Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
Religion
Reply to "Schism in the church"
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Oh, I wish all the anti Vatican II people would form their own separate church and they can even name their own pope if they want. The Holy Spirit has moved within the church in the selection of this pope. If the people who want to turn back the church to pre Vatican II times are not happy with that message, they could split off and form a church that harkens back to an earlier era that they prefer. [/quote] For the most part, these people are not anti Vatican II people. They just want to celebrate mass and the sacraments according to the Latin Roman rite used until 1962 or so. The Church already accommodates many different liturgical rites, so it would be natural to ask why not this rite too.[/quote] Many of the people who are attracted to the Mass as it existed before 1962 would very much prefer the Church to go back to the way it was before Vatican II. They do not care for the changes in the Church that were led by the Holy Spirit through Vatican II. [/quote] They can attend Latin Mass. For me, the folk mass of the 70s is where it's at. Everybody doesn't have to be a clone, there are many ways to celebrate. Do you really care if I go to a folk Mass while you go to a Latin Mass? I assure you, God doesn't care which music is played.[/quote] Really? You can assure us of what God doesn't care about?? Then why did the Catholic Church change from Latin to the vernacular? Why did priests start facing the congregation instead of the altar? Please tell us.[/quote] Actually, the documents of the Second Vatican Council specifically call for priests to be very well trained in Latin and for it, Gregorian Chant, etc., to retain pride of place in what was directed to be a minimally changed rite. The rubrics of the Mass likewise make clear even today that[b] Mass facing the people is neither required nor necessary; the custom of celebrating while facing the people is the result of a (deliberate?) misinterpretation of the official texts.[/b] And the idea that the changes in Church culture that occurred in the 60’s and 70’s and going forward were all “led by the Holy Spirit” is at least disingenuous, given the massive loss of priests and religious they triggered (even to the point of the near destruction of religious life), the massive departure from regular religious practice that also occurred, and the appalling doctrinal confusion that arose subsequent to the Council and continues to develop. [/quote] Really? Mass facing the people was neither required nor necessary? My Dad told me that priests hated it, but did it because they were ordered to, and that the people didn't particularly like it either.[/quote]
Options
Disable HTML in this message
Disable BB Code in this message
Disable smilies in this message
Review message
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics