Why Do All the Bad Guys, and Some Good Guys, Still Defend Vatican II?

The Remnant Newspaper ^ | August 25, 2023 | Robert Morrison

[ebb tide]

Ping

[ebb tide]

 16 By their fruits you shall know them. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?  17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, and the evil tree bringeth forth evil fruit.  18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can an evil tree bring forth good fruit.  19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, shall be cut down, and shall be cast into the fire.  20 Wherefore by their fruits you shall know them.

Matthew Chapter 7

[No name given]

Amen. Well said.

[Dr. Sivana]

When people say they support Vatican II, I sometimes ask them, WHAT is it in Vatican II that is so great? Name a dogma (none defined), an anathema (non given) or even a specific thing that is defined in a specific was (none, in fact there are conflicting descriptions and arguments throughout).

Contrast with Councils with lasting consequences that clarified matters.

Nicea(325): Nicene Creed
First Council of Constantinople (381): Condemned Arianism
Ephesus (431): Theotokos (against Nestorianism)
Trent (1545): Defined relationship of Faith and Works to Salvation.

etc.
There is no substance to Vatican II it is used as anexcuse for be behaviour and changes since.

[BrexitBen]

The beginning of the end for the current Catholic Church.

Who would’ve ever thought that it would lead to a communist pope?

The Latin Mass was so beautiful.

[elenvee]

As a covert to Catholicism I do not believe that I would have converted if I had to attend mass in Latin. That is a very foreign idea to someone who did not grow up with the tradition.

[chopperk]

They are progressives; if they could they would rewrite the Ten Commandments to appeal to their own wishes.

[A Cyrenian]

If the latin Mass was/is so great.

Why don't they say the Homily in latin?

For the simple reason that no one would know what they are talking about.

It's perfect that you enjoy a latin Mass.

I'll pass.

[Its All Over Except ...]

“Words and phrases “systematically suppressed and eliminated from the “revised” Novus Ordo missal solemnly promulgated by the false “Pope”were systematically suppressed and eliminated from the “revised” Novus Ordo. ...”

All of them find their source in Sacred Scripture, but that would no doubt offend protestants and those of other religions.

https://novusordowatch.org/2013/07/new-mass-orations/

[Arkansas Toothpick]

Ebb Tide,

The more you post these kinds of articles, the more you tear down your argument that the Roman Catholic Church is the only true church. The implication is that it is NOT the immutable church handed down; rather, it is instead an ecclesial organization riddled with error and heresy.

Ironically, you are really more of a Protestant than you know. The Reformers sought to return the Church to its roots by removing accretions that had slowly turned it away from the Gospel and toward heresy. You are making the exact same argument they did.

[mountainlion]

I defend the Bible. I did not see the word Pope nor Vatican in it.

[amihow]

Because V2 was an Ecumenical Council, formed and ratified as historically done and official. It is our duty to defend it.

[Dr. Sivana]

Why don't they say the Homily in latin?

Technically, the homily takes place during a suspension of the Mass and is optional. Since the priest makes his own remarks, there is not as much concern about bad translations or a chanhing language, either.

[ebb tide]

You’re hillarious, toothpick.

A prot calling a traditional Catholic to be a prot like yourself.

We’re polar opposites. And your knowledge of the Catholic Church is sorely lacking.

It’s no wonder y’all elected Bill Clinton twice as governor.

[ebb tide]

Because V2 was an Ecumenical Council, formed and ratified as historically done and official. It is our duty to defend it.

That's absolute B.S.

What are Catholics to think of Vatican II?

[ebb tide]

Do you see “sola scriptura” in that bible of yours?

[ebb tide]

Have either of you two ever been to a traditional latin Mass?

The differences between it and the "bogus order" are much more than the language.

Compare the Traditional Mass to the New Mass

The Traditional Mass vs. the New Mass

[ebb tide]

The Mass According to Vatican II

Much of the debate about the preconciliar rite maintains that the Novus ordo, the rite that the vast majority of Catholics attend today, represents the intention of Vatican II. The council’s blueprint for reform, however, the constitution Sacrosanctum concilium, suggests that the adherents of the preconciliar rite may be more faithful to the liturgical vision of Vatican II than their detractors.

Pope Paul VI promulgated Sacrosanctum concilium (hereafter SC) on December 4, 1963, which was six years prior to the establishment of the Novus ordo. SC called for greater lay participation in the liturgy, meaning that the laity should recite Mass parts along with the clergy: “To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs.” [30]

Instead of an epistle and a Gospel, as in the preconciliar Mass, the reformed liturgy should have “more reading from Holy Scripture, and it is to be more varied,” i.e., from the Old Testament, rarely found in the earlier liturgy, and more of the liturgy should be in the vernacular, a decision to be made by “the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority,” namely, “territorial bodies of bishops.”

But the council also clearly stated: “The use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.” [36.1] The introduction to the Constitution stated that “the rites be revised carefully in the light of sound tradition” [4], for “there must be no innovations unless the good of the Church genuinely and certainly requires them,” and they should “grow organically from forms already existing.” [23]

Further, SC orders that “steps should be taken so that the faithful may also be able to say or to sing together in Latin those parts of the Ordinary of the Mass which pertain to them.” [54] Steps like these had been taken for centuries; medieval councils decreed that parents ought to teach their children the Lord’s Prayer in Latin. After the advent of printing, missals had Latin and vernacular on facing pages.*

SC approached other possible reforms in much the same way. While other musical forms might fit liturgical purposes, “the Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services.” [116]

A new edition of books of Gregorian chant should be edited [120], in accord “with the most rigorous scholarly methods.”  [117] And the organ should continue to be the primary musical instrument played during the Mass, “for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church’s ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man’s mind to God and to higher things.” [120].

SC mentioned nothing about ad orientem or versus populum, or the priest’s vestments.

SC’s vision vanished in the liturgical reform wrought between its promulgation and the implementation of the Novus ordo in 1970. Latin yielded entirely to the vernacular. Gregorian chant virtually disappeared, and the organ took a back pew to guitar, drums, and tambourine. Much was edited out; a few, long-abandoned prayers (e.g., the Prayer of the Faithful) were reinserted.

These alterations confounded a number of learned prelates who had been Council Fathers. Cardinal Josef Frings, a distinguished medieval scholar and the archbishop of Cologne said in 1969: “This is not what we council fathers decided; this is against the decisions of the council. I cannot understand how the Holy Father could give his consent to such a thing.”

In his view, “the council didn’t want many things, but then came the periti (experts), and they were mostly very progressive gentlemen, and they pushed everything in a different direction.”

Cardinal Alfons Stickler, an influential ecclesiologist, rendered a similar judgment: “You can understand my astonishment when, on taking note of the final addition of the new Missale Romanum, I found that its contents in many respects did not correspond to the texts of the council with which I was well-acquainted, much was altered, expanded, and even directly contrary to the decrees of the council.”

Bishop Robert J. Dwyer of Portland, Oregon, lamented:

Who could have dreamed on the day Sacrosanctum concilium was promulgated that in a few years, in less than a decade, the Latin tradition of the church would be all but extinguished and become a slowly fading memory? The thought of this would have horrified us, but it seemed so inconceivable that we considered it ridiculous. And so we laughed it off [when a Sicilian bishop predicted precisely what happened while the council was still meeting].

Frings’s peritus, Josef Ratzinger, wrote to a colleague in 1976: “I can say with certainty from my knowledge of the council debate and from rereading the speeches of the council fathers delivered at that time that [the Novus ordo] was not intended by them.”

The Jesuit musicologist Joseph Gelineau added: “the Roman rite as we knew it no longer exists.”

According to these authorities, the preconciliar rite was closer to the liturgical vision of Vatican II; the rite finally implemented in 1970 departed from it in general and in detail.

So how can anyone claim that the small number of Catholics who worship in the Mass of St Pius V reject a Council that decreed that their liturgical preferences mostly be preserved?

 

[A Cyrenian]

When I was younger and growing up all Masses were latin.

I can still remember when they would say a Mass in english ocassionally.