Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:06:58.245Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pope John XXIII, Conciliar and Contemporary Episcopal Pastoral Governance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Paul Gadie
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article will discuss the emergence of an increasingly cogent argument made by Pope John XXIII for a redefined role of episcopal pastoral governance in the (ante) preparatory phase of the Second Vatican Council and during early conciliar debate. Pope John will be presented as encouraging a renewed role for bishops in his public orations preceding the Council. This continued in his support of the conciliar process and encouragement given to senior bishops at critical moments during its first session. As contemporary understandings of episcopal governance were questioned before and at the Council, increasing numbers of bishops saw the possibilities of revitalising their governance role in a pastoral mode. Its contemporary relevance lies in Pope Francis’ call to build a synodal church in which episcopal governance is exercised at the local and universal levels. Today, this requires individual bishops ‘to assume their responsibilities to govern their own diocese, always in consultation with the faithful.’1

Keywords

Pope John XXIIIEpiscopal governancepastoral
Type
Original Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 101 , Issue 1094 , July 2020 , pp. 400 - 417
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers

Pope John XXIII: A Council to renew the episcopal role

The cardinals who chose Angelo Roncalli as successor to Pope Pius XII understood they were choosing a man who would lead the church differently. His leadership style would need to be more engaging and open to the modern world. Pope John XXIII fit their ‘job description’. His life and ministerial experience were unique among the College of Cardinals. From military service in the First World War to working as a seminary teacher during the modernist crisis. From ministry as bishop's secretary to Vatican diplomatic service in countries with small Catholic populations and those fractured by the Second World War. In 1952 he became Patriarch of Venice. In all these positions he built community by focussing on what united humankind.Footnote 2

On 25th January 1959, John XXIII announced two momentous events: a Roman Synod, and the calling of a general Council.Footnote 3 The latter he envisaged as facilitating the revision of the Code of Canon Law.Footnote 4 Later, he framed the three main goals of the Council: ecclesial spiritual renewal; aggiornamento (‘appropriate adaptation of Church discipline to the needs and conditions of our times’); and the continuance of Christian unity.Footnote 5

There were other, early indications of the nature of John XXIII's papacy. In 1959, as Bishop of Rome, he took personal, solemn possession of the Lateran Basilica, Rome's cathedral Church. In more recent times popes had disregarded a local episcopal role. Pope John's action ‘implied a real consideration of bishops and a re-evaluation of their role and that of the local Churches, which were to become major participants once again in ecclesial life and not just the recipients of Roman decisions.’Footnote 6 At the same time, John XXIII inaugurated a pastoral programme for the diocese of Rome. This included the visitation of hospitals, prisons, and parishes.

The Roman Synod, the first of its kind, took place in January 1960 and encouraged the diocese to reflect on itself as a discreet entity aside from its historic role as centre of the Church. Pope John's new Secretary of State, Cardinal Domenico Tardini, understood the Synod ‘as a sort of pilot venture’,Footnote 7 helping the Church in its preparations for Vatican II.Footnote 8 Familiar as he was with the writings of St Charles Borromeo, the idea of a local synod appealed to the Pope.

Pope John's actions highlighted an episcopal governance role that was pastoral in its exercise and encouraged the development of a richer paradigm of papal ministry. In its turn, this new paradigm encouraged a renewed focus on the ministry of bishops of local Churches and their relationship with the Bishop of Rome and vice versa. The First Vatican Council (1869-70) had not envisaged the bishop as the local agent of a Roman Church, but in practice this is what he had become. After Vatican II was announced, some bishops began to vocalise concerns that, over time, their office had been ‘deprived of many of its rightful prerogatives and that the bishops had been reduced to simple executors of decisions of the Roman Curia.’Footnote 9 For Archbishop Joseph Cordeiro of Karachi this meant ‘the concept of a bishop as a “successor of the Apostles” would be stressed early in the Council.’Footnote 10 These concerns were heard more frequently and more clearly after the Council began.

The Pope used opportunities before the Council began to encourage the bishops to reflect on their episcopal ministry and its exercise.Footnote 11 This may be seen in three documents:

  1. (1) John XXIII's speech inaugurating the Preparatory Commission (1960);

  2. (2) Apostolic constitution, Humanae salutis (1961);

  3. (3) The Pope's opening address: Gaudet Mater Ecclesia (1962).

When read together, they demonstrate the Pope's desire to convey a new paradigm of pastoral governance to all bishops.

John XXIII's inaugural speech

Addressing the Preparatory Commissions, John XXIII reminded them that theirs was a pastoral task on behalf of the Council, over which he was presiding.Footnote 12 The Pope reflected on the forthcoming exercise of the Magisterium. It would not be about identifying and fixing doctrinal challenges. It would be used as an affirmative restoration of ‘Christian thinking and living.’Footnote 13 He also clarified his role: he presided over the Central Commission, which coordinated the other commissions. He also acknowledged that his plans for the Council had been well supported by all involved – what today might be refer to as ‘spin’.

In the anti-preparatory phase, the bishops’ vota identified material for conciliar discussion.Footnote 14 As the preparatory phase commenced, the commissions were instructed to ‘pay particular attention to the desires and proposals of the bishops, the venerable fathers of our noble assembly.’Footnote 15 It was Pope John's understanding that the commissions served the bishops. The response to those who tried to undermine this relationship was one of renewed patience and vigilance as the Pope John was filled with positive expectations of the coming event. He offered encouragement to members of the commissions and invited the conciliar bishops to make ‘their own special contribution of prayer, advice and activity’.Footnote 16

Pope John and Humanae salutis (1961)

The Council was formally convoked with the publication of the apostolic constitution Humanae salutis.Footnote 17 The Pope spoke about issues facing the contemporary Church: it was witnessing a crisis within human society. He urged people to trust in God and to learn to distinguish ‘the signs of the times,’Footnote 18 thus developing a more positive view of society beyond the Church. A more pastorally sensitive, open Church was better able to befriend, collaborate with and influence society. The time for this development was now. Pope John's secretary, Archbishop Louis Capovilla, identified the phrase's biblical origin (Mt 16:3), referencing an ‘overriding pastoral concern’ for an anxious, modern world.Footnote 19

As the preparatory phase had almost concluded, its work would shortly be sent to the bishops, whom Pope John clearly identified as the central participants in the Council. Those involved with its preparation had a clear role: to provide support to both pope and bishops.

Pope John's opening address to the Council: Gaudet Mater Ecclesia (1962)

In his opening address, John XXIII outlined his conciliar vision, presenting himself as asserting ‘the magisterium (teaching authority) […] in order that this magisterium, taking into account the errors, the requirements, and the opportunities of our time’Footnote 20 can be presented to all. This magisterium was the teaching authority of the Pope together with the bishops. The address marked the Pope's intention to give the conciliar bishops ‘a personal and authoritative instruction that would link this assembly with the great conciliar tradition of the Church.’Footnote 21

The Council would assist the Church in looking forward without anxiety, aided ‘by bringing [itself] up to date where required.’Footnote 22 He contrasted this position with those ‘prophets of gloom […] always forecasting disaster, as though the end of the world were on hand’.Footnote 23 They saw little positive in the current era compared with previous eras and ‘behaved as if they had learned nothing from history, […] the teacher of life.’Footnote 24 During his time as papal nuncio to France he read Congar's Vraie et fausse réforme dans l’Église (1950). His response: ‘A reform of the Church: is such a thing really possible?’ As pope, John called a reforming Council ‘to update the Church's capacity to explain herself to the world’.Footnote 25 He used Congar's language in his address to describe this task.

Pope John understood the central task of the Church to be one of teaching and influencing humanity. Reflecting on the Fathers and modern research methods assisted the Church to evangelise the modern world. In his mind: ‘[t]he substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith [is] one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another.’Footnote 26 The latter was to be carried out with great patience to reflect a magisterium predominantly pastoral in character, as a pastoral approach would be better received by the modern world.

Errors encountered by the contemporary Church should also be dealt with in this pastoral manner as it ‘prefers to use the medicine of mercy rather than of severity [meeting] the needs of the present day by demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by condemnations.’Footnote 27 The Pope accepted that the time had passed when the Church spoke on a subject and all automatically listened and obeyed.

While his style was emphatic it did not emphasise the juridical. If he and the bishops were to exercise their magisterium, to teach and govern the modern Church and influence the world beyond, their task was best carried out in a reasoned, non-condemnatory manner; that is, in a pastoral manner. His allocution was ‘the act, not of a “sovereign” imposing his will but that of the primate among Catholic bishops, providing authoritative suggestions about the path their work should take.’Footnote 28 This considered methodology better served the Church's wish to evangelise modern society and his wish to encourage an expansive view of episcopal governance.

Finally, John XXIII gave the exercise of the magisterium into the hands of his fellow bishops, not to the Roman Curia.Footnote 29 His concluding prayer called on Mary, ‘Help of Bishops.’Footnote 30 Pope John clarified that it was the task of the Pope and the bishops to discuss, debate, and deliberate in ways they deemed fruitful and on matters they deemed necessary. Their outcomes were the fruits of the magisterium, one that was exercised collegially.

His speech responded to concerns expressed by bishops and their periti regarding the pastoral nature of the Council. He tactfully outlined ‘a conciliar agenda quite different from the one reflected in the prepared texts and in effect authorising the bishops, should they agree, to choose another direction for their work. The bishops accepted the challenge.’Footnote 31 The signing of the confession of faith followed the opening address. One gesture was received with particular thanks from the Eastern Churches. Pope John signed: ‘“John, Bishop of the Catholic Church.” No pretentious titles; just the simple official designation which united him with his brethren, the bishops of the universal Church of God.’Footnote 32

This action communicated Pope John's wish for a truly ecumenical Council and suggested to the bishops that he was their conciliar confrère - a bishop among bishops. For many, his speech was liberating.Footnote 33 Others suggest guarding against an understanding that the Pope had given ‘birth to a fully formed Council.’Footnote 34

John XXIII's historical approach

The Pope supported an historical approach to theology and encouraged the Council to follow his lead. This has its origins in his time as a seminary teacher in Bergamo and earlier as secretary to Bishop Radini Tedeschi, bishop of Bergamo.Footnote 35 During the latter he made an important historical discovery. While browsing in the Archbishop's library he discovered the Archivo Spirituale - Bergamo of St. Charles Borromeo, who understood that episcopal reform of the local Church was achieved by thorough parish visitation, ‘followed by a diocesan Synod.

He decided to edit the thirty-nine volumes of Borromeo's Archivo.Footnote 36 The project shaped his understanding of the Council of Trent,Footnote 37 ‘not as an anti-Protestant polemic, but as a reforming Council.’Footnote 38 In the mind of Trent, the bishop, not some Curial interloper from Rome, was the proper agent of reform. In joining Tedeschi on parish visitations he walked in Borromeo's footsteps. This built a sense of Church history that was ‘not exclusively Rome-centric.’Footnote 39

Before Roncalli left for the conclave he commented:

“The Church is young; it remains, as constantly in its history, amenable to change.” The statement is that of a program. As a Church historian, familiar with the historical change of the Church in a constantly changing world, Pope John was convinced that the Church must adapt its preaching, organization, and pastoral methods to the fundamentally changed world, and for this he coined the much-disputed notion of aggiornamento. In an effort to realise it he convoked the Council.Footnote 40

John XXIII valued what history brought to the study of theology and encouraged a more historical view of theological investigation.Footnote 41

Noting the Pope's credentials, Joseph Komonchak viewed it as natural for him to sidestep bureaucratic tinkering and ‘recall ancient and rather neglected forms for the renewal and reform of the Church.’Footnote 42 Pope John's approach engaged with Pope Pius XII's stance. In his encyclical Humani generis Pius XII suggested ‘not to study historical theology too deeply, but to concentrate on speculative (deductive) theology.’Footnote 43 An historical-theological view, as developed, for example, by Marie-Dominique Chenu and his student, Yves Congar, confirmed ‘that Church doctrine was not as unchangeable as had traditionally been asserted.’Footnote 44 This act of stepping over the line between the historical and theological abandoned Roman Catholic certitude ‘to accept the historically conditioned, reformable, and essentially provisional nature of all doctrinal formulations, ecclesiologies, and church structures’.Footnote 45 While Pope did not make such a radical statement, his historical perspective on the process of theological investigation encouraged the conciliar bishops to consider that governance should always be exercised in a pastoral, synodal key. He was also grounded enough to offer a view of progress by the Curia and commissions that was congruent with his visions for the Council and supported a far greater episcopal role.

A pastoral methodology

From the outset, John XXIII's methodology for the Council was pastoral, and may be identified in five discrete yet related steps. First, in Gaudet Mater Ecclesia, the Pope's opening speech to the Council, he stressed the benefits of the fruits of modern research methodologies, which, in turn, gave impetus to his theme of aggiornamento. This central tenet has been described as part of a broader conciliar vision. It encouraged ‘a thorough and deeply spiritual renewal of the Church and to undertake the pastoral adaptations, aggiornamento, that would enable it to be a more effective redemptive presence in a changed and changing world.’Footnote 46

Second, bishops were welcomed to Rome by the Bishop of Rome as individuals and as equals. Third, the Council was an environment in which the bishops reflected further on their own episcopal role. Fourth, coming together as bishops and as a college, the bishops learned how to govern the Church in a pastoral manner, at both the local and universal level. This also supports a more synodal approach to the exercise of episcopal governance. The Pope understood that this approach honoured the past and used the fruits of modernity to work for the future renewal of the Church and of humankind. Finally, and most fundamentally, John XXIII encouraged the bishops to express themselves freely.Footnote 47 This showed faith in the conciliar process and in the role the bishops would play. Rather than imposing his views, the Pope ‘had sought simply to grant freedom and reasons for speaking and thinking.’Footnote 48

Some members of the preparatory commissions and Curia found Pope John's approach incomprehensible. There model of governance promoted a less prominent role for the bishops.Footnote 49 While some bishops differed, expecting their governance role to be discussed, the subject did not appear in the voluminous schemas.Footnote 50 For Congar, the scholasticism underpinning these schemas ‘hardly has a place in the pastoral government of dioceses, and it is this that now has the floor.’Footnote 51 However, events were to take an important turn.

The first session of the Council

From the earliest possible moment the bishops began to experience their governance of the Council.Footnote 52 This was demonstrated at the beginning of the first session as Cardinal Achille Liénart of Lille (1884-1973) motioned that a postponement of conciliar business was in order.Footnote 53 This would encourage the bishops to get to know one another and to consult, not as individuals, but more importantly in regional groups and episcopal conferences.Footnote 54 This growing sense of collegial, synodal episcopal action encouraged the bishops to learn the language of collaboration.Footnote 55 Within these groups the bishop would discuss elections to the ten commissions, whose members would have the important role of redrafting and (re)presenting schemata.Footnote 56

This postponement was supported by Cardinal Frings of Cologne, who spoke on behalf of Cardinals Julius Döpfner and Franz König. Liénart's intervention ‘demonstrated the fathers’ determination to govern themselves as an assembly [and] voiced the uneasiness of the bishops with the electoral mechanics planned for that October 13.’Footnote 57 The postponement of conciliar business at the very beginning of the Council was ‘a decisive moment for Vatican II.’Footnote 58 These suggestions, which contravened any curial control, were supported by loud, episcopal applause and it was agreed.Footnote 59 But were their interventions so spontaneous and original?

Spontaneity queried

Cardinal Frings’ spontaneity has been questioned as ‘two currents’, linked to the preparatory work of the Council, may be identified.Footnote 60 The first, ‘a predominantly curial influence’,Footnote 61 generated unease among the more open bishops (including Liénart and Frings). The schemata produced by the Curia did not match the varied pastoral situation of the bishops, nor the pope's ‘aggiornamento’.Footnote 62 Frings’ unease also focussed on the second current: the elections to conciliar commissions. While the latter was questioned during the preparatory period,Footnote 63 the critical nature of their membership became a concern.Footnote 64

Membership concerns revealed themselves more fully at the opening of the Council and the desire for action was supported by the Pope's opening speech. As many bishops did not have great expectations of the Council, a more direct, public engagement was required. Liénart's intervention was such an occasion. It was ‘not spontaneous’.Footnote 65 It was planned and supported the Pope's call to pastoral governance.Footnote 66

Pope John's attitude to conciliar preparations

In his opening speech, the Pontiff spoke against ‘the prophets of doom’ and identified those unable to distinguish 'the signs of the times.’ His stance was further clarified when he personally intervened in conciliar business, against the Council's own regulations, to remove the schema De fontibus revelationis from the conciliar agenda. His statements and actions communicated his personal encouragement of critical episcopal engagement with the restrictive view of episcopal governance in the original schemata, and what he - and the Church, required of a bishop.

While the Pope's attitude reflected his understanding that the Curia and Council were separate, he did not wish to force his will on the Curia's work.Footnote 67 Perhaps a more important reason reflected the episcopal vision that John XXIII wished to develop. The Pope allowed the bishops their full authority, to ‘get on’ and govern the Council. This process would then naturally relegate the Curia and its theology reflected in the schemata.Footnote 68

Pope John's leadership allowed the bishops to develop a clearer vision of what they wanted and what they did not want of the Council. This encouraged them to develop their identity in a measured way, placing them in a strong position to debate and enunciate a more expansive understanding of the episcopal role by including statements outlining collegiality, synodality, of episcopal governance and leadership throughout all conciliar documents.

The Bishops consult

The confusion of the opening day of the Council was followed by a three-day pause during which the bishops consulted on the membership of the commissions. Some curial members were elected, but membership also included those from outside the Curia and from previously underrepresented countries and regions.Footnote 69 Congar viewed this as, ‘THE FIRST CONCILIAR ACT, a refusal to accept even the possibility of prefabrication.’Footnote 70 The consultation was greatly welcomed by (banned) applause, which underlined its importance. As peritus, Joseph Ratzinger noted: ‘The Council had shown its resolve to act independently and autonomously, rather than be degraded to the status of a mere executive organ of the preparatory commissions.’Footnote 71 This three-day interlude also confirmed the growing importance of episcopal conferences.Footnote 72 Their meetings provided opportunities for many bishops to receive informed briefings from periti and to hear reports from other episcopal conferences.

These three days provided not only an opportunity for conciliar action but also for episcopal engagement. Bishops could engage with conciliar business as individuals, but also as members of their episcopal conferences, in a renewed, collegial and increasingly synodal manner. Congar commented: ‘ONE OF THE RESULTS OF THE COUNCIL COULD WELL BE THE BIRTH OF AN ORGANISED AND STRUCTURED WORLD-WIDE EPISCOPAL COLLEGIALITY.’Footnote 73

Message to Humanity (1962)

These actions were reflected in a message published by the bishops a few days later. Their Message to Humanity (1962),Footnote 74 spoke on three separate occasions about renewal. Firstly, the Council was an opportunity for episcopal renewal, ‘so that we may be found increasingly faithful to the gospel of Christ.’Footnote 75 Secondly, as shepherds and ‘pastors [we] devote all our energies and thoughts to the renewal of ourselves and the flocks committed to us.’Footnote 76 Thirdly, the bishops hoped for a ‘spiritual renewal from which will also flow a happy impulse on behalf of human values such as scientific discoveries, technological advances, and a wider diffusion of knowledge.’Footnote 77 This represented the reality of independent, autonomous episcopal action presented in a public document for the first time.

At the same time a plan was devised by Cardinal Suenens of Mechelin-Brussels and Cardinal Giovanni Battista Montini of Milan to address the seventy schemata prepared for the Council by the Preparatory Commissions. This ‘distressing’ volume was challenged to reduce possible episcopal frustrations.Footnote 78 The schemata represented the Curia's way of reiterating its authority ‘as Christ's juridically empowered agent in the world.’Footnote 79 However, Cardinal Montini could not identify how the schemata reflected Pope John's conciliar agenda.Footnote 80 With papal support they sat about creating a more thematic and condensed view of the material. In a note set to the Pope by Cardinal Suenens’ in March 1962 he spoke of removing the ‘dead wood [to] set the Council on a truly pastoral course. The Pope approved this verbally to me [Suenens]; and it then paved the way for future work.’Footnote 81 The choice of the liturgy as the first subject to be debated represented a familiar topic and support a positive, initial collegial experience.

The first session ends

By the end of the first session a more expansive episcopal consciousness and governance role was emerging. The bishops began to think and act autonomously, avoiding ‘a Council that merely approved prepared texts. It had gained its own momentum. A coordinating commission was set up with wider representation, and the schemata had gone back to much broader commissions for rewriting.’Footnote 82 The re-formed commissions were given norms to guide their work. One norm reflected a papal theme: ‘The stress is on the pastoral, rather than doctrinal or juridical, nature of the Council.’Footnote 83 As the first conciliar session ended the bishops began to emerge from behind their reserve and what emerged was ‘a gathering of holy and pastorally-minded men, united in a spirit of faith to seek not their personal gain but a better understanding of the evangelical message.’Footnote 84 The bishops understood more clearly that they had a right, indeed a duty to speak at the Council and to govern its procedures.

In his pre-conciliar orations and writings, John XXIII encouraged the bishops to attend a ‘pastoral’ Council at which they, rather than the Roman Curia, presided and presented the Church to the modern world. As they gathered together as bishops of a worldwide, rather than a Euro-centric Catholic Church, they experienced conciliarity. Gathered as a college around the pope, the Bishop of Rome, they learned to act collegially and synodally. Congar observed that during the first session:

The episcopate has discovered itself. It has become aware of itself. Given that, the formulas will emerge. They will come spontaneously, because the way has been cleared for them. […] As a result, each of the participants becomes, in many respects, another person: he sees things differently; tendencies asleep within him come fully alive, while others that had been dominant quietly withdraw; he is excited at sharing in other types of humanity, in other horizons; finally, he realises fully the world-wide solidarity and responsibility of the episcopate. Gone are the trite images of the life of a bishop in his see, alone there at the head of a diocese with its daily and sometimes petty problems. Each bishop feels himself to be a member of a body not limited by place or time: the body of the apostolic pastorate of which Jesus Christ is the invisible head, the one whose universal pastoral office is reflected in that of the successor of Peter.Footnote 85

With the death of Pope John XXIII on 3rd June 1963, this self-discovery now required the continuing support of a new pope.

The state of pastoral governance

A deep reassessment of the episcopal governance role had taken root. It stressed the collegiality of the bishops, who gather the universal Church (LG 19) and govern as the apostles (LG 20, 21) with and never without the pope. The task, however, required a new understanding of how the bishop carries out his ministry. O'Malley identifies the pastoral style of the Council as epideictic – the art of persuasion, of winning consensus.Footnote 86 In future, pastoral governance would involve the bishop in more than an exercise of jurisdiction. Ad intra, the bishop would be involved in an ongoing dialogue with the lay faithful and clergy of the local church, to interrogate not just what the bishop does, but how he does it, with whom, and to consider the consequences. Via the episcopal conference, and later the Synod of Bishops, he would assist in governing the universal Church. Ad extra, the dialogue would extend to other Christian communities, world religions and the secular authorities. In future, episcopal pastoral governance will be open to learning lessons from secular leadership, while continuing to model itself on the leadership of Jesus.Footnote 87

Pope John XXIII's death and legacy

In his memorial address delivered at the opening of the Council's second session on 29th September 1963, Cardinal Suenens clarified the centrality of the role of the episcopate in the late Pope John XXIII's ecclesiology, and in the hermeneutical understanding of the ecclesiology operating within the Council. Pope John changed the orientation of the relationship of bishops and Pope, as:

[T]he Council was not first of all a meeting of the bishops with the Pope, a horizontal coming together. It was first and above all a collective gathering of the whole episcopal college with the Holy Spirit, a vertical coming together, and entire openness to an immense outpouring of the Holy Spirit, a kind of new Pentecost.Footnote 88

The late Pope trusted and expressed confidence in the episcopate.Footnote 89 Their reciprocal appreciation was something to celebrate and to continue: by governing the Council in a pastoral manner and supporting Pope Paul VI.Footnote 90

Conclusion

In the late 1950s, bishops exercised a limited governance role. Some heard Pope John's initial invitation to govern the Council in a pastoral manner, which encouraged a more expansive view of episcopal governance. The Curia's function at the Council was redefined: to serve the Pope and bishops.Footnote 91

Episcopal action was supported by a growing understanding of episcopal collegiality. Meeting together in their episcopal conferences encouraged reflection on Pope John's invitation to govern the Council, and to identify something very tradition within Pope John's call. The call was to a return to resources such as the Scriptures and the Fathers.

When the bishops were ready to engage with the schemata on the liturgy, a greater number had a more profound and expansive understanding of their identity, of the conciliar task, and the invitation to govern the Council. They understood themselves as bishops of the Church, chosen by the Spirit, following in the footsteps of the Apostles, with John as their leader. Their future task was to govern the local Church and to assist in universal Church governance, in a similarly pastoral, collegial and synodal mode.Footnote 92

Pope Francis, like Pope John sees himself as Bishop of Rome and as head and member of the College of Bishops. He has re-received the Council's doctrine. His synodal church of the third millennium requires locally sourced and emotionally intelligent individuals with proven leadership skills. They will chime with the pastoral direction encouraged by Popes John and Francis. With the faithful they serve, they will welcome the mission to present the mercy, justice and love of God to today's world.

References

1 O'Hanlon, Gerard F., “Ireland and the Quiet Revolution in the Catholic Church,” The Furrow 68, no. 5 (2017), p. 261Google Scholar.

2 See: Mannion, Gerard, “Pope Francis's Agenda for the Church - Evangelii Gaudium as Papal Manifesto,” in Pope Francis and the future of Catholicism: Evangelii Gaudium and the papal agenda, ed. Mannion, Gerard (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017), p. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Pope John XXIII was elected on 28 October 1958. On 25 January 1959 he announced: ‘We propose to call a diocesan synod for Rome, and an ecumenical Council for the Universal Church [leading] to the desired and long awaited modernisation of the Code of Canon Law, which is expected to accompany and to crown these two efforts in the practical application of the rules of ecclesiastical discipline, applications the Spirit of the Lord will surely suggest to Us as We proceed.’ The Encyclicals and Other Messages of John XXIII, (Washington D.C.: TPS Press, 1964), p. 21Google Scholar.

4 Questa festiva: AAS 51 (1959), pp. 65-69, at p. 68. Later in the encyclical Ad Petri cathedram: AAS 51 (1959), pp. 497-531, n. 3.

5 Ad Petri cathedram, nn. 61-62.

6 Alberigo, Giuseppe, “John XXIII,” in The Papacy: An Encyclopedia, ed. Levillain, Philippe and O'Malley, John W. (New York: Routledge, 2002), p. 854Google Scholar.

7 The Encyclicals and Other Messages of John XXIII, p. 4. Synodal texts were promulgated 25-27 January 1960. See Pope John XXIII's Apostolic Constitution, Sollicitudo omnium Ecclesiarum (1960). An address of 24 November, 1960 to the Clergy of Rome entitled ‘The Roman Synod and the Priest’ may be found in: ibid., pp. 112-128. Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI commented on the Roman Synod: ‘I remember that [it] was thought of as a negative model. It was said - I don't know whether this was true - that they had read out prepared texts in the Basilica of Saint John, and that the members of the Synod had acclaimed, approved with applause, and that the Synod had been conducted thus. The [conciliar] bishops said: no, let's not do that.’ Pope Benedict XVI, “Meeting with the Parish Priests and Clergy of Rome,” Papal Address, (2013).

8 See: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/speeches/1960/index_en.htm. The proceedings were published in: Prima Romana Synodus A.D. MDCCCCLX (Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1960).

9 O'Malley, John W., Tradition and Transition: Historical Perspectives on Vatican II, Theology and Life series (Wilmington, Del.: Michael Glazier, 1989), p. 12Google Scholar.

10 Abbott, Walter M., Twelve Council Fathers: Exclusive Interviews with Twelve of the Most Important Figures Guiding the Vatican Council (New York/London: The Macmillan Company/Collier-Macmillan Limited, 1963), p. 23Google Scholar.

11 His preparations included ‘two programmatic speeches […] on September 11th (radio message) and on October 11th (opening speech).’ Lamberigts, Mathijs and Greiler, Alois, “"Concilium episcoporum est”: The Interventions of Liénart and Frings Revisited, October 13th, 1962," Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 73, no. 1 (1997), p. 56Google Scholar.

12 John, Pope XXIII, “Towards the Ecumenical Council,” The Pope Speaks 1960, pp. 376-385Google Scholar. Delivered 14 November 1960 in St. Peter's to around five hundred members of the commissions and secretariats.

13 Ibid., p. 378.

14 For their responses (vota) see: Acta et documenta Concilio Vaticano II apparando. Series prima (Antepraeparatoria). For a discussion of the vota see: Fouilloux, Étienne, “The Antepreparatory Phase: The Slow Emergence from Inertia (January, 1959 – October 1962),” in History of Vatican II: Announcing and Preparing Vatican Council II, ed. Alberigo, Giuseppe and Komonchak, Joseph A. (Maryknoll, N.Y./Leuven: Orbis/Peeters, 1995), pp. 91-149Google Scholar. For an overview see: Alberigo, Giuseppe, A Brief History of Vatican II, trans. Sherry, Matthew (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 2006), pp. 12-13Google Scholar. Subjects for conciliar discussion were also sought, for example, from Catholic universities. For details of a letter from the president of the Antepreparatory Committee, Cardinal Tardini, to the Rector of the Catholic University of Leuven, Mgr. Henri van Waeyenberg, in 1959, and the response from the University, the Belgian bishops and Religious see: Borgman, Erik, “Introduction,” in Catholic Theology of Revelation on the Eve of Vatican II: a Redaction History of the Schema De fontibus revelationis (1960-1962), ed. Schelkens, Karim (Leiden, The Netherlands: Koninklikje Brill NV, 2012), pp. 10-24Google Scholar.

15 John XXIII, “Towards the Ecumenical Council,” p. 381.

16 Ibid., p. 384.

17 25 December, 1961 in: “The Documents of Vatican II,” ed. Walter M. Abbott (London/Dublin: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966), pp. 703-709.

18 Ibid., p. 704.

19 Capovillia, Loris F., “Reflections on the Twentieth Anniversary,” in Vatican II Revisited: By Those Who Were There, ed. Stacpoole, Alberic (Minneapolis, Mn.: Winston Press, 1986), p. 118Google Scholar.

20 “The Documents of Vatican II,” p. 710.

21 Riccardi, Andrea, “The Tumultuous Days of the Council,” in History of Vatican II: Formation of the Council's Identity, First Period and Intersession, October 1962 - September 1963, ed. Alberigo, Giuseppe and Komonchak, Joseph A. (Maryknoll, N.Y./Leuven: Orbis/Peeters, 1997), p. 15Google Scholar.

22 “The Documents of Vatican II,” p. 712.

23 Ibid.

24 Ibid.

25 In the ‘Introduction’ to: Congar, Yves, True and False Reform in the Church, trans. Philibert, Paul, Rev. ed. (Collegeville, Mn.: Liturgical Press, 2011), iiiGoogle Scholar. Congar identified four necessary conditions for the discernment and realisation of genuine reform - one that does not result in schism. First, it advocates the centrality of charity and pastoral care i.e. avoiding merely rational system-building. Second, it demonstrates a continuing commitment to communion with the entire Church, especially committed to by the bishops. Thirdly, while reform is a task requiring patience, the hierarchy avoids straining the patience of reformers through carelessness or pointless disruptions. Finally, reform reflects fidelity to Catholic tradition. Tradition does not consist merely of the accumulated treasury of the past, but is dynamic: ‘the continuity of development arising from the initial gift of the Church’. Ibid., p. 117. While Nuncio in Paris (1944 -53), Roncalli was reacquainted with his friend, Lambert Beauduin, while the latter was co-founding the Centre de Pastorale Liturgique, Paris (from 1943). See: Leggett, Richard G., “Lambert Beauduin,” in How Firm a Foundation: Leaders of the Liturgical Movement, ed. Tuzik, Robert L. (Chicago, Ill.: Liturgy Training Publications, 1990), p. 27Google Scholar.

26 “The Documents of Vatican II,” p. 715.

27 Ibid., p. 716.

28 Riccardi, “The Tumultuous Days of the Council,” p. 18.

29 “The Documents of Vatican II,” p. 718.

30 Ibid., p. 719.

31 Komonchak, Joseph A., “The Significance of Vatican Council II for Ecclesiology,” in The Gift of the Church: A Textbook on Ecclesiology in Honor of Patrick Granfield, O.S.B., ed. Phan, Peter C. (Collegeville, Mn.: Liturgical Press, 2000), p. 73Google Scholar.

32 Ratzinger, Joseph, Theological Highlights of Vatican II (New York: Paulist Press, 2009), p. 22Google Scholar.

33 Schelkens, Karim, The Council Notes of Edward Schillebeeckx 1962-1963 (Leuven: Peeters, 2011), p. 11Google Scholar.

34 Alberigo, Giuseppe, “The Announcement of the Council from the Security of the Fortress to the Lure of the Quest,” in History of Vatican II: Announcing and Preparing Vatican Council II, ed. Alberigo, Giuseppe and Komonchak, Joseph A. (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis; Leuven: Peeters, 1995), p. 34Google Scholar.

35 O'Malley, John W., What Happened at Vatican II (Cambridge, Massachusetts/London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2008), p. 103Google Scholar.

36 The five volumes were published in 1936, 1937, 1938, 1946 and 1957.

37 Borromeo's ‘work as Archbishop of Milan (1564-84) enormously influenced the implementation of the Council of Trent.’ Alberigo, Giuseppe, Jossua, Jean Pierre, and Komonchak, Joseph A., eds., The Reception of Vatican II (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1987), p. 6Google Scholar.

38 Hebblethwaite, Peter, John XXIII: Pope of the Century (London: Continuum, 2000), p. 30Google Scholar. Jared Wicks notes the importance of Borromeo's Archivo and of Trent to John XXIII. See: Wicks, Jared, “Tridentine Motivations of Pope John XXIII before and during Vatican II,” Theological Studies 75, no. 4 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 O'Malley, What Happened at Vatican II, p. 103.

40 Jedin, Hubert, Repgen, Kongad, and Dolan, John Patrick, eds., History of the Church, 10 vols., vol. 10 (London: Burns & Oates, 1981), p. 99Google Scholar.

41 Faggioli also notes its importance for Pope John. Faggioli, Massimo, True Reform: Liturgy and Ecclesiology in Sacrosanctum Concilium (Collegeville, Mn.: Liturgical Press, 2012), p. 29Google Scholar.

42 Komonchak, Joseph A., “Convening Vatican II,” Commonweal 126, no. 3 (1999), p. 10Google Scholar.

43 Heyndrikx, Marcel, Towards Another Future: On the Christian Faith and Its Shape between Yesterday and Tomorrow, Louvain Theological and Pastoral Monographs (Louvain: Peeters, 2006), p. 92Google Scholar.

44 Ibid.

45 Oakley, Francis, “Authoritative and Ignored: The Overlooked Council of Constance,” Doctrine and Life 64, no. 9 (2014), p. 31Google Scholar.

46 Komonchak, Joseph A., “The Struggle for the Council During the Preparation of Vatican II (1960-1962),” in History of Vatican II: Announcing and Preparing Vatican Council II, ed. Alberigo, Giuseppe and Komonchak, Joseph A. (Maryknoll, N.Y./Leuven: Orbis/Peeters, 1995), p. 350Google Scholar.

47 Riccardi, “The Tumultuous Days of the Council,” p. 66.

48 Ibid., p. 67.

49 See Riccardi: ‘In the view of Siri, as of Ottaviani and others, the duty of the Council fathers was to go also with the great stream of the Church's tradition in theology and government, and to do it quickly and with brevity. Rome and the Curia were the best interpreters in that tradition.’ ibid., p. 64.

50 Gerald P. Fogarty, “The Council Gets Underway,” ibid., ed. Giuseppe Alberigo and Joseph A. Komonchak, p. 70.

51 Congar, Yves, My Journal of the Council, trans. Ronayne, Mary John, Boulding, M. Cecily, and Minns, Denis (Dublin: Dominican Publication, 2012), p. 89Google Scholar.

52 First session: 13 October - 8 December 1962.

53 Congar, My Journal of the Council, pp. 91-92.

54 At Vatican II, episcopal conferences became ‘an important instrument for the exchange of information and for the construction of opinion among the bishops of particular nations or regions.’ Komonchak, Joseph A., “Introduction: Episcopal Conferences under Criticism,” in Episcopal Conferences: Historical, Canonical and Theological Studies, ed. Reese, Thomas J. (Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1989), p. 3Google Scholar.

55 De Roo, Bishop Remi J., “Experiences of a Council Father,” The Downside Review 121, no. 422 (2003), p. 58CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

56 ‘Bishops were told not to rush to complete their voting forms.’ ibid., p. 54.

57 Riccardi, “The Tumultuous Days of the Council,” p. 34.

58 Schelkens, The Council Notes of Edward Schillebeeckx 1962-1963, p. 3. Fn.4.

59 Faggioli, Massimo, “Reform of the Curia at and After Vatican II,” Concilium, no. 5 (2013), p. 26Google Scholar.

60 Lamberigts and Greiler, “"Concilium episcoporum est”: The Interventions of Liénart and Frings Revisited, October 13th, 1962," p. 56.

61 Ibid. The second ‘current’ concerned groups who influenced the formulation of the schemata and ‘indicated how the Council should proceed, according to the mind of the Curialists.’ ibid.

62 Ibid.

63 See footnote 5: ‘Minutes of the subcommission for the organisational preparation of the Council show that different ideas were expressed on the future commissions, with Liénart and Frings present. Finally, a compromise was accepted between appointments by the Pope and elections.’ ibid.

64 The conciliar rules were published, motu proprio, Appropinquante Concilio 6 September 1962. The importance of influencing elections to the commissions was pointed out by Hubert Jedin to Cardinal Frings. Lamberigts and Greiler suggested the information was probably discussed by ‘Suenens, Léger, Montini, J. Döpfner [...], Frings, Liénart, and others during the meetings of the central preparatory commission ’ ibid., p. 57.

65 Ibid., p. 61.

66 Remi J. De Roo, “Experiences of a Council Father,” p. 54.

67 Lamberigts and Greiler, “"Concilium episcoporum est”: The Interventions of Liénart and Frings Revisited, October 13th, 1962," p. 56.

68 Komonchak, “The Struggle for the Council During the Preparation of Vatican II (1960-1962),” p. 356. This stance is reflected in the Pope's personal diary. See: Agende, November 19, 1962. Cited in: Riccardi, “The Tumultuous Days of the Council,” p. 67.

69 For a list of the initial 160 elected members see: Anderson, Floyd, ed. Council Daybook, Vatican II: Sessions 1 & 2 (1962-3), 3 vols., vol. 1 (Washington: National Catholic Welfare Conference, 1965), pp. 42-44Google Scholar. These numbers were subsequently increased. See: ‘List of New Appointees to Council Commissions’ ibid., pp. 54-55.

70 Congar, My Journal of the Council, p. 92. Capitalisation and emphasis original.

71 Ratzinger, Theological Highlights of Vatican II, p. 23.

72 For example: ‘The Pan-African group [...], gave birth to “a committee of theologians for all of Africa.” The “strategy workshop,” a French-speaking group that would hold meetings on Wednesdays, also got under way [...]. The best organised conferences (the French, the German-speaking, the Dutch, the Polish, the Canadians, and others) had calendars of meetings to listen to views on the work they were resuming.’ Melloni, Alberto, “The Beginning of the Second Period: The Great Debate on the Church,” in History of Vatican II: The Mature Council, Second Period and Intersession, September 1963 - September 1964, ed. Alberigo, Giuseppe and Komonchak, Joseph A. (Maryknoll, N.Y./Leuven: Orbis/Peeters, 2000), p. 41Google Scholar.

73 On 15 October, 1962. Congar, My Journal of the Council, p. 95. Capitalisation and emphasis original. Congar's comment was made after the preparation of lists for the various commissions by the episcopal conferences. See: Riccardi, “The Tumultuous Days of the Council,” p. 34. See also: Congar, My Journal of the Council, p. 140.

74 “The Documents of Vatican II,” pp. 3-7. Its full title is: Message to Humanity: Issued at the Beginning of the Second Vatican Council by its Fathers, with the Endorsement of the Supreme Pontiff. The first paragraph is headed ‘The Fathers of the Council to all Men’. Abbott comments: ‘For the first time in the history of Ecumenical Councils, a Council addresses itself to all men, not just to members of the Catholic Church. In the following year, Pope John XXIII added, for the first time, the salutation “and to all men of good will” as the opening of a papal encyclical (See: Pacem in terris, 11 April, 1963).’ ibid., p. 3. Fn. 2. For background to its authorship see: Rynne, Xavier, Letters from Vatican City: Vatican Council II (First Session) Background and Debates (London: Faber & Faber, 1963), pp. 88-92Google Scholar.

75 “The Documents of Vatican II,” p. 3.

76 Ibid., p. 4.

77 Ibid., p. 5.

78 See: Ratzinger, Theological Highlights of Vatican II, pp. 19-20.

79 Komonchak, Joseph A., “What's Happening to Doctrine?,” Commonweal 112 (1985), p. 456Google Scholar.

80 Riccardi, “The Tumultuous Days of the Council,” p. 56.

81 Suenens, Leon-Joseph Cardinal, “A Plan for the Whole Council,” in Vatican II Revisited: By Those Who Were There, ed. Stacpoole, Alberic (Minneapolis, Mn.: Winston Press, 1986), p. 89Google Scholar. The note is added as Appendix I: ibid., pp. 92-94.

82 Collins, Paul, Papal Power: A Proposal for Change in Catholicism's Third Millennium (London: Fount, 1997), p, 76Google Scholar.

83 McBrien, Richard, “The Church (Lumen gentium),” in Modern Catholicism: Vatican II and After, ed. Hastings, Adrian (London/New York: SPCK/Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 85Google Scholar. Emphasis added.

84 Fesquet, Henri, The Drama of Vatican II: The Ecumenical Council June, 1962 - December, 1965, trans. Murchland, Bernard (New York, N.Y.: Random House, 1967), p. 72Google Scholar.

85 Referenced by: Alberigo, Giuseppe, “The Conciliar Experience “Learning on Their Own”,” in History of Vatican II: Formation of the Council's Identity, First Period and Intersession, October 1962 - September 1963, ed. Alberigo, Giuseppe and Komonchak, Joseph A. (Maryknoll, N.Y./Leuven: Orbis/Peeters, 1997), pp. 575-576Google Scholar.

86 O'Malley, John W., “Vatican II Revisited as Reconciliation: The Francis Factor,” in The Legacy of Vatican II, ed. Faggioli, Massimo and Vicini, Andrea (New York / Mahwah N.J.: Paulist Press, 2015), p. 17Google Scholar.

87 For a deeper discussion of leadership see: Gadie, Paul, “Episcopal Pastoral Governance and Leadership,” Doctrine and Life 66, no. 7 (2016), pp. 13-22Google Scholar.

88 Suenens, Leon-Joseph Cardinal, A Man Sent From God (Dublin: Veritas Publications, 1992), p. 10Google Scholar.

89 Hebblethwaite comments on Pope John's approval of episcopal initiatives by Cardinals Suenens, Lercaro, and Montini, to ensure the smoother passage of the Council into a second session. Hebblethwaite, Peter, “John XXIII,” in Modern Catholicism: Vatican II and After, ed. Hastings, Adrian (London/New York: SPCK/Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 32Google Scholar.

90 Ibid., p. 11. Gerard Mannion speaks of the ‘Roncalli Factor’. The Pope had a great capacity for pastoral sensitivity as a priest, shaped by his humble background. John XXIII was also shaped by living in a variety of ‘cultures and multi-faith contexts and his experiences and perception of what happens when there is a suspension of the ethical and ugly realpolitik, such as in Vichy France. But, of equally vital importance were also his own studies and researches as a historian, especially of the Church, itself.’ Mannion, Gerard, “Pacem in Terris@50: Gifts Old and New for Church and Society in Recent Times,” in Human Dignity in World Affairs: Celebrating Pacem in Terris and its Legacy (Georgetown University, Washington 2013), p. 1Google Scholar.

91 Faggioli, “Reform of the Curia at and After Vatican II,” pp. 25-26.

92 ‘Synodal’ connotes a way of working ‘though group dialogue and discernment.’ Hinze, Bradford, “The Ecclesiology of Pope Francis and the Future of the Church in Africa,” Journal of Global Catholicism 2, no. 1 (2017), p. 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Today, the concept of pastoral governance continues to challenge the bishops to working in a synodal manner with other bishops and with all of Christ's faithful.