Skip to comments.In 2014, how can grown men write this with a straight face? "Vatican II was a new Pentecost ... ."
Posted on 06/21/2014 6:51:12 PM PDT by ebb tide
In 2014, how can grown men write this with a straight face?
International Theological Commission of the Catholic Church
The Church had one Pentecost. One. The Church does not need new foundations, she is not a country in search of new constitutional orders. Enough is enough: 50 years of collapse of the sensus catholicus, collapse of Catholic life in all countries where the Church was firmly established in Europe and the Americas, near-disappearance of all Catholic communities across the Middle East (in this case, mostly through no fault of the hierarchy, but still indicating that speaking of a "new Pentecost" is a mockery), collapse of vocations and religious life, that is enough. The only communities holding up are those of some regions in Africa -- and precisely those that preserve the faith of the original missionaries and that reject dialogue with the wicked immoral spirit of the contemporary world -- as well as those tiny congregations around the world making their best to worship as the Church always did and teach what the Church always taught.
The delusion must end: Vatican II was not a new Pentecost. A renewal of the Church can only come from the "old" Pentecost, the first and only Pentecost, whose living word is Apostolic Tradition straight from the Lord -- "Paraclitus autem Spiritus Sanctus, quem mittet Pater in nomine meo, ille vos docebit omnia, et suggeret vobis omnia quæcumque dixero vobis." (Jn 14: 26: "the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you.")
____________________ [Note: This is not a dismissal, of course, of the whole document -- recalling the consultative and advisory nature of the commission. As every committee-based document of the past five decades, however, it is often confusing and unclear. In any event, there is one excerpt in particular that should be highlighted: "The magisterium and theology must work constantly to renew the presentation of the faith in different situations, confronting if necessary dominant notions of Christian truth with the actual truth of the Gospel, but it must be recalled that the experience of the Church shows that sometimes the truth of the faith has been conserved not by the efforts of theologians or the teaching of the majority of bishops but in the hearts of believers." (n. 119)]
There is no apostolic tradition straight from the Lord or any one else...
(Jn 14: 26: "the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you.")
Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
This verse proves apostolic tradition from the Lord is total nonsense...Jesus spoke to the apostles and did many things but nothing was written down...Jesus knew they would forget many details...
Jesus tells the apostles that he will send the Holy Spirit to refresh their memories of what was said and what took place...
This has nothing to do with future Christians...This promise was for those who were in direct personal contact with Jesus while he was on earth...
That only your opinion. I'll stick with the teachings of the Catholic Church, the only Church founded by Jesus Christ.
Vatican II was and is a major disaster in the Catholic Church. It was more of a marketing strategy to get more people into church than anything else.
Hence, major loss of respect for the clergy; filthy hands grasping the consecrated host; women all over the altar; homosexuals infesting the seminaries; masses in English; Saturdays becoming the Sabbath so people could sleep in or play golf; etc.
Don’t forget alteration of Traditional teachings on ecumenism, religious unity and religious liberty.
The major problem with Vatican II was there was too many protestant theologians involved. And that is fact. Protestantism creeping into the church was the worst thing that came out of Vatican II. It’s like a cancer and must be weeded completely out.
As all good Modernists do.
How does the Catholic Church allow heretics to get involved in their business? When has that ever happened in the history of Holy Mother Church?
You also give way too much credit to the “outsiders”. Vatican II’s issues was more of an internal problem.
Is there a difference in your mind?
It's get a little tiring being called a heretic because I don't believe in a religious institution verses the Word of God...
Simple fact is there was much input from protestants during Vatican II. And after the council, even though hardly anything of note came out of it, little by little protestantism started creeping into the Church. Communion on the hand, altar girls, ridiculous hippy guitar playing at Mass, commune-hippy holding hands during the Our Father. Too much noise in the Church, the lack of reference, doing away with communion rails. The list is endless. And none of this came out of Vatican II. It was the atmosphere created out of Vatican II that allowed this to happen. And not enough bishops put their foot down and stopped the nonsense. And lastly, the acceptance of men with strong homosexual tendencies into the priesthood. Once again official Church teaching didn’t change, it was the seminaries letting these homosexuals in. Now that would not be that bad if the average homosexual man could remain celibate, but studies have shown time and again, most homosexual men are predators. For a time they can keep their sexual desires until control, but it eventually rears it’s ugly head. 90% of the sexual abuse cases in the Catholic Church are from homosexual men abusing young teenage boys. And this was made possible by the permissive attitude created by Vatican II.
I'm going to be honest here. I, as a non-Catholic, believe that Catholics and evangelicals are Christians who share more common belief than not, although we certainly don't agree on all doctrine.
But some of the remarks made by some RC on this forum have served to turn me off Catholicism to a degree that didn't previously exist. I have a good friend, Catholic and longtime Freeper, who would no doubt be appalled at some of this stuff. She and I consider one another Christians, and that's it.
I wonder how many lurkers there are who might have been considering checking out the Catholic church IRL, but have been turned off by what they see here.
I agree with the author generally. Nobody in 2014, surveying the carnage of the last 50 years of Church history, could possibly believe that Vatican II was anything but an unqualified disaster. Vatican II was a bomb that went off in the Church. Entire orders of religious were closed. Catholic colleges were infiltrated and turned to the Dark Side. Two generations were not catechized in any meaningful way. No, Vatican II was a terrible calamity for the Church. There can be no denying that.
The sad reality is that folks forget first and formost that we are called by our baptism to be CHRISTIANS first, then our respect churches after that. The flaming that goes on on these faith threads does turn folks who have been considering the RCC off bigtime.
I agree with you. Lately it seems like a one-up game among both sides.
The sad reality is that so many Catholics forget the dogma of EENS, and by doing so, they mislead non-Catholics.
Pope Innocent one-upping. Shame on him for speaking as a true Catholic.
You don’t believe in the Church of Christ, not just a “religious institution”. Sorry it gets tiring for you to hear that. I get tired of the same old heretical story that the Catholic Church is “just a religious institution”.
And what does EENS mean?
I don't believe in the Church of Christ, I believe in Christ...
Too bad you can't see the difference...
True, with those doing it thinking they are so right when it is simply just opinions. They end of acting like trolls in the process.
Having faith in Christ must come first.
Yup, the Pope just expressing his "opinion".
It's a good thing Vatican II changed everything, right?
Belief in Christ includes belief in the Church He established.
I don’t think they “forget”. I don’t think most “know”. Vatican II modernized the religion so much that Catholics speak like Modernists nowadays. It’s why comments like “heretics” offend them so.
There's no opinion to it...It's bible...I'll stick with the inspired words of God in the scriptures...The scriptures that condemn your religion...
Keep rationalizing your behavior. Meanwhile every time you scream “heretic”, another lurker thinks, “This is Catholicism? No thanks.”
Then they’re not interested in the Truth of the Catholic Faith. They are more interested in any one of the false religions because they are “nicer”.
Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." He didn't say "this church over here is the truth."
" They are more interested in any one of the false religions because they are nicer."
Is it your position that non-Catholic Christians are practicing false religion?
In the Bible, Jesus says, “That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18
Please note that Christ said, “church”, not “churches”.
Also in the Bible, Jesus says, “Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” John 20:23
Does your not Bible state the same? If not, who decided to edit the works of the Holy Ghost?
Didn't think I'd get an answer to that one. But I think I have it, nevertheless.
I can’t answer for piusv, but that is my position.
Pre-Vatican II the Catholic Church made it very clear that Catholicism is the only true religion and the only true Church. So, yes, anything that is not Catholic is false. This was (and is) the Traditional Catholic position.
And what’s with the *crickets* comment? You posted late at night. I went to bed.
Thank you for your honesty. To sum up---in your view, a person can accept Jesus Christ, be baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and live his or her life for the Lord, but if the person isn't walking through the doors of a Catholic church on Sunday, he/she is a heretic practicing a false religion.
Of course it is. Doesn't surprise me at all, but at least you're willing to admit it.
Not in “my” view. In the Traditional Catholic view. This isn’t about me. It’s about being faithful to Christ and His Catholic Church.
Most Catholics you know have been infected with Modernism and Protestantism. It’s no wonder you are shocked to hear a Catholic say these things.
And to be honest, I thought about your concern last night. I felt bad that my comments bothered you. But then I also realized that all I did was speak as Catholic popes spoke in the past. I’m sure they offended a lot of people.
Piusv, I’m sorry to disillusion you, but your comments don’t “bother” me. As a child of Jesus Christ, they simply don’t have that capability. You lack the understanding that He exists outside the doors of your denomination. You place limits on the Lord of creation.
Nor am I shocked to see you admit your belief. I wanted to see if you would be honest enough to do so, in bald terms, and you were.
Yes, you are in error, and you lack understanding of the power of salvation through Jesus. You don’t boast about Him, as Paul instructed us to do; your misplaced pride is in your denomination, your popes, your history, your buildings, your traditions. While I find that sad, we’re not going to change each other’s minds, so it is what it is.
But you needed to be called on it.
It does lead back to my original point as to why some folks on this forum have given me a negative opinion of Catholicism. I expect there are Catholics here who understand exactly where I’m coming from.
Have a blessed day.
Sure sounded like you were bothered.
Understanding of Jesus Christ includes His One True Church. It is you who misses the mark. Other so-called Catholics fail in promoting the Faith when they don't tell you so. And you "needed to be called on it".
I do hope that someday you (and the Catholics that get where you're coming from) will come to know and love Jesus Christ in His Traditional Catholic Faith.
Church is used two ways in the scriptures...One is the collective, spiritual Body of Christ...The other is various called out assemblies of believers, churches...
Also in the Bible, Jesus says, Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. John 20:23
This promise is given to all spirit indwelt Christians...
You guys don't look at scripture very closely, do you??? You'll notice that if a sinner forgives the sins of another sinner, the other sinner is forgiven (already)...But if YOU retain another sinner's sins, they are retained, BY YOU...
Bearing in mind that we know God will forgive any and all sins, 1Jn_1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness., regardless of who retains them, it might be wise not to retain anyone's sins...
Mar_11:26 But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
Says who? You?
Meanwhile every time you scream heretic, another lurker thinks, This is Catholicism? No thanks.
...I take it you’ve failed to see the unprovoked attacks launched by Protestants on this forum....
...time to visit the eye doctor...
“Is it your position that non-Catholic Christians are practicing false religion?”
...the thread is days old, I realize, but in case you’re lurking about, I’ll take a stab at that, speaking as what I call a ‘traditionalist’ Catholic...
...it is not my opinion that you and others are practicing ‘false’ religion...you invoke Christ; such invocation requires a more substantive response than a blithe charge of apostasy...but my notion of worship requires a bit of introspection as well, as I seek the most perfect expression of it, in order to satisfy an innate desire for meaning sought out of human endeavor...my gut tells me the closest expression of perfection we’ve attained is the Catholic Mass as it existed prior to the innovations in 1965, and beyond...
...however, it falls to better brains than mine to determine who is practicing falsity and who is not...though that doesn’t stop me from offering opinions...and my noggin says that falling short of perfection, or even the closest thing to perfection, is a far cry from falsity...and since I am not in possession of the secrets of existence and being, I cannot in truth castigate anybody as practicing false religion, even if the rites of that worship call for standing on your head and baying at the moon...in other words, I acknowledge, I may be wrong about the nature of religion, and my idea of perfection as rotten as a month old tomato...
...all told, then, my belief being that the preconciliar Catholic Mass represents the truest virtues of Christianity, requires me to hold that any worship other than that is that much more imperfect, which certainly includes the rite that Catholics today claim to be ‘the Mass’, and naturally, any Protestant service, and thus ‘bending away’ from Christ and His highest ideal...but false? No. As stated, not achieving perfection is not practicing falsity, and true belief in the Triune Godhead cannot, in my studied opinion, put one’s salvation in jeopardy...
...I know I’ll not please everyone with this answer, but who seeks that...and my prior comment about your eyesight stands, as only a blind man could miss the viciousness of some Protestants on this forum toward the RCC...
‘Church is used two ways in the scriptures...One is the collective, spiritual Body of Christ...The other is various called out assemblies of believers, churches...’
‘Says who? You? ‘
All you gotta do is read it...I realize you won’t find it in the catholic bible, your catechism...But you’ll find it in the word of God, the bible...
...time to visit the eye doctor..."
I appreciate and respect your remarks on faith in your other post, but I suggest it's you who needs an eye exam. I refer you to post #15.