Read a copy of "The Tablet"an English Weekly publication,though I find it hard to believe that you can,t find any informed view,its seems to me its all be forrced down our troats since Vactican Two
The fact remains that criticizing some very unfortunate events in the light of Vatican II is not being negative about Vatican II. It is academically constructive to do so. If you wish to read a book that not only talks about Vatican II but also other Councils, specifically focused on the liturgy, read Pope Benedict’s Spirit of the Liturgy. It peels back several layers and forces the reader to accept that some very unfortunate things have come in the name of Vatican II while not being of Vatican II.
Do you read the Huffinton post? Full of disrespect and dissident Catholics from what I have experienced so far. One of the latest articles on it, which made Michael Voris dedicate a whole Vortex episode on the subject, was claiming that St. Joan of Arc was actually “queer” (Their words) and wasn’t burnt for heresy but was actually burnt for cross-dressing. Absolutely disgusting. It didn’t make me suprised when I realised the ‘research’ was conducted by an openly lesbian woman and another man who is actually a woman who underwent a sex change.
Sure, maybe thats true. I know there are some ‘radical’ Vatican II advocates out there just like there are radical anti-Vatican II advocates, but they are usually the ones who are not well informed.
Good point
and thank you. Yeah I guess when I say “positive view” I really just mean someone who holds a different view than just simply anti-new mass. Not necessarily one who just defends everything that came out of Vatican II to no end.Yeah, the Huffington Post is the absolute worst. Bottom of the barrel for journalism.Do you read the Huffinton post? Full of blasphemy and dissident Catholics from what I have experienced so far. One of the latest articles on it, which made Michael Voris dedicate a whole Vortex episode on the subject, was claiming that St. Joan of Arc was actually “queer” (Their words) and wasn’t burnt for heresy but was actually burnt for cross-dressing. Absolutely disgusting. It didn’t make me suprised when I realised the ‘research’ was conducted by an openly lesbian woman and another man who is actually a woman who underwent a sex change.
Another article was about the New Translations, with a bunch of Catholics (Although it is hard to tell if they are actually Catholic or just some other Christian denomination interfering with Catholic subjects) on the comments section encouraging complete schism with Rome to create their own ‘American Catholic church’ where they can keep the old translations.
Man, sometimes I think the ultra left-wing liberal extremists are almost as bad as the far-right anti-Semitic sedevacantist sites.
I’m too sickened to read it regularly, but when I see an article recommended (usually out of harsh criticism) I usually read it.Do you read the Huffinton post? Full of disrespect and dissident Catholics from what I have experienced so far. One of the latest articles on it, which made Michael Voris dedicate a whole Vortex episode on the subject, was claiming that St. Joan of Arc was actually “queer” (Their words) and wasn’t burnt for heresy but was actually burnt for cross-dressing. Absolutely disgusting. It didn’t make me suprised when I realised the ‘research’ was conducted by an openly lesbian woman and another man who is actually a woman who underwent a sex change.
Another article was about the New Translations, with a bunch of Catholics (Although it is hard to tell if they are actually Catholic or just some other Christian denomination interfering with Catholic subjects) on the comments section encouraging complete schism with Rome to create their own ‘American Catholic church’ where they can keep the old translations.
Man, sometimes I think the ultra left-wing liberal extremists are almost as bad as the far-right anti-Semitic sedevacantist sites.
Goodness me, I just read the most hilarious comment I have ever seen. On HuffingtonPost in the comments section:
It was written by a sedevacantist, but nevertheless I found it funny. The clash of the left-wing extremists and the right-wing sedevacantists.
My advice to you is to not trust anyone you find on Catholic Answers; better yet, limit your time on here. Do the research for yourself. Do not be offended by people who talk badly about the Novus Ordo. Do not be defensive simply because it’s the Mass you’ve grown up on. I’m in no way accusing you of this, but there are so many who are ignorant of the old Mass simply out of spite for those who disagree with them.
Edited: Never mind.
We do know several items that Vatican II called for. Unfortunately, some people simple choose not to see these things despite them being incredible positives.
TrueLight, only if was blind I would not notice !
That means I’ve become predictable.
A couple of questions:
I hide some of them, trust me.
For me there should be NO comparison, unless academic or theologic or liturgical.
You should. But I was referring to the Tridentine Mass, you just are definitely in favor and you openly declare so. And it is a right for you to do so… I respect people who are clear about their ideals and show them without shame.
I hide some of them, trust me.
Um… OK!
There is nothing special about language in this case, unless you are talking about the translation from on to another. What you are talking about could be suggestive of an unhealthy spiritual pride. I would ask you, again to reconsider your position here based upon the historical development of the liturgy, and even the scriptures them selves. There is nothing in tradition to suggest any of your points, nothing what so ever. Rather, if you consider tradition, then again you must consider the Mass was regularly translated in to the “vulgar” toung, iincluding many languages which decidedly didn’t exist at the time of Christ.
So it’s unhealthy spiritual pride vs excessive national pride now? I think I’ll go with Catholic pride, so condemn me.
And I would ask you to consider where the Church would be today if it had allowed all liturgies and documents to be in changing and increasing vernaculars from early on, no adoption of a codified language or anything. Or where Western civilization would be, for that matter?
