EXCERPT:
Earlier (CrossCurrents#307, “Keeping the Flame Alive”) I drew an analogy between Catholic history and American history. We Catholics have often failed to use the story of our Church’s rebirth to inspire younger generations born after the Council experience. Americans, by contrast, have been much better at using the story of our country’s birth to inspire generations born long after 1776. I propose we now push this analogy by examining how Americans keep the flame of our founding alive.
The first thing to realize is we commemorate our nation’s birth in three distinct modes. Some practices are permanent features of American life; others are annual events built into our calendars; still others we reserve for anniversary years, such as the US bicentennial in 1976.
Permanent Features.
…Why not make effective parish use of Popes John XXIII and Paul VI? Portraits, buildings, halls, gardens, and courtyards could bear their images and/or names. Souvenirs, mementos, awards could have similar images. And why not begin the habit of calling Blessed John XXIII “the Father of Renewal,” or even “The Father of Our Rebirth”? Why not recognize Paul VI as “The Pilgrim Pope,” since it was he who created the globe-trotting papacy that John-Paul II and Benedict XVI have emulated.
…
Why not do this in our churches? I began Catholic high school just weeks before Vatican II began, and every day we recited a prayer “For the Success of the Second Vatican Council.” Why not use such a prayer to end our Masses?—surely praying for the Council's success is still a timely plea.
The Council’s story can be mined for a rich store of slogans (“Open the Windows,” “People of God,” “War No More!”) images (St. Peter’s filled with bleachers, then with 2000 bishops, Paul VI at Yankee Stadium, or meeting with President Lyndon Johnson) and even heroes and villains (Bishop Lienart, Cardinal Ottaviani). Why not make these a permanent part of our parish life?
Finally, Americans have mastered the indoctrination of each generation. …Why haven’t we Catholics taught younger generations about the Church's transformation from a Euro-centric, imperial Church to a multi-cultural global Church? Certainly the Council’s preparations, four annual sessions, and aftermath offer plenty of dramatic scenes to learn and remember.
Annual events.
…Why not select key dates on the parish calendar to celebrate as annual events? Paul VI’s famous 1965 speech to the UN was on October 4, Vatican II began on October 11, 1962 (that same date is the official feast day of John XXIII). Why not establish a special annual event around those dates? The Mass of the Holy Spirit (traditionally celebrated to open the Jesuit school-year) might be a fitting choice.
We could also re-publish famous texts from these two men. (John’s speech opening Vatican II, and Paul’s UN address come to mind), and create an annual social event to commemorate the Council.
Why not a December ministry fair, to mark John XXIII’s call (closing the first session in December 1962) for a “vast effort of collaboration” to renew the Church? In springtime, why not a “new life” event to mark (1) John's spring 1963 death (putting the Council’s fate in limbo), (2) Paul’s election (giving the Council new lease on life), and (3) renewal itself, (bringing new life to the Church)?
Anniversary years.
I recall the U.S. Bicentennial in 1976…Why couldn’t our parishes devote 2012-2013 to the 50th anniversary of Vatican II? Imagine reenacting the Council opening, with school kids processing in decked out as bishops, periti, and observers. Imagine everyone lighting special candles symbolizing their baptismal commission as members of the People of God. Imagine hearing John XXIII’s opening speech, scolding the “doomsayers” who see only evil in the world, promising mercy rather than condemnation, calling for a rebirth to revitalize the Church.
Why not organize a model Vatican II …Evenings could present video documentaries about the Council, John XXIII, Paul VI, and history before and after--all designed to provoke fresh thought and lively discussion.
…A “Popes John and Paul” lecture series can be inaugurated, then become an annual event. A “Roncalli Guild” could be formed, dedicated to permanently preserving and promoting the parish’s memory of Vatican II. An award for outstanding parishioner could be named after one or both popes, to highlight the new role for laity proclaimed by the council. A Lenten series could present the council’s history, especially for those too young to remember.
…A spirituality program on conversion and renewal would clarify why renewal means more than reforms.
…Pentecost could be a special celebration organized, culminating the parish anniversary year by emphasizing how both Popes intended the Council as a “Second Pentecost” reshaping Catholic life and renewing the hearts of Catholics into the next millennium.
By now you get the idea: we Catholics could revive our identity as a Church renewed by Vatican II the same way we Americans maintain our identity as a people freed by revolution…
The result: a type of parish life that acknowledges in celebrates a new way to be Church--and earns that parish the label “A Vatican II Parish.”
Oh, dear Bernie, I go away for a few weeks and come back to find you've gone off on a hopey-changey bender of brobdingnagian proportions! A simple question for you: If the goal of THE COUNCIL was to bring the holy Catholic Faith more deeply into the lives of the people - and vice-versa - was it a success? I don't see how anyone can believe it was; even your favorite living pope doesn't seem to think so.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to share a little story with you, old bean. It's about a friend of mine, you met him years ago but I don’t think you ever really got to know him. Let’s call him “Kirk”. In our youth we all looked up to Kirk; he was everything we all wanted to be: learned, confident, charitable, well-traveled, and firmly established in his field. Of course no man is universally beloved, but Kirk enjoyed the respect of all who knew him, even amongst those who had disagreements with him.
Kirk’s two eldest sons, let’s call them “John” and “Paul”, were being groomed to take over the family concern. They both cared deeply about their father, but thought that his innately conservative nature, tending almost to stodginess, was holding him back. They wheedled, cajoled, and prodded, and gradually forced a reluctant Kirk to step outside of his comfort zone. Under the influence of John and Paul he became enthusiastic about worldly things, but before long began to exhibit odd behavior and signs of physical decline. But even after John died Paul adamantly refused to acknowledge any problems with their father. “Nonsense, he’s never been better!” was his usual reply, “he’s having the time of his life!”
But by 1970 Kirk’s health was in a parlous state, ruined by years of unnatural excesses; and his nerves were shattered. Some still insisted that there was nothing wrong with him, but even Paul eventually began to express doubts himself. After Paul’s death other family members began to nurse Kirk back to health, and by the early 1980's he had begun to recover. Sadly, many of his "friends" from the 1960's continued to urge him to resume his old ways, but Kirk finally realized how dangerous his deviant lifestyle had been. His younger son, call him “Ben”, is firmly devoted to keeping Kirk on the straight and narrow and rebuilding his reputation.
But even now, some people don’t seem to get it. For instance, one of Kirk’s stepchildren – call him “Barnie” - has romaticized Kirk's ordeal to the extent that he's actually planning to throw a big bash, a veritable love-in, to commemorate it. To Barnie, who has lived for years on the periphery of Kirk's family circle, the whole thing is a jolly lark, a grand nostalgia trip. Fortunately, it's been years since anybody has taken Barnie seriously...