Vatican 2: Some Thoughts on Implications

The second Vatican Council was and continues to be a source of strife among Catholics. We hear so much these days about how the Council should be interpreted, either as a 'hermeneutic of reform,' or as a 'hermeneutic of discontinuity.' I have personally come face to face with the fruit of both of these hermeneutics. What I have come to realize over the last little while though as I ponder all of this is that I am not nearly as intelligent nor well informed as I was once willing to flatter myself with. This blog really has become simple ramblings from a simple guy struggling and stumbling towards God and Mystery...So, I will offer only a few thoughts knowing they will be in all likelihood dispatched with rather quickly...I am not trying vainly to sound humble either. I have just come to realize that there a gaping holes in my areas of study and reading. I have done far to much reading and research in a vacuum. I am at long last becoming more historically minded, I think...(lol).

One area of thought that I think was thoroughly overhauled and witnessed a return to a more historical framework was that of Divine Revelation. In the time before the second Vatican council, the Catholic Church entertained a much more 'propositional view' of divine revelation. In other words, divine revelation was seen as sort of dropping out of the sky as a series of files in a filing cabinet so to speak. This 'deposit' was entrusted to the Pope and the Bishops in communion with him and they alone were seen as the sole guardians and interpreters of this 'deposit.' The Pope and the Bishops alone were seen as the 'teaching Church' while everyone else was seen as the 'learning church.' ( I realize I am oversimplifying here :-)! Handing on the faith, and learning the faith involved opening the cabinet and mastering all of the files. This view fits well in a more fundamentalist framework where the faith is understood as "Articles of Faith." It didn't seem to fit well with the ancient way of understanding the faith as 'creedo.' A good example of this today is the current Catechism of 1994. The catechism is set up in four sections as was the ancient practice, with a view to the fact that as Catholic Christians we 1. Profess the faith, 2. Live it in fraternal sharing, 3. Celebrate it in the liturgy, and 4. Celebrate it in prayer.

The second Vatican Council returned to and opened up a fresh understanding of Divine Revelation as much more 'dynamic.' Dei Verbum offered a biblically informed presentation of divine revelation as nothing less than God giving himself to humanity in love. It sought to replace the idea that revelation is a body of information about God, to instead revelation being a living encounter with God. The eternal word that God shares with us, all of humanity, is received into our hearts and being by the Holy Spirit. On that note, I think Vatican II also saw a shift in the Catholic Church's Pneumatology. The council did not limit the work of the Holy Spirit to ensuring the efficacy of the sacraments and empowering church office. The vision of Vatican II saw a Church wholly empowered and animated by the Spirit of God, who bestowed both hierarchic and, AND charismatic gifts. So what is my point? To ask the question of whether or not there is a place for disagreement within the Church in light of the new and much larger parameters set at Vatican II?

If, as I believe the council points to, we respond to the divine revelation first as an encounter with God, then the question of true catholic identity cannot be reduced simply to adherence to one or another of the Church's teachings. True Catholic identity should be shaped by our willingness or unwillingness as the case may be, to be addressed by God in Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. Now this address I admit comes to us through the teaching office of the Church herself. BUT, it should also be shaped by sacred scripture, by the lives of the saints who have borne witness to the faith, by faithful celebration of the sacraments and entering into the Mystery of Christ. It should also be shaped by fasting, prayer, visiting the sick, the imprisoned, the destitute...

I don't think post Vatican II Catholic faith is a break with the past at all, nor the over-enthusiastic seeking of novelties. I do think that Vatican II was a determination on the part of the bishop's of the time to bring the Catholic Church into the modern world in terms of it's faith and practice, and at the same time to return to the historical sources of the faith and recover some of that which had been lost, while holding and continuing to hold the two in tension...Of course, I am no expert though...

Encounters on the Street Corner

This past week I had the pleasure, (or maybe displeasure) of stumbling across a couple of street preachers at the Rideau Centre. There were two ladies there, one was preaching quite vocally, and the other was standing there handing out booklets to anyone who would take them. Being a retired street preacher, (lol), I decided to approach them and find out what they were all about.

As I approached, the one lady offered me a copy of the booklet they were handing out. After glancing at it quickly I recognized these teachings as those of the 7th Day Adventists. There was a catch though, these were the REFORMED 7th Day Adventists! WOW! How many more reformations do we really need? So......I decided to strike up a conversation with the first lady about this booklet.

The preaching seemed to be aimed at Christians outside of their particular camp. Condemnation of Sunday worship, condemnation of, well,....everything Catholic for sure, and Orthodox for that matter. And condemnation for Protestants as well. I decided to share a little bit of my faith journey with the first lady, and told her about my journey into the Catholic Church. Well.....the gloves came off. The second lady, the preacher came over to let me know in no uncertain terms that I am an idolater, that all Catholics are idolaters, and that the Catholic Church willfully and wrongfully distorts the "truth" about everything under the sun. (I realize some of the readers here may share these sentiments...).

So, I asked her if I might be able to show her something she may find interesting in the Bible she was holding up as she preached. "NO!" was the response as she backed away from me. I was a little surprised, and reiterated, "I would just like to open the scriptures and show you something if I could." At this point she came right up into my face and declared rather forcefully I might add, "YOU CAN BELIEVE WHATEVER LIES YOU WANT TO, WE ARE PREACHING THE TRUTH!!!!!" And with that she told me "WE ARE DOING THE WORK OF GOD, NOW GET OUT OF HERE!" It later dawned on me that she probably saw me as some sort of demonic intruder there to thwart the "work of God." I say that because there was a time in my street preaching days when I would have said and done the same thing. All in the name of God......astonishing.

Now it occurred to me in the course of this encounter, that I have Catholic friends who also like to label others as heretics and so forth. I wondered to myself, what would happen if I put some of these people in the same room? In all likelihood they would call each other names, dismiss each other, and maybe even allow tempers to flare and let the situation get completely out of hand. People who claim to believe in the Lord Jesus, who call upon his name, writing each other off in absolute disgust....I can just see it........

God help us....

Bulwarks of Belief Cont'd, 5-6: Michael Samson

Picking up where Kenneth left off, chapter 1 on Charles Taylor's book "A Secular Age" continues in sections 5-6 to develop his thoughts on the shift in the "conditions of belief" which have taken place in pre-modern to modern societies using as marker dates the years 1500 to 2000.

After looking at disenchantment and the eclipse of anti-structure, Taylor examines the shift in time-consciousness between moderns and pre-moderns, and in particular the time placing of events which to pre-moderns could be and were placed in more than one kind of time. For moderns, at least Taylor cites Walter Benjamin in saying that time is "homogeneous, empty time." (pg. 54). Or in other words, our present outlook for the most part enshrines homogeneity, coupled with a view of indifference to content. For earlier pre-moderns, there were three "kinds" of time. The 'secular' or 'ordinary,' 'higher times,' which introduce the kairotic knots and 'warps' according to Taylor, and thirdly the idea of 'The Great Time.' The 'Great Time' is the time of creation, or the beginning, which is behind us, but also above us. The Middle Ages inherits two kinds of 'Higher Time' or 'Eternity,' one from Plato and the Greeks, that of objective time of process and movement, and that of St. Augustine who wrestles with 'time' in his 11th book of his Confessions. St. Augustine sees eternity as the gathering together of past into present to project a future. Unlike the pre-moderns, we moderns tend to live their lives and conceive of them entirely within the horizontal flow of 'secular time.' Now I must confess, I have never really thought about this. Franks Comment captures this beautifully for me. This is indeed a complex thread to trace out. These shifts are not easily explained, and I too am enjoying this monster book.

Bound up closely with the change in time-consciousness is another shift in the way we understand the universe in which we live. We have moved from the idea of a 'cosmos,' an ordered whole with meaning for humanity, to a universe having its own kind of order, that of exceptionless natural laws. This insight I found tantalizing indeed! I once held to the young earth creationist viewpoint. It is no secret either as Taylor points out that many of the battles between belief and unbelief of the modern era, have been fought over this issue of 'cosmos' vs 'universe.' and the challenge of 'universe' to Biblical religion. Creation vs Evolution is fast becoming or else already is a political hot potato in the USA. For me the irony of the Ussher chronology using modern calculation methods to entrench the Bible in the 'cosmos' was startling! I never heard it put that way before. I will be following Taylor closely here, and hope he develops this further.

Lastly, Taylor looks at the issue of "Reform" and "reform." He spells out with refreshing candor for a Catholic the spiritual abuses that arise in the Middle Ages and how the stage gets set for the Reformation. Being a catholic myself, I appreciate his openness. He also seems to hint at how it may have been avoided. Latin Christendom in the late medieval period attempts to bridge the gap between the laity and the 'elites' if you will. Between those who are 'clergy' and or 'religious.' Interestingly Taylor sees this drive to reform and remake society as playing a key role in the undoing of the old enchanted cosmos idea, and further, the creation of a visible alternative in exclusive humanism, as he puts it. Again, I'm going to follow this closely.

Now, I don't really feel that I am in a position to be critical of Taylor at this point. This is the first work I have read from him, and I am in uncharted waters right now. I may need to supplement my reading of this book in order to get a better handle on him. I'm still taking it all in. This is far more complex than any of the 'subtraction stories' I have read quickly over the years. I wish I could say more at this point and make a better contribution, but this will have to do for now... still reading.....