chrysostom Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 If it happened in place of Trent there would be no Protestants ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify ii Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 ? The liturgical changes that were introduced by the Protestant Reformer Thomas Cramner were condemned by the Church during the Council of Trent but were later adopted during Vatican II. Cf Michael Davies' works Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AccountDeleted Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 There are so many ways things could have been different, just like the what if theories about Hitler (what if he had been assassinated) or Kennedy (what if he had lived through a second term). I just love hypotheticals. What if John XXIII had not died during the council. What if, as you said, the council happened later or under a different Pope etc etc. I wonder if all the nuns would still be wearing those big head pieces and hitting kids on the hand with rulers. I wonder if the sex abuse cases would ever have come out at all. I mean, there are just so many possible variables in this life.Maybe I am just an alternative universe sort of person - it fascinates me how life turns out and what the things are that influence that. I think the whole Vatican 2 issue is complex because good came out of it, as well as loss and division. But I still wonder if it hadn't happened, or had happened in some other way, what the results would have been.I know, I know, we will never know for sure. But that doesn't stop me imagining things. What if Doctor Who had gone back in his Tardis and changed things?? :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostom Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Well whatever happens Mary's Immaculate Heart will still triumph! :) I think it's likely that not all that much would have been different if Vatican II had happened in the 70s and possibly the 80s. Humanae Vitae would still probably have happened given the advent of the pill. But what about the Consilium? Surely its placement in 1969 had the largest impact on Catholic life. I for one would be interested to see what a Ratzingerian Consilium would have produced (say if he had been its head under JPII, or even under Paul VI) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AccountDeleted Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 (edited) Well whatever happens Mary's Immaculate Heart will still triumph! :) I think it's likely that not all that much would have been different if Vatican II had happened in the 70s and possibly the 80s. Humanae Vitae would still probably have happened given the advent of the pill. But what about the Consilium? Surely its placement in 1969 had the largest impact on Catholic life. I for one would be interested to see what a Ratzingerian Consilium would have produced (say if he had been its head under JPII, or even under Paul VI) Well, that's what makes alternative histories so fascinating for me. Sometimes it seems as if something just had to happen, in order for something else to happen. It's like trying to assassinate Hitler but things going wrong because it had to end up the way it did. Who knows if Vatican 2 had to happen in order for something else to happen that we know nothing about in the present time. I'm not saying everything is predestined or anything like that, but since God is overseeing it all, what He permits certainly has its purpose. Otherwise we can start questioning God like, 'why did you let the Holocaust happen' or 'why do babies die' etc. either He knows about it all or He doesn't, in which case, He wouldn't be God. I'm not saying He 'want's things to happen, but He certainly does allow a lot of suffering, and there must be reasons for that. The Edith Stein quote that has me thinking a lot lately (since I am older and much of my life has been apparently beyond my control) is: “Things were in God's plan which I had not planned at all. I am coming to the living faith and conviction that - from God's point of view - there is no chance and that the whole of my life, down to every detail, has been mapped out in God's divine providence and makes complete and perfect sense in God's all-seeing eyes.†This can pretty much apply to Vat 2 as well- He has it mapped out and makes sense to Him even if to us it is very confusing. Edited July 2, 2014 by nunsense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostom Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 On the other hand, let's say 650 years from now we will be as far off historically from Vatican II as we are now from the Council of Vienne, which everyone remembers, right? How will we remember Vatican II then? Since it issued no formal definitions, I cannot imagine that it would rival Trent in its long-term impact. Whatever new challenges arise, the rocking boat will have settled from this particular time. The Mass will still go on as the sun of the world and the Catholic mind will gravitate towards it in reverence and adoration. I think the importance of facing East will reestablish itself in the Catholic mind. I think - I hope - that by then, a larger-scale reunion will have happened between Eastern and Western Christianity. It remains the single most important ecumenical effort for the Church and in constant need of prayer. I fear especially that new formal schisms will happen, perhaps in parts of Europe. Those take centuries to fix, if ever. I fear what new blows Satan will lay upon the suffering Body of Christ, what new ways Satan will devise to twist humanity and pervert the image of God in man. And there are always the old ways. No evil will really be new. But think of all the saints we will have between now and then! All the courageous souls who will give up their lives for the Mass, those who will cheerfully proclaim the gospel in the dark world, those who will live lives utterly consecrated to Mary, those who will in the hiddenness of the cloister deny themselves for love of God. And we each are called to be one of these. It still boggles my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Ryan Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 I generally think of Concilium when I hear "the Spirit of Vatican II". Though, Communio also seeks to remain faithful to the Spirit. Maybe I just think about both journals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify ii Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 On the other hand, let's say 650 years from now we will be as far off historically from Vatican II as we are now from the Council of Vienne, which everyone remembers, right? At the current rate of decline there will be very few of us 650 years from now... if any at all... Luke 18:8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AccountDeleted Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 At the current rate of decline there will be very few of us 650 years from now... if any at all... Luke 18:8 Well, I strongly doubt that I will be here 650 years from now.... :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perigrina Posted July 2, 2014 Author Share Posted July 2, 2014 I love reading alternative histories (sci-fi) like 'what if Hitler had won the war' or 'what if Kennedy had lived' so I would like to read a novel about what would have happened if John XXIII had died before calling the Council - and if it had never happened. Theories? I often think about this on a personal level. I am not sure how I would have become Catholic without the Council. I was born Jewish and became an Evangelical Protestant in my teens. In my early 20s I became engaged to Catholic man and started exploring Catholicism and attending Mass with him.. Because of Vatican II, the Mass was designed to be accessible to Protestants (sometimes, I think, at the expense of being clear to Catholics). It emphasized what Catholics have in common with Protestants and downplayed the differences. I am not sure that I would have even figured out that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist, if I had not already learned in high school history about the Catholic belief in transubstantiation. But I did sense Christ's presence, so I had no problem believing that Catholics must be right about that. And that is about the only thing I was exposed to that challenged what I had been taught as a Protestant. Even going through the RCIA program, I was only taught things that I already believed as a Protestant. I was not taught how to pray the Rosary or to go to Confession. I was taught that God created the world and He loves us (which is true enough, of course.) At no point did anyone suggest that I had believed errors as a Protestant and that I ought to renounce them. So I wonder if I would have become Catholic if it had been more demanding. Maybe I owe being Catholic to having all the challenges removed so that it did not even feel like a conversion. One of the stated purposes of the changes was to make things easier for Protestants. My becoming Catholic is arguably one of the successes of Vatican II. So, even though I recognize ambiguities, misinterpretations, and poor implementation of the Council, problems that have caused hurt and confusion to many people, I personally benefited and have cause to feel grateful to it. It is a strange position to be in. I imagine that a person who was alive because of the death of an organ donor might feel something like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify ii Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Well, I strongly doubt that I will be here 650 years from now.... :) I will be around as my consciousness will have been downloaded into a quantum computer and the biggest debate on phatmass will be whether I have a soul or not (sometimes this is even debated now :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo in Deum Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 I will be around as my consciousness will have been downloaded into a quantum computer and the biggest debate on phatmass will be whether I have a soul or not (sometimes this is even debated now :) Mortify II will become, RoboTrad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostom Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 or TRAD 9000. "Open the tabernacle door, TRAD." - I'm sorry, Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that. "What's the problem?" - I think you know what the problem is just as well as I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proletarian Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Because of Vatican II, the Mass was designed to be accessible to Protestants (sometimes, I think, at the expense of being clear to Catholics). It emphasized what Catholics have in common with Protestants and downplayed the differences. What? Have you read any of the council documents? Sacrosanctum Concilium is the document that deals with liturgical changes, but primarily reaffirms all that is amazing, beautiful, and divine about the liturgy. Nowhere did I read anything about "designing" the Mass to be "accessible to Protestants." Just like I didn't read anything about the priest hopping over to the other side of the altar, the choir playing terrible folk music, or liturgical dance. I don't mean this as a personal attack on you, but this is the exact sort of thing that the "Spirit of Vatican II" boneheads do -- read between the lines, inserting their own judgments. I hope someday we can get back to a world where people don't get into "debates" based on sound bites. This is the same thing that happened with your recent post about the gay book. Everyone comes in full force with their opinions based upon EVERYTHING EXCEPT FOR THE VERY THING THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DISCUSSING. Nobody goes to the source because it's easier to listen to someone on talk radio or to read 140 characters instead. For the love of God, people, the council documents are all available for free. The "Spirit of Vatican II" is pretend. Vatican II is real. Read about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrysostom Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 What? Have you read any of the council documents? Sacrosanctum Concilium is the document that deals with liturgical changes, but primarily reaffirms all that is amazing, beautiful, and divine about the liturgy. Nowhere did I read anything about "designing" the Mass to be "accessible to Protestants." Just like I didn't read anything about the priest hopping over to the other side of the altar, the choir playing terrible folk music, or liturgical dance. I think you might first ask what precisely Peregrina found more accessible, because I didn't think for a moment that she was talking about liturgical dance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now