What good has come out of Vatican II?

[lentang2]

This reminds me of, which future Apostle was it?, who asked, “What good has come out of Nazareth?”

I think you are judging the OP too harshly. I know her very well. Your accusation, though understandable, is not correctly applied to her.

I apparently did a poor job of tring to inject humor into the thread.

 

[ncjohn]

Unfortunately I live in a Diocese whose churches are devoid for the most part of images (these are the rule, the others are exceptions), and unfortunately these churches seem more like carnivals–both before and during the Mass, than they do Masses.

I truly do sympathize with those who have that experience as it most assuredly should not be a common one.

My only point was that reverence is internal rather than external. It can be prompted by any number of things, and diminished by any number of things. The problem is that it is often the very same things that bring one person to greater reverence while being a distraction to another. It is, in my opinion, when we start trying to project our preferences in that arena on to others as if they are universal that we get into trouble and start getting into judgment games about whose piety and reverence is better than the other’s.

I saw what I considered a brilliant post in that regard once from a woman who compared it to her young children trying to outdo each other to show which one loved her more. Except that what they were really trying to prove to each other was which one SHE loved more. I sometimes sense that same dynamic going on here; that we are trying to imply that “our” “side” loves God more because of how we do things, when we’re really implying that God loves our side more.

Kind of makes God a little small, that He can’t really love all of us infinitely, and just because we try in our own silly ways to please Him. I find that kind of stuff sad when I want so much to lift up all my brothers and sisters as we toil shoulder to shoulder in His field.

To bring this back on topic, I’ll return to a point I made previously. I find the division so prevalent in the Church to be a definite downside since V2. I find the increased interest in the Church from so many “sides”, from lay orders like my Secular Franciscns to Cursillo to Charismatic Renewal, and including the tremendous renewed interest in the EF, to be very encouraging. Over time I think that we will come to a greater understanding and tolerance of each other and that the petty squabbling will mostly disappear.

While I know that many don’t find those “fruits” of V2 to be positive, I do find that the greater responsibility that people are taking for their own salvation rather than doing the “pay, pray and obey” thing is bringing many more passionate Catholics into play, even if absolute numbers are down from societal influences, etc. It will take that kind of passion, and a willingness from both ends of the spectrum to work together, to “rebuild His Church”.

Peace to you maurin. I was not “riled” even if we might disagree to some minor level. I have great respect for you and your devotion.

 

[maurin]

I apparently did a poor job of tring to inject humor into the thread.

apparently so.

please forgive me for “not getting it.”

 

[pnewton]

please forgive me for “not getting it.”

There are may here who have no sense of humor. Personally, I think a good joke, light hearted side-track or even just a little personal touch here and there should always be allowed. I think it goes a long way to viewing each other a little more as people and less like enemy or ally. Especially in the more charged forums like politics this sort of banter and comaraderie is beneficial. It also dispels the myth that all traditionalists lack a sense of humor that I have been perpetuating.

 

[ProVobis]

Latin was originally adopted because it was becoming the vernacular of the people in the west.

How do you know this? Was Latin the vernacular in ALL the countries it was adopted? Isn’t it possible that Latin was adopted because people felt it was most appropriate for their worship? There are other religions where their members are more comfortable in languages other than their vernaculars so why not Catholics?

 

[ProVobis]

When the Mass was in Latin, the laity followed in missals that provided translations.

I don’t think third centurians had handmissals with any translations.

By the argument that meaning is lost in translation, were not those translations inherently flawed, prior to the advent of the Pauline Mass?

Somewhat of a non-sequitor here. How did the Pauline Mass remove translation flaws?

I think we simply need to get the best translation we can. Seems like that will be here in about a year or so.

It MAY be the best but no translation is perfect. There are no two languages which have universally accepted one-to-one mapping between the source word/phrase and the object word/phrase. Some languages are just better in expressing certain thoughts and ideas. The Church has (I think) tried to hold steadfast to its Latin language to minimize ambiguities and miscommunications. That said, vernacular is not wrong, it is merely better that we know that there may be mistranslations. In other words CAVEAT EMPTOR with the translation.