Anyone here reject Vatican II?


You accurately describe some of the processes that happened. There were many times I would have preferred “banality” to some of the liturgical abuses I encountered. But for me, the Mass (new or old, reverent or otherwise) never stopped being a participation in the liturgy of Heaven. That liturgy never stopped being good.

Keep an open mind about whatever Masses are available in your area.


I have never seen anyone use the term “traditional” that way. For example, I would not normally see charismatic Catholics contemporary hymns, or liberal theologians labeled traditional, even if they are orthodox.


Unfortunately, “that liturgy” is not what I experience at Mass. Perhaps I am setting up my own - impossible to obtain - standard; perhaps I am paying too much attention to trivial matters. It certainly has more to do with me than it does with the liturgy (at least as an ideal).


Well, I totally see where you’re coming from there.

Fair enough. All Catholics recite the same Creed on Sunday.

Labels don’t really do any good.


You get to recite a Creed at Mass on Sunday–be thankful.

Some of us do not have that ‘option’ and have not had it for years.

But hey you know, ‘illicit’ is not the same as invalid, right?

Pile illicit act on illicit act, it still may not add up to invalid, but it’s like Chinese water torture, starts out small, barely noticeable, ends up increasing, increasing, and ultimately unbearable (without the grace of God).


You don’t get to say any creed?


This is so cool.


For what it is worth, you are also right about how the word should be used, even though it is not. All I mentioned above is also grounded in tradition. As you say, all say the same Creed.


No. No Nicene, no Apostles, no renewal of baptismal promises, directly from the homily to the Prayers of the Faithful, every Sunday for the last 7 years, including Easter and Christmas. . .except the weekend in the summer when Father takes a vacation and we get a substitute priest who DOES say it, and must be surprised at how very few in the pews ‘speak’. But then again the people here have very little that they are allowed to say anyway since we don’t have a penitential rite, a Gloria, a responsorial psalm, etc.


I’m a huge non-fan of the “contact your bishop” response, but this sure looks like an exception to me.


The Mass is still the Mass. We are supposed to attend it


Healing? Yes, let’s have a Truth and Reconciliation movement for people who survived the Spirit of Vatican II. :rofl:


There was nothing unorthodox in the documents of Vatican II. The Church needed renewal. It even needed liturgical renewal.

That probably ought to have occurred in a more orderly, more thoughtful fashion.

Instead, a great number of liturgists, some self proclaimed, some with their own agendas, were unleashed on unsuspecting parishes, eager to try first one innovation, then another, then another. It was pretty wild. I knew that the Church would endure, that things would eventually settle down. And they did, in the dioceses I have been in. But the transition period was a huge shock to many Catholics who simply wanted to go to Sunday Mass without being bombarded with tryouts of new things.

So I’m glad we had the Council, but I’m sorry for those Catholics whose sensibilities were unfairly subjected to a barrage of transitional changes. Had we gone directly from the former Tridentine Mass to the OF Mass that we now celebrate in my own parish, there would have been no outcry. It just didn’t play out that way.


Wow - - I can’t imagine this. I’m afraid to ask - - how does the pastor fill all the time this would normally take?
Has anyone mentioned this to the bishop?


I read ya.


I think in the last 10 to 20 years there have existed some very very traditional religious orders that were implicitly rejecting Vatican II, but I’m not an expert on that.

I think that has been brought under control now by the last three popes.


I’m not an expert either, but I can tell you I know a convent like that. I ran into one of their sisters in Walmart and asked where she was from. I looked at their website, and one of the requirements is that candidates “belong to the traditional Catholic faith and not be associated with the Novus Ordo Church, schismic groups, or groups with doubtful sacraments.” I thought the website used to ask for a letter from the parish priest to confirm this, but I don’t see that particular point now…


The term “Novus Ordno Church” is unfamiliar to me. The newer form of the mass does not make a new Church, nor is it at odds with “traditional faith”.

Excluding “schismic (sic) groups, or groups with doubtful sacraments” does not seem unreasonable.


I agree completely.


We’re to actively participate in the Mass, not just be silent observers,as we were before Vatican II.


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