2nd Vatican Council


#1

This is for all the “old catholics” out there in forum land.

At the time did the 2nd Vatican Council seem like it was needed?


#2

[quote=rayray81]This is for all the “old catholics” out there in forum land.

At the time did the 2nd Vatican Council seem like it was needed?
[/quote]

NO.
Next question please.


#3

I was only in my 20’s, and did not have much concern with what was going on in Rome. But I remember 3 young priests I knew who left the priesthood for marriage when they did not get what they thought was coming… permission to marry.

On hindsight, … if there had been no followup abuses (ha, ha) we might have benefited from this pastoral council, and VatII would have been a good thing. … but then we might not have as many topics to discuss, and ********* and ******** and ******** would not be here posting the stuff they do.

( depending on your position, you may insert your choice of user name in place of the ********)
:whistle:


#4

[quote=rayray81]This is for all the “old catholics” out there in forum land.

At the time did the 2nd Vatican Council seem like it was needed?
[/quote]

James Hitchcock, widely respected author and historian, much loved by the Novus Ordo Advocates:

the fact that ecumenical councils have usually been summoned when the Church faces some great crisis, yet no such crisis was visible in l960. On the contrary, the Church at that date was probably as healthy and vigorous as it had been at any time during the whole post-Reformation period.

The whole article is at:
catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Dossier/2000-08/column2.html

Also, do a google search on
James hitchcock, vatican II,healthy
there will be about 100 hits


#5

[quote=TNT]NO.
Next question please.
[/quote]

Sorry, it posts the thread before the poll is up and running. Come back and vote if ya want.

I read an article saying that Vatican 2 was unnecessary and they had some convincing statistics to go along with it. But if there is one thing I have learned from school it is that statistics can be made to show whatever the writer wants to show.

I have also heard that Vatican 2 was a good idea but it has been poorly implemented and that is where all the trouble is. Sounds like the Cleveland Browns and Vatican 2 have a lot in common!:smiley:


#6

Ray,

If you really like me, dont throw a softball like that my way, you are going to get me in trouble here. Does the analogy to the “Titanic” sum up my and many for that matter feelings on the subject quite well???

[quote=rayray81]This is for all the “old catholics” out there in forum land.

At the time did the 2nd Vatican Council seem like it was needed?
[/quote]


#7

[quote=rayray81]I read an article saying that Vatican 2 was unnecessary and they had some convincing statistics to go along with it. But if there is one thing I have learned from school it is that statistics can be made to show whatever the writer wants to show.
[/quote]

GO WITH THAT ONE.

I have also heard that Vatican 2 was a good idea but it has been poorly implemented and that is where all the trouble is. Sounds like the Cleveland Browns and Vatican 2 have a lot in common!:smiley:

More like LBJ’s war on poverty.
Look, if you build a grassy field full of mines and quicksand, then chase the sheep across it, what are the odds of having any sheep left on the other side?
Just a guess. I won’t hold you to it.


#8

[quote=CrusaderNY]Ray,
If you really like me, dont throw a softball like that my way, you are going to get me in trouble here. Does the analogy to the “Titanic” sum up my and many for that matter feelings on the subject quite well???
[/quote]

Ok, that settles it.
Great analogy!
PS: One of RAYRAY’s poll questions:
Q. No opinion, just hope that the discussion in this thread stays civil.
Yea, right. Are you a Blonde??


#9

Vatican 2 came post World War 2, at a time where people were beginning to come out of a very isolated and insulated life. People were moving out of the ghettos both mentally and physically. The Civil Rights movement was well under way. We had been through two world wars, which had done much to reshape politics. Travel was much more widely and cheaply abvailable, and at least in terms of Europe and North America, there was a new openness to others and to ideas.

The Church appeared to be alive and vibrant; but that can be argued as to whether it was form or substance. Moral theology had worked itself into a rather simplistic, legalistic, and minimalistic stance among the people in the pew and their confessors. For all the training that the Baltimore Catechism did, it pretty much ended at 8th grade, and that is where a large part of the practicing Catholic’s faith knowledge eneded. There had been a large influx into convents and seminaries. Theological thought had moved from a negative view (what is wrong with the Protestants) to a more positive view: we all worship Christ, and share more than what divides us. Discussions had ben ongoing for some time ecumenically. There were new, and officially recognized movements within the layity that moved them from an appendage to priests and nuns, to people capable of, and responsible to spread the Gospel.

As with any historian, Mr. Hitchcock picks and chhoses what to him seems important; he has his philosophical stance, whcih in turn affects what he views as important and what as not. The Church was not facing a heresy; that is why it was a pastoral counsel.

Sadly, the world was in the throes of a beginning crisis, and the Church was caught up in that maelstrom after the Council. To presume that the Council caused the damage in the Church is to play “post hoc, ergo propter hoc”.

There is tremendous work still to be done, and it will be intereesting to watch what happens as this Pope dies and the nex one is elected.


#10

From:


by James Hitchcock:
[left]

“In many ways the promise of the Council has not been fulfilled, as** the immediate effect of the Council** …. was to plunge the Church into an internal crisis more severe than any other in her History. The crisis was provoked by the fact that, almost immediately at the Council’s end, there occurred the worldwide cultural phenomenon now popularly known as ‘the Sixties,’ amounting to nothing less than a frontal assault on all forms of authority. The cultural map itself changed rapidly, so that many of the assumptions found in the conciliar decrees were rendered obsolete. The Council fathers apparently had no inkling of that coming crisis; the task of ‘reading the signs of the times’ was apparently far more difficult than was imagined in the euphoric days of the early 1960s.”

[/left]


#11

[quote=rayray81]This is for all the “old catholics” out there in forum land.

At the time did the 2nd Vatican Council seem like it was needed?
[/quote]

Yes Vatican II was needed to battle modernism, but was misused for the promotion of modernism.


#12

Being born the year of VII means I never new the pre Vat II church.

However the Church I grew up in taught me … nothing.

I understood the language yet knew nothing. I did not know that Mass was a Sacrifce … I was under the impression it was a boring sing song.

Saints … who are they. Prayer … How’s that Hail Mary go again? Purgatory … never heard of it. And isn’t the rosary something you hang from your mirror for decoration?

God is cool and it doesn’t matter what you do because everyone goes to Heaven

And if you don’t go to Heaven well don’t worry about it because Hell doesn’t exist

And what ever you do … All little boys stay away from the priest!
The above are TRUE facts … that was me … that is the fruit of VII.

But by the grace of God I am no longer a product of VII - When I went seaching for the Truth I found it … and too be quite honest once I found it - I was MAD - to think that that which should have been my right since birth was almost completely stolen from me!


#13

Don’t know how anyone can debate the councils… the one in this thread or those previous… in all cases the Holy Spirit is speaking to the Church. :thumbsup:


#14

I’ve raised a nice brood of faithful Catholics based on the Counciliar Church and they are well on their way to raising a second generation of good Catholics.


#15

The Council was called by Pope John 23rd, a great and saintly man. He felt that it was necessary to have the Council, and that is good enough for me.


#16

It permitted by the Holy Sprit.

I’m in no place to question it.


#17

The Council was called by Pope John 23rd… A great and saintly Pope. He felt the Council was necessary,and that is good enough for me.


#18

That was excellent and I feel exactly the same way, sort of like here in New York, when you see pictures of the Old Penn Station, which was demolished in 1962 (funny same year as V2) to make way for Modernism and the “New Penn Station and Madison Square Garden”. Well if any of you commute as I do into Manhattan each day into the “New Penn Station” and then go by Grand Central and see pictuers of the Old Penn and told that it looked and felt just like Grand Central, you cry and say, who is responsible for this? What the heck were they thinking to bring the wrecking ball to a beautiful edifice such as the Old Penn station, whose demo gave rise to the Landmarks commission here in NYC. As one scholar put it, you used to enter into NYC , look up at the old Penn Station and a feeling of grandeur, now you enter into the “Modern” Penn Station and feel like a rat running around through tunnels below ground…

Just like Our church, what were they thinking…How could they have put the wrecking ball to a Church that was the envy of all for centuries, and now we are relegating our holy Father in the name if Ecumenism to sitting in on Hindu Services, Jewish services, Kissing the Koran, and saying we all worship the same God, building our churches to look like modern round spaceships instead of beautiful works of art, ripping out altar rails, watering down the liturgy, changing the sacrements and the words of consecration, allowing annulments by the thousands each year for the “right contribution to the church coffers”, on and on…It is sad

[quote=Rara Avis]Being born the year of VII means I never new the pre Vat II church.

However the Church I grew up in taught me … nothing.

I understood the language yet knew nothing. I did not know that Mass was a Sacrifce … I was under the impression it was a boring sing song.

Saints … who are they. Prayer … How’s that Hail Mary go again? Purgatory … never heard of it. And isn’t the rosary something you hang from your mirror for decoration?

God is cool and it doesn’t matter what you do because everyone goes to Heaven

And if you don’t go to Heaven well don’t worry about it because Hell doesn’t exist

And what ever you do … All little boys stay away from the priest!
The above are TRUE facts … that was me … that is the fruit of VII.

But by the grace of God I am no longer a product of VII - When I went seaching for the Truth I found it … and too be quite honest once I found it - I was MAD - to think that that which should have been my right since birth was almost completely stolen from me!
[/quote]


#19

I think we were just in starting the 2nd Vatican Council. “The purpose of the 2nd Vatican Council is to better present the Catholic faith”, (John XXIII). The Council recognized the beauty of other Languages, and that the Novus Ordo is just as good as the Triditine. In the Triditine mass there is just as much abuse as there is in the Novus Ordo. God would never condemn someone to hell, if through no fault of their own did not know Christ and His Church. To defy the council, is to act like your the Judge and try to covet powers that don’t belong to you. Cardinal Ratzinger even said it himself that Vatican II was not implemented very well. We saw the rise of anarchy within the hierarchy itself, as many desenting Bishops and priests questioned the revelancy of today’s teachings. The bishops passed in petitions to the Pope for marrried priests and that the issue of abortion may be discussed. The Pope reserved those issues to himself. Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae alienated many Catholics. Consequently the rise of anarchy in the hierarchy gave way to liturgical and missalete abuse, the sex abuse scandal, dissent in doctrine, qoute “Ecumenical services”, and so forth. Result? A lot of Catholics are not catechized! You wonder why we have the problems we do. Those abuses of the things that I just mentioned above are just some of many things that lead to the protestant reformation.

Padre Pio “Don’t worry, work and pray.”


#20

As taken from a Theologian in a recent Catholic Publication. It is also states that in France, there are more people attending the TLM either through the Indult or SSPX than that go to the Novus Ordo:

There are serious concerns about the validity of the New Mass, especially when said in the vernacular. Quite often the words of the Consecration are ad-libbed and thus the Mass becomes invalid.(even if the translations are valid) When there are serious doubts as to whether one has attended a valid Mass or not, it is best to err on the side of caution and avoid the Novus Ordo altogether.

Moral Theology And Canon Law provide for such situations :

-Canon 1248.2. states that those who through inconveniece or
moral impossibility cannot fulfil the Mass obligation can pray at home ; “personally or in a family or, as occasion offers, in groups of families.”

-Canon 1323. States that one incurs no penalty for violating a
precept when he acts from serious inconvience or even percieved
fear.

Moral impossibility, can in short, be defined as when you believe that it is wrong to act in a given situation. (i.e attend the Novus Ordo)

Now, if you find the Novus Ordo to be a near occasion of sin,
or sacrilege, or a danger to your spirituality-- you are in a situation where you cannot take action (i.e-- you cannot attend the Novus Ordo )


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.