A couple of thoughts on Vatican II

[TheDoctor]

OP - as you can see, even the first question has generated a multitude of facts and opinions and off-shoots. We have gone from Latin in the Mass to changing sacraments to traditions.

The council changed nothing in the Mass in relation to language. The council mandated no change. The council said that the vencular *could *(very important word here - could, not must) be used but the Roman Missal in use before V2 was the same missal in use after V2.

The changes in the Mass to the vernacular were approved by Rome. Remember that the Pope did not need a council to even suggest this. If V2 had never happened, Paul VI could have promulgated the exact same missal we use now.

The point I want to make with you is not that it is OK to abandon Latin. The point is that it was not the council that changed the Mass, it was the Pope. It will not be a council that puts more Latin back into the Mass - it will come back in the same way.

Now sit back, becasue I am kinda’ sure some of my brothers and sisters will have other opinions. And off we go…

 

[IntegraCatholic]

The desirable “traditions” tend to be what we experienced in our youth and whixch we imagined to have been unchanged for the past two thousand years.

They rites that were changed had been in existence for 2000 years? Not likely my friend. The benefit of the Sacrament is still there. BTW…the Tridentine Mass has gone through changes.

It is not correct to attribute the efficacy of the Sacrament through the rite as long as it follows the teaching of the church.

The length of time something has existed has no relevance to the inherit merit of the rite. This idea (antiquarianism) is condemned by Pius XII in Mediator Dei (among other places). The antiquarian principles were the justification for the new rite, in fact (though, none of the new rites of the sacraments reflect antiquity). The rite has very much to do with its efficacy, for one only receives as much grace as he is disposed to receive. One may very much discuss the appropriateness of a given rite in disposing someone to receive grace.

Is there somewhere you can compare the sacraments. I would be especially interested in the sacrament of reconciliation. How it maybe has changed, if it has.

This is the traditional form:

[Customary blessing when the penitent requests it before confessing his sins: Dominus sit in corde tuo et in labiis tuis: ut digne et competenter confiteatis peccata tua: in nomine Patris, et Filii, + et Spiritus Sancti. Amen. The rest follows after the penitent has confessed his sins.]

Penitent: Confiteor Deo omnipotenti, beatæ Mariæ semper Virgini, beato Michaeli Archangelo, beato Joanni Baptistæ, sanctis Apostolis Petro et Paulo, omnibus Sanctis, et tibi, pater: quia peccavi nimis cogitatione, verbo et opere: mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Ideo precor beatam Mariam semper Virginem, beatum Michaelem Archangelum, beatum Ioannem Baptistam, sanctos Apostolos Petrum et Paulum, omnes Sanctos, et te, pater, orare pro me ad Dominum Deum nostrum.

Priest: Misereatur tui omnipotens Deus et dimissis peccatis tui, perducat te ad vitam aeternam. Amen.

Indulgentiam, absolutionem, et remissionem peccatorum tuorum, tribuat tibi omnipotens et misericors Dominus. Amen.

Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat; et ego auctoritate ipsius te absolvo ab omni vinculo excommunicationis (suspensionis [if the penitent be a cleric]) et interdicti in quantum possum et tu indiges. Deinde, ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris, + et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

Passio Domini nostri Jesu Christi, merita Beatæ Mariæ Virginis et omnium sanctorum, quidquid boni feceris vel mali sustinueris sint tibi in remissionem peccatorum, augmentum gratiæ et præmium vitæ æternæ.

English translation:

Priest: May the Lord be in your heart and on your lips that you may worthily and suitably confess your sins. In the Name of the Father + and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Penitent: I confess to Almighty God, to blessed Mary ever Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the Saints, and to you, Father: that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word and deed: through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault. Therefore I beseech blessed Mary ever Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the Saints, and you, Father, to pray for me to the Lord our God.

Priest: May Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you your sins, and bring you to everlasting life. Amen.

May the Almighty and Merciful Lord grant you pardon, absolution, and remission of your sins. Amen.

May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve you; and by His authority I absolve you from every bond of excommunication, [suspension,] and interdict, so far as my power allows and your needs require. Thereupon, I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, + and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

May the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of all the saints obtain for you that whatever good you do or whatever evil you bear might merit for you the remission of your sins, the increase of grace and the reward of everlasting life.

Compare to the new form:

God, the Father of mercies, through the death and the resurrection of his Son has reconciled the world to himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, + and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Magnus467]

The length of time something has existed has no relevance to the inherit merit of the rite. This idea (antiquarianism) is condemned by Pius XII in Mediator Dei (among other places). The antiquarian principles were the justification for the new rite, in fact (though, none of the new rites of the sacraments reflect antiquity). The rite has very much to do with its efficacy, for one only receives as much grace as he is disposed to receive. One may very much discuss the appropriateness of a given rite in disposing someone to receive grace.

This is the traditional form:

[Customary blessing when the penitent requests it before confessing his sins: Dominus sit in corde tuo et in labiis tuis: ut digne et competenter confiteatis peccata tua: in nomine Patris, et Filii, + et Spiritus Sancti. Amen. The rest follows after the penitent has confessed his sins.]

Penitent: Confiteor Deo omnipotenti, beatæ Mariæ semper Virgini, beato Michaeli Archangelo, beato Joanni Baptistæ, sanctis Apostolis Petro et Paulo, omnibus Sanctis, et tibi, pater: quia peccavi nimis cogitatione, verbo et opere: mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Ideo precor beatam Mariam semper Virginem, beatum Michaelem Archangelum, beatum Ioannem Baptistam, sanctos Apostolos Petrum et Paulum, omnes Sanctos, et te, pater, orare pro me ad Dominum Deum nostrum.

Priest: Misereatur tui omnipotens Deus et dimissis peccatis tui, perducat te ad vitam aeternam. Amen.

Indulgentiam, absolutionem, et remissionem peccatorum tuorum, tribuat tibi omnipotens et misericors Dominus. Amen.

Dominus noster Jesus Christus te absolvat; et ego auctoritate ipsius te absolvo ab omni vinculo excommunicationis (suspensionis [if the penitent be a cleric]) et interdicti in quantum possum et tu indiges. Deinde, ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris, + et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen.

Passio Domini nostri Jesu Christi, merita Beatæ Mariæ Virginis et omnium sanctorum, quidquid boni feceris vel mali sustinueris sint tibi in remissionem peccatorum, augmentum gratiæ et præmium vitæ æternæ.

English translation:

Priest: May the Lord be in your heart and on your lips that you may worthily and suitably confess your sins. In the Name of the Father + and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Penitent: I confess to Almighty God, to blessed Mary ever Virgin, to blessed Michael the Archangel, to blessed John the Baptist, to the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, to all the Saints, and to you, Father: that I have sinned exceedingly in thought, word and deed: through my fault, through my fault, through my most grievous fault. Therefore I beseech blessed Mary ever Virgin, blessed Michael the Archangel, blessed John the Baptist, the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, all the Saints, and you, Father, to pray for me to the Lord our God.

Priest: May Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you your sins, and bring you to everlasting life. Amen.

May the Almighty and Merciful Lord grant you pardon, absolution, and remission of your sins. Amen.

May our Lord Jesus Christ absolve you; and by His authority I absolve you from every bond of excommunication, [suspension,] and interdict, so far as my power allows and your needs require. Thereupon, I absolve you of your sins in the name of the Father, + and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

May the Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the merits of the Blessed Virgin Mary and of all the saints obtain for you that whatever good you do or whatever evil you bear might merit for you the remission of your sins, the increase of grace and the reward of everlasting life.

Compare to the new form:

God, the Father of mercies, through the death and the resurrection of his Son has reconciled the world to himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, + and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

What you posted is completely inaccurate. I think you know it too. You completely left out most of the new form and only posted the absolution, very dishonest. The parts just have different words. You still ask for the blessing, etc. Make your confession, say an act of contrition, and then receive absolution etc. You seem to be more attached to the traditions and words themselves than the actual sacraments.

 

[IntegraCatholic]

What you posted is completely inaccurate. I think you know it too.

No, I really don’t. I can’t recall how the NO confession goes exactly.

You completely left out most of the new form and only posted the absolution, very dishonest. The parts just have different words. You still ask for the blessing, etc.

That isn’t part of the rite itself (what is in the ritual) from what I understand.

Make your confession,

Of course. That is assumed.

say an act of contrition,

Is this in the rubrics for the rite itself? It isn’t in the traditional ritual, though an act of contrition is customary.

You seem to be more attached to the traditions and words themselves than the actual sacraments.

And someone who goes to the traditional Mass is attached to the rite itself instead of the Sacrament, I guess.

 

[dnu]

I just entered the Church this past Easter, but I am of the opinion that these Traditionalist have something going for them.

I may take heat for this, but I have been looking into SSPX a lot lately. The way they describe Catholicism is the way I pictured it in my head.

Out of all of the apologetics, the entire RCIA program, the discussions on here, watching EWTN, etc. etc. I NEVER seen anyone suggest that a Catholic should consider not having a television because it leads to sloth. I began to think about that statement and it clicked…television DOES create sloth…why I had never heard that from any of the other sources before still boggles my mind.

sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/catholic_faqs__traditional.htm#tv_in_home

Read through the Catholic FAQ at the SSPX website. Why does the Catholic Church today not speak in such a “hardline Catholic” way anymore?

 

[MarkThompson]

I just entered the Church this past Easter, but I am of the opinion that these Traditionalist have something going for them.

I may take heat for this, but I have been looking into SSPX a lot lately. The way they describe Catholicism is the way I pictured it in my head.

Out of all of the apologetics, the entire RCIA program, the discussions on here, watching EWTN, etc. etc. I NEVER seen anyone suggest that a Catholic should consider not having a television because it leads to sloth. I began to think about that statement and it clicked…television DOES create sloth…why I had never heard that from any of the other sources before still boggles my mind.

sspx.org/Catholic_FAQs/catholic_faqs__traditional.htm#tv_in_home

Read through the Catholic FAQ at the SSPX website. Why does the Catholic Church today not speak in such a “hardline Catholic” way anymore?

“Hardline Catholic” ≠ Luddite. Never has.

 

[dnu]

“Hardline Catholic” ≠ Luddite. Never has.

So would you argue that television doesn’t produce sloth? What points of the source I provided do you disagree with?

 

[IntegraCatholic]

Dnu,

If you are seeking an authentically traditional parish and one that has certainly valid Sacraments (of penance and matrimony) and which is entirely regularized jurisdictionally in the Church, I recommend instead the FSSP rather than the SSPX. I see that you are in Oklahoma. Both the FSSP priests in Tulsa, interestingly enough, have come over to the FSSP from the SSPX because of the SSPX’s irregular canonical status within the Church. One came over as a priest, the other while he was still a seminarian (more accurately, he was in the seminary with them, left to return to the world, and eventually went back to seminary with the FSSP). Both priests, especially Fr. Lillard (whom I have known on an intimate level for several years), are models of the true priestly spirit. I am sure they both would tell you that television is a bad idea, a waste of your time, and certainly something that leads to vice rather than virtue, even if not illicit per se (that is, when it is used properly and in moderation).

 

[dnu]

Dnu,

If you are seeking an authentically traditional parish and one that has certainly valid Sacraments (of penance and matrimony) and which is entirely regularized jurisdictionally in the Church, I recommend instead the FSSP rather than the SSPX. I see that you are in Oklahoma. Both the FSSP priests in Tulsa, interestingly enough, have come over to the FSSP from the SSPX because of the SSPX’s irregular canonical status within the Church. One came over as a priest, the other while he was still a seminarian (more accurately, he was in the seminary with them, left to return to the world, and eventually went back to seminary with the FSSP). Both priests, especially Fr. Lillard (whom I have known on an intimate level for several years), are models of the true priestly spirit. I am sure they both would tell you that television is a bad idea, a waste of your time, and certainly something that leads to vice rather than virtue, even if not illicit per se (that is, when it is used properly and in moderation).

Integra,

Thank you for the response. I have also read about FSSP. I live about an hour from both the Parish in Oklahoma City and the Parish in Tulsa, but I would like to attend their services someday.

 

[MarkThompson]

So would you argue that television doesn’t produce sloth? What points of the source I provided do you disagree with?

TVs produce sloth like guns produce murder, like McDonald’s produces gluttony, or like good looks produce lust. Or, put differently, TVs produce sloth like board games produce sloth, like magazines produce sloth, or like writing poetry produces sloth.

You can sense the utter idiocy of the document you linked to from the first paragraph:
I do not believe that the question is asked in the correct way, which would be: Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to have a television in the home? I think that simply by rephrasing the question, the answer becomes much more obvious. Nevertheless, let us answer the question as posed.
Okay, let’s play that game:
Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to have a dog?
Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to play chess?
Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to eat meatloaf on Wednesdays?
The question is simply indiscernible and nonsensical.

 

[Melchior_1]

A television can create sloth just as food can create gluttony.

But that’s besides the point. Has the arguments about “which form is better” really extended to **all **Sacraments now?

People need to learn valid is valid and that some things boil down to preference.

 

[dnu]

TVs produce sloth like guns produce murder, like McDonald’s produces gluttony, or like good looks produce lust. Or, put differently, TVs produce sloth like board games produce sloth, like magazines produce sloth, or like writing poetry produces sloth.

You can sense the utter idiocy of the document you linked to from the first paragraph:
I do not believe that the question is asked in the correct way, which would be: Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to have a television in the home? I think that simply by rephrasing the question, the answer becomes much more obvious. Nevertheless, let us answer the question as posed.
Okay, let’s play that game:
Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to have a dog?
Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to play chess?
Is it the will of God for a traditional Catholic family to eat meatloaf on Wednesdays?
The question is simply indiscernible and nonsensical.

I think the ultimate point of the article is rather or not one is being a Christian (i.e. feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, reciting a Rosary, etc. etc. etc.) at every opportune moment or is one sitting on his or her duff not being a Christian. The Traditional movement seems more about being a Christian and not just “being” a Christian. I see being a Christian in SSPX writings and teachings. I see “being” Christian in the Parish I attend.

 

[dnu]

A television can create sloth just as food can create gluttony.

But that’s besides the point. Has the arguments about “which form is better” really extended to **all **Sacraments now?

People need to learn valid is valid and that some things boil down to preference.

Perhaps, but one has to eat. One doesn’t have to spend an hour watching American Idol, no? Could the hour of television not be better used readin the scripture, reciting a Rosary, volutneering at a food kitchen, etc. etc.?

I believe this is why they say television produces sloth. Rather than being in the world serving Christ at EVERY moment of the day, one is sitting at home serving his or her own personal wants.

(yes, I recognize the utter hypocrisy of me sitting on the internet for the last half hour discussing this )

 

[Melchior_1]

Perhaps, but one has to eat. One doesn’t have to spend an hour watching American Idol, no? Could the hour of television not be better used readin the scripture, reciting a Rosary, volutneering at a food kitchen, etc. etc.?

I believe this is why they say television produces sloth. Rather than being in the world serving Christ one is sitting at home serving his or her own personal wants.

So I suppose works of fiction are out, correct? Books and the like.

Also, women can produce lust and anger.

Oh, and some people use overeating as a relaxing mechanism or coping mechanism. The food, in this case, is an enabler just like you’re saying a TV is.

The “traditionalist” movement you described to Mark reminds me of something. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franciscan to be specific.

 

[dnu]

So I suppose works of fiction are out, correct? Books and the like.

Also, women can produce lust and anger.

Oh, and some people use overeating as a relaxing mechanism or coping mechanism. The food, in this case, is an enabler just like you’re saying a TV is.

The “traditionalist” movement you described to Mark reminds me of something. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franciscan to be specific.

Hi Melchior,

I would suggest that if one is spending an excessive amount of time reading works of fiction and not serving the world as an ambassador of Christ, then yes, they could be “out” as well.

A mans tendency to lust after an attractive woman is why the Tradiationalist movement (and I thought all Catholics) insist on women (and men) dressing modestly at all times (even the beach).

p.s. I LOVE the Franciscans. This is my Rosary: catholiccompany.com/catholic-gifts/2010760/Franciscan-Corded-Rosary/?aid=178

I was a “happy agnostic” when I got married many years before joining the Church. I’ve often wondered if I might have been called to the Franciscan Orders if I had not gotten myself married before becoming Catholic.

 

[IntegraCatholic]

Or, put differently, TVs produce sloth like board games produce sloth, like magazines produce sloth, or like writing poetry produces sloth.

Would you agree, Mr. Thompson, that all of these other examples (even magazines, though they approach TV the most) require much more abstract thought and engagement than TV? It’s not called the “idiot box” for nothing.

 

[MarkThompson]

So I suppose works of fiction are out, correct? Books and the like.

Also, women can produce lust and anger.

Oh, and some people use overeating as a relaxing mechanism or coping mechanism. The food, in this case, is an enabler just like you’re saying a TV is.

Yeah, one can just as easily argue against reading Chaucer, practicing the violin, or painting a landscape. Heathen! Why weren’t you reading Aquinas, practicing Gregorian chant, or painting an icon? The fact is, very few people live their lives that way. Some people may feel they are called to such, but for the vast majority it profits us to remember that God created the world and its delights for us. Besides which, you could always be doing something better than you are. Reading Chaucer? You should be reading Aquinas. Reading Aquinas? You should be praying the Liturgy of the Hours. Praying the Liturgy of the Hours? You should be comforting the afflicted. Comforting the afflicted? I’m sure there’s a Mass somewhere in your city; you should be with the Real Presence.

 

[Melchior_1]

Hi Melchior,

I would suggest that if one is spending an excessive amount of time readin works of fiction and not serving the world as an ambassador of Christ, then yes, they could be “out” as well.

Mens tendency to lust after an attractive woman is why the Tradiationalist movement (and I thought all Catholics) insist on women (and men) dressing modestly.

p.s. I LOVE the Franciscans. This is my Rosary: catholiccompany.com/catholic-gifts/2010760/Franciscan-Corded-Rosary/?aid=178

I was a “happy agnostic” when I got married many years before joining the Church. I’ve often wondered if I might have been called to the Franciscan Orders if I had not gotten myself married before becoming Catholic.

And there it is;* “excessive amount of time”*. Anything can be this way. Books, computers, TV’s, food, radio, musical instruments, airsoft guns, video games.

What myself (and Mark) are trying to say is pretty much everything can lead to sin, but that doesn’t make pretty much everything inherently sinful. Could that hour of watching TV be better spent doing something else? Maybe. But that hour of relaxing with your spouse can also help keep you sane after a hard day of work.

I find modesty more attractive than immodesty in several cases. In the case of my wife, she looks good in anything (she could make a sackcloth and ashes look attractive). But you’re right; the Church as a whole is big on modesty. We had one Priest during Mass make no less than three appeals to modesty (two during the homily, one at the end of Mass). But the reason I brought it up was because it still can lead people to sin.

You should look into the Secular Franciscans (aka the Third Order of Francis). Once I’m finished my current parish ministries (God only knows when that will happen) I intend on joining them. He founded it for people like you and me who want to follow his way of living but are married. Women and kids can join as well.

 

[Melchior_1]

Would you agree, Mr. Thompson, that all of these other examples (even magazines, though they approach TV the most) require much more abstract thought and engagement than TV? It’s not called the “idiot box” for nothing.

Then you must not object to Video Games, correct? They are very involved and require thinking and reflexes.

(But you need a TV to use them though…)

 

[MarkThompson]

Would you agree, Mr. Thompson, that all of these other examples (even magazines, though they approach TV the most) require much more abstract thought and engagement than TV? It’s not called the “idiot box” for nothing.

It all depends on the game, magazine, and TV program, but in the end it’s an irrelevant side issue. The complaint of the SSPX document that dnu posted wasn’t the TV requires insufficient abstract thought, it was that it somehow “paralyzes his ability to think and to elevate his soul to spiritual things, and prevents him from rejoicing in the things of God, in divine truth, and in heavenly aspirations.” That is, it is not “truly God-centered.” It’s tough to know what to say about that, except that it’s complete and pompous tripe and humbug.