Vatican II, A Rupture in Catholicism?

For too long, we Vatican II Catholics have understandably confused Roman Rite Catholicism with the Universal Catholic Church,
…mainly because Roman Rite Catholicism is internally confused about that one as well.

Vatican II, however, was definitely a rupture in that kind of confused thinking.
More than that, Vatican II was a rupture in the very theology that
…supports what Rome defines as bona fide Catholicism.

Meanwhile, Roman Catholicism has tried to quietly stitch together that rupture between
…Vatican II theology and RC theology with authoritative words
…like “continuity,” “tradition,” and “unity”.
The  justifiable effort here was to spiritualize the aggiornamento (updating) of the Church …in order to save the Church from the “excesses” of Vatican II.
The unintended consequence of this action was to shut down /melt down  Vatican II …into business (theology/governance/liturgy) as usual.

The Holy Spirit, however, was not to be shut out or melted down into business as usual.
Just as the first Pentecost was a rupture in the Judaic vision of itself, humanity and God,
…so was Vatican II a rupture in the Roman Church’s view of itself, God and the world
…a rupture in Roman Catholic Theology.
(Vatican II expert Richard Gaillardetz discusses “micro-ruptures evident in the teaching of Vatican II” in Boston College School of Theology video, “Fulfilling the Unrealized Vision of Vatican II”.)

With Vatican II, the Holy Spirit initiated a challenge to Roman Rite theology,
…as well as RC hierarchic style of governance and its liturgical/sacramental practice.
Vatican II also challenged the ROMAN Catholic  vision of the Church
…as well as its concepts of Catholic identity and Catholic culture.

Any kind of rupture, even sacred micro-ruptures in theology alone;
…these were not the intent of Vatican II,
…but these ruptures were definitely the consequence of the Vatican II event.

The purpose of Vatican II was the updating of the Roman Catholic Church,
…and some cardinals/bishops didn’t even see the need for that.  

The Holy Spirit had different ideas, inviting the Council to move in other directions
…right from the start
…as typified when the cardinals/bishops resisted
…the imposition of a curial-fixed agenda on the Council proceedings.

How often, the Holy Spirit calls us in one direction, only to take us off down a road we never expected, always with results beyond any we could ever have imagined. 

Continue reading

Jesus Brings Division?

“Do you think that I have come to establish peace on the earth? No, I tell you, but rather division. This is what it will be like. It will be as if a household of five were divided, three against two and two against three…”  From Luke 12:49-53

“At present there is increasing talk of schism. Will it be necessary for conservatives to separate, as the Old Catholics in Holland did after Vatican I? Or is it time for progressives to break away and form ‘The People of Vatican II’ as some are advocating?

In the end the question is, can we be in communion with people who have different thoughts and attitudes to ours? Historically, when divisions occur, at some point we break off communion. Religious people, whether catholics or protestants, christians, muslims or jews, take the matter of being ‘in communion’ very seriously. We value purity of doctrine above family bonds. We can’t break bread with you! This is very sad. It is very odd. I wonder is this the aberration that Jeshua knew they would not avoid?

What is the ‘unity’ he prayed for? Was it uniformity of thought and expression in a world whose very evolution and development is a product of diversity? Was it conformity that is changeless in a living world where adaptation to different environments is the rule of life’s survival? Was it to be unchanging in a cosmos where there is nothing that is not moving? Sameness, permanence, being still: these are all illusion.
Or was he thinking of a family bond that would hold us together, even while we find many different paths through life. Unity in diversity.

What is the touchstone? What is the bond that makes us one? Why do our divisions hurt more than the divisions that are part and parcel of politics in a democracy, of business interests, of sport and even of football codes? Why do we treat difference in our Christian Family as worse than criminal? Why do we cut off communion and refuse to talk with the ‘others’? Is it reasonable? Or is it childish recoil from the pain of family hurt where any disharmony is magnified into trauma.

I believe that, in the last analysis, it’s a matter of trust.
We do not trust those who are different, or go a different way. The sad fact is that our rejection of them shows that we do not trust God to lead them along their paths. We judge them because the thought that there might also be another way threatens our security. Without understanding them, we reject them on the measure of our own perception of the truth. To cement our stance in place we all claim that God’s approval makes our position absolute.  Children! Children! Behave yourselves. Remember where you are!

In our Father’s house we must first trust him. It is the embodiment of believing – to trust. It takes faith out of the airy intellectual and makes the heart big enough to embrace other sisters and brothers, God’s other children. It is not foolish or irresponsible to trust God. But it is silly to try to run his world our way.”

Article excerpt reprinted with permission.

Click link below to read Full article by Tony Lawless at
He Brings Division? Sunday Readings



Vatican II…Going the Way of Climate Change?

For those who are “pessimistic about the short term of the Church, yet remaining totally optimistic about the long term,” those depending on the Holy Spirit to make all things right,”  Debb from Australia writes on

“As I read your words I think “climate change, climate change, climate change”.
For this human species and for all life on earth the long term might be fifty years at most, if we don’t suddenly and dramatically change our ways. What are we to make of that in the light of discussing the “future” of Christianity or of the church?”

We totally agree with you, Debb!   So many of us in the Church pacify ourselves with the idea that change happens in centuries in the Church.   Trouble is, we don’t live any longer in an age where change happens at a century-by-century pace.

Yet most of us are old and too tired to take that final step necessary to rescue Vatican II from the Roman vault where it has been locked away gasping for air.  WE FEAR SCHISM…thinking there could be no other alternative.

Young theologians and others who work to revive Vatican II within the Roman Church do it very carefully so as not to disturb the organization that can make or break their career.  Many of them also espouse the belief that the Church is working at the Holy Spirit’s pace.

COULD WE BE FAILING TO REALIZE??…THAT THE HOLY SPIRIT MIGHT BE DEPENDING ON OUR COURAGE to rescue Vatican II from the over-confidence of  the Roman Rite’s claim on the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council and its implementation.

Rome is perfectly free to lock Vatican II away and/or suppress its implementation within the Roman Rite of Catholicism, but not within the realm of universal Catholicism.

As we are perfectly free to go on ignoring the threat of CLIMATE CHANGE…TO OUR PERIL AND TO THE PERIL OF OUR CHILDREN AND AND OUR CHILDREN’S CHILDREN’S CHILDREN, so, too, we are likewise perfectly free to sit back and allow Vatican II to fade into the background of our Catholic Church, citing age, helplessness, or pessimism as reasons for not heeding the threat of the very extinction of Catholicism. Some believe this extinction would be a good thing in the same way that pessimists today believe the earth isn’t worth saving. After all, there is heaven and there are other planets. We don’t happen to go along with this line of thinking.

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 (not enough time left for that). 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 Branch of the Catholic Church, whether the Roman Rite recognizes us or not. This Catholic Branch/Rite exists whether or not we recognize our connections or not. History will declare what has already taken place through the work of the Holy Spirit among us! (Remember, the followers of Jesus never could have known they were founding a Catholic Church, much less the 22 other official Catholic Rites in union with Rome.)

Meanwhile, we may dismiss even the idea of a Vatican II Branch/Rite of Catholicism because we dread the work of creating a new organizational structure. However, 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!
For Position Paper: “Resolving Polarization of Vatican II and Roman Catholic Visions”…

Warm regards to all,
Sisters Lea and Consilia

READ MORE:  Vatican II Going the Way of Climate Change? – Catholica Forum

Garden Sin of Origin, Original Sin?

Garden Sin of Origin (audio version)


 Before sin, Adam and Eve walked and talked with God, freely and openly—no boundaries.  Suddenly God sets limits.
“Don’t eat of this tree.” “This tree is My space.”

Suddenly love defines differently. No longer you = me or me = you in womb-like comfort. Homey oneness get a push away to make room for ego-separateness, for self, for one’s transcendent mystery, for God’s transcendent mystery.

For Adam and Eve, womb-like intimacy gets a jolt and ego is born infantile.
“Poor me, God is not sharing everything with me. God must be holding something back so He can be over me. I am deprived. Let me eat of the tree and I shall be like God.”

Original Sin—Invading God’s Space…Violating Transcendence?

“Do not eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.”   Was it a test? Or was God defining Divine space—the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Was this never meant to be our space?

Was eating of this tree an unintentional effort to cross boundaries with God…an unconscious effort to blot out the loneliness of self and vanquish it by invading the Other? If so, eating of this tree was denying God’s Otherness, an attempt to steal into the unique mystery of the other justified by the childish whim that love must have no boundaries. Love with boundaries was something Adam and Eve could not yet understand.

Ego boundaries were the one thing God couldn’t give Adam and Eve.
Ego must discover its own separateness and come to honor it.
Presumably, God could have forgiven Adam and Eve and allowed them to remain in the Garden, but how could Love do that?   The Garden was no place for ego development anymore than the womb is place for such development.

Adam and Eve needed an environment where they could experience themselves as separate from God in order to learn a sense of unique and individual self.
Without knowing that, they could never understand how to relate with God as adults.
And certainly God had no mind to keep them ever-children.
O Happy Fault!  Garden Sin of Origin, O HAPPY FAULT!

by Sister Lea

¿En serio? “El próximo Cisma…Ya está aquí”

Translation of RITE BEYOND ROME document  <Really? “Next Schism Already Here”>

Phyllis Zagano inicia esta página con su artículo publicado en el National Catholic Reporter:

“El próximo Cisma no se encuentra lejos en el camino, ya está aquí. Sus ponentes bien alineados para una seria confrontación, con las camisetas de su equipo bien puestas, luciendo los emblemas “Pre-Vaticano II” y “Post Vaticano II”

La fisura se está agravando, ya que más y más jóvenes van llegando, con el deseo, con la apetencia por aquellos buenos tiempos (que existieron antes de que ellos nacieran) cuando había un orden general, cuando cada cosa tenía su lugar y se seguían las reglas.”

La Respuesta de SisterLea’s está en National Catholic Reporter”

“Esta guerra verbal… entre los Católicos buenos contra los Católicos malos y en la que la definición de “buenos” y “malos”, depende del lado en que estás… ¿cuánto tiempo va a prolongarse esta guerra?

Que enorme daño se están haciendo las dos posturas entre si y a la Iglesia por no creer que en las dos hay buena voluntad!

Que escándalo le estamos dando a nuestros niños y luego nos preguntamos porque tienen tan poco o ningún deseo de pertenecer a nuestra Iglesia.

No hay duda que existen católicos que necesitan desesperadamente, certeza y seguridad en este mundo tan rápidamente cambiante…esto podemos entenderlo.

¿Será necesario que el lado Post-Vaticano II se mofe y vilipendie a quienes están en la posición del Pre-Vaticano II por su visión de salvar al mundo aferrándose al entendimiento y prácticas “tradicionales” de la doctrina… nosotras podamos ver que algunos de esos valores están pasados de moda, o distorsionados y finalmente no-Cristianos- No hay duda que ellos nos ven de manera similar.

Y sí, si hay Católicos que sienten la desesperada necesidad de un cambio en la Iglesia… un cambio que no puede esperar 50 o 500 años… por lo mismo el tiempo apremia esta necesidad, dentro de la visión de la Iglesia como la Roca de Pedro en lugar de la de la Barca de Pedro en mar abierto.

¿Será necesario que el lado Pre-Vaticano II se mofe y vilipendie a quienes estando en la Iglesia ven al Vaticano II de una manera diferente a como ellos lo ven? ¿Es acaso necesario que ellos denuncien como herejía cualquier deseo o intento por de-construir la tradición con el fin de continuarla más fielmente en el mundo actual? ¿Es necesario que nos acosen y persigan por no ser capaces de pensar como ellos, así como ellos también son incapaces de pensar como nosotros?

Un Cisma no es la respuesta para ninguno de los dos lados. El Árbol de la Familia Católica, se inició de una Raíz en Jerusalem, extendiendo sus ramas en tres diferentes tradiciones: Roma, Antioquía y Alejandría.

Necesitamos una rama nueva en la Iglesia, la del Vaticano II, algo como lo que dice el Teólogo Daniel Maguire en su artículo de Crux 9.13.15. “El Catolicísmo ¿seguirá el camino del Judaísmo?” ( con sus tres ramificaciones: Ortodoxa, Conservadora y Reformada).”

Leer: “¿Una ramificación totalmente nueva?” y otros artículos en

Muchas gracias a Luisa Maria Rivera por su traducción de este artículo!







“Huge gap separates Pope Francis from liturgical traditionalists” by Massimo Faggioli

Our comment on Massimo Faggioli’s article on 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 and decline 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     (article published 7.18.2016)


Dare We Catholics Believe Differently?

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…

leaving behind
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

View, share, download:

Position Paper:  Resolving Polarization of Vatican II and Roman Catholic Visions

Sisters Lea and Consilia

Really? “Next Schism Already Here”

Phyllis Zagano starts out here with her article on National Catholic Reporter:

“The next schism isn’t down the road somewhere. It is already here. The proponents are lined up in a serious face-off, their team shirts emblazoned “Pre-Vatican II” and “Post-Vatican II…

The fissure is getting worse, as more and more younger people come along yearning for the good old days (before they were born) when everything was orderly, everything had its place, and the rules were followed.”

“This verbal war…the one of the good Catholics against the bad Catholics, with “good”or “bad” being defined by which side you are on…how long must that war endure?

What Massive Harm the two sides are doing to each other and the Church by not believing in each other’s good will!
What scandal we give to our children and then wonder why they have little or no desire to remain in our Church!

So, there are Catholics who desperately need certainty and security in this rapidly changing world…one can understand this.

Must the post-Vatican II side deride and vilify the pre-Vatican II side for their vision of saving the world by hanging on to “traditional” understandings of doctrine and practice…even though we might see some of those values as outmoded, distorted, even un-Christlike?  Surely they see us in a similar light.

And yes, there are Catholics who see the desperate need for change in the Church…change that cannot wait 50 or 500 years more…whereby time presses that need under the vision of Church as Rock of Peter rather than Barque of Peter on the open sea.

Must the pre-Vatican II side deride and vilify those in the Church who see Vatican II differently than they do? Must they denounce as heretical any desire or attempt to deconstruct tradition in order to follow it more faithfully in our time? Must they harass and hound us for not being able to think like them anymore than they are unable to think like us?

SCHISM IS NOT THE ANSWER FOR EITHER SIDE. The Catholic Family Tree started out from one Root in Jersalem, branching out into three different traditions of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria.
We need a Vatican II Branch of the Church something like theologian Daniel Maguire’s article in Crux 9.13.15, “Will Catholicism go the Way of Judiasm?” (with its Orthodox, Conservative, Reform branches).”

Read “A Whole New Branch of Catholicism?” and other articles on

¡No existe un Ritual del Vaticano II! Qué pérdida para el mundo Y la Iglesia!

(Translation of RITE BEYOND ROME document  No Vatican II Rite! What Loss to World & Church)

¡No existe un Ritual[1] del Vaticano II!…Qué pérdida para el mundo y la Iglesia!

Vaya, ¿querrá decir esto que el Concilio Vaticano II, sólo fue uno más de esos Concilios de la Iglesia?

No es así. Este Concilio fue obviamente un Concilio muy peligroso, porque pudo haber cambiado la Iglesia de hoy y el Mundo, si no hubiese sido percibido como una amenaza para el Ritual Romano del Catolicismo.

“Eviten que cause una ruptura en la Iglesia”, ha sido la preocupación central de todos los Papas post-Concilio Vaticano II. “Espiritualícenlo… sumérganlo en el Ritual Romano y todos estaremos mejor así.

El Papa Francisco ha tomado una dirección distinta: al enfocarse en: ayudar a los pobres y alejarse de cambios doctrinales que constriñen la estructura jerárquica Romana, su estrategia está encaminada a socializar el Vaticano II..

¿Acaso el mundo está hoy mejor, sin la completa implementación del Vaticano II y su consecuente nuevo Ritual Católico con su apertura, versus un sistema cerrado de acercamiento al Mundo y a la Iglesia?

 Veamos… ¿tendríamos…

Un fracaso masivo de la conciencia cristiana, ante la respuesta mundial a la crisis global de los inmigrantes… una crisis similar a la experimentada por la conciencia cristiana durante el Holocausto, un fracaso moral, que incluyó la introducción de armas nucleares… Estas fueron algunas de las razones de peso que llevaron a convocar el Segundo Concilio Vaticano.

Si en los 80’s hubiera surgido del Concilio un Ritual Vaticano II, ¿estaríamos involucrados hoy en día, en los siguientes fenómenos globales/nacionales?

  • ¿Un incremento considerable de las guerras étnicas y religiosas?
  • ¿Nuevo aumento de: un racismo descarado, anti-semita y xenófobo?
  • ¿Nuevos candidatos favoritos nacionalistas, con anti-xyz posturas fascistas?
  • ¿La regresión, en el llamado Primer mundo, hacia un nacionalismo egocéntrico y amante de las denominaciones?
  • ¿Cabildeo de las grandes Corporaciones en contra de: medidas de control para no afectar el clima, regulación de los procesos bancarios, programas domésticos?

¿Está la Iglesia en un mejor estado, por haberse resistido al movimiento del Vaticano II hacia un cambio en el paradigma de su teología, gobierno y liturgia?

    Veamos… ¿Se habrían dado los siguientes hechos?

  • Una resistencia fuerte y prolongada de parte del clero y de la alta Jerarquía para rendir cuentas responsablemente de los abusos sexuales.
  • Una ruptura conservadores/liberales dentro de la Iglesia, con separaciones en las parroquias, en las comunidades religiosas y en las familias.
  • Una pérdida, sin precedentes, de católicos practicantes y comprometidos con sus parroquias que aún continua, -y a nivel mundial-, y que incluye la pérdida de vocaciones al sacerdocio y a la vida religiosa… así como la pérdida de mujeres ordenadas para el ministerio.

Según lo expresado por el Cardenal Kasper: “No solo no hemos implementado en su totalidad el Concilio, sino que tampoco hemos recibido los documentos post-conciliares; continúan sin tener efecto o resultados. Estamos en un punto muerto. (Cardenal Kasper , ORIGENS, 2 de Julio de 2015, Volumen 45 num.9, Vaticano II: Hacia una Unidad Multifacética)

 Existe una resistencia hacia el Concilio Vaticano II, porque propone un cambio tal en la perspectiva del Catolicismo Romano… por lo tanto:

… para lograr ser de nuevo una influencia moral eficaz en el mundo moderno.

Necesitamos con urgencia un Ritual del Vaticano II?

… al lado de los 23 Rituales Católicos diferentes,

… un Ritual Vaticano II para estar fraternal y Sororalmente en unión con Roma?


 [1] La palabra Ritual (Rite en Inglés) se entiende como la herencia Litúrgica, Teológica, espiritual y disciplinaria, que es distinta, dependiendo de la cultura y las circunstancias históricas de los pueblos, y encuentra su expresión en la forma autónoma de vivir su fé, de cada Iglesia.

Muchas gracias a Luisa Maria Rivera por su traducción de este artículo!

A Whole New Branch of Catholicism?

For some the path to a healthier church is about waiting for the orthodox positions of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church to change.

Others see no hope in this patient hopefulness…no hope that “patient hopefulness” will eventually resolve the polarization afflicting the Catholic Church in a post-Vatican II age.

Once Judaism had to face a similar case of on-going polarization within itself.  From this realization flowed the diversified branches of orthodox, conservative and reform interpretations of their faith.

What if we are in need of a three-pronged Catholicism…orthodox, conservative and reform?

  • Not such a strange idea as it seems, if you check out “Will Catholicism go the way of Judaism?” by Marquette University theologian, Daniel Maguire.*
  • Why even Pope Francis sees the need for a “multi-faceted unity” of faith in Cardinal Kasper’s article, “Vatican II: Toward a Multifaceted Unity,” (ORIGINS, July 2, 2015)**

Catholicism is not new to the idea of branching out.  Rome, Antioch and Alexandria are today three branches of the original Christian “mother” Church in Jerusalem.  Has the time come to officially recognize a Vatican II Branch of Catholicism?

We could say Holy Mother Church has already conceived a new Vatican II vision by the Holy Spirit at Vatican II.  That vision is the seed of a new branch of Catholicism born in the documents and in the people who experienced the implementation of the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council and in those who were later influenced by it.


The Roman Branch of Catholicism was reared and educated in scholasticism, systematic theo-logic and an ethics of justice.

The yet-to-be-proclaimed Vatican II Branch has been nurtured in a conciliar commitment to “the construction of a new form of the church adequate to the demands of our age” as Richard R. Gaillardetz puts it.*

This new form of Church would, according to Gaillardetz, include:

  • dialogical engagement compared to hierocratic monoply on truth
  • mutual respect between clergy and laity, differing from a hierarchy of respect
  • pastoral approach to doctrinal formation  in contrast to a scholastic approach
  • unity-in-difference committed to humble learning from each other

In his book , An Unfinished Council, Chapter 4, “Toward a New Ecclesial Form,” Richard Gaillardetz does not suggest the formation of a new branch of Catholicism, but rather a rebuilding of the temple from within the ruins of the old temple by means of a “synthesized reading” of the documents of Vatican II.

We do not find this solution to be a fair assessment of Roman Catholicism and its contributions to the Church.

  • Roman Catholicism is hardly a temple in ruins. It has complete control of the Church.
    • Even though that complete control has driven many from the pews,
      Roman Rite Catholicism has a very faithful following of cardinals, bishops and people who want the the church to return to the highly-structured Roman system of theology/doctrine, governance and liturgy.
  • Not to mention, there will always be people who find support in highly-structured systems for the certainty and security of mind they provide. It may also be that we gravitate toward a more structured approach at different times in our lives.

There will also always be people who need a less-structured variation of Catholicism……those who need a more open Catholicism…

…much as Paul of Tarsus needed a more open interpretation of the Apostles’ original interpretation of Christianity as a Jewish sect entirely compatible with Judaism.

…much as early Catholicism later needed to make room for the Roman and Eastern Rite branches of the faith.

For these people and all those who see Vatican II as a singular event in the course of the history and future of the Catholic Church, we ask again,

Would a Vatican II Branch of the Church be such a terrible thing?

Would it not unify the Catholic Church and PREVENT schism?

Would it not it make the Church MORE healthy and LESS myopic?

For more information:
For further discussion:  h

Links below are to sources quoted in this article:



Continue reading

Aunque sería excelente que la Estrategia del Papa Francisco, lograra una reforma efectiva…

(Translation of RITE BEYOND ROME document  Much As We Want Pope Francis’ Strategy for Reform to Work…)

Aunque sería excelente que la Estrategia del Papa Francisco, lograra una reforma efectiva…

En respuesta al artículo de Robert Mickens, publicado por el National Catholic Reporter, “Francisco está Reformando la Curia Romana con una Estrategia de soslayo”.

R. Mickens pregunta: ¿Está el Papa llevando a cabo los movimientos que aseguren que, el deje un legado que no podrá ser revertido cuando muera?

Esto implica que el Papa tendría que llevar a cabo, algunos cambios en la organización y en la estructura.

Mickens señala que la estrategia del Papa Francisco de “neutralizar” a la CDF (Congregación de la Doctrina y la Fe) y “suavizar” las cabezas de otras ramas de la Curia,

Hmmmmm… estos cambios van a tomar años, y
además no sabemos si el Papa logrará llevarlos a cabo; y aún si lo hace…

Esta estrategia del Papa Francisco de neutralizar y suavizar, ¿logrará llevar a un cambio dentro del Ritual de la Iglesia? 1

…una Iglesia/Ritual en la cual tantos sacerdotes y obispos han sido formados, durante los últimos 30 años, en las manos del Opus Dei y de la Sociedad de San Pio X (Hermandad Sacerdotal de San Pio X), fraternidad sacerdotal internacional, cuyo objetivo es formar, apoyar y animar a los santos sacerdotes a permanecer fieles a las enseñanzas tradicionales de la Iglesia y de la misa… con su visión ultraconservadora y entendimiento de lo que es la Iglesia?

La visión de la Iglesia Romana/Ritual, es una visión muy diferente de la del Papa Francisco… con su “ética situacional”, que el Papa Benedicto XVI condenó.
Pero esto no es aún el centro o el corazón del problema de la reforma de la Iglesia.

La visión del Papa Francisco sobre la Reforma de la Iglesia, está estancada en la visión jerárquica de Constantino, según la cual, esta es la única estrategia para lograr la unidad. Esta visión jerárquica está basada, a su vez, en una teología de Dios, como el Divino Monarca o como el Amoroso Divino Monarca. Esta reforma NO es la reforma que el Concilio Vaticano II plantea, no importa cuan “Sinodal” (de Sínodo) pueda volverse la Iglesia con el paso de los años.

Por otra parte,

El Papa Francisco entiende la idea de una unidad multifacética, de acuerdo con el Cardenal Kasper en su artículo “Vatican II, hacia una unidad multifacética” (ORIGINS Volumen 45, número 9).

Sin embargo el Papa Francisco persiste en su postura de la unidad jerárquica, en lugar de considerar que el Ritual Romano, probablemente nunca lleve a la Iglesia a abrazar la diversidad.

La Iglesia necesita el Ritual Romano con su visión jerárquica de Dios, de la teología, gobierno y Litúrgia. Y sin embargo…

Así como la Iglesia necesitaba la aportación del Rito Malakita de Oriente durante el Concilio Vaticano II para confrontarlo y considerar la posibilidad de abrazar lo Sinodal, la colegialidad y una visión distinta del mundo…

La Iglesia necesita también un Ritual del Vaticano II para confrontar y ser confrontada por el Ritual Romano y sus hermanos y hermanas de los Ritos Occidentales en unión con Roma.

Sin esto, estaremos estancados para siempre, tratando de empujar y lograr la Reforma entre las visiones de Roma y del Vaticano II, de lo que es la Iglesia.

1 Aquí la palabra Ritual (Rite en Ingles) se entiende como la herencia litúrgica, teológica, espiritual y disciplinaria, que es diferente, dependiendo de la cultura y las circunstancias históricas de los pueblos y encuentra su expresión en la forma autónoma de cada Iglesia de vivir su fé.

El link para leer todo el artículo de Robert Micken es: http.//

Muchas gracias a Luisa Maria Rivera por su traducción de este artículo!


[Escriba aquí]




Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 214 other followers

%d bloggers like this: