Benedict XVI: The Pope of the Council

CMR ^ | April 21, 2008 | Patrick Archbold

[NYer]

The last few days have been have been amazing for the Church in America. I spent the last few days watching events and reading speeches. With all the hoopla surrounding the papal visit, I wondered if there might be some stories that you and I have missed. After the mass at Yankee stadium, I have spent the last few hours trying catching up. With papal speeches still clinging to my brain, slowly completing the osmosis process, I saw a thread in some of this other news that I might have missed otherwise.

Prior to the Pope's election three years ago, our lovable Pontiff was know as the 'panzer kardinal'. Much of the punditry at the time couldn't have told you much, but the would probably have largely agreed that Joseph Ratzinger was not a fan of Vatican II.

A year ago, in the run-up to and subsequent to the release of Summorum Pontificum there was a blizzard of articles with loudly proclaimed that the Pope was in effect rolling back Vatican II.

During his trip to America, the Pope made several mentions of Vatican II. While acknowledging the disappointments that followed the Council, the Pope repeatedly made mentions the outpouring of the Holy Spirit during the Council calling clergy and laity alike to fulfill its calls.

[Homily at St. Patrick's Cathedral]For all of us, I think, one of the great disappointments which followed the Second Vatican Council, with its call for a greater engagement in the Church’s mission to the world, has been the experience of division between different groups, different generations, different members of the same religious family. We can only move forward if we turn our gaze together to Christ! In the light of faith, we will then discover the wisdom and strength needed to open ourselves to points of view which may not necessarily conform to our own ideas or assumptions.

Thus we can value the perspectives of others, be they younger or older than ourselves, and ultimately hear “what the Spirit is saying” to us and to the Church (cf. Rev 2:7). In this way, we will move together towards that true spiritual renewal desired by the Council, a renewal which can only strengthen the Church in that holiness and unity indispensable for the effective proclamation of the Gospel in today’s world.

Here is the thing about Pope Benedict and the Council, these words in his speeches are not mere lip service, he means it.

Pope Benedict has often spoken that the Council, properly viewed, should be interpreted through a hermeneutic of continuity. The Council needs to be viewed in continuity with all that came before. Through this lens, the real Spirit of the council can be discerned.

This brings me to the first of two other stories of the last few days. NLM reported the other day about a response from the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei about the potential use of the vernacular for the readings in the Extraordinary form. This question is based on article 6 of the motu proprio which states:

Art. 6. In Masses celebrated in the presence of the people in accordance with the Missal of Bl. John XXIII, the readings may be given in the vernacular, using editions recognised by the Apostolic See.

The response of the PCED to a question that essentially asked "Does this mean what it seems to mean?" Answer, yes.

1. Article 6 of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum foresees the possibility of proclaiming the readings in the vernacular without having to proclaim the first in Latin.

2. The Readings may be proclaimed in English according to the translations approved for liturgical use by the Holy See and the Bishops of the United States.

It was unsurprising that some reacted quite negatively to this clarification of the obvious. A sampling of the negative reaction I have seen ranged from "What a disaster!" to "Latin only, no exceptions!" to "Now they are monkeying with the EF!"

These reactions, it seems to me, all proceed from a hermeneutic of rupture. The premise is that any and all reform of the liturgy is bad. This counterfeit orthodoxy claims that Vatican II must be rejected and the liturgy must preserved as a fly in amber. Back to 1955 (or pick your favorite year) or bust! Obviously, Pope Benedict thinks quite differently.

This article of the motu proprio is clear evidence that Pope Bendict does not only not reject the Council, he takes it very seriously indeed. So seriously, in fact, he is actually trying to implement it — properly. Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Council's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, calls for just such a reform.

36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites.

2. But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters.

The Pope is doing exactly what the Council called for. This is not the Bugnini baby out with the bathwater reform that followed the council, but reform based on a hermeneutic of continuity. This is the work of the Holy Spirit, the fruits of the council.

This brings me to the the other story of the past few days. Rorate Caeli reported on a statement by the Superior-General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay, Bishop Fellay. In the statement, Fellay rejects any accord with the the Vatican because the Pope has yet to reject Vatican II:

The Motu Proprio which introduced a hope of change for the better at the liturgical level is not accompanied by logically co-related measures in the other areas of the life of the Church. All changes introduced at the Council and in the post-Conciliar reforms which we denounce, because the Church has already condemned them, are confirmed. With the difference that, from now on, it is said, at the same time, that the Church does not change…[sic], which means that these changes are perfectly in the line of Catholic Tradition...The disruption at the level of concepts, together with the reminder that the Church must remain faithful to her Tradition, may trouble some. Since facts do not corroborate the new attitude [lit.: affirmation], it is necessary to conclude that nothing [sic] has changed in the will of Rome to follow the Conciliar orientations

This view of the faith and of the Church is textbook hermeneutic of discontinuity. The SSPX will not find it opportune to reach accord with the Holy See until the Holy See rejects the Council. The words and, more importantly, the actions of Pope Benedict clearly show that this sought after rejection will not be forthcoming.

If the SSPX is waiting for this rejection, they will be waiting a long long time. This Pope, and likely all of his successors, will never reject the council in the way that the SSPX seeks. In fact, it is possible, that Pope Benedict might very well be remembered as the Pope who finally implemented the Council. I would not be surprised if a future history would show that after forty years in the desert for our unfaithfulness to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the real fruits of the council began to appear under Pope Benedict XVI, the Pope of the Council.

[NYer]

I would not be surprised if a future history would show that after forty years in the desert for our unfaithfulness to the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the real fruits of the council began to appear under Pope Benedict XVI, the Pope of the Council.

While watching the various celebrations and meetings during the 6 days of his visit, I used his facial expressions as a gauge. At Dunwoodie Seminary, prior to the meeting with seminarians and youth, the Holy Father met the families of handicapped children and blessed each child. He then "listened" to a performance of the Archdiocesan Deaf Choir. For those who may have missed it, here are some pictures.

The expression on his face was one of absolute amazement ... his jaw dropped open as he watched.

Without VCII, would the pope have ever witnessed such a display of devotion and faith.

[Incorrigible]

 

 

 

 

 

[steadfastconservative]

These reactions, it seems to me, all proceed from a hermeneutic of rupture. The premise is that any and all reform of the liturgy is bad. This counterfeit orthodoxy claims that Vatican II must be rejected and the liturgy must preserved as a fly in amber. Back to 1955 (or pick your favorite year) or bust! Obviously, Pope Benedict thinks quite differently.

This writer is 100% correct. Those who believe that the Pope is going to disavow the Second Vatican Council are sadly mistaken and, like Bishop Fellay of the schismatic SSPX, are going to be very disappointed by his pontificate.

[ELS]

LOL! Love the second cartoon.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Absolutely. God bless Benedict. Henceforth begins the authentic implementation of Vatican II.

[livius]

The Pope was very involved in the Council as one of the periti. Needless to say, he did not expect it to turn out as it did, and he began to express misgivings very shortly afterwards.

The Council, on the whole, was well-meaning but really didn’t have a reason for being. That is, it wasn’t a doctrinal council, called in response to some heresy, or really anything except John XXIII’s wish to “open the windows.” Most of the documents produced by the Council were correspondingly vague and unfocused summaries or restatements of the collected thought on a particular aspect of Church life, and of course, did not make any doctrinal statements because it wasn’t that kind of council.

I think this lack of definition left a lot of cover for evil-doers, who had been awaiting their chance since they went underground in the Modernist crisis in the early part of the century.

Furthermore, the Council did produce a couple of new structures and did loosen the traditional chain of authority, or at least appeared to do so. Coupled with the breakdown in authority in secular society, this left the Church defenseless against the wolves within.

But the biggest problem of Vatican II was the radical change to the Mass. As the article points out, this was not the original intention of the liturgical experts - with the exception of some, such as Bugnini, for example - who had actually been looking at a modest retouching and removal of accretions, and probably the introduction of more parts in the vernacular and an improvement to the music. One of the things they wanted to do, for example, was to give precedence to Gregorian chant, and this is even in one of the Council’s documents! Needless to say, that didn’t happen...

What I find interesting is that BXVI actually criticized the outcome of the Council. For a long time, in order to prove that you were not an SSPXer, you practically had to genuflect every time you said Second Vatican Council, and simply pretend that everything was fine and you just had a few minor suggestions.

It is clear that BXVI is not even pretending that everything is ok. There really wasn’t anything to reject in VatII itself, but what came after is a different matter. And I think he is trying to work on the most crucial aspect of all, the Mass, which is why he is gradually reintroducing the old mass and liturgical practices related to it.

I think there will eventually be a somewhat hybrid form, or rather, the Old Mass but with the changes that the Council would have made had it not been for the likes of Bugnini, who was clearly a man with an evil agenda. And I think restoration will build around that.

[stop_fascism]

May he live long enough to fulfill his mission!

[CdMGuy]

If you think the Latin Mass is ever going to return except for an occassional use, you are smoking something. The one good thing coming out of Vatican II was Mass in the vernacular.

Finally, Catholics are able to attend Mass and actually be a part of the celebration by hearing and understanding every single part of the Mass. No longer are we staring at the back of a priest mumbling the words of the Mass in Latin.

Having served as an altar boy for 7 years and been a participant in the mumbling back and forth between priest and altar boys, I do not ever want to return to the Latin Mass. Watching a Latin celebration of the Mass on EWTN is absolutely boring. The Latin Mass is one part of my early life that I do not miss.

Attending the Latin Mass was fulfilling an obligation. Little was derived from the experience. Attending a Mass in English is an experience that I look forward to every week. I am able to worship Our Lord in a far more meaningful way. At the same time, I feel fulfilled having attended and been a part of the service.

As someone who serves as a Eucharistic Minister and attends Bible study classes at our parish church, the opinion that I am expressing here is the same as just about all of my fellow parishioners. I am not talking about a bunch of “new age” Catholics here. Our community is a major retirement area, and our parishioners mostly senior citizens who remember quite well the not-so-good old days of the Latin Mass. It includes retired nuns and priests who all feel the same way.

[Pyro7480]

Thus saith the Baby Boomer.

[livius]

. Our community is a major retirement area, and our parishioners mostly senior citizens...

So are most of the devotees of the Novus Ordo. The young, on the other hand, are going to the Latin Mass.

You will note that I said that the old Mass would have been changed in a legitimate way by the Council, had it not been for the likes of Bugnini, who basically wanted to destroy it and actually succeeded. There probably would be more vernacular and probably will be, when the Old Mass comes back again.

Time and youth are on its side.

[B Knotts]

Precisely. I think this is something that will occur over the next century. The ordinary form will probably survive, but I can see where it could become less widespread.

And I think your comments regarding the Second Vatican Council are correct. Too often, this is set up as some kind of super-council, creating a rupture in the Church, and bringing about some new era, displacing all that which came before, which clearly cannot be.

The council will be authentically implemented eventually, and it will ultimately be remembered as a relatively minor council (probably less important than Vatican I, for instance) as time progresses.

[B Knotts]

Without VCII, would the pope have ever witnessed such a display of devotion and faith.

I am puzzled by this comment.

[livius]

it will ultimately be remembered as a relatively minor council (probably less important than Vatican I, for instance) as time progresses.

Had it not been for the disruption that followed it, I think it would already be forgotten. And the disruption really had little to do with the Council and its actual documents, which were pretty non-descript. The most destructive, disruptive and possibly longest lasting thing that Vatican II did was to replace the Tridentine Rite Mass, but I don't think even that will last. Perhaps it will have been a time for purification for all of us, though; times of destruction sometimes have that effect, and certainly we all know that God can bring good out of evil.

[CdMGuy]

Well, you had to know that the Latin Mass fanatics would come out of the woodwork on this one. Yeah, yeah, yeah, one hundred years from now living Catholics will be back to celebrating the Mass in Latin.

That must be the case. Everybody is so disgruntled with the Mass in the vernacular. Every weekend, every Mass in my parish is standing room only, with the exception of Sunday at 5PM. As I walk around the church grounds before and after Mass, I hear continual mumbling from all the Catholics calling for the return of the Mass in Latin. NOT

Young Catholics want the Mass celebrated in Latin??? What, so they can read along using their English translation missals? Why they stopped teaching Latin in high schools years ago. At least in my time, we had the ability to translate the Latin. Now, it is tough to find someone who can teach it. Most priests do not have the ability to celebrate a Latin Mass.

You know, maybe we should bring back sack cloth and ashes as punishment. Why not go back to receiving the sacrament of Reconciliation only once in a lifetime? Gee, let’s all go back to communal living like the early Christians.

[steadfastconservative]

I think you still do not understand Benedict XVI’s views on the Council. Although he has criticized some of the things which have happened since the Council, he has never blamed the Council itself for these things. Rather, he blames those who used the so-called spirit of Vatican II in order to promote an agenda that actually contradicted the decrees of the Council. Moreover, he has stressed that the Council did not constitute some kind of break or rupture with the Church’s past but can only be interpreted correctly if it is seen as part of the tradition of the Church, which preceded it.

Since I wrote my master’s thesis on the Second Vatican Council’s Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, I can state categorically that the Council did NOT call for any radical changes to the Mass or the other parts of the liturgy. Therefore, your claim that “the biggest problem of Vatican II was the radical change to the Mass” is simply false. You cannot blame the Council for changes to the Mass that cannot be found in its constitution on the liturgy, whether or not these changes were made in the name of the Council. The reforms that the Council Fathers envisioned were far more modest than most Catholics realize. Unfortunately, the average Catholic has fallen for the propaganda from both the Modernists on the left and the traditionalists on the right, that the Council started a “revolution” in the Church, that it “broke” with the Church’s past and tradition.

Fortunately, Benedict XVI, who actually attended the Council, realizes that it was a council of continuity as well as reform. Those who are waiting for him to disavow the Council, such as those nuts in the SSPX, will, indeed, be disappointed.

[GCC Catholic]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, one hundred years from now living Catholics will be back to celebrating the Mass in Latin.

That must be the case. Everybody is so disgruntled with the Mass in the vernacular. Every weekend, every Mass in my parish is standing room only, with the exception of Sunday at 5PM. As I walk around the church grounds before and after Mass, I hear continual mumbling from all the Catholics calling for the return of the Mass in Latin. NOT Actually, if they intend to follow the directives of the Second Vatican Council, they will be back to celebrating the Mass in Latin (at least the majority of the Mass) in most places under the Latin Rite.

Young Catholics want the Mass celebrated in Latin???

Actually, some of us do.

Why they stopped teaching Latin in high schools years ago. At least in my time, we had the ability to translate the Latin. Now, it is tough to find someone who can teach it. Most priests do not have the ability to celebrate a Latin Mass.

A good reason to start teaching it again. Most Americans are literate enough to learn it (and their English would get better if they did). It is a shame that parishes with more than one ethnic group have to continue the divisive practice of having a vernacular-language Mass for each one. One or more Masses in Latin would be far superior (and in fact directed by documents like Sacramentum Caritatis).

Also, the priests who want to celebrate either the older or the newer form of the Mass in Latin will learn the Latin to do it. This is especially true for recently-ordained priests and seminarians currently in formation.

Well, you had to know that the Latin Mass fanatics would come out of the woodwork on this one.

You should be very nice to us "Latin Mass fanatics"... most of your future priests will probably either be from among us, or sympathetic to us, as it seems that more and more young people are moving toward traditional practices, or are leaving the Church altogether.

[NYer]

Thank you for posting a very good analysis.

It is clear that BXVI is not even pretending that everything is ok. There really wasn’t anything to reject in VatII itself, but what came after is a different matter. And I think he is trying to work on the most crucial aspect of all, the Mass, which is why he is gradually reintroducing the old mass and liturgical practices related to it.

In his address to the members of ecclesial communities on the day of his installation, Pope Benedict XVI said:

Our meeting today is particularly important. First of all, it enables the new Bishop of Rome, Pastor of the Catholic Church, to repeat to you all with simplicity: Duc in altum! Let us go forward with hope. In the footsteps of my Predecessors, especially Paul VI and John Paul II, I feel strongly the need to reassert the irreversible commitment taken by the Second Vatican Council and pursued in recent years, also thanks to the activity of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. The path to the full communion desired by Jesus for his disciples entails, with true docility to what the Spirit says to the Churches, courage, gentleness, firmness and hope, in order to reach our goal. Above all, it requires persistent prayer and with one heart, in order to obtain from the Good Shepherd the gift of unity for his flock.

Essentially, he fully committed himself to the implementaton of Vatican Council II. That is what we are witnessing!

In every age, God delivers to His people the person best able to ensure their path to eternal salvation. There can be no doubt that Joseph Ratzinger - Pope Benedict XVI is the right man for this time and age. May our Lord bless him with good health and long leadership. May he give him the time needed to select his successor.

[NYer]

I am puzzled by this comment.

I was wondering if one would have seen a Deaf Choir at an Indult Tridentine Mass. I will now extend that question to those who celebrate the TLM - have you encountered such a choir?

[B Knotts]

Unless I’m mistaken, that wasn’t at a Mass. That was why I was puzzled; I didn’t understand what Vatican II had to do with the Holy Father seeing a deaf choir.