree with most of what you said with the Tridentine Mass,...it is a sacred in it's forms and faithfuls can be easily guided how one should conduct themselves in the Holy Mass reverently in adoration, which we see in most NO Mass missing..we cannot blame the Traditionalists for observing the church goers in NO disposition in participating in the celebration. It's a good point you mentioned this "But I sincerely have no idea why Latin became so sacred of it's own right, more important than the people's direct involvement with the Mass"....for me the Tridentine form was like a Royal Robe of God...it's provide believers of what kind of God we adore, a Majestic and a Holy God...but personally we can also experience deep reverence in the Novos Ordo Mass particularly if the Priests prepares well prior to celebrating the Holy Mass and the participants attending was in the state of grace. the homilies of a pious & obedient Priests radiates Christ presence more clearly...Godbless!

To be clear, I would never deny anyone a Latin Mass if that's how they felt they wanted to worship. How the NO was introduced by American Bishops was deplorable.

but in the life of King Saul there mention an offering that is not pleasing to God...that cause him the lost of Authority & God's anointing for a simple disobedience....As I said the Latin Mass is like a Royal Robe for God...in order to redeemed mankind, God willingly remove all His power and majesty as King of Kings in the form of a slave, a helpless child..in our times particularly in year 1959(75th year) were the public announcement of Vatican II was made coinciding with Pope Leo XIII vision of 1884...God once again in order to redeemed His Church (The Mystical Body) is willing and allows to remove His Royal Robe in Tridentine Mass in the form of Novus Ordo to stoop down again to the level of man's understanding to show forth His Loving Kindness & Mercies for the salvation of all the redeemed. Latin Mass can only be offered pleasing to God in the form of unity in full communion with Pope's intention and in harmony with Church Authority.If not in Full Communion with the Church the offering will be likened to King Saul human intention that falls into disobedience...Godbless!

The heresy of vatican II and modernism is a test

Jarl Kilduff what heresy? I never seen any specific and definite arguments that would convince me that the Vatican Ii commited any heresy.. So far all accusations that ive read fall flat particularly if the criticism was made by the known church enemies, critics & groups who had a history of disobedience, opposition & resistance. St. Athanasius said "when there is slander, there is Satan"..all ive seen is persecution, calumny and all sorts irreverent words directed to our beloved Pope Francis. Godbless

you are protestant , we worship the act of our salvation, in a sacred place in a sacred way remember what happened to core and faily

Correct! Aesthetic/external beauty is only peripheral to the faith..what matters to God? Book of Samuel says "man look at the appearance but God looks into the heart" Jesus calling for every believers is to be perfect just like the heavenly farher is perfect...Obedience is better than sacrifice.. Samuel added. .Godbless

I'm a Protestant for having questions. Fabulous. Very Catholic of you.

A M - you would like our church... it’s plain. Just bricks and painted walls.

"Over time I found it very helpful for my mental prayer development by having holy images to look at." That's very good for you, I'm glad. I don't think it will be mine, because I'm a different person.

cistercian architecture is very simple and unadorned

Yes. Join the Lutherans.

Regarding having to use a missal - I just read this quote attributed to (abbot ?) Bacquez that "by this means the words striking the eye and ear at the same time, are less exposed to pass unperceived and the care taken to discover the word we pronounce is one more safeguard against the tendency to routine." I agree with Fr. R, and I think people of today are whiners who don't want to put any effort into prayer. The Byzantine rite I attend is in English, but the prayers are much more glorious and sacred sounding.

sue200012 - That's wonderful on the your parish and it's litgury and that's my point. Somehow "only minor changes" became no changes and enforced prayer in a foreign language, that's easy to disconnect from. I have been told of people showing up for their beautiful mandatory Latin Masses...and praying the Rosary. I understand the objections to the NO. But I sincerely have no idea why Latin became so sacred of it's own right, more important than the people's direct involvement with the Mass

Nothing at all wrong with saying a rosary during Mass ( I can't remember where I read that). People are involved in the Latin Mass if they choose to be. Don't jews still use Hebrew(?)? Why? It's sacred. It's a sacred language for a sacred rite.

"Nothing at all wrong with saying a rosary during Mass " Um...doesn't that defeat the point of being there at all? That's really what God wants - for people show up and not pay attention to what's going on - in this case, the sacrifice that saved the whole world? In any other context, that's extremely rude. I don't get it. " People are involved in the Latin Mass if they choose to be. " If people want the Latin Mass, they should absolutely have it and it should be available. I absolutely would never deny anyone that. My questions are along the lines of why did the Western Catholic church refuse to _also_ offer a Mass in vernacular as the Eastern Rite has done easily and you actually attend? Why even now is there pining over a language out of temporal use for thousand years, like it's going to solve problems of reaching the modern mind? "It's sacred. It's a sacred language for a sacred rite." Languages aren't sacred. People and prayers are sacred, but not the particular language in use. Pentecost makes it very clear that we are to reach out to people in their language, not ask them to learn a new one for us.

No one is asked to learn a new language!! just look at a book. The priest offers the sacrifice. You can say the Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary and be on Calvary just like those who are saying the Mass prayers, and you never know what's going on with worshippers anyway. Latin was kept because the Church is universal - same language wherever in the world the Mass was said. It is a sacred language to me; it was used by many great saints of the RC Church who attended the Latin Mass that came down to us from the earliest times.