Over at Southern Orders, Fr. McDonald makes the following assertion:
"However, the Church prior to Vatican II had a "circle the wagons" mentality to protect it from the Protestant Reformation. But the type of godless secularism that is much more dangereous for Catholics needs to be acknowledged and protection from it is necessary. There should be a greater fear of godless secularism compared to Reformed Protestantism."
I must disagree with the good Father. The godless secularism is easy enough to deal with...the Church conquered that once before you know. However, reformed Protestantism is a completely new concept which has wrought upon God's creation so much strife and disdain for the Church which Christ gave to the whole of humanity.
When we look at modern godless secularism, it comes directly from reformed Protestantism. For ultimately what is Protestantism if it is not humanism veiled with the trappings of religion. The so-called enlightenment found it's roots in Protestant Europe and gained it's foothold not by causing Catholics to abandon Catholicism, but rather by coercing Protestants to stop believing in that which is true. In other words to take off the veil of relgious trappings and expose humanism in it's fullest sense.
As I see it, Vatican Council II, addressed nothing. All it did was to allow the liberals a forum in which they could complete their ideology. John XXIII gave them the stage and Paul VI let them dance on it. Thankfully, the dance is winding down.
We, as Catholics, should be circling the wagons. We should be protecting the Faith, because that is what we are called to do. We are called to catechize the Catholic and the Protestant. We are called to be ecumenical with the Orthodox and we are called to evangelize the non-Christian (pagan). This is how we have circled the wagons in all of history. It is how we should do it today.
Vatican Council II, while being a Council did nothing to further Catholicism. It simply was. It did nothing to help the Catholic achieve the 3 ends of which I just spoke. In the end, Vatican Council II was a non-starter, because there was nothing started...except the liberal mindset being forced upon the average Catholic during the reforms after the Council. And that was harmful.
Father also says,
"The Church has had a two thousand year history and there is always great fomment and great strife after Ecumenical Councils and when there is religious, political and social upheaval."
There was no foment and strife after most Councils. The path was straight and the vision was clear. Dogma was defined and Doctrine was made to be understood. While there was a curve to application, because of the correspondence of the time, that does not equate to foment. There was a clear understanding of what must take place. And a new Catholic Renaissance became the norm, until the need for another Council in 1870.
Father, don't misunderstand, I think that Catholics should be Catholics. I just think that Protestants should be too. That is our goal and Vatican Council II just didn't account for that. And that is the great downfall of the latest Council.