Third Vatican Council

  • Thread starter Thread starter papaspicy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

papaspicy

Guest
I’m not quite sure where to post this thread, but I hope that some others would be interested in some speculative discussion. It has been over forty years since the close of the Second Vatican Council, and because there is a council on average every 100 years or so, it is not likely that another will occur anytime soon. But, if another council was called what are the major doctrinal issues that are currently in need of serious definition? What would be discussed, and what changes to various disciplines might we expect? Don’t get me wrong, I am quite happy with the official church teachings and our catechism (not so much with some localized problems), but I’m interested in knowing what subjects other people would be interested in seeing discussed by our leaders.

I don’t want this thread to delve into lengthy arguments on specific issues so keep that to a minimum or start a new thread. Obviously if I am asking about another council, I am more than happy to let our bishops debate the specifics.
 
papaspicy said:
I’m not quite sure where to post this thread, but I hope that some others would be interested in some speculative discussion. It has been over forty years since the close of the Second Vatican Council, and because there is a council on average every 100 years or so, it is not likely that another will occur anytime soon. But, if another council was called what are the major doctrinal issues that are currently in need of serious definition? What would be discussed, and what changes to various disciplines might we expect? Don’t get me wrong, I am quite happy with the official church teachings and our catechism (not so much with some localized problems), but I’m interested in knowing what subjects other people would be interested in seeing discussed by our leaders.

I don’t want this thread to delve into lengthy arguments on specific issues so keep that to a minimum or start a new thread. Obviously if I am asking about another council, I am more than happy to let our bishops debate the specifics.
Click to expand...
It would be focused on the reunion of Christianity. It would discuss deeper non-Christian relationships. The Evangelization of the non-Christian world. Possibly deal with the moral decay in society, secularism.
 
Like Constantinople I closed up the “holes” that Nicea I left open for the Arians, I pray a “Vatican III” will do the same against the modernists/minimalizers (dare I say “liberals”?) who took and ran amok in the MYTHICAL “spirit of Vatican II”. The Bishops both John Paul II apointed and Benedict XVI is apointing will go a long way in preparing they way for such a council
 
papaspicy said:
I’m not quite sure where to post this thread, but I hope that some others would be interested in some speculative discussion. It has been over forty years since the close of the Second Vatican Council, and because there is a council on average every 100 years or so, it is not likely that another will occur anytime soon. But, if another council was called what are the major doctrinal issues that are currently in need of serious definition? What would be discussed, and what changes to various disciplines might we expect? Don’t get me wrong, I am quite happy with the official church teachings and our catechism (not so much with some localized problems), but I’m interested in knowing what subjects other people would be interested in seeing discussed by our leaders.

I don’t want this thread to delve into lengthy arguments on specific issues so keep that to a minimum or start a new thread. Obviously if I am asking about another council, I am more than happy to let our bishops debate the specifics.
Click to expand...
That is a scary thought. We still have not recovered from the “spirit” of Vatican II. That is not to say that Vat. II was wrong, but it sure was abused. I think we should give the Church a chance to figure out what Vat. II actually means before we hold another council. I hope the Church gives some time to re-integrate the SSPX as well as reverse some of the mess caused by liberal interpretation of Vat. II before launching another council.

Mark Wyatt
www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
I would like to see a 3rd Vatican Council or maybe a neutral place. Like another Council of Jerusalem since that is the Birthplace of the Church.

Since it is the birthplace, I believe that reunification for all Christians should be discuss and settled in Jerusalem.
 
Lion_of_Narnia said:
Like Constantinople I closed up the “holes” that Nicea I left open for the Arians, I pray a “Vatican III” will do the same against the modernists/minimalizers (dare I say “liberals”?) who took and ran amok in the MYTHICAL “spirit of Vatican II”. The Bishops both John Paul II apointed and Benedict XVI is apointing will go a long way in preparing they way for such a council
Click to expand...
Good idea! They should re-name Vatican II, Vatican II-A, and have the next council called Vatican II-B
 
Lion_of_Narnia said:
Like Constantinople I closed up the “holes” that Nicea I left open for the Arians, I pray a “Vatican III” will do the same against the modernists/minimalizers (dare I say “liberals”?) who took and ran amok in the MYTHICAL “spirit of Vatican II”. The Bishops both John Paul II apointed and Benedict XVI is apointing will go a long way in preparing they way for such a council
Click to expand...
I agree. Some modernists also want a ‘Vatican III’ that will ‘open up’ the Church and shake of its ‘antiquated’ doctrines and positions. Let us turn their artillery against them
(Though I expect after Vatican III, the Church will face another problem. A Sign that the Holy Spirit is in the Council since that problem will be caused by the Anti-Spirit, the Evil One to try to undermine the Council’s good fruits just as he did with the previous ones).
 
Councils are way apart in years, it’s way too early for another Council. The Church believes it can easily take 100 years or more to fully and properly implement the changes from a Council ( I heard Pope JP II say this once). The very chaos everyone is reacting to would be worse with another Council, it would produce nothing but churn.

Give the Holy Spirit and mother Church a chance to implement. Christ heads this Church, have faith.
 
If some of the dissenters in the “Wolves” project have their way, it would probably be a “Council of New York City” at the UN Building :eek:
 
awalt said:
Councils are way apart in years, it’s way too early for another Council. The Church believes it can easily take 100 years or more to fully and properly implement the changes from a Council ( I heard Pope JP II say this once). The very chaos everyone is reacting to would be worse with another Council, it would produce nothing but churn.

Give the Holy Spirit and mother Church a chance to implement. Christ heads this Church, have faith.
Click to expand...
Correct. It is still too early for another general council. Even the reforms enacted by the Council of Trent in the 16th century took many decades to implement fully.
 
im really glad i just joined this site… and im glad i saw this message…cuz im having a final on this exact topic of the 3rd vatican council…and i’ve found four possible topics…
  1. obv. the poverty is a big one
  2. but i also believe in the morality…the racism, socialism, stuff like tht that the church can definitly try to fix…
  3. then u’ve got cloning and nano technology, looking inot the future this would be possible, and they should beasking the ?'s of whether or not it is right to create beings with out natural souls?..with gods given grace?..and should we really prolong life and strengthen ourselves so much that we just go past our time tht god has given us and risk our salvation
  4. then u’ve got another biggy, abortion and possibly having/getting church officail to interact in a phsycological way that could help people with these problems…
  5. i think i would definitly have to agree with oe of the posts from someone about the reuniting ofthe churchs, catholic and protestant strains, united, and def. reunited in jerusalem where it all started. DEF…
well those are my thoughts on the 5 substantial things that should be donw during that time
 
zackattack47 said:
im really glad i just joined this site… and im glad i saw this message…cuz im having a final on this exact topic of the 3rd vatican council…and i’ve found four possible topics…
Click to expand...
  1. obv. the poverty is a big one
Click to expand...
While poverty and social problems like AIDS and genocide in Africa are very important and need our full attention and any possible help, I don’t think a Council would be called for problems like these unless they became so rampant that they held a theological significance or perhaps a very serious need of acting by the Church specifically. In my knowledge, Councils generally have to do more with doctrine than social conditions in the world. The Pope in union with the bishops will certainly exhort the people of the Church to support efforts against poverty and genocide, though.
  1. but i also believe in the morality…the racism, socialism, stuff like tht that the church can definitly try to fix…
Click to expand...
I think that words against racism wouldn’t be at the Council-level. Socialism perhaps at the Council-level depending on its ramifications.
  1. then u’ve got cloning and nano technology, looking inot the future this would be possible, and they should beasking the ?'s of whether or not it is right to create beings with out natural souls?..with gods given grace?..and should we really prolong life and strengthen ourselves so much that we just go past our time tht god has given us and risk our salvation
Click to expand...
This is probably one of the two most likely topics you’ve mentioned that will be addressed at the Council-level. The future holds many terrible possibilities. Just the other day on TV an inventor was talking about how humans are going to be combinations of man and machine- how he expects to live forever because he believes technology will advance that far soon enough. Every year new technology comes out which has the potential to unnaturally create and then horribly destroy countless human lives. It is likely to, in the very least, be majorly addressed.
  1. then u’ve got another biggy, abortion and possibly having/getting church officail to interact in a phsycological way that could help people with these problems…
Click to expand...
I think this could be possible…probably being addressed under the umbrella of that “dictatorship of moral relativism” that Pope Benedict has talked about. Not only is legalization of abortion widely accepted in Europe, but euthanasia and various other atrocities are being hailed as enlightened in Europe as well (that is why we have heard so much about the European spiritual decline in recent times). Sooner or later, the Church will have to make a major motion against this.
  1. i think i would definitly have to agree with oe of the posts from someone about the reuniting ofthe churchs, catholic and protestant strains, united, and def. reunited in jerusalem where it all started. DEF…
Click to expand...
I agree that ecumenism will probably be important in future Councils, if not the next. The number of Protestant denominations grows by the year. Tensions between people of different religious backgrounds can and could be catastrophic- as seen with the fight for centuries over Jerusalem, with Islamic fighting among Sunnis/Shiites, and many other examples. Ecumenism will probably be important up until at least the beginning of the end of the world.

I agree with others above- that first Vatican II must be implemented. If anything, the opposite of the desired effect has taken place with some people…instead of a renewal of spirit people have lost their spirit. It seems that we have just the pope to help with that, though (not to exclude our very helpful last pope).
 
Councils aren’t regular, there was about 300 years between Trent and Vatican I, but about 10 in the 400 years before Trent. Therefore time is not a problem.

Thinks that need addressing:
  1. The idea that protestant ‘churches’ can save you just as well as the Catholic Church, which is the same as denying the Church and the sacraments very existance. Now not saying all protestants automatically go to Hell, but likewise they cannot be saved just by being protestants. Also linked to this original sin needs a stronger emphasis as while that is the actual Catholic teaching many turn it into semi-Pelagianism
  2. An anathema needs attaching to the idea of women priests, though whether there coud be women deacons and whether married men should be allowed to be ordained (but not marriage of priests) needs to be investigated, though there’s no easy answer in these (especially the latter which happens in parts of the Catholic Church anyway), and I’d stick with the status quo on balance.
  3. The proposed Marian dogmas need to be debated
  4. Heretical clergy should be deposed and excommunicated after being given warning and a chance to repent
 
i thank you all very much for the insights and answers to my post…it helps alot…thnxs…and i just have on e thing to say

i realize JMBNH is a senior member in all but i have to dis agree with wat u were saying about how “protestants cant be saved by just being protestants”…see how remeber it/ how i was taught is that God savesall no matter the race, belief, or ethnicity…see protestants believe the same core beliefs they just do it in a simpler and different way…have u ever read anything from the time of individualism in America…“Not every person beats to the same drummer, but they still get to the same place”…again not being mean, just saying…

thank you both and i think i’ll go tweak my essays a bit…thanx a ton:thumbsup:
 
zackattack47 said:
i realize JMBNH is a senior member in all but i have to dis agree with wat u were saying about how “protestants cant be saved by just being protestants”…see how remeber it/ how i was taught is that God savesall no matter the race, belief, or ethnicity…see protestants believe the same core beliefs they just do it in a simpler and different way…have u ever read anything from the time of individualism in America…“Not every person beats to the same drummer, but they still get to the same place”…again not being mean, just saying…
Click to expand...
From the Catechism:

**“Outside the Church there is no salvation” **

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

848 “Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top