Where are we now?
I read that question on Fr. Martin's Facebook page. Massimo Faggioli asked the question in his essay Obsessed with Continuity.
It's an interesting read. I've certainly witnessed what Faggioli observes - the delegitimization of the Council leading to the delegitimization of the documents. I think it goes hand in hand with the rejection of Pope Francis and the gradual turning against Pope Benedict XVI. One comes across that notion on the websites and blogs of the more outspoken traditionalist critics online - be they fringe types or not - their views are shared to some degree by other traditionalists.
When private revelation agrees with the rejection of Vatican II.
Someone who friended me on Facebook posted something about followers of Maria Divine Mercy 'getting possessed'. I asked where she heard this, she said Fr. Paul Kramer published it. Fr. Kramer is a former colleague of Fr. Gruner and the nutty Fatima cult. Need I say more? My point in mentioning this is the appetite people have for private revelation increases in a time of general confusion and moral ambiguity.
One must be careful of even 'approved' locutions.
Locutions are not necessarily ever approved, but frequently a spiritual director and a person's bishop may give permission to publish the meditations of a person who claims to receive locutions, while the publication would be allowed for the edification of the faithful and to increase devotion. That doesn't necessarily mean the locution are 'approved' - there is simply nothing contrary to the faith in them. As St. Hannibal Madia di Francia explained:
My dear father, to consider any expression of the private revelations as dogma or propositions near of faith is always imprudent! The mistakes could amount to thousands. Poulain substantiates this fact with examples of saints we venerate on the altars. It is not surprising because the visions or the news undergoes some modifications while passing through human channels… Aptitudes and dispositions may not be the same: a psychological, moral spiritual, physical event can modify them, hindering the spiritual enlightenment from shining perfectly in the soul. Thus the person is unaware of circumstances, details or propositions, and is mistaken involuntarily. In fact, everything is received through and according to the subject.
This is proved by experience, by the mystical theologians, such as St. John of the Cross, St. Teresa, Castrotevere, Poulain, etc. By prudence and reason we cannot accept all the words of revelations as they were propositions near to the faith; still less when they are contrary to the authoritative opinion of renowned writers and to the simple, beneficial devotion of the saints. - Source
"We cannot consider the revelations and the locutions as words of Scripture."
Today it is especially important to keep this in mind, and to be especially careful of any locution which casts doubts upon the teaching Magisterium of the Church. 'Heavenly' complaints of actual liturgical abuses may be one thing, but to controvert the will of all the Popes since the Council regarding the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite could indicate a subjective prejudice for the Usus Antiquior, as well as a more human point of view in keeping with the personal preference of the mystic. In other words, if Our Lord or Our Lady are making known a heavenly predilection for the Extraordinary Form over the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, I'd say something may be off with the locutions and one needs to discern very carefully. The meditations may be spiritually rich and nourishing, but like the Imitation of Christ, by Thomas a Kempis, though inspired, they may be the author's own words and not actual locutions.
Keep in mind, all the Popes since Vatican II have celebrated the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite and have supported Vatican II while endeavoring to interpret and implement its Constitutions and decrees. Beware of those Catholics who suggest or claim the Ordinary Form is a bad Mass, and that Vatican II was a bad Council. If you fear apostasy, consider what such claims really mean. If you put private revelation above Catholic teaching, you may end up like Fr. Paul Kramer and other sedevacantists who reject Pope Francis and Vatican II.
Something else to keep in mind. 2017 and the many prophecies and fears expressed by devout Fatima enthusiasts ought to demonstrate the unreliability of private interpretations of God's revelations and warnings, coming true at a specific time and in a literal manner.
"[...] Souls are misled by imparting to God's locutions and revelations a literal interpretation, and interpretation according to the outer rind. As has been explained, God's chief objective in conferring these revelations is to express and impart the elusive, spiritual meaning contained in the words. This spiritual meaning is richer and more plentiful than the literal meaning and transcends those limits."
[...] "Anyone bound to the letter, locution, form, or apprehensible figure cannot avoid serious error and will later become confused for having been led by the literal sense and not having allowed for the spiritual meaning which is divested of the literal sense. ('The letter kills, the spirit gives life' - 2 Cor. 3:6)" - Read St. John of the Cross, The Ascent, Bk II, Chapter 18 and 19
Song for this post here.