WASHINGTON — Critics have accused the Second Vatican Council of many things, but Cardinal William Levada says one criticism in particular lacks any credibility — the claim that Vatican II was in any way a “second-class council” whose teachings, therefore, aren’t binding on Catholics.
Cardinal Levada, who stepped down in June as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, refuted this notion in his Sept. 26 opening address at a four-day symposium held at The Catholic University of America entitled “Reform and Renewal: Vatican II After 50 Years.”
The claim, made by followers of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, is based on the idea it was “merely” a pastoral council that didn’t define dogma.
“It is true to say that Vatican II was by intention a ‘pastoral’ council,” Cardinal Levada told his CUA audience, “[because] it was decided a priori that its broad scope of ecumenical dialogue (with other Christians) and interreligious dialogue (with other religions) and with the society of the ‘world’ did not call for the formulation of new dogmas to correct errors of faith, as was the case in previous councils.”
But this did not make it any less authoritative than the rest of the 21 ecumenical councils that have occurred during the Catholic Church’s 2,000-year history, the American cardinal stressed.
“One cannot infer that the Council’s teachings are not ‘doctrinal,’” he said. “Teaching the gospel of life and salvation is the chief ‘pastoral’ task of bishops; it is doctrinal in its principles and pastoral in its applications. So, too, the teaching of the ‘universal ordinary magisterium’ — the apostolic College of Bishops, together with their head, the Pope — should not be considered ‘second-class teaching’ or ‘optional’ and not necessary to accept.”
The cardinal said that, according to the best theological interpretations, the Second Vatican Council was intended to “resolve and declare the Catholic faith on several issues that had been disputed in the past.”
Said Cardinal Levada, “Rather than pastoral or doctrinal, we should say of the Council that it was pastoral and doctrinal.”
The Collegial Council
For example, while the Council affirmed the teaching of papal infallibility defined at the First Vatican Council, it also clarified the role of the College of Bishops as exercising the teaching authority of the Church.
Cardinal Levada said the synods of bishops, which are held every three years at the Vatican, are a direct consequence of this development in the Church’s understanding of collegial authority.
In the post-conciliar period, these international episcopal gatherings have addressed the fundamental themes of the laity, the family, religious life, the formation of priests, the priesthood and bishops, he noted, along with key pastoral and doctrinal issues like catechesis, evangelization, penance and reconciliation, the Eucharist and the Bible.
“Indeed, the 50th anniversary of the Council coincides with this year’s synod, whose theme is ‘The New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian Faith,’” the cardinal said, referring to the synod that began Oct. 7. “In these synods and apostolic exhortations, the Church has amassed a rich treasury giving sure direction for a correct interpretation of the Council itself.”
Cardinal Levada also discussed the “letter vs. spirit” debate, which seeks to divide the interpretation of the Council’s work into two opposing camps: one that is rigidly attached to the wording of the Council’s texts and another that conforms to a substantially different “spirit” of radical reform that some Catholics have asserted to be the Council’s true outlook.
But Cardinal Levada insisted it was “not legitimate to separate the letter and spirit of the Council,” pointing to Pope Benedict XVI’s 2005 address to the Curia as a guide to interpret the Council properly.
In that address, the Pope rejected the “hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture” that “caused confusion” by claiming the Council’s texts failed to express its true “spirit” fully. The correct mode of interpreting the Council is through “the hermeneutic of reform,” the Holy Father said, a method that he said promotes “renewal in continuity” of the Church and that, unlike the noisy hermeneutic of discontinuity, “silently, but more and more visibly, bore and is bearing fruit.”
Other Perspectives
Like Benedict and Cardinal Levada, CUA theology professor Christopher Ruddy rejects the notion that the Second Vatican Council is best understood when viewed through a “letter vs. spirit” lens.
Speaking at a symposium discussion of Lumen Gentium (Light for the Nations), the Council’s dogmatic constitution on the Church, Ruddy began with a trenchant but good-natured observation about how Catholics often debate about Vatican II.
“I sometimes have the impression,” Ruddy said, “that discussions and debates over the Council have for some time resembled a game of tic-tac-toe played by adults: Each player knows the other’s moves, and the result is invariably deadlock.”
Instead of dialogue, the opposing camps often trade rhetorical phrases like “spirit of Vatican II” and “Show me the text,” Ruddy added, “with the result of an often sterile hermeneutical stalemate.”
At a Sept. 29 symposium session, Dominican Father Nicolas Lombardo, assistant professor at the School of Theology and Religious Studies at CUA, addressed one of the most controversial Council documents, Dignitatis Humanae, its decree on religious freedom.
Some of the Council Fathers were opposed to a religious-liberty decree that would bestow equal rights on non-Catholic religions on the grounds that “error has no rights.” But Father Lombardo said that the right to be immune from coercion and come to a religious belief of one’s own free will — rights enshrined in Dignitatis Humanae — are in harmony with the dignity of the human person.
Asked if this right is particularly relevant in light of the federal Health and Human Services’ contraceptive mandate, which seeks to define what institutions can be considered Catholic and therefore exempt from the federal mandate, Father Lombardo replied, “Yes — and the right to religious freedom is the right on which all other rights hang. We cannot afford to give an inch on this.”
‘Great Grace’
At the end of his overview of the Second Vatican Council and its consequences, including its role in inspiring publication of the 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church, Cardinal Levada alluded to its continuing influence as the Church embarks on the Year of Faith that began Oct. 11, the 50th anniversary of the opening of the Council.
“Dear friends, as this symposium looks back to the ‘great grace’ that was the Second Vatican Council, may it also serve to help us look forward to the Year of Faith designed to honor the Council and the Catechism,” he said. “As we become stronger by believing, who knows but that you and I will find ourselves in the vanguard of the New Evangelization, whose urgency for the Church today is the theme of next month’s [October’s] Synod of Bishops’ assembly at the Vatican.”
Concluded Cardinal Levada, “God bless you all, and God bless the ongoing ‘reform and renewal’ of our beloved Church.”
Charlotte Hays is a Register Correspondent, who writes from Washington.
Benjamin Wiker: Benedict XVI: Doctor of the Church
Comments
Post a Comment
Well, this is progress; twenty years ago Vatican II was the only council, so the new position that it is a council as good as or better than the other councils is still an improvement. The fact that Prefects now take notice of critiques and respond to them can only be a good sign that the debate about the bitter fruits of the Second Vatican Council can no longer be ignored.
Why is everyone deferring to some nebulous reference to whether Vatican II was “pastoral”, “doctrinal”, “binding”, etc.? Why don’t our leaders just get down to basics: the miriad FAILURES OF CATHOLICISM since Vatican II? Obsessing over history, motives, and writings of the past are just what satan wants us to do. Why not focus on NOW? We are living TODAY in the Eternity that exists within Christ’s Church, and have to live with many, many fallen-away Catholics and shameful buildings that look like governmental offices with checkmarks on walls resembling the Way of the Cross.
Foot-stomping around the meal table just does not show the Faithful the dignity of Christ’s world. And is it true that “rights enshrined in Dignitatis Humanae are in harmony with the dignity of the human person”. Look around. How dignified are we now? We are indeed following the example of a flawed, confusing document that causes errors to be pronounced throughout the Church. Just because it was written by “good people” does not mean it is good and/or right. Our Bishops have not spoken out for Christ’s purity in any understandable way to the public (following the example of many, many Vatican II documents).
Catholics deserve holiness in every aspect of the Church. We are demanding it, after trusting a failed organization for results in the past. Vatican II effectively killed Catholicism (yes, there was a “spirit” involved). It is time for a remedy. Let us put Vatican II behind us in a very real way.
Maybe instead of quibbling over whether Vat II was pastoral or dogmatic, the questions ought to be “Did the Council Fathers 1) do what they set out to do and 2) achieve the desired results?”
Pope Benedict XVI has made apostasy (falling away) a focus and a primary issue of his early papacy. I think studying the results of Vatican II has to be part of that effort.
.
IMHO Catholics fall away from the church now because they do not FEEL Catholic.
Being Catholic means nothing. There is nothing special about Catholics vs. any other Christian or non-christian religion. Sure we have the pope and we can argue a few fine points of faith, but that does not bind us to Christ and his Church.
1) Most Catholics would hesitate to say openly that they are part of the one true church.
2) Most Catholics do NOTHING that feels particularly Catholic.
3) We do not have any traditions, no practices and we have waived away most of our holy days.
4) Most Catholics are not aware of the Eucharist and do not have any respect for the presence of Christ in our churches.
.
If you want to address apostasy you need to make people FEEL Catholic.
1) Bring back physical prayer.
2) Bow your head when you say Christ’s name
3) Bless yourself with the sign of the cross in public restaurants
4) Stop eating meat on Fridays
5) Go to First Friday mass
6) Wear a Crucifix
7) Genuflect when you enter church or approach the tabernacle
8) Fast on Sundays and holy days
9) Stop putting up Santa Claus and put up a Nativity scenes
10) Start contributing, every month, to Catholic Relief Services or Catholic Charities
.
Catholics might realize that Jesus is present in the Eucharist if we actually genuflected when we entered the church. If we actually talked about being in the presence of Christ.
.
I believe that if you ask Catholics to act Catholic and explain why we act that way, they will start to feel Catholic. (e.g. “We don’t eat meat on Friday because it is a physical prayer, an act of denial, that teaches us disciple and reminds us weekly of our faith and of Christ’s sacrifice on Good Friday”)
When people feel Catholic, they will start to ask themselves “As a Catholic how should I ... act, pray, increase my faith, get involved—How should I be different”. They will be recognized as Catholics by their friends and neighbors and they will want to know what to say if someone asks them why we believe what we believe.”
.
Finally if Christ’s church asks nothing of His people, they will get nothing.
“Simon, son of John, do you love me?” “Feed my sheep”.
I tend to agree with the previous comments. For the remnant non-apostate Catholics in America we have our marching orders. Just read the Post-Apostolic Exhortation, Ecclesial in America. Pope JPII described his vision with this ‘operations order’ from 1999. We have just failed to implement it. I believe we have a quagmire in this information age. People equate the written word with personal action. This is why we need to state simply and in few words that action demands to be priority one. Going out two-by-two with a simple message is the tried and true way. Our cleric leaders need to go to the street with us, or else give the laity authority (through a greatly expanded deaconate) the mission to lead the army for truth in these end times.
The purpose of Religious Liberty is so that we can come to know, Love, and serve The Blessed Trinity, not so that we can worship false idols. Only The True God can endow us with Religious Liberty to begin with.
Regarding the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition” “revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II” - - - - - -
We each must ask ourselves -
1) When was the last time we read the CCC ?
2) When was the last time we encouraged others to do so ?
- - - - -
For more info on the CCC including quotes from our Popes - on the internet go to: http://whatcatholicsreallybelieve
or search: ” What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE “.
I agree but at the sane time find Vatican II the most misunderstood council of all time. Not only by the parish members but especially by the clergy who have made all kinds of changes that were not mentioned in Vatican II. Would be wonderful if it were explained to the Priests who seem to have their own idea of what it was all about.
Great post Rob!! Vatican II was a disaster. There was no reason for it. The churches, seminaries, convents, and Catholic schools were full. Now, we have about a 30% attendance rate in church, you can shoot a cannon ball down the halls of seminaries and hit no one-the same with convents. Catholic schools are closing at an alarming rate. Even churches are being closed. On the other hand, the traditional seminaries are filling up. A Society of Pius X seminary in Europe has 45 seminarians. Many of the young are moving toward the Latin Mass. We have many young people at our Latin mass.
The Catholic church has lost its identity. Now, the pope said that the Catholic church subsists in the Church. In another words, we are just another Christian church among Christian denominations. Jesus said that upon this rock I will build my church. Jesus didn’t say churches. Jesus found the Catholic church. Every other Christian church was founded by men.
That belief in the True Presence which before the council was almost 100 percent has been unconscionably degraded to 25 percent after the council is certainly not first class.
Before the council, you could tell by the attire, actions ,and obvious spirituality of all at Mass, that everyone truly believed God was there.
After the council, it is quite obvious from the attire, indifference and often disrespect for the Eucharist that the estimates of 25 percent belief are accurate.
I can’t consider the council a complete success until every Catholic at Mass acts and dresses as though they believe God is there.
I seriously doubt that we can recover the lost spirituality so long as unconsecrated hands are allowed to profane the Eucharist and holy vessels. No wonder people became indifferent. That was not a change I or any other dedicated convert before the council could believe in. I hope the new evangelization mirrors the lost spirituality of the Tridentine Mass of St. Pius V.
Why not bring back the Altar Rails?
I agree with everything Rob said except #10. That is, unless you want your contributions to fund Obama’s relection campaign, abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage. Some of you need to trace where your dollars go after you give to Catholic charities.
Thank you “That Hat Lady”
.
I apologize for listing Catholic Charities without doing my research. I have not given through them because I do not believe the US needs support as much as other parts of the world.
.
I have researched CRS and have given thorough them for decades due to their focus of helping disaster victims and helping people build their own self-reliance.
.
My question back to all here is “What do you think is a good and worthy charity to give through?”
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
The time period for commenting on this article has expired.