In my once in a blue moon (or should that be RED given the recent lunar eclipse?) browse of Catholica I actually came across a good article which I guess (unsurprisingly) wasn't viewed as such there...
"And so, in a 1969 German radio broadcast, Father Joseph Ratzinger would offer his thoughtfully considered answer (regarding the future of the Church) . Here are his concluding remarks,
“The future of the Church can and will issue from those whose roots are deep and who live from the pure fullness of their faith. It will not issue from those who accommodate themselves merely to the passing moment or from those who merely criticize others and assume that they themselves are infallible measuring rods; nor will it issue from those who take the easier road, who sidestep the passion of faith, declaring false and obsolete, tyrannous and legalistic, all that makes demands upon men, that hurts them and compels them to sacrifice themselves. To put this more positively: The future of the Church, once again as always, will be reshaped by saints, by men, that is, whose minds probe deeper than the slogans of the day, who see more than others see, because their lives embrace a wider reality. Unselfishness, which makes men free, is attained only through the patience of small daily acts of self-denial. By this daily passion, which alone reveals to a man in how many ways he is enslaved by his own ego, by this daily passion and by it alone, a man’s eyes are slowly opened. He sees only to the extent that he has lived and suffered. If today we are scarcely able any longer to become aware of God, that is because we find it so easy to evade ourselves, to flee from the depths of our being by means of the narcotic of some pleasure or other. Thus our own interior depths remain closed to us. If it is true that a man can see only with his heart, then how blind we are!
“How does all this affect the problem we are examining? It means that the big talk of those who prophesy a Church without God and without faith is all empty chatter. We have no need of a Church that celebrates the cult of action in political prayers. It is utterly superfluous. Therefore, it will destroy itself. What will remain is the Church of Jesus Christ, the Church that believes in the God who has become man and promises us life beyond death. The kind of priest who is no more than a social worker can be replaced by the psychotherapist and other specialists; but the priest who is no specialist, who does not stand on the [sidelines], watching the game, giving official advice, but in the name of God places himself at the disposal of man, who is beside them in their sorrows, in their joys, in their hope and in their fear, such a priest will certainly be needed in the future.
“Let us go a step farther. From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge — a Church that has lost much. She will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning. She will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices she built in prosperity. As the number of her adherents diminishes, so it will lose many of her social privileges. In contrast to an earlier age, it will be seen much more as a voluntary society, entered only by free decision. As a small society, it will make much bigger demands on the initiative of her individual members. Undoubtedly it will discover new forms of ministry and will ordain to the priesthood approved Christians who pursue some profession. In many smaller congregations or in self-contained social groups, pastoral care will normally be provided in this fashion. Along-side this, the full-time ministry of the priesthood will be indispensable as formerly. But in all of the changes at which one might guess, the Church will find her essence afresh and with full conviction in that which was always at her center: faith in the triune God, in Jesus Christ, the Son of God made man, in the presence of the Spirit until the end of the world. In faith and prayer she will again recognize the sacraments as the worship of God and not as a subject for liturgical scholarship.
“The Church will be a more spiritual Church, not presuming upon a political mandate, flirting as little with the Left as with the Right. It will be hard going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost her much valuable energy. It will make her poor and cause her to become the Church of the meek. The process will be all the more arduous, for sectarian narrow-mindedness as well as pompous self-will will have to be shed. One may predict that all of this will take time. The process will be long and wearisome as was the road from the false progressivism on the eve of the French Revolution — when a bishop might be thought smart if he made fun of dogmas and even insinuated that the existence of God was by no means certain — to the renewal of the nineteenth century. But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. Men in a totally planned world will find themselves unspeakably lonely. If they have completely lost sight of God, they will feel the whole horror of their poverty. Then they will discover the little flock of believers as something wholly new. They will discover it as a hope that is meant for them, an answer for which they have always been searching in secret.
“And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals. But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end: not the Church of the political cult, which is dead already, but the Church of faith. It may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that she was until recently; but it will enjoy a fresh blossoming and be seen as man’s home, where he will find life and hope beyond death."
Spoken in 1969, Father Razinger's "vision" is obviously not yet realised but offers a very plausible and hopeful insight into the possible shape of a deeply renewed and AUTHENTIC Catholic Church.
Our community of believers through its institutional structure has been in a state of flux since, and including the days of Christ's Apostles with early believers taking sides with the Jerusalem "church" of Jesus' brother, James against those supporting Paul, or Simon Peter etc. Paul felt obliged to censure Simon Peter for his support of the Mosaic Law on circumcision, and the uncleanliness of certain foods. In due time Simon Peter, and Paul became good friends.
Reaching back to the expulsion of The Hebrews from Egypt, Moses was confronted with various factions disputing his leadership, from the moment the 40,000 left Egypt until his death.
The institutional church has been polarised by so called schisms since the time of the Emperor Constantine, who attempted to introduce some order into the competing "sees" and "visions" representing early Christianity.
The great schism of 1054 AD between the Western, and Eastern Sees is usually referenced by the Filioque issue, whereas in reality the division was the result of the collapse of Rome's political, and military power...and the flourishing of the Eastern Roman Empire, morphed into the Byzantine Empire centred in Constantinople.
Pope Emeritus Benedict's opinion of some fifty years ago on the future of the institutional church did not foresee the consequences of the clerical abuse scandals an ongoing daily reality.
When I read the following day journalist reports on my football team's (Liverpool FC) latest game I recognise that each journalist writes their report with a priori prejudice. In other words each newspaper report will share the same game result, with the rest of the reports, subject to the bias of each reporter watching the same game.
I have learned, and am learning that religious discussion boards are as much a political force saturated with their puppet masters, and sock puppets as are those newspaper readers' comments filled with input from Putinbots influencing elections in the USA, Germany, Italy, and the referendum in the UK. In an age of false news, and politically driven agendas it is wise to be sceptical of those offering remedies that appear to offer a return to an earlier, cleaner, purer church...that never was.
Definitely more prayer and penance is required.. we can at least agree on that?
Previous Message
Our community of believers through its institutional structure has been in a state of flux since, and including the days of Christ's Apostles with early believers taking sides with the Jerusalem "church" of Jesus' brother, James against those supporting Paul, or Simon Peter etc. Paul felt obliged to censure Simon Peter for his support of the Mosaic Law on circumcision, and the uncleanliness of certain foods. In due time Simon Peter, and Paul became good friends.
Reaching back to the expulsion of The Hebrews from Egypt, Moses was confronted with various factions disputing his leadership, from the moment the 40,000 left Egypt until his death.
The institutional church has been polarised by so called schisms since the time of the Emperor Constantine, who attempted to introduce some order into the competing "sees" and "visions" representing early Christianity.
The great schism of 1054 AD between the Western, and Eastern Sees is usually referenced by the Filioque issue, whereas in reality the division was the result of the collapse of Rome's political, and military power...and the flourishing of the Eastern Roman Empire, morphed into the Byzantine Empire centred in Constantinople.
Pope Emeritus Benedict's opinion of some fifty years ago on the future of the institutional church did not foresee the consequences of the clerical abuse scandals an ongoing daily reality.
When I read the following day journalist reports on my football team's (Liverpool FC) latest game I recognise that each journalist writes their report with a priori prejudice. In other words each newspaper report will share the same game result, with the rest of the reports, subject to the bias of each reporter watching the same game.
I have learned, and am learning that religious discussion boards are as much a political force saturated with their puppet masters, and sock puppets as are those newspaper readers' comments filled with input from Putinbots influencing elections in the USA, Germany, Italy, and the referendum in the UK. In an age of false news, and politically driven agendas it is wise to be sceptical of those offering remedies that appear to offer a return to an earlier, cleaner, purer church...that never was.
Thanks, Pete. It is astounding that so much truth was allowed to be aired on that site, but the response was predictable – Let’s not look into the truth of the words of the good Cardinal, but instead, do the easy thing: Shoot the Messenger – Aleteia.
As for your response, Alex, particularly: “Pope Emeritus Benedict's opinion of some fifty years ago on the future of the institutional church did not foresee the consequences of the clerical abuse scandals an ongoing daily reality” that would fit the other site better than this one.
Well, John, the opinion offered by Pope Emeritus Benedict some fifty years reflected his personal views at that time. Hardly a...truth.
Benedict's choice to retire, rather than die in the role of Bishop of Rome, might well have been prompted by his growing awareness that the ongoing clerical sexual abuse scandals revelations are not boding well for his forecast of a smaller, purer institution filled with faithful loyalists, dedicated to serving the call of The Saviour.
All opinions should be welcomed for they have the effect of inviting us to consider the possibility that we can change our mind, when life offers us the prospect that our earlier understandings may need updating, the result of learning from our life's daily experiences.
He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.~ Thomas Paine
"And so it seems certain to me that the Church is facing very hard times. The real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals."
Prophetic words indeed...
Previous Message
Thanks, Pete. It is astounding that so much truth was allowed to be aired on that site, but the response was predictable – Let’s not look into the truth of the words of the good Cardinal, but instead, do the easy thing: Shoot the Messenger – Aleteia.
As for your response, Alex, particularly: “Pope Emeritus Benedict's opinion of some fifty years ago on the future of the institutional church did not foresee the consequences of the clerical abuse scandals an ongoing daily reality” that would fit the other site better than this one.
Could you elaborate how Father Ratzinger's remarks "offer a return to an earlier, cleaner, purer church...that never was"?
Previous Message
Our community of believers through its institutional structure has been in a state of flux since, and including the days of Christ's Apostles with early believers taking sides with the Jerusalem "church" of Jesus' brother, James against those supporting Paul, or Simon Peter etc. Paul felt obliged to censure Simon Peter for his support of the Mosaic Law on circumcision, and the uncleanliness of certain foods. In due time Simon Peter, and Paul became good friends.
Reaching back to the expulsion of The Hebrews from Egypt, Moses was confronted with various factions disputing his leadership, from the moment the 40,000 left Egypt until his death.
The institutional church has been polarised by so called schisms since the time of the Emperor Constantine, who attempted to introduce some order into the competing "sees" and "visions" representing early Christianity.
The great schism of 1054 AD between the Western, and Eastern Sees is usually referenced by the Filioque issue, whereas in reality the division was the result of the collapse of Rome's political, and military power...and the flourishing of the Eastern Roman Empire, morphed into the Byzantine Empire centred in Constantinople.
Pope Emeritus Benedict's opinion of some fifty years ago on the future of the institutional church did not foresee the consequences of the clerical abuse scandals an ongoing daily reality.
When I read the following day journalist reports on my football team's (Liverpool FC) latest game I recognise that each journalist writes their report with a priori prejudice. In other words each newspaper report will share the same game result, with the rest of the reports, subject to the bias of each reporter watching the same game.
I have learned, and am learning that religious discussion boards are as much a political force saturated with their puppet masters, and sock puppets as are those newspaper readers' comments filled with input from Putinbots influencing elections in the USA, Germany, Italy, and the referendum in the UK. In an age of false news, and politically driven agendas it is wise to be sceptical of those offering remedies that appear to offer a return to an earlier, cleaner, purer church...that never was.