Loss for the Church

[zorrox]

In the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council things were changed in Holy Church.
What according to you, would you consider a great loss to the Church of the ways it was before?
(apart from the TLM)

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I don’t actually think that there was any permanent loss, because I do not believe that the actual documents of Vatican II were in any way heretical, or damaging, or ‘took things away’ that should not have been. (That heresies, damage, and wrongly taken things occurred was not the fault of the Council itself).

I do see that because of the actions of some people–clergy and lay–that at least one generation has suffered the loss of the Latin language and the treasury of Gregorian chant. . .but even there, Latin Masses exist and thanks to cheaper and more available music (one can now have vinyl, cassette, CD and beyond) the chants exist as well.

And I believe that those of us who do miss some of the “smells and bells” which were more prevalent prior to Vatican II are going to see them again. And we appreciate them more for having been deprived of them.

And those who appreciate ‘vernacular’ language still have it, and they appreciate the Mass more. That is a great gain for them.

We have the power of choice and we have far more access to information now than was available in 1970. And I have to say that a lot of people who might have been quietly passive and content should the Mass have stayed the way it was have found greater participation and greater and deeper overall understanding of their faith just because they had to work through things which disappointed them, because they worried that they had lost something.

But the core of the Mass is the Eucharist, the Body and Blood of Christ. And that core has not been lost–for many, they’ve come to a deeper and more loving understanding and appreciation of the Mass. . .some through ‘returning’ to the old, some with ‘embracing’ the new, and some taking attributes from both so far as they are able.

 

[zorrox]

I do not consider the documents of Vatican II to be in anyway heretical.
I just wonder what people think about the state of the Church in our time, have we lost something?

Could the longing for the perfect “time” be a longing for the perfect country: Heaven?

BTW Why are some people today so shy to show their love for the Immaculate and Glorious Virgin the Mother of God?

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

In the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council things were changed in Holy Church.
What according to you, would you consider a great loss to the Church of the ways it was before?
(apart from the TLM)

I’m afraid that I do believe there has been a significant loss (besides the TLM) after Vatican II. As well as a few extra things I personally don’t think should have been introduced.

Losses:

1. There seems to be a more relaxed attitude towards mortal sin, the necessity of being in communion with the Catholic Church, the liturgy, and the Eucharist.
2. The Catholic Church after Vatican II has been ‘protestanized’ in certain areas especially due to the new spirit of ecumenicalism.
3. A decline in vocations (for whatever the reason… I think it’s impossible to attribute any specific reason since there involves many cases)

Unwanted Additions:

1. Ecumenism.
2. A looser interpretation of Church doctrine concerning justification.
3. Pushing into the background beliefs about Mary, the Saints, and purgatory that could hinder the ecumenical movement.

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

BTW Why are some people today so shy to show their love for the Immaculate and Glorious Virgin the Mother of God?

Ah just caught this bit.

I think it’s mainly because such views are considered stumbling blocks for ecumenism with protestants. At least, In my opinion if I was trying to convert a protestant I probably would address Mary last and work on the things we had in common first.

 

[Andruschak]

Ah just caught this bit.

I think it’s mainly because such views are considered stumbling blocks for ecumenism with protestants. At least, In my opinion if I was trying to convert a protestant I probably would address Mary last and work on the things we had in common first.

Coming into the Church as an RCIA Candidate with no sponser or other human help.it would seem that it was precisely Mother Mary that convinced me this was correct. Go figure

 

[Missa_Solemnis]

Coming into the Church as an RCIA Candidate with no sponser or other human help.it would seem that it was precisely Mother Mary that convinced me this was correct. Go figure

Well…im not infallible.

Welcome Home.

 

[LilyM]

BTW Why are some people today so shy to show their love for the Immaculate and Glorious Virgin the Mother of God?

I’ve had EWTN TV streaming over my computer pretty much constantly yesterday and today.

The Rosary was broadcast THREE times in that 24-hour period, there was a documentary about Mary’s place in Carmelite spirituality, and right now there’s a Mass being broadcast that included a rededication of America to Mary Immaculate. I think we’re showing plenty of love for Our Lady

 

[Jaypeeto4]

In many of the new Churches built after the Council, the sanctuaries are devoid of any sacred art (no statues, no icons).
Catechesis has been poor since Vatican II and surveys have shown that many adults catechized in the post-conciliar period do not understand the basic doctrines of the Catholic faith.
Discipline of rebellious, trouble-making doctrinal dissenters has been appallingly lax, as has been discipline of the grossly immoral.

I don’t think these things are the fault of the Council documents, but rather the fault of the so-called “Spirit of Vatican II” — an attitude that basically, the Catholicism that existed before 1965 was “passe” and had to go.

Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)

 

[Genesis315]

“The doctrines of the Fathers are despised; apostolic traditions are set at nought; the devices of innovators are in vogue in the Churches; now men are rather contrivers of cunning systems than theologians; the wisdom of this world wins the highest prizes and has rejected the glory of the cross. Shepherds are banished, and in their places are introduced grievous wolves hurrying the flock of Christ. Houses of prayer have none to assemble in them; desert places are full of lamenting crowds. The elders lament when they compare the present with the past. The younger are yet more to be compassionated, for they do not know of what they have been deprived.”

That was from St. Basil the Great in the 4th century. Doesn’t seem like things have changed all that much.

The entire history of the Church has been one big tempestuous storm, but the barque of St. Peter carries on, you of little faith

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Vatican II had nothing to do with the change in attitudes in the Church, but rather, it was the change of attitudes in people in general. We went through the rebelious years of the 60’s and the libeal years of the 70’s. The 80’s saw a rise in conservatism, only to be replaced with synicism. We’re now in an age of complete apathy, which is about where the Roman Empire was before it’s collapse.

Vatican II, if anything, help bring the Church to places it was unable to reach, China in particular. By allowing the Chinese people to use their own language, and bring their beautiful culture into the Church, has enabled Christianity to become the fastest growing religion in Asia.

Don’t blame Vatican II, for what was the result of the cultural changes of the West.

Jim

 

[Fidelis]

…Catechesis has been poor since Vatican II and surveys have shown that many adults catechized in the post-conciliar period do not understand the basic doctrines of the Catholic faith.

Discipline of rebellious, trouble-making doctrinal dissenters has been appallingly lax, as has been discipline of the grossly immoral.

I don’t think these things are the fault of the Council documents, but rather the fault of the so-called “Spirit of Vatican II” — an attitude that basically, the Catholicism that existed before 1965 was “passe” and had to go.

This pretty much sums it up for me, too. Poor catechesis, rebellion in conformity with the larger society, and lax discipline. I would add to that a reduced emphasis on the uniqueness of the Catholic Church and of being Catholic, the almost complete ditching of Latin in the Liturgy, and a general loss of the sacred including the fact that people loudly chatter, chew gum, text message, recieve cell-phone calls, and dress like beach-goers at Mass, no matter what the weather.

As others have pointed out, this is not the fruit of Vatican II, but of those who hijacked it to justify their own misguided agendas, and the weakness of overwhelmed parents, catechists and hierarchy who failed to respond. God bless that faithful remnant, however, who stayed strong in the face of discouragement, and held the course. In many places, the tide is starting to turn.

My :twocents: