A couple of thoughts on Vatican II

[IHeartAquinas]

Oh dear. I’ve never seen something degenerate this quickly. I think we can all agree that all worldly things in moderation can be good, but either extreme is well…extreme?

As for the comments regarding nostalgia versus mystery/validity, I have to say that whether or not my image of what the Mass should be and what it was before Vatican II are consistent, it should be made clear (and it’s my fault for not including this) that I find the EF Mass insufferably mechanical. I’ve attended it one time and through most of it I longed for the engaging OF. My beef is with the change in language. As I noted above, the psychological effect of a sacred language during worship has been recorded in most religious traditions that utilize a sacred language separate from the local vernacular (I cannot recall all the religions that I have seen mentioned in these studies, nor can I readily verify whether or not they covered more than just the big ones–ie, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism) and this effect generally is positive for those participating in the worship. I am also well aware that the Council did not forbid the use of Latin, nor did any Pope. What I am advocating is a form of the Mass similar to the OF that utilizes Latin or another culturally-acceptable sacred language. If that happens to be Greek, Hebrew, Sanskrit, Navajo, or any other language that carries a deep spiritual history, so be it. Hell, use Klingon if you have to. The point is that the sacred language carries a lot of weight, weight that cannot be found in the vernacular. I can pray the rosary in English as much as I want, but I will never attain the sense of peace and grace that I feel when I pray it in Latin. There is a sense that because I do not understand Latin in the way I understand English that my focus falls more on the meaning of the prayer and less on the exact wording. So instead of hearing the words which eventually lose meaning, I instead have a mantra of sorts that I know is the prayer in another language, which allows me to focus all of my energy on the intention of the prayer or simply the meaning of the prayer itself.

As far as TV’s in the home, they call it “programming” for a reason.

 

[damooster]

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.

That article also acknowledges that the television itself is not intrinsically evil like you’re trying to suggest.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting everything to be God-centered and wanting to remove things that can be occasions of sin for us. I agree with the article; habitually viewing of television is an occasion of sin for me. As the article states, not only are there commercials or shows with impurity everywhere, but it keeps me focused on what’s currently on to the point that I don’t want to do anything else.

I could understand your frustration with dnu if he/she had brought the article up to throw it in everyone’s face or suggest that everyone get rid of their tv’s, but dnu didn’t do that. Dnu simply invoked his/her own experiences into the discussion. I read the article some time ago and I now only watch television when I’m trying to learn Ecclesiastical Latin (have lessons on DVD) and for predetermined recreational time where I watch one religious movie a week (this week I’ll be watching a St. Francis dvd I just purchased).

You said, in another post:

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.

I’m not going to question how anyone wants to spend their free time, but I just want to stick up for those that do spend their free time in prayer and study. I know you didn’t directly come down on them, but the statement I highlighted makes it sound like people who do such things are somehow awkward. The truth is, I spend my evenings learning Latin, reading Holy Scripture and the Catechism, and reading books on Catholicism. On the weekends, I do some type of Works of Mercy and Eucharistic Adoration. The rest of the time, I’m praying, studying, or doing some other Church related event i.e. Knights of Columbus. I say this not to toot my own horn, but because I’m trying to avoid things that can be occasions of sin because I acknowledge my weaknesses.

 

[TheDoctor]

Oh dear. I’ve never seen something degenerate this quickly.

Don’t vist the TC forum a lot, do ya? V2 is one of those hot button issues especially in these forums.

My beef is with the change in language. As I noted above, the psychological effect of a sacred language during worship has been recorded in most religious traditions that utilize a sacred language separate from the local vernacular (I cannot recall all the religions that I have seen mentioned in these studies, nor can I readily verify whether or not they covered more than just the big ones–ie, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism) and this effect generally is positive for those participating in the worship. I am also well aware that the Council did not forbid the use of Latin, nor did any Pope. What I am advocating is a form of the Mass similar to the OF that utilizes Latin or another culturally-acceptable sacred language.

There are OF’s out there (not enough) that still keep a great deal of Latin and work the venacular in as needed. My personal hope is that the new English translations will cause folks to look back at the original Latin and perhaps start to incorporate more in the OF.

 

[maurin]

That article also acknowledges that the television itself is not intrinsically evil like you’re trying to suggest.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting everything to be God-centered and wanting to remove things that can be occasions of sin for us. I agree with the article; habitually viewing of television is an occasion of sin for me. As the article states, not only are there commercials or shows with impurity everywhere, but it keeps me focused on what’s currently on to the point that I don’t want to do anything else.

I could understand your frustration with dnu if he/she had brought the article up to throw it in everyone’s face or suggest that everyone get rid of their tv’s, but dnu didn’t do that. Dnu simply invoked his/her own experiences into the discussion. I read the article some time ago and I now only watch television when I’m trying to learn Ecclesiastical Latin (have lessons on DVD) and for predetermined recreational time where I watch one religious movie a week (this week I’ll be watching a St. Francis dvd I just purchased).

You said, in another post:

I’m not going to question how anyone wants to spend their free time, but I just want to stick up for those that do spend their free time in prayer and study. I know you didn’t directly come down on them, but the statement I highlighted makes it sound like people who do such things are somehow awkward. The truth is, I spend my evenings learning Latin, reading Holy Scripture and the Catechism, and reading books on Catholicism. On the weekends, I do some type of Works of Mercy and Eucharistic Adoration. The rest of the time, I’m praying, studying, or doing some other Church related event i.e. Knights of Columbus. I say this not to toot my own horn, but because I’m trying to avoid things that can be occasions of sin because I acknowledge my weaknesses.

Great reply, damooster. I remember reading on another (liberal) forum someone bashing the Society’s recommendation to lose the television in the home (it is not a requirement of the faithful, only for the third order) because for the most part it offers the faithful nothing tobut occassions and near occasions of sin. One of the moderators responded that if it were anyone other than the Society who recommended the loss of tv in a Christian home the recommendation would be treated with respect. The moderator, who was no friend to the Society, lamented that the devil has a way of bringing evil out of good, and it was not wise to bash the Society’s opinions just because they were the Society’s opinions.

Television is the modern world’s way of bringing the games of the Colisseum into the livingrooms of the faithful. I lost my cable hookup more than a year ago and spend that money on good Catholic books, and prayer, and the occasional internet hour on my hand held phone.

Sidebar over, please return to the regularly scheduled programs of wolves in Traditional clothing.

 

[Magnus467]

That’s pretty cool!

 

[IHeartAquinas]

That video was still absolutely, phenomenally beautiful. Thanks for sharing it.

 

[joedecarlo]

Before we can agree or disagree, it is important, especially when talking about such a hot button topic, to get our facts straight so we can all speak from a common starting point and learn from each other. You have said a lot, so let me take it one step at a time:
Respectfully, I don’t think so, but I may be wrong. Can you please show me where in the documents of V2 the council said that we were not to use Latin in our Mass anymore? As you are looking, keep in mind that V2 did not change the Mass, that was done by Paul VI (apologies if you already knew this - I just want to make sure we are on the same page).

Remember, there were 6 protestant ministers on the Liturgy council during Vat. II. You can understand why the Novus Ordo is similar to a protestant service.

 

[MarkThompson]

Remember, there were 6 protestant ministers on the Liturgy council during Vat. II. You can understand why the Novus Ordo is similar to a protestant service.

How many Protestants were present at Trent? You might want to check that one out before you continue to embarrass yourself.

 

[Ockham]

Remember, there were 6 protestant ministers on the Liturgy council during Vat. II. You can understand why the Novus Ordo is similar to a protestant service.

The point here is the Novus Ordo bears the hallmark of an ecumenical gesture by simplifying and diminishing the distinctively Catholic elements of the liturgy.

 

[maurin]

A simple side by side comparison of cranmer’s communionservice and Eucharistic Prayer 2 shows some pretty disheartening parallels.

Davies offers evidence (whether convincing or not) that the protestant observers were not merely observers in hiss book, “Pope John’s Council.” I’m reading Wiltgen again to see if there"s any corraboration (Rhine flows into Tiber).

 

[joedecarlo]

How many Protestants were present at Trent? You might want to check that one out before you continue to embarrass yourself.

i never knew there were protestants on the Council of Trent. What impact did they have on the Council of Trent? They surly didn’t have the impact that the protestant ministers had on Vat. II.

What is embarrassing is what Vat.II did to the Catholic Church. The mass is indistinguishable from the protestant service. And don’t tell me that the main difference is transubstantiation compared to consubstantiation because most Catholics don’t believe in the former.

 

[joedecarlo]

the point here is the novus ordo bears the hallmark of an ecumenical gesture by simplifying and diminishing the distinctively catholic elements of the liturgy.

bravo!!!

 

[TheDoctor]

Remember, there were 6 protestant ministers on the Liturgy council during Vat. II. You can understand why the Novus Ordo is similar to a protestant service.

That is simply not true. There were non Catholic observers at V2, but none of them had (name removed by moderator)ut to the V2 official documents and it was not V2 that changed the Mass, it was the Pope. If you have proof otherwise, start another thread and post it, however you may want to use the search function as this has been hashed and rehashed numerous times on the forums.

 

[joedecarlo]

That is simply not true. There were non Catholic observers at V2, but none of them had (name removed by moderator)ut to the V2 official documents and it was not V2 that changed the Mass, it was the Pope. If you have proof otherwise, start another thread and post it, however you may want to use the search function as this has been hashed and rehashed numerous times on the forums.

If they were observers, those observers had a strong influence on the mass. The Novus Ordo Missae sure looks and smells like a protestant service. Cardinal Bugnini, who helped changed the mass, was let go by Pope Paul II for being a Mason. As you know, Masons and Catholics don’t get along very well.

 

[Ockham]

Well, someone is going to point this out eventually so we might as well get it out of the way now.

• Bugnini never made Cardinal
• Pope Paul ***VI ***signed off on the NO
• he wasn’t ‘let go’ he was assigned to Iran (yes, the equivalent of an outpost job in Serbia)

Other than that I agree that the NO looks more like a Protestant service than the traditional Catholic liturgy. However, a high Anglican service is pretty reverent. It’s interesting how the Traditional Anglican Communion is the first major Protestant group to be in discussions about coming home. If the NO was an attempt to simply the liturgy for ecumenical purposes it has failed.

 

[TheDoctor]

Cardinal Bugnini, who helped changed the mass, was let go by Pope Paul II for being a Mason.

Sorry my friend, I will let most of the uneducated comments go, but this one is a direct attack on a Priest. You have to prove this one or apologize. Please take it to a new thread so as not to derail this one.

 

[Ockham]

Sorry my friend, I will let most of the uneducated comments go, but this one is a direct attack on a Priest. You have to prove this one or apologize. Please take it to a new thread so as not to derail this one.

I"ve never seen any definitive proof of Bugnini’s membership in the Masons (i.e. membership card, initiation photos, etc) but there is the rumour or suspicion that he was a member, the Doctor isn’t making this up.

 

[Melchior_1]

I"ve never seen any definitive proof of Bugnini’s membership in the Masons (i.e. membership card, initiation photos, etc) but there is the rumour or suspicion that he was a member, the Doctor isn’t making this up.

Yet people have condoned Mozart being an actual member of the Masons and support his music at Mass.

Go figure.

 

[Ockham]

Granted.

Could you please shed some light on Archbishop Bugnini’s biography?

In the Church’s history someone who does something as notable as a new liturgy gets sainthood, a cathedral naming, or something. What did Bugnini get for crafting the Novus Ordo?

 

[Ockham]

Yet people have condoned Mozart being an actual member of the Masons and support his music at Mass.

Go figure.

Mozart made positive contributions to the Church.