+
JMJ
I've attached below the two paragraphs that jumped out at me.
Source: Rorate-Caeli
P^3
Why is all this happening? Isn't it all deeply irrational?
"No, it isn't. I would even say that the Vatican II Council has finally exploded in all its revolutionary and subversive radicalness. They are ideas that lead to the suicide of the Catholic Church, but they are ideas that were already supported and justified at that time and in that occasion. It is forgotten that the Council preceded in time the student revolution, the sexual one, that of mores and of modes of living. It anticipated them and, in some way, it provoked them. The aggiornamento of Christianity secularized the Church strongly then, it triggered a change that was very deep, even if it, which risked leading to a schism, was controlled and kept at bay in the following years. Paul VI supported it [the Council], but in the end became its victim. The two very great Popes who followed him [John Paul II and Benedict XVI] were perfectly aware of the consequences that had been triggered, but tried to contain and govern it. They assumed a tragic vision of reality, they resisted, they tried to bridge what is new with Tradition. They did it in a sublime way. They had made reverse course; but now those reins are unraveled: society, and not salvation, the Augustinian earthly city, and not that divine one, seem to be the reference point of the ruling ecclesiastical hierarchy. The rights of man, all and without exclusions, have become the ideal and the compass for the Church, while there is almost no room left for the rights of God and of Tradition. At least apparently. Bergoglio feels himself to be and lives completely liberated regarding the latter."
Why do you say "apparently"?
"Because, behind the showcase and the applause, not all that shines is golden. Applause in Saint Peter's Square is not all there is. I, who live in the countryside, realize that a portion of the clergy, above all and surprisingly the younger ones, remain stupefied and baffled by certain affirmations of the Pope. Not to mention so many ordinary people who already today live with the safety issued that migrants create in our outskirts, and who are irritated when they hear talk of unconditional welcoming. The older clergy, the middle-aged ones, are more on the side of Bergoglio: either due to conformism, or to opportunism, or due to conviction (having grown also in that same cultural climate of the Seventies that is at the origin of certain choices). Precisely due to this, I speak of a deep and latent schism. With which the Pope does not seem to be concerned."
Comments
Post a Comment