I have some questions about Vatican II

Hi all, I wanted to clear up a few things about Vatican II and improve my understanding of it.

The leaflet I read about Vatican seemed to make the Church alot more “nice”. e.g. instead of there being no salvation outside the Church, there may be salvation outside the church.

I have read long lists of criticisms, here is one:

The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one true religion and the rest are false. The Catholic Church teaches that pagan religions (such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Voodooism, etc.), which worship various “gods,” actually worship demons, since all the gods of the heathen are the devils.

Psalms 95:5- “For all the gods of the Gentiles are devils…”

1 Cor. 10:20- “But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils.”

St. Paul says that when the pagans worship their gods they are worshipping devils, and he doesn’t want you to be in communion with devils. The Vatican II sect, however, endorses these false religions which commit idolatry and worship devils. This is unspeakably evil; it is a total rejection of the teaching of the Gospel and the Catholic Church, and it is condemned as apostasy by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos

What is everyone’s view on this? Was The Church under pressure from an increasingly liberal society to change it’s views accordingly? Why was Vatican II necessary?

I hope you can help me with this. Thanks alot in advance and God bless you all.

Vatican 2 did not say that there may be salvation outside of the Church. She merely re-iterated what the Bible says: “God shows no partiality, but in every nation the one who fears Him and does what is right is acceptable to Him.” (Acts 10:34-35) That is not to say that there is salvation outside of the Church, but that such people are – mysteriously – in the Church.

The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one true religion and the rest are false.

True. She has not stopped teaching this. She has only re-affirmed the other side of the coin: though non-Catholic religions are false, when it comes down to it, they do contain A FEW PIECES of the truth. Acts 14:16-17 says that God has “not left Himself without a witness” in the pagan religions, because although they falsely worship “heavenly rains and fruitful seasons,” yet at least they know that these things are important signs of God’s reality.

The Catholic Church teaches that pagan religions (such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Voodooism, etc.), which worship various “gods,” actually worship demons, since all the gods of the heathen are the devils.

She has not changed this teaching. She has only re-affirmed what Scripture has continuously said: someone is not held accountable for a thing which they did not know. The people of the other nations, who did what was wrong but did not know it, will receive a lesser beating (i.e. purgatory) than those who knew God’s will and rejected it (who will be damned). That’s Luke 12:47-48, for those of you keeping track at home.

The Vatican II sect, however, endorses these false religions which commit idolatry and worship devils.

Where? Name the document of Vatican 2 that says to embrace non-Catholic religion. You will not find it, because it is not there. In fact, Vatican 2 document “Apostolicam Actuositatem” #6 decrees that Catholic laity are obligated to "announce Christ by words…to non-believers with a view to leading them to faith… The words of the Apostle should echo in all hearts, “Woe to me if I do not preach the Gospel” (1 Cor. 9:16).

Those are not the words of a Council which seeks to embrace unbelieving religions as valid! They are the words of a Council led by God to decree in our times what the Church has always taught. The gates of hell cannot prevail against this Church; how much less can the words of a pamphlet destroy faith in the Church of Christ!

If the Catholic Church is destroyed, or hidden, or dispersed as your pamphlet says, than gone is the promise of Christ that His Church would remain set upon a hill for all to see forever. DON’T let such a pamphlet confuse you! Stick with the Word and Church of God, the pillar and foundation of truth, the Catholic Church, now and forever Amen!

I hope that helps. God bless!
-Dmar198

Reading the actual documents of Vatican II would be a good start to improving your understanding of it.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/

Sounds like you have come upon a document produced by a group that is outside of communion with the Catholic Church. These groups are in schism, and in some cases excommunicated. You should get your information from Church documents, not groups such as this.

Yes, the Church teaches that it contains the fullness of Truth and that others are false. And, nothing in the documents of Vatican II contradict this teaching.

However, the assertion that the pagans worship devils is not supported by what St. Paul teaches here:

Acts 17:22 -28 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: "Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious. For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you. "The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. 7God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’

Vatican II is not a sect. It was a council of the Catholic Church.

And, Vatican II did not “endorse” false religions. Please provide something to substantiate your claim.

Mortalium Animos is a response to false ecumenism-- pan-Christianity.

It in no way condemns *authentic *ecumenism and interreligious dialog.

Start reading what the documents of Vatican II actually say and what the Church actually teaches.

No. And furthermore, the Church did not change its views on anything. The Truth is the Truth. It doesn’t change. However, the context in which we express the truth, the language we use, and the methods we use certainly can change.

Church Councils are typically called in response to concerns, crisis, heresy, or other internal Church needs. Vatican I was cut short, and therefore issues related to pastoral and dogmatic issues were not covered. Vatican II sought to respond to the societal, economic, technological, etc, upheaval and change going on in the world. The Church sought to engage the modern world and bring Christ’s message to it.

I hope you will read the documents of Vatican II for yourself.

No. And furthermore, the Church did not change its views on anything.

I think I understand what you’re trying to say, having read and being in full agreement with the things you point out in your post. However I don’t think expressing it in these words will make much sense to anyone. It can be interpreted to say the Church held a years-long Council for no reason.

Certainly things did change after V-2, but as you were very careful to point out, it changed nothing in terms of basic faith or Teachings.

More accurately, the Church doesn’t change its views on Dogma (what it teaches) because the truth is the truth. It does change its practices (how it teaches) to try to be as effective as possible in reaching the people. Vatican changed numerous chruch practices, but did not change any Church dogma.

Actually, you have all missed the point. There is a difference between “outside the Church” as in (pagan) Voodoo, witchcraft, etc… and “outside the Church” as in other Christian denominations. You have to decide which one you are going to address.

The Church does not teach that Non-Catholic Christians cannot be saved and are going to hell. When it referrs to “Outside the church” more often than not it is referring to pagan religions. The Church does, however, teach that the Catholic Church is the one true church, founded by Christ and only within the Catholic Church do you find the fullness of salvation and justification. You have to remember that prior to the 1500s, there was only the Catholic Church and Pagan religions. That’s it.

As for the documents quoted here, one has to read them in context both in wording and in history. That is the only way they can be rightly understood.

Their is only ONE TRUE GOD! Any church that teaches the worship of any type of idol isn’t a church based in God. It is a false church! The scriptures are very clear:

In Revelation 12:17, what additional two-point description did Jesus give of His end-time remnant church?

Answer: It would keep all the Ten Commandments, including the seventh-day Sabbath of the fourth commandment (John 14:15; Revelation 22:14). It also would have the “testimony of Jesus”, which the Bible tells us is the spirit of prophecy (Revelation 19:10)

Don’t take my word for it, read it yourself!:thumbsup:

Happy Sabbath to All!

Be more specific about what you are implying.

Thanks for all answers so far guys, I am currently plowing through the Vatican II documents.

Slightly off topic, I saw a picture of Pope John Paul II kissing the Quran. Isn’t that blasphemous? I accept that the Church teaches that many are the paths to God but when Islam is so opposed to Christianity in general this seems strange.

RE: JPII and the Koran, read this:

jimmyakin.org/2006/04/jp2_and_the_qur.html

John Paul II authored Dominus Jesus and this should confirm for you that he did not espouse an “all paths are equal” belief system.

From your questions, I think Nostra Aetate would be the first to read:

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_nostra-aetate_en.html

Please be sure that you stay on topic in this thread as per the Forum Rules which specify one thread: one topic.
Your servant in Christ.

Ok I apologise. I’ll bear it in mind for future reference.
God bless you all for helping me out.

=Zamudio;5674464]Hi all, I wanted to clear up a few things about Vatican II and improve my understanding of it.

The leaflet I read about Vatican seemed to make the Church alot more “nice”. e.g. instead of there being no salvation outside the Church, there may be salvation outside the church.

I have read long lists of criticisms, here is one:

The Catholic Church teaches that there is only one true religion and the rest are false. The Catholic Church teaches that pagan religions (such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Voodooism, etc.), which worship various “gods,” actually worship demons, since all the gods of the heathen are the devils.

***To this list we can add Morons and 7th. Day Adventest, who like all of the above are cults, not religions as they do not beleive in a Divine God [Triune or otherwise.] I personally would stop short of calling them devil worshipers, even though there is truth in the statement. As Faith is a gift, a great many simply do not know. They need our prayers.

Clearly if they don’t accept God and are not Baptized, there chances for a happy eternity are nill. God being God must is Divine Justice make sufficient grace available to all to come to know Christ, and through Christ, to develope a relationship with God. Here is America it would seem everyone whould have an opportunity, but many refuse it. They are no different than atheist.***

***As to the Church’s position on salvation through the church. It has not changed! What has changed is how this might come about. Because God founded only His CC, all other Chrsitian religions worship the same God we do, share the same Baptism and for the most part, the same Bible.

Therefore if they are saved [same conditions apply as they do for us Catholics] there salvation is chaneled through the CC by virtue of our common beliefs. There is of course the issue of personal cupability. If they are exposed to the TRUTH of the One trut church, they have the same obligation to accept it as do Catholics

Again at root is the issue of invinceable ignorance. Some simplt do not know [or bother with finding out… sounf filmiliar?] and others are cupable by choosing to deny or ignore the truths.***

St. Paul says that when the pagans worship their gods they are worshipping devils, and he doesn’t want you to be in communion with devils. The Vatican II sect, however, endorses these false religions which commit idolatry and worship devils. This is unspeakably evil; it is a total rejection of the teaching of the Gospel and the Catholic Church, and it is condemned as apostasy by Pope Pius XI in Mortalium Animos

***Oh really :shrug: And where does it say that? I have the doucments sitting here on my desk and read them mutiple times.:***blush:

What is everyone’s view on this? Was The Church under pressure from an increasingly liberal society to change it’s views accordingly? Why was Vatican II necessary?

It should be noted that neither Vatican I or V II issued and Doctrinal or Dogmatic NEW Teachings. [V I on the papacy was a long held position.] It would seem in hindsite that indeed there was extreme pressure applied to “modernize” The Church. And that is what happened, all though I could list a litiany of changes NEVER approved by V II. Infact Communion in the hand, and under both species was discussed and severly defeated by specific votes, for what little effect it had on Americas prelates.

I hope you can help me with this. Thanks alot in advance and God bless you all.

Love and prayers,
Pat

I have found that the best answer for Vatican II is the documents themselves. There are quite a few good translations out there. You can also access these documents via the Vatican or EWTN websites. These documents are packed full of meaning.

One of the compelling things about Vatican II historically is that it was not responding to any crisis. Trent responded to the Protestant reformation. John XXIII wanted to communicate the faith more effectively. If there were abuses, they arose out of individuals and not the Council itself.

Vatican II revamped the church in such a new way. Some people didn’t like that.

Overall, I think Vatican Two was a good thing. I wish that they kept masses in latin though!

Vatican II was designed to update Church Practice, how the Church imparts doctrine to the Faithful, to make it more accessible to 20th century man. It did not address Church Doctrine, what we teach, at all.

As can be seen, Pope Benedict agrees with you that the Latin mass should be available to those that want it and it is clearly making a comeback around the world, I personally don’t remember the Latin mass (and I’m 49) and am very comfortable with the English one but at some point I expect the Latin mass will make its way to my parish and I’ll get to partake in it as well.

One thing that is obvious, though. It is very easy now to learn the Catholic faith now , with internet sites like this one and EWTN and Catholic Radio. This was not available a generation ago.

Wow you are such a “Christian”! Calling people with different faiths Morons! I guess you have really let everyone know who you really follow.:thumbsup: After that comment, all credibility is out the window!!!:wink:

I was there just prior to Vatican II, Mass was in Latin. After Vatican II, there was a new, smaller altar in front of the original, the priest faced the congregants and the Mass was in English. A few people were confused and a few complained, but after they were told that the Mass being in English, or the native language of the parishioners, was to make it more accessable to people, they faithfully went along. Eventually, not eating meat on Friday was dropped but that’s it.

Any bad event that people attempt to connect to Vatican II is not true. A few self-styled reformers and dissidents in the Church caused real damage when Humanae Vitae was released in 1968. That led to widespread problems as Hippies, anarchists and radicals took to the streets to deny the foundational concepts of family life, the proper relationship between the sexes and aspects of moral living. Smoking dope and ‘dropping acid’ (LSD, a powerful hallucinogen) helped to make them less fit to deal with day to day life.

Peace,
Ed

I can’t quite tell from the emoticons but you know he was saying Mormons and he made a typo,right?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.