Going on my own, personal experience, it is hard for ANY generation to maintain humility!

Humility is living in the Truth.  Seeing ourselves as God sees us.  The whole story (not just the rose-colored version we prefer).  It's reality.  And reality is hard to swallow.  We prefer another version of the way things are.

I know this doesn't get to directly answering your question about the present generation.  I think it is too easy to take a "Woa is me...this generation is the worst we've seen" mentality.  Or a "Back in my day...." perspective.  Instead, I would personally focus on getting this generation (and every generation) closer to Christ and in a personal dialog with God so that they can come to know Him and THEMSELVES better. 

Then you see all the distractions of today, keeping anyone from getting closer to God, and you see the impediments to humility.

I guess krish needs to define what generation is meant by "this" as we all look at "this" subjectively. I was thinking in terms of today's 18-25 yr olds. This generation to me would be born in the 80's and one that I would consider Genration "Indifferent" or Generation "Tolerant".

A generation that believes in the right of the individual to choose. A generation taught by generations that  "eliminated God from public schools, created modern feminazism, tries to clone humans, believes we can control everything in God's creation, weather, climate change, etc.." and provided no stance of their own.

A generation like every other generation of recent times that believes the end of religion is confirmation. A generation that has said yes to contraception, yes to abortion, no to marriage, yes to pre-marital sex, etc...

I await the Generation of "the Holy Spirit" - a body of living beings that says yes to God, yes to Church, yes to the Truth.

I do not see the elderly talking "during" Mass. Before and after some of the elderly generation do this. As a whole, I see them as the most reverent of any generation.

I'll offer this question, did Vatican II, when it tore down the rails to the sanctuary allow for irreverence in God's house? Did it allow for less humility, less humbling, less submission?

lpioch - Your opinion - did it?

If there was true humility and submission before the rails went down, then there would have been after.

and there is and was and will be always.

But what of those who are weak, easily deceived, etc.? Did vatican II blow open the doors to litrugical abuses and irreverence in God's house with or without His Eucharistic Presence?

I remember reading or hearing somewhere...there was a council or synod and a cardinal cautioned his brethern to be careful not to even leave the window open a crack lest the evil one find his way in to lay waste to the faithful. The faithful, as is seen in this forum, who have differing degrees of faith. Some can not withstand a simple attack while others are willing to be martyrs. To those that are given much, much is required.

This same line of thought crossed my mind two or three years ago when CE produced a short video called "Proud to be Catholic"

It is hard to cultivate the virtue of humility, especially when we want to place such a high value on pride.

lpioch - so is it yes or no, because I do not want to interpret incorrectly?

 I do not think Vatican II led to the problems we see today.No

The problems are most certainly from individuals - and there are many - that saw it as an opportune moment to twist and distort.  To let the Enemy do his thing. Yes?

The good of Vatican II has yet to outweigh the bad that individuals opportunistically forced upon the many. Yes and no?

People do bad things, not God.

My point for discussion is that certain aspects of Vatican II, certainly not Humanae Vitae, left the window open.

So that you don't misunderstand me, and the window, it is not leaving it open, it is opening a closed one{ I know I wrote, "left the window open"}. Change for the sake of change or change for the purpose of bringing men to God. Vatican II and all councils before have as their purpose defining the faith and leading the faithful to God.

Also, I think we need to consider who "they" are. These INDIVIDUALS-I read and understood when you wrote the word in lower case-that took advantage of liturgical (not moral or dogmatic) changes to infuse confusion and to do as they wanted, not as they ought. Are they not some of the same bishops who comprised the body of Vatican II? How else would they be able twist and distort whether by ignorance or malice?

David,

Have you read the documents of Vatican II?  If so, you find very quickly (especially reading translations into English that are good) that Vatican II and the documents of Vatican II are not the problem. 

Who are THEY?

Some are bishops.  Some are priests.  Some are laity.  Listed in order of likely knowledge.

THEY are anyone who, for innocent or malicious reasons, became opportunistic to put forward their own ideas instead of the mind of the Church.  I cannot be more specific than that. 

As for opening a closed window, I don't think that is what happened.  If it is, then didn't Christ open a closed window when He was born?  When He began his ministry?  When he died on the Cross?  When he rose from the dead?  When the apostles began to spread the faith?  When the apostles and disciples were inspired to write?  When the Church cannonized the Bible?  The list is long.

For that matter, didn't God open a closed window when he created the angels, giving them the choice to accept or reject him?

Didn't God open a closed window when he created humanity and gave them freewill?

Actions and decisions and changes cannot be done based on fear.  They must be done based on love.  The "Don't do Vatican II because it might let the devil in" argument is fear-based.  It rejects the notion that God can give grace above and beyond what we need.  It rejects the notion that Christ has already won the battle with The Enemy.

I guess I do misunderstand your open window usage.  When I read "open a window" implied to me is "and let The Enemy in".  The window itself can be neutral.  Even its being open can be neutral.  There's a difference between "inviting" The Enemy in and simply his being able to get in.

I suggest Vatican II was an opportunity for The Enemy to get in...just like all positive and good events (as listed above).  But he was not specifically invited in by Vatican II. 

It depends on what change you're talking about.  Are you speaking specifically ONLY to liturgical change?  I'm not sure I can answer that anyway.  So I will have to fall back to theory.  If the Holy Spirit guided Vatican II (which I believe he did), then what was ACTUALLY enacted was from God. 

Abuses that followed were not.

Humility?

Christ was humble. 

Humility has everything to do with ourselves.  Once we start looking at other people and judging if they have the "proper" amount of humility, we have lost the war.  Satan loves us to strap on the mask of judging others humility.  It elevates us automatically. 

I am a proud bloated chunk of wood floating down the stream.

We need to pray for humility, lead by example or fail.  Through God's grace we can become more humble.  One truly humble soul will change the world ... example Mother Teresa.  Anti-example: me.

krish,

I think our modern age makes it very easy for us to be proud.  We have communication and electronic tools that make us more powerful than we really are.  We have the internet to gather mounds of information much more quicker than we deserve.  We stand on other people's shoulders all the time and think we are tall because of our own doing.  We hardly ever consider God as the source of it all and any of it as pure gift.  So, I agree that we are, all of us in the US from age 123 down to 3, a proud generation.  And humility is the hardest thing in the world to achieve.

Pardon me, I have to go pat myself on the back and treat myself to a nice weekend to make up for all the work I have done this week.  Ah, Labor day!

GK - God is good!

Dear Protect the Rock, I do not wonder what Christ would have to say about the use of highly concentrated chemical intervention in the treatment of human illness. Christ healed by prayer and the power of God. If you want to take a bottle of pills to stay alive, then I will send you my sympathy in the form of a greeting card.

In the Holy Love of God I am your brother in Christ and my name is Royal

Matty, et al - do you enter these forums looking to discuss or argue? Why do you feel attacked  personally when at issue is an entire generation, not MattyChooChoo.

First, I did not write "his generation...", I wrote "this generation..." 

Secondly, I wrote a, "a generation taught by generations" before you used the words to sum up your post.

Thirdly, I wrote, "a generation like every other generation of recent times".

I do not think it incorrect, if we can sum up the 60's and 70's as the "love the one your with" generation, to summarize the 80's as going with the flow, whatever it might be.

And while the products of the sexual revolution were not created by the 80's generation, their certainly not shouting from the rooftops to stop the inasanity.

A question, how many stood with you in class to drown out the professor?

It is very difficult for one person to stop their own behavior, much less a whole generation to change a society.

Ahh. That it is, but the 60's and 70's managed. Through Christ all things are possible.

Wheras it is fair to say that a good tree will bear good fruit, it is also true that one are all in the end responsible for ourselves. I find it remarkable when people say to me, "your son{10 mos - year} is so smart because look, you tell him to go to daddy and he does." I say all humans are like processing computers, you feed them information and look out. Some can not express themselves as wholly as most, but within all of them is the ability to love.

At issue here is a lack of humility present in all of us but in particular the present generation which as of yet has not been defined. I see the youth - 12 to 18 - as a great display of boldness. The media and clothing manufacturers along with an indifferent attitude have promulgated a western culture whereby it is it very difficult to maintain a chaste and modest posture.