Protestantization of U.S. Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dave_in_Dallas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Can you imagine if there was the internet and Facebook and forums and blogs in the first century around the time they allowed uncircumsized gentiles into the Church?
It would have been nice if the internet etc had been around 1960 or so. Instead we picked up our information from second-hand or third-hand sources instead of the Vatican itself and most of what we picked up was misinformation.
 
Did you ever meditated why do you call it 'Spirit of Vatican II" instead of what is: the secularism, the modernism, the liberalism, the humanism, or whatever anti-religious ‘ism’. I do not believe it is your fault, just the consequence of the social engineering flooded around us.
The expression “spirit (lower-case “s” intentional) of Vatican II” embodies all those things and represents willful the mis-interpretation of the Council in order to further a particular agenda. It really has nothing to do with the Council, and that’s the point of using it.
By my best knowledge the ideas described in the Sancrosanctum Concilium were implemented by 1967, allowing the active participation, removing the duplications, allowing the vernacular in the intended measure.
I would dispute that. Maybe the short-lived (and ill-fated) “interim Missal” of 1965, but certainly not the 1967 aberration what was merely a prelude to the Novus Ordo. By 1967, “vernacular in the intended measure” came to mean in practice the total absence (more like “prohibition”) of the use of any Latin, and was also when the post-conciliar liturgical free-for-all got underway in earnest.
By now it is quite clear that the 1964 innovation the fee standing altar was a mistake
No, free-standing altars (not tables) are, as I have said myriad times in other threads, very traditional. The mistake was versus populum.
 
It would have been nice if the internet etc had been around 1960 or so. Instead we picked up our information from second-hand or third-hand sources instead of the Vatican itself and most of what we picked up was misinformation.
There was the “internet” back then. Although nothing like what we have today. But the internet’s predecessor ARPANet existed in the 60s.

Although I wouldn’t count on the internet delivering accurate information. Even today, there’s many misinformation, even more than before, thanks to the internet. Suddenly, everyone’s a journalist.
 
There was the “internet” back then. Although nothing like what we have today. But the internet’s predecessor ARPANet existed in the 60s.

Although I wouldn’t count on the internet delivering accurate information. Even today, there’s many misinformation, even more than before, thanks to the internet. Suddenly, everyone’s a journalist.
we have Zenit though
 
we have Zenit though
Right, but part of the problem today is that with so much information available, a lot of people get their from unreliable sources. I’ve seen many Catholics develop Protestant understanding of the faith because they get their catechisis from the media. The internet isn’t helping either, for every vatican.va, there are hundreds of blogs and top level domain sites that preach erroneous doctrine or beliefs about the Catholic Church. Some people are just not that resourceful, tech savy, or too trusting to find a more reliable source for information.
 
There was the “internet” back then.
The internet made its “debut” in 1969. I know because I participated in the early testing of it for industry. The military and universities had done much earlier testing. But that wasn’t a Protestant thing.
 
The internet made its “debut” in 1969. I know because I participated in the early testing of it for industry. The military and universities had done much earlier testing. But that wasn’t a Protestant thing.
I was just saying, the internet has become an avenue for petty squabbles and misinformation.
 
Some people are just not that resourceful, tech savy, or too trusting to find a more reliable source for information.
Still better than the word-of-mouth, one-source stuff that came about from the iconoclastic translators in the 60’s and 70’s. Many still believe we only have to use our own consciences to determine what sin is.
 
Still better than the word-of-mouth, one-source stuff that came about from the iconoclastic translators in the 60’s and 70’s. Many still believe we only have to use our own consciences to determine what sin is.
I don’t know. While its easier to find reliable information, its just as easy to find misleading information. Some of us are just lucky we know how to pick and choose the reliable sites. For us its a blessing. But for those who are not, its a curse. They fall into a deep hole of misinformation thats very hard to get out of.
 
ARPANET is the source of all the problems of the Internet because it was built on trust, but we are getting off topic.
 
I do wish that the Tridentine lovers would actually study the history of the Mass.
Perhaps you could share with us some of your favorite works on the subject.

By the way, I think you misspoke when you said the Mass is no longer in Latin. Latin is the language of the Roman Missal, both for the Ordinary Form and for the Extraordinary form. The Novus Ordo may be, and in fact in some places is, celebrated in Latin. Also, you may have noticed all the highly-publicized squabbling about the forthcoming English translation of the Roman Missal.
 
Perhaps you could share with us some of your favorite works on the subject.

By the way, I think you misspoke when you said the Mass is no longer in Latin. Latin is the language of the Roman Missal, both for the Ordinary Form and for the Extraordinary form. The Novus Ordo may be, and in fact in some places is, celebrated in Latin. Also, you may have noticed all the highly-publicized squabbling about the forthcoming English translation of the Roman Missal.
Precisely. And didn’t/don’t the myriad of most if not all of the Protestant denominations have their roots in the myriad of translations and interpretations of scripture and liturgy?
 
Precisely. And didn’t/don’t the myriad of most if not all of the Protestant denominations have their roots in the myriad of translations and interpretations of scripture and liturgy?
Latin itself is a translation from the Greek and Hebrew.
 
Latin itself is a translation from the Greek and Hebrew.
Yes and
Council of Trent:
The sacred and holy, ecumenical, and general Synod of Trent,—lawfully assembled in the Holy Ghost, the Same three legates of the Apostolic See presiding therein,—keeping this always in view, that, errors being removed, the purity itself of the Gospel be preserved in the Church; which (Gospel), before promised through the prophets in the holy Scriptures, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, first promulgated with His own mouth, and then commanded to be preached by His Apostles to every creature, as the fountain of all, both saving truth, and moral discipline; and seeing clearly that this truth and discipline are contained in the written books, and the unwritten traditions which, received by the Apostles from the mouth of Christ himself, or from the Apostles themselves, the Holy Ghost dictating, have come down even unto us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand; (the Synod) following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and venerates with an equal affection of piety, and reverence, all the books both of the Old and of the New Testament—seeing that one God is the author of both —as also the said traditions, as well those appertaining to faith as to morals, as having been dictated, either by Christ’s own word of mouth, or by the Holy Ghost, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession.

And it has thought it meet that a list of the sacred books be inserted in this decree, lest a doubt may arise in any one’s mind, which are the books that are received by this Synod. They are as set down here below:

Of the Old Testament: the five books of Moses, to wit, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first book of Esdras, and the second which is entitled Nehemias; Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Davidical Psalter, consisting of a hundred and fifty psalms; the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias, with Baruch; Ezechiel, Daniel; the twelve minor prophets, to wit, Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of the Machabees, the first and the second.

Of the New Testament: the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John; the Acts of the Apostles written by Luke the Evangelist; fourteen epistles of Paul the apostle, (one) to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, (one) to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, two to Timothy, (one) to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews; two of Peter the apostle, three of John the apostle, one of the apostle James, one of Jude the apostle, and the Apocalypse of John the apostle.

But if any one receive not, as sacred and canonical, the said books entire with all their parts, as they have been used to be read in the Catholic Church, and as they are contained in the old Latin vulgate edition; and knowingly and deliberately contemn the traditions aforesaid; let him be anathema. Let all, therefore, understand, in what order, and in what manner, the said Synod, after having laid the foundation of the Confession of faith, will proceed, and what testimonies and authorities it will mainly use in confirming dogmas, and in restoring morals in the Church.
Aren’t Ecumenical Councils infallible?
 
I beg to differ; we all know Al Gore invented it! 😃
The internet made its “debut” in 1969. I know because I participated in the early testing of it for industry. The military and universities had done much earlier testing. But that wasn’t a Protestant thing.
 
My guess is that 40-65% of American Catholics are more protestant than Catholic in their actual beliefs and practices and will remain that way because quite frankly, why would they change. I’ve never seen Father “X” tell someone in line for communion to sit down because he knows for a fact they shouldn’t be receiving the eucharist for one reason or another. If it did I suspect that person would just go to another parish. If it happened again they would either leave the church or take care of the situation. Leaving may prove the easier option for many.
 
40-65%? How did you arrive at that number L.T.? 😛 I would say most churches run the gamut of a huge spectrum of beliefs. There are probably Lutherans that don’t believe in the Real Presence in the Eucharist at their own parish, Lutherans who believe that faith is not enough, that works play a role a la James, etc. There are pro-choicers and pro-lifers, and we’re all hypocrites. That’s what Church is for, sinning hypocrites like me. I don’t know if the topic is really about Father X disallowing Communion for a Catholic so much as the idea that protestant ideas about faith alone, the lack of a need for confession, the priesthood of all believers, divorce, and many other more Protestant-style approaches have infiltrated the Church. Holding hands during the Our Father and Eucharistic ministers trying to play priest blessing children and adults in the communion line, and many other things are mostly due to a post-Vatican II overreaction and horrible delivery by many bishops and priests.
My guess is that 40-65% of American Catholics are more protestant than Catholic in their actual beliefs and practices and will remain that way because quite frankly, why would they change. I’ve never seen Father “X” tell someone in line for communion to sit down because he knows for a fact they shouldn’t be receiving the eucharist for one reason or another. If it did I suspect that person would just go to another parish. If it happened again they would either leave the church or take care of the situation. Leaving may prove the easier option for many.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top