“They did not hesitate to challenge the academic presenters or to raise the stakes by freely expressing their views during the debates.
In fact, they even protested when the presentations of the experts exceeded the time limit and ate into their precious discussion time.
They also criticized the Vatican survey addressed to young people which was considered to be too long or poorly translated.
‘The pope asked us to ‘make chaos,’ that’s precisely what we’re doing,’ said Lucas Barboza with a smile.”
VIEW short VIDEO snippets of their discussions on the link below
Is it true that the Eastern Catholic Churches are allowed to have different theological expressions? If so what does it involve?
This certainly is true. The Eastern Catholic Churches are not only “allowed” but are actively encouraged to cultivate their own distinctive theological expressions.
Eastern Catholics, while fully Catholic and in communion with the Pope, differ in more ways than just liturgy. We also possess a unique spiritual tradition, as well as a unique theological approach. While we agree with the Latin Church on fundamental matters of doctrine, we approach doctrine in a very different way – from the Eastern perspective. While the Western Church has traditionally formulated doctrine in terms of scholastic Latin theology, we rely almost exclusively on the theology of the Eastern Church Fathers. This difference, rather than rupturing the unity of the Church, further expresses the true UNIVERSALITY of Christ’s Church.
This is authoritatively taught by the Second Vatican Council:
“All in the Church must preserve unity in essentials. But let all, according to the gifts they have received enjoy a proper freedom, in their various forms of spiritual life and discipline, in-their different liturgical rites, and even in their theological elaborations of revealed truth,” (UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO, no. 4).
Excerpt above from Doctrine | From East to West
Certainly Opus Dei, as the first Roman prelature approved by the Vatican, has different theological perspectives on Vatican II than traditional Roman Rite/Church theology.
Given the above, it should be perfectly reasonable that a Vatican II Rite/Church with its different theological perspectives can co-exist with the 22 other non-Roman Rites/Churches in union with Rome.
Post-Vatican II efforts to significantly rethink Catholic theology have been suppressed over the past few decades, in the same way that the implementation of a Post-Vatican II Rite has been suppressed. WHY?
Modern communication breakthroughs have chipped away at the religious rationale and justification of the Roman Rite western model of authority and power as the gift and will of God. This “chipping away” appears to some as an attack on “God-in-Charge” theology, as if there can only be one and only one theological view of authority .
Post-Vatican II progressive theology emphasizes power-sharing images of God as core scriptural and traditional concepts…concepts heretofore minimized and neglected in favor of the Roman Rite western standard.
Constructionist/activist theologian, Joerg Rieger* explains that the “God in Charge” theological perspective is not the only one, nor even the most beneficial one for society in our time. Rieger explores the popularity and success of right wing theological activism in our time and poses this question:
“Is it possible that Trump’s way of projecting power resonates with the way in which many people of faith perceive God’s power to be at work?”
If “Trump’s way of projecting power resonates with the way in which many people of faith perceive God’s power to be at work,” then the post-Vatican II Rite urgently needs to engage in a Theological Activism that highlights shared power as bona fide scriptural and tradition-based concepts and practices…shared power in no way inferior to the efficient Roman model.
The present underlying theological substructure of politics/economics continues to support the political rise and popularity of dictator-type personalities and trickle-down economics. With no input from progressive activist theologians, is there any hope for substantive change of heart and mind in regard to the stranger? …or any hope, that matter, for change in the ultimately apocalyptic direction in which we are moving at full speed ahead?
Activist progressive theologians, Joerg Rieger* and Kwok Pui Lan*, raise two important questions for us to ponder:
- Is it time for people of faith to think more deeply about the God they are worshiping and the kinds of power they want to support?
- SHOULD we be leaving prayer-based theological activism solely in the hands of politically conservative religious leaders? (And, whether we acknowledge it or not, are we already doing so at our own peril and the peril of our faith, country, and world?)
A post-Vatican II rite in union with Rome has no fear to engage in prayer-based Theological Activism in ecumenical dialogue…exploring how we might see God in new ways…in wisdom ways that are invitational, NOT confrontational or polarizing.
*Activist theologian and author of several books on this subject, Joerg Rieger, co-author of OCCUPY RELIGION: Theology of the Multitude with Kwok Pui Lan are both part of the Occupy Theology Movement.
JOERG RIEGER’s Website: http://joergrieger.com/
URL Link for Huffington Post piece: “Divine Power, Donald Trump, and How the 2016 Presidential Elections Challenge Common Religious Assumption” by Joerg Rieger
The blog excerpt below speaks of the willingness to hold opposite viewpoints in creative tension as the “Spirit of Vatican II”.
We ask these questions in response to that viewpoint:
Think about it…and share your thoughts below. Thanks from all at https://RiteBeyondRome.com
Questions above are in response to the blog post excerpt below:
The Wild Reed: Truth About “Spirit of Vatican II” Finally Revealed!
“The Vatican II documents in many places are compromise documents that smooth over some of the major conflicts without resolving them. Thus the decree on the Church talks about collegiality on the one hand but absolute papal authority on the other. The decree on the Liturgy says: “Lingua Latina est lingua Ecclesiae” (variously translated as “Latin is the language of the Church.” “Latin is a church language.” “A Latin language [Italian?] is a language of the Church.” etc.) but at the same time opens the way for the widespread use of the vernacular…
…One can’t absolutize church authority to the point that there is no room for the active participation of the laity in the liturgy. Similarly, one cannot stress the hierarchical nature of the Church to the point where the Church becomes identified with the Bishops and Pope with no place for the laity or to the point where it negates the notion of the Church as the people of God.
These ideas have to be held in creative tension as the Church adapts to the needs of the time. As such they form the basis for sisterly and brotherly dialog as to where the contemporary Church should fall within the extremes. For example, we need to address the question: How should hierarchical oversight be exercised so as to encourage the active participation of the faithful….
…Perhaps the willingness to hold this “creative tension” when reading and interpreting the documents of Vatican II is a big part of what is meant by “the Spirit of Vatican II.”
Abajo está la traducción de “Dare we Catholics Believe Differently?” on this website.
¿O quizá, aún no hemos entendido la naturaleza o grado de cambio al que él Espíritu Santo nos pidió y contInua ´pidiéndonos a partir del Concilio Vaticano II?
Algunos católicos ven las últimas décadas desde una perspectiva distinta… una erosión de la fé en nuestras doctrinas.
Pero otros ven el Vaticano II como un don del Espiritu Santo, un llamado de Dios que nos pide renovar nuestros puntos de vista de la doctrina… y si éste fuera el caso, hay necesidad de deconstruir en profundidad “cómo eran nuestras creencias antes y como quizá lo sigan siendo hasta el día de hoy”
DECONSTRUCCIÓN DE LA FÉ CATÓLICA
HASTA LLEGAR A LOS FUNDAMENTOS DE NUESTRA FÉ,
CREENCIAS ATESORADAS DE LA DOCTRINA
CON EL FIN DE LLEGAR HASTA LA RAIZ Y
A SU APLICABIULIDAD EN NUESTRO TIEMPO
No se trata de cambiar o quebrantar la teología del Rito Romano,
la cual mantiene a la institución focalizada, en la certeza y seguridad, del día a día en el mundo, sino manteniendo una teología amigable en su unión con Roma…
…desde la perspectiva de un mundo en constante proceso de adaptación, ante los sucesivos cambios;
…que cada teología cuestione a la otra en nuestra Fé diversa en Jesús, el Cristo y nuestra proclamación al mundo, de la Buena Nueva.
…un Dios que se mantiene “ un paso atrás”, y que nos que revela lo mucho que tendemos a apoyarnos en la fuerza y en el poder
… una voluntad divina que modela y solicita el perdón, la hospitalidad y el amor al otro: el factor determinante de quién descubre o “entra” en el Reino de Dios.
Muchas gracias a Luisa Maria Rivera por su traducción de este artículo!
Ver, compartir, descargar: Explorando el Camino Del Concilio al Nuevo Rito:
Documento de posición: Para resolver la polarización iglesia
Por favor comparta sus pensamientos!
Sisters Lea and Consilia
Rite Beyond Rome responds to MORE GOOD THINKING on http://www.Catholica.com.au
Jesus is saviour: what does it mean?
“It was like a rising from the dead…” doesn’t explain the transformation of the disciples after Pentecost, or the comment in Acts that “it was impossible for death to hold him”. Again, “if Christ did not rise” quoting St Paul in I Corinthians 15, our faith is in vain and our sins are not forgiven.” M (courtesy of Francis)
Rite Beyond Rome responds:
How can we understand the Christ rising, apart from the traditional sense?
Must that rising be constrained in traditional belief in a physical flesh and blood way?
Or is there a rising that goes beyond such a physical phenomenon?
A rising of spirit that cannot be destroyed no matter the forces of evil against it…
a transformation like Pentecost perhaps?
* * * * *
We know in our bones that love saves…
when it is larger than its often idolatrous or cultic variations…
when love is what we call divine.
Is it Jesus who saves by his physical death and rising?
Does salvation depend on the acceptance/obedience/practice of
Jesus’ often crucifying practice and message to
“Love one another as I have loved you”…?
Is it the embrace and practice of this Jesus love that “does” the actual saving?
Is it this very loving that forgives sins…because such love cannot hold judgments and hurts in the same breath as the divine love to which Jesus calls us?
Is it this humanly divine practice of love that makes it impossible
for physical death to hold us?
Our thanks for the questions M called forth through Francis for the coming Holy Week…
Sisters Lea and Consilia
Ours is just one of many responses to Tony Lawless’ essay, “A Palm Sunday reflection on the meaning of Obedience” http://www.catholica.com.au/forum/index.php?mode=thread&id=197593#p197641
Poor Pope Francis, his hands are tied by literal interpretations of tradition regarding women’s ordination, GLBT, Communion for the divorced and other issues.
As Patriarch of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church; he is caught between a rock and a hard place…between:
How ironic is it that democracy-oriented “Catholics for reform” maintain that Pope Francis should speak as a monarch and command the Roman Rite to change. How strange it is that reform-minded Catholics also express great satisfaction when Pope Francis demotes or dismisses Romanist ultra-conservatives from office, no?
Doesn’t this type of reform-minded Catholicism wind up advancing the same “get rid of the opposition” uniformity position…a position that reformist Catholics have long criticized Romanist Catholics for using against Vatican II cardinals, bishops and pastors?
Despite the Roman Catholic position for a tradition against change,
reform-minded Catholics console themselves with the belief that Roman Catholicism will change eventually, even if they do not live to see that change.
A thousand years ago, Roman Rite Catholicism could not force the Eastern Catholic Churches to accept and practice Western interpretations of catholic theology, governance, and liturgy. And so they worked out a settlement.
The settlement worked out to keep unity between East and West. You might call the settlement a “toleration policy”…allowing Eastern Rite/Church differences such as married priests and collegial governance… as long as they promised to recognize the Patriarch of Rome as head of the Catholic Church.
This tradition of “friendly toleration” has been applied most recently with the Anglican Catholic Rite/Church which promises union with the Pope as Patriarch of Rome. SO, why can’t dissent on this matter of women’s ordination and other matters be resolved by our Church’s ancient “toleration” policy…Roman Rite toleration of a Vatican II Rite/Church with its different interpretations and practices of theology, governance and liturgy? …a Vatican II Rite in union with Rome? Why not?
Like the adversaries of the climate change movement, many in the Church pacify themselves with the idea that change happens in centuries. Trouble is, we don’t live any longer in an age where change happens strictly at a century-by-century pace.
Meanwhile, the Spirit of Vatican II as a “game-changer* “is locked away securely in a Roman vault where it can be safely guarded, controlled and memorialized.
*game-changer…that which changes
the way things are thought about,
the way things are done,
the way things relate to each other in new contexts.
Theologians and others, who work to revive Vatican II within the Roman Church these days, do their reform work very carefully so as not to disturb the organization that can make or break their careers.
Many espouse the belief that the Church is working at the Holy Spirit’s pace. And who determines the Holy Spirit’s pace?
COULD WE BE FAILING TO REALIZE??…THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT MIGHT BE DEPENDING ON OUR COURAGE to bring Vatican II out from under Rome’s claim of sole control over the interpretation and implementation of the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council in our world and Church?
Rome is perfectly free to normalize or spiritualize Vatican II and its implementation within Roman Rite Catholicism, but NOT within the realm of universal Catholicism.
The Pope is the Bishop of Rome, brother-rite/church to 22 other Catholic rites/churches which were also full voting members of the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council of the Catholic Church. These 23 other Catholic rites/churches are in full union with the Roman Rite/Church.
As some are perfectly free to go on ignoring the threat of CLIMATE CHANGE…TO THE PERIL OF OUR CHILDREN AND AND OUR CHILDREN’S CHILDREN’S CHILDREN…
…so, too, Catholics are likewise perfectly free to sit back and allow Vatican II to fade into the background of our unchanging Church…citing age, helplessness, or despair as reasons for not heeding the threat of the very extinction of Catholicism and perhaps even Christianity itself.
There are alternatives to schism when we envision the future of the Church…alternatives NOT based on changing the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church. There is also an alternative NOT based on forming another catholic church separated from Rome.
In fact, the alternative already exists among us by virtue of all the local Vatican II communities, both throughout the world and online. Together we comprise a Vatican II Church, whether Roman Rite Catholicism recognizes us or not. This Catholic Branch/Rite exists whether or not we ourselves recognize it. History will declare what has already taken place through the work of the Holy Spirit among us!
Remember, the Jerusalem followers of Jesus never could have known they were founding a Catholic Church, much less the 23 other present-day official Catholic Rites in union with Rome. So, too, we do not know what Church history will claim about us…nor should we base our work today on what others will write or think about us in the future.
We may dismiss the idea of a Vatican II Branch/Rite of Catholicism because we dread the work of creating a new organizational structure. But think…a Vatican II branch of Catholicism in union with Rome might be bi-rite (belonging to both Roman and Vatican II Rites) much as Early Christians were both Jewish and Christian.
We’d love to hear your ideas on all this!
To comment, click on title of this post and scroll down to bottom of page.
For Download of PDF Discussion Points:
EXPLORING THE WAY TO A VATICAN II RITE (PDF SLIDES)
Warm regards to all,
Sisters Lea and Consilia
“It is clear that a new ecclesial style is being called for, and this new style requires an understanding of the variety of situations that must be dealt with,” said Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, president of the Pontifical Council for the Family.
IS IT all about “a new ecclesial style”?
Be kind to Catholics and they will come flooding back into the Church?
Sounds like news commentators on the U.S. election…
where “poise and style” are more important than truth and facts.
For Catholics, DOCTRINE is truth and facts (or at least it is supposed to be)
…so we better get doctrine right with Vatican II…
right with the Vatican II orientation to God, self and other…
if Vatican II is to make any substantial contribution to the modern world.
Roman Rite Catholicism brings immutability and permanence to the Church
in the belief that these are gifts of God .
“New style ministry” will serve Roman Rite Catholicism very well,
smoothing over hurts inflicted on individuals in the past,
comforting those who long for stability in a world of change.
Vatican II Catholicism, however, honors aggiornamento (“the act of bringing something up to date to meet current needs”) as gift of the Holy Spirit.
This aggiornamento for Vatican II Catholics means more than
updating ministry style or incorporating the internet as a means of evangelization.
“New style ministry” is not enough aggiornamento for Vatican II Catholics!
Scientific facts about the universe, human sexuality, climate change, etc…
for many Catholics, perceptions on these have all changed significantly
since the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council of 1962-1965.
In order to actualize a more profound aggiornamento, the Catholic Church needs
a Vatican II Catholic Rite/Church in union with Rome.
Vatican II Rite aggiornamento means transvaluing the very core
of Catholic belief and practice
in much the same way that
Judaism had to transvalue itself after the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E.
Permanent Temple Destruction for Judaism required far more than
simple revision of Temple/high priest-oriented theology and practice.
Destruction of the Jewish Temple required a total re-build of its core theology and practicearound home, synagogue, and Sabbath
as the new “presence of God” experience.
It required what Jacob Neuser, author of numerous works on the history of Judaism,
called TRANSVALUTION:“Everything had to be re-classified according to new information”…from values and interpretation of history to practice to
“unprecedented rereading of established symbols in fresh and striking ways…”
When Matthew Fox responds to Bishop Spong’s
“12 Principles and the Future of Religion,”
he is writing about doctrinal transvaluation in terms of a Vatican II+ orientation.
Roman Rite Catholicism has no desire or need for doctrinal transvaluation.
Vatican II Rite Catholicism needs it desperately!
Agree? or Disagree?
Sisters Lea and Consilia
“One aspect typical of Catholicism today is the division among bishops. The first division follows geo-cultural fault lines…
…The bishops of the region of Buenos Aires in Argentina (endorsing Amoris Laetitia) talking about the possibility for divorced and remarried Catholics who cannot live “in chastity”to receive communion after a process of discernment with their pastor.
…In North America the bishops…deny the idea that the Synod and Amoris Laetitia brought any kind of change…
…what is happening in the reception of Amoris Laetitia among bishops shows… the difference between the pastoral reception and what I am calling the worldview or Weltanschauung reception.”
Response to above article: “Weltanschauung bishops” of the Romanist persuasion have successfully silenced Vatican II pastoral bishops over the past 30+ years in the USA, Canada and other countries. The few Vatican II bishops who remain are not likely to speak against brother bishops steeped in “Weltanschauung” theology.
Some believe we have gone far beyond the need for “aggorniamento,” i.e. updating” of church structures, language and reconnecting to the culture in the vernacular.
Perhaps we have just begun the aggorniamento process which needs to acknowledge that we have arrived at a split mind within the Western/Latin Branch of Catholicism…a place where Roman and Vatican II Catholics see things so very differently, that we speak two very different cultural languages as Catholics, akin to the 1054 East-West mystical/scholastic split mind in Catholicism, including the Eastern Churches which remained in union with Rome.
This “split mind” in our Church drove the direction of Vatican II and, according to the article below and other sources, this “minority mind” had such a great influence on the Church that we are still wrestling with its contributions today.
It was, after all, Patriarch Maximos and his small Melkite band in a sea of Latin Rite hierarchs, who managed to introduce such items as:
From “Eastern Christians in Australia” by Lawrence Cross in Australian eJournal of Theology 19.2(August 2012)
So, we ask, “Should so many be so hesitant of even addressing the option of a Vatican II Rite standing next to its 22 Eastern siblings in union with “elder sibling” Rome?
Sisters Lea and Consilia
To read original article with comment: Relearning critical obedience and faithful dissent – Global Pulse Magazine
For too long, we have not tackled the task of transvaluing* the very important doctrines which have provided structure and meaning to our faith…for so long.
Could our Catholic doctrines have been so guarded and locked down that they gradually diminished in ability to develop their fullness of spirit in each modern age,
culminating in the rejection of Catholicism so evident today?
As more than one theologian has said, we DO need “right” theology.
We also need to transvalue,* not dilute it, according to each new epoch.
The problem, of course, lies in what is the “right theology” and
what is vehicle for the faith which has carried us into the 21st century.
There are and always will be great differences of opinion on this question.
However, too many people today cannot “buy” the essence of Christianity
according to the literal “died for our sins” version
that many still hold so very sacred.
This rejection of theological understanding in the Catholic Church today
is likewise going on in other Christian denominations.
There is a split between the literal and “poetic” versions of Catholicism
and it is well documented by philosopher/theologian John D. Caputo in his books,
RELIGION WITHOUT RELIGION, THE WEAKNESS OF GOD,
and THE INSISTENCE OF GOD.
Could there be at least two different valid interpretations of our Catholic faith
…not just “continuity and rupture”?
Vatican II pointed us in the poetic direction while retaining the literal hermeneutic.
Might we have need for both literal and poetic interpretations
of theology, governance and liturgy in the Church today?
…even if that means “allowing” (if not “fostering”) the development of a new rite
in our Church which has managed to “allow” 22 other rites in union with the Roman Rite of the Jerusalem Church of Saints Peter and Paul and the earliest Christians?
Sisters Lea and Consilia welcome your feedback…even a “like” if you are so inclined.
*transvalue here meaning: “To represent or evaluate something according to a new principle, causing it to be revalued” differently…with the “new principle” being the work of the Holy Spirit in Vatican II and the world.
See Position Paper: Resolving Polarization of Vatican II and Roman Catholic Visions
No Vatican II Rite! What Loss to World and Church
Our comment below on Massimo Faggioli’s article…comment censored by Global Pulse Magazine (GPM article link below):
“We appreciate Massimo Faggioli’s hope that Vatican II Church is going to make a come-back. However, in the few short years Pope Francis has, do you really believe he can reverse the massive “particular sympathy and irenic attitude” towards traditionalism” imbibed by the Catholic population and taught in many universities, seminaries, parishes and publications worldwide for the past 30+ years?
Furthermore, with the dying off of so many Vatican II Catholic clergy, theologians and laity, should we really sit back and depend on Pope Francis to revive the Vatican II Church…against the strong and pervasive traditionalist push for a “smaller, purer Church”?
Fact is, the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church has set itself up as a formidable opponent to Vatican II and its prophetic interpretations of theology, governance, liturgy and Catholic identity. So why not let elder brother Rome stand guard over Council of Trent hermeneutics as the representative of institutional Catholicism?
Meanwhile, Pope Francis is in a position to liberate Vatican II from the hands of those who shall never see Vatican II as anything more than a confirmation of the Council of Trent.
Pope Francis can protect the universal Church from schism by blessing the Trentonian and Vatican II traditions as “equally valid yet different” branches of Catholic thought and practice.
This move would be somewhat akin to the “separate yet one-with” brotherhood of Roman and the Eastern Church Catholicism which has a less scholastic/more mystical interpretations of Catholic theology, governance and liturgy than its Roman “elder brother”.
Otherwise, Francis dies and the Church moves comfortably back into its Curial mode of Trent Council Catholicism, as if Vatican II never really happened, no?”
Massimo Faggioli’s article: “Huge gap separates Pope Francis from liturgical tradionalists” – Global Pulse Magazine
http://www.globalpulsemagazine.com/news/huge-gap-separates-pope-francis-from-liturgical-tradionalists/3568 (article published 7.18.2016)
Have we even begun to understand what degree of change the Holy
Spirit was/is calling forth from within the event of the Second Vatican Council?
Some Catholics see the past few decades…from a different viewpoint…
…as an erosion of faith in the doctrines we have…
But others look at Vatican II as a gift of the Holy Spirit,
as God calling forth a whole new perspective on doctrine…
in which case, there is the need for a very deep deconstruction of
“how we believed before and often still do now.”
A deconstruction of Catholic belief
down to the very bedrock of our faith…
cherished understandings of doctrine…
in order to get to the root of doctrine
and its applications for our time.
NOT to change or break down Roman Rite theology …
which keeps the institution focused on certainty and security in the everyday world,
… BUT to be a “next-door” theology in union with Rome…
……..from the point of a world constantly adapting to change…
…that each theology may call forth and challenge the other in our uncommon faith
in Jesus the Christ and our proclamation of the Good News to the world.
Uncommon Faith speaking from two different perspectives:
+Roman Rite Catholicism from the perspective of the “strong force” of a
…hierarchical, unchanging, all-knowing, all powerful God who is everywhere,
a God who designed the universe according to the order of His Will.
+ Vatican II Rite Catholicism from the perspective of the “weak” strength of a
…God that calls and promises but doesn’t command, awaits response but doesn’t demand.
The Name of which God carries an event that stretches us
beyond what we know to where we are certain we must go,
to an order other than hierarchy (the internal order of chaos theory perhaps),
…a divine “stepping back” which reveals how much we tend to rely on force as power,
…a divine will that models and solicits forgiveness, hospitality and love of the other
as the determining factors of who discovers or “gets into” the kingdom of God
More on Vatican II Theology to come on Rite Beyond Rome.
Meanwhile, read John D. Caputo’s books:
On Religion and The Weakness of God, A Theology of the Event with us.
Interested in conversation…comment below and/or email 4Vatican2Rite@gmail.com
View, share, download:
Slide Presentation: EXPLORING A VATICAN II RITE
Position Paper: Resolving Polarization of Vatican II and Roman Catholic Visions
Sisters Lea and Consilia
Ah, so Vatican II was just another one of those Church Councils, was it?
Well, no, it was obviously a very dangerous Council because it could have changed today’s Church and World had it not been perceived as a threat to Roman Rite Catholicism.
“Keep it from rupturing the Church” has been the main concern of post-Vatican II popes. “Spiritualize it…Merge it into the Roman Rite and we will be all the better for it.”
Pope Francis takes a different turn. His strategy is to socialize Vatican II by focusing it on helping the poor and away from doctrinal change which undergirds Roman hierarchical structure.
Is the World better off without the full implementation of Vatican II as a new Catholic Rite with its open vs. closed system approach to World and Church?
Let’s see…Would we have …
▪ Massive failure of Christian conscience in regard to world response to the global immigrant crisis…a crisis too similar to the global failure of Christian conscience at the time of the Holocaust. Such moral failure, including the introduction of nuclear warfare, were major reasons the Second Vatican Council was convened.
Would we be engaged in the following global/national phenomena today if a Vatican II RITE had emerged out of the Council by the 1980’s?
• Significant increase in ethnic and religious wars?
• New rise in rampant racism, anti-Semitism, and xenophobia?
• So many favored national candidates with anti-xyz tyrannical positions?
• First world regression into old self-satisfied nationalism and denominationalism?
• Aggressive controversy in media (including blogs) replacing efforts at genuine dialog?
• Corporate lobbying vs. climate control, bank regulation, and domestic programs?
IS the Church better off for having resisted the movement of Vatican II toward a paradigm shift in theology, governance and liturgy?
Let’s see…would there have been…
▪ Long and strong resistance to accountability for the clergy sex abuse scandal, especially at higher bureaucratic levels?
▪ Conservative/liberal rupture within the Church…with parishes, religious communities and families split asunder…even the Church itself.
▪ Unprecedented and continued loss of practicing and dedicated Catholics from parishes in much of the world…including loss of vocations to priesthood and religious life…including loss of women to ordained ministry.
According to Cardinal Kasper: “We have neither fully implemented the council nor really received the post-conciliar documents; they have remained without consequence. We are at a standstill.” (Cardinal Kasper, ORIGENS, July 2, 2015 (Volume 45, No. 9) “Vatican II: Toward a Multifaceted Unity”)
Has Vatican II been resisted as a Council because it is such a paradigm shift in perspective from Roman Catholicism…so much so that…
…in order to become once again an effective moral influence in the modern world,
…We desperately need a Vatican II Rite?
…alongside the 23 other different inter-independent Catholic Rites,
…a Vatican II Rite to stand in sisterly/brotherly union with Rome?
Think about it! To Comment: Click on title of article and scroll to bottom of page.
Blessings and thanks for reading and thinking about this!
Sisters Lea and Consilia et al
Thanks for reading…Comments and questions appreciated!
(Click on article title to comment.)
(Abajo está la traducción de “All Catholics are cafeteria Catholics” says Jesuit priest. Is this a good thing?” on this website.)
Quizá el Padre Thomas Reese, editor del National Catholic Reporter, está en lo cierto cuando él dice: “Bienvenidos a la Cafetería”, metafóricamente hablando de la unidad en el Catolicismo. Y él lo explica de la siguiente manera…
“La verdad es que todos los católicos, son católicos de cafetería. Los católicos conservadores estuvieron dispuestos a ignorar las fuertes declaraciones sobre la justicia y la paz, pronunciadas por los Papas Juan Pablo y Benedicto y están gustosamente dispuestos a ignorar la oposición del Papa Francisco a la ordenación de mujeres.
Si esto es el Catolicismo de Cafetería no hay duda de que continuará obstaculizando, -durante muchas generaciones- el cambio en la Iglesia Católica. Es decir, que la Iglesia Católica continuará siendo una gran e infeliz familia discutiendo y argumentando de una posición a otra, mientras decidimos sobre que pelear y cuales temas ignorar, sean de Liturgia, Justicia, Paz o la ordenación de las mujeres, etc. etc.
Si es así como se va a proceder, ¿qué ocurrirá con la reforma profunda de la Iglesia Católica propuesta por el Concilio Vaticano II… más allá de su enfoque pastoral y misericordioso? ¿Morirá a causa de una benigna negligencia o por miedo a causar un cisma?
El Padre Reese dice: “Los católicos necesitan, crecer, madurar y aprender a vivir en una Iglesia en la que se discute, se argumenta, pero no debemos permitir que los desacuerdos separen a la familia. Necesitamos entender que las personas tienen puntos de vista diferentes y que podemos aprender unos de otros a través del diálogo. En lugar de dividirnos en facciones partidarias, necesitamos definir lo que significa para nosotros ser comunidad.
Sí, “somos familia”! Pero una familia no puede crecer si no se respetan las diferencias, y se permiten unos a otros el espacio para crecer diferentes… ¿Y qué sucede si algunos miembros de la familia están en contra de las diferencias, en contra del cambio, en contra del diálogo? ¿Deben los otros miembros de la familia inclinarse sumisos… con la esperanza de que antes, o muchos años después de su muerte, algo cambie? Nosotras pensamos que NO!
En 2015, el Cardenal Walter Kasper escribió un artículo en “ORIGINS”: “El Vaticano II va hacia una “Multifacética Unidad”(Vol.45. num.9). El escribió sobre la necesidad de una unidad en la diversidad, si es que queremos un progreso en el Ecumenismo . Nosotras sugerimos que ya es tiempo de MIRAR HACIA ADENTRO de nuestra Iglesia, para ver las posibilidades de una “multifacética unidad”, porque el estilo cafetería, no le está sirviendo a ninguno de los dos lados de la Iglesia. El estilo cafetería no representa un reto para el crecimiento de ambos lados.
Nosotras decimos NO al estilo cafetería y SI a una “Unidad Multifacética”
Link artículo Padre Reese: https://ncronline.org/news/opinion/more-catholic-pope
(Nuestra más profunda gratitud a Luisa Maria Rivera por su fina traducción profesional de este artículo.)
A conversation with Paula Ruddy in regard to her comments to our post, Church Unity: NOT about merging disparate factions, on this website.
“I can see the intention for this, empathize with it. However, I think there is another way to unity through dialogue among people of different worldviews.
The postmodern cultural view that all are equally valid ways of viewing “reality” supports this strategy for unity, but is it true that Vatican II can be interpreted both as true to the Gospel in opening to the world and as not true to the Gospel in opening to the world? Isn’t there some objectivity in what the Gospel teaches and how the Church should exist in the world?”
Sisters Lea and Consilia reply:
Yes, there have always been different ways of viewing “reality” with every view claiming its own view as valid, even superior to the other’s view of reality.
The problem within the Catholic Church begins when two or more worldviews diverge so radically that they no longer see the Gospel through the same “objectivity” lens. This is the case of the different Gospel views between Opus Dei/ Evangelical Catholicism AND Post-Vatican II understandings of the Gospel. In other countries, the problem is that cultural adaptation to the Gospel is thwarted by “one way only” interpretations of Catholic doctrine and practive.
Pope Benedict may have correctly described the two interpretations of Vatican II as continuity and rupture…continuity with the Council of Trent and rupture as break. However, one might interpret his words differently…as meaning continuity with Church Tradition AND rupture…NOT break or Schism as Pope Benedict implied…but rupture into a new shoot, an evolutionary outgrowth from the Root of Jesse.
“What about the Petrine Ministry to lead in the Gospel direction? Should the Pope say ‘all interpretations of Vatican II are valid’?”
Sisters Lea and Consilia reply:
Insofar as any interpretation of Vatican II can be supported by Vatican II documents or post-Vatican II theology, it would seem the pope ought to consider those interpretations valid.
Of course, this has not been the case with the two popes preceding Pope Francis. For many Catholics today, including George Weigel, the interpretation of Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI are the ONLY authorized interpretations of Vatican II.
As for the Petrine Ministry of the Pope to lead and unify the Church in the Gospel direction, perhaps the papal ministry for the future lies in coordinating/negotiating the differing Gospel interpretations within a shared Papal/People of God relationship… a negotiating servant-leadership for a challenging multifaceted set of Gospel interpretations. For example, the 20+ Eastern Catholic Rites/Churches in union with Rome, the Opus Dei prelature, and the Anglican ordinariate are but a few examples of this negotiating servant-leadership.
“The question I have about dividing us up is this: Is it good to abandon the mainstream Church to the point of view that the Holy Spirit is NOT IN the world while establishing an ordinariate that believes the Gospel calls for discerning the Holy Spirit and the Kingdom of God WITHIN the world as it is?”
Sisters Lea and Consilia reply:
The questions we have here are these: What is “mainstream Church” Catholicism? The majority viewpoint? The viewpoint of the presiding pontiff?
Is there any point of view within the various Catholic Rites/Churches, prelature, or ordinariates that teaches “the Holy Spirit is NOT in the world”? Perhaps the answer is “yes” when we consider post-Trent Church vs. world theology where the Holy Spirit resides only in the One True Catholic Church. The Second Ecumenical Council pushed back on this view of Church and world. Is this theological viewpoint what is “dividing us up” along with the scientific revolution, the loss of leadership credibility, clericalism, and marginalization of women, divorced Catholics, LGBTQ+, etc?
“Isn’t it better to continue the dialogue among people with evolving worldviews within the Church, depending on the Holy Spirit, faith and reason to keep us together?”
Sisters Lea and Consilia reply:
Indeed, it is ALWAYS better to continue dialogue within the Church. When there is radical divergence in theological interpretation, however, dialogue becomes much more difficult, if not impossible.
Throw inequality of relationship into the mix, as Leonard Swidler discusses in his Dialogue Decalogue and dialogue actually becomes impossible. One has to ask if even the Holy Spirit is impeded from holding us together if we cannot treat each other as the sisters and brothers that Jesus called us to be.
Do the believers in the rightness of Vatican II have brave spokespeople who can make the vision clear and compelling to the mainstream Roman Rite Catholic? If not, how are they going to run an ordinariate?
Sisters Lea and Consilia reply:
One has to wonder if it is necessary “to make the vision clear and compelling to the mainstream Roman Rite Catholic.” If the goal is to win mainstream Catholicism back from the decades of spiritual groundwork done by Evangelicial Catholicism (and its precursor, the Opus Dei Movement/Prelature), that ship has left the harbor.
What we see as possible and URGENT is the redirection of energy spent by those who stand continually waiting in the vestibule of Roman Rite Catholicism, begging and hoping that someday Vatican II will rise again…if only we are patient enough.
If the Apostles never came out of the Upper Room, there would be no Catholic Church today. What were they waiting for? Approval by the Temple High Priest?
As for “brave spokespeople” of the great Second Ecumenical Vatican Council, we have many both in this life and in the hereafter. Fortunately, those who have left us in this life have also left their writings for us to study and discern the earliest spirit and wisdom of Vatican II.
As for how a Vatican II prelature or a Vatican II ordinariate might operate, we do have models today within the Church, models which might be adjusted and applied both to different national cultures and different evolving understandings of a Post-Vatican II Church in an ever-changing world. As in every institutional model, what the model presents is always ONLY a model.
“I appreciate the “Rite Beyond Rome” effort to discern how we should proceed. I hope we keep talking.”
Sisters Lea and Consilia reply:
We appreciate your efforts and the efforts of all those working to discern how we should proceed in moving forward. We intend to explore the prelature, ordinariate models here on https://RiteBeyondRome.com as precursor to a Post-Vatican II Rite/Church in union with Rome, if that is where the Wisdom Spirit of God leads.
And YES, let’s keep talking!
(Abajo está la traducción de Theological Differences between Catholic Rites on this website.)
Este texto es un extracto de: Doctrina/ De Oriente a Occidente.
(Vea la dirección de Internet abajo.)
¿Es verdad que en las Iglesias Católicas Orientales se permite tener expresiones teológicas (puntos de vista teológicos) diferentes? y si esto es así, ¿qué implica?
No hay duda que esto es cierto. En las Iglesias Católicas Orientales no solo está permitido diferir, sino que son animados activamente, a cultivar sus muy propias expresiones teológicas. Los católicos orientales, aunque íntegramente católicos, y en comunión con el Papa, difieren en varios aspectos, además de en lo litúrgico. Nosotros también tenemos una tradición espiritual única, así como un enfoque teológico único.
Aunque estamos de acuerdo en lo fundamental de la doctrina, nosotros enfocamos la doctrina de una forma muy diferente – desde la perspectiva de Oriente. Mientras que la Iglesia Occidental, tradicionalmente ha formulado su doctrina en los términos de la Escolástica Teológica Latina, nosotros nos apoyamos casi exclusivamente, en la Teología de los Padres de la Iglesia Oriental. Y en lugar de que esta diferencia rompa la unidad de la Iglesia, expresa con mayor claridad, la verdadera UNIVERSALIDAD, de la Iglesia de Cristo.
Esto fue proclamado, -con autoridad- por el II Concilio Vaticano:
“Todos en la Iglesia deben preservar la unidad en lo esencial. Pero también que todos, de acuerdo a los dones que han recibido, gocen de una apropiada libertad en las variadas formas de vida espiritual y disciplina, en sus ritos litúrgicos diferentes, y aún en sus elaboraciones teológicas de la verdad revelada.” UNITATIS REDINTEGRATIO, num.4
Hasta aquí el extracto de: Doctrina/ De Oriente a Occidente
Ciertamente el Opus Dei, siendo la primera prelatura Romana, aprobada por el Vaticano, tiene perspectivas teológicas diferentes del Vaticano II, de las tradicionales de la Teología de la Iglesia del Rito Romano
Dado lo anterior es perfectamente razonable, que un Rito/Iglesia Vaticano II, con sus perspectivas teológicas diferentes, pueda co-existir, con los otros 22 Ritos/Iglesias no Romanas, en unión con Roma.
(Nuestra más profunda gratitud a Luisa Maria Rivera por su fina traducción profesional de este artículo.)
(Abajo está la traducción de Our comment on “Join the work of transformation” posted on National Catholic Reporter on this website.)
Una forma a través de la cual podemos unirnos al trabajo de transformación de nuestra Iglesia y de nuestro país, es ver, con toda claridad, como la actual forma de gobierno de los Estados Unidos, se asemeja en su modus operandi, a las dictaduras de América del Sur, cuyos dictadores fueron entrenados por los Estados Unidos, en la Escuela de las Américas.
William Cavanaugh tiene la experiencia de primera mano con la Iglesia de Chile, durante la dictadura del Gral. Pinochet (1973-1990), cuyo régimen Cavanaugh lo describe como dedicado a avivar las llamas de la confusión y el desorden a través de:
¿Nos suena conocido algo de lo anterior? ¿Lo sienten como algo que han experimentado?
Pero, ¡claro está¡ algo similar a una dictadura, jamás podría suceder en USA.
Las citas anteriores han sido tomadas del libro TORTURA Y EUCARISTÍA de William Cavanaugh. El capítulo 2 de este libro, “La Iglesia aprende a vivir oprimida” probablemente nos enseñaría algo a todos.
Sobre este tema continuaremos hablando.
(Nuestra más profunda gratitud a Luisa Maria Rivera por su fina traducción profesional de este artículo.)
Maybe Fr. Thomas Reese, editor of National Catholic Reporter, is right when he says, “Welcome to the cafeteria” as a way of expressing Catholic unity. He explains why…
“The truth is all Catholics are cafeteria Catholics. Conservative Catholics were quite willing to ignore John Paul’s and Benedict’s strong statements on justice and peace, and progressive Catholics are happy to ignore Francis’ opposition to women priests.”
If this is cafeteria Catholicism, then certainly it will continue to obstruct change in the Catholic Church for generations to come. Thus the Catholic Church will remain one big unhappy family adamantly arguing back and forth as we decide what to fight and what to ignore about liturgy, justice and peace, and opposition to women priests, etc, etc.
So what happens to deep Vatican II reform of the Catholic Church…beyond even its pastoral and merciful approach? Does it simply die of benign neglect or fear of causing schism?
Fr. Reese says, “Catholics need to grow up and learn to live in a church where arguments take place, but we should not let disagreements break up the family. We need to understand that people have different viewpoints and that we can learn from one another by having dialogue. Rather than dividing into partisan factions, we need to model what it means to be a community.”
Yes, “WE ARE Family!” But family cannot grow if it cannot respect each other’s differences and allow one another the space to grow differently. And what if certain members of the family are against differences, against change and against dialog? Do the other family members just bow their heads in submission…in hope that something someday will change before or long after they die? We think NOT!
In 2015, Cardinal Walter Kasper wrote an article in ORIGINS “Vatican II: Toward a Multifaceted Unity”. (Vol 45, #9). He wrote about the unity in diversity needed if we are to make any further progress in ecumenical endeavors. We suggest it is time to look WITHIN our Church to see the possibilities for a “multifaceted unity” because cafeteria style is definitely NOT working for either side of the Church. Pick&Choose cafeteria-style offers no challenge for growth on either side.
We say, “NO” to Cafeteria Catholicism and “YES” to Multifaceted Unity! https://RiteBeyondRome.com
Fr. Reese’s article: https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/more-catholic-pope
(Abajo está la traducción de Eucharist: My Bread Broken on this website.)
“Si no dejas que se rompa tu pan para que bendiga
y alimente a otros, no habrá vida en ti.”
Cuando esto dijo, los demás se alejaron.
Todos quieren una vida mejor,
más vida, y más grandiosa que la dada.
¿Dónde está el punto? ¿Existe tal cosa?
¿Dónde está el punto? ¿Quiero ir ahí?
MI pan, MI todo,
Todo lo que me es caro,
¿Debo dejar que se rompa?
¿Cómo podría ser?
¿Dejar que se rompa mi pan?
¿para QUÉ?… ¡Me ahogo!.
“Sin pan, sin rotura,
Y se alejaron.
¡Oh!, ahí está el roce en mi alma:
MI Pan, MI PAN…
No se debe partir.
Lo quiero como lo quiero
por qué, dónde y cuándo.
Yo lo decido…. y punto.
Debes de tener pan,
tu propio pan. No lo puedes dar,
o deja que se lo lleven.
¿Dejar que se rompa tu pan?
¿Dejar que se ROMPA como se ha de romper?
¿Permitirlo o NO?
¿El Pan roto
no me hará un fracasado?
“¿No acaso lo perdemos de todas maneras?
No nos lo podemos llevar.”
No, pero aun así nos sustenta.
El pan roto, las esperanzas, sueños, ilusiones
y las cosas que casi nunca se cumplen…
porque la vida no se ajusta lo suficiente,
sólo te rodea a ti y a mí.
No puedo partir mi pan…
me lo ha partido la vida.
“Pobre de mí”, el único pan que tenía…
La con-miseración es lo que me hace seguir
seguir y seguir, más y más,
una y otra vez, de vuelta a donde comencé
…¿a menos que parta mi pan?
¿preciosos planes para que las cosas sean lo que deben?
¿lo que yo, tú, ella y él
simplemente deberíamos de ser?
La quieta vocecilla interior
que llama donde sea,
el dónde, el cómo y el por qué carece de razones,
el loco llamado desde un lugar desconocido…
Así que, a menos que parta mi pan,
¿no habrá vida en mí?, ¿en lo que hago?
O sólo sentiré la terrible ausencia de algo…
Me dijeron que sería feliz; que estaría a salvo,
La Certeza y la Seguridad, mis fieles compañeras, merman.
¿Dónde, dónde está el pan que he de partir?
La hermana Lea
(Nuestra más profunda gratitud a Cinthia De Gortari por su fina traducción profesional de este poema.)