Traditional Catholics - Do They Understand the Context of Vatican II

  • Thread starter Thread starter trickster
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

trickster

Guest
Hey all. I was thinking today about why there is such an attraction for traditional catholic expressions. One of the questions I have is "do traditional catholics understand the context which drove the church to change in the early 60’s?

Bruce
 
trickster said:
Hey all. I was thinking today about why there is such an attraction for traditional catholic expressions. One of the questions I have is do traditional catholics understand the context which drove the church to change in the early 60’s?

Bruce
Click to expand...
 
trickster said:
Hey all. I was thinking today about why there is such an attraction for traditional catholic expressions. One of the questions I have is "do traditional catholics a) remember pre-Vatican II church and b) do they understand the context which drove the church to change in the early 60’s?

Bruce
Click to expand...
 
I would say that the traditionalists understand it more than most.
 
Moore11 said:
I would say that the traditionalists understand it more than most.
Click to expand...
I agree. Probably the WORST time to hold such a council. The “smoke of Satan” was permeating the air like an old-time London smog, or in the West when a forest fire is nearby, and John XXIII (Paul VI more so) threw open all the doors and windows to the Sanctuary, and was surprised when things went wrong. The reaction to Humanae Vitae gave Paul VI a clue of what had happened, but by then it was too late.
 
I would say that traditional Catholics are probably aware of the context (historical, ecclesiastical and otherwise) of Vatican II more than anyone else.

We can discuss context all day. 🙂
 
I have to get this off my chest- my experience with Traditionalists is that they lack joy and are not very friendly and are very uptight and don’t like change - just my observations
 
Christine85 said:
I have to get this off my chest- my experience with Traditionalists is that they lack joy and are not very friendly and are very uptight and don’t like change - just my observations
Click to expand...
Do you mean the “reject Vatican II and any word related to it” kind of Traditionalist? I’m just curious…

But to answer the OP, I think Traditional Catholics do understand the context of Vatican II…it’s only as of late though that the documents of VII are even beginning to be understood correctly though.
 
I think many traditionalists understand Vatican II far better than those who are always talking about “the spirit of Vatican II” understand it.
 
I suppose I just want to share how I felt attending the Latin Church over Easter. Looking back it took away my liveliness and peace being around some of those people. Also the woman who took me there told me one of the Priests there said she’s committing a mortal sin if she doesn’t sleep with her husband. - isn’t that a bit old fashioned.
And that her leaving her bag in the Church and it getting stolen was required to be confessed because she was providing an occasion of sin for the thief.
That’s simply ridiculous … Talk about encouraging scruples
 
Christine85 said:
I suppose I just want to share how I felt attending the Latin Church over Easter. Looking back it took away my liveliness and peace being around some of those people. Also the woman who took me there told me one of the Priests there said she’s committing a mortal sin if she doesn’t sleep with her husband. - isn’t that a bit old fashioned.
And that her leaving her bag in the Church and it getting stolen was required to be confessed because she was providing an occasion of sin for the thief.
That’s simply ridiculous … Talk about encouraging scruples
Click to expand...
That’s rather odd…I see what you mean then.
God Bless :signofcross::byzsoc:
 
I don’t know maybe it’s just that Church. Perhaps all Latin Churches aren’t the same.
 
Christine85 said:
Also the woman who took me there told me one of the Priests there said she’s committing a mortal sin if she doesn’t sleep with her husband. - isn’t that a bit old fashioned.
Click to expand...
It is correct Catholic teaching. It goes back to Scripture, which I suppose that makes it old-fashioned, but it is also true. A husband and wife have a duty to be sexually intimate with each other. There are some circumstances under which this obligation does not apply, but presumably the priest who told her this knew that her situation was not one of the exceptions.
 
Isn’t it the Church teaching that the partner is not to feel cohersed.
Surely if a husband wants to have sex and the wife doesn’t it’s not a MORTAL SIN!!!
This is almost bordering on rape. Her situation was she was about to get married and the Priest knew she felt uncomfortable with having sex with her partner straight away and he said if she didn’t it’s a mortal sin. Where in the Bible does God or Jesus say if you don’t have sex with your spouse when they want to that’s a mortal sin?
 
Even my Spiritual Director who has been a Priest 50 years said that’s wrong
 
Some days I almost get the impression that this particular forum exists so that people can have a place to take shots at the Latin Mass and those who attend it.
 
That’s what you may think, but I can’t deny what I have experienced there
 
Funny you say that because I suppose it does… But I think in my experience it works to their detriment
 
There’s no point in me continuing to vent my disappointment, best thing I can do is not go back
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top