"What Happened at Vatican II"

Started by rowsofvoices9, January 11, 2013, 01:59:52 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

LouisIX

Quote from: dust on January 14, 2013, 03:18:50 PM
Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 14, 2013, 02:52:24 AM
Quote from: LouisIX on January 13, 2013, 03:44:28 PM
We can never know John XXIII's intentions when calling the Council.  We can never know who did or didn't advise him.  What we know is that the original schemas were traditional.  The German-speaking bishops seemed to be lead by Schillebeeckx (and certainly some members of the Curia) in getting the schemas thrown out (which they did by getting the South American and African bishops to vote with him).  And the rest is a history of hell on earth.


We can know/tell he was anti-Fatima and was pretty insulting.

Calling the visionaries "prophets of doom" in the opening speech or whatever?


Pretty crappy.

His Holiness seemed of the school that thought the Adherents of Trent and Tradition were "meanies" who did not focus on the "Love" aspect. If you look at the opening speech he gave, it is evident that a break was afoot from the beginning.


That was evident to a lot of prelates who, nonetheless, were not expecting what happened to happen.
IF I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

Kaesekopf

It was evident to a number of prelates who then decided it was best to roll over and not resist the anti-Catholic changes. 


Makes you think.
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.

LouisIX

Well, we know how few resisted.  A few bishops.  One archbishop.  One cardinal.
IF I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

Kaesekopf

I looked at Card. Ottaviani's Wikipedia page, and I laughed at this:
QuoteHe was opposed in his movements for a rapid Council by German Cardinal Josef Frings. Frings was advised by then Fr. Joseph Ratzinger, who would later become prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and then Pope Benedict XVI.
Wie dein Sonntag, so dein Sterbetag.

I am not altogether on anybody's side, because nobody is altogether on my side.  ~Treebeard, LOTR

Jesus son of David, have mercy on me.

tmw89

Also gotta love Card. Spellman's assessment of Roncali:  "He's no Pope. He should be selling bananas."
Quote from: Bishop WilliamsonThe "promise to respect" as Church law the New Code of Canon Law is to respect a number of supposed laws directly contrary to Church doctrine.

---

http://tradblogs.blogspot.com

NOW OPEN:  A new Trad forum featuring Catholic books, information, and discussion!

Christknight104

Quote from: tmw89 on January 14, 2013, 10:30:51 PM
Also gotta love Card. Spellman's assessment of Roncali:  "He's no Pope. He should be selling bananas."

;D

Apparently, Archbishop Montini of Milan, later Paul VI, stated this about John XXIII: "This holy old boy doesn't seem to realize what a hornet's nest he's stirring up."

poche

Quote from: EcceQuamBonum on January 11, 2013, 03:50:41 PM
I watched two minutes and eleven seconds of the video.  Once he called Trent and V2 the "two great councils" and claimed that they "illuminate each other" I stopped watching because my sense of irony isn't that strong.

Is there some point in watching beyond that, or is it just rah-rah V2 nonsense for an hour?
I watched the whole thing. It's not rah-rah nonsense. I don't agree with some of his conclusions. It appears to be objective. He described himself as a historan not a theologian. I don't think the audience was catholic and I wonder about him.

Also, from the brochure:  "The Council proposed a noble simplicity whereby the rites are short, clear, free from useless repetition and within people's powers of comprehension without need for much, if any, explanation."

"Within people's powers of comprehension"!  There's that good ol' Vatican 2 condescension at work!  If only the laity weren't so darn dense, maybe they could handle Latin.  Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the most supreme, most sublime mystery of the Christian Faith something that, you know, ought to require some explanation?
Sometimes explanation is a good thing. I have been to funerals where many of the people were not Catholic and the priest stops to explain what is going on for those who were in a Catholic Church for the first time.

Did you post this to show us what's wrong with V2 or what?  Because I must confess I'm a bit confused.
The speaker recognized where there were problems and mentioned some of those areas such as collegiality and ecumenism and freedom of religion that are controversial in some Traditionalist circles. 

poche

Quote from: Der Kaiser on January 11, 2013, 05:42:43 PM
Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 11, 2013, 04:20:28 PM
I like how uneducated peasants could "get" the Church from Trent (and prior!), but now modern man is too dumb for the liturgy.  We're arguably more educated now than ever before, and yet....

That is true though. Most Novus Ordoites are dumb as toadstools. Look at the pants crapping when the New New New Mass translation came into effect. People were screaming about how it would be hard to understand. Catachesis has been...lacking
The only people who were complaining about the new translation were people who had an interest in complaining. 

tmw89

Quote from: poche on January 15, 2013, 01:06:30 AM
Quote from: EcceQuamBonum on January 11, 2013, 03:50:41 PM
I watched two minutes and eleven seconds of the video.  Once he called Trent and V2 the "two great councils" and claimed that they "illuminate each other" I stopped watching because my sense of irony isn't that strong.

Is there some point in watching beyond that, or is it just rah-rah V2 nonsense for an hour?
I watched the whole thing. It's not rah-rah nonsense. I don't agree with some of his conclusions. It appears to be objective. He described himself as a historan not a theologian. I don't think the audience was catholic and I wonder about him.

Also, from the brochure:  "The Council proposed a noble simplicity whereby the rites are short, clear, free from useless repetition and within people's powers of comprehension without need for much, if any, explanation."

"Within people's powers of comprehension"!  There's that good ol' Vatican 2 condescension at work!  If only the laity weren't so darn dense, maybe they could handle Latin.  Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the most supreme, most sublime mystery of the Christian Faith something that, you know, ought to require some explanation?
Sometimes explanation is a good thing. I have been to funerals where many of the people were not Catholic and the priest stops to explain what is going on for those who were in a Catholic Church for the first time.

Did you post this to show us what's wrong with V2 or what?  Because I must confess I'm a bit confused.
The speaker recognized where there were problems and mentioned some of those areas such as collegiality and ecumenism and freedom of religion that are controversial in some Traditionalist circles.

Thing is, those concepts aren't just "controversial in some Traditionalist circles" - they're un-Catholic ideas, condemned by the Church in her Magisterium.
Quote from: Bishop WilliamsonThe "promise to respect" as Church law the New Code of Canon Law is to respect a number of supposed laws directly contrary to Church doctrine.

---

http://tradblogs.blogspot.com

NOW OPEN:  A new Trad forum featuring Catholic books, information, and discussion!

Gottmitunsalex

Quote from: tmw89 on January 15, 2013, 01:12:22 AM
Quote from: poche on January 15, 2013, 01:06:30 AM
Quote from: EcceQuamBonum on January 11, 2013, 03:50:41 PM
I watched two minutes and eleven seconds of the video.  Once he called Trent and V2 the "two great councils" and claimed that they "illuminate each other" I stopped watching because my sense of irony isn't that strong.

Is there some point in watching beyond that, or is it just rah-rah V2 nonsense for an hour?
I watched the whole thing. It's not rah-rah nonsense. I don't agree with some of his conclusions. It appears to be objective. He described himself as a historan not a theologian. I don't think the audience was catholic and I wonder about him.

Also, from the brochure:  "The Council proposed a noble simplicity whereby the rites are short, clear, free from useless repetition and within people's powers of comprehension without need for much, if any, explanation."

"Within people's powers of comprehension"!  There's that good ol' Vatican 2 condescension at work!  If only the laity weren't so darn dense, maybe they could handle Latin.  Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the most supreme, most sublime mystery of the Christian Faith something that, you know, ought to require some explanation?
Sometimes explanation is a good thing. I have been to funerals where many of the people were not Catholic and the priest stops to explain what is going on for those who were in a Catholic Church for the first time.

Did you post this to show us what's wrong with V2 or what?  Because I must confess I'm a bit confused.
The speaker recognized where there were problems and mentioned some of those areas such as collegiality and ecumenism and freedom of religion that are controversial in some Traditionalist circles.

Thing is, those concepts aren't just "controversial in some Traditionalist circles" - they're un-Catholic ideas, condemned by the Church in her Magisterium.
This
"Nothing is more miserable than those people who never failed to attack their own salvation. When there was need to observe the Law, they trampled it under foot. Now that the Law has ceased to bind, they obstinately strive to observe it. What could be more pitiable that those who provoke God not only by transgressing the Law but also by keeping it? But at any rate the Jews say that they, too, adore God. God forbid that I say that. No Jew adores God! Who say so? The Son of God say so. For he said: "If you were to know my Father, you would also know me. But you neither know me nor do you know my Father". Could I produce a witness more trustworthy than the Son of God?"  St. John Chrysostom  Sunday Homily

"The two goals of the Jews: The universal domination of the world and the destruction of Catholicism, out of hatred for Christ" --Mgr. Jouin

Bonaventure

They're errors and heresies. Unfortunately, since the 18th century authority has been so attacked that many good intentioned Catholics don't realize it. For me, realizing the meaning of the Syllabus, Quanta Cura, etc. was like getting hit in the face with a brick. Even the great Abp. Lefebvre said that when he went to seminary, he realized that he held liberal ideas.
"If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."

tmw89

Quote from: Bonaventure on January 15, 2013, 01:28:21 AM
They're errors and heresies. Unfortunately, since the 18th century authority has been so attacked that many good intentioned Catholics don't realize it. For me, realizing the meaning of the Syllabus, Quanta Cura, etc. was like getting hit in the face with a brick. Even the great Abp. Lefebvre said that when he went to seminary, he realized that he held liberal ideas.

Growing up in France or America anymore one is almost guaranteed to have liberal ideas drilled into one's mind throughout school (as if ya didn't need another reason to home-school  ;) )
Quote from: Bishop WilliamsonThe "promise to respect" as Church law the New Code of Canon Law is to respect a number of supposed laws directly contrary to Church doctrine.

---

http://tradblogs.blogspot.com

NOW OPEN:  A new Trad forum featuring Catholic books, information, and discussion!