Presbyterians, like Episcopalians and Methodists, are on the way down in numbers. Heck, some members of those denominations are embarassed to claim so---for instance, in 30327, Northside United Methodist Church has renamed itself "Northside Church". And Peachtree Presbyterian Church in 30305 (Buckhead), the nation's largest Presbyterian Church, now calls itself "Peachtree Church." (Almost sounds non-denominational?!?) I can't imagine a Catholic or Orthodox Church doing the same!
There is an altar railing too. In terms of names, many parishes, even prior to VII, drop Catholic in self identification, to shorten things. All of my assigned parishes: St. Teresa Church, Cathedral of St. John the Baptist, Church of the Most Holy Trinity, St. Joseph Church, St. Anne Church. 41 years just passed before your Catholic eyes.
Thanks, but no thanks. I prefer Catholic Churches. I am Catholic not Protestant, and have no plans on changing, no matter how much the Church wants me to.
It is what Paul VI wanted, and is called "noble simplicity." The minimalist movement in the arts gained popularity in the 1960's, which I think eventually led to the back to earth hippie movement. The whole thing like the Council is very dated because it was a product of the times.
Yet some Councils, like Trent, spoke in timeless truths which are as valid today as when stated. And Trent resulted in a reinvigorated Faith, the polar opposite of Vatican II
Every. Ecumenical. Council. Was. A. Product. Of. The. Controveries. Heresies. Of. The. Times.
Called only when long accepted teaching contested.
Vatican II was the only one ever called simply to liven up the joint. And became a lightning rod to collect all the change simply for the sake of change folk. No reason or continuity required, continuity actually discouraged. Old is wrong, new is better, because...well...it's NEW. Progress. Progressives. Where all which matters is change and all things mutable.
"Vatican II was in complete harmony with sacred Tradition, but is often distorted to suit a particular view. When one actually reads the documents, without prejudice, one sees how wonderfully traditional they are."
The counter-myth is that Vatican Two was a terrible and awful, cobbled together by men who, because so many of them were Freemasons or Communist "plants," acted with the intention of destroying the Church from within.
The counter-myth overlooks the vast differences in culture between the time of Trent (or most any previous Council) and the culture at the time immediately prior to and after the Second Vatican Council.
Trent took place in the aftermath of the Protestant Revolt when the Church was in terrible shape. Vatican II took place when the Church was at its zenith in modern times and squandered its power and influence
So are we to take it that the passage in inverted commas is the myth, and what follows is the counter-myth? A counter-myth can be equally mythical but from an opposing standpoint (I presume that is what is meant here) but it can also be something that uses facts to demolish a myth. For example see John Terraine 'The Smoke and the Fire - Myths and Counter-Myths of War' which debunks the popular view of the Great War.
I was born in 1962. I attended a private Catholic school from 10 to 17. The “Vatican II era”. Most of our teachers at this school could be divided into 2 groups: those who continued on, to a great extent, as though “The Council” had never happened; and those who were mad (mad is the right choice of word) for ALL the changes happening in the Church in the 1970s. For the second group, it was as though it was a sort of Year Zero for Catholic Christianity. It was a very strange experience, for me and others, to be a teenager in this private Catholic school in that crazy 1970s decade - for example, over several years, knowing Fr X believed and taught this, that and the other; while knowing that Fr Y really and often, believed and taught something completely different...
I can confirm your experience. My parish priests in late 60’s and early 70’s were angry about radical changes, priests and nuns marrying, others oblivious.
18 comments:
It is far more festive than wreckovated Catholic Soviet style inspired by Moscow train stations, and airport.
Tiffany windows, no less.
https://www.firstchurchbuffalo.org/architecture
Quite beautiful!
Looks fine to me. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, anyway....
Presbyterians, like Episcopalians and Methodists, are on the way down in numbers. Heck, some members of those denominations are embarassed to claim so---for instance, in 30327, Northside United Methodist Church has renamed itself "Northside Church". And Peachtree Presbyterian Church in 30305 (Buckhead), the nation's largest Presbyterian Church, now calls itself "Peachtree Church." (Almost sounds non-denominational?!?) I can't imagine a Catholic or Orthodox Church doing the same!
I wish the local modern worship space was even half as traditional as that church.
There is an altar railing too. In terms of names, many parishes, even prior to VII, drop Catholic in self identification, to shorten things. All of my assigned parishes: St. Teresa Church, Cathedral of St. John the Baptist, Church of the Most Holy Trinity, St. Joseph Church, St. Anne Church. 41 years just passed before your Catholic eyes.
Had you not labeled it as presbyterian, in the first instance, I would have thought it to be Roman Catholic.
Thanks, but no thanks. I prefer Catholic Churches. I am Catholic not Protestant, and have no plans on changing, no matter how much the Church wants me to.
It is what Paul VI wanted, and is called "noble simplicity." The minimalist movement in the arts gained popularity in the 1960's, which I think eventually led to the back to earth hippie movement. The whole thing like the Council is very dated because it was a product of the times.
Every. Council. Was. A. Product. Of Its. Time.
Yet some Councils, like Trent, spoke in timeless truths which are as valid today as when stated. And Trent resulted in a reinvigorated Faith, the polar opposite of Vatican II
Anon1pm...
Every. Ecumenical. Council. Was. A. Product. Of. The. Controveries. Heresies. Of. The. Times.
Called only when long accepted teaching contested.
Vatican II was the only one ever called simply to liven up the joint. And became a lightning rod to collect all the change simply for the sake of change folk. No reason or continuity required, continuity actually discouraged. Old is wrong, new is better, because...well...it's NEW. Progress. Progressives. Where all which matters is change and all things mutable.
Some Myths about Vatican II
Author: Michael Hains
"Vatican II was in complete harmony with sacred Tradition, but is often distorted to suit a particular view. When one actually reads the documents, without prejudice, one sees how wonderfully traditional they are."
The counter-myth is that Vatican Two was a terrible and awful, cobbled together by men who, because so many of them were Freemasons or Communist "plants," acted with the intention of destroying the Church from within.
The counter-myth overlooks the vast differences in culture between the time of Trent (or most any previous Council) and the culture at the time immediately prior to and after the Second Vatican Council.
Trent took place in the aftermath of the Protestant Revolt when the Church was in terrible shape. Vatican II took place when the Church was at its zenith in modern times and squandered its power and influence
Anon @ 2:57
So are we to take it that the passage in inverted commas is the myth, and what follows is the counter-myth? A counter-myth can be equally mythical but from an opposing standpoint (I presume that is what is meant here) but it can also be something that uses facts to demolish a myth. For example see John Terraine 'The Smoke and the Fire - Myths and Counter-Myths of War' which debunks the popular view of the Great War.
I was born in 1962. I attended a private Catholic school from 10 to 17. The “Vatican II era”. Most of our teachers at this school could be divided into 2 groups: those who continued on, to a great extent, as though “The Council” had never happened; and those who were mad (mad is the right choice of word) for ALL the changes happening in the Church in the 1970s. For the second group, it was as though it was a sort of Year Zero for Catholic Christianity. It was a very strange experience, for me and others, to be a teenager in this private Catholic school in that crazy 1970s decade - for example, over several years, knowing Fr X believed and taught this, that and the other; while knowing that Fr Y really and often, believed and taught something completely different...
I can confirm your experience. My parish priests in late 60’s and early 70’s were angry about radical changes, priests and nuns marrying, others oblivious.
Post a Comment