HOW THE PILL EXPLODES THE MYTHOLOGY of VATICAN II

[CradleCath]

Every earlier Council was called to solve a problem, to combat some heresy. This Council unleashed them.

Agreed. It was Cardinal Manning who said:
“to convoke a General Council, except when absolutely demanded by necessity, is to tempt God”.
I’ve always felt pity for H. E. Cardinal Manning, who went through great inner turmoil when he left the Anglican Church for the Catholic…then was called on to deal with the Council. It seems he jumped out of one fire into another.

The declared purpose of the Council called by John XXIII was “aggiormento”. get with the times.

 

[Warrenton]

catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=768

Something to think about for all those who insist that Vatican II is the cause of all the woes in the Church today."

Having read the article, I disagree with the author’s main point strenuosuly. The author claims that it was primarilly the pill and sexual immorality that brings us to the pretty pass we face today.

While the position has a certain appeal, it is fundamentally mistaken. The problem lies in the almost total victory of the state over the people, and of their Church. We need to consider what the governments of the West, and also the East acheived during the 20th Century.

The world wars were a governement planned destruction and slaughter on a massive scale, over positions that were scarcely distinguishable. No one can seriously contend that the Czar’s politics were that much more enlightened than the Emporer’s in 1914, any more than one can say that Hitler’s politic’s were much less enlightened than Stalin’s in 1941. And yet, upon such pointless issues, millions and millions were killed, and the fabric of the heart of Christendom rent.

I suggest that what was really occurring was a war for the mastery of the people by their rulers, They deliberately have brought the wrold to the brink of a destruction so total, that most people feel their onloy hope of survival is to cleave to the master who himself threatens destruction.

That is why all our countries still maintain their nuclear arsenels, after any arguable need for them is gone.

The governements have the schools, own many of the churches, decide how much access to the public square to give us, decide the ethnic make up of our communities without any regard to what we think. The government funded, approved and authorized the distribution of the very pill of which the author speaks.

The pill is simply a small reward given by the governments to a willing populace, for the purpose of securing loyalty and docility.

In this regard, Vatican II was as mistaken regarding the nature of the problem it faced in 1960 as the Roman Emporer was in 600 when he initially characterized Islam as a mere heretical outburst in a far flung desert.

 

[grandfather]

You know, I’d never thought about that, but you’re right. It seems unfair as Paul VI walked into a mess he didn’t start & I don’t think that, at that point, he could stand on the tracks & stop the train.

 

[ProVobis]

CradleCath;7552457:

He did not have to stand on the tracks. He was driving the train. He was the man with his hand on the throttle and brake, the supreme pontiff. He carries a lot of weight on his shoulders and responsibility. The reason his cause is not ever mentioned has nothing to do with him not being able to stop a train. He is the pope who imposed the revolutionary new Mass and forbid the old, despite the current claim that the Old Mass was never banned. I remember it all. This was likely the biggest event in a thousand years of Church history, or more.

We have inherited a mess. All of the problems, the scandals, epidemic divorce, loss of millions of Catholics, have a cause.

I agree that the Pope who reconvened the Council was certainly different than the Pope who convened it in 1962. Pope John obviously was upset at the way things were progressing with the council in that he never signed a single document and was reported to have exclaimed “Stop the council, stop the council” on his deathbed. He lived under the same adversity as his successor, yet very few doubt he had better control over the situation. His Veterum Sapietia was met with tremendous fanfare only to be severely compromised after his death. One can’t say the same fanfare was in store for his successor’s Humanae Vitae, which did too little, too late. The latter didn’t have to reconvene the council but he chose to for whatever reasons and the rest is history.

 

[edwest2]

grandfather;7552783:

I agree that the Pope who reconvened the Council was certainly different than the Pope who convened it in 1962. Pope John obviously was upset at the way things were progressing with the council in that he never signed a single document and was reported to have exclaimed “Stop the council, stop the council” on his deathbed. He lived under the same adversity as his successor, yet very few doubt he had better control over the situation. His Veterum Sapietia was met with tremendous fanfare only to be severely compromised after his death. One can’t say the same fanfare was in store for his successor’s Humanae Vitae, which did too little, too late. The latter didn’t have to reconvene the council but he chose to for whatever reasons and the rest is history.

Pope Paul VI should be commended for Humanae Vitae which was released at precisely the right time and predicted the abnormal sexuality of the present. You should read what Pope Paul VI said at the close of the Council.

A booklet published right before the opening of the Council tells us that Communism was one very big concern. ICBMs had just been deployed a few years earlier, then there was the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Council had a specific aim but it was subverted from within and without. I watched as Hippies began living openly in alternative lifestyles. That was the problem.

Peace,
Ed

 

[ProVobis]

Pope Paul VI should be commended for Humanae Vitae which was released at precisely the right time and predicted the abnormal sexuality of the present.

Beg to differ. By the time HV was disseminated, the “conscience” clause of the Pope’s Progressio Populorum had been firmly ingrained. Also the fact that Pope Paul had assembled a group of moral theologians who publicly gave their approval to birth control made any attempt to curb the practice almost impossible. The rules on meat abstinence and fasting and Latin requirements were relaxed so why not artificial birth control too, many figured. There was massive resistence against HV, and the blame wasn’t all with the general population.

 

[ProVobis]

A booklet published right before the opening of the Council tells us that Communism was one very big concern.

This is true. One also heard a lot of criticism against the council for not addressing communism.

It was also reported that Pius XII had refused to elevate Archbishop Montini (later Paul VI) because of his alleged willingness, perhaps overdesire, to negotiate with communists. I don’t know if this had any effect later on.

 

[JRPO]

According to Father John Corapi The Winnipeg Statement has everything to do with everything that is wrong with society to day. In his words “That brings down such darkness on humanity” take alook at the link.

youtube.com/watch?v=cLZyN8x8gNE

 

[pnewton]

According to Father John Corapi The Winnipeg Statement has everything to do with everything that is wrong with society to day. In his words “That brings down such darkness on humanity” take alook at the link.

youtube.com/watch?v=cLZyN8x8gNE

It is bad, to be sure. There is a little bit of a chicken and the egg issue though. The fact that such a statement was made reveals a rather deep problem already existed. Can you imagine the Syllabus of Errors getting such a reception? On the other hand, even the fact that the Syllabus was issued showed that there was a need back then to address some of the philosophical problems taking root in society. They just weren’t as prevalent yet.

 

[Bob_Crowley]

I don’t think it was the Council at all, and I think the Pill was God’s idea given at the very time population pressures were becoming a real problem in some places. That it is often abused is quite plain.

But so are the automobile, the computer, atomic power, the over use of antibiotics, explosives, religion, politics and all the rest.

The fact remains however that God’s given us a brain and expects us to use it. If we can’t live without a narrow sense of duty and can only make our decisions because the church says so, it doesn’t say much for our level of intelligence.

As far as I’m concerned the two singular fact which began the rot in Western society were ijn the first instance, World War II, when Anglican England, Protestant American and Atheist USSR fought Catholic Italy, Lutheran Germany and Shinto Japan, and religion barely came into it.

The second was the dropping of the atomic bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. While normal aerial bombing made no distinction between civilian and combatant, this took the concept of “Total War” to a whole new level. The “Brave New World” had arrived.

That said, I agree with the decision to drop the bombs. That was preferable to the Americans losing a million men, and the Japanese many times more, including civilians.

As a former Protesant, I get a bit irritated with the ultra conservatives in the Catholic Church, who seem to think that if we get back to eating fish on Friday, don’t use the Pill and a handful of other rules, somehow or other the genie will be put back in the bottle.

It isn’t going to happen.

 

[edwest2]

I don’t think it was the Council at all, and I think the Pill was God’s idea given at the very time population pressures were becoming a real problem in some places. That it is often abused is quite plain.

But so are the automobile, the computer, atomic power, the over use of antibiotics, explosives, religion, politics and all the rest.

The fact remains however that God’s given us a brain and expects us to use it. If we can’t live without a narrow sense of duty and can only make our decisions because the church says so, it doesn’t say much for our level of intelligence.

As far as I’m concerned the two singular fact which began the rot in Western society were ijn the first instance, World War II, when Anglican England, Protestant American and Atheist USSR fought Catholic Italy, Lutheran Germany and Shinto Japan, and religion barely came into it.

The second was the dropping of the atomic bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. While normal aerial bombing made no distinction between civilian and combatant, this took the concept of “Total War” to a whole new level. The “Brave New World” had arrived.

That said, I agree with the decision to drop the bombs. That was preferable to the Americans losing a million men, and the Japanese many times more, including civilians.

As a former Protesant, I get a bit irritated with the ultra conservatives in the Catholic Church, who seem to think that if we get back to eating fish on Friday, don’t use the Pill and a handful of other rules, somehow or other the genie will be put back in the bottle.

It isn’t going to happen.

Your comment is simply speculation and ignores what God is currently doing. Young people are being told why chasity and abstinance are important. They are also being told about the dangers of using The Pill. God does intervene and He will continue to do so to protect His bride, the Catholic Church.

Peace,
Ed

 

[excubitor]

I don’t think it was the Council at all, and I think the Pill was God’s idea given at the very time population pressures were becoming a real problem in some places. That it is often abused is quite plain.

But so are the automobile, the computer, atomic power, the over use of antibiotics, explosives, religion, politics and all the rest.

The fact remains however that God’s given us a brain and expects us to use it. If we can’t live without a narrow sense of duty and can only make our decisions because the church says so, it doesn’t say much for our level of intelligence.

So are you saying that if we obey the church then our level of intelligence is lessened?
I say not. Instead our pride and arrogance is wounded and our humility and submission grows. Obedience to the legitimate church authority is a great virtue in the eyes of God, even though it is despised by the world.

As far as I’m concerned the two singular fact which began the rot in Western society were ijn the first instance, World War II, when Anglican England, Protestant American and Atheist USSR fought Catholic Italy, Lutheran Germany and Shinto Japan, and religion barely came into it.

The second was the dropping of the atomic bomb on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. While normal aerial bombing made no distinction between civilian and combatant, this took the concept of “Total War” to a whole new level. The “Brave New World” had arrived.

That said, I agree with the decision to drop the bombs. That was preferable to the Americans losing a million men, and the Japanese many times more, including civilians.

Catholic morality teaches that we may not do evil so that good might result. In fact there is no way of knowing that millions of lives were spared at all. Such outcomes are in the hands of God.
Karl Keating has an article on this subject which I thoroughly agree with.
orientem.blogspot.com/2006/08/karl-keating-on-nagasaki-and-hiroshima.html

The highest concentration of Catholics in Japan lived in Nagasaki, 10% of those killed were Catholic including all the worshippers in the great Cathedral who were assembled to pray for a just end to the war and preparing themselves to make reparation for the sins of their nation. The bomb exploded immediately above the Cathedral destroying the Cathedral and all inside. Perhaps it was out of respect for these worshippers prayers that the church never spoke out publicly against this horror, but subsequently at Vatican II in Guadiem et Spes

Every act of war directed to the indiscriminate destruction of whole
cities or vast areas with their inhabitants is a crime against God and man,
which merits firm and unequivocal condemnation. A danger of modern
weapons is that it provides the opportunity to those who possess modern
weapons – especially atomic, biological or chemical weapons – to commit
such crimes.(5)

Surely this is a reference to the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombings.

As a former Protesant, I get a bit irritated with the ultra conservatives in the Catholic Church, who seem to think that if we get back to eating fish on Friday, don’t use the Pill and a handful of other rules, somehow or other the genie will be put back in the bottle.

It isn’t going to happen.

Well as a former protestant you are conceding that a genie has got out of the bottle. Humanly speaking the genie cannot be put back in the bottle but the Lord Almighty can put the genie back in the bottle, and when he does then the Friday fast will be emphasised again, the Pill will be universally declared as a grave evil by the church, not just by the Popes but by the whole church.

 

[JRPO]

Well as a former protestant you are conceding that a genie has got out of the bottle. Humanly speaking the genie cannot be put back in the bottle but the Lord Almighty can put the genie back in the bottle, and when he does then the Friday fast will be emphasised again, the Pill will be universally declared as a grave evil by the church, not just by the Popes but by the whole church.

and the world will one day thank the Catholic Church for sticking to her guns and keeping the truth fully alive.

 

[pnewton]

As a former Protesant, I get a bit irritated with the ultra conservatives in the Catholic Church, who seem to think that if we get back to eating fish on Friday, don’t use the Pill and a handful of other rules, somehow or other the genie will be put back in the bottle.

I think it critical not to confuse disciplines with the moral teaching of the Church. The intrinsic immorality of contraception is not something promoted by “ultra conservatives” but by Holy Mother Church. I is a matter of orthodoxy to accept this teaching and dissent to reject it.

 

[CradleCath]

QUOTE]

Yes, they do, but I don’t think that we can lay it all on Pope Paul.
I guess we all see things out of our own eyes. I saw Pope Paul as a quiet, behind-the-scenes man, rather in-effectual in handling the loud voices clamoring for change, within the hierarchy. After all, his Father was an attorney, a newspaper editor and parliamentary deputy. Pope Paul, himself was an attorney, he had degrees in both civil & canon law. He was a bookworm & a scholar. He spent most of his career as a Church diplomat & turned down the “Cardinal’s hat” in 1953 He seemed much more at ease in one-on-one encounters or small groups. His health was “iffy” from his childhood to his death, because of that he “attended Seminary from home.”

After HV in 1968, he became thinner & more sickly, it is said that he was terribly hurt by the fact that the clergy criticized him so badly about HV., which had been the law of the Church since the Days of the Fathers. None of the laity, that I knew (including myself & I was 28 yrs. old at the time) ever expected the Church to give the OK. to artificial birth control. I already had 3 children by 1968 & looked forward to an even larger family…hopefully 6 children. My parents had 5 children, (they’d lost two so they would have had 7, if all had gone right), my parents-in-law had 8. This was certainly not a big thing to the people who’d grown up with me & the people who had studied the “Sin of Onan” in depth during their high school years. We were very aware that the Catholic Church CANnot oppose scripture. It’s not that we WILL not, it’s simply that we are the Church of Christ & cannot go against His will, for if we did, we’d no longer be His Church.

Most of the “Catholics in the Pews” knew nothing of the battle concerning “the Pill” among the powers that be in the Church. And, in retrospect, I can’t help but feel pity for Pope Paul & awe for the predictions he made in HV. They’ve all come true.

 

[edwest2]

Pope Paul VI’s warning was buried under “alternative lifestyles” springing up at the time. Strangers coming into our neighborhoods and basically saying, “Try it our way. You’ll like it.” Pope Paul VI rejected the majority view and stuck with the minority: the Church will not change its teaching on artificial birth control. The howl of protest was great inside and outside the Church.

The Sexual Revolution was about sex, not love. Since pleasure was the primary goal, artificial birth control and abortion were embraced.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Warrenton]

One can draw his own conclusions as to the connection between Vatican II and the relaxation of the strict rules which, in my opinion, led to the decline of the Church’s moral leadership worldwide. Was it a coincidence or was there a causal relationship, even if slight? What if Pope Paul had never reconvened the council? Would the decline have been worse?

I tend to think the decline would have been different. It seems that all churches in the West, and of course in communist countries, have declined since 1960, and none of them had anything even remotely like V2.

As far as I am aware, the Roman Catholic Church is the only church that has undertaken a revision of the changes it underwent in the 1960s. The others have just drifted.

Orthodoxy poses an interesting counterpoint. Especially in the US and Canada, namely, the largest areas outside of the traditional national boundaries, it is fraying at the edges and discipline is hard to maintain. Not, perhaps, in the way that lapses in discipline have led to the sex scandals in our ranks, but rather in who listens to whom, and which bishop is rreally in charge. Sex scandals can be survived: the victims can be paid, prayers said, bad priests defrocked and so forth. Schism can destroy a church entirely.