| [
Italiano ] - [
Française] - [ Español
] - [ Deutsch
] - [ English ]
- [ Portugués ]-
[ Polacco ]
[ Latino ]
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS
OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
Introduction
The Second Vatican Council, with its Dogmatic Constitution Lumen
gentium, and its Decrees on Ecumenism (Unitatis redintegratio)
and the Oriental Churches (Orientalium Ecclesiarum), has contributed
in a decisive way to the renewal of Catholic ecclesiolgy. The
Supreme Pontiffs have also contributed to this renewal by offering
their own insights and orientations for praxis: Paul VI in his
Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam suam (1964) and John Paul II in his
Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint (1995).
The consequent duty of theologians to expound with greater clarity
the diverse aspects of ecclesiology has resulted in a flowering
of writing in this field. In fact it has become evident that this
theme is a most fruitful one which, however, has also at times
required clarification by way of precise definition and correction,
for instance in the declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae (1973), the
Letter addressed to the Bishops of the Catholic Church Communionis
notio (1992), and the declaration Dominus Iesus (2000), all published
by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The vastness of the subject matter and the novelty of many of
the themes involved continue to provoke theological reflection.
Among the many new contributions to the field, some are not immune
from erroneous interpretation which in turn give rise to confusion
and doubt. A number of these interpretations have been referred
to the attention of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Given the universality of Catholic doctrine on the Church, the
Congregation wishes to respond to these questions by clarifying
the authentic meaning of some ecclesiological expressions used
by the magisterium which are open to misunderstanding in the theological
debate.
RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS
First Question: Did the Second Vatican Council change
the Catholic doctrine on the Church?
Response: The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended
to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened and more
fully explained it.
This was exactly what John XXIII said at the beginning of the
Council1. Paul VI affirmed it2 and commented in the act of promulgating
the Constitution Lumen gentium: "There is no better comment
to make than to say that this promulgation really changes nothing
of the traditional doctrine. What Christ willed, we also will.
What was, still is. What the Church has taught down through the
centuries, we also teach. In simple terms that which was assumed,
is now explicit; that which was uncertain, is now clarified; that
which was meditated upon, discussed and sometimes argued over,
is now put together in one clear formulation"3. The Bishops
repeatedly expressed and fulfilled this intention4.
Second Question: What is the meaning of the affirmation
that the Church of Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?
Response: Christ "established here on earth" only one
Church and instituted it as a "visible and spiritual community"5,
that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has always
existed and will always exist, and in which alone are found all
the elements that Christ himself instituted.6 "This one Church
of Christ, which we confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic
and apostolic […]. This Church, constituted and organised
in this world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed
by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him"7.
In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium ‘subsistence’
means this perduring, historical continuity and the permanence
of all the elements instituted by Christ in the Catholic Church8,
in which the Church of Christ is concretely found on this earth.
It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm correctly
that the Church of Christ is present and operative in the churches
and ecclesial Communities not yet fully in communion with the
Catholic Church, on account of the elements of sanctification
and truth that are present in them.9 Nevertheless, the word "subsists"
can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone precisely
because it refers to the mark of unity that we profess in the
symbols of the faith (I believe... in the "one" Church);
and this "one" Church subsists in the Catholic Church.10
Third Question: Why was the expression "subsists
in" adopted instead of the simple word "is"?
Response: The use of this expression, which indicates the full
identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church, does
not change the doctrine on the Church. Rather, it comes from and
brings out more clearly the fact that there are "numerous
elements of sanctification and of truth" which are found
outside her structure, but which "as gifts properly belonging
to the Church of Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity"11.
"It follows that these separated churches and Communities,
though we believe they suffer from defects, are deprived neither
of significance nor importance in the mystery of salvation. In
fact the Spirit of Christ has not refrained from using them as
instruments of salvation, whose value derives from that fullness
of grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the Catholic
Church"12.
Fourth Question: Why does the Second Vatican Council
use the term "Church" in reference to the oriental Churches
separated from full communion with the Catholic Church?
Response: The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of
the term. "Because these Churches, although separated, have
true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic
succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means
of which they remain linked to us by very close bonds"13,
they merit the title of "particular or local Churches"14,
and are called sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches15.
"It is through the celebration of the Eucharist of the Lord
in each of these Churches that the Church of God is built up and
grows in stature"16. However, since communion with the Catholic
Church, the visible head of which is the Bishop of Rome and the
Successor of Peter, is not some external complement to a particular
Church but rather one of its internal constitutive principles,
these venerable Christian communities lack something in their
condition as particular churches17.
On the other hand, because of the division between Christians,
the fullness of universality, which is proper to the Church governed
by the Successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion with him,
is not fully realised in history18.
Fifth Question: Why do the texts of the Council and those
of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of "Church"
with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation
of the sixteenth century?
Response: According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do
not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and
are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church.
These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the
absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the
genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery19 cannot,
according to Catholic doctrine, be called "Churches"
in the proper sense20.
The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, at the Audience granted to
the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine
of the Faith, ratified and confirmed these Responses, adopted
in the Plenary Session of the Congregation, and ordered their
publication.
Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith, June 29, 2007, the Solemnity of the Holy Apostles Peter
and Paul.
William Cardinal Levada
Prefect
+ Angelo Amato, S.D.B.
Titular Archbishop of Sila
Secretary
_______________________
1 JOHN XXIII, Address of 11 October 1962: "…The Council…wishes
to transmit Catholic doctrine, whole and entire, without alteration
or deviation…But in the circumstances of our times it is
necessary that Christian doctrine in its entirety, and with nothing
taken away from it, is accepted with renewed enthusiasm, and serene
and tranquil adherence… it is necessary that the very same
doctrine be understood more widely and more profoundly as all
those who sincerely adhere to the Christian, Catholic and Apostolic
faith strongly desire …it is necessary that this certain
and immutable doctrine, to which is owed the obedience of faith,
be explored and expounded in the manner required by our times.
The deposit of faith itself and the truths contained in our venerable
doctrine are one thing, but the manner in which they are annunciated
is another, provided that the same fundamental sense and meaning
is maintained" : AAS 54 [1962] 791-792.
2 Cf. PAUL VI, Address of 29 September 1963: AAS 55 [1963] 847-852.
3 PAUL VI, Address of 21 November 1964: AAS 56 [1964] 1009-1010.
4 The Council wished to express the identity of the Church of
Christ with the Catholic Church. This is clear from the discussions
on the decree Unitatis redintegratio. The Schema of the Decree
was proposed on the floor of the Council on 23.9.1964 with a Relatio
(Act Syn III/II 296-344). The Secretariat for the Unity of Christians
responded on 10.11.1964 to the suggestions sent by Bishops in
the months that followed (Act Syn III/VII 11-49). Herewith are
quoted four texts from this Expensio modorum concerning this first
response.
A) [In Nr. 1 (Prooemium) Schema Decreti: Act Syn III/II 296,
3-6]
"Pag. 5, lin. 3-6: Videtur etiam Ecclesiam catholicam inter
illas Communiones comprehendi, quod falsum esset.
R(espondetur): Hic tantum factum, prout ab omnibus conspicitur,
describendum est. Postea clare affirmatur solam Ecclesiam catholicam
esse veram Ecclesiam Christi" (Act Syn III/VII 12).
B) [In Caput I in genere: Act Syn III/II 297-301]
"4 - Expressius dicatur unam solam esse veram Ecclesiam
Christi; hanc esse Catholicam Apostolicam Romanam; omnes debere
inquirere, ut eam cognoscant et ingrediantur ad salutem obtinendam...
R(espondetur): In toto textu sufficienter effertur, quod postulatur.
Ex altera parte non est tacendum etiam in aliis communitatibus
christianis inveniri veritates revelatas et elementa ecclesialia"(Act
Syn III/VII 15). Cf. also ibid pt. 5.
C) [In Caput I in genere: Act Syn III/II 296s]
"5 - Clarius dicendum esset veram Ecclesiam esse solam Ecclesiam
catholicam romanam...
R(espondetur): Textus supponit doctrinam in constitutione ‘De
Ecclesia’ expositam, ut pag. 5, lin. 24-25 affirmatur"
(Act Syn III/VII 15). Thus the commission whose task it was to
evaluate the responses to the Decree Unitatis redintegratio clearly
expressed the identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic
Church and its unicity, and understood this doctrine to be founded
in the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium.
D) [In Nr. 2 Schema Decreti: Act Syn III/II 297s]
"Pag. 6, lin. 1- 24: Clarius exprimatur unicitas Ecclesiae.
Non sufficit inculcare, ut in textu fit, unitatem Ecclesiae.
R(espondetur): a) Ex toto textu clare apparet identificatio Ecclesiae
Christi cum Ecclesia catholica, quamvis, ut oportet, efferantur
elementa ecclesialia aliarum communitatum".
"Pag. 7, lin. 5: Ecclesia a successoribus Apostolorum cum
Petri successore capite gubernata (cf. novum textum ad pag. 6,
lin.33-34) explicite dicitur ‘unicus Dei grex’ et
lin. 13 ‘una et unica Dei Ecclesia’ " (Act Syn
III/VII).
The two expressions quoted are those of Unitatis redintegratio
2.5 e 3.1.
5 Cf. SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium,
8.1.
6 Cf. SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Unitatis redintegratio,
3.2; 3.4; 3.5; 4.6.
7 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Dogmatic Constitution, Lumen gentium,
8.2.
8 Cf. CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Declaration
Mysterium Ecclesiae, 1.1: AAS 65 [1973] 397; Declaration Dominus
Iesus, 16.3: AAS 92 [2000-II] 757-758; Notification on the Book
of Leonardo Boff, OFM, "Church: Charism and Power":
AAS 77 [1985] 758-759.
9 Cf. JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 11.3: AAS
87 [1995-II] 928.
10 Cf. SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium,
8.2.
11 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium,
8.2.
12 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 3.4.
13 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 15.3;
cf. CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Letter Communionis
notio, 17.2: AAS, 85 [1993-II] 848.
14 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 14.1.
15 Cf. SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Unitatis redintegratio,
14.1; JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint, 56 f: AAS
87 [1995-II] 954 ff.
16 SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Unitatis redintegratio, 15.1.
17 Cf. CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Letter Communionis
notio, 17.3: AAS 85 [1993-II] 849.
18 Ibid.
19 Cf. SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, Decree Unitatis redintegratio,
22.3.
20 Cf. CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH, Declaration
Dominus Iesus, 17.2: AAS 92 [2000-II] 758.
|