Sunday, August 7, 2011

A Recent Question

We recently received the following query regarding our prior post on Cardinal Ottaviani:


«The Curia would eventually develop allies as the other Council Fathers began to note the Rhine group's concerted actions. This would eventually lead to the formation of the "International Group of Fathers," composed mostly of bishops from Italy, Spain, Portugal, and Latin America.»

Can you elaborate some more on this?

Basically, the coordinated activity of the Rhine bishops to re-direct the conciliar proceedings was either unnoticed or insufficient to raise any real concerns. In other words, nobody really did anything about it. We have the benefit now of knowing about all the meetings and strategery that culminated in Cardinal Leinart's first session demands that all the commissions be scrapped and that the preparatory efforts be restarted essentially at ground zero.

As it progressed and the Rhine alliance was exposed, a separate block (that had really already begun to emerge) organized to back the efforts of guys like Cardinal Ottaviani. They became known as the Coetus Internationalis Patrum (the International Group of Fathers). While they served to blunt many of the Rhine initiatives, they were late to the game and pretty much played from behind the whole time.

Hope that helps.

5 comments:

Mark of the Vineyard said...

I was surprised to find that Card. Ratzinger belonged to the Rhine group.

What had initially caught my attention was the mention of Portuguese bishops belonging to the group backing Ottaviani. Given the quality of Portuguese bishops presently I find it almost hard to believe :-D

Throwback said...

Regardless of his own comments claiming the contrary, it's very difficult to square the Ratzinger of the CDF with what he was writing and saying back in the 60s.

Throwback said...

Also, keep in mind he was just a peritus back then. Not even a bishop yet.

Alexander said...

Does this mean Ratzinger does not know he became more conservative? I thought I read something where he states people in the 60s called him progressive and now they call him conservative yet he claims his theology never changed. Or..? I don't remember really.. any help?

Throwback said...

That's pretty much it. His take is that he hasn't changed, but all of his friends from those days (eg- Hans Kung) are the ones who changed.

Just from my POV, Kung seems to be exactly who he was back then. Ratzinger, not so much.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it all sounds very weird once you've read enough of their respective works.