Replies

"We can tell a tree by its fruits, and the fruits of Vatican II can be seen in the great loss of faith, vocations and fidelity to the Church's teachings among the laity, and the misdirection and apostasy of much of the priesthood, religious, and bishops."

Is this true? I was under the impression that the RC church was the only Christian Church that was not in decline. Speaking only for myself, I have doubts that I would have begun the process of converting to Catholicism if it had been solely in Latin.

I "enjoy" an occasional trip down to a nearby parish where they are permitted to celebrate the Mass in Latin. From the bi-lingual missalette it seems to be pretty much the same. Architecturally the altar is against the front wall, whereas in our normal (I mean the one we are members of) Church the Altar stands between the Priest and the congregation. In both cases the Priest does not put his back to the altar unless he is holding the Consecrated Host.

I am generally quite moved by the reverence, piety, and adherence to the forms of the Mass by the attendees of the Latin Mass. And while not at all dismayed that they frequently seem to be "in this world but not of it", I have on one occasion been beset by a woman who held forth at great length on the Popes betrayal, and the kowtowing to Protestant and Jewish groups to come up with a form of the Mass that would not offend said groups (Vatican II).

She seemed a bit disloyal to me, but as I am not yet even a Neophyte, I obviously have much to learn, If the Pope says its so, who are we to dispute it?

I was under the impression that the RC church was the only Christian Church that was not in decline

Actually there are many evangelical Protestant denominations that are growing rapidly. However most mainstream Protestant denominations are in decline(generally the ones with a liberal bent). I dunno, maybe, just maybe something to do with their aversion to evangelism? (Why 'go into the world' if you might risk offending an atheist, gay, pedophile, liberal victim group de jour?)

Is this true? I was under the impression that the RC church was the only Christian Church that was not in decline.

The Catholic Church is in severe decline throughout the Western world. Scant vocations, Scant conversions, and a majority of people calling themselves Catholic no longer attend Mass on Sunday. Many Parishes in the US and Europe don't even have a priest. In some parts of the country, there's one priest to a dozen parishes, so parishoners only get to assist at Mass every 2 weeks or more. The situation is not good. I do have faith that things will get better, however.

In Asia and Africa, I hear, things are better, but then I also hear that the faith is being polluted by tribal superstition. I've seen newstories of Africans trying to incorporate animal sacrifices and witch doctors into the Mass. But then again, I haven't seen any of this first hand, so I take it all with a grain of salt.

Speaking only for myself, I have doubts that I would have begun the process of converting to Catholicism if it had been solely in Latin.

The sermon and the readings were in the vernacular, and the Church encouraged people to follow the Mass in Missals which had Latin and the vernacular side by side, so people did know what was being said.

In my opinion, however, changing to the vernacular is the change to which I object the least. It is the deletion of so many beautifull centuries-old prayers and rubrics, and their replacement with the concoctions of some committee, that I disagree with most. Even if both were said in the vernacular, there is a world of difference between the old Mass and the New.

Of course, the New Mass is still a valid Mass, so the most important thing remains unchanged.