Newspaper Page Text
t
♦
#
4
0
1
PAGE 8 GEORGIA BULLETIN THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1964
STEPPED-UP-PACE
Council Zipping Along With Throttle Wide Open
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
regarding the title “Mother of the Church": “If the Church is
our Mother, then this makes Mary our “grandmother’’ which is
awkward!”
3. “ Pastoral Office of Bishops” Draft Decree, This Decree
drew no notable debate. It was generally agreeable to the Bishops
and the speakers pointed out only minor defects.
4. "THE BISHOPS and Collegiality” Chapter III of the Schema:
The Church,
This provoked the fireworks which was fully covered in the
press. Since then, there has been wide discussion about the role of
Archbishop Parente, Assessor of the Holy Office, who spoke as
“the simple Bishop of Thebes (his titular See)’ in support of
collegiality of the Bishops, with the Pope, in the government of the
Universal Church, Thi3 came as a great surprise because of the
strong position against collegiality taken by Cardinal Ottaviani,
Head of the Holy Office,
There has also been a public expression at the U, S, Bishops’
Press Panel (13 U.S. Experts who “meet the Press” every day
at 3:30 p,m,) that the establishment of a kind of “Senate” of the
Church international could now be expected. This was the state
ment of Archbishop McGucken of San Francisco, National Press
Chief for the U.S, Bishops. And it means that the Pope now will
probably invite a body of Bishops from around the world to sit
down with him to shape general, high level polity for the Church,
instead of leaving so much policy-making to the Roman Curia.
5. “RELIGIOUS LIBERTY” STATEMENT
This was covered in my last Rome Letter and made headlines
and big stories in all the newspapers. Since last writing, the de
bate on the question has been completed and I have worked up a
count on it, as follows:
The Debate on Religious Liberty lasted for 31/2 tense
days. Speakers for and against it were about evenly
divided, 25 Fathers spoke for the Schema as written
in favor of Religious Liberty, 19 Fathers spoke against
the Schema as written.
Represented by Speakers were: 18 Countries, The
Curia, 2 Orders (Gen«) Spain had 6 against; Italy 3
against and 1 for; U.S.A. 5 for.
The Roman Curia had 3 against.
Generally against: India, Bolivia, Brazil, Poland,
China.
Generally for: Canada, Chile, S, Africa, Yugoslavia,
Austria, Germany, France, Holland, Poland, Vietnam,
Ireland,
HOWEVER—Bishops speaking for Religious Freedom
usually spoke for a large number of fellow-Bishops
from the same country. This was not true of those who
spoke against it. And the general feeling is that the
Schema will be approved “in gene re” when it comes
back to the floor for a vote.
Still, the pronouncement will induce serious problems
for the Church in countries which have a formal “Con
cordat” with the Vatican, such as Italy and Spain be
cause these agreements guaranteed the Church’s right
to many things: a free press, Christian education and
so forth. Yet even greater problems will arise if the
Church fails, in General Council, to spell out this
matter.
6, ’THE JEWS And Other Non-Christians”
The gist of this debate was this: “Jews generally -
of today, of the time of Christ, even the Jewish lead
ers who brought about Christ's death - must be absol
ved once and for all of the charge of “deicide”.
(“Father, forgive them,” said Christ Himself “For
they know not what they do”.)They acted in ignorance.
Further, no one may charge a whole race or nation
with the faults of some Individuals. Moreover, we must
purge ourselves of the anti-Semitic feelings and actions
of the past......If Moslems are mentioned, then other
non-Christian nations and groups should be mentioned
too, as objects of Christian love. Yet there is strong
feeling that the Jews, in view of their special role in
God’s Providence in preparing for Christianity, should
receive special treatment in the Statement. There were
very many speakers on this subject but there was not
a great deal that any one of them could contribute of an
original nature. So they kept repeating each other for a
long time. Looks like the final statement will go the
above route.
7. “REVELATION” SCHEMA.
Here is a revision of the Schema rejected at the First
Session because it was written in pre-Pius XII tone
and approach. At that time it was called * On the Two
Sources of Revelation”. Debate on the revision is just
about at the half-way mark, I should think, right now.
And the revision is definitely post- “Divino-Afflante-
Spiritu”. That is about all I can say about it at the
present time. But the signs are good for an up-dated
treatment to pass the Council.
SO MUCH for the great debate. It has been very definitely inte
resting and exciting and many brilliant addresses have been made
on all of the above topics. In addition, many colorful figures have
risen to speak: Suenens, DeSmet, Cushing, Ottaviani, Ruffini,
Parente, Doepfner — time and again. And on each occasion the
coffee-shop was deserted and the seats almost filled.
Yesterday a most important vote was taken. But, somehow, it
got by the press who seemed to have been cought napping.
T WAS the explicit declaration of equality for the People of God
as regards dignity and rights regardless of nationality, race, sex
or social condition.
This was the statement on which I had made an intervention at
the Second Session. And itwas passed in the form the U. S, Bishops
had asked for. But instead of appearing in Chapter II of the Schema:
The Church, where it was last year, the statement appeared, in
stead, this year, in Chapter IV: On the Laity in die Church.
THE NCWC picked up the story quickly enough. But the secular
press seemed so absorbed in the debate going on at the moment
on the floor (on the Jews and other Non-Christians) that the vote
on Chapter IV came as a kind of sleeper. At least none of the re
porters at the press panel seemed to be aware of what had been
voted on, for none asked a question about it.
Odd notes: The New York Tribune went speculating the other
CORRESPONDENT SEES
Greatest Challenge Ahead For Council
CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1
gard irenicism as weakness,
ecumenism as men have been
disappointed and are frequently
bitter about the way things
are going in Rome. Evelyn Wa
ugh, the English Catholic nove
list, for example, on more than
one occasion has publicly ex
pressed his disapproval and
asked the bishops for “more
of the same please” in their
efforts to strengthen the
Church.
BUT the general reaction
throughout the world. Catholic
and non-Catholic, has been en
couraging. Anyone who has sat
in the press building down from
Saint Peter's and has listened
to hard-bitten journalists from
all over the world studiously
asking theologians’ opinions on
the sources erf revelation knows
that there is a tremendous in
terest of the right kind in the
Council. As Eh-. Albert Outler,
a Protestant observer, said
once, the remarkable thing is
that the lead has been taken by
a Church long deemed passe
and irreformable.
At their best, the Fathers of
the Council have given brilliant
evidence that the spirit of the
Gospels still lives in the
Church. Take their discussions
about the declaration on the
Jews. By and large, it was a
model of evangelical charity.
As such it was a bafflement to
a few Catholics who have nur
tured anti-Semitism in their
hearts. To such persons there
seems to be no explanation for
the genuine Christian senti
ments expressed by the Coun
cil Fathers other than their
gullibility and susceptibility to
alleged Jewish “plots.”
IN the absence of facts to sus
tain their theory, they simply
manufacutred them. For ex
ample, it was recently reported
in Le Monde, the Parisian
daily, that Fathers of the Coun
cil had been circularized by a
group identifying itself only as a
body of priests. The anonymous
group warned the bishops aga
inst being taken in by Jew
ish propaganda. They also
singled out a number of priests
active in Council affairs who
have Jewish backgrounds. The
conciliar Fathers were warn
ed against these priests. It was
suggested that they might be
“plants.” Among those named
were two prominent members
of the clergy well known to Ame
ricans— Msgr. John M. Oes-
terrelcher of Seton Hall Uni
versity, Newark, N. J., and the
Canadian Augustinian theologi
an, Father Gregory Baum. The
same letter cast doubt on the
leading ecumenist of the
Church, the Jesuit Cardinal
Bea. Cardinal Bea, who was bom
in Germany, it was suggested,
has been a Jewish “agent”
all along.
But it is of major significance
that no one here took this face
less letter seriously. The
priests named were more
amused than hurt by it and the
bishops treated it with the dis
dain it deserved.
AS an effort to renew Catho
licism, great progress has al
ready been made by the Coun
cil, and more is in the offing.
One need only recall the
shocked reaction to Hans
Kueng’s first book on reform
and renewal to see how far
along the Church has come.
When, in that book, Father
Kueng, the brilliant young Swiss
theologian, suggested that the
Church needed an internal “re
formation” and overhaul of out
moded customs, canons, theolo
gical methods, and restric
tions on freedom, there was a
cry against him throughout the
Catholic world. He was accus
ed of being not only a boat-
rocker and trouble-maker but
a crypto-heretic, to boot.
BUT Father Kueng, rather
than hi s critics, turned out to
be the better prophet of what
the work of Vatican II would
be.
Only two decrees of the Coun
cil have been formally proclaim-
by the Pope to date. The lesser
of these, the decree on com
munications, admittedly added
little to Pope John search for
aggiomamento. At best it was a
collection of banalities and re
vealed the inability of its au
thors to deal creatively and at
the same time realistically with
its challenging theme. Since
its proclamation last December
it has been largely, and mer
cifully, forgotten.
THE explanation for this fail
ure is that the Fathers of the
Council were preoccupied with
more pressing theological mat
ters and did not give it the
attention it deserved. Absent-
mindedly, they let a golden op
portunity slip through thelrfin-
gers.
But the liturgical constitu
tion, proclaimed on the same
occasion, was a brilliant ac
complishment. To the degree
that is is put into practice,
it will reorient Catholic piety
from an individualistic and
sometimes sentimental pre
occupation with personal salva
tion to a broad social aware
ness that the Church-at-prayer
is the people of God broad so
cial awarnesss that the Church-
at-prayer is the people of God
sharing the highest spriitual ex
perience open to man on earth.
PUBLIC attention has been
largely fixed on such dramatic
changes as the shift from
Latin to the vernacular in the
Mass and Sacraments. Much
more important, however, is the
spirit of the document, which
promises to enrich the worship
of the Church, heighten the
meaning of the Sacraments,
and dissipate the incomprehen
sibility and frequent boredom
which so many Catholics for so
long have associated with the
performance of their sacra
mental “duties.”
The draft on Divine Revela
tion, which at this writing is
under discussion, is equally
promising. Though its themes
are abstruse and highly theo
logical, it has strong implica
tions not only for the future
intellectual life of the Church
and ecumenical work but for the
growth of a Biblical mind-set
among the Catholic people, as
well. This proposed decree
opens the possibility of unfold
ing, for Catholics, the riches
to be found in the sacred Scri
ptures and shifting their reli
gious thinking away from the
long-cauonized “propositional
mode, by which faith becomes
assent to a series of syllogis
tic counclusions, to a more
Biblical turn of mind, which puts
its emphasis on the Christian
experinece as an “encournter”
between God and man.
AS the Abbot of Downside
(England), Dom Christopher
Butler, O. S. B., noted, the
schema on the sources of re
velation which is of great in
terest to theologians may be
practically incomprehensible to
the untrained. Coming im
mediately after the lively dis
cussions of religious liberty
and the declaration on the Jews,
the debate on it seemed like
something of a let-down to
many. Still, for the futue of the
Qiurch, its importance cannot
be exaggerated.
The schema is concerned with
three basic matters: 1. The
idea of revelation: 2. The con
sequences of revelation; and
3. The uses of the Bible.
THE schema, formerly known
as “sources of revelation,” is
now simply “On Divine Reve
lation.” The title change from
the 1962 schema indicates
a shift in emphasis from the
apologetical, catechism tone
critized then to the current
preservation of revelation as
the “perennial and life-giving
word still active in the
Church.”
Two key words in the treat
ment of revelation are Scrip
ture and tradition. The auth
entic interpretation of tra
dition is entrusted to the m^tg-
isterium of the Church, includ
ing the interpretation of sacred
Scripture which is not outside
tradition but forms part of it.
Under guidance of the Holy
Spirit, the Church gains an
ever-increasing comprehens
ion of the mystery of salvation^
There are no new revelations,
but what has already been re
vealed can be better under
stood as the Church progres
ses on its journey through time.
THE first session of the
Council, in 1962, got bogged
down in an argument about
whether the sources of revela
tion were to be found indepen
dently in the Bible and In the
tradition of the Church or whe
ther the revelation communic
ated through tradition was also
ultimately rooted in Scripture.
Thus a variant on the Prote
stant-Catholic theological bat
tle of the Reformation about
Scripture was renewed in the
aula of Saint Peter's.
The present schema bypasses
that issue entirely. It was
felt that theological specula
tion had not matured enough for
the Council to take a firm
position on the matter and that
it would be well to let the theo
logians work on it longer. In
the meantime, the Biblically-
oriented faction— who were
once held highly suspect by the
Holy Office as possible devi
ants from orthodoxy— are free
to continue their studies, to up
hold their position that Scrip
ture and tradition are intima
tely related, and to question
the other doctrines, which have
been widely held for the last
400 years — but, Father George
Tavard insisted, no longer than
that.
AS it now stands, “the sour
ces of revelation” is in keep
ing with the thought of John
Henry Newman, he great Vic
torian cardinal, whose classic
theories on the development of
doctrine were questioned in
his own day. It gives expres
sion to the idea that revelation
is not so much a matter of
words as of the “salvific”ac-
tions of God in history, which
are recorded in the books of
the Bible and preserved by tra
dition. The Biblical accounts
themselves, the document affir
ms, must be understood in their
literary, historical, linguistic,
and theological contexts. The
supreme revelation of course,
in which all is fulfilled, is to
be found in the life of Christ,
who is the revelation in whom
God manifested Himself.
The new schema encourag
es Catholics to read the sac
red Scriptures in both their pri
vate and public worship. It en
courages the work of modern
Scripture scholars and the col
laboration of Catholic scholars
with biblicists of other faiths.
Finally, it authorizes joint Pro
testant-Catholic versions of the
Bible based on modern scholar
ship, especailly in those new
nations where no translations
have been available.
THIS stress on the Bible
will surely strengthen ecumeni
cal ties between Christians.
It will enrich Jewish-Catho-
lic understanding as well; the
Church's theology of the fu
ture — influenced bythe Semitic
caste of thought found in the
Scriptures— will be more com
prehensible to Jewish thinkers
than the alien Hellenic emph
asis of Catholic thought also
was. Moreover, the existential
flavor of Biblical thought also
seems much more tongenial
to secularist thinkers than the
Graeco-Roman presentation erf
Catholic doctrine which has for
so long dominated the Church’s
seminaries and universities.
The favorable votes for ep
iscopal collegiality, the doc
trine by which the bishops
will be given a larger share
with the Pope in the governance
of the entire Church, can also
be counted as a big step for
ward in reaching the aims of the
Council.
Acceptance of the “colle
giate” principale brings Catho
lic thinking closer to Eas
tern Orthodox conceptions of
the bishops’ role. It diminish
es somewhat the persistent
Protestant notion of Catho
licism as a kind of religious
dictatorship presided over by a
despotic Pope. In addition, the
wider representation within the
ruling body at Rome of the dif
ferent families of mankind,
which can be counted on to re
flect a wider concern and more
“open” attitude than the classi
cally “clerical” directors of
the Roman Curia — this too Is
appealing. The implementation
of “collegiality,” in a word, is
sure to have a vast ecumenical,
and perhaps wholesomely pas
toral, effect on the life of the
Church.
ALL these changes will effect
the dialogue between the Church
and the world which Pope Paul
called for. The first attempts
at that dialogue will be coming
before the Fathers soon, when
the crucial schema 13, On the
Church and the Modem World,
is presented to them. Another
touchy questions. It could go
either way — be another hap
less communications decree or
speak meaningfully to modern
man. But one thing is cer
tain: If the declarations on re
ligious liberty and on the Jews
and other non-Christians had not
been received as they were by
the Fathers of the Council, who
approved of both of them and
sent them back for strength
ening since they arrived here in
mid-September, the third aim
of the Council —to speak mean
ingfully to contemporary man—
would have been put out of range.
The schema on ecumenism, to
which these fateful delcarations
were attached, established a
model for speaking to the world:
“openness” without essential
compromise; firmness about
principale without arrogance or
self-righteousness; a lively aw
areness that the estrangement
of centuries cannot be comp
letely healed overnight, without
hopelessness.
IF the Church’s attempts to
establish a dialogue with the
modem world are as fruitful
as its earier effort to break
through to its non-Catholic
Christian brethren, Vatican II
will go down in history as the
greatest event in a thousand
years of Catholic history. The
greatest challenge, the, is still
ahead.
TO WORK IN MASS MEDIA—Father Gustavo Perez, (left)
director general of the Catholic Institute for Social Develop
ment in Colombia and Father Thomas F. McMahon, (right)
a Maryknoll Misaioner who is going to Bogota to work in
the undertaking. The institute has been set up to do re
search and to carry out pilot projects.
day on the possibility of Pope John's canonization at the close of
this Session, without the usual drawn out procedure. Most of us
expect it to come some day, but it is hardly on the agenda for this
Session......No definite word yet about the close of this Session.
However, it seems almost certain that we will leave Rome to re
turn home on November 21 .But rumor is guessing about wheth
er the Council will close permanently at the same time. Favoring
this guess is the rapid pace at which the debates and voting are
moving ahead. Against it is the time-element, the vast prepara
tions of documents, and so forth. So the best rumor at the moment
is that the Council will close in November, as far as debating and
voting is concerned, but that we will all be brought back in the
Spring for a solemn closing and for signatures to the finishing
documents Well, speriamol
THE WEATHER is still very warm in Rome as October enters
the scene......We have had the most amazing weather I have ever
experienced in my life: since August 16 I have seen only one
rainy day during my travels to New York, Ireland, England, Scot
land, France and Italy Prices here have risen 10% since
last year in all the stores and hotels in Rome. After all, this is
probably the First Sessionl......Bishop Greco made a fine inter
vention the other day on behalf of the Confraternity of Christian
Doctrine, asking that it be mentioned, by name, in the Schema
the Pastoral Office of Bishops. He was also the first Bishop ever
to have his picture taken in movies while he was speaking, because
the rule against picture-taking was relaxed just before he rose to
speak. Said Archbishop Felici, the announcer, in Latin: ‘After all,
we want our bishops beautifully recorded in colorl
Cardinal Newman was, as usual, away ahead of his time in re
gard to debates at the Council, just as he was ahead of his time on
the care of students at non-Catholic colleges and many other mat
ters After all, he was living (as a man of 70, with 20 years of
life still ahead of him) when the First Vatican Council convened.
Newman was a great ecumenist and always kept up good relations
with his Anglican friends......He was a pioneer in the theory of the
development of doctrine which is all the go at the Council now
and he went down the line for Religious Liberty 100 years before
it hit the Aula last week.
Archbishop Felici, the announcer, continues to get off a few good
cracks between announcements at the Council: Tired of ’ Excel-
lentissimi Domini” and ‘ Veerabiles Patres” in addressing
the Fathers, yesterday it was “Omatissimi Patres”! And
noticing that, after 11 a.m. when the speeches became repetitious,
many seats were vacant because Fathers had gone to the coffee-
shop, the Archbishop addresses “Venerabiles Patres - qui
adsunt et etiam qui sunt in diaspora!” .Then, today, impatient
to get the session started, he cried out: *Exenut Omnes — cum
omni festinationel’ (P.S. Get your parish-priest to translate!)
The Non-Catholic Observers are here in force, and I have got
ten to know a few more of them: Dr. Caird of Oxford, England,
Dr. Baker of Glasgow, Scotland, and a number of others. I met
them at a dinner the Paulist Fathers in Rome gave the other even
ing and they are finding this session of the Council most interest
ing. Even Constantinople is represented this time as are a number
of the Eastern Orthodox communities which at first had held off
sending Observers.
WHAT ABOUT TOMORROW'S SISTER?
A SISTER WELL DRESS DIFFERENTLY 100 years from
now, understand her own vocation better, be in closer iouch
with lay people. Moreover, she will
he "imhued with a deep sense of
the social nature of her vows.” . . .
Top o r f«HaIs of 400 religious orders
e-reed on these noints not loner aero.
*■* T h"v me* in Cincinnati to discuss
O* ** the ‘Sister of the Future” . . . Wc
think, of course, of our Sisters over
seas. and wc wonder what will lie-
come of them. They are under
privileged. sometimes even under-
. fed. Nevertheless, they care for
Tht Holy Path# s Minton Aid lepers without fear, give unwanted
for the Oriental Church orphans a mother’s love, teach pagan
youngsters about God. —Where would the mission Church be
without our native Sisters? ... To train young novices, “form”
them for the rigors of mission life, the SISTERS OF ST. JO
SEPH IN KAI-PUZHA, southern INDIA, need a simple chapel.
Can you send them $1. $2. $5. $10? . . . The chapel (a wonderful
memorial for a loved one. by the way) will cost only $4,800
altogether. Whatever you can give, will be a token of your
thanks for what Sisters have done for you and yours. Write
to us now.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
HOW TO TRAIN A SISTER
Sl-a-month '$12 a year) pays your membership dues in
MARA’ S BANK, our sponsors’ club for training native
Sisters.
$3 supports a novice for about a week.
$5 buys shoes for a Sistcr-to-bc.
$7.50 provides incidentals for one year.
$10 is the cost of a Sister’s habit.
$12.50 supports one Sister for a month.
$150 supports one Sister for a year.
□ $300 pays the entire cost uf a Sister’s two-year training
PERMIT THE HOLY FATHER TO DECIDE?—That’s wha
you do when you send us a gift for the missions “no string!
attached.”
THERE'S A CHILD FOR YOU IN BETHLEHEM, a littl
gtt! who has no mother or father . . She’s being eared for b
Sisters in the PONTIFICAL MISSION ORPHANAGE. Wouli
you llke a d°I* he r- Pay her expenses <$10-a-month) niontl
by month? We H send you her picture-and. when she’s oh
enough, she II try to write to you. Just drop us a line.
HER E dldh!fl^’ AT LEAST ’ MY FRIENDS.” —NOV EM
* d ^ th<? SOUL S IN PURGATORY, is less tha
tho \f \ 0ur m ^n»ry priests will be pleased to offe
ini- «k >0U request • • • Simply send us, with your offer
.uf’, of > our deceased loved ones ... Ask us. toe
about GREGORIAN MASSES (Mass each day for 30 day
without interruption).
Dear Monsignor Ryan:
Enclosed please find
Name
Street
City .
for
Zone .... State
lii12earKst(Riss!onsjMi
FRANCIS CARDINAL SPILLMAN, President
Jotopk T. tyoo, Not'l Wc'y
S©o4 all oooioraoicatioot to:
CATHOLIC NEAR FAST WELFARE ASSOCIATION
SIR Mod!*©* Avo. at 42*4 St. Now York. N. Y. 10017