Our content for
this hour is cumulative. The experiences of selected scholars, genuinely
interested and involved in what had been happening, before, after and during the
Vatican council II, is twined to make a rope-ladder to peep into the mind of
the council. It serves well to sense the spirit of LG, the document under our
study. The following are their names,
Ladislas Orsy sj (1921-), Martin E. Marty (1928-), Charles E. Curren (1934-),
Richard Rohr ofm (1943-), Daniel E. Pilarcyzk (1934-), Francis Sullivan sj
(1922-), Lawrence S. Cunningham (1935-) and Richard P. McBrien (1936-). They
represent the ‘events’ that elude our empirical senses voices, debates, heated
arguments, tedious seminars, learning-unlearning- and-relearnings, long
discussions, quarrels, similar such things that went into making literally
every word of the council documents. They tell us what happened when LG in the present form was formulated.
More important, they share with us the spirit of LG ‘what it means to be the church’. During the council, most of them were research
students of theology, some were teaching theology, Fr. Sullivan was directly
involved in LG and another Archbishop
Pilarcyzk was the rector of the seminary. Their sharing primarily is a
testimony of what happened to them with the ‘conciliar event’.
1950s, the Context of LG
The climate a
decade before the Vatican II was one of rising momentum to embark into the sea
of new interpretations of the old mysteries. Fr. Orsy speaking about it,
phrases it as “new wine in the making”. New approaches, understandings,
insights and altogether a new theology was in the making by theologians like
Henri de Lubac, Teilhard de Chardin, Yves Congar, M.D. Chenu, Karl Rahner,
Edward Schillebecckx, John Courtney Murray, Bernard Lonergan, Bernard Haring,
Josep Fuchs and others. In contrast to the traditional beliefs which almost
reduced the church to pope, the new theology interpreted church as ‘people of
God, not just bishops, priests, and religious but ‘all’, called to holiness and
continual conversion’.
The Church
(Roman Curia) then received such ideas with contempt. It tightened the reigns
of many such outstanding theologians. One after another they were ordered to be
silent. Describing the situation, Fr. Orsy writes, “A cold air of suspicion
swept over the church… Once again it seemed that there were no prophets in
Israel; there was sadness in the land.” The stout new pope on the other hand,
Fr. Curran would say, was least impressive compared to the aristocratic posture
of the then late Pius XII. However, he brought in an air of excitement with his
call for the works of renewal in the church: synod of Rome, the updating of
canon law and an ecumenical council. People, sincerely expected no big change
from him and his renewal programme, than a re-affirmation of Vatican I. On the other
hand his renewal programme churned the Church almost upside down.
Spirit
of LG
Prof. Madges
writing about LG exclaims, “No
document of Vatican II experienced more thorough going revision between its
first draft and final approved document as Lumen Gentium”. It held special
place among all the documents of Vatican II, since so to say ‘as a concept’ it governed
literally the proceedings of the whole council. The council came to a critical
point already in the first session. The sheep that usually nods ‘yes’ and gets
away with the documents rejected the draft on sources of revelation. After
repeated clarifications, arguments and voting sessions 60% against and a small
group for it, the session had come to an abrupt end. The queer novelty, at that
time, was the ‘no’ to the documents
that had passed the desk of the chair of peter.
Pope John XXIII
discerned the action of the Holy Spirit working through bishops (co-heirs of
the apostolic tradition) from the proceeding of the session. He announced,
therefore a revision of the committees[1]
for all the issues of the council. This was the turning point and the rise of a
new ecclesiology. Fr. Orsy dramatizes these events, “magisterium was correcting
the magisterium. That is, the ordinary magisterium of the council was
supporting much of the new theology. It kept completing, rectifying, even
reversing what was presented earlier as the ‘official teaching of the church’.”
The church thus gradually got redefined from traditional monarchical model, to
a pilgrim people of God, a mother; from the community of unequals
to a community where all are called
to holiness with charisms unique to
the individuals baptized in the spirit and share the royal priesthood of
Christ.
The new
ecclesiology of the LG proposes reorientations
in three major areas: the relationship of clergy and laity within the church,
the relationship between the Catholic and other Christian churches and
communities, and the relationship of the bishops to the pope. In all these
aspects there is a shift in the conception of the church from a ruling
authourity to a humble handmaid journeying in dialogue, after the example of
Mother Mary.
Conclusion
Despite the
radical change that has happened with LG
in the theology of the church, yet the church has not fully released its
strings tied to Vatican I. The subtle interior tension between the older
tradition and the proposed new one is evident in the document and in our
efforts to actualize it. The more pressing problem today is to rejuvenate the
Church as its institutional relevance is gradually falling apart. This is
evident in the decreasing enthusiasm in the rituals of the church and increase
in the interest about the wellbeing of the interior world. Cunningham speaking
about the future of the church quotes Karl Rahner, “the Christians of the
future would either be a mystic or would not be a Christian at all”. ‘Mystic’ in Rahner means one who goes beyond
the mere church observance to experience the divine in Jesus Christ. In Rahner,
we have clue for our future.
Our experience
to the contrary is that with the support of some ‘modern’ theologians and
priests the church seems to be going back to Vatican I, in the name of renewing
its vitality in the world. This movement is backed by quite irrational accusation
against Vatican II, as the cause for the decrease in the Church attendance and
its general decline.
Caution: History
teaches that every great change has humble beginning. The future of our church
is determined by what happens to us here. This is our reservoir of action in
our apostolate. What then is our understanding of the church?
Bibliography:
Madges, William “Formulating a New Understanding
of the Church”; Orsy, Ladislas “A Lesson in Ecclesiology”; Marty, Martin E.
“Certainty and Condemnations,”; Curran, Charles E. “The Church as the Pilgrim
People of God”; Rohr, Richard “Honesty and Creativity in the Church”;
Pilarczyk, Daniel E. “Bringing Old and New Together”; Sullivan, Francis
“Vatican II on the Charisms of the Faithful”; Cunningham, Lawrence S. “Tensions
in Vatican II and How to Proceed Today”; Mc Brien, Richard P. “Renewed
Commitment to Vatican II as Best Preparation for the New Millenium." Vatican II: Forty Personal Stories.
Edited by William Madges and Michael J. Daley. New York: Twenty-Third
Publication, 2003. 69-104.
[1]
The
new committees were given the authourity to change the proposed texts and the
power to propose new one.
No comments:
Post a Comment