A Critical Analysis of Vatican II & What We Know It Manifested! by Larry Welch

A Critical Analysis of Vatican II & What We Know It Manifested!
by Larry Welch

Pope Paul VI, who promulgated the documents of the Council in 1965, like his predecessor began to "reject" the fruits of that Council. He issued two startling statements to that effect:

1. "The Church finds herself in an hour of anxiety, a disturbed period of self-criticism, or what would even better be called self-demolition [auto-destruction]. It is an interior upheaval, acute and complicated, which nobody expected after the Council. It is almost as if the Church were attacking itself. We looked forward to a flowering, a serene expansion of conceptions, which matured in the great sessions of the Council. But ... one must notice above all the sorrowful aspect. It is as if the Church were destroying herself." [Pope Paul VI, December 7, 1968, Address to the Lombard Seminary at Rome]

2. " We have the impression that through some cracks in the wall the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God: it is doubt, uncertainty, questioning, dissatisfaction, confrontation.... We thought that after the Council a day of sunshine would have dawned for the history of the Church. What dawned, instead, was a day of clouds and storms, of darkness, of searching and uncertainties." [Pope Paul VI, June 29, 1972, Homily during the Mass for Saints Peter & Paul, on the occasion of the ninth anniversary of his coronation in his response to Vatican II]

In regard to Pope Paul VI's latter response to what he knew Vatican II manifested, I definitely believe his statement about "the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God" was a reflection of his deep "regret" for having allowed high-ranking and very influential prelates at the Council and in his Curia, who he had been "informed" were active Freemasons by Cardinals Dino Staffa, Silvio Oddi & Archbishop Edouard Gagnon, at two private papal meetings - to remain in their "positions-of-prominence" at the Vatican - after the close of the Council. Two of the "most prominent prelates" Staffa, Oddi and Gagnon presented irrefutable documentation on to Pope Paul, regarding their Freemason affiliations were - Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, Pope Paul's chosen confidant & mentor during Vatican II, and Cardinal Sebastiano Baggio, the Prefect of the Sacred Congregation for Bishops, and a close friend of Archbishop Bugnini. Some of the documents shown to Pope Paul verified that Baggio & Bugnini were members of the French and Italian Masonic lodges. Pope Paul VI "allowed" a known Mason to decide who would and who would not become a bishop of the Church. In other words, Pope Paul VI permitted Cardinal Baggio to be the "Freemason Ambassador to the Holy See!" This was unquestionably an egregious act against his duty as the successor of Peter, as was leaving Archbishop Bugnini in his position as the Deputy-Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship, and authorizing him to "hire" 6 prominent Protestant Ministers to "spearhead" the creation of the Novus Ordo (New Order) Mass.
They were: 1. A. Raymond George (Methodist) 2. Ronald Jaspar (Anglican) 3. Massey Shepherd (Episcopalian) 4. Friedrich Künneth (Lutheran) 5. Eugene Brand (Lutheran) 6. Max Thurian (Calvinist-community of Taize).

Their contribution in creating the New Mass was immortalized in a picture taken of them during an audience with Pope Paul VI after thanking them for their assistance. The image was subsequently published in L’Osservatore Romano on April 23, 1970, with the title: “Commission Holds Final Meeting, Pope Commends Work of Consilium”.
Inline image

Here was Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's view of Vatican II as written in the L'Osservatore Romano, December 24,1984.
"Certainly, the results of Vatican II seem cruelly opposed to the expectations of everyone, beginning with those of Pope John XXIII and then of Pope Paul VI. Expected was a new Catholic unity, and instead we have been exposed to dissension which, to use the words of Pope Paul VI, seems to have gone from self-criticism to self-destruction. Expected was a new enthusiasm, and many wound up discouraged and bored. Expected was a great step forward, and instead we find ourselves faced with a progressive process of decadence that has developed for the most part precisely under the sign of a calling back to the Council and has therefore contributed to discrediting it for many. The net result, therefore, seems negative. I am repeating here what I said ten years after the conclusion of the work: it is incontrovertible that this period has definitely been unfavorable for the Church."

Cardinal Ratzinger was not the only cardinal who thought "The net result, therefore, seems negative" in regard to Vatican II. Here's what Cardinal Giuseppe Siri, who attended all 4 Sessions of Vatican II had to say about that Council "If the Church were not divine this Council would have buried it."

Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani, Antonio Bacci, Hans Kung, Yves Congar, Fr. Marie-Dominique Chenu, Cardinals Dino Staffa & Silvio Oddi, Cardinal Leo Jozef Suenens and then- Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger were correct in saying that "Vatican II broke with Church tradition!" [Their respective statements
regarding this matter are documented]

Did you know that Our Lady of Good Success in Quito, Ecuador in the 16th century, whose many apparitions & messages were approved by the Church in 1611, warned us about the "break with tradition" and the "rupture" that would ensue in her Church in the mid 20th century, which was the time of Vatican II.

I know from personal experience what the Blessed Mother warned us about was "true" as I was in the seminary from 1968-1975 with the SMA Fathers (Society of African Missions) - when that "rupture" Our Lady of Good Success spoke about was "in full bloom" within most seminaries and convents in the late 60's and 70's. The Protestantized script of the New Mass, coupled with its focus, no longer on the High
Priest, Jesus, in the Tabernacle, but on whatever priest was saying the Mass & the "dialogue" between
him and the congregation all throughout the New Mass is what gave rise to the various "sacrilegious Masses" such as Disco & Clown Masses, that were in vogue after Vatican II, and have been resurfacing
in "large number" in Europe, the Philippines and elsewhere over the past 5 years or so. The "sacrilegious Mass" we didn't have back in the 60's & 70's, to my knowledge, was ill clad women dancing erotically on top of the altar just before the Consecration, as is sadly happening quite frequently now at Novus Ordo churches in Europe. The Vatican just hosted a "sacrilegious Mass" on September 21, 2025
at the Gesu, the Mother-Church of the Jesuits where St. Ignatius' body is buried. Bishop Francesco Savino, vice-president of the Italian Bishop's Conference officiated at a Mass for LGBT Catholics with
over 30 priests concelebrating, including Fr. James Martin, all of whom are in full support of LGBT lifestyles for Catholics. None of the aforementioned "sacrilegious Masses" ever occurred prior to Vatican II. Why is that?

The net result of Vatican II's New Religion of what I call "anthropomorphic/horizontal theology" - that often "mirrored" that of Teilhard de Chardin's, coupled with the Novus Ordo (New Order/New Age) Mass - that Padre Pio refused to say, because he said it was "offensive" to Our Lord & Our Lady - was pronounced "confusion, chaos & division" between priests, sisters, seminarians, novices and the laity.

Indubitably, Vatican II's "break with tradition" truly caused a palpable "rift" in most seminaries & convents. Sadly, that "rift" carried over to our day. That is certainly not a fruit of the Holy Spirit, for the Holy Spirit wants "unity" among the faithful, whereas Satan wants the Body of Christ "divided," which is precisely what he got from Vatican II, as did we!

What a pity that Pope Paul VI did not listen to Padre Pio's grave concern about the Novus Ordo Mass and Vatican II itself or to the "grave concerns" of Pope John XXIII, Cardinals Alfredo Ottaviani, Antonio Bacci, Archbishops Edouard Gagnon, Marcel Lefebvre, et al about Vatican II. These fathers were opposed to the Council's primary focus on "conciliarism" and formally expressed their "serious concerns" about the Council's overall "direction" and what would be the "implications" of its decisions!
They also highlighted the "significant contradictions & ambiguities" in the Council's documents. Having read all 16 documents many times myself, they were absolutely correct in their assessment of Vatican II's documents. Every document, like Pope Paul VI's closing speech, was embedded with substantive and relevant ambiguities, patent contradictions, significant omissions and grave errors in doctrine, all of which clearly implies that these many errors were "deliberate!"

Ut in omnibus glorificetur Deus per Mariam! Larry Welch
lawrencewelch2003@yahoo.com
(954) 895-2168
Fort Lauderdale, FL

Nota bene: Please feel free to contact me if you would like additional information on anything. God bless you!