He remembered a "certain feeling of exhilaration in the
opening of the Council in Rome ,
the mysterious sense of new beginnings that has a way of stirring man and
propelling him forward."
He sensed "the imminence of an event of historic
significance."
He experienced the "diversity of tongues...the prospect
of rich new encounters, the promise of what was coming."
Father also acknowledged a "strange ambivalence of
feelings" in experiencing the opening ceremonies.
"The mighty basilica, the grandeur of the ancient
liturgy, the colorful diversity of the visitors from all over the world --all
this was magnificently impressive," he wrote. "Yet there was, on the
other hand, an undeniable uneasiness, whose most obvious symptom was annoyance
with the endlessly long ceremonies."
He realized that the liturgy did not involve all who were
present. "Did it make any sense," he asked, "for 2,500 bishops,
not to mention the other faithful there, to be relegated to the role of mere
spectators at a ceremony in which only the celebrants and the Sistine Choir had
a voice?"
His criticism continued, "Was not the fact that the
active participation of those present was not required symptomatic of a wrong
that needed remedy?"
Happily, he noted further, things were different only a
couple months later, when at the ceremonies on the last day of the first
session, "the responses and other fixed parts were sung in unison by the
bishops and all those present. This was the result of the bishops' own
initiative."
He also celebrated the day when the bishops were to elect
members to the council's various commissions. The assembly objected to the curia's schedule and postponed the
election until the bishops had time to think over their choices and consult
with one another about the best candidates. Clearly the 2500 members of this
meeting did not know one another. This proposal met with what Father called
"a lively ovation, despite the official prohibition against applause."
This decision, he explained, allowed for a broader
representation, what he described as "horizontal Catholicity,"
something which he said had been lost in the Church's practical life.
And further, in this decision "the curia found a force to reckon with and a real partner in
discussion...Now it became clear that, besides the official curia organs
(subordinated to the pope), the body of bishops was a reality in its own right,
infusing into the dialogue and the very life of the Church its own spiritual
experience."
"Without saying much," Father wrote, "Pope
John, by the influence of his personality, encouraged the Council to openness
and candor...Here there emerged a new awarewness of how the Church could conduct
a dialogue in fraternal frankness without violating the obedience that belongs
to faith."
Catholics across the board, especially any who tend to criticize
or reject Vatican II, would do well to experience even these fifty years later
a first-hand account of the excitement, freedom, spirit and magisterium of
Vatican II.
Reading the written experiences and analyses of a Council peritus (a person accepted and designated
by the Council as an expert in a given field) is eye-opening and
mind-expanding, allowing later generations access to the formulation of the
Church's path for the future.
If you would like to read more of this first-hand account,
find a copy of Theological Highlights of Vatican II by the peritus and eye-witness Joseph Ratzinger.
No comments:
Post a Comment