What is it with liberal Catholics and the "Spirit" of Vatican II?

[netmilsmom]

otm:

It amazes me how you can twist what someone else says.

What’s the matter - is your consicience giving you a poke?

How did I twist this statement?

YinYangMom:

.the liberals have so much to offer the traditionalists in becoming true members of ‘family’ while expanding their service to social justice issues. (No, it’s not enough to turn in your money and pray devotions. We really do have to start getting out of our homes, our comfort zones and making the changes in our communities ourselves.

Hey, read the whole thread and see what MY parish does. I have no reason to bother with any of these generalizations.

 

[Dr.Bombay]

otm:

That is just pure snot blowing, and you know it.

Get off your high horse and read the Gospels. What part of “What you do to the least of these, you do to Me” don’t you get?

Furthermore, it is the liberals who want the government to do all the bending and lifting; doing it on the immediat local level with no support form the government is hardly what I have read in the Democratic Party platform; it seems to me it is a lot closer to Bush’s compassionate conservatism.

It takes guts and humilty to open you own wallet after you’ve paid your taxes, and buy a couple of cans of beans, or several punsd of rice, or a turkey or ham or other staples, and take it to the food bank at your church.

It takes even more humility to take a food basket out to a family. And then it takes humility to deal with the attitude some of theose people have when you deliver it; humility, because you expect them to be gracious and grateful when you bring it, and they act like they are insulted and imposed upon.

The humility part helps you to understand that the only thing they may have left is what little pride hasn’t been completely destroyed, and when they act that way, they are only responding out of the pain of having to admit they have nothing.

Your comments are exactly what ncjohn was saying about conservatives; thank you for proving the point so well.

Snot blowing?? http://bestsmileys.com/rude/2.gif Mmmm…yummy!

Yes, indeed. “What you do to the least of these, you do to me.” Not, “What Big Government does to the least of these, you do to me.” Not, “What you’ve done with the money you’ve stolen from someone else, you do to me.”

But, if you want to continue to live in a fantasy world that engendering hatred amongst the classes and redistribution of wealth are Catholic teachings, even though that directly contradicts a Sovereign Roman Pontiff, knock yourself out. .

Your comments are exactly what I was saying about liberals. Namely, you substitute your own feel good panaceas for actual Church teaching. Thanks for proving my point so well. :tiphat:

 

[rwoehmke]

I would suspect that after the Council of Trent and Vatican I that similar debates and even schisms occurred because some just could not accept the teachings of the council or misunderstood what it was all about. It was perhaps good fortune for the church that the laity had very little to say in the matter and the action was mostly between those in Orders. I have heard it said that it takes at least a century before a council is understood and the wrinkles ironed out. I have never considered myself a liberal or a traditionalist and I can see that both extremes have something to tell us if we can shut up long enough to listen. As for things like holding hands, communion in the hand, the orans position, etc. I can live with them and often wonder if some of these things are the kind of “organic” developments that seem to be expected in some quarters. I have to agree that most of the early contemporary music that was foisted on us stunk. Some of the more recent stuff I find acceptable. Peace be with you all.

 

[MrS]

ncjohn:

…To fuel the division and inability of Catholics from both sides to even talk to each other much less work together.

While I don’t doubt that there may in fact be people who fit the descriptions that you are throwing out here with broad brushes, I know very few people that fit those charicatures. Most of the devoted Catholics who follow the visions proposed by V2 are exactly the opposite of what you are portraying here.

If anything, we are LESS concerned with the visible. Those I know primarily go by a “live and let live” on most of these issues, and only even get involved in the fray because “traditionalists” want to make an issue of portraying people as irreverent, impious, or “less Catholic” for holding hands during the Our Father or not wanting to go back to Latin masses for example. From “our” side, it is the “traditionalists” who are focused on the external and visible.

Further, the V2 people I know and associate with are pious, devout, and committed Catholics who are genuinely trying to live out the visions of V2. They are committed to the social justice issues while not sacrificing their prayer life. They are committed to living the gospel call to care for the “least of their brothers.”

As to thinking they are above the Pope or the Magesterium, I would suggest you take a look at some of the threads here and see to whom that might apply.** It is traditionalists that try to say that holding hands or using the “orans” position are unacceptable,** though the Pope and magesterium have taken no such position. It is traditionalists who are saying that “contemporary praise” music is unacceptable in Mass, though the Pope and Magesterium have taken no such position. It is traditionalists who are making claims that people are “not Catholic” because they struggle with some teachings, yet the teaching authority of the Church says exactly the opposite.

I am not going to tar all traditionalists with this brush, as it would be just as unfair as the statements made about V2 Catholics. Nor am I going to say that all V2 Catholics are in the same mold as what I have described from my experience. The fact is that we’re all frail, sinful human beings who need each other in the Body of Christ.

When it’s all said and done, we need the conservaitve to protect and defend the purity of the faith. We also need to “liberal” to help promote the vision of how to live out that faith. We need the prayers and devotion of both to be able to help each other carry our crosses and combine them into one cross that Jesus can help us all carry.

We need to always keep in mind that we are one Body with different gifts. Just as the eye cannot cast aside the ear, the traditionalist cannot cast aside the gifts of those committed to the beautiful vision put forth by V2. We are all brothers and sisters, children of the same loving God. This is one place where family bickering doesn’t belong.

Peace to all,

Hi John…

Visions are not always directives. Visions are too often what one sees based on their own desires. Directives are often what a legitimate authority sets forth.

Perhaps the comments of our leadership “not taking a position” is more powerful than you intended. Indeed, they have too often NOT taken a position. That is why we have so much “bickering” - afterall, we are a family in that sense too.

The title of the thread refered to “liberal” Catholics… and my post was in line with the thread title.

I think if you are honest, you will admit that those not in favor of your pet peeves (handholding, contempory music, abuses in the liturgy etc) are just that… not in favor of them. Reality tells us that they are, in fact, acceptable. We all need to stand back and see WHO is accepting them. Then we might be able to better choose between conservative values or liberal values.

Tomorrow’s Gospel reading will remind us to love one another as I have loved you, and certainly to love God with our whole heart, soul, and mind.

(think about why this is changed from the OT verse that includes strength - the physical aspect.)

The vision we should strive for is the Beatific Vision… for now we are graced with the Eucharist… let’s not mess it up.

 

[cyprian]

Yes, so anyway back to the question. The spirit of V2 is found in it’s documents. We aren’t at liberty to create a way of thinking out of these documents. The documents create a spirit, not the other way around. So some have interpreted these documents liberally (to fit themselves) and some have actually read them and apply them accordingly(truthfully) without getting their panties in a bunch. Liberal Catholics(if there is such a thing) have no control over anything in their lives (truth, morals, etc) and therefore make all of their own things to be truth. The reverance due to the mass was becoming less, way before V2. The problems that plague the church in the U.S., if to be attributed to V2, are because of it’s misinterpretation, not because of the council. But that’s just my opinion.

Peace and LOVE

Peace and Love

 

[ncjohn]

Tantum ergo:

Do you not see the irony in those who decry the traditionals’ stance, who want themselves the very same thing, what they have come to consider the “right rite”, the practices that make THEM feel comfortable. . .

yet turn around and in the same breath, castigate “trads” and complain that they are exclusionist, antiprogressive, and, of course, my favorite “anti-person”, elitist and COLD.

I fully agree with you to the extent that that has happened. I have consistently and constantly promoted a position of charity on both sides, with neither side trying to force it’s position on the other.

Quite frankly to be fair though, and to add to the “irony,” the only reason the discussion comes up is because of the number of “traditionalists” who keep trying to create something that says it is not allowed, thereby putting those who want to do it in the defensive position you describe.

It is indeed a viscious cycle that perpetuates the mistrust and divisiveness. I’ll make you a deal though: how about we work together to create some peace where those of us who want to can, and those of you who don’t want to don’t get pressured, and neither of us looks down on the other for our preferences?

More importantly, how about if we work together to promote the gospel values we are all called to and just set aside all the petty bickering?

Peace,

 

[Servus_Pio_XII]

ncjohn:

With all due respect to both of you, these are the kinds of unkind and untrue statements that continue to fuel the division and inability of Catholics from both sides to even talk to each other much less work together.

While I don’t doubt that there may in fact be people who fit the descriptions that you are throwing out here with broad brushes, I know very few people that fit those charicatures. Most of the devoted Catholics who follow the visions proposed by V2 are exactly the opposite of what you are portraying here.

If anything, we are LESS concerned with the visible. Those I know primarily go by a “live and let live” on most of these issues, and only even get involved in the fray because “traditionalists” want to make an issue of portraying people as irreverent, impious, or “less Catholic” for holding hands during the Our Father or not wanting to go back to Latin masses for example. From “our” side, it is the “traditionalists” who are focused on the external and visible.

Further, the V2 people I know and associate with are pious, devout, and committed Catholics who are genuinely trying to live out the visions of V2. They are committed to the social justice issues while not sacrificing their prayer life. They are committed to living the gospel call to care for the “least of their brothers.”

As to thinking they are above the Pope or the Magesterium, I would suggest you take a look at some of the threads here and see to whom that might apply. It is traditionalists that try to say that holding hands or using the “orans” position are unacceptable, though the Pope and magesterium have taken no such position. It is traditionalists who are saying that “contemporary praise” music is unacceptable in Mass, though the Pope and Magesterium have taken no such position. It is traditionalists who are making claims that people are “not Catholic” because they struggle with some teachings, yet the teaching authority of the Church says exactly the opposite.

I am not going to tar all traditionalists with this brush, as it would be just as unfair as the statements made about V2 Catholics. Nor am I going to say that all V2 Catholics are in the same mold as what I have described from my experience. The fact is that we’re all frail, sinful human beings who need each other in the Body of Christ.

When it’s all said and done, we need the conservaitve to protect and defend the purity of the faith. We also need to “liberal” to help promote the vision of how to live out that faith. We need the prayers and devotion of both to be able to help each other carry our crosses and combine them into one cross that Jesus can help us all carry.

We need to always keep in mind that we are one Body with different gifts. Just as the eye cannot cast aside the ear, the traditionalist cannot cast aside the gifts of those committed to the beautiful vision put forth by V2. We are all brothers and sisters, children of the same loving God. This is one place where family bickering doesn’t belong.

Peace to all,

Let us cite specifics:

It is traditionalists that try to say that holding hands or using the “orans” position are unacceptable, though the Pope and magesterium have taken no such position. It is traditionalists who are saying that “contemporary praise” music is unacceptable in Mass, though the Pope and Magesterium have taken no such position. It is traditionalists who are making claims that people are “not Catholic” because they struggle with some teachings, yet the teaching authority of the Church says exactly the opposite.

#1- See Redemptionis Sacramentum regarding not adding gestures to the Mass unless approved by them.

#2- Musicam Sacram

#3- As Catholics we are bound to follow the Church’s teachings. To be, as some say, a “Cafeteria Catholic” is to deny the basic tenet of faith.

The LAST thing that the Church needs is liberal experimentation with the Liturgies. What they need are people who, while maybe not following to the letter, will respect the Church’s decrees, and not blatantly ignore them, or take parts without the whole.

With a constant wish for unity:

-Servant of Pius XII
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/img/p_xii.jpg
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/img/stemma_p_xii.jpg

 

[ncjohn]

Dr. Bombay:

Pardon me, but liberals have nothing to offer traditionalists in the area of social justice issues. All liberals have to offer in that area are a bunch of tired socialist nostrums like tax increases, redistribution of wealth and increased government programs and power. Which, BTW, completely and conveniently excuses Catholics and every other member of society from any personal responsibility to combat these issues. After all, if Big Government is going to solve all our social ills, why do we need to do anything.

Traditionalists can point to Rerum Novarum as a true exposition of Catholic teaching on social justice issues. Liberals ignore this encyclical, however, since it condemns most of the pet utopian ideas they’ve grown so fond of over the past 40 years.

But, if you want to continue to live in a fantasy world that engendering hatred amongst the classes and redistribution of wealth are Catholic teachings, even though that directly contradicts a Sovereign Roman Pontiff, knock yourself out. .

Your comments are exactly what I was saying about liberals. Namely, you substitute your own feel good panaceas for actual Church teaching.

As someone who is left of center on religious views while being right of center on political views, I’m not sure what you are talking about here, as it appears your mixing religious references to traditionalists and political references to liberals. I am addressing the gospel call to take care of the “least of our brothers” and am not addressing any politics or government involvement whatsoever. I am addressing our own individual responsibility to do more than just say “I’ll pray for you” as the way we take care of those brothers. Do I understand you to deny this call?

As to traditionalists and Rerum Novarum, I fail to see where it fits in with anything you are talking about. RN specifically addressed as its main points: equitable distribution of property and goods; requiring employers to pay just wages; challenging the rich to give to the poor; support for the rights of unionization; and organizing the state to provide for the poor. All of these contradict the things you state in the next quoted paragraph. BTW, I’m sure you’re aware that JP2 suggested that the ideal form of government would be a modified socialism. It would seem to indicate that a “Sovereign Roman Pontiff” supported some kind of redistribution of wealth…

Be all that as it may, the whole point of my posts was the need for us to work together and stop the divisiveness. I have made no claims that traditionalists don’t get involved in social ministries or that they are uncaring; I only commented on my own experience that I have seen a trend back to the pre-V2 vision where personal piety was paramount and “others” (usually the missionaries and religious) did the physical labor of taking care of the poor.

I know that the V2 documents call for us to join the two. Maybe I’m wrong that Catholics as a whole believe the Church’s teaching in this regard. I’m sure it’s true that many Catholics don’t know the Church’s teaching and that it isn’t really being preached in a lot of places. Thus we have ongoing misunderstandings from both sides about V2 is about and where we’re supposed to be going.

I am also sure that we don’t overcome this by calling each other names or playing superiority games. If we’re going to help bring “thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven” to reality, it’s going to take all of us–praying and working together.

Anyone want to join that team?

Peace,

 

[palmas85]

Brendan:

NCJohn

What is your parish doing to comply with this instruction from Vatican II.

This is the very directive that allows for a liturgy in the Vernacular

*SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM *

Vatican II SPECIFICALLY states that while the Liturgy may be allowed in the vernacular, the faithful should also know their responses in Latin as well.

What steps are taken at your parish to ensure this? What instruction is provided to comply with Vatican II?

Was I the only to notice no specific response to this one?

 

[Lux_et_veritas]

Ok people, lets be charitable now.

When I hear the words “Spirit of Vatican II” I truly believe there were many in the beginning who had good intentions. However, in time, I believe that a good many used the expression to try to pull the Church and its Liturgy in a direction more suitable to them.

For example, the Liturgy is truly for the unconditional worship of God. What it is not, is something with which to please the senses of those assisting. When it becomes the latter, people come when they believe that there is something for them to get out of it. If they aren’t getting anything out of it, then they don’t bother or show up half-heartedly (as I once did).

Rather, when we look at the Liturgy as something that is to be given, not taken, then it becomes a whole new ballgame. Things like “Clown Masses” (done in the “spirit of Vatican II”) and other actions which are labeled as pure liturgical abuse are not designed to please God, but to please those in attendance.

Spirituality takes on new heights for each individual as God graces them. IMHO, what has happened is that the contemporary Masses, many done “in the spirit of V2” have catered to those in a particular stage of spirituality. But, these Masses do not entice one to reach ever higher.

The Mass is all about giving ourselves in unconditional worship to our God. It is about detaching ourselves from all that is not Him in order to give Him thanks and Praise. It is heaven on earth and therefore, the earthly is something we should strive to detach from gradually. As I just experienced for the first time ever this year, a traditional Novus Ordo, celebrated ad orientem and in Latin was just the tool that taught me this lesson.

Prior to that Mass (which I now attend almost daily), it was all about my comfort, my wants, my desires in music and celebrants (I always like those who could keep me awake). The more dynamic the Mass was the more I liked it. The more touchy feely the better it was.

Now, I have discovered that God can be worshipped without all of that and that it is far more fulfilling because I let go of the world around me to do so. It is not about “communion” with those next to me, with whom I would hold hands, rather it is joining God in a mystical union with the universal church far beyond the walls of any one building, past and present and with all of creation - visible and invisible.

The best example of “spirit of v2” I can bring forward today, is much of what Cardinal Mahoney practices and allows within his diocese. I’ll leave others to cite specifics as it is time to go to Mass.

 

[Confiteor]

I cringed when I saw the title of this thread because it seemed inflammatory. And it sure was. I am not exactly what people would label as a liberal Catholic or a “spirit of Vatican II” Catholic, but I think it would help both groups to focus on the issues rather than how screwed up the other side is.

The Gospel I heard this morning said “Love God with all your heart and soul and mind” and “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Obviously, as I believe someone pointed out, we’re called to love and worship God as perfectly as possible and to love our neighbors in charity as perfectly as possible. Jesus taught the same lesson in his encounter with the rich young man —keep the commandments and give of yourself to the poor. Yet there is a perception that “liberals” only do the latter, and “traditionals” only the former.

Maybe we all need to make an attempt, given our particular talents, to make our presence known in both areas…If you’re a spirit of Vatican II Catholic, read the VII documents and you will see Latin is called for in the Mass. Read the Notitiae on the GIRM and you will find holding hands at the Our Father has been condemned by the Vatican. Likewise, if we never miss a daily Mass, pray the Rosary daily, frequent Confession,use NFP, etc but never offer aid to those in need, then we don’t really “get” the Gospel either.

 

[JSmitty2005]

palmas85:

Was I the only to notice no specific response to this one?

I found this excerpt from an article here on Catholic Answers website:

And, of course, we all know that the reforms of Vatican II did away with the Latin Mass. Strangely enough, nobody informed the bishops: “The use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites” (36). And some priests will be amazed to learn that “in accordance with the centuries-old tradition of the Latin rite, the Latin language is to be retained by clerics in the divine office” (101). It would seem that a real Vatican II Catholic ought to foster the use of Latin, eh?

The rest of the article, entitled Will the real Vatican II Please Stand Up?, can be found here:

catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0307fea1.asp

Here’s another article called Do Church Councils Always “Fail”? (this one even mentions this “spirit of Vatican II” we’re talking about):

catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0307fea1sb.asp

Lastly, here’s one called It Didn’t Go Out with Vatican II:

catholic.com/thisrock/2002/0207fea3.asp

 

[Servus_Pio_XII]

Wow.

As I said, the council was used as a tool for rogues to change what they saw fit, and blame it on Vatican II.

 

[JSmitty2005]

Servus Pio XII:

As I said, the council was used as a tool for rogues to change what they saw fit, and blame it on Vatican II.

Exactly.

 

[otm]

Dr. Bombay:

Snot blowing?? http://bestsmileys.com/rude/2.gif Mmmm…yummy!

Yes, indeed. “What you do to the least of these, you do to me.” Not, “What Big Government does to the least of these, you do to me.” Not, “What you’ve done with the money you’ve stolen from someone else, you do to me.”

But, if you want to continue to live in a fantasy world that engendering hatred amongst the classes and redistribution of wealth are Catholic teachings, even though that directly contradicts a Sovereign Roman Pontiff, knock yourself out. .

Your comments are exactly what I was saying about liberals. Namely, you substitute your own feel good panaceas for actual Church teaching. Thanks for proving my point so well. :tiphat:

I don’t live in a fantasy world. I just go quietly about working with the social justice group at our church. Your comment about the peace and justice ministry being a cover for radicals is just bull. You paint with a broad brush those who quitely give time, talent and treasure to support the poor. Interestingly, some fo the greates supprot we get is from well to do capitalist Rebulicans. I don’t need your knee-jerk tripe about it being a cover designed to promote the Democratic platform. Rather than a cover for radical politics, it is an implementation of the Gospel commands.

and you might want to read what the Sovereign Pontiffs =- the current one and the last one - have had to say about about capitalism, and about redistribution of wealth. If you had bothered to read, you would know that they have both said that there is an enormous inequality of distribution of wealth, and they have had a good bit to say about accumulation of wealth. Rerum Novarum is not the only writing on the subject.

I don’t, however, use the work I do, nor do the others who work in it whom I have contact with, for a platform for big government, or a cover for promoting the Democratic platform. We just work on getting affordable housing for the poor; food on the table; useable clothing; health emergency funds…

But being that you so soundly and roundly reject the work that the peace and justice groups do, you wouldn’t know of any of that; you just sit in your chair issuing political diatribes about that which you have no experience. some day, you might wnat to get your hands dirty doing something for the poor.

 

[MrS]

otm:

you might wnat to get your hands dirty doing something for the poor.

judging from the smiley… his hands are dirty

(sorry., just the first thought that came to mind on a quiet Sunday, waiting for the rain.)

 

[otm]

palmas85:

Was I the only to notice no specific response to this one?

Perhaps, as it was only one of 16 documents, and only part of the document noted?

It seems to me that I hear that part noted more than just about any other of the hundreds of paragraphs - or is over a thousand?

In any event, peridodically we have a bit of Latin and Greek in the Mass. And it doesn’t seem to be a minor issue, let alone a major one.

Interestingly, about an 18 to 20 minute trip away, we had the Mass in Latin, with a schola that had done international tours, and sang Palistrina as he was meant to be sung. I told a number of people about it (it was every Saturday night), and none of them made the effort to attend that Mass.

Oh well…

 

[otm]

Confiteor:

Read the Notitiae on the GIRM and you will find holding hands at the Our Father has been condemned by the Vatican.

Then you might want to let someone like Archbishop Chaput know about that, since he says that it is neither required nor condemned, and suggests that those who wish to hold hands should do so, and those who wish to not do so should not be required to. Particularly, since he seems to alwasy know what the Vatican is saying, i9ncluding their condemnations.{QUOTE=Confiteor]Likewise, if we never miss a daily Mass, pray the Rosary daily, frequent Confession,use NFP, etc but never offer aid to those in need, then we don’t really “get” the Gospel either.No, it is not that anyone is saying that those who pray often, go to daily Mass, etc. do not get the Gospel; what is being said is that they seem to have very selective memory of what the Gospels say; they seem to leave out a hugh amount of what Christ says we must do for our fellow man.

There is a vast difference between saying “you don’t get it”, and “you don’t get this part of it”.

 

[Eileen_T]

dennisknapp:

This is something I have always wondered. What is it with liberal Catholics and the “Spirit” of Vatican II?

Whenever I have commented on some innovation in the Liturgy I have been referred to Vatican II. I would then ask where this particular thing was mentioned as I couldn’t remember having read it. If I disagreed and actually quoted from a particular document, the reply I almost aways received was “Well it’s the SPIRIT of Vatican II”

To me refering to the ‘Spirit’ of V2 rather than to the Documents themselves was an excuse to ignore them and make whatever changes they wanted.

I suspect that the ‘Spirit’ of V2 is the one whose name is ‘LEGION’

 

[palmas85]

Sad to say, most of the social justice types that I have run into, and believe me I run into a lot, seem more concerned with their own feelings than in doing anuthing positive. Helping out at a food line, delivering pre packaged meals to the elderly or giving a couple of dollars to a homeless person doesn’t really make any difference in the scheme of things. Sitting around in a committee deciding how to help the poor is usually a big waste of time.

If they really wanted to help out why not go all the way. Invite some homeless in to your own home. Use your grocery money, not excess, but your funds to provides food for a poor family. You do without so that they might have. Pay someone elses health care costs, electric bill or rent. Pay out of your own pocket for some kids to attend a good Catholic School etc.

And do it all completely anonymously. No groups, no meetings, no committees, no trophys or plaques, no mention at all, and nobody knowing that you did it, except you, God and maybe the ones you helped.

Then my opinion of the majority of the Social Justice crowd will change, and maybe just maybe some good will actually be acomplished.