Anyone here reject Vatican II?


I do. I’m from 200 years in the future, and Vatican III is so much better!


From the future, eh? I’d like a 300 petabyte computer (or 3 exobyte) and a ‘perfect replica’ ™ cybernetic pony.


We don’t use computers so much anymore, cerebral augmentation with accelerated organic neural processing meshed with Iridium based multiplexing greatly reduced our needs for external computation infrastructure.


Well, I can’t speak for Jim’s grandparents, but my very traditional grandparents would have been horrified by Fr. Z’s statement that it wasn’t sinful to pray for the death of a pope.


I don’t know. That ‘cerebral augmentation’ stuff is still a little iffy, and a bit pricey. But since full brain interfaces are available (without an external port like the old days), I’d rather attach a flesh-colored, short-range, wi-fi interface to my skin since my computer would fit in a pocket.


Link please?


Well, here’s his apology: (he pulled the original)

And here’s an article about it from a year later in which he told the interviewer it was “frankly, not a sin.”


I mentioned in similar thread about who people can ignorantly swallow what they are fed through the media. This is a great example of people who do not like this priest labeling him “alt-right” and believing a twisted version of what he said. His answer was perfectly orthodox when read in context, though there are a lot of disclaimers.


Well, I think that’s an odd way of looking at the removal of altar rails. More logically, one might ask, “why did we install them previously if they were not really required anyway”?


Oh ho ho. There were a lot of things gotten rid of! Have you not read the accounts of statues thrown into river, etc? I myself know of a parish where their beautiful stations of the Cross were chopped up and buried in pieces in the parish cemetery!


So…that would be on those who did that act I think…and nobody else. “Oh ho ho”.


To be fair, beautiful stain glass windows are not required. Neither are the statues. But they do create a sense of wonder and awe.

Likewise, people knelt for communion back in the day. You could kneel on the ground but you could also kneel on an altar rail. It is more practical. And it could lift your mind towards God if it was ornamented.


Look at the extraordinary and ornate churches in Europe. Soaring, inspiring, uplifting…and expensive! We chose certain approaches in certain time periods. It is well and good to like and prefer certain designs and features. But few features are compulsory!


Do you really believe that ?

Where are these young Converts getting these notions you speak of ? RCIA ?

The way you describe things here, the first 1950 years of the Church’s roughly 2000 years of History are some sort of detriment to piety.

Perhaps they just want to be orthodox and are simply using the modern-day term to distinguish between heterodox and orthodox.

To be orthodox is simply to be
traditional. And traditional may be a better term rather then orthodox. A lot of people equate orthodox with Greek Orthodox or Russian Orthodox.


I have no clue on vatican 1 or 2 and really do not care, the reading of the material is beyond convoluted, with everyone trying to speak in some kind of pompous religious tone as if every word is supposed to be enlightening an some deep spiritual meaning. When in reality it is probably nothing more than a power struggle. everyone wants to be top dog, so someone says hey i dont like this lets change it. and then the arguement begins. more over from what i gather the Church hasn’t even fully adopted all of what ever the vatican 2 changes are, so exactly why should I care what it is even about if the leaders of the church cant even impliment everything from the change. ( answer is, i dont have to because when greedy pompous leaders cant even do the right thing and try to pretend they can force changes on other, it becomes unimportant and voided)

What is even sader is one can not negatively criticize the pope on this forum, but other bishops are allowed to dissent and disagree with the pope and claim he is a heritic or on the verge of it or some other nonsense.

So there are constantly one after the other morally poor leaders in the higher tiers of the church who are more interested in grand standing and showing off their feathers and playing politics on lots of levels, than actually letting the pope that they elected, lead and let him bare the responsiblities of his decisions and in turn follow suit. There is too much corruption and greed in the church to trust any of them, and trust is something earned not given.

so to really ask if anyone rejects Vatican II is a bit of a wobbly unimportant question, especially when one has to realize the papacy is masked in secrecy as to how the electing of one is done, and then for the layity becomes a popularity game of is someone from their country chosen, to which everyone wants their pope to become a saint afterwards .

Not to mention the corrupted process of someone being chosen to become a saint.

in the end it is just a joke and there are better things to worry about. nothing more than the same games being played in US Politics, it is absolutely no better.


I suppose another Ecumenical Council was necessary to address the subject of liturgy & the organization of lunar / suborbital / martian dioceses and their respective populations, along with the need to address animal DNA in humans, ethical applications in neural interfaces, widespread hypersensitivity to pathogens and how to address it in public worship, along with the crisis in socialization never being learned and pandemic anxiety problems.

Plus there was that incident in 2168 when the Madagascan virtual ice hockey team was attacked by trans-transhumanist Tibetan eco-terrorists in suspended animation. Awkwaaaaard.

Still, sometimes I miss the good old days of going to Mass without my biosuit. People were so rugged & adventurous shaking hands like that. Kids these days.

Cheers mate.


My point is that he did a lot of damage with his original answer—to people who have been raised to hold the deepest respect for the pope, his answer was shocking.


What he said…


Whole lotta healin’ needa be goin’ on.

I’d like to see people present their own actual wounds, without bringing forward others’ they’ve “heard about” often second or third hand over what is it, 60 years?


Of course, Vatican II is not responsible for the rise of post-modern philosophy, and the general decline of the culture that results from relativism and “constructed truth”.

But the liturgical reforms were developed by a group of clergy who disliked the Tridentine Mass, and listened to those vocal criticisms of it, most of which were inspired by a post-modernist culture developing at the time. My mother stoped going to mass when the reforms kicked in because, as she said, “They don’t take it seriously anymore.” That was in the 1970s. She was right. I no longer attend Mass. Its banality is suffocating.

I don’t reject Vatican II. I reject the putrid consequences of those who reformed the church to fit comfortably in the disturbed culture that we live in today.

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