Apropos of nothing at all except a lecture I'm preparing, I'm in the mood to defend Vatican II against the logical fallacy that because one thing happens after another, the first thing must be the cause. Here are two old but perfectly applicable articles in that regard. I grow weary of hearing that vocations formed prior to and while the Council was in session left the Church because of Vatican II. Bah.
First, Jay Dunlap contra the idea that Councils are universally successful. On the contrary, no one can point to a single Council that quickly put down the troubles it addressed. They seem to routinely take 30 years to be understood. As Dunlap puts it most provocatively, let's not forget that the Traditionalist's favorite Council, Trent, was meant to put down the Reformation. So since Protestantism has flourished, was Trent a failed council?
Then, just for fun, here's Fr. Peter Stravinskas with 15 things that liberals like and conservatives hate about Vatican II that aren't there.
Hey, here's an idea --a great Lenten program-- for all you Catholics who love to argue about Vatican II. How about reading it?
