The Hermeneutic of Revolution...



...or rupture, appears to be the light in which this Rome Reports advertised documentary presents the Second Vatican Council. Benedict XVI saw the Second Vatican Council in terms of a 'hermeneutic of continuity'. Language is important. It sends out a signal. A Vatican documentary painting Vatican II as a revolution within the Church is, well, interesting, no?

Comments

viterbo said…
"In common use, the term “revolution” is an emphatic synonym for “fundamental change,” a major, sudden, and hence typically violent alteration in government and in related associations and structures. A revolution constitutes a challenge to the established order and the eventual establishment of a new order radically different from the preceding one. In this sense, it is the triumph of a principle subversive of the existing order. There have always been revolutions in human societies, but Revolution with a capital “R” is (paradoxically) a modern phenomenon...Revolution is the systematic denial of legitimate authority, it is rebellion raised into a principle and right and law....A “Mystery of Iniquity” From a religious point of view, Revolution can be defined as the legal denial of the reign of Christ on earth, the social destruction of the Church. Revolution necessarily involves the Faith. Our contemporaries have lost a religious sense of the world and of events. Revolution appears therefore essentially as political, and only accidentally as religious. Such a view is erroneous because while Revolution could accommodate any political regime, it is always hostile to Catholicism. He who believes in the divinity of Christ and in the divine mission of the Church (if he is logical) cannot be a revolutionary. All power has been given to Christ, in heaven and on earth, and He has entrusted to the ecclesiastical hierarchy the mission of teaching what is necessary to do the will of God."

from: Reflections on the Kingship of Christ. Angelus Press.

-
If they are officially calling it a revolution, then Archbishop Lefebvre was correct in pretty much everything.
23 March 2014 at 04:55
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

So Now That We're All Saying What We're Thinking...

Image
Over the years on this blog I have offered some commentary on Pope Francis and his bizarre, scandalous and increasingly diabolical pontificate. Of late, I have tried to keep it light, trying to offer some comic relief on the papacy arranged meticulously in a conference room in Hell. Later still, I stopped blogging, mostly due to time constraints, domestic and work commitments. Before I stopped blogging, I was confident enough in my own limited knowledge of the Church to offer some insights into what I thought had gone wrong in the time since 13 March 2013.

Reasons for the catastrophe I offered over the time were varied, from the election of a 'mad Pope' to the election of an apostate Bishop to the Papacy, to someone who was elected Pope but who resisted the Truth and simply taught his own beliefs instead. Who hasn't thought, 'Oh, he's a Jesuit, what could anyone expect?' Did I say these things explicitly? Some yes, others I expect not, because with this situat…
Read more