Vatican 1 and Vatican 2 part II?

Question

I have read that there are people who still follow the Vatican 1 council, and believe the Vatican 2 to be wrong.
see: http://www.catholicrestoration.org/library/v2_condemned1_p1.htm
What is the differences?

Answer 1

Vatican II brought more of the laity involvement into the liturgy and the Faith itself was explained with more of an inclusive flair. Prior to Vatican II people were separated from the priesthood and the celebration of the Mass so much that alot didn't know what was going on in the Mass or anything. They just knew you had to show up every Sunday and days of obligation. Women had to wear hats and every Friday was fish day. Now we are much more aware of everything in the Mass because it is in English (or the language of the country) instead of in Latin and customs are far more lax in dress code and dietary restrictions (other than Lent). People are upset at the abuses that go on on each side of the arguments for and against these new things. Like everything it takes some time to work things out and we are just recently getting to a happy medium point. The Liberals were stinking up the place pretty good and the conservatives were so strict and police acting it was very uncomfortable for just regular people who love Jesus and the Church to be involved.

Answer 2

Yes there is a small number of nominal Catholics who refuse to accept the current teaching of the Church on a number of matters. Not doctrinal matters of course. Those never change. But they don't like the new format of the Mass, the greater participation of the laity in the worship of the Church, the increased participation of women in non-ordained positions, and other changes put into place by vatican II. Such people consider themselves "traditionalist Catholics", but of course no-one who rejects the official teaching of the Church, especially that of the Pope Himself, are in any way traditionalist, or for that matter in any way Catholic. Some people prefer the Latin Mass and certain pre-Vatican II forms of spirituality that are still allowed by the Church under specific guidelines, and choose to participate in such licit forms of worship. There is nothing wrong with this, and such people are certainly Catholics in good standing.

Answer 3

enable me see if i'm getting this directly. enable me see if i'm getting this directly. you're asking me to have self belief you have come alongside and, single-handedly suggestions you, outsmarted better than 2,000 years of accumulated understanding and discernment from limitless clergy and theologians over the centuries? i think of no longer. 2d VATICAN COUNCIL The twenty-first ecumencial council of the Catholic Church, first introduced by potential of Pope John XXIII, on January 25, 1959. He opened the council on October 11, 1962, and the 1st consultation ended on December 8 of a similar 3 hundred and sixty 5 days. After Pope John's dying, June 3, 1963, Pope Paul VI reconvened the Council for the subsequent 3 sessions, which ran from September 29, to December 4, 1963; September 14 to November 21, 1964; and September 14, to December 8, 1965. A blended entire of two,865 bishops and prelates took area in the Council court cases, even in spite of the undeniable fact that 264 ought to no longer attend, especially from Communist countries. between the sixteen information issued by potential of the Council, the 4 constitutions--on divine revelation, the liturgy, and a pair of on the Church--have been the inspiration for the rest. you're able to do nicely to easily examine those information earlier you sound off on them. Credibility is going an prolonged way, you recognize.