Oddly Aidan rather good arguments here were not enough for him to end up being a papal accuser of Heresy latter on in life. Hopefully he repents. ( )

Though I give this book 3 1/2 stars, I do recommend any serious Catholic to read and consider the issues. Those, like myself, who are converts or those, like myself, born after the council, will do well to read and understand the issues facing the council and the consequences of the decisions made.

The dialogue occurs as a series of letters between a SSPX-supporting journalist (traditionalist) who views the council as a rupture with both traditional Catholicism and Sacred Tradition, and a priest who recognizes the concerns many have, agrees with some of them, but nonetheless believes the council can be legitimately viewed within the hermeneutic of continuity. The exchanges are respectful and informative.

I am hesitant to give it higher rating for two reasons:

1) Doorly, who takes the traditionalist position, fails to clearly establish her main premise that the council is a rupture. She assumes it throughout, and much of the rest of her arguments rest on this assumption.

2) Fr. Nichols, who takes the official position, is not as direct as I would like to him to be when answering Doorly's questions. I would have like to see some responses include more ancient authorities.

In the end, it was unsatisfying, though indeed edifying. ( )