Thoughts on Vatican II and a question for you
#26
(07-23-2009, 08:43 PM)ResiduumRevertetur Wrote: I'm not usually very helpful in these discussions, but I do have one opinion that's been bugging me. Now I'm thinking about this in relation to the US especially because I know diddly about Europe--but in the general population, in the government, and elsewhere, as the 50s were working their way into the 60s there were so many fault lines starting to emerge that I don't even think it's fair to say, Hindsight was 20/20, we didn't know changes were happening, right? These fault lines would have made the 60s the most wrong time imaginable to convene a Council and on top of that to dump nearly every visible landmark the Faithful had by the end of the decade. It was like a perfect storm to convene a Council when the people in the pews needed continuity more than ever, not change! People can say all they want that the faith did not change during VII. Technically. Tell that to my mom. She got fed up with the Church about 1963 or 64 and stopped all together by the end of the decade. She hasn't gone back since, doesn't see it as important in her life at all. She's not angry or bitter, she just doesn't care. And she was a product of 1940s Catholic school.

I think of the Church in the 60s like a teenager whose parents are divorcing. The kid is already mixed up because of the dreaded teen years (relating to the turmoil of the 1960s, generally), then Mom says she needs to "find herself" (the Council), Dad says he's moving out and they're selling the house to boot (the total overhaul of liturgy) but everyone will be happier in the end. Really. Nine out of ten psychologists say so. The kid is going to drift away from the family, start drinking or something else destructive, and have a poor view of marriage and family, mark your calendar.

To top it off, the <A HREF="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10415a.htm#III" Target="_blank">Modernists</A> were rubbing their hands together while salivating waiting for this Council to begin.

So, right prescription, perhaps, but wrong, wrong, wrong time.

+ RR. ! Your viewpoint is interesting. The "spirit" of revolution was a sleeping giant in the 50s (and before) who woke up in the 60s..

I also agree about bad timing. But I’m not sure there was ever good timing for a pastoral Council since the age of  Enlightenment. I believe (and mind you, there’s no way I can prove this) that a crisis would have happened with or without Vatican II. That’s the direction the whole world was headed and the Church was not immune. Someone said (I think it was Miles) that the Church was crawling with Modernists since the 19th century. I don’t want to keep repeating myself, but when I say “Church” I guess I mean the Vatican, but again, it wasn't just the Vatican.

I have more I want to say.. but I need to get something to eat.

- Lisa
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Thoughts on Vatican II and a question for you - by SCG - 07-23-2009, 09:16 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)