This paragraph is take from the Pope's recent pre Christmas speech to the Cardinals:

The Muslim world today," the Pope observed, "is facing a task very similar to that imposed upon Christians from the time of the Enlightenment, and which Vatican Council II, as the result of a long and arduous journey, brought to fruition with concrete solutions for the Catholic Church."

_____________________

I would like to read some of your reflections on what you think is meant by the "concrete solutions" that Vatican Two gave to the Church.

Personally, the only 'concrete solution' I can think of is simply the abandonment of the militant fervor of fighting the spirit of the world.

The two key thrusts of the council, I can gather are:

-permitting a dialog (that seems to include room for common prayer) with non Catholics, both other 'Christians' and non Christians.

-a reinterpretation of religious liberty to include the public expression of non Catholic religions in Catholic countries and the removal of special status for the church in countries where she has a majority.

The other changes that V2 was supposed to have ushered in, eg. changes to the mass etc, all seem to be subservient to attaining one of these  two goals above.

V2, rather than being a 'concrete solution' to the problems of the modern world ushered in by the Enlightenment, it seems that it was a concrete surrender. How they can think that the strategy espoused by V2 is a solution is beyond comprehension in the face of the empirical evidence and can only be condoned by someone who is more bound to an ideology rather than to their own common sense.

Your ideas and comments are welcome.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/ProgressivistDoc/A_018_RatzingerScholasticism.htm





PROGRESSIVIST DOcuмENT OF THE WEEK



Cardinal Ratzinger takes a position
against Scholasticism



In an April 1994 interview with the Italian magazine 30 Giorni, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger declared that the unbalance, uncertainty, and lack of logic of post-conciliar theology constitute a necessary step for rejecting the Scholastic Theology from the first half of the 20th century.

Ratzinger gives his unequivocal support to that rejection of Scholasticism.

He considered that Scholasticism (thesis) had to generate its own opposition (antithesis) in order to generate a new situation (synthesis), in which the new theology would recover the lacking equilibrium and logic. It seems a clear adhesion to the Hegelian method of analyzing History.

Below right, the cover of 30 Dias (the Portuguese edition of 30 Giorni) where the interview was published. We translated Ratzinger's statements - highlighted in yellow - in the Portuguese text below the translation

:



 
"In a certain sense, the theology of the first half of the [20th] century was more balanced, but also more closed within itself. Much of that theology lived inside the box of Neo-Scholasticism. It had greater certainty and logical lucidity than today's theology, but it was far removed from the real world. The adventure that began in the Council took theology out of that box and exposed it to the fresh air of today's life.

"Consequently this exposed it to the risk of new unbalances, since it was subject to divergent tendencies without the protection of a system. This caused theology to look for new balances in the context of an open and lively dialogue with today's reality.

"This step seems to me not only justified, but also necessary, because theology should serve faith and evangelization, and, for this reason, must face reality as it is today .... Therefore, it was a just and necessary step, although also a risky one .... But risk is part of a necessary adventure."

(30 Dias, April 1994, p. 62)

Umm, could it be that he is referring to the assimilation of Masons into the Vatican? I mean, the beginnings of thinking that the world revolves around man, not that man should revolve around God. I have heard it said that when the U.N. meets  they always run into problems with the Vatican and the Muslilm countries when it comes to things like abortion, birth control. Clearly the Muslims need to join the Masonic brotherhood of man. Now, the dirty little secret is that all along with Humane Vitae and Natural Family Planning, the New Church is not teaching the truth about these things. The plan fact is that they can't get the Muslims countries to jump on board the "brotherhood" bus. Think of the current pontiff as a kind of Rev. Jesse Jackson friend to all and uniter of the people into the One World Rainbow coalition, bring me your heretics, sodomites, perverts, barbarian murderous dictators...just keep those Traditionalists trying to  preserve the faith out.

Though, come to think of it, perhaps his implied "let's have a Vatican II for Islam" idea, really means, "it didn't do the Catholic Church much good, maybe it'd harm Islam too! :wink:

Lol.  As serious as this is, this statement is pretty funny.  

Hey!  Maybe that IS the secret mission of false ecuмenism!  In that case, it's not nearly as bad as we thought.

 :rolleyes:

V2 did not offer 'concrete solutions'; it was the piece de resistance of the Revolution that makes Man into God.