Now that the dust has settled, can we agree the second Vatican council was a mistake?

Now that the dust has settled, can we agree the second Vatican council was a mistake?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottaviani_Intervention
abebooks.com/Cranmers-Godly-Order-Liturgical-Revolution-Vol/18009942406/bd
amazon.com/Problems-New-Mass-Theological-Difficulties/dp/0895554127
books.google.com/books?isbn=0941532984
mostholyfamilymonastery.com/17_JointDeclaration.pdf
novusordowatch.org/quo-vadis-sspx-2009/
sspx.org/en/news-events/news/true-vs-false-ecumenism-3202
youtube.com/watch?v=jjlWYp1qQLA
youtube.com/watch?v=BWsgxCVYtAI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Carré
amazon.com/Aa-1025-Memoirs-Communists-infiltration-Church/dp/0895554496
genus.cogia.net/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bella_Dodd
catholicism.org/father-feeney-fact-sheet.html
youtube.com/watch?v=3lwwfCpvXnc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

I know what are your true intentions

The Council itself was not a mistake.

The "Spirit of Vatican II" was probably a mistake.

It wasn't a mistake. The Church couldn't idly sit by and let the rest of the world pass it. Boohoo, it generated some heretics and some LARPers. Like that's new.

>proddies are stupid for being creationists
>vatican II was a mistake
choose one

What Vatican II has to do with creationism? And it is not like Protestants have Latin Masses.

Can I get a rundown on what happened?

Veeky Forums was a mistake.

I have also never much understood the Second Vatican Council, which many refer to as Vatican II. Did authorities discover that they were doing things the wrong way, the whole time, and then, only by the early '60s they noticed?

Mostly they just created a new version of the mass, which is meant to be translated, unlike the previous version which was rarely if ever said in any language but latin.

They also issued a few statements that were more interpretations than changes, but they came down pretty liberal theologically and gave the liberals in the church a lot more wiggle room than they had before.

Both these things pissed of some conservative Catholics enough that they schismed or try to argue the pope and the council are illegitimate

Church attendance is lower than ever and it's because of vatican 2. They can get fucked tbqh.

>the act of squatting over the plate wasnt a mistake, it was dropping the shit!

This desu

It was difficult to find a proper mass near me

>mistake
>no guys really, Latin in the 21 century is totally feasible
>what do you mean people have troubles with a language that has been dead for centuries?
Yankee latiboo wanker
Papa Giovanni XXIII is best Papa.

Its arguable that traditional religion is in a decline in general (in the west)

you cant compare something like southern baptism to the catholic church

I highly doubt lower church attendance has much at all to do with Vatican 2. Protestantism has been declining even more rapidly in Europe than Catholicism. Compare traditionally Protestant countries like Sweden, the Netherlands, and Denmark to Catholic countries like Italy, Ireland, and Poland. Even Germany has slightly more Catholics than Protestants now.

You realize the reason people are leaving church in the first place (the rise of athiesm) is because the Church valued appealing to liberals more than appealing to the truth of our beliefs?

Why go to church when all the priests and pastors say exactly what their favorite late night talk show host says? Consumerism has replaced religion and it's the fault of making appeals to liberals who can't understand theology and the purpose to intergenerational truths and community being passed down via religion. There is nothing appealing about sitting in mass for an hour and giving the church.

Want to know a good way to have Catholics stop being called pedophiles? Execute priests who engage in pedophelia, the recent stances on capital punishment put forward by the Church are horseshit.

You realize the reason people are leaving church in the first place is because it's all horseshit

>T. Athiest who doesn't realize that scientism is his religion
Empiricism, positivism, and materialism a shit, anyone who is an athiest is a brainlet

>Athiests will defend this

I want sede fucking shits to leave

The SSPX is not sede

>You realize the reason people are leaving church in the first place (the rise of athiesm) is because the Church valued appealing to liberals more than appealing to the truth of our beliefs?


Wrong chruch has lost it's power to surpress and kill scientists and religious dogma is destroyes by reason,logic,science and evidence of the real world.

Why do you still belief in your imaginary friend that makes you feel special?

>Scientism is a term generally used to describe the cosmetic application of science in unwarranted situations not covered by the scientific method.

Science/scientism

Science destroys religion not scientism, but nice whataboutism attempt "he belief in something as well his thingy is a religion as well".

Why are you still so fucking backwards?

>Science destroys religion
>this entire fucking post

/pol/ swears that it isnt which is interesting enough. but yeah I wonder what Veeky Forums anons think of vatican II

>The Council itself was not a mistake
.

You know a religion is a gutted, dead body when the rulings of the highest leaders which are supposedly guided by God are casually being discussed as a "mistake"

that's because "Catholics" on /pol/ are all lapsed Catholics who were new atheists a few years ago and now want to larp as traditionalists
the council was extremely helpful and helped make Catholicism more accessible and comprehensible to the average lay person through many of its documents, and ultimately the commissioning of the CCC (and the Compendium to the CCC)
but "the Spirit of Vatican II" was at the very least a misstep and at least a generation of Catholics was lost because of poor religious education and youth catechism

the big change was the shift from the Tridentine Latin Mass to the Novus Ordo
the Novus Ordo involved changes in language (Latin to the vernacular), the readings (expanded), the Eucharistic prayers (revised), how the Mass was celebrated (ad orientem to versus populum), among other things

on top of the that, the council produced a number of documents that clarified or restated Church position on basically the entirety of Christian life and the Church's relationship to mankind, the most controversial being Lumen Gentium which trad caths feel is an attempt to say that the Church no longer admits it is the One True Church

TL;DR:
- 6 protestants helped Paul VI to make the vatican II mass to look like the Anglican rite (there is a book proving they are identical, comparing both Latin and vernacular versions)
- promoted false ecumenism (pretending orthodox and schismatics don't have to go back to the catholic church)
- put men in the place of God

short bibliography
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottaviani_Intervention (there is a link to the book)
abebooks.com/Cranmers-Godly-Order-Liturgical-Revolution-Vol/18009942406/bd

- Rama P. Coomaraswamy:
amazon.com/Problems-New-Mass-Theological-Difficulties/dp/0895554127
books.google.com/books?isbn=0941532984

Internet docs:
mostholyfamilymonastery.com/17_JointDeclaration.pdf
novusordowatch.org/quo-vadis-sspx-2009/
sspx.org/en/news-events/news/true-vs-false-ecumenism-3202

Video:
- Lefebvre confirms Vatican II is no longer the Church
youtube.com/watch?v=jjlWYp1qQLA
- A documented video explaining Vatican II
youtube.com/watch?v=BWsgxCVYtAI (first 10 min are introduction)

Misc. information regarding to Vatican II in the 60s:
-AA 1025 author: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Carré
amazon.com/Aa-1025-Memoirs-Communists-infiltration-Church/dp/0895554496

- Bela Dodd's book "School of Darkness" can be found here online: genus.cogia.net/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bella_Dodd
- catholicism.org/father-feeney-fact-sheet.html

Last time I checked I had 70 books about the Vatican II, some 20 are from the Vatican II perspective so I could analyze both sades take on Vatican II.

>/pol/ swears that it isnt which is interesting enough
I know for a fact that you're full of shit.
T./pol/tard. Reactionary fags are NOT happy about Vatican 2: degeneracy and liberalism Boogaloo

>Religion is anti-science meme
The absolute state of fedorism

This guy is actually right. People value things like the truth. People want to be told that what they're doing is bad and how to change, people want to be accountable

when the church starts preaching that sin isn't a big deal, when they stop telling you how to live a just life, people stop going and start to wallow in their own shit

its why autistic preachers like steven anderson are popular, despite their autism, they are hardline and don't give an inch.

if the catholic church was half as strict as someone like pastor anderson, the churches would be full.

>T./pol/tard

An hero immediately if you don't like it.

>strict as someone like pastor anderson
youtube.com/watch?v=3lwwfCpvXnc

He is only strict when it comes to homosexual behavior. Regarding everything else he is what we call a protestant liberal.

the only way Vatican II can be tied to declining Church membership
which again, isn't something that I'm 100% conceding because other Christian denominations have experienced a similar or more aggressive decline
is that it dumbed down teaching and dogma to make theology more "friendly"
the result was that when that generation of parents and instructors were confronted with adolescents who had philosophical inquiries they were unable to answer them

but if you read all revolutionary writers from the 18th and 19th century they would say either that the Church must follow progress or they should vanish
Church followed progress... and here we are

your entire post is a non sequitur
and i'm going to go ahead and guess that you're just pretending to be a trad cath

>He is only strict when it comes to homosexual behavior.

I know that, which is why I called him an autist. I'm not an anderson fanboy in the slightest, I just admire his strictness, we need people with his tenacity in the catholic church

>the result was that when that generation of parents and instructors were confronted with adolescents who had philosophical inquiries they were unable to answer them

This was me in sunday school. I'm a "catholic" and I don't know shit.

that describes most Catholics in the last 40 years.
it's sad to meet so many who don't understand why the Eucharist is special or even basic dogma.

Where can I learn? Is there a dogma for dummies book?

the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the Compendium to the CCC are a good start.
it's available online and the first section covers Catholic dogma in an accessible, easy to digest way, while provided a ton of footnotes from Scripture and Tradition

So what exactly where the planks of V2?

I've heard people say that it essentially dogmatized a more liberal interpretation of the Bible and the Church, but what does "liberal" even mean in this context?

How much of the core dogma is made-up tradition? I'm weary of man-made tradition, christ denounced it in the bible and when you go too far with it you get crap like the talmud.

were*

Dei Verbum (the document relating to Scripture) did not introduce any new interpretation, liberal or otherwise, of Scripture, as the Church had maintained from the very beginning that certain writings are meant to be allegorical
some conservatives/trad caths disagree with Lumen Gentium (document relating to the Church and the rest of the world) because what they perceived to be a walking back from declaring the Church the One True Church in favor of ecumenism

but that only focus on a minor part of the council, which was mostly updating/revising the Church's structure which had kind of built up ad hoc over time

>made-up tradition
>man-made tradition
are you sure you want to be Catholic
Christ didn't write a book, he founded a Church
the magisterium of the Church stems from tradition and scripture. the two are inseparable. without scripture it's just philosophy. without tradition it's just protestantism. don't fall into the protestant trap of believing crap like the great apostasy or the constantinian shift.

Jesuit takeover
yes it was a mistake