Vatican II

[Eilish_Maura]

I see nothing in the last paragraph of #31 that is out of order. Please explain.

As far as finding copies of the documents I believe there are millions of catholics that never knew where to find them. Many probably did not even know that these documents were available to the laity.

In your research you did not discover them?

Or the hardcopy edition of them?

 

[samoht]

In your research you did not discover them?

Or the hardcopy edition of them?

No. How did you discover them?

 

[1ke]

I see nothing in the last paragraph of #31 that is out of order. Please explain.

You stated that you had done research. Yet, you haven’t read the documents of Vatican II nor even know where to find them. In post #31 you asked the following questions:

One of my questions has not been answered yet as far as I know. That is does anyone know who was on the council for Vatican II? Were there any outsiders? I mean those of other christian denominations. And if there were why were they there?
If an answer is not known please do not guess. Personally I have heard that there were ministers from other faiths and is that true?

These questionsn you ask indicate you have not done any research, because even one Google search would have turned up this information with no effort at all. If you had read the documents of Vatican II the answers to these questions would be found there too.

As far as finding copies of the documents I believe there are millions of catholics that never knew where to find them.

I would say those millions never had any interest in finding them. I had read the documents of Vatican II before I ever became a Catholic. If I could find them, I’m sure millions of others could too. The library has them, Catholic bookstores carry them, and for the last ten years they’ve been available on the Internet as well.

Many probably did not even know that these documents were available to the laity.

Again, only the willfully ignorant. They are in every Catholic bookstore I’ve ever been in. The public library has them.

But, I do agree that many didn’t even think to read them or have much interest in them-- and there were likely many different reasons for that. It’s a shame more laity do not take an interest in the many documents of the Church… they are indeed a treasure trove.

 

[samoht]

You stated that you had done research. Yet, you haven’t read the documents of Vatican II nor even know where to find them. In post #31 you asked the following questions:

One of my questions has not been answered yet as far as I know. That is does anyone know who was on the council for Vatican II? Were there any outsiders? I mean those of other christian denominations. And if there were why were they there?
If an answer is not known please do not guess. Personally I have heard that there were ministers from other faiths and is that true?

These questionsn you ask indicate you have not done any research, because even one Google search would have turned up this information with no effort at all. If you had read the documents of Vatican II the answers to these questions would be found there too.

I would say those millions never had any interest in finding them. I had read the documents of Vatican II before I ever became a Catholic. If I could find them, I’m sure millions of others could too. The library has them, Catholic bookstores carry them, and for the last ten years they’ve been available on the Internet as well.

Again, only the willfully ignorant. They are in every Catholic bookstore I’ve ever been in. The public library has them.

But, I do agree that many didn’t even think to read them or have much interest in them-- and there were likely many different reasons for that. It’s a shame more laity do not take an interest in the many documents of the Church… they are indeed a treasure trove.

My quest was not for the documents but why after Vatican II everything that was tradition in the church started to become almost irrevelant. But I can tell from your attitude that you want to argue for the joy of arguing. I do not play that game.

My research is abundant but you will close your mind to anything that makes you fearful may prove your lack of understanding. You have tried to do everything but come right out and call me stupid and ignorant. And now you claim the millions that have not read the documents are probably not much better.

You have finally told me what I suspected. That you came to the catholic church from a non-catholic way and there is not a thing wrong with non-catholics. I would think you would find it to serve you better if you were more open to constructive comments about the catholic faith being not origianlly catholic yourself. But I think you are too busy attempting to find personal fault with others and look down your nose with a better than thou attitude towards born catholics. You have a lot to learn my friend and you could learn it from one such as I who has spent his 72 years as a catholic.

The trouble with some converts is that they would like to prove to born catholics that they know more than they do. What a pity.

Enjoy yourself as long as you can for the fall could be a bitter one.

I would love to sit down with you face to face and see how well you would do then.

Thomas Eby…

 

[1ke]

One of my questions has not been answered yet as far as I know. That is does anyone know who was on the council for Vatican II?

All bishops and the heads of a number of religious orders of priests-- approximately 2900. The council took place over 4 years, plus numerous committees that worked on the various documents in between the four general sessions held each year. The number in attendance at the Council varied.

Were there any outsiders? I mean those of other christian denominations. And if there were why were they there?

Yes, representatives from a number of non-Catholic denominations were invited as observers and attendance varied over the four years of the council.

If an answer is not known please do not guess. Personally I have heard that there were ministers from other faiths and is that true?

Yes, there were numerous observers. They did not participate.

 

[1ke]

My quest was not for the documents but why after Vatican II everything that was tradition in the church started to become almost irrevelant.

You have yet to establish this as a fact. It is your opinion. One that is shared by some and not by others. And, your use of absolutes such as “everything” is not logical. “Everything” has not changed. Some things have changed. Some of those changes have been positive and some have not. Some are in the eye of the beholder and people take differing positions on them. None of them are doctrinal.

But I can tell from your attitude that you want to argue for the joy of arguing. I do not play that game.

You know very little about me at all. And, having posted here for 4 years and thousands of posts, I can assure you that I do not “argue” for the “joy of arguing”. I try to answer questions and share my knowledge, my opinions, and my Faith.

You’ve made many accusations, but with no evidence at all to back it up.

My research is abundant

It would seem to me that without having read any of the documents of VII it couldn’t be that abundant.

but you will close your mind to anything that makes you fearful may prove your lack of understanding.

I’m not fearful of anything, least of all the documents of Vatican II or discussion of the topic of Vatican II.

You have tried to do everything but come right out and call me stupid and ignorant. And now you claim the millions that have not read the documents are probably not much better.

I did not call you stupid or ignorant.

You have finally told me what I suspected. That you came to the catholic church from a non-catholic way and there is not a thing wrong with non-catholics. I would think you would find it to serve you better if you were more open to constructive comments about the catholic faith being not origianlly catholic yourself.

I didn’t know that there was a separate section on the bus for those not born catholic or that we were not allowed to have opinions.

But I think you are too busy attempting to find personal fault with others and look down your nose with a better than thou attitude towards born catholics.

Wow. That certainly is a completely unsubstantiated statement. For someone who recently posted that they do not take things perosnally, your comments certainly indicate otherwise.

I don’t know you, and I am not finding fault with you. Honestly I’m trying to understand you. You say “everything” has been for the worse since Vatican II but yet you cannot give examples of HOW it’s worse. You gave an example of the priest not kneeling down at the end of mass and saying a particular prayer-- how exactly has that made anything WORSE? Simultaneously, you have yet to acknowledge some of the things that are for the BETTER-- for example, the revision of the lectionary and the addition of large portions of the bible to the Liturgy through that revision.

You have a lot to learn my friend and you could learn it from one such as I who has spent his 72 years as a catholic.

And, perhaps you could learn too from someone who hasn’t.

The trouble with some converts is that they would like to prove to born catholics that they know more than they do. What a pity.

Perhaps there are some who are in that category. I am not one of them.

Enjoy yourself as long as you can for the fall could be a bitter one.

I would love to sit down with you face to face and see how well you would do then.

I am sure I would do quite well.

 

[Eilish_Maura]

not allowed, you should dress respectfully for Mass

Not good either

What prayer is that? At the end of Mass at my parish we have the traditional blessing.

This is only supposed to be allowable if there is no other way to serve all communicants in a timely fashion

This was a silly change, made by people who felt that there should be no seperation from where the priests are to where the people are. Its just bad theology.

In new Churches VII called for the alter to be moved away from the wall, and seperate it from the tabernacle so that the alter could be censed all the way around, and to draw Roman Style Altars into closer sembalence to Eastern Alters, and to older alters. Basically to take the idea of the altar at St. Peters and apply it univerally, but because in that Bassilica the Celebrant faces east (as per tradition) which is towards the people in St. Peters, a bunch of priests thought they should copy that, and it just caught on.

**Bassically VII did not perscribe any of the atrocities you see, they are fruits of the “Spirit of Vatican II” but if anything it is a Counter Spirit.
**
These and many other questions have I and no real substantial answers.

Can anyone answer these questions?

Thank you and God Bless you

Thomas Eby
thomaseby07@comcast.net

Just curious - how could you make the bolded statements if you did not read any of the documents as part of your ‘research’?

 

[samoht]

Eilish_Maura:
Just curious - how could you make the bolded statements if you did not read any of the documents as part of your ‘research’?

I have read some of the documents. Have you? I know I said previously that I did not read them because they are not what I am talking about. If you have eyes to read then you know exactly what I am talking about. I do not need to know about the alter and it facing east or anything else other than the altar is now facing the people and it should be the way it has been for many years.

Making bold statements is what I am all about. I will say one last time that it has nothing to do with the documents that most of you think I am talking about. Forget the documents for once and read to yourself what I am saying.

1. The slovenly dress
2. Talking while Mass is going on
3. throwing away the beautiful statues
4. no more communion rail
5. No more chimes when the priest consecreates the bread and
   water.
6. Confessions of all the faithful rather than individual confessions
7. A wooden table replacing the beautiful altars.
8. The replacing of the Latin Mass with the vernacular
9. Almost everything in the church now says secular not religious
10. The use of girls along with altar boys
11. Saturday Mass of convenience so that one does not have to
    get up Sunday morning. Even the Jews still make holy their
    sabbath as they have done for thousands of years
12. Devout atmosphere in the church is almost gone.

There is more but do I need to say it? You are probably not old enough to know how beautiful the Mass used to be before Vatican II. The Missals (of which I still have mine) had English on one page and on the other page was Latin that you could follow either if you wanted to. The atmosphere in the churches was of one accord in total reverance. If you can say that now then you deserve what you have.

Thomas Eby

 

[samoht]

You have yet to establish this as a fact. It is your opinion. One that is shared by some and not by others. And, your use of absolutes such as “everything” is not logical. “Everything” has not changed. Some things have changed. Some of those changes have been positive and some have not. Some are in the eye of the beholder and people take differing positions on them. None of them are doctrinal.

You know very little about me at all. And, having posted here for 4 years and thousands of posts, I can assure you that I do not “argue” for the “joy of arguing”. I try to answer questions and share my knowledge, my opinions, and my Faith.

You’ve made many accusations, but with no evidence at all to back it up.

It would seem to me that without having read any of the documents of VII it couldn’t be that abundant.

I’m not fearful of anything, least of all the documents of Vatican II or discussion of the topic of Vatican II.

I did not call you stupid or ignorant.

I didn’t know that there was a separate section on the bus for those not born catholic or that we were not allowed to have opinions.

Wow. That certainly is a completely unsubstantiated statement. For someone who recently posted that they do not take things perosnally, your comments certainly indicate otherwise.

I don’t know you, and I am not finding fault with you. Honestly I’m trying to understand you. You say “everything” has been for the worse since Vatican II but yet you cannot give examples of HOW it’s worse. You gave an example of the priest not kneeling down at the end of mass and saying a particular prayer-- how exactly has that made anything WORSE? Simultaneously, you have yet to acknowledge some of the things that are for the BETTER-- for example, the revision of the lectionary and the addition of large portions of the bible to the Liturgy through that revision.

And, perhaps you could learn too from someone who hasn’t.

Perhaps there are some who are in that category. I am not one of them.

I am sure I would do quite well.

I am not sure that you would do well if all you do is offer what you have offered so far.

I just replied to Eilish Maura with a list of things and I will not list them again. I am sure all of you colaborate on the posts you get so ask Eilish to see what I just sent.

I might learn something from you if you opened your eyes to what is going on in the church as well as the world.l

Do you not have one criticism of what is happening in the church?
You remind me of someone who is afraid to speak against something for fear that if you do then everything you profess to believe will be for naught. Think about it.

Thomas Eby

 

[Eilish_Maura]

I have read some of the documents. Have you? I know I said previously that I did not read them because they are not what I am talking about. If you have eyes to read then you know exactly what I am talking about. I do not need to know about the alter and it facing east or anything else other than the altar is now facing the people and it should be the way it has been for many years.

Making bold statements is what I am all about. I will say one last time that it has nothing to do with the documents that most of you think I am talking about. Forget the documents for once and read to yourself what I am saying.

1. The slovenly dress
2. Talking while Mass is going on
3. throwing away the beautiful statues
4. no more communion rail
5. No more chimes when the priest consecreates the bread and
   water.
6. Confessions of all the faithful rather than individual confessions
7. A wooden table replacing the beautiful altars.
8. The replacing of the Latin Mass with the vernacular
9. Almost everything in the church now says secular not religious
10. The use of girls along with altar boys
11. Saturday Mass of convenience so that one does not have to
    get up Sunday morning. Even the Jews still make holy their
    sabbath as they have done for thousands of years
12. Devout atmosphere in the church is almost gone.

There is more but do I need to say it? You are probably not old enough to know how beautiful the Mass used to be before Vatican II. The Missals (of which I still have mine) had English on one page and on the other page was Latin that you could follow either if you wanted to. The atmosphere in the churches was of one accord in total reverance. If you can say that now then you deserve what you have.

Thomas Eby

Consecrate WATER???

Confession of all the faithful and not individual confessions???

Your ‘research’ should have turned up plenty of churches with religious statues and other religious art and some with stone altars (not just wooden ones).

You have been bouncing back and forth on a few things - and now you have made some very odd statements.

What is really going on in this thread??

 

[1ke]

I do not need to know about the alter and it facing east or anything else other than the altar is now facing the people and it should be the way it has been for many years.

Why? Why should it be that way?

1. The slovenly dress

People do not attend Mass at my home parish slovenly dressed. I am traveling for work right now, and people were not dressed slovenly at the Mass I attended today, either.

1. Talking while Mass is going on

No one talks while Mass is going on at my parish, nor before-- we recite the Rosary before Mass.

No one talked during Mass today either.

Perhaps you should say something to people who talk during Mass at your parish.

1. throwing away the beautiful statues

I do know that statues were removed from some parishes, however my parish has several lovely statues. The point being-- the things you name off are NOT universal.

1. no more communion rail

In most parishes, yes, this is true-- although I have been in several that retained the Communion rail and have had Communion at the rail in these parishes. But again, articulate WHY you believe this to be bad.

1. No more chimes when the priest consecreates the bread and water.

The parish I attended this morning had them.

1. Confessions of all the faithful rather than individual confessions

Since when? And, where have you witnessed this? Communal confession is NOT allowed except as specified in Canon Law (for example, the battlefield, etc) and no parish I have ever attended has had it.

1. A wooden table replacing the beautiful altars.

My current parish has a wooden altar. The parish I attended this morning and my old parish both had stone altars. Both are allowed. Not sure why this is a problem for you. Wood can be beautiful. Also, many old churches I’ve visited had wooden altars, carved and painted (sometimes painted to look like stone).

1. The replacing of the Latin Mass with the vernacular

Explain why this is a problem.

1. Almost everything in the church now says secular not religious

Substantiate this accusation with some facts, please. Not one doctrine of the Church has changed.

1. The use of girls along with altar boys

And???

1. Saturday Mass of convenience so that one does not have to get up Sunday morning. Even the Jews still make holy their sabbath as they have done for thousands of years

Again, accusations without substance. Now you are assigning motives to people regarding the anticipatory Mass.

In our parish, we share a priest with two other parishes and we have Saturday evening Mass as our ONLY Mass this year. We rotate with the other parishes on an annual basis, so next year we’ll have Sunday at 8:30 and the year after that Sunday at 10:30. My husband and I certainly keep Sunday holy regardless of going to Mass on Saturday evening.

Mass is Mass.

1. Devout atmosphere in the church is almost gone.

Perhaps in your parish, not in mine.

If you can say that now then you deserve what you have.

The sum total of your argument seems to be “it’s wrong because I say so” and “it’s wrong because it’s different”.

Well, I’m sure when the Mass went from Greek to Latin; from the house churches and catacombs to buildings that had once been pagan temples; and from the many rites celebrated prior to Trent to a uniform Rite after there were people who thought those changes were “bad” or “wrong” too.

C’est la vie.

 

[1ke]

Do you not have one criticism of what is happening in the church?

Sure I do.

Heretics should be dealt with much more swiftly, publically, and harshly than they currently are. I think the Bishops are way too soft on dissenters and Catholics in public positions.

 

[1ke]

Consecrate WATER???

He meant wine, I’m sure.

 

[Joe_5859]

If you want a good, readable overview of what led to many of the things you have asked about follwing Vatican II, I highly recommend this book:

What Went Wrong With Vatican II by Ralph McInerny

This book is very helpful in gaining perspective over much of the confusion in the Catholic world in the past 40 years. It is a good starting point to studying the Vatican II documents as well.

Vatican II: The Crisis and the Promise by Alan Schreck is also a great book. It is a bit longer than McInerny’s book, but has the added benefit of summarizing the documents in easy-to-understand language.

These two books will help give you a more thorough understanding of the subject than can likely be gleaned from us here!

 

[CradleCath]

QUOTE=samoht;3351353]1. I will ask a few more questions. What particular social changes occurred since the end of WW II?

1. Who are the people who give answers to these questions
   and what is their age range?

1. Can you tell me who made up the Vatican council?

I agree with much of what you said. As a 66 yr. old Catholic, I too have experienced the reverence & solemnity of Catholicism before the council & am appalled by the “do your own thing & use the doctrine of Primacy of Concience to justify it” attitude today. .

I doubt you will find anything in the documents of Vatican II that explains to you why this has all happened, but it would be good to read them…if for no other reason that to learn what was actually determined by the Council & what wasn’t.

The truth is the Council was hijaked by many of our hierarchy…starting with the German delegation. Karl Rahner, often called the “father of the council” would be my first choice of answers to your question: “Who is responsible?” I cannot provide much info this morning, but will start with a link that will help you understand:
everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=553725

An exerpt:

[SIGN]"When the Second Vatican Council was called in 1962, Rahner became the chief theological expert for the German-speaking bishops, even though he was still being investigated by the Curia’s doctrinal policemen. In addition to contributing directly, he heavily influenced Josef Cardinal Frings, who sat on the Council sub-committee that drafted its most important documents. **In the end, Vatican II officially approved a doctrinal statement on the nature of the Church that was substantially crafted by Rahner. In **1961 Rahner was under a cloud; in 1964 his work had been officially endorsed by the highest authority in the Catholic Church.

Rahner continued to work after the Council. He intervened on behalf of the noted, younger theologian Eduard Schillebeeckx when Curial officials attempted to silence him in 1968, and became a lead editor of the influential journal Consilium. He continued to write and speak actively until his death in 1984".[/SIGN]
2 PS’s: Do not give up hope. Pope Benedict is making massive corrections to the irreverence & disobedience that we see within our Church today.

AND you’ll receive more info & a much kinder reception if you post within the Tradional forum. God be with you in your search for the truth.

 

[CradleCath]

Consecrate WATER???

Confession of all the faithful and not individual confessions???

Your ‘research’ should have turned up plenty of churches with religious statues and other religious art and some with stone altars (not just wooden ones).

You have been bouncing back and forth on a few things - and now you have made some very odd statements.

What is really going on in this thread??

 

[CradleCath]

=Eilish Maura;3354634]Consecrate WATER???

Since I’m sure that you know that this man intended to type WINE & that this is a typo, why did you pick this…from his complete post…to comment on??

Confession of all the faithful and not individual confessions???

Yes! This practice, general absolution, was not only practiced in my diocese…it was PREVELENT for years.

Your ‘research’ should have turned up plenty of churches with religious statues and other religious art and some with stone altars (not just wooden ones).

I must almost laugh at this comment. The wreckovation within the Churches in this country is well-known to most Catholics. . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wreckovation[ to be.

You have been bouncing back and forth on a few things - and now you have made some very odd statements.

What is really going on in this thread??

appears](http )

 

[peary]

Concerning Vatican II I would like to know why so many things of tradition have changed and changed to the detrement not the benefit of Catholics.

I have heard many reasons from lay people and priests but none of them can assure me that they were for the best. To name a few: the atrocious and careless way people dress for Mass? the talking to ones neighbor while attending Mass? the prayer for peace at the end of the Mass? the communion served by lay people? the elimination of the communion rail? the altar turned toward the people?

These and many other questions have I and no real substantial answers.

Can anyone answer these questions?

Thank you and God Bless you

Thomas Eby
thomaseby07@comcast.net

the atrocious and careless way people dress for Mass…

This is a cultural problem, and is widespread throughout all of society. It is not the result of Vatican II.

the talking to ones neighbor while attending Mass…

lack of manners, which is also widespread throughout all of society. It is not the result of Vatican II.

the prayer for peace at the end of the Mass…

I am not aware of one, at least, not in our parish. At the end of the Tridentine Mass was a prayer to St. Michael the Archangel. The Novus Ordo dropped this but this was due more or less to its inclusion as a private relevation of a pope rather than its acceptance by a council.

the communion served by lay people…

They have to be Extraordinary ministers, not some one off the street or out of the pews. These ministers have a specific duty to perform for the church community.

the elimination of the communion rail…

The Communion rail was eliminated because the faithful were no longer required to kneel when receiving the Eucharist. They were doing this in Europe a decade before Vatican II, by the way.

the altar turned toward the people…

In the Tridentine Liturgy, everyone faced the Blessed Sacrament in the tabernacle on the altar. Part of the reason for turning the altar around was the problem of Consecration on the same altar in front of an already consecrated host, which did not make theological sense. The Novus Ordo had a valid reason for turning the altar facing the people because we all were to be witnesses to the Consecration of the Eucharist, just as the early Christians were.

I hope this answers some of your questions.

 

[jeaniemarie]

Dear Mr. Eby -
Some thoughts from a post VII cradle Catholic in case you are interested in a different perspective. Tho first I would like to say that I really respect your love for the church and for the tradition you were raised in. The long history and tradition of the Church is one of the things I take great comfort in.

I was born in the early 60’s so my formation on the faith was right on the edge of VII. I have done no research of my own on VII but was taught that the purpose was to be more accessible to the regular people.

1. The slovenly dress

I would agree that we are way more casual than even some protestant churches I have been to. However, the fastest growing non-denominational church in our area stresses casual attire. I also understand that for your generation, the way you dressed was part of your worship to God - a sign of respect. But you must not presume that people in my generation are dressing the way the are out of disrespect.

1. Talking while Mass is going on

The only time I see this is during Christmas and Easter (usually midnight Mass or the Easter Vigil). While it is annoying and distracting I say a prayer of thanks that people who do not normally come to church are here, ask God to bless them and speak to their hearts, and offer up the aggravation.

1. throwing away the beautiful statues

I don’t care much for the more modern churches. My church has beautiful statues and architecture.

1. no more communion rail

We have one tho it is not used. I can see, in theory how using one may be more reverential, but I can remember when I was very young using one and it really wasn’t more reverential for me. Of course, I was very young.

1. No more chimes when the priest consecreates the bread and
   water.

I like the chimes. Our current priest does not use them, but our last priest did.

1. Confessions of all the faithful rather than individual confessions

I have no idea what this is.

1. A wooden table replacing the beautiful altars.

We have beautiful marble altars. I wouldn’t much care for a wooden one either.

1. The replacing of the Latin Mass with the vernacular

My mother is a cradle Catholic. She attended Masses in Latin with the Homilies in Bohemian. I am very grateful that I can experience the entire Mass in a language I understand.

1. Almost everything in the church now says secular not religious

Not at my church.

1. The use of girls along with altar boys

I think that’s a generational thing - I see nothing wrong with it at all. My mother loves it - she always wanted to be an altar server but of course, could not because she was a girl.

1. Saturday Mass of convenience so that one does not have to
   get up Sunday morning. Even the Jews still make holy their
   sabbath as they have done for thousands of years

Guilty. Tho, in my defense - I teach CCD on Sunday mornings and this allows me to get to class early to prepare for the little darlings.

1. Devout atmosphere in the church is almost gone.

I think that is up to you. If you have alot of talking people before and during mass I can see your point. Perhaps that is something your parish priest can address?

There is more but do I need to say it? You are probably not old enough to know how beautiful the Mass used to be before Vatican II.

True. I am sorry I missed it.

The Missals (of which I still have mine) had English on one page and on the other page was Latin that you could follow either if you wanted to. The atmosphere in the churches was of one accord in total reverance.

It sounds lovely. But how was church growth at the time? Was it better or worse than now? This year, my parish has 9 catechuments and candidates we will be welcoming into the Church.

And, as others have said, I believe most of these changes were cultural, not from VII. And, in my comparatively short experience, some of it depends on your priest. Our last one was very traditional and brought back a lot of traditions (including the Angelus which I had never heard of - sad, I know). Our current one is more modern and did away with a lot of the traditional stuff.

I’ve learned to lift my heart up to God, no matter the form of the Mass or the priest involved. Christ is still there along with the whole communion of saints - it is still a beautiful thing.

God bless you.

 

[Eilish_Maura]

I have read some of the documents. Have you? I know I said previously that I did not read them because they are not what I am talking about. If you have eyes to read then you know exactly what I am talking about. I do not need to know about the alter and it facing east or anything else other than the altar is now facing the people and it should be the way it has been for many years.

Making bold statements is what I am all about. I will say one last time that it has nothing to do with the documents that most of you think I am talking about. Forget the documents for once and read to yourself what I am saying.

1. The slovenly dress
2. Talking while Mass is going on
3. throwing away the beautiful statues
4. no more communion rail
5. No more chimes when the priest consecreates the bread and
   water.
6. Confessions of all the faithful rather than individual confessions
7. A wooden table replacing the beautiful altars.
8. The replacing of the Latin Mass with the vernacular
9. Almost everything in the church now says secular not religious
10. The use of girls along with altar boys
11. Saturday Mass of convenience so that one does not have to
    get up Sunday morning. Even the Jews still make holy their
    sabbath as they have done for thousands of years
12. Devout atmosphere in the church is almost gone.

There is more but do I need to say it? You are probably not old enough to know how beautiful the Mass used to be before Vatican II. The Missals (of which I still have mine) had English on one page and on the other page was Latin that you could follow either if you wanted to. The atmosphere in the churches was of one accord in total reverance. If you can say that now then you deserve what you have.

Thomas Eby

Just curious here

How does your ‘research’ not provide you with proper terminology for some of the things you have complained about?