Newspaper Page Text
PAGE 6-—July 35, 1971
CONTROVERSIAL DOCUMENT
Vatican Official Defends
Proposed Constitution
By Father Leo
E. McFadden
VATICAN CITY (NC) - A
Vatican official has defended
a controversial document that
would serve as a general
constitution for the Church.
The document attempts to
set down the theological and
juridical principles governing
the Church.
Msgr. William Onclin,
assistant secretary of the
Pontifical Commission for the
Revision oi me Uoae of
By Richard Kilian
GENEVA (NC) - The
ecumenical movement “has
slowed down considerably,”
according to a Roman
Catholic priest who has been
very active in the movement.
The priest, Jesuit Father
George Dunne from St.
Louis, Mo., general secretary
of the joint committee on
Society, Development and
Peace (SODEPAX) of the
Catholic Church and the
World Council of Churches
(WCC), told NC News:
“Following Vatican II and
other Vatican documents on
ecumenism, there was a great
splurge of enthusiasm for
unity. And there has been a
great change in the
relationship between Rome
and the WCC. But the bloom
is off the rose. The
enthusiasm is not quite what
it was.
f ‘For example, the
Secretariat for Christian
T nity in Rome has not had a
ssening feeling about the
promotion of Christian unity.
But I think that in other
circles in Rome-and I think
in some there never was much
enthusiasm-there is much less
enthusiasm now.
“That does not mean it is
totally dead.”
Father Dunne dressed in
“civies”-dark suit, white
shirt, gray tie-said he
considers his present job
proof that the Vatican is still
basically supporting
SODEPAX.
In 1968, the first year of
its existence, Father Dunne
was SODEPAX. “A quite
unique moment,” he said,
“since it was the first time
since the Reformation over
400 years ago that the
Catholic Church had joined
the Protestant and the
Orthodox.”
The first mandate for three
years and money, $20,000,
came from the Pontifical
Commission on Justice and
Peace and was matched by
the WCC and a Ford
Foundation grant of $30,000.
“We are certain it will be
continued for another three
years, and are awaiting
official word from Rome on
it,” Father Dunne said. “We
have done our planning for
the next three years and no
one is complaining.”
He said the Vatican has
always approved of
SODEPAX’s programs,
“although certain people
must have their doubts about
them. ”
He said SODEPAX’s
mandate is to arouse
Christians and non-Christians
to the problem of proverty
and war and to obtain moral
assurances of action.
Canon Law, told a news
conference July 5 that the
Church, as a society, needs
rules of law. These rules, he
insisted, should define
concretely “the modes, the
manner of exercising the
various functions entrusted to
the Church by Jesus Christ.”
The Belgian canon lawyer
said that Pope Paul told the
commission in November,
1965, to incorporate a
written constitution into the
revised laws of the Church.
In its present form the
constitution has been
He said the organization is
primarily educational and
leaves those in various areas
to deal with problems after
international and national
conferences are held on
specific subjects.
For the next three years,
SODEPAX will concentrate
on Africa, Europe and North
America, Father Dunne said.
“We want to arouse the vast
network of church-controlled
mass media to the problems
we study. We don’t want to
abandon Asia or Latin
America, but we don’t want
to dissipate our efforts.”
He said the way to
Christian unity is to prompt
the churches to cooperate in
dealing with social problems.
“Here at WCC (his office is
in the WCC headquarters) we
are of different faiths,” he
said. “But we get to know
each other and discuss
theological differences too.
We find that we were not as
inseparable as we had been
led to think. We are
experiencing ourselves a
wonderful unity.”
Father Dunne said he
believes in a grassroots
approach to Christian
involvement in social
problems. “It can’t be
imposed from on top.”
He said SODEPAX wants
to arouse the leading citizens
of rich countries to assume
responsibility for assisting
developing nations.
“We plan a London
conference early in 1973 of
top policy makers in
American mass media like
Frank Stanton of CBS,” he
said. “We want to sensitize
them to use their vast
resources to promote justice
and peace. We hope to have
NBC and ABC as well educate
the people to the problems.”
He also emphasized the
need to instill in seminarians
an awareness of the Church’s
responsibility to alleviate the
ills of the world.
Father Dunne said there is
less talk now than there was a,
few years ago of Catholic
membership in the WCC. “At
that time there were people
in the WCC who felt that the
Roman Catholic Church was
on the verge of applying for
membership. I think they
now realize that this is some
way off. There are problems
on both sides .. .
“The whole structure of
the WCC would be affected.
The whole constitutional
arrangement would have to
be changed because of the
size of the Catholic Church.
“Ways and means would
have to be found so that by
its size alone it would not
submerge other churches.”
criticized by the Canon Law
Society of America (CLSA)
for allegedly reversing some
progressive steps of the
Second Vatican Council.
A much harsher criticism
of the proposed constitution
came from the Institute for
Religious Science at the
University of Bologna. This
analysis states bluntly that
the constitution is a political
maneuver to stop Church
renewal.
The CLSA quoted German
Jesuit theologian, Father Karl
Rahner, and other
theologians as saying it is
impossible to write a static
constitution for the Church
because the Church is
“always becoming and
evolving in response to the
promptings of the spirit of
Christ.”
Msgr. Onclin observed: “It
is difficult to understand the
animosity, indeed the
hostility, some showed in
their evaluations.”
He said that such hostile
critics “distorted the
intentions of the authors of
the constitution and sowed
confusion.”
The authors of the
constitution always
welcomed evaluations or
positive criticism “but not
hostility,” he continued.
It will be a “few more
years” before any
constitution will be in final
form to be voted on by the
world’s bishops, Msgr. Onclin
said. As it now stands, the
constitution is in its second
revision and will be presented
to the fall session of the
World Synod of Bishops, but
only in the form of a progress
report and not for a vote.
The Bologna criticism
charged that the Vatican is
trying to “slip the document”
through by gathering
opinions from bishops during
the summer vacation and
then calling for a quick
approval by Synod delegates
in October.
“It has never been the
intention of the code
commission or of others to
submit the present draft to
the vote of the Synod,” Msgr.
Onclin said. “As has already
been announced by the
secretary general of the
Synod, the president of the
code commission, Cardinal
Pericle Felici, will report to
the bishops of the Synod on
the work done so far and on
the very great deal of work
that remains to be done.”
Msgr. Onclin said also that
the present document is still
very much a working paper
and merely a proposal
“destined to be eventually
corrected or even thoroughly
modified.”
The CLSA evaluation,
commissioned by the
American bishops, criticized
the constitution for allegedly
exalting the role of the Pope
over the place of the bishops,
for ignoring new institutions
recommended by the Vatican
Council and for being a
possible deterrent to the
ecumenical movement. The
CLSA suggested that any
attempt at developing a
constitution should be made
in open inquiry with the
entire Church.
Msgr. Onclin did not
comment on the secret
approach the Vatican has
taken in developing the
document, but he did observe
that bishops of the world
have from the outset been
urged to “consult priests and
laymen who are evidently
experts in order to effect a
true consultation of the
people of God.”
Msgr. Onclin said that after
the Synod the constitution
will eventually be sent to the
bishops for further updating
and in “a few years time” a
final draft will be voted on,
“probably during one of the
upcoming Synods.”
He was careful to explain
that if the Church does adopt
a constitution it will be
enacted by the bishops, not
the code commission.
Ecumenical
Movement Slowed?
IN THIS CARTOON BY JONATHAN, she comments on one of the roles of the emerging woman
in the Church, as discussed by Father Joseph Champlin this week. (NC PHOTO)
Worship And The World
Women in the
Sancturay
By Fr. Joseph
M. Champlin
This column is not about
the ordination of women to
the priesthood or to the
diaconate. It does, however,
speak to the question of their
greater direct participation in
the liturgy.
The General Instruction of
the Roman Missal, issued in
April 1969, contained this
interesting and, for many,
irksome paragraph: “When a
qualified man is not available,
the conference of bishops
may permit a woman to
proclaim the readings prior to
the gospel, while standing
outside the sanctuary.”
The fact remains that the
American bishops did so
approve of women lectors.
However, the controversial
points at issue were those
phrases “outside the
sanctuary” and “when a
qualified man is not
available.” The first
reservation raised all types of
practical and liturgical
difficulties; the second
limitation incensed feminine
liberation leaders and
confused those anxious to
invlolve women actively in
worship.
Why “outside the
sanctuary”? What is a
“qualified man”? When does
he become “not available”?
Fortunately, two recent
official documents have
removed those offensive and
unclear restrictions.
A Third Instruction on the
Sacred Liturgy from the
Congregation for Divene
Wo rship in Rome
(September, 1970) offers a
simple practical principle:
Women may exercise
liturgical offices with the
exception of “serving the
priest at the altar.” Even
here, however, exceptions
have been granted as in the
case of lay ministers for Holy
Communion.
This means irt effect that
women may fulfill the role of
reader, cantor, leader of
singing, commentator, choir
member, instrumentalist and
other similar functions.
What are the
qualifications? The same ones
required of men for these
tasks. As St. Paul stressed to
the Galatians (3:27-28),
“There does not exist among
you Jew or Greek, slave or
freeman, male or female. All
are one in Christ Jesus.” In
view of that admonition we
insist on two characteristics
only in persons who are to
assume liturgical leadership
positions: exemplary
character and technical
competence. Sex is secondary
here.
The Bishops’ Committee
on the Liturgy for the United
States approved a statement,
February 14, 1970, on the
“Place of Women in the
Liturgy.” This Committee
sent copies to the total body
of American bishops for their
information and use, then
published the entire text in
its April-May NEWSLETTER.
That statement, intended
to interpret for and apply to
our country section 7 of the
Third Instruction, specifies,
although in a general way, the
proper place where women
may excercise their liturgical
ministry.
With regard to lectors, it
states: “Women who read one
or other biblical reading
during the liturgy of the word
(other than the gospel, which
is reserved to a deacon or
priest) should do so from the
lectern or ambo where the
other readings are
proclaimed. The reservation
of a single place for all the
biblical readings is more
significant than the person of
the reader, whether ordained
or lay, whether woman or
man.”
With regard to additional
activities it suggests: “Other
ministries performed by
women, such as leading the
singing or otherwise directing
the congregation, should be
done either within or outside
the sanctuary area, depending
on circumstances.”
Who will make these
judgments? “The pastor or
the priest who presides over
the celebration, in the light of
the culture and mentality of
the congregation.”
I suppose those who argue
strongly for women in the
priesthood will find these
developments “to little and
too late,” legalistic game
playing, or preoccupation
with trivia while the
substantive issue rests
unresolved.
However, lasting change
does come gradually. It seems
to me that according to the
usual human processes we
walk slowly first. Before a
woman stands behind the
altar and offers Mass, I think
we should become
accustomed to having her
walk to the pulpit and read
the scriptures. That really is a
big step, and one not taken in
many or most American
parishes.
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. What roles are women
now permitted to perform in
the liturgy?
2. Should women be
permitted to perform the
same functions in the liturgy
as men?
CATHOLIC BOOK AWARD: Father Harold A. Buetow, author
of “Of Singular Benefit - The Story of U S. Catholic
Education,” accepts from James A. Doyle, Executive Director
of the Catholic Press Association, this year’s National Catholic
Book Award in the field of Education and History. Mr. Doyle
praised the book, a contemporary work which examines the
entire history of U.S. Catholic education. (NC PHOTO by
Joseph L. Reilly, Jr.)
JESUIT
Seminarians Won’t
Accept Exemption
ST. LOUIS (NC) -
Twenty-seven Jesuit
seminarians at St. Louis
University school of divinity
have announced they will no
longer accept their
exemptions as seminarians
from the draft.
They also announced that
they would neither carry
their draft cards as required
by law nor cooperate with
the Selective Service System,
“which is the machinery of
international murder.”
The 27 Jesuit scholastics
represent about a third of the
Jesuit seminarians studying at
the divinity school.
In announcing their refusal
to obey Selective Service
regulations, the Jesuits
compared themselves to the
parable workers who stood all
day idle before being sent
into the vineyard at the
eleventh hour.
“We Jesuit Americans, men
of draft age, have tried to
listen to the Gospel, the word
of Him to whom we are
vowed,” they said, accusing
themselves of standing idle
while “the call to work in His
vineyard” in opposition to
the war was clear and “was
there at daybreak.”
“We have stood by,” they
said, “while our nation rains a
nightmare on the land of
burning children, because we
are unwilling to sacrifice our
national ‘honor’ for the lives
of human beings.
“We have watched as men
of our own age are forced by
their government to commit
murder or face imprisonment
while our bodies are immune
to conscription, hidden
behind our clerical
exemption.”
“Indeed the time is late
but the work is far from
complete” the young Jesuits
said, stating that they “can
no longer remain inert” and
“so filled with real joy we
take our place in the field.”
“We know,” they wrote,
“that what we are doing,
though it is really very little,
very late, does put us outside
the law (technically
punishable by five years in
prison and/or $10,000 fine,
though we doubt that our
government has either the
interest, or the courage to
prosecute us) but we do this
intentionally because we
believe that this law of our
land is the law of death.”
A spokesman for the 27
said the signers made
individual decisions on what
form their refusal to carry
draft cards would take.
Some of the signers, he
said, had already returned
them to their draft boards.
Others plan to do that and
others may destroy them, he
said.
A group of 11 of the
signers sent their draft cards
with the peace statement to
Father Robert Drinan, S.J.,
U.S. representative from
Massachusetts. Father Drinan,
who was elected in November
on an anti-war platform,
refused to comment on the
statement or say whether he
had received the draft cards.
The Jesuits also sent the
statement to Pope Paul VI,
President Nixon, several U.S.
bishops, and congressmen, all
Jesuit houses and institutions
in the U.S. and their own
draft boards, families and
friends.
James T. Ayers, S.J., one
of the signers, said the
response had been very
favorable.
“We found one of the most
beneficial parts of the whole
experience was raising the
consciousness of people in
regard to peace,” he said.
Ayers added that the Jesuits
had deliberately framed their
opposition to the war in “a
specifically religious rather
than political, polemic way”
because they believed that
their proper “social response”
was as seminarians.
Leisure—
(Continued from page 6)
Him for your ability to hear,
for the wonderful variety of
sounds that warn us of
danger, make possible
conversation, entertain us,
soothe our troubled spirits.
You might ask Him to help
you learn to listen, to learn to
hear His voice speaking
through the sounds of life.
You might ask forgiveness for
not taking time to enjoy and
appreciate the sounds that are
part of His creation.
Learning to hear God
speaking through the
creatures that surround us or
through our own inner desires
requires an inner silence that
must be searched for and
created. “Be still, and know
that I am God.”
Y ardstick
(Continued from Page 4)
can ill afford the luxury of indulging (tms time
at the instigation of so-called radicals or
progressives in another such orgy of
recrimination triggered by our sense of
disillusionment over the war in Vietnam.
We may well be headed in that direction,
however, unless the point that Kenneth
Thompson, among others, has repeatedly made
about the ambiguity of political morality is
taken to heart by the people responsible for
molding public opinion during this troubled
period in our national history. “If the liberal
pragmatist,” Mr. Thompson, a distinguisehd
political scientist, writes in the April issue of
Notre Dame’s Review of Politics, “must forever
be on guard against the illusion that politics can
be divorced from moral purpose, the moralist
needs to know that like ancient churchmen,
once having crossed the line separating ethics
from politics, he is on new ground. It is a realm
of ambiguity and complexity, where
compromise and adjustment for good ends, not
the final triumph of justice, are often the best
practical outcome. It is infrequently a realm of
yes or no, victory or defeat, my side right and
all else wrong.” In our day the impatient radical
must grasp this in his approach to both national
and international problems.”
That’s an umpopular thing to say at the
present time, especially in the light of what we
have learned thus far from the Pentagon papers.
Nevertheless it needed to be said. At the very
least it can serve to remind us that avoiding a
repetition of the tragic mistakes of the past
decade is the real lesson to be learned from the
Pentagon papers and that using these papers
simply as an occasion or an excuse for settling
political accounts or for self-righteously
separating the moral sheep from the amoral
goats or pragmatists would be a serious mistake
and one which, as Newsweek has pointed out,
could result in tragic consequences.
s