Friday, September 17, 2010

You Might be a "Vatican II Only Catholic" If...

You Might be a "Vatican II Only Catholic" If...
Its time to have some fun. OK, here are a few questions to ask yourself to see if you are a Vatican II only Catholic. That would be a Catholic who thinks the Church has only existed since the Second Vatican Council.
You might be a Vatican II only Catholic if...
  1. You think Vatican II has changed Catholic doctrine. 
  2. You think that kneeling to receive the Eucharist on your tongue is an outdated medieval practice.
  3. You think that a cheap table cloth with a hole cut in it passes for liturgical vestments.
  4. You love those ugly felt banners that hang from the ceiling of your church.
  5. You think that glass dinner ware passes for the sacred vessels of the Mass.
  6. You think it is your right to be part of the flock of Extraordinary ministers that hover around the altar like vultures waiting to grab the “bread and wine.”
  7. You think the death penalty should be completely abolished from the face of the earth because you think retribution and justice is cruel.
  8. You think the crusades were started by a Pope who loved violence and hated the peaceful religion of the East. 
  9. You hate St. Thomas Aquinas, and you think he is boring.
  10. The only Church document you have ever read is the New Catechism
  11. You hate Latin.
  12. You hold your hands up, or clap, and sway at Mass.
  13. You think that “On Eagles Wings” is great liturgical music to replace Gregorian Chant. 
  14. You can’t tell the difference between the altar and the tabernacle. 
  15. You are upset because the Pope says the Church cannot ordain women.
  16. You like liturgical dance. 
  17. You think it is not ecumenical to tell people that the Catholic faith is the one true faith.
  18. You think that 'Summorum Pontificum' was a mistake made by the Pope.
  19. You think that the Mass is all about the community.
  20. You think that Thomas Merton was the greatest mystic of all time.
  21. You think that St. Therese of Liseux wanted to be officially ordained a priest.
  22. You cite the USCCB as an authority for your Catholic faith. 
  23. You think that Cardinal Bernardin was a great theologian.
  24. You think Karl Rahner was a genius.
  25. You think the secondary end of the conjugal act is now the primary and sole end.
  26. You think your daughter has a right to serve as an altar boy.
  27. You think a head bob replaced genuflection.
  28. You think St. Paul was chauvinistic pig because he told women to cover their heads. 
  29. You substituted the crucifix for a flying Jesus. (Resurrected Christ)
  30. You think the sign of peace is an intermission where you get to catch up on the latest news.
  31. You think your priest looks better in a sweater than his collar. 
  32. You think its hip that nuns are now wearing slacks and Reebocks. 
  33. The only religious art you have in your house are of Ghandi and Dorothy Day.
  34. 'Brother Sun, Sister Moon' is your favorite Catholic saint movie of all time.
  35. You drop your teens off at the Life Teen Mass.
  36. During football season you wear your favorite team jersey to Mass.
  37. You think that you have to pray the consecration prayer during Mass along with the priest. 
  38. The Latin Mass bores you. 
  39. You think that Mark Shea is the new G.K. Chesterton. 
  40. Add your own in the comment box.  


Alexander Greco said...

You use The Five Gospels: The Search for the Authentic Words of Jesus as your Lectio Divina.

Alexander Greco said...

You think that the Charismatic Renewal is a valid expression of Catholic spirituality.

Anonymous said...

If you think Michael Voris is dodgy

Andrew W said...

You never miss a Fr McBrien column...

Andrew W said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Andrew W said...

You think Humanae Vitae is why the pews are nearly empty today...

Andrew W said...

You think married clergy would solve the Church's vocations crisis.

Andrew W said...

You were stunned to find out that Jesuit led retreats weren't always based around zen buddhism.

Andrew W said...

You think the priest facing ad orientem at Mass is wrong because everyone dining at the Lord's table would naturally be facing each other.

Alexander Greco said...

You attended a Liturgical Music Symposium sponsored by OCP Publications praising the "liturgical" music of the St. Louis Jesuits.

Andrew W said...

You have used the statement "We are Church."

Andrew W said...

When asked to define what the Eucharist is your response contains the words "communal action."

Andrew W said...

You prefer to use the phrases "the Lord's Table," "the Lord's Supper," or "Holy Meal" instead of Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

tato said...

you think the devil is a allegory for moral evil and does not really exist.

Oswald Sobrino said...

Very sarcastic. Not a good sign.

Matthew Bellisario said...

What do you mean?

Alexander Greco said...

More importantly, why would you describe the above as catholic joy?

Alexander Greco said...

Maybe Mr. Sobrino doesn't care for your comment regarding Mark Shea?

Or maybe it is his views on the Mass?

In the interminable liturgical "wars" (which, by the way, Screwtape is happy to encourage), there is a continual debate as to whether the priest should face the people during the consecration (celebration versus populum or toward the people) or toward the liturgical east (ad orientem). Some of this debate is, at times, tied to the idea that somehow the Extraordinary Form (commonly mislabeled the "Tridentine Mass") of the Roman Rite is superior to the post-Vatican II or ordinary form of the Roman Rite, because in the Extraordinary Form the priest consecrates while facing away from the people. Let me be clear that in my view both forms of the one Roman Rite are perfectly appropriate, although I personally favor the Ordinary Form as an appropriate and welcome renewal of the liturgy as envisioned by the assembled bishops of Vatican II and by the subsequent General Instruction of the Roman Missal.

There's more.

Alexander Greco said...

Or maybe it was my comment here:

You think that the Charismatic Renewal is a valid expression of Catholic spirituality.

Given that he says this:

The similarities are certainly there between the experience of jubilation in both Gregorian Chant and in praying or singing in tongues. I confess that I don't really know yet what to make, au fond ("fundamentally"), of the similarity. But I do know that I am delighted to pray in both forms at the Mass; and I suspect that, in a wonderful and surprising way, when I pray in Gregorian Chant, I am also at times also praying in tongues in and through the Gregorian Chant. How typical of the Holy Spirit to assimilate experiences that, at first, may seem so different in origin to us who dwell together in the one, holy, Roman, and Catholic Church.


The Mass of the 1962 Missal (commonly known as the "Tridentine" Mass) is, of course, also a healing Mass in which God's power works its way in our lives. The Presentation Ministries brochure is also usable by those who attend the 1962 Mass, with obvious adjustments. In fact, Catholic charismatics can even pray in tongues in a non-disruptive way during the 1962 Mass. I agree with the view that such non-disruptive praying in tongues during the Tridentine Mass dovetails with the times when the celebrating priest is praying before the altar in a manner inaudible to the congregation. Those who pray in tongues know that you can pray in a very soft and even imperceptible manner, just as some pray other personal and private prayers in a non-disruptive manner during parts of the Tridentine Mass. As the brochure notes, while praying in tongues, your mind can still follow the prayers being said by the priest-- a practice facilitated in the 1962 Mass by using the Latin-English hand missal. Hence, such praying in tongues does not detract from focusing on the liturgical action. In fact, because the congregation is silent more of the time in the 1962 Mass than in the modern Vatican II Mass, the 1962 Mass is actually more amenable to such periods of prayer. In my view, this "silent" praying in tongues is at least part of what St. Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 14:28.

And he seems to endorse this:

Anonymous said...

I clicked this link because I thought it was a satirical list.

But three numbers down, and through your comments, I figured you weren't.

I think the point about Catholicism being a Universal faith is missed by your post. There is no such thing as a "Vatican II only Catholic". Why do you insist on creating dichotomies within the Church? Within our Church? That's why the imagery of the Church is Christ's body - there is no way to separate one part from the other or to identify one part as more essential or superior to the other.

Our history as a people of faith (and please note that I am talking about the collective history of Christianity) has been rocked and plagued by so many divisions and schisms. If we fail to recognize and understand each other, we shall fall into the same patterns as our fathers and forefathers did. If we let ignorance and apathy and pride get the better of compassion and fidelity and love, then we fail to apply Jesus' message today.

Lenny Brown said...

I think the issue is entirely irrelevant, even anti-Catholic in the universal sense, as an early comment so indicated. I would even go further as to say it is anti-Church, as it tends to sow division and enmity among our brothers and sisters. Our Church has already made pronouncement after pronouncement concerning these various issues. Things like this foment dissatisfaction against our leaders or pastors and may even be considered a rejection of the magisterium. In the very least it is disrespectful of the opinions of there as it very apparently intends to put them into ridicule and this website purports to make it all so official, especially with its very formal "Catholic" layout. Who ever thought about this is certainly doing a disservice to the Church and should be ashamed on himself.

Matthew Bellisario said...

Lenny, your accusations are ridiculous. There is nothing anti- Church or anti-Magisterial here. There is nothing that makes my opinion "official" or is there even an attempt to do so, and anyone who is makes such an accusation should be ashamed of themselves.

Alexander Greco said...

Lenny, can you identify any particular point you disagree with, and elaborate? Are we just supposed to pressume to know what you are talking about?


The young fogey said...

Pretty good but:

I think only the old Vatican II types love Merton. He's half-forgotten now. (I like 'The Seven-Storey Mountain' from his young, orthodox phase, before he became really famous.)

Wearing sports jerseys to Mass seems more a lower-class cultural thing than a theological statement from the Vatican II types, part of the general lowering of standards in society.

(A poorly taught or not very bright Catholic who gets his theology from pop culture is not the same as a Vatican II type.)

David said...

I started reading this list, and at first I found it amusing. However, some of the points trouble me.

6. I dislike the way EMEs are implemented at times, and I question their necessity at most Masses. The amount of time it takes to assemble them and have them receive Holy Communion usually eliminates any time saved by using them instead of just a priest and deacon. I'm also sure that there are EMEs and lectors who act holier-than-thou because of their roles. However, I know several EMEs who are devout and pious people. Again, not crazy about the practice, but don't paint them all with the same brush.

7. It is clear that the death penalty is not the same issue as abortion or euthanasia. Also, I do believe there are some circumstances where its use is legitimate. However, we must not be uncharitable to those who oppose it entirely. They must be catechized on WHY it is or isn't right, because they often equate it with abortion (when discussed in a pro-life context). Given that both the current and the last Holy Father decried its use, we should form our consciences correctly.

10. While I have read many other Church documents as well (Denziger's Enchiridion, Catechism of Trent, etc.), the "New Catechism" (CCC) is the most recent and updated catechism. Is it perfect? No. It leaves things out that were included in Trent. Is it heterodox? Pope John Paul II said it's "a sure norm for teaching the Faith". I'd say it's at least a good start.

22. I'm torn on this one. The USCCB is the governing body of the American bishops; they should not be ignored. That said, they don't directly carry magisterial authority. Again, be informed.

39. What's wrong with Mark Shea? Maybe I missed something, but the articles I've read seem pretty solid. I'm sure he's to the "left" of some folks here on some issues, but not on issues of faith THAT I HAVE READ. (I must emphasize that, because I have not read everything he's written, and I may have missed something.) Disagreeing with political policies (i.e., wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.) does not make one heterodox.

I say all this as someone who:
a) loves the Traditional Latin Mass and wishes it were still the norm

b) used to serve as an altar boy for a TLM while in college

c) is happy to hear about the Third Edition of the new Roman Missal - it appears to restore "pro multis = for many" and some other mistranslations. I think that the "what if we just said wait" crowd are no less disobedient to Rome than those who say that the Novus Ordo is invalid, or those who say than the TLM (aka Usus Antiquorum, Gregorian Rite) should be banned.

c) and agree on most of the other points made here

David said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David said...
This comment has been removed by the author.