Thoughts on Vatican II and a question for you
#1
I think 1950s Catholicism looked good census-wise. There were more priests in the seminaries, more nuns in the convents, and more heads in the pews on Sundays. But so many of these were the same people who left the Church in droves in the 1960s, or stayed and became part of the problem (the liberal mess we have now) instead of part of the solution.

The issues of Vatican II were old by the time the Council was convened. Part of the Council’s professed purpose was to remind the Faithful that they were to be pursuing holiness. There had developed an over-clericization over the centuries that left the laity to think solely in pedestrian ways and to basically be spectators in the Mass and in the Faith. Such spectatorship was never the intent of the Church Christ founded. As a result the liturgy had grown moribund and was taken for granted. Heroic virtue was for priests, religious and nuns, not lay people.

There had to be renewal (imo), just as there had to be renewal in the 1500s. The counter-reformation not only attacked Protestant error, but also reformed the Church from within (mainly clerics and religious orders) of moral and spiritual laxity. Then the pendulum swung too far in the opposite direction when along came Jansen. The reform had its roots in holiness, and Jansenism, to a degree, corrupted it. 

Today we have a similar problem with Vatican II and liberalism. By the second half of the 20th century, Catholics needed renewal and I have no doubt Pope John had the good of the Church in mind. When I say “renewal” I mean “restoring” all things in Christ and maintaining Tradition in the world and times we live in (not necessarily a return to the forms and norms of 1950 or the 1st century). The Church (in her human element) is like a garden that needs constant maintenance and pruning. Weeds (abuses) creep in that need to be uprooted and burned. What is demanded of us now has been demanded since the day of Pentecost: a genuine conversion and ever-deepening conversion. Now, whether we needed to call a Council to achieve that goal is debatable. But one thing is certain: The Holy Spirit is in the business of setting the world on fire. Either the Holy Spirit inspired and ordained Vatican II, or He allowed Vatican II to happen.. Either way, we got the “wake-up call” we deserved.


End of editorial. Let me turn it into a question and ask if traditional Catholics will admit that renewal (restoration) in the 20th century Church was needed? If so, how would you have effected change and/or dealt with problematic issues in the Pre-Vatican II Church if you had the know-how, the power and authority?

- Lisa
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Thoughts on Vatican II and a question for you - by SCG - 07-23-2009, 01:59 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)