[sitetest]

Dear RobbyS,

Yeah, but frankly, these younger folks are also better catechized than the pre-Vatican II folks.

I just don't think all the damage can be blamed on "theological liberals" (not that they didn't do their own damage). I think that a lot of the problems that we attribute to the post-Vatican II era existed prior to the Second Vatican Council, and often, to a much greater degree than folks are willing to admit.


sitetest

[Desdemona]

I just don't think all the damage can be blamed on "theological liberals" (not that they didn't do their own damage). I think that a lot of the problems that we attribute to the post-Vatican II era existed prior to the Second Vatican Council, and often, to a much greater degree than folks are willing to admit.

How much of it do you think is a form of intellectual laziness? The same sort that brought us the ideas that English grammar didn't need to be taught if kids heard the language spoken properly. You know, when sentence diagramming was dropped. Or was that later?

[RobbyS]

Jacques Barzun points out that the sexual Revolution took place, not in the 1960s but in the 1890s. It began with the European middle classes and spread through western society. In a way it is simply the sexual practices of the aristocracy, many of whom had never paid more than lip service to Christian sexual. Not for nothing did the flower children of the '60s talk about "middle-class morality." They were really aristocrats, the children of privilege.

[ultima ratio]

Another howler. Do you ever talk to anybody over sixty? Do you ever read a book? Do you swallow ALL the liberal propaganda you are told to swallow? Read Iota Unum. If you haven't read it, you should. Vatican II was a sea-change. After it came the Deluge.