Roman Catholics: The Right to Worship According to One’s Conscience

The Vatican Council last week moved closer to the beginning of a vast change in both the spirit and structure of the Roman Catholic Church. In a series of decisive votes, the 2,500 assembled prelates approved the principle of episcopal collegiality—thereby affirming that as a body they govern and teach the entire church in union with the Pope. They thus restored to Catholicism a sense of fraternal authority that had been lost during the development of an all-powerful papacy and foreshadowed a gradual diminishment of the Roman Curia’s power.

In the eyes of many observers, the council seems finally to be coming to fruition. The first session saw a well-mannered power struggle between contending ecclesiastical viewpoints, and the gradual unfolding of progressive strength; the second was bogged down by papal indecision and defensive parliamentary maneuvering by Curial forces. But by the end of the third session’s second week, the bishops had taken 37 votes on sections of the 219-page schema De Ecclesia (On the Church), rushed through discussion of two other chapters, started debate on a schema outlining the duties of bishops, and drafted declarations concerning religious liberty and antiSemitism. So much was being prodded through the lengthened daily sessions that an African bishop complained: “I feel like a nun who has lost her place in her missal.”

Smooth Sailing. In part, the brisk pace of the session was due to the businesslike approach of four cardinal moderators. Last fall they were often hesitant and unsure; now they are quick to cut off speakers who gobe yond their allotted ten minutes or stray from the point. But there was a more important reason for the council’s smooth sailing: the growing sense of community and mutual responsibility among the bishops, and the emergence of a theological consensus that is prudently but overwhelmingly progressive. It is now clear that a vast majority of the prelates reject the abstract, legalistic theological language that has been spoken by Rome since the Council of Trent and favor a more pastoral, Scripture-centered approach.

Sensing that the council is finally going their way, the bishops appear more confident of themselves, more inclined to treat Curial prelates as anachronistic staff officers rather than superiors. There was also a new tone in the bishops’ references to Pope Paul VI, in which respect for his position was tempered by realistic appraisals of his qualities. Some bluntly described him as “afraid,” “so sensitive,” “in need of our help.” “Let’s face it,” said one Australian bishop. “He’s weak.”

Teachers & Rulers. The triumph of the consensus was reached in the vote on collegiality—a theory that is new in Catholic theology, but is a reality as old as the church. The Acts of the Apostles clearly expresses the fraternal spirit of the first bishops, and the early Christians had no concept of an authoritarian Pope. Last week, by margins that were never less than 5 to 1, the prelates agreed that they are successors of the Apostles just as the Pope is the successor of St. Peter, that the Apostles, with Peter in charge, formed a kind of episcopal college to carry on Christ’s mission of salvation, and that episcopal consecration confers on a priest the role of teacher and ruler of the church, in union with the Pope.

The votes, which must be confirmed later in the session by approval of the entire schema, cleared the way for some concrete expressions of collegiality. Archbishop Joseph McGucken of San Francisco suggested that the Pope might appoint a permanent senate of bishops to serve as his advisers. Others believe that the Pope instead would internationalize the predominantly Italian Curia. There were rumors that Paul might play down the college of cardinals by refusing to appoint new ones.

Whatever the specific outcome, the vote also had many ecumenical overtones. Although the schema carefully ensures the primacy and rights of the Pope, the bishops nevertheless have approved a theory of ecclesiastical government that is closer to what Anglicans and Orthodox believe. Baptists and Presbyterians would disagree with the council’s view that the episcopacy is of divine origin; yet they could hardly help favoring a new touch of democracy in Catholicism.

“A Decent Respect.” Another test of the bishops’ new spirit of community came last week in discussion of the draft declaration on religious liberty, which affirms the right of every man, Catholic and atheist alike, to worship or not as his conscience dictates. It is a proposal that has little appeal to prelates from such strongly Catholic countries as Spain, Italy and Ireland. But their objections seemed halfhearted, questioning, almost resigned to defeat—and council watchers believe that the declaration will be approved by at least 85% of the bishops. Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani of the Holy Office upheld the traditional view that “a man in error should not be entitled to honor”; yet even he did not condemn the declaration outright. The traditionalist arguments were forcefully answered by American cardinals. Chicago’s Albert Meyer said: “We must give to others what we claim for ourselves.” Boston’s Richard Cardinal Gushing, in a speech written partly by Jesuit Theologian John Courtney Murray, principal author of the declaration, argued that the religious-liberty statement was “something that the Catholic world and the non-Catholics alike have been waiting for” —admission by the church that it has “a decent respect for the opinion of mankind.” It was Cushing’s first speech in three sessions of the council; he was greeted by a torrent of forbidden applause when he sat down.