|
Post by prayerful on Mar 2, 2017 19:34:06 GMT
Lumen Gentium and other Council documents affirmed the correct position that the Mass is the bloodless sacrifice of Calvary, but the rapid collapse in priestly and other religious vocations, the disasterous, corrupting formation of priests, the near disappearance of so many worthy devotions and their dubious replacements, the doubtful Bugnini 'Mass' (Paul VI in the Latin of Missale Romanum had no deadline and avoided legislative language, although the legislative English version reflected what happened, and is problematic even without considering ICEL errors) which spurred the Great Apostasy, all followed V2. I think advantage should be taken of how Paul VI declared V2 to be pastoral, not dogmatic. V2 needs to be effaced by whichever means possible. Perhaps in the future it could be condemned, like its prototype, the Council of Pistoia. Then Catholics can then know the Church Militant has been restored.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Mar 2, 2017 21:13:03 GMT
I must admit I do wonder if anything good came out of Vatican II, other than a better relationship with the Jewish people and more readings at Mass.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Mar 2, 2017 21:16:45 GMT
Lumen Gentium and other Council documents affirmed the correct position that the Mass is the bloodless sacrifice of Calvary, but the rapid collapse in priestly and other religious vocations, the disasterous, corrupting formation of priests, the near disappearance of so many worthy devotions and their dubious replacements, the doubtful Bugnini 'Mass' (Paul VI in the Latin of Missale Romanum had no deadline and avoided legislative language, although the legislative English version reflected what happened, and is problematic even without considering ICEL errors) which spurred the Great Apostasy, all followed V2. I think advantage should be taken of how Paul VI declared V2 to be pastoral, not dogmatic. V2 needs to be effaced by whichever means possible. Perhaps in the future it could be condemned, like its prototype, the Council of Pistoia. Then Catholics can then know the Church Militant has been restored. With all due respect, comparing VII and the Synod of Pistoia is like comparing apples and oranges. For one thing, the latter was a diocesan synod, with no papal involvement whatsoever, and thus was not covered by infallibility. VII on the other hand reaffirmed Catholic teaching and did not contain heresy, as opposed to certain misinterpretations of the Council. Furthermore, the Pope who called it is now a saint, so condemning the Council would by extension cast doubt over his sanctity. In other words, it's not going to happen.
|
|
|
Post by prayerful on Mar 24, 2017 22:24:23 GMT
Not really, the errors of Pistoia were precursors of Vatican II. If history had been a little different, it could have gained great status, rather than rightful condemnation. The earlier Council was plainer in what it intended. Most Orders were to be suppressed with the Synod. Instead with V2, orders withered. No need to mention infallibility, as Paul VI did not proclaim anything infallible at the lamentable Council. Sacrosanctum Concilium might have seemed orthodox to all who signed, even Archbishop Fellay, but gaps wide enough for a coach and four were easily exploited by Mgsr Bugnini, and his escalating attack on the Mass of All Time. V2 won't be condemned any time soon, that is very true. Realistically, the best that can happen is the orthodox elements of the Council (Mass as Sacrifice of Calvary etc) will be emphasised, and the ecumenical and other errors forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Mar 7, 2022 22:27:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Jul 17, 2022 10:28:16 GMT
I didn't want to start a new thread so I've put these comments here as they vaguely apply to changes over the last 50 years or so.
A couple of highly ironic observations:
In the 60s and onwards it was an oft repeated phrase that the (Irish) Catholic Church was occupied and obsessed by sexual matters. In novels, commentators, TV programs there was the stereotypical over zealous country priest railing against modern music or risque dresses etc. Fast forward 60 years and the liberal West is quite literally falling over itself to accommodate the LGBT industry in every aspect of our lives. Looking back we were being 'gaslit' from a very early stage to pave the way for this social engineering. The old over zealous priest now seems like an innocent compared to modern degeneracy.
Another irony. One of the emerging and popular new pursuits in health fitness and diet is something called Intermittent Fasting (IF). Many seem to testify to the effectiveness of the health benefits of IF. So it looks like the Church had simple effective wisdom written in to many of its traditions which were not only geared towards holiness but could also be good for your health if done in moderation. Yet we have largely pushed fasting to the side....
|
|
|
Post by annie on Nov 10, 2022 14:40:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 16, 2023 23:09:32 GMT
Here's a thought that occurred to me recently while reading the just-published books on the murderer Malcolm McArthur. It appears that Mr McArthur sees himself as a fundamentally good man who happens to have done a few bad things in the past. Although he is an atheist, Mr McArthur seems to have come up quite independently with a version of Karl Rahner's moral theology - that what counts is not individual acts, but a fundamental orientation towards the good. Without pronouncing on Mr McArthur's subjective sincerity, or the general state of his soul, I would suggest that he helps to explain why many people are uneasy with Karl Rahner's moral theology.
|
|