Page 1 of 8
Original Research
The ‘enemy within’ the post-Vatican II Roman Catholic Church Author: Graham A. Duncan1 Affiliation: 1 Department of Church History and Church Polity, University of Pretoria, South Africa Correspondence to: Graham Duncan Email: graham.duncan@up.ac.za Postal address: Faculty of Theology, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0002, South Africa Dates: Received: 06 Jan. 2013 Accepted: 30 Mar. 2013 Published: 31 May 2013 How to cite this article: Duncan, G.A., 2013, ‘The “enemy within” the postVatican II Roman Catholic Church’, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 69(1), Art. #1915, 8 pages. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/ hts.v69i1.1915 Copyright: © 2013. The Authors. Licensee: AOSIS OpenJournals. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.
The Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) is regarded as one of the most significant processes in the ecumenical church history of the 20th century. At that time, a younger generation of Roman Catholic theologians began to make their mark in the church and within the ecumenical theological scene. Their work provided an ecumenical bridge between the Reforming and the Roman Catholic ecclesiastical traditions, notwithstanding the subsequent negative response of the Roman church hierarchy. Despite important advances, recent pontificates significantly altered the theological landscape and undermined much of the enthusiasm and commitment to unity. Roman Catholic theological dissent provided common ground for theological reflection. Those regarded as the ‘enemy within’ have become respected colleagues in the search for truth in global ecclesiastical perspective. This article will use the distinction between the history and the narratives of Vatican II.
Introduction The second Vatican Council (1962–1965) was a theological watershed for the Roman Catholic Church. Despite valiant attempts by the Curial administration to maintain rigid continuity with the past, a new generation of theologians emerged which represented the aggiornamento that Pope John XXIII so earnestly desired. This group was at the forefront of providing grounds for a rapprochement with Reforming theology. However, from the beginning of the pontificate of John Paul II, Catholic theology based in the Office of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith under Cardinal Josef Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) reasserted its power to control theological reflection through the replacement of history with narratives.
The history and the narratives Faggioli (2012:4) defines narrative as ‘a way to read the text not in the context that produced it, but in the context of the consequences that supposedly created the text.’ Hence, narratives, like traditions, are dynamic rather than static entities (Tilley 2000:1). There are a variety of narratives which emerged from Vatican II. They are summarised from an American perspective by Steinfels (2003:32–39) as a critical error (ultra-traditionalist narrative), a process which was misinterpreted and distorted (conservative), the necessary change with a desire to engage in the world (liberal) and a false revolution (ultra-liberal). From this, it is evident that we can only describe the outcome of Vatican II as a plurality of narratives. For instance, it is the ultra-traditionalist narrative which emerged during the council itself, personified by Archbishop Marcel Lefèbre. With him, the concept of the 19th century papal magisterium is identified with the form and content of church teaching. In this narrative, dialogue is the diabolical outcome. Another narrative regards Vatican II as a council which was compromised from within even before it completed its work and whose after-effects were similarly compromised. This view is represented by Hans Küng who became a personal peritus to the Bishop of Rottenburg. His concern was the lack of an exegetical and historical basis for its conclusions. He wrote about his and others’ involvement and its outcome: The bishops present there – advised and prompted by theologians – spoke a lot about the breathing of the Holy Spirit; but under another Pope [Paul VI] they returned to their old surroundings and the papal curia tried to correct the mistakes of the new Pope’s predecessor and to consolidate afresh its tottering rule over the Roman Empire. (Küng 1978:36)
Read online: Scan this QR code with your smart phone or mobile device to read online.
Ten years later, he was still referring to the ‘ecclesiastical bureaucracy fostering a restoration movement’ (Küng 1986:1). A third narrative blends elements of the two – the ultra-traditionalist and the ultra-liberal resulting in a neoconservative narrative. Faggioli (2012:12) described the situation as a dialogue between ‘two partially conflicting visions of Vatican II: [these visions were represented by] John Paul II’s fundamentally positive view of the council and Ratzinger’s decidedly pessimistic reading of the post-Vatican II period’ with the ultra-conservative ‘silent majority’ narrative achieving control with the accession of Joseph Ratzinger as Benedict XVI. However one views the council and its after effects, the ‘continuity/discontinuity’ (Faggioli 2012:14) issue looms large, not least because the significant History of Vatican II (Alberigo 1996–2006), by emphasising
http://www.hts.org.za
doi:10.4102/hts.v69i1.1915