Obsequium Religiosum

At this Press Conference for the Vatican’s document on Human Dignity, coming prepared with a copy of the Code of Canon law, Tucho Fernández bizarrely starts quoting Can. 752 that religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff… pic.twitter.com/Nv52hackYV

— Catholic Sat (@CatholicSat) April 8, 2024

On Joseph Ratzinger and Vatican II (Again)

Of his many theological achievements, Benedict’s pre-eminent contribution was his role in the interpretation and reception of the Second Vatican Council.https://t.co/VkqPpjHhjl

— First Things (@firstthingsmag) January 4, 2023

The Narrative for the Pauline Reform

These constant attempts by the DDW Prefect to rewrite history are so very tiresome.
The fact is that Vatican II's Constitution on the Liturgy repeatedly proposes an «instauratio» of the liturgy (e.g. nos. 1, 14, 21, 23-24, 33, 43, 87-90): a "renewed" liturgy, not a "new liturgy"! https://t.co/ufAOvAwLZu pic.twitter.com/TLJATDeYpD

— Matthew Hazell (@M_P_Hazell) June 16, 2022

Still Trying to Salvage Vatican II

You should read this to get a sense of what the Second Vatican Council was really all about and what it intended for the Church. @WordOnFire @BishopBarron pic.twitter.com/gdLBKv03tM

— Fr. Andrew Budzinski (@fatherbudzinski) January 18, 2022

Vatican II's Old Guard

Pope Francis to Council of Bishops’ Conferences of Europe: “To make the Church beautiful and welcoming we need together to look to the future, not to restore the past, which unfortunately is a fad. Restoring the past will kill us, it will kill everyone” pic.twitter.com/9xenYUo1R1

— Catholic Sat (@CatholicSat) September 23, 2021

God-Breathed Psalms?

One intervention at Vatican II argued that the psalms *Iudica me* at the foot and *Lavabo* during the offertory had “lost their meaning” and so should be suppressed. Might I suggest that, if the God-breathed psalms have “lost their meaning,” we might want to try to find it?

— Urban Hannon (@hannonregular) September 22, 2021

Inspired?

Trapped in Latin Ecclesiology

Lessons from a Failed Council and a Failed Reform https://t.co/lhUZFzUhad pic.twitter.com/MiK8SMpdNA

— NLM (@NLMblog) September 15, 2021

Another Exercise in Mental Gymnastics

by a Latin on Vatican II because of his commitments to Latin ecclesiology:

Aside from the need to distinguish Vatican II and the liturgical reforms following (many of which do not reflect the council’s teachings), it is curious how Francis has removed Vatican II as an object of further study and inquiry.https://t.co/N0V4cwRYAv

— Crisis Magazine (@CrisisMag) August 24, 2021

The Underlying Issue is Latin Ecclesiology

Legislation, writes liturgical scholar and historian Dom Alcuin Reid, cannot change historical facts. Nor can an act of legal positivism determine what is or is not part of the 'lex orandi' of the Church.https://t.co/8aAkUfALFH

— Catholic World Report (@cworldreport) August 7, 2021

(1/5) I mean, sure, it'd be nice if the NO was celebrated in a way continuous with the tradition.
But I'd hoped that, by now, we might have started to move past the (still important) issue of the ars celebrandi, & into a more substantial analysis of the post-conciliar reforms... https://t.co/kNIfbTZMKL

— Matthew Hazell (@M_P_Hazell) August 6, 2021

Iota Unum, our popular series of online talks are back.

To launch the new series @LMSChairman gives an in-depth analysis on the recent Motu Proprio, Traditionis Custodes.https://t.co/XPyFNNh5ya

All the talks in the series are available on Podbean, Spotify and our website. pic.twitter.com/UWtEFiAz38

— Latin Mass Society (@latinmassuk) August 6, 2021

Latin Progs Still Trying to Claim Vatican II for Their Agenda

There is no place for Tridentine Rite in a post-Conciliar Church. Lex orandi, lex credendi...https://t.co/GcwGmW7VOA

— Robert Mickens (@robinrome) July 24, 2021

So, Bobby is asserting that Vatican II founded an entirely new religion - with a new liturgical expression - and it was inserted forcibly into all the institutions of the Church, replacing the Old Religion, along with the old liturgy...https://t.co/34B9vwe9mT

— Hilary White (@hilarityjane) July 24, 2021

Related:

In case it’s of interest in light of current events, here’s an essay I published in 2015 about the hermeneutics of liturgical reform and their relation to interpretations of Vatican II. https://t.co/VOYipce6gm

— Innocent Smith, op (@InnocentOP) July 24, 2021

Massive Cope

Post conciliar eras tend to be messy as the Church grapples with its implications/ applications. Contentious issues are often not defined or need further explication. But we trust in the Holy Spirit & the promise of Jesus. Those suspicious of VII would do well to remember this. https://t.co/1PKPvzoYJx

— Bishop Scott McCaig (@bishopscmc) July 21, 2021

Again, I don't think Vatican II is that problematic, but Latins trying to hide from reality through their claim that their council was ecumenical need to question that assumption.

A Return to Mysticism?

Reappropriating the Mystery and Meaning of Salvation in Christ
by Robert Imbelli of @BostonCollege via @leodelo2
https://t.co/QTDgU2L1E6 #wednesdaythought #CatholicTwitter #Wednesdayvibe #Catholic #WednesdayMotivation #religion #theology

— Church Life Journal (@ChurchLifeND) June 16, 2021

Various spiritual writers and theologians have been praised as being precursors of Vatican II in calling for the return of the Christian faithful to the pursuit of holiness. But was a synod the appropriate means for trying to implement such a reform? A centralized system cannot help but look for a centralized solution; was a better way possible? Are there too many human obstacles to the action of the Holy Spirit, especially in the form of ecclesial power structures?

A Latin Attempt to Save Vatican II

Crisis: Moving Beyond Vatican II by Eric Sammons

Latin Apologists Still Trying...

CWR: How should we think about Vatican II? Some have misunderstood this and accused the Council of a wholesale infidelity that uprooted the theocentrism of Christian faith. It is difficult to imagine a more ungrounded allegation.

Not an Anniversary Celebrated by Latin Traditionalists

Today is the anniversary of the promulgation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, and I was just sent this photograph of Monsignor Frederick McManus, J.C.D., my predecessor teaching Liturgical Law at @CUACanonLaw, outside Saint Peter’s after the vote. pic.twitter.com/RslmIy8wnX

— Fr James Bradley (@FrJamesBradley) December 4, 2020

And maybe not any orthodox Christian either -- liturgical reform should have been secondary to ecclesial reform, and changing the institutional structures and ethos of the patriarchate of Rome.

Sacrosanctum Concilium

Gregory DiPippo

The Next in Roberto Pertici's Series on Vatican II

Sandro Magister: The Expectations of the Council Contradicted by History. The Reasons for the Eclipse of the Christian Faith

The Roman Position

The liberal left and right find it difficult to submit to the social teaching of the Church

The former refuses to obey Her teaching in matters of sexuality and the right to life.

The latter refuses to obey in matters of economic policy.

Nevertheless, she is Mother and Teacher. pic.twitter.com/fT291akkZS

— Leonine Institute (@leoinstituteCST) September 17, 2020

Network Tribalism at Work?

Seems like at this point the only ones paying attention would be Latin traditionalists.

Archbishop Viganò: Without Vatican II, Destruction Wrought by Revolutions of the 1960s Would Not Have Happened https://t.co/wnU0nTBm0O pic.twitter.com/7loyawXLu8

— Edward Pentin (@EdwardPentin) September 14, 2020

“In days gone by, forbidden books were censored in order to protect the simple ones, whose souls would be poisoned by them; today, what is good is censored, because evil does not tolerate it.” — +Viganò, Sept. 12 interview with @MarcoTosatti https://t.co/wnU0nTBm0O pic.twitter.com/2P8CHwqLH4

— Edward Pentin (@EdwardPentin) September 14, 2020

Vatican II as a Ressourcement Project

CWR: A Deeper Context: Overlooked book provides insight into Vatican II debates by Conor Dugan Why I think there is no better book to help put the Council in context than Robert Royal’s tour-de-force A Deeper Vision: The Catholic Intellectual Tradition in the Twentieth Century.

Dugan writes:

But, now, with Vatican II in the dock, Royal’s book takes on increased importance. He helps put the Council in context and to see the trends that were already at work in the Church prior to the Council and that continued after it closed. In particular, his highlighting of the emphasis on nuptial mysticism—a “theme” that “had long existed in the tradition”—prior to the Council is a key insight. His description of the advances—and hiccups—in biblical studies is another. Still another insight is that pre-Conciliar Catholicism was much more disparate than many want to admit. And many of the Conciliar themes were simply the fleshing out of work that predated the Council. Certainly, after reading Royal’s careful study of 20th century Catholicism, one could not claim that “what the Council produced was not remotely in continuity with the past” or that after the Council there was not “the faintest desire to carry on the Catholic religion as existed before,” as one recent commentator on the Vatican II debates recently put it.

Indeed, to accept the thesis that the Council should be rejected requires a rejection not just of the Council itself, but the work of figures such as Guardini, Chenu, Congar, de Lubac, Ratzinger, and Balthasar. Many traditionalists seem to be fine with this move but they should be clear that they are not asking simply for the Council to be declared anathema but much (or most?) of the 20th century Catholic intellectual tradition to be declared anathema as well. This raises the question of to which date the clock should be reset. 1950? 1940? 1910? Earlier?

I don't have a problem with Vatican II being understood primarily as a Ressourcement project of renewal or reform, a project nonetheless affected by other intellectual and "spiritual" trends within the Patriarchate of Rome. But it was a project necessary not for the Church Universal, only the Patriarchate of Rome.