Magazine — Vatican II: Renewal or Rupture?

What led the robe-clad nuns of the fifties to come to resemble the women’s libbers of the seventies? When did the priests become ‘presiders’ and jump into secular garb, instead of wearing the Roman collar as a badge of honor? Ever hear of a document on religious freedom? It was about the right for an individual to make an act of faith.  Nowhere was it written an individual could make up his own rules about right or wrong in the name of conscience, nor did it give error rights!

magazine_vatII_rupture

In Vatican II: Renewal or Rupture, we feature these scintillating offerings:

The Truth Shall Make You Free, Frank Morriss
Vatican II and the Priesthood, William Marshner
Religious Life: Forsaking All Others or Forsaking Christ, Laurene Connor
Humanae Vitae: The Completion of the Council, Charles E. Rice

and much more…

Interested? Get your subscriptions now. Our subscriptions run for one year. That means all issues of 2013 will be yours for a mere $25 and that doesn’t even cover postage (did I say donations welcome?).

From the Back Cover:

Out of the Depths

The abandonment felt by the laity after the misinterpretations of Vatican II became widespread was intense. Priests, Sisters, schools, colleges, friends, were all on some tangent that seemed hell-bent on destroying the Catholic Church rather than strengthening it. By the fruits you will know them, as the saying goes, and it seemed as though the apple of Eve had truly poisoned those charged with leading the flock. And the flock, like those with itching ears for new things, followed right along.

Like islands in an ocean of dissent, the few–laity, priests and religious–determined to keep the faith read what they could, a difficult task when bookstores stocked more Hans Kung than papal encyclicals; spoke up for the truth when given the opportunity, and prayed for deliverance.

God’s time is not our time. It took awhile. It took a Pope who kept the pressure on the dissidents, one who held the true vision of what the Council meant. It took priests who challenged the nonsense in the seminaries and Sisters who were bold enough to found new religious orders faithful to their consecration. And it took laity to hold tightly to the promise of Christ that the gates of Hell would not prevail.

Renewal or Rupture?

Perhaps there needed to be a rupture for the renewal to occur, to clean out the debris, the dead matter that the Council made visible. The Church could not move forward until those who would not serve finally revealed themselves and over time lost their power over the faithful.

It isn’t over yet. There is still work to be done. Positive action must be taken by all of us to live the faith with truth and holiness called for by the Second Vatican Council. The documents must be read and lived with the mind of the Church to truly renew our age.

It is to provide understanding of the Second Vatican Council that the Bellarmine Forum magazine has committed its four issues in this Year of Faith.

The Bellarmine Forum, formerly known as the Wanderer Forum Foundation, was founded in 1965 to promote and defend true Catholic teachings and educate Catholics in their Faith. Its national and regional conferences and published materials represent some of the finest Catholic thought in the last 30 years. Operating under the patronage of the great Jesuit, St. Robert Bellarmine, will only serve to focus its efforts in the service of the Church.

 


Quantity Discount





This article, Magazine — Vatican II: Renewal or Rupture? is a post from The Bellarmine Forum.
https://bellarmineforum.org/magazine-vatican-ii-renewal-or-rupture/
Do not repost the entire article without written permission. Reasonable excerpts may be reposted so long as it is linked to this page.

Avatar photo

John M. DeJak

John M. DeJak is an attorney and Latin teacher and works in academic administration. He writes from Ann Arbor, Michigan.
  • Janet Baker says:

    “The documents must be read and lived with the mind of the Church to truly renew our age.”

    But really? No, let’s revise the documents so that they can no longer be misinterpreted. What exactly does the text say regarding other religions and their need to convert? What does it affirm about the authority of the pope over all others? What is the message regarding secularism and the desirability of the Catholic state, with God and Christ firmly in the center of civic legislation, over the secular state? Ecumenism, religious liberty, and collegiality are the three central areas, the areas that have led to the chaos, but the new trend, now that so the results of the Council can’t be ignored, is for unclear analysts to blur over in a vague exhortation like this one to ‘read the documents with the mind of the Church.’ Google Gleize Ocariz for a very good and clear analysis of the difference in the wording of Vatican II and the wording of tradition on these three central teachings of the Catholic Church. The documents are misinterpreted because the language in the documents allow for the misinterpretation, and purposefully. It is like a poison that is drugging the Church. Let’s heal the sickness once and for all–amend the damn documents already!

    • Avatar photo John M. DeJak says:

      Janet,

      There is an old saying to the effect that “The Devil knows Scripture better than we do.” Indeed the Father of Lies has utilized and twisted the meaning of Scripture even in his attempt to tempt Our Lord. If the Holy Scriptures can be distorted, what makes any other work less likely to be distorted by those who wish to? Willful twisting of the meaning of Church documents–including the words of the Second Vatican Council–has its root in the ancient Deceiver. All honest Catholics must read the Council documents in the light of the whole tradition of the Church and see it in that lens. That is the only coherent means of understanding them. Indeed, I’m with Bishop Athanasius Schneider who suggested a “syllabus of errors” in misinterpreting Vatrican II.

      Thanks for reading our stuff and the always good conversation!

      JMD

      • Janet Baker says:

        Well. Good. I’d go for a syllabus of errors. As long as they address specifically the text of Vatican II that changes traditional teaching. Have you ever read the SSPX examination of the texts? Please do, if you never have, google Gleize Ocariz and see that it is specific wording, wording that contradicts tradition, tucked in there next to the traditional teaching. It’s just like the poisoned apple bits! It has to be coughed up and out! It’s that, those bits, that’s causing the mischief. The Holy Father asking, Who am I to judge–sin? is a specific outgrowth of the bad teaching. It is the Church’s obligation to judge sin. Only a teaching that says the Church does not have that right could result in a statement like that from a pope. He is following the contradictory teaching found right there in the wording of the Council.(Oh God how the sinners need him to tell the truth about it and invite their conversion!)

        Sometimes I feel contentious, but I trust you that you mean it when you encourage the conversation, and perhaps you do, when it is contrasted to ‘likes’ on Facebook. I don’t know why it makes me so uneasy to hear, ‘Read the Council in light of Tradition.’ It doesn’t specifically identify what’s wrong, I suppose, and we can play that for the next fifty years, and just guess the cost. In souls.

  • Get VIP Notice

    Have new blog posts delivered right to your inbox!
    Enter your email: