The controversial liberal theologian Edward Schillebeeckx, "one of the most active theologians at the Second Vatican Council", has died at the age of 95 after a long illness. He died in the Netherlands on December 23.
[12/28]
A couple recent letters have been making waves in Catholic circles. The first is a draft of a pastoral letter on marriage by the U.S. bishops. It was "leaked" to the press and will be discussed & voted on by the bishops in November. The second is a pastoral letter of the Bishop of Sioux City, Iowa. Brief highlights concerning both appear below.
U.S. Bishops' Letter
The 57-page pastoral letter on marriage is said to discuss Catholic teaching on marriage as well as covering "fundamental challenges to the nature and purpose of marriage" such as c*ntraception, homosexual unions, divorce and cohabitation. The document reportedly also covers harm to children from cohabitation and divorce, as well as harm to society from same-sex unions.
On the positive side, the letter has been "harshly criticized" by dissenters. On the negative side, the document is said to encourage NFP while omitting reference to the required "serious reason" which make its use licit only in certain cases and only for certain periods (click here for more information). Also potentially troubling are references to 'remarriage' which may lack forceful denunciations and reminders of the gravity of sin involved. Even when actions are condemned as "gravely immoral", one may fear that the final document will (as is common nowadays) omit all mention of the grave eternal consequences of such actions as well as the divine mandate not to engage in them.
For example, which explanation do you think is more likely to prevent fornication?
* "To [engage in the marital act] outside the covenant of marriage is gravely immoral because it communicates physically the gift of oneself to another when, at the same time, one is not willing or able to make a total and permanent commitment."
* "To [engage in the marital act] outside the covenant of marriage is a mortal sin that offends God. Those who engage in this sin may suffer the pains of hell for all eternity. Scripture says, "Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers...will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9-10) and says that "If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries. Anyone who rejects the law of Moses is put to death without pity on the testimony of two or three witnesses. Do you not think that a much worse punishment is due the one who has contempt for the Son of God, considers unclean the covenant-blood by which he was consecrated, and insults the spirit of grace? We know the one who said: 'Vengeance is mine; I will repay,' and again: 'The Lord will judge his people.' It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." (Heb. 10:26-31)
One may be permitted to think the latter would have a better chance of deterring sin, especially since this approach seems more closely aligned with writings of previous popes, saints, and even Holy Scripture.
Letter of Bishop of Sioux City, Iowa
Certain Catholics may be glad to hear that Bishop Nickless' recent pastoral letter includes a reference to exorcising the spirit of Vatican II. Specifically, the bishop says, "The so-called 'spirit' of the Council has no authoritative interpretation. It is a ghost or demon that must be exorcised if we are to proceed with the Lord’s work." He also says that "It is crucial that we all grasp that the hermeneutic or interpretation of discontinuity or rupture, which many think is the settled and even official position, is not the true meaning of the Council" and says that "There can be no split...between the Church and her faith before and after the Council."
The Bishop embraces Vatican II, but wants to see it "fully implemented and brought to fruition." In fact, not only does he embrace Vatican II, but he somehow actually considers it "the greatest gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church in centuries." There seems to be no precedent for "the greatest gift of the Holy Spirit to the Church in centuries" which also requires that it's "so-called 'sprit'...must be exorcised."
Certainly his letter is not a 'traditionalist's document' [e.g. it contains multiple, unqualified references to "Pope John Paul the Great" (click here for one user's article on this topic), it says Vatican II's "aggiornamento brought about a great breath of fresh air, a new freedom and excitement about being Catholic", it speaks favorably concerning certain novelties, etc.], but it does note a loss of sense of sin and refers to problems in today's liturgy, calling for a renewed "reverence, love, adoration and devotion to the Most Blessed Sacrament, within and outside of Mass."
There seems to be no word on which exorcist may be called in for the task, but still it's an interesting thought, is it not?
[Related Resources: Summary of Changes Since Vatican II: A Revolution in the Church? | Vatican II and its Fruits]
[10/16]
It's hard not to scratch one's head over comments such as "Critics say the new, more literal word-for-word translation [of the Novus Ordo] is part of an attempt to roll back the progress made decades ago" and over concerns that the more faithful translations might "alienate" persons from the Church. One priest finds it troubling that the Pope isn't listing to "critics" and is concerned that the Pope may suffer "another major embarrassment" by correcting Mass mistranslations. Things are surely backwards when making a translation more accurate could be construed as a major embarrassment that might alienate persons from the Church. Should not these persons rather have been alienated when the less accurate translations were "forced on the people in the pews" (as the above mentioned priest refers to the introduction of these more accurate translations)? Further, should the Pope be more concerned about "critics" or faithful sons and daughters of the Church who are entitled to accurate and orthodox translations of the Missal? Was St. Paul nervous about what his critics might think? Was Jesus? [3/17]
Posts
