uther, I am totally guilty of not being knowledgeable in this area. It was a very stupid question. I was confused about the movie until strummer (my dh) came in and explained things, duh. Sorry for the confusion and thank you for trying to answer my question
Perhaps it’s time for me to learn a bit more about Vac-II. I have avoided in the past because it sounds like it’s endless documents that are fairly heady, am I right?
Well, I apologize if I sounded over-critical. For someone who is not into studying and reading the way I am, they can be heavy going, boring even, I suppose.
The two longest ones and perhaps the most over mis-used are the two I mentioned, Gaudium et Spes(Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World) and Lumen Gentium(Dogmatic Constitution on the Church) as well as Sacrosanctum Concilium(Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy.)
Some of what was written on certain subjects was a bit vague and it fell to Paul VI and John Paul II to define and explain the Council.
In my opinion, which I derive from my own reading of many theologians, and of course John Paul II and Benedict XVI, the Council has yet to be truly implemented. Part of the reason for that is that many priests for a start, even after forty years, have not taken the time to read the documents. It cannot be expected that all of the lay people are going to read them. Of course not. We all have our own particular talents and abilities and for many, studying Church documents is not one of them. That is as it should be. God has ordained that not every member of the Body of Christ is the same with the same charisms. Praise God for that.
But you would think that the clergy, who had to pass through seminary, a place of study, and teachers, who likewise study their way into their vocation, would have the time in forty years to read sixteen documents of an Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church.
The reason that so much of the agenda of those who wanted to undermine orthodoxy in the Church was actually put into practice in various places was that the people in charge, who could have put the brakes on early in any given diocese or parish, either had the same agenda or didn’t know that what was promoted was not taught by the Council at all. A lot of error and novelty has been blamed on the Second Vatican Council when it was simply opportunists taking advantage of trusting people who didn’t know, and didn’t realize that they could know for themselves.
That is one of the great things about CA and these forums. Information is getting to the average Catholic, and I think some of them are getting a little upset that what they took for Vatican II changes, in the liturgy especially, were nothing of the sort. They were someone’s private agenda all along.
So I’m not blaming you
anamchara. Your priest should be aware of these distinctions. To be honest, it is not useful to blame anyone really, other than to alert Catholics to check out what’s happening for themselves and this is a good place to do that, thanks to Karl and Jimmy Akin, Jerry Usher, et. al.
Certainly, there is a legitimate ongoing debate about the extent of the use of the vernacular as opposed to the Latin, and I think that our current Pope has a lot of sympathy for the traditional approach to the mass. I hope he will bring us all back in that direction, with a Latin ad orientum mass and altar rails once more. I truly do. It is not out of the realm of possibility.
I know it was poor quailty, I just though many in TC could relate to the struggled many faced losing what they held so dear. I know for me it opened my eyes a bit to our important the Latin Mass was for many. I think it must have been very devastating for many of the faithful and this is something I hadn’t given much thought to.
I remember thinking where in the heck did they that get that?? Was there some kind of misunderstanding at the time of Vac-II? I knew this was ridiculous. That was why I had originally asked the question.
I shall do that now!