is not the full text of the Report Fr Lanzetta, but it is more than just a statement, because it seems too important for anyone with a passionate interest is acquiring these authoritative, in-depth reflections.
Even during the listening and now, as we travel and meditate with joy and gratitude, this work has opened up many new 'came out' and lines of study to better understand and frame the complex and tormented in thought and 'actions have crossed our Church in the last half century. I think that is an unavoidable step for the continuation of the journey, so well summarized by the words of Fr Lanzetta, "Our conference is not closed with the end of the work. In fact now it opens the debate, which we hope will be profitable for a hold on all the serious issues related to the Second Vatican Council. We talk about it because they vanish at last that blanket of silence disrespectful, which has often undermined the faith in the name of the Council. We want to rediscover the faith and so the true Council: what is really guided by the Holy Spirit that meeting would be for the good of the Church. Only that we care. "
The Vatican Council: a council and theologians No doubt theologians at Vatican II had a notable role. Battista Mondin maintains this data with strong relief:
"To bring out the theologians throughout la loro grandezza fu il Concilio, del quale essi furono i principali artefici e protagonisti. La loro presenza al Vaticano II fu massiccia. I periti ufficiali e privati erano più di duecento. Come i Vescovi anche i teologi provenivano da tutte le parti del mondo, e questo contribuì a dare al pensiero “teologico” del Concilio quella cattolicità che gli consentì di superare gli orizzonti ristretti della teologia curiale. L’apporto dei teologi ai lavori del Concilio fu sostanziale, costante e decisivo: i loro pareri furono continuamente ascoltati e le loro proposte accolte. A loro fu affidata la stesura di tutti i testi conciliari che poi furono approvati dai padri. In definitiva si può dire che la teologia del Vaticano II è quella dei teologi che vi hanno partecipato (Parente, Colombo, Congar, Daniélou, Rahner, Ratzinger, Chenu ecc.) […] Il Concilio rappresenta la felice conclusione del grande rinnovamento che aveva avuto luogo nella teologia cattolica dopo la seconda guerra mondiale».
Per R. Laurentin, il problema fondamentale da risolvere nella teologia post-conciliare, in ragione delle istanze del Concilio è la teologia, atrofizzatasi, in quanto lentamente aveva perso il contatto con le fonti della Rivelazione e con la vita, ed era diventata una collezione di un sistema di tesi.
«Il rimedio – dice – veniva dai teologi stessi che lavoravano accanitamente nell’ombra. Il Vaticano II gave legal recognition to the acquisition of this assumes that the current sources in a single motion detector, and the living reality of salvation. "
In this conference, we intend to verify the contribution of theologians at Vatican II. We exclude, however, that the council resolved in the given theological emphasis or high criticism: the Council and the Magisterium of the Church. It is undeniable, however, the important role of theology at the Vatican, and in reference to the theologians who were experts and to guide discussions and somehow the same as voting for the major impact of the Council in the post-conciliar theological reception. Here, we will identify and explore six positions, by us to be typical and somehow riaffioranti in numerous investigations on our theological theme. So do not pretend to exhaust the questionis status of the problem, but only to provide role models hermeneutic very relevant in the Council and later, so you can also derive the key elements for our final reflection. We have chosen six theological positions, so that you see on the one hand the contribution of theologians, experts, on the other hand the reception of data reconciliation.
1. Cardinal Pietro Parente (1891-1986): the Council for Christian Weltanschauung
At a conference held in 1961 on the forthcoming council Ecumenical Bishop Parente, then commissioner of S. Supreme Congregation of the Holy Office, sketched the auspices of Pope John XXIII, hopes to shine in the faces of the beautiful new face of the Church and more than a point or the other of the doctrine and discipline, was a matter of giving value and substance to human life and Christian (Talk November 14, 1960). After drawing a quick overview of the 20 previous ecumenical councils, Bishop Parente also focuses on the purposes and prospects of the next council,
"conditioned by the deep analysis of the reality of the modern world. A brutal war and a grueling war in men have sown skepticism and disdain per ogni ideologia o istituzione del passato e un senso avventuroso di novità in tutti i settori dello scibile e della vita. In tal modo è scossa la fiducia nella Chiesa, nella verità, anche rivelata, nella legge morale, nella vecchia struttura sociale. Di questo stato d’animo in subbuglio si è avvantaggiata un’ideologia materialistica concretata in una struttura politico-sociale, in cui i valori spirituali sono sostituiti dalla tecnica […]».
Ad una Weltanschauung materialistica e ateistica, a giudizio di P. Parente, il Concilio avrebbe dovuto opporre una « Weltanschauung cristiana opposta a quella materialistica, perché l’umanità divisa e smarrita riprenda la via del suo vero progresso e del fine supremo, a cui l’ha destinata la Somma Sapienza e il Primo Amore».
In un altro saggio, a vent’anni dalla chiusura dell’assise conciliare, scriverà Parente:
«La causa determinante di un Concilio generalmente è una crisi o della Chiesa o del mondo o di ambedue. Il Vaticano II risponde alle esigenze di una crisi interna alla Chiesa e di una crisi del mondo moderno».
Il Cardinale Parente vede il Vaticano II come approfondimento teologico della dottrina cristiana, precisando che le distorsioni della dottrina del Concilio non sono del Concilio ma di una certa teologia nuova, i cui prodromi sono riconducibili the 40s in 1900. So
addresses the doctrines of the Council which would lend themselves to the misunderstanding, but to an authentic interpretation, both theological and magisterial, are in their proper order.
a. The Vatican does not endorse the change of the substance of dogma The documents of the Council did not authorize and shall not carry in itself an affirmation of dogmatic development understood as a substantial change of dogma and faith.
"Now this statement is arbitrary - Parente said, in reference to this issue - because the Council reaffirms all the essential content of Christian doctrine based on divine revelation and experience for centuries, under the action of the Fathers and theologians, under the action of the Holy Spirit and the close watch of the Magisterium of the Church. "
The identity and the continuity of the sacred deposit are clearly expressed in Dei Verbum (Nos. 7-8). Here it is asserted the divine origin of the divine revelation, the inspiration of the sacred books, and the need to transmit it faithfully. The No 8 of DV talking about progress of revelation, referring to S. Vincent of Lerins, cited by Vatican I. So says DV 8:
"This tradition comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the assistance of the Spirit Santo: cresce infatti la comprensione, tanto delle cose quanto delle parole trasmesse, sia con la contemplazione e lo studio dei credenti che le meditano in cuor loro (cfr. Lc 2,19 e 51), sia con la intelligenza data da una più profonda esperienza delle cose spirituali, sia per la predicazione di coloro i quali con la successione episcopale hanno ricevuto un carisma sicuro di verità. Così la Chiesa nel corso dei secoli tende incessantemente alla pienezza della verità divina, finché in essa vengano a compimento le parole di Dio».
Da queste parole, spiega Parente nessun lettore saggio e attento potrebbe ricavarne un’ammissione di una evoluzione intrinseca della verità rivelata e delle stesse formule dogmatiche. Yet, writes Parente,
"certain liberal theologians argue that the Vatican has rehabilitated the evolution of dogma, already sentenced to the time of Modernism under Pius X. [...] In conclusion we can say that the deviations are abuses of post-conciliar inattentive and not very loyal readers who seek to justify the authority of the council with their mistakes and their uncontrolled trends. This abuse also known for other parts of the council, which at first strike you as an absolute novelty in contrast to the tradition, but careful reflection puts things right. "
b. The uniqueness of the Catholic religion
On this given the Council presents the statements that lend themselves to discussion, especially in front of the unique character of the Catholic religion, which we believe because of divine revelation that is the only saving religion,
"by divine right to earn all of humanity to the Kingdom of God and the Gospel which is the code. This sentiment led to the Middle Ages right language, usage and attitudes that offend the conscience today, think of the phrase "Catholicism the state religion, with the result that the Church enjoyed every privilege, while other religions were" tolerated "without the possibility public profession. "
Parente, fa notare, che il soggetto della religione è l’uomo cosciente e libero, che ha diritto di pensare e di scegliere autonomamente il proprio credo, salvo il rispetto dell’ordine sociale e della pubblica moralità. Così il Concilio mette in evidenza un dato oggi irrinunciabile che è la libertà religiosa e la libertà di coscienza. «Gli abusi dell’Inquisizione non si possono giustificare solo col ricorso al diritto divino dell’unica Religione vera, senza considerare la psicologia umana, in cui domina la religione e la libertà».
c. La collegialità Un altro dato, che al dire di Parente desta scandalo tra i conservatori, è la collegialità, la quale «sarebbe una novità disastrosa che colpisce il Primato del Romano Pontefice!». Invece Parente, che questo tema lo conosceva molto bene, in quanto anche relatore in sede di Commissione dottrinale risponde semplicemente col dire che essa nel suo senso più genuino fu voluta dallo stesso Cristo che fondò il Collegio apostolico con Pietro e gli altri apostoli come membri, i quali partecipano, subordinatamente a Pietro, tutta la Sacra Potestà di Cristo. Il Primato di Pietro non è un dispotismo ma un primato paterno d’amore e di realizzazione della comunione. Il Sacro Romano Impero con la figura di un Imperatore che impersonava tutto il potere del mondo occidentale influì certamente sulla Chiesa, creating a sort of absolutism of the Roman Pontiff. This ecclesiology, somewhat mortified lasted until Pope Pius XII, who in Mystici corporis, recalling the true nature of the Church and his team supernatural. The Vatican, while it confirms the doctrine of infallibility of the Pope of Vatican I, it softened the autocracy - for a theological reason - shedding light on the doctrine of collegiality, directly invoking the concept of hierarchy understood as a sacred principle of ecclesial communion of all God's people in this way the Council also supports the theological study of the role of the laity in the Church and their participation in liturgical and sacramental the life and mission of the Church, because of their common priesthood. So the Vatican, referring directly to the example of Christ, highlights the concept of service of the Authority to build up the communion of all the members.
d. Ecumenism and missionary
The Council takes on the ecumenical and missionary stopped the doctrine of the oneness of the Church of Christ, the Catholic Church. At the same time, however, highlights the need not to condemn and reject the brothers separated from it but to establish a dialogue with them in order to build the unity of all Christians in the Church. The separated belong to Christ, are also its members (though not so full).
"So not only S. See, but each particular church, every Christian should feel the duty, indeed the need, to participate in the ecumenical movement and missionary to gain all the true Faith and the Heart of Christ. "
The Council wanted to be a hotbed of missionary responsibility for the brothers to save. A Church for a divine act more alive and more aware of its unique mission and sanctifying the world to realize the Kingdom of God
2. Karl Rahner (1904-1984): the Council, "the beginning of the beginning"
K. Rahner was a theologian very influential across the 900 theological and had a very important role in the Council. First, in 1961, was appointed only a consultant for the Commission and the discipline of the sacraments, then during the council was expert and theologian of Cardinal König. In Rahner
conference held on the occasion of the solemn closing ceremony of the Second Vatican Council nell'Herkules-Saal in Monaco of Bavaria (December 12, 1965), Rahner first highlights the role of the "Council of Bishops" and says:
" is [...] difficult to predict whether today's college-synodal principle of the Church will take in the future exactly the concrete figure of this or previous councils, finding in it its effective realizzazione, o se invece il consiglio episcopale di recente istituzione riuscirà, qualora non si limiti ad un’azione puramente consultiva, a fare proprie le funzioni e le forme, tanto complesse da non essere quasi ormai più tecnicamente controllabili, dei concili del passato, diventando, nella sua essenza teologica, un vero e proprio concilio, tenuto anzi con frequenza maggiore».
Così Rahner chiarisce anche il suo pensiero teologico del Concilio in relazione alla fede:
«Fu un concilio tenuto nella libertà e nell’amore. Certo in quella libertà che in tutti i Padri si sapeva legata all’inviolabile credo a Dio, a Cristo, alla sua grazia e con ciò ai dogmi che la Chiesa ha fino ad oggi proclamati perennemente validi e, nello stesso tempo, storicamente evolventisi nella concezione della fede. Fu però un concilio nella libertà».
Libertà è per Rahner la capacità che il Concilio ha dato a tutti di sostenere la propria tesi e di arrivare così all’unità (ai consensi) ma nel rispetto della libertà, e tutto questo considerando il Concilio «alla luce della storia dello spirito». Infatti,
«Dappertutto, persino nel campo della teologia, si può ai giorni nostri avere la deprimente impressione che la libertà non abbia la sufficiente consistenza e che ogni opera grande di pensiero e di azione si debba conquistare by force. "
Rahner recognizes that the theological primacy of liberty had triumphed on the choices already determined and the same patterns and results of the preparatory committees. It took an ecumenical council which Rahner calls "the liturgy and mission." The issues that were most dear to the Council, after careful selection, are listed by our in this way:
'[...] the principle Synod of the Church, the importance of the charismatic in it, the local community as a Church, the possibility of salvation of non-Christians, the "hierarchy" of importance between the truth set, Scripture in whose service are the Church and its teaching, the universal priesthood, the pluralism of the various theologies with equal rights within the one Church, the personal freedom of belief, the importance and the existence of a theology and historical criticism, unfounded a theory that exist in the Church a moral value and sanctity of different locations on two different levels, emphasis on the service of God in word, etc... "
What did the Council for Rahner is only "the beginning of the beginning." The beginning of the beginning, which is read by Rahner as a "new beginning" of the Church, is understood to be this way Rahner:
«che Cristo e la Chiesa incontrino veramente il tempo di oggi e di domani. Dunque inizio dell’inizio per una Chiesa della grazia di Dio liberamente concessa, per una Chiesa del nostro Signore e Salvatore, del Verbo di Dio, della fratellanza, della speranza, della carità umile […]».
Resta tutto da fare in una Chiesa che col Concilio ha voluto dare un nuovo inizio. Resta da trasformare in forma concreta le direttive sulla liturgia, da istituire i diaconi permanenti, da riformare il Codice di Diritto Canonico, iniziare il dialogo ecumenico con coraggio e speranza, il dialogo con l’ateismo e con il bisogno impellente di fede nel mondo di oggi, ecc. C’è bisogno, però, more than any other thing 'worthy of a theology of Vatican II and the commitments therein, "so that it becomes more dynamic and sharp to penetrate the depths of God and time. Rahner so also is the organizer of the new demands will await the post-conciliar theology:
'[...] speak of God and of his being at the center of human existence with words really understandable to people today and tomorrow, announce Christ in the evolutionary view that today's world, so that the word of man-God, the incarnation of the eternal Logos in Jesus of Nazareth, does not resonate like a myth to which you can not pay serious faith to determine the relationship between projects and ideologies of man about his future el'escatologia Christian prevent, in ' eschaton of redemption has already taken place, that man falls within the interior condition of the man who had lived in' AT, to remain in constant fear that, after death, away from the God of life, understand how to love God and neighbor always formed, but soon also in an entirely new, an absolute unit [...]. "
Therefore, even the tasks facing the Church are different. The near future, in fact,
"the Church does not ask the detailed precision of his legal costituzionali, la strutturazione più attraente della liturgia, nemmeno, in primo luogo, dottrine di più precisa distinzione nella teologia della controversia di fronte alla dottrina dei non-cattolici, né un governo più o meno perfetto della curia romana. Il prossimo futuro domanderà invece se la Chiesa è in grado di testimoniare la vicinanza, che guida e appaga, di quel mistero ineffabile al quale diamo il nome di Dio […]».
Sempre alla luce di questa libertà che è come il cuore della teologia di Rahner, bisogna leggere la sua riformulazione della teologia pastorale, intesa come teologia della prassi, teologia anche politica e perciò «principio organizzativo intrinseco ed estrinseco of all theology. " The pastoral care as a science of practical reason, or freedom, has a priority over dogma. Rahner writes:
"If we recognize the practical reason (reason not emotion or will, which was given the name of freedom!) A priority for the fact that it reflected the existence of that action and that means salvation you only think and totally in itself, not on something else, then you can give the TP, understood as the representative of this practical reason of self-reflection in the church, a priority in global theology. This should not in itself surprising. You will have to be recognized free love (and hope) a certain property in respect of dogmatic belief. "
3. René Laurentin: a council of limitations, ambiguities and hopes
Another witness chose to assess the impact of Vatican II in the immediate post-conciliar years, is the French mariologist R. Laurentin, the first member of the Preparatory Commission of the Council and then the expert work of the Council. One year after the close of the Council Laurentin includes an overview of pastoral and doctrinal legacy left to posterity by the Council. These, note a paradox:
"The Vatican II, Pastoral Council, has become paradoxically the Council for a renewal of doctrine. Theologians have found an audience like never before. "Council of Experts has been said since the first session, with a critical note justification for what was excessive, but the fact he had a justification."
identified by Laurentin The justification, in a necessary revision of theology and keep it updated, it expands in its budget, to highlight the limits of the Council, the silences and hesitations, the incompleteness and ambiguity and fully the tasks incumbent upon the post-conciliar Church. Among the limitations, especially Laurentin sees the lack of decisions on matters as pressing:
1) intermarriage : ....
2) The regulation of births ...
3) The the issue of celibacy for priests , ..... [...]
Laurentin Hence comes the hottest up with parresia and clear words, the 'incompleteness and ambiguity "of certain Council documents. This ambiguity is Laurentin to say, "that life in the developing world" but "do not touch the council but are of concern for many Christians"
These should include:
1) the ambiguity of ecumenism reported also O. Cullmann, "when it returns to our ranks, we will fight, especially among the laity the false ecumenical sentimentality. " Laurentin for this ambiguity is not the Vatican but is "one of the risks of its rapid expansion after the Council. We must also warn against triumphalism ecumenical [...]
2) Another ambiguity is the update, also denounced by Cullmann. Some, in fact, read it as an adaptation to the modern world, while the council wants to illuminate the human activity with the light of the Gospel. The risks, says our, "are linked to the ambiguity of the term" world ", which has been under consideration by the Council."
3) In addition to these two, there is another "who touched the Council itself: the one linked to the term" pastoral. " Here is a quote longer to leave Laurentin describe this point, that we believe has a very serious historical and theological node:
"This adjective (pastoral) launched by John XXIII was lucky. It certainly answers to profound insight: the need to restore the bond between life and truth, doctrine and salvation. Its use, however, remained vague and pragmatic during the first session. But with the second session and fell into the error of considering the term "pastoral" as opposed to "doctrinal" so the "collegiality" hierarchical love marriage belonged to the "pastoral", not to the "doctrinal." We thus wanted to find a way of solution to the opposing tendencies: the need for a pastoral escaped rigor of its doctrine and words would be enough time approximate. Since the beginning of the session, Cardinal Silva was astonished that this principle had found a place even in the official explanation of the amendments of the Scheme 13. The rupture between theology and life was one of the most serious deficiencies in recent centuries. Illusion would want to remedy this fact, creating a kind life full of doctrine: the first most damaging illusion. "
Laurentin According to the Vatican is placed between Scylla and Charybdis: between the fear of addressing the problems and abuses of liberty, freedom of research has always proclaimed by the Council with its own risks. Much has been said of the harassment suffered by progressive theologians, but less is said of the proliferation of Crypto heresies of left and right, like the mushrooms that you find sometimes in the most obscure. Indeed, "if the restrictions and closures provoke riots secret, even misunderstood freedom can unleash negative forces: the superficiality, the heresy scandal." Therefore, Laurentin says, "the Vatican II council is a return to the sources, must maintain contact with the whole tradition." There are updates, of course, but were read as references to light and openness to God and desire to reach the world, taking note of changes so accelerated that confront it. The Church has recognized the autonomy of land values \u200b\u200band authenticity of human progress. Thus, 'the Vatican, without the need to abandon absolute that inspired the Syllabus , has exceeded the spirit of mistrust and inflexibility. "
course if the Council, the Church is losing out some type of security, has developed a sense of research, also freeing the minutes. He found a sense of the essential, that the Father's plan. He finally found the place "great unknown", the Holy Spirit, who say Laurentin, and was recognized in the early centuries for its preeminence in the Church, then had lost its importance until it was forgotten. The Vatican II, "will appear - in the opinion of the French mariologist -, before history, as a first step in the rediscovery of the Holy Spirit."
The future of the Church, therefore, must be marked by the implementation of these initiatives, pastoral-dogmatic, so you really have a post-conciliar Church, which draws Laurentin the model bishop in the post-Vatican II, the layman, the priest, and finally the post-conciliar theology, still in its early stutter but promising given the amount of renewal proposal from the Council. Thus the Council should be like a "continuous creation", trying to establish with RH 12 or hierarchy of truths that order because their relationship with the foundation of faith and putting greater emphasis on the suggestion originally proposed by John XXIII, to distinguish between "substance" and "formulation" of the doctrine of faith, but does not deal with the Pope or the Council. In closing, the French mariologist, all council is, so to speak, in the post-council.
4. Hans Küng: the Council via reunification Küng represents the work of the Council and its symbolic position of strength, a very interesting author, whose examination shows that the scope of hermeneutics, when separated the context of the living Church, which is isolated in a solitary work of the theologian, brings a needed break from the subject-Church. Küng has been celebrated this break with the Church, because, in his view, especially the betrayal of the Council by the Magisterium itself.
Küng had a role important to the Council as a surveyor and later as a theologian for the implementation of post-council. One of the themes he explored and seen more as a hope for true unity of the Church with the Protestants was to ecumenism. It is interesting to quote the testimony of Cardinal W. Kasper, who was his assistant professor of fundamental theology:
"At first there were many things that fascinated by Hans Küng: his way of asking young and fresh, his spontaneous and unconventional vision of the church and also many ideas of reform. His book and reunification Council, quickly became a bestseller, gave expression to the expectations that many had in the Council, it also became a sort of catalyst, on which many spirits were divided. Even my teacher Geiselmann frowned. "
A fountain-like theme and essential to understand the position ecumenical very hopeful because of hasty Küng, is the Church's Tradition, in the context of the discussion was addressed in the Doctrinal Commission Training Scheme, which then lead to the promulgation of Dei Verbum , repeat pattern that had avoided the problem of the duplicity of the sources of Revelation. A scholar of the problem, assume that Küng's thesis is Geiselmann JR. They argued, taking up the theme and accuses Trent Lutheran Tradition (rather accuses the ministry in the Church), that Vatican II gave up the idea of \u200b\u200b partim (part of the revelation contained in Scripture and Tradition in part) to settle its particle et. From here Geiselmann follows that the idea of \u200b\u200bduality of the sources of Revelation was abandoned by Vatican II or at least not explicitly defined. Thus derives his idea that, after a Catholic can lead seamlessly to the concept of material sufficiency of Scripture (all revealed truths contained in Scripture) and as a Catholic you can always claim that the Scripture gives us so sufficient Tradition. In this way, but disappears the Catholic concept of tradition as a channel of revealed truth and knowability of the same with the Scripture. You can just imagine the joy and the consensus that such a view reflected among those who toiled for a peaceful dialogue with Protestantism, offering completely new possibilities for a new meeting between Catholics and evangelical Christians in particular. Among the Council Fathers were particularly pointed Cardinal Döpfner, which the Council said that Sacred Scripture and Sacred Theology was not to be venerated with the same compassion.
Küng had put into this trail, give up more and more pronounced in the Catholic concept of Tradition, Whereas the actions of the Church simply as a reflection of a particular historical moment, and so will clear from the normative content of the Tradition. This theological his gait, will inaugurate a new way of considering the ecumenical movement as a call to unity: Vatican II imperative.
This new way of example can be seen already in his book - which in the words of Cardinal Kasper was a bestseller in this sense, much of which transcended the expectations of Geiselmann - on the council and the unit (the Church?): hence the renewal of the Council is seen as a call to unity (subtitle suggested to be K. Barth). Küng asks: "How can we meet Catholics and Protestants"? He answers by showing the way was opened by John XXIII, or that of the " internal renewal of the Church in view of return to unity." This means for Küng: " not a simple, ineffective call to return to the unity of our Church ',' not simply individual conversions ',' not only a moral reform," because the division of the Church does not belong the order of the seven deadly sins, and then to eternal vices of mankind, but as has occurred historically, "[...] can then - very different from the seven deadly sins - you end with the grace of God. " Here, then, that Küng renewal must take place in the Catholic Church, which, starting from its original essence (as Barth said), then implement the true spirit of the Gospel. It sums up so emblematic of his thinking on this renewal must:
"The protest of Protestants against the Catholic Church must, to the extent that it may be justified, could lose its subject, the work of the Catholic Church itself. The Catholic Church, it is true, as the Church of men and sinners, it remains until the end of time reformanda Ecclesia. "
So ultimately
Küng sees its program of renewal: the Protestant Reformation is the desire for just and humane reform, which gives the Catholic Church's model of a real return to the Gospel, and we Catholics returning to the Gospel, in this historical logic / historicity of the reform, we return to unity with Protestants. But you might ask where a unit? In what church? What kind of unity, after all, Küng is speaking? Over the years, however, thrilled by the hosannas to John XXIII, as reflected in the preface of this book, which animated him to gallop the wave of renewal of the Council and the new ecumenism, will pass to a qualified dispute del Magistero, e accuserà la Chiesa di aver tradito il Concilio.
5. Card. Leo Scheffczyk (1920-2005): aspetti della Chiesa nella crisi
Leo Scheffczyk, dogmatico tedesco, amico e collega di J. Ratzinger, elevato alla porpora cardinalizia per i meriti teologici, è un testimone della teologia di non poco conto, in ragione – come gli riconosce J. Ratzinger nella presentazione alla sua opera italiana che esamineremo –, della «sua conoscenza straordinaria delle fonti, del suo sguardo acuto per i problemi e i compiti del presente, come anche della sua profonda fedeltà, radicata nella fede, al Magistero».
Per Scheffczyk il problema della crisi post-conciliare is due to an ecclesiological crisis, or a search on "Church" held for several reasons already exhausted, in an era of strong post-modern irrationalism of which contains within itself the elements of post-Christian. So
"ignoring this situation - he writes - and considering the non-fraternization and reckless criticism of Christianity with the spirit of the time, it is easy to foresee that even within the church introduced the postmodern irrationalism trends such as religiosity Gnostic and a vague presumption, thus involving in the intertwining of the "mild" conspiracy "." These
reflections are made by the author,
"in the midst of a revolutionary ferment, understanding of what is permanent in the church [...]. The potential risk is that in the near future be able to return the current period of unrest Aryan tragic words: "moans the terrestrial globe and wonders why he had become Arian." All Christians truly concerned for the Church in Vatican II should find a meeting place. "
Scheffczyk, in his essay on aspects of the Church in crisis . When choosing a real Council, would sound like a more literal translation of its volume on the aspects of post-conciliar crisis, focuses on "the Church", outlining a renewed theology in the light of Vatican II, but without betraying or adulterate the data acquired from the dogmatic tradition and in the earlier theological reflection. Scheffczyk The crisis is a crisis of the Church as a mystery. It may seem strange, given the emphasis placed ecclesiological development post-conciliar theological but the real issue is attributable to our cardinal, the loss of a metaphysical concept of participation in the mystery-the Church. The passions antiecclesiali end of '800 and '900, caused largely by liberal Protestantism, which claims democratizzazione, di abbandono dell’autorità, di libertà dai dogmi, di liberalità e di parità – quasi tutte accolte dalla Chiesa evangelica – continuano a sfidare il concetto cattolico di Chiesa. Per il protestantesimo un dato è certo, dice il Nostro: «Si può reagire alla crisi non con cambiamenti esteriori, bensì solo attraverso un mutamento interiore del nucleo di fede». E così i dissidi interni al protestantesimo e il calo esteriore sono molto più estesi e perniciosi di quelli presenti nella Chiesa cattolica. In ambito cattolico, invece, dice Scheffczyk ,
«la vera cesura nello sviluppo della coscienza della chiesa ha avuto luogo dopo il Concilio Vaticano II, whose legitimate aspirations of reform trends overlapped a restructuring designed in other words. They have an impact today is in the Gospel and in Catholic and become visible in the first place in the external aspects. "
One thing however is certain: the ecclesiological doctrine of Vatican II is to be interpreted as progress and continuity. The LG designate the Church as mysterium , linking clearly to the Tradition. The Church is the mystery of God Unitrino, making him in a sign of divine life among men. From here you change to another definition of the Church: "The Church is a sacrament, this definition anchored Tradition, but transferred here to a new dimension. " LG 1 says that the Church is "in Christ in the sacrament or sign of intimate union with God and the unity of all mankind." This formula, notes Scheffczyk, by which the Church is designated as the "indissoluble sacrament of unity" is already in Cyprian († 258), according to which the formula is to be referred
'unit inside the church and it means above all the unity with the legitimate bishop. This is why those who are not included in this unit are "outside the Church." Speaking to the heretics, Cyprian emphasizes in this context that the unity with the church is necessary for the salvation of souls. "
Scheffczyk So, points out that although the Council did not cite the classic formula of Cyprian "outside the Church there is salvation," nevertheless remains the same image in the Vatican II Church, which show the traits sacramental unity, the need for salvation and the fullness of salvation in Christ and the Holy Spirit. This is "the sole Church of Christ in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church" (LG 8).
This concept allows the sacrament of the Church Council di passare adagio dal sacramento Cristo al sacramento Chiesa, la cui radice cristologica più profonda è
«l’immagine del corpo di Cristo. […] Pio XII riconobbe in esso la “definizione più significativa e più divina della sostanza della Chiesa”. Anche il Concilio Vaticano II tiene in grande stima questa immagine, quando considera la chiesa “per una non debole analogia… paragonata al mistero del Verbo incarnato” (LG 8)».
In questo modo il Concilio non porta nessuna innovazione formale nel pensiero ecclesiale. Ha dato solo ad un’idea biblica e fondata nella Tradizione, un ulteriore riconoscimento. Infatti già il Vaticano I aveva definito la Chiesa come «il segno innalzato tra i popoli», facendo riferimento ad Is 11,12. Quindi «riconoscendo alla chiesa questo suo carattere di segno si garantisce la diversità tra Cristo e la chiesa e si riconosce quest’ultima come realtà che esiste a partire dalla sua relazione con Cristo». La Chiesa è «di fronte» a Cristo e non si identifica con Lui. Il rapporto giusto Cristo-Chiesa è fondamentale per capire anche la portata salvifica di Cristo nella Chiesa e sempre attraverso la Chiesa. Cristo ha fondato la sua Chiesa e la conserva nell’essere. È presente nella sua Chiesa ma la sua presenza non «si esaurisce nella Chiesa, ma resta al di sopra: Cristo abita nella chiesa e ne è superiore allo stesso tempo; la Chiesa è compresa da Cristo, mentre essa non lo può contenere in modo completo». In questo senso la Chiesa è sempre strumento e organo di Cristo.
Accanto al concetto di «sacramento», il Concilio utilizza anche il concetto di «popolo» per designare la Chiesa. Questa immagine profondamente biblica, esprime il dato secondo cui la Chiesa è una comunione vivente di fratelli e sorelle esprimendo la sua natura comunionale, dinamica e storica. Certamente la missione di questo popolo di Dio non è di ordine politico o sociale, ma dice Gaudium et spes 42 «il fine […] che le ha prefisso (Cristo) è di ordine religioso». Non sono mancate però le interpretazioni and social policies of this lemma Church-people. Principiano from today's concept of people as revealed by Romanticism, it is connected to the spirit of the people, popular sovereignty, the people as a primitive force that determines the law and custom. So someone yelled, "we are the people", "wir sind die Kirche . But note Scheffczyk,
"the Council does not provide any basis for this interpretation, since it includes the image of the people of the sacramental community of the" body of Christ, "which is composed not only of" people ", but a and head of a sacramental body composed of members. Meanwhile, post-Vatican II era, in which the council would continue only in accordance with its "spirit", without following the spirit and the content expressed by it, the concept of "People of God" has been repeatedly misunderstood and interpreted in accordance with a democratic model '.
Another central concept is to reconcile the concept of communion unfortunately also become ambiguous and contradictory in the post-council. This does not detract, however, its right meaning given by Vatican II, which states, "are truly embedded in the society of the Church ... those who are joined to Christ through the constraints of the profession of faith, the sacraments, ecclesiastical government and communion "(LG 14). Here is the communion of the Trinity as a whole and hierarchical (ie, a source has sacred) and therefore is a hierarchical communion or a hierarchy for the communion of the Church.
Finally, Leo Scheffczyk, discharges the continuation of the tradition of conciliar ecclesiology in two other data: the fact that the Catholic Church is the only Church of Christ and the fact that there is no salvation outside the Church. These are two different problems, the other for an ecumenical religious dialogue.
Vatican II never speaks of a restoration of unity the Church, but only for Christians. If you were to restore the unity of the Church itself, mean that Christ has withdrawn, as it were, by his incarnation and it belies his promise to stay in it until the end of time. The most delicate problem which has been placed is why the Council to designate the one true Church is called to the concept of existence, the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church (cf. LG 8) and not that it is the Catholic Church . Here we see the opening of the theological concept of ecumenism and want a theology rooted in the elementa Ecclesiae . There are certainly elements present in other ecclesial communities or Christian Church particolari separate da Roma, ma dice Scheffczyk,
«“ecclesialità” non è ancora “chiesa”, come (per fare un esempio) le caratteristiche e le connotazioni particolari di un popolo non formano ancora uno Stato, anche se per uno Stato esse rivestono un grande significato».
È da pensare, perciò, in modo corretto l’unità e la molteplicità, il mistero della Chiesa universale (precedente in modo ontologico e cronologico) e quello delle Chiese particolari. L’unità della Chiesa precede la molteplicità: è la sua misura e il suo scopo. La molteplicità, infatti, «non coinvolge l’essenza, bensì le modalità esteriori; non la sostanza, bensì la forma, non la verità bensì la sua espressione (come la teologia e la devozione) […]».
L’altro dato importante, ma anch’esso fortemente e volutamente frainteso è il dialogo interreligioso e la salvezza dei non cristiani che non può realizzarsi se non nella Chiesa e mediante la Chiesa. Anzitutto Scheffczyk appura che la dottrina del Concilio non rinnega l’assioma classico di origine patristica secondo cui «al di fuori della Chiesa non vi è salvezza», che del resto è comprensibile solo a partire dalle condizioni storiche del periodo in cui ha avuto origine. Sin da Origine e Cipriano, fa notare Scheffczyk, was directed against the divisions and wounds of the Church and wanted to challenge the particular Churches the right to stand as saving organizations alongside the one true Church. But, says our,
"even in the Fathers of the church, strict judges, who supported this principle, there are references to the" hidden saints "of paganism and the possibility of salvation for non-Christians, because grace is offered to all men and all people of good will can recognize it. "
also another fact should be borne in mind: the fact that the Church has condemned the Jansenist phrase that 'outside the Church there is no grace. " So says Scheffczyk,
"the church [...] also repeating until recently the traditional principle, does not deny in any way the possibility of salvation for those who are outside, as it, on the other hand (it is important to note this), does not guarantee the individual Christian salvation on the basis of his membership of the church. "
Therefore it is the Council to endorse the new interpretations that all religions, as objective facts, would be enough ways to salvation and that everyone tries to be what it is: a good Muslim, a good Hindu, etc.. For example Küng, wants religion to engage "in search common truth. " it is true that the Council,
"does not clarify the difficult issues concerning the relationship of Christianity with other religions. But there is a fundamental decision whose consequences must be observed. [...] With the advent of Christ is objectively something happened (understandable only in the Christian faith), which amounts to a fundamental critique, and an increase (both negatively and positively) to a '"abolition" of religions in fullness of Christ "And because the rays of truth in some way present in religions," are now gathered in the church, given by Christ, the action of giving grace to the outside the church does not take place without the church and even outside it. The church is the universal sacrament of salvation from which the grace and the grace to which it directs. "
6. The School of Bologna: the Council as a "historic event" A great role in hermeneutics and in the implementation of the Council held the School of Bologna, founded by G. Dossetti with the creation of an Institute of Religious Studies, led by G. Alberigo, director of the powerful History of Vatican II , collected in five volumes. Work of international scope, whose hermeneutical criteria of the Council are due primarily to the historicity stessa del Concilio, categoria che permette di vedere il Vaticano II come “evento” con una grande partecipazione e amplificazione mass-mediatica. Dalla storicità si coglie bene poi l’impronta pastorale-ecumenica fontale dell’evento conciliare e questo permette in definitiva di esaminare in maniera trasversale, con una notevole opera di cesello, anche gli aspetti più reconditi del Concilio. Questi aspetti non si esauriscono nella celebrazione dell’evento in quanto tale, ma in ragione di uno spirito, il Concilio si può leggere come una legge della “conciliarità” – tema dominante nella lettura bolognese dell’ermeneutica conciliare – sempre presente, in modo che il Vaticano II sia anche in futuro quello che voleva essere nel passato. Questo ad esempio lo vediamo nella disamina storica che fa Alberigo a quarant’anni dalla celebrazione del Vaticano II e al termine della pubblicazione dei 5 volumi della storia del Vaticano II. Scrive Alberigo: «La storicizzazione del Vaticano II apre la possibilità di una “svolta ermeneutica”». Alberigo, nota anche che «non è improprio ritenere i movimenti della prima metà del XX secolo (liturgico, ecumenico, biblico, per la promozione del laicato) un autentico “preconcilio”. Come all’opposto, ha avuto effetti “ritardanti” la diffidenza post-modernista nei confronti della ricerca teologica».
However, the reading of Vatican II as an event is needed to overcome the problem of the moment of its reception and celebration of the event, the dispute between doctrine and pastoral. Alberigo writes in the introduction to the first volume of History of Vatican II:
"linger in a vision of the council as the sum of hundreds of pages of conclusions - often lengthy, sometimes short-lived - has so far hampered the perception of its meaning fruitful pulse of the community of believers to accept the disturbing confrontation with the Word of God and the mystery of human history ... It is now increasingly recognize the priority of the event reconcile even with respect to its decisions, which can not be read as abstract that legislation, but as an expression and extension of the event. The office of renewal, anxiety research, the availability of a comparison with the gospel, the fraternal care of all men, that have characterized the Vatican etc. are not folk or otherwise marginal and transient. On the contrary, this is the spirit of the event reconcile, to which the hermeneutics of its sound and proper decisions can only refer. "
The post-council should be the time of the historicizing of the Council, which is resolved by working just a "historicizing Vatican II non per allontanarlo, relegandolo nel passato, ma per agevolare il superamento della fase controversistica della sua recezione da parte delle Chiese». Ciò sarà possibile solo nella misura in cui si farà affiorare «lo spirito e la dialettica che hanno caratterizzato l’assemblea». Questa disamina, al dire di Alberigo, è interessante perché fa emergere «un gap, tra l’evento conciliare come fatto collettivo e le decisioni finali dall’assemblea». Questo ancora una volta sottolinea che «l’evento conciliare sia irriducibile al corpus , pure molto ampio delle decisioni: la collegialità conciliare ha avuto una densità molto maggiore di quella enunciata in Lumen gentium. The constitutions and the decrees do not reflect all the virtuality that were expressed during the life of the Council ". So opens the possibility of a cross-search leading
"in the light of the recurrent and often of the most critical determinant of the spirit of the Council: the ecclesiological and liturgical renewal, beyond the limits of the two constitutions corresponding anxiety ecumenical , richer and more articulate than say the decree UR , the rediscovery of the Word of God, not only emerges from Dei Verbum, the waiver of religious freedom, which the Fathers of the Council progressively acquired primarily as a Christian dimension of their status. "
For the Bolognese school, the criterion of the pastoral council is essential to distinguish a level of historical and contingent forms and level of the principles of faith, without, however, that the two levels displayed in a discontinuity between them, the fact that the theologian's work and teaching begins with what the historian and the apparent historically contingent forms of pastoral, it would be supported both by the hierarchy of the truths of RH 11 and the other by a core doctrine that remains inside the same while become fragmented. Faith here is subject to history as le dichiarazioni del magistero, ormai non più proponibili come condanne ma, le stesse condanne di prima, superabili in ragione della loro storicità e della nuova pastoralità.
Pastoralità, poi, è in un certo modo, sinonimo di ecumenicità. Infatti, a dire di C. Theobald,
«i rappresentanti del segretariato per l’unità, il card. Bea, mons. Smedt e mons. Volk, che la momento cristallizzano l’opinione di tutti coloro che si oppongono agli schemi preparatori, colgono il legame interno tra la forma pastorale e la forma ecumenica dei documenti conciliari da comporre».
La visione pastorale della Scuola bolognese che riesce a saldare in unità the event with the doctrine, or the content of faith with its communicability is due, we believe, to this expression of Theobald:
'[...] is really in the relationship between Scripture and tradition, a problem of truth or points contained in the "deposit"? The doctrine is not quite a way to put in different contexts, because of the conditions within the tradition itself kerygmatic event or ministry can happen in reality and in all its dimensions? It is surely why he targeted John XXIII spoke of the "pastoral form of doctrine or teaching". "
Sul versante della storicità del Vaticano II si colloca anche B. Forte. Questi definisce il Vaticano II «il Concilio della storia», nel senso che,
«il Vaticano II ha avviato una “storia del Concilio”, un itinerario di ricezione attraverso il quale la promessa risuonata nell’evento conciliare potesse prender corpo nella vita degli uomini».
In questo modo il Vaticano II assume la «storia nell’autocoscienza della fede», mettendola in rapporto alla verità. Il documento più importante del Vaticano II è per Forte la Dei Verbum ,
«il più incisivo contributo che la riflessione magisteriale has given to the problem of historical mediation of revelation. Overcoming the doctrine of the two sources, Scripture and Tradition, in that the only traditio Verbs ex fide in fidem , which has its legal time in the word recorded in the sacred text, but who lives in a permanent news story and interpretation under the action of the Holy Spirit in time .... "
On the line of pastoral understood as historical, it also places the bishop witness of the Council, one of the youngest participants in the Vatican, L. Bettazzi. Precisely because of the pastoral council, can be overcome in some way, the discontinuity caused, however, dai precedenti concili in quanto dogmatici. Il Vaticano II sarebbe sempre attuale/storico perché pastorale.
Rilievi conclusivi A questo punto del nostro itinerario teologico, che ci ha portato a verificare alcune posizioni sul Concilio Vaticano II, da noi scelte perché ritenute alquanto esemplari, possiamo ora ricavare dallo studio d’insieme del problema alcuni elementi-chiave. Questi elementi, a nostro giudizio, sottolineano, da un lato la complessità del dato teologico che si presenta nel suo insieme quale “Concilio Vaticano II”, dall’altro, riescono a far emergere i nodi delle problematiche che via via si sono presentate, riassumibili in tre posizioni: 1) The Vatican is inherently compromised? 2) The Vatican hides a lack fundamental metaphysics? 3) The fundamental theological assertions, such as keys to interpret the council.
1. The Vatican is a "compromise text"? The issue becomes very sensitive and hot, although we have seen that even Laurentin not afraid to expose the inaccuracies in the documents of the Council. A rather unusual case and certainly no suspicion is that the OH Pesch - actually somewhat pungent and sarcastic - accused the council of a compromise text: "It is not unusual - he says - in extreme cases you have to do with "the compromesso del pluralismo contraddittorio”». Per pluralismo contraddittorio Pesch intende ad esempio il fatto che, gli schemi, molto spesso, erano formulati come un do ut des : se accetti il mio testo io approvo il tuo. Questo si presenta nelle votazioni in sede di Commissione, per quanto riguarda, ad esempio, la collegialità episcopale: prima si fanno delle grosse aperture, poi per una minoranza conservatrice, si fanno dei passi indietro, moltiplicando i riferimenti alla potestas del Romano Pontefice: questo lo si appura, al dire di Pesch, soprattutto nel risultato finale.
A Pesch, su questo dato, risponde P. Hünermann, che critica questa posizione estrema per il fatto che i documenti del Concilio non sono da vedere come documenti di una costituzione umana e civile. La possibilità di parlare di “pluralismo contraddittorio” applicata a Lumen gentium , esisterebbe «solo se si partisse da un testo conciliare che possedesse, a motivo del genere, la forma di giudizio o di legge». Per Hünermann, in linea con l’idea della Scuola di Bologna, bisogna valutare rettamente il genere dei testi del Concilio soprattutto nel loro processo ricettivo, tenendo conto della genesi e dello svolgimento del Concilio. Il Vaticano II, infatti, si inserisce nella tradizione di Trento e del Vaticano I, ma a differenza di questi, non fa delimitazioni in termini di definizioni. Il senso del Vatican II's pastoral nature, is to be seen especially in the will of the Pontiffs, and in particular the work of the first session. This will facilitate the fact that they reflect the ' corpus of documents of Vatican II as a standard durable. Only if the text of the Council fails to fulfill the functions just once, but you constantly see to current problems and to process them, then indeed it is stated his character. " For Hünermann, however, "you can specify the kind of texts of Vatican II as a" constitution of the ecclesial life of faith "or, in short, as" constituent of the faith "."
So, we wonder, will solve the problem of "pluralism contradictory? I think not, the fact that documents of a council generally not the faith, express it, define it in a solemn manner. Could form only in a dogmatic, pastoral, as seen from the historical angle as required by the School of Bologna. But the Council was not this, nor would it be.
We believe, too, that a certain diversity appears contradictory and it was inevitable for several reasons, all innervated but the lack of clear boundaries between what is ministry and what is dogmatic. The two dimensions equivalents are the only theology? Stand out? The one is subordinated to the other? Therefore, one could not give a complete answer to the question asked, nor could occur in the theological continuity / discontinuity of the doctrines of the Council with the Tradition of the Church, not mentioning two other levels, which follows.
2. The Vatican II as a metaphysical problem: a problem of substance and form?
The problem, "Vatican II" rather than an "adversarial pluralism", is not a clear indication of its nature and therefore the content of its documents, in which optics, have to read the so-called "openings" or better in-depth theological and magisterial. If should be understood that the nature of the pastoral council is (not in the historical sense understood by Rahner: draw the theological presuppositions of the practice and the secular sciences, but in the theological sense intended by the Magisterium) and that the content is authentic Magisterium of the ordinary, only infallible to the extent that repeats information already defined or final being held in the Customs, then the improvements and advancements of the Council, which could give rise even to the setbacks as a result of the break in theology, must be examined in light of the healthy way theological. The theology that illuminates the Magisterium should check the status of these insights and provide a criterion for a ruling Magisterium (perhaps even ordinary) aimed to dispel all misunderstandings accumulated. The teaching in this way could say authoritatively that only continuity is the hermeneutic right to apply to the council, and that innovations are to be read in this continuity of tradition, whose discontinuities are not dogmatic (in the sense that hurt the dogma or change, or explain it other than try to explain it) but theological. In Vatican II as a dyadic relationship of "council-mystery" does not get into modernism. It would be blasphemous to the mere thought. This was present even in some experts and theologians, but the Council Catholic, convened and approved by the Roman Pontiff, his papers are, on the nature , a magisterial teaching binding.
3. Some basic principles in the theological-Vatican II Finally, it is necessary to identify certain principles that could be called theological core set by the Council, on whose application and reading, depends to a great extent, the overview of the Vatican II, as the Council (Event / solemn celebration) and, consequently, the right / wrong interpretation of the doctrines of the Council. In our opinion, these principles could be summarized into three: 3.1 pastoral / update, 3.2, the distinction tra sostanza della fede e sua formulazione; 3.3 il principio “gerarchia delle verità”. Esaminiamoli brevemente, per sottolinearne la cogenza, auspicando il conforto di altri studi di approfondimento.
3.1 La pastoralità del Concilio intesa come aggiornamento e viceversa
Nell’intenzione di Giovanni XXIII il Concilio doveva provocare un aggiornamento, inteso come apertura al mondo e quindi come modo per dire al mondo, hic et nunc la fede della Chiesa. Si volle un modo pastorale d’approccio per far sì che si scegliessero i mezzi più adeguati ed anche il linguaggio della modernità, quando necessario, per parlare all’uomo di oggi, profondamente different from that of the Vatican for the new historical conditions and even theological. At the Council are intertwined and entangled two levels: the faith must move forward, but the council did not want to take a dogmatic character, because it would be anachronistic. Progress should be seen as an update but the update was not to be dogmatic (like defining new dogmas) but pastoral, but on the doctrine itself. It was clear that it came in updating the doctrine has as its heart a pastoral doctrine, but the Council wanted to do in a pastoral way, ie with a real ordinary magisterium. Leaving in a sort of Wavering general terms involved, and using Overall a rather discursive and non-metaphysical language, soon "ministry" has become the yardstick for Rahner's theology as such, so to subsume secular anthropology and history understood as a revelation from the theological categories, theology itself, in its together becomes pastoral, pastoral and not derive more from the theological theory but from practice. Here the world and the lust of dogmatic enters and transforms it.
3.2. The distinction between substance and its formulation of the faith (the substance and form?)
John XXIII in his opening speech on 11 October 1962 said:
'Other is the substance of the ancient doctrine of deposit of faith, and another one is the formulation of its cover: and that is what it should be - with patience if necessary - to take much account. "
The Pope calls the theology here to distinguish between the substance of the faith and its covering, between substance and appearance or apparent. This is a problem of language? The Pope tells us that we must adopt a new philosophy of language to overcome the fateful moment of IN itself and what is being expressed through the meshes of a strong subjectivity of the person who says, has been part of his interpretation? We believe that John XXIII did not refer to a problem language, but very simply wanted to tell everyone that the essence of faith does not change, but may be better adapted to the time a language to communicate the faith. In fact, UR 11 say
'[...] the Catholic faith must be explained in greater depth and accuracy, with an exposure mode and a language that can be understood even by separated brethren. "
theology was long ago coined a new language, for the most part setting aside the metaphysical school, to make way for the more modern, which becomes, in some theologians, to adopt an existentialist philosophy and phenomena. This principle, therefore, it is provided to a variety of readings, even contradictory: a renewed theology based on the sources of knowledge revealed to a renewed theology, it becomes plural because of philosophical pluralism, drunk in incorporating the data of modernity and without too many qualms about his faithfulness to God's revelation . Much of the theology has become an anthropology. The Church is worldly, secular. It seems strange, but the pick was largely the theology that largely did the Council.
3.3. The hierarchy of truths (RH 11) or rather analogy of the truth?
Here we enter a very delicate discussion. The hierarchy of verità è enunciato da UR 11 che dice:
«Nel mettere a confronto le dottrine si ricordino che esiste un ordine o “gerarchia” nelle verità della dottrina cattolica, in ragione del loro rapporto differente col fondamento della fede cristiana».
Il testo, letto nel contesto teologico ormai acquisito da così lungo tempo, si protende più verso un’analogia delle verità che verso una subordinazione di alcune verità ad altre fino a farle scomparire. Le verità rivelate hanno tutte pari dignità perché ci sono dette per la nostra salvezza e tutte promanano dall’unico Autore, Dio. Gerarchia o ordine, dovrebbe essere qui letto nel suo senso etimologico as the original source of the sacred truth of God and in their relationship with the analog foundation of faith that God is the same as truth rivelantesi, distinguishing between fides qua and fides quem . No one who reads the council in the Church and in line with its tradition, would dream of exploiting the truths of faith, recognizing some - usually those who do not like the theologian - less and less important than others. But this has been done. Consider, for example, to H. Küng sees in this principle that the starting point for ecumenical dialogue aimed not at the return of our separated brethren in the one Church of Christ, the Catholic Church, but a conversion of all historical data unequivocally rule, by a just and reasoned application brought by the reform: that of a spiritualized and conversion of the Church. A mere reach out to others. The Bolognese school sees this principle the starting point for a truly mind "reconcile" that put all together, quickly became a political program, or maybe it was on.
How to read, therefore the principle of hierarchy of truth? We are at the point of departure. But this means, if you are not a genuine theological reading, meaning the top of this speech, these first-principles of Vatican II, all the rest can easily be distorted. Risulterebbe, pertanto, veramente utile per i fedeli e per i teologi, un documento (metafisico) dogmatico del Magistero, per spiegare la retta origine e la retta interpretazione di questi principi, così da orientare poi il Popolo di Dio e i maestri della fede in primis , in una lettura corretta del Concilio, facendo vedere, in modo autentico, che l’unica ermeneutica giusta, che porta frutti, è quella della continuità e del progresso nella verità dell’unica Traditio Ecclesiae . È vero che il Magistero si è già pronunciato per dirimere i vari errori di interpretazione attestatisi, talvolta, proprio sui temi a cui abbiamo fatto riferimento. Questo però ancora non risolve il problem, the fact that, with the dominance of a certain vision of "conciliar", was easily passed, in large part to a "neo-conciliar" We continue to appeal to the council and then forget it, wrongly in fact, that The Magisterium has not frozen with the Council. The Pope is above the Council and therefore only he can indicate which is definitely nullifying the correct interpretation of Vatican II.
p. M. Serafino Lanzetta, FI
