We had a Dream

Published in Spirituality
September – October 2012
Dominican press Dublin

With the arrival of the Sixties, the somewhat drab austerity of the post-War Fifties began to recede. We had come to live with the reality of the Cold War, which so nearly early in the new decade, came close to nuclear conflict. In October 1962, (1) during the tense days of the Cuban missile crisis, Kennedy faced Khrushchev and the world held its collective breath.

At the same time as this potentially suicidal face-off between East and West, the Second Council of the Vatican opened on October 11. Called by Angelo Roncalli, who became Pope John XXIII following the death of Pius XII in October 1958, the Council was to become a springboard for renewal in the Church.

What was to be the work of the Council? Dom Christopher Butler in his book “The theology of Vatican II” (2) writes “…..nothing in particular, it would appear; or perhaps it would be truer to say: everything. Christian unity was the Pope’s distant goal no doubt, but his immediate aim was ‘to let some fresh air into the Church’ and to promote within her an aggiornamento. ”

The word ‘aggiornamento’ that became so closely associated with the Council is usually translated as ‘bringing up to date’. Not a Council called to condemn heresy but one called to celebrate the Church and its mission in the world. This quiet, avuncular prelate, who had been the Patriarch of Venice, set in motion a gathering that would reinvigorate the Christian Church. And just two months before his death, in June 1963, after only a brief time in the Chair of Peter, his famous encyclical, Pacem in Terris, was published. In its very title it showed a shift in emphasis, for here was a papal document that was written for “the clergy and faithful of the whole world and to all men of good will”. (3) Here was indication that the Church was intent to look out to the world, and speak to both believers and to those who did not share Christian belief. With open arms Peter greeted the world and the Council began its deliberations.

It is sometimes difficult with the passing of many years, to remember with any clarity the Church of my childhood. There was a degree of certainty, of accepted norms, of being somehow different and of course the dominance of prayer in Latin, a language we became very good at pronouncing but were somewhat less adept in translating. The Council would come to have a profound effect on the Church I grew up in as documents were drafted and re-drafted until, accepted by the Fathers, a clearer vision of hope and joy in the Christian faith emerged.

And how that was needed in the turbulent decade of the Sixties. Within a year of Cuba , Kennedy was assassinated and the seeds of conflict in South East Asia were sown. Vietnam was later to become the touch-stone for youth, both in protest and music. The greyness of the previous decade was replaced with a riot of colour in clothing, music and life. As with anything that has been constrained, this sudden release produced excess in the midst of laughter and the sexual mores of the time, together with the emerging drug culture, often gave rise to confusion and doubt. Surety had gone out of the window with the rule book and uncertainty knocked at the door.

Theologians, acting as experts to the Council Fathers became well known both during the time of the Council, and in subsequent years through their writings and academic research. Schillebeeckx, Rahner, Lonergan, Murray, von Balthasar, Chenu, Congar, and de Lubac stood among the giants. Congar’s recently published account in English of the Council (4) will no doubt be read with enthusiasm as the account of one who was so close to the debates in Rome. Kung and Ratzinger, the latter of course the present Pope, Benedict XVI , are the only two left alive from that significant gathering and have now of course ended up holding very different views of subsequent developments.

Hans Kung was invited earlier this year to attend a celebration of Fifty years since the opening of the Council at the German Katholikentag in Mannheim . Four days before the congress was due to open, Kung responded, declining the invitation. “…. In my opinion there is no reason for a festive Council Gala but rather for an honest service of penance or a funeral service.” (5).

In spite of his critical position, Kung remains a priest of good standing even though his licence to teach in a Catholic faculty of Theology was withdrawn by John Paul II in December 1979.

Many theologians worked hard and long contributed their learning and advice to the original writing and revising of the Schema that were finally accepted by the Council.

Two great men from an earlier time, Newman (1801-1890) and de Chardin (1881-1955), had prepared the ground for the Twentieth Century gathering in Rome in so many ways and in fact the Council has often been called Newman’s Council (6). What is striking however is that many of those whose thought proved to be formative during these years had themselves often been placed under interdict in earlier times and prohibited from publication, writing or preaching. Maybe one of the invaluable fruits of the Council, was the rehabilitation of these great thinkers and the recognition of their faithfulness to the mission of the Church. Their contribution continues to this day.

There was a real feeling of expectation and hope, the expectation of challenge that the Council Documents demanded and the hope they instilled. But within three years came the first disappointment, for in July 1968 Paul VI published Humanae Vitae (7) and, in spite of the large majority view of the Commission set up to examine the issue in favour of change, this encyclical upheld the traditional teaching on contraception. It challenged many, both priests and laity, and caused a significant stir in the national press. I can still remember the full page of letters published in the aftermath in the London Times. A number of priests felt unable to accede to its teaching and were suspended by their Bishops. The church lost their ministry. At that time I asked a good friend of mine, ordained in 1954, what he intended doing. His reply? “If I leave, who is there to help and support the people?” And so he stayed. The teaching remains a matter of contention, where, for so many, conscience has become the final arbiter rather than acceptance of the encyclical.

With that cloud hovering, other matters moved forward. Ecumenical dialogue gained apace and we were encouraged to share with each other our Christian faith, seeking common ground and looking for solutions in areas of difficulty. Whether or not we have achieved that understanding only future years will tell. That there have been challenges to that early vision cannot be denied.

The manner in which the Ordinariate was offered by Rome was not the most diplomatic way forward, but maybe we will get over that.

Two major issues that gave vitality to those post-conciliar years remain with us: collegiality and the use of the vernacular in the celebration of the Eucharist. It was the use of English that was, for most of us, the significant change, for it affected our lives in a very particular and regular way, and we welcomed it. Contrast that to a comment made to me in 1963 when as a student teacher I helped arrange what we called then a “dialogue mass” where students read the Epistle and Psalm in English. I was told afterwards by a lady in her sixties that “I feel as though I have been to a protestant service”. Thank goodness we have moved beyond that narrow view.

But as recent years have shown, language is a contentious issue. The translation from Latin into English of the early 70’s, considering the speed with which it was undertaken, has served us well and has supported the prayer of so many. It was not perfect, but then neither is what we are now experiencing; some of us would argue that this New Translation is a good deal worse. Use of the vernacular however, a direct result of the Council, in spite of the small groups such as the Latin Mass society, cannot be reversed. The welcome publication in English of the Liturgy of the Hours after the Council (8) made another inroad into adherence to Latin and opened praying the Office to both laity and clergy.

The decision in July 1870 of the first Vatican Council, taken in the midst of a thunderstorm over Rome , to declare the Infallibility of the Pope gave rise to continued concern over ensuing years. The problems of an unfinished Council hung in the air in subsequent years.

The emergence of the principle of collegiality from Vatican II, whilst not denying the papal position, did emphasise the collegiality of the Bishops and that engendered great expectation. (9) But, some fifty years on, this is possibly the greatest casualty of Council hope. More and more we see the local voice of Conferences being over ruled in favour of a centralised Roman position. Not only has this radically limited the principle of collegiality, but it has produced an atmosphere of tension, where speaking out may give rise to censorship and the consequent problems. We must be aware of the re-emergence of Papalism that was firmly rejected by the Council Fathers in Lumen Gentium. An article on the SSPX website (10) “On Collegiality” speaks of “the error of collegiality”, a position diametrically opposed to the wishes of the Council.

The emergence in the late 60s and early 70s of two journals “Concilium” (11) and “Communio” (12) expressed the post-conciliar tension among theologians, with colleagues from the days of the Council, Kung and Ratzinger, going their separate ways; a division that remains, inspite of a five hour discussion between Kung and Ratzinger just after the latter’s election to the papacy.

The last forty years have seen a transformation in our secular society in so many areas. I doubt, if we had been asked to outline the changes we might expect in the years following the conclusion of the Council, that few of us would have come near to the reality we now experience. The Church, living and teaching within this changing world-wide milieu cannot hope to ignore it. Nor should it. The end of the Cold War, the break up of the Soviet Union, the emergence of the European community, the ever growing plight of the Third World and the rise of terrorist activity, culminating in the nightmare of 9/11, have crowded our lives. We now have to learn how to be a prophetic voice for this tumultuous time. It is unfortunate and indeed sad, that some seek to solve the problems we face by attempting to go back to a time of greater certainty where so many questions had black and white answers and we ignored the many shades of grey. We can no longer do that.

It was also in these post-conciliar years that we saw the emergence of Liberation Theology in Latin America . We owe its name to Gustavo Guitierrez, the author of “A Theology of Liberation” (13). The Movement was to become a source of tension between Rome and those countries in the Americas where the ‘preferential option for the poor’ became the popular descriptive phrase in subsequent years. The first Conference of the Latin American bishops (CELAM) held after the conclusion of the Council at Medellin in 1968 debated how to apply the teaching of the Council to the church they represented. The conclusions they reached were strongly influenced by the tenets of liberation theology. It has not gone away and the tension remains.

There is a feeling abroad that there is now a concerted attempt to undo much of the vision of the Council. Recently the key-note presentation at a Symposium on the Council given by Professor Tracey Rowland in Leeds was critical of theologians working at that time. The Tablet quoted her as saying that she was particularly critical of Schillibeeckx and his followers for “correlating faith with modernity”. Arguments such as these seek to undermine our confidence in the work of the Council and call in to question much that has been achieved in the subsequent years (14). When we read in Proverbs (15) that “where there is no vision, the people perish” we should be aware that a blurred vision is dangerous, for it leads to confusion and contention.

Maybe the time is fast approaching when we need to take stock once again and ask whether we should begin to make preparations for the a further Council. We would be failing our grandchildren if we allowed the fruits of the Second Council of the Vatican to fade through our lack of concern. We do indeed have a duty to make the case, in faith, for the Church as it is today and for what it might become.

END

1 High Chase Rise

Little Haywood

Staffordshire ST18 OTY July 2012

Notes

(1) “Seriously threatening situation concerning Cuba . Nuclear war could break out from one day to the next. Da pacem!” Pg 116 My Journal of the Council: Congar Dominican Publications 2012

(2) The Theology of Vatican II Dom Christopher Butler DTL 1967 Pg 6

(3) Subtitle of Pacem in Terris Encyclical of Pope John XXIII promulgated April 11, 1963.On establishing universal peace in truth, justice, charity and liberty

“To our venerable brothers the patriarchs, primates, archbishops, bishops and other local ordinaries in peace and communion with the apostolic see to the clergy and faithful of the whole world and to all men of good will. “

(4) My Journal of the Council. The notebooks of Yves Congar OP Pub in English – Dominican Publications Dublin 2012. See also Ch VII onwards “The struggle for the Freedom of the Council” in Hans Kung - My Struggle for Freedom Pub Continuum 2003

(5) “Kung refuses invitation to celebrate Vatican II Anniversary” The TABLET May 19^th 2012 Pg 25

(6) See John Henry Newman, a biography Ian Ker OUP 1990 Pg 411 and others

(7) Humani Vitae, encyclical on artificial means of birth control: Pope Paul VI promulgated 25^th July 1968

(8) Liturgy of the Hours: Published in three volumes Collins 1974

(9) Lumen Gentium Chapter 3 Documents of Vatican II

(10) “On Collegiality” Fr Basil Wrighton www.sspx.org

(11) Concilium first published 1965

(12) Communio first published 1972

(13) A Theology of Liberation Gustavo Gutierrez first published1971 re-printed SCM Classics 2001

(14) “Post Vatican II theologians ‘weakened the church’” The Tablet June 30 2012 pg 39

(15) Book of Proverbs - ch29. v18

HTML Comment Box is loading comments...