Lori, like the rest of the church, wants to pretend Vatican II didn’t happen
Tags
Related Posts
About the author
Archbishop William E. Lori’s article on the Second Vatican Council (“Not a break but a continuum,” Aug. 18) fails to mention Pope John XXIII who convened the council. Instead Mr. Lori refers to Pope Paul II. According to Archbishop Lori, Pope Paul II reports the council as “historically a thing of the past, but spiritually still in being.”
In fact the church has been trying to put the “spirit” of that gathering behind them ever since the death of John XXIII. The Second Vatican Council was not just a meeting of bishops, as reported in the article, but included laity and women of the church. (My father was a participant in two separate sessions, one on world peace and the other on families. )
The Second Vatican Council was held in a spirit of new “revelation,” a movement toward universal wholeness, catholicity. At last, people were recognizing that God did not stop speaking to creation with the last of the prophets and with the written words of those who remembered Jesus and His teachings. Pope John XXII was acknowledging God’s word in creation. It was a time when the work of Einstein, Bohr, Pauli, Heisenberg and others were shedding light on what the mystics had been telling us for centuries, and the main teachings of Jesus: “we are one in spirit.” [more]
SOURCE
Leave a Comment
Photo Archive
-
May 20, 2013 5:17
Maine Catholic church closing its doors
-
May 20, 2013 5:14
Muslim leaders in US facing challenges inside and outside the faith
-
May 17, 2013 5:43
Archbishop clarifies remarks about Cuomo
-
May 17, 2013 5:40
Fr. Gary Meier goes public with clergy experience
-
May 17, 2013 5:37
Predator priests paid to pray for unsuspecting families
-
May 16, 2013 1:56
Cleanup of Bridgeport, Conn., diocese begins in earnest
-
May 16, 2013 1:38
Archbishop Presses Cuomo Over Abortion
-
May 16, 2013 1:26
Deal reached in Catholic lawsuit
-
May 16, 2013 1:13
N.Y. matriarch moves closer to sainthood
-
May 16, 2013 1:07
Alvare talk on women, religious freedom, draws hundreds to seminary
36 Comments
A very poorly done article. Uninformed. Agenda?
Dear Mary — is it possible for a writer NOT to have an agenda?
The list of those silenced, just more evidence of the bishops eating their own.
The yet to be silenced Robert Taft, S.J. wrote that he is a Vat. II loyalist, with no apologies to anyone, reminding us that Vat. II was a general council of the Church and the popes since the council have made it clear there is no going back. He adds that that the mandate for reforms of Vat. II was passed by overwhelming majority (2,147 yes, 4 no), so it is the tradition of the Church, “like it or lump it.” Amen
Although I’d like to think I am a Vat II Catholic (and a Deacon), it seems to me that many who protest the hierarchy are less than knowledgeable about Vat II. I wonder how many who protest have actually read the documents. Thus, it seems to me if a bishop opens his mouth about Faith & Morals, he is automatically opposed to Vat II. Just as it stated above that all those theologians are not likely all to be wrong, so also the bishops.
Deacon thank you for being a Vatican II Catholic and for responding to the call of Vatican II to enter the diaconal ministry.
I looked up Archbishop Lori’s piece; after reading it, I’m wondering whether the author of this piece simply used the Archbishop’s article being published as an opportunity to vent frustrations about conservatives in the Church or if she is responding to what Archbishop Lori actually wrote? I’m also wondering how much homework she did before writing your piece, and how much of the Catholic Church’s official teaching she actually accepts in her personal faith? I wish that folks who are “Cafeteria Catholics” (and I’m not in this author’s head, so I can’t say for sure that she is), would begin their articles stating that their beliefs are not orthodox so that they don’t scandalize non-Catholics as well as Catholics who have not been fully catechized.
First, “Pope Paul” lived from 1417 – 1471. I had hoped this was a typo, but then I saw that she mentioned him twice at the beginning of the article. Regarding her beef with Lori quoting “Pope John Paul II” rather than Pope John XXIII, I believe that the Archbishop’s intention was to reach the JPII generation with his message. With many of the devout Catholics of this younger generation ready to reject the council entirely (the point of Lori’s third paragraph), it seems that his point is something like, “Hey, don’t reject the council outright as something that was thrown together by a bunch of liberal theologians and laypeople. Even your conservative hero Pope John Paul II was on-board.”
She also wrote that “The Second Vatican Council was not just a meeting of bishops, as reported in the article, but included laity and women of the church.” Bishop Lori never says that only bishops were present; he’s merely making the point that it wasn’t just “a gigantic strategic planning meeting” that conservative Catholics should feel free to sweep under the carpet and ignore, but rather a meeting of the Magisterium that should be taken seriously by faithful Catholics.
Her third paragraph starts as such: “The Second Vatican Council was held in a spirit of new “revelation,” a movement toward universal wholeness, catholicity. At last, people were recognizing that God did not stop speaking to creation with the last of the prophets and with the written words of those who remembered Jesus and His teachings.” Yet in the Second Vatican Council document entitled “Dei Verbum” (translated as “The Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation”), the council declared that all public revelation was completed, and therefore ended, with the death of the last apostle (see Vatican II, Dei Verbum 4)! Therefore, Archbishop Lori’s statement in his article would seem to make a lot more sense: “Actually, there is a better way for us to appreciate the council. Pope Benedict XVI calls it a “hermeneutic of continuity” — not exactly a household phrase. What he means is that the best way to delve into the authentic meaning of the council is to see its connections with Christ, the Scriptures and the whole of the Catholic Church’s tradition.”
Most frightening of all to me is that she mentions a New Age writer such as Depak [sic] Chopra as someone who faithful Catholics should look to for a better understanding of spirituality than what the Magisterium of the Catholic Church has to offer….. Really?!??!? Why should I bother being Catholic at all if I reject the core Catholic teaching that the pope and bishops in union together retain inerrant teaching authority for matters of faith and morals for Catholics? It makes me sad and frustrated that folks who insist that they are Catholic, but reject so many core teachings of what it even means to be Catholic by definition, fight so hard to publicly teach against those who “hold the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven and Earth.” If you outright reject their teachings as irrelevant, why stay Catholic? Surely there is an easier path……such as the New Age movement.
Rick, I didn’t read the article, but I read most of your post — and you wonder if the author of this article is a cafeteria Catholic? Well, actually, she isn’t — because she isn’t Catholic, not even the cafeteria version. Trash like this disgusts me. Thank you for your post, but don’t be afraid to speak the truth in love — the author of this article should be fired by her newspaper — but of course they won’t fire her, because virtually all newspapers are progressive propaganda masquerading as objective news sources.
Pope Paul II was Pope from 1464 to 1471. It would seem he never knew about Vatican II either.
Medellin Conference and the Puebla Conference are also forgotten today. hermeneutical.
The important believe emerging out of the Latin American context is summarized in Hugo Assmann’s reference to the “epistemological privilege of the poor.” On a continent where the majority is both poor and Roman Catholic, liberation theology claims the struggle is with man’s inhumanity to man and not with unbelief.
Wrong as usual, MJF — inhumanity springs from lack of belief. Fix the unbelief, and you fix the inhumanity. You can’t fix inhumanity on the basis of human efforts, as all good things come from God, not humans. Get your head in the game, MJF.
Look outside your door some day, and dismiss poverty as the sin of the poor. I stand with Roman Catholic, liberation theology.
More correctly, you stand with discredited Roman Catholic liberation theology. You should at least have the integrity to admit that the Church has opposed liberation theology. But then again, to have integrity, it helps greatly to go to Mass and receive the Eucharist in a state of grace; state of grace means no unconfessed mortal sins, like missing Mass on a Holy Day or Sunday.
Some of the greatest saints, like Padre Pio and JPII, went to Reconciliation every day. What do you think about that, MJF?
MJF — in re-reading your post, you didn’t even respond to mine — you just continue to stand on the street corner and beat your heretical drum. I feel sorry for you, MJF.
Roman Catholic liberation theology is still alive and well, thank you, despite numerous attempts to “discredit” or “abolish” it by such authorities as then-Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, whose successor may well take a very different approach to RCLT.
Popes have a very uneven record when it comes to recognizing or accepting individual liberties. Recall that Pope Innocent attempted to annul the Magna Carta. Blessed Pope Pius IX opposed not only the unification of Italy in the XIX century, he also took a firm and very dogmatic stand against the liberties of the individual person. And so on.
Blessed Pope John XXIII set out to change all that, and his two most recent successors have attempted to change his changes and move the church back to Vatican I and Trent. Thus it is no surprise that some use the appellation “cafeteria Catholic” to describe those Catholics with whom they decide to disagree. Not just a few people consider Jesus of Nazareth (the Son of God, y’know) as a “Cafeteria Catholic” instead of what he was: a “renegade” Jew. Ah, the mysteries of history . . .
Florian — liberation theology may be “alive and well” in people like you and MJF — but let us realize that evil is “alive and well” in Satan. So, I have a choice — I can either follow you and MJF — neither of whom has been to Reconciliation apparently in years — or I can follow the men appointed by God as Peter’s successors. Tough choice — let me think about that and get back with you.
With regard to the history you quote: I am not familiar with those events, but what I am absolutely certain of is that people twist facts all the time; and I also know that there is tons of context and nuance to every situation. I know the Crusades and Galileo and even Pius XII’s handling of the Jews have been grossly twisted by others hostile to the Church. So, I don’t have the time to read about the issues you raise — nor does anyone have all the time in the world to investigate every allegation — but I am convinced that the Church is inerrant in their dogmatic proclamations — so, sight unseen, if the Church opposes it, I oppose it.
You’re like one of my formerly-Catholic brothers, Florian — he is so convinced that he is so bright and knowledgable that he believes he is brighter and more knowledgable than the Church over the centuries, a Church that has the brightest and the best populate its ranks. You need some humility, Florian. Everyone who accesses the Sacrament of Reconciliation agrees: it requires humility to do so, and having done so, it increses your humility.
To illustrate the “spirit” of Vatican II that has been carried since the close of Vatican II, here is a partial list of the theologians who have been silenced, fired from their jobs or banished under Joseph Ratzinger, our present pope, and formerly the head of the office of the Inquisition for most of the time since the close of Vatican II:
Jon Sobrino, S.J. (El Salvador)
Bernard Haring, CSSR (Germany)
Sr. Lavinia Byrne, IBVM (UK)
Jacques Dupres, S.J. (France)
Thomas Reese, S.J. (USA)
Prof. Michael Buckley (USA)
Fr. Philip S. Keane, S.S. (USA)
Fr. John McNeill, S.J. (USA)
David Hollenbach, S.J. (USA)
Anthony de Mello, S.J. (Indian Goan priest)
Michael Morwood (Victoria, Australia)
Bishop Thomas Gumbleton (Detroit, USA)
Archbishop Paul Evaristo Arns (Sao Paul, Brazil)
Jose Antonio Pagola (Basque)
Fr. Hans Kung (Switzerland)
Fr. Edw. Schillebeeckx, O.P. (Holland)
Fr. Charles Curran (USA)
Fr. Leonardo Boff (Brazil)
Fr. Anthony Kosnik (USA)
Fr. Gustavo Gutierrez (Peru)
Fr. Karl Rahner, S.J. (Germany)
Fr. Matthew Fox, O.P. (USA)
Sr. Mary Agnes Mansour, RSM (USA)
Sr. Elizabeth Morancy, RSM (USA)
Sr. Arleen Violet, RSM (USA)
Archbishop Raymond Hunthausen (USA)
Fr. Ernesto Cardenal (Nicaragua)
Fr. Robert Nugent (USA)
Sr. Jeannine Gramick (USA)
Sr. Barbara Ferraro (USA)
Sr. Patricia Hussey, SND (USA)
Miguel d’Escoto, Maryknoll (Nicaragua)
Fr. Edgar Parrales (Nicaragua)
Uriel Molina, O.F.M. (Nicaragua)
Jean-Bertrand Aristide (Haiti)
Fr. Tissa Balasuriya, O.M.I. (Sri Lanka)
Fr. Eugen Drewermann (Germany)
Sr. Ivone Gebara, SND (Brazil)
Bishop Jacques Gaillot (France)
Fr. Fernando Cardenal, S.J. (Nicaragua)
Fr. Roger Haight, S.J. (USA)
Sr. Margaret McBride (USA)
Fr. Andrew Guindon (Canada)
Bishop Remi DeRoor (Canada, forcibly retired)
Bishop Pedro Casaldaliga (Brazil)
Fr. Paul Collins (Australia)
Sr. Jane Kelly (USA)
Bishop Helder Camara (Brazil)
Fr. Gyorgy Bulanyi (Hungary)
Don Luigi Sartori (Italy)
Fr. Eugenio Melandri (Italy)
Fr. Paul Valadier, S.J. (France)
Don Vittorio Cristelli (Italy)
Bishop Bartolome Carrasco Briseno (Mexico)
Fr. Phillipe Denis, O.P. (France)
Bishop Samuel Ruiz (Mexico)
Teresa Berger (Germany)
Fr. Renato Kizito Sesana (Kenya)
Don Leonardo Zega (Italy)
Fr. John Sye Kong-seok (Korea)
Fr. Paul Cheong Yang-mo (Korea)
Fr. Edouard Ri Jemin (Korea)
Jacques Dupuis, S.J. (Belgium)
Luigi Lombardi Vallauri (Italy)
Fr. Jim Callan (USA)
Monsig. Luigi Marinelli (Italy)
Reinhard Messner (Austria)
Fr. Marciano Vidal (Spain)
Josef Imbach, O.F.M. (Italy)
Don Franco Barbero (Italy)
Fr. Cipriano Carini, O.S.B. (Italy)
Juan Jose Tamayo (Spain)
Don Vitaliano Della Sala (Italy)
Rev. Mary Ramerman (USA)
Rev. Ludmila Javorova (Czech.)
Bishop Felix Maria Davidek (Czech.)
Rev. Christine Mayr-Lumetzberger (Austria)
Rev. Adelinde Theresia Roitinger (Austria)
Rev. Gisela Forster (Ger.)
Rev. Iris Muller (Ger.)
Rev. Ida Raming (Ger.)
Rev. Pia Brunner (Ger.)
Rev. Angela White (Austria and USA)
Fr. Edw. Cachia (Canada)
Fr. Clodovis Boff (Brazil)
Fr. Bill Callahan, S.J. (USA)
Fr. Johannes Metz (Ger.)
Fr. Pedro Arrupe, S.J. (Spain)
Fr. Alvaro Arguello (Nicaragua)
Fr. Jacques Pohier, O.P. (France)
Archbishop Oscar Romero (El Salvador)
Bishop George Robinson (Australia)
Hey Recovering Catholic–I see you have assassinated Bishop Oscar Romero on the silenced, fired and banished list. He sure was finished off–please explain what J Ratzinger did—I know JP II didn’t like Bishop Oscar R.
Thanks for sharing the list. Most people would never realize the sheer numbers of people who have been “silenced” by the Church. The law of large numbers dictates that they can’t all possibly be wrong, but the USCCB and the Vatican won’t be happy until we’re back to Tridentine Mass and the “pray, pay, and obey” mentality of the laity. We cannot, however, that WE are the Church and cannot allow this hijacking of our faith.
Fr. Mark, if you reject that the Magisterium should hold the keys (at least it sounds like that’s what you are saying), then how do you recommend that WE decide what is and what is not the teaching of Christ?
Rick — “Father” Mark already has rejected the Magisterium — he is not a Catholic priest. I believe he may have started his own church, so perhaps he is his own pope as well.
Fr. Mark — “the law of large numbers dictates that they can’t all possibly be wrong” — sounds very Protestant (and wrong) — but then again, you should be honest with the folks here and not represent yourself as a Catholic priest, because you are not. BTW, who came up with that “law of large numbers” — you? Should we begin to call it Father Mark’s law?
Isn’t rooting out heresy part of the pope’s job? Sounds like you disagree, which you are obviously free to do. I wish that other Catholics would become educated about why Catholic Church authorities might feel the need to silence a theologian. Our Church is not a democracy, and Jesus didn’t set it up that way. If I ever have a problem with that, there are plenty of other denominations for me to choose from that are.
Rick — your comment is right on target, and one of the few faithful Catholic ones here.
Halleluia! Halleluia! Halleluia! I thank God that Cardinal Ratzinger was on the job, protecting us from these heretics.
Baloney. This is one of the most irrational, unsubstantiated article I’ve ever read. I can’t believe that the editor would put his name to such trash, making himself to seem very unintellible. However, being that it came from the “Baltimore Sun”, I guess that I should consider the source.
I don’t think referring to him as Mr. is anything but what it is. He certainly cannot be referd to as anything other than a mouthpiece for the ultra conservative voice of the church. He doesn’t speak for the millions of catholics who embraced and live by Vatican two. And who really cares about burying Vat 2 ? It’s a done deal with the clergy we have anyway.
One cannot always believe what one reads.
This “article” is nothing other than remarkably ignorant and inarticulate drivel.
Archbishop Lori would also like to pretend that the Catholic clergy sex abuse crisis didn’t happen. He would also like to pretend that his “fortnight for freedom” will obtain for him the red hat of a cardinal and secure for him a prominent place in Catholic history.
Reality being what it is, the search for Truth will proceed without Archbishop Lori.
So very true…thanks!
Aaaahhh, yes, another unsubstantiated comment from you, Florian. You know the Archbishop’s motives, do you? Talk about being judgmental — you are judging his motives with zero data on which to base your conclusions. Wow, I thank God I am not married to you.
Florian; Stop beating that old horse – All Catholics have acknowledged the sins commited by some Catholic Clergy and pray for the healing of those who were victims. However there are good clean young men who have choosen to heed God’s call and are serving in our Parishs. How do you think these young men feel listening to the rants of people like you? It is no wonder that we are finding it hard to attract young people into the life of the Religious.
Right off the bat, the article has a few glaring mistakes, To refer to The Archbishop as “Mr” Lori is the first and to refer to the sucessor of Pope John XXIII as Pope Pau II is the other. Also the Council was not held in a spirit of “New revelation.”
What a waste of time this article is.