De Mattei Calls For Revising Vatican II

Roberto de Mattei refutes claims that Benedict XVI is the "true pope" and Francis only a “false prophet” (CorrispondenzaRomana.it, July 1). The historian predicts that Benedict XVI's demission will …
mccallansteve
Vatican II was inspired by Satan and he played his part well during it.
Dr Bobus
Vatican II was called to address certain legitimate problems in the Church. Most of what happened, however, did little except exacerbate those problems.
Wichita Knight
Well put, Dr. Bobus. I have long maintained that V2 was not conceived in a vacuum. John XXIII didn't wake up one morning and say "Hey! Let's call a council!" V2, as you said, was called to address legitimate problems. If V2 failed to solve those problems we have to ask ourselves if those problems are part of a shift of civilization so large that it cannot be stopped by the Church alone.
Dr Bobus
Most of the problems had nothing to do with a shift in civilization. Among them were:

1. A utilitarian approach to liturgy. Liturgy was primarily seen as just a tool needed to confect the Sacraments and the obligation of Divine Office (cf Jesuit influence). The Benedictine concept of sanctification through the liturgy had been lost. Early efforts by Dom Gueranger (the real Liturgical Movement) …More
Most of the problems had nothing to do with a shift in civilization. Among them were:

1. A utilitarian approach to liturgy. Liturgy was primarily seen as just a tool needed to confect the Sacraments and the obligation of Divine Office (cf Jesuit influence). The Benedictine concept of sanctification through the liturgy had been lost. Early efforts by Dom Gueranger (the real Liturgical Movement) didn't improve the situation. There are texts in Vat II that attempt to remedy this problem, but they were drowned by other texts that continue a utilitarian approach. The change was toward use the liturgy as a tool for false Ecumenism or social justice. The liturgy was Protestantized.

I recommend a visit to Clear Creek to see what liturgy primarily is supposed to be.

2. Vocations to the religious life were up, vocations to the diocesan priesthood were down. This was likely a consequence of candidates who were educated in or oriented toward professional careers. The preference was for the more intense formation of religious life, including theological formation. Instead of correcting thie problem, Vat II put forth a vision of the priesthood that was a compromise with Protestantism. Pastoralism overwhelmed the essence of the priesthood and religious life

3. Intellectually, Counter Reformation intellectual formation had been based on Neo Scholasticism. With certain exceptions, the philosophy was based on Rationalism. And the theology was too Ecclesiocentric. This was--and still is--confused with the thought of St Thomas. In fact, it is not, except for certain common use of terms. The reaction against Neo Scholastic philosophy went to the contrary extreme--from Rationalism to Empiricism (German Existentialism). The reaction against Ecclesiocentric theology also went to the contrary extreme, a reaction against Church doctrine.
foward
Not, Vatikan II is a rabish. So simply.