by Anura Guruge
on July 17, 2022
Well, there are enough Catholics, particularly in the U.S., that already think that Pope Francis is mad. So, part should not be a problem. The real question is does he, for all his swaggering bravado, have the chutzpah to make such a monumental call.
He should. It has been 60 years since the start of Vatican II.
The average gap between the Ecumenical Councils is 81 years — BUT that is grossly distorted by a FEW extremely long gaps, e.g., 324 & 254. As you can see from the 3rd image there were times when councils were held on a more frequent basis.
It also used to be the case that Councils were held to clarify, confirm & consolidate decisions made by a prior Council.
Francis’ of late, as the 2nd image demonstrates, is obsessed by Vatican II.
Convoking a Vatican III to ratify the pope’s desires would be a great idea.
There is, however, one PROBLEM. A Vatican III, especially given the growing discord within the Church, might go totally OFF THE RAILS!
Rather than building upon what was agreed upon at II the III MIGHT decide to discard some of the Vatican II thinking.
Intriguing?
But, wouldn’t it be worthwhile, especially now?
So, many diverse issues confronting the Church. So, why not get all the prelates together, again, & get them to have a candid soul-searching followed by some VOTES to see what the consensus is. It is possible that there is NO consensus, on anything, but the voting alone would be telling.
Yes, it would be a COSTLY, labor-intensive & complicated affair.
Folks will claim the Vatican no longer has the money to organize a Council — which this time around might be attended by upwards of 4,000 prelates. But, the Catholic Church still is the richest institution in the known solar system. Sell a few dozen items tucked away in the numerous basements & we will be all set. Or maybe a just a few of the real estate in London & Rome.
More to the point is whether today’s (reorganized) curia has the expertise & WILL to pull off a Vatican III. If you know your Vatican history you will know that ‘John XXIII‘ was blessed with a cadre of exceptional lieutenants who worked miracles to make Vatican II a reality. Does Francis have similar? Many will say ‘NO’.
This will be a MAJOR coup for Francis. It will be his crowning glory. He will forever be the pope that convoked Vatican III. Without that Francis legacy will be that of a spluttering papacy.
There is a chance that Francis will not be around when the Council starts. That is NOT a problem. But, him CONVOKING it will also GREATLY INFLUENCE the next conclave! That too is NOT a bad idea.
So, think about it.
I’ll start with the initial premise of your posting: Does Pope Francis Have The Chutzpah To Convoke ‘Vatican III’ To Consolidate His ‘Vatican II’ Desires?
[My] answer: No.
My initial thoughts:
He’ll be 86 in December. That should be reason enough not to convoke a Council. And honestly, while it COULD be in his mind to “pull a J23” and start the ball rolling, and have his successor (like P6) get down to the nitty-gritty details of the deliberations and force THEM to live the results, good or bad, I don’t think that’s what he wants to do.
Francis, as the last 9½ years has shown, doesn’t like definitive answers, doesn’t like to commit himself to….well, pretty much anything. He basically says (to anyone…the press, the cardinals, whomever) off the cuff statements depending on who his audience is at that moment. Maybe to provoke people, maybe just to curry favor, without a thought to the consequences.
He has a bee in his bonnet (again, at the moment) about the Traditional Latin Mass, and because other people (rightly, IMHO) have called him out on that, he digs in his heels and tightens the noose. For all the talk of “openness” and “accompaniment” in this pontificate, Francis really doesn’t tolerate anything of the kind.
Councils tend to publish documents and codify and clarify rulings about things, but Francis has a penchant for muddying the doctrinal waters.
And it has to be noted that while the fruits of Vatican II were on the whole good and noble, what came after was far more alarming–all allegedly done “In the Spirit of Vatican II”–which is merely shorthand for throwing things not actually discussed in Council over the fence or under the door. Where prelates in crucial positions pushed their OWN agendas (one of which resulting in what the Novus Ordo Mass of 1970 eventually became). Leading many to lose their Catholic identity and drift away (or outright walking out the door) in terms of vocations, Mass attendance and the like. Anyone with eyes can see that. While I think Francis does get a perverse thrill from causing Chaos, I think he’d rather not take it that far. Mostly because he knows he might get more than he bargained for.
And any notion of what a future post-conciliar “Spirit of Vatican III” nonsense might be, fills me with dread.
Many thanks Mark. I smiled as I read your (as usual) well thought-out & reasoned comment. When I was writing the post I wondered what your reaction would be. I got maybe 60% right. SMILE.
I do agree that him calling a VIII is very SLIM, but I wouldn’t say that the odds are ZERO.
Now IF he was a THINKING (cerebral, profound) pope … the odds would be higher.
But, he is like Trump. Likes chaos but not planned chaos.
*****
Lot to be said for the J23 ‘model’. He got to see & ‘enjoy’ the start & then let P6 do the real hard work (though you & I both know that P6, pre-pope, was also extremely engaged).
That is one aspect that intrigues me. Does Francis have the cadre that J23 had to pull off a Council.
But, this, as you can tell, was just food for thought.
*****
But, IF … BIG IF … Francis announces VIII at his August consistory WE will look brilliant. LoL.
Thanks & Cheers, Anura
It is completely absurd to accuse Francis of wanting to convene a new council. Yes it is true that such rumours were already spread by his opponents shortly after he took office. In fact, these circles (which are currently also up to mischief in the USA) resent his efforts to implement the decisions of Vatican II.
Under the tenures of JP II and B XVI, every effort was made to water down the message of Vatican II as much as possible.Jorge Mario Bergoglio was expected to continue this policy, but this did not materialise.
Moreover it is extraordinarily inaccurate and primitive to judge Francis as a madman and a heretic because of this. It should not be overlooked that all those who despise the present incumbent are in fact also directed against John XXIII and Paul VI.
More important than the question of Vatican III seems to Francis’ opponents the question of a possible resignation. However, I think that this matter is currently off the table. All those who expect such a declaration at the coming consistory will probably be disappointed.
Wow. SMILE. You do get emotional when it comes to the pope. ‘Accuse’ is a strong word. I am sure I didn’t ACCUSE him. More a question of postulated.
I am puzzled as to WHY YOU seem to think that convening a council is a BAD thing.
Shouldn’t it be a GOOD thing?
You got me thinking. Vatican II took place such a LONGTIME ago! Think about it. It predates the Internet & mobile phones! It was in an era when popes were rarely seen by the worldwide population. Now we have popes who (supposedly) TWEET. It was prior to gay marriage becoming LEGAL in some countries. It was a VERY LONGTIME ago.
Shouldn’t there be councils on a regular basis. Maybe once every 75 years.
*****
I certainly have never said Francis is MAD. Eccentric, attention-seeking etc. Trump in a white robe in a wheel chair. SMILE.
*****
The person who brings up resignation, without fail, at least twice a month is FRANCIS himself. SMILE. He loves the attention. Trump in a white robe in a wheel chair.
Smile.
I don’t think he will resign this year.
He will NOT resign while B16 is still alive & B16 might be the 1st after Jesus to live forever! Is B16 an incarnation? The promised 2nd coming? Could be? He was very God like. SMILE.
*****
You do REALIZE I have NO AXES to grind. I am NOT RELIGIOUS! I do not pray. I do NOT believe in life after death. I don’t believe in a spirit. My interests in popes are purely historical & factual. That is why I can be detached (& YES also be flippant). Pope & Trump. Same to me. No difference. Both historic figures that need to be documented, commented upon & studied. Ditto Jesus & the Buddha. SMILE.
PAX.
I am sorry if I have offended you with my contribution !
I am not Catholic (nor did I ever intend to be), but I started to look into certain aspects of Church politics about 40 years ago, being particularly interested in the aggiornamento period. A great help was the contact to an employee of the Kathpress (Austrian Catholic news agency), who provided me with many insights and contacts.
When Jorge Mario Bergoglio, was finally elected Pope, I was convinced that he would follow the path of Vatican II, that he would continue on the path of Vatican II.
However, it was also clear that this would be associated with endless difficulties; since then, I have taken part in various discussions – both in small circles and in public – and got to know the most diverse points of view. In the process, however, I had to realise that the opponents of the current Pope all too often introduce arguments based on commonplaces.
So I became an apologist for Francis on a small scale, which unfortunately also leads me sometimes to reactions that can be somewhat aggressive.
PAX ET BONUM !!!
No. No. No. You did NOT offend me. I am cool. I am NOW old; nearly 69. I don’t get upset by much.
WOW! I am FLOORED that you are NOT a Catholic! Given your intimate knowledge of UDG etc. I had even thought that maybe you were a CARDINAL! WOW.
You definitely have been following Church politics for way longer than I — 3x longer. BRAVO. I am humbled.
Wow. Apologist to Francis. I would really like to know more about YOU. Please stay in touch. WE ARE COOL. NO problems. I get a feeling we have much in common.
I am sorry that my views on Francis must have offended YOU. SORRY. Did NOT mean to. I say it as I see it. I really do think of him as the Trump of popes!
Pax et Bonum (back to YOU). SMILE.
On the question of whether Pope Francis could convene Vatican III, what would be the point? At the end of Vatican II, sixteen documents were solemnly ratified.A problem, of course, would be the fact that a large part of the decisions were only insufficiently implemented.
Now, in Roman law, as well as also in canon law, there is a principle which reads “Ne bis in idem” in translation “Not twice the same”. In concrete terms, this means that a definitive decision is considered unrepeatable.
If one now assumes that council decisions are inspired by the Holy Spirit, then this principle is all the more valid. In fact, there is the possibility of convening a synod ( planned for 2023) to reaffirm the binding nature of Vatican II in all clarity.
Of course, a refusal could be linked to sanctions, but these would probably be the most extreme measures.and would not be in keeping with the spirit of Vatican II.
ALL THE BEST !!!
Maybe we are having issues with ‘language’. There was NEVER a question as to whether Francis could convene V III. Of course, he can. The question was whether he has the GUTS to do so.
Any decision has to be reconsidered in the light of new events! The Vatican did NOT use to believe in evolution.
I find it amusing how you cling so to a Council that took place 60 years ago. Man, times change.
Why are you SO AGAINST change?
You claimed NOT to be Catholic, but it would appear you are Christian … given your comment re. inspired by the Holy Spirit. WOW. Was he/she napping before & after the Council or was he again going around having his way with virgins? If I recall WW II took place prior to that Council & we have seen so much human misery since. The Holy Spirit has NOT been inspired to intervene? He only intervenes doing Councils & conclaves? SMILE.
******
At this point I, with all RESPECT, have to AGAIN reiterate that YOUR insistence of SNIPING behind a mask does NOT sit well with me.
What are you afraid of? If you deal in the truth, why can’t you stand up and say so like a real, honorable MAN?
Yes, I do NOT like dealing with people who refuse to identify themselves.
You obviously have SOMETHING TO HIDE.
I don’t.
So, until you have the balls to give us some clue as to who the heck you are, I am SORRY BUT I am not going to waste my time responding to your comments. OK? Deal?
Just be UPFRONT. Be True. BE A MAN! It can’t be that difficult. SMILE.
Cheers. Holy Spirit! LoL.