Pope praises critic of "Bologna School" as "best interpreter of" Vatican II
#11
(11-14-2013, 03:05 PM)Geremia Wrote:
(11-14-2013, 03:04 PM)PolishTrad Wrote:
(11-14-2013, 03:03 PM)Geremia Wrote: From the publisher of Abp. Marchetto's book:
Quote:This important study by Archbishop Agostino Marchetto makes a significant contribution to the debate that surrounds the interpretation of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council. Archbishop Marchetto critiques the Bologna School, which, he suggests, presents the Council as a kind of “Copernican revolution,” a transformation to “another Catholicism.” Instead Marchetto invites readers to reconsider the Council directly, through its official documents, commentaries, and histories. Marchetto’s volume will be a useful resource for graduate students, seminarians, and scholars interested in the theological significance of Vatican II.
Well, this post confirms what McCall1981 wrote. :D
Yes, but that is just Abp. Marchetto's interpretation of it.
If he's a Modernist, what be really continuity with Tradition would indeed seem like a "Copernican revolution."
Surely he might have been biased, but Francis praises him knowing his views. Even if the Bologna School was not so straightforwardly liberal, it is the opinion of the pope that Abp Marchetto is right in criticising it for its alleged progressivism.
Reply
#12
My understanding is that the Bologna school is the progressive, hermeneutic of rupture school of thought.  They say Vat II was a "copernican revolution" in that it broke with Tradition and formed a "new" Catholicism.  They are reprresented by Alberto Melloni, etc.

Oppossed to the Bologna school is the hermeneutic of continuity school of thought, as proposed by Benedict XVI, that says Vat II must be read in continuity with Tradition. 

Archbp. Marchetto wrote a well known book in which he critisizes the Bologna school, and supports the hermeneutic of continuity.  That Pope Francis praises Marchetto as the best interpreter of Vat II means that Francis supports the hermeneutic of continuity as well, so this is good.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here.
Reply
#13
I think this confirms what I was saying:

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2013/11/stop-the-...e-francis/
Reply
#14
This book is what Imre Lakatos would have called an attempt to protect the "core hypotheses" of the "research programme."  In fact, this book is a presentation of a complete research program, namely, the hermeneutic of continuity.

The core hypotheses of this research program are an interesting study in a particular school of church historiography.  One of the hypotheses of this school tends to be that there can never be magisterial mistakes on what we might call a large scale.  One can have isolated bishops here and there screwing up the implementation of the commission laid down by Christ, but one can never witness an almost wholesale corruption of those efforts by the majority of the bishops (with, albeit rather grudging, approval by the pope).  Thus, the last council can never be interpreted in that particular sense.

Oddly, though, under that hypothesis there is no council that could ever be interpreted in that sense.  That is problematic from the point of view of actual historical events; for there exist certain precedents (such as the Arian crisis).  The Arians had the power to obscure the authentic tradition for a number of years, not from everybody certainly, but from a very large number.  Much of what they did and said had to be condemned and undone later because the purity of Divine Revelation will always be preserved in the Church.  It cannot fail to be, even if the actual process is, in fact, rather mysterious.

Imre Lakatos was a philosopher of science and mathematics.  The reason I bring up his concept of "research programs" is because he invented it as a way of explaining the strange behavior of scientists in defending their theories from counter-examples (i.e., anomalies).  One part of research programs is the "positive heuristic."  The positive heuristic is a

"powerful problem solving machinery, which with the help of sophisticated mathematical techniques, digests anomalies and even turns them into positive evidence. For instance, if a planet does not move exactly as it should, the Newtonian scientist checks his conjectures concerning atmospheric refraction, concerning propagation of light in magnetic storms, and hundreds of other conjectures that are all part of the programme. [b]He may even invent a hitherto unknown planet and calculate its position, mass and velocity in order to explain the anomaly[/b]." (Lakatos, 1977, p. 5)

There is a different research program which is far more realistic and congruent with actual history.  Examples of it can be found in books such as Iota Unum by Romano Amerio.  Another theologian, still living, whose name is Mgr. Brunero Gherardini has written a book very recently entitled The Ecumenical Vatican II Council: A Much Needed Discussion.  In the case of the research program of continuity regarding the Second Vatican Council, theologians have invented all sorts of hypothetical objects to save the appearances, just like any scientist would do to save his particular theory.  The most prominent and famous of these invented objects is the hypothesis of living tradition.  In his book on the council, Gherardini elaborates on this concept in the following way:

"We are confronted with a manner of expression, which, while desirous of simplifying the message, ends up by making it more complicated because of a too generic language, its amphibological use and its lack of specificity.  And I am not talking about the fact that living could open the doors to all kinds of innovations which could be born of, or germinated from the old plant.

[ . . . ]

I make one last observation concerning the so-called living Tradition of the Church. Apparently it is an irreproachable expression, yet it is in fact ambiguous. It is irreproachable because the Church is a living reality and Tradition is its very life. It is ambiguous, because it allows the introduction into the Church of any novelty, even the least recommended, as expression of the Church’s life.
"

He goes on with an interesting critical study of certain passages from Dei Verbum in which the concept of "living tradition" is invoked but not explained at all.  Further on he says this

The truth is (and this is serious) that we speak of living Tradition only to rubber stamp any innovation presented as the natural development of truths officially handed down and received, even if the innovation has nothing in common with the said truths and is something far removed from a new shoot out of the old trunk.
Reply
#15
(11-14-2013, 03:18 PM)McCall1981 Wrote: My understanding is that the Bologna school is the progressive, hermeneutic of rupture school of thought.  They say Vat II was a "copernican revolution" in that it broke with Tradition and formed a "new" Catholicism.  They are reprresented by Alberto Melloni, etc.

Oppossed to the Bologna school is the hermeneutic of continuity school of thought, as proposed by Benedict XVI, that says Vat II must be read in continuity with Tradition. 

Archbp. Marchetto wrote a well known book in which he critisizes the Bologna school, and supports the hermeneutic of continuity.  That Pope Francis praises Marchetto as the best interpreter of Vat II means that Francis supports the hermeneutic of continuity as well, so this is good.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong here.

No you nailed it
Reply
#16


Some days I want to find a little mole hole somewhere and squeeze myself through the opening, slinking through its burrows, dragging my blankie behind me, and curling up in a ball inside Mother Earth, with the critters that live down there snuggled all around me. Then I just want to get all cozy and sleep for a hundred years til the madness has, pray God, ended.

"Bologna"..."rupture"... All I can think of are the fried bologna sammiches my Pops used to make. The bologna sizzling in the frying pan used to poof up like breastesses. We kids would laff and call them "boobies." Life was so much simpler then.


Reply
#17
(11-14-2013, 03:32 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Some days I want to find a little mole hole somewhere and squeeze myself through the opening, slinking through its burrows, dragging my blankie behind me, and curling up in a ball inside Mother Earth, with the critters that live down there snuggled all around me. Then I just want to get all cozy and sleep for a hundred years til the madness has, pray God, ended.

"Bologna"..."rupture"... All I can think of are the fried bologna sammiches my Pops used to make. The bologna sizzling in the frying pan used to poof up like breastesses. We kids would laff and call them "boobies." Life was so much simpler then.

Some days, when I take a nap in the late afternoon, this is exactly what I want as well.  I imagine myself being held in the hands of the infinite, eternal Source of All Things, God... as the Fall Sun shines crisply through the leafless trees.  In that place... I can forget all of this insanity...  It is horrible to me that I dread going to Mass compared to doing that...
Reply
#18
(11-14-2013, 03:18 PM)McCall1981 Wrote: My understanding is that the Bologna school is the progressive, hermeneutic of rupture school of thought.  They say Vat II was a "copernican revolution" in that it broke with Tradition and formed a "new" Catholicism.  They are reprresented by Alberto Melloni, etc.

Oppossed to the Bologna school is the hermeneutic of continuity school of thought, as proposed by Benedict XVI, that says Vat II must be read in continuity with Tradition.
Which could also be considered "progressive"…
And "opposed" in what sense?
(11-14-2013, 03:18 PM)McCall1981 Wrote: Archbp. Marchetto wrote a well known book in which he critisizes the Bologna school, and supports the hermeneutic of continuity.  That Pope Francis praises Marchetto as the best interpreter of Vat II means that Francis supports the hermeneutic of continuity as well, so this is good.
It is?
It denies Vatican II has errors in it.
Reply
#19
(11-14-2013, 03:39 PM)Joseph11 Wrote:
(11-14-2013, 03:32 PM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: Some days I want to find a little mole hole somewhere and squeeze myself through the opening, slinking through its burrows, dragging my blankie behind me, and curling up in a ball inside Mother Earth, with the critters that live down there snuggled all around me. Then I just want to get all cozy and sleep for a hundred years til the madness has, pray God, ended.

"Bologna"..."rupture"... All I can think of are the fried bologna sammiches my Pops used to make. The bologna sizzling in the frying pan used to poof up like breastesses. We kids would laff and call them "boobies." Life was so much simpler then.

Some days, when I take a nap in the late afternoon, this is exactly what I want as well.  I imagine myself being held in the hands of the infinite, eternal Source of All Things, God... as the Fall Sun shines crisply through the leafless trees.  In that place... I can forget all of this insanity...  It is horrible to me that I dread going to Mass compared to doing that...

Niiiiice.... nice... Good imagery...  I love Autumn!

I also have my mental wolf den I go to. It's Winter, and I'm part of a pack but still me, human. We're all inside a den, snuggled up in a big ball of Wolf Luv. Their fur and breath are warm, and I know it's nasty-cold outside. So I just burrow my face in their fur and sleep and listen to the "dog" sounds they make as they get cozy...

When I am trying to make my grandson sleep, and even though he's pre-verbal, I tell him he needs to go to "the Bear Cave," which is like my Wolf Den. I talk about how the bears have their bellies all full of nuts and berries and are ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh-soooooooooooo-tired that they have to sleep for an entire Winter. I talk about how it's so cold outside the cave, but inside it's all warm and nice. I describe the bears in a reallllllly soft voice while stroking his brow, telling him how the bears smell like pine trees and blah blah -- and typically can get him to knock off pretty quickly. It's a gift! LOL

Reply
#20
Here's an interview from Zenit with Abp. Marchetto regarding his work that "opposes" the Bologna school.


Modified by Vox to add text of article:


Clearing the Record on Vatican II
Interview With Archbishop Agostino Marchetto
July 13, 2005 | 360 hits


VATICAN CITY, JULY 13, 2005 (Zenit.org).- One of the prevailing historical interpretations of the Second Vatican Council betrays the event, says the secretary of the Pontifical Council for Migrants and Travelers in a new book.

Archbishop Agostino Marchetto, in "Vatican Council II: Counterpoint for Its History" (Vatican Publishing House), describes as "unbalanced" and "ideological" the analysis of the event made by some schools of historians, in particular the so-called Bologna Group.

He elaborated on his view in this interview with ZENIT.

Q: Some historians, such as professor Giuseppe Alberigo and his collaborators [in the Bologna Group], have presented the Second Vatican Council as a discontinuity in the history of the Church, a conservative Curia against progressive theologians, tradition against renewal, a Paul VI who betrays John XXIII. What is your opinion?

Archbishop Marchetto: Whoever reads my book will realize that, while trying to situate myself in the historical interpretation of the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council, taking into account the framework of the general historiographic "tendencies," I retain my specific vision of what the Catholic Church is, also historically.

Therefore, I see Vatican II in continuity with all the ecumenical councils, not as a shooting star, but as part of a constellation, though having some of its own characteristics. Hence, it does not constitute a break, a sort of birth of a new Church.

This is, after all, the thought of John XXIII, of Paul VI, of John Paul II and also of Benedict XVI, to only mention the Popes.

The opposition between "conservative Curia" and "progressive theologians" is also a simplification, as within the Curia there were different sensibilities and tendencies.

An example of this was Cardinal Cicognani who unblocked the stagnant situation of the first schema on the Church, giving a green light to Cardinal Leo Jozef Suenens for a new writing, although in fact it was not totally new, as according to him, 60% of the earlier schema remained in the second.

The opposition between John XXIII and Paul VI, which would separate "John's Council" from Paul VI's, in December 1963, is groundless, and this is not just my opinion, but also that of professor Roger Aubert. According to him, there is only one conciliar line between the two Popes of the Council. There are other examples, but my answer is already quite lengthy.

Q: According to the "History of Vatican Council II," written by Giuseppe Alberigo and his collaborators, Pope Paul VI betrayed the progressive thrust that stemmed from the Council, on two essential topics: collegiality in regard to the primacy of Peter, and the moral judgment on the use of contraceptives. What happened and what did Paul VI do?

Archbishop Marchetto: As I have already explained, the profound sense of the debate was the image of Catholicism, an ecumenical Council, with its search for consensus, which would unite -- the word "aggiornamento" is used, updating -- the two spirits of Catholicism, fidelity to Tradition and the incarnation of what I call "the today of God."

This was the idea that united John XXIII and Paul VI, despite the diversity of their personalities. In the volume I present the ideas of one and the other, in communion. … For me, in the end, Tradition and renewal embraced in the Council.

In regard to the two topics you mentioned, the first, collegiality, was rather an ecclesial characteristic of the first millennium, which was rediscovered, so to speak, by Vatican II. It was placed, without contradiction, next to papal primacy, exercised personally, which developed especially in the second millennium.

In this case also the conjunction "and" reveals itself Catholic: collegiality and primacy, as one cannot speak of collegiality if, in the college, its head -- the Bishop of Rome -- is not there.

In regard to the use of contraceptives, without going into the ethical judgment of the magisterium, it must be admitted that Alberigo's accusation of a "conciliar silence" is not justified, as it is not right to speak, as he does, of a "trauma caused throughout the Christian world by the encyclical 'Humanae Vitae.'"

Q: You have described the analysis of Vatican II made by the Bologna Group as "unbalanced" and "ideological." What do you think are its most serious errors?

Archbishop Marchetto: From the beginning I have defined as "ideological" the interpretation made by the "Bologna Group." And where ideology exists there is a lack of balance, extremism, blurred vision.

I will limit myself to take up all that I wrote about Alberigo's conclusions in Volume V of his history of the Council, namely, the already mentioned opposition between John XXIII and Paul VI; the question of "modernity" -- what does it mean?; the tendency to consider "new" schemas which were not new; the judgment of "lack of a head" in the conciliar assembly; the partisan view on religious liberty.

Q: You say there are more exact and balanced studies and analyses that explain the meaning and history of Vatican II. Which are they?

Archbishop Marchetto: I might mention, for example, the works of Cardinal [Leo] Scheffczyk, which in Italian is entitled "The Church: Aspects of the Post-Conciliar Crisis and Correct Interpretation of Vatican II," with a presentation by Joseph Ratzinger, as well as that of Monsignor Vincenzo Carbone, entitled in Italian "Vatican Council II, Preparation of the Church for the Third Millennium."

In 1994, professor A. Zambarbieri published a small volume on "The Councils of the Vatican," which for me constitutes the best brief study published up to now on the great Vatican synod.

I would add the work of Antonio Acerbi, which is very critical of Alberigo, in his "Minutes of the Meetings Held in the Episcopal Seminary of Bergamo 1998-2001."

Lastly, I think I cannot forget the new Pope, in particular some of his reminiscences, in "La mia vita. Ricordi (1927-1977)" [in English: "Milestones: Memoirs 1927-1977] which led me to ask him to write others. But now this is no longer possible.

Q: What do you hope to achieve with your book? Has the time arrived to discuss Vatican II in truth and charity?

Archbishop Marchetto: In the preface of my book I wrote: "My desire is to contribute to write, finally, a history of Vatican II, which will overcome the grave conditionings -- that is why the title mentioned 'counterpoint' -- created up to now by a vision that I describe as ideological from the start and that imposes itself as a monopoly in the publishing market."

If my hard effort and my going against the current for years has served to break a monopoly and to create freedom of research among historians, to study Vatican Council II in a wider dimension than that realized to date, I would feel profoundly happy.

In any case, dialogue is important also among historians, and my history of the historiography on Vatican II over the past 15 years is an attempt to make a contribution. Moreover, "counterpoint" also refers to music, to harmony, to overcoming one-sidedness.

In this connection, at the end of his presentation of my book in the Capitolio of Rome, Cardinal Camillo Ruini said: "The interpretation of the Council as a rupture and a new beginning is coming to an end. Today it is an extremely weak and groundless interpretation in the body of the Church. The time has come for historiography to produce a new reconstruction of Vatican II that is finally a true history."

Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)