What do people have against Vatican II Council?

[Brendan]

Hello Brendan,

Did you notice that I said it is something “I” view? The part I wrote: “It is a good reminder that the “communion” about to be received is more than just unity with Christ, but also with the Christ who indwells our neighbor - ONE bread, ONE mystical Body” —

— agrees with R.S. as you wrote: “but instead signifies peace, communion and charity BEFORE the reception of the Most Holy Eucharist.”

It was just in my mind an extension of the penitential rite, for in that part of the Mass, the “I confess” applies only to the one praying it; whereas, at the sign of peace, we affirm it by extending it to our neighbor.

I pray we will not quibble about another person being in “error” for expressing a personal opinion?

Well, I could have a personal opinion that the moon is made of green cheese, but that wouldn’t make it true, now would it So personal opinion can be erroneous.

The sign of peace is just that, a SIGN, it is not the peace itself, which the priest has already given us. It signifies and points towards, but it not the true thing itself; in much the same way that a road sign points towards a street, but the road sign is not the street itself.

RS makes that clear when it states that it SIGNIFIES peace and communion. In other words, it points TOWARDS the communion we will experiece in the Eucharist. It’s a road sign towards the communion, not the communion itself.

And I’m a bit confused about your statement “the “I confess” applies only to the one praying it; whereas, at the sign of peace, we affirm it by extending it to our neighbor”

Of course the Confetior applies only to the person praying it. Who else can confess my faults to God?? And how exactly is the Kiss of Peace an extention of this?? Is the community now confessing my faults to God for me???

 

[Joysong]

The sign of peace is just that, a SIGN, it is not the peace itself, which the priest has already given us. It signifies and points towards, but it not the true thing itself; in much the same way that a road sign points towards a street, but the road sign is not the street itself.

Did I say it wasn’t a “sign?” Nevertheless, it is in the mind of the one who confers it. Lk 10:5-6 “Into whatsoever house you enter, first say: Peace be to this house. 6 And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon him.” When I extend the peace from the priest’s at the altar, I believe it is more than just a sign, for I do intend the peace I offer. But that’s just the mystic in me. Am I not permitted to believe that?

RS makes that clear when it states that it SIGNIFIES peace and communion. In other words, it points TOWARDS the communion we will experiece in the Eucharist. It’s a road sign towards the communion, not the communion itself.

Of course, it is not communion in the reality which we will receive in Eucharist, but it is is meant to express our unity, peace, charity, reconciliation, prior to reception of the Christ who makes us truly ONE.

And I’m a bit confused about your statement “the “I confess” applies only to the one praying it; whereas, at the sign of peace, we affirm it by extending it to our neighbor”

I don’t get the feeling you are confused, but wishing to pick at my words to prove me unorthodox in some manner, because my understanding of the rite is not in accord with yours. As I said, I don’t wish to quibble, Brendan.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

This thread is getting sidetracked. Please, if you wish to discuss other issues start new threads. Thank you.

 

[anamchara]

---

You’ve gone horizontal.

So your saying we can never see Christ in anything but the sacrifice? Or we are no suppose to while in Mass? So I can’t glance over at an old women, crippled and smile as I see Christs love surrounding her? Or when I shake the hand of a child who is beaming with love and I see through their eyes the eyes of Christ and His love for them? If you see this as wrong then you really don’t have any clue what Christianity is all about or even being Catholic for that matter. You need to find a cubical that has eye holes only so you can keep forward and have your own little personal Mass or “entertainment/worship”

It doesn’t feel very good to have someone use the word “entertainment” does it?

If this is the unfounded sentiment of people who have so much against Vatican II then I can see why there is such a divide. I can understand complaining about extreme abuses in the NO but these rigid judgmental accusations will no doubt be your undoing.

 

[Walking_Home]

So your saying we can never see Christ in anything but the sacrifice? Or we are no suppose to while in Mass? So I can’t glance over at an old women, crippled and smile as I see Christs love surrounding her? Or when I shake the hand of a child who is beaming with love and I see through their eyes the eyes of Christ and His love for them? If you see this as wrong then you really don’t have any clue what Christianity is all about or even being Catholic for that matter. You need to find a cubical that has eye holes only so you can keep forward and have your own little personal Mass or “entertainment/worship”

It doesn’t feel very good to have someone use the word “entertainment” does it?

If this is the unfounded sentiment of people who have so much against Vatican II then I can see why there is such a divide. I can understand complaining about extreme abuses in the NO but these rigid judgmental accusations will no doubt be your undoing.

---

Are you equating “Christ in the community” to our Lord Christ on the Altar.

 

[anamchara]

---

Are you equating “Christ in the community” to our Lord Christ on the Altar.

lol, nice try walkin’ the poster was talking about passing of the peace and how they don’t have any issues with it and you came in and used the famous trigger word " horizontal" I’ve been on here long enough to know that word basically accuses people of being self centered and not focusing on God but each other.

Let me ask you something, did the person you quoted say anything about preferring to just come to Mass and shake hands with people instead of participating in the sacrifice? Did I ever once say in my post that seeing the love of Christ in others is more important that the sacrifice? No I don’t think so…but nice try

 

[BobP123]

I’ve been on here long enough to know that word basically accuses people of being self centered and not focusing on God but each other.

That sounds about right. And one can rationalize that by seeing God in everyone. Therefore we worship God by worshipping one another. Is this the crux of what this discussion is all about?

And hold holding. If we see Christ in everyone, then we hold Christ’s hands as well. How am I doing?

But what does all this have to do with Vatican II?

 

[Jean_Anthony]

As Bob wrote: “What does all this have to do with Vatican II?” Please return to the OP’s topic or I will close the thread. Thank you.

 

[anamchara]

That sounds about right. And one can rationalize that by seeing God in everyone. Therefore we worship God by worshipping one another. Is this the crux of what this discussion is all about?

And hold holding. If we see Christ in everyone, then we hold Christ’s hands as well. How am I doing?

But what does all this have to do with Vatican II?

No, you have it wrong. Many of us just see passing of the peace as an extension of Gods love, how you got worshiping each other is way beyond me.

If you thought what we were talking about had nothing to do with this thread then why start your post making comments that are arguably judgmental and completely off topic?

The OP didn’t understand why so many have issues with Vatican II, I think there’s been some good answers but it is a topic that triggers a great deal of anger in many. This is unfortunate.

Again, it’s maybe not Vatican II but how it was implemented and the changing world so many are very fearful of.

What do they have against it? It’s what they think it is that they have the most problems…I don’t believe anyone really has enough scholarly knowledge on here to really speculate. But it never stops any of us trying.

On that note, I personally feel the whole thread has run it’s course.

 

[Walking_Home]

Quote:
Originally Posted by BobP123
That sounds about right. And one can rationalize that by seeing God in everyone. Therefore we worship God by worshipping one another. Is this the crux of what this discussion is all about?

And hold holding. If we see Christ in everyone, then we hold Christ’s hands as well. How am I doing?

But what does all this have to do with Vatican II?

No, you have it wrong. Many of us just see passing of the peace as an extension of Gods love, how you got worshiping each other is way beyond me.

If you thought what we were talking about had nothing to do with this thread then why start your post making comments that are arguably judgmental and completely off topic?

The OP didn’t understand why so many have issues with Vatican II, I think there’s been some good answers but it is a topic that triggers a great deal of anger in many. This is unfortunate.

Again, it’s maybe not Vatican II but how it was implemented and the changing world so many are very fearful of.

What do they have against it? It’s what they think it is that they have the most problems…I don’t believe anyone really has enough scholarly knowledge on here to really speculate. But it never stops any of us trying.

On that note, I personally feel the whole thread has run it’s course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by anamchara
So your saying we can never see Christ in anything but the sacrifice? Or we are no suppose to while in Mass? So I can’t glance over at an old women, crippled and smile as I see Christs love surrounding her? Or when I shake the hand of a child who is beaming with love and I see through their eyes the eyes of Christ and His love for them? If you see this as wrong then you really don’t have any clue what Christianity is all about or even being Catholic for that matter. You need to find a cubical that has eye holes only so you can keep forward and have your own little personal Mass or “entertainment/worship”

It doesn’t feel very good to have someone use the word “entertainment” does it?

If this is the unfounded sentiment of people who have so much against Vatican II then I can see why there is such a divide. I can understand complaining about extreme abuses in the NO but these rigid judgmental accusations will no doubt be your undoing.

---

The Mass is the highest prayer we offer to God .
Within this prayer our Lord becomes truly present for us—yet you say that God is also in other things besides on the Altar. This does reflect taking the focus from our one true Lord and turning it to seeing God in the community. Since we do give worship to our Lord—but as you say—God is present in other things besides on the Altar—well—that does in a way --say that the worship we give extends to each other.

 

[Warren_Stassi]

Forgive me if I am starting a new thread if my question has been covered elsewhere, I just couldn’t find it. Why do so many people not like Vatican II Council? I have heard many say this which is why I ask. Personally, I don’t see what is so wrong or bad about Vatican II. I have been Catholic for just 4 years so I don’t know much about the Church prior to Vatican II. In my limited knowledge of the history of the Church, I would have to say that I feel the Church did need reforming. Do people who don’t like Vatican II simply just not like change? I also feel that in my part of the world, a lot of objections I have heard to change seem to me to be a storm in a teacup and I don’t understand what everyone is getting so upset about. I was appalled at a discussion I heard on my local radio station, argueing the sign of peace should be removed from the Mass by people who seemed to be hard-line traditionalists. Their reason? They didn’t like touching someone else’s hand in case they caught germs and didn’t want to touch someone’s hand if they had blown their nose. I someone uses a hanky I have no real objection as colds are airborn anyway so you are breathing in lots of who knows what and did Our Lord not reach out and touch a leper and wash the feet of his Apostles? The people who were asking for this to be removed from the Mass are critics of Vatican II. Did Saint Paul not say something like, ‘if I have all these things but do not have love’ there is nothing? Did he not also say ‘let not the one eating just the one not eating’ so on and so forth? Can’t we just be a little more tolerant? Why is that a bad thing?

 

[Warren_Stassi]

Un fortunately the writer has no concept of the church before Vatican 2 I have been a member for eighty one years with many generations behind me my heart is sick when I see the results of Vatican 2. Can the writer know what has happened to the religous nuns,the semanarions and the many catholics of the generations that I represent.? We are in pain.

 

[lentang2]

---

You’ve gone horizontal.

Guess that’s better than diagonal…

 

[paramedicgirl]

Maybe for you, but why are you assuming everyone loses their focus on the Creator? For me, I simply see Christ in EVERYONE during the Sign of Peace - just wish I could maintain the vision for the rest of the day!

Are you also able to keep your focus on the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar which has just taken place? If you were present at Calvary would you be shaking your neigbour’s hand while Jesus was being put to death? Just a thought…

 

[Walking_Home]

Guess that’s better than diagonal…

---

That depends–with a diagonal–at least it shows an upward motion–and upward is where our focus should be.

 

[lentang2]

Why do so many people not like Vatican II Council?

Only a very tiny percentange of Catholics even care about this debate, really. In actuality, almost all so-called “Traditionalists” have never read the documents (come on now, be honest!); they are just angry at what they THINK the documents say. They have been mislead by confused and angry dissident catholics that, because of some past NO mass abuses, they generalize and say “all NO masses are wrong…and we traditionalists are right!”. Traditionalists are more about Gnosticism than about Catholicism…they think that have been “enlighened with secret knowledge and awareness” that the rest of us poor Magisterium-following Catholics are ignorant of. Those who “dislike Vatican II” are simply dissidents, plain and simple. Don’t waste too much time even worrying about them, MinkyI know, …

I know, I know, here come the “horizontal” comments, because…the truth hurts.

 

[Walking_Home]

Only a very tiny percentange of Catholics even care about this debate, really. In actuality, almost all so-called “Traditionalists” have never read the documents (come on now, be honest!); they are just angry at what they THINK the documents say. They have been mislead by confused and angry dissident catholics that, because of some past NO mass abuses, they generalize and say “all NO masses are wrong…and we traditionalists are right!”. Traditionalists are more about Gnosticism than about Catholicism…they think that have been “enlighened with secret knowledge and awareness” that the rest of us poor Magisterium-following Catholics are ignorant of. Those who “dislike Vatican II” are simply dissidents, plain and simple. Don’t waste too much time even worrying about them, MinkyI know, …

I know, I know, here come the “horizontal” comments, because…the truth hurts.

---

I can see—the “catechisis” you got — is paying off.

 

[TNT]

Only a very tiny percentange of Catholics even care about this debate, really. In actuality, almost all so-called “Traditionalists” have never read the documents (come on now, be honest!); they are just angry at what they THINK the documents say. They have been mislead by confused and angry dissident catholics that, because of some past NO mass abuses, they generalize and say “all NO masses are wrong…and we traditionalists are right!”. Traditionalists are more about Gnosticism than about Catholicism…they think that have been “enlighened with secret knowledge and awareness” that the rest of us poor Magisterium-following Catholics are ignorant of. Those who “dislike Vatican II” are simply dissidents, plain and simple. Don’t waste too much time even worrying about them, MinkyI know, …

I know, I know, here come the “horizontal” comments, because…the truth hurts.

Can we put this in the Dictionary under the definition of superficial or sophistry?

Better yet, a Protestant’s description of Catholics.angelqueen.org

 

[lentang2]

Are you also able to keep your focus on the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar which has just taken place? If you were present at Calvary would you be shaking your neigbour’s hand while Jesus was being put to death? Just a thought…

I AM able to keep my focus. And I am able to fully understand the meaning of the entire mass, do you? Why are you correlating the sign of peace with the bizzare idea of shaking hands with Calvary observers? Do you not understand the purpose of the sign of peace?

 

[lentang2]

---

I can see—the “catechisis” you got — is paying off.

The word is catechesis - but then, you know all about it, I am sure, far more than me…