Traditional Catholicism: A Prophetic Movement

[spock2022]

I was taught in theology school that a prophet’s role is many but the one that I remember is the one of agitating his or her own society. Prophet’s in the OT (Hebrew Bible) got killed for saying what the Lord was telling them to say.

Do you think that the reconciliation of the pre and post Vatican II church is a movement that is prophetic? If so, how do you see it as prophetic?

My personal guess would be YES. The reason I think the reconciliation and re-balancing of the 1960 odd years of Catholicism with the gifts of the post-vatican II church is a prophetic movement; it certainly is being critisized for its messaging; Ii.e. we are for the dignity of life and all that contains, yet we are neither capitalist or communist because we believe people should pursue thier dreams and enjoy the resources they get for their work, but we also believe in the balanced approach that greed is greed and a connected humanity-ecological inter-woven reality cannot sustain great imbalances…we are also balancing “high and low” christology, we are restoring the majesty of God without forgetting the Fisher of men…the gentle lamb and the work that our Lord did amongst the lowly of the low…and how he decended into hell and then rose…gosh, how do we celebrate those polarities? So, yeah, because Catholicsm pleases none of the worldly powers I think it is therefore a prophetic movement.

Spock2022

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I was taught in theology school that a prophet’s role is many but the one that I remember is the one of agitating his or her own society. Prophet’s in the OT (Hebrew Bible) got killed for saying what the Lord was telling them to say.

Do you think that the reconciliation of the pre and post Vatican II church is a movement that is prophetic? If so, how do you see it as prophetic?

My personal guess would be YES. The reason I think the reconciliation and re-balancing of the 1960 odd years of Catholicism with the gifts of the post-vatican II church is a prophetic movement; it certainly is being critisized for its messaging; Ii.e. we are for the dignity of life and all that contains, yet we are neither capitalist or communist because we believe people should pursue thier dreams and enjoy the resources they get for their work, but we also believe in the balanced approach that greed is greed and a connected humanity-ecological inter-woven reality cannot sustain great imbalances…we are also balancing “high and low” christology, we are restoring the majesty of God without forgetting the Fisher of men…the gentle lamb and the work that our Lord did amongst the lowly of the low…and how he decended into hell and then rose…gosh, how do we celebrate those polarities? So, yeah, because Catholicsm pleases none of the worldly powers I think it is therefore a prophetic movement.

Spock2022

Do you think that the reconciliation of the pre and post Vatican II church is a movement that is prophetic?

Is this an American Problem?
Never noticed the 2 churches: pre as post Vatican II…

 

[spock2022]

Is this an American Problem?
Never noticed the 2 churches: pre as post Vatican II…

Good point. I was referring to the re-introduction of latin extraordinary masses and other changes that were apart of reconciling SSPX stuff and the harsher decisions of not allowing latin masses for many years.

I think that the re-balancing of the two is a prophetic force in terms of challenging the world…

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

Our Holy Father said it perfectly:

We do not want to apply precisely this dramatic description to the situation of the post-conciliar period, yet something from all that occurred is nevertheless reflected in it. The question arises: Why has the implementation of the Council, in large parts of the Church, thus far been so difficult?

Well, it all depends on the correct interpretation of the Council or - as we would say today - on its proper hermeneutics, the correct key to its interpretation and application. The problems in its implementation arose from the fact that two contrary hermeneutics came face to face and quarrelled with each other. One caused confusion, the other, silently but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.

On the one hand, there is an interpretation that I would call “a hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture”; it has frequently availed itself of the sympathies of the mass media, and also one trend of modern theology. On the other, there is the “hermeneutic of reform”, of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.

The hermeneutic of discontinuity risks ending in a split between the pre-conciliar Church and the post-conciliar Church. It asserts that the texts of the Council as such do not yet express the true spirit of the Council. It claims that they are the result of compromises in which, to reach unanimity, it was found necessary to keep and reconfirm many old things that are now pointless. However, the true spirit of the Council is not to be found in these compromises but instead in the impulses toward the new that are contained in the texts.

More here: va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/december/documents/hf_ben_xvi_spe_20051222_roman-curia_en.html

I agree with Pope Benedict, modernists who never have read a page of the document or have read it and misinterpreted it are in the wrong and are the ones causing the discontinuity in the Church. The only thing that is going to mend this is time, the generation that is replacing all these heretical bishops and priests are the ones Pope Benedict is speaking of that are bearing the true fruit of Vatican II. Ten years time, all those abusing the Liturgy and misrepresenting Vatican II will be gone and be nothing more than a bad memory.

 

[spock2022]

Our Holy Father said it perfectly:

More here: va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2005/december/documents/hf_ben_xvi_spe_20051222_roman-curia_en.html

I agree with Pope Benedict, modernists who never have read a page of the document or have read it and misinterpreted it are in the wrong and are the ones causing the discontinuity in the Church. The only thing that is going to mend this is time, the generation that is replacing all these heretical bishops and priests are the ones Pope Benedict is speaking of that are bearing the true fruit of Vatican II. Ten years time, all those abusing the Liturgy and misrepresenting Vatican II will be gone and be nothing more than a bad memory.

I thought that Vatican II was to find contemporary ways of expressing the ways of the church since the beginning. I kind of take the position that we need to be neither post or pre-councilor in our thinking…there is only one church, however, there are many ways of expressing the beliefs in a manner that is both the “fresh air” and “outpouring of the Holy Spirit” of which John XXIII looked towards and implemented in today’s church…so I think our call is to be Catholic…to be taking sides with the old church or the new church is also a form of cafeteria catholicism…either we believe in the legitimacy of the Spirits lead in Vatican II or we don’t.

Having said that…it looks like what is happening is that the merging of the hermenutics of continuance (forgot how Benedict referred to it)…is the prophetic challenge to the contemporary world that is consistent with the biblical sense of prophets…or something like that

Spock 2022 is lost in his thinking… Not Logical!

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

Good point. I was referring to the re-introduction of latin extraordinary masses and other changes that were apart of reconciling SSPX stuff and the harsher decisions of not allowing latin masses for many years.

I think that the re-balancing of the two is a prophetic force in terms of challenging the world…

I have no problem with SSPX: they excluded themselves. Their way will lead to an empty and void land.
They want reconciliation? Easy…they must obey the Pope without conditions…