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...