It is easy to overlook recent historical events; such as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's interview that he gave to Vittorio Messori in August 1984. This interview formed the basis of a book that was later published called 'The Ratzinger Report'.
Publication of the interview sent shock waves through a church that was nestling down comfortably in the belief that change had been for the better (although the Cardinal was vocal in pointing out the authority of Vatican II).
It was, a pessimistic (realistic) appraisal of the status quo that must have sent many a Bishop rushing for the Wincarnis.......here is an extract:-
"...What the Popes and Fathers were expecting was a new Catholic unity, and instead one has encountered a dissension which....seems to have passed over from self-criticism to self-destruction....There had been the expectation of a step forward, and instead one found oneself facing a progressive process of decadence.....(A) real reform of the Church presupposes an unequivocal turning away from the erroneous paths whose catastrophic consequences are already incontestible.....My diagnosis is that we are dealing with an authentic crisis and that it must be treated.....
...The decisive new emphasis on the role of the Bishops is in reality restrained or actually risks being smothered by the insertion of the Bishops into episcopal conferences that are ever more organised, often with burdensome bureaucratic structures. We must not forget that the episcopal conferences have no theological basis, they do not belong to the structure of the Church, as willed by Christ, that cannot be eliminated; they have only a practical, concrete function......No episcopal conference has, as such, a teaching mission......It happens that with some Bishops there is a certain lack of individual responsibility, and the delegation of his inalienable powers as shepherd and teacher to the structures of the local conference leads to letting what should remain very personal lapse into anonymity. The group of Bishops united in the conferences depends in their decisions upon other groups, upon commissions that have been established to prepare draft proposals. It happens then that the search for agreement between the different tendencies and the effort at mediation often yield flattened documents on which decisive positions (where they might be necessary) are weakened......In many episcopal conferences, the group spirit and perhaps even the wish for a quiet, peaceful life, or conformism, lead the majority to accept the positions of active minorities bent upon pursuing clear goals."
Extracts from Anne Roche Muggeridge's book, Revolution in the Church
The Holy Father has a depth of experience given to few; he has proved, over the past 5 years, or so, his capacity to embrace all elements within the faith and to draw them together in one, united Church - or, at least, a Church that is slowly moving in that direction.
Yet, so many laity seem to despise him; so many of the priesthood actively ignore him and so many of the hierarchy fail to support him.
Our Lord's words ring in my ears: "if you are not with Me you are against Me".
Ah Richard, it was all going fine and dandy there until you went a bit polemical at the end! I don't think it's as bleak as that. There's always been a tension between the papacy (Rome) and local churches. You've probably read Duffy's brilliant book, 'Saints & Sinners?'
ReplyDeleteThanks for the post, though, - beautiful analysis from H.E JR when at the CDF.
Brian
Thanks Brian but that's not being polemical, it's stating a sad fact.
ReplyDeleteEvery time I see these debates about Vatican II, and related Catholic issues, I think the same thing.
ReplyDeleteWho among American Catholics are paying enough attention to this? And how many realize the implications for the Church, and ultimately for themselves? I know I'm not. Ponder that a little.
Check out my blog at http://whatistheroomofshatteredglass.blogspot.com/