Background to Vatican II – 1 (Update)
As we approach the fiftieth anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council, it might be helpful to keep in mind developments after Pope John’s announcement of an ecumenical council on January 25, 1958. In my files I have a number of essays that provide some background, and I am making them available on my blog here. There may be more detail than many feel is necessary, but others may find them illuminating.
The first discusses proposals for a council that were briefly entertained during the reigns of Popes Pius XI and Pius XII.
The second discusses where Pope John may have gotten the idea of a council.
The third discusses initial reactions to the announcement of a council, both in Rome and elsewhere.
The fourth describes some features of the first stage of the whole conciliar event, the antepreparatory period that ran from May 1959 to November 1960 when the preparatory period began.
The fifth are the simple notes I distributed to undergraduates and expanded on in a lecture on the movements of renewal in the Catholic Church earlier in the twentieth century, which made the Council possible.
Finally, there is a very brief outline of the principal dates and events from the announcement of the Council to its conclusion.
I have now added here two other essays on the more remote background to the Council.
Thank you! I am one of those people deeply disappointed that I never got to attend your classes on Vatican II and the Council of Trent.
After my father died, I found in his bureau a booklet containing PRAYER FOR THE ECUMENICAL COUNCIL. I think that he must have used it during Eucharistic Adoration, that he attended every year, 3-4 a.m. on Good Friday morning. The date of publication is 1959.
O Divine Spirit, sent by the Father in the name of Jesus, Who dost infallibly assist and guide the Church, pour forth the fullness of thy gifts upon the Ecumenical Council.
Kind teacher and Comforter, enlighten the minds of our bishops, who, responding to the invitation of the Sovereign Roman Pontiff, will gather in solemn assembly.
Grant that from this Council there may come forth abundant fruits: that the light and strength of the Gospel may ever more widely influence human society: that new vigour may infuse the Catholic religion and its missionary task; that the Church’s teaching may be better known and Christian morality more widely practiced.
Sweet Guest of our souls, confirm our minds in truth, and dispose our hearts to obedience, so that the decisions of the council may find in us generous acceptance and prompt fulfillment.
We beseech Thee, too, on behalf of those sheep, who no longer belong to the one fold of Jesus Christ, that they also, glorifying as they do in the name of Christian, may finally regain unity under one Shepherd.
Renew in our time Thy wondrous works, as in a new Pentecost, and grant that Holy Church, gathered together in unanimous, more intense prayer, around Mary, the Mother of Jesus, and guided by Peter, may spread the kingdom of the Divine Saviour, which is the kingdom of truth, of justice, of love, and of peace. Amen.
NCR today has a piece on the (largely unremebered anniversary) of the calling of the Council.
That NCR article, http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/curial-horror-greeted-john-xxiiis-announcement-ecumenical-council, for the most part agrees with your description. But your detail gives important nuances and who was thinking what. Joe, do you agree with the NCR article that Rome is trying to ignore the anniversary?
No, I don’t think Rome is ignoring the anniversary. The 50th anniversary of the announcement was noted when it occurred–in 2009. That no special notice of it was taken this year is not significant. Notice was taken at Christmas time of the 50th anniversary of Pope John’s official convocation, and Pope Benedict has placed the upcoming “Year of Faith” under the sign of the Council, much to the chagrin of the Lefebvrites…
I found the NCR piece rather overblown, and would like, for example, to know the evidence of “horror” on the part of Romans. There were a number of Romans who wanted a Council–to confirm the emphases and orientations of the modern popes. They weren’t “horrified.” If we’re going to do history, we have to reflect its complexities–it wasn’t simply Cowboys vs. Indians.
There are many of us who lived through some of the time leading up to V2 – and that is why what JAK has posted is a good aide-memoire to the multis. Thanks for posting it.
I will audit the course and will not be taking any snap quizzes of final exam, though.
Far from ignoring the Council, the Church is celebrating it with an entire Year of Faith and a Synod on the New Evangelization of the Faith, the need for which was a major impetus for the calling of the Council.
As the CDF recently said in its Note on the Year of Faith –
The beginning of the Year of Faith coincides with the anniversaries of two great events which have marked the life of the Church in our days: the fiftieth anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council, called by Blessed Pope John XXIII (11 October 1962), and the twentieth of the promulgation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, given to the Church by Blessed Pope John Paul II (11 October 1992).
The Council, according to Pope John XXIII, wanted “to transmit doctrine, pure and whole, without attenuations or misrepresentations,” in such a way that “this sure and immutable teaching, which must be respected faithfully, is elaborated and presented in a way which corresponds to the needs of our time.”[3] In this regard, the opening words of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium remain of primary importance: “Christ is the Light of nations. Because this is so, this Sacred Synod gathered together in the Holy Spirit eagerly desires, by proclaiming the Gospel to every creature, (cfr. Mk 16:15) to bring the light of Christ to all men, a light brightly visible on the countenance of the Church.”[4] Beginning with the light of Christ, which purifies, illuminates and sanctifies in the celebration of the sacred liturgy (cfr. Constitution, Sacrosanctum Concilium) and with His divine word (cfr. Dogmatic Constitution, Dei Verbum), the Counil wanted to elaborate on the intimate nature of the Church (cfr. Dogmatic Constitution, Lumen gentium) and its relationship with the contemporary world (cfr. Pastoral Constitution, Gaudium et spes). Around these four Constitutions, the true pillars of the Council, are arranged the Declarations and Decrees which address some of the major challenges of the day.
After the Council the Church – under the sure guidance of the Magisterium and in continuity with the whole Tradition – set about ensuring the reception and application of the teaching of the Council in all its richness. To assist in the correct reception of the Council, the Popes have frequently convoked the Synod of Bishops,[5] . . . The next General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops, to be held in October 2012, will have as its theme: The New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian Faith.
From the beginning of his pontificate, Pope Benedict XVI has worked decisively for a correct understanding of the Council, rejecting as erroneous the so-called “hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture” and promoting what he himself has termed “the ‘hermeneutic of reform’, of renewal in the continuity of the one subject-Church which the Lord has given to us. She is a subject which increases in time and develops, yet always remaining the same, the one subject of the journeying People of God.”[6] . . . The Year of Faith is intended to contribute to a renewed conversion to the Lord Jesus and to the rediscovery of faith, so that the members of the Church will be credible and joy-filled witnesses to the Risen Lord in the world of today – capable of leading those many people who are seeking it to the “door of faith.” . . .
The main ecclesial event at the beginning of the Year of Faith will be the XIII General Assembly of the Ordinary Synod of Bishops, convoked by Pope Benedict XVI in October 2012, dedicated to The New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian Faith. During this Synod, on 11 October 2012, there will be a solemn celebration of the beginning of the Year of Faith, in remembrance of the fiftieth anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council.
Joseph, thank you so much for your article above and your fantastic notes that you made available on your blog. I really appreciate the scholarship.
I thought Modernity & the Construction of Roman Catholicism particularly interesting, thanks.
JAK –
About the intolerance of theological argument by the Vatican —
In the past there were sometimes terrible consequences for disagreeing with Rome (burning at the stake). But at least in the medieval period the Church authorities felt obligated to give their own *reasons* for the dogmas imposed on the Faithful. Church authorities allowed a great deal of public argumentation before such penalties were imposed. Further, before a decision was made the dissenter had the opportunity to argue his case in a tribunal called especially for that purpose. A theologian even had a right to appeal to the Pope himself if a bishop condemned him, or so I’ve read.
Such is not the case today, in spite of all the purported changes since the 19th century. Theologians can be condemned without even knowing that their views are being reviewed!
How do you account for this lack of due process for theologians? Is this fear of public discussion a left-over from the period when the scholastic ideals were debased? What, in other words, do you think is the historical cause of the downright secrecy that is so characteristic of the Vatican? Even in the age of Galileo the official Church acted relatively transparently. Where did this omerta come from historically? Who imposed this style of problem “solving”? So far as I can see, it is not a legacy of the middle ages.
Ann: I’m not sure to which of my essays your comment applies, but I agree that there was great room for theological debate during the Middle Ages. Newman said something very similar to your remarks, about the lack of “elbow-room”, as he called it in the modern Church.
Here’s a hypothesis: That this idea of controlling thought is a modern notion, owing much to the idea of the “enlightened monarch” who was presumed to know what was best for his subjects. Major Enlightenment figures, now in positions of influence, argued that ideas not in accord with what Reason requires (that is, what they required) were not to be allowed to impede the measures an Enlightened ruler knew was best for the people. I don’t know of any evidence that the axiom “Error has no rights” was known in the Middle Ages, but it can be found in the writings of Enlightenment philosophers, as Isaiah Berlin’s famous essay on Liberty shows.
This is not the only bad idea that some Church leaders derived from regimes that in principle they opposed.
JAK –
It’s the 5th one that inspired my question. I just wondered what within the Church or outside of it impelled the Vatican to become so obsessively secretive. I”m hopeful that Pope Benedict is starting to see the need for transparency.
Of course, given that popes were and are absolute monarch, maybe some of them who were naturally secretive imposed the secrecy simply because that was what they were comfortable with. Also, after they lost their temporal power, maybe they used the secrecy to cover-up what was going on in their reduced circumstances. And maybe not.
It is odd that Enlightenment thinkers like Voltaire retained their admiration for absolute monarchs, but it might just be human nature. See his friendship with Frederick the Great, or Descartes friendship with the Queen of Sweden, and the European intellectuals who willingly helped Catherine the Great implement her plans. Not that any of these people were democratically inclined.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.