Why switch from vatican 1 to vatican 2

[isus]

what cauzed the change ?

and bonus question: what are some of the changes made?

 

[PietroPaolo]

Vatican 1 was an incomplete Council, it was broken off because of the Franco-Prussian War. Vatican 2 completed the work of Vatican 1 by defining other roles in the Church aside from the Role of the Pope. Vatican 2 was primarily a missionary council and, as such, called for a change in tone more than anything else. Much happened after the Second Vatican Council and was even done in the name of the Council that had nothing to do with the Council. But both are legitimate ecumenical councils and, as such, are acts of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Celtic_Maiden]

There is a Book called The Vatican 11 Documents, this will list out all the updates from Vatican 1 to 11. I think the Orthodox recognize the first 7 then did not.

 

[R_C]

what cauzed the change ?

and bonus question: what are some of the changes made?

It was not a switch, and it was not a change.

They are two entirely different Councils.

And despite it all, Vatican II does not contradict Vatican I. In fact, Pope John Paul II stated that the documents of the Council must be understood in the light of Tradition and Magisterium of the Catholic Church.

No “changes” were made on matters of faith and morals, since no “changes” can be made in matters of faith and morals. Some reforms were brought forth in pastoral matters, in matters of discipline. In non-dogmatic stuff. Or rather: they were called for. No “reform” was brought forth by the Council itself (as far as I know).

 

[edward_george]

There is a Book called The Vatican 11 Documents, this will list out all the updates from Vatican 1 to 11. I think the Orthodox recognize the first 7 then did not.

The book is of the documents of the Second Vatican Council; that’s a Roman numeral 2 (II) and not an 11. You are right though that the Orthodox generally hold that the first seven Ecumenical Councils (Nicaea I, Constantinople I, Ephesus I, Chalcedon, Constantinople II, Constantinople III, and Nicaea II) are truly Ecumenical and binding, and that subsequent ones were not. Vatican I and II falling much, much later than the first seven (being the 21st and 22nd), the Orthodox do not accept them as Ecumenical Councils.

-ACEGC

 

[Abu]

R_C #4
Some reforms were brought forth in pastoral matters, in matters of discipline. In non-dogmatic stuff. Or rather: they were called for. No “reform” was brought forth by the Council itself (as far as I know).

The facts are that Vatican II has been dogmatic and pastoral as have other Councils, and Christ’s Supreme Vicars have consistently affirmed this.

In his book, *Sources of Renewal *Karol Cardinal Wojtyla (Bl Pope John Paul II) wrote: “It may be said that every Council in the Church’s history has been a pastoral one, if only because the assembled bishops, under the Pope’s guidance, are pastors of the Church. At the same time every Council is an act of the supreme Magisterium of the Church. Magisterium signifies teaching based on authority, a teaching which is the mission of the Apostles and their successors, it is part of their function and an essential task.” The Cardinal goes on: “All this has been signally confirmed by Vatican II, which, while preserving its pastoral character and mindful of the purpose for which it was called, profoundly developed the doctrine of faith and thus provided a basis for its enrichment.” (Ibid, p 38-39). [My emphasis].

Pastorally inclined like all Councils, Vatican II also developed doctrine profoundly, as 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.” 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.

Fr Hardon, S.J., emphasises:
“The scope of collegial infallibility extends to the whole range of doctrine on faith and morals, comparable to what the First Vatican Council had defined for the Pope. Accordingly, the freedom from error is not limited to matters of strict revelation, but covers also whatever is in any way connected with revealed truth and on which the bishops of the Catholic world agree in their authentic teaching, i.e., in their official capacity as shepherds of the flock of Christ. In the moral order, the Church’s teaching on contraception exemplifies this kind of inerrancy.” The Catholic Catechism, 1975, Doubleday, p 232-3]

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].