Light blogging of late due to the fact I am still working on my taxes. A new challenge arose this morning though. I went to 'warm up' the car for travel to morning Mass as usual - but the car won't turn over. Went to car number 2 and that won't turn over either. I did not plan to spend my day working on the cars - but it seems to be the only option available.
I suspect I will be walking the 3 miles into town later today.
However, to keep my hundreds (thousands) of readers entertained, I am going to blog on a controversial subject.
In the Fall of 2003 issue of Latin Mass Magazine there was an article by Mr. Kenneth Jones, “Vatican II Renewal: Myth or Reality”. While I didn't dispute Mr. Jones' data, I did dispute his conclusions from the data - especially considering the 'data' he left out. I wrote a letter to the editor of Latin Mass Magazine with my objections and concerns. This letter was never printed to my knowledge. As more than a year has now passed, I think it is time to re-print it below (especially as this will save me the trouble of trying to blog something original). As I recall, my original letter was three times as long, but in fear they wouldn't print it or would edit it to death, I did the editting myself. Therefore, if I were to make a complete rebuttal to Mr. Jones' article, what you see below would only be the highlights.
Without further ado, I present an old letter:
"Dear Editor,
Without being an apologist for the implementation of Vatican II, I am also weary of articles like “Vatican II Renewal: Myth or Reality” by Mr. Kenneth C. Jones (Fall 2003). Tunnel-vision may be the appropriate term to describe the selection and analysis of data whenever a discussion of the wisdom of convening Vatican II is on the agenda. I do not dispute the data Mr. Jones provides, but dispute its completeness and the conclusions.
Was the Faith so robust around the Catholic world as Mr. Jones assumes it to have been in the USA prior to the convening of Vatican II? My understanding is that the Catholic culture in Europe, especially France, was already waning – desperately needing some kind of renewal. Further, the logistics of solidifying the Catholic evangelization in many third world countries may also have been a factor in convening Vatican II and the pastoral documents emanating therefrom.
Further evidence that troubles were already brewing in the Catholic world can be found in Humani Generis where Pope Pius XII says in effect that modernist errors have infiltrated higher education – even the seminaries (HG - Paragraph 13).
If the priests and bishops were, prior to Vatican II, so staunchly orthodox, it is hard to fathom how their orthodoxy disappeared so suddenly following Vatican II. Is it possible that their orthodoxy was more of a convenience and than of true belief?
By 1962 in the US, Catholics had come of age. They were no longer poor immigrants; they had economic and political clout. Sometimes money and power corrupt – both the laity and the clergy. These Catholics had not had their Faith seriously challenged in years. When it was, in the decades of the 60’s and 70’s: were so many so poorly educated in their Faith that they blindly followed modernist clergy and secular immorality; or were they simply not spiritually up to the challenge? Many remained faithful, but many more did not or did not pass the Faith to their children.
Great societal changes were beginning at the time of Vatican II. The introduction of the pill and the resultant so-called ‘sexual revolution’ were the most significant. Neither the clergy nor the laity were up to dealing with these changes. It would be difficult to show how they would have been any better prepared without Vatican II. The battle was joined before Vatican II convened, but it was under the radar.
Vatican II was implemented poorly (I surely understate) because the much of the clergy was already corrupted.
The conclusion that the problems in the Church in the past 40 years would have been avoided without Vatican II is very naive considering all we have witnessed. In fact, one might conclude that Vatican II was convened 10 or 20 years too late!
Understand my comments are generalized and not comprehensive, but perhaps will provoke more thoughtful research. One final thought: is it possible that the fruits of Vatican II have not been fully realized – that the blossom is just beginning during the current pontificate? Looking at Pope John Paul II’s extensive writings, travel, and influence on Vatican II as a young bishop, hasn’t he proposed the Catholic Truths directly to the people – because much of the clergy is unwilling to do so? Ironically, if the fruits are just beginning to blossom, perhaps the true renewal of and with the Tridentine Mass will be one of the fruits of Vatican II.
Oremus pro invicem!
Jim Curley"
Without being an apologist for the implementation of Vatican II, I am also weary of articles like “Vatican II Renewal: Myth or Reality” by Mr. Kenneth C. Jones (Fall 2003). Tunnel-vision may be the appropriate term to describe the selection and analysis of data whenever a discussion of the wisdom of convening Vatican II is on the agenda. I do not dispute the data Mr. Jones provides, but dispute its completeness and the conclusions.
Was the Faith so robust around the Catholic world as Mr. Jones assumes it to have been in the USA prior to the convening of Vatican II? My understanding is that the Catholic culture in Europe, especially France, was already waning – desperately needing some kind of renewal. Further, the logistics of solidifying the Catholic evangelization in many third world countries may also have been a factor in convening Vatican II and the pastoral documents emanating therefrom.
Further evidence that troubles were already brewing in the Catholic world can be found in Humani Generis where Pope Pius XII says in effect that modernist errors have infiltrated higher education – even the seminaries (HG - Paragraph 13).
If the priests and bishops were, prior to Vatican II, so staunchly orthodox, it is hard to fathom how their orthodoxy disappeared so suddenly following Vatican II. Is it possible that their orthodoxy was more of a convenience and than of true belief?
By 1962 in the US, Catholics had come of age. They were no longer poor immigrants; they had economic and political clout. Sometimes money and power corrupt – both the laity and the clergy. These Catholics had not had their Faith seriously challenged in years. When it was, in the decades of the 60’s and 70’s: were so many so poorly educated in their Faith that they blindly followed modernist clergy and secular immorality; or were they simply not spiritually up to the challenge? Many remained faithful, but many more did not or did not pass the Faith to their children.
Great societal changes were beginning at the time of Vatican II. The introduction of the pill and the resultant so-called ‘sexual revolution’ were the most significant. Neither the clergy nor the laity were up to dealing with these changes. It would be difficult to show how they would have been any better prepared without Vatican II. The battle was joined before Vatican II convened, but it was under the radar.
Vatican II was implemented poorly (I surely understate) because the much of the clergy was already corrupted.
The conclusion that the problems in the Church in the past 40 years would have been avoided without Vatican II is very naive considering all we have witnessed. In fact, one might conclude that Vatican II was convened 10 or 20 years too late!
Understand my comments are generalized and not comprehensive, but perhaps will provoke more thoughtful research. One final thought: is it possible that the fruits of Vatican II have not been fully realized – that the blossom is just beginning during the current pontificate? Looking at Pope John Paul II’s extensive writings, travel, and influence on Vatican II as a young bishop, hasn’t he proposed the Catholic Truths directly to the people – because much of the clergy is unwilling to do so? Ironically, if the fruits are just beginning to blossom, perhaps the true renewal of and with the Tridentine Mass will be one of the fruits of Vatican II.
Oremus pro invicem!
Jim Curley"
From the small holding in Bethune...
Oremus pro invicem!
No comments:
Post a Comment