Bishop Fulton J Sheen and Vatican ll?

[Joanne_ca]

Does anyone know how Bishop Sheen felt about Vatican ll? I used to watch him when I was young as my mother was a devout catholic and his program was on our tv every week. I enjoyed his show even as a kid. He used to preach continually about the importance of the Eucharist and I was wondering how he would feel about taking communion in the hand, as well as all the other traditions we have lost. I’m sure he would follow all the new teachings of the church, but I’m curious to know how he really felt.
I wait for the day when he reaches sainthood, what an example he has set for all catholics.:tiphat:

 

[CatholicNerd]

Joanne_ca:

Does anyone know how Bishop Sheen felt about Vatican ll? I used to watch him when I was young as my mother was a devout catholic and his program was on our tv every week. I enjoyed his show even as a kid. He used to preach continually about the importance of the Eucharist and I was wondering how he would feel about taking communion in the hand, as well as all the other traditions we have lost. I’m sure he would follow all the new teachings of the church, but I’m curious to know how he really felt.
I wait for the day when he reaches sainthood, what an example he has set for all catholics.:tiphat:

Something you must remember is that the Second Vatican Council abrogated none of our traditions Archbishop Sheen was present at the Council sessions, and made every effort to enact reforms. Unfortunately, he had to put up with a lot of flak for trying to follow the teachings of the Church… I heard it said that on more than one occaision mobs pelted his car with rotten fruit after he refused to break his ties with Rome and offer the Tridentine Mass. I suspect that if he had lived to see the Ecclesia Dei Indult, he would have granted it liberally after witnessing how people had abused the Mass that he gave his all to render dignity to.

I think that John Paul II’s words to him in 1979 sum everything up well. “You have written and spoken well of the Lord Jesus. You are a loyal son of the Church.” If he were alive today, Fulton Sheen would enforce the decrees of the Second Vatican Council AS THEY WERE MEANT TO BE ENFORCED.

 

[Crusader]

Archbishop Sheen was extremely orthodox (and also bi-ritual) so I’m sure he followed the mandates of the Catholic Church as outlined in the postconciliary documents of Vatican Council II.

I seriously doubt he would have been a big ring-leader for the “traditionalist” movement. While I am sure he would have respected and followed Ecclesia Dei, this man was just too catholic (as in “universal”) to hem himselm into one tiny and extreme faction within the Catholic Church.

I think he would have been one of those dedicated to driving abuse out of every type liturgy – be it the Novus Ordo Mass, the Tridentine Mass or the Divine Liturgy…

 

[PASCENDI]

I’ve read several of his books. A friend was one of the editors of “The Quotable Fulton Sheen”

He seemed very enthuiastic about V2 and criticised the 3 bishops who voted against everything. Later, he had some misgivings (at least with the implementation) He would say, “As soon as we stopped praying the beads, the hippies put them around their necks.”

As the “American Chesterton” I’m sure whatever he had to say about our situation, it would be worth listening to. Like the Church herself he had a long term view of everything. He didn’t read newspapers and I doubt you’d find him on a blog today.

If he’s ever cononised, I fear that day is a long way off. He wrote a lot, retained few of his correspondences, and his archives in Rochester are a mess of loose and damaged papers (the roof leaked and the wind blew). And then those arguing for his cause will have to explain his great admiration for Teilhard de Chardin. To my knowledge, Sheen never advanced Teilhard’s heresies, but this will be a tough one to get past.

Little trivia: Fulton is Gaelic for WAR and Sheen translates to PEACE. Indeed, Uncle Fultie was always a man of contraditions.

 

[puzzleannie]

for the Record nothing in V2 documents allowed for reception of the Eucharist in the hand, it was an experiment reluctantly tolerated in US and other places, nearly impossible to eradicate after the practice became entrenched.

 

[Crusader]

puzzleannie:

for the Record nothing in V2 documents allowed for reception of the Eucharist in the hand, it was an experiment reluctantly tolerated in US and other places, nearly impossible to eradicate after the practice became entrenched.

Reception of Holy Communion in the hand does follow the early church’s practice, however.

 

[deogratias]

for the Record nothing in V2 documents allowed for reception of the Eucharist in the hand

True

it was an experiment reluctantly tolerated in US and other places, nearly impossible to eradicate after the practice became entrenched

Not quite accurate. Prior to Vatican II some countries had already started doing this and were of course not in compliance with Church law then or after Vatican II. The United States was not one of these countries. After Vatican II, it was brought to the attention of Pope Paul the VI that some countries were doing this ilicitly. He surveyed the Bishops of the world about it and almost unanimously they voted to continue doing it in the traditional manner, i.e. receiving on the tongue.

Then for reasons still a mystery to me, he decided to grant an indult to let those countries aleady doing this to continue to do it. (it should be noted that this is not the norm even now but an indult and not all countries do it).

Even more odd, the Bishops of the U.S. where the practice had not been done prior to this, asked permission of the Holy See to have the indult apply to the U.S. as well and this was granted.

So even though it was common in the “early Church” it can only be done by Indult in some countries and is not the universal norm. Just as the Tridentine Mass was the norm for centuries, but now it can only be celebrated by Indult with the permission by the Bishop of a Diocese.

Bottom line - though an Indult is an exception to the norm - it is valid.

 

[FenianMan]

Crusader:

Reception of Holy Communion in the hand does follow the early church’s practice, however.

So does using the kitchen cupboard as a tabernacle. Does anyone want to go back to that?

 

[CatholicNerd]

FenianMan:

So does using the kitchen cupboard as a tabernacle. Does anyone want to go back to that?

The tabernacle at the parish I attended this summer looks like a kitchen cupboard. sigh :nope:

 

[FenianMan]

I mean no offense,* Crusader***. **I just realized how rude that sounded. Pray for my better prudence…

 

[PASCENDI]

FenianMan:

So does using the kitchen cupboard as a tabernacle. Does anyone want to go back to that?

As does saying mass underground and not paying priests

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

While I had heard earlier that communion in the hand is actually still a matter of indult, can anyone actually show the current norms/legislation to that effect? I tried going to the GIRM, but since the form I had was from the USCCB it had all of the American adaptations already listed in.

 

[deogratias]

Andreas

In Memoriale Domini, which granted the original concession, and in the letter to nuncios which in each and every case accompanied the actual indult (L’instruction “Memoriale Domini”), the permission for Communion in the hand was hedged around with so many precautions, that some have concluded that even in countries where it would seem to be legal, actually, in the larger number of cases, it is still not allowed.

ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWMEMOR.HTM

 

[CatholicNerd]

While we’re on the subject… at ECF tonight I learned that the first celebrant of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom in English was none other than Bishop Sheen!!! Apparently he was very much in love with the Eastern Catholic churches, and urged his brother bishops and priests in the West to stop treating Eastern Catholics as second-class citizens. Pretty darned cool.

 

[Ter]

He strongly supported it. You should read his autobiography “Treasure in Clay”