Haus Jakob

[Ep2] Why is the Vatican II Sect afraid of the Traditional Latin Mass?

LANGUAGE(S) | 其他語言:

華語

≪
Return to Series
≫

In recent years, the celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) has been gradually restricted by the Vatican II Sect which consists of the advocates of the liturgy and theology developed after the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II). In this episode, I would like to discuss some of the reasons why the Vatican II Sect is so afraid of the Traditional Latin Mass.

The Scripture regarding Cain and Abel (Genesis 4:3-12) teaches us that God favoured Abel and his offerings, because Abel ‘rigidly’ offered to God the best he could achieve. Cain, on the other hand, found consolation from being a lukewarm man of God, and God had no respect to his offerings and himself as a person. Eventually, instead of changing himself, Cain chose to commit the first murder.

The utmost physical and intellectual efforts required for offering the TLM are very much likened to the utmost efforts that Abel put into rising and fattening his flock, which also makes TLM the closest representation, we humans can perform to date, of the perfect immolation of our Lord Jesus Christ. By choosing to celebrate or attend the TLM, in this day and age when an easier and more lukewarm form of liturgy is available, we are doing the same thing as Abel when he chose the first-born animal from his best fattened flock and offered it to God.

The advocates of the Novus Ordo and Vatican II know very well that God has no respect to them and to their liturgy. They know that Catholics who take their religion seriously would flock into TLM, once she becomes widely available. However, they themselves do not want to invest their time and energy in learning Latin and celebrating the TLM. Instead of changing themselves, members of the Vatican II Sect have decided to murder their truly Catholic brothers and sisters, by defaming them, by erasing the Traditional Liturgy and Traditional Catechism from the landscape thus draining the spiritual blood out of them.

CLOSING PRAYER

Sancte Míchaël Archángele, defénde nos in prǽlio, contra nequítiam et insídias diáboli esto præsídium. Imperet illi Deus, súpplices deprecámur: tuque, Princeps milítiæ cœléstis, Sátanam aliósque spíritus malígnos, qui ad perditiónem animárum pervagántur in mundo, divína virtúte, in inférnum detrúde. Amen.

℣. Cor Jesu sacratíssimum.
℟. Miserére nobis.

🍻 Book your Q&A Session with the Missionary now
≪
Return to Series
≫

Friedrich J. Wu

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Like this post? Haus Jakob is free to use, but we could use your help!

Like this post? Haus Jakob is free to use, but we could use your help!

Like this post? Haus Jakob is free to use, but we could use your help!

The precept of the Church exhorts us Catholics to contribute to the support of our Pastors. Your donations sustain the pastoral mission of Haus Jakob to spread the beauty and Truth of Traditional Catholicism in Mainland China and empower us to create more content like this.

Please consider making a donation, and as long as you did it to one of His least brethren, you did it to the Lord (Mt. 25:40).

You may choose an amount

A$5.00
A$20.00
A$100.00
A$5.00
A$20.00
A$100.00
A$50.00
A$200.00
A$1,000.00

Or enter a custom amount

A$

Thank you so much for your generosity!

Thank you so much for your generosity!

Thank you so much for your generosity!

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

14 responses to “[Ep2] Why is the Vatican II Sect afraid of the Traditional Latin Mass?”

  1. logiciel dentaire Avatar
    logiciel dentaire

    Fantastic post however , I was wondering if you could
    write a litte more on this topic? I’d be very thankful if you could elaborate a little bit more.
    Thank you!

    Like

    Reply
    1. Jack Wu Avatar
      Jack Wu

      Thank you for your comment and encouragement! We shall elaborate more on topics related to the TLM.

      Like

      Reply
  2. PromoteVaticanII Avatar
    PromoteVaticanII

    The Trad movement has become something which is seperating itself from the Pope, many leaders in this movement teach error that the Pope is in grave mortal sin and heresy. Or fall under sede views and do not recognize the Popes authortity. That is why the TLM is restricted. The movement is setting itself against the Pope the vicar of Christ, hence the Pope feels it needs to be repressed. If the Trad movement can prove they can be obedient and faithful to the magesterium, they might lift the restrictions. Setting oneself above the Pope is a pretty common way most Protestants or other groups got censored. Not saying that TLM faithful each and every person at mass has these faults but several of the big name figures do and unfortunetly making the rest suffer the loss of TLM.

    Like

    Reply
    1. Jack Wu Avatar
      Jack Wu

      It is true that some individuals in what you call the “Trad movement” have separated themselves from the Pope and even committed the error of sedevacantism. However, there are also so-called “Traditionalist” Catholics who have realised the error of the post-Vatican II or postconciliar reforms and committed themselves to the correction of the error while praying for the Popes and Bishops who are in error, just like what St. Athanasius and St. Catherine of Siena did centuries ago. These are the true and innocent Catholics who are harmed by the restriction of the TLM.

      Although sedevacantism is erroneous and evil, most postconciliar reforms including the forcible implementation of the New Mass, that introduce the spirit of protestantism and false ecumenicism into the Holy Mother Church, are equally erroneous and evil. Both St. Peter and St. Paul said “Not rendering evil for evil” (1 Peter 3:9) or “To no man rendering evil for evil” (Romans 12:17). The evil of sedevacantism should not and cannot be dissolved by rendering the evil of postconciliar reforms to it.

      After all, there are Catholics separating themselves from the Papacy nowadays, exactly because some of them are scandalised by the postconciliar reforms and the fanatical rejection of the Sacred Tradition and Catholic orthodoxy within the postconciliar hierarchy. It is the promoters of the reforms done in the name of Vatican II, that’s been inciting division among the Faithful. This episode provides you with an anthropological explanation of why certain individuals in the Church whom I call “the members of the Vatican II Sect” would rather incite division within the Church than embracing the beauty of Traditional Liturgy.

      Like

      Reply
      1. PromoteVaticanII Avatar
        PromoteVaticanII

        I will not get into the whole V2 debate, but honestly the Holy See does not think V2 is so bad or evil so when they see others downgrading it they recact like the would to any serious undermining of the faith. The whole point is the restrictions are not because they are afraid of TLM, but because the bad parts of the community are schismatic. I agree yes, the perhaps minority or even majority in thought but not formally in heart number of those who are seperating themselves from the Pope are harming the rest, by giving TLM communities a bad name. The Holy See sees the bad ones and has to unfortunetly restrict it for everyone. The reaction to the restrictions calling Francis names and things by the bad ones only reinforced this. Unlike Padre Pio or others who were humble when restricted from doing certian liturgical things, the bad ones have gone even further away from the Pope. I think the Holy See has restricted the TLM to avoid schism in the bad ones rather than to cause it. Lets be honest one side of this uses pretty strong langauge about the other like evil, protestant, dreadful, etc… while the other side simply is acting like a sheperd and not name calling. The Holy See has the power to do what it did. The question is will TLM communities be sheep and follow or proove to be wolfs and do their own thing instead.

        Like

      2. Jack Wu Avatar
        Jack Wu

        I agree that this debate should not involve Vatican II as a Council but focus on the changes made in the name of Vatican II, as some of which (e.g. the Mass of 1969) even defy the Council itself. Nevertheless, either the Council or the postconciliar reforms has caused the loss of Faith by millions of souls, as shown by data. The Mass attendance drops even more rapidly after the implementation of the New Mass than in preconciliar years. Still an increasing number of Catholics no longer believe in important doctrines such as the Real Presence, and many liturgy experts agree that this is because of the postconciliar form and rubric of liturgy that have changed the consecration and handling of the Blessed Sacrament. If the Holy See still doesn’t think this is evil enough, they deserve to be called names as a wakeup call, just like the one St. Catherine made to exhort the Pope in Avignon to come back to Rome.

        Ask yourself: The Pope could have solved all the issues caused by the postconciliar reforms, including the loss of Faith in the Vatican II Sect and the schism of certain “Traditionalist” communities, by simply restoring the Liturgy that the Church has celebrated for centuries and has created numerous Holy men and women throughout the history. But why doesn’t he, or is he too comfortable with the lukewarm liturgy created after the Council and afraid of actually standing in the Presence of God in a Traditional Latin Mass?

        Again, ask yourself: When our Lord saw St. John at the foot of the cross, did He say to St. John “You wolf, how dare you follow Me to the Calvary, instead of following your Pope Peter like a sheep in denying Me and running away?”

        Like

      3. PromoteVaticanII Avatar
        PromoteVaticanII

        I think it would be hard to argue that Mass attendance decreased in Asia or Africa. Mass Exodus by Stephen Bullivant argues from statistical studies that Catholics actually had better retention rates than all of the other denominations post Vatican II. Thus, perhaps although the changes did not help things (Perhaps) it definitely is not to blame by itself (not saying you are as comment sections are impossible to have full detailed talks in) if Africa could increase attendance and Catholicism perform better than other sects which did not have councils but also lost numbers. Many people stopped practicing the faith over contraception not changes to the liturgy. If people stop attending church when something else happened. It could be causal relationship or just something unrelated. The 60s and 70s had soo much else going on it is hard to the point of impossible to single out V2 as the single or even majority reason people stopped going to Mass. Just think for a second, the last 5 Popes have been pro Vatican II, 3 are now saints. They are all saying that although things are not perfect, V2 liturgy is the way to go. I really don’t want to argue all the details of this. The whole point is that the Hole See is not restricting the TLM because they are evil or somehow killers like Cain, nor because they afraid of the the presence of God as you say above. It is because they have taken a stance V2 > TLM. If TLM communities disagree they are allowed to, the question remains, will they be obedient? and be civil about name calling. I highly doubt St. Catherine called the popes names, evil or even anything distasteful. I have not read her, perhaps she called them some loose terms as insults but do doubt this.) Nor did Padre Pio. St. Paul was able to rebuke Peter without entering into the same type of low level hits. If TLM is so confident they are right, God will allow them to prevail eventually. suffering in silence and being humble will only make that victory happen even faster. Communion on the Hand was practiced for 100s of years and is in numerous Church Father texts. Maybe not prudent today, but it cannot be called a sin or loss of faith without saying that the Church fathers and 100s of years of church history are sinners. Holy See restricts TLM because –some– in that camp are not being obedient to the magisterium and respectful in their disagreements, and has nothing to do with some evil intentions or plot. The Holy See is allowed to make the judgements on the Liturgy it did. This will be my last comment as I think the point is made.

        Like

      4. Jack Wu Avatar
        Jack Wu

        It may be hard to argue the decrease in Mass attendance in some regions, but in countries with more complete data (e.g. the US), it is the case. This is why apart from the decrease in Mass attendance, I also mentioned the loss of the true Catholic Faith, which is hard to be measured in numbers but is a determinant of whether a soul can be justified (Galatians 2:16). What we see after the Council is that there is a great number of Catholic laity, clergies and prelates alike openly supporting or voting for the legalisation of things that have clearly condemned by the Church, such as idolatry, abortion, contraception, homosexuality, transgenderism, etc., which constitutes a sign of mass apostasy. We Catholics know this must have something to do with the New Mass, because (1) Mass is Sacramental, and a “Sacrament is a visible sign of an invisible grace” (Roman Catechism). If the sign has become unclear, it will be more difficult for Catholics to discern, not mentioning to utilise, the grace they have received. And (2) there is a saying in the Church that “Mass is the sun”. If the sun is smitten and darkened, neither will the day shine (cfr. Apoc. 8:12). A postconciliar lukewarm version of liturgy may be good at retaining some people in a Vatican II Sect as nominal and lukewarm “Catholics”, but it doesn’t empower them to believe, to live and to die as true Catholics. Even the enemies of the Church knew where to attack, so they made the reform of the Holy Mass a most symbolic reform after the Council.

        The Pope and the prelates would understand the Theology of Mass and the poisonous fruits of postconciliar reforms way better than most Catholics, and yet some of them chose to promote an evidently problematic liturgy but restrict the true Mass which is the best representation we humans can perform to date of the perfect Immolation of Christ at Calvary, and which has been granted by Pope St. Pius V, a perpetual indult, valid “for always,” to be celebrated freely, licitly, without scruple of conscience, punishment, sentence or censure. Therefore, whosoever is deliberately against the TLM clearly does not have the salvation of souls as his top priority.

        It’s not why I mentioned St. Catherine because she called Pope names, although her language was pretty powerful for a young woman. Rather, she and those who fervently defend Catholic Tradition today oftentimes shared one thing in common, that they obeyed God, rather than men, as we Catholics ought to (cfr. Acts 5:29), and they put “compunction” into the hearts of those unrepentant sinners, just like our first Pope did under the guidance of the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:37).

        Talking about “victory”, the attendance of the TLM is actually increasing in many countries. In spite of the restriction, the TLM does not only survive but thrive, flourish and is attractive particularly to young and devout Catholics, the future generations. However, this is not where our victory is. Our victory is not on earth but in Heaven, is in the deliverance of the soul of each and every of us. To achieve such victory, we must not only suffer in silence but also warn the wicked, like a good prophet in Christ (cfr. Ezekiel 3:19). We must openly profess our Faith, as required by the Roman Catechism.

        By the way, Communion on the hands is not what I mean by the “handling of the Blessed Sacrament” at all. You’ll need better knowledge of the difference between the two forms, in order to understand this.

        Like

      5. PromoteVaticanII Avatar
        PromoteVaticanII

        Would you say the NO leads to the loss of faith directly such that it is wrong to attend or that the church has directly promoglated something gravely harmful to the faith? From the above it would seem so. My question for you is, how do you reconcil that view with the teaching that the church is gaurded from grave error is teaching at the level which NO is, and indefectibility. It is one thing for something to be unprudent and cause minor harm another for something to cause the damage you are describing. The Pope is the visible sign of unity, if TLM have the sacramental signs some in this group are lacking the Papal unity needed for salvation. One must be part of the Roman Church under the Pope not a roman church under private judgement of what is roman. A prior Pope cannot bind a subsequent one on matters that are not divine, ie liturgical elements that cannot change. Openly professing does not mean going against the Pope when they tell you you are wrong.

        Like

      6. Jack Wu Avatar
        Jack Wu

        Yes, it is evident that the New Mass would lead to the loss of Faith, and “the Church [being] guarded from grave errors” at this point, means that the Church cannot validly oblige the Faithful to attend the New Mass. And a previous Pope having granted a perpetual indult would mean it cannot be changed by later Popes. Moreover, Pope Paul VI said himself that the New Mass “by itself is NOT a dogmatic definition”.

        There might be people who prefer the TLM also unfortunately lacking Papal unity, but the people who attend or celebrate the New Mass but doubt the Real Presence certainly lack Papal unity, as no Pope can teach “it is ok for Catholics to not believe in the Real Presence” and continue to be Pope.

        Open profession of Faith sometimes requires us NOT necessarily going against the Pope, but to charitably correct his wrongs, based on prayerfully and prudently made judgment which must also align with the revelations of God through the Scripture, the Tradition and the Magisterium.

        Like

      7. PromoteVaticanII Avatar
        PromoteVaticanII

        Thanks for the good conversation. I thank you for remaining charitable to myself throughout. This is something many online commenators cannot do, which you did. I think we depart significantly at this point, if the NO is evident that it leads to loss of Faith, I have nothing else to say other than I will not hold the Church could promulgate something that directly leads to grave wrongs. I also hold prior Popes cannot bind future ones on matters in the liturgy which are open for change. I dont think we need to argue these points as they are sufficently easy to type into an internet browser and get an answer from both sides, which I think we both already know what those are. In my prayers, keep me in yours. The more prayers from people of good will the better. Cheers friend. Iron sharpens iron and I thank you for a good sharpen!

        Like

      8. Jack Wu Avatar
        Jack Wu

        You are quite right that the Church cannot promulgate something that directly leads to grave errors, which exactly means it is NOT the Church the has been promulgating the New Mass as well as many other postconciliar reforms, but men. Sometimes, obeying God rather than men may cause you to be (invalidly) excommunicated, like St. Athanasius, may cause you to be condemned as a heretic, like St. Jeanne d’Arc, by your Pope or prelates. True Catholics, however, believe in God above all things. I pray that one day, by the grace of God, you will find the true meanings of being a Catholic. God bless!

        Like

      9. PromoteVaticanII Avatar
        PromoteVaticanII

        Pretend you were a v2 loving Pope. That may be hard to do, but you seem to be a pretty smart person so im sure you can. If we are this V2 Pope and see a group inclined to sede views, and calling out the Popes saying they are not just wrong but have malice in their hearts which some groups do, then we can see why they restrict TLM. That is the point of my first comment. We do not need to ascrib malice to Popes to see a reason why they restrict the mass nor judge interior dispostions towards their journey with Christ. When TLM groups starts doing and going into interior judgments of the Popes intentions instead of focusing only on the arguments why TLM is better it just proves the Pope correct in restricting it. You have some good arguments, but you undermine them when you say the Popes are like Cain and have bad interior motives. Alot of Popes actions can be explained without nees to judge their hearts and say they are fleeing Gods prescene.

        Like

      10. Jack Wu Avatar
        Jack Wu

        Firstly, it is not up to the Pope to love or hate. The Pope is supposed to be under the guidance of the Holy Ghost. And secondly, I don’t need to pretend. I once loved Vatican II and the New Mass. I once ridiculed TLM-lovers like so many people do nowadays, until I was made to understand the problems with the postconciliar reforms, and I have chosen to conform my will to the Will of God, to conform my heart to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. Then I realised that the Pope and the prelates have all the knowledge of the value of the Traditional Liturgy and Catechism and all the power and reason (as I mentioned earlier) to restore them, but they don’t. Why? They must, like you said, “have malice in their hearts”. Just like I had malice in my heart when I was afraid of the TLM and ridiculed those who love it, because there are somethings in common in our humanity.

        Like

Leave a reply to Jack Wu Cancel reply