http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/02/pope-offers-final-view-of-council.html

Important - The Pope explains the Council
"The Virtual Council was stronger: its results are calamitous"
The Council of the Fathers was replaced by the "Council of the Media"
 
In his address to the Roman clergy today, Pope Benedict XVI spoke of his experience of the Council. The official translation has not been made available, but Vatican Radio offers a commented translation, of which the most important part is undoubtedly its conclusion, in which the Pope compares the Council of the Fathers, and what actually reached the regular Catholic faithful, the "Council of the Media".


The same mainstream media that is this very day trying to influence the choice of the next Pontiff by hyping the names of their favorites, those candidates who represent the Church of the Media, the Church of Politics, the hypocritical "Church of the Poor", the "Church of New Ideas", those who have spent the past 50 years, in academia (such as the Alberigo "School of Bologna" and its hermeneutic of politics and rupture), and in news organizations, and as careerist clergymen, distorting, polluting, and destroying everything that was sacred while smiling.

The malignant Alberigo-Melloni "School of Bologna" Church and its disciples, the hermeneutic of rupture Church, the Calamitous Church, the Church of the Media must end and disappear so the real Church may reappear: an entire roadmap for the future conclave.


______________________________



[T]here was the Council of the Fathers – the true Council – but there was also the Council of the media. It was almost a Council in and of itself, and the world perceived the Council through them, through the media. So the Council that immediately, effectively, got thorough to the people was that of the media, not that of the Fathers. And meanwhile, the Council of the Fathers evolved within the faith, it was a Council of the faith that sought the intellect, that sought to understand and try to understand the signs of God at that moment, that tried to meet the challenge of God in this time to find the words for today and tomorrow. So while the whole council – as I said – moved within the faith, as fides quaerens intellectum, the Council of journalists did not, naturally, take place within the world of faith but within the categories of the media of today, that is outside of the faith, with different hermeneutics. It was a hermeneutic of politics.


The media saw the Council as a political struggle, a struggle for power between different currents within the Church. It was obvious that the media would take the side of whatever faction best suited their world. There were those who sought a decentralization of the Church, power for the bishops and then, through the Word for the “people of God”, the power of the people, the laity. There was this triple issue: the power of the Pope, then transferred to the power of the bishops and then the power of all … popular sovereignty. Naturally they saw this as the part to be approved, to promulgate, to help.

This was the case for the liturgy: there was no interest in the liturgy as an act of faith, but as a something to be made understandable, similar to a community activity, something profane. And we know that there was a trend, which was also historically based, that said: “Sacredness is a pagan thing, possibly even from the Old Testament. In the New Testament the only important thing is that Christ died outside: that is, outside the gates, that is, in the secular world”. Sacredness ended up as profanity even in worship: worship is not worship but an act that brings people together, communal participation and thus participation as activity. And these translations, trivializing the idea of ​​the Council, were virulent in the practice of implementing the liturgical reform, born in a vision of the Council outside of its own key vision of faith. And it was so, also in the matter of Scripture: Scripture is a book, historical, to treat historically and nothing else, and so on.

And we know that this Council of the media was accessible to all. So, dominant, more efficient, this Council created many calamities, so many problems, so much misery, in reality: seminaries closed, convents closed, the liturgy was trivialized … and the true Council has struggled to materialize, to be realized: the virtual Council was stronger than the real Council. But the real strength of the Council was present and slowly it has emerged and is becoming the real power which is also true reform, true renewal of the Church.

It seems to me that 50 years after the Council, we see how this Virtual Council is breaking down, getting lost and the true Council is emerging with all its spiritual strength. And it is our task, in this Year of Faith, starting from this Year of Faith, to work so that the true Council with the power of the Holy Spirit is realized and Church is really renewed. We hope that the Lord will help us.

I, retired in prayer, will always be with you, and together we will move ahead with the Lord in certainty. The Lord is victorious! Thank you.

Benedict XVI
Meeting with Roman Clergy
February 14, 2013

Talk about the Church moving slow, 50 years and the council has not been properly applied or understood by all of the bishops chosen by Paul VI, JPII, and B16.

Anyone that knows how the Vatican works, knows that no novel theology ever gets to the laity unless it is promoted by the pope. Nothing and no one gets to a position to influence anything, unless it/he is promoted by the pope. That IS the way it IS.

These popes have either lost the faith or they have lost their marbles (maybe both?)

Could you believe that a true Vicar of Christ would dare to admit that the Holy Ghost failed the Vatican, if the media has any influence over the changes within the church it is the fault of Vatican II for allowing it, where was/is their outcry all this time.  

The truth is Vatican II was influenced by the devil, and although it may appear the devil is gaining, we traditional Catholics know the end of the story, we just don't know when this end is.  

Keep the Faith,

What is exasperating is that the novus ordites will take this as the latest talking point.  The conciliarists always come out with these trendy but superficial announcements about how Vatican II didn't really call for all these liturgical abuses.  It must be intended for a shallow audience because if I hear that Vatican II didn't call for the removal of the commuion rails, I'm going to be happy to hear that but I'm also going to be looking forward to the reinstallation of the communion rails soon.  If that reinstallation doesn't occur, and the concilliarist novelties do occur, I'm going to think that someone is lying to me.

I'm surprised there isn't a bigger shock in novus ordo-land regarding the first papal resignation in over 600 years.  I think Raoul76 is right in that if the pope came out and announced his devotion to Satan then the novus ordites would say "The pope was speaking of his private proclivities and not Ex Cathedra."