I imagine that in a possible world not altogether remote from the actual one, today is a day of great rejoicing among Catholics, for on October 11, 1962, John XXIII opened the Second Oecumenical Council of the Vatican. You’ll excuse my possible worlds language, but you see, I’m speaking of the Council which might have been. Indeed, one might say that there were two councils: the one that John XXIII prepared and the other whose documents you can find today at the Holy See’s website.

The buildup to the Second Vatican Council is most interesting. Many people either forget or never knew that every single one of the documents ordered to be drawn up by John XXIII was later thrown out - except for Bugnini’s masterpiece, Sacrosanctum concilium. Iacobus has two wonderful posts on this subject of the discarded preparatory documents, Chastity and the Council and The Council and the Moral Order.

Romano Amerio writes of the transition from the prepared documents to those more in step with modern man:

As we have said, a distinctive feature of Vatican II is its paradoxical outcome, by which all the preparatory work that usually directs the debates, marks the outlook and foreshadows the results of a council, was nullified and rejected from the first session onward, as successive spirits and tendencies followed one upon another.

This departure from the original plan did not happen as a result of a decision made by the council itself, operating within its duly established rules, but by an breaking the council’s legal framework, which although not prominent in accounts given of these events, is now certain in its main outlines.

That is a long story in itself, but one which should be reserved for another day, since we wish to remark upon John XXIII’s opening address given exactly 44 years ago today.

Before I come to the good stuff, I must say a few words by way of preface. The Cornell Society for a Good Time will cede to no one the pride of first place in singing the praises of Romano Amerio. We have often called attention to his work on this blog, and some others, such as Giacomo Cardinal Biffi of Bolonga have jumped on the bandwagon. But whether in favor or out, we recommend Amerio to all.

Now do allow us to share some of Amerio’s commentary on the speech of John XXIII which opened the Council. Amerio dedicates no less than nine pages to commentary on this opening speech.

The passage in the speech which distinguishes between the unchangeable substance of Catholic teaching and the changeability of its expressions, gives rise to the same uncertainty. The official text reads as follows:

Est enim aliud ipsum depositum fidei, seu veritates, quae veneranda doctrina nostra continentur, aliud modus quo eaedem enuntiantur, eodem tamen sensu eademque sententia. Huic quippe modo plurimum tribuendum est, et patientia si opus fuerit, in eo elaborandum, scilicet eae inducendae erunt rationes res exponendo, quae cum magisterio, cuius indoles praesertim pastoralis est, magis congruant.

The Italian translation reads:

Altra e la sostanza dell’antica dottrina del ‘depositum fidei’ e altra e la formulazione del suo rivestimento, ed e di questo che devesi con pazienza tener gran conto, tutto misurando nella forma e proporzione di un magistero a carattere prevalentemente pastorale.

The divergence is so great as to admit of only two hypotheses: either the Italian translator was attempting a paraphrase, or the translation is in fact the original text. If the Italian is the original, it must have appeared convoluted and imprecise (what in fact is “the formulation of its clothing”?) so that the Latin translator tried to gather its general sense and, being dominated by traditional ideas, failed to notice how great a novelty the original version contained.

What is very noticeable is the omission of the words eodem tamen sensu eademque sententia which are an implicit quotation of a classic text of St. Vincent of Lerins, and which are bound up with the Catholic understanding of the relation between the truth to be believed and the formula in which it is expressed.

Amerio then turns to address a particularly interesting subject in the speech, the new attitude towards error proclaimed by John XXIII.

The attitude to be adopted in regard to error is . . . a definite novelty, and is openly announced as being a new departure for the Church. The Church, so the Pope says, is not to set aside or weaken its opposition to error, but “she prefers today to make use of the medicine of mercy rather than of the arms of severity.”

A delicious footnote here reads: “During the preparation of the Roman synod [a sort of Vatican II trial-run], which maintained the Church’s traditional teaching methods, the Pope had already accepted the suggestion that some norms should be relaxed, and had said to Mgr Felici (who recounts the event in Osservatore Romano of 25 April 1981): “The imposition of rules is not liked these days.” He does not say “is of no use”, but “is not liked”. Amerio continues:

She resists error “by showing the validity of her teaching, rather than by issuing condemnations.” This setting up of the principle of mercy as opposed to severity ignores the fact that, in the mind of the Church, the condemnation of error is itself a work of mercy, since by pinning down error, those laboring under it are corrected and others are preserved from falling into it.

This next part is classic Amerio - this is why we love the man:

Furthermore, mercy and severity cannot exist, properly speaking, in regard to error, because they are moral virtues which have persons as their object, while the intellect recoils from error by the logical act that opposes a false conclusion. Since mercy is sorrow at another’s misfortune accompanied by a desire to help him, the methods of mercy can only be applied to the person in error, whom one helps by confuting his error and presenting him with the truth; and can never be applied to his error itself, which is a logical entity which cannot experience misfortune.

Oh, it’s too glorious! Someone tell him to stop! But he won’t stop, he just keeps rolling:

Moreover, the Pope reduces by half the amount of help that can be offered, since he restricts the whole duty of the Church regarding the person in error to the mere presentation of the truth: this is alleged to be enough in itself to undo the error, without directly opposing it. The logical work of confutation is to be omitted to make way for a mere didascalia on the truth, trusting that it will be sufficient to destroy error and procure assent.

This papal teaching constitutes an important change in the Catholic Church, and is based on a peculiar view of the intellectual state of modern man. The Pope makes the paradoxical assertion that men today are so profoundly affected by false and harmful ideas in moral matters that “at last it seems men of themselves,” that is, without refutations and condemnations, “are disposed to condemn them; in particular those ways of behaving which despise God and His law.”

One can indeed maintain that a purely theoretical error will cure itself, since it arises from purely logical causes; but it is difficult to understand the proposition that a practical error about life’s activities will cure itself, since that sort of error arises from judgments in which the non-necessary elements of thought are involved.

This optimistic interpretation of events, asserting that at last error is about to recognize and correct itself, is difficult enough to accept in theory; but it is also bluntly refuted by facts. Events were still maturing at the time the Pope spoke, but in the following decade they came to full fruition. Men did not change their minds regarding their errors, but became entrenched in them instead, and gave them the force of law.

The public and universal acceptance of these errors became obvious with the adoption of divorce and abortion. The behavior of Christian peoples was entirely altered thereby and their civil legislation, until recently modeled on canon law, was changed into something completely profane, no longer having a shade of the sacred about it. On this point, papal foresight indisputably failed.

Thus far Romano Amerio’s commentary on John XXIII’s opening address to the Council given 44 years ago today.

go to main page