 |  |  |
| 0:00 | -1:08:12 |
In the first episode of the new year, JD and Ed talk about the 60th anniversary of the opening of Vatican Council II, and ask: why does it take so long to implement?
Publish on Substack
The Pillar is on Substack – the place for independent writing
Fantastic job gents. One of the marks of a good podcast is when you both thoroughly enjoy it and it causes you to think even when you don't agree with some of it.
One thing worth considering - there is often this idea that the Council is the documents and the documents are the Council. But is this true? Can we simply reduce the council down to its documents? I think probably not. While a few people have gripes about the council documents (and I think there's a valid way in which someone can complain about them), most people haven't even read them. Which leads me what is at least in part the origination of the spirit of the council in its various forms. Can we really say that all of the discussions, speeches, debates, etc aren't a part of the Council? We can certainly say they're not an infallible part of the Council, but I'm not sure it can be so easily dismissed as separate from it.
Take for example a Council father involved in the discussions comes home in the immediate aftermath and says "at the Council we discussed X and therefore I'm implementing Y reform". An astute observer could find many instances of X and Y that someone like a Ratzinger may not find acceptable. A devout Catholic can be forgiven, I believe, if they were under the impression that the sudden shift weren't a part of the Council even if they're not directly found in the documents (take the Liturgy for example).