FIFTY YEARS AGO THERE WAS A COUNCIL…THE MEANING OF VATICAN II

Víctor Codina

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................2. THE PRE-COUNCIL ERA ...............................................................................................3. THE COUNCIL ...............................................................................................................4. PERSONAL INTERLUDE: MY OWN EXPERIENCES OF THE COUNCIL ..................5. AFTER THE COUNCIL ..................................................................................................6. CONCLUSION: FROM CHAOS TO KAIROS ................................................................

NOTES .................................................................................................................................

17

8

4

3

32

19

30

CRISTIANISME I JUSTÍCIA Edition, Roger de Llúria, 13 - 08010 Barcelona Tel. 93 317 23 38 - info@fespinal.com - www.cristianismeijusticia.netPrinted by: Ediciones Rondas S.L. - Legal deposit: B-27.529-2013 ISBN: 978-84-9730-325-5 - ISSN: 2014-6566 - ISSN (virtual edition): 2014-6574 Translated by Joseph Owens - Cover illustration: Roger Torres Printed on ecological paper and recycled cardboardDecember 2013

The Fundació Lluís Espinal lets it be known that its data are registered in a file under the name BDGACIJ,legal title of the Fundació Lluís Espinal. These are used only for providing the services we render you andfor keeping you in form ed of our activities. You may exercise your rights of access, rectification, cancelationor opposition by writing to the Fundació in Barcelona, c/Roger de Llúria, 13.

Víctor Codina, sj. has a doctorate in theology. Since 1982 he has lived in Bolivia, where hehas been working with people´s organizations and assisting with the formation of lay people inOruro and Santa Cruz. He is a professor of theology at the Universidad Católica Bolivia in Co -chabamba and also does pastoral ministry in working-class neighborhoods. His publicationsfor Cristianisme i Justícia include: Lluis Espinal (Cuaderno 64), Acoger o rechazar el clamordel explotado [Accepting or Rejecting the Cry of the Exploited] (Cuaderno 23), and L. Espinal,un catalán mártir de justicia [L. Espinal, a Catalonian Martyr for Justice] (Cuaderno 2).

3

1. INTRODUCTION

We live our lives at such an accelerated pace that an event of 50 years agocan easily be buried in oblivion if we make no effort to recover the memoryof our past. And such recovery is not easy when the direct witnesses of the event are gradually disappearing. This is what is happening with theSecond Vatican Council (1962-1965).

Slowly but surely the great prota gonists ofVatican II have been vanishing from ourmidst: the Pope John XXIII and Pope PaulVI and the great majority of the bishops,both the renewers (such Suenens, Alfrink,Frings, Döpfner, König, Máxi mos IV, Ler -caro, Helder Cámara) and the con ser va - tives (such as Ottaviani and the greatan tago nist Lefèbvre). Of the great theolo -gians of the Council (Rahner, Con gar, DeLubac, Schillebeeckx, Jung mann, Häring,Murray, etc.), there survive only Küng andRatzinger, who were then quite young.Deceased also are the Taizé monks

(Roger Schutz and Max Thurian) and theOrthodox observers such as Evdokimovand the Patriarch Athenagoras of Cons -tantinople, whom Paul VI embraced as asign of ecumenical recon ciliation.Even the historians of Vatican II (such

as G. Albrigo and E. Vilanova) have beenslowly leaving the scene. The Christianswho had some direct ex perience of theCoun cil are now persons retired fromactive life. How are we to transmit totoday’s younger generation the meaningof an event whose main protagonists havealmost all disappeared?

But the problem is not simply gene -rational or chronological because thereare sectors of the today’s Church that areinterested in forgetting Vatican II. Theywish to bury its «dangerous memo ry» orat least offer a minimalist, «lite» readingof the Council. What was the real meaning of Vati can

II? Different people have described it asthe major event of the 20th century (DeGaulle), a prophetic council for our days(Chenu), or a great grace the Spirit gavethe Church (John Paul II). It signaled achange from anathema to dialogue (Ga -raudy) and a shift from a western Churchto a universal Church (Rahner). For othersthe Council was a kind of nightmare oreven «a sewer», as a Lefèbvre followerclaim ed. How can we now recover thememory of Vatican II in such a way thatits message is good news for the world oftoday?There is no better way to do this than

to recall what the pre-Vatican II era waslike, what happened during the Councilitself, and what changes have taken placesince then.

2.1. The pre-conciliar Eucharist

The priest celebrates with his back to thepeople; he is the mediator of the sacred,the one who stands between God andhuman beings, the other Christ; he isseparated from the people even by hisdress: habit, clerics, tonsure; he adminis -ters the sacraments in the name of Christ;he prays and reads the word of God inLatin. There is no concele bration; oftensimultaneous Masses are celebrated onside altars; sometimes Mass is celebratedwith the Blessed Sacrament exposed, or atthe end of Mass there is exposition andbene dic tion. The tabernacle presides overthe church. The central act is the narrativeof the consecration and the elevation ofthe host and chalice (with bells ringings).Adoration appears to be more importantthan communion. The liturgy is an actionof the priest alone. The Roman canon isthe only one that exists.

The people are passive; they attendMass as if at a spectacle; they do notunderstand the Latin; they pray the rosaryor novenas; the more adept follow theliturgy with a bilingual missal; the faithfulare kneeling down almost all the time;communion is taken kneeling and in themouth; it is offered in just one species;people have been fasting since midnight;many do not dare to receive communionwithout confessing beforehand; other at -tend Mass without receiving communion;sometimes communion is given beforeand after Mass or in a side chapel. Manypeople attend Mass simply to fulfill theSunday obligation since otherwise theywould be sinning mortally; in order for theMass to count they must reach the churchat least by the time of the Gospel. The Eucharist is not understood or

appreciated as a community celebration of the paschal mystery; there is no prayer

4

2. THE PRE-COUNCIL ERA

Instead of beginning with generic pronouncements about the pre-conciliarChurch, let us recall what the Eucharist was like before Vatican II.

of the faithful and no kiss of peace; theCredo and the Our Father are prayed inLatin; most of the hymns are in Latin andsung as Gregorian chant; at the end ofMass the prologue to John’s Gospel isread, and then everyone prays three HailMarys and a Latin prayer to Saint Michaelasking him to defend the Church and castthe devil into hell.The sermon or homily, when there was

one, was in the vernacular; it summed up the Gospel interpreted in very littlefashion; the preaching was often verymoralistic. What little knowledge peoplehad of the Bible was gained through thepreaching they heard and through theirstudy of the catechism with its questionsand answers; the Bible itself was hardlyread.

2.2. What was behind this liturgy?

The liturgical celebration is not somethingaccidental in the Church; it ex presses theChurch’s faith, her theology, her way of being Church.1 What lay behind thispre-conciliar Tridentine liturgy was theChurch of Christendom which originatedin the 4th century with Constantine andTheodosius and which was reinforced inthe 9th century by the reforms of GregoryVII which es tab lish ed the model for acentralized Church until Vatican II. Thatmodel was a pyramidal Church at whosesummit was the Pope, the bishops, and thepriests and at whose base were the laity. Itwas an unequal Church: a few personstaught, commanded, and celebrated; therest obeyed, learned, prayed, kept quiet,and paid tithes. It was a clerical Churchthat had the power to consecrate, pardon,and baptize; it possessed the Spirit. The

Church was the pope, the bishop, thepriest. It was a Church in which the priestsand religious were called to holiness bythe evangelical counsels while lay peoplehad to be satisfied with obeying the com -mandments in order to be saved. It was aChurch united to the state, which protec -ted her and assisted her; the citizens of acountry were automatically members ofthe Church. Baptism of children was thecommon practice; Christianity was some -thing socio-cultural; people were Chris -tian more by tradition than by conviction.Outside the Catholic Church there was nosalvation, which explains the missionaryzeal to save souls from perdition, thecondemnation of non-Christian religionsas diabolical, and the denunciation of non-Catholic Christians as heretics and schis -matics. There was no religious libertybecause error has no rights. The Churchwas a perfect society like the state; it pos -sessed not only spiritual power but alsotemporal power (the Papal States…); thepope could assign newly discovered ter -ritories to the Catholic monarchs; he couldconsecrate and depose emperors andkings. The Church was the Kingdom ofGod on earth. The Church of Christendom, also

called the Church of the Second Millen -nium, certainly made a great effort to be -come incarnate in society. It was a sourceof humanization at critical mo ments ofhistory; it kept the faith united; it broughtthe Gospel to other continents; it struggledfor liberty; it produced many fruits ofextraordinary holiness; it built cathedralsand published theological mas terpieces.But all this came at a great cost: theseparation of the Eastern Churches, theReformation, the Crusades, the reli gious

5

wars, anti-Semitism, rejection of themodern world of the Enlightenment,oppo sition to the French revolution andLatin American independence, neglect ofmodern science and technology, and thedeparture from the Church of manyintellectuals, workers, politicians. It is nowonder, then, that during the Jubilee Yearcelebration of 2000 John Paul II askedpardon for these sins and errors of theChurch of the Second Millennium.The two major councils of modern

Christendom, Trent in the 16th century andVatican I in the 19th century, reinforced theinstitutional ecclesiology. They were onthe defensive against Protestants and themodern world, and they identified theChurch with the hierarchy, above all thepapacy. In the 19th and 20th centuries, withPopes Pius IX, Pius X, Pius XI, and PiusXII (the «piano» epoch, to use Rahner’sexpression), this church of Christendomreached its peak. The Church became alegalist, triumphalist, clericalist institu -tion far removed from the Church thatJesus wanted and from the Church of thefirst centuries. The Church of the FirstMillennium was a Church of communionand fraternity; it was a Church of the Spiritstructured in the image of the trinitariancommunity.

2.3. Something was moving in the Church

The theology of the pre-conciliar yearswas scholasticism or, in the best of cases,neo-scholasticism, in accord with thenorms laid down by Leo XIII in the en -cyclical Aeterni Patris. Its deductivemethod was built around Latin theses ofgreat logical rigor, but it was completely

divorced from history and modern cul -ture. It was what Rahner called «Den -zinger theology», that is, theology basedprincipally on the documents of thecouncils and the magisterium.2

Meanwhile, modernity was advancing:the Enlightenment brought science andprogress; the Russian revolution of 1917spread through eastern Europe and part ofAsia; the two world wars caused massivebloodshed; the countries of the so-calledThird World attained autonomy and inde -pendence and made their voices heard.New philosophies and new ways of think -ing became ever more estranged fromtraditional Christian ways of thinking.But not all was tranquility in the

bosom of the Catholic Church. Betweenthe First and the Second World Wars, aseries of theological movements arose,above all in Central Europe, and theysowed a crop that would later be reapedby Vatican II. This aspect has been widelystudied,3 and it will suffice here to outlineits principal components. The biblical movement (the Biblical

School in Jerusalem, the Biblical Institutein Rome, etc.) approached the Bible withnew perspectives and fresh historical andcritical methodologies. The patristic move -ment (DeLubac, Daniélou, etc.) redis -covered the importance of the Latin andGreek Fathers, and it brought a newrichness to theology, spirituality, andpastoral work with its new editions of the works of the Fathers (Sources chré -tiennes, Patrologia Graeca, etc.). Theliturgical movement (the monasteries ofSolesmes, Maria Laach, Montserrat, etc.)placed special value on the liturgicalassembly and focused espe cially on thecelebration of the paschal mystery. The

6

ecumenical movement (Couturier, Congar,etc.) entered into dialogue with Protes -tants, Anglicans, and the Orthodox, thusputting an end to a long epoch of con -frontation and apologetics. Pastoral min -istry was also opening up new paths,above all in reaching out to young people,workers, and the secularized sectors of thepopulation. This was the age of workerpriests, and questions were raised as towhether the so-called Christian countrieswere not now themselves mission lands.A new social sensibility was born, result -ing both from a deepened Christology thatemphasized the life of Jesus of Nazareth(Cardjin, Abbé Pierre, Gauthier, Voillau -me, the biblical studies of Dupont andGelin, etc.) and from earnest dialoguewith the social sciences, especially Marx -ism. There also appeared the so-called«theology of earthly realities», whichstressed the importance of the sciences,economics, history, politics, progress, thebody, and sex (Thils). Finally, Teilhard de Chardin opened up new theologicalperspectives through his evolutionaryvision of the cosmos.All of these innovative movements

centered around European theologicalfaculties at places like Lyon-Fourvière,Louvain, Le Saulchoir-Paris, Innsbruck,Munich, and Tübingen. Prominent theo -logians like Rahner, Balthasar, Chenu,Congar, Daniélou, and Schillebeeckxsought to replace the then dominant scho -

lastic theology with a theology that wasmore biblical, historical, and anthropolo -gical. These theologians not only knewwell the sources of Church tradition, butthey were also in dialogue with themodern world. Some of them had directexperience of the World Wars and evensuffered imprisonment; they participatedin ecumenical meetings, and they were incontact with worker priests, with scien -tists, with Marxists, and with othersoutside the Church.This «new theology» was censured by

Pius XII in his encyclical Humani generis(1950), but the same theologians who werethen sanctioned and in some case removedfrom their uni versity posts would laterbecome the star theologians of Vatican II.The groundwork was also being laid

for the ecclesiology that would emergefrom Vatican II. Theologians like Cerfauxand Koster were developing the biblicalconcept of the people of God, and otherslike Mersch and Tromp contributed to thedogmatic development of the concept.Their efforts resulted in the encyclicalMystici corporis of Pius XII (1943),which presented a vision of the Churchthat was less juridical and more mystical. But all this theological and ecclesias -

tical renewal arising from the bases of theChurch found its catalyzer in John XXIII.Without taking him into account there isno way to understand the council.

7

3.1. There was a man sent by God,named John…

Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli was born in1881 in the small Italian town of Sotto ilMonte. His family was poor and livedfrom farming, but they were very Chris -tian and never ashamed of their peasantroots; they remained faithful to the wis -dom and simplicity of country folk.Angelo studied Church history, especiallythe epochs of Gregory the Great and ofCharles Borromeo, the great Tridentinereformer of Milan. These studies helpedhim develop a dynamic, historical visionof the Church. During the First World Warhe served as a chaplain, ministering to thewounded soldiers who were recovering ina military hospital. After the war he wasmade secretary to Radini Tedeschi, theprogressive bishop of Bergamo, and alsotaught for some years in the seminary of

Bergamo. Being unjustly accused at thattime of modernism, he was later able tounderstand well the situation of theolo -gians who had been removed from theiruniversity positions by Pius XII. Roncalli was named apostolic delegate

in Bulgaria and then in Turkey andGreece, nations belonging to the Ortho -dox Christian tradition. Working in thosecountries, he experienced the tragedy ofthe divisions within Chris tianity and cameto appreciate the im portance of ecume -nism. He consid ered it important to high -light what unites the different traditionsrather than dwell on what divides them.During the Second World War he helpedwith the evacu a tion of the persecutedJewish population and of the prisoners ofwar. His years as papal nuncio in Paris(1944-52) opened him up to modernity.These were the years of the worker

8

3. THE COUNCIL

What one analyst has called the «Roncalli mystery» can be in part clarifiedif we recall something of the life of the man who would become John XXIII.

priests, of Teilhard de Chardin, and of theFrench theo logical renewal (the nouvellethéologie). During years France facedgreat pastoral challenges as a «missionland». Finally, his years as archbishop ofVenice (1953-58) helped him understandthe difficulties of proclaiming the Gospelin modern society.

3.2. A transitional Pope?

When Pius XII died in 1958, Roncalli waselected as a transitional Pope since theconclave considered it as difficult foranyone to follow up on the extraordinarypontificate of the noble, cultivated figureof Pope Eugenio Pacelli.Once elected, Roncalli demonstrated

a different human and ecclesial style. Hewas a short, plump peasant Pope, good-humored and astute. He began his pon -tificate with a historical wink of the eyeby taking the name John XXIII, since theprevious John had been an anti-Popedeposed by the Council of Constance.Although he was 77 years old, he sur -prised everybody in 1959 by convokingan ecumenical council. His idea was thatit should complete the work the FirstVatican Council (1870) had left unfin -ished, but it was not to be a simple con -tinuation of Vatican I; rather it was to bea new council, Vatican II. He recognizedhimself that this idea «sprang from hisheart and onto his lips as a grace of God,as a light from on high, with great fervorand gen tle ness of soul and vision». Many Church leaders were left speech -

less. They thought that the Pope was naïve,precipitous, and impulsive, completelyunaware of the difficulties he would haveto face, even with the Roman curia. Or

maybe, they thought, the old man waslosing it. Nevertheless, the idea provokedgreat enthusiasm in all the theological andecclesial move ments of the time. It had atremendous ecumenical impact and in -spired much hope throughout the Chris -tian world. John XXIII in effect shifted thetrajectory of Pius XII, whose ideal hadbeen the Church of Christen dom. JohnXXIII proposed a new model of Church,one that returned to the sources of the faithand responded to the signs of the times. The new Pope sought what he called

the aggiornamento of the Church; hewanted to bring the Church up to date.This updating would involve dialoguewith the modern world, engagement withthe new culture forces, return to the livingsources of Christian tradition, and doctri -nal and pastoral renewal. The goal of theCouncil was to take a leap forward bystrengthening the faith, renewing thecustoms of the Christian faithful, andupdating Church discipline. When anAfrican bishop asked the Pope what hewas hoping to achieve, he responded thathe was «opening the window» so thatfresh air would enter the Church and carryoff the dust that had accumulated duringcenturies.Little by little the goals of the Coun cil

became more concrete: dialogue with themodern world, renewal of Christian life,ecumenism, and making the Church onceagain the Church of the poor.There began four years of preparation.

Consultations were held with all sectors ofthe Church, and from these consultationscame all sorts of petitions, ranging fromcondemnation of commu nism to promo -tion of devotion to Saint Joseph to ob -servance of morality on the beaches.

9

The Pope’s inaugural discourse to theCouncil on October 11, 1962, caused evengreater surprise. The Church, said JohnXXIII, does not want to condemn anyone;she prefers to practice com pas sion andmercy; she desires to be open to themodern world and to all Chris tians and tooffer them a renewed proclamation of theGospel. In contrast to the «prophets ofdoom», John XXIII professed a hopefuloptimism based on God’s action in his -tory. He was also careful to distinguishbetween the essen tial content of the faithand the adap tations that could be made inthe light of the changing times and newcultural circumstances. This speech, according to the historian

Alberigo, was the most significant act ofRoncalli’s pontificate; it challenged theChurch to confront the modern age. Andas the Pope had hoped, it was a major leapforward. In the evening of that historic day, the

Pope, although weary from the longinaugural ceremony, appeared in SaintPeter’s Square where many people werestill gathered. Pondering the full moon inthe sky, he greeted everybody and askedall the parents to embrace their childrenon his part as soon as they reached home.Something was clearly changing in theChurch. The «little flowers» of Pope Johnwere reflecting this new style. Once the Council was underway, it

was quickly seen that the bishops arrivingin Rome from all over the globe were notgoing to let themselves be limited tosimply approving documents elaboratedby the commissions of the Vatican curia.Due to the interventions in the Councilhall of Cardinals Joseph Frings of Ger -many and Achille Liénart of France, new

commissions were created which includ -ed many bishops of the «periphery», asthose from outside the Vatican werecalled. This buoyant atmosphere dissipated,

however, at the end of the first session ofthe Council when rumors spread of thePope’s illness. When John XXIII diedserenely on June 3, 1963, his passingdeep ly moved not only the Church but thewhole world. And questions about thefuture of Vatican II were left floating inthe air. The new Pope Paul VI, Cardinal Gio -

vanni Battista Montini, assured peoplethat the Council would continue to moveforward. Montini had a char acter ratherdifferent from that of John XXIII. He wasless charismatic and less intuitive; he wasa Vatican insider and an intellectual withgood knowledge of theology, especiallyFrench theology. He was hesitant –theycalled him Hamlet– but he primaryconcern was the welfare and unity of theChurch. He brought the Council to asuccessful end, but after it was over hesuffered greatly, going so far as to say thatthe devil had entered the Church.4

3.3. Keys for understanding Vatican II

Rather than give detailed explanations ofthe 16 documents of the Council (4 consti -tutions, 9 decrees, and 3 declarations)along with their context, their genesis, andtheir interpretation, we prefer to provide afew keys that will help us to understandall the documents. In this way we will beable to discern the underlying constantsthat reveal the spirit of John XXIII’sconciliar aggiornamento.

10

3.3.1. A new stance toward the world:the «legitimate autonomy of creation»This new stance reflects the goodness andthe realism of John XXIII and hisopenness to the whole world. He viewedall people with compassion and sought todo good by all. He wanted people to beoptimistic and merciful, not prophets ofdoom.The earlier theology was profoundly

dualist (body and soul, heaven and earth,world and Church, profane and sacred,nature and grace). Vatican II departedfrom this worldview, especially in Gau -dium et Spes, the Pastoral Constitution onthe Church in the Modern World. Itaffirmed that God and world are notrivals. Rather, the world is the work ofGod; God is the ultimate mystery of theworld; the world is a sacrament of God;worldly reality is constitutive of theChurch and of Chris tian life. Therefore,there exists only one history, the historyof salvation. The Church does not con -sider itself superior to the world or op -posed to the modern world. Rather, it ispart of the world and of history. Vatican IImoved from anathema to dialogue; it tookhuman progress seriously and recognizedthe autonomy of creation [GS 36]. For thisreason, said the Council, the Church notonly gives to the world but receives fromthe world [GS 44], and the Church’spastors do not always have answers toevery question [GS 43].In this way Vatican II inaugurated a

new, more inductive theological method,the so-called doctrine of the signs of thetimes [GS 4:11,44]. This method, recog -nizing that the Spirit of the Lord directshistory and sows the seeds of God’s Wordin all cultures, seeks to discover God in

human reality. Vatican II was also apastoral council and so gave birth to apastoral theology that was not simply theapplication of dogma to practice; rather, itsaw pastoral work as constitutive oftheology of itself. Pastoral work was boththe start ing point and the end point fortheology. Concretely speaking, Vatican II ex -

pressed its positive regard for the humanperson [GS 12-17], for labor [GS 33-36],for culture [GS 53-62]. and for all ofcreation. It reaffirmed that the goods ofthe earth exist for the benefit of everybody[GS 69]. In expressing its appreciation forthe human person, the Council especiallystressed respect for religious liberty. Thiswas something new because in 1832 Pope Gregory XVI in Mirari Vos calledreligious liberty a pestilent error anddelusion, and in 1864 Pope Pius IXcondemned it in the Syllabus of Errors.Vatican II’s document Dignitatis Huma -nae is dedicated to the defense of religiousliberty; it states that every person has theright to follow his or her own consciencein religious matters. But the Council was not naïve; it

recognized the presence of sin and evil inthe world, and it realized that there was aconstant struggle between the light andthe shadows [GS 13]. Accord ingly, itdenounced all that destroys the dignity ofcreation, and it condemned all sin thatenslaves the human person [GS 13-14].More concretely, it condemned atheism[GS 19-21]; racial, sexual, and culturaldiscrimination [GS 29]; degradation ofhuman labor [GS 37] and culture [GS 56];economic inequality [GS 66]; totali -tarianism and dictator ship [GS 75]; tor -ture and war [GS 82]. It sought to found

11

human dignity on Christ, the new man[GS 22,45].In the Council’s vision, the mission of

the Church is not just religious and spiri -tualist but involves the whole hu manperson; it preaches the Gospel to the wholeof society insofar as it looks out for thewelfare of human beings [GS 76].

3.3.2. Rediscovering community: «the Lord established a people»The importance of the Church’s com -munal dimension was rediscovered as theCouncil responded to the economic, so -cial, political, and religious individualismof modern society. Human persons areessentially social beings, and the family isthe first and most basic human commu -nity [GS 47-52]. All men and women arecalled to form one great family, living ina community modeled on the image of theTrinity. They should pursue the commongood of all [GS 23-32] in a socio-econo -mic community where material goodsexist for the bene fit of all [GS 63-72], ina political community that seeks the com -mon good and respects the rights of all[GS 73-76], and in an international com -munity that works for peace, collabora -tion, and justice [GS 77-91]. All this isfounded on Christ who desires to bringtogether the community of God’s children[GS 32]. This communitarian dimension, al -

ready implicit in Gaudium et Spes, reachesis full ecclesial significance in LumenGentium, the Dogmatic Consti tu tion onthe Church. The first draft of the docu -ment was elaborated by the Roman curiabut was rejected as excessively clerical,legalist, and triumphalist. It described the

Church in terms more characteristic of theChristendom of pre-Reformation times. A new document was drawn up whichdefined the Church as a community unitedby the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit [LG4]; it is the People of God [LG II] movingtoward eschatological fulfillment [LGVII]; it is the mystery and sacrament ofsalvation [LG I]; it is a com munity bornof baptism and responding to the plan ofGod, who wants to save humankind not asisolated individuals but as a united peoplewho knows him and serves him inholiness [LG 9].In treating of the People of God [LG

II] before the hierarchy [LG III], the laity[LG IV], and religious life [LG VI], thisecclesiology was truly revo lutionary. Thehierarchy and the various charisms areseen as oriented to com munity and or -dained for the service of the People ofGod. The reaffirmation of the collegialityof all the bishops with the Pope is situatedwithin this communitarian and synodalvision of the Church [LG 22-23]. Also, therecognition of the autonomy of the localChurches in communion with Rome isfounded on a vision of the Church that isnot pyramidal but collegial [LG 23]. Theecclesiology of Lumen Gentium is cen -tered on the People of God, the localChurch, and episcopal collegiality; it isabove all an ecclesiology of communion.It conse quently brought about a transitionfrom the Christendom ecclesiology of thesecond millennium to the communionecclesiology more typical of the firstmillennium.This concern for community and

communion is what led the Council tostress the importance of ecumenism withthe other Christian churches [LG 15] and

12

dialogue with non-Christian religions [LG 16]. These themes are developed ingreater detail in the Document on Ecu -menism (Unitatis Redintegratio) and inthe Declaration on the Relation of theChurch with Non-Christian Religions(Nostra Aetate), respectively. After Vatican II this communitarian

spirit was reflected in synods, nationalbishops’ conferences, pastoral councils,concern for world peace, and dialoguewith those outside the Church. Paul VIdedicated his very first encyclical, Ec -clesia Suam, to the theme of dialogue. One of the main places where the

mystery of the Church as community andcommunion is revealed is in litur gicalcelebration, especially the Eucha rist. It istherefore natural that the first documentapproved by the Council was the Dog -matic Constitution on the Liturgy (Sa -crosanctum Concilium), which broughttogether and synthesized the best contri -butions of the liturgical movement of the1950s.We have already commented on how

the preconciliar Eucharistic liturgy, whichhad remained the same since the Councilof Trent (1545-63), was a reflection of theold Christendom eccle siology. A changein ecclesiology natu rally leads to a changein liturgy since the liturgy is the com -munity’s cele bration of Christ’s salvationand helps the faithful penetrate into thepaschal mystery. The Eucharist is thesource and the summit of Christian life[SC 10]. According to Vatican II, the liturgy is

an action not of the priest alone but of thewhole assembly. Liturgical actions are notprivate devotions but celebrations of thewhole Church. The entire People of God

[SC 26] participates actively in thesecelebrations [SC 17,18,30]. Both theclergy and the faithful were therefore inneed of education regarding reform of theliturgy [SC 15-18]. The Word is whatgives Spirit to the liturgy [SC 25,33].The new theological vision produced

sweeping liturgical reform and corre -sponding transformation of the rites. Thevernacular was used; well chosen biblicalreadings were plentiful; the altar faced the people; the celebrant’s seat was at thecenter and the tabernacle at the side; therewere also the prayer of the faithful, thekiss of peace, com munion under twospecies, renewal of the sacramentalrituals, etc. All these liturgical reforms were not

just a concession to modern style but aconcrete expression of the Church’s iden -tity as a community of baptized personsall of whom are equal before the Word andbefore God.

3.3.3. Return to the sources: «Christ the mediator and fullness of revelation»John XXIII was a traditional man butfirmly rooted in the true Tradition, whichsought to make the Church resemble thevillage fountains, always ready to offereveryone the living water of the Gospelbut without forcing anyone to drink thewater.The life the Church in Christendom

had been centered on laws, norms, andstructures. In 1816 Pius VII order BishopMohilev to retract his state ments recom -mending that all Christians read the Wordof God. Now Vatican II was encouraginga return to the sources, to the origins of the

13

true Tradition, to Christ. That is why theCouncil turned again to the Word of God,above all in its Dogmatic Constitution onthe Word of God (Dei Verbum). Thisrenewed enthusiasm for the Word wouldmake it easier to engage in dialogue withthe Reformation churches.Following the lead of the biblical

movement, the Council restored the Wordto its central place in Christian living.Citing Saint Jerome, Dei Verbum statedthat «being ignorant of scripture is beingignorant of Christ» [DV 25]. If traditionaltheology had considered revelation to bea parcel of truths that God had com -municated (or even dic tated) to us and thatconstituted the «deposit of faith», theCouncil under stood revelation as the liv -ing commu nication of God in historythrough Jesus and the Spirit. Revelationdoes not consist only of ideas; it com -municates to us the life of the Spirit in theperson of Jesus.Thus it becomes clear that what comes

first is not the human search for God butGod’s free communication of himself tohumankind in creation and in history.Revelation is communicated to us notonly through words but also throughdeeds, such as the liberation of the Exodusand the paschal mystery of Jesus. The Godwho spoke to us in the past through hisSon keeps up the dialogue now with thespouse of his Son, the Church [DV8].Revelation can be understood better

with the help of contemplation, study,preaching, and spiritual experience [DV8]. Revelation can be investigated scien -tifically with modern methods but shouldalways be kept within the faith of theChurch, which has the Spirit of the Lord.In response to those who wished to speak

of two sources of revelation, the Councilstated that both Church Tradition and thescriptures proceed from one and the samesource, Christ and his Spirit [DV 9].For the Council the Word revealed in

scriptures [DV] is present in the Church[LG 1-2,8] and active in the liturgy [SC].It should be the soul of theological study.The whole Church is under the Word ofGod. This affirmation by the Council willlater receive deeper treatment in theChurch and will find new expression inthe post-synodal exhortation of BenedictXVI, Verbum Domini (2010). It is also interesting to recall that the

Decree on Ecumenism (Unitatis Redinte -gratio) affirms that there is a hierarchy oftruths and that not all truths have the sameforce and importance [UR 11]. For exam -ple, denying the divinity of Christ is notthe same as denying the primacy of Peter.

3.3.4. Rediscovering the Spirit: «the Spirit of the Lord fills the universe»John XXIII saw Vatican II as the Spirit’sbreathing new life into the Church, asrenewal and aggiornamento, as a truePentecost. This breath was a wind thatwould renew the Church and blow awaythe accumulated dust of past centuries.Vatican II rediscovered the Spirit,

which had been quite forgotten by thetheology of the Latin Church. This redis -covery was no doubt helped by thepresence at the Council of other Chris -tian observers, especially the OrthodoxChris tians of the eastern Churches whoalways criticized Catholics for lack ofattention to the Spirit. This highlightingof the Spir it is the key to understandingthe Coun cil documents; though silent and

14

unseen, the Spirit is present and gives lifeto the texts. The Council was truly anevent where the Spirit blew where shewould. The Council recognized and reaffirm -

ed that the Spirit has always been activein the world, in the Old Testa ment, in theprophets, and in Jesus. It is the Spirit whovivifies, sanctifies, guides, instructs, uni -fies, renews, and rejuvenates the Church[LG 4]. The Spirit inspires the scriptures,which need to be read in the light of thesame Spirit [DV 7,9,12,18,21]. The Spir -its acts in the sacraments of the Churchand above all in the Eucharist [SC 6,43].The Spirit anoints the faithful interiorly,gives full meaning to their faith, andassures their unfailing adherence to it [LG 12]. The Spirit bestows gifts andcharisms on all the baptized [LG 12],raises up voca tions to religious life [LG44-45], and transfigures history and theworld in the likeness of the eschatologicalfullness of the Kingdom [GS 37-39].Christian life is, therefore, life accordingto the Spirit.The Spirit is active in other Chris tian

communities [LG 15; UR 3-4] and hasgiven rise to the ecumenical movement ofrecent years [UR 1,4]. Moreover, VaticanII was moved by the Spirit when itaffirmed that salvation exists outside theChurch because Provi dence does notdeny the assist ance needed for salvationto those who live righteously withoutknow edge of Christian revelation [LG16]. In a way known only to God, theHoly Spirit offers to all people thepossibility of being asso ciated with thepaschal mystery of Christ [GS 22]. Themyste rious but efficacious presence of

the Spirit inspired both the Decree onEcu menism (Unitatis Redinte gratio) andthe Declaration on Relations with Non-Christians (Nostra Aetate), and it is thissame Spirit who drives the missionaryactivity of the Church from within (seethe decree Ad Gentes). Not only does the Spirit lead the

Church to her eschatologogical fullness,but the Spirit also guides the history ofhumankind, filling the universe andbecoming visible in the signs of the time[GS 4,11,44]. Accordingly, recognition of religious liberty (Dignitas Humanae)does not mean yielding to relativism ordenying Christian identity. Rather, it is away of responding to the Spirit’s signs of the times.

3.4. The final synthesis of Paul VI:a Samaritan spirituality

In his discourse at the closing of Vatican IIon 8 December, 1965, Paul VI expressedall these new dimensions in syntheticfashion:«The religion of the God who be -comes human has encountered thereligion –for that is what it is– ofhuman beings who would makethemselves God. What has happened?A collision, a struggle, a condemna -tion? That could have happened, but itdidn’t The old story of the Samaritanhas set the guidelines for the Coun -cil’s spirituali ty. Immense sympathyhas pervaded all its proceedings. Thediscovery of human needs, whichgrow greater even as earth’s childrenincrease their power, has absorbed theatten tion of our gathering.» (no. 8)

15

The Pope later in his speech said thefollowing: «Let us remember how we can andmust recognize the face of Christ theSon of Man in the face of every per -son, especially those faces madetrans parent by their tears and theirpains (Matt 25:40); and let usremember how in the face of Christwe can and must also recognize theface of the heav enly Father. “Who

sees me sees the Father”, said Jesus(John 14:9). If we do this both the oneand the other, then our humanismbecomes Christianity, and our Chris -tianity becomes theocen tric to such anextent that we can also affirm: toknow God it is necessary to knowhuman beings.» (no. 16)John XXIII’s spirit of aggiorna men to

pervaded the whole Council from begin -ning to end.

16

Each night there were press conferencesin which bishops, observers, and theolo -gians commented on the progress of theCouncil. We heard from everybody: KarlRahner on episcopal collegiality, JeanDaniélou on religious life, Yves Congaron the Church, Henri DeLubac on reve -lation, the Protestant theologian OskarCullman on salvation history, CardinalAugustine Bea on ecumenism, RogerSchutz on Taizé, Sugranyes de Franc onschema XIII, etc.A number of Third World bishops met

together in a Roman college, with Brazi -

lian Helder Camara at their head, to treatof their specific problems. Their aim wasa create a new face of the Church of thepoor and to send prophetic messages tothe other Council bishops. Some of thecardinals also gave conferences. I remem -ber especially conferences at the Grego -rian in which Cardinal Franz König ofVienna spoke about non-Christian reli -gions and Cardinal Pellegrino of Turinspoke about the signs of the times,lamenting the fact that the Church hadsometimes been very unaware of thosesigns.

17

4. PERSONAL INTERLUDE: MY OWN EXPERIENCES OF THE COUNCIL

During the years 1963-65, when the Council was in session under Paul VI, Iwas living in Rome and studying for my doctorate in theology. The ex -citement of the Council events was overflowing the Vatican halls and fillingthe streets. The whole city was vibrating with passionate enthu si asm andunprecedented joy. The debates and the voting in the Council sessionswere closely followed day by day. We discussed the commen taries issuedby the Vatican press office and devoured the reports of well-knownjournalists Like Raniero La Valle in L’Avenire d’Italia, Henri Fesquet in LeMonde, and Martín Descalzo in La Gaceta del Norte. We filled Saint Peter’sSquare to watch the bishops and famous theologian entering and leavingthe sessions.

Besides the ones I’ve already men -tioned, other more progressive bishopswere beginning to become known. I re -member that Suenens of Belgium had animportant role in introducing the chapteron the People of God in the Constitutionon the Church. Alfrink of Holland, Döpf -ner of Germay, and Lercaro of Italy madehighly publicized interventions on theimportance of the poor in the Church. TheEastern Patriarch Maximus IV becamewell known for his freedom of spirit, asdid Bettazi of Italy for the ardor withwhich he defended episcopal collegiality.The more conservative prelates also be -came famous in their own way, such asCardinal Ottaviani, head of the HolyOffice, and Bishop Lefêbvre of France, afierce opponent of religious liberty whoended up provoking a schism after theCouncil We should also consider other events

that coincided with Vatican II such as PaulVI’s trip to the Holy Land, where heembraced the Patriarch Athe nagoras ofConstantinople, and his trip to Bombay,which left him profoundly impressed withthe deep religious sense and the povertyof India. The assassination of John F.Kennedy profoundly moved the membersof the Council, and a solemn funeral Masswas celebrated in the Basilica of SaintJohn Lateran. Meanwhile, the people ofRome were constantly visiting the tombof John XXIII with great devotion andadorning it with flowers and garlands. The hall of Saint Peter’s Basilica, with

its immense stands for 2,000 bishops, wasfor the most part reserved for the bishops,theologians, periti, and official observers

from other churches. With the help of abishop, however, it was possible to get apass to attend a conciliar session. Thanks to Bishop Azcárate, a Cuban

Jesuit, I was able to attend a morningsession, which began with the Eucharist.Before Mass many bishops lined up to goto confession; this offered the world a newand refreshing image of a humble, sinfulChurch that was conscious of her need tobe forgiven by God. After Mass the Bookof the Gospels was enthroned as a signthat all the discussions were nothing morethan an attempt to understand better theWord of God. For DeLubac this consti -tuted the most impressive moment of theCouncil schedule: the Church placingherself beneath the Word.Debate then began on the theme of the

day, all in Latin. On that day it centeredon marriage between Catholics and Prot -estants. I remember that Cardinal Heenanof London was in favor of festive cele -brations of these matrimo nies; he wasopposed to the sad sight of brides beingobliged to get married without flowers ormusic, as some bishops dictated. Halfwaythrough the morning the bishops and theperiti disappeared silently into a cafeteriasituated in a side chapel, popularly knownas «Bar Jona». There they drank coffee ora soft drink while they shared their im -pressions of the session just finished. Atthe end of the morning session the secre -tary of the Council, Bishop Pericles Felici,advised the bishops about the subsequentsession in his Ciceronian Latin. The Second Vatican Council was truly

a phenomenon of the Spirit.

18

5.1. Ecclesial springtime

It was a Council of the Church about theChurch; it related to the Church in herself(ad intra), and it related the Church to themodern world (ad extra). True re newalwas seen in every aspect of the Church:

– In the ecumenical sphere, the mutualexcommunications between Romeand Constantinople were canceled,and meetings were held be tween PaulVI and Athenagoras in Jerusalem andRome. Ramsay, the Primate of Eng -land, visited the Pope, and Paul VItraveled to Ge neva for a meeting ofthe Reformed Churches.

– In the area of liturgy, as we men -tioned above, there was a renewal ofthe sacramental rituals, especially ofthe Eucharist. Greater emphasis wasplaced on the Word and on preaching,the laity was allowed more partici -pation, the vernacular was used in theliturgy, etc. – More serious dialogue was under -taken with the non-Christian religionsand with the modern world in general,all within an ambience of respect forreligious liberty previ ously unknown. – As regards Church structure, therewere new modes of participation andcollegiality in the form of episcopal

19

5. AFTER THE COUNCIL

The prayers and the desires of John XXIII that Vatican II would be a kind ofPentecost for the Church were certainly heard by the Lord. The Council wasan authentic outpouring of the Spirit onto the Church. It was a salvific event,a true kairos, a new Pentecost. Vatican II was a watershed between whatcame “before” and what came “after”.

conferences, bishops’ synods in Rome,pastoral councils in dioceses andparishes, assemblies and synods at thediocesan and na tional levels, etc. – There was theological and spiritualrenewal in the training of priests, inreligious life, and among the laity,who took on a more active role in theChurch. – In the area of theology there wasmore serious study of biblical andpatristic sources, and in liturgical andpastoral ministry there was greateropenness to modern reality and thesigns of the times. In a word, there was a new mentality

that could be called «conciliar» to distin -guish it from the «preconciliar» mentalityprior to Vatican II. The following are the most significant

ecclesiological changes that resulted fromthe Council:– The Church grew from a second-millennium Christendom-type institu -tion centered on power and hierarchyinto a Church of the third millenniumthat is seeking to restore the commun -ion ecclesiology more typical of thefirst millennium. In doing so, theChurch seeks to open herself up to thechal lenges pre sented by the new signsof the times [GS 4,11,44]. – The Church grew from beingcentered on herself to being orientedtoward the Kingdom of which theChurch here on earth is the seed andthe beginning [LG 5].– The Church grew for being con -sidered a «perfect» society as visibleand historical as the Republic of

Venice or the Kingdom of the Franks(according to Robert Bellarmine) tobeing a Church of mystery rooted inthe Trinity, a multitude gather togetherby the unity of the Father, the Son, andthe Holy Spirit [LG 4].– The Church grew from being exclu -sively Christocentric (Christomonist inthe vocabulary of Eastern theologians)to living under the Christological prin -ciple and at the same time under thepneumatological principle of the Spiritwho rejuvenates, renews, and leads herto the fullness of union with Christ[LG 4].– The Church grew from being central -ist to being co-responsible and synod aland respectful of the local churches, inwhich and for the sake of which theuniversal Church exists [LG 23]. – The Church grew from being iden -tified with the hierarchy to being seenas the whole People of God endowedwith diverse charisms and ministries[LG II]. – The Church grew from being a tri -um phalist institution that gave airs ofhaving already reached glory to beinga Church that gets covered with dustas she walks along the road of historytoward eschatological times [LG VII]. – The Church grew from being mis -tress, dominating mother, and uni -versal teacher to being the servant ofall, especially the poor, in whom sherecognizes the image of her poor andpatient founder [LG 8]. – The Church grew from being alliedwith the powerful to being sent to evan -gelized the poor, with whom she feelsherself in solidarity [GS 1; LG 8].

20

– The Church grew from being an arkof salvation to being a sacrament ofsalvation [LG 1,9,48], engaged in dia -logue with other churches and withother world religions and committedto recognizing religious liberty. In this sense it has been said that Vati -

can II was a council of transition whichhelped the Church to move from a tradi -tional ecclesiology to one more in keepingwith the times.5As the Church thus movedfrom anathema to dialogue in a true ag -gio rnamento, some overly optimistic ob -servers thought that meant the requiem ofConstantinism, the tomb of the Church ofChristendom. As Joseph Comblin reports,however, the euphoria resulting from theCouncil lasted only three or four years.

5.2. From springtime to winter in the Church

Just as springtime produces thaws whichcan cause dangerous avalanches andmudslides, so the implementation of Vati -can II after fifteen centuries of ecclesialConstantinism produced many exagger -ated reactions in the bosom of the Church.From a sociological per spective thisshould not surprise us since it is only withgreat difficulty that most of the faithfulchange their traditional ways of thinkingand acting.Some conservative theologians re -

sisted accepting Vatican II because theythought that the Church was bowing tomodernity (J. Maritain, L. Bouyer, etc.).Even more intransigent was the posture ofBishop Marcel Lefè bvre, who ended upforming a dissident group, the Fraternityof Pius X. When he proceeded to ordain

his own bishops, he was excom municatedby John Paul II (1988). For the followersof Lefèbvre, the liturgical question (suchas returning to the Latin liturgy of Pius V)was not the most im portant one; at thebase of the split was a frontal attack onVatican II, which was accused of yieldingto Protes tant ism and modernism. These reactionary postures were ag -

gravated by the tendency of some pro -gressive groups to interpret Vatican II withexcessive freedom and exu ber ance, as ifthe Council had created a rupture with thetrue ecclesial tradition of the past. Such away of understanding the Council led toabusive excesses in the areas of dogma,liturgy, morals, ecumenics, the mission tonon-Christians, etc. What hurt most, how -ever, was that many priests and religiousabandoned Church ministry. Additional problem resulted from the

significant declines in Sunday church at -tendance, in reception of the sacraments,and in the number of religious and priestlyvocations. Meanwhile, the divorce rate in -creased, religious indifference grew, andthe general ambience became highlysecularized and critical of the Church. Allthese negative de vel opments were blamedon the Council. By May of 1968 Paul VI was quite

concerned about the struggles going on inthe Church; he feared that the documentsof the Council were being interpreted inways that went beyond what the texts said.At that point he began to act more on hisown. Without consulting with the bishops,he published the encyclical on celibacy(Sacerdotalis Coelibatus) and the Pope’sProfession of Faith. He also published theencyclical against contraceptives (Huma -nae Vitae) even though a majority of his

21

own pontifical commission had counseledotherwise. These developments explain why

some very responsible and representativemem bers of the Church criticized the wayVati can II was implemented, if not theCouncil itself. Especially noteworthy inthis regard is the interview that CardinalJosef Rat zinger, then prefect of theCongregation for the Defense of the Faith,gave to the Italian journalist VittorioMessori in 1985.6

Ratzinger did not criticize the Councilitself but only the «anti-spirit» of theCouncil that had been introduced into theChurch; this «anti-spirit» re sult ed fromthe assaults of modernity and the culturalrevolution on the whole of western cul -ture. He did not advocate turning back butargued in favor of ec clesial restoration. Hewanted to return to the authentic texts ofthe Coun cil in order to find a new balance,to recover the unity and integrity of Churchlife, and to restore her relation with Christ.In the interview he did not express muchinclination to emphasize the Church’shistorical nature, the signs of the times, orthe concept of the People of God. He didnot support the bishops’ conferenceswhich he thought interfered with the roleof the local bishop. He thought that thetwenty years following the Council hadbeen unfavorable ones for the Church andcontrary to what John XXIII had hopedfor. He had no sympathy for the liberationtheology of Latin America, the non-Chris -tian religions, or the feminist movement.The tone of the dia logue is rather pessi -mist and somber. The sole hopeful ray oflight for Ratzin ger were the new lay move -ments and the charismatic renewal.7

In response to Ratzinger’s critique ofthe post-Council years, the Cardinal ofVienna, Franz König, who played a veryimportant role in Vatican II, wrote a booktitled Church, Where Are You Going?8 Inthe book he stated that a minority of theCouncil fathers had seen Vatican II as athreat, and they had used all their powerto empty it of meaningful content. Königclaimed that the situation of the contem -porary Church with out Vatican II wouldbe catastrophic, and he viewed the resto -ration attempts with suspicion. The change of ecclesial climate that

had begun in the time of Paul VI got con -solidated in the long pontificate of JohnPaul II. As we have said already, John PaulII was post-Marxist and progressive insocial concerns, but his thinking aboutChurch matters was premodern.9

In 1984 John Paul II allowed dioce sanbishops to grant permission for Mass to becelebrated in Latin according to the pre-Council rite. In 1985 he convoked an ex -traordinary synod on the Council, whichended up defending the integrity of Vati -can II against those who attacked it. How -ever, instead of using the concept of thePeople of God, the synod preferred tospeak of the Church as communion and asthe Body of Christ; it was claimed that theconcept of the People of God was proneto sociological and political misinterpre -tation. The synod stressed the importanceof holiness and the cross in the Church,and it also used the word «pluriformity»instead of «pluralism». Deeming Gaudiumet Spes to be excessively opti mistic andhumanist, it proposed that the documentbe read from the perspective of LumenGentium and not the reverse.

22

The minority who were originally«defeated» by Vatican II have little by lit -tle been winning the day as regards theway the Council is interpreted and imple -mented (Alberigo). We have slowly passedfrom springtime to winter (K. Rahner); wehave returned to the great discipline (J.B.Libanio), to eccesial restoration (G.C.Zízola), to a dark night of the Church (J.I.González Faus). The journal Conciliumfeatured the Council’s great theologians,but in 1972 it was joined by the journalCommunio, inspired by Hans Urs vonBalthasar and following a different theo -logical line. Von Balthasar seems to havebecome the great theological figure of thepost-Council epoch, as Rahner was duringthe Council. Something is changing.The magisterium produced a number

of ecclesiological documents during thepapacy of John Paul II –such as ApostolosSuos (1998) on bishops’ conferences,Communionis Notio (1992) on the localchurches, and the Instruction on Collabo -ration of the Faithful Laity in the Ministryof Priests (1987)– but these clearly are aretreat from the profound inspiration ofVatican II.10

There is talk of ending experiments,and canon law has become the norm forauthentic interpretation of the Council.Dissident theologians are being censured(Pohier, Schillebeeckx, Küng, Boff,Curran, Balasurya, De Mello, Dupuis,Haig, etc.). Conflicts arise with some reli -gious orders (Jesuit, Francis cans, Carmel -ites, etc.). There are attempts to reverseearlier achievements through control oflocal churches, prevalence of nuncios, andselection of conservative bishops. Thepractice of the bishops’ conferences arequestioned, and their decisions are so

controlled that colle giality becomes anempty formality. The Roman synods areonly consulta tive and treat strictly intra-ecclesial matters. There are negativeresponses to such pastoral demands ascommunion for the divorced and remar -ried, admis sion of women to ministry, andsacra mental discipline. The liturgical re -form is further reformed. Church govern -ance returns to being pyramidal, clerical,and authoritarian. Everything having todo with base communities is watereddown. The phrase «option of the poor»has the adjective «preferential» added toit. At the same time there is strong supportfor lay movements of a traditional naturewith little social sensitivity or advocacy;these include Opus Dei, Communion andLiberation, the Legionaries of Christ, andthe Neo-catechumenate. Despite this reversals, we should

recognize that John Paul II made someimportant gestures of openness, such asthe meeting in Assisi with repre senta tivesof all the world religions (1986), the in -vitation for all Christians to rethink themanner in which the primacy of Peter isexercised in the Church (Ut Unum Sint[1996]), the exhortation to the faithful tofollow the Council teaching (At the Begin -ning of the Third Millennium [1994]), andhis asking forgiveness in the jubilee year2000 for the Church’s sins during thesecond millennium.Benedict XVI acceded to the pontifi -

cate in 2005, during a time of ecclesialconfrontation and conflict when there wasincreasing debate about interpretation ofthe Council. Benedict spoke of a con -frontation between two hermeneutics, thehermeneutics of dis continuity or ruptureand the herme neu tics of reform.11 In 2007

23

the Pope allowed the whole Church to usethe Latin ritual of Pius V’s Roman Missalwhich pre dated the reforms of 1970. In2009 he lifted the excommunication ofseveral bishops of the Lefèbvre schism.These actions have provoked considera -ble consternation and even indignation in many sectors of the Church. They areconsidered a pastoral error (Hünermann)and a step backward with regard to theCouncil. They are seen as yielding to thepres sures of more conservative groupswhich reject the Council’s liturgicalreform and the ecclesiology of LumenGentium, as well as the Coun cil’s posi -tions on religious liberty and dialoguewith non-Christian religions.12

5.3. Symptoms of disquiet

Fifty years after Vatican II convened, somepeople are asking whether anything reallyhappened at the Council.13 In response tothose who have doubts and criticize whathas been happening, his torians like G.Alberigo and J. O’Malley have demon -strated that Vatican II was truly a «signifi -cant event». In counter-response are thearguments of people like Bishop A. Mar -chetto, who claims that Vatican II broughtabout no histori cal changes and that it isbetter to speak of continuity.14

We are in fact witnessing a slow butsteady regression to pre-conciliar times. A counter-reformation is attempting toreform the Council’s reforms. Rome hascontinued to function the same as beforethe Council; the Curia has overwhelmedthe forces for renewal; centralism has wonout over local church autonomy. In aword, the Council has been dismantledpiece by piece (E. Biser). In all of Church

history we have never seen such a repu -diation of the conclusions of a legiti matecouncil (P. Hünermann). Every effort hasbeen made to minimize the Council’steaching and to retreat from the «greatleap forward» that the Council made. Setting up an opposition between con -

tinuity and novelty is faulty reasoning. Noserious theologian holds that Vatican IIcreated a rupture with respect to the greattradition of the Church. Rather, what itbrought about was in the line with New -man’s teaching on «doc trinal develop -ment»: it was continuity open to novelty,or novelty in profound continuity withtradition. As John XXIII wrote in his diarya few days before his death: «It’s not as ifthe Gospel has changed; it’s just that wehave begun to understand the Gospelbetter». In any case, the most seriousrupture has been brought about not byprogressives but by the extreme right-wing followers of Lefèbvre. This involution has caused great disil -

lusionment among the faithful who werehopeful that the Council would renew theChurch. Many good-willed Christianshave left the Church silently, especiallyyoung people and women. The Churchruns the risk of becoming a subculture ora ghetto, but as Rahner tells us, we shouldnot confuse the «small flock» with a sect.There has recently been a growing outcryagainst the movement toward a ghetto.15We are face to face with an ecclesial crisiswhich some people compare to the crisisthat preceded the Reformation of the 16thcentury. The Church has lost its credibility, and

it has great difficulty situating itself in thecontemporary social and cultural context.It is a clerical organization in a society that

24

is often anticlerical; it is vertically struc -tured in a democratic society; it silenceswomen even a femi nism grows strongerthroughout the world; and it subordinateslay people in a lay-run society. Once againthe Church has become infused with anti-modern features.16

5.4. Causes of the ecclesialinvolution

The Second Vatican Council was defi cientin ways that have thwarted its posi tiveelements and overshadowed them.In order to obtain a larger consensus

of the bishops, the Council had to approvea series of amendments pro posed by themore conservative groups. As a result, theCouncil’s ecclesiology contains a certainambiguous duality, as the Italian theolo -gian L. Acerbi has pointed out: on the onehand, there is the juridical stress oftraditional ecclesiolo gy, and on the otherthere is the more affirmative quality of anecclesiology of communion. Another deficiency is that Vatican II

was not able to spell out the concreteapplication of some of the major themes itdiscussed; general pronouncements wereleft without specification of practical meas -ures. In many cases the Council formulatedonly theoretical princi ples and underes -timated the difficulty of putting the reformsit proposed into practice. The Council’sdocuments were never truly institu tion -alized. No concrete proposals were maderegarding topics such as the election ofbishops, the election of the Pope, the im -portance of the bishops’ conferences, theauthority of the Roman synods, the relationof laity to ordained ministers, or the powerof lay people in the Church.

Moreover, the Council failed to treatsome of the more controversial topicssuch as priestly celibacy, the decrease inthe number of ordained ministers, theordination of married men (viri probati),the role of women in society and theChurch, sexuality and birth control, thediscipline of matrimony, the func tion ofthe Roman curia, the relation betweencivil laws and moral precepts, and theecclesiological status of auxiliary bishops,nuncios, and cardinals. Anxious to avoid division in the

Church, Pope Paul VI himself orderedthat a Nota previa be introduced at the endof Lumen Gentium. He seemed to fear thatepiscopal collegiality would diminish thepapal power proclaimed at Vatican I; hewanted it to be perfectly clear that thePope maintained his primacy in theepiscopal college. In addition to all this, Vatican II failed

to realize the prophetic dream of JohnXXIII that the Church would trulybecome the Church of the poor. Apartfrom a brief allusion to the topic in LumenGentium 8 and Gaudium et Spes 1, theCouncil documents, which were drawn upmainly by bishops and theologians fromthe North, place little importance on therole of the poor. In 1968 it was the LatinAmerican Church that took up the themewhen it spoke of the option for the poorand condemned the unjust structures ofsin that oppress the people. As a result of these lacunae, Vatican II’s

magnificent ecclesiology of communionhas been only half realized in practicalterms. After the Council, during the papa -cy of Paul VI, many of these topics gaverise not only to discussion but to conflict.

25

Think for example of the polemics thatarose around Humanae Vitae. The Roman curia under Ottaviani’s

leadership always viewed the Councilwith suspicion. If the Council’s decreeswere given practical application, the curiawould lose power. As a result, implemen -tation was impeded, and barriers wereoften set up between the Pope and thebishops of the world. The Council docu -ments were interpreted in a literalist,minimalist manner, that is, according tothe norms of Christendom, Trent, andVatican I. Clear examples of this involu -tion are the new Code of Canon Law(1983) and the Catechism of the CatholicChurch (1992). The Church’s magisterium was be -

sieged by traditionalist bishops and theo -logians who were terrified at the thoughtof the Council’s possible consequences.Acceding to the petitions of conservatives,the curia put the brake on reforms andcensured prophetic positions that wereconsidered dangerous.

5.5. Outstanding matters

There are a number of themes which theCouncil could not treat or which it treatedinadequately. We offer here a long list ofthe principal ones.– Reform of the Petrine ministry inaccord with the desire John Paul IIexpressed in his encyclical Ut UnumSint, so that the exercise of the papacyceases to be a major obstacle to theunion of Christians. It has beenproposed that the Pope no longer be ahead of state and that the curia bethoroughly reformed since it has

seriously hindered the imple mentationof the Council’s decrees and hasobstructed the relations between thePope and the bishops. There is a needto revise the whole question of «sacredpower» in the Church. – Revision of structures relating tocardinals and nuncios as diplomaticbishops, since they are positions thatcorrespond more to a Christendom-style of Church than to Vatican II. – Participation of the Christian peoplein the election of their bishops.– Making episcopal collegiality moreeffective by granting greater autono -my to the local churches as regardsdoctrines of faith, law, and liturgy. – Making the Roman synods delib -erative and not just consultative. – Improving relations between theCongregation for the Doctrine of Faithand theologians by creating a climateof sincere dialogue, respect ing humanrights, and doing away with humili -ating secret processes that violatehuman dignity.– Being open to other forms of or -dained ministry, which can includeordination of married men who aremature in their faith (viri probati).– No longer considering celibacy as anobligatory condition for ordainedministry in the Latin Church.– Reevaluation of the role of womenin the Church and elimination of allforms of chauvinist patriarchy. Recon -sidering whether excluding womenfrom ordained ministry should beconsidered something «definite» andtruly undebatable, especially since this

26

exclusion seems to have no foundationin scripture or tradition. – Promoting the role of the laity andtheir ministries; improving theirtraining; giving them full confidenceand autonomy; listening to them andseeking their advice in matters of theircompetency such as marriage and thefamily, economics, politics, science,culture, etc. – Greater respect for the charisms of religious life and for the role ofwomen religious and brothers, whichmeans not using them to make up forthe lack of clergy and giving themparish jobs indiscriminately. – Thorough revision of the officialdoctrine on birth control and con -traceptives; renewed consideration of homosexuality, prematrimonialrelations, communion for remarrieddivorced persons; these should beseriously rethought on the basis ofanthropology, psychology, and mod -ern science.– Greater dialogue with the fields ofmedicine and genetics about manytopics of bioethics. – Relaunching ecumenical effortswhich are now being restrained, andgreater openness to inter-religiousdialogue.– Continuation of liturgical reform,permitting greater freedom to bishops’conferences and allowing greaterspace for variation of forms accordingto different cultures and traditions.– Renewal of ecclesial language intheology and catechetics as well as inthe magisterium and the liturgy. The

present language tends to be «anach -ronistic, boring, repetitive, moraliz -ing, and ill-adapted to today’s world»(Boulad).– Last but not least, we must take veryseriously the initial proposal of JohnXXIII that the Church, while certainlyuniversal, but above all be the Churchof the poor.No doubt there are other themes that

Vatican II could not foresee. Two exam -ples are the insertion of the new lay ec -clesial movements in the local church andthe challenge of the environment andrespect for the natural world.

5.6. Change of emphases

Keeping in mind the diverse ways VaticanII has been interpreted and implemented,if we examine the new socio-ecclesialcontext in which we live, we will come torealize that in these 50 years there hasbeen a steady shift in accents and interestregarding the relevance of the councildocuments. To take one example, while the ec cle -

siology of Vatican II, expressed prin -cipally in Lumen Gentium,was that of analready constituted Church, nowadays wesee that the decree Ad Gentes on theChurch’s missionary activity takes ongreat urgency and significance. This is sonot only for the so-called «mission lands»but also and perhaps especially for thetraditionally Catholic countries whichhave today become truly mission terri -tories badly in need of a new evan ge -lization. Was it any accident that the synodof bishops in 2012 was about the newevangelization?

27

Furthermore, the Council’s ecume -nism, expressed above all in the decreeUnitatis Redintegratio, seems to havebeen somewhat displaced by the inter-religious dialogue that the same Councilpromoted in its decree Nostra Aetate.What meaning and urgency can there bein the in-house discussions with Ortho doxChristians, Evangelicals, and An gli canswhen the most serious problems concernour relations with the great non-Christianmajorities? The whole ecu meni cal proble -matic obviously does not dis appear, but itbecomes subordinated to the political andreligious problems involved in dialoguewith Islam, Hin duism, Buddhism, Juda -ism, and other types of religious expres -sion, both tradi tional and postmodern. What is happening? How are we to

interpret these changes that affect the verynature of our ecclesial reality?

5.7. From ecclesiology to the problem of God

This overview would be excessively intra-ecclesial and basically false if we did nottake into account the social, political,economical, cultural, and reli gious eventsof the last 50 years, ranging from theevents of May 1968 to the protest of theindignados of 2011. We have seen the fallof the Berlin Wall, the destruction of theTwin Towers, globa lization, postmoderni -ty, the present eco nomic crisis of neolib -eralism, African turmoil, new technology,advances in science and biology, climaticchange, the new axial age with a changingreli gious paradigm, and so many otherthings. We are experiencing an earth quakeor a tsunami that is overturning every -thing, and naturally the religious sphere as

well. We are entering into a new world andexperiencing a change of epochs. There isa crisis of world culture that is not exactlydestructive, but it is of unprecedentedproportions; it affects all dimensions ofour existence: social, economic, political,cultural, religious, and spiritual. To blame Vatican II or the Roman

curia for all these disparities would beextremely unfair. All these changes naturally affect our

religious and ecclesial conscious ness. J.B.Metz has formulated in a kind of soritesthe changes we are experi encing in thisregard. As we emerge out of an epoch ofunquestioningly belong ing to the Church,we are today first affirming «Christ yes,the Church no», and then advancing to«God yes, Christ no», and then further onsaying «reli gion yes, God no», and finallyasserting «spir ituality yes, religion no».In this chaotic climate of change and

generalized uncertainty, the problematicof Vatican II has been in a way displacedand even superseded. There is no longermuch sense in limiting ourselves to dis -cussing liturgical rites, the Vatican curia,the decrease in Sunday Mass attend ance,birth control, communion for divorcedpeople, or homosexual couples. The pro -blems are much more radical and deep-seated. The younger generations are theones who perceive them and suffer them.Vatican II had a strong ecclesiol o gical

emphasis, which was expressed in LumenGentium and Gaudium et Spes.The Coun -cil was responding to the question thatPaul VI had posed to the Council fathers:«Church, what do you say about yourself?»All the other documents revolve around theChurch and converge toward her: reve la -tion, liturgy, laity, People of God, hierar chy,

28

religious life, ecumenism, dialo gue with themodern world, religious liberty, etc.But while addressing a social forum in

France a few years after Vatican II, PaulVI himself changed the question andasked, «Church, what do you say aboutGod?».Cardinal Walter Kasper acknowledged

that Vatican II limited itself to the Churchand ecclesial matters to such an extent thatit failed to treat of God, the authenticcontent of faith.17 Karl Rahner went so faras to state that the First Vati can Councilwas bolder than Vatican II in that it daredto treat the question of God’s ineffablemystery. In this regard he wrote: «Thefuture will not ask the Church about themost precise and beautiful forms ofliturgy nor about the controversialtheological doctrines that distinguishCatholic doctrine from the teachings ofnon-Catholic Christians nor about a moreor less ideal organi zation of the Romancuria. The future will ask whether theChurch can bear witness to the intimateguidance of the ineffable mystery we call

God. … That is why the answers andsolutions of the recent Council can be nomore than a first step toward what theChurch of the future must do».18

The Church must concentrate on whatis essential; she must return again to Jesusand the Gospel; she must regain a spiritualexperience of God (mysta go gy). Ours isan age of spirituality and mysticism. It isan age of prophecy that confronts a worldwhere the greater part of humanity is poorand excluded from the wealth of the earth,an earth which itself is seriously threat -ened. Mysticism and prophecy are insepa -rable. The Church is called upon to awakenhope and instill meaning into a world thatis death-bound. This is not a time for half-hearted revamping. We should not fool ourselves. We

should not give in to the temptation to playour violins while the Titanic is sinking.The Church must be a mysta gogicalcommunity;19 it must be a her meneuticalcommunity that helps to mediate theencounter with the God of Jesus and withthe poor instead of obstructing it.

29

In this climate of generalized confusionand crisis, we Christians believe that it isa moment not of death but of birth. Webelieve that present in the midst of thischaos is the Ruah, the Spirit who hoveredover the primeval chaos to bring forth life,the same Spirit that begot Jesus of theVirgin Mary and raised him up from thedead. This is the Spirit who guides theChurch and all humankind. The presentcrisis is not the first one through which theChurch has passed. This can be a paschalmoment, the passage from death to life.Out of the chaos can arise a time of grace,a kairos, and a renewed Church, one thatis poorer, more evangelical, and trulyNazarene.

Amid the complaints and dis content ofChristians who demand this new style of Church in order to escape from thepresent ecclesial impasse, we can discernthe living presence of the Spirit who isgroan ing and pleading for a different kindof Church. Another Church is possible;another Church is neces sary (J. Sobrino).Meanwhile, we have to continue the

still unfinished process of adopting Vati -can II and doing the best we can with itslegacy, for we cannot respond to thechallenges of today without the light of itsintuitions. We must be converted to thesame Spirit that moved John XXIII to callthe Council; we must imitate his good -ness, his willing ness to dialogue, and his

30

6. CONCLUSION: FROM CHAOS TO KAIROS

In this climate of generalized confusion and crisis, we Christians believethat it is a moment not of death but of birth. We believe that present in themidst of this chaos is the Ruah, the Spirit who hovered over the primevalchaos to bring forth life, the same Spirit that begot Jesus of the Virgin Maryand raised him up from the dead. This is the Spirit who guides the Churchand all humankind. The present crisis is not the first one through which theChurch has passed. This can be a paschal moment, the passage fromdeath to life. Out of the chaos can arise a time of grace, a kairos, and arenewed Church, one that is poorer, more evangelical, and truly Nazarene.

mercy, serenity, and confidence in God.At the same time, we must be in tune withhis desire for aggiornamento and hisdesire to make a great leap forward. Wemust not become disillu sioned but mustrather work from below to renew theChurch just as the renewal movements ofthe 1950s did. After a harsh winter thereare always the spring blossoms.We cannot be «prophets of doom». We

must feel with the Church, or better still,we must feel ourselves Church, even in themiddle of the ecclesial winter. God and hisReign are greater than the Church. TheChurch is sinful, but she is under the force

of the Lord’s Spirit who never abandonsher. The Church is not identified simplywith the hierarchy; she is the Church ofthe poor, historical Jesus; she is the Churchincarnated in the smallness and fragility ofthe human race as a sign of contra dictionlike Jesus himself. We should be gratefulthat the Church has given us the best ofwhat it possesses, Jesus. And all of us, bothhierarchy and faithful, must be convertedto the Gospel. We must remain criticallyand defiant ly faithful, but always hopingagainst hope in the One «who gives life tothe dead and calls into existence the thingsthat do not exist» (Rom 4:17).20

31

1. There is a classical axiom of Prospero of Aqui -taine which states, «lex orandi, lex credendi»,that is, the form of prayer expresses the formof belief.

2. H. Denzinger was the German Jesuit whoauthored a classical work that gathers the keytexts of the Church councils and the pontificalmagisterium. This work has been updated inrecent years with the collaboration of othertheologians such as Rahner, Schönmetzer, andHünermann.

3. See R. AUBERT, La théolo gie catholique aumilieu du XXe. siècle, Tour nai 1954.

4. For a more complete study of Vatican II we referthe reader to these specialized works: G. AL -BE RI GO, ed., Historia del Concilio Vaticano II, 5 vv., Salamanca, Sígueme, 2008; S. MADRI -GAL, Vaticano II: Remembranza y actualiza -ción, Santander, Sal Terrae, 2002; Unaslecciones sobre el Vaticano II y su legado,Santander, Sal Terrare, 2012; E. VILANOVA, ElConcili Vaticà II, Barcelona, Facultat deTeologia de Catalunya, 1995; J. Mª. ROVIRABELLOSO, Vaticano II: Un concilio para eltercer milenio, Madrid, B.A.C., 1997.

5. A. J. de ALMEIDA, Lumen Gentium. A transiçâonecessária, Sâo Paulo, 2005.

6. V. MESSORI, J. RATZINGER, Informe sobre la fe,Madrid, B.A.C., 1985.

7. A text helpful for understanding the theologicalthought of J. Ratzinger is that of J. MARTÍNEZGORDO, La cristología de Josef Ratzinger-Bene dicto XVI. A la luz de su biografía teoló -gica, Barcelona, Cristianisme i Justícia, Cua -der no 158, 2008.

8. K. KÖNIG, Iglesia ¿adónde vas?, Santander, SalTerrae, 1986.

9. J. I. GONZÁLEZ FAUS, Comprender a Karol Wojtyla,Santander, Sal Terrae, 2005.

10. J. MARTÍNEZ GORDO, «Datos y razones de lainvolución eclesial», Éxodo, no. 109, June2011, pp. 5-12.

11. BENEDICT XVI, Discourse of Christmas Greet -ing to the Roman Curia, 2005, published inActa Apostolicae Sedis 98 (2006), pp. 40-53.

12. J. PEREA, J. I. GONZÁLEZ FAUS, A. TORRESQUEIRUGA, J. VITORIA: Clamor contra elgueto, Madrid, Trotta, 2012, pp. 9-23.

13. D. G. SCHULTENHOVER (ed.), Vatican II: DidAnything Happen?, New York 2007.

14. A. MARCHETTO, El Concilio Ecuménico Vatica -no II. Contrapunto para su historia, Valencia2008. See also S. MADRIGAL, El aggiorna -mento, clave teológica para la interpretacióndel Concilio, Santander, Sal Terrae, February2010, pp. 111-127.

15. PEREA, GONZALEZ FAUS, TORRES QUEIRUGA,VITORIA, Clamor contra...

16. J. A. ESTRADA, «La pérdida de credibilidad dela Iglesia», in Clamor contra..., pp. 205-207.

17. W. KASPER, «El desafío permanente del Vatica -no II», in Teología e Iglesia, Barcelona 1989,p. 414.

18. K. RAHNER, El Concilio, nuevo comienzo, Bar -celona, Herder, 1966, p. 22.

19. F. J. VITORIA, No hay “territorio comanche”para Dios, Madrid 2009, pp. 163-193.

20. Allow me to refer to my booklet, SentirseIglesia en el invierno eclesial, Barcelona,Cristianisme i justícia, EIDES 46, 2006.

32

NOTES