Why are some people so against Vatican 2?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MP_Kid
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MP_Kid

Guest
I hear a few people complain about Vatican 2. They talk like it is a horrible thing and that it is to blame for problems in society today. Usually those who complain are extremely conservative. I even know a woman who claims that women wearing head coverings is a commandment.

I see have only seen the positive of Vatican 2. A lot of the complaints I hear make no sense.
 
A lot of trads conflate correlation and causation, and attribute the massive loss in Church attendance after V2 to the Council itself rather than the massive societal change that surrounded the Council.

Also, a humorous take on the issue:

Sequels are never as good as the original.
 
Last edited:
Hang around long enough and you’ll certainly run into people who claim the Council taught heresy. Maybe even before this thread gets locked 🤣
 
Betting not a single one of them has actually read the documents. Approaches were changed. The content of the deposit of faith was left untouched. The V1 crowd seems to suffer from some sort of misplaced nostalgia or theological romance.

Some simply reject change of any type - except theirs.

What is lacking is simple submission and obedience.
 
This question has been asked many times of late (as in within the last couple of months):
40.png
Anyone here reject Vatican II? Traditional Catholicism
For what reasons? And does that mean you recognize no post-conciliar pope?
Click to expand...
40.png
Why are some people opposed to Vatican II? Traditional Catholicism
Is it because they feel the new Mass is not “Catholic”? I’ve had some tell me that the Priest is supposed to face the altar, and not the people. Some have also said freemasons have infiltrated the Church through Vatican 2…?
Click to expand...
40.png
Why is there opposition to Vatican 2? Traditional Catholicism
I’ll have the honor of starting off! Now I’m second because I wrote a long post! You don’t have to look far to find opposition–it was in the council itself. Different factions naturally had different points of view. Also, there was (and is) the issue of non-Catholic (particularly Protestant) participants. I don’t believe they had a vote, but they were there, they talked to people, and there was (in many people’s minds, including mine) an attempt to “Protestantize” the Church to please them. I’…
Click to expand...
 
po18guy said:
What is lacking is simple submission and obedience.
Click to expand...
Who, specifically, are we talking about here? There are plenty of folks who identify as traditional Catholics and don’t argue that VII was invalid. They attend diocesan approved Latin Masses (or FSSP or ICKSP – both Vatican approved).
 
MP_Kid said:
40.png
gracepoole:
Some have also said freemasons have infiltrated the Church through Vatican 2…?
Click to expand...
Catholics are forbidden to be Free Masons.
Click to expand...
Um, please note that I DID NOT provide the comment you quoted. I linked to a thread in which someone made that claim. Be careful when attributing comments to posters.
 
Just a thought, but I think JohnX111 was misinterpreted. who knows the reason why things are the way they are in society? Maybe it started with protesters of the Vietnam war? But John X111 was trying to bring more people into the Catholic church, in ways that were not in contradiction with the gospel.
 
I don’t claim to know the intricacies of Vatican 2 but as a traditionalist I do believe that in moving morality to follow social norms, and especially to follow the ‘woman’s movement’ the Church makes a huge error.
 
I know a few elderly people who said that V2 was a blessing. Before V2 they had to call the priest and ask permission to do certain things all the time. They also said that priests had to go to doctors appointments with women before V2.
 
MP_Kid said:
I hear a few people complain about Vatican 2. They talk like it is a horrible thing and that it is to blame for problems in society today. Usually those who complain are extremely conservative. I even know a woman who claims that women wearing head coverings is a commandment.
Click to expand...
People see the decline in church attendance since V2, and they blame the council. However, they fail to understand that Mass attendance was already off of its peak by the opening of the council and the world changed an awful lot in the 60’s and subsequent decades.

This information gets repeated enough, a lot of people think we can revisit the 1950’s Catholic Church. Not at all. If the Latin Mass became mandated church wide again, you’d still have the same people, it would be no more “reverent” or less so.
 
WHAT? I’m sorry, but my 88 year old mother flat-out contradicts that ‘doctor’s appointments’ claim, thank you very much.
 
I really wish you’d tell us what they ‘had to call the priests to get permission to do’. No offense to your elderly friends (I have an elderly mom and she’s sharp as a tack), but perhaps some of them are somewhat confused? It happens.
 
Women had to have the priest with them when they went to the gynecologist.
 
I never came into the church until 1992…one elderly life long Catholic woman told me Vatican 2 was the best thing that happened…“now you only get Catholic who really want to go to mass”…that’s the way it should be.
 
What women? Sorry, my mom did not. My LORD, man, think! Even with more priests available in the 1950s, the birth rate was pretty dang high. How on earth would priests be able to accompany every pregnant woman to every GYN appointment?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top