Vatican II Neil Patterson Originally published in Issue III of Vulgata,  December, 2001.

The Second Vatican Council, held in 1962-1963, is sadly misunderstood by many Catholics.  It’s very much like the Bible in that way: everyone is sure he knows what it says, very few have actually read it.  So, after having read this article (or, even better, in lieu of reading this article) find a copy of the Documents of Vatican II and read it.  If you don’t have a copy, you can have mine; my address is on the back cover.

The hallmark of post-Vatican II heresy is to claim that Vatican II taught heresy.  This is true for both the modernist liberals and the arch-conservatives.  I’m sure we are all familiar with the innovations of the modernists, but the striking thing is that the modernists somehow feel that they are operating “in the spirit of Vatican II”.  It seems that there are two main things that the modernists believe that they believe are acceptable post-Vatican II.

1- The Church’s previously-dogmatized doctrines are now up for debate and can be ignored.

To quote a small sample, Vatican II denounced contraception, euthanasia and abortion (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World # 51).  It also said that no one but a priest can celebrate the Eucharist (Lumen Gentium, #17).  I mention these items because they are doctrines which are not believed by such heretical organizations as We Are Church and Catholics for Free Choice, but all of the Church’s teachings are affirmed either in Vatican II or post-Vatican II documents like the Catechism and the Code of Cannon Law.

2 – The Church does not have the ability to define doctrine which is binding on all believers.

Innumerable Church documents throughout history have affirmed this and Vatican II itself said that it and the Church is infallible and their decrees are binding on all believers. (Lumen Gentium, #23).

There is much else that can be said about the liberals, but the point here is that in no way did Vatican II allow for liberalism nor are liberal groups acting in any way in the spirit of Vatican II.

On the other end of the spectrum are the arch-conservatives who, quite rightly reviling the false teachings of the modernist liberals, make the very same error the modernists do and denounce Vatican II.  This is no less ridiculous as throwing the Bible in the trash because the Jehovah’s Witnesses profess it or as slandering our the Blessed Virgin because Muslims also revere her.  While different groups will say different things, most will claim that Vatican II was not a valid council because it taught heresy and that the Catechism, the Novus Ordo Missae (the post-Vatican II Mass rubrics) and the 1983 Code of Cannon Law are also invalid and heretical.  Some groups will also claim that every Pope since and including John XXIII (the Pope who convened Vatican II) has been invalid.  Like the modernist liberals, the arch-conservatives vary a lot in extremity, but I will try to deal with the most commonly held beliefs of these groups.

1 – Vatican II made no infallible statements and is therefore not binding on all believers.

It is true, in the words of Paul VI (who presided over the Second Session of the Council after John’s death) that “given the Council’s pastoral character, it avoided pronouncing in an extraordinary manner, dogmas endowed with the note of infallibility.”  There are two very important words here “extraordinary” and “dogma”.  By “extraordinary” he means through the extraordinary teaching authority of the Magisterium and by “dogma” he means defined doctrine of the Church which must be believed under pain of heresy.  Vatican II did not, through the Extraordinary Magisterium, define anything which had not previously been defined.  However,  to allow His Holiness to finish his above sentence, Vatican II “provided its teaching with the authority of the Ordinary Magisterium.”  There is an important distinction.  If the Pope or the College of Bishops in unity with one another and with the Pope, make a solemn statement that something is true, this becomes a dogma of the Church through the operation of the Extraordinary Magisterium.  However, the Church does not often do this.  Most of the time, the Church does not make positive statements of truth, but is preserved from doctrinal error in its pronouncements of faith and morals.  This is called the Ordinary Magisterium.  So, by the power of the Holy Spirit, nothing was said at Vatican II that was incorrect.

The confusion of the arch-conservatives on this point probably comes from the difference in language between Vatican II and all previous councils.  John XXIII did not feel it wise to follow the usual format of lists of exhortations followed by anathemas, but to instead to show the faithful what the direction of the Church would be in the modern world.  Most previous councils intended to deal with a specific issue or heresy, but Vatican II was the Council that had to lead the Church through the evils of the modern world.

2 – Vatican II cannot be infallible, because it contradicts previous infallible statements of the Church.  Arch-conservatives seem to have three main problems doctrinally with Vatican II.

A: Vatican II teaches that non-Catholics and the unbaptized can obtain salvation.

The council of Trent teaches that both the unbaptized (i.e. those baptized by desire or by blood, see Catechism pars. 1258-1260) and non-Catholic Christians can obtain salvation.  The problem arch-conservatives have with salvation for the unbaptized and for Protestants is that they think it makes the Church unnecessary.  They err.  Firstly, the Church is the body of Christ, that is, all the baptized.  Some of the members of the body of Christ are separated from it, but they are still part of it and can be saved.  As for the unbaptized, the Church has always taught that baptism is necessary for salvation, but as I mentioned before, by "unbaptized" the Church means not baptized by water.  There are other exceptional circumstances where baptism can occur through other means.  Read the Catechism on this point for a better explanation than I could give.

B: Vatican II says that all people have freedom of religion and conscience.

Vatican II could not have taught otherwise.  The free will given by God to man allows him to believe whatever he wants.  It is not only wrong, but nonsensical to say that men do not have the freedom to believe as they choose.  Presumably, the problem arch-conservatives have with the idea is that the liberals have taken it to mean that one can believe anything and not be wrong or a heretic.  This is simply not true.

C: Vatican II teaches that the faithful are to respect other religions and reject nothing which is good and holy in them.

While the language of the above statement is very different from previous councils, it is again a simply truth that the Church could not but teach.  It is undeniable, since no religion disagrees with Catholicism on every single point of doctrine, that there are things good and holy in all religions.  Things that are good and holy must be revered and respected. The intent of the Church’s statement is not to accept other religions as true, but, in the spirit of Christian love, bring those of other religions to truth (i.e. Christ and His Church).

Conclusion

In the spirit of ecumenism that they so revile, I accept the arch-conservative schismatics as good Christians who want to keep the Church from the heresy of modernism, but who, by rejecting the Magisterium, have fallen into error and will continue to fall in more serious errors the longer they distance themselves from the teaching authority of the Church.  Notice how once a schismatic group rejects Vatican II, it starts denying more and more central Catholic doctrines like the possibility for those not belonging to Catholic parishes of salvation.

And in the true spirit of ecumenism as outlined in Vatican II, I exhort the modernists, out of charity, to abandon the ways of secularism and to return to the Church.  Yes, this is ecumenism.  Part of being ecumenical is preaching the truth to all people of all religions.  The truth is that the liberals have dropped the cross of Jesus Christ half way to Calvary and they need help to pick it back up again.

Both liberals and arch-conservatives have abandoned the Magisterium and have used Vatican II as an excuse to do it.  I encourage all those who are still in the Church and who want to follow the Magisterium to read the Documents of Vatican II and understand them.  They are not written in impenetrable theological language (another complaint of the arch-conservatives), but are perfectly clear and simple.  These are great documents showing us how to live as Catholics in the modern world and I believe that in the decades to come Vatican II will be counted among the great and most important councils of the Church.