Here are some extremely interesting observations by a Lutheran observer at Vatican II. From what the man says it appears that the bishops got to Rome without any particularly pressing concerns of their own to deal with, they were asked to pass on grand issues for which they weren’t prepared, the experts argued rings around everyone else, the bishops became their pupils, and against their own preferred ways of thinking they answered the questions put to them as they had been taught. It seems an odd way to run a church.
Those who took part in the Council and favored the direction it took seem to have been intoxicated by the adventure and romance of it all, a state of mind not often helpful in governing a church or anything else. Whether romantic excitement was appropriate to the event should I suppose be judged by its fruits. This account of Yves Congar’s reactions is helpful as a reflection of what the Council seemed at the time to its fervent proponents.
Lindbeck had an article on
Lindbeck had an article on the Council in First Things a while back as I recall.
Interesting. My Communio
Interesting. My Communio discussion group discussed the areas that the Catholic church has never issued an opintion on – the interpretation of the book of Revelations,for instance. A seminarian made the point that the Church’s policy is to avoid making statements on issue until there is some necessity, the number of sacraments at the Council of Trent, for example, and that some have viewed the problem of Vatican II as being that it was addressing issues when there was no crisis to focus attention.
Mr. Kalb’s frank discourse
Mr. Kalb’s frank discourse supports a growing suspicion that Vatican II was a disaster. It is difficult to avoid awe over the idea of a second Vatican Council because it is only the second in 2,003 years, and it occurred very close, historically speaking, to our lifetimes. But I have always wondered why these times deserved a second council in light of the seeming lack of good results. I assumed the good results resided primarily in esoteric Catholic theology. My wonderment is fueled by the abandonment of the Latin Mass, which was a cord linking together Catholics worldwide and a practice maintaining a tradition. (Thank Jesus that there is always a Latin Mass in every substantial American city.)
Wonderment is further fueled by implied tolerance of Biblical grotesqueness: homosexuality. Homosexuality is a virus that infects the Church; it contributes nothing but grief. The same might be said of all adultery (sex outside marriage), but our Church is not besieged by ceaseless allegations of adultery by heterosexual priests. Unintentionally, the liberal allies of homosexuality have heralded the evils of homosexuality. The Church needs humble activists to take over the ministerial but everyday functions of the Church that are now performed by the deceived.