Vatican II did not teach that churches should be renovated in this way and it is a scandal to say that Vatican II did say we must do this to Catholic Churches:
I am old enough to remember quite well hearing those who more than likely did not read the documents of Vatican II, teaching us what Vatican II wanted. They taught this in the most authoritarian and dogmatic way possible.
I have said it before and I’ll say it again, in the 1970’s and 80’s the label “you are so pre-Vatican II,” was as derogatory toward the person so labeled as is the “n” word. Again, it was/is another form of the most vile sort of manipulation and marginalization.
Bishop Pete of Boise recovers the scandal of the tactic of using Vatican II in a false way to manipulate priests into obeying his authoritarian command.
Let me be clear, in the Church still recovering from authoritarian manipulation by bishops who demanded silence from abuse victims and often payed them off in order to contain their own mismanagement of the Church from becoming exposed, for a bishop to continue to use his authority in a false way needs to be called out, especially if he ignorantly and blatantly tells lies about Vatican II to shore up what he wants.
Let me be clear too, that Vatican II said nothing about facing or not facing the people, the bishops of the Church would have presumed the norm as was experience in most parishes and institutions throughout the world, if they didn’t, they would have said Mass should face the people.
Vatican II said absolutely nothing about completely destroying the traditional architecture of churches to impose on them what Vatican II said about how churches should be renovated or built with altars protruding into the nave with seating all around it and distractions like statutes, crucifixes, tabernacle and other artwork, to include stained glass, removed.
Vatican II said nothing about standing or kneeling for Holy Communion, receiving on the hand or tongue, altar girls, and the like.
But all of these were shoved down the throats of questioning Catholics in the most authoritarian and dogmatic way by claiming Vatican II taught these things. And if you questioned the person saying so, you were disobedient.
Using Vatican II to promote things Vatican II didn’t teach is a scandal because it is a lie. We’ve had many lies in the Church for the past 50 years coming from very high sources. It needs to cease.
21 comments:
Vatican Two was seen as sweeping permission to focus on the humanistic, the horizontal, and the subjective. The Church may never recover from it.
The second picture, Holy Comforter in Charlottesville, VA has been re-remodeled. It looks different now, much better. They have a TLM every Sunday at 1:30 PM. It is a wonderful Mass with lots of children and even some old folks.
How well I remember the stuff pumped at us in our Catholic college in those years. How well I remember radical nuns and priests turning everything upside down. Seeing some of them reverse course 180 degrees in just a matter of weeks stunned me. Then there were the radical priests and nuns who called press conferences in opposition to the few bishops who heroically tried to put the brakes on the wrecking process of the times. Reluctant bishops and priests were cowed into silence by a sympathetic press. The abuses were many and rampant. There was a syndicated Catholic priest who answered a woman distraught at the destruction of beautiful high altars, communion rails, and statues rampant in the sixties and seventies with a harsh reproach that she was an obstacle to "the work of the Holy Spirit" Who was inspiring all this, and that she was being disobedient to the bishop and priests who were "doing the work of the Spirit." It was a free-spirit time when anything goes. Morality was also turned on its head. Two years after my graduation, my Catholic college decided that it would allow the young men to sleep with their girl friends overnight. Outraged, the bishop called the head of the college into his office, read him the riot act, told him "not while I'm bishop" and demanded a public apology. There's so much the more I saw and heard, but some things are best left unsaid. Yes, Father, like you I am still amazed that the wreckers will not see the terrible damage they have done; they were so cocksure that all their radical changes would effect a "new, vibrant Church" that would retain all the Baby-Boomer youth and be so attractive spiritually that Protestants would flock to join. None of this has happened; just the opposite. Yet they refuse to see it. I find that absolutely incredible.
Father McDonald,
Man, those "sanctuaries" are probably the ugliest I have ever seen.
I was called "pre-Vatican II" even though I was a teenager then who loved Gregorian chant and saw no need for the deforms in the liturgy. The other hackneyed phrase that was chanted over and over again was "it is so meaningful" or "that's not meaningful." Narcissistic view of the Liturgy?
Vatican II did not actually teach anything; it was expressly not a dogmatic Council. However, it aimed to restate teachings in such a way as to better engage with 'modern man'. It was effectively hi-jacked early on (in the week of the Cuban missile crisis, as it happened) by certain bishops from the 'liberated' countries who had a grudge against the Roman Curia dating from the Second World War. By this time John XXIII was terminally ill - in the event he did not sign off a single decree of the Council he himself had called.
Even at the time it was seen as a game-changer, particularly after the election of the liberal Paul VI, who actually encouraged the so-called 'reforms', even to the extent of producing a radically new rite of Mass, something that none of his predecessors had done (Pius XII's Holy Week reforms were radical enough, but on his death Sunday Mass was little changed from what it had been 500 or more years earlier).
Paul steered the Council until its conclusion, and attempts to shift the blame, claiming false interpretations of Council documents, and scapegoating Bugnini for the destruction of the venerable Roman Rite, are becoming less and less convincing.
I've posted about this before, but I was about 10 years old when the New Mass (dishonestly referred to as a Vatican II "reform") was foisted upon us. A short time after that came my first experience with guitars and, to this day, I get almost nauseous just thinking about the infantile drivel that replaced the music we once heard at Mass. "Sons of God" particularly sickens me.
Kids can smell something phony and there was something that was just not right about this "new thing" in the Church. It was especially painful for me, because most of my classmates at Our Lady of the Sacred Heart liked the New Mass. Our clueless nuns (Sisters of St. Joseph of Orange) didn't have a clue and thought they were "finally reaching the kids". When they shed their habits and embraced the whole modernist muddle, my esteem and respect for these ladies diminished greatly. And as I look back, most of my classmates who loved the superficial fun of do-it-yourself liturgy stopped practicing their faith a long time ago.
Kids don't want to see priests and nuns trying to be "hip" or contemporary and the priests and nuns who do so are oblivious to the young people laughing at them behind their backs. It's like watching the Lawrence Welk Show and seeing Myren Floren and Norma Zimmer come strutting out in plaid bell=bottoms. From the get-go, the new Mass just felt like pandering from people who were completely oblivious to what young people really wanted--or NEEDED.
Before moving to Valdosta, I would occasionally attend the "indult" Mass in San Diego--the first one granted in the United States. Most parish priests would denounce it as an exercise in nostalgia to appease a few old folks. However, what I witnessed was something altogether different: That Mass was filled to capacity with young families, teens and young adults. Some drove from as far away as L.A. to escape the inanity of their parish's insipid liturgies. And the fellowship afterwards would have made any Protestant envious, even though no coffee and donuts were offered (it was held at Holy Cross Mausoleum).
When I moved to Valdosta in 2004, it was very discouraging to see how little anything had changed since the 1970's. When Benedict was elected pope a year later, I attended the weekday Mass and the priest was visibly shaken. He nervously improvised a sermon that is almost laughable in retrospect: "We, uh, well, this man might not be what we think. After all, he said that he was going to keep doing Vatican II, which means modernizing the Church..." Thank God, Benedict gave us the weapon we need to save the Church, Summorum Pontificum.
A few years later, a woman in my parish criticized me on another blog, proclaiming that i was one of those people who wants to "bring back the past". It was almost humorous, as she wrote it as if to say she "had the goods" on me. Sadly, little has changed here since then--just a few personnel moves. We briefly had a good pastor here, but he voluntarily left after a misguided group attempted to bring him down in the lowest way.
Most young Catholics today aren't interested in Vatican II, the failed revolution in the Church or, for that matter, Peter Paul and Mary records. But those of us who actually care about our Church need to keep learning and stay informed. We need to know what Vatican II really was and what its documents really say. Most Catholics have been sold a bill of goods on Vatican II and its up to us to speak the truth.
"It was effectively hi-jacked early on (in the week of the Cuban missile crisis, as it happened) by certain bishops from the 'liberated' countries who had a grudge against the Roman Curia dating from the Second World War."
Amazing how someone who was not there has such amazing insider information...
Anonymous,
More Catholics WOULD have insider information if they spent as much time reading and researching their faith as they did criticizing each other. There are a number of great books examining and documenting what happened at the Second Vatican Council and more and more of them are revealing it for the debacle it (apparently) was.
No, I wasn't there either, but I've lived with its effects and I've lived long enough to know what it was like to be Catholic BEFORE the Council. It's kind of like comparing a successful company with another that is in bankruptcy. I'll leave it to you to guess which company the Church resembles these days.
Well anan if you do have such info, spill it or go away, please, we are tired of your snark, put on your sandals grab your love beads and go
that first "church" almost scared me crap less, I had a nightmare a while back about some idiot doing exactly that to the little country church of my youth, right down to the wall in front of the true sanctuary, egad is that an abomination, the person responsible should be hung by their toes
Anonymous Kavanaugh,
Yet we have evil cardinals, bishops and priests, morally and intellectually bankrupt like you, who vote for the baby-killer party. And YOU have insider information. You built that! (to borrow the language of your demi-god, Obozo the Magnificent).
Anonymous
I wasn't at the battle of Waterloo but I know quite a lot about it. The inside story of Vatican II has been the subject of numerous studies and commentaries since Ralph Wiltgen wrote 'The Rhine Flows into the Tiber' back in 1967.
Amazing how you can post such damfool comments ...
so where you there anon
I wasn't at the death of Pope John Paul I, but I know quite a lot about it. The inside story has been the subject of numerous investigations and commentaries.
I still wonder, though, if he was killed because he WAS a Mason, or because he was planning to expose the Masonic control of the Roman Curia?
Or, I wonder if he was killed because he WAS gay, or because we was planning to expose the Gay control of the Roman Curia?
Or, I wonder if he was killed because we WAS part of the Vatican Bank scandal, or because he was going to expose those who were behind it?
Or maybe all three?
Amazing how you can post "It has been investigated and I read those reports" and expect that that closes the discussion. Or that you can post that you read the reports and, therefore, what I read has got to be factual. Only a damn fool operates that way.
Anonymous,
Congratulations on a superb illustration of hyperbole to make your point.
There are a lot more sources and books about what happened at Vatican II, including the actual record of the proceedings than a mere report that one could have read.
As far as feeling attacked, as you are likely to claim, frankly, YOU asked for it by your tone. Your mocking, derisive, put-down tone invites the snapping back. There's an old saying, "If you want to get some honey, don't kick the beehive."
I would hope we ALL would hold ourselves to a higher goal in these posts other than, "Gotcha!" or "I really told them!" Save that for the kindergartners.
....and I didn't notice anyone attempting to "close the discussion." In fact, given what we've read from you, I suspect it's going to go on endlessly from this point until Father shuts it down.
Anonymous
Whom was your 8:42 comment addressed to? I suspect to me, as it seems to be a crude parody of my last post.
I did not post 'It has been investigated and I read those reports' You are a liar.
I did not suggest that the discussion was closed, since it isn't. The controversy concerning Vatican II shows no sign of abating. More lies.
Nowhere did I post that any report, on any subject, has to be factual in itself, although some of its content may well be factual. Still more lies.
Pope John Paul I died suddenly during the night of 28/29 September 1978. The most probable cause of death was myocardial infarction.
Some conspiracy theorists prefer to believe he was murdered. That is no reason to dismiss out of hand each and every study and analysis of past events. It's not comparing like with like.
Making up a quotation and attributing it to another is bad enough. Drawing your own conclusions and deliberately and falsely attributing them to another is worse, and exposes you as a mendacious scoundrel.
"I wasn't at the battle of Waterloo but I know quite a lot about it. The inside story of Vatican II has been the subject of numerous studies and commentaries since Ralph Wiltgen wrote 'The Rhine Flows into the Tiber' back in 1967."
It has been investigated and, unless you used mental telepathy, you read the reports of those investigations. I am not lying.
You want us to believe that, having read those reports, your conclusion - that Vat Two was "hijacked" - is accurate. You have closed the case and expect others to do the same. (The controversy here isn't over Vatican Two - it is over your "hijacked" claims.) I am not lying.
If you accept reports of "hijacking" you accept that they are factual. I am not lying.
You expose yourself as a grammatical weasel. Have another go at this one: "Oh, but I didn't SAY that!!!"
Yeesh, what a jerk.
Anonymous, if your only quibble is my use of the term 'hijacking', then read up about how and why the procedures were changed in October 1962, allowing the original schemas to be withdrawn and enabling the Council to adopt a more progressive agenda than that envisioned by John XXIII. It is well documented. Wiltgen's book is a good starting point; he was an American priest and journatist who sympathized with the progressives but was astute enough to recognize the manoeuvres whereby they gained control of the Council. Then let's have your take on it.
I realize that this goes against the grain, since it means advancing a genuine argument rather than setting up straw men, inventing quotations and falsely attributing them to others, and indulging in non-sequiturs. Who knows, it might even give you a modicum of intellectual respectability on the blog.
Which is surely better than being a laughing-stock.
Allow the rest of us to salute all of those faithful Catholics who despite all of the Judas betrayals from top to bottom have remained loyal to Jesus Christ Who, as Saint Joan of Arc reminded all of us at her trial for witchcraft, IS the Church. Those who lived through the gut-wrenching decades following the Modernist Council know just how horrorific those years were. In too many instances it was difficult to find a Catholic priest to confess your sins. What many Catholics ignore is that prior to the French Revolution of 1789 during the 18th Century there were 3,000 members of the clergy, high and low, who were members of Masonic Lodges. The Jesuit University of Ingolstadt in Baveria where Adam Weishaupt founded the Order of the Illuminati on May 1, 1776 was the spawning ground for that Luciferian architect of the New World Order. So when Pope Saint Pius X was providentially elected Pontiff over the intended Masonic candidate Cardinal Rampollo, the Luciferian infiltration of the Catholic Church was far advanced. Pope Saint Pius X did what he could, but the clerical Judases with whom he was contending at the start of the 20th Century had covenanted their souls with the Devil and they just laughed at him and went underground until after he went to Heaven. By the time that the Second Vatican Council was convened, the Modernists were well infiltrated all all levels and without too much effort were able to pull off what one apostate cardinal dubbed The French Revolution inside of the Catholic Church. A common denominator among those Remnant Catholics who are still left is that either by a special grace or by suffering or by both they discovered the infinite merits of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Divine Mysteries of His Incarnation, of His Holy Infancy, of His youth in Nazareth with His Holy Family, of His Public Life, and of His Sorrowful Passion & Death. Not infrequently these Remnant Catholics were graced with a holy Catholic priest who instructed them in the profound truth that the interior dispositions of Jesus Christ, Who is the Incarnate Son of God, are eternal precisely because He is always also God. Our interior dispositions we experience in any given moment and then we lose them because we are finite human beings. That is not true with Our Lord because He is Divine. When He was hanging on the cross, after being savagely tortured and then crucified, He reached a moment before He died when his human nature experienced a total sense of abandonment by His Father and He cried out: My God, My God, Why have You abandoned Me? Because we are Catholic, we know that God the Father never abandoned God the Son, but that does not mean that Our Lord Jesus Christ in the most terrible moment of His agony in human terms did not experience that sense of total abandonment. We Catholics, sinners that we all are, are invited to unite our genuine sorrows and our pains of loss that we have experienced over the last 60 years to the eternal interior dispositions of Our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross on Calvary. The Spouse of Christ, the Catholic Church is going through its Passion during the last 60 years and is approaching its nadir, its lowest point. Our duty and obligation is not to run away like most of the apostles, rather we are called to immerse ourselves in the Divine Mysteries of Our Lord's Passion and Death and stand solid like Saint John and Our Blessed Mother beneath the Cross accompanying Our Lord -- even during the agonies of these actual moments. There is no crown, no reward for quitting and running away, there is an eternal reward for sticking by Our Lord both in the good times and during what all of us are going through, now for 60 years, and in this actual moment. In Christo Rege, Doug Valenzuela
Allow the rest of us to salute all of those faithful Catholics who despite all of the Judas betrayals from top to bottom have remained loyal to Jesus Christ Who, as Saint Joan of Arc reminded all of us at her trial for witchcraft, IS the Church. Those who lived through the gut-wrenching decades following the Modernist Council know just how horrorific those years were. In too many instances it was difficult to find a Catholic priest to confess your sins. What many Catholics ignore is that prior to the French Revolution of 1789 during the 18th Century there were 3,000 members of the clergy, high and low, who were members of Masonic Lodges. The Jesuit University of Ingolstadt in Baveria where Adam Weishaupt founded the Order of the Illuminati on May 1, 1776 was the spawning ground for that Luciferian architect of the New World Order. So when Pope Saint Pius X was providentially elected Pontiff over the intended Masonic candidate Cardinal Rampollo, the Luciferian infiltration of the Catholic Church was far advanced. Pope Saint Pius X did what he could, but the clerical Judases with whom he was contending at the start of the 20th Century had covenanted their souls with the Devil and they just laughed at him and went underground until after he went to Heaven. By the time that the Second Vatican Council was convened, the Modernists were well infiltrated all all levels and without too much effort were able to pull off what one apostate cardinal dubbed The French Revolution inside of the Catholic Church. A common denominator among those Remnant Catholics who are still left is that either by a special grace or by suffering or by both they discovered the infinite merits of Our Lord Jesus Christ in the Divine Mysteries of His Incarnation, of His Holy Infancy, of His youth in Nazareth with His Holy Family, of His Public Life, and of His Sorrowful Passion & Death. Not infrequently these Remnant Catholics were graced with a holy Catholic priest who instructed them in the profound truth that the interior dispositions of Jesus Christ, Who is the Incarnate Son of God, are eternal precisely because He is always also God. Our interior dispositions we experience in any given moment and then we lose them because we are finite human beings. That is not true with Our Lord because He is Divine. When He was hanging on the cross, after being savagely tortured and then crucified, He reached a moment before He died when his human nature experienced a total sense of abandonment by His Father and He cried out: My God, My God, Why have You abandoned Me? Because we are Catholic, we know that God the Father never abandoned God the Son, but that does not mean that Our Lord Jesus Christ in the most terrible moment of His agony in human terms did not experience that sense of total abandonment. We Catholics, sinners that we all are, are invited to unite our genuine sorrows and our pains of loss that we have experienced over the last 60 years to the eternal interior dispositions of Our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross on Calvary. The Spouse of Christ, the Catholic Church is going through its Passion during the last 60 years and is approaching its nadir, its lowest point. Our duty and obligation is not to run away like most of the apostles, rather we are called to immerse ourselves in the Divine Mysteries of Our Lord's Passion and Death and stand solid like Saint John and Our Blessed Mother beneath the Cross accompanying Our Lord -- even during the agonies of these actual moments. There is no crown, no reward for quitting and running away, there is an eternal reward for sticking by Our Lord both in the good times and during what all of us are going through, now for 60 years, and in this actual moment. In Christo Rege, Doug Valenzuela
Post a Comment