INTRODUCTION

To those of us 'in the pews' at the time, the calling of the Second Vatican Council was an exciting prospect, even if there was little sense of its necessity. Few had any reason to expect any changes in the Catholic Church, which we had been taught was unchangeable in any case, as was God! The pope in his infallibility could address any questions that might arise and the church seemed to be in fairly good shape. Parishes and schools were full, vocations were plentiful, lines of authority were straight, the mission to 'convert' was clear, we knew who the 'enemy' was.

And yet beyond the pews it was a world still recovering from two world wars, the Shoah, the establishment of atheistic totalitarian regimes, and the instabilities of decolonization. The atomic bomb ushered in the constant threat of nuclear war. Human life was tenuous. At the same time new discoveries in science and technology heralded progress, development, medical cures, even space travel. Human life was also full of possibilities.

Within the church itself, a 'nouvelle theologie' was making inroads in spite of banning and opposition. Theologians, biblical scholars, historians, even liturgists were unearthing resources from earlier times, evidence from centuries past that bore witness to different ways of understanding and being church that challenged the status quo. The 'unchanging and unchangeable church' had in fact changed and adapted much over the centuries. What we knew as the Roman Catholic Church of the mid-twentieth century was not what had always been, nor we would soon find out, what could - or would - always be.

Into this mix came the 'interim' pope, Blessed John XXIII, who under the sure inspiration of the Holy Spirit just a few months after his election convoked the Second Vatican Council. The church was about to undergo a serious 'make over'.

O'Malley enumerates, in retrospect, a list of the aims of the council to: '1) end the stance of cultural isolation that the church was now seen as having maintained; 2) initiate a new freedom of expression and action within the Church that certain Vatican institutions were now interpreted as having previously curtailed; 3) distribute more broadly the exercise of pastoral authority, especially by strengthening the role of episcopacy and local church vis-à-vis the Holy See; 4) modify in people's consciousness and in the actual functioning of the Church, the predominantly clerical, institutional and hierarchical model that had previaled; 5) affirm the dignity of the laity in the church; 6) establish through a more conciliatory attitude, through some new theological insights, and through effective mechanisms a better relationship with other religious bodies, looking ultimately to the healing of the divisions in Christianity and fruitful 'dialogue' with non-Christian religions; 7) change the teaching of the Church on 'religious liberty' and give new support to the principle of 'freedom of conscience'; 8) base theology and biblical studies more firmly on historical principles; 9) foster [new styles of piety]; 10) affirm clearly that the church was and should be affected by the cultures in which it exists; 11) finally, to promote a more positive appreciation of 'the world' and the relationship of the church to it, with a concomitant assumption of clearer responsibility for the fate of the world in 'the new era' that the Council saw opening up before its eyes' (quoted in Rush 2004: 99-100, numbering added).¹

Today we look back on that council from the perspective of half a century. Many of the changes that it ushered in are taken-for-granted today: the centrality of the scriptures, participation of the laity, a vernacular liturgy, ecumenical and inter-faith relations and an 'outreach' to the world. And yet we recognize also that there have been significant losses, not least in terms of alienation and disaffection with the church: the sexual abuse scandals, the ban on artificial contraception, the diminishing numbers of clergy and religious and the closing of parishes and schools.

In this edition of Grace and Truth the council will be our focus, not only to consider the changes that it brought about, but also to reflect on its ongoing implementation. Some would say the council merely re-affirmed what had always been, for the foundational elements of the faith cannot be changed. However, the changes ushered in by the council, 'micro ruptures' as Rush terms them, cannot be denied.² Yet the ongoing dynamic ushered in by these changes, what some might term 'the spirit' of the Council continues. It is here that the question of interpretation becomes relevant.

Fr. Gabriel Mmassi, SJ, in the first chapter lays out for us the concerns of the bishops of Africa on the eve of the council as evidences in their 'vota', their submissions to the Vatican preparatory committees in anticipation of the council, some quite radical at the time. They can be read in light of their fulfilment - or not - during the council. They give us some measure of the African church before the council; and may raise continued questions as to the council's ongoing implementation.

Fr. Anthony Egan, SJ, gives us a 'millianiarst' interpretation of the council, noting the 'roosters' who trumpeted the reform, and the 'owls' who would downplay its significance and seek to negate it. It is a 'fresh take' on the post Vatican II history, but ultimately raises serious questions as to its interpretations, and as to what has become of its hopes and promises.

Fr. Larry Kaufmann, CSSR, in a personal re-reading of Guadium et Spes demonstrates how the church sets forth a new way of engaging with the world, a method of openness, dialogue and mutual respect; and he reflects on the movement from a Roman Eurocentric church to a world church. He laments the negation of dialogue and movement especially as seen in the present imposition in the English liturgy of a Latinate language in direct denial of the mandate of the council, which said this was the task of the local churches in order and effect.

Fr. Rodney Moss, in dealing with the council's document on Scripture, Dei Verbum shows that while the Catholic bishops at the council were giving new prominence to the place of scripture in the church, Protestant scholars at the same time were coming to a new appreciation of the necessity of tradition. He draws out some of the ecumenical implications of such convergence.

Fr. Anselm Prior, OFM, through an examination of Ad Gentes and Nostra Aetate raises the question of the mission of the church and its relationship to other faith traditions. If, as the council acknowledged in Lumen Gentium, salvation is possible through other religions, what are the implications for the Christian church in its proclamation of the unique revelation of the gospel of Jesus Christ? This question, Prior says has been a matter of theological discussion since the council.

Fr. Thomas Plastow, SJ, from the perspective of teacher and pastor, examines the implementation of the liturgical reforms of the council specifically in the South African context and raises questions as to the work that is yet to be done.

Finally, Sr. Judith Coyle examines two contemporary interpretations of the council, first as a 'symbolic event', and then as regards its pastoral 'style'; finally a theological proposal for a way forward in its continuing interpretation and implementation is examined.

There are some like the followers of the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who totally reject the council, and others who criticize what they term its 'naïve optimism'. However, one Australian bishop who was present at all four sessions, when challenged as to its significance said indubitably: 'The Holy Spirit was there!'³ It was this same Holy Spirit, whose 'fresh outpouring' was the hope of Blessed John XXIII when he convoked the council. Perhaps in what follows, a generation who never knew the 'before' of Vatican II will find something useful for their understanding of the significance of this event in the history of the church, and of the necessity to continue to engage with its vision.

Judith Coyle IHM
_________________________________________________

1    Rush, Ormond 2004, Still Interpreting Vatican II. Some Hermeneutical Principles. New York/Mahway, NJ. The original source for this quotation was O'Malley, Hohn W. 1987. 'Vatican II: Historical Perspectives on its Uniqueness and Interpretation,' in Vatican II. The Unfinished Agenda: A Look to the Future, Lucien Richard, Daniel Harrington, and John O'Malley (eds.). New York: Paulist Press, 22-32

2    Rush, 7.

3    Rush, 26.