A Bishop speaks about the second Vatican Council - it affects Catholics and Protestants and the world.

[Xeno.of.athens]

Bishop Robert Barron reflects on the 60+ years since the second Vatican Council started in 1962. What did it accomplish, has it failed, can it be undone? It's interesting.

---

Transcript:
Welcome back to the word on fire show I'm Brandon Vaught the host and the senior publishing director at word on
fire we just passed the 60th anniversary of the opening of Vatican II the second
Vatican Council six decades later however can we say that the council was
a success or was it a failure or was it something in between lots of people are
discussing the relevance and the continued impact of the second Vatican Council and we'll continue that
conversation today with Bishop Robert Barron Bishop good to be with you hey Brandon always nice to see you I
want to ask you something that I always love to ask you but I haven't done it in a while namely what books are you
reading tell us any good stuff you've been into lately wait I read a lot of books at the same
time uh I'm reading Matt loveren's book that we just published we're on fire on Newman on doctrinal corruption uh
typical lovering book really good thorough serious scholarship and then he
and I both love new men's I'm reading that I'm continuing with um what's his first name is it Peter Adamson the
historian of philosophy uh you ordered a lot of those books for me uh I think I'm I'm still on the ancient philosophy I
read as one on medieval philosophy it's a history it's called philosophy without gaps so he's like covering absolutely
everybody but I'm enjoying that um I just finished John mcgreevy's book on the history of Catholicism from the
French Revolution to uh modern times and it's good it's a it's a very common
wheel Notre Dame sort of Center left take on on those issues so read them in
tandem let's say with uh George Weigel on Vatican II and you'd get you know it's kind of Center left versus center
right just finish that um what else I'm I'm going to get to
Chesterton on Aquinas and Francis because I'm getting ready for the Chesterton a meeting next summer they
asked me to speak on the uh on Saint Francis book right so you sent that to me I'm going to bring that with me to
um uh Chicago my next trip anyway those are a few things I'm reading how about I know when you were in California you
were driving so much and one of the things you would do is listen to audible books you got anything going on Audible
these days I'm doing that less because I I haven't had as many of those super long trips
but there was what was it there was something I was listening to oh I know I know um I got the Diary of a country priest
by George bernanos which I had tried to read many years ago and kind of got
bogged down in it frankly so I've got that in my car and and I was uh uh
plowing oh and also I got the constellation of philosophy boethius which I I will confess to you I'm a
master's degree in philosophy love but I had never read boethius I never read the constellation
philosophy so I'm listening to that in the car it's got the whole Wheel of Fortune thing which you talk about right then
that comes from boethia yeah yeah indeed right all right well let's turn from books to
the second Vatican Council again the the second Vatican Council opened officially on October 11 1962 which means we just
passed the 60th anniversary of its convening as expected there have been lots of Articles commentary reflecting
back on the council both pro and con and its continued relevance but I have
noticed within the past year a surprising number of these Reflections questioning whether the council was in
fact a net positive for the church whether it was better than worse for the church and I'm thinking in particular of
two recent articles that have gotten a lot of commentary by our friend Ross douthit Ross has been a friend of Word
on Fire for years and he uh actually appeared in one of our films right the new evangelization documentary years ago
but Ross is a op-ed writer for the New York Times and he recently had two op-ed
pieces one titled how Catholics became prisoners of Vatican II and then a
follow-up piece titled how Vatican II failed Catholics and Catholicism and I
wanted to talk through both of those articles with you all right and the first piece delphit
says this quote the council poses a continuing challenge it creates intractable intractable seeming
divisions and it leaves contemporary Catholicism facing a set of problems and dilemmas that Providence has not yet
seen fit to resolve he then lists three of these three statements that to him
encapsulate the problems and dilemmas of Vatican II the first one is this the council was necessary he says the Church
of 1962 needed significant adaptation significant rethinking and reform these
adaptations needed to be backward looking so getting away from throne and
alter Politics the rise of modern liberalism and the horror of the Holocaust all of which required response
from the church but they also needed to be forward-looking in the sense that Catholicism in the early 1960s had only
just begun to reckon with globalization and decolonization and the information
age and social Revolution touched off by the invention of the contraceptive pill
so let's stop there and get your thoughts on that that first statement would you agree that the council was
necessary in the first place why I say yes and relying not so much to my own judgment but that of those who
are involved um almost everybody who mattered around that time thought the church needed
something I go back to uh words Von Balthazar and the famous raising of the
bastians book he wrote in the 1950s that sums up the attitude of a lot of people
at Mid mid 20th century Catholicism that we were too defensive that we were kind
of crouching behind our own medieval walls that our our philosophical system
was sort of Arcane and outdated and that to engage the modern world which is a
major concern of Vatican II to engage the modern world certain adjustments and
so on in our in our thinking and in our practice had to happen you know I had the privilege Brandon
when I was a young priest there were still a number of priests around who uh
knew Vatican II very well one of them was a good friend of mine senior Bill Quinn of happy memory bill was was at
Vatican II I won't go into all the reasons why but he was a liaison between the Latin American Bishops conference
and our Bishops conference so Bill knew all the players and he was there for the obsessions of Vatican II and and Bill
would have been raised completely in the pre-conciliar church he was ordained about 1940.
knew it loved it loved all the truth and goodness and beauty of Catholicism love
Dante Aquinas Shard Cathedral the whole bit right but Bill would have said to me
you know we desperately needed changes we had to make adjustments so
the church could do its Mission second sort of empirical observation look at the votes
whenever people kind of either question the legitimacy of Vatican II or the needfulness of it here's by far the most
ecumenical council in the history of the church meaning the the one that represented the largest swath of
populations and countries ever you know you got east to west all over the world people are there Africa Asia Latin
America Europe North America they're all there look at the votes look at the votes
overwhelmingly in favor of a conciliary document obviously the vast vast majority of the
key leaders of the Church of that time felt that these changes in tone in
Behavior at some degree in thinking had to happen right so there I would say
yeah the empirical evidence is clear I trust the people who were there at the
time they judged that it was necessary so Delta continues that
um just because a moment calls for reinvention doesn't mean that a specific
set of reinventions will succeed and he says we now have Decades of data to
justify a second encapsulating statement and here it is the council was a failure
so that's doubt that's second claim he adds this isn't a truculent or reactionary analysis the second Vatican
Council failed on the terms that its own supporters set it was supposed to make the church more Dynamic more attractive
to Modern people more Evangelistic less closed off and stale and self-referential it did none of those
things the church declined everywhere and the developed world after Vatican II
under conservative and liberal popes alike but the decline was swiftest where
the council's influence was strongest would you agree with that claim that the council was a failure
no I wouldn't put it that way but I I want to give him his full do there
um I think it was George Weigel some years ago raised that question about any Council that you can say okay there's
the council the documents and the teachings and of course you know we believe in the guidance of the holy
spirit so you can't say these councils are saying you know heretical things but nevertheless you can ask was it
successful think of the famous lettering Council just before the Reformation that's everyone holds up as the most
famous example of a council that clearly failed because what followed immediately after was the Protestant Reformation you
know so yeah a council can fail it can fail to achieve what it wanted to
achieve and I'll give Delph that his his full do there uh I've said it for years following
Cardinal George and others it was a missionary Council meant to bring us out into the modern
world in an evangelically compelling way it wanted to bring more people back to
mass it wanted to revitalize the mass it wanted to bring people to the source and
Summit of the Christian Life moreover it wanted ecumenical Unity that's a major
concern Reed kongar's Diaries read delubach read all the major players at fatigue read rotzinger they they wanted
desperately to bring the the Riven Body of Christ together uh all good and Noble things articulated
beautifully in the documents yeah I would say now here's delphic giving him his do did any of that happen
...

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

Transcript:

frankly no now now mind you in the West
in the west we're looking at Europe and North America Australia
you know we've noticed that this radical disaffiliation we've noticed people leaving the church in droves they're not
coming back to mass they're walking away from us they're not coming to the Eucharist they're abandoning the Eucharist seventy percent of our own
people don't believe in the real presence ecumenism we're certainly nicer to each other which is a no small thing
don't get me wrong there's no small thing that we're not hurling anathem of each other but you know have as the body
of Christ come together no in fact the Protestant mainstream churches have kind of drifted off into secularism
um so okay I'll I'll Grant him a fair amount there that
um you know the jury's out let's put it that way the jury's out knowing too that the church Takes A Very
Long View let's say you would ask after nicaea so when I see is 325 if he was 60 years
later 385 hey was Nicea a failure most thoughtful people at the time
probably would have said you bet it was because look at us you know the the post-nicene period is marked by
extraordinary division in the life of the church not about trivial matters about christology who is Jesus Christ
look at Saint athanasius force not one not two but three times into Exile much
of the Christian World under the leadership of Aryan Bishops so 60 years after nicaea
success or failure I think most people would say boy it's been a failure what do we say now well I mean we recite
the Nicene Creed every single Sunday at Mass because it was such a resounding success my point there is
we think in centuries we take a very long View will in time the fruits of Vatican II be
on clearer display yeah yeah possibly here's something else Brandon I want to
throw into the mix maybe the question is posed the wrong way what if we pulled it this way
why was there at least in the west such a resistance to Vatican II here's the
church calling calling us good things right
evangelization reaching out to the modern world drawing people back to mass bringing them back to the Bible the role
of the laity in the world to transform the society all good things right so how come they
were resisted how come they were in numbers maybe I'll shift the question don't blame the
council boy that Council what a mistake it was or what a failure was
how about look and I'm Bishop's priests lay people how come we resisted it look at the way
the left today resists Vatican too they don't want to read the documents of Vatican II they want Vatican four right
the conservatives they don't want to read Vatican too Vatican II was a was an outrage and it was it was a heretical
you know um outburst so why are we resisting Vatican II why
in the west did we not listen to these great texts now we can explore lots of reasons I
I'll give you two uh very bad implementation in the west and these huge cultural shifts
especially the sexual Revolution that swept through the church that led an awful lot of Catholics to say that I'm
done with Catholicism you know so I let me just throw that into the hopper maybe
as a challenge to Rost Alpha that perhaps that's the wrong way to ask the question is the Council of success or
failure how come we resisted it how come it's been so thoroughly
resisted by both left and right uh and when will we Catholics
get with the darn program you know maybe that's a better way to to think about it
whenever I talk with my friends about the effectiveness of Vatican II and these are mostly American friends so
we're seeing it through the lens of the West um I I often see them making two what I
consider to be very serious mistakes in their judgment at the council one is the post-hoc Ergo propter Hawk fallacy that
if something happened after Vatican II it was because of Vatican II but then the other thing is you hinted at this
The Limited lens of seeing the effectiveness on the council on America or the West
without considering the church is a universal church and as you said in in Africa and Asia especially the church
boomed post Vatican II and I would argue and because of Vatican II Vatican II was
the key that Unleashed this Evangelical energy in those countries and that without it I'm not sure we would have
seen that explosive growth would you agree with with those two things it's very fair it seems to me and Africa
is the great example um go on YouTube you can see all kinds of images of liturgies and processions
and masses and prayers going on in Africa with extraordinary devotion mind
you in light of our last conversation what's the great exception to this demographic uh winter going on Africa
Africa where people are reproducing like mad I mean big families well again the
correlation between vibrant faith in God and big families um and they're not may I just observe
they're not celebrating the traditional Latin mass in Africa they're celebrating the novus ordo Mass with all of its use
of the vernacular involvement of the people um in culturation ETC et cetera and look at
the church booming and flourishing there uh we are much more of a Southern and
brown church now that's very important for those of us who are kind of in the commentariat in the western world and so
we ring our hands all the time about what's going on in Germany and Holland and England and America and Australia
well that's in some ways it's the it's the old church the the fresh young church is Southern and it's brown and it
is indeed flourishing there and yes it's the Church of Vatican II so I think
that's a very important thing to your first point I often used it when I taught at Mundelein and I would teach
the guys the the logical fallacies you know when I would do Post talk Ergo propter Hawk which by the way means uh
coming after therefore because of you know um I would always use the example of
Vatican too that was my example is is all the time people say oh well look what's happened look at this terrible
decline that happened after 1965 well therefore it's because of the council
um that's right a logical fallacy now I I don't want to be brushing aside these
critiques though as I say I I want to give Ross his full do and that that's a fair question that's a fair
question uh if we were a missionary counsel and let's say you've got the you got the board of directors saying okay Brothers
here here's what we decided we were going to accomplish and here's how we set about doing it how we doing what's the honest answer and and we
should give honest answers and maybe it does call for some you know um redirection or it causes them
rethinking okay also though that instinct that I had earlier with
you is turn the question around how come we resisted it how come we've been resisting Vatican II for so long
again we're talking about a couple of new op-ed articles by Ross douthit in the New York Times on the 60th
anniversary of the second Vatican Council Ross had three summary statements that encapsulated what he
considers to be the problems and dilemmas of Vatican II the first one was that the council was necessary the
second one was the council was a failure we just talked about that let's look at the third one now he says no one can
evade the third reality the council cannot be undone by this he says I don't
mean that the mass can never return to Latin or that various manifestations of post-concilia or Catholicism are
inevitable I just mean that there is no simple path back not to the kind of
thick inherited Catholic cultures that still existed down to the middle of the 20th century not to the moral and
doctrinal synthesis stamped with the promise of infallibility and consistency he says even if the council's changes
did not officially altered Doctrine to rewrite and renovate so many prayers and
practices inevitably made ordinary Catholics wonder why an authority that
suddenly declared itself to have been misguided across so many different fronts could still be trusted to speak
on behalf of Jesus Christ himself well there's a lot there actually we do
a whole show on each of those the last one I don't know if that's the case that because of some of these changes let's
say at the level of of practice and so on we lost all credibility I I don't
know if that's the case uh I I fully get you know think of Mary Douglas the great English sociologist who commented
balefully on the um the change in the Friday fish you know regulation that it
was such a defining quality of Catholic life that when it just disappeared overnight it did something to the to the
collective psyche of Catholics also I draw attention to the fact that um many
many priests I know have talked about this confession didn't gradually Fade Away confession fell off a cliff it was
going strong and then boom it simply stopped so there is something there
where we can maybe we mishandled the way those things were done and It produced
in people's psyches uh turmoil you know I I can see that but
I don't know if you say the church's credibility across the board was thereby undermined
um you know I think of I I go out to my mother I was you know it was not a
theologically reflective person but uh I said to her when this is a few years ago I said yo mom we would you ever want to
go back to the mass the way it was and the first what 50 years of her life were spent in the old mass and she said oh no
no I I like the mess the way it is you know I I like to I understand what's going on and so it's kind of it was a
simple uh response of a very devout you know Pious Catholic I don't think that
change LED my mother to say I no longer believe in the in the authority of the church or the church can't speak to you
know moral and doctrinal issues I think she she kind of took that in stride you know so I don't know how far I'd really
push that issue I think he's dead right about we can't go back
think of cardinal George here again he used to say sometimes conservatives make the mistake of identifying Catholicism
with a particular mid-20th Century form of Catholicism
um there was let's say in our country the fibrant Catholic parish with the priests and the four priest directory
and the nuns in the school and and a certain integrated form of life yeah okay which was a product of all sorts of
cultural and religious uh influences do we simply identify that's Catholicism
that's what it was and we lost it as opposed to no Catholicism again this
would be Cardinal George it's the sacraments it's the Eucharist it's Jesus Christ proclaimed it's Apostolic
Authority it's the the witness of of the Pope it's the Saints it's Catholic art
and architecture that's Catholicism it's not necessarily mid-20th century
American or mid 20th century French or Canadian Catholicism
so I think that's right when he says we can't or shouldn't think about going back before the council the world has so
moved on and shifted and the church not taking the world as a Criterion that's
certainly a mistake but the the church has to engage the world all the time you
know we can't just go back and say well we're going to stay in this this now defunct cultural form no we have to be
in in engagement with the culture that's actually there so I quite agree with
that no there's no going back behind it reminds me of that other Cardinal George
quote that you that you often mention where he says in the beginning of the church's life there were no parishes
dioceses institutions but there were evangelists and Saints but there were evangelists right and so that's the
essential element and so then he read the council that way the council was to awaken an Evangelical Spirit now to be
fair did that happen in fact did that happen or the way I rephrased the question why
didn't we cooperate with that you know why do we want to turn Vatican 2 into something else oh no I don't want
to hear the the gospel in a fresh way I want to change you know X Y and Z or no
I don't want to hear the gospel fresh way I want to go back to the way it was so how come we resisted it you know I'll
put the onus on on us let's close with Ross douthit's closing
of his articles he says ultimately the business of the Catholic church is to save souls to serve Jesus Christ and to
manifest the presence of God through its Holiness and beauty and as I said in my first column I'll say it again what
really breeds cynicism is when the church behaves like the Soviet Empire and its dotage and demands constant
encodiums to the wisdom and success of a now decades-old renewal project when
everyone doubt that says can plainly see that it's presiding over crisis and decline is that a fair critique and how
would you no how would you assess the effectiveness of Vatican II 60 years after its opening well here's the thing
first of all I to refer to Vatican II as a renewal project like it's something you know a new a new program we've
adopted in our Parish uh no it was an ecumenical council of the church which means the church operate at the highest
possible level of authority an ecumenical council under the leaders ship of a pope so to to characterize
Vatican II as a renewal project is is the wrong way to think about it I get the Sofia thing because I remember those
days when the the ancient Soviet leadership would be trotted out on the on the you know balcony and they would
wave like this and every oh it's everything we're doing so well you know in fact the whole thing was crumbling
around them so I get that it's funny you know so I would say no don't treat
Vatican II as a renewal project but but to give him his due again sure I think
we can and should ask those hard questions about what did and didn't work and why uh why was Vatican 2 not
properly received and implemented it might be the way I'd put it um and it is good for us Bishops to keep
asking that question and and not to live in a fantasy land of oh it wasn't Vatican II just you know supremely
wonderful in every way and in all of its effects no I think we should always be
realistic a basic principle of mine is Whatever Gets You in touch with being is
getting you more in touch with God because God is being itself right so whenever you start living in fantasy
worlds and that's what he means with the Soviet thing is you know everything's fine just ignore the chaos behind me
well that's you're getting far away from God and so sure we church leaders and and all church people should ask those
questions how come I've often said this brand you know that this this dream of Vatican II has not
yet come true and I've said this about the role of a laity I said about the biblical renewal I've said it about
liturgical renewal I said about the renewal of the moral life moral teaching I think all of those they've not yet
come true okay okay why not fair enough that's a good question that's a fair
question but I I wouldn't want to write the council off as a failed renewal
project I think because then we're going to dismiss it to uh too cavalier.

 

[BobRyan]

There is a saying in modern days "that looks like a word salad".

There is a long standing practice in the case of such documents to provide what is called "an executive summary".

If you could provide some sort of bullet point list

1. List (summary points) of the main problems Vatican II attempted to solve
2. List of actions/decisions taken to accomplish that goal
3. Short list of why some Catholics think it failed - it did not accomplish its goals
4. Short list of why others would say that it was a success - it mostly accomplished its goals -

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

There is a saying in modern days "that looks like a word salad".

There is a long standing practice in the case of such documents to provide what is called "an executive summary".

If you could provide some sort of bullet point list

1. List (summary points) of the main problems Vatican II attempted to solve
2. List of actions/decisions taken to accomplish that goal
3. Short list of why some Catholics think it failed - it did not accomplish its goals
4. Short list of why others would say that it was a success - it mostly accomplished its goals -

I provided a video, surely that is sufficient

 

[Hazelelponi]

I provided a video, surely that is sufficient

Except for those who don't know what Vatican 2 is or how it might pertain to Protestants.

It seems this is a topic one might need a little pre-school in.

 

[ozso]

Except for those who don't know what Vatican 2 is or how it might pertain to Protestants.

It seems this is a topic one might need a little pre-school in.

Here's a shorter version:

And shorter still:

 

[ozso]

Here's "Vatican II Ruined Everything". - This turned out to be a loquacious rambling rant that's hard to follow.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Here's "Vatican II Ruined Everything".

He keeps complaining about protestantism - what is that? What is he meaning a Spirit of protestantism in the faithful that he thinks is a bad thing that Vatican 2 engendered?

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

He keeps complaining about protestantism - what is that? What is he meaning a Spirit of protestantism in the faithful that he thinks is a bad thing that Vatican 2 engendered?

The chap making the video says it is a "rant".

 

[jas3]

I provided a video, surely that is sufficient

The video was good, but the transcript as it stands is not readable. There's no indication of who's saying what, no punctuation, lots of spelling errors from the transcription not recognizing words consistently, stutters/fillers that get transcribed, etc.

 

[Xeno.of.athens]

The video was good, but the transcript as it stands is not readable. There's no indication of who's saying what, no punctuation, lots of spelling errors from the transcription not recognizing words consistently, stutters/fillers that get transcribed, etc.

I think it is AI done.

 

[ozso]

He keeps complaining about protestantism - what is that? What is he meaning a Spirit of protestantism in the faithful that he thinks is a bad thing that Vatican 2 engendered?

I added that one on because the title was interesting. Had I started listening to it I wouldn't have because there's just too much rambling involved.

However the basic complaint is Vatican 2 made the Catholic Church more Protestant like by modernizing it and getting rid of certain dogma and tradition. Like the priest preaches a contemporary sermon facing the audience, rather than standing with his back to everyone while chanting liturgies in Latin as used to be the norm.

 

[jas3]

I think it is AI done.

Yes, it is, I'm just saying that if you're going to include it alongside the video, the transcript could use some cleaning up to make it worth including.

As for the question in the OP and the video, if the goal of Vatican II was to revitalize the Catholic Church in modernity, then it did fail. Bishop Barron takes a familiar line of defense by referencing the Arian Crisis as a similar time of darkness after a council, but there are some important differences that get glossed over in his comparison.

To give an example, whether Arianism or Orthodoxy was more prevalent during the 4th century was more dependent on the emperor than the Pope. Today, the Pope has much more direct control over the Catholic bishops, so there should be no problem correcting the "Spirit of Vatican II" errors if they are truly erroneous interpretations of what the council promulgated.

Bishop Barron also accuses critics of Vatican II of committing the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, but it would be naive to think that the radical changes in the Catholic faith in the 20th century, nearly all of which came after Vatican II, weren't done with the justification that it was "a new springtime" in the church or because of "the" council, as if there were only one that mattered.

It's probably not worth getting into the many issues with the Latin rite's liturgy that resulted from the council, other than to say that they did and still do damage the credibility of Catholicism.

 

[hislegacy]

As a former Roman Catholic, now Protestant minister. Vatican 2 has no impact whatsoever.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I added that one on because the title was interesting. Had I started listening to it I wouldn't have because there's just too much rambling involved.

However the basic complaint is Vatican 2 made the Catholic Church more Protestant like by modernizing it and getting rid of certain dogma and tradition. Like the priest preaches a contemporary sermon facing the audience, rather than standing with his back to everyone while chanting liturgies in Latin as used to be the norm.

The priest always faced the congregation when preaching to them. It was during the altar prayer s that his back faced them.

Changes made the Church and the Mass more accessible for active participation. Traditions were updated to take them out of old habits without compelling basis. That is not necessarily "Protestant".

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

"Evangelization reaching out to the modern world drawing people back to mass bringing them back to the Bible the role
of the laity in the world to transform the society all good things right? So how come they
were resisted? How come they were in numbers maybe I'll shift the question don't blame the
council boy that Council what a mistake it was or what a failure was
how about look and I'm Bishop's priests lay people how come we resisted it look at the way
the left today resists Vatican too they don't want to read the documents of Vatican II they want Vatican four right
the conservatives they don't want to read Vatican too Vatican II was a was an outrage and it was it was a heretical
you know um outburst so why are we resisting Vatican II why
in the west did we not listen to these great texts."


Good question there. Why such resistance? Of course we always resist change because it disturbs our comfortable routines. Jesus found that human trait pretty frustration as he was all about challenging status quo.


"sometimes conservatives make the mistake of identifying Catholicism with a particular mid-20th Century form of Catholicism.
There was let's say in our country the vibrant Catholic parish with the priests and the four priest directory and the nuns in the school and and a certain integrated form of life yeah okay which was a product of all sorts of cultural and religious uh influences.

Do we simply identify that's Catholicism, that's what it was and we lost it as opposed to no Catholicism again this would be Cardinal George it's the sacraments, it's the Eucharist, it's Jesus Christ proclaimed, it's Apostolic Authority, it's the the witness of of the Pope, it's the Saints it's Catholic art, and architecture, that's Catholicism.

It's not necessarily mid-20th century American or mid 20th century French or Canadian Catholicism so I think that's right when he says we can't or shouldn't think about going back before the council the world has so moved on and shifted and the church not taking the world as a Criterion that's certainly a mistake but the the church has to engage the world all the time you know we can't just go back and say well we're going to stay in this this now defunct cultural form no we have to be in in engagement with the culture that's actually there so I quite agree with
that no there's no going back behind it"

That is like Make America Great Again, And the Catholic Church also. Let's take it back to mid-20th Century and pretend there were no problems that needed worked out.

 

[hislegacy]

I am not aware of anything the Roman Catholic Church does in the was of position etc. that has any effect on anyone outside of the Roman Catholic Church especially not something from 60 years ago.

 

[Palmfever]

I doubt very much that if I had zero information regarding Vat 2, and I don't, that anything concerning my faith and relationship with God will be impacted.
If I knew nothing other than that which my parents instilled in me as a child pertaining to the good news, it is sufficient. As Paul states;

1 Cor 2:2 AMP version
for I made the decision to know nothing [that is, to forego philosophical or theological discussions regarding inconsequential things and opinions while] among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified [and the meaning of His redemptive, substitutionary death and His resurrection].

 

[The Liturgist]

I am not aware of anything the Roman Catholic Church does in the was of position etc. that has any effect on anyone outside of the Roman Catholic Church especially not something from 60 years ago.

Vatican II definitely had an impact on the majority of Protestants in terms of the liturgical reforms it engendered, and the ecumenical cooperation with Protestant churches. The Revised Common Lectionary is basically derived from the three-year lectionary implemented by the Concilium (not the Council itself, but an entity set up to implement Sacrosanctum Concilium, which I personally disagree with - I feel many liturgical decisions made by the Concilium were very poorly thought through, and that they exceeded their mandate given by Sacrosanctum Concilium, and also, the changes were so controversial as to cause schisms, most notably with the SSPX, and these schisms persist even now.

The surest way to cause a schism is to impose a change on the way people worship, and therefore forcing a liturgical change I believe should be limited to cases where the former liturgy is actually incompatible with the teaching of the Christian church, which was extremely rare (although recently, some denominations, not the Roman Catholic Church, but some others, have published liturgical texts which are, in my opinion, entirely heterodox and unacceptable. For example, there is a theoretically ELCA liberal Lutheran church in San Francisco, formerly called Ebenezer Lutheran Church, but now called herchurch, which worships a mother goddess. This obviously is unacceptable, as I am sure you and my friends @Xeno.of.athens and @MarkRohfrietsch and @prodromos would agree.

From the perspective of the Eastern churches, the council had much less of an impact on us, because it did not result in any change of liturgy per se, although it did popularize a transition to a more contemporary and informal style of English which some Orthodox chruches use, but others prefer not to use, specifically the lack of “thy” “thine” et cetera, the second personal pronouns. I fall into the later camp, because translations of the liturgy into other languages such as French and German retained these distinctions, and deleting the second person pronoun I believe can lead to a loss of semantics. This does not mean I agree with retaining a purely Jacobean form of English for liturgical use.

 

[The Liturgist]

I think it is AI done.

Most AIs are not that verbose, unless you tell them to be. I have been able to get very good results from chatGPT, for example, and indeed we have one member who is quite into AI work himself, who is also Roman Catholic - I forget his name.