R
RaphaelJ
Guest
Hello. Is it true that the last words of John XIII were to stop the council? If so, it would be disappointing because I believed that Pope Francis canonized him for the opening of the council.
- Status
S
sw85
Guest
(You mean John XXIII.)
There is no real proof or disproof either way; these words were attributed to him by Jean Guitton. Personally, I don’t think Guitton had much of a reason to lie – he was a close personal friend of both J23 and Paul VI, a prolific writer and respected theologian, and apparently a reasonably devout man, and we have some evidence already that good Pope John had wanted the Council to close by Christmas of 1963.
But whether he really, truly said those words – well, J23 and Guitton are both dead, so know I suppose God only knows!
E
Ed_Silvia
Guest
I always liked St Pope John XXIII since I learned he devoutly recited the entire 3 decades of the Rosary daily and now I have renewed affection for him.
P
ProVobis
Guest
I believe that was only one of the reasons cited.
That might be a moot point if it were his last words, as a council is automatically closed upon the death of the Pontiff.
S
sw85
Guest
I’ve never heard it said that these were J23’s last words (I’d heard his last words were “Souls! Souls!”), only that he spoke them from his deathbed, so it’s possible Guitton heard him beg for an end to the Council earlier.
J
John_Lazarus
Guest
Why the rolleyes?I always liked St Pope John XXIII since I learned he devoutly recited the entire 3 decades of the Rosary daily and now I have renewed affection for him.
A
Abu
Guest
There is no reference whatsoever in Dr Warren Carroll’s *The Crisis of Christendom *in his A History of Christendom, Vol.6, to such an unlikely remark from St John XXIII.
In fact, “on December 5 Pope John, despite his illness, stepped in, establishing a new commission ‘to coordinate and direct the work of the Council.’ ”
“On April 25 his serious illness was publicly admitted and on June 3 he died, saying he hoped to watch the conclusion of the Council from Heaven. Since he has since been beatified, we know that he did.” [op.cit., p 631-2].
The assumed words are fiction.
C
CrossofChrist
Guest
Very doubtful.
On 25th January 1959 Pope John XXIII announces his intention to call an ecumenical council of the Church. The aims were to be the renewal of the Church, greater clarity in thinking and strengthening the bonds of unity. A cycle of lectures was organised in Genoa as preparation for the council at which also Cardinal Joseph Frings was to talk. The Archbishop of Cologne however does not feel capable of fundamentally discussing the theme assigned to him The Council and Modern Thought, and turns to the mere 34-year-old theologian Ratzinger. In his memoirs Frings recounts: “I met Professor Joseph Ratzinger at a Gürzenich concert… I asked him if he would like to help me prepare for this theme and the topic seemed to appeal to him. He soon provided me with an outline which I found so good that I needed only to make one correction.” Cardinal Frings, summoned to an audience with Pope John XXIII because of the speech in Genoa, discovered that contrary to his expectations, the Pope was delighted with the ‘wonderful speech’: “Dear Cardinale, you said everything I have been thinking and wanting to say but could not say myself.” When it was mentioned that the lecture was not in fact from him but from Professor Ratzinger, the Pope answered that he as well has to have texts written for him. It is all a question of finding the right adviser. The audience with Pope John XXIII encouraged Cardinal Frings to bring in Joseph Ratzinger as theological adviser for the coming work in the central commission on the dogmatic texts.
papsthaus.eu/english/index.php?inc=0204
If you scroll down you will get to an outline of the text that Ratzinger prepared for Cardinal Frings: scotthahn.com/download/attachment/3459
L
Lormar
Guest
A Dominican priest, who has since gone to his reward and who was in a position to know things like this, told me it was true.
Personally, I think it is an old wives tale and don’t believe it.
P
PaulfromIowa
Guest
That would kind of put the rad trads in a dilemma, wouldn’t it? They have been spreading the story that he was a secret Mason elected to destroy the Church and now they are supposed to believe that he actually opposed the Council?
L
Lormar
Guest
It has nothing to do with “rad trads”. I was told the same story by a priest very much in communion with the Church and connected with the Vatican.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Well, he didn’t sign any Vatican II documents and didn’t make any long range council plans, such as housing for the bishops. I wouldn’t read any more into that, though.
C
commenter
Guest
This pope wrote a great deal and spoke a great many things of which we have direct confirmation from the time he spoke them. Please reference that body of communication if you want to refer to this pope. It is destructive of the legacy of this pope, and the papacy in general, when people keep handing on tales several-times-removed of what some pope, or saint reportedly said, or maybe said something like, such and such.
You’ll notice that every one of these “tales” supposedly was relayed through someone who is “very reliable about such things”, who heard it from someone “in the know”, who got it from someone “high up in the Vatican”. The original relayer of the story is often now deceased, and none of the 1000 other people buzzing around the pope ever thought about writing anything down or notifying anyone. Until now.
I don’t think the people on this thread have an agenda, but the people who start circulating these stories do. We live in an age when the secular media uses disinformation to undermine the Church, especially the Pope and bishops. Let’s resist the Church’s enemies, by affirming what is known to be true, avoiding conjecture.
You’ll notice that every one of these “tales” supposedly was relayed through someone who is “very reliable about such things”, who heard it from someone “in the know”, who got it from someone “high up in the Vatican”. The original relayer of the story is often now deceased, and none of the 1000 other people buzzing around the pope ever thought about writing anything down or notifying anyone. Until now.
I don’t think the people on this thread have an agenda, but the people who start circulating these stories do. We live in an age when the secular media uses disinformation to undermine the Church, especially the Pope and bishops. Let’s resist the Church’s enemies, by affirming what is known to be true, avoiding conjecture.
A
Abu
Guest
commenter
Great post #15. It seems that more amd more people are using these forums for idle gossip rather than for evangelising and reevangelising.
Great post #15. It seems that more amd more people are using these forums for idle gossip rather than for evangelising and reevangelising.
C
commenter
Guest
I can see why posters might conjecture about what might have been said or done. It can be fun. The problem is when people circulate their conjectures, they tend to get repeated and linger in people’s minds much more that the actual things the pope definitely said and wrote; I have heard people repeat stuff from Dan Brown’s books as if his “facts” were on the same level as the Bible and Early Church Fathers. They may not remember that these “facts” came from novels, but keep repeating them. That kind of repeating does damage because it draws people away from the better sources of truth.
Read “Journal of a Soul” rather than chasing down conjectures. His encyclicals make good starter points for a thread. The conjectures are not harmless, even if I happen to like or agree with some of them. They distract people.
T
Tigg
Guest
I really find the label “rad trads” offensive. By what criteria do we define the faith of others as radical?
P
ProVobis
Guest
You’re exactly right. There is really no need to spread unsupported hearsay from one’s deathbed when the 62 Missal and Veterum Sapientia alone already speak volumes.
- Status