O
Ockham
Guest
Then you and your parish are ‘right on’.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Where did John Paul II, in calling the Council, specify that it was called as a pastoral council?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?
Even if he did, so what? It’s still an ecumenical council, the 21st such Council in the Catholic Church, as he noted in his opening address.
Where did every Pope since Vatican I judge against Vatican II (I thought they were all dead by then?)?
Most of the changes following EVERY ecumenical council were not explicitly called for by the Council. So what? It’s the same Church authority, the Magisterium, that both approved Conciliar teachings and subsequent Magisterial teachings.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
But Benedict XVI has not said the Church has misinterpreted the documents. Did he? So if the Church (the same Church that of course approves and adheres to the teachings of an ecumenical council) approves something, shouldn’t Catholics follow what the Church teaches?I’m citing from our Pope who has stated the documents were misinterpreted.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Exactly. If anyone disagrees, I really think they’re missing the point of Catholicism.I don’t believe that our current pope would have any problem with the new CCC.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Who cares? The point is, the Church has accepted (though not required) CITH and removal of altar rails.Where in the original NO does it call for CITH? What official document called for the removal of altar rails?
Why do you refuse to accept the teachings of the Magisterium? Do you know better?
D
diggerdomer
Guest
So were the changes following the Council of Trent.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.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
So are all parishes that follow the teaching of the Church. Which may or may not include communion rails, may or may not offer CITH, may or may not offer communion under both species, and so on.Then you and your parish are ‘right on’.
O
Ockham
Guest
digger, I promised myself not to get into any more discussions with you. Unless you have something valuable to add to any discussion I’ll keep that promise. BTW, Pope John Paul II didn’t call V2. More time researching, less time making barrage posts and you’d be better off. I’ll help you with one point though (emphasis mine):
"In recent decades, however, the Church in your country has had to confront new and serious challenges to the faith arising from the rapid transformation and secularization of Irish society. Fast-paced social change has occurred, often adversely affecting people’s traditional adherence to Catholic teaching and values. All too often, the sacramental and devotional practices that sustain faith and enable it to grow, such as frequent confession, daily prayer and annual retreats, were neglected. Significant too was the tendency during this period, also on the part of priests and religious, to adopt ways of thinking and assessing secular realities without sufficient reference to the Gospel.* The programme of renewal proposed by the Second Vatican Council was sometimes misinterpreted and indeed, in the light of the profound social changes that were taking place, it was far from easy to know how best to implement it**." *
From the Vatican, 19 March 2010, on the Solemnity of Saint Joseph
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20100319_church-ireland_en.html
"In recent decades, however, the Church in your country has had to confront new and serious challenges to the faith arising from the rapid transformation and secularization of Irish society. Fast-paced social change has occurred, often adversely affecting people’s traditional adherence to Catholic teaching and values. All too often, the sacramental and devotional practices that sustain faith and enable it to grow, such as frequent confession, daily prayer and annual retreats, were neglected. Significant too was the tendency during this period, also on the part of priests and religious, to adopt ways of thinking and assessing secular realities without sufficient reference to the Gospel.* The programme of renewal proposed by the Second Vatican Council was sometimes misinterpreted and indeed, in the light of the profound social changes that were taking place, it was far from easy to know how best to implement it**." *
From the Vatican, 19 March 2010, on the Solemnity of Saint Joseph
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20100319_church-ireland_en.html
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Oops! Typo on my part. Of course JPII didn’t call Vatican II. I assume we all know John XXIII did. My fingers, typing, misunderestimated what my mind was thinking. Sorry for any confusion. You do agree John XXIII is a Pope, right? A successor of Peter? And so authoritatively convened the ecumenical council that is Vatican II?digger, I promised myself not to get into any more discussions with you. Unless you have something valuable to add to any discussion I’ll keep that promise. BTW, Pope John Paul II didn’t call V2. More time researching, less time making barrage posts and you’d be better off. I’ll help you with one point though (emphasis mine):
"In recent decades, however, the Church in your country has had to confront new and serious challenges to the faith arising from the rapid transformation and secularization of Irish society. Fast-paced social change has occurred, often adversely affecting people’s traditional adherence to Catholic teaching and values. All too often, the sacramental and devotional practices that sustain faith and enable it to grow, such as frequent confession, daily prayer and annual retreats, were neglected. Significant too was the tendency during this period, also on the part of priests and religious, to adopt ways of thinking and assessing secular realities without sufficient reference to the Gospel.* The programme of renewal proposed by the Second Vatican Council was sometimes misinterpreted and indeed, in the light of the profound social changes that were taking place, it was far from easy to know how best to implement it***."
From the Vatican, 19 March 2010, on the Solemnity of Saint Joseph
BENEDICTUS PP. XVI
vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/letters/2010/documents/hf_ben-xvi_let_20100319_church-ireland_en.html
Sorry if you think my posts are irrelevant or not helpful. I apologize for any shortcomings or misunderstandings on my part. I am interested in learning more about the Catholic faith, that is why I participate here. Maybe it would help if you found a non-Catholic forum that may be more open to your musings?
Does the rest of your post have anything to do with the topic at hand in this Thread?
O
Ockham
Guest
Has it really come to this, digger? You don’t have anything intelligent to add to the conversation, you seem incapable of providing support documents for your claims (try www.google.com) so now you have resorted to insults?
G
Geremia
Guest
Could this acceptance have been only to avoid schism, though?Who cares? The point is, the Church has accepted (though not required) CITH and removal of altar rails.
Why do you refuse to accept the teachings of the Magisterium? Do you know better?
D
diggerdomer
Guest
I sincerely apologize if anything I wrote came across as insulting. That was neither my thought, nor intent.Has it really come to this, digger? You don’t have anything intelligent to add to the conversation, you seem incapable of providing support documents for your claims (try www.google.com) so now you have resorted to insults?
I would appreciate it, though, if in your responses to my posts you responded to the specific questions I ask you. You tend to not do that. Why?
Again, sorry for any perceived insult. I have never intended nor desired such.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
I doubt it. Does anyone have evidence that CITH being denied would have resulted in schism? I have never come across anything even remotely suggesting such.Could this acceptance have been only to avoid schism, though?
However…those who DENY what the Church teaches regarding CITH have definitely been prone to schism (though not based on that one issue alone).
D
diggerdomer
Guest
I also apologize if my intelligence is not up to your standards. If my sincere participation irks you, or is less intelligent than yours, I am sorry.Has it really come to this, digger? You don’t have anything intelligent to add to the conversation, you seem incapable of providing support documents for your claims (try www.google.com) so now you have resorted to insults?
I
IntegraCatholic
Guest
The necessity of Baptism did not take effect until the Great Commission, or more specifically, not till Pentecost, when the Apostles were given the power and fortitude to fulfill such a command given at the Lord’s Ascension. (I’m certainly not denying the efficacy of Baptism of Desire/Blood in its proper context, but the good thief does not seem to fit into that category. There are enough saints in the martyrology to point out as authentic examples.)The criminal on the cross was probably the first example of baptism of desire and was saved.
O
Ockham
Guest
For the last time, the Magisterium does not teach CITH. It is approved by indult which could be taken away at any time. The specifics of the indult actually did not apply to the USA so actually it is an abuse. The universal norm of the Church is COTT.I also apologize if my intelligence is not up to your standards. If my sincere participation irks you, or is less intelligent than yours, I am sorry.
People who don’t approve of CITH are not schismatic. There is more evidence to suggest those that do are acting against the Church.
I’ve seen you irritate priests. Your passive aggresive style is not cute nor productive and it is difficult to stay civil with you. Please stop responding to my posts and find better things to do with your time.
We will be civil. If you disagree with traditional Catholicism and cannot post civilly, please find another forum that is more to your liking.* If you are a traditional Catholic and cannot be civil and abide by the forum rules, then don’t post**.*
Patrick Eastin, Moderator
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=127816&page=2
C
CWBetts
Guest
Can you pleas provide the Church document that defines CITH as an abuse?For the last time, the Magisterium does not teach CITH. It is approved by indult which could be taken away at any time. The specifics of the indult actually did not apply to the USA so actually it is an abuse. The universal norm of the Church is COTT.
People who don’t approve of CITH are not schismatic. There is more evidence to suggest those that do are acting against the Church.
I’ve seen you irritate priests. Your passive aggresive style is not cute nor productive and it is difficult to stay civil with you. Please stop responding to my posts and find better things to do with your time.
We will be civil. If you disagree with traditional Catholicism and cannot post civilly, please find another forum that is more to your liking.* If you are a traditional Catholic and cannot be civil and abide by the forum rules, then don’t post***.
Patrick Eastin, Moderator
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=127816&page=2
O
Ockham
Guest
The original indult stated that the requests for CITH were denied. However, in countries were it was already being practiced (i.e. Holland) it may continue with certain conditions. CITH was not being practiced in the USA therefore did not qualifiy for the indult.
C
CWBetts
Guest
You still have not produced the document. Until you do, I will not regard CITH as a liturgical abuse.The original indult stated that the requests for CITH were denied. However, in countries were it was already being practiced (i.e. Holland) it may continue with certain conditions. CITH was not being practiced in the USA therefore did not qualifiy for the indult.
O
Ockham
Guest
My apologies. I assumed you would be familiar with the indult. Here it is, emphasis mine:
MEMORIALE DOMINI
Issued on May 29, 1969.
"The Apostolic See therefore emphatically urges bishops, priests and laity to* obey carefully the law which is still valid and which has again been confirmed**. It urges them to take account of the judgment given by the majority of Catholic bishops, of the rite now in use in the liturgy, of the common good of the Church.
Where a contrary usage, that of placing holy communion on the hand, prevails, the Holy See—wishing to help them fulfill their task, often difficult as it is nowadays—lays on those conferences the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist there, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow".*
ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwmemor.htm
MEMORIALE DOMINI
Instruction on the Manner of Distributing Holy Communion
Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship
Issued on May 29, 1969."The Apostolic See therefore emphatically urges bishops, priests and laity to* obey carefully the law which is still valid and which has again been confirmed**. It urges them to take account of the judgment given by the majority of Catholic bishops, of the rite now in use in the liturgy, of the common good of the Church.
Where a contrary usage, that of placing holy communion on the hand, prevails, the Holy See—wishing to help them fulfill their task, often difficult as it is nowadays—lays on those conferences the task of weighing carefully whatever special circumstances may exist there, taking care to avoid any risk of lack of respect or of false opinions with regard to the Blessed Eucharist, and to avoid any other ill effects that may follow".*
ewtn.com/library/curia/cdwmemor.htm
- Status
- Not open for further replies.