(Quotes from discussion on National Catholic Reporter)
John S. to Sister Lea:
“If you truly understood the meaning, teachings and import of the Second Vatican Council you would not be so quick to misuse it as an excuse for advocating that which is not Catholic truth and promoting what the Council Fathers never taught.
You are accepting what Pope Benedict XVI rightly called the “hermeneutic of rupture” rather than the “hermeneutic of continuity”.
The Second Vatican Council was in no sense a “super council” that denied or changed what had come before it in time. Its goal was pastoral, as the Church sought new ways to teach the ancient truths of the Church.”
Sister Lea to John S:
“ There needs to be a “hermeneutic of singularity” which addresses the age of change in which we live! Vatican II Fathers succeeded in opening the Church to change, whether they intended to do that or not. Would the Holy Spirit not have wanted to prepare the Church for these times of geometrically progressing change…ancient truths and all…continually transvaluing them so that they stay ALIVE for every generation? ”
John S to Sister Lea:
“And yet truth must remain rooted in what is eternally true for it to have any value for the human soul which was created immortal so that it would throughout time continue to seek the eternal God who is the source of all truth . Newness and change for their own sake – uprooted and disconnected from the sacred deposit of faith – are a recipe for disaster, which the history of schism, heresy and apostasy show all too well. ”
Agreed, “Newness and change for their own sake – uprooted and disconnected from the sacred deposit of faith – are a recipe for disaster, which the history of schism, heresy and apostasy show all too well. ” The Vatican II Rite I speak of is not interested in schism, heresy and apostasy…or even disconnection from the sacred deposit of faith…just interested in taking a look at all this from a very different point of view.
P. John to John S:
“Now hold on John. Ole Sis Lea might have a point here. Acknowledge the rupture, acknowledge the new theology, let them go off and develop their own rite (we can call it the – oh I don’t know – the NOVUS ORDO or something), give them their own bishops and let them go their way. The rest of us Latin Rite Catholics can get on with being – well – CATHOLIC, and in 50 years or so the NOVUS ORDO rite, having continued to shrink due to abortion contraception, defection, etc., will finally collapse. Then we can bury the whole thing down the memory hole as just another bad experiment and move on with the flourishing Latin Rite. I tell ya, Ole Sis IS on to something…”
John S. to P. John:
“Well said but I’m afraid you have spelled out what has in fact happened with far too many Catholics, all of them using a vague sense of “Vatican II” as a defense. What is untrue will sooner or later fail because it is not of God. As Rabbi Gamaliel said to the assembled Sanhedrin, speaking of the gospel of Christ,, “if this plan or this undertaking is of men, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them.” Heresy has always failed and will always fail because it is of man, not of God.”
Ah, YES! We will let God do the judging. So no worries about that! Besides, the Vatican II Rite might just bring Catholics BACK to the Church in 50 years! You never know. No one has dibs on the Holy Spirit! And thanks for your concern!