This year marks the sixtieth anniversary of the closing of the Second Vatican Council and also the sixty-third anniversary of the opening of the Council on October 11, 1962, the Feast of Our Lady’s Divine Maternity in the usus antiquior. At its closing in 1965, Pope Paul VI, the pope who would bring the Council to its conclusion, proclaimed Our Lady the Mother of the Church.
Much has been written about the Council and its aftermath; and for those who are older, the experience of its implementation for good or for ill, has been described by some as revolutionary. The liturgical reforms inspired by the conciliar texts are perhaps the most hotly debated fruits of this signal event, and this is quite understandable given the centrality of the sacred liturgy in the life of the Church. The sacred liturgy is the vehicle of the faith, the source and summit of the Church’s life, as the Dogmatic Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (Sacrosanctum Concilium) would solemnly affirm.
Unbeknownst to most people however, is the vast preparation that took place before the Council. Historically, ecumenical councils have addressed themselves to the challenges and needs faced by the Church in a particular time or crisis. The Second Vatican Ecumenical Council differed from its antecedents in that no heresy threatening either the deposit of the faith (depositum fidei) of the Church herself caused it to be convoked. Arguably, the tragedy of two world wars had caused such upheavals that the Church had to address the toll of these conflicts on a wounded humanity always in need of the saving message of the Gospel. The inspiration for the idea of a council is attributed to a conversation between Pope John XXIII and his Secretary of State, Cardinal Tardini. In a discussion about the many difficulties being experienced in the world at the time, and the Church’s role in a rapidly changing world, the thought of a council emerged. Thus, on 25 January 1959, in a discourse given to the cardinals gathered at the Basilica of St. Paul Outside the Walls, the aged pope announced the proposal of a dual celebration: a diocesan synod for his own diocese of Rome and an ecumenical council for the Universal Church.
With the announcement, preparations began, and thanks to the ability of easy communication, it is not an exaggeration to say that never in her history had the Church organized such a vast meeting. The appendix to this commemorative article contains an English translation of the submissions of the Latin Rite bishops of the province of Ontario. These submissions were almost exclusively written in Latin and as such, are beyond the reach of most readers today. Nevertheless, they are accessible in translation in the appendix and they make for interesting reading. What follows is a brief analysis of these submissions or vota, to use the technical term. This was the first step in the preparations for the Council. Their submissions to the Counicl’s Antepreparatory Commission are contained in a series published by Vatican Polyglot Press in 1960: Acta et Documenta Concilio Oecumenico Vaticano II Apparando, Series I, Antepreparatoria. This series is available as an online resource (Cf. Internet archive).
As historical documents, these submissions are invaluable because they provide us with a record of the aspirations and concerns of bishops as fathers of souls. It is fair to say that few if any of the Ontario bishops foresaw the extent or scope of the conciliar reforms. Nevertheless, their contributions reveal a concern for the effective mission of the Church at both the local and universal levels. The Council documents, the dogmatic constitutions, decrees and declarations have their origin (albeit some more than others) in the concerns, observation and desires of the world’s bishops and other ecclesiastics. It is from these submissions that members of the Preparatory Commission compiled the seventy schemata which would form the basis for the conciliar debates and proceedings.
The Council is Announced and the Antepreparatory Phase Begins
After the announcement of the Council on January 29, 1959 at the Roman Basilica, on May 17th, the Feast of Pentecost, Pope John named the Antepreparatory Commission for the Council, and its task was to contact the world episcopate and request suggestions as well as proposals formulated by the Dicasteries of the Roman Curia, seek the counsel of theological and canonical faculties of Catholic universities, and lastly, to organize the different commissions and secretaries to deal with the actual work of the council. On June 18, 1959, the President of the Pontifical Antepreparatory Commission for the Ecumenical Council sent a letter to the world episcopate inviting proposals and opinions which might be discussed at the future Council. These submissions were to be in Latin and if possible, to be submitted no later than September 30th. On June 29, 1959, Pope John XXIII issued his first encyclical letter, Ad Petri Cathedram, wherein he articulated the Council’s purpose: This fond hope compelled Us to make public Our intention to hold and Ecumenical Council. Bishops from every part of the world will gather there to discuss serious religious topics. They will consider, in particular, the growth of the Catholic faith, the restoration of sound morals among the Christian flock, and appropriate adaptation of Church discipline to the needs and conditions of our time. This event will be a wonderful spectacle of truth, unity and charity. For those who behold it but are not one with the Apostolic See, We hope that it will be a gentle invitation to seek and find unity for which Jesus Christ prayed so ardently to His Father in heaven (61, 62). On June 30, 1959, the Antepreparatory Commission met for the first time in a plenary assembly with Pope John presiding. Less than a year later, on May 30, 1960, the antepreparatory phase ended. Its task of collecting the responses of the world episcopate completed, commissions now met to collate the received submissions. The second phase would be known as the Preparatory phase.
The Bishops of Ontario Submit their Responses
There are three ecclesiastical provinces of Ontario: Kingston, Toronto and Ottawa. Responses from the Archbishops and Bishops of the sees comprising these provinces vary in length and content. There was no reply from the Archdiocese of Toronto then headed by James Cardinal McGuigan. This may have been due to his precarious health. In February, 1961 the see of Toronto would receive the appointment of Archbishop Philip Pocock as Coadjutor Archbishop. Submissions were made by all the bishops and archbishops of the Ontario dioceses with the exception of Bishop Webster of Peterborough who informed the Commission that nothing of particular importance had resulted from a discussion with the senior priests of the diocese. Similarly, Bishop Levesque of Hearst expressed his confidence in the judgment of the Holy See in regard to the upcoming Council. Of the other submissions, they reveal concerns that may be grouped in the following categories: Liturgy, Laity and Ecumenism. The council would concern itself with all of these topics. The submissions of the Ontario bishops reveal a genuine concern for the care and salvation of souls.
Liturgy
The influence of Pope Pius XII (1939-1958) is discernible in the conciliar documents and it is not an exaggeration to say that he prepared the Church for the Council through the reforms promulgated during his pontificate. This influence is evident in the submission of the Ontario bishops. Two major encyclicals of his pontificate are reflects in the submissions of the Canadian Council Fathers. In Mystici Corporis Christi (June 29, 1943), Pope Pius had expounded the nature of the Church in terms of Christ’s Mystical Body. Mediator Dei (November 20, 1947) on the liturgy followed four years later, calling for the intelligent participation of the laity in the Church’s liturgy.
A liturgical reform of the Holy Week liturgy was put in place in 1955, as well as a standardized relaxation of the Eucharistic fast (Sacram communionem, March 19, 1957). These theological concepts and reforms are mentioned in the Ontario submissions and a wider application of these reforms was sought especially in regard to the use of vernacular in the liturgy (Cf. Bp. Brodeur, Abp. Lemieux); though Bp. Jennings of Thunder Bay cautioned too liberal a use of the vernacular in order to safeguard the language of the Mass as it is now and to avoid a dangerous confusion of conversion to many languages.
The question of the Eucharistic fast was also concerning. Bishops Cody, Ryan and Smith all requested a relaxation of this discipline and their submissions reflect shared consultation on this matter since the texts of their submissions are almost identical. Of particular note is the submission of Bp. McCarthy of St. Catharines whose interesting treatment of the concept of ‘servile work’ indirectly approaches the question of greater participation in the liturgy by the laity. In retrospect, the liturgical changes introduced after the closing of the Council and the controversial work of the Consilium on the Liturgy have been and continue to be debated and discussed. Ironically, the sacred liturgy which ought to unite Catholics in sacred worship has sadly become a cause of division. Conspiracy theories abound and ideological battles are waged and in the fog of the liturgical wars that afflict us we seem to forget that the one thing necessary is to worship the Father in spirit and in truth.
Laity
As noted, the encyclical of Pope Pius XII on the Church, Mystici corporis Christi expounded the nature of the Church in terms of Our Lord’s Mystical Body. This concept was the thematic unity for the submission of Abp. Lemieux, the most theologically based of all the Ontario submissions. This is not surprising since the University of St. Paul in Ottawa would have provided ample opportunity for consultation with its theological faculty. He called for a more complete synthesis of the concept of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ. Those interested in ecclesiology will find his submission of particular interest. As for lay participation in the mission of the Church, this is discussed by all the bishops in light of Catholic Action, then a nearly universal lay movement. Although the bishops spoke of the laity’s role especially in the missionary activity of the Church, their treatment is situated within the narrow context of movements and organization.
The conciliar document on the laity, Apostolicam actuositatem states that the laity shares in the apostolate of the Church since inserted as they are in the Mystical Body of Christ by baptism and strengthened by the power of the Holy Spirit in confirmation, it is by the Lord himself that they are assigned to the apostolate (3). Interestingly, it was during a debate on this very Decree on the apostolate of the laity on October 7, 1964 that one of the more prominent Canadian Council Fathers, Bp. Alexander Carter criticized the schema on the laity as too clerical (nimis clericalis). Bp. Carter also noted that it was absurd (absurdum esse) that not a single layperson was numbered among the members of this commission. As noted above, the texts of the discussions and debates at the council are available online and make for interesting reading. For students of the Council and specifically for those interested in the genesis and development of the conciliar documents, the Acta Synodalia Sacrosancti Concilii Oecumenici Vaticani II provide a comprehensive record of the discussions and decisions of the Vatican Council.
Ecumenism
The desire for unity among Christians was one of the Council’s desired ends as expressed by Pope John XXIII. This desire for unity was likewise present in the Ontario submissions, especially in the submission of Abp. O’Sullivan of Kingston and of Bp. Cody of London and Bp. Ryan of Hamilton. All three prelates provided the same analysis of Protestantism in Canada and saw in certain areas of Protestantism a fertile field for converts to the Catholic Church. Their submissions, like that of Abp. Lemieux of Ottawa request a clearer presentation of Church teachings as well as a clearer presentation on the very nature of the Church. This is what arguably the Council Fathers produced in Lumen Gentium, the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, wherein the basic question in regard to the Church’s existence is answered and ‘her own nature and universal mission’ is set forth (1).
Expressive of more local concerns is the desire for close union between the Eastern and Western rites especially in the co-ordination of their respective codes of canon law. Also noteworthy are the suggestions made to enhance the universality of the Church, especially the request that the College of Cardinals be expanded so as to reflect this universality.
The submissions of the Ontario bishops to the initial phase of preparation for the Second Vatican Council, like those of bishops throughout the Catholic world are a written record of the state of the Church in what has been described as an age of growth and expansion unparalleled in Church history.
Ironically, however, beginning with the year of the Council’s closing, the Church continues to live through a period of precipitous decline. In the Church’s long history, some councils were successful in their proposed purposes and others were not. Whatever the judgment on the Second Vatican Council may be, it is necessary to approach the subject without bias so as to formulate a learned and studied opinion. For the local Church at least in Ontario, a reading of the submissions of the Ontario bishops to the Second Vatican Council’s brings us to the very beginning of an event that Pope John XXIII hoped to be a wonderful spectacle of truth, unity and charity.
A Christian Anthropology
The submissions of the Ontario bishops emerged from a more homogenous ecclesiastical and secular culture. In the Council’s aftermath, Canadian culture quickly became multicultural as a matter of government policy and so did the culture of the Church, at least in the liturgical expressions of the one faith. Perhaps the caveat of Bp. Jennings on the too liberal use of the vernacular was prescient both as it concerns the unity of the Church and of our own Canadian culture. As a nation, unity is our strength. The assertion that Canada is a ‘post-national state’ (whatever this may mean) and accusations of ‘colonialism’ that are now routinely made against those who first brought the Christian faith to our shores is an affront to our shared Canadian culture. We do have one. Multiculturalism, though enshrined as a feature of Canadian life is arguably now a threat to our national unity.
Perhaps it is better to speak of Canada as a multi-ethnic society with one culture, a Christian culture founded on Judeo-Christian principles that define the identity of our nation and which are foundational most especially to our governments and educational institutes at every level. The Ontario bishops who prepared for the Second Vatican Council expressed an overwhelming concern for the salvation of souls; and for this reason sought to make the Church’s life and mission more effective both locally and universally. Though not articulated, their submissions reflect a theological anthropology that recognises the human person as a unity of body and soul. As the universal sacrament of salvation, the Church is at the service of the human person whatever the need, but always with a view to salvation in Christ. Perhaps what is needed more than anything as the Church continues to serve our nation is a renewed, clear articulation of the Church’s teaching on the nature, purpose and destiny of the human person created in the image and likeness of God. A multicultural society is a society of competing anthropologies, some of which are violent, dismissive of inherent human dignity and equality; while others seem to be at the service of one of fallen humanity’s most crippling tendencies – the lust of domination, the libido dominandi.
The ressourcement associated with the Second Vatican Council invites the Church in our day to proclaim the saving message of the Gospel in all simplicity and conviction: ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel’ (Mk. 1:15).
The submissions of the Ontario bishops to the first preparatory phase of the Second Vatican Council may in some instances appear to be trivial or insignificant. Nevertheless, they reveal a firm conviction of the truth of the Catholic Faith and that faith in Jesus Christ, Way, Truth and Life is the greatest good for man. Christian culture confirms these goods. The Council Fathers from the ecclesiastical provinces of Ontario have all gone to their eternal reward. May their concern and zeal for the salvation of souls and the wellbeing of our nation inspire all the members of the Church to witness to truth of the Messiah because there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12).
Addendum:
A list of the Ontario Bishops whose written submissions may be found here Bishops Prepare for the Second Vatican Council as a pdf.
Diocese of Alexandria (Cornwall) Bp. R. Brodeur
Diocese of Fort William (Thunder Bay) Bp. E. Q. Jennings
Diocese of Hamilton Bp. J. F. Ryan
Diocese of Hearst Bp. L. Levesque
Archdiocese of Kingston Abp. J. A. O’ Sullivan
Diocese of London Bp. J. C. Cody
Diocese of Pembroke Bp. W. Smith
Diocese of Peterborough Bp. B. I. Webster
Archdiocese of Ottawa Bp. M. J. Lemieux
Diocese of Sault Sainte Marie Bp. A. Carter
Diocese of St. Catharines Bp. T. J. McCarthy
Diocese of Timmins Bp. M. Tessier
