of October 1870, which gave the impression that papal infallibility was unlimited. Similarly, he would no doubt have sympathised with the Lefebvrists to the extent that he would have deplored the stance of Hans Küng and “the spirit of Vatican II” party. Newman makes a striking point at the beginning of his Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine. Where he is speaking about the process of development in ideas, he points out that a living idea cannot be iso- lated “from intercourse with the world around”. But he argues that this intercourse is actually necessary “if a great idea is duly to be understood, and much more if it is to be fully exhibited”. To the obvious objection that the further anything moves from its ori- gin or source, the more likely it is to lose its original character, Newman concedes that there is always a risk of an idea being cor- rupted by external elements, but nevertheless insists that, while “it is indeed sometimes said that the stream is clearest near the spring”, this is not true of the kind of idea he is talking about. “Whatever use may fairly be made of this image, it does not apply to the history of a philosophy or belief, which on the contrary is more equable, and purer, and stronger, when its bed has become deep, and broad, and full,” wrote Newman. “It necessarily rises out of an existing state of things, and for a time savours of the soil. Its vital element needs disengaging from what is foreign and temporary …” In other words, the philosophy or belief becomes more rather than less its true self as it changes or develops in time. And it is ironic that the famous words which appear in the conclusion to this section are regularly quoted out of context to mean the opposite of what Newman intended: “In a higher world it is otherwise, but here below to live is to change, and to be perfect is to have changed often.” The point is not that Catholicism has to change or develop in order to be different but in order to be the same, as the preceding sentence makes clear: “It changes with them [that is, external cir- cumstances] in order to remain the same.” If Newman is correct in what he says about an “idea” such as “a phi- losophy or belief” becoming “more equable, and purer, and stronger” as it develops, then the teachings of Vatican II will become “more equable, and purer, and stronger” as time goes on. Both Küng and Lefebvre had no doubt in their minds about how the council was to be understood (as a rupture with tradition), and, ironically, like Döllinger and Manning, were in close agreement about its significance. In retrospect, we can see much better the limited scope of the definition of papal infal- libility. But for both Döllinger and Manning the definition signified more than Catholic theology has since understood it to mean. Similarly, in the case of the Second Council, both Küng and Lefebvre exaggerated the revo -
Newman insisted that it is not only theologians who have to ‘settle the force’ of teaching, but ‘the voice of the whole Church diffusive’
lutionary nature of the council. If it is appro- priate to call Newman “the Father of Vatican II”, then it is not unreasonable to apply the mini-theology of councils which he adum- brated at the time of Vatican I, together with his theology of development, to Vatican II. We may use that passage in the Essay on the Development to argue that those who par- ticipated in or lived through the Second Vatican Council are less likely to understand the true meaning and significance of the council’s teachings than posterity. The “idea” of Vatican II will, if Newman is correct, grow “more equable, and purer, and stronger” as the “stream” moves away from the “spring”. In our time there has been no Vatican III that would have extended and strengthened the equivalent conciliar texts as the liberal wing of the Church would have liked, but rather the Popes from Paul VI to Benedict XVI have endeavoured to set the teachings of the council in the wider perspective of the whole history and tradition of the Church, so that the council can be understood in continuity rather than rupture with the past. This brings us to the second kind of devel- opment that Newman speaks of in his mini-theology of councils. For it is not only a question of the meaning and significance of the “idea” of Vatican II becoming more luminous as it is seen both in the light of the past and in the developing life of the Church, but there is also the consideration that councils open up further developments because of what they don’t say or stress. In the case of Vatican I, Newman saw that the isolated teaching on the papacy and the lack of a general teaching on the Church must open up the kind of development that would reach fruition nearly a century later in Vatican II’s Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium. The priorities similarly had to change after Vatican II, both because of unbalanced exaggerations of its teachings and because of the emergence of new problems. This change in fact began to happen very soon after the council. After only 11 years had elapsed, Pope Paul VI issued
Evangelii
Nuntiandi in 1975, in which he called for a new evangelisation. Apart from the decree on the foreign missions, Vatican II was vir- tually silent on evangelisation, which of course was to become the great theme of Pope John Paul II’s pontificate. These two kinds of development have come
together in a wholly unexpected post-Vatican II phenomenon, which is vitally connected with the new evangelisation, and which exem- plifies both the two kinds of Newmanian development of which I have been speaking. The extraordinary rise of the new so-called “ecclesial” communities and movements can on the one hand be said to represent a response to what the council failed or omitted to speak about, and on the other hand to make
clearer the ecclesiology of the first two chapters of Lumen Gentiumby putting flesh and bones on them. These two chapters, in which the council sets out its understanding of the fun- damental nature of the Church, must surely be the central text of a council that was almost wholly about the Church. The council’s scriptural and patristic under- standing of the Church as the organic communion of the baptised – as opposed to the Tridentine clerical-lay model of the Church – was the same idea of the Church that Newman had learned as an Anglican from his reading of the Greek Fathers. And it is the same ecclesiology that the new communities and movements manifest, called “ecclesial” precisely because they are neither clerical nor lay but open to all the baptised. For what is so significant is that they bring together the baptised, into an organic communion within the particular community or movement. It is interesting that Newman himself antici - pated this post-Vatican II phenomenon by leading what could be called an ecclesial move- ment, the Oxford Movement, which brought together both clerical and lay Anglicans in a common spiritual revival that did so much to evangelise the industrial cities of England.
■Fr Ian Ker is parish priest of Sts John Fisher and Thomas More, Burford, Oxfordshire, and the author of John Henry Newman: a biography published by Oxford University Press.
KINNOULL
Redemptorist Centre of Spirituality Sabbatical In Scotland
Seven-Week Renewal Courses Join us in Scotland for your sabbatical time.
For the past twenty fi ve years our seven-week renewal at St. Mary’s in Perth has proved to be just the right length of time in one place for many people looking for a time of renewal. Participants invariably highlight these renewal dimensions of our course: the focus on inner healing and personal growth, the contemplative approach to prayer, emphasis on a spirituality of true self-esteem and the theology of the
body, the introduction to Celtic spirituality and the three day pilgrimage to St. Columba’s island of Iona. St. Mary’s, overlooking the historic city of Perth, is at the gateway to the Highlands of Scotland, and provides an ideal environment for sabbatical rest and spiritual renewal. You will love being in Scotland.
18 October – 2 December 2010 16 May – 24 June 2011
24 October – 8 December 2011
One Week Course Theology of the Body 4 – 8 October 2010
Fr Jim McManus C.Ss.R.
Details: The Secretary, St. Mary’s, Kinnoull, Perth PH2 7BP Tel. 01738 624075 Email:
stmaryskinnoull@btconnect.com Vist our website:
www.kinnoullmonastery.org
18 September 2010 | THE TABLET | 15
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48