VATICAN II: A Vehicle of Grace for Our Time

  • Thread starter Thread starter JReducation
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JReducation

Guest
I wanted to start a thread on this forum that would look at Vatican II in a positive light. Since I have been on CAF I believe that I have heard almost every conceivable complaint against Vatican II. Some are beginning to repeat themselves, because you can only say so many negative things about something before you become redundant.

But the goal in life is not just to correct everything that we believe is wrong. Obviously, correcting errors, mediating misunderstandings, applying truths correctly are all very serious concerns.

However, being as the Council was guided by the Holy Spirit, even if the men and women attending it were human and sinful, there had to be grace poured out on the Church and on each of us. The Holy Spirit never makes himself absent from the Church. It is safe to believe that he did not make himself absent from Vatican II.

If we are to fulfill our vocation, which is Christ’s call to the union of our soul with his Divinity, we must work at being saints, not just critics. Saints make it to Heaven; critics only make the front page of the newspaper, if they’re good at it.

This thread is not for those who have complaints against Vatican II or for debates. It is a post for sharing the graces that we received through Vatican II, either directly or remotely.

I was born and raised Jewish. When Vatican II began I was a little boy. No, I’m not going to tell you my age. Suffice it to say that I remember the Council. Like most Jews and non Catholics I always thought that the Catholic Church lived in a bubble.

Given the sexual liberation of the 1960s and 70s, the racial tensions in our country, the explosion of the drug culture, the Cold War, JFK’s threat to the Russians if they did not recall their weapons, the assassination of so many leaders in our country and abroad, and other things that I’m leaving out, I felt that I was drowning.

At the time of Vatican II I was attending a Catholic school run by Capuchin-Franciscans, because in my hometown Jews and Black people were not welcome in public schools. As I approached my college years I began to question the world around me. I remember going back to my Capuchin Brothers and asking them to help me understand. One of the friars gave me a copy of Lumen Gentium.

“He therefore chose the race of Israel as a people unto Himself. With it He set up a covenant. Step by step He taught and prepared this people, making known in its history both Himself and the decree of His will and making it holy unto Himself. All these things, however, were done by way of preparation and as a figure of that new and perfect covenant, which was to be ratified in Christ, and of that fuller revelation which was to be given through the Word of God Himself made flesh” (Ch II, parr 9)

This was the first time that I saw my people as part of the mystery of redemption. It was through Lumen Gentium that I came to know this great truth that my people were not excluded from salvation by Catholics, but they were essential to the process of Redemption.

While many say that the Council was a pastoral council and made no dogmatic declarations, I believe that this simple declaration regarding the relationship between Israel and the Church is solemn truth. This statement made me look at Jesus Christ as more than a good man who had been unjustly killed 2000 years ago.

I cannot speak for others, but this great truth was the beginning of a journey toward Christ that has lasted more than 30 years.

In Perfectae Caritatis I found another great truth that moved me.

“Communities which are entirely dedicated to contemplation, so that their members in solitude and silence, with constant prayer and penance willingly undertaken, occupy themselves with God alone, retain at all times, no matter how pressing the needs of the active apostolate may be, an honorable place in the Mystical Body of Christ, whose “members do not all have the same function” (Rom. 12:4). For these offer to God a sacrifice of praise which is outstanding,” (Parr 7).

By observing contemplative communities, I learned the true meaning of prayer, the value of silence, the efficaciousness of solitude, the power of penance and the centrality of the Liturgy of the Eucharist and the Liturgy of the Hours in daily life. I came to realize that contemplative religious are a gift that God gives us to imitate, not to keep hidden. For scripture tell us that we should not put a lamp under a basket where it gives no light.

Contemplative life is lived by religious for the benefit of the Church. Their prayers change the world with more power and more permanency than any action that we can undertake. Through my beloved Capuchin Friars I came to understand that this life is to be imitated by all peoples. It exists for the sanctification of its members and as a witness of true intimacy with the Incarnate Son of God. The contemplative religious teaches us how to be intimate with God. This more than a pastoral statement; there is no lack of truth in the fact that those who take upon themselves to live for God alone occupy a place of honour in the Mystical Body.

This was the life that I wanted. However, because of health reasons I was unable to enter a monastery, but not unable to live this life in the privacy of my home. Once again, God gave me another grace through this event that we call Vatican II.

I welcome anyone else who has received other graces directly or indirectly through Vatican II and its teachings.

Remember, no debates please. This is a thread to bear witness, not to debate.

JR 🙂
 
Howdy JR! I too have noticed a great number of negative postings on CAF regarding the changes following Vatican II, and I completely agree with you that it does become a bit redundant.

I for one am a person who has only known the Catholic Church since the time of Vatican II, and I can’t say that I have many complaints regarding the changes they made to the structure of the mass and other such things… after all, Vatican II largely shaped the Church that I have grown to know and love so completely. It is the post-Vatican II Church which has led me to love Christ and seek to serve Him in my life. That is not to say that I do not have respect for the traditions prior to the Council, but that I truly believe that Vatican II took into account the “signs of the times” of our age in order to better aid in the spreading of the Gospel message.

Our age is one enamored with the internet and independence and instantaneous gratification, and while Vatican II did not change the Church in such a way that would bend it to the whimsical desires of people, it did take into account our need for a more active role within the Church. In allowing the laity to take part in the liturgy both through being a lector or Eucharistic minister or any other number of roles within the Church, it recognized also our need to serve God within His Church. Furthermore, by changing the language of the Mass to the vernacular, the Council adopted a sharing of the Word of God which could truly be fruitful for the common man.

In short, I thank the Vatican II Council for giving me the Church I know and love and for teaching me how to know and love Christ my Saviour. May He ever-change and renew me to more greatly desire His will in my life.
 
Vatican II was a valid ecumenical council led by the Holy Spirit. I wonder how can someone call themselves a Catholic and object to Vatican II.
 
Vatican II was a valid ecumenical council led by the Holy Spirit. I wonder how can someone call themselves a Catholic and object to Vatican II.
There is a lot about VII that should cause a Catholic to squirm. While I accept VII as a legit council, it has been the source of terrible suffering throughout the Church.

BTW…VII was a “pastoral council” and not a dogmatic council. Exactly what does “pastoral council” mean?
 
There is a lot about VII that should cause a Catholic to squirm. While I accept VII as a legit council, it has been the source of terrible suffering throughout the Church.

BTW…VII was a “pastoral council” and not a dogmatic council. Exactly what does “pastoral council” mean?
The way I the difference between the two described was that a dogmatic Council actually declares something regarding Faith and/or Morals, and therefore it cannot err. The pastoral council is a council of “shoulds” and “should nots.” Essentially, a council of “discipline,” if you will, subject to change, not infallible. Thank God.
 
I have been blessed by the authentic following of Vatican II which urged the participation of the laity in evangelization and participation in the work of the Church.

(I am not talking about the abuses people see with EMHC’s and the like, the laity have been misleading themselves into thinking the Mass is a show where everyone wants to be the lead actor)

I am talking about beautiful things, like the amazing story of EWTN and how it continues to bless us with many services to reach the world for Christ. Websites such as this, which allow us to share the faith and learn more to share. Apostolates such as the Bible Christian society and the like all are great illustrations of this. I was at a pro-life conference on Humanae Vitae which illustrated how the laity can all get involved in many ways to promote holiness and a call to conversion to Christ.

As soon as more people start following Vatican II and reading the documents in light of the constant tradition and understanding of the faith, we will see more blessings. Read Trent, etc and documents issued by the Church.
newadvent.org/library/

The faith comes from God, it doesn’t change, we just can find more effective means of presenting the same truth to others.

In Christ
Scylla
 
An error in understanding Vatican II is thinking that every word, every suggestion, every commentary issued in the essays that came forth from the Council are somehow binding dogma. Such an attitude is reflected in the OP:
“However, being as the Council was guided by the Holy Spirit, even if the men and women attending it were human and sinful, there had to be grace poured out on the Church and on each of us. The Holy Spirit never makes himself absent from the Church. It is safe to believe that he did not make himself absent from Vatican II.”
To which I would say, of course the Holy Spirit wasn’t absent - He was there, not in divinely inspiring every word, every suggestion, every commentary issued in the essays that came forth from the Council, but in preventing formal error from being bound for the Church in said essays.

As such, now with hindsight, as we see the ambeguities in these essays being constantly twisted and distorted to contradict what already has been bound infallibly - we need more than ever the light of Tradition (that often forgotten necessary aspect of Truth - Scripture, Tradtion, and Magestarium) to prevent us from going off the deep end and into error.

The biggest problem, the biggest hurdle, is to get folks to realize that the unorthodox interpretation of the ambeguities are not guaranteed to be infallible, and are not Church Teaching - especially when it comes to matters of faith and morals. Such folks often refuse - absolutely stubbornly refuse - to see this, and thus any critique of their interpretations result in accustions of infidelity to Holy Mother Church.

The stubborn refusal to look honestly at the infallible dogmas and proclamations that the Holy Spirit gave us pre-Vatican II betray a “that was then, this is now” attitude to both Holy Mother Church - and Truth itself.

Peace in Christ,

DustinsDad
 
BTW…VII was a “pastoral council” and not a dogmatic council. Exactly what does “pastoral council” mean?
The way I the difference between the two described was that a dogmatic Council actually declares something regarding Faith and/or Morals, and therefore it cannot err. The pastoral council is a council of “shoulds” and “should nots.” Essentially, a council of “discipline,” if you will, subject to change, not infallible. Thank God.
The term “pastoral”, as applied to a council, is simply a description of the goals intended and/or fulfilled by the council. There is no class of councils termed “pastoral”. In other words, a “pastoral” council has no less authority than any other ecumenical council; all ecumenical councils have the same authority. The frequently heard idea that a “pastoral” council is not infallible is incorrect. You will find no Church document to substantiate this.

Is is true, however, that the primary purpose of the Second Vatican Council was not to issue dogmatic declarations, but to handle more practical concerns. This is why it is a “pastoral” council. Yet it is still an ecumenical council.
 
I like to think that Vat2 did not precipitate, but rather anticipated, by the guidance of the HS, the changes which western societies underwent and which some leaders and teachers in the Church unfortunately conformed to in the last 40 years. Most of the documents were gems of Catholic thought. It was an awesome, timely council which purposed to fill the Church with a clearer vision of the truth and infuse her with a greater love for, and perhaps less fear of, a lost world. It will require decades to fully understand and implement the council correctly.
 
One of the graces we received as laity from Vatican II was the gift of hearing the Liturgy, and especially the Liturgy of the Word in our own language. It is crucial as humans to come to understand God in *all *truth in order to have a full relationship with Him, and one of the important ways He has revealed Himself to us is through Sacred Scripture, in order that we many come to know him not only in spirit but also in fullness of truth.

The Sacred Scriptures tell us that faith comes by hearing, and by hearing the Word of God. This is telling us something important. We have to actively engage our minds in an interaction with the spoken Word of God. If this spoken Word is in a language that we do not understand, we are being robbed of something vital to our faith, which is the knowledge of God as revealed in Sacred Scriptures.

I believe that one thing that was missing prior to Vatican II was the ability of the average lay person to understand and engage intellectually with the Liturgy of the Word during the celebration of the Mass, this is a very important part of Mass. It is vital when celebrating the Mass that all aspects of God’s revelation be presented and understood by those who participate or else their knowledge of God in fullness of truth is lacking.

If we are in a relationship with another human being, and that person withholds information that is critical in coming to understand who they are, our relationship with them in not complete and true intimacy is impossible. So it is with our relationship with God. We need all areas of revelation in order to have the truest and most intimate relationship with Him. This includes an intellectual understanding, one that grows with study of his revealed Word, the Church’s teachings of the Word, and then on to contemplation.

I believe the Church, being led by the Holy Spirit, recognized that the Liturgy, and especially the Liturgy of the Word needed to be opened up and available to every person participating in the Mass in order to make available every possible grace that God has for us through our worship of him.
 
I believe the Church, being led by the Holy Spirit, recognized that the Liturgy, and especially the Liturgy of the Word needed to be opened up and available to every person participating in the Mass in order to make available every possible grace that God has for us through our worship of him.
You are right and I agree, it is just a shame that in many parishes they threw out the proper understanding of Vatican II. Instead of teaching Latin, sharing the Word in the vernacular and paying respect both desires of Vatican II, to maintain Latin as the language of the Liturgy and share the Word in the individual languages, some people twisted the wording of Vatican II to their own desires, threw out the Latin and ignored the traditions of our Church.

It is a shame, you can share tradition, teach people, teach the faith and make it available for everyone but instead the documents of Vatican II were ignored and many things got messed up. I am grateful for the urging of Vatican II to keep Latin as the language of the Liturgy and the Word of God in the language of each group of people, so that people can get an introduction to the faith and see the faith reflected in Her traditions.

In Christ
Scylla
 
Perhaps my biggest problem with Vatican II is that many Catholics are inclined to believe that everything that came before has been reprobated.
 
You are right and I agree, it is just a shame that in many parishes they threw out the proper understanding of Vatican II. Instead of teaching Latin, sharing the Word in the vernacular and paying respect both desires of Vatican II, to maintain Latin as the language of the Liturgy and share the Word in the individual languages, some people twisted the wording of Vatican II to their own desires, threw out the Latin and ignored the traditions of our Church.

It is a shame, you can share tradition, teach people, teach the faith and make it available for everyone but instead the documents of Vatican II were ignored and many things got messed up. I am grateful for the urging of Vatican II to keep Latin as the language of the Liturgy and the Word of God in the language of each group of people, so that people can get an introduction to the faith and see the faith reflected in Her traditions.

In Christ
Scylla
Remember, it is the inention of this thread to discuss the graces that we have received through Vatican II. All criticisms of Vatican II should be placed in another thread.

Thanks and God bless

JR 🙂
 
Perhaps my biggest problem with Vatican II is that many Catholics are inclined to believe that everything that came before has been reprobated.
Your problem is not with the Council, but with those who believe this.

JR 🙂
 
Perhaps my biggest problem with Vatican II is that many Catholics are inclined to believe that everything that came before has been reprobated.
Yes. Like the 1962 Missal. But, thankfully the Mass has been freed of the “stigma”, and the recent announcement that Cardinal Hoyos will pray the Forma Extraordinaria soon is wonderful news. 👍
 
Remember, it is the inention of this thread to discuss the graces that we have received through Vatican II. All criticisms of Vatican II should be placed in another thread.

Thanks and God bless

JR 🙂
No problem, please look at my post closely there is no criticism of Vatican II at all. I believe it was quite a blessing on our Church to seek to better present the Holy Faith to the world and of course to ourselves.

I meant no implication of negativity on Vatican II, so I am sorry if I gave that impression. Lets get back to pointing out what is good from Vatican II.

God Bless
Scylla
 
Your problem is not with the Council, but with those who believe this.

JR 🙂
Perhaps. And perhaps the Council Fathers and especially the bishops and underlings who implemented the changes should have been more clear in their language and intent.

Many changes have taken place “in the spirit of Vatican II” that were never called for in the Council, and much it did call for was ignored by bishops and others in charge.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top