MOSAIC Spring 2023 | Page 15

Cardinal Ratzinger , “ despite and in the midst of the plurality she has accepted .” The council ’ s ecclesiology , indeed , affirms that the Church of Jesus Christ is a single reality , historically realized in a concrete , visible form , subsisting in the Catholic Church rather than an erroneous ecclesial relativism or pluralism — a multiple subsistence ecclesiology — in which the Catholic Church is one among many churches . Yet , the Council ’ s ecclesiology also recognizes elements of truth and sanctification outside the visible boundaries of the Church .
Thus , we must consider the historical context of the document , particularly if its statements are polemical and antithetical . All truth formulated for polemical reasons is partial — albeit true . This means that what these documents , such as Mortalium Animos , fail to say is not necessarily denied ; furthermore , what they do say is true , albeit said insufficiently and imperfectly , less than balanced or comprehensive . What is said must be supplemented and hence interpreted with respect to the “ full doctrine and the full life of the [ Church ],” as Yves Congar rightly stated . He adds , “ Ambivalence , if there is any , will be resolved positively in the direction of orthodoxy .” Aidan Nichols , OP , correctly explains : [ T ] he doctrinal statements of a Council ( which , obviously , are far more important for the Church of all ages ) may be less than balanced or comprehensive and thus , by implication , need supplementation , whether from another Council or from other sources . . . . We must not ask for perfection from Councils , even in their doctrinal aspect . It is enough to know that , read according to a hermeneutic of continuity they will not lead us astray . An Ecumenical Council will never formally commit the Church to doctrinal error . It is , moreover , unfair to ask of Councils what they have not claimed to provide .
Pope Paul VI and Enrico Dante during Second Vatican Council
On the fiftieth anniversary of Vatican II , Benedict underscored the limits of Nostra Aetate because of its overly positive approach to religions , failing to adopt a critical stance . His position clearly distinguishes , as Nichols puts it , “ criticizing incomplete or unbalanced formulations in the language of the Conciliar texts . . . from the claim that the Council fathers formally committed the Church to doctrinal error .” The former is within the limits of acceptable criticism , not making one a dissenter ; the latter is not .
Ratzinger clearly sides with this hermeneutical position . He continues with a statement adumbrating the second hermeneutic he stated in 2005 by stressing that Vatican II did “ nothing but reaffirm the continuity of Catholicism .” Of course , this claim is not inconsistent with “ expressing a specific truth in a new way .” But this new expression , according to Vincent of Lérins , “ must remain within the proper limits , i . e ., the same dogma , the same meaning , the same judgment of truth ” [ eodem sensu eademque sententia ]. Here , too , there is a reform and renewal that the Church engages in her “ ever deepening and ever better understanding [ of ] the treasure of faith ” that Christ himself entrusted to the one , unique Church . This means that “ new thinking is demanded on a specific truth and a new and vital relationship with it .” Thus , there is a development of her fundamental teaching rather than a doctrinal change .
In the Ratzinger Report , Ratzinger urges us “ to return to the authentic texts of the original Vatican II .” John Paul II convened the extraordinary Synod of 1985 , on the 20th anniversary of the close of Vatican II . It laid down the master key for interpreting these texts . For example , the normative prioritizing of the four constitutions ( liturgy , revelation , the Church , and culture ) of the Council as the key to the other documents ; attending to all the documents , in themselves and their close interrelationship ; affirming the interrelationship between the pastoral import of the documents and their doctrinal content ; no opposition between the spirit and letter of the texts ; the hermeneutic of continuity and renewal ; and the illuminating power of Vatican II for our contemporary problems .
God richly blessed the Church with this master of dogmatic and ecumenical theology . May we continue to deepen our thought and life on the writings of Joseph Ratzinger / Benedict XVI .
Dr . Eduardo J . Echeverria is a Professor of Philosophy and Theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary . shms . edu 15