Catholic Culture’s “Split Mind”

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:

  • the use of the vernacular,
  • eucharistic concelebration,
  • communion under both species in the Latin liturgy,
  • restoration of the diaconate as a permanent order,
  • creation of what would become the periodically held Synod of Bishops
  • creation of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity,
    • championing new attitudes to and less offensive vocabulary in ecumenical relationships with Eastern Orthodox and other Christians,
      • recognition of Eastern Catholic communities for what they are, “Churches,” not “rites.”

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
4vatican2rite@gmail.com

 

Literal & Poetic Interpretations of Catholicism, the real split?

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.
Thanks!

***

*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
https://www.scribd.com/doc/311664852/Resolving-Polarization-of-Vatican-II-and-Roman-Catholic-Visions

No Vatican II Rite!  What Loss to World and Church
https://wordpress.com/post/ritebeyondrome.com/1469

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 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
https://ritebeyondrome.com

Roman Rite Catholics Speak Out

(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.
”

Sister Lea:
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.”

Sister Lea:

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!

Saving Both Vatican II and Traditionalist Visions

There is no reason for Catholicism to be reserved only for its most orthodox believers.

The Church is large enough to presently accommodate 22 other Rites which view and practice Catholic theology, governance and liturgy differently…and still remain in union with Rome.

IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH TOO SMALL FOR A VATICAN II RITE…where there would be a place for Vatican II Catholics all over the world?

For Position Paper:  RESOLVING POLARIZATION OF VATICAN II AND ROMAN CATHOLIC VIEWPONTS,  Click in document window below. Scroll up to bottom of document where you can zoom in to full page view.  Document Download also possible below.

 

Francis Juggles Vatican II & RCC

“He (Pope Francis) is a Christian certainly but he is also a Roman Catholic, and Christianity is only one component of Roman Catholicism. There is mercy on one side and control on the other. How will he keep both those balls in the air before one drops?”  William Shea From Internet Conference “50 Years After Vatican II”

Very good, honest question! The Pope is a Vatican II Rite Catholic in a Church institution of mostly Roman Rite Catholics. He is struggling with a polarization which is 50 years old and worsening by the day as it did with the past two popes…each side having very different views of God and the God-human relationship.

Isn’t it time to raise the suppressed Vatican II Council to the status of Rite along with the 20+ other inter-independent Catholic Rites in union with Rome?…Rites with different perspectives on theology and different practices in governance and liturgy.

Pope Francis could move the Vatican II Rite forward and Pope Emeritus Benedict could hold Roman Rite Catholicism intact…because both rites are going to need each other…a unity unafraid of diversity.
Just a thought…