Friday, March 4, 2011

Defense of Vatican II Is Impossible

This essay will argue that - the root method which Vatican II used to supposedly 'improve the Church', by making changes for the times - is impossible to defend. The very method when examined, is self-evidently destructive or greatly harmful to the Church. Thus let us proceed.


 Various pros and cons regarding the state of the Church in its practices, life and functions, at the time of Vatican II (1962-1965), could be set forth. (Let it be clear that the strength and soundness of the Church at that time, can be fully defended and argued. However, for now it is being set aside. That aspect of the Church is not pertinent to this essay.)

The most important factor for us to examine and focus on, is the principles and teachings, or the foundation by which the Church functioned and by which it was ruled and governed at that time. To distinguish between these two, namely the foundation for governing and the effects of and from governing is a very necessary distinction, for helping to understand what happened at Vatican II and its effect upon the Church, and the resulting collapse of Catholicism in many areas and ways. We must say that the Church was principally ruled and governed at that time by the writings and teachings of St. Thomas Aquinas.

These teachings were translated and fed to minds according to their capacity. And so even very young children were educated by St. Thomas Aquinas through his Summa Theologica via the fine work and efforts of those who produced the Baltimore Catechism. As always, it was up to each teacher to expound upon the teachings presented by the Baltimore Catechism written for various grade levels. The point is that the root foundation for this teaching was the soundest possible - very nearly so.

Going up the ladder of implementation, St. Thomas, via Canon Law, was the required guide in seminaries and Catholic colleges and universities. The Oath Against Modernism was a further aid to help purify the foundation used to teach higher level students.

And regarding official Church documents, the popes drew faithfully, as a rule, upon St. Thomas in writing their encyclicals and other proclamations.


And so, according to reason and common sense, we must say that at the time of Vatican II, there existed a clear, sound foundation for ruling and guiding the Church in all of its many departments and functions. This point cannot be over stated. The Church was not ruled by dummies or principal shepherds without zeal for their flocks. In addition this aspect of the Church had centuries of time for minor corrections, not to St. Thomas, of course, but to the numerous documents and guides for the many departments and functions of the Church which drew from St. Thomas ( as for example various religious communities, the missions and missionary work in general, lenten fasts, and penance in general etc.). And constructive criticism by numerous saints and scholars, had centuries to help bring many things to virtual perfection. By the time of Vatican II, these many documents and guides were very highly perfected and purified. Changes were almost nonexistent. It is a modern idea that change upon change is a sign of advancement. God is absolutely unchanging. Being a Divine Institution, there are aspects of the Church which are absolutely unchanging. And the other aspects had centuries to reach a relative perfection. And as St. Thomas states, custom carries very great authority. In addition hope, confidence and strength are effects from seeing stability and firmness in all these things and functions. Change is a mark, obviously, of imperfection. Where change is natural, it leads to perfection. The body and mind of the young are meant to change and so grow. However principles and teachings and their derivatives which, as we know, draw upon truth, logically reach stability and changelessness, and so inspire confidence, trust and greater effectiveness.


Now human nature suffers the weakness of original sin, and so there exists at all times some margin between what the mind knows, or the principles and teachings presented and the will's use of that knowledge and those teachings. The Church is perfect only in the areas of Divine Institution, and it achieves a relative perfection and holiness proportional to how well its members - which includes priests, bishops, cardinals and popes - apply and live by its teachings. And so at best, it could well be argued, that at the time of Vatican II, there existed a need, or at least it would have been very helpful, to RESTORE ALL THINGS IN CHRIST, by a restoration of and a greater faithfulness to the principles and teachings which were intact. There always exists the need for a balanced and more precise application of some teachings. For example God is both just and merciful. At times the pendulum swings too far toward severity and at times too far toward mercy or need for more preaching upon hell and damnation. There exists the need for proper application of discipline, applying always the principle that virtue is a mean between two extremes. The point is that it is the interpretation and application of the principles and teachings which from time to time need attention by higher teaching authority. The principles and teaching themselves, in this matter are not the problem. And so at the time of Vatican II it must most firmly be stated that there existed a very great perfection in the foundation, or the principles and teachings by which the Church was ruled and governed.


The real problem existing at the time of Vatican II is the same one (but much advanced) which already St. Pius X battled with all his might. This problem consisted of enemies within the Church, or those who were determined to make the Church more like the world around them, and so taught and wrote many heretical doctrines in this regard. These were labeled Modernists. St. Pius X's encyclical against Modernism and the Oath Against Modernism were two of his primary means in this battle. On the positive side he attempted to see St. Thomas' weapons, that is his teachings, be fully used.

Now the dangers of calling a council of such size as Vatican II were not unknown. And so it takes no revelation from God to surmise WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AT VATICAN II. The cards speak for themselves when one closely examines the situation going in to Vatican II


 Popes of the past well knew and proclaimed the greatness of the gift of the Holy Spirit given to the Church through St. Thomas Aquinas, and especially his greatest work THE SUMMA THEOLOGICA. They well foresaw and stated that if the enemies of the Church could ever remove St. Thomas, then the Church would be in very serious straits. But to their minds this was impossible. How could they possibly foresee how devious Satan might be. And so Vatican II has DONE THE IMPOSSIBLE, as far as these past popes thought. The method used to remove St. Thomas and what was developed from his teachings (that is traditional teachings), we might term TRANSFERENCE, or SPOTLIGHT, or A NEW FOCUS. Whatever we call it, we must say that St. Thomas and traditional, clear, sound principles and teachings have been set aside - not by direct action, but The New Focus, The New Theology, The New Council.

 A New Foundation was produced by Vatican II, replacing the long established, sound and proven foundation. Now the most basic foundation remained namely, the Church is built upon Jesus Christ as the ultimate foundation, and built upon Peter and the papacy as a Rock resting upon an absolute foundation. We might make the analogy that Vatican II did what replacing the first floor of the empire state building would amount to, if it were replaced by a new construction using highly defective materials and very poor engineering. The foundation would remain secure, yet the 100 floors above the first floor would be shaky indeed and sway (much more then now) in the wind with some collapse and perhaps the three top floors would fall away. However, even though Vatican II removed St. Thomas and retained the basic foundation, yet even the lower foundations were damaged. For St. Thomas gives to the Church a much clearer and more penetrating and sound teaching on God and Jesus Christ and the Church, papacy etc.

Yet this analogy fails badly since Vatican II led to a whole New Structure, or first floor and all one hundred floors above. The Vatican II documents needed a New Code of Canon Law, a New Catechism, and New Encyclicals etc. - A New Church. Somehow Vatican II was initially given great cheer leading attention, a glamour we might say, a NEW PENTECOST declared etc, and as they say :THE REST IS HISTORY. However, it is history which demands attention and correction. Satan must be cast aside and tradition restored. Michael Davies summed up the Vatican II Church by saying : IT IS AS IF NO OTHER COUNCIL EVER EXISTED.


Vatican II laid a New Foundation for ruling and governing the Church. And thus common sense combined with the above truths of this case, manifestly proclaims that Vatican II necessarily is destructive and not constructive, harmful to the Church and not beneficial, Satan's work and not the work of the Holy Spirit. It cannot be defended for its most basic means of coming to existence is destructive of a good sound foundation. In addition it quickly and carelessly produced documents, ignoring the language of the Church, failing to define its own language, failing in clarity and order, replacing what was clear, sound, and guaranteed of the Holy Spirit, and had centuries of refinement and perfection.



The documents of Vatican II are necessarily confusing and incomprehensible. There exist a number of reasons, but the main one, as indicated above, is that they fail to use the language of the Church or the words and terms well defined and traditionally used. And the new terms used, which deviate from traditional well defined terms, are not defined. Now not a few strongly defend these documents which I find very difficult to comprehend. The difference lies in whether one is reading them for a clear, deep understanding or as a sort of method of inspiration. They certainly were written to move the emotions or the sense of a spiritual value. Had they not been, they would not now be OFFICIAL DOCUMENTS OF THE CHURCH. There exists sufficient quoting of scripture to cause many to ignore the details of what is said. Those who like myself fully see them as a deliberate deception by Satan, through those at the Council willing to be moved by him, must see all this as a deliberate very intelligent effort.

The documents of Vatican II now exist as the absolute foundation for ruling and governing the Church, and yet are quite ambiguous, at the least, and very erroneous, at least in their possible interpretations, if not directly. They yet serve as the absolute foundation for guiding billions of souls, for governing the many and various and numerous departments and functions of the Church - or the Church in its entirety - and yet their numerous weaknesses and defects have been declared to be simply the language of the Holy Spirit, as if they were written to overpower the mind and not be a clear sound foundation for guiding the Church and leading souls to heaven. Is it not strange that a Council, called to help guide the Church, strengthen it in its mission, is itself in great need of interpretation. The Father of lies and confusion has certainly, it seems to me, performed his greatest deception since Adam and Eve.

 ***** MORE ITEMS *****

For more items to look at click (Worldwide Truth Center) or continue to scroll down on this blog. ***

No comments:

Post a Comment