Many cardinals and theologians (I don’t mean Ben and JP) have not believed it for a long time, and not just since Vatican II, but before.
What we will see a few centuries from now is “transubstantiation” has been slowly redefined. Why do we no longer hear the word? Why is kneeling discouraged? Why has the somewhat inaccurate phrase “real presence” replaced “body and blood of Christ”? Why “community” instead of “communion of saints”? Why the insistence on “eucharist” over “blessed sacrament”? I’m sure you’ve seen more than I have, too.
Those are not haphazard modernisms due to merely linguistic or social trends. They are deliberate, gradual steps to a vision long cherished in certain high circles. These changes were not caused by Vatican II and they will not be reversed any time soon. The true Church will exist within the larger one (I won’t say the “false” one...???)
True. Changes were happening before then (for example, the liturgical reform movement started in the 40's), but Vatican II made the changes official. It's been down hill ever since....
The true Church will exist within the larger one (I won’t say the “false” one...???)
This is an interesting comment because Vatican II teaches that Christ's Church "subsists in" the Catholic Church, rather than "is" the Catholic Church which is what the Church has always taught. The Novus Ordo apologists will explain this away but it is a very clear denial of Catholic Truth.