FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Really Confused about Vatican II - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Really Confused about Vatican II (/showthread.php?tid=85056)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5


Really Confused about Vatican II - SacraCor714 - 08-18-2019

Hey all, my husband and I have been going in circles about V2 lately. We both have started going far out of our way to attend Latin Mass because the closest Catholic churches in our area of the Texas bible belt are extremely protestant and boomer-y.

Which brings me to this question:

Are we really to believe that the Holy Spirit inspired Pope John XXIII to radically change the Holy Mass and Catholic social teaching that had been the backbone of Catholicism for nearly 2000 years? That the Holy Spirit suddenly decided that we needed to make the Holy Mass/Catholic doctrine more approachable and relatable to modern times? It doesn't make logical sense, not for a moment. There have literally been no good fruits from Vatican II. In fact, one could safely argue that the Church is in the state it's in right now precisely because of V2 and the heresy and errors it promulgated. 

It makes no sense that the Holy Spirit would inspire V2. Rather, it makes more sense that Satan used John XXIII to infiltrate the Church and bring Her to Her knees through errors such as denouncing Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, women priests, communion in the hand and other sacrileges, and the general protestantizing of the Church.

Was John XXIII a Pope who started out as a good, valid Pope under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit but who fell astray and thus gave himself over to Satan? Did the Holy Spirit withdraw His favor from John XXIII because he started declaring heresy as doctrine? If that is the case, is the Chair of Peter truly empty and has Christ punished His Church for her unfaithfulness by leaving her temporarily without an earthly leader?


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - MagisterMusicae - 08-18-2019

(08-18-2019, 07:18 PM)SacraCor714 Wrote: Are we really to believe that the Holy Spirit inspired ...

Short answer : No.

The Holy Ghost, properly speaking, only "inspires" Sacred Scripture. Though graces and the Gifts of the Holy Ghost, He works through people, but that is not "inspiration" except in a wide sense.

When it comes to Popes and Councils, the Holy Ghost's influence is a negative influence, not a positive one. The Holy Ghost, when invoked and when Popes and Councils speak on matters of Faith and Morals, defining what is to be held by the faithful, along with the other criteria for infallibility, is protected from error. The Holy Ghost negatively protects.

When it comes to matters which are not for definition, this is the human element of the Church speaking in matters of discipline and prudence. Here we owe an religious obedience and a deference when there is no serious reason to question these things, but these are neither infallible, nor inspired. 

They could be the product of the Holy Ghost having granted some grace to people who make a suggestion the result of which is other Churchmen agreeing and some prudential action or discipline resulting, but it is just as possible that Churchmen come up with their own ideas and the Holy Ghost neither positively influences them, nor negatively protects them, so these are bad ideas, even errors.

We have more than a few examples of councils and Popes not only erring, but promoting or even teaching heresy (e.g. John XXII, and Councils of Constance and Basel). These errors were never defined as the Catholic Faith, so the Holy Ghost did protect form these errors.

Thus if there is a serious reason to question aspects of Vatican II or Papal actions because they seem to contradict something of Faith or previous discipline or doctrine of the Church we are free to do so, but only if there is a serious reason.

With Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Mass, I think, and many others smarter that I, think that serious reason exists, all the more so because the Popes who convoked and close the council clearly stated no doctrine was being defined, and the Council was merely a pastoral (e.g. prudential) Council.


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - Zedta - 08-18-2019

(08-18-2019, 07:18 PM)SacraCor714 Wrote: Hey all, my husband and I have been going in circles about V2 lately. We both have started going far out of our way to attend Latin Mass because the closest Catholic churches in our area of the Texas bible belt are extremely protestant and boomer-y.

Which brings me to this question:

Are we really to believe that the Holy Spirit inspired Pope John XXIII to radically change the Holy Mass and Catholic social teaching that had been the backbone of Catholicism for nearly 2000 years? That the Holy Spirit suddenly decided that we needed to make the Holy Mass/Catholic doctrine more approachable and relatable to modern times? It doesn't make logical sense, not for a moment. There have literally been no good fruits from Vatican II. In fact, one could safely argue that the Church is in the state it's in right now precisely because of V2 and the heresy and errors it promulgated. 

It makes no sense that the Holy Spirit would inspire V2. Rather, it makes more sense that Satan used John XXIII to infiltrate the Church and bring Her to Her knees through errors such as denouncing Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, women priests, communion in the hand and other sacrileges, and the general protestantizing of the Church.

Was John XXIII a Pope who started out as a good, valid Pope under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit but who fell astray and thus gave himself over to Satan? Did the Holy Spirit withdraw His favor from John XXIII because he started declaring heresy as doctrine? If that is the case, is the Chair of Peter truly empty and has Christ punished His Church for her unfaithfulness by leaving her temporarily without an earthly leader?

I know that by some around here, I am a sort of heretic. But personally, I am one who is staunchly in opposition to just about anything Vat II. I don't think, if you want to use dreaded labels, I am a Sedevacantist, because I think the Popes have been valid up to Benedict. But I certainly have many issues of what slithered out of Vat II. I was a sophomore in Catholic High School when the changes came in and it was spiritually and emotionally devastating to me and just about all of the school's students. When the nuns (BVMs) came to class dressed in conventional dress and with makeup...ya, devastating indeed!

So ya, I've got issues with Vat II.

That said, Fr. Malachi Martin wrote a number of books on the subject, albeit in a roundabout way and in essence, he alluded to a cabal that existed and does to this day, of rather evil characters that got in around John XXIII (who was not of very strong intent on things) and misguided the Council, especially towards the end, with Communistic ideology and destructive religiosity.

Again, personally, I don't think one can attend an all out Novis Ordo Church and receive the True Prescience. I have attended such churches and the words of Consecration are often altered and I never go back. I have heard a number of Catholic pendents who would say that even the sacraments at NO churches are invalid. I am not altogether on board with that, but I certainly can see the point.

I am blessed with a good priest here at the Catholic Church ( Note: Not "Community", CHURCH) that I attend. Our priest was a devout Carmelite and after his transfer, we got a priest from Poland, from Pope St. John Paul II seminary and he has been quite conservative in his handling of our 'older' flock. I know there is some controversy about JPII, generally, but of the three priests I have seen from the seminary in our diocese, they are rather Traditional in their Sacred duties. At least, they use the Roman Missal and not the Vat II one.

Sadly, I wish we had a better Bishop. He seems to have some serious problems, morally. Enough said.

Anyway, there are a lot of Latinos in Texas and if you check around, you may find a more Traditional Church somewhere. You didn't mention where in Texas you are, but perhaps this site may help you find what you seek: Latin Mass Directory, USA

Good hunting!


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - MagisterMusicae - 08-18-2019

(08-18-2019, 07:18 PM)SacraCor714 Wrote: Was John XXIII a Pope who started out as a good, valid Pope under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit but who fell astray and thus gave himself over to Satan? Did the Holy Spirit withdraw His favor from John XXIII because he started declaring heresy as doctrine? If that is the case, is the Chair of Peter truly empty and has Christ punished His Church for her unfaithfulness by leaving her temporarily without an earthly leader?

Re-reading I see this passage which is concerning, since I really doubt you could identify a "heresy" that John XXIII promulgated "as doctrine".

Lots could be said, and he certainly was a very liberally-minded Pope, but only the most ridiculous of the sedevacantist would say this, and usually it is because they don't even understand the Faith, but have their own opinions of what is "the faith".


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - JacafamalaRedux - 08-18-2019

I like Fr Hesse's idea of making bumper stickers--no let's do car magnets:


Quote:                                                                               Forget Vatican II

How awesome is that? Just let's forget it ever happened. Like a bad dream we could wake up and it would be like it never really happened. It'd be so wonderful.


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - MagisterMusicae - 08-18-2019

(08-18-2019, 09:56 PM)JacafamalaRedux Wrote: I like Fr Hesse's idea of making bumper stickers--no let's do car magnets:


Quote:                                                                               Forget Vatican II

How awesome is that? Just let's forget it ever happened. Like a bad dream we could wake up and it would be like it never really happened. It'd be so wonderful.

But doesn't a bumpersticker suggestion to forget something just remind one of that thing?


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - Blind Horus - 08-19-2019

(08-18-2019, 08:23 PM)Zedta Wrote:
(08-18-2019, 07:18 PM)SacraCor714 Wrote: Hey all, my husband and I have been going in circles about V2 lately. We both have started going far out of our way to attend Latin Mass because the closest Catholic churches in our area of the Texas bible belt are extremely protestant and boomer-y.

Which brings me to this question:

Are we really to believe that the Holy Spirit inspired Pope John XXIII to radically change the Holy Mass and Catholic social teaching that had been the backbone of Catholicism for nearly 2000 years? That the Holy Spirit suddenly decided that we needed to make the Holy Mass/Catholic doctrine more approachable and relatable to modern times? It doesn't make logical sense, not for a moment. There have literally been no good fruits from Vatican II. In fact, one could safely argue that the Church is in the state it's in right now precisely because of V2 and the heresy and errors it promulgated. 

It makes no sense that the Holy Spirit would inspire V2. Rather, it makes more sense that Satan used John XXIII to infiltrate the Church and bring Her to Her knees through errors such as denouncing Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, women priests, communion in the hand and other sacrileges, and the general protestantizing of the Church.

Was John XXIII a Pope who started out as a good, valid Pope under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit but who fell astray and thus gave himself over to Satan? Did the Holy Spirit withdraw His favor from John XXIII because he started declaring heresy as doctrine? If that is the case, is the Chair of Peter truly empty and has Christ punished His Church for her unfaithfulness by leaving her temporarily without an earthly leader?

I know that by some around here, I am a sort of heretic. But personally, I am one who is staunchly in opposition to just about anything Vat II. I don't think, if you want to use dreaded labels, I am a Sedevacantist, because I think the Popes have been valid up to Benedict. But I certainly have many issues of what slithered out of Vat II. I was a sophomore in Catholic High School when the changes came in and it was spiritually and emotionally devastating to me and just about all of the school's students. When the nuns (BVMs) came to class dressed in conventional dress and with makeup...ya, devastating indeed!

So ya, I've got issues with Vat II.

That said, Fr. Malachi Martin wrote a number of books on the subject, albeit in a roundabout way and in essence, he alluded to a cabal that existed and does to this day, of rather evil characters that got in around John XXIII (who was not of very strong intent on things) and misguided the Council, especially towards the end, with Communistic ideology and destructive religiosity.

Again, personally, I don't think one can attend an all out Novis Ordo Church and receive the True Prescience. I have attended such churches and the words of Consecration are often altered and I never go back. I have heard a number of Catholic pendents who would say that even the sacraments at NO churches are invalid. I am not altogether on board with that, but I certainly can see the point.

I am blessed with a good priest here at the Catholic Church ( Note: Not "Community", CHURCH) that I attend. Our priest was a devout Carmelite and after his transfer, we got a priest from Poland, from Pope St. John Paul II seminary and he has been quite conservative in his handling of our 'older' flock. I know there is some controversy about JPII, generally, but of the three priests I have seen from the seminary in our diocese, they are rather Traditional in their Sacred duties. At least, they use the Roman Missal and not the Vat II one.

Sadly, I wish we had a better Bishop. He seems to have some serious problems, morally. Enough said.

Anyway, there are a lot of Latinos in Texas and if you check around, you may find a more Traditional Church somewhere. You didn't mention where in Texas you are, but perhaps this site may help you find what you seek: Latin Mass Directory, USA

Good hunting!


The Circle & the Star

Marching to G_d Bless America

The end of Christendom

-Pope Leo XIII's Devil's Century-

So yeah Zedta, it'a a good possibility that seat is vacant.


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - SeekerofChrist - 08-19-2019

(08-18-2019, 07:18 PM)SacraCor714 Wrote: In fact, one could safely argue that the Church is in the state it's in right now precisely because of V2 and the heresy and errors it promulgated.

I would say that the "spirit of Vatican II" existed before the Council was called.  I think the mindset of the modernists had already made significant headway in the Church in the years leading up to the Council.  I can't think of any other way to explain the aftermath of the Council.  There doesn't appear to have been any kind of broad, widespread resistance to the changes.  You have some brave clerics like Archbishop Lefebvre and some laity, but the number of traditionalists out there was, and still is, quite small when compared to the Novus Ordo.  In some respects, I think that Vatican II is another symptom of the problem in the Church, not the cause of it.

Quote:Rather, it makes more sense that Satan used John XXIII to infiltrate the Church and bring Her to Her knees through errors such as denouncing Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, women priests, communion in the hand and other sacrileges, and the general protestantizing of the Church.

Satan's attempts at infiltrating the Church began, at the very least, with Judas Iscariot.  It is worth remembering that Judas's betrayal led to Our Lord's death and resurrection, which was Satan's decisive defeat.  I wonder how Satan's efforts to undermine the Church today will also blow up in his face?

While you are correct about communion in the hand and other liturgical abuses, I am not aware that the Church has denounced EENS and permitted women priests.  So far, the Devil has failed to achieve that.  And he can't, as the Church couldn't do anything like that, though of course it is possible that some bishops might attempt to do those things and (presumably) thereby separate themselves from the Church.

Quote:Was John XXIII a Pope who started out as a good, valid Pope under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit but who fell astray and thus gave himself over to Satan? Did the Holy Spirit withdraw His favor from John XXIII because he started declaring heresy as doctrine? If that is the case, is the Chair of Peter truly empty and has Christ punished His Church for her unfaithfulness by leaving her temporarily without an earthly leader?

Satan might have tempted John XXIII, as no doubt any pope would be a prime target of the Devil.  I'm not sure it is accurate to say that John XXIII gave himself over to Satan.  What do you mean by that?  That John XXIII was knowingly in league with the Devil?  An unwitting pawn?  I've known lots of Catholics who seem like John XXIII, liberally-minded, but I wouldn't say any of them had given themselves over to Satan.  Mistaken in many things, perhaps.  One thing that I would strongly caution against is sedevacantism.  So far, no pope has taught heresy.  Lots of watered-down teachings, ill-advised changes to the Mass, etc., but outright heresy has not, as far as I know, been taught by a pope since Vatican II.


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - MaryTN - 08-19-2019

Just a side note. 
.
Giving up the Boston Catechism was a huge, huge mistake.  Simple.  Allowed parents to teach the same thing at home as was learned in school.  I was very young when it was dropped, I only learned the first couple of questions/answers, but I still remember the basics of those questions.
.
I can't think of anything good that came out of VII, except that my non-Catholic grandmother would not automatically go to hell for being Protestant.  We lost so much.


RE: Really Confused about Vatican II - MagisterMusicae - 08-19-2019

(08-19-2019, 03:57 PM)MaryTN Wrote: Just a side note. 
.
Giving up the Boston Catechism was a huge, huge mistake.  Simple.  Allowed parents to teach the same thing at home as was learned in school.  I was very young when it was dropped, I only learned the first couple of questions/answers, but I still remember the basics of those questions.
.
I can't think of anything good that came out of VII, except that my non-Catholic grandmother would not automatically go to hell for being Protestant.  We lost so much.

I think you might mean the Baltimore Catechism.