Vatican II

  • Thread starter Thread starter Loving_disciple
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Loving_disciple

Guest
I have been talking with a Eastern Orthodox Christian and he has some up with an interesting point. He said that of all the councils Vatican II was the worst of them all. I know only some of what Vatican II says and I am wondering how I could refute this arguement. I can’t use anything invovling JP2 because appearenlty the Orthodox hate him.
 
I think there are probably quite a few steps that would need to be addressed first before getting into Vatican II with an Eastern Orthodox person.

In general, it’s really difficult to respond to blanket generalizations like “Vatican II was the worst ecumentical council.” First you need to find out exactly why he thinks that. What specifically from the Council does he have a problem with? In order to correct misunderstandings, you need to know the specific problems. Otherwise, you’re just guessing and possibly taking on issues that are irrelevant to the underlying concerns.
 
The evidence is on him to prove that Vatican II was a bad council in any way.
 
I have been talking with a Eastern Orthodox Christian and he has some up with an interesting point. He said that of all the councils Vatican II was the worst of them all. I know only some of what Vatican II says and I am wondering how I could refute this arguement. I can’t use anything invovling JP2 because appearenlty the Orthodox hate him.
That’s not telling anyone here much. A list of reasons why he thinks that might be good, otherwise, where do you start? It’s like saying, the movie XYZ was the worst movie ever. Nothing to refute without more information regarding why.

Peace,
Ed
 
I have been talking with a Eastern Orthodox Christian and he has some up with an interesting point. He said that of all the councils Vatican II was the worst of them all.
Remind our brother that a Sacred Ecumenical Council of Holy Church is what it is by God’s grace and the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Ask him where did he learn that the faithful of the Church can pass judgment on a Council of the Church.

Besides, I am quite certain that from his perspective, the First Vatican Council was the worst, as it defined the Pope’s primacy in Church governance and his infallibility…
I can’t use anything invovling JP2 because appearenlty the Orthodox hate him.
On June 29, 1995, Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople again withdrew the excommunications imposed on each other’s church in the 11th century and concelebrated the Eucharist together.

In May 1999, Pope John Paul II visited Romania on the invitation from Patriarch Teoctist of the Romanian Orthodox Church, who stated, “The second millennium of Christian history began with a painful wounding of the unity of the Church; the end of this millennium has seen a real commitment to restoring Christian unity.”

During his 2001 travels, John Paul II became the first Pope to visit Greece in 1291 years. In Athens, the Pope met with Archbishop Christodoulos, the head of the Greek Orthodox Church. After a private meeting, the two spoke publicly.

Christodoulos read a list of “13 offences” of the Catholic Church against the Eastern Orthodox Church since the Great Schism, including the pillaging of Constantinople by crusaders in 1204, and bemoaned the lack of any apology from the Catholic Church, saying “Until now, there has not been heard a single request for pardon” for the “maniacal crusaders of the 13th century.”

The Pope responded by saying “For the occasions past and present, when sons and daughters of the Catholic Church have sinned by action or omission against their Orthodox brothers and sisters, may the Lord grant us forgiveness." The two leaders then said the Lord’s Prayer together, breaking an Orthodox taboo against praying with Catholics.

Draw your own conclusion on their love or hatred towards him!
 
Well his main problem is that there is not as much emphasis on Mary as the protector of the Church. Second he feels that the Catholic Church’s look to Protestant and that the Roman Catholics have become less serious about their beliefs because of VII
 
Well his main problem is that there is not as much emphasis on Mary as the protector of the Church. Second he feels that the Catholic Church’s look to Protestant and that the Roman Catholics have become less serious about their beliefs because of VII
Chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium talks about the Virgin Mary’s role as mother of the Church.

It’s true that a lot of people lost their faith after Vatican II, but if you actually look at what the council prescribed, it is nothing but the same, orthodox, apostolic faith that has been handed down the centuries. Devils (whether literal or figurative) are responsible for the widespread confusion after the council that has lead many to misunderstand it.
 
Chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium talks about the Virgin Mary’s role as mother of the Church.

It’s true that a lot of people lost their faith after Vatican II, but if you actually look at what the council prescribed, it is nothing but the same, orthodox, apostolic faith that has been handed down the centuries. Devils (whether literal or figurative) are responsible for the widespread confusion after the council that has lead many to misunderstand it.
I agree, I am just am currently reading over the V2 document which is a lot of work. I have yet to find anything that conflicts with other councils which is what my friend would use to say V2 is Hersey
 
Again, it would be his burden to demonstrate heresy, not your burden to analyze every single sentence making sure it’s not there.
 
True but for the sake of disproving my own doubt I want to see for myself. By doing this I can strenght my faith.
 
By all means, I encourage you to read the documents of Vatican II yourself, particularly Lumen Gentium and Gaudium et Spes.
 
On June 29, 1995, Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople again withdrew the excommunications imposed on each other’s church in the 11th century and concelebrated the Eucharist together.
I’m pretty sure that that didn’t happen.
 
Well his main problem is that there is not as much emphasis on Mary as the protector of the Church. Second he feels that the Catholic Church’s look to Protestant and that the Roman Catholics have become less serious about their beliefs because of VII
As far as Mary:

ncregister.com/daily-news/pope-francis-to-consecrate-the-world-to-marys-immaculate-heart

Most Catholics are less serious about their beliefs today, but Vatican II had nothing to do with that.

ncregister.com/daily-news/pope-francis-to-consecrate-the-world-to-marys-immaculate-heart

Peace,
Ed
 
There are many misconceptions regarding Vatican II. My own misconceptions were erased when I actually read the documents of the Council.
Regardless of personal thoughts, one result of the Council is that the Catholic Church has become less insular. It has sought to heal the divisions within the Body of Christ that “cause scandal to the world,” between our separated brothers and sisters.
 
Is this person an ex-Catholic? The EOs do not believe Vatican II to even be an ecumenical Council.

Anyway, by definition as an EO, your friend would find the paragraphs in Lumen Gentium dealing with the authority and infallibility of the Pope to be “heresy” (when it is of course dogma). Vatican II is no “worse” in this regard than, say, Vatican I or Florence.

Vatican II also does more teaching about Mary (in Lumen Gentium) and teaches more Marian “maximalism” than all other Councils combined, so I’m not sure how that is a criticism. The fact that many Catholics don’t take their faith seriously these days isn’t also really a valid criticism, since the the Council texts in many places say the faithful have a duty to know and practice their religion. The continued spread of Arianism for centuries after Nicea I did not make Nicea I a bad Council.
 
Loving disciple
To clear up some misconceptions of Vatican II, heed Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, as Cardinal Ratzinger, and come to understand the great importance of that Ecumenical Council.

Cardinal Ratzinger expressed the required fidelity to Vatican II as: “to defend the true tradition of the Church today is to defend the Council…And this today of the Church is the documents of Vatican II, without reservations that amputate them and without arbitrariness that distorts them.” (The Ratzinger Report, Ignatius Press, 1985, p 31).

“It must be stated that Vatican II is upheld by the same authority as Vatican I and the Council of Trent, namely, the Pope and the College of Bishops in communion with him, and that also with regard to its contents, Vatican II is in strictest continuity with both previous councils and incorporates their texts word for word in decisive points…” (The Ratzinger Report, p 28).

"I am convinced that the damage that we have incurred in these twenty years is due, not to the ‘true’ Council, but to the unleashing within the Church of latent polemical and centrifugal forces; and outside the Church it is due to the confrontation with a cultural revolution in the West: the success of the upper middle class, the new ‘tertiary bourgeoisie’, with its liberal-radical ideology of individualistic, rationalistic and hedonistic stamp. The cardinal exhorts all Catholics who wish to remain such “to return to the authentic texts of the original Vatican II.” The Ratzinger Report, Vittorio Messori, Ignatius, 1985, p 28-31].

Cardinal Ratzinger expressed the required fidelity to Vatican II as: “to defend the true tradition of the Church today is to defend the Council…And this today of the Church is the documents of Vatican II, without reservations that amputate them and without arbitrariness that distorts them.” (The Ratzinger Report, Ignatius Press, 1985, p 31).

Fr William Most examined ten legitimate changes at Vatican II and found not one was a reverse of doctrine. All gave answers to previously debated points. Fr Most concludes: “It is obvious then that Vatican II did not create a revolution in theology. There are no reversals of teaching at all, and some…are only a little different or stronger than previous teachings, but all are in the same direction.” Catholic Apologetics Today: Answers To Modern Critics, Fr William G Most, TAN, 1986, p 200].

So pastorally inclined like all Councils, Vatican II also developed doctrine profoundly, as the revered Fr John a Hardon, S.J., affirms. Vatican II confirmed that even non infallible doctrine must be received with assent: “This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra”…when doctrine is proposed or formulated. Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church), 25].

Similarly, “collegial infallibility…marks a turning point in doctrinal history.” [See *The Catholic Catechism, 1975, Doubleday, p 232-233]. This refers to the bishops around the world when teaching in accord with the Pope; when reflecting historical continuity of teaching; and in an Ecumenical Council when approved by a Pope.

The Dogmatic Constitution On The Church #8 (Vatican II) teaches that “The one mediator, Christ, established and ever sustains here on earth His holy Church…(T)his is the sole Church of Christ which in the Creed we profess to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic.” Fr John Hardon, S.J., describes as “unequivocal” (= clearly defined), “for the first time in conciliar history — the Church is not one of many branches.” [See *The Catholic Catechism, 1975, Doubleday, p 213].
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top