Why are traditional Catholics, strongly criticizing the Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Mass?
Why are traditional Catholics, much criticized by the Second Vatican Council, the Novus Ordo Mass, and the current state of the Church? When I say the Catholics, I mean Catholics who follow the doctrines and practices of the Catholic Church before the changes of Vatican II.
- Why are traditional Catholics, strongly criticizing the Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Mass?
- Why are traditional Catholics do not agree with Vatican II and the Novus Ordo Mass?
- Is the behavior of Catholics difference compared with the behavior of Catholics before Vatican II
- The Catholic Church will always be How to Restore Tradition Back The Church was before Vatican II?
- Why make a New Catholic Church Mass after Vatican II?
Please, of all places, do not go to yahoo answers to questions like this! If you're really interested, read Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre, vol. 1. You can find it on Amazon, eBay or Half.com, or maybe. To answer your question.
Before the Mass of Vatican II Mass was instittued Christ, and as St. Pius V, is not to be changed. After Vatican II, has been changed. It is not a matter of "managing change", is a question of truth.
If someone is taught all their lives to tell the truth, and someone says "lie" that the person should continue because it is good to adapt to "change"? In this case, the reason for withholding the same, not change.
Dios te bendiga
They, like the Latin and fish.
They are afraid of change and not accept things that fit inside the Vatican Council of the Mass and the teachings of the church.
Unfortunately, they do not realize that the church has nothing to do what was in the beginning, and the church before Vatican Two is in no way superior to the church below.
Vatican made two adjustments to the Mass to be more welcoming to the congregation … Mass in the language of the people, the priest facing the people rather than outside, so traditionalists can not accept that things may have been good, and they want things to stay as they were.
What can you say … Catholics love rituals.
They do not fully understand the changes that Vatican II did.
Good question. The easy answer is that all is lost and the whole point of what is Catholic. The word "catholic" means universal. This means that all move together and decide as a Church, what we believe God wants us to do in spreading the Gospel. People who refused to accept Vatican 2 did so largely because they thought the church was becoming "too Protestant." The way the Mass was said and some things about the church hierarchy has been changed, the participation of the laity more. Although none of the fundamental tenets that have changed at all, that she disagreed with the changes instituted by Pope. Therefore, these people who consider themselves Roman Catholics real "decided not to follow the teachings of Rome and is separated from the Church.
God bless
Because you can not change and do not want to admit that the world is not the same as it used to be, nor what they really want people to understand and think about their religion.
Change is difficult.
Let me make a comparison of the true faith quickly.
Im a media student. So in class we talk about the issues of gender roles and stereotypes in the media. Usually commercials and television programs are gender roles / stereotypes that are more than a regression of the evolution of civil liberties in the current life.
Why do television and the media have more time to catch up to the present day liberalism or evolution is moving towards equality? Because many CEOs or upward in the industry of mobile phones that are rules and regulations are older men so they have a long position in the media and how it represents today's society.
That said … anything with a hierarchy takes time to catch up to BC today the highest in the hierarchy are older than the most populous towns contemporaries.
Because they are out of fashion are the words most often due to age (even within a single congregation) the change is more difficult to adapt.
It's like this with everything that evolves over time.
I think only misinterpreted the intent of Vatican II. They believed that opened the door to ecumenical dialogue too. In fact, Vatican II did not change any doctrines. Dogmas, but do not change the practices of the Church do. Probably met with the new liturgy offensive. I have no objection to the old mass if some parishes like to have.
The pastoral reasons adduced to support such a serious break with tradition, even if such reasons could be considered as a good holding in the face of doctrinal considerations, do not seem sufficient. The innovations in the Novus Ordo and the fact that everything of value is considered only a minor perennial, if they exist at all, could well become a certainty the suspicions already prevalent, alas, in many circles , that the truths that have always been believed by the Christian people, may be changed or ignored without infidelity to that sacred deposit of doctrine of the Catholic faith, which is linked forever. Recent reforms have amply demonstrated that the new changes in the liturgy could lead to nothing but complete bewilderment on the part of the faithful who are already showing signs of restlessness and a clear reduction in the faith.
They felt it was as if a Protestant church in the same mold.
I think they felt betrayed.