Vatican II was good for some
A Response to “On administering Holy Communion in a Time of a Plague”
This was sent to me and deserves a read. You can read the Calivas article here . We can all agree that we are living in unusual times. However, the nature and extent of the illness that we face, and the proper response of the Church, is a matter of much disagreement. We have seen various responses to the COVID-19 epidemic: calls to close our Churches as infectious vectors, and demands to open them as places of spiritual healing. Directives a) ordering the cessation of sacramental life as part of an effort to “flatten the curve,” and cries for access to the divine grace that flows forth from those very mysteries; b) calling for the restriction of “at-risk persons,” and serious questions about the validity of such controls, c) instructions to liturgists to wear personal protective equipment during the celebration of the divine services and the distribution of the holy Mysteries, and uncertainty about the fitness of such practices. Who has been championing what and on behalf of whom? The ...
The degree to which the Antiochian Orthodox misread Vatican II was cause for some tragicomic moments- In 1974, Elias IV sent Georges Khodr on a (at the time) secret mission Rome to ask Paul VI to voluntarily suspend communion with the Melkite Catholics so that they could reunite with their Mother Church (as Melkite leaders were then starting to refer to the Antiochian Orthodox). In Khodr's account of the hour-long meeting years later, "Paul VI kept silent and I understood that he was not prepared for such an opening..."
ReplyDeleteI don't think it's appropriate to condemn the Council in toto. I think there are many strong parts of the Council and even Abp. Marcel Lefebvre said there were many parts of the Council that can and should be meditated on. It's possible to only partially condemn the Council.
ReplyDelete