Vatican II Myths

[Caedmon]

I have a close Catholic friend that thinks that Vatican II was pure evil. My friend showed particular contempt for Novus Ordo mass, among other things.

Could y'all list and briefly explain some of the more common Vatican II myths for me?

Thanks...

 

[Wolseley]

Ralph McInerny wrote a book you should pick up and read, entitled What Went Wrong With Vatican II. He explains how the liberals in the West decided not to implement Vatican II, but their own screwball agenda instead, and call it Vatican II.

Denying the legitimacy of Vatican II usually places one in the camp of the sedevacantists, or at the very least in with the SSPX'ers.

 

[Caedmon]

Originally posted by Wolseley
Denying the legitimacy of Vatican II usually places one in the camp of the sedevacantists, or at the very least in with the SSPX'ers.

Whaaaaa...

Translation?? hehe...

 

[Caedmon]

So is Vatican II at fault, or is it misinterpretations of Vatican II that are at fault?

 

[Wolseley]

Sedevacantists and SSPX'ers are two brands of extreme Catholics who deny Vatican II.

Sedevacantists (a term meaning "the Chair [of Peter] is empty") feel that there has not been a legitimate Pope since Pius XII died in 1958. The next Pope was John XXIII, who of course called that evil ole 2nd Vatican Council, and all Popes since then have been post-Vatican II Popes, so of course, they can't be real.

SSPX'ers are members of the Society of St. Pius X, a homemade add-water-and-stir artificial Catholic church devised by the late Archbishop Marcel LeFebvre, who felt that Vatican II was the ruination of everything, and therefore it couldn't possibly be legitimate.

There are other groups like these, but they all have a common theme, which is to return to what they think was the "Golden Age" of American Catholicism, the period from about 1925 up to the late 1950's. They dote on Catholic figures from the past like Archbishop Fulton Sheen, and mourn the passing of their idealized, romanticized, unrealistic pseudo-era of The Absolute Zenith Of All Things Catholic. One group actually went so far as to elect their own "Pope" in a clapboard cabin in Montana a few years back. It's kind of sad, really; these people are so entrenched in the past that they cant see that the past the idealize is not a real reflection of that past, and never was.

Vatican II is not at fault for the problems the Church has experienced over the last 40 years. Vatican II was a pastoral council that really changed very little; there are various factors behind the problems, but the council was blamed for a lot of stuff that it had nothing to do with.

 

[Caedmon]

What about Novus Ordo? My friend really likes to complain about that, says that a lot of prayers and things were left out of the mass, and that jews, protestants, and even buddhists were involved in its design.

Did I mention that my friend also detests the new "luminous" mysteries?

 

[Wolseley]

What about Novus Ordo? My friend really likes to complain about that, says that a lot of prayers and things were left out of the mass,

Left out as compared to what? The Tridentine Mass of 1546? Of course they're different. Mention to him that the Mass of 100 AD "left out" a lot of things the Tridentine Mass had, too. Does that make every Mass prior to 1546 invalid as well? Pfah!

and that jews, protestants, and even buddhists were involved in its design.

Balderdash.

Did I mention that my friend also detests the new "luminous" mysteries?

The content, or the fact that now it isn't the same way the Rosary was "in the good old days"?

Like I said, they long for 1950. Sad, really.

 

[Kotton]

Originally posted by Wolseley

Like I said, they long for 1950. Sad, really.

Yea, I long for 1950 too, I knew so much more then. Gee, the things I lost over the years.

On a serious note, my parents were telling us even before the 50's that some things we practiced and thought of as 'the way it always was' would change. Not the Church  it's self, but the way we looked at it. They embraced the Mass in English as better reaching the people, and enjoyed the more community in the Novus Ordo. My mother expected to see a change in rules of fast and abstainence, as some applied to another time and were ignored by some people. Knowing the history of the Church and how it responds to each age is important to seeing it as still the same Church throughout all ages.

Kotton

 

[dignitized]

1 - no such thing as novus ordos mass - it is the Liturgy of Paul VI

2 - No such animal as the tridentine mass - it is in itself a reformation of the rite of Gregory the Great which was a reformation of the Petrine Liturgy, but it properly termed the liturgy of Pius V. This liturgy was a standardization of the differing practices of the rite of Gregory the great. It is NOT as the sede Vacantists wish to claim the only VALID form of the Mass. The Council of Trent sought to unify the practice of the Liturgy in the west by eliminating from use any Rite of the Liturgy which was not at least as old if not older than that of St Gregory. Other Rites of the Mass include: The Liturgy of John Chrysostom, Liturgy of St. James, the Liturgy of ST Mark, the Liturgy of ST Basil - all of which are still in use by the church today.

3. There were non-Catholics is attendance upon the Vatican II council as OBSERVERS ONLY. There is no evidence of those people participating in any formulation of any of the Vatican II Documents.

4 - The sede's have also given us MANY popes since Vatican II! What's really fun is the way they all attack one another - each calling the others Anti-pope and usurper. *shrug* It's good for a laugh!!

www.truecatholic.org/pope/ - Pope Puis XIII

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/7170/ibio1.htm - Pope Gregory XVII

http://popemichael.homestead.com/ Pope Michael I


Other claimants include -
Michael Collin - Pope Clement XV; 1950. France. Deceased.
Gaston Tremblay - called himself Pope Gregory XVII, 1968. Canada.
Palmarian Catholic Church, The One Holy Clemente Dominguez Gomez - called himself Pope Gregory XVII, 1978. Spain.
Chester Olszewski - Pope Peter II, 1980. Pennsylvania, USA.
David Bawden - Pope Michael I, 1990. Kansas.
Francis Konrad Schuckardt - Pope Hadrian VII, 1984. Chicago, IL, USA. [Site 1]
Habemus Papam? [Site 2]
Fr. Valeriano Vestini, O.F.M.Cap. - Pope Valeriano I, 1990. Avezzano, Italy.
Fr. Victor von Pentz - Pope Linus II, 1994. Rome, Italy.
Maurice Archieri - Pope Peter II, 1995. France.
True Catholic Church, The Fr. E. Lucien Pulvermacher, O.F.M. Cap. - called himself Pope Pius XIII, 1998. Kalispell, MT, USA.
Julius Tischler - Pope Peter II, 19xx. Germany.
Unknown - called himself Pope Benedict XXV, 19xx.
Unknown - called himself Pope Leo XIV, 19xx.
Unknown - called himself Pope Peter Athanasius II, 1984.(Belgium, then Canada)
Unknown - called himself Pope Emmanuel I, 19xx.
Blasio Jesheck Ahitila, 1991, died 12 June 1998.
"The Little Pebble", William Kamm - Pope Peter Romanus II (pope in waiting - assumes when JPII dies!!!) Australia.

 

[Caedmon]

Edit: I misinterpreted Br. Max's post... my apologies.

 

[panterapat]

Humble Joe,

Misinterpretations! People used Vatican II to justify all sorts of things that were never intended. Pope John Paul II is even now bringing to fruition the true spirit of Vatican II. Historically, it takes many, many years for a Vatican Council to realize the fruit of it's decrees. Remember, we think in terme of years, the Church thinks in terms of centuries (or should I say in terms of eternity).

In Christ, Patrick

 

[geocajun]

Originally posted by Br. Max

www.truecatholic.org/pope/ - Pope Puis XIII

this website appears to be down, but I have seen his picture before, I think their 'vatican' is actually a 'trailor'.

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/7170/ibio1.htm - Pope Gregory XVII

wow, this schism is really serious, you see his hat? wow! that musta cost some serious money.

http://popemichael.homestead.com/ Pope Michael I

I bet this one is Italian, you can tell by his dark sunglasses and his suit coat in this picture: http://popemichael.homestead.com/mushroomrock1.html

 

[dignitized]

Humble: its okay people often misunderstand me. Its the nature of communication

Geo: oh but Pius XIII is soooo funny!! He has a whole section of encyclicals which he has written. Of course that's not as much fun as the one who was elected pope by his parents!!

 

[sklippstein]

Of course that's not as much fun as the one who was elected pope by his parents!!

 

Who was that?

 

[SSPX]

Ahh Vatican II. There's much I'd like to say about the council, but I'll try to stay in the realm of the permissable, lest the conciliar inquisition come after me.

27th December 2002 at 05:19 AM Wolseley said this in Post #5 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=530329#post530329)
SSPX'ers are members of the Society of St. Pius X, a homemade add-water-and-stir artificial Catholic church devised by the late Archbishop Marcel LeFebvre, who felt that Vatican II was the ruination of everything, and therefore it couldn't possibly be legitimate.

Okay, its apparent you don't know what you are talking about. Archbishop Lefebvre was a council father and never denied that the council was a legitimate council.

There are other groups like these, but they all have a common theme, which is to return to what they think was the "Golden Age" of American Catholicism, the period from about 1925 up to the late 1950's.

Maybe thats what some people want, but its not what those in the SSPX want. If you listen to some of bishop Williamson's tapes, for example, he is often critical of 1950's Catholicism.

Vatican II is not at fault for the problems the Church has experienced over the last 40 years. Vatican II was a pastoral council that really changed very little; there are various factors behind the problems, but the council was blamed for a lot of stuff that it had nothing to do with.

Whether or not Vatican II is the cause of the problems of the post-conciliar era depends to a certain extent on what you think the problems are. In other words, if you think ecumenism is the best thing since sliced bread, then you won't have a problem with Pope John Paul II inviting African animists, voodoo priests, buddhists, and Great Thumb worshippers to pray to their gods for peace, at the convent in Assisi for the world day of prayer for peace last year (you can still find some pictures of the event on the vatican web site). Now, if you DO have a problem with ecumenism and believe it leads to indifferentism and syncretism then you WILL have a problem with Vatican II. The same goes for all the other Vatican II novelties (and even JPII acknowledges they are new, so I'm not saying anything controversial) like religious liberty, and collegiality.

Its also no secret that some of the major theologians at Vatican II, like Rahner, Kung, Congar, and Schillebeeckx were condemned under Pius XII. These men are certainly not known for their orthodoxy, so defending the true faith was not their objective at Vatican II. In fact, Fr. Schillebeeckx had this to say about Vatican II:

"we say things in a 'diplomatic' way but after the council we will draw the implicit conclusions."


Joe

 

[SSPX]

29th December 2002 at 09:09 PM sklippstein said this in Post #14 (http://www.christianforums.com/showthread.php?postid=534544#post534544)

 

Who was that?

I think he goes by the name 'Pope' Michael. He lives near St. Mary's Kansas.

 

[Wolseley]

I may not know what I'm talking about, Joe----but I do know one thing.

The Society of St. Pius X is not the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

 

[MichaelFJF]

"The Council" by Bill Huebsch is an excellent plain English explanation of Vatican II. M

 

[SSPX]

Wolseley,

You are certainly right about that.

Joe

 

[Caedmon]

Hey Joe, got a question for ya...

I'm not a confirmed Catholic... am I going to Hell?