Watch Michael Davies, William F. Buckley, and Malachi Martin Completely Dismantle Post-Conciliar Amchurch

The video below was recorded in 1980.  Michael Davies, God rest his soul, was a young and very charismatic man who had already written several books defending Archbishop Lefebvre and exposing the protestantizing changes in the Mass.  He had also developed ample evidence that the changes were deliberately made to change the belief and practice of believing Catholics in order to turn the Catholic Church into something other than the entity Christ founded our Holy Mother to be.

That evidence comes to the fore repeatedly as a certain Father Joseph Champlin repeatedly tries, in true post-concliar fashion, to so parse and muddy the Faith that not even licentiates in sacred theology could make heads or tails of what the Church was supposed to believe, what the current pope was promoting, or how the Church fell into the general post-conciliar mess.  Certainly it is true that there were a number of factors at work in, for instance, the total collapse in vocations in historically Catholic/Christian countries (lumping the US in that group for convenience), but to pretend that the loss of 50,000 priests and nearly 100,000 religious in a mere 10 years after the close of Vatican II had nothing, or very little, to do with the massive changes imposed on the Faith in the wake of that council is laughable, as Davies and Buckley repeatedly demonstrate. Fr. Champlin, who was part of the disastrously liberal Dioceses of Rochester and Syracuse in New York, repeatedly had to engage in what I found to be deliberate obfuscation and attempts to so parse matters of theology that virtually no one could rightly claim to know what the Church believed, at least beyond what the most recent pope had declared.  He had to do this because both the Council and the post-conciliar popes at various times and places made declarations in open conflict with the well defined, long-declared solemn Doctrine of the Faith.

This was a regular modernist ruse, reducing the Faith to meaningless or practical indeciperable nonsense that no lay person could hope to comprehend, in stark contrast to the clear belief of the pre-conciliar Church.

Anyway the debate is well worth your time and is a helpful time capsule in understanding how the battle over the mind and soul of the Church was fought in its early days. I would say that traditional critiques of the Council, and more particularly, that false “spirit” that came in its wake, have only sharpened and improved since then.

It is also interesting to point out how even at this point – more than 10 years after the implementation of the Novus Ordo – a large majority of Catholics polled indicated their preference in returning to the Mass of the ages.