Vatican II

  • Thread starter Thread starter loyola_rambler
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

loyola_rambler

Guest
From what I’ve read on this board, it really makes me wonder what people’s views on the Second Vatican Council are. So do you view Vatican II as a council on par with Trent, Nicea, etc, or was it a major waste of time and should be removed from the face of the earth? Or, are you still trying to figure out what it really said and how we’re really supposed to use its teachings?
 
Vatican II was absolutely on a par with other Church Councils, like Trent and Nicea.

Like some of those Councils, it took a generation or more for the message of the Council to be accepted. In many countries, the teaching of the Council has been twisted our of shape and remolded to suit the whims and fancies of local Church leaders.

Anyone wants to understand how to apply the teaching of the Second Vatican Council can look to Pope John Paul II.
 
I’d like to certainly figure out what it all means, but I do know some things that changed: the Eucharist and the vernacular Mass. I just have a feeling, after doing the same thing for a couple thousand years, that changing it is maybe the least bit heretical, even though HH thinks it’s ok.
 
I would prefer it stated differently (it sounds slanted) but I chose option #2.

The Council was, of course, an ecumenical council. To consider its teachings and doctrine wrong is heretical. I believe the Holy Spirit led its teachings and directions, and I think it is extremely important, properly implemented.

Unfortunately, the true messages and teachings of the Council have been incredibly misconstrued. But it is an important point to note that in the context of history, 40 years is NOT an unexpected bump in the road. It’s a generation.

So, I think we are finally seeing the fruits, and over the next century we will continue to see more fruits, as the messages are properly taught.

As it is in the current and histroical state, the liberals did take a mile with the inch they were given. “Some things are allowed” somehow was translated into “anything goes.” And there is no problem with the Novus Ordo Mass, properly done. Again, the liberal elements abused what was supposed to occur.
 
I’m working on reading the documents right now! I am currently on chapter 3 of Lumen Gentium.

Vatican II and its implementation have contributed to the present destruction within the Church in various ways. That does not mean that the Council is heterodox or invalid though. From what I’ve read so far, the documents can readily be interpreted in a traditional way which upholds the Church’s patrimony.

My own opinion is that Vatican II is being used by God as an instrument for flushing out the liberals and modernists. These things were building up in the Church long before the Council. They are just out in the open and a lot stronger now.

In the future we are going to need another Pope Saint Pius X or a dogmatic Vatican III. Just about every conceivable modernist and liberal error has been made known to the Church. The Church must strike back with dogmatic proclamations to put the modernist heresy into the grave, just like Pope Saint Pius V and the Council of Trent which defined the Church’s position against Protestantism forever.

One possibility would be to simply tack Canons on to the Vatican II documents. They have been twisted in various ways for the past forty years, and all of the liberal interpretations are well known. Dogmatic Canons could destroy the liberal misinterpretation of Vatican II.

Finally, we need to take a look at what is necessary to fix the liturgical situation. Cardinal Ratzinger has discussed many solid steps in what he calls the ‘Reform of the Reform’. The Novus Ordo needs to be reformed as a Rite, while retaining the positive elements of Sacrosanctum Concilium and its intentions. I also hope and pray for the growth of the Ecclesia Dei indult.
Peace,
Ryan
 
gomer tree:
I would prefer it stated differently (it sounds slanted) but I chose option #2.

The Council was, of course, an ecumenical council. To consider its teachings and doctrine wrong is heretical. I believe the Holy Spirit led its teachings and directions, and I think it is extremely important, properly implemented.

Unfortunately, the true messages and teachings of the Council have been incredibly misconstrued. But it is an important point to note that in the context of history, 40 years is NOT an unexpected bump in the road. It’s a generation.

So, I think we are finally seeing the fruits, and over the next century we will continue to see more fruits, as the messages are properly taught.

As it is in the current and histroical state, the liberals did take a mile with the inch they were given. “Some things are allowed” somehow was translated into “anything goes.” And there is no problem with the Novus Ordo Mass, properly done. Again, the liberal elements abused what was supposed to occur.
Click to expand...
Right on!
 
The best thing that ever happened to the church. I hope I live to see the day when it is all implimented as intended.

I guess the Holy Spirit thought it was time to “stir the pot”

When everything settles we should have a new stronger church.

I pray the Holy Spirit will continue to send us many more of our fellow Christians who are searching for the truth. I have learned more about my faith from non- Catholics who returned home to the faith, then I have learned from our priests.

Especially on Catholic radio and EWTN.

And thanks to men like Karl Keating.
 
Just so’s you all know, I’m the ONLY one who voted for the 3rd choice. But I’ll have to post a qualification: Vatican II did NOT of course do away with the Tridentine Mass. That was done in complete OPPOSITION to the Vatican II proclamations in Sacrosanctum Concillium saying Latin was to REMAIN the language of the mass and Gregorian chant to REMAIN the liturgical music.

Why these were not abided by is anyone’s guess. I have my suspicions.
 
40.png
Salvo:
Just so’s you all know, I’m the ONLY one who voted for the 3rd choice. But I’ll have to post a qualification: Vatican II did NOT of course do away with the Tridentine Mass. That was done in complete OPPOSITION to the Vatican II proclamations in Sacrosanctum Concillium saying Latin was to REMAIN the language of the mass and Gregorian chant to REMAIN the liturgical music.

Why these were not abided by is anyone’s guess. I have my suspicions.
Click to expand...
Interesting! Do share your suspicions.
 
I’m fine with Vatican II. But I think there’s a growing faction in the Church that doesn’t understand that this was a valid ecumenical council and its teachings, writings, and proclamations aren’t negotiable. We can’t go back to what things were just because we didn’t like the change. It is what it is and that’s just the way it is.
 
Vatican II was an interesting experiment that got sidetracked with the death of Pope John XXIII. It is interesting to speculate how Vatican II would have evolved if John XXIII have lived a few more years.
 
As a matter of history, I don’t think that the Novus Ordo Mass flowed directly from the documents or teachings of VC-II. Am I wrong about this?
 
IMHO The Latin mass was the one thing that made the church truly catholic i.e. universal. You could attend mass anywhere in the world and it would be the same.
 
I would recommend that you read the hundreds to thousands of posts to this topic in dozen of threads.

To summarize what I have said repeatedly,

The Second Vatican Council was a good and beneficial council of the Church.

Many people claiming the “spirit of Vatican II” and against the teachings of the magisterium attempting to introduce their changes into the Church. The true spirit of Vatican II is very strongly with the current teaching magisterium of the Church.
 
Vatican ll is a work in progress. I’m seeing a lot of changes and enthusiasm in the young people. “Our future church”. I am very encouraged by it.

They are looking for the truth, want to follow the magisterium and be close to God by praying and doing his will. Not always easy.

Many times they have trouble finding a priest that is willing to guide them. The new younger priests, few as they are, seem to be looking for the same thing and need our encouragement and prayers.

A lot of the errors that have slowly crept into the church will slowly fall by the wayside as the Holy Spirit enlightens those who ask for his guidance.

Keep praying for new holy priests to serve us and lead us all Our Heavenly Father. :amen:
 
I’m not voting simply because none of the answers suit me. I will say this though - how dare anyone judge the Holy Spirit who moves His Church as He wills?

I also get sick and tired of all those who blame the Holy Spirit for all that is wrong in the Church by citing the Second Vatican Council as the reason why everything is a mess. I think this weekend’s reference to scorpions and snakes in the Readings is very telling. There have been many folks who have handed out quite a few handfuls of scorpions and snakes and claimed it was the spirit of V2 that moved them to do so. UGH!!!

Peace and all good,

Thomas2
 
I voted the "not sure waht it all means…spirit of VAT II " answer.
Although - I was rendered dumbstruck and speechless at the one Tridentine mass I attended. I would love to attend that regularily.
I wasn’t catholic then. I bet if there was more of the Tridentine Mass in the US - we would have MORE converts!!
 
I voted for “not sure what it all means”. I have read quite a bit about VII but I am still confused. Apparently great care was taken over the course of three years to prepare the groundwork for the Council and the likes of Kung and Schillebeckx(sp?) had these documents thrown out and everything was started over from scratch. Was this the work of the Holy Spirit? I dunno.

And what did the documents really say about the Mass, ecumenism, the laity,etc. I keep reading contradictory explanations. What did VII really say? HELP!
 
40.png
krazykatlady:
And what did the documents really say about the Mass, ecumenism, the laity,etc. I keep reading contradictory explanations. What did VII really say? HELP!
Click to expand...
That’s probably the best thing about the Catechism of the Catholic Church, almost everything references Vat2 documents. Look and see!

John
 
I challenge those that hold the anti-Vatican II position to start a thread where they quote from a document of Vatican II and prove that it teaches heresy.

It is impossible to meet this challenge, and that is why I don’t pay much attention to those who whine about Vatican II.

Ecumenical Councils are protected by the Holy Spirit from teaching error on matters of faith and morals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top