Our 'modern' Catholic response to the Traditionalist criticism of Vatican II....
#11
Well, not the Church's fault but Church men's fault, yes.  I agree with Nick.  As the Church goes, the world goes.  And her men have slowly but surely been trying to form her to the world, as opposed to evangelizing the word to her.  Churchmen have failed the Church.  This is not a new phenomenon, but it is especially awful now after the enlightenment, after the reformation, etc.

More Catholic Discussion: http://thetradforum.com/

Go thy ways, old Jack;
die when thou wilt, if manhood, good manhood, be
not forgot upon the face of the earth, then am I a
shotten herring. There live not three good men
unhanged in England; and one of them is fat and
grows old: God help the while! a bad world, I say.
I would I were a weaver; I could sing psalms or any
thing. A plague of all cowards, I say still.
Reply
#12
(12-23-2011, 09:05 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote: Our 'modern' Catholic, that is those who have not fallen away and actually believe in Vatican II, makes this argument: "Well it wasn't the Second Vatican Council that caused this crisis in the Church but our sick culture these days ever since the 1960's." The problem with this answer is that it fails to understand that the modern world has always had a 'crisis' that is against God and His Church but the Church was always the one who took the moral high ground. The 1950's was full of sexual immorality even before the sexual revolution. There are many other examples of immorality through history but the Church always had the Truth to fight against the liberalism and modernism of the modern world.

With Vatican II however the Church tried to meet down the middle and tried to make itself relevant in an immoral age. In doing so however many Catholics became disillusioned and left the Church, as the converts had no real reason to convert because of 'ecumenism,' the beauty of the Mass to get us out of our immoral world was gone with the 'new architecture' and high irreverence in the liturgy, nuns were told their earlier sacrifices were unnecessary so they criticized the patriarchal Church.

The priests and bishops meanwhile taught to preach the good word of the Gospel failed to stop or denounce the masturbation and fornication of our teens and young adults, just as the old people go to Mass just for 'looks' and 'keeping with tradition' not actual prayer, and the married couples contracept their way out childbearing and child-rearing. But if the laity was bad the clergy was even worse letting this happen and making irrelevant sermons. Can we not see the fall of faith in Catholics hit a high point at the conclusion of Vatican II?

right on
Reply
#13
(12-23-2011, 09:05 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote: Our 'modern' Catholic, that is those who have not fallen away and actually believe in Vatican II, makes this argument: "Well it wasn't the Second Vatican Council that caused this crisis in the Church but our sick culture these days ever since the 1960's." The problem with this answer is that it fails...

I have a perspective, but it is probably not new and I read it somewhere perhaps. Here's my 2cents.

The problem with that answer is that it is not a problematic answer at all. Not for the traditionalist, but it is problematic for the post-VII apologist. Why? Well, one only has to look at the reason that the council was called and what the Council Fathers kept saying about the Council. I don't have all the quotes at the moment, but everybody knows them. Vatican II was meant to usher in a new era! It was meant to revive Catholicism! It was meant to make Catholicism more Catholic! It was meant to bring hordes of people into the Church!

This never happened. Catholicism slowly started dying.The zeitgeist infected the Church heirarchy and laity like a cancer and we're still dealing with the effects today. Nobody converted, millions left the Church, our liturgy suffered, our doctrine is watered down, and morality is at an all time low for Catholics and secular people.

Hold on though... I thought Vatican II was meant to do the exact opposite? Aha. Now we see why someone who blames the "culture of the 60's" is in fact agreeing with the traditionalist position! For surely, when a council is called, it must do what it is meant to do; that is, combat the heretical and anti-God spirit of the times and establish the Church even more firmly as God's Kingdom on the earth. The Council should have renounced all the new age, secular humanist rubbish. That didn't happen.

So when somebody says "Oh, it wasn't the Council that caused this but the culture since the 1960's" they are contradicting the Council Fathers who assured us that the Council would combat the culture of the 60's and usher in a new era. The only logical conclusion is that the Council in so many ways (which we all know by now) tested God, and conformed to the culture, and like the culture of the 60's that has since died out, much of Catholicism today seems to be hanging by a thread.

To illustrate this clearly, go back to Trent. Imagine 10 years after Trent closed. Thousands of Catholics left the faith. The Mass has been changed and looks like Luthers Mass. Catholic doctrine everywhere is watered down. Then someone says "Ah, but you can't blame Trent, you must realise that the Protestant heresy was all around us you see!" To which the only response would be, "Is it not the very nature of the council, then, to make sure to protect the Church from such a heresy? If she hasn't - and if, in fact, much of these documents from Trent reveal Protestant tendencies, what sense does it make to say that we cannot blame the council. Surely Councils are called in order to combat such things? If they fail at that, after promising so much, then surely we have a right to say the council failed in some respect!".

I think the current position we are in is somewhat similar, and many are started to realize that the old "you can't blame the Council" line just doesn't work any more. The Council documents hardly gave the liberals and heretics a hard time; in fact, rather the opposite. Now we are to believe that this is actually not the Councils fault but the culture? It just makes no logical sense.

We must not take the position that Vii was not a valid Council. Neither should we completely renounce it, because much of what is in the documents is in fact orthodox and teaches the authentic faith. What we should do, I can hardly say.

This is just all just my speculation and opinion, and if it hardly makes sense that's because I am hardly a theologian or Michael Davies!
Reply
#14
(12-23-2011, 09:49 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote:
(12-23-2011, 09:46 PM)Nic Wrote:
(12-23-2011, 09:42 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote:
(12-23-2011, 09:40 PM)Nic Wrote: I am of the firm opinion that the problems in the world today due to loss of morality is completely the Church's fault.  Remember, the Church is the guiding light of the world.  When that light no longer shines properly, the entire world is left in darkness.  The Church at Vatican II eclipsed the light, and we are still suffering the confusion of darkness because of it.  If the Liberals/Masons/Modernists had never usurped the ecclesiastical structure of the Church and Vatican II never went down, there is no doubt in my mind that we would be living in a drastically different world.
This might be putting a little too much fault at the Church's feet since the sexual revolution, the counterculture, the drug revolution, etc. was already in the making by the time of Vatican II but I do agree that the Church could have taken the moral high ground and taken a stance against the immoral world. Instead they wanted to find a 'cold peace' by trying to 'modernize the Church' but still keep 'in step with Tradition' which is impossible.

Pornography, drugs and many, many evils have ALWAYS been "in the making," but the light of the Church kept the darkness at bay.  When the light no longer shines, darkness prevails.
I agree. The Church is still looking for that Athanasius to restore it to Tradition and get rid of the heresy of modernism. It has yet to find such a man.

Modern day St Athanasius = Archbishop Lefebvre. Just saying
Reply
#15
(12-31-2011, 11:46 AM)TrentCath Wrote: Modern day St Athanasius = Archbishop Lefebvre. Just saying
Well I'm not a member of the SSPX THOUGH I am sympathetic to their cause of the Traditional Latin Mass, and being against ecumenism and religious liberty within the church since the Church is the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. I was speaking of a Pope however that could return the WHOLE Church to its traditions.
Reply
#16
(12-23-2011, 09:40 PM)Nic Wrote: I am of the firm opinion that the problems in the world today due to loss of morality is completely the Church's fault.  Remember, the Church is the guiding light of the world.  When that light no longer shines properly, the entire world is left in darkness.  The Church at Vatican II eclipsed the light, and we are still suffering the confusion of darkness because of it.  If the Liberals/Masons/Modernists had never usurped the ecclesiastical structure of the Church and Vatican II never went down, there is no doubt in my mind that we would be living in a drastically different world.
So am I.
As the Church goes, so goes the world.
Reply
#17
I agree completely: "As the church goes, so goes the world." I think the reason world culture has tanked to the lowest level, and continues to do so, is because the organized Catholic church has grown further away from Jesus' gospel teachings and toward the ideals of man. This is why we're seeing the spread of abortion and same sex marriage even into countries that have rejected these idols for decades.
Reply
#18
Good book about the price of appeasement that the modern church took...

Kenneth C. Jones' "Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II."

Since 1965:

1. The number of Catholic priests has fallen from 58,000 to 45,000. By 2020, there will be 31,000 and half will be over 70.

2. In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained. In 2002, the number was 450. Some 3,000 parishes are today without priests.

3. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians fell from 49,999 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the seminaries open in 1965 have since closed their doors.

4. The number of Catholic nuns, 180,000 in 1965, has fallen by 60 percent. Their average age is now 68. The number of teaching nuns has fallen 94 percent since the close of Vatican II.

5. The number of young men studying to be Jesuits has fallen by 90 percent and of those studying to be Christian Brothers by 99 percent. The religious orders seem to be dying out in America.

6. Almost half the Catholic high schools open in 1965 have closed. There were 4.5 million students in Catholic schools in the mid-1960s. Today, there is about half that number.

7. Only 10 percent of lay religious teachers in 2002 accepted church teaching on contraception, 53 percent believed a Catholic woman could get an abortion and remain a good Catholic, 65 percent said Catholics have a right to divorce and remarry, and in a New York Times poll, 70 percent of Catholics ages 18 to 54 said they believed the Holy Eucharist was but a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus.

8. Where three in four Catholics attended mass on Sunday in 1958, today one in four do.
Reply
#19
The religious orders were already falling apart even before Vatican II, especially those where the "renewal" had started back in the 1940s and 50s.  The Christian Brothers have been hit very hard by endless scandals arising from seemingly every school and institution they operated.  Same with the Jesuits. 

(12-31-2011, 06:48 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote: Good book about the price of appeasement that the modern church took...

Kenneth C. Jones' "Index of Leading Catholic Indicators: The Church Since Vatican II."

Since 1965:

1. The number of Catholic priests has fallen from 58,000 to 45,000. By 2020, there will be 31,000 and half will be over 70.

2. In 1965, 1,575 new priests were ordained. In 2002, the number was 450. Some 3,000 parishes are today without priests.

3. Between 1965 and 2002, the number of seminarians fell from 49,999 to 4,700, a decline of over 90 percent. Two-thirds of the seminaries open in 1965 have since closed their doors.

4. The number of Catholic nuns, 180,000 in 1965, has fallen by 60 percent. Their average age is now 68. The number of teaching nuns has fallen 94 percent since the close of Vatican II.

5. The number of young men studying to be Jesuits has fallen by 90 percent and of those studying to be Christian Brothers by 99 percent. The religious orders seem to be dying out in America.

6. Almost half the Catholic high schools open in 1965 have closed. There were 4.5 million students in Catholic schools in the mid-1960s. Today, there is about half that number.

7. Only 10 percent of lay religious teachers in 2002 accepted church teaching on contraception, 53 percent believed a Catholic woman could get an abortion and remain a good Catholic, 65 percent said Catholics have a right to divorce and remarry, and in a New York Times poll, 70 percent of Catholics ages 18 to 54 said they believed the Holy Eucharist was but a "symbolic reminder" of Jesus.

8. Where three in four Catholics attended mass on Sunday in 1958, today one in four do.
Reply
#20
(12-31-2011, 11:46 AM)TrentCath Wrote:
(12-23-2011, 09:49 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote:
(12-23-2011, 09:46 PM)Nic Wrote:
(12-23-2011, 09:42 PM)Traditional Guy Wrote:
(12-23-2011, 09:40 PM)Nic Wrote: I am of the firm opinion that the problems in the world today due to loss of morality is completely the Church's fault.  Remember, the Church is the guiding light of the world.  When that light no longer shines properly, the entire world is left in darkness.  The Church at Vatican II eclipsed the light, and we are still suffering the confusion of darkness because of it.  If the Liberals/Masons/Modernists had never usurped the ecclesiastical structure of the Church and Vatican II never went down, there is no doubt in my mind that we would be living in a drastically different world.
This might be putting a little too much fault at the Church's feet since the sexual revolution, the counterculture, the drug revolution, etc. was already in the making by the time of Vatican II but I do agree that the Church could have taken the moral high ground and taken a stance against the immoral world. Instead they wanted to find a 'cold peace' by trying to 'modernize the Church' but still keep 'in step with Tradition' which is impossible.

Pornography, drugs and many, many evils have ALWAYS been "in the making," but the light of the Church kept the darkness at bay.  When the light no longer shines, darkness prevails.
I agree. The Church is still looking for that Athanasius to restore it to Tradition and get rid of the heresy of modernism. It has yet to find such a man.

Modern day St Athanasius = Archbishop Lefebvre. Just saying

Plus. Mother. Friggin. One.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)