Where I stand, I was taught about Mary by my Catholic mom who left the post V2 church. I was instructed by the Orthodox about the Theotokos. I was not raised in the post V2 church but was formed and received FHC prior to the apostasy.

In the past few days there has been a feud allowed by a V2 'priest/Marian theologian' and a 'evangelical presbyterian' attacking threads listing insights into St. Louis du Montfort's works (on another forum that claims to be Catholic).

I am appalled by the priest attacking the OP's devotion as wrong in view of V2 teachings of a new Marian theology.

Is this true, did the council change the church's teaching on Mary? They say we do not have any obligation to believe in any approved apparition, have any form of devotion or venerate Mary whatsoever and her title roles are being redefined. I am deeply saddened by this. My soul is aching. The post V2 church has now fully apostasized and I can no longer stay attached even in my Eastern Catholic church.

https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1047361

This so-called priest is doing the works of Satan.  Vatican II did not uphold Mary.  Vatican I was ready to define co-redemptorix but Vatican I was never finished and never resumed.  Mainly forgotten, IMO.  Apparitions.  They do not affect the Faith, but for me it can uphold it.  But to make "new" or "redefine" is the sign of big trouble.  If you are under a dioceses, you are under Marxism.  Get out!  

Where I stand, I was taught about Mary by my Catholic mom who left the post V2 church. I was instructed by the Orthodox about the Theotokos. I was not raised in the post V2 church but was formed and received FHC prior to the apostasy.

In the past few days there has been a feud allowed by a V2 'priest/Marian theologian' and a 'evangelical presbyterian' attacking threads listing insights into St. Louis du Montfort's works (on another forum that claims to be Catholic).

I am appalled by the priest attacking the OP's devotion as wrong in view of V2 teachings of a new Marian theology.

Is this true, did the council change the church's teaching on Mary? They say we do not have any obligation to believe in any approved apparition, have any form of devotion or venerate Mary whatsoever and her title roles are being redefined. I am deeply saddened by this. My soul is aching. The post V2 church has now fully apostasized and I can no longer stay attached even in my Eastern Catholic church.

https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1047361

Jovita,

Thank you for posting this.

Vatican II stripped out any mention of the Blessed Mother from the Novus ordo missae liturgy.

This is why you know Vatican II is from the devil.  

There can be no acceptance of any of it!   

Yes, to Hell with Vatican II 

Please copy and paste the questionable comment to this forum.  For those of us who aren't members of this forum, the link you provided won't take us to the page saying that we do not have permission to access the page.

I would recommend that you simply stop visiting non-Catholic religious forums.  Catholic Answers does not represent the Catholic Faith.

Vatican I was ready to define co-redemptorix

No.   The issue of Marian hagiography that was proposed to be debated at the First Vatican Council[‡] was the bodily Assumption of the Blessèd Virgin Mary[†].  That belief and feasts that celebrated it was able to be docuмented (at the time of the council) as extending back more than a millennium.

Altho' the Catholic Encyclopedia article about that untranquil council[‡] mentioned the petitions received during its preparation, which "demanded the definition" of the Assumption, its later paragraphs failed to mention it.  So interested C.E. readers are left wondering whether the issue was even placed on the agenda.

It was Pope Pius XII who decreed its elevation to dogma, in his bull Munificentissimus Deus (November 1, 1950)[††]

[....] Mainly forgotten, IMO.

Hah!  Not by the handful of popes in a row who became "Prisoners of the Vatican" after the capture of Rome (September 20), which occurred only 2 months after the final vote adopting infallibility (July 18, 1870).

-------
Note †: Frederick Holweck 1907: § "The fact of the Assumption".   Catholic Encyclopedia.   <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02006b.htm>.

Note ††: De facto postscript[†], yellow-highlighted as hosted by New Advent.

Note ‡: Joseph Kirch 1912: "[First] Vatican Council".  Catholic Encyclopedia.  <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15303a.htm>.

Is this true, did the council change the church's teaching on Mary? They say we do not have any obligation to believe in any approved apparition, have any form of devotion or venerate Mary whatsoever and her title roles are being redefined. I am deeply saddened by this. My soul is aching.

Never has Holy Mother Church required anyone to believe in private revelations and apparitions. These are for the spiritual edification of the individual honored by God with such grace, not necessarily for the benefit of all. Also words may mean one thing for one, another for another.

The Second Vatican Council did not change the Church's dogmatic teaching on Mary. However, in my studies it is clear that the minimalist faction was superior in discussions that great scholars defined as very low-level and banale. The minimalist faction wanted the Council to reaffirm those titles with the greatest Biblical support.

There are other titles with which Our Blessed Mother is honored in East and West that are still perfectly valid. But the words must be understood properly and in context. For example, Mediatrix Omnia Gratiarum is very controversial today because theologians have expanded their understanding of "mediation" and "grace". Yet nobody would dispute this title that finds support in Popes and Saints.

Let us not forget that Aquinas did not support the Immaculate Conception, although it found strong support in other saints and theologians. Yet the Papal Dogmatic Declaration "ex cathedra" was not an unilateral move, but merely the proclamation of that which was already believed everywhere, in the same way, at all times - part of the Ordinary Magisterium elevated to the Extraordinary Magisterium, to a Dogma De Fide.

Due to a lot of false Marian apparitions and a lot of fanaticism around it that has even placed faithful Catholics against Pope and Bishops, the Church focuses on the most important and essential titles.  But no changes in Church teachings.

See Liguori's "The Glories of Mary", perhaps the best book written on the subject.

Also the Mariology of Maximilian Kolbe, the martyr, expands our understanding of the Uncreated Immaculate Conception and the Created Immaculate Conception. But this is very advanced even for today's theologians who focus instead on how Mary can help us dialogue with non-Catholics and draw them to the Faith.