Next Ecumenical council

[eddie_too]

i cannot come up with a good reason for the pope to call another ecumenical council.

none of the reasons presented so far in this thread would justify another ecumenical council.

not intended to be a personal attack on anyone, just my opinion.

 

[MarkInOregon]

1. reform the liturgy and return all worship to ad orientem, increase the use of incense, return the old canon of the mass ad remove all other Eucharistic prayers, restore pomp on dress and encourage statues, icons and catholic devotions. Lastly I would minimize the optionality of then Ordinary form and make it strictly rubrical in which it can only be said one way. I would reinstate the St Michael prayer at the end of mass.

I’m not sure much of this or any of it requires an ecumenical council, but I will say the part about restoring pomp on dress and I assume you’d like communion rails returned also–I’m not sure about. There is a part of me that likes it, but a part of me see’s it as an area the Church maybe should have thought better of once it started walling off the laity and adopting imperial dress after the Church was allowed to come out of the shadows --so to speak. In someways it seems to me we undo some of what God did through His incarnation and the tearing of the temple veil in two at his death. God came down to man and became one of us, he lived among us, walked with us, touched us, ate and drank with us–the old segregated temple was replaced–the curtain was torn in two–when we erect these barriers–in our Church–it at times seems like we are trying to re-erect the temple veil/curtain, to re-erect the holy of holies and wall off Christ from people. Christ came as a humble servant and there is a part of me that thinks those operating in persona Christi–should dress and move among the people more as the earliest priests and bishops did.

I guess sometimes I think that when we get so caught up in which canon is said, and what our priests and bishops wear, what our fellow Mass attendees wear, etc. that we can lose sight of Christ and why God became incarnate. And you can see that by the way we often treat each other and by the judgments we often make regarding our fellow Mass attendees. To see this all you have to do is peruse many of the threads on this forum.

I impute no ill motives or ill will to anyone nor to you–I think you want right teaching and want it reinforced, I think you want people to love and worship Christ and that you think going back to the old ways, of some specific point in time, is the best way to accomplish that. I guess I’m not sure that a wholesale restoration of the liturgy to the liturgy of x date is necessarily the best way. Suffice it to say I will worship as the Church, as those in authority over me, instruct me, and I will assume all those around me at Mass have come because they are answering a call from Christ, and I will do my best to assume the best in them and to assist them in their walk with Christ and their growth in holiness and pray that do the same for me. That’s all I can do.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

 

[CB_Catholic]

I’m not sure much of this or any of it requires an ecumenical council, but I will say the part about restoring pomp on dress and I assume you’d like communion rails returned also–I’m not sure about. There is a part of me that likes it, but a part of me see’s it as an area the Church maybe should have thought better of once it started walling off the laity and adopting imperial dress after the Church was allowed to come out of the shadows --so to speak. In someways it seems to me we undo some of what God did through His incarnation and the tearing of the temple veil in two at his death. God came down to man and became one of us, he lived among us, walked with us, touched us, ate and drank with us–the old segregated temple was replaced–the curtain was torn in two–when we erect these barriers–in our Church–it at times seems like we are trying to re-erect the temple veil/curtain, to re-erect the holy of holies and wall off Christ from people. Christ came as a humble servant and there is a part of me that thinks those operating in persona Christi–should dress and move among the people more as the earliest priests and bishops did.

I guess sometimes I think that when we get so caught up in which canon is said, and what our priests and bishops wear, what our fellow Mass attendees wear, etc. that we can lose sight of Christ and why God became incarnate. And you can see that by the way we often treat each other and by the judgments we often make regarding our fellow Mass attendees. To see this all you have to do is peruse many of the threads on this forum.

I impute no ill motives or ill will to anyone nor to you–I think you want right teaching and want it reinforced, I think you want people to love and worship Christ and that you think going back to the old ways, of some specific point in time, is the best way to accomplish that. I guess I’m not sure that a wholesale restoration of the liturgy to the liturgy of x date is necessarily the best way. Suffice it to say I will worship as the Church, as those in authority over me, instruct me, and I will assume all those around me at Mass have come because they are answering a call from Christ, and I will do my best to assume the best in them and to assist them in their walk with Christ and their growth in holiness and pray that do the same for me. That’s all I can do.

The peace of Christ,
Mark

Nicely stated.

 

[Reuben_J]

…

1. reform the liturgy and return all worship to ad orientem, increase the use of incense, return the old canon of the mass ad remove all other Eucharistic prayers, restore pomp on dress and encourage statues, icons and catholic devotions. Lastly I would minimize the optionality of then Ordinary form and make it strictly rubrical in which it can only be said one way. I would reinstate the St Michael prayer at the end of mass.

Finally I would remove all restrictions on the Extraordinary form as commanded by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI

1. Reemphasise emphatically Extra ecclesiam nulla salus and explicitly dispel Amy misunderstandings that could lead to branches theory.

The council would be held in Rome in the Archbasilica of St John Lateran.

What would you want from this council?

While the liturgy is not my passion, I am ok with both forms, living an authentic Christian (Catholic) life and repentance are, I am not in favor to a tinkling with the liturgy as it is. It will create more harm to the Church than not. Already it is. To undo Vatican II would not solve the problem as there are equally as many Catholics, if not more, who are in favor of it.

If there should be a Council, it is perhaps something to heal the somewhat division/strife within Catholicism itself which was caused by Vatican II.

Just my two cents.

 

[Wandile]

Just FYI , I’m not calling for the return of the Extraordinary form and abolition of the Ordinary form. I’m calling for a reform of the Ordinary form (actually more like celebrating it according to the rubrics as intended by Vatican II).

Look HERE for this demonstration of the Ordinary form. This is the kind of way I expect the Ordinary form to be celebrated.

I don’t mind it totally being in vernacular (which I prefer) but it more or less should be like this.

 

[Reuben_J]

Just FYI , I’m not calling for the return of the Extraordinary form and abolition of the Ordinary form. I’m calling for a reform of the Ordinary form (actually more like celebrating it according to the rubrics as intended by Vatican II).

Look HERE for this demonstration of the Ordinary form. This is the kind of way I expect the Ordinary form to be celebrated.

I don’t mind it totally being in vernacular (which I prefer) but it more or less should be like this.

Okay, gotcha.

Just a caution though. We have more than fifty years of the OF in vernacular, which means there are people who are fifty /sixty or less who have grown up with the present OF (local version?) and perhaps that’s all they know and come to like it, if you know what I mean. I am referring to countries where Catholicism is still recent and may not be the tradition.

In the end it would be more about personal taste (preference) and reasons could be rather subjective. I am just saying there is no short cut of a solution to this issue; there will be two factions of those who are for and against it.

What would a Council achieve? Or would just a stricter compliance of the rubrics be adhered to, which we already have the GIRM in placed?

Anyway, an interesting suggestion. We can trust that the Holy Spirit will always lead the Church to where He wants to.

 

[adf417]

The dust has settled. Vatican II failed (something people are afraid to admit) as many Ecumenical Councils have. The truth is the Church needs an urgent reform and a dogmatic council could do that.

The new younger priests are more open to the possibility that Vatican II was flawed and at times problematically ambiguous. These priests look to prior councils like Vatican I and Trent as well as tradition for guidance. Vatican II has some good fruits but the new generation of priests are not blinded by the praise heaped on it by the older generation. They see it for what it was, a well intentioned council that didn’t meet its expectations and has some problems that need to be addressed.

Younger priests are a lot more conservative and traditional , Thanks be to God.

Hmmmm! Can you substantiate the bolded statment above? I was under the impression the opposite but cant confirm it.

Peace!!!

 

[Reuben_J]

Hmmmm! Can you substantiate the bolded statment above? I was under the impression the opposite but cant confirm it.

Peace!!!

That would my sense too. The young priests are more likely not to have any problem with post-Vatican II, at least those that I know. It also depends on their formation and the seminaries where they are trained, are they pro-Vatican II or the more traditional pre-Vatican II? In a local region it would be a foregone conclusion that the seminary would have huge influence on their priestly outlook.

I guess it depends on whom you talk to.

 

[adf417]

That would my sense too. The young priests are more likely not to have any problem with post-Vatican II, at least those that I know. It also depends on their formation and the seminaries where they are trained, are they pro-Vatican II or the more traditional pre-Vatican II? In a local region it would be a foregone conclusion that the seminary would have huge influence on their priestly outlook.

I guess it depends on whom you talk to.

Yeah i would like to see the trending line since V2. But no matter what time line we look at there will always those that their view is, or should be, the standard.

Peace!!!

 

[rcwitness]

I would like to see married men (who are proposed by their parishes) permitted to be considered ordained, on a larger scale.

 

[eddie_too]

in an earlier post, i said i could think of no good reason for the pope to call another ecumenical council.

since then, one reason did come to me. that reason is if such a council would re-unite all christians. that is, i believe, a good justification for calling another council.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

in an earlier post, i said i could think of no good reason for the pope to call another ecumenical council.

since then, one reason did come to me. that reason is if such a council would re-unite all christians. that is, i believe, a good justification for calling another council.

Never happen doctrinaly, but I could see a situation where a rational representative from each denomination attends and we hammer out some defining points together. Let’s start with no, the Catholic Church is not of the devil, then work our way down from there.