List all the things Vatican II did NOT call for

  • Thread starter Thread starter VociMike
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

VociMike

Guest
Somebody recently made a claim that Vatican II called for thing X, which the Council did not call for. That got me thinking we should form a list of all the things that Vatican II did not call for, but which many people might mistakenly assume the Council did call for. The issue is not whether any of these things are right or wrong, but just a list of things since Vatican II that Vatican II did not call for. Please, let’s keep this an objective list, not an argument. I’ll start with a few:
  • Mass entirely in the vernacular
  • A new Missal
  • Priest saying Mass facing the people
  • Removal of altar rails
  • Communion in hand
  • Communion standing
  • Abandonment of Latin and Gregorian chant
I can think of more, but I’ll let others add them.
 
  • That Protestants dont need to convert to the Church
  • There is no Longer “No salvation outside the Catholic Church”
  • False eccuminism and “dialouge” with false religions
 
  1. We lovingly address to all the words of St. Augustine: "Let us love the Lord our God; let us love His Church; the Lord as our Father, the Church as our Mother. Let no one say, I go in deed to idols, I consult fortune-tellers and soothsayers; but I leave not the Church of God: I am a Catholic. Clinging to thy Mother, thou offendest thy Father.
What doth it profit thee not to offend the Father, who avenges an offense against the Mother? What doth it profit to confess the Lord, to honour God, to preach Him, to acknowledge His Son, and to confess that He sits on the right hand of the Father, if you blaspheme His Church? . . . If you had a beneficent friend, whom you honoured daily - and even once calumniated his spouse, would you ever enter his house? Hold fast, therefore, O dearly beloved, hold fast altogether God as your Father, and the Church as your Mother"

papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13satis.htm

A word to the wise, before this becomes another N.O. and V-II Council bashing thread. 😉 There are certainly hundreds of threads that already depict the dissatisfaction of some members, but keeping these factions in the limelight does not become a true Catholic.
 
They are not bashing Vatican II they are pointing out that Vatican II did not change these things in the Church.

I have said before and I will say it again, I am still waiting for Vatican II to be implemented.

In Christ
Scylla
 
Joysong said:
  1. We lovingly address to all the words of St. Augustine: "Let us love the Lord our God; let us love His Church; the Lord as our Father, the Church as our Mother. Let no one say, I go in deed to idols, I consult fortune-tellers and soothsayers; but I leave not the Church of God: I am a Catholic. Clinging to thy Mother, thou offendest thy Father.
What doth it profit thee not to offend the Father, who avenges an offense against the Mother? What doth it profit to confess the Lord, to honour God, to preach Him, to acknowledge His Son, and to confess that He sits on the right hand of the Father, if you blaspheme His Church? . . . If you had a beneficent friend, whom you honoured daily - and even once calumniated his spouse, would you ever enter his house? Hold fast, therefore, O dearly beloved, hold fast altogether God as your Father, and the Church as your Mother"

papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13satis.htm

A word to the wise, before this becomes another N.O. and V-II Council bashing thread. 😉 There are certainly hundreds of threads that already depict the dissatisfaction of some members, but keeping these factions in the limelight does not become a true Catholic.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with dissatisfaction, it has to do with edification. I specifically asked that this not become an argument but rather an objective clarification. But as I also mentioned in my original post, people are honestly misinformed about what Vatican II did and did not specifically call for. Nobody should be afraid of an objective enumeration of those things which have mistakenly been attributed to the expressed desires of the Council Fathers.
 
Joysong said:
  1. We lovingly address to all the words of St. Augustine: "Let us love the Lord our God; let us love His Church; the Lord as our Father, the Church as our Mother. Let no one say, I go in deed to idols, I consult fortune-tellers and soothsayers; but I leave not the Church of God: I am a Catholic. Clinging to thy Mother, thou offendest thy Father.
What doth it profit thee not to offend the Father, who avenges an offense against the Mother? What doth it profit to confess the Lord, to honour God, to preach Him, to acknowledge His Son, and to confess that He sits on the right hand of the Father, if you blaspheme His Church? . . . If you had a beneficent friend, whom you honoured daily - and even once calumniated his spouse, would you ever enter his house? Hold fast, therefore, O dearly beloved, hold fast altogether God as your Father, and the Church as your Mother"

papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13satis.htm

A word to the wise, before this becomes another N.O. and V-II Council bashing thread. 😉 There are certainly hundreds of threads that already depict the dissatisfaction of some members, but keeping these factions in the limelight does not become a true Catholic.
Click to expand...
Joysong, you always say what i am thinking, but much more articulately and intelligently!👍
 
  • Viewing Mass as a “Communal Meal” over a Holy Sacrifice
  • “Renovation” of many older churches, and the horrific designs of newer ones.
  • Lay ministers
  • Hippy music
 
It did not call for the “Spirit of Vat II” and those prosper and protect it.
 
  • That the Pope is always in College with his Bishops, rather then just at an Ecumenical Council.
 
  • No penance on Fridays
  • Removing the pain of sin from failing to attend Sunday Mass without good cause.
  • Removing the necessity of going to Confession before receiving Holy Communion if you have grave sin on your conscience
 
mercygate said:
  • No penance on Fridays
  • Removing the pain of sin from failing to attend Sunday Mass without good cause.
  • Removing the necessity of going to Confession before receiving Holy Communion if you have grave sin on your conscience
Click to expand...
Funny, I don’t recall such a thing happening!
 
marybee said:
Funny, I don’t recall such a thing happening!
Click to expand...
I havent been taught any of those in my “Catholic” school. When I approached a religion teacher to ask why he explained that Vatican II put an end to those teachings (of course, I knew better, but still).
 
40.png
VociMike:
But as I also mentioned in my original post, people are honestly misinformed about what Vatican II did and did not specifically call for. Nobody should be afraid of an objective enumeration of those things which have mistakenly been attributed to the expressed desires of the Council Fathers.
Click to expand...
The only problem, Mike, is that the “things” enumerated are depicted in such a light as to appear that they are wrong, yet many of the “things” did flow indirectly from the Council when a Commission was directed to implement certain changes not specifically spelled out in black and white in Council documents. The subsequent documents are also Church teachings and permissions, and are not invalid or illicit. And that’s where the bashing comes in.

I simply sent a “word to the wise,” not identifying anyone, but hoping to prevent the customary debasement of both the N.O. and the directives of the Council. Your allegiance to traditionism is well known, so it is not highly probable for anyone to assume you are defending Vatican II.

… as if over these last several years, nobody ever discussed this *ad nauseum *before?
 
Back to the original topic—Things Vat II did NOT called for.
 
Removing the Tabernacle from the Sanctuary
Altar Girls
abolition of the minor orders
hand holding during the Pater Noster
Replacing Meatless fridays with an “encouraged” optional penance
Albs Albs and more albs
DIscontinuation of the Leonine prayers after Mass
An increase in the gay subculture at Many seminaries
Nuns taking off their habits
Priests wandering around without thier collars on
 
Vatican II did not:

Change doctrine, specifically the Doctrine of Purgatory. A colleague seriously told me that Vatican II did away with Purgatory, that we don’t believe in that anymore. When I explained to her that Vatican II changed some things, but not doctrine, specifically Purgatory, she was shocked.

Suppress meat-less Fridays and Confession in general.

Suppress the use of the organ at Mass.

Suppress the use of Latin in the liturgy.

Turn the priest around to face the people.

All the other changes to the environment: less statues, no communion rails, removal or moving the tabernacle, etc. etc.

That’s all I can think of off the top of my head, but I’m sure I’ll come up with more over the weekend.
 
Oh yeah, and Vatican II did not allow everyone and anyone to wander in and out of the sanctuary at will like it’s someone’s living room.

I’m so tired of seeing people casually wander around the sanctuary as if that space is no different than anywhere else in the world. I can still remember when the only folks allowed in the sanctuary were the priests and altar servers. We didn’t dare go past the communion rails.
 
40.png
VociMike:
This has nothing to do with dissatisfaction, it has to do with edification.
Click to expand...
So much for “edification” in all the “edifying” posts about the Church, the Bride of Christ.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top