Is Church criminal activity the result of failed theology?

Seems that Church criminal activity IS the result of failed theology…according to Robert Mickens quoting Church historian, Massimo Faggioli, in Mickens’ recent article “Why Catholic Church leaders risk failing on the issue of sexual abuse”

Scrolling down Mickens’ article to the subheading The ongoing implosion of the Church, we find these words:

“As Massimo Faggioli suggested in a recent article published by La Croix International.” says Mickens,

It is not simply a question of dealing with a criminal phenomenon. It is also a theological question: from the theology of the sacraments (especially ordination to the priesthood) to ecclesiological models; from the role of women in the Church to last century’s magisterium on sexual morality. (Bold emphasis ours)

 

“The most complicated issue concerns the structural reforms required to address the mystique surrounding the priesthood and the episcopate, which are often still seen as positions of honor without the responsibilities that derive from holy orders.
(Indented text and absence of most quote marks in above two paragraphs are as in original Mickens’ article.)

At Rite Beyond Rome, we believe that Church criminal activity IS the result of failed theology.

If Vatican II had been taken seriously by the Church preceding Francis, it would not have been dismissed as simply a pastoral council. 

If Vatican II had been taken seriously back in the 1970’s, 80’s, 90’s up to the present day, collegial community would have been the hallmark of a modern theology transvalued in light of the very core of the Gospels and Church Tradition of Collegial Community…and not simply in light of episcopal collegiality which was also suppressed.

Want more on how the Church would look as a Collegial Community?

Also see:  Beyond Damage Control and Church Structural Reform: Theology Supports Sex/Power Abuse?

 

Beyond Damage Control and Church Structural Reform: Theology Supports Sex/Power Abuse?

There was a time when damage control worked well for the church. That time is no more!

Now, damage control like sincere apologies, policy changes and even sacrificial scapegoats fail to convince Catholics and others that the Church is determined enough to change its fundamental “modus operandi”.

Fortunately for the church, Catholic consciousness has been raised by the Spirit of Vatican II to expect more than damage control. This new consciousness cannot be rolled back any more than a born child can go back into it’s mother’s womb.

Those who talk about the need for structural change in the church rarely, if ever, recognize the origin of church sex/power abuse in theology itself.

In the past several decades, Popes Paul VI, John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and now Pope Francis have adamantly steered the church away from the deep theological reform that Vatican II set in motion. Their unwavering resistance to deep theological reform unwittingly supported the clerical power abuse and cover-up that we find today in the global Church. Continuation of this resistance will only lead to more virulent and deeply-entrenched power abuse cover-ups.

If the connection between theology and power abuse is not recognized now, then any policy and structural changes enacted by the Church will be worthless. As empowered as the laity will appear to be after all new policy/structural changes are in place, laity will NOT be allowed to cross the boundaries of “religious freedom” around well-guarded Church doctrine.

If Augustine could assimilate Roman ideals into Christian theology, surely by this time, Catholicism is capable of assimilating the best of modern findings in scientific, philosophical and theological research. Vatican II brought attention to the need for updating and adapting the Church to new conditions. With the extent, horror and gravity of the sex/power abuse scandals in the Church, one would think that the Church would wake up to Vatican II and its focus on the many momentous new questions that modern society must deal with in terms of human survival, not to mention the survival of its religious institutions.

The sex/power abuse scandals bring into question the domination model of traditional Biblical understanding and its application in doctrine. The domination interpretation of power in Scripture has been seriously questioned by many post-Vatican II theologians.  Even so, the institutional teaching authority of the Church has opposed little, if any, change in this ancient theology of power.

NOW IS THE TIME to re-evaluate theology that sanctifies and sacramentalizes domination. We must ask ourselves: Should modern scriptural interpretation be supporting the understanding of God as the One Who Desires Power Over Us?…justifying the way that we desire power over the earth and each other?

Pope Francis on Jesus as our Humanism

Pope Francis:  “Jesus is our humanism. Let us always be unsettled by his question: “who do you say that I am?” (Mt 16:15).

On Questioningtrust in structures, in organizations, in planning that is perfect…(a trust) which often gives one the security of feeling superior…”

On the Church:  “May she be a free Church, open to the challenges of the present, never on the defensive out of fear of losing something.”

On “trusting in logical and clear reasoning, which nonetheless loses the tenderness of (humanity).”

On the attraction of... “a purely subjective faith whose only interest is…to console and enlighten, but which ultimately keeps one imprisoned in his or her own thoughts and feelings” (Evangelii Gaudium, n. 94).

What is the Pope asking of us?
“It is up to you to decide: people and pastors together”…to look to Jesus together to discover what it means to be human.

From:  “Pastoral Visit – Florence: Meeting with the participants in the 5th Convention of the Italian Church (Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, 10 November 2015”

w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2015/november/documents/papa-francesco_20151110_firenze-convegno- chiesa-italiana.html

Can the Church Dialogue Its Differences into Unity?

A conversation with Paula Ruddy in regard to her comments to our post,  Church Unity: NOT about merging disparate factions, on this website.

Paula Ruddy:

“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.

Paula Ruddy:

“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.

Paula Ruddy:

“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? 

Paula Ruddy:

“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.  

Paula Ruddy:

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.

Paula Ruddy:

“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!

https://RiteBeyondRome.com

Church Unity: NOT about merging disparate factions

Unity is not like a puzzle pieced together.jpg

different puzzle pieces pic.jpg

 

If Cardinal Kasper can say this

about ecumenical unity,

might this wisdom for unity

apply as well WITHIN the Church?

Might this be the wisdom we need
WITHIN our polarized Roman Catholic Church?

Cardinal Kasper.jpg

…a Church polarized by its different interpretations of
the Second Vatican Council

…a Church polarized between

those who hold minimum assent to the Council
and
those who see Vatican II as whole new direction for the Church?

Continue reading

Post-VATICAN II RITE, Theological Activism for the Sake of World Survival, Peace, and Justice

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?

  • Because a post-Vatican II Theology would cut across the political and economic agendas of western civilization, both church and state?
  • Because a post-Vatican II Theology created cracks in the wall that kept Judeo-Christian scriptures and tradition within strict political and economic boundaries?
  • Because the foundation and daily functioning of top-down church/state structures depend most heavily on the Roman “God-in-charge” model?
  • Because the survival of western political/economic agendas depends on the  image of an all-knowing, all powerful, judgmental (exclusionary) God-in-Charge?   If that image changes, do political/economic agendas change as well?

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?”


  • (God/Trump) as a doer who can single-handedly fix things if he wants to.
  • (God/Trump who) acts without consulting others and without asking for permission
  • (God/Trump who) acts without being influenced by anyone else.
  • (God/Trump) projects power…strictly from the top down, from a subject to its objects, from the ruler to the ruled.
  • (God/Trump) can do anything. According to this logic, might also makes things right.

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:

  1.  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?
  2. 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.

——————————————-

References:
*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

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joerg-rieger/divine-power-donald-trump_b_12488082.html

Vatican II…Going the Way of Climate Change?

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.

Pope Francis is a game-changer in his own way, yet even he keeps the Spirit of Vatican II away from the “rooms” where doctrine is stored, making his game-changing moves dependent on his own longevity, health, and good will.

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.   There are many Catholic Churches in union with Rome. https://ritebeyondrome.com/2016/05/02/diagram-of-riteschurches-from-jerusalem/

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.
https://RiteBeyondRome.com

For Download of PDF Discussion Points:
EXPLORING THE WAY TO A VATICAN II RITE (PDF SLIDES)

Warm regards to all,
Sisters Lea and Consilia

A “new style of ministry, but no new doctrine”?

“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.

Source: Vatican official: Amoris Laetitia calls for new style of ministry, but no new doctrine : News Headlines | Catholic Culture

Our response:
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.
http://progressivechristianity.org/resources/responding-to-bishop-spongs-12-principles-and-the-future-of-religion/

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
https://RiteBeyondRome.com

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

 

On “Relearning critical obedience and faithful dissent” by Massimo Faggioli

Massimo, you say, “…there is actually a deep theological and cultural rift around

ecclesiology and in particular about the role of Vatican II in the practical ecclesiology of Catholicism today.”

Could there be at least two different valid interpretations of our Catholic faith, not just “continuity and rupture” or “obedience and dissent”?

As you well know, there is a split between the literal and “poetic” interpretations of Catholicism, well-documented by Catholic philosopher/theologian John D. Caputo in his books, RELIGION WITHOUT RELIGION, THE WEAKNESS OF GOD, and THE INSISTENCE OF GOD.

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? https://ritebeyondrome.com/201…

As for the Church, she has the tradition to address this problem in her agreement to allow differing interpretations of theology, governance and liturgy within the 22 other rites beyond her Roman walls. Apparently the Catholic Church, including the Roman patriarchy of earlier time, was not so hell-bent on its hegemony over Catholicism as it is today, you think?

To read original article with comment: Relearning critical obedience and faithful dissent – Global Pulse Magazine

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

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)

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!

Much As We Want Pope Francis’ Strategy for Reform to Work…

In response to article in National Catholic Reporter: “Francis is Reforming the Roman Curia by Circumvention” by Robert Mickens.

Robert Mickens asks: “Is the pope making any moves to ensure that he will leave a legacy that cannot be undone when he is gone? Which means he has to make some structural or organizational changes.”

Mickens notes Pope Francis’ strategy of “Neutralizing” the CDF and “Softening” the heads of other branches of the Curia.

Hmmmmm…will this change, which will take years that Pope Francis may or may not have, ever come about? And even if it does…

This “neutralizing and softening strategy” of Pope Francis…
…can it ever lead to structural change within the RC Rite/Church?
…… a Rite/Church in which so many ‘new’ priests/bishops of the past 30 years have been formed in the hands of O P U S Dei and SSPX…
……with their ultraconservative vision and understanding of the Church?

The Roman Rite vision of Church is A VERY different vision from Pope Francis…with his “situational ethics” which Pope Benedict XVI condemned.
But even this isn’t the core of the problem of Church reform.

Pope Francis’ vision of Church reform is stuck in Constantine’s vision of hierarchy as the only strategy to unity. This vision of hierarchic unity, in turn, is based on a theology of God as Divine Monarch, even Divinely Loving Monarch. This reform is NOT the reform that Vatican II points to, no matter how “synodal” the Church gets as the years go on.

On the other hand,

Pope Francis understands the idea of a multifaceted unity according to Cardinal Kasper and his ORIGINS article, “Vatican II: Toward a Multifaceted Unity. (Volume 45, Number 9).

Yet, Pope Francis’ reform persists in the direction of hierarchic unity instead of considering that the Roman Rite may never really take to Vatican II’s embrace of diversity.

The Church NEEDS the Roman Rite with its hierarchic vision of God, theology, governance and liturgy.  AND YET…

Just as the Church needed the input of the Melkite Eastern Rite at Vatican II to challenge it to consider and embrace synodality, collegiality, and a different view of the world…

…SO THE CHURCH ALSO NEEDS A VATICAN II RITE to challenge and be challenged by the Roman Rite and its sister/brother Eastern Rites in union with Rome.

 

Otherwise, we will be stuck forever trying to push and pull reform back and forth between Roman and Vatican II visions for the Church.   No?

Link to Robert Micken’s article: http://www.ncronline.org/blogs/roman-observer/francis-reforming-roman-curia-circumvention

Subscribe, Share, Comment or Contribute your ideas on Rite Beyond Rome. 4vatican2rite@gmail.com

No Vatican II Rite! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . What Loss to World & Church!

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.

Visit :  PICTURE THE POSSIBILITY OF A VATICAN II RITE

Blessings and thanks for reading and thinking about this!
Sisters Lea and Consilia et al
https://RiteBeyondRome.com

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

WHY THE CHURCH NEEDS A NEW RITE ALONGSIDE THE ROMAN RITE…

Pope Francis is a good and holy man!  Many think he can save the Catholic Church from ripping apart at the seams.  Maybe so, but we think NOT!

Pope Francis’ job is to hold the threads of unity together as long as possible…
…even if that unity “cannot” surrender hierarchy as the model for God & Church,
…even if that unity “cannot” recognize the sexism of patriarchy,
…even if that unity “cannot” recognize sexual relationship outside man-woman marriage,
…even if that unity “cannot” discuss certain topics like women’s ordination,
…even if that unity must protect the image of the Church AT ALL COST.

Continue reading

African Theologian Makes Good Points, Yet…

Four significant quotes from Fr. Agbonkhianmeghe Orobator, principal of Hekima University College in Nairobi and well-known African theologian:

1. “My reading of it (Amoris Laetitia) tells me that Francis reaffirms in uncompromising terms 
the church’s teaching on abortion, contraception, birth control, and 
marriage. What we must not forget is that (Pope Francis) is just as uncompromising 
in affirming the centrality of conscience (#303), discernment, pastoral 
accompaniment, and compassion.”

2. “Part of his message to us is that we need to refrain from the common 
practice of equating “irregularity” with “mortal sin” [paragraph 301].”

3. “If African bishops are wise, they would realize that the pope gives them
 license to be creative in addressing pastoral situations of family life 
and marriage. Francis is actually saying: “Don’t hide behind the veil 
of magisterium!”

4. “I believe that there is still a long way to go before we actually make 
the bold steps that are long overdue with regard to critical issues such
as the role of women in church, homosexual unions, reproductive rights,
all of which are broached and addressed in the document.”

RITE BEYOND ROME Response:

Fr. Orobator’s last quote about there being “a long way to go before we actually make 
the bold steps that are long overdue with regard to critical issues,”…this is why Catholicism needs a new inter-independent Vatican II Rite in union with Rome as part of the universal Catholic Church.

As an historic example of what a non-Roman Catholic Rite has already contributed to the universal Catholic Church, take “the small band of Melkite Eastern Rite/Church leaders, in a sea of Latin Rite hierarchs,” who brought their wisdom and long-term experience to the Second Vatican Council….”introducing such items as the use of the vernacular, eucharistic concelebration, communion under both species, restoration of the diaconate as a permanent order, creation of what would become the periodically held Synod of Bishops and the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, while championing new attitudes to and less offensive vocabulary in ecumenical relationships with other Christians…”
  (From article “Eastern Christians in Australia” by Lawrence Cross in Australian eJournal of Theology 19.2, August 2012)

Do you think that the Second Vatican Council would have ever been an “event of unparalleled significance,” as Vatican II expert Gailliardetz calls it, without the contributions of the inter-independent non-Roman Melkite Rite/Church in full union with Rome?

Could a Vatican II Catholic Rite/Church, with every intention of remaining in union with Rome…could it help shorten what Fr. Orobator calls the “long way to go before we actually make the bold steps that are long overdue with regard to critical issues such as the role of women in church, homosexual unions, reproductive rights, all of which are broached and addressed in “Amoris Laetitia”?

More than shorten the time for change, could that inter-independent Vatican II Rite help save the Catholic Church itself, including the Roman Rite/Church? 
Google Rite Beyond Rome.

(See National Catholic Reporter for full article on Fr. Orobator by Joshua McElwee , April 11, 2016.  http://ncronline.org/news/african-theologian-responds-amoris-laetitia)

Unity pre-supposes Diversity

Psalm 132 (133) which reads: “Behold how good and how pleasant it is when brothers and sisters dwell together in unity.”

Comment Source: Vatican II Essays

Oscar Cullman, guest of the Secretariat of Unity at the Second Vatican Council, is mentioned frequently in Yves Congar’s Book, MY JOURNAL OF THE COUNCIL. Cullman argues that unity pre-supposes diversity; it cannot by definition by mere uniformity. Thus diversity may be seen as a necessary structure of unity…a polarity of unity and diversity as a necessary element within the structure of community.

“A community of one heart and one mind”… We need a “polarity of unity” between heart and mind, a polarity of unity where”brothers and sisters dwell together in unity” as in Psalm 132(133). We need the sacred separateness of inter-independent Catholic rites with their different interpretations of theology and different practices of governance and liturgy. We need the holy oneness of different rites challenging, remembering, creating anew in a dynamic on-going inter-coursing union.

We need a Vatican II Rite!
Vatican II and Roman Visions for the Church: Do They Really Sync?  http://wakeuplazarus.net/v2/ES…

VATICAN II RITE SEES GOD AND OBEDIENCE DIFFERENTLY

“In the Mass Readings 489 for today, Saint Paul is helping the Faithful keep obedience in perspective. “to lead the Gentiles to obedienceby the power of signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God, so that from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum I have finished preaching the Gospel of Christ” (Romans 15:18-19). Obedience must be to God, whatever the “politically correct” risks may be.”

  • Some say God is about OBEDIENCE. They see God as the King of the realm and/or the Father of a family of obedient and unruly children. This God-view keeps obedience as the pinnacle of Roman Rite theology.

    Vatican II theology sees God differently. Vatican II theology sees life and love differently, and so sees God differently. Two very different Catholic cultures: Roman and Vatican II. There is no stuffing one into the other without eviscerating one or the other or both.

    Eastern Catholic Rites in union with Rome see God and each other differently. Eastern and Latin/Western Rites see each other differently.  Is there no room for a Vatican II Rite in the Catholic Church?

    Google “Rite Beyond Rome” or go to https://RiteBeyondRome(dot)wordpress(dot)com or email 4Vatican2Rite@gmail.com for link to above site.

“You Still Aren’t Going to Get a Rite.”

JK to Sister Lea:

“You still aren’t going to get a rite. You may get a separate ecclesial community, but it won’t be in union with the Successor to Peter. If that doesn’t matter to you, well…”

 


Sister Lea to JK:

“You think I am advocating for a Vatican II Rite for myself?

Vatican II was effectively shut down and “synthesized” into the Roman Rite by the papacy in the last 30-40 years.

We who have experienced the joy of the Spirit in the Vatican II Rite OWE it to those who follow us to RAISE VATICAN II FROM COUNCIL TO NEW RITE!

Besides, you never know, the Successor to Peter just might find himself glad for a Vatican II Rite. No more straddling the great polarization divide, no more frustration and appeasements for each side of the divide…diluting the vision of both sides.

With a new rite, both Roman and Vatican II Rites can pursue their very different visions of Church… in union with Rome or not, as Rome chooses.”

 


 

JK to SisterLea

“That’s my point, the bit you wrote about “NOT.” That’s what’s not going to happen. If you’re talking about a separate body, not in union with Rome, it’s being done all the time. Lots of ecclesial communities already have a system in place. You don’t even have to set up your own (though I suspect it’s REALLY about being able to call the shots…but if that’s so, you can go autocephalous. There’s even an organization or association that helps facilitate such things).

As for your take on the Council, I’m going with Saint John Paul II and the Pope Emeritus and the idea of the hermeneutic of continuity over that of rupture. They were there.”

 


 

Sister Lea to JK

“I am NOT talking about “a separate body, not in union with Rome, ” NOT one that denounces Rome, but one that sees its brother Rome in all its sacred separateness…the same separateness it has now with the 20+ other rites in union with Rome.

I am NOT interested in “calling the shots” or setting up an alternative system. The model of Church that Vatican II called forth will do just fine.

As you well know, Joseph Ratzinger, then-future Pope Benedict XVI was also at Vatican II as theological advisor to the Council. His book written in 1966, THEOLOGICAL HIGHLIGHTS OF VATICAN II, is full of the joy and spirit of the Council along with the struggle between “integrists and progressives”…the same struggle going on now 50 years later! Only now we look at a hermeneutic of unity through diversity!”

 

 

EXPLORING THE WAY TO A VATICAN II RITE (PDF SLIDES)

VISUAL PDF PRESENTATION FOR PERSONAL THOUGHT OR GROUP DISCUSSION
Click here:  Exploring the Way 4 VATICAN 2 Rite
(Slides are not time-sensitive.  Scroll down at your own pace.)
Download of presentation available at link above.

Too many people think that Uniformity or Schism are the only solutions to the severe polarization in the Catholic Church.  That is not the case!

Too many people think that Catholic priests cannot marry…when Eastern Rites in union with Rome have many married priests.

For too long, other rites in union with Rome have been explained as being different from the Roman Rite ONLY in Liturgy.  That is not the case!

Check out how and why it is possible to have a Vatican II Rite in union with Rome.

(If link above does not work, Click on link below to see PDF Presentation.  Link above loads faster.)

Exploring the Way 4 VATICAN 2 Rite

%d bloggers like this: