Comments on: Some Thoughts on the “New Springtime”

By: dymphna

dymphna — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 17:21:48 +0000

I think we’re still in deep mid winter. There are tiny little signs of hope but let’s be honest. The homosexual scandal drove a lot people away from the church. The weird stuff that happened in the 70s and 80s probably drove away millions more than the scandal did. For the souls who are lost and going to hell the signs of hope we’re seeing here and there don’t mean a thing. Where there is life there is hope but let’s not sugar coat it. The bright young priests we are seeing now have no power to change anything and won’t for another ten or twenty years. In the mean time all we can do is pray, fast and wait for winter to be over.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:57:23 +0000

With regards to the reunification of certain (eastern) Orthodox communities, I think it important to note also that Eastern Catholic (Byzantines mostly) churches, already in communion with Rome, are experiencing exponential growth in eastern Europe now that Communism has been overthrown. The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church is an amazing success story, with hundreds of new parishes under construction, a new Catholic university recently opened, and a glorious new Patriarchal cathedral under construction in the capital, Kiev. Although this growth is problematic, to say the least, for separated Orthodox communities, there is indeed a New Springtime in the East. Glory to God, forever.

By: Ikilope

Ikilope — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 22:16:55 +0000

Ian:

Consider two pieces of data on sex abuse scandal. While many of the crimes were committed in the 1980’s the ordination years for the criminal priests was generally in the 1950’s and 1960’s with some or all of their seminary formation in the pre-Vatican II church. Many priests were not named or charged in crimes nor became a part of the settlements because they had died many years before. Issues of sex abuse are not new, what is new is the heightened awareness of the criminal nature of the acts.
Unhealthy attitudes towards sexuality and arrested sexual development in adolescent males is part of the undiscussed nature of the problem we have faced. While there were some seminaries in which a homosexual subculture existed it is too simple to blame everything that has come to light on that issue alone.
And the bottom line is, it was the tolerance of the Bishops as much as anything else, that enabled the problems to fester.

By: Ian

Ian — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 19:34:42 +0000

I have yet to see any proof that the sex scandal is a result of the pre-Vatican II church. If anything, it seems to be the result of a culture of homosexual acceptance that arose after Vatican II when good seminarians were canned and deviants were welcomed and protected.

I think we are so close to Vatican II that finding the good that came from it is still difficult. The liturgy as it is generally celebrated does not appear to me to be a good of the reform, especially since the actual decrees from and after Vatican II are not followed in 99% of parishes in the US.

By: Ikilope

Ikilope — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 19:22:50 +0000

Realizing that the church is in procession forward, the signs of spring need to shake off the vestiges of winters past. While Ian speaks of good things happening, we will never lose the good of the reform and renewal of Vatican II, its liturgy, laws and decrees.
Great care must be taken to see what happens in the present future is not simply a reaction against but and incorporation of what has happened in the 40 years since Vatican II. Nostalgia of and by itself cannot govern the direction of the church — it will not be and cannot be and should not be the way it was.
I hope we are not too easily blaming the problems of the recent present on Vatican II. Certainly we have suffered much recently because of the Pre-Vatican II church, especially through the recent sexual abuse scandal.
The church has always been in a procession, look ahead, we cannot just look back hoping that the past somehow saves us.

By: Daniel Latinus

Daniel Latinus — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:22:23 +0000

I was with you until I read the line “The reunification of several Orthodox patriarchies with Rome.” So far as I know, while there continue to be cordial, and in some quarters improved relations, with the Orthodox, no Orthodox Patriarchate has returned to full communion with Rome.

I would be glad to wrong about this…

By: TradCath

TradCath — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:45:18 +0000

Deo gratias!

The Church is indeed experiencing a renewal of faith and tradition. The Lord’s promise is true, after all. The Church shall never fall to the powers of the Devil.

I also hope Pope Benedict will live many more years. His great reforms are doing much good for the Church, especially in liturgy and doctrine. As for who will become pope after Benedict, I think we will have to entrust that to the Holy Spirit and PRAY PRAY PRAY!

By: Rachel

Rachel — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:40:01 +0000

Good thoughts, Ian, thank you. I am a convert-to-be, joining the church at the Easter Vigil this year. Sometimes I am blown away by how watered down or even distorted the teachings in my RCIA class are and how almost anti-Catholic some of the older parish priests and lay teachers are. But then I am moved by the faithfulness of some of the other priests, and especially the younger ones (but some of the other older ones, too), and I’m so excited to be coming into the church during this quite, almost silent movement of Spring.

By: Bill

Bill — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:01:13 +0000

Ian:

Thanks for posting the vocations information. All along, I’ve believed the explanation for the “crisis” as a crisis of fidelity, not of magisterial overlording, gender bias, etc… There are still many parts of the world struggling for vocations, but I pray they hold on a little longer.

I think Benedict was chosen in part because they quickly realized he could be pastoral and wasn’t the “Rotweiler” that the press made him out to be. Those two homilies changed a lot of views about him both inside and outside the Vatican, and I’m sure when they got into the Sistine Chapel it is obvious that no one else was more electable. I was in St. Peter Square for the conclave and I admit that I selfishly wanted a couple more rounds of votes so I could extend my stay in Rome. And while I felt he would end up pope, I thought it was a quick vote. I’m just praying that his health holds up long enough to keep his momentum going.

With JPII’s successor, Ratzinger was always the lead candidate. When Benedict passes on, I have no idea who would be a frontrunner.