9 January 2019

Fromthecardinalsdesk

"An ecumenical council has not infrequently created such divisions, and truth is ultimately promoted by what at the time is so very painful."

9 comments:

Ann said...

Is this historically true, or just wishful thinking?

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

Benedict XVI

I, too, lived through Vatican Council II, coming to Saint Peter’s Basilica with great enthusiasm and seeing how new doors were opening. It really seemed to be the new Pentecost, in which the Church would once again be able to convince humanity. After the Church’s withdrawal from the world in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, it seemed that the Church and the world were coming together again, and that there was a rebirth of a Christian world and of a Church of the world and truly open to the world.

http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/158061%26eng%3Dy.html?refresh_ce


This is the 1960s he is speaking about - a decade as unChristian in the world as can possibly be remembered by any living man...

What are our ancient and permanent enemies?

The World, The Flesh, The Devil.

In that order

Sadie Vacantist said...

If V2 were a marriage there would be grounds for its annulment. Recently I saw Fellini's La Dolce Vita for the first time. Just as Ottiviani sought a response to the problems of the post-war paradigm shifts so did Fellini. In the latter case it was to mock and even condemn the changing society. Ottiviani saw his schemas rejected, Fellini's vision was fully implemented.

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

It should be noted that Prof Mattei in his indispensable text, "The Second Vatican Council (an untold story)" noted on page ix that Pope Benedict Xvi erred (ABS' word) in comparing the chaos following Nicea and Vatican Two because - It should be noted that between the crisis situation following the Council of Nicea and the one in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council there is a fundamental difference. The crisis after Nicea was not started as a of result the hermeneutical conflict over the canons of the council in 325, but in an open reaction against the decrees.

O, and Nicea was infallible and binding in the main whereas the revolution within the form of Catholicism that was Vatican Two is not at all infallible and binding

Banshee said...

The very early 1960's did seem to be a good time. There were signs of danger, but also much good and wholesome culture. And of course a lot of European countries were finally done rebuilding from WWII, and the UK finally stopped rationing food. So things seemed hopeful and good.

Amateur Brain Surgeon said...

August 1961, Berlin Wall erected
March 1962 riots in Venezuela
October 2, 1962 US Marshals had to escort a black student to U Mississippi so he'd be safe
100s of nuke bomb tests (Operation Domenic) in Nevada and Pacific
October 11, 1962 Vatican Two opened
October 22, JFK delivers prime time address to nation about Commie Russia’s missiles in Cuba
October 1962 Riots in Venezuela


On a happier note, Caroline Kennedy had a pony named, Macaroni.

E sapelion said...

The Second Vatican Council took place against a turbulent socio-political situation. Tha victorious allies of WWII - USA, UK and France had seriously compromised the moral authority of Government. UK and France by conspiring with Israel in a failed military attack on Egypt, and then the USA in Vietnam. Despite rapidly increasing prosperity, civil unrest was widespread, culminating in the 'events' of 1968. Certainly the young adults could hope that the old corrupt order would be swept away. As Dickens said 'It waa the best of times, it was the worst of times'.

Tancred said...

I remember being bored to and threatened potentially with death by lesbian nuns and lay teachers, who, though they themselves were really bored and uninterested, forced us to parse through Vatican II's teachings.

The Catholicism I was attracted to, hearing about the old Mass from elders from exposure to GK Chesterton at a fairly modern Jesuit retreat house and watching Granada TV's, Brideshead Revisted and the writings of JRR Tolkien, didn't seem to have much to do with the minimalist pantomime of the reformed missal and the Pastoral Council Documents (Which no one really read.)

Gaius said...

It should be noted that Prof Mattei in his indispensable text, "The Second Vatican Council (an untold story)" noted on page ix that Pope Benedict Xvi erred (ABS' word) in comparing the chaos following Nicea and Vatican Two because - It should be noted that between the crisis situation following the Council of Nicea and the one in the aftermath of the Second Vatican Council there is a fundamental difference. The crisis after Nicea was not started as a of result the hermeneutical conflict over the canons of the council in 325, but in an open reaction against the decrees.

Yes, exactly. The Arians hated Nicaea as the chief obstacle to their plans; the Modernists love Vatican II as the chief aid to theirs.