How do you react to the celebrations of Vatican II?
#11
(10-24-2012, 03:46 AM)TraditionalistThomas Wrote: Why would I celebrate the anniversary of the uncrowning of Christ the King? Quoting Archbishop Lefebvre, of course.

QFT!
Reply
#12
(10-24-2012, 03:46 AM)TraditionalistThomas Wrote: Why would I celebrate the anniversary of the uncrowning of Christ the King? Quoting Archbishop Lefebvre, of course.
Christ the King was not uncrowned. His feast day was moved to the last Sunday in ordinary time.
Viva Cristo Rey!!!!
Long live Christ the King!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply
#13
Depends what he says, right? What Fr Ted Martin would say would be very different than Fr Richard McBrien would say. Too many variables in the question. At the least there would be a spirited conversation.
Reply
#14
Mmm.  Spirited.  Vatican II-spirited.
Reply
#15
What is there to celebrate? Fifty years of heresy, schism, and scandal?
Reply
#16
(10-24-2012, 09:51 AM)JuniorCouncilor Wrote: Mmm.  Spirited.  Vatican II-spirited.

Perhaps.  :shrug:
Reply
#17
(10-24-2012, 09:45 AM)Scriptorium Wrote: Depends what he says, right? What Fr Ted Martin would say would be very different than Fr Richard McBrien would say. Too many variables in the question. At the least there would be a spirited conversation.

I'm thinking more in terms of what and how you would express your distaste / hatred for / opposition to / horror of Vatican II if you were asked some inocuous question like "What do you think of Vatican II?"  

Would you go with all guns blazing or keep it cool?  
Reply
#18
I believe this emoticon was made expressly to answer the question posed in the title of this thread:  :puke:.
Reply
#19
(10-24-2012, 10:00 AM)Gerard Wrote: I'm thinking more in terms of what and how you would express your distaste / hatred for / opposition to / horror of Vatican II if you were asked some inocuous question like "What do you think of Vatican II?" 

Would you go with all guns blazing or keep it cool? 

I always keep it cool, unless someone was comitting right in front of me a heinous crime like abortion -- the equivalent of saving someone from walking off the cliff. In personal discussions I always let the other set the tone. I then manueuver within their paradigm, but prompt them to expand it. How confortable are they with the topic? How do they regard it? It may just be a series of Socratic questions posed. Hard to know how it would be. I never talk to the same person in the same way twice. I take it anew every time. I am always, though, straightforward, and don't gloss over my view.
Reply
#20
I think I could keep my cool while expressing my disgust with the Council.  I'd be very careful with my wording, however; I'd want to be both clear and charitable.

What would I say?

I'd bring up the abandonment of scholastic terminology and theology, the problems of Dignitatis Humanae's use of "right," the problems with the Church's own interpretation of "subsistit in", as well as the poorly conceived new discipline of allowing non-Catholics to receive Holy Communion without first abjuring their errors.  And then there's the scandal of communicatio in sacris and false ecumenism.  These would be the chief problems which I would address (the liturgy is its own discussion entirely).
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)