Vatican II

[CWBetts]

Well CW, if you go back and read my post I actually said poor catechesis was to blame. And I was questioning whether allowing CITH was a prudent decision in light of that fact. And based upon the statement by the Sec. of the Congregation Of Divine Worship and the example of the Pope, I would say I’m in good company to question a discipline that they have stated leads to lack of reverance in the Real Presence.

All I know is that sometimes I receive Him on the tongue, and sometimes I receive Him in the hand…and I believe. Perhaps it would help if people would use the pronoun “Him” instead of “it”…

 

[Ockham]

It is up to you to provide the evidence. It is you who are making the charge. To simply assume without evidence is the logical fallacy of “begging the question”.

Look at the numbers. Belief in Transubstantation, attendance at Mass, Confession, adherence to Church teaching has all declined since V2. Of course the Modernist retort is to blame everything on the sexual revolution or George Bush, but the numbers speak for themselves.

 

[CWBetts]

Look at the numbers. Belief in Transubstantation, attendance at Mass, Confession, adherence to Church teaching has all declined since V2. Of course the Modernist retort is to blame everything on the sexual revolution or George Bush, but the numbers speak for themselves.

1. CITH has nothing to do with Vatican 2. I am sure you can cite the appropriate section in the appropriate document.
2. There has been a general decline in adherence to the strictures of the faith in Protestant circles as well. Is Vatican 2 and CITH to blame for those too?
3. Instead of falsely blaming Vatican 2 or the Pauline Mass, why don’t you chalk it up to the basic tendency of humanity to stray from God?

The only “evidence” you have is circumstantial. Using this kind of logic, I can blame Herbert Hover for the Holocaust.

 

[Ockham]

That’s the typical pro-‘spirit of V2’ response.

Of course all of the declining numbers are sheer coincidence (sarcasm).

The Pope is moving us back towards traditional practices just because he’s Bavarian (more sarcasm).

Sorry for all the sarcasm. This weak defence you put up doesn’t deserve anything more.

There may have been people on the Titanic blaming the sinking on anything but collision with an iceberg, but they still drowned.

 

[pnewton]

Of course the Modernist retort is to blame everything on the sexual revolution or George Bush, but the numbers speak for themselves.

Logic is not the exclusive territory of modern man. I do not know what you mean by “Modernist”, as that term is used as an insulting label indiscriminate of the truth. By that I mean, others and I have frequently been called as a modernist merely on the basis of disagreement. I say that as a precursory to the topic of Vatican II. The sexual revolution began before Vatican II. Many of the challenges Vatican II were meant to address are often credited as the result of Vatican II, in a sort of revisionist anachronistic way. As other Christians besides Catholics have experienced many of the same problems as Catholics, and since Catholics alone claim Vatican II as an authoritative Church Council, it is a reasonable belief that Vatican II is not responsible for all the ills attributed to it.

 

[Eric_Hilbert]

A whole page of posts have been deleted for being off topic. Stay on the topic of the OP please.

 

[MarkThompson]

Many of the challenges Vatican II were meant to address are often credited as the result of Vatican II, in a sort of revisionist anachronistic way.

That’s worth repeating. It’s not a self-proving statement, by any means, but it deserves to be kept in mind when explanations are sought.

 

[Ockham]

V2 was called as a pastoral council, against the judgement of every pope since V1, the prep documents were thrown out at the commencement, and our current pontiff has stated that the ‘spirit of V2’ has been misinterpreted. Most of the changes in our Church since V2 were not called for by the council.

What do we do now?

 

[CWBetts]

V2 was called as a pastoral council, against the judgement of every pope since V1, the prep documents were thrown out at the commencement, and our current pontiff has stated that the ‘spirit of V2’ has been misinterpreted. Most of the changes in our Church since V2 were not called for by the council.

What do we do now?

Listen to the magisterial documents from the Church on the proper interpretation of the Council. The new Catechism would be a good place to start.

 

[dmorgan]

Dmorgan, next time you cut and paste all the content of a webpage (this one), please attribute it properly so that no one could mistake you for trying to pass it off as your own research. Just a tip.

I apologize if anyone thought that the compilation of quotes was my work. I was in a hurry and missed placing the link on the last page.It came from this website:

catholicapologetics.info/

As for wasting bandwidth, which another poster mentioned, I do not see learning about the true history of our faith as a waste. Some are on this forum to promote traditional beliefs, some are here to defend the post-conciliar church and some just wish to learn something about the faith. Posting links and quotes from those who have gone before is an attempt to educate individuals in order that they may draw from the rich History of our Faith. Not just from opinions and what has happened since V-II. Contrary to what some believe, the holy Catholic Church did not start with the second Vatican Council.

For those looking to learn their Faith in more depth, I offer:
vatican.va/holy_father/index.htm (Papal documents)

papalencyclicals.net/ (many more authentic Papal Documents and the Councils)

cin.org/users/james/ebooks/master/master2.htm#Extreme%20Unction%20or%20Holy%20Anointing (a single link to six of the most used Catachisms)

None of these sites have any slant, pre or post concilliar.

 

[Ockham]

Listen to the magisterial documents from the Church on the proper interpretation of the Council. The new Catechism would be a good place to start.

I’m citing from our Pope who has stated the documents were misinterpreted.

 

[CWBetts]

I’m citing from our Pope who has stated the documents were misinterpreted.

As long as you believe that it was the interpretation of the documents, and not the documents themselves, that are in error.

 

[fhansen]

V2 was called as a pastoral council, against the judgement of every pope since V1, the prep documents were thrown out at the commencement, and our current pontiff has stated that the ‘spirit of V2’ has been misinterpreted. Most of the changes in our Church since V2 were not called for by the council.

What do we do now?

I don’t believe that our current pope would have any problem with the new CCC.

 

[Ockham]

As long as you believe that it was the interpretation of the documents, and not the documents themselves, that are in error.

That’s what he said.

To extend his thoughts, no where did it call for CITH for example.

 

[CWBetts]

That’s what he said.

To extend his thoughts, no where did it call for CITH for example.

That i because the Novus Ordo came after Vatican 2, and was not part of the council itself.

 

[Ockham]

Where in the original NO does it call for CITH? What official document called for the removal of altar rails?

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Where in the original NO does it call for CITH? What official document called for the removal of altar rails?

If my question is too simple than please ignore it, because I’m not much of a Catholic history scholar. (IOW I’m asking, not challenging you.)

What official document called for the installation of altar rails?

Alan

 

[Ockham]

If my question is too simple than please ignore it, because I’m not much of a Catholic history scholar. (IOW I’m asking, not challenging you.)

What official document called for the installation of altar rails?

Alan

None that I know of. They came about in a continuation of the traditional manner of receiving Holy Communion. The ‘spirit of V2’ changes were radical, not a slow and organic evolution.

 

[CWBetts]

None that I know of. They came about in a continuation of the traditional manner of receiving Holy Communion. The ‘spirit of V2’ changes were radical, not a slow and organic evolution.

Those that did things “in the Spirit of Vatican 2” are those that are responsible for the problems in the Church. You will not find me throwing my support behind them. My parish actually still has a communion rail.

 

[Lycorth]

Those that did things “in the Spirit of Vatican 2” are those that are responsible for the problems in the Church. You will not find me throwing my support behind them.

Amen; we’ve had our differences but I can’t agree with you more, here.

No matter how much individual Catholics may disagree with many of the things called for at Vatican II, what is clear is that the first blame lays with those genuine modernists who have cited this nebulous, vague concept called the “Spirit of Vatican II” as an excuse to take sacrilegious liberties with the liturgy and with the Faith itself, making bad examples of themselves and causing wounds that are still present in the Church.

It’s akin to blaming a rapist for a rape he committed.

My parish actually still has a communion rail.

Wish I could say the same