2 Timothy 2:14-19 (NRSV) “Remind them of these things, and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers. Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some. But God’s firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.”
I have a lot to learn from this peice of scripture, have learnt and repent of not living up to its calling.
This is just a short apologetics training post.
Basically, when trying to defend Vatican II or the Papacy, don’t always get caught up in verbal debates over single sentences or minor historical issues. It is important to defend Vatican II on every issue to show forth its light (as this website tries to do), yet the major battles are won when taking a step back and going for higher level issues like fidelity to the popes and infallibility of the ordinary magisterium.
People like Pope John Paul II wrote vase amounts of literature. It does not take much to twist or isolate sentences to come up with something scandalous. (that is until you read the next sentence or compare it with 1570 other quotes were he says the exact opposite proving his true opinion)
The same things is true of Vatican II. (or scripture as the devil himself or others have used it to attack Catholicism or Christ in the desert) You can take minor words here and there and come up with ridiculous stories. But when you take the entire document or event you get nothing but the truth.
What I am going to try do myself, is before I get bogged down with minor disputes to tackle high level issues.
Do you assent to the fact that the council was an ecumenical council and its teaching is/were/have become part of the ordinary magisterium of the church and so guarded by the Holy Spirit from error? If yes, then I think we are on the same page and would not critique Vatican II like any other council or church teaching. Let us then talk about serving the poor or something else. If not then I doubt we are going to agree on the minor issues. Perhaps it would be better to discuss sedevacantism or infallibility extraordinary dogmatic claims vs. ordinary magisterium if we cannot agree on the above.