Who else is ready for Vatican III?

[Miles_Mariae]

I still don’t understand why, outside of long practice and personal preference by some , Latin is any better than any other language. Presumably God has no difficulty understanding.

“The use of the Latin language prevailing in a great part of the Church affords at once an imposing sign of unity and an effective safeguard against the corruptions of true doctrine.” -Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, 1947, Sec. 60

“For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure until the end of time … of its very nature requires a language that is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.” -Pope Pius XI, Officiorum Omnium, 1922

“36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.” -Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium

 

[He_Man]

We’ve had two official Vatican councils in about 2000 years. Which means on average, the next one won’t happen for another 950 years or so.

I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for that…

 

[napad]

The thing is, even when they come in succession, it takes a while for them to take effect–the first one may not have fully taken effect before the second one. I think is pretty apparent if one studies histories of the early Councils and their aftermaths–it was never pristine until decades or even centuries afterwards.

You make it sound like councils contradict each other. Many said we don’t need a universal Catechism but I think it helped to progress things better than without it!
The same goes for a 3rd council. They are protected by the Holy Spirit aren’t they? There are a number of problems that have become much clearer since Vac II. Most of the bishops didn’t even know that there was Modernism in the Church at the time! or that many of the theologians that were advisors were heretical in their thinking.:yup: Most bishops thought of it more of like a holiday in Rome.

It was a mess. Schibibeexx( sp?) completely reversed the whole schema of the council from the start by passing out critiques of what was to be covered and it all went in every direction after that.

Procedure kept changing:
First bishops could speak from the floor at anytime; then they had to be picked after raising their hand; and then they had to write a secret note in order to be heard.Modernist rode ruff-shot over the orthodox bishops! Read the history of the council it was a MESS!

 

[Manfred]

I’ll vote for Trent II.

DEFINITELY count me in on this!!! :yup:

 

[Quackers]

I realize there are many problems in the Church today, but I just feel compelled to say that I think we’re all blessed by God to have the gift that is the Catholic Church. Perhaps any discussions about the current problems in the Church should be carried out in that light. (And I’m not suggesting that anyone here isn’t devout or isn’t appreciative of the Church, so please don’t misunderstand what I’m saying.) I know I myself am overjoyed that I’ve finally found the true Church after so many years. Ok, please forgive the intrusion from a newbie who’s just too excited to be in catechism class!

 

[LCMS_No_More]

I have an anathema.

“If anyone says that one form of the Mass of the Roman Rite is superior to any other form of the the same Rite, let him be anathema.”

 

[Miles_Mariae]

I have an anathema.

“If anyone says that one form of the Mass of the Roman Rite is superior to any other form of the the same Rite, let him be anathema.”

I see what you did there

I realize there are many problems in the Church today, but I just feel compelled to say that I think we’re all blessed by God to have the gift that is the Catholic Church. Perhaps any discussions about the current problems in the Church should be carried out in that light. (And I’m not suggesting that anyone here isn’t devout or isn’t appreciative of the Church, so please don’t misunderstand what I’m saying.) I know I myself am overjoyed that I’ve finally found the true Church after so many years. Ok, please forgive the intrusion from a newbie who’s just too excited to be in catechism class!

I agree, can’t wait for Easter. Is catechism class RCIA or different?

 

[Quackers]

I see what you did there

I agree, can’t wait for Easter. Is catechism class RCIA or different?

It’s a bit different. I meet with my priest for instruction directly from him. There is no set timeframe; I’ll finish and enter the Church when he believes that I’m ready. There are currently two other people receiving instruction too, but my priest told me that he would conduct catechism classes even if only one person expressed an interest in converting.

I didn’t understand the anathema comment. Would you mind explaining it to me?

 

[palmas85]

I have an anathema.

“If anyone says that one form of the Mass of the Roman Rite is superior to any other form of the the same Rite, let him be anathema.”

Anathemas really aren’t things to play around with. I know it probably sounds cute but anathemas are pretty serious things.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

As a Catholic that was born in 1965. I grew up in the mess that VII has caused. I am so tired of being told that " that is not in the spirit of VII" or " that goes against VII" I really don’t know about anyone else but i really don’t that that personally I could handle VIII right now. What people seem to miss is that form all I have read or heard it did not matter were in the world you were The Mass was the Mass. That is not necessarily the case today. Even within a 20 mile radius with the NO there can be (granted small) differences. Some churches do not even have kneelers ( sorry but I believe one should be kneeling in church if physically able). I have seen churches that have been IMHO destroyed by renovations to bring them into compliance with VII that you would not even know you were in a Catholic Church with out it being written on the sign out front.

Now with that said was everything from VII bad. By know means. The thing I it can at a time of great upheaval and instead of being a steading force the church leaders contributed to the uncertainty be in many mind making drastic changes.

Forty years later we are still arguing over these changes, that we are now finding out from His Holiness Pope Benedict were not made in a lot of cases correctly. Now I know that there are a lot of people that disagree and that we have not change enough. To those I pray for you to indulge me I my view of holding to a train of thought that there was nothing wrong with the Mass pre VII.

I think that God has answered the prayers of all the people with the Election of Pope Benedict as a man who can heal the wounds that have been created and bridge the gap between the TML and the NO.

 

[Feedmysheep]

“The use of the Latin language prevailing in a great part of the Church affords at once an imposing sign of unity and an effective safeguard against the corruptions of true doctrine.” -Pope Pius XII, Mediator Dei, 1947, Sec. 60

“For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure until the end of time … of its very nature requires a language that is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.” -Pope Pius XI, Officiorum Omnium, 1922

“36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.” -Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium

Thank you. This is the first time I’ve ever understood why using Latin was so important. Intuitively, I knew it was, but lacking the words to articulate it, I was lost.

Now, if I could just convince my husband that going to a TLM isn’t going to kill him.

 

[Seminarian_X]

How about Vatican II 1/2? Not quite Vatican III, but a little more than Vatican II.

I’m a uniter, not a divider.

 

[Miles_Mariae]

.
I’m a uniter, not a divider.

But who’s the decider?

 

[Genesis315]

Why does it have to be at the Vatican? Why can’t it be Chalcedon II, Lyons III, Lateran VI, etc. or even some place new like Lisbon or Krakow, etc?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Anathemas really aren’t things to play around with. I know it probably sounds cute but anathemas are pretty serious things.

First, I wasn’t the only one throwing around anathemas.

Second, the point I was making should be clear.

The other anathemas that were thrown around are rehashes of clear Church teaching. This one is based on something the Holy Father said but is generally ignored by people on both sides of the TLM/NOM argument (the TLM is better than the NOM!/No, it isn’t!..that sort of thing). The point is that they are one and the same mass. I prefer the TLM but have no problem with a properl celebrated NOM.

Finally, if there is going to be another Ecumenical Council, it will most likely be held at the Vatican; therefore Vatican III. It seems that some people think that the name is about the kind of council that is held (i.e., I don’t want a Vatican III but I would love a Trent II). WRONG-O! It’s based on where it is held. Vatican III could end up being similar to Trent. Furthermore, there were anathemas issued at Vatican I. Unlike Trent, Vatican II wasn’t called to address a major upheaval in the Church…unfortunately, a misapplication of its tenents created one.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

As a Catholic that was born in 1965. I grew up in the mess that VII has caused. I am so tired of being told that " that is not in the spirit of VII" or " that goes against VII" I really don’t know about anyone else but i really don’t that that personally I could handle VIII right now. What people seem to miss is that form all I have read or heard it did not matter were in the world you were The Mass was the Mass. That is not necessarily the case today. Even within a 20 mile radius with the NO there can be (granted small) differences. Some churches do not even have kneelers ( sorry but I believe one should be kneeling in church if physically able). I have seen churches that have been IMHO destroyed by renovations to bring them into compliance with VII that you would not even know you were in a Catholic Church with out it being written on the sign out front.

Just a little bit of info: Vatican II never called for a single renovation of any Church. The Missal of 1970 never called for any renovation of any parish church, either. These were done by people who were either misled or had some strange notions of how Catholic worship should be expressed.

It’s one of those things of “well, show me where it says that!” and I can only respond that I cannot because it isn’t there! No orders to have free-standing altars, nothing abot removing kneelers, no recommendations to remove statues, etc. Nada. What IS there will surprise many:

A renewed lectionary to provide a broader range of scripture readings…and none of this nonsense about “lesser quality” scripture passages…it’s God’s Word, it all talks about Christ and if you can’t find Him there, you aren’t paying good enough attention!.

A renewed Divine Office (the biggies being the change of Matins to the Office of Readings with less psalms and longer readings, the four-week psalter and the suppression of Prime)

Aside from that, V2 didn’t intend any major changes to the Mass itself, with some exceptions (i.e., the reduction of duplicate prayers, etc.).

Now with that said was everything from VII bad. By know means. The thing I it can at a time of great upheaval and instead of being a steading force the church leaders contributed to the uncertainty be in many mind making drastic changes.

Forty years later we are still arguing over these changes, that we are now finding out from His Holiness Pope Benedict were not made in a lot of cases correctly. Now I know that there are a lot of people that disagree and that we have not change enough. To those I pray for you to indulge me I my view of holding to a train of thought that there was nothing wrong with the Mass pre VII.

I think that God has answered the prayers of all the people with the Election of Pope Benedict as a man who can heal the wounds that have been created and bridge the gap between the TML and the NO.

Amen to that. I wonder if we won’t get a Mass of Benedict the XVI before all is said and done.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

Why does it have to be at the Vatican? Why can’t it be Chalcedon II, Lyons III, Lateran VI, etc. or even some place new like Lisbon or Krakow, etc?

The Council of Los Angeles!

Hey, we got this nifty new Cathedral and all. dons asbestos suit

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Just a little bit of info: Vatican II never called for a single renovation of any Church. The Missal of 1970 never called for any renovation of any parish church, either. These were done by people who were either misled or had some strange notions of how Catholic worship should be expressed.

It’s one of those things of “well, show me where it says that!” and I can only respond that I cannot because it isn’t there! No orders to have free-standing altars, nothing abot removing kneelers, no recommendations to remove statues, etc. Nada. What IS there will surprise many:

[/QUOTE]

 

[THurifer2]

I’ve heard this “it takes a hundred years or so for a Council to stick” argument and it doesn’t hold water.

Nicaea 325------Constantinople 381… 56 years between

Constantinople 381-----Ephesus 431… 50 years between

Ephesus 431-----Chalcedon 451… only 20 years between those

Chalcedon 451-----Constantinople II 553… we finally have those 100 years to take effect?

Constan. II 553-----Constan.III 680… another 127 year gap, is somebody on to something?

Constan. III 680 -----Nicaea II 787… 107 years, so far half have been over 100 and the other have been 50 or less.

Nicaea II 787-----Constan IV 869… only 82 years, the times are getting closer…

Constan IV 869----- Lateran 1123… a whopping 254 years!

The 4 Lateran Councils were all held within 92 years, why didn’t they let them take effect?

From the 4th Lateran Council to the Council of Vienne there were 3 Councils in less than 100 years.

Constance, Florence and Lateran V (whoops! I made a mistake earlier ) were all held with in 100 years in the 15th and 16th Centuries.

Trent, everyone’s favorite Council, was held in 1545 and this seems to be the biggest gap; between it and Vatican I----- 325 years.

And… it was almost 100 years again between Vatican I and Vatican II.

This is assuming you agree that all 21 Councils were Ecumenical. Various groups have their opinions… 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 19, or 20 as well.

So, I conclude that the “it takes 100 years for a Council to take effect” argument is false. Otherwise we wouldn’t have had all the bunch ups in the lists.

I believe Trent and VII dealt more with liturgy than most others…and the big problem with VII is the Liturgy that was born out of it. VII did not create the current liturgy…it was born after the close of the council.

 

[TMC]

I agree with those that say we are still working on implementing Vatican II. But I also think that we will need another council in no more than a few decades to take a look at the doctrinal controversies that will almost certainly remain.

My read of Church history is that there have been a number of times when there was some confusion and controversy over certain doctrines, and that is when councils came in to study those things. We have some of that kind of confusion and controversy now. Such controversie are more spread to the masses today (no pun intended) because of modern communications, so we may not have the luxury of waiting for everything to settle down (or a real hope that it will) before the next council. If I were a betting man, I would not put anything down on the current Pope instituting a council, for a number of reasons. But perhaps the next will feel its time again.