Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Dumpster Fire in the Church Today: Time to Let Go of Vatican II
For the past month, the laity in the Church have vented their anger over the explosion of sexual abuse allegations that surround former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and the accompanying failure of his brother bishops to stop his abuse or curtail his rise to power and prominence in the Church. The statements that have come out from the bishops that surround this crisis, are to me weak, pathetic, and devoid of any sense of responsibility. And they continue to be devoid of any self-awareness, accountability, or responsibility (just listen to Cardinal Wuerl, McCarrick’s successor in DC, say that he doesn’t think it is a massive crisis and calls it a “terrible disappointment” — good grief man, are you kidding me?)
Cardinal Wuerl and Fr. Rosica are not as reassuring as they intend to be in this clip. pic.twitter.com/rXbuaEeQ0G
— Matthew Schmitz (@matthewschmitz) August 10, 2018
It is impossible to defend the indefensible and matters are made worse when those bishops who were closest to McCarrick say they were shocked — shocked mind you, that this could happen — saying that they had no idea that any of this was going on and issuing statements asking what more could have been done to protect the People of God. The bishops have lost all credibility in my mind. This is not only a moral failure, but it is a failure of leadership, a failure of these men to shepherd their people, and a failure of these men to admit the root cause of this horrific scandal:
Homosexual acts committed by or between clerics—even among those presumably able to consent—are at the root, the very root, of the sexual misconduct and cover-up crisis exposed by the McCarrick scandal. Who on earth does not yet know that yet?
Amidst all this I was surprised to read this article by George Weigel, Distinguished Senior Fellow of Washington DC’s Ethics and Public Policy Center, and noted Catholic commentator. He writes about this year’s 25th anniversary of World Youth Day in Denver, CO, where about 700,000 young Catholics gathered to see and hear Pope John Paul II proclaim the Gospel. Weigel writes that JP2 challenged that crowd at the papal mass in Mile High Stadium with these words:
Do not be afraid to go out on the streets and into public places, like the first apostles who preached Christ and the good news of salvation in the squares of cities, towns, and villages. This is no time to be ashamed of the Gospel.… It is the time to preach it from the rooftops.
Weigel writes that what he calls the triumph of WYD93 was not only a triumph for JP2 and the organizers for the event but that it was a turning point for the Church in the USA:
Before WYD 1993, too much of Catholicism in America was in a defensive crouch, like too much of the Church in Western Europe today. After WYD 1993, the New Evangelization in the United States got going in earnest, as Catholics who had participated in it brought home the word that the Gospel was still the most transformative force in the world. Before WYD 1993, U.S. Catholicism was largely an institutional-maintenance Church. With WYD 1993, Catholicism in America discovered the adventure of the New Evangelization, and the living parts of the Church in the U.S. today are the parts that have embraced that evangelical way of being Catholic.
He paints a rosy picture but is he right?
Pope John XXIII opened the Second Vatican Council in a spirit of aggiornamento or modernization — a throwing open of the doors of the Church in a desire to dialogue with the outside world. Perhaps the New Evangelization was meant to flow from this (although it seems that PJP2 thought it necessary because of the decline in the Church since the Council). When one compares the statistics of the number of priests, religious sisters and brothers, reception of the sacraments, and church attendance to the total Catholic population from 1995 to now, the picture is grim.
A taste with a comparison of 1995/2017:
- Catholics: 57.4M/68.5M
- Parishes: 19,331/17,1567
- Priests: 49,054/37,181
- Seminarians: 3172/3405 (some good news!)
- Baptisms: 981,444/660,367
- Former Catholics: 17.3M/30.0M
I have to say we are back in a defensive crouch big-time with the continuing scandal of predatory homosexual clerics in the Church, the doctrinal confusion that emanates from Rome, the lack of belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist (up to 40% of Catholics), the declining numbers for mass attendance, and the absolute failure of the bishops to protect the flock. Based on this, how can one proclaim the New Evangelization — prioritized towards lapsed and lukewarm Catholics, anything other than an utter failure?
Perhaps Vatican Council 2 has gone past it’s sell-by date and we need to stop using that Council as a reference for the Church. As Fr. Hugh writes:
(V2) described itself as a pastoral council, and it sought to repackage the teaching, life and worship of the Church to suit a world in flux. For this very reason the Council was necessarily going to have a best-before date. That date has been passed. The sad thing is that its milk turned sour very soon after packaging.
As Fr. Hugh notes, and the statistics above confirm, “Catholic vitality has plummeted” in the post-conciliar years. And as the Liturgy Guy writes:
If one still disputes this they cannot be taken seriously and should step away from the grown up table; these discussions aren’t for you.
Fr. Hugh again:
By any reasonable standard of judgment the application of the Council failed, miserably, to achieve the Council’s aims. This statistical revelation of decline is quite apart from the decline experienced by Catholics as they have seen dogmas, doctrines, morals and many other elements of Catholic life thrown into chaos in the wake of the Council. St John Paul II and Benedict XVI, in their different ways and according to their lights, attempted to stem the ecclesial wasting away. But while ever the main nutrition of the Church was based on the Council (usually very loosely) then the Church will ever be gaining a pound a losing two.
When one looks back and reads in Gaudium et Spes (the document that was most associated with aggiornamento), that “love of God and neighbor is the first and greatest commandment” (GS24), and that “man is the source, the center, and the purpose of all economic and social life” (GS63), one reads statements that clearly contradict the words of Jesus Christ. And if one looks back to the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae, and the subsequent liturgical abuses that followed from this, one sees a clear break with the tradition of the Church and the dereliction of the duty of the Pope to protect this tradition.
But as Fr. Hugh points out and it is obvious to one who will look, the decline is not universal:
The Church grows apace in the developing world, where a different social and attitudinal dynamic is at work. The Church is growing in the West in certain places too. But here’s the rub: it is growing precisely where much of what was discarded by the post-conciliaristas is slowly and sensibly being reclaimed and integrated into the world of 2017 rather than the mid-1960s. What they are reclaiming is essential, timeless Catholicism rather than the tired mantras and shibboleths of the “Vatican II Church”. The young have discovered, and many of the older re-discovered, that there was a Church before Vatican II, and it was healthy, vital and beautiful.
V2 proclaimed itself a pastoral council. Pastoral actions, unlike doctrine, are not timeless. I will admit that I have for many years pounded the table and said that if only the council was implemented as the Fathers wanted all would be good. But I have come to realize that this is like the Progressives who say that if only socialism or communism was implemented properly all would be good. Fr. Hugh:
So, despite the many virtues of the Council documents, and some (of) its beautiful passages of theological lyricism, they are so laden with deliberate ambiguities, and have been so abused and misrepresented in their application, that are fit only for the occasional reference or quotation. They addressed too specifically a world that disappeared soon after the Council; Gaudium et speswas flawed even then, but now it reads almost risibly.
Thus it makes no sense to be constantly referencing every contemporary initiative to Vatican II, for justification or acceptance-value. It is time to move from a post-conciliar Church to a post-post-conciliar Church; which is to say, it is time to reclaim the Church as She has always been in her essence and her stable form, which has been able to function viably and vitally in every age and circumstance since the time of Christ. In the 1960s mankind, not least of the Catholic variety, seemed to think it had found something new under the sun. How old, dated and desiccated that new thing now looks.
It may seem silly or outrageous to you to blame the crisis in the Church today on the Second Vatican Council. But for me, it is time to move on and move back to regaining the history and tradition of our Church, and not use as a point of reference and foundation the most recent Council in the history of the Church. And my jumping off point for this is to avoid whenever possible the Novus Ordo mass and attend the Usus Antiquior mass.
To finish, I will point you to an article from a priest who gets the anger that so many are full of today. Monsignor Charles Pope writes:
Published in Religion & PhilosophyI am grateful that many lay faithful love the Church enough to be angry. Sometimes one must be angry enough to be willing to act for change and to persevere in that work. I hope you will honor your anger and use it to creative ends: to tirelessly demand real reform in all the ways God gives you to see. Be careful to target your anger and speak it in love and for the good of all.
So, this is a crucial moment for God’s people. As a member of His clergy, I want to say that we need you now more than ever and to remind you that you will be essential to reform by insisting on it and refusing to accept a return to business as usual. Let us pray for one another and work for the reform we all know is necessary and long overdue.
That’s sure what it feels like. Not so much a steward as a ruler. The Church is off its moorings and going whichever way the wind blows. Usually to the Left.
That is sad, but not unexpected. Evangelicals have been working hard, particularly in Central America, at converting people while the Catholic Church has played footsie with Cultural Marxists.
It turns my stomach every time I hear a priest talk about “social justice” (Bishop Barron).
“Guys, it doesn’t mean what you think it means anymore.”
I think the point where I started to question Pope Francis was when he told his Evangelical friend, Bishop Tony Palmer, not to come into the Catholic Church even though Bishop Palmer wanted to. Bishop Palmer died before he had a chance (thwarted by the Pope) to come into full communion with the Catholic Church – because the Pope wanted Bishop Palmer to be a “bridge-builder”, rather than a Catholic. The CoC cautions me from commenting further.
I became nervous when I heard, “South American Jesuit.” I held out hope as long as I could, really I did. But, the accumulation of data has convinced me I was right to fear.
That makes no sense. It seems like a non sequitur. The Church is spiritual, Catholicism or other denominations are run by men. It is madness to follow a wicked leader when other options are available.
The original reason I rejected your church was doctrine. I do not buy into several of your beliefs, especially if you are going back to the pre-v2, everyone else is going to hell approach. The biggest was naturally telling me that despite what all scientific evidence would tell me, that wine is actually blood. That’s not a miracle, that’s Let’s Pretend. This current crisis is just icing on the cake.
We don’t follow the bishops, we follow Jesus. The bishops are successors to the apostles. Did anyone start a church by “following” the apostles? The same church today as 2,000 years ago?
You don’t deny Church teaching, you deny Jesus’ words: “This is my body. This is my blood.” Does God create reality when He speaks or not? Your choice to believe. You wouldn’t be the first to reject Jesus’ teaching. It happened in the Messianic Age as well. Many disciples walked away.
If you want to have a conversation about your struggles to accept Catholicism, I suggest you start a post. If you do it in good faith, I think many Catholics will happily engage with you. But, this is probably not the appropriate thread.
Actually it makes all the sense in the world. The Church is a mystery – both divine and human. Christ founded the Church and promised us that the Gates of Hell would not prevail.
Then you are rejecting Truth. What the Church teaches as doctrine isn’t true because it is Catholic, it is Catholic because it is true.
I assume you are referring to extra ecclesiam nulla salus (outside the Church there is no salvation)? It is a doctrine taught by Jesus Christ to his Apostles, preached by the Fathers of the Church, and taught by Popes through the millennia. Go read John 14:6. What it means is that if we are to be saved, we are saved through Christ and his Church.
That wine is wine. We have numerous scientific tests to determine the presence of blood. Even in the turn of the previous century, they had several chemical tests for blood. It does not meet any of those criteria. If I looked at the wafer under a microscope with H&E stain, I would not see human tissue. When Jesus was raised from the dead, he was able to walk and talk, people could touch him, he was hungry and ate food. It was not just a mental or perception thing, or some imperceptible change. Jesus’s miracles actually had concrete, detectable results, like sick people being healed. The miracles I have heard about in the modern era were similar: even if you could claim a natural cause, there was an actual change.
I’m a Lutheran mostly. I believe in the Real Presence, but I believe it is not a physical transformation. I suppose this means I am not eligible for grace. Oh well.
I wanted to to get the point across that I did not reject Rome solely because of the Pope – heck, all of the popes I had experience with were decent. I had serious theological disagreements, and I didn’t want to be a Nancy Pelosi fake Catholic, though do you believe that’s better than a protestant?
Regardless, I will stop posting here.
Of course you wouldn’t, the doctrine of transubstantiation has always held that the substance changes but the accidents do not. “Accidents” is a somewhat arcane term from philosophy that includes all external appearances and measurable qualities. So yes, it looks like bread, even under a microscope.
Tastes like bread too.
I had no idea just how prescient this comment would be, given that one of the revelations in this most recent scandal.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/catholic-churchs-pennsylvania-grand-jury-report/
Abusers are going to abuse. I get that. But how can these so called men of God be so bloody uncaring about the victims of their abusive brothers?
That is how diabolical narcissists act – especially the predatory homosexuals.
That’s the thing though … it’s not just the gays. As noted, there were heterosexual rapists they were covering up for as well!
I can only imagine that these quisling bishops have such a bunker mentality that they think “Better to pretend everything’s okay than to admit we still have rapists in collars.” Well, that’s great if you can ensure that the word never gets out, but obviously they don’t have that kind of power. So with each attempt at damage mitigation, they only dug themselves deeper — and their actions make very clear that the only people they care about protecting are their bad apples and not their flocks.
Maybe they should look into the whole phrase where “a few bad apples” comes from: “A few bad apples will spoil the whole bin.”
Yes, sadly this is the end of it for me. I have been heading this way for a while. The Church, self proclaim champion of morals seems to lack morals and have become just another zombie of the Left. Spouting Left wing talking points and living Left wing life styles. I can no longer support it. At this point it would be better for all for it to die. It has committed suicide by stupidity and have handed its demise over to those that wish it the worst. Now the government will kill it off. The worse of it is that I am going to have to support it’s death because it has done everything in its power to deserve its fate. I whole lifetime as a Catholic, 12+ years of Catholic education all that I was proud off. Now all for naught. All that is left is shame and embarrassment for being played a fool by an institution with bad intentions and purposes. I hope they close down and kick out the US branch of this filth quickly. I am tied of watching this farce.
Where do you plan to go instead?
Either the First Church of Eeyore or some secret shrine in his basement I’d guess.
Perhaps he might become the patron saint of despair?
Peter Kwasniewski shares a letter he received from a friend:
It is a sad state of affairs to agree what this man wrote.
Yeah. Yes, these monsters are gay, but that is mostly ancillary to the fact that they are apostates and false teachers. Mostly ancillary, because I imagine that their homosexuality was probably the first step toward deciding to remake doctrine to tickle their ears. Just getting rid of active homosexual is too loose of a net to catch all the problems.
Their ordination was already forbidden. So it is symptomatic of a deeper disregard for Church authority and tradition.
It is not ancillary. It is a primary motivator for softening the Church’s moral stances. One collection of perverts defending and excusing other perversions.
Go? Nowhere. The Church has proven itself faithless. It has left me. It will no longer get my support. In any way, shape or form. For any of its endeavors. Quite the opposite. It has betrayed a trust. At this point I want it gone. The sooner the better. If the government decides to dissolve and disband it, I will support those efforts. If the government outlaws it. I will support that too. For most my life I have considered the Church one on mankind’s greatest goods. I now know I was very wrong. It may be one of its greatest evils.
Then why would the other erosions of traditional Catholicism happen? I mean, if we’re going by stereotypes here, shouldn’t gays want all the beautiful Mass pageantry, with the flowing robes that need acolytes to carry and the carefully choreographed “chancel prancing,” as I’ve heard it referred to as?
So, you hate the Church so much that you are willing to destroy the U.S. Constitution to end the Church?
I am a lapsed Catholic; there is no way I would ever give money to the Church as it now stands, and I rarely go to Church. But if you support the U.S. government destroying any Church, that kind of goes against everything America is supposed to stand for, doesn’t it?
So you’ve given up on the First Amendment as well?
Does it? America stands for a religion that sacrifice children’s live to the predation of adults? Sorry, your argument has been resolved years ago. Just like the First Amendment does not allow a religion of human sacrifice it does not allow a religion that’s clergy sacrifice small children for its own sport.
I must support the raping of children because of the First? Really?
Because those are stereotypes. The perversion is not.
Geeze John/Jane, the Magesterium doesn’t teach that sexual predation is morally acceptable. Our faith teaches that it’s wrong to use people for sexual gratification — even in marriage! It’s one of the (very) few to do so.
You’re throwing out the baby with the bathwater, imo. I understand the anger, but we can’t let it rule over our rationality. These wolves are apostates. I encourage you not to let them drive you out of the Church. This problem must be fixed by the laity living holy lives and holding the bishops accountable.
Maybe it does not teach sexual predation. It seems that it just promotes and protects sexual predation withing its ranks. This stuff was brought up and should have been resolved decades ago. That it is now still an issue seems to support that the Church has no desire to resolve the issue. That is fine. It is time to resolve the issue for the Church. It needs to go. It needs to cease as an institution. Effectively it is nothing other than a corporation. Corporations are shutdown by the government all the time. Especially one that fosters the sexual abuse of children.
Wow, it’s amazing how you managed to distill my argument so accurately and fairly!