New priests' group hopes to preserve vision of Vatican II

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dirt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ProVobis said:
The seeds of the Mass reform were planted in 1948, if not 100 years before. This was evidenced by the Holy Week changes in 1955 and then the change in the Canon of the Mass itself in 1962. I’m of the opinion more changes were already on the drawing boards in the 50’s with only the right opportunity left to implement them.
Click to expand...
👍 They started to really come out immediately after WWI and bloomed after WWII.
 
ProVobis said:
The seeds of the Mass reform were planted in 1948, if not 100 years before. This was evidenced by the Holy Week changes in 1955 and then the change in the Canon of the Mass itself in 1962. I’m of the opinion more changes were already on the drawing boards in the 50’s with only the right opportunity left to implement them.
Click to expand...
Agreed. The warning signs were evident during the Reign of Pope Leo XIII and Pope St. Pius X. The warnings about modernism and the treachery that was being inserted into theological disertations was not unwarented. Reading Pascendi Dominici Gregis now, 100 + years later, the Encyclical seems prophetic beyond description. The Father of all lies will do anything, use any means, and a distort all truths in order to divide and destroy the Church. Our modern age, with it’s questioning of all Dogmas, is fertile soil for Satan to continue to divide the Body of Christ. Too many are fooled into thinking this is old fashioned hand-wrigging, but the evidence suggests otherwise. Pray for Unity, and Pray continuosly for The Holy Father. The wolves are at the Gate.
 
Interesting how most of those people in that pic are old folks. Yep, most of us young folks could care less about this “spirit.”
You can take your spirit to your warehouse place of worship we will gladly worship where the true Spirit is, that is the spirit that connects us to the past with our saints, the apostles, and of course our Lord!
 
Equites_Christi said:
I agree.

I think maybe the reason so many of us young, serious Catholics love traditional Catholicism is because we’ve had to grow up with modern Catholicism.

Maybe a modernized version of the faith was appealing to baby boomers, but our generation was raised on it, so we know very well that it’s pretty ******.
Click to expand...
Well, I’m a baby-boomer, and I don’t like a ‘modernized version of the faith’!

So don’t paint ALL baby-boomers with the same brush!

There are baby-boomers who LIKE (even LOVE) ‘traditional Catholicism’!

So there! :mad:
 
archangel04 said:
Interesting how most of those people in that pic are old folks. Yep, most of us young folks could care less about this “spirit.”
You can take your spirit to your warehouse place of worship we will gladly worship where the true Spirit is, that is the spirit that connects us to the past with our saints, the apostles, and of course our Lord!
Click to expand...
Pope John XXIII thought the Vatican II would be the new pentecost. The spirit you diss would seem to be the Holy Spirit.
 
At his recorded message played in the International Eucharistic Congress today in Dublin (Long live the Pope!) Pope Benedict actually talked about Vatican II and how there had been many “misunderstandings and irregularities” about interpreting what it was trying to achieve in the renewal of the liturgy. Here’s the excerpt:
At our distance today from the Council Fathers’ expressed desires regarding liturgical renewal, and in the light of the universal Church’s experience in the intervening period, it is clear that a great deal has been achieved; but it is equally clear that there have been many misunderstandings and irregularities. The renewal of external forms, desired by the Council Fathers, was intended to make it easier to enter into the inner depth of the mystery. Its true purpose was to lead people to a personal encounter with the Lord, present in the Eucharist, and thus with the living God, so that through this contact with Christ’s love, the love of his brothers and sisters for one another might also grow. Yet not infrequently, the revision of liturgical forms has remained at an external level, and “active participation” has been confused with external activity. Hence much still remains to be done on the path of real liturgical renewal. In a changed world, increasingly fixated on material things, we must learn to recognize anew the mysterious presence of the Risen Lord, which alone can give breadth and depth to our life.
Click to expand...
irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2012/0617/breaking102.html

Is it coincidental that many of these misunderstandings and irregularities are happening here in Ireland right now?

If I understand him correctly he’s saying that active participation means appreciating what is going on in the liturgy at a deep spiritual level - not merely taking part in meaningless ritual for participation’s sake. For some reason, I’m reminded of a quote from Michael Voris, and I know very little about the man, but one clip I saw of him spoke of “an army of laypeople” doing various things during the Mass, so much so that it would distract you from the sacredness of what is happening.

Either way, God bless Pope Benedict for telling it like it is.
 
Cristiano said:
Be careful of what you wish for. The EF is not immune from abuses, if you read the history of the Church with references to the history of the liturgy of the Roman Rite you can see that about 200 years ago about 80 out 120 French bishops were abusing the liturgy, that is not an isolated case. Catholic tradition is not based on slogans but on proper education.
Click to expand...
Well, I don’t think the French Church, especially in the last 200 years (or 230 years) is really a good example of anything…

Anyway, yes, no doubt there were abuses in the EF. But the EF rubrics were pretty hard and fast, so it was clear if something was an abuse. WIth the OF rubrics being pretty much a “Chinese Menu”, one person’s “abuse” is another person’s “incultration” or “pastoral creativity.”
 
I like how everyone here is an expert, and thinks Vatican 2 is erroneous. Everyone has different tastes in how the Mass is given, but I disagree in condemning the other form. Is everyone here a expert or just heavily biased?
 
This issue about Vatican II and what it meant can be found out easily. The point is that Vatican II became a scapegoat used by dissenters inside and outside the Church to do things that Vatican II never even suggested.

catholicnewsagency.com/column.php?n=1145

So, to my fellow Catholics, whenever anyone brings up the bad things things that happened after Vatican II, it would be good to point out that Vatican II had nothing to do with it. Another link:

harvestingthefruit.com/

Peace,
Ed
 
ellipsis2 said:
Pope John XXIII thought the Vatican II would be the new pentecost. The spirit you diss would seem to be the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
Notice that I said “spirit” with quotes not the Holy Spirit or Spirit of Vatican Two which is the authentic one, not the this false spirit people keep putting in our faces to defend every incorrect teaching.
 
archangel04 said:
Notice that I said “spirit” with quotes not the Holy Spirit or Spirit of Vatican Two which is the authentic one, not the this false spirit people keep putting in our faces to defend every incorrect teaching.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know. Still, on a regular basis, the wrong “spirit” is to blame for everything that happened after. I was there before and after Vatican II.

Peace,
Ed
 
ProVobis said:
Perhaps. But the Reformers of the 16th and 17th century basically wanted the same thing, with the net result of eventually having created some 30,000 denominations, each with its own interpretation of scripture and its teachings.
Click to expand...
No, that’s not at all what the Protestant Revolt was about. The Protestants wanted to completely change the Church Herself, not just re-state Church teachings in a language that non-Catholics could more easily understand.
 
edwest2 said:
Yes, I know. Still, on a regular basis, the wrong “spirit” is to blame for everything that happened after. I was there before and after Vatican II.

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
Thanks, Ed, I appreciate your perspective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top