Reclaiming Vatican II - An Interview with Fr. Blake Britton 

This book was pretty much life changing for me. I am so thankful that it was available for me to read. As a cradle Catholic, I now see the church anew and feel revived in my faith. Thank you, Father!!

👏🏻🙌🏻💫✨🙏🏻awesome!! A great meeting of minds and hearts!! So needed 👍🏻🙏🏻

Thanks for this video. I need to lay my hands on the documents and read them. I believe podcasts and audio books can also help more people in this light.

I just have to drop a second comment....I have learnt a lot about Vatican II in these 30 minutes

Great book Fr. Blake wrote. Highly recommend it!

Can’t wait for the book…have studied this and all the V2 camps in under and grad school…but Father’s presentation is illuminating & Dr Mixta is excellent.

Fr. Blake really describes what I, as a young adult Catholic in the 1970s, experienced. My parents were very active catechists in the 1950s and 60s. So I knew about Vatican II growing up - not the "Spirit of Vatican II." In the 70s, I saw our diocese split into factions, which had a severe impact on "dumbing down" teaching about our Faith, including teachings on the Real Presence of the Eucharist. All one has to do to get a sense of what I grew up with is to look at Archbishop Sheen's wonderful videos on Vatican II and Pope St. John XXIII. I really hope Fr. Blake, WOFI, etc. will continue to set the story straight. Having worked in education and in television, clearing the air here will go a long way to helping average Catholics like me to reclaim the authentic Faith we first came to know and love in our childhood! Bless you, and thank you again! P.S. I getting this book for my parish pastor and our deacon who is leading our efforts with the National Eucharistic Revival - they are very connected!

Great book! May this book clarify the misunderstandings of the documents of Vatican II.

This is an amazing interview by Fr Blake Britton on the extreme importance of The Second Vatican Council in the life of the church some 50 years after it writing. In some circles, good Catholics will think that Vatican II is some type of anti-Catholic prognostication - and nothing could be further for the truth - as articulated in the interview and I imagine in the book - "Reclaiming Vatican II." One of the most interesting comments in the interview is at about 25 minutes on the most important role of the Priest is to celebrate The Holy Mass - in The sacred Liturgy as expressed in Vatican II. I am going to order the book - "Reclaiming Vatican II" ... Peace & love... Tom Hackim

Brought back the Excitement of Vatican II. Share this Video ...

Wow! I need to watch this!!

First time I've seen you on video, Mr. Mixa! Was a pleasure to see you and Fr. Blake talk about Vatican II

Thank you father for the wonderful teaching on VaticanII...very enlightening...how i wish to have a copy of your book

26:00 Wikipedia says that "aggiornamento" means "bringing up to date", "updating". Google translator says that "renewal" in Italian is "rinnovo".

Did Vatican II change Catholic belief and the church's awareness of itself? A consideration of Vatican II using the concepts of genus and species. Without getting into the historical background, inner workings and doctrinal details of the Vatican II documents and rather relying on what most Catholics know about it the following analogy I think is most revealing: Aristotle says that the natural way of learning and coming to know things is from the generic to the more specific. Just as when we see something moving in the distance we first identify it as a body and then as it moves closer an animal and even closer a man and finally as this particular person Socrates. Now it needs to be understood that there is a difference between our knowledge of a thing and the thing itself. Our knowledge is always more generic than the thing itself existing in reality which is very specific. If someone were to give the definition of the species of a thing instead of giving the definition of the genus of that thing one would give a more precise and fuller account of the thing. In other words the more specific our knowledge becomes of something the closer our knowledge resembles the thing. The truer our knowledge is, in the sense of having more truth - adeguatio res et intellectus. This is the natural way man comes to know. To try to move in the opposite direction is unatural and against human nature. To try to forget what one already KNOWS about something in order to know it more generically is an act of violence against oneself. It would entail force that goes against one's own nature. Now what is more generic and less specific is more universal. Whereas as what is more specific is more exclusive. In the same way when one says the word animal it can apply to many things. Where when one says man it excludes many things and applies to just one type of animal. Now things that exist in reality ARE NOT generic they are specific. The Church founded by Our Lord is a real existing reality. It is something specific with its own essential elements and properties. Now the Councils, pronouncements and doctrines through the ages became more and more specific. The Church's awareness of itself approached more and more the reality of its own being. It is impossible to move in the other direction. In other words it is impossible to move from a specific knowledge to a more general confused knowledge. A generic knowledge of anything is always more confused than a specific one, just as knowing something only in so far as it is an animal is more confused than knowing it specifically: a man. Instead our knowledge specifies as we gain acquantaince and experience of a thing. This should.not be confused with the knowledge particular persons had of the Church. Ofcourse the apostles and early Christians had a very specific knowledge of the Church. However the Church's formulated doctrine was not as specific. Throughout the centuries this doctrine became better formulated and more specific. This was neccesary especially to rule out heresy and error. A more generic knowledge on the other hand is more open to heresy and error. Now, in order for Vatican II to be less divisive, open to non Catholics and ALSO IN ORDER FOR THERE TO BE CONSENSUS AMONGST THE COUNCIL FATHERS, THE COUNCIL HAD TO REVERSE THE NATURAL PROCEDURE AND PROCLAIM SOMETHING MORE GENERIC THAN PREVIOUS COUNCILS. Now one could argue that the council taught no error. Entering into this debate is not easy and not for the most of us. However knowing that the council purposefully decided to be less specific and more generic is known by all of us. Can we say that a generic knowlwdge of a thing is deficient compared to a fuller specific knowlwdge of a thing? Trying to go against oneself and forget what one once knew creates the impression that one must have been wrong once upon a time. Because why else would one try to forget what once knew? Especially if what one once knew one used to think was valuable and true, a treasure to be safeguarded. How many people do we know who have used Vatican II to look back and interpret older Councils? Anything more specific than the Council is frowned upon as superfluous and outdated. But does truth age? Never the less can we blame them for acquiring this habit when this is a natural consequence of artificially regressing and not progressing in knowledge? Of trying to be less specific and more generic.

Very informative Fr. Blake Britton and Dr. Mixa. I love the City Beautiful ie the Magical City ie Orlando where I worked at the Orlando PD three times in IT. Yall ought to get together with the Jesus Image, Benny Hinn, etc. to Evangelize for Christ Jesus. Very informative Fr. Britton and I will buy the Audio version of your book because I have cataract(s) that prevents me from reading, especially long documents. God Bless Yall.

If as Fr. Blake Britton says, true council was overtaken in life of normal Catholics by paracouncil, it means that SVC and Catholics of that time were very poorly dealing with challenges of the time. Which put in doubt how good their ideas of "dealing with the modern world" were.

How is nostra aetate along with the declaration of religious liberty in the Vatican 2 council not blatant gaslighting, and apostasy? The harlot is riding the beast

If Fr. Britton is a faithful priest who wants to live his priesthood "all the way down" to quote Bp. Barron, (and I assume he is) then he will eventually run into the brick wall of the incongruity with the faith of all time and the cynical deceptions deployed in the form this Council. It has NO "inner coherence", and the spirit and "distortions" were THE feature, not a bug. God bless you for your efforts nonetheless.

Sorry, but the doctrine on Eccumensim alone from the V2 documents is heretical.

The scandal of the predatory priests and the bigger scandal of covering it up should have been the anathema of the council. I can’t seem to get past the evil. I think FR Britton is very excellent but the world has been waiting for the arrest of bishops and public repentance of some well known cardinals and bishops who engaged in a type sex trafficking. Then the horrible way Cardinal Pell was treated when innocent. Francis seems to court them and defrock good priests. I can see the misuse of V2 in twisting NO masses with the priests who go too far trying to be cool and the clown masses as not a true V2 result but the crazies let out took over. On the visuals of NO I can hardly take the vulgar way women dress for mass. Takes one’s breath away. My husband wouldn’t go back because though it’s bad in many churches today one expects more of the church with the mantle of the Mother of God. Good luck it’s a terrible battle and the traditionalists will not go back.

Nothing of substance is being said here. Rather, here is an attempt to smile a lot, and talk a lot, and yet say nothing definite and nothing of substance. The only reoccurring theme is blame all the horrors following on the heels of Vatican II on anything and everything but Vatican II. Sorry, father, but smile and put a happy face on this all you want, it does not cover the horrors done by the post conciliar POPES , horrors they justified by specifically pointing to the actual substance of the documents of Vatican II. It is easy to find these quotes from JPII, Benedict, and most especially Francis, with his made up sins, like the sin against ecumenism, the "sin" against rigidity, and the sin of proselytizing non-Catholics---which Francis called "the worst venom." The golden calf is not only alive and well, but has proliferated exponentially during the post conciliar horrors. How many calves do these ambitious promoters of "new Church" and "relevant church, " and the "new ecumenism" (as if there ever was an old ecumenism that was ever acceptable by the ONE Holy and Apostolic Church), have hidden in their barns, refusing to drive them out to be justly gored?