Yves Congar's Vision of the Church in a World of Unbelief 075460652X, 9780754606529, 2003043736, 9781315233253

Citation preview

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page i

YVES CONGAR’S VISION OF THE CHURCH IN A WORLD OF UNBELIEF

Yves Congar (1904–1995) was one of the chief architects of a remarkable renewal in Roman Catholic ecclesiology in the twentieth century. His vision for ecclesial renewal led to a profound transformation of the Roman Catholic Church, its relationship with other churches and the world. This book considers the contribution made by Congar to that transformation. Situating Congar’s ecclesiology in the context of his whole theology, the book presents for the first time a comprehensive study of two related aspects of Congar’s thought – unbelief and the notion of ‘total ecclesiology’. Dr Flynn shows how unbelief provides the common inspiration for Congar’s thought on the Church and constitutes the raison d’être for his entire programme of ecclesial reform at the Second Vatican Council. This study demonstrates how Congar’s ‘total ecclesiology’ contributes to the restoration of unity and helps to redress unbelief. Congar’s vision for the future and his programme for ecclesial renewal, centring on a church committed both to the preservation of its heritage and an openness to true reform, is shown to be still pertinent to the churches in the third millennium, a point accented by Pierre-Marie Gy, OP in his Preface to the work.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page ii

Dedicated to my mother Maisie Flynn In memory of my father Christopher Edward Flynn 1913–2001 and my brother Michael Joseph Flynn 1946–1991 requiescant in pace

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page iii

Yves Congar’s Vision of the Church in a World of Unbelief

GABRIEL FLYNN

First published 2004 by Ashgate Publishing Published 2016 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017, USA Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor 6- Francis Group, an informa business Copyright © Gabriel Flynn 2004 The author has asserted his moral right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as the author of this work. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Flynn, Gabriel Yves Congar's vision of the Church in a world of unbelief l.Congar, Yves 2.Church 3.Church renewal - Catholic Church I. Title 230.2'092 Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data Flynn, Gabriel, 1960Yves Congar's vision of the church in a world of unbelief / Gabriel Flynn. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-7546-0652-X (alk. paper) 1. Cougar, Yves. 1904- 2. Church—History of doctrines—20th century. 3. Catholic Church—Doctrines—History—20th century. I. Title. BX1746.F59 2003 262'.02'092»dc21 ISBN 13: 978-0-7546-0652-9 (hbk)

2003043736

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page v

Contents Key to Select Bibliographical Abbreviations Preface by Pierre-Marie Gy, OP Author’s Preface Introduction

vii x xi 1

1

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology ‘I Love the Church’: Ecclesiology and Affectivity The Church: A Cause of Unbelief? Vatican II: The Council of the Church Congar and the Renewal of Ecclesiology at Vatican II Congar’s Theological Method Conclusion

18 21 36 51 67 70 79

2

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology Congar’s Proposed Definition of the Church Biblical Images in Congar’s Ecclesiology ‘What Belonging to the Church has Come to Mean’ Congar’s Theology of Ministry ‘Divisions Among Christians are Responsible for the Genesis of Modern Unbelief’ Conclusion

80 84 94 117 123

Reform and Tradition in Congar’s Ecclesiology Congar’s Self-critique for the Church Why a Holy Church Needs Reform The Structure and Life of the Church The Church Holy and Sinful: A Critical Evaluation Congar’s Principles for a True Reform of the Church Tradition: ‘A Power at Once Conservative and Progressive’ Conclusion

146 153 156 170 175 187 198 211

3

139 145

Epilogue Afterword

212 221

Appendix Bibliography Index

229 234 268

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page vi

This page intentionally left blank

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page vii

Key to Select Bibliographical Abbreviations 1 Works by Yves Congar Books CC CLC CP CTL DBC DC EME HS LP MC MCE PC P&L PP SE TCIL TL TT TT, I TT, II UPU USCA VFR

Challenge to the Church: The Case of Archbishop Lefebvre (1976). Christ, Our Lady and the Church: A Study in Eirenic Theology (1957). The Church Peaceful (1977). Called to Life (1988). Dialogue between Christians: Catholic Contributions to Ecumenism (1966). Divided Christendom: A Study of the Problem of Reunion (1939). Esquisses du mystère de l’Église, new edn (1953). I Believe in the Holy Spirit, 3 vols (1983). Lay People in the Church: A Study for a Theology of Laity, rev. edn, with additions by the author (1985). LP is referred to as Jalons in the main text. The Mystery of the Church: Studies by Yves Congar, 2nd edn rev. (1965). Ministères et communion ecclésiale (1971). La Pentecôte: Chartres 1956 (1956). Priest and Layman (1967). Power and Poverty in the Church (1964). Sainte Église: études et approches ecclésiologiques (1963). This Church That I Love (1969). Tradition and the Life of the Church (1964). Tradition and Traditions: An Historical and a Theological Essay (1966). La Tradition et les traditions: essai historique (1960). La Tradition et les traditions: essai théologique (1963). Une passion: l’unité (1974). L’Église une, sainte, catholique et apostolique (1970). Vraie et fausse réforme dans l’Église (1950). VFR is referred to as Vraie in the main text.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page viii

viii

Yves Congar’s Vision

Articles ‘Belonging’

‘What Belonging to the Church has Come to Mean’, Communio, 4 (1977). ‘Church Reform’ ‘Church Reform and Luther’s Reformation, 1517–1967’, Lutheran World, 14 (1967). ‘Comment’ ‘Comment L’Église sainte doit se renouveler sans cesse’, Irénikon, 34 (1961). ‘Letter’ ‘Letter from Father Yves Congar, O.P.’, TD, 32 (1985). ‘Path-findings’ ‘My Path-Findings in the Theology of Laity and Ministries’, Jurist, 32 (1972). ‘People’ ‘The Church: The People of God’, Concilium, 1 (1965). ‘Poverty’ ‘The Place of Poverty in Christian Life in an Affluent Society’, Concilium, 15 (1966). ‘Reflections’ ‘Reflections on being a Theologian’, NB, 62 (1981). ‘Religion’ ‘Institutionalised Religion’, in The Word in History: The St. Xavier Symposium, ed. by T. Patrick Burke (London: Collins, 1968). ‘Renewal’ ‘Renewal of the Spirit and Reform of the Institution’, Concilium, 73 (1972). ‘Unbelief’, I ‘The Reasons for the Unbelief of our Time: A Theological Conclusion’, Part I, Integration (August 1938). ‘Unbelief’, II ‘The Reasons for the Unbelief of our Time: A Theological Conclusion’, Part II, Integration (December 1938). 2 Works by Other Authors Congar Denzinger Ecclesiology Écrits réformateurs ‘Frère Yves’ L’Ecclésiologie Models

Puyo, Jean, Jean Puyo interroge le Père Congar: ‘une vie pour la vérité’ (1975). Denzinger, Henricus, and Adolfus Schönmetzer (eds), Enchiridion symbolorum: definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum (1976). Lennan, Richard, The Ecclesiology of Karl Rahner (1997). Jossua, J.-P. (ed.), Cardinal Yves Congar, O.P.: écrits réformateurs (1995). Fouilloux, Étienne, ‘Frère Yves, Cardinal Congar, Dominicain: itinéraire d’un théologien’, RSPT, 79 (1995). Famerée, Joseph, L’Ecclésiologie d’Yves Congar avant Vatican II: Histoire et Église (1992). Dulles, Avery, Models of the Church (1983).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page ix

Key to Select Bibliographical Abbreviations

Père Congar Théologie Catholique

Jossua, Jean-Pierre, Le Père Congar: la théologie au service du peuple de Dieu (1967). Aubert, Roger, La Théologie Catholique au milieu du XXe siècle (1954).

3 Journals and Other Writings AAS AER AG CD CDF DTC DV ITQ LG LV NB NRT PO RSPT RT ST TD TI TS UR VI VS

ix

Acta apostolicae sedis American Ecclesiastical Review Ad gentes divinitus (Vatican II) Christus Dominus (Vatican II) Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith Dictionnaire de théologie catholique Dei verbum (Vatican II) Irish Theological Quarterly Lumen gentium (Vatican II) Lumen Vitae New Blackfriars Nouvelle revue théologique Presbyterorum ordinis (Vatican II) Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques Revue Thomiste Schriften zur Theologie Theology Digest Theological Investigations Theological Studies Unitatis redintegratio (Vatican II) La Vie intellectuelle La Vie spirituelle

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page x

Preface An important book about an important topic. Those who have frequented Yves Congar’s writings or even, as I did for almost half a century, have frequented the man himself, know well his two qualities – namely his full attention to the needs, desires and aspirations of today, and his use of all that history may let us understand about the Church and its Tradition. Intellectuals mainly interested with ideas may prefer, among the main theologians of the twentieth century, some other great thinkers, but all of us admire Congar’s attention to the present world and to the breadth of history and Tradition. These two qualities, together with his readiness to help and his love of the Church, so well described by Fr Flynn, help us to understand how important Congar’s work has been during the Second Vatican Council. We will understand much more about this from Congar’s Mon journal du Concile (2002). In addition to this may I say that the ‘sens du concret’ of the Englishspeaking thinkers qualifies Fr Flynn for such a consideration, perhaps even better than a French or a German thinker. Is the expression ‘the Shape of the Church’ (as my friend Dom Gregory Dix spoke of The Shape of the Liturgy) adequate to express such a vision? I don’t know. Anyhow it makes me think about Congar’s interest in the idea of the Church as a person, about which his paper, ‘La personne “Église”’ (1971) is not more than a draft. May I add an hypothesis that I would surely express to Père Congar if I met him today, as I frequently did years ago in our House of Studies at the Saulchoir? During the time when he was a young professor of theology the question of unbelievers was perhaps the most important his generation had to consider. At the time of Vatican II the main question was the dialogue between the Ecclesia and Mundus hodiernus. Today, almost thirty years later, the world has undergone a deep change. What should a similar dialogue be today? Fr Flynn’s Afterword shows that he is aware of this question. Pierre-Marie Gy, OP Le Saulchoir Paris 28 September 2002

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page xi

Author’s Preface This book is based on research for a doctoral dissertation submitted to the University of Oxford in 1999. I owe a great debt of gratitude to my supervisor the late Dr Edward J. Yarnold, SJ, priest and scholar. Requiescat in pace. He has not spared any effort. Omnia vincit labor improbus. I am especially grateful to Professor Pierre-Marie Gy, OP, for his expert advice and unfailing friendship. I also wish to express my gratitude to Professor Jean-Pierre Jossua, OP, for his kind interest in my research. I am deeply grateful for the encouragement I received from Dr John Webster, sometime Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity, Christ Church, Oxford as well as Professor John Saward. I wish to thank the Bishop of Meath, the Most Revd Dr Michael Smith who has supported this project at every stage. In Oxford, I was blessed in my friends. Their love and learning have been perhaps Oxford’s most precious gifts to me. My Oxford friends enriched my life and extended my family across the globe. At home, my young friends in Navan, the Sisters of Mercy in Athlumney, Father Ned and all my family in Ballinabrackey were constant in their love and care. I am grateful to the librarians who offered much appreciated help in the course of my research. I thank the staff of the Bodleian Library, the Taylor Institution Library and Blackfriars Library, Oxford. My special thanks to Michel Albaric, OP and Jérôme Rousse Lacordaire, OP, directors of the Bibliothèque du Saulchoir, Paris. I wish to express my gratitude to Helena Saward-Tomko, Joseph Donohue and Aaron Hillyer for their help with proof-reading. I wish to thank my students and colleagues for their help in the preparation of the text for publication. Sarah Lloyd and Frances Britain of Ashgate Publishing Group have shown me the utmost kindness at all times. My greatest debt of gratitude is to my beloved parents, brothers and sisters. My parents have been my best teachers. They have taught me love and loyalty, fortitude and faith. They have always been to me, to borrow a phrase of Père Henri Lacordaire, fortiter sed suaviter, ‘strong as the diamond, more tender than a mother’. They fill me with gratitude and wonder at God’s providence. The Milltown Institute, Dublin 6 January 2004 The Epiphany of the Lord

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.05

Page vi

This page intentionally left blank

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 1

Introduction European society underwent a period of profound change and crisis from about 1930 to 1960. During this time, a broad intellectual and spiritual movement arose within the European Catholic community, largely in response to an atheistic secularism which lay at the heart of the crisis. The movement encompassed Belgium and Germany, but was most powerful in France, where it was led principally by Jesuits and Dominicans.1 The French revival included some of the most eminent Catholic theologians of the twentieth century. This is a book about the origin and development of the ideas of Yves M.-J. Congar (1904–1995), the foremost French theologian of the epoch. Congar’s career was remarkable. He was one of the chief architects of an exceptional renewal in Roman Catholic ecclesiology in the twentieth century. He contributed to the recovery of the biblical images of the Church which emphasize its mystical nature rather than the hierarchical and societal aspects that had been given such prominence in the previously dominant post-Tridentine ecclesiology. Congar’s vision for ecclesial renewal led to a profound transformation of the Roman Catholic Church, its relationship with the other Christian Churches, and the world. The Second Vatican Council (1962–1965) became the catalyst for this change, and its documents gave authoritative expression to his most important ideas on the Church.2 This book seeks to present and assess Congar’s career and writing primarily in light of their contribution to contemporary theology and the renewal of the Roman Catholic Church. The book examines how Congar’s comprehensive theology of the Church, synthesized in the notion of a ‘total ecclesiology’ (ecclésiologie totale),3 1

2

3

See Gustave Weigel, ‘The Historical Background of the Encyclical Humani Generis’, Theological Studies, (hereafter TS), 12 (1951), 208–230 (p. 217). Étienne Fouilloux, La Collection “Sources Chrétiennes”: éditer les Pères de l’Église au XXe siècle (Paris: Cerf, 1995), pp. 115–116. See Yves Congar, ‘Reflections on being a Theologian’, (hereafter ‘Reflections’), trans. by Marcus Lefébure, New Blackfriars, (hereafter NB), 62 (1981), 405–409 (p. 405). Étienne Fouilloux, ‘Frère Yves, Cardinal Congar, Dominicain: itinéraire d’un théologien’, (hereafter ‘Frère Yves’), Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques, (hereafter RSPT), 79 (1995), 379–404 (p. 400). Avery Dulles, ‘Yves Congar: In Appreciation’, America, 173 (1995), 6–7; Patrick Granfield, Theologians at Work (New York: Macmillan; London: Collier-Macmillan, 1967), p. 47. Congar, Lay People in the Church: A Study for a Theology of Laity, (hereafter LP), trans. by Donald Attwater, rev. edn, with additions by the author (London: Geoffrey Chapman; Westminster, MD: Christian Classics, 1985), p. XVI; also idem, Jalons pour une

congar pages

2

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 2

Yves Congar’s Vision

was formulated in response to particular problems within the Church which, in his view, contribute to unbelief. In support of this claim, I look at the principal findings of his 1935 study, ‘Une conclusion théologique à l’enquête sur les raisons actuelles de l’incroyance’ (hereafter ‘Conclusion théologique’).4 In addition, I refer to later writings by Congar in which he says plainly that this essay, published as a theological conclusion to a threeyear investigation by the journal La Vie intellectuelle into the causes of unbelief, provides the inspiration for his major works on the Church and motivated him to institute a new ecclesiological series called Unam Sanctam.5 While unbelief was the essential motive for the founding of this series, there were also other motives that were not in any way opposed to each other. These include his commitment to ecumenism, his passion for the Church, and his concern for the world. Congar acknowledges that the Unam Sanctam series, dedicated to the restoration of the genuine value of ecclesiology by means of a return to the ancient sources of Scripture and tradition, prepared the way for Vatican II.6 In an analysis of his works dealing with ecclesial renewal, an important concern is the illustration of the connection between unbelief and his vision of the Church. In exploring how unbelief stands at the focal point of Congar’s ecclesiology, I also consider whether it offers a source of unity for the present study, while being careful to avoid overstating its importance. Congar notes that the results of the survey on unbelief conducted by La Vie intellectuelle are valid only for France.7 The findings of his ‘Conclusion théologique’, however, and his subsequent deliberations on unbelief and other related issues in an article published shortly before the Second Vatican Council, ‘Voeux pour le concile: enquête parmi les chrétiens’, are clearly relevant to the whole Church. Essentially, Congar held that certain ideas of

4

5

6 7

théologie du laïcat, Unam Sanctam, 23 (Paris: Cerf, 1953), p. 13. See 3rd edn, rev. with additions and corrections, 1964. Following the initial citation, the page numbers of works in the original language will be given in round brackets. Unless otherwise stated, translations from the French are mine throughout. Congar, ‘The Reasons for the Unbelief of our Time: A Theological Conclusion’, Part I (hereafter ‘Unbelief’, I), Integration (August 1938), 13–21 and Part II (hereafter ‘Unbelief’, II), Integration (December 1938), 10–26; also idem, ‘Une conclusion théologique à l’enquête sur les raisons actuelles de l’incroyance’, La Vie intellectuelle, (hereafter VI), 37 (1935), 214–249. In view of significant developments in the nature of unbelief since the publication of Congar’s 1935 treatise, I attempt to outline relevant questions in the current analysis of unbelief. See Afterword, pp. 221–228. See Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, trans. Barry N. Rigney, Cross Currents, 12 (1962), 144–151 (pp. 146–149); idem, ‘Voeux pour le concile: enquête parmi les chrétiens’, Esprit, 29 (1961), 691–700 (pp. 694–697); idem, ‘Reflections’, p. 405; Granfield, Theologians at Work, pp. 251–253. See Congar, ‘Reflections’, p. 405. Congar, ‘Unbelief’, I, p. 13 (p. 215).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 3

Introduction

3

God and faith, together with a ‘wholly juridico-hierarchical’8 image of the Church, were largely to blame for unbelief. He was convinced that the face (visage) presented by the Roman Catholic Church is crucial for the evangelization of the modern world and determines, to a large degree, the chances for the reunion of the Christian Churches.9 In order to transcend the juridical idea of the Roman Catholic Church, Congar, together with his colleagues Marie-Dominique Chenu and Henri-Marie Féret, embarked on an enterprise to eliminate ‘baroque theology’,10 a term which they coined to describe the theology of the Counter-Reformation.11 The accomplishment of this goal was an important reason for the foundation of the Unam Sanctam collection in November 1935. A study of Congar’s thought on the Church must, of necessity, include a consideration of the influences that shaped his vocation to ecumenism and ecclesiology within the Order of Preachers, and before he became a religious.12 Timothy Radcliffe, former Master of the Dominican Order, in his sermon at Congar’s Requiem Mass on 26 June 1995, spoke of four moments of grace in his life: the friendships he formed during the Second 8

9

10

11 12

Congar, ‘Letter from Father Yves Congar, O.P.’, (hereafter ‘Letter’), trans. by Ronald John Zawilla, Theology Digest, (hereafter TD), 32 (1985), 213–216 (p. 213). Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, Cross Currents, 12 (1962), 146, 149–150 (pp. 694, 697–699). Jean Puyo, Jean Puyo interroge le Père Congar: ‘une vie pour la vérité’, (hereafter Congar) (Paris: Centurion, 1975), pp. 45–46. See Congar, ‘Reflections’, p. 405. Chapter 1, footnote 222. The richest autobiographical sources in Congar’s writings are as follows: Congar, Dialogue between Christians: Catholic Contributions to Ecumenism, (hereafter DBC), trans. by Philip Loretz (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966), pp. 1-51; also idem, Chrétiens en dialogue: contributions catholiques à l’oecuménisme, Unam Sanctam, 50 (Paris: Cerf, 1964), pp. IX-LXIV; idem, Une passion: l’unité, (hereafter UPU), Foi Vivante, 156 (Paris: Cerf, 1974). This is a republication of the preface to DBC except for the last chapter which provides an update of his reflections to 1973. See also Puyo, Congar; Yves Congar, Journal d’un théologien (1946–1956), ed. and annotated by Fouilloux and others, 2nd edn (Paris: Cerf, 2001); and Pierre-Marie Gy, ‘Yves Congar, Journal d’un théologien: (1946–1956)’, RSPT, 86 (2002), 560 (p. 560). Gy remarks that anyone who reads this diary ‘is struck there by a frankness which goes at times almost to a brutality in the assessment of persons’. Another source is Bernard Sesboüé, ‘Le drame de la théologie au XXe siècle: à propos du Journal d’un théologien (1946–1956) du P. Yves Congar’, Recherches de Science Religieuse, 89 (2001), 271–287. Congar’s, Mon journal du Concile, ed. and annotated by Éric Mahieu, 2 vols (Paris: Cerf, 2002) is a valuable historical work, belonging to a different genre to the aforementioned autobiographical sources. The conciliar diary provides a direct, rather brutal if sometimes ambiguous, account of Congar’s considerable role in the Council. See Jan Grootaers, ‘Yves Congar: “Mon journal du Concile” Vatican II raconté de l’intérieur’, Ecritures, 50 (2002), 6–7; Mahieu, ‘Présentation de “Mon journal du Concile”’, Istina, 48 (2003), 9–19; Gabriel Flynn, ‘Mon journal du Concile: Yves Congar and the Battle for a Renewed Ecclesiology at the Second Vatican Council’, Louvain Studies, 28 (2003), 48–70.

congar pages

4

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 4

Yves Congar’s Vision

World War in the prisons of Colditz and Lübeck; membership of the Dominican Order; participation in Vatican II; and the hope of seeing perfect unity among Christians. In these moments of grace for Congar, Radcliffe says, it is possible to observe the mystery of suffering transformed into communion.13 This point can be made clearer by taking a closer look at the people and places associated with his life as a theologian and preacher. Congar’s career may be divided into four main periods. The first, 1904–1939, principally concerns his formation and education. I propose to treat briefly the influences of his professors at the institutions where he received his education, but also to consider other factors that had a bearing on the elaboration of his most important theological goals. During the years 1925–1939, Congar was involved with Action catholique, a lay organization in Belgium and France. This experience contributed to his formulation of a renewed theology of the laity. The second period, 1939–1945, was dominated by the Second World War and the time of his captivity. The third, 1945–1965, encompasses the low point of his exile from Paris and the high point of his participation at Vatican II. The fourth period, 1965–1995, marked by illness and suffering, was also a peaceful interlude towards the end of which Congar was elevated to the College of Cardinals. Congar was born on 13 April 1904 at Sedan in the French Ardennes. From the beginning, he regarded his vocation as being ‘at once and by the same vein, priestly and religious, Dominican and Thomist, ecumenical and ecclesiological’.14 In the years 1928–1929, he experienced the first great interior appeal to dedicate himself particularly to the Church and ecumenism.15 Now, Congar had a quite definite idea of the close relationship between ecumenism and ecclesiology. He always viewed the renewal of ecclesiology in conjunction with ‘wide participation in unitive activities’.16 Congar studied scholastic philosophy at the Institut catholique in Paris from 1921-1924 while attending the university seminary of the Carmelites. During this period, he was introduced to Jacques Maritain by Daniel Lallement, a strict Thomist professor at the Institut catholique. Congar was also part of a Thomist fraternity, and attended annual retreats preached by the Dominican, Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange. The contempt that his mentors 13

14

15 16

Timothy Radcliffe, ‘La mort du cardinal Yves-Marie Congar: homélie du P. Timothy Radcliffe, O.P.’, Documentation catholique, 92 (1995), 688–690 (p. 688). See also Congar, ‘Preface’, in Charles MacDonald, Church and World in the Plan of God: Aspects of History and Eschatology in the Thought of Père Yves Congar O.P. (Frankfurt: Lang, 1982), pp. VII–X (p. IX). Congar, UPU, p. 14. See also Fouilloux, ‘Frère Yves’, RSPT, 79 (1995), 382; Congar, Journal d’un théologien (1946–1956), p. 20. Congar, ‘Reflections’, p. 405. Congar, DBC, p. 9 (p. XVIII).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 5

Introduction

5

showed for all modern philosophers, including Maurice Blondel (1861–1949), Lucien Laberthonnière (1860–1932), and Joseph Maréchal (1878–1944), meant that Congar did not feel at home in these circles. Such was his dissatisfaction with this aspect of his training that, in 1968, he said: ‘I had no real philosophical formation.’17 Nonetheless, Thomism was his most important discovery in this period. Congar claims that St Thomas’s concern for clarity influenced his entire theological corpus.18 Moreover, he was helped by the approach to the teaching of Thomism at Le Saulchoir, the Dominican house of studies in Paris, which avoided separating St Thomas from his historical context. Thus while Congar was critical of the narrow interpretation of St Thomas propounded by many of his early professors,19 and even manifested some disenchantment with Thomism towards the end of his life, it still remained an influential factor in his thought.20 In 1925 Congar entered the Dominican noviciate for the province of France, taking the name Marie-Joseph in religion. He read theology from 1926–1931 at Le Saulchoir then in exile in Kain-la-Tombe near Tournai in Belgium because of the anti-clerical legislation of the French Third Republic. This exacting ‘school of theology’,21 with its harmonious rhythm of work and liturgical prayer, provided him with an ideal of the religious life. It was here that he came under the influence of Chenu and Ambroise Gardeil, professors at Le Saulchoir, whom Congar regarded as his masters.22 Gardeil, who introduced him to the thought of Blondel, had a marked influence on Congar and his generation through his work, Le donné révélé et la théologie.23 Although Congar began his study relatively late, he admits that the more he read, the more he appreciated Blondel’s thought.24 Blondel’s philosophy provides the basis for the dialectic of structure and life, a fundamental feature of Congar’s ecclesiology.25 17

18 19 20

21 22 23

24 25

See Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 245. Also Congar, ‘Letter’, pp. 215–216. Congar writes: ‘I am not a philosopher. I lack philosophical training and a philosophical spirit. […] But I have always joined what used to be called speculative theology and positive theology.’ Puyo, Congar, p. 39. See also Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 247. Congar, DBC, p. 24 (p. XXXV). Jean-Pierre Torrell, ‘Yves Congar et l’ecclésiologie de Saint Thomas d’Aquin’, RSPT, 82 (1998), 201–241 (p. 201). Marie-Dominique Chenu, Une école de théologie: le Saulchoir (Paris: Cerf, 1985). Puyo, Congar, p. 47. Ambroise Gardeil, Le donné révélé et la théologie, 2nd edn (Paris: Cerf, 1932). See also Puyo, Congar, p. 47; Congar, A History of Theology, trans. and ed. by Hunter Guthrie (New York: Doubleday, 1968), p. 194; idem, ‘Théologie’, in Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, (hereafter DTC), ed. by A. Vacant, E. Mangenot and É. Amann, 15 vols (Paris: Letouzey and Ané, 1946), XV Part 1, cols 341–502 (col. 443). Puyo, Congar, p. 72. See Timothy I. MacDonald, The Ecclesiology of Yves Congar: Foundational Themes (Lanham: University Press of America, 1984), p. 17.

congar pages

6

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 6

Yves Congar’s Vision

Chenu, perhaps the single most significant influence,26 awakened in him an awareness of the historical dimension of reality,27 and, as Congar acknowledges, also provided the motivation for some of his most important theological endeavours: Father Chenu, an incomparable inspiration to a whole generation of young Dominicans, spoke to us on one occasion of the ‘Faith and Order’ Movement during his course on the history of Christian doctrine, as he also spoke of the Lausanne Conference and of Möhler.28

In an interview given in 1975, Chenu states that he and Congar effected a rediscovery of Johann Adam Möhler (1796-1838), the German ecclesiastical historian and theologian of the Church. Möhler, and the Roman Catholic School of Tübingen, had introduced a principle of renewal into nineteenthcentury theology with a conception of faith which integrates its historical, psychological, and pastoral dimensions.29 Chenu suggested Möhler as a possible model for a Roman Catholic contribution to ecumenism and, accordingly, Congar embarked on a study of Church unity for his lectorate, an internal Dominican degree equivalent to the licentiate.30 Writing in 1970, Congar affirms the influence of Möhler: ‘Möhler can even today be an animator (éveilleur). That is what he was for me for more than forty years.’31 In the same brief article,32 he notes how Möhler moves from a pneumatological approach to the Church in Die Einheit,33 to a profoundly Chalcedonian, Christological position in Symbolik.34 An opposite development can be observed in Congar, whose major work on the Holy Spirit, Je crois en l’Esprit Saint,35 is the fruit of the latter part of his career. 26

27

28 29

30

31

32 33

34

35

Congar, ‘The Brother I Have Known’, trans. by Boniface Ramsey, Thomist, 49 (1985), 495–503. Jean-Pierre Jossua, Le Père Congar: la théologie au service du peuple de Dieu, (hereafter Père Congar), Chrétiens De Tous Les Temps, 20 (Paris: Cerf, 1967), p. 19. Congar, DBC, p. 3 (pp. XI–XII). Jacques Duquesne interroge le Père Chenu: ‘un théologien en liberté’ (Paris: Centurion, 1975), p. 55. See Aidan Nichols, Yves Congar (London: Geoffrey Chapman; Wilton, CT: MorehouseBarlow, 1989), p. 3. Congar, ‘Johann Adam Möhler: 1796–1838’, Theologische Quartalschrift, 150 (1970), 47–51 (pp. 50–51). See also MacDonald, The Ecclesiology of Yves Congar, pp. 27–29. Congar, ‘Johann Adam Möhler 1796–1838’, p. 50. Johann Adam Möhler, Die Einheit in der Kirche oder das Princip des Katholicismus (Mainz: Grünewald, 1925). Möhler, Symbolik oder Darstellung der dogmatischen Gegensätze der Katholiken und Protestanten nach ihren öffentlichen Bekenntnisschriften, 2 vols (Cologne: Hegner, 1960), I. Congar, I Believe in the Holy Spirit, (hereafter HS), trans. by David Smith, 3 vols (New York: Seabury; London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1983), II, pp. 19–20; also idem, Je crois en l’Esprit Saint, new edn, 3 vols (Paris: Cerf, 1995), II, pp. 32–34.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 7

Introduction

7

The contribution of Möhler and the Tübingen School helped to prepare for the ecclesiological renewal of the twentieth century. I look briefly at the strategy of the Tübingen scholars in Chapter 2. Another important influence of this period was Congar’s reading of Ernst Bernard Allo’s Saint Jean: l’Apocalypse36 between 1927 and 1928 through which he discovered eschatology. Congar comments: ‘Once I had accepted the eschatological point of view, I had to speak of the church dialectically.’37 From this time forward, his ecclesiology displays an increased awareness of the importance of eschatology and of the dialectics of ‘structure’/‘life’, ‘gift’/‘task’, and ‘already’/‘not yet’. The circumstances of Congar’s early life contributed to his ecumenical vocation. The way had been prepared by childhood relations with Protestants and Jews, contact with a Russian seminary at Lille, and a lecture given by Chenu on the Faith and Order movement of Lausanne.38 The decisive point that set his course, however, was his retreat in preparation for ordination. As Congar notes: To prepare for ordination I made a special study both of John’s Gospel and Thomas Aquinas’ commentary on it. I was completely overwhelmed, deeply moved, by chapter 17, sometimes called the priestly prayer, but which I prefer to call Jesus’ apostolic prayer on Christian unity: ‘That they may be one as we are one.’ My ecumenical vocation can be directly traced to this study of 1929.39

Following his ordination on 25 July 1930, and upon completion of his lectorate, Congar became a professor at Le Saulchoir, where he taught from 1931 to 1939 and from 1945 to 1954. He lost no time in acquainting his superiors with his desire to work for unity and was allowed to visit the chief places associated with the life of Martin Luther (1483–1546). During two visits to Germany in 1930 and 1931,40 Congar came in contact with the Lutheran High Church movement. He also attended courses at the Protestant Faculty of Theology in Paris and became familiar with Karl Barth and Oscar Cullmann, as well as Orthodox theologians. Congar loved the Anglican Church, and admired its inheritance and ethos, but viewed its ecclesiological situation as weak.41 His primary ecumenical interest, however, continued to be in Protestantism. In 1937, he published, Chrétiens désunis: principes 36

37

38 39 40 41

E.-B. Allo, Saint Jean: l’Apocalypse (Paris: Gabalda, 1921). See also Congar, ‘Preface’, in MacDonald, Church and World in the Plan of God, p. VIII. Congar, ‘Forward [sic]’, in MacDonald, The Ecclesiology of Yves Congar, pp. XXII–XXIII (p. XXII). Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 213. See also idem, DBC, pp. 3–4 (p. XII). Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 213. Congar, DBC, pp. 5-6 (pp. XIV–XV). Ibid., p. 16 (pp. XXV–XXVI).

congar pages

8

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 8

Yves Congar’s Vision

d’un ‘oecuménisme’ catholique,42 the first volume of the Unam Sanctam series and the first contribution in French to Roman Catholic ecumenism.43 There is one point arising from Congar’s involvement in ecumenism which calls for a brief comment at this stage. In a doubtless salutary caveat issued in 1974, he observes that, with the Second Vatican Council, the Roman Catholic Church ‘knows today a kind of Aufklärung which unquestionably brings it nearer to what is good, but also to what is more questionable, in Protestantism’.44 Congar accepts that it is legitimate to speak of ‘a “Protestantisation” of the Catholic Church’.45 As evidence of this, he points to the use of the vernacular in the liturgy, the study of Scripture, collegiality, increased initiative on the part of local Churches, and the acceptance of lay charisms, which, he asserts, sometimes involve a diminution of the position of ordained priests.46 While these developments are seen by him as more positive than negative, nonetheless, Congar echoes a warning which Barth repeated to Catholics on more than one occasion during his last years: ‘Do not participate in the pathological experiences that we have undergone and from which we have emerged with such great suffering.’47 By the end of the 1930s, Congar had become one of the leading theologians of the French Church. He became well known, in the first instance, because of his theological conclusion to a survey on unbelief conducted by La Vie intellectuelle. The other reason that accounts for the emergence of Congar was the launch, under his direction, of the Unam Sanctam collection by Éditions du Cerf. Chenu saw in this new collection ‘one of the most beautiful fruits of our theology at Le Saulchoir’.48 This consideration of the first period of Congar’s life (1904–1939) reveals the roots of his ecumenical vocation, the first fruits of his contribution to ecclesiology and ecumenism, and the most important influences on his 42

43 44 45

46 47 48

Congar, Divided Christendom: A Catholic Study of the Problem of Reunion, (hereafter DC), trans. by M. A. Bousfield (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1939); also idem, Chrétiens désunis: principes d’un ‘oecuménisme’ catholique, Unam Sanctam, 1 (Paris: Cerf, 1937). See Fouilloux, ‘Frère Yves’, p. 388. Congar, UPU, p. 106. Ibid., p. 104. See also Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, in Vatican II by Those Who Were There, ed. by Alberic Stacpoole (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1986), pp. 337–358 (p. 353); also idem, ‘Regard sur le Concile Vatican II à l’occasion du 20e anniversaire de son annonce’, in Unterwegs zur Einheit: Festschrift für Heinrich Stirnimann, ed. by Johannes Brantschen and Pietro Selvatico (Freiburg: Herder, 1980), pp. 774–790, (p. 790). Congar, UPU, pp. 104–105. Ibid., p. 105. See Fouilloux, ‘Frère Yves’, p. 386. Chenu is cited here by Fouilloux who does not give the source of his reference.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 9

Introduction

9

intellectual formation, which include Chenu, Gardeil, Aquinas, Möhler and Blondel. The second period, 1939–1945, was marked by the Second World War which, as Congar notes, interrupted everything for him. Yet even the war became an occasion of grace in comradeship and had an important influence on his view of the laity and unbelief. Congar claims that his experience of imprisonment during this time showed him that modern unbelief was much more complex than he had thought.49 The third period, 1945–1965, includes the Second Vatican Council. The far-reaching programme of ecclesial reform executed at this Council is the de facto consummation of Congar’s whole previous theological oeuvre. While a full assessment of the part he played in the Council will not be discussed, principally because its history is still incomplete,50 understanding his contribution to the renewal of ecclesiology that prepared the way for Vatican II is an important objective of this study. Congar viewed the time immediately after the Second World War as one of the finest in the French Church.51 There were new initiatives in theology, liturgy, biblical studies, the laity and pastoral life. Congar and Jean Daniélou, along with other leading Jesuits and Dominicans, spearheaded the movement for a return to the biblical, patristic and liturgical sources in order to present a more animated faith to the modern person confronted by an atheistic worldview. This project was subjected to severe criticism by M.-Michel Labourdette,52 as well as by Garrigou-Lagrange, who seems to have coined the phrase ‘la nouvelle théologie’ to describe it.53 A brief consideration of this new movement’s objectives will be presented in Chapter 1. The third period of Congar’s career was also his most prolific, with important works on the laity (Jalons pour une théologie du laïcat, 1953 hereafter Jalons); reform (Vraie et fausse réforme dans l’Église, 1950 hereafter Vraie); tradition (La Tradition et les traditions, 2 vols, 1960, 1963); ecumenism (Chrétiens en dialogue, 1964); Mariology (Le Christ, Marie et l’Église 1952); and Christology (Jésus-Christ, 1965). The issues considered in these studies form an important part of deliberations in this book. 49 50

51 52

53

See Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 214. See History of Vatican II: Announcing and Preparing Vatican Council II, ed. by Giuseppe Alberigo. English version ed. by Joseph A. Komonchak, 5 vols (Maryknoll: Orbis; Louvain: Peeters, 1995), I. Each of the following volumes will be devoted to a period of the Council’s work. Congar, DBC, p. 32 (p. XLIII). M.-Michel Labourdette, ‘La Théologie et ses sources’, Revue Thomiste, (hereafter RT), 46 (1946), 353–371; idem, ‘La Théologie, intelligence de la foi’, RT, 46 (1946), 5–44. See also Roger Aubert, La Théologie Catholique au milieu du XXe siècle (Tournai: Casterman, 1954), pp. 84–86. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, ‘La nouvelle théologie où va-t-elle’, Angelicum, 23 (1946), 126–145.

congar pages

10

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 10

Yves Congar’s Vision

Following the publication of Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Humani Generis on 12 August 1950,54 the clouds began to gather over the Roman Catholic Church in France. By the summer of 1953, the question of the worker-priests (prêtres-ouvriers),55 which Congar had supported, was also known to be in the balance. In February 1954, Congar was summoned to Paris by the Master of the Dominican Order and, together with his colleagues Chenu, Féret, and Pierre Boisselot, was dismissed from his post at Le Saulchoir. At his own suggestion, Congar went into exile in Jerusalem. Then, in November 1954, he was assigned to Blackfriars, Cambridge. It was only through the kind offices of Bishop Jean Weber of Strasbourg that Congar was allowed to return to France in December 1955 to continue his work which he describes as ‘that of an inner renewal, ecclesiological, anthropological and pastoral’.56 Congar’s contribution to the renewal of the Church cannot be fully understood without reference to his personal sufferings. He willingly accepted his difficulties and bore them with patience and courage: The cross is a condition of every holy work. God himself is at work in what to us seems a cross. Only by its means do our lives acquire a certain genuineness and depth. […] Only when a man has suffered for his convictions does he attain in them a certain force, a certain quality of the undeniable and, at the same time, the right to be heard and to be respected. O crux benedicta.57

In 1987 Congar serenely said: ‘Withdrawn from active life, I am united to the mystical body of the Lord Jesus of which I have often spoken. I am united to it, day and night, by the prayer of one who has also known his share of suffering.’58 Is this not an understatement? Congar describes, in

54

55

56 57 58

Pius XII, False Trends In Modern Teaching: Encyclical Letter (Humani Generis), rev. edn, trans. by Ronald A. Knox (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1959). See Gregor Siefer, The Church and Industrial Society: A Survey of the Worker-Priest Movement and its Implications for the Christian Mission, trans. by Isabel and Florence McHugh (London: Darton, Longman and Todd, 1964); also idem, Die Mission der Abeiterpriester (Essen: Driewer, 1960). Joseph Thomas, ‘Prêtres-ouvriers aujourd’hui’, Études, 359 (1983), 245–257; François Leprieur, Quand Rome condamne: Dominicains et prêtres-ouvriers (Paris: Cerf, 1989); idem, ‘France in 1953–4: Do the Baptised Have Rights? The Worker-Priest Crisis’, NB, 80 (1999), 384–396; Congar, ‘Dominicains et prêtres ouvriers’, La Vie spirituelle, (hereafter VS), 143 (1989), 817–820 (p. 819). Congar argues that the worker-priests, like the Dominican and Jesuit theologians of the same era, were viewed suspiciously by the Roman authorities because they encompassed too many new things, as yet unproven. Congar, DBC, p. 44 (p. LVI). Ibid., p. 45 (p. LVII). See also ibid., p. 10 (p. XIX). Congar, Fifty Years of Catholic Theology: Conversations with Yves Congar, ed. by Bernard Lauret, trans. by John Bowden (London: SCM, 1988), p. 86; also idem, Entretiens d’automne, 2nd edn (Paris: Cerf, 1987), p. 111.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 11

Introduction

11

stark terms, his response to his sufferings at the hands of Church authorities in the period before Vatican II. He writes: ‘I only succeeded in overcoming all this, both spiritually and at the level of ordinary human sanity, by complete resignation to the cross and to reduction to insignificance [rien].’59 Congar’s sufferings were, however, not without purpose. His commitment to truth and to the Church ensured an exceptionally respectful reception for his views among the Fathers of the Council.60 Pope John Paul II has praised Congar for his immense contribution to the work of Vatican II.61 The then Master of the Dominican Order, in his sermon at Congar’s obsequies, paid tribute to his contribution to the Council and to the renewal of the Church in the context of his physical and spiritual sufferings.62 The Second Vatican Council marked the beginning of a new and critically important phase in Congar’s theological career. The success of his ecclesiological programme is nowhere more apparent than in its impact on the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church at this Council.63 Congar was named a Consultor to the theological Commission in preparation for the Council on 20 July 1960 and then a peritus at the Council itself, thus ending a painful period of intellectual and spiritual exile.64 His recently published conciliar diary, Mon journal du Concile, reveals the thought and work of a careful academic theologian, who patiently pursued realizable goals at Vatican II.65 Congar placed himself entirely at the disposition of the Council in which he saw the possibility of the achievement of one of his dearest wishes – a reform of the Church without injury to its unity which would facilitate a presentation of the true face of the Church to the people of the twentieth century.66 In an entry in his diary on 15 August 1960, Congar 59 60

61

62 63 64

65

66

Congar, DBC, p. 43 (p. LV). M.-J. Le Guillou, ‘Yves Congar’, in Bilan de la théologie du XXe siècle, ed. by Robert Vander Gucht and Herbert Vorgrimler, 2 vols (Paris: Casterman, 1970), II, pp. 791–805 (p. 795). John Paul II, ‘Télégrammes du Pape Jean-Paul II à Mgr Jean-Marie Lustiger, et au P. Timothy Radcliffe’, Documentation catholique, 92 (1995), p. 690. Radcliffe, ‘La mort du cardinal Yves-Marie Congar’, pp. 689–690. See Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 47; Fouilloux, ‘Frère Yves’, p. 398. See Congar, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 3 (end of July 1960). See also idem, ‘Letter’, p. 215; Stefano M. Paci, ‘“Le Pape obéit aussi”: Entretien avec le théologien Yves Congar’, 30 jours dans l’Église et dans le monde, 3 (1993), 24–29 (pp. 24–25). See footnote 12. In helping us understand the Council, Mon journal du Concile also documents Congar’s contribution to the realization of a renewed Church, committed to Christian unity and dialogue with the world. That such a renewal helped to dismantle juridicism in the Catholic Church and undo the pernicious effects of unbelief in the world is undeniable, but the contemporary Church still encounters new problems, which create even more formidable obstacles to belief than those witnessed by Congar and his contemporaries. See Congar, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 403 (29 September 1963); also Afterword, pp. 221–228. See Fouilloux, ‘Frère Yves’, p. 397.

congar pages

12

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 12

Yves Congar’s Vision

writes: ‘I wish to offer myself loyally to serve to the best of my ability as part of the council opened by John XXIII under the impulse of the Holy Spirit.’67 Congar’s service at the Second Vatican Council bore rich fruit because of his theological expertise, his ‘omnipresence’ in the different conciliar commissions, his astute political sense and, above all, his sense of the assembly. This sense of the assembly implies the acceptance of limitations imposed by the conciliar commissions which had an enormous structure, each commission having thirty members and at least as many periti. Along with this limitation, there was also the need to obtain a majority in the assembly. Congar’s unique gift of patience also contributed towards the ultimate success of his programme for the reform of the Church: Anyone who is acquainted with me knows that I am impatient in little things. I am incapable of waiting for a bus! I believe, however, that in big things I am patient in an active way […] The patient sower, who entrusts his seed to the earth and the sun, is also the man of hope. Coventry Patmore has said that to the man who waits all things reveal themselves, provided that he has the courage not to deny in the darkness what he has seen in the light.68

Congar said that Pope Paul VI alluded to the work he and other theologians had done in his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam.69 This official recognition is testimony to the deep friendship between Congar and the pope. On 26 November 1994, Congar was created a Cardinal by Pope John Paul II. He died at the Hôpital des Invalides in Paris on 22 June 1995. Nobody would be prepared to maintain that, in studying the development of Congar’s thought, we could profitably omit all consideration of the deliberations of other scholars. Whether or not one accepts their conclusions, it is clear that important elements of Congar’s theology cannot be properly understood without reference to them. Building on the findings of others, this book seeks to identify and assess the fundamental inspiration for Congar’s thought on the Church. Among theologians, attention has been focused on Congar’s ecclesiology which was the pre-eminent concern of his career. Much work has already been done in this area. In French, there are five studies of note. The first is by his colleague Jean-Pierre Jossua, Le Père Congar: la théologie au service du peuple de Dieu (1967),70 and the second, by Joseph Famerée of the University of Louvain-la-Neuve, L’Ecclésiologie 67 68 69

70

Congar, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 20 (15 August 1960). Congar, DBC, pp. 44–45 (pp. LVI–LVII). Congar, ‘Theology in the Council’, American Ecclesiastical Review, (hereafter AER), 155 (1966), 217–230 (p. 220); idem, ‘La Theologie [sic] au Concile: Le “théologiser” du concile’, Vérité et Vie, 71 (1965–66), 1–12 (p. 4). See also Paul VI, Ecclesiam Suam: The Paths of the Church (New York: America Press, 1964), para 33; Congar, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 426 (3 October 1963) and II, p. 115 (8 June 1964). See footnote 27.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 13

Introduction

13

d’Yves Congar avant Vatican II: Histoire et Église (1992).71 Jossua, a friend and collaborator of Congar’s over many years, presents a perceptive insight into the man and his work.72 An important advantage of Jossua’s book is the inclusion of a bibliography of Congar for the period 1924–1967 compiled by Pietro Quattrocchi.73 A supplement for the period 1967–1987 has been produced by Aidan Nichols of the University of Cambridge.74 The library at Le Saulchoir possesses a third supplement for the period 1987–1995, compiled by Jossua in association with Congar, and published for the first time in an appendix to this work.75 A complete bibliography of Congar’s works – more than 30 books and approximately 1600 articles76 – would greatly facilitate future research. Famerée’s study presents an erudite yet limpid account of Congar’s theology of the Church. As its title indicates, it is limited to the period before Vatican II. A third study, Cardinal Yves Congar 1904–1995 (1999),77 is a collection of papers edited by André Vauchez. It identifies areas that call for further study including the historical questions in Congar’s ecclesiology and his contribution to Vatican II. The fourth work in French is Congar’s Journal d’un théologien (1946–1956), edited and annotated by the historian Étienne Fouilloux in 2000.78 Fouilloux provides an account of the highly restrictive measures taken against Congar by Church authorities during the difficult period 1946-1956, as recounted in this previously unpublished diary. The most recent work is Congar’s long awaited conciliar diary,79 Mon journal du Concile (2002), edited and annotated by Éric Mahieu.80 The diary provides an original, perhaps unique contribution to our knowledge of the history and proceedings of Vatican II. 71

72 73

74

75

76 77

78 79

80

Joseph Famerée, L’Ecclésiologie d’Yves Congar avant Vatican II: Histoire et Église, Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium, 107 (Louvain: Leuven University Press, 1992). See also idem, ‘L’ecclésiologie du Père Yves Congar: essai de synthèse critique’, RSPT, 76 (1992), 377–419. See Jossua, ‘Yves Congar: un portrait’, Études, 383 (1995), 211–218. Pietro Quattrocchi, ‘Bibliographie générale du Père Yves Congar’, in Jossua, Père Congar, pp. 213–272. Nichols, ‘An Yves Congar Bibliography 1967–1987’, Angelicum, 66 (1989), 422–466. ‘An Yves Congar Bibliography 1987–1995, with Addenda: 1996–2002’; see the Appendix, pp. 229–233. See Congar, ‘Reflections’, p. 405; Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 250. Cardinal Yves Congar 1904–1995: actes du colloque réuni à Rome les 3–4 juin 1996, ed. by André Vauchez (Paris: Cerf, 1999). See footnote 12. In a personal letter, 4 April 1997, from Père André Duval, OP, formerly Archivist of the Dominican Province of France, in response to a request for authorization to consult Congar’s journal, Duval replies: ‘Je suis au regret de vous informer de la volonté explicite du Père Congar, écrite de sa main, sur l’original comme sur la copie dactylographiée de ce journal, “non communicable avant l’an 2.000”.’ See footnote 12.

congar pages

14

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 14

Yves Congar’s Vision

It gives particular insights into the thought and hopes of the popes and bishops, the theologians and observers of the Council, and describes the politics and the spirituality of individuals, as well as of powerful groupings of bishops and of theologians at the Council. It goes without saying that the diary supplies a profoundly personal account of the most important period of Congar’s life, a kind of soliloquy with God, but also a dialogue with the Church and the modern world. In English, Nichols’s Yves Congar (1989) provides an introduction to the main themes of Congar’s theology. Nichols concludes that Congar was ‘a theologically gifted, historically-minded preacher and pastor, rather than a speculative or systematic theologian’.81 This line of argument has considerable force. But it is imprecise on one important point – namely that Congar was, by his own admission, not a pastor.82 The analysis of Congar’s theology of ministry presented in Chapter 2 attempts to show that his assessment of the worker-priest movement constitutes an anomaly in his ecclesiology which, I believe, results, at least in part, from a profound lack of pastoral experience. Victor Dunne’s study, Prophecy in the Church: The Vision of Yves Congar (2000),83 presents a careful analysis of Congar’s understanding of reform in the context of his vision of prophetic activity in the Church. The principal weakness of Congar’s vision of ecclesial prophecy, as Dunne notes, is that it lacks a sufficiently developed structural framework for the implementation of the prophetic inspiration of the faithful. There are three works of interest by American authors. A common feature in all three is a preface or foreword by Congar which contain important clarifications on crucial aspects of his ecclesiology. Timothy I. MacDonald’s The Ecclesiology of Yves Congar (1984) presents a systematic analysis of the dialectic of structure and life, seen by him as foundational in Congar’s ecclesiology. In his comments on MacDonald’s study, however, Congar says that he used this concept primarily in response to the question of true and false reform. I shall return to this point in an evaluation of the concept of structure and life in Congar’s theology. Charles MacDonald, in a work entitled Church and World in the Plan of God (1982), puts forward an evaluation of the relationship between Christology and eschatology in Congar’s thought. MacDonald’s major criticism concerns Congar’s ideas of development and progress. He questions the tenability of Congar’s teleological interpretation of history which, by making development a condition for the kingdom, endangers the kingdom’s gratuity.84 While not 81 82 83

84

Nichols, Yves Congar, p. 201. Congar, ‘Reflections’, p. 407. Victor Dunne, Prophecy in the Church: The Vision of Yves Congar, European University Studies 23 (Frankfurt: Lang, 2000). MacDonald, Church and World in the Plan of God, p. 146.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 15

Introduction

15

rejecting Congar’s teleological approach, MacDonald finds it necessary to place it more in the context of covenant theology, which views all progress as the result of God’s fidelity. William Henn’s The Hierarchy of Truths According to Yves Congar, O.P. (1987) provides a survey of Congar’s contribution to the systematization of the concept of the ‘hierarchy of truths’. Congar notes that this expression should find application in the practice of ecumenism. He says that it certainly has its place in the idea of ‘reconciled diversities’ so dear to Lutherans.85 In German, Cornelis van Vliet’s Communio sacramentalis (1995), argues that the term Communio sacramentalis, though not used by Congar, provides a synthesis of the different conceptions of the Church discussed by him.86 While van Vliet refers to Congar’s treatment of unbelief,87 he does not give it an important place in the development of his theology. In Spanish, Ramiro Pellitero presents a study of the theology of the laity in Congar’s thought. His work, in three parts, is entitled La Teología del Laicado en la obra de Yves Congar (1996). Part I situates Congar in the context of historical and theological reflection on the laity. It examines Jalons, his most important treatise on this subject. Part II presents the developments in Congar’s theology to the end of the Second Vatican Council and follows closely his reading of the principal documents of that Council. Part III offers a synthesis and theological discussion of the material studied, including the question of the relationship between Church and world. While Pellitero refers to the idea of ‘a total ecclesiology’,88 and studies the principal elements of the theology of the laity outlined in Jalons, he nonetheless fails to provide a comprehensive analysis of what Congar means when he says: ‘At bottom there can be only one sound and sufficient theology of the laity, and that is a “total ecclesiology”.’89 In other words, the difficult process of examining the genesis and significance of a central concept in Congar’s theology of the Church is passed over. This book seeks to provide a better understanding of Congar’s ‘total ecclesiology’ by attempting to show how unbelief supplies the main inspiration for his vision of a renewed Church. A concern to formulate a better Church response to unbelief was shared by other prominent French 85

86

87 88

89

See Congar, ‘Preface’, in William Henn, The Hierarchy of Truths According to Yves Congar, O.P. (Rome: Gregorian University Press, 1987), pp. IX–XII (pp. XI–XII). See also Henn, ‘The Hierarchy of Truths Twenty Years Later’, TS, 48 (1987), 439–471. Cornelis Th. M. van Vliet, Communio sacramentalis: Das Kirchenverständnis von Yves Congar – genetisch und systematisch betrachtet (Mainz: Grünewald, 1995), p. 275. Van Vliet, Communio sacramentalis, pp. 50–51. Ramiro Pellitero, La Teología del Laicado en la obra de Yves Congar (Pamplona: University of Navarre Press, 1996), p. 133. See also idem, ‘Congar’s Developing Understanding of the Laity and their Mission’, Thomist, 65 (2001), 327–359. See footnote 3.

congar pages

16

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 16

Yves Congar’s Vision

theologians, including Henri de Lubac and Jean Daniélou.90 It was Congar who encouraged de Lubac to write Catholicisme: les aspects sociaux du dogme (1938) which attempts to address the problem of an extremely individualized and privatized religious sensibility among Catholics.91 The present study acknowledges the importance given to history by Congar,92 and his emphasis on thinking historically,93 without presenting an analysis of his major historical works.94 There is one further point concerning a later development in Congar’s ideas on unbelief that should not be passed over without comment. In Église catholique et France moderne (1978), Congar expresses concern that the historic failures of the Roman Catholic Church were being given too much attention, to the neglect of its transcendental purity.95 Still, even this matter did not take away from his insistence on the necessity for the Church to respond to the ever changing needs of the modern world. In 1987 Congar describes the greatest challenge facing the Roman Catholic Church in the twentieth century, to which his ecclesiology is a response: I have often said, and I must say it again, that we are in one of the most evangelistic centuries of all history. I know that it is a century of unbelief and religious indifference, that it is also the century of the expansion of Islam, but among the minority of faithful who truly believe, it is a really evangelistic century.96

The present work, divided into three chapters, aims at providing an interpretative framework for understanding Congar’s ecclesiology. The first chapter reconstructs his vision of the Church. It shows that a renewed ecclesiology forms an essential theological basis for the renewal of the Church. The second chapter investigates the actual shape of the renewed 90

91

92

93

94

95 96

Jean Daniélou, ‘Les orientations présentes de la pensée religieuse’, Études, 249 (1946), 5–21. Henri de Lubac, Catholicism: Christ and the Common Destiny of Man, trans. by Lancelot C. Sheppard and Elizabeth Englund (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988); also idem, Catholicisme: les aspects sociaux du dogme, 4th edn, Unam Sanctam, 3 (Paris: Cerf, 1947); idem, Mémoire sur l’occasion de mes écrits (Namur: Culture et Vérité, 1989), p. 26; Joseph A. Komonchak, ‘Theology and Culture at Mid-century: The Example of Henri de Lubac’, TS, 51 (1990), 579–602 (p. 591). See Puyo, Congar, p. 43; Congar, ‘Reflections’, p. 407; idem, ‘Preface’, in MacDonald, Church and World in the Plan of God, p. VII. Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, Cross Currents, 12 (1962), p. 145 (p. 692). Congar, L’Ecclésiologie du haut moyen age: de saint Grégoire le grand à la désunion entre Byzance et Rome (Paris: Cerf, 1968); idem, L’Église de saint Augustin à l’époque moderne, Histoire des dogmes, 20 (Paris: Cerf, 1970). Congar, Église catholique et France moderne (Paris: Hachette, 1978), pp. 279–280. Congar, Fifty Years of Catholic Theology, p. 66 (p. 86).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 17

Introduction

17

Church, paying particular attention to the principal means proposed by Congar for its renewal. In the third chapter, I assess Congar’s idea of a true reform, based on a recognition of the indefectibility of the Church’s visible institution and a fidelity to its tradition.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 18

CHAPTER 1

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology Congar’s life’s work concerned the articulation of a complete theology, through the study of the totality of Catholic doctrine, for the benefit of the Church and the advancement of its mission in the world. A clear idea of his rich hopes for the Church may be found in a short essay written in 1937, entitled ‘Pour une théologie de l’Église’: Everywhere we get a sense that it would be of great profit in our pastoral ministry and would allow Christianity to spread to a far greater extent throughout the world, if the concept of the Church were to recover the broad, rich, vital meaning it once had, a meaning deriving wholly from the Bible and Tradition.1

The key elements of Congar’s theology include the following: the restoration of the genuine value of ecclesiology; ecumenism; a fresh consideration of the person and mission of the Holy Spirit; reform; the laity; a return to the sources; and the application of the fecund resources of tradition to the current problems of the Church. His prodigious ecclesiological programme was translated directly into the documents of Vatican II. This was a source of gratification for Congar: I was filled to overflowing. All the things to which I gave quite special attention issued in the Council: ecclesiology, ecumenism, reform of the Church, the lay state, mission, ministries, collegiality, return to sources and Tradition.2

Clearly the development of a comprehensive theology of the Church was one of the most important concerns of Congar’s theological career. Église et papauté: regards historiques3 is a later and valuable collection of Congar’s historical writings which he chose for this volume for their decisive importance in understanding the ecclesiological renewal of the twentieth century. They facilitate a more informed judgement of the properly historical importance of Vatican II as a turning point in the life of the Church. Commenting on this work, which provides an invaluable insight 1 2 3

Congar, ‘Pour une théologie de l’Église’, VS, 52 (1937), 97–99 (p. 98). Congar, ‘Reflections’, NB, 62 (1981), p. 405. Congar, Église et papauté: regards historiques, Cogitatio Fidei, 184 (Paris: Cerf, 1994).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 19

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

19

into his theology of the Church, Fouilloux affirms a clear consistency of purpose in Congar’s theology – namely ‘to elucidate the course of the Church across history’.4 In view of his consistent concern for the Church, it is not surprising that, in the introduction to Jalons, Congar indicates that a full theology of the Church is essential for an adequate theology of the laity: The real difficulty is that such a theology [of the laity] supposes the existence of a whole ecclesiological synthesis wherein the mystery of the Church has been given all its dimensions, including fully the ecclesial reality of laity.5

Congar points out that it is not his intention to offer a complete treatise on the Church in Jalons, although, for him, this would have been an eminently desirable project. He notes, however, that ecclesiology is a recurrent theme: Ecclesiology keeps on cropping up, and when the reader meets seemingly rather irrelevant and laboured explanations, he must remember that they are necessary in order to tie up particular applications with general principles. Much repetition would have been avoided had we been able to refer him to a complete treatise on the Church.6

Congar is careful to draw attention to certain serious difficulties for the Church that would ensue from a failure to formulate the principles of a full ecclesiology: Without those principles, we should have, confronting a laicised world, only a clerical Church, which would not be the people of God in the fullness of its truth. At bottom there can be only one sound and sufficient theology of laity, and that is a ‘total ecclesiology’.7

It is clear that, for Congar, Church and laity cannot be understood in isolation from each other. A study of the concept of the Church in Congar’s theology is, then, a necessary prerequisite to an analysis of his theology of the laity. Congar’s notion of the Church is that of a multifaceted reality. His ecclesiology is markedly disparate, being made up of many different images or models. However, he did not produce a systematic theology. He reveals something of the nature of his theology when, in a somewhat nuanced, yet modest, manner, he asserts: ‘I am not like K. Rahner.’8 Congar’s theology is occasional in the sense that it was written in response to requests, but also charismatic, since these requests emanated from within the heart of the 4 5 6 7 8

Fouilloux, ‘Frère Yves’, RSPT, 79 (1995), p. 404. Congar, LP, pp. XV–XVI (p. 13). Ibid., p. XVI (p. 13). Ibid. See Jossua, Le Père Congar: la théologie au service du peuple de Dieu, Chrétiens de Tous les Temps, 20 (Paris: Cerf, 1967), p. 53.

congar pages

20

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 20

Yves Congar’s Vision

Church. Thus, it would be erroneous to attempt either to systematize or to hierarchize his thought according to French or German conceptual schemata. Congar provides a clear picture of his major theological endeavours in the post-Second World War period: After the war I had the idea of considering the twofold question of the laity and reform within the Church. […] At that time I gave many lectures. There were requests for lectures and articles on the laity as well as on the question of change in the Church. This led first to my book Vraie et fausse réforme dans l’Église (1950) – reform not of the church, but in the church, since it remained within the church. That then led to my extensively documented book of 1953, Lay People in the Church.9

Congar’s theology is fragmentary in nature.10 M.-J. Le Guillou points out that Congar’s failure to produce a great treatise on ecclesiology was due to his concrete service of the Church and his brethren.11 Jossua attributes this failure to certain traits in Congar’s intellectual temperament. In Jossua’s opinion, Congar’s rejection of ‘a theological science closed in on itself’12 is one of the factors that ‘makes of him perhaps a new type of theologian, closer to the Fathers than to the medieval scholastics’.13 Although he never produced a complete theology of the Church, the Church is nonetheless the major theme of Congar’s theological corpus: It was during my days as a student brother in 1928–1929 that I first conceived the ambition of writing a treatise on the Church, but it will probably never be written. While my writings give fragments of the project it remains uncompleted, and yet I do not regret this. I now see many things differently and, I hope, better in comparison with forty years ago.14

The foregoing survey indicates that, for Congar, an ecclesiological synthesis of all the dimensions of the Church is necessary in order to construct a theology of the laity. The central aim of this chapter is, therefore, to present an analysis of the key elements in Congar’s new vision of the Church – the most enduring element of his theological legacy – in order to reconstruct it. 9 10

11

12 13 14

Congar, ‘Letter from Father Yves Congar, O.P.’, TD, 32 (1985), p. 214. Battista Mondin, I grandi teologi del secolo ventesimo, 2 vols (Turin: Borla, 1969), I, p. 195. M.-J. Le Guillou, ‘Yves Congar’, in Bilan de la théologie du XXe siècle, ed. by Robert Vander Gucht and Herbert Vorgrimler, 2 vols (Paris: Casterman, 1970), II, p. 795. Jossua, Père Congar, p. 53. Ibid. Congar, ‘My Path-Findings in the Theology of Laity and Ministries’, (hereafter ‘Pathfindings’), Jurist, 32 (1972), 169–188 (p. 169); also idem, ‘Mon cheminement dans la théologie du laïcat et des ministères’, in Cardinal Yves Congar, O.P.: écrits réformateurs, (hereafter Écrits réformateurs), ed. by Jean-Pierre Jossua (Paris: Cerf, 1995), pp. 123–140 (p. 123).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 21

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

21

An understanding of his unique contribution to the renewal of ecclesiology, an initial consideration of his role at Vatican II and his ecclesiological methodology constitute some of the principal areas of concern. I will also attempt to trace the origins and development of Congar’s vision of the Church with particular reference to the place of the laity, a full consideration of which will be presented in Chapter 2. Another important element in the examination of the vision concerns Congar’s view that the Church is a cause of unbelief in the world, which calls for careful consideration of his ‘Conclusion théologique’. This controversial essay on the pastoral mission of the Church in society points to a poor presentation of the humanity of Christ and of his grace in the world. This was due to the juridical and defensive nature of the Roman Catholic Church in France, major factors that contributed to modern unbelief. Before proceeding to Congar’s analysis of the question of unbelief, let us look at the influence of affectivity on his theology.15 ‘I Love the Church’: Ecclesiology and Affectivity Congar loved the Church. As he explained to Jean Puyo in 1975, ‘I am of the Church. I love the Church’.16 This love is based on a simple yet profound truth that he recognized the Church as the Mother, the hearth and the homeland of his spiritual being.17 Congar’s love for the Church, motivated by his love for Christ, is situated in the wider setting of his love for humankind.18 It is difficult to avoid an admiration for his shrewd insistence on the need to locate the maternal and fraternal dimensions of the Church’s nature, seen as perfectly compatible, in a communion ecclesiology. A communitarian, ecclesial milieu is correctly identified as essential for the formation of Christians: Maternal, the Church is also fraternal. It is a fraternity. The two qualities are perfectly compatible, evangelically speaking, because in the spiritual plan, they are united in communion: as in a text like Matthew 12. 50 (Mark 3. 35; Luke 8. 21). Better: it is the fraternity which exercises here a maternity, as it is said so 15

16

17

18

Some elements of my presentation on the role of affectivity in Congar’s theology appeared in New Blackfriars (July–August 2002), and are reproduced here with the kind permission of the editor. See Gabriel Flynn, ‘The Role of Affectivity in the Theology of Yves Congar’, NB, 83 (2002), 347–364; also idem, ‘Le rôle de l’affectivité dans la théologie d’Yves Congar’, VS, 157 (2003), 73–92. Puyo, Jean Puyo interroge le Père Congar: ‘une vie pour la vérité’ (hereafter Congar) (Paris: Centurion, 1975), p. 185. Congar, ‘Pourquoi j’aime l’Église’, Communion: Verbum Caro, 24 (1970), 23–30 (p. 23). Ibid., p. 25.

congar pages

22

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 22

Yves Congar’s Vision often by Saint Augustine and many others. This does not take away anything from a particular paternity of priests and pastors who can say with Saint Paul: ‘It is I who, through the Gospel, begot you in Jesus Christ’ (1 Cor. 4. 15). This signifies that if, taken individually, we are sons of the Church, we form collectively or rather as a community, this ecclesial milieu which we have seen is the generator and educator of Christians.19

Congar’s love for the Church informed and inspired all his theological projects.20 In every question regarding the Church, its mission in the world and its reform, the guiding principle is, so to speak, love. As Congar comments: ‘But this [reform] must be done in love, not in indifferent disinterestedness neither in cold criticism [critique froide], nor in latent revolt [fronde larvée].’21 In the midst of the crisis of 1954, when he and his closest confrères at Le Saulchoir, were forbidden to teach, Congar was heard to say: ‘For the Church one cannot but give all!’22 In Cette Église que j’aime, Congar attests unhesitatingly to what is most important in his life: Do not man’s words flow out of what fills his heart? The subjects dealt with here constitute the passion of my life. […] May I be permitted to engrave in the front of this work on dogma and spirituality: Church, Laity, Priesthood, linking these three loves by a common relation to the Missions.23

The place of the Church in Congar’s theology is best understood in the context of his utter dedication to its service and to the search for truth: [I decided] to dedicate myself particularly to the Church and ecumenism. […] I’ve consecrated my life to the service of truth. I’ve loved it and still love it in the way one loves a person. I’ve been like that from my very childhood, as if by some instinct and interior need. When I was a young Dominican, I took over the motto of St Hilary which St Thomas Aquinas had first made his own (Contra Gentes 1, 2) and which was reproduced on his statue, in the house of studies at Le Saulchoir: ‘Ego hoc vel praecipuum vitae meae officium debere me Deo conscius sum, ut eum omnis sermo meus et sensus loquatur’ (De Trin. I, 37; PL 1, 48 C).24

19 20 21 22 23

24

Ibid., p. 26. Le Guillou, ‘Yves Congar’, p. 792. Congar, ‘Pourquoi j’aime l’Église’, p. 30. Le Guillou, ‘Yves Congar’, p. 793. Congar, This Church That I Love, (hereafter TCIL) trans. by Lucien Delafuente (Denville, NJ: Dimension Books, 1969), p. 7. See also idem, Cette Église que j’aime, Foi Vivante, 70 (Paris: Cerf, 1968), p. 7. Congar, ‘Reflections’, pp. 405–406. See also idem, ‘St. Thomas Aquinas and the Spirit of Ecumenism’, NB, 55 (1974), 196–209; also idem, ‘Saint Thomas d’Aquin et l’esprit oecuménique’, Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie, 21 (1974), 331–346; Patrick Granfield, Theologians at Work (New York: Macmillan; London: Collier-Macmillan, 1967), p. 253.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 23

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

23

A defining feature of Congar’s theology of the Church is its orientation towards the world.25 His ecclesiology, far from being ecclesio-centric, is for the world and at the service of all.26 Even a cursory reading of his works shows that Congar was not prepared to ignore the modern world or its history.27 Such a course would have had the inevitable consequence of rendering the Church, as presented in his theology, irrelevant to modern society. Congar’s was a prophetic voice speaking as much for the benefit of the world and humanity as for that of the Church. His view of the relationship between the Church and the world is one of dependency: At bottom, the Church and the world need one another. The Church means salvation for the world, but the world means health for the Church: without the world there would be danger of her becoming wrapped up in her own sacredness and uniqueness.28

In the conditions of a modern, secular, pluralist society, Congar argues that theology must exercise a critical function: Theology must, of course, be constructive, but also exercise a critical function, and if possible a prophetic function, too, towards a status quo which might be disregarding the actual state of things.29

The goals of Congar’s ecclesiological programme referred to above do not stand in isolation from each other. He indicates that the interior renewal of the Church and the realization of Christian unity, for which he worked untiringly, are only attainable through action inspired by prayer: When it is a matter of the renewal of the Church and the conversion of heart, prayer for unity, especially when made in common, and when it attains a certain level of sincerity and depth – as it is generally the case – makes us aware of the exigencies of Jesus Christ, and the indifference of the rest. It invites us to go inside ourselves and not to harden our hearts.30

Common prayer is, then, a source of conversion through which, in Congar’s view, Christians become more Christian and more Catholic. 25

26

27

28

29 30

Congar, ‘Where Are We in the Expression of the Faith?’, trans. by Dinah Livingstone, Concilium, 170 (1983), pp. 85–87 (p. 86). Congar, Called to Life, (hereafter CTL) (Slough: St Paul; New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1988), p. 88; also idem, Appelés à la vie (Paris: Cerf, 1985), p. 95. Congar, Laity, Church and World: Three Addresses by Yves Congar, trans. by Donald Attwater (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1960); also idem, Si vous êtes mes témoins: trois conférences sur laïcat, Église et monde (Paris: Cerf, 1959). Congar, The Wide World My Parish: Salvation and its Problems, trans. by Donald Attwater (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1961), p. 23; also idem, Vaste monde ma paroisse: vérité et dimensions du salut (Paris: Témoignage Chrétien, 1959), p. 34. Congar, ‘Where Are We in the Expression of the Faith?’, p. 86. Congar, TCIL, p. 115 (p. 121).

congar pages

24

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 24

Yves Congar’s Vision

It was affectivity in his approach to the Church, together with his commitment to its reform, that inspired Congar’s unflagging service at Vatican II. As we read one of his letters: I worked on many conciliar commissions. I do not think that I had more than two days rest in the four conciliar sessions of three months each. The work was enormous: I was on the theological commission presided over by Cardinal Ottaviani, where we laboured unceasingly, always in Latin; the Commission for the Missions, a great grace in my life; the Commission for the Clergy, for the decree on priests, Presbyterorum ordinis, in which I was responsible for not a few texts. With the Secretariat for Christian Unity I worked hard on the decree on ecumenism, on the declaration on religious freedom, which demanded a great deal from us, and on the text on non-Christian religions. I also had a part in other things, more or less, but in none more than in the famous Gaudium et spes (The Church in the Modern World) which issued simultaneously from the commissions on theology and the laity. It was an enormous structure, since each commission had thirty members and at least as many periti.31

Congar may be numbered among those outstanding Roman Catholic theologians whose efforts contributed to the transformation of theology in the decades that preceded the Second Vatican Council.32 He provides an outline of some of the reasons for the renewal of the sense of the Church: One does not have to deny the general influence exercised on the work of theologians by the development of sociological studies and the rebirth of the social sense. We have rediscovered, in social philosophy, the notion of wholeness [tout].33

Congar believed, however, that the true causes of the renewal in ecclesiology were to be found in the religious domain. He was convinced that the most decisive element in the ecclesiological renewal in the period before the Council was a deepening in the interior life of the Church, especially with regard to the person of Christ: We are convinced that it is the attention directed, with great fervour, towards Christ himself which made his mystical body better understood. Is it not remarkable that one of the most read works since the war, one of those which

31

32

33

Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 215. See also idem, Fifty Years of Catholic Theology, ed. by Bernard Lauret, trans. by John Bowden (London: SCM, 1988), p. 14 (p. 22). Congar indicates that he also worked on Lumen gentium no. 17 and on the Decree on the Missionary Activity of the Church no. 7 concerning the interpretation of the Catholic dogma Extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Also Dulles, ‘The Essence of Catholicism: Protestant and Catholic Perspectives’, Thomist, 48 (1984), 607–633 (p. 633). Vittorio Subilia, The Problem of Catholicism, trans. by Reginald Kissack (London: SCM, 1964), p. 95; also idem, Il Problema del Cattolicesimo (Turin: Claudiana, 1962). Congar, ‘Autour du renouveau de l’ecclésiologie: la collection “Unam Sanctam”’, VI, 51 (1939), 9–32 (pp. 9–10).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 25

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

25

contributed most to foster the beginnings of this ecclesiological renewal, was the work of Dom Marmion, so fully christological and liturgical?34

Congar also points to the impulse given to eucharistic piety by Pope Pius X (1903–1914), which united Christians more closely with Christ, thereby contributing to a better understanding of the Church. Congar asserted, therefore, that, if his evaluation of the ecclesiological renewal was correct, his assessment would allow an appreciation of the soundness of Christian instinct and of the sense of tradition, both of which were born of the same renewal.35 The immense distance between the true face of the Church and that which it presents to the world was a source of such great concern to Congar that, at an early stage in his career, he resolutely embarked on a search for that true face: My God, your Church which is Holy and One [Unique], which is one, holy and true, why does it often have this austere and discouraging face [visage], when in reality it is full of youth and life? ‘In reality, we are the face of the Church: we make it visible; my God make of us a truly living face of your Church!’36

In essence, Congar was concerned that, for many, the Roman Catholic Church could be a cause of unbelief because the Church was often perceived as a harsh and condemning judge – an image that was inevitably damaging for the Church. Congar was acutely aware of this sad situation which caused many of his contemporaries to distance themselves from the Church: My God, who made me understand from 1929–1930 that if the Church changed its face [visage], if it simply assumed its true [VRAI] face, if it was very simply the Church, all would become possible on the path of unity.37

Congar’s initial contribution to the transformation of Roman Catholic theology was, then, in the area of the renewal of the Church. He knew that such a renewal was essential in order to overcome unbelief: It is necessary to restore fully to the mystery of the Church its human and divine dimensions. Its whole divine dimension by showing and stressing its inner connection with Christ, the decisive and ever present role of the Holy Spirit, and the primacy of grace; its entire human dimension by showing to advantage the

34

35 36 37

Ibid., p. 11. Columba Marmion (1858–1923), Abbot of Maredsous, Belgium, Irish by birth, was a gifted writer and spiritual director. See Mark Tierney, Dom Columba Marmion: A Biography (Dublin: Columba, 1994). Congar, ‘Autour du renouveau de l’ecclésiologie’, p. 11. Congar, UPU, pp. 15–16. Congar, Mon journal du Concile, ed. by Éric Mahieu, 2 vols (Paris: Cerf, 2002), I, p. 257 (24 November 1962).

congar pages

26

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 26

Yves Congar’s Vision activity of the entire community of believers, its liturgical and apostolic role, its reality as fully ecclesial.38

Thus, Congar’s proposals for the renewal of the Church recognize the centrality of Christ and of the Holy Spirit and, at the same time, emphasize the Church’s human dimension. His renewal programme is a prophetic call for the full involvement of the entire ecclesial community in the apostolic activity of the Church. The extent of human cooperation in salvation is crucially important for Congar, not only in ecclesiology but also in Mariology and Christology. The profound nature of his own affective approach to the mystery of the Church sensitizes Congar to the manner in which the Church, on its human side, is a cooperative participation in divine activity. Congar’s Le Christ, Marie et l’Église,39 published on the occasion of the fifteenth centenary of the Council of Chalcedon, takes up again, from an ecumenical perspective, the points of friction between the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Churches. An important work, it shows that disagreement concerning the role of the Church and of Mary in the plan of salvation inevitably leads to disagreement concerning the role of Christ. The Council of Chalcedon (451) is recognized by all the Churches as is the definition of the Church as the community of believers. The Churches are divided, however, on the question of what unites the Church to God.40 Essentially, Protestants favour an ecclesiology that is vertical, in which God is seen as the sole author of salvation.41 Catholics, on the other hand, prefer a more horizontal ecclesiology that recognizes the role of the human person, the Church and Mary in the salvation of humanity.42 Congar’s stress on the divine-human nature of the Church and on its saving activity cannot be overemphasized.43 He is sharply critical of Luther’s frequently repeated view of salvation as an opus Dei,44 a work of God, not of humanity and, therefore, of God only: 38

39

40

41

42 43 44

Congar, Sainte Église: études et approches ecclésiologiques, (hereafter SE), Unam Sanctam, 41 (Paris: Cerf, 1963), p. 552. Congar, Christ, Our Lady and the Church: A Study in Eirenic Theology, (hereafter CLC), trans. with an introduction by Henry St John (London: Longmans, Green, 1957); also idem, Le Christ, Marie et l’Église (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1952). See C. Caillon, ‘Y. Congar, Le Christ, Marie et l’Église’, Lumière et Vie, 16 (1954), 135–136 (p. 135). See Paul D. L. Avis, ‘Ecclesiology’, in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Modern Christian Thought, ed. by Alister E. McGrath (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), pp. 127–134 (p. 131); Hans Urs von Balthasar, The Theology of Karl Barth: Exposition and Interpretation, trans. by Edward T. Oakes (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1992), pp. 387, 389; also idem, Karl Barth: Darstellung und Deutung Seiner Theologie (Cologne: Hegner, 1951). Caillon, ‘Y. Congar, Le Christ, Marie et l’Église’, p. 136. Congar, CLC, pp. 38–39 (pp. 46–47). Ibid., p. 30 (pp. 37–38).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 27

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

27

But if neither the human race as such, nor the Church nor Our Lady has any active part in the work of salvation the question cannot but occur what of the cooperation of Christ’s human nature? If we disagree about the Church and Our Lady for the same reason as we do about the idea of a pure opus Dei in which God alone is active in the work of salvation, this third problem must be faced. Are we not also in disagreement about the part played by Christ’s humanity in that same work? […] For if salvation is wholly an opus Dei, the sole act of God, what becomes of the part played by Christ’s humanity itself, since our own part, and the parts of Our Lady and the Church are held to have no place. God, according to Luther, does our works in us. Faith, the one thing that should respond in us to God’s action is, in his view, itself the work of God.45

The crux of the argument in Christology, as well as in ecclesiology and Mariology, concerns the nature and extent of human cooperation with the Creator. Congar points out that, in Roman Catholic theology, the intimate connection between the three subjects of Christ, Mary and the Church is determined by a single principle, applied with due qualification in each case, and which he defines as follows: ‘Human nature plays its part in the work of salvation, yet equally clearly the total power of effecting that salvation is from God.’46 Congar thus emphasizes the human dimension of the Church without in any way understating its divine dimension, thereby avoiding the monophysite heresy in ecclesiology.47 Congar, moved by a deep love for the Church, urged a return to the great wealth of the whole previous Christian tradition not only in order to retrieve it for the enrichment of the present-day Church48 but also to counteract its hostile image, itself a cause of unbelief: Our contribution obviating these reasons for unbelief [a poor presentation of the Church] would be a truly traditional presentation of the life of the Church, one based on the great inspirations of the first centuries … i.e., on the sources. You see at once that my theology, to the extent one can speak of my theology, is linked specifically to a study of the sources, with a great reliance on those sources: … scripture, the fathers, the liturgy, the great councils, and the very life of the Church, the Christian community.49

The concrete form that affectivity took in Congar’s approach to ecclesiology was a demanding search for the sources of authentic ecclesiology and their deployment according to a principle of Christological recentring. The return 45 46 47

48

49

Ibid., pp. 19, 27 (pp. 26, 35). Ibid., p. 31 (pp. 38–39). See S. Paul Schilling, Contemporary Continental Theologians (London: SCM, 1966), p. 189. See Congar, ‘L’hérésie, déchirement de l’unité’, in L’Église est une: hommage à Moehler, ed. by Pierre Chaillet (Paris: Bloud & Gay, 1939), pp. 255–269 (pp. 256–257, 262). Congar, ‘Letter’, pp. 213–214.

congar pages

28

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 28

Yves Congar’s Vision

to the sources (ressourcement) was part of a lively movement for reform in French theology, dating from the early part of the twentieth century, that effected a renewal in Scripture, patristics and liturgy. Congar defines ressourcement as ‘a new examination [réinterrogation] of the permanent sources of theology: the Bible, liturgy, the Fathers (Latins and Greeks)’.50 The return to the sources was not just an archaistic reproduction of the early Church; rather, it concerned the understanding of the Fathers in their own context and the application of the pure and full vision of Christianity, expounded by them, to the Church in the modern era. Congar considers the Fathers of the Church as the normal spiritual milieu of the theologian: Most often, the Fathers remain exterior to the thought of modern theologians: they are invoked from the outside. […] For Möhler, the knowledge of the Fathers is a means of being united with their spirit, and this communion itself is not properly speaking a means, because it is the communion with Christianity in its concrete, purest and fullest reality. Like the company of parents and of brothers in the bosom of the family, the company of the Fathers is more than a means, it is a spiritual milieu, the milieu of the normal life of the theologian.51

Roger Aubert, an historian of Roman Catholic thought and theology, provides the most comprehensive account of the ressourcement. Writing during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII and soon after the publication of Humani Generis (1950), Aubert states that his aim is to discern the predominant trends of present-day theology that indicate the orientations of theology in the years to come. He acknowledges his debt to two studies – one by Congar and the other by Daniélou52 – both of which consider the same question of the present orientations in religious thought. The ressourcement passed through various stages of development. The biblical renewal, which began in Germany in the course of the interwar period, spread progressively to the rest of the Catholic world and even to what may be considered the less progressive countries. In France, youth movements – most notably the young Catholic workers’ movement, the Jeunesse Ouvrière Chrétienne (JOC) as it came to be known – from their inception gave an important place to meditation on the Gospel while Dom Columba Marmion led many priests and laity to a rediscovery of the Scriptures.53 The liturgical renewal is older than the biblical renewal. 50

51

52

53

Congar, La Foi et la Théologie, Théologie dogmatique, 1 (Tournai: Desclée, 1962), p. 271. Congar, ‘L’Esprit des Pères d’après Moehler’, Supplément à la ‘Vie Spirituelle’, 55 (1938), 1–25 (p. 2). Congar, ‘Tendances actuelles de la pensée religieuse’, Cahiers du monde nouveau, 4 (1948), 33–50; also Daniélou, ‘Les orientations présentes de la pensée religieuse’, Études, 249 (1946), 5–21. See Roger Aubert, Théologie Catholique au milieu du milieu du XXe siècle (Tournai: Casterman, 1954), p. 11.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 29

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

29

Although known in France from before the First World War, and although its first intense period of activity was linked with the name of Dom Lambert Beauduin, it was in Germany during the interwar period that the liturgical renewal blossomed when the Church was forced, especially during the Nazi era, to renounce social action and focused instead on the lively celebration of the divine mysteries.54 The liturgical renewal, which was not limited to Germany and France, could count on the active goodwill of the Holy See.55 The biblical renewal and the liturgical movement were, very naturally, completed by a patristic renaissance.56 The movement towards fuller contact with patristic thought is perhaps the most interesting and challenging of the various currents of renewal in theology in the early part of the twentieth century, as it provides an authentic witness to the faith in a way that is sensitive to the ever-changing needs of humanity.57 The characteristic feature of the patristic renewal, according to Aubert, was that it no longer solely concerned, as it did a half century earlier, the study of the works of the Fathers for apologetic arguments to prove the antiquity of professed doctrines or practices in use in the Roman Catholic Church. Its aim was, rather, to recover that which had been forgotten or neglected in the course of history.58 The ressourcement reached a dramatic high point in French theology in the period during and following the Second World War.59 During the 1940s and 1950s, the ressourcement helped liberate Protestants from tired liberalism or oppressive fundamentalism, while also freeing Catholics from neo-scholasticism.60 Protestant neo-orthodox theologians, most notably Barth, who called for a return to the Bible, also contributed to the Catholic ressourcement by showing Roman Catholics that it is possible to read the Bible in ways that are faithful both to the historic faith and to the methods of historical criticism.61 The power of the movement for a return to the sources was, however, most evident on the Roman Catholic side, with Congar as its pre-eminent practitioner, and he provides a clear expression of his line of thought on the importance of the return to the sources:

54 55 56 57

58 59 60

61

See ibid., p. 31. See ibid., p. 34. See Louis Bouyer, ‘Le Renouveau des études patristiques’, VI, 15 (1947), 6–25. See John Courtney Murray, ‘Sources Chrétiennes’, TS, 9 (1948), 250–255 (pp. 250–251). Aubert, Théologie Catholique, pp. 38–39. Ibid., pp. 7–8. See George Lindbeck, ‘Ecumenical Theology’, in The Modern Theologians: An Introduction to Christian Theology in the Twentieth Century, ed. by David F. Ford, 2 vols (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989), II, pp. 255–273 (p. 258). See ibid., pp. 258–259.

congar pages

30

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 30

Yves Congar’s Vision In everything I have always been concerned to recover the sources, the roots. I am firmly convinced: a tree strikes deep roots and cannot rise to heaven except to the extent those roots hold firmly to the soil of the earth.62

Congar worked consistently for a reform of the Church that would proceed by way of a return to the sources. In his view, however, ressourcement could only be accomplished by way of a recentrement (recentring on Christ), thereby effecting ‘a return to the essential, to Jesus Christ, especially in the central mystery of Easter’.63 The combination of ressourcement and recentrement was critically important in Congar’s ecclesiology, providing the insight that enabled him to deal with the important, though difficult, question of the relationship between the Church and the world – a relationship that Congar defined in such a way as to avoid the dangerous error of either being subordinate to the other. Congar borrowed the idea of a return to the sources from the poet and social critic Charles Péguy (1873–1914),64 as well as from the liturgical changes inaugurated by Pope Pius X.65 He was also influenced by Möhler whom he praises for his efforts to live as perfectly as possible in communion with the spirit of the Fathers: ‘But Möhler does not use the Fathers in order to prove conclusions; he seeks to live and, by communion with their spirit, to find as perfect as possible a communion with their thought and with their life.’66 The path of Church reform by way of a return to the biblical and patristic roots was pursued not only by Congar, but also by de Lubac, Daniélou, Joseph Ratzinger and Karl Rahner, to mention the most important theologians. The achievement of these scholars, seen by the Lutheran George Lindbeck as ‘tradition-minded but not traditionalist renewers of theology’,67 was made possible by their deep knowledge of Scripture and the Fathers and by their abiding respect for and appeal to traditions earlier than those of the Middle Ages and the CounterReformation. The origins of the programme of reform and renewal that was at the heart of the ressourcement may be traced to certain elements in Roman Catholic 62 63 64

65

66

67

Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 215. Congar, ‘Il faut construire l’Église en nous’, Témoignage Chrétien, 7 July 1950, p. 1. Congar, ‘Le prophète Péguy’, Témoignage Chrétien, 26 August 1949, p. 1. See also Giovanni Turbanti, ‘The Attitude of the Church to the Modern World at and after Vatican II’, trans. by Mortimer Bear, Concilium (1992/6), 87–96 (p. 87). Congar, ‘Autour du renouveau de l’ecclésiologie’, p. 11. See also Aidan Nichols, ‘Yves Congar’ in The Modern Theologians, ed. by David F. Ford, 2 vols (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989), I, pp. 219–236 (p. 224). Congar, ‘L’Esprit des Pères d’après Moehler’, Supplément à la ‘Vie Spirituelle’, 55 (1938), p. 12. See also idem, ‘L’hérésie, déchirement de l’unité’, in L’Église est une: hommage à Moehler, ed. by Pierre Chaillet (Paris: Bloud & Gay, 1939), pp. 255–269. Lindbeck, ‘Ecumenical Theology’, p. 258.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 31

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

31

Modernism.68 An ambivalent term, ‘Modernism’, was first used by its Roman opponents to describe an extreme that should be avoided, a crisis, and ultimately a condemned position. It refers to a definite movement of thought within the Roman Catholic Church that began about 1900 and ended soon after its condemnation in 1907.69 It would, of course, be misleading to refer to Modernism as a single coherent doctrine.70 The most important factors in the rise of the Modernist movement in France were the introduction and use of the results and methods of biblical criticism, as well as new philosophical ferments.71 Congar defines Modernism briefly as ‘the introduction into the Church of historical critical methods, their application to the religious sciences, with often insufficient philosophical foundations’.72 He views the response of the Church to Modernism as shallow and ‘purely negative’.73 A question raised by the Modernist crisis concerns the acceptance within traditional theology, and ultimately by the Church, of progress in historical science and its application to faith. Congar acknowledges that Modernism stimulated debate among Roman Catholic thinkers on the problems of Revelation, the nature and method of theology, and the precise nature of tradition. He also refers to certain difficulties which he views as a direct result of Modernism.74 One of the factors that gave rise to the Modernist crisis was the lack of complete correspondence between the Church’s doctrines and the historical and critical study of the documentation used as their basis. It was this factor, according to Congar, which led to an erroneous distinction, and indeed an opposition, between dogma and history. Modernist thinkers claimed the 68

69

70

71

72 73 74

For a history of modernism, see J. Rivière, ‘Modernisme’, DTC, ed. by A. Vacant, E. Mangenot and É. Amann (Paris: Letouzey and Ané, 1929), X Part II, cols 2009–2047. See Roger D. Haight, ‘The Unfolding of Modernism in France: Blondel, Laberthonnière, Le Roy’, TS, 35 (1974), 632–666 (p. 633); Ernesto Buonaiuti, ‘The Future of Catholicism’ in Pilgrim of Rome: An Introduction to the Life and Work of Ernesto Buonaiuti, ed. by Claud Nelson and Norman Pittenger, 1st edn (Welwyn, Herts: Nisbet, 1969), pp. 102–104 (p. 102); George Tyrrell, Medievalism: A Reply to Cardinal Mercier (Tunbridge Wells: Burns & Oates, 1994), p. 158; Jan Hulshof, ‘The Modernist Crisis: Alfred Loisy and George Tyrrell’, trans. by Theo Westow, Concilium, 113 (1978), 28–39 (pp. 28–30). See Roman Catholic Modernism, ed. and introduced by Bernard M.G. Reardon (London: Black, 1970), p. 10. See Congar, A History of Theology, ed. and trans. by Hunter Guthrie (New York: Doubleday, 1968), pp. 190–191 (col. 440); also idem, La Foi et la Théologie, p. 270. Puyo, Congar, p. 38. Ibid., p. 36. See Congar, Tradition and Traditions: An Historical and a Theological Essay, (hereafter TT), trans. by Michael Naseby and Thomas Rainborough (London: Burns & Oates, 1966), pp. 214–216; also idem, La Tradition et les traditions: essai historique, (hereafter TT, I) (Paris: Fayard, 1960), pp. 264–266; idem, La Tradition et les traditions: essai théologique, (hereafter TT, II) (Paris: Fayard, 1963).

congar pages

32

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 32

Yves Congar’s Vision

right to treat the conclusions drawn from the historical study of the documentary sources of Christianity independently from the dogmatic statements of the magisterium. Congar, like Blondel, views the separation of dogma from history as unnecessary: To oppose the data of history and the statements of dogma was to make an unwarranted separation between the two elements of a single reality with an essentially religious nature. It amounted to judging this reality by inadequate criteria, without doing justice to its nature and its demands.75

The manner in which distinctions were made by the Modernist theologians gave rise to other difficulties which Congar describes as follows: One of the misfortunes of the Modernists was that they did not know how to distinguish theology and dogma. Certainly at that time the distinction for all practical purposes was not as clear as it is today. This was one of the benefits of the Modernist crisis.76

Congar further elucidates this somewhat obscure, but important, point by arguing that the Modernists, in their legitimate efforts to avoid any confusion between the absolute of faith or Revelation and the theology of St Thomas, or the theology of the thirteenth century in general, wrongly separated Revelation and dogma from all properly speculative content on which theology lives and without which it no longer exists as theology.77 Congar studied the Modernist thinkers as part of his preparations to teach an introductory course in theology at Le Saulchoir78 and was concerned that his generation should rescue for the Church whatever was of value in Modernism. He wanted Roman Catholic theology to benefit, first, from the application of the historical critical method to Christian data and, second, by giving greater attention to the concerns of the experiencing subject. Congar also recognized the Modernist aspiration that Roman Catholic theology remain closely connected to its sources: Modernism with considerable acuteness set before Catholic theology the twofold problem, first, of its homogeneity, when taken in its scientific and rational form, with Revelation, and second, of its relation to its positive sources, henceforth subject to historical and critical methods, viz., the Bible, ancient and progressively developing traditions and institutions.79

75

76 77 78 79

Congar, TT, p. 216 (TT, I, pp. 265–266). See also Maurice Blondel, ‘Histoire et dogme’, La Quinzaine, 56 (1904), 145–167, 349–373, 433–458. Congar, A History of Theology, p. 191 (col. 440). Ibid. The substance of this course is to be found in his La Foi et la Théologie. Congar, A History of Theology, p. 192 (col. 441). See also Congar, La Foi et la Théologie, pp. 270–272.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 33

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

33

In Congar’s view, the ressourcement contributed to overcoming certain dissociations between theology and spirituality. The central issue for him, however, concerns the construction of a complete theology capable of synthesizing the contributions and inspirations of all the research associated with the ressourcement and combining it with a rediscovery of the decisive elements of the traditional treasure: the doctrine of the mystical Body; the theology of the Mass and of the liturgical mystery; eschatology and agapè. A complete theology of this nature, with its new techniques of research, exegesis and criticism should, in Congar’s view, ‘be at the service of openness, of contact with the world of Others: missiology; ecumenism; pastoral [theology]’.80 It would also, in his opinion, include some of the most lively aspects of the work of theology: faith, the Word, the Church and anthropology. The condemnation of Modernism was quite effective. On 3 July 1907 the Holy Roman and Universal Inquisition issued the decree Lamentabili sane exitu which listed the errors that were believed to be threatening the Church. On 8 September of the same year, Pope Pius X published the encyclical Pascendi dominici gregis which presented a systematic account of the new errors and the measures to be taken against those who held them. The repressive enforcement of Pascendi in seminaries and throughout the Roman Catholic world, by means of the anti-Modernist oath, effectively brought the whole Modernist movement to a halt within a few years.81 Nevertheless, legitimate dissatisfaction in the theological world did not disappear just because it could not be openly expressed, but in fact grew as many theologians viewed all Roman orientations as a function of the fear of Modernism. Future generations of Roman Catholic theologians would again take up the challenge of modernity, the question of the relationship of the Gospel to the world, and the task of reclaiming the sources of the Christian faith. One of the developments in French theology in the period following the condemnation of Modernism and before the publication of Humani Generis was the widespread portrayal of the Church as a theandric union of all Catholics with Christ.82 Although this new view of the Church did not entail a denial of the juridical model, nevertheless, by the end of the 1930s, a new militancy had emerged in 80 81

82

Congar, La Foi et la Théologie, p. 272. See Pius X, Encyclical Letter (Pascendi): on the Doctrines of the Modernists to which is added the decree (Lamentabili) of July 4, 1907, on Modernist Errors (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1937); also Owen Chadwick, A History of the Popes 1830–1914 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), pp. 346–359. See Congar, The Mystery of the Church: Studies by Yves Congar, (hereafter MC), trans. by A.V. Littledale, 2nd edn, rev. (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1965), p. 27. See also Congar, 2 vols: Esquisses du mystère de l’Église, (hereafter EME), new edn, Unam Sanctam, 8 (Paris: Cerf, 1953), p. 26; La Pentecote [sic]: Chartres 1956 (hereafter PC) (Paris: Cerf, 1956).

congar pages

34

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 34

Yves Congar’s Vision

favour of the spread of what has been described as ‘vitalism’. This was due, in part, to the description of the Church as the Mystical Body in the 1920s and to the influence of certain French theologians who became convinced, as a result of their contact with non-believers through the resistance movement, that the only way to attract non-Catholics into the Church was through its presentation in terms of the vital and organic.83 In an effort to redefine the relationship between the Church and the world, to re-establish contact with the young generation, and to make the Church more attractive to non-Catholics, a new movement arose in French theology that came to be known as the nouvelle théologie.84 Subjects that had already emerged in the Modernist debate constituted important aims of this movement, including: the call for theological renewal; the need to move beyond scholasticism; the necessity of closer links with the contemporary world; a concern for a return to the Fathers of the Church; and a clarification of the link between nature and grace. There were also political and psychological elements involved in the debate. As Giacomo Martina notes, however, the discussion remained on the theological plane and never descended to other levels.85 The epithet nouvelle théologie corresponds to a theology that is concerned to know the tradition, as opposed to a purely scholastic and repetitive theology. The conception of tradition proposed by the nouvelle théologie, far from being traditionalist, in the sense of a repetition of the recent past, is concerned rather with the unity of the ever living tradition. This is precisely Congar’s position.86 Two groups of French theologians, one Jesuit and the other Dominican, became synonymous with the nouvelle théologie.87 They were the Jesuit trio 83

84

85

86

87

Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 214. See Weigel, ‘The Historical Background of the Encyclical Humani Generis’, TS, 12 (1951), p. 217. Weigel, ‘The Historical Background of the Encyclical Humani Generis’, pp. 219–220. For Congar’s response to Weigel’s negative assessment of the ‘nouvelle théologie’ see Congar, ‘Bulletin de théologie dogmatique’, RSPT, 35 (1951), 591–603 (p. 596, footnote 12). Gy, sometime colleague and friend of Congar, describes Congar’s criticism of the term ‘nouvelle théologie’ in a personal note to me dated 9 July 1998. He comments that for Congar, as also for Chenu, ‘l’appellation de “nouvelle théologie” et l’enumération de ses représentants étaient artificielles, polémiques, étrangères à la réalité’. Giacomo Martina, ‘The Historical Context in Which the Idea of a New Ecumenical Council Was Born’, in Vatican II: Assessment and Perspectives Twenty-Five Years After (1962–1987), ed. by René Latourelle, 3 vols (New York: Paulist Press, 1988), I, pp. 3–73 (p. 31). See Congar, Tradition and the Life of the Church, (hereafter TL), Faith and Fact Books, 3 (London: Burns & Oates, 1964), pp. 144–155; also idem, La tradition et la vie de l’Église, 2nd edn, Traditions chrétiennes, 18 (Paris: Cerf, 1984), pp. 117–125. Weigel, ‘The Historical Background of the Encyclical Humani Generis’, p. 217; Fouilloux, La Collection “Sources Chrétiennes”: éditer les Pères de l’Église au XXe siècle (Paris: Cerf, 1995), pp. 115–116.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 35

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

35

– Daniélou, de Lubac and Henri Bouillard – and a corresponding Dominican trio – Chenu, Congar and André Marie Dubarle. Like Modernism and liberation theology, the nouvelle théologie attracted considerable attention beyond those directly concerned with it. In the period 1945–1950, a lively debate ensued between the Jesuit and Dominican proponents of the nouvelle théologie and some of the most outstanding theologians of the Angelicum in Rome.88 As early as 1946, Pope Pius XII had expressed his concerns regarding the nouvelle théologie to representatives of both the Dominicans and the Jesuits, warning against an attack on the fundamental tenets of Roman Catholic doctrine. In an atmosphere of suspicion and controversy, Pius XII rejected the nouvelle théologie in 1950 with the publication of the encyclical Humani Generis.89 Congar read Humani Generis very attentively, having been advised by Emmanuel Suarez, then Master of the Dominican Order, that there were things in it which concerned himself. Congar denies, however, that either he or anyone in his ecumenical milieu ever practised a bad ‘irenicism’.90 The clash between the defenders of traditionalism and the innovators continued to characterize theology in the pre-conciliar period and was a part of the preparations for Vatican II. The nouvelle théologie has been linked with Modernism because of its presumed downplaying of the supernatural order and of the magisterium.91 Unlike their predecessors in the Modernist movement, however, some of the practitioners of the nouvelle théologie served as periti at Vatican II or as members of the new Theological Commission established by Pope Paul VI. In the light of this analysis of the various movements for ecclesiological reform in the first half of the twentieth century, we proceed to a consideration of Congar’s proposals for a Church response to unbelief. The view that the Church is a cause of unbelief is crucial because, notwithstanding the possibility of belief in God outside of the Church through Judaism, Islam and reason, the Church supplies – at least in a theologically, if not in a statistically normative, sense – the necessary context for all-faith divine salvation. Congar’s critique of the Church as a cause of unbelief may be best understood in the context of his approach to 88

89

90 91

See Introduction, footnotes 52–53. See also Mark Schoof, Breakthrough: Beginnings of the New Catholic Theology, trans. by N.D. Smith (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1970), p. 108; idem, Aggiornamento (Baarn: Het Wereldvenster, ‘[n.d.]’). Pius XII, False Trends In Modern Teaching Encyclical Letter (Humani Generis), trans. by Ronald A. Knox, rev. edn (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1959). See also Nichols, ‘Balthasar, his Christology, and the Mystery of Easter’ in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Mysterium Paschale: The Mystery of Easter, trans. with an Introduction by Aidan Nichols (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1990), pp. 1–10 (p. 2). See Puyo, Congar, pp. 106–113. Richard P. McBrien, Catholicism, new edn, rev. (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1994), p. 50.

congar pages

36

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 36

Yves Congar’s Vision

ecclesiology as influenced by affectivity. Naturally, in an ecclesiology undertaken for such strongly affectivity-coloured reasons, it was a priority for Congar to tackle those aspects of the present-day Church that could lead present or potential members away from the Church. The Church: A Cause of Unbelief? Congar’s 1935 study on unbelief, ‘Conclusion théologique’, is critically important for a correct understanding of his most significant projects in ecclesiology. As I have indicated, it was precisely his findings regarding the causes of unbelief that moved him to initiate the Unam Sanctam collection, dedicated to the renewal of ecclesiology, and to write his most important works on the Church. The topics considered in these works are among the most significant in Congar’s theology – namely, a renewal in ecclesiology, the reform of the Church, ecumenism, the role of the laity and the place of Mary in the Church. These subjects go to the heart of our study and constitute some of its most important concerns. In an article written less than a year before the opening of Vatican II, Congar demonstrates that these issues are still uppermost in his mind: When in 1935 my co-workers at Les Éditions du Cerf asked me to draw up a theological Conclusion to the inquiry which they [La Vie intellectuelle] had been conducting for three years on the real causes of unbelief, I was led not only to formulate a unified interpretation, but to reflect on what could be done. It seemed to me that since the belief or unbelief of men depended so much on us, the effort to be made was a renovation [rénovation] of ecclesiology. We must recover [retrouver], in the ever-living sources of our profound tradition, a meaning and a face of the Church which will truly be that of the People of God – Body of Christ – Temple of the Holy Spirit. This conclusion led to the Unam Sanctam collection, (37 volumes to date) and the books which I have written myself: Divided Christendom, Vraie et fausse réforme dans l’Église, Lay People in the Church, Christ, Mary and the Church, The Mystery of the Temple.92

This crucially important statement demonstrates clearly that the results of Congar’s study on unbelief provide the raison d’être for his entire programme of ecclesiological reform. In order to address current causes of unbelief, Congar recognizes the need to rediscover the true face of the Church in Scripture and tradition, thereby effecting a renewal in ecclesiology. It is possible, on the basis of Congar’s remarks, to identify an overall unity in his entire theological programme. I shall attempt to assess 92

Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, Cross Currents, 12 (1962), pp. 147–148 (p. 695).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 37

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

37

the extent to which this claim may be verified, both pastorally and theologically, in Chapter 2. A remark on ecumenism is apposite. Congar identifies a decisive link between unbelief, as a consequence of the division of Christendom, and the significance of ecumenism for the future of the Roman Catholic Church in a hostile world. This provides further evidence of the interconnectedness of the various elements of Congar’s programme of ecclesiological reform and of unbelief as its principal inspiration: Historically, the divisions among Christians, the fiercely cruel wars, carried out in the name of dogmatic differences, are largely responsible for the genesis of modern unbelief (Herbert of Cherbury, Spinoza, the Philosophes of the eighteenth century). Concretely, the division among Christians is a scandal for the world. The world is exonerated, to a degree, from the duty to believe. […] The future of the Catholic Church evidently depends on herself, on the dynamism which has been infused into her by her founder and teacher. I believe that the future of the Church insofar as it is to be realized in history depends also on the fact that besides herself there are our separated brothers, and that directly confronting her is the world which is indifferent, hostile, or at least protesting and disturbing. I believe that this point is precisely significant for the present task of the Church, and she must do her utmost to recognize and pursue it at the Council. […] Hence missions and ecumenism, the hearing of the Word and dialogue, the attention to appeals and to questions, are part of her existence as the Church of this world and the Church militant.93

Congar does not depart from his belief that, although the Church exists for the world, it must never be separated from its heavenly source in Christ. The view of the Church proposed by him is, then, from above and from below – that is, a Church actively engaged in human history with a character that is fully human, earthly and militant: Concerning the catholicity of the Church: I would point out that she must join in herself a source from above – the fullness of Christ – and a source from below: the fullness of creation. […] The Church, then, makes the connection between Christ and the world. This point is, in my opinion, decisive. It marks a fundamental division between integralists and others, the former wanting everything in the Church to be determined from above. […] Concerning the temporality of the Church, that is to say, her full earthly and militant character, her complete and true humanity, proceeding from the humanity of Jesus Christ, whose divine dignity it does not, incidentally, possess. What must be sought is genuine growth along the paths of history, which are those of opposition and strife, not just a harmonious development, ideally preserved by a purely internal flowering. Didn’t St. Paul go so far as to write, ‘Opportet haereses esse’? It is necessary that there be the rending of divisions [déchirements].94

93 94

Ibid., p. 148 (p. 696). Ibid., p. 149 (pp. 696–697).

congar pages

38

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 38

Yves Congar’s Vision

In 1967 Congar described the basic findings of his 1935 study ‘Conclusion théologique’ in a way that brings us to the heart of the matter. He indicates that his view of the Church can only be fully understood in the light of his research on unbelief: This [the study on unbelief by La Vie intellectuelle] led to the conclusion that as far as this unbelief depended on us, it was caused by a poor presentation of the Church. At that time, the Church was presented in a completely juridical way and sometimes even somewhat political.95

An important study, Congar’s theological exposé offers a critical assessment of unbelief and a positive presentation of the nature of belief in God. It finds that unbelief, like belief, affects a person’s life in its entirety, touching his whole being, his environment and his history. According to Congar, faith gives meaning, and therefore unity, to the totality of a person’s life, because faith is a total principle. He writes: ‘Faith is, of its nature, total [totale]; it arises within us in a movement which carries us whole and entire towards our Whole [Tout].’96 To believe, therefore, is to experience a type of conversion whereby a person adopts a whole new scale of values on the psychological and moral plane.97 Congar refers to Aquinas who said that one would not believe unless one saw the necessity of belief.98 Catholicism, with its internal coherence and moral consciousness, is seen by Congar as meeting the spiritual needs of the person, thereby enabling him or her to live harmoniously in the faith and to transfigure and sanctify his or her life and the world. The achievement of this harmony is, in Congar’s view, the essential motive for credibility among the faithful. Congar identifies a critical relationship between the human search for happiness in life, on the one hand, and on the other, the possibility of its fulfilment through faith in Christ: Faith, and first of all the will or intention of believing, is rooted immediately in that fundamental desire for happiness and perfection. […] My accession to faith, the concrete climax of my previous disposition to use the necessary means, whatever they may be, to realize my destiny, is thus effected under the pressure of my desire of the absolute Good to which the God of the Christian revelation is seen to conform. For me, to choose the Christian faith, is to choose to complete myself in Christ. Thus faith is, of its nature, rooted in the deepest dynamism which, dominating and unifying the totality of my existence, makes

95 96 97

98

Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 251. See also Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 213. Congar, ‘Unbelief’, I, Integration (August 1938), p. 14 (p. 216). See Congar, Priest and Layman, (hereafter P&L), trans. by P. F. Hepburne-Scott (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1967), p. 28; idem, Sacerdoce et laïcat devant leurs tâches d’évangélisation et de civilisation (Paris: Cerf, 1962), pp. 40–41; idem, Les Voies du Dieu Vivant: théologie et vie spirituelle (Paris: Cerf, 1962), p. 410. Congar, ‘Unbelief’, I, p. 19 (p. 222).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 39

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

39

me adhere at once to that which is for me my Whole, my satisfying, beatifying, total and last Good.99

To recognize that the search for happiness is realized in Christ is to recognize in him the source of salvation. If salvation is the ultimate end of theology, as it is of the Christian life, then an important task for theologians is the study of the nature of salvation and the possible means of its realization in the world. A consideration of the reasons for unbelief is also necessary, since unbelief poses a direct challenge to the validity of the Christian claim that salvation is attainable in and through Christ. Another important question concerns the possibility of salvation for unbelievers. An authentically ecclesial theology cannot maintain its theses within the solidarity of the believing community. It must also listen to the questions of unbelievers.100 Moreover, careful consideration must be given to developments in the secular sciences. This, however, ought to be done in an entirely critical and objective manner.101 It should be pointed out, of course, that the question of salvation in non-Christian religions, clearly germane to this whole work, is considered because of its significance in Congar’s response to unbelief and because of his influence on the issue of a formulation of the means of salvation and the mission of the Church at Vatican II.102 I shall discuss Congar’s response to the question of the salvation of unbelievers and compare his views with those of other leading modern theologians. In particular, I will refer to Rahner’s theory of the ‘anonymous Christian’ because of its implications for faith and belief in Congar’s vision of the Church. An essential reference point in the discussion of salvation and its various related issues will be the teaching of the Church, with particular reference to its formulation at Vatican II. In an interview in 1974, Congar accepts that salvation is possible without knowledge of God or of the Gospel. He also clearly states his objection to the expression, though not to the idea, of ‘anonymous Christians’: I am fully convinced that people can be saved without knowing the Gospel and even without knowing God, when they are not to be blamed for this ignorance. […] The period reaching from Abraham to the present is nothing in the history 99 100

101

102

Ibid., pp. 15–16 (p. 217). See Walter Kasper, The Methods of Dogmatic Theology, trans. by John Drury (Shannon: Ecclesia Press, 1969), pp. 30–31; idem, Die Methoden der Dogmatik: Einheit und Vielheit (Munich: Kösel, 1967). See Henri de Lubac, Catholicism: Christ and the Common Destiny of Man, trans. by Lancelot C. Sheppard and Elizabeth Englund (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988), p. 217 (p. 179). See Chapter 1, footnote 137. See also Congar, Mon journal du Concile, II, p. 352 (29 March 1965). In Congar’s view, the mission of the Church is directed towards those in situations of unbelief. A territorial notion of mission should be situated within an anthropological definition, rather than in opposition to it.

congar pages

40

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 40

Yves Congar’s Vision of the race. It is certain therefore that there was salvation outside of that time, but I do not like to speak of ‘anonymous Christians’ in this connection. In my opinion this is a bad expression. To use the term ‘Christian’ is to imply knowledge of Jesus Christ leading to baptism, and therefore the term ‘anonymous Christian’ is contradictory. I criticise the expression but not the idea. I prefer to use the term ‘salvation of the non-evangelised’.103

In 1987 Congar restated the view that, while salvation is accomplished for all through the death and resurrection of Christ, the manner in which salvation is applied varies: The salvation thus acquired is applied to many people who know neither Christ nor God, by ways that God knows. For those of us who have received the gospel, if we welcome it in faith, salvation comes through baptism and eucharist, sacraments of his death and resurrection. By them we become members of the body of Christ, co-heirs.104

Thus, while Congar is not opposed to the idea of salvation without explicit knowledge of God or of the Christian Gospel, it is clear that his use of the term ‘Christian’ is, in this context, a qualified one. It implies a knowledge of Christ that leads to baptism. Congar expresses his conditional acceptance of the idea of ‘anonymous Christians’ in the following way: Should we speak of ‘anonymous Christians’? […] I find it difficult to see how one can deny that such a condition exists. But the expression ‘anonymous Christians’ is not a happy one, for ‘Christian’ implies the profession of the Faith proclaimed and received, followed by baptism.105

Congar’s notion of salvation clearly upholds the place of the sacraments and the necessity of the missionary activity of the Church, since a profession of faith is only possible if it is preceded by a proclamation of the Gospel.106 There can be no complacency, therefore, in the mission of the Church to the world, a responsibility shared by all Christians.107 103

104 105

106 107

Congar, ‘Talking to Yves Congar: Interview by Tony Sheerin’, Part I, Africa: St. Patrick’s Missions, (1974), 6–8 (p. 7). See also Karl Rahner, ‘Atheism and Implicit Christianity’, in Theological Investigations, (hereafter TI), trans. by Graham Harrison, 23 vols (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1972), IX, pp. 145–164; also idem, ‘Atheismus und implizites Christentum’, in Schriften zur Theologie, (hereafter ST) (Einsiedeln: Benziger, 1967), VIII, pp. 187–212. Here, Rahner presents an analysis of implicit Christianity or what he says could also be termed ‘anonymous Christianity’. Congar, Fifty Years of Catholic Theology, p. 21 (pp. 30–31). Congar, ‘Non-Christian Religions and Christianity’, in Evangelisation, Dialogue and Development: Selected Papers of the International Theological Conference, Nagpur (India) 1971, ed. by Mariasusai Dhavamony, Documenta Missionalia, 5 (Rome: Gregorian University Press, 1972), pp. 133–145 (p. 134). See de Lubac, Catholicism, p. 233 (pp. 193–194). Ibid., pp. 240–241 (pp. 200–202).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 41

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

41

Rahner’s notion of the ‘anonymous Christian’,108 however, was used to justify belief in the explicit offer of grace in the Church and in the ‘anonymous’ offer of grace outside of it. According to Rahner, God dwells in all people, thus determining them to be made in the image of his Son who bestows on them an orientation towards the divine mysteries – mysteries which they may never be able to identify by name. To be an ‘anonymous Christian’ requires an affirmation or acceptance of God’s grace.109 Rahner held that, if the Church is defined as the People of God, then even the unbaptized could, by virtue of a votum ecclesiae (desire of the Church), all other conditions being fulfilled, be numbered among its members.110 Congar criticizes Rahner’s understanding of the idea of People of God: One cannot apply the idea [of ‘anonymous Christians’] to all men without distinction because of the fact that they are in an objective situation of salvation, on the basis of which K. Rahner uses also, wrongly in my opinion, the expression ‘people of God’.111

There are two important consequences of Congar’s understanding of salvation to which I want to refer briefly. First, Congar notes that, although missionary activity for the salvation of souls which might otherwise be lost cannot be accepted as a motive for the urgency of evangelization, it does not follow, in his opinion, that ‘the proclamation of the Gospel, the obedience of Faith, and the active presence of the Church are without importance for the salvation of men’.112 But this view, although it acknowledges the active role of the Church in the salvation of humanity, nonetheless gives rise to a problem. Since the precise reason for the missionary activity of the Church is the salvation of souls, Congar’s rejection of the urgency of the Church’s mission to souls which, without it, would be lost, constitutes a fundamental weakness in his theology of mission which is, in this respect, different from that of Vatican II.113 108

109

110

111 112 113

Rahner, ‘Anonymous Christians’, in TI, trans. by Karl-H. and Boniface Kruger (Baltimore: Helicon Press; London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1969), VI, pp. 390–398; also idem, ‘Die anonymen Christen’, in ST (Einsiedeln: Benziger, 1965), VI, pp. 545–554. See also Johannes B. Metz, ‘Unbelief as a Theological Problem’, trans. by Tarcisius Rattler, Concilium, 6 (1965), 32–42 (p. 40). Rahner, ‘Anonymous Christians’, in TI, VI, p. 398 (ST, VI, pp. 553–554). See also idem, ‘Observations on the Problem of the “Anonymous Christian”’, in TI, trans. by David Bourke (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1976), XIV, pp. 280–294 (p. 283). ST, (Einsiedeln: Benziger, ‘[n.d.]’), X. Rahner, ‘Observations on the Problem of the “Anonymous Christian”’, pp. 282–283. Rahner here acknowledges the problematic nature of the notion of the ‘anonymous Christian’. Congar, ‘Non-Christian Religions and Christianity’, p. 134. Ibid. ‘Dogmatic Constitution on the Church: Vatican II, Lumen Gentium’, 21 November 1964, (hereafter LG), in Vatican Council II: The Conciliar and Post Conciliar

congar pages

42

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 42

Yves Congar’s Vision

Nevertheless, in Cette Église que j’aime, Congar outlines his understanding of the essential role of the Church in human salvation: If above and beyond the rescue of the individual, salvation consists in the realisation of the truth of His being, the Church is the universal sacrament of salvation. From the point of view of individual salvation, the reality (res in the sense of classical analysis in sacramental theology) is sometimes bestowed independently of the sacramentum. But this unity of mankind, as God wants it, cannot be accomplished outside the Church, which is its sacrament.114

The second consequence of Congar’s view of salvation concerns his insistence on the distinction between the objective value of non-Christian religions, which he accepts, and the salvation of the non-evangelized: One cannot directly affirm the salvific value of these religions on the basis of the fact that their adherents can obtain from God grace and salvation without being converted to the Gospel. Very frequently theologians go from the idea of the salvation which is possible for these men to that of the salvific value of the religions which are theirs. It is true that there is a link between these two things, but the inference is not immediate.115

Congar’s response to the challenge of non-Christian religions is to propose a via media which recognizes authentic values in these religions. Thus, Congar accepts that the non-Christian religions are a preparation for the Gospel – a solution which he says is not peculiar to himself but is, rather, in substantial agreement with de Lubac and Jossua, and is also accepted by missionaries such as Jacques Dournes and Henri Maurier.116 Congar maintains that there are elements of the mystical body outside the Church: The Church includes members who appear to be outside her. They belong, invisibly and incompletely, but they really belong. They belong to the Church in so far as they belong to Christ. […] The existence of this element apart from and outside the Church is indeed abnormal and untoward, for of its very nature it calls for integration in the one body of Christ, at once visible and invisible, which is the Catholic Church.117

114 115

116 117

Documents, ed. by Austin Flannery, 7th edn, 2 vols (New York: Costello, 1984), I, para. 17. ‘Decree on the Church’s Missionary Activity: Vatican II, Ad Gentes Divinitus’, 7 December 1965, (hereafter AG), in Vatican Council II, ed. by Flannery, I, paras 5–8. See also The Congregation for the Evangelisation of Peoples, Instruction on Missionary Co-operation: Cooperatio Missionalis (Boston: Pauline Books & Media, 1999), para. 21. Congar, TCIL, p. 59 (p. 61). Congar, ‘Non-Christian Religions and Christianity’, p. 134. See also Leo Scheffczyk, ‘On the Absoluteness of Christianity’, trans. by Adrian Walker, Communio, 24 (1997), 245–258 (pp. 257–258). See Congar, ‘Non-Christian Religions and Christianity’, p. 143. Congar, DC, pp. 234–235 (p. 292).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 43

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

43

Congar’s position on the question of the salvation of unbelievers is, in certain respects, closer to that of de Lubac,118 who also insists on the place of the Church and on the active cooperation of humanity in its own salvation, than to that of Rahner. Congar’s way of approaching the matter, however, is not unproblematic. The weakness in his view of the Church’s mission exposes his entire ecclesiology to the charge of relativism, seen as a serious threat to ‘the Church’s constant missionary proclamation’.119 There is one further point which can briefly be alluded to. Since Congar’s vision of the Church is a nuanced one, it is important to bear in mind that his assertion of the transcendence of the Gospel does not disavow the need for religious and cultural dialogue: One must therefore both welcome and oppose, address oneself to persons without being unaware of religions and cultures, recognise preparations, assume authentic values and, in patience and humility, boldly affirm what Gospel represents by way of novelty and transcendence (depassement) [sic]. For it is the creation (projet), not of some religious geniuses, but of God. It is just in this sense that Christianity is something other than a religion: it is a Faith.120

Such a programme, as Congar points outs, requires of missionaries ‘not less but more of profound spirituality, of exigency, of supernatural ambition’.121 The idea of the ‘anonymous Christian’ has been rejected by theologians other than Congar primarily because it is not biblical.122 Rahner’s claim that the incarnation is the means of forming the People of God is unconnected with the biblical notion of the People of God. It also contributes to a diminution of the Gospel mandate to proclaim the Good News.123 Furthermore, Rahner’s efforts to bridge the gap between those inside and outside the Church are made at the expense of the Church itself. The idea that salvation is possible outside the Church has, therefore, been criticized as having rendered the Church superfluous.124 Richard Lennan points out, however, that Rahner does not follow the path of ecclesiological relativism – a course he specifically rejected.125 118 119

120 121 122

123 124 125

de Lubac, Catholicism, p. 226 (pp. 187–188). See also Chapter 1, footnote 144. See Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, (hereafter CDF), “Dominus Iesus” On the Unicity and Salvific Universality of Jesus Christ and the Church (London: Catholic Truth Society, 2000), paras. 4–5. Congar, ‘Non-Christian Religions and Christianity’, p. 145. Ibid. See Richard Lennan, The Ecclesiology of Karl Rahner, (hereafter Ecclesiology) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), p. 39, footnote 105; also Bernard Sesboüé, ‘Karl Rahner et les “Chrétiens anonymes”’, Études, 361 (1984), 521–535. See also Chapter 1, footnote 144. See Matthew 28. 19. See Lennan, Ecclesiology, p. 43, footnote 120. Ibid., pp. 147-148.

congar pages

44

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 44

Yves Congar’s Vision

The teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on the possibility of salvation for unbelievers is controversial, since it raises the difficult question of the development of doctrine.126 Pope Pius IX’s encyclical Quanto conficiamur moerore (1863)127 allowed theologians to teach that people who are invincibly ignorant of the Christian faith, but who nevertheless cooperate with divine grace, can attain eternal life. The encyclical, however, also reaffirmed the established dogma Extra ecclesiam nulla salus.128 The weakness of subsequent Church pronouncements – namely, Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Mystici corporis (1943)129 and the letter of the Holy Office to Archbishop Richard J. Cushing of Boston (1949), in response to the famous Leonard Feeney case130 – was their failure to acknowledge that Christians, by virtue of their baptism, have a sacramental relationship to the Church not enjoyed by non-Christians.131 According to the Second Vatican Council: ‘Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart […] those too may achieve eternal salvation.’132 The Council also states, however, that the Church is necessary for salvation.133 While Vatican II affirms that it is only in the Roman Catholic Church that the fullness of the means of salvation is to be found, nevertheless, the Council also recognizes that other Christian communities are used by God as instruments of salvation for their own members.134 In the 126

127

128

129

130

131 132 133

134

See Francis A. Sullivan, Salvation Outside the Church? Tracing the History of the Catholic Response (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1992), p. 10. Pius IX, ‘Quanto Conficiamur Moerore: Encyclical of Pope Pius IX on Promotion of False Doctrines August 10, 1863’, in The Papal Encyclicals 1740–1878, ed. by Claudia Carlen, 5 vols (Raleigh: Pierian, 1990), I, pp. 369–373. Pius IX, ‘Quanto Conficiamur Moerore’, para. 8. See also Congar, TCIL, pp. 59–61 (pp. 61–63). Pius XII, Encyclical Letter (Mystici Corporis Christi): On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and Our Union With Christ Therein (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1960), trans. by George D. Smith from the Latin text as published in the Osservatore Romano, 4 July 1943. Feeney was an American Jesuit who publicly accused Archbishop Richard J. Cushing of Boston of being a heretic for allowing that there is salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church. He was dismissed from the Society of Jesus and subsequently excommunicated but was, however, reconciled with the Church before his death. See Sullivan, Salvation Outside the Church?, p. 140. LG, para. 16. Ibid., para. 14. See AG, para. 7. Gérard Philips, L’Église et son mystère au IIe Concile du Vatican: histoire, texte et commentaire de la constitution Lumen gentium, 2 vols (Paris: Desclée, 1967), I, pp. 185–219. LG, para. 8. See also ‘Decree on Ecumenism Vatican II, Unitatis redintegratio’, 21 November 1964, (hereafter UR), in Vatican Council II, ed. by Flannery, I, para. 3; Dulles, ‘A Half Century of Ecclesiology’, TS, 50 (1989), 419–442 (p. 430); idem, The Reshaping of Catholicism: Current Challenges in the Theology of Church (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988), pp. 138–141; also Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 215; Joseph Ratzinger, ‘Catholicism after the Council’, trans. by Patrick Russell, Furrow, 18 (1967), 3–23 (p. 21).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 45

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

45

light of the teaching of the Council, the old dogma Extra ecclesiam nulla salus is, in Francis A. Sullivan’s view, ‘no longer a problem for Catholic theology as far as the salvation of other Christians is concerned’.135 The Second Vatican Council provides the most complete discussion of the mission of the Church that is to be found anywhere in the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. The Decree on the Church’s Missionary Activity presents the Council’s view of mission in plain parlance: It is clear, therefore, that missionary activity flows immediately from the very nature of the Church. Missionary activity extends the saving faith of the Church, it expands and perfects its catholic unity, it is sustained by its apostolicity, it activates the collegiate sense of its hierarchy, and bears witness to its sanctity which it both extends and promotes.136

Congar rejects the view that Vatican II led to a devaluation of Christian salvation – a lapse from the specific mission of the Church to a religious relativism. In response to such claims, he calls for the continued proclamation of Jesus Christ while also recognizing the need for ongoing dialogue: I worked on two conciliar texts on this question [of Vatican II’s interpretation of the famous saying ‘Outside the Church there is no salvation’], Lumen Gentium no. 17 and no. 7 of the Decree on the Missionary Activity of the Church. Taking part in this commission on missions was one of the great blessings of my life. […] Now it is clear that for individuals, the culture in which they live and the religion associated with it are the ordinary ways of salvation. […] At all events, whatever position one holds it is inseparable from the dialogue which is characteristic of the Council and the Church which has emerged from the Council. […] Beyond question, we must still proclaim Jesus Christ. In the conciliar Declaration on Non-Christian Religions there is a passage which says this very well. It was composed on the insistence of Fr Daniélou, but of course with unanimous support. To proclaim Jesus Christ it is not always necessary to speak of him or to preach him explicitly.137

The Church can never accept a relative universality based on the view that the same grace is equally effective outside the Church as it is within. The Church is missionary by its very nature. If it were otherwise, it would cease to be the Church, and would become a merely human institution alienated from the mission entrusted to it by Christ.138 In order to be faithful to that mission, the Church must seek to lead all men and women into the fullness of particular saving history – a history that is realized only when human 135

136 137 138

Sullivan, Salvation Outside the Church?, p. 149. See also Catéchisme de l’Église catholique (Paris: Mame/Plon, 1992), paras 846–847. AG, para. 6. Congar, Fifty Years of Catholic Theology, pp. 14–16 (pp. 22–25). See Matthew 28. 19–20; Mark 16. 15–16.

congar pages

46

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 46

Yves Congar’s Vision

beings receive baptism and participate actively in the life and witness of the Church.139 The mission of the Church is essential, therefore, in order to provide the opportunity to all who desire it to enter into the new Christian order in which humankind is united to God through the love and grace of Christ.140 In the period since Vatican II, Roman Catholic theology has continued to debate the question of the necessity of the Church for salvation and the related issue of the Church’s attitude towards missionary endeavours. Various Roman Catholic theologians have argued that the Church is not the means of salvation but rather a sign of the Kingdom of God.141 Careful examination of the documents of the Second Vatican Council, however, shows that such views are incompatible with the conciliar texts.142 The claims of some theologians that action on behalf of social justice is on the same plane as the Church’s mission of evangelization must also be rejected as a false interpretation of Vatican II.143 It cannot be denied, however, that since the Second Vatican Council the missionary endeavours of the Church have been seriously weakened. Against these difficulties, it may, nonetheless, be observed that the indigenous Churches in various parts of the world have become stronger and so are less dependent on missionaries. Rahner acknowledges that his thesis of the ‘anonymous Christian’ was opposed by de Lubac and von Balthasar, and that even Schillebeeckx expressed objections to it.144 Avery Dulles points out that Vatican II did not follow Rahner’s very broad conception of the People of God or his understanding of the Church as sinful.145 While it was not Rahner’s intention to propose ‘anonymous Christianity’ as sufficient in itself or in opposition to the call of the Gospel to evangelization, nevertheless, the 139

140

141

142 143 144

145

Johannes Feiner, ‘Particular and Universal Saving History’, in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic: Studies in the Nature and Role of the Church in the Modern World, ed. by Herbert Vorgrimler, trans. by Edward Quinn and Alain Woodrow (London: Sheed and Ward, 1968), pp. 163–206 (p. 182). James Dupuis, ‘The Salvific Value of Non-Christian Religions’, in Evangelisation, Dialogue and Development, ed. by Mariasusai Dhavamony, pp. 169–193 (p. 189). See also Synod of Bishops, ‘The Final Report’, Origins, 15 (1985), 444–450 (pp. 449–450); Dulles, ‘A Half Century of Ecclesiology’, pp. 441–442. See Edward Schillebeeckx, Interim Report on the Books Jesus & Christ, trans. by John Bowden (London: SCM, 1980), pp. 122–124; idem, Tussentijds verhaal over twee Jezus boeken (Bloemendaal: Uitgeverij and Nelissen, 1978). See Dulles, ‘Vatican II and the Church’s Purpose’, TD, 32 (1985), 341–352 (pp. 344–345). Ibid., pp. 348–349. Rahner, ‘Observations on the Problem of the “Anonymous Christian”’, pp. 280–281 (ST, X). See Hans Urs von Balthasar, Cordula ou l’épreuve décisive (Paris: Beauchesne, 1968), pp. 80–89; Henri de Lubac, Paradoxe et mystère de l’Église (Paris: Aubier-Montaigne, 1967), pp. 153–156. Kasper, Faith and the Future, trans. by Robert Nowell (Tunbridge Wells, Kent: Burns & Oats, 1985), p. 81. Dulles, ‘A Half Century of Ecclesiology’, p. 432.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 47

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

47

notion of the ‘anonymous Christian’ is subject to misunderstanding.146 In its intended sense, it has major implications for the role of the Church, of Christ and of the Christian sacraments in the salvation of humankind.147 In all these key areas and in the critical issue of mission, Rahner’s view of the Church stands in contrast with that of Congar. We may consider how Congar, whose theology is biblically rooted and Christ-centred, proposes to construct a Church that is more in the image of the human Christ. In Congar’s view, only such a Church will be able to bear more credible witness to its founder in a modern world which is increasingly defined by unbelief and indifference to the Christian religion. In ‘Conclusion théologique’, Congar identifies two causes of contemporary unbelief. The first of these causes is the substitution of a Christian way of life with a purely human spirituality. This was part of the movement towards secularization that began in the fourteenth century with the passing of culture into the hands of the laity and then spread inexorably, affecting the professions and social life. All human activities were gradually reconstituted outside of the Church and independent of the Christian faith. The second reason for contemporary unbelief concerns the response of the Church to secularization and its own changed status. In the face of the new, secular–human spirituality, the Church was reduced to a fenced off, special and anti-progressive group. As Congar notes: The separation which exists between faith and life appears to us to be at once the most specific reason for the present state of unbelief and a fact which, in the most literal meaning of the words, does violence to the nature of faith and constitutes a mortal poison, the worst of abortives for it.148

This is a crucial observation. The failure or inability of the Church to respond positively to the problem of the separation between faith and life is an important factor in explaining the phenomenon of continued widespread unbelief in contemporary society. It is not a question of power or even of influence with those in positions of power. Rather, it is a question of the Church creating ways of making the Christian faith meaningful for people. The challenge is to unite faith and life and to show that this faith offers the possibility of attaining a degree of understanding of the true meaning of life.

146

147

148

John P. Galvin, ‘Questions Centered on Vatican II’: ‘A Changing Ecclesiology in a Changing Church: A Symposium on Development in the Ecclesiology of Karl Rahner’, ed. by Leo J. O’Donovan, TS, 38 (1977), 736–762 (p. 753). Rahner, ‘Observations on the Problem of the “Anonymous Christian”’, p. 292 (ST, X). Rahner calls for further discussion of ‘the question already mentioned above as to the meaning and necessity of the mission of Christianity, a question in the light of which it is very often believed that this theory should be rejected’. Congar, ‘Unbelief’, I, p. 14 (p. 216).

congar pages

48

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 48

Yves Congar’s Vision

This is precisely what Congar was attempting to achieve by linking faith in Christ to the human search for happiness and meaning in life. The expression of his concern regarding the consequences of the process of secularization which gives rise to a humanist spirituality is also a manifestation of Congar’s acuity: Hence the gravest thing to our mind is not the substitution of a secularist for a Christian framework, but the constitution of a purely human spirituality outside Christianity. It is this latter which gave to the former all its anti-Christian virulence.149

In effect, this means that one spiritual whole, a Christian one, was replaced by another which was secular–humanist in nature and which was guided not by faith, but by reason. According to Congar, the movement towards secularization was sustained and animated by a certain human, or what he prefers to describe as humanist mysticism. It was precisely this mysticism which, in his view, made the transfer from one spiritual whole to another possible. Congar depicts it in this way: This mysticism is characterized by the principle of immanence implying the sufficiency of reason and the possibility of an indefinite progress within the world. The world of these thinkers is a closed world in which everything is given, in which everything is intelligible. […] It follows that progress consists in conversion to mind, to which [auquel] everything is immanent and that there is not, there never will be, any other light than that of reason. An external and transcendent assistance, revelation and grace as we understand them, is an impossible thing. […] It is a feeling of the perfect mastery of man in a world whose key he can possess.150

In the secular system just described, the individual forgets his or her true and greatest value, which is to be and to live. Instead, he or she becomes enclosed ‘within the infernal logic of activism and productivism’.151 Thus, there are two worlds: the modern spiritual world governed by faith in progress and the Christian world of the Church. Nevertheless, Congar’s description of the world in which the Church exists offers an outline of some key problems. He describes the Christian world as one that is ‘engaged in the traditional forms of Catholicism, with all its regime of dogmatism, authority, submission, conservatism’.152 These two worlds are separated by an inexpiable opposition. In the world of productivism and activism, religion is relegated to the private sphere, the Church is isolated and its ministers are confined to the sacristy. Religion is nonetheless present in the secularized, 149 150 151 152

Congar, ‘Unbelief’, II, p. 12 (pp. 228–229). Ibid., pp. 13–14 (pp. 230–231). Ibid., p. 16 (p. 234). Ibid., p. 19 (p. 238).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 49

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

49

profane world. The challenge facing theologians is to demonstrate the rationality of faith.153 The Church, although of the kingdom of God and not of the world, cannot, however, be divorced from the world. Cardinal Emmanuel Suhard’s pastoral letter addressed to the Archdiocese of Paris, on 11 February 1947, in which he restates traditional Christian teaching, warned of the danger of the Church adapting itself to the world.154 The perennial challenge for the Church is to define a right relationship with the world that respects all cultures without compromising what is immutable in its own nature. Congar’s theology responds to this challenge by presenting a carefully considered and finely balanced understanding of the relationship between Church and world: That, although the Church remains always the same in its evangelical substance, it cannot be a Church of yesterday in the world of today and tomorrow. Its own future requires that it be present to the future of the world in order to direct it towards the future of God.155

Thus, Congar praises the Church for its moral courage in the face of the onslaught of modernity: One may think that the doctrinal action of the Church was too exclusively negative and condemnatory; but it was her greatness not to have compromised, whilst this new world was developing, the least particle of her spiritual patrimony. It was thus that of old the Fathers of Nicea, Ephesus and Chalcedon had acted each in their turn.156

This was not to deny the very real problem of a Church which had failed to take root and become incarnate in a whole new growth of humanity. And so Congar arrives at an important conclusion: We do not think that we have betrayed either the truth or the answers made to the enquiry when we see the most general reason for the unbelief of today in a certain hiatus between faith and life, a hiatus that attacks faith in what is one of its essential properties and which determines collective conditions unfavourable to belief. The constitution of a spiritual and even religious world, of a whole, of human life outside Christianity, on the one hand; the contraction of the Church, its falling back upon itself into a special world and the fatal attitudes of defence 153

154

155

156

See Kasper, ‘Is God Obsolete? On the Possibility and Necessity of Thinking about God’, trans. by Eamonn Breslin, Irish Theological Quarterly, (hereafter ITQ), 55 (1989), 85–98 (p. 94). Emmanuel Suhard, Growth or Decline? The Church Today, trans. by James A. Corbett (Montreal: Fides Publishers, 1948), p. 9; idem, Essor ou déclin de l’Église: Lettre pastorale Carême de l’an de grâce 1947 (Paris: Lahure, 1947), p. 21. Congar, Église catholique et France moderne, p. 53. See also Chapter 1, footnotes 25–28. Congar, ‘Unbelief’, II, p. 20 (p. 241).

congar pages

50

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 50

Yves Congar’s Vision that it has taken up: these are two major and correlative facts which have concurred to create this hiatus between faith and life.157

Congar identifies the construction of a spiritual whole, outside and independent of Christianity, and the Church’s defensive reaction, as the main reasons for the hiatus between faith and life in the world – the principal cause of unbelief. As a result of the separation of faith and life, Catholicism appears as only a part of the world or even, in the opinion of some, as a sect. The relegation of the Christian faith to the sphere of private life contributes, in Congar’s view, to the reduction of the visible presence of Church and faith in society: Neither the Church nor faith have any longer the totality of their visibility, i.e., of their expression, of their radiation in life; and the enquiry rightly noted the importance, from this point of view, of even very external details such as the disappearance of the religious habit from the ordinary walks of life. This is theologically exact: the religious orders are the sanctity of the Church humanly institutionalised and visible; and clothing, like culture in general, is the expression, in signs, of spiritual values. We must again fill our world with signs of faith, i.e., just as truly, with the presence of faith. Faith must again become humanly present, like Christ.158

Congar is concerned to preserve the total Christian vision and the totality of the Catholic Christian heritage. Totality is a perennial concern for him and one to which I return again in this study. I will consider to what extent Congar’s ecclesiological programme helps to bridge the hiatus between faith and life and provides the only way by which the Church can fulfil its proper role in society. It was precisely in response to the separation of Church and world, to the loss of the totality of the Catholic Christian heritage, and to the poor presentation of the ‘face’ of the Church, that Congar embarked on an ambitious programme of theological renewal: I wanted to remedy this state of affairs. I decided to start a series of theological works that would examine a number of ecclesiological themes that were profoundly traditional, but had become more or less overlooked as the formal De Ecclesia tract developed. I sought to restore the genuine value of ecclesiology by viewing, as far as possible, the totality of Catholic doctrine and by using the rich resources of tradition and applying it to the current problems in the Church.159

157

158 159

Ibid., pp. 25–26 (pp. 248–249). See also Congar, DBC, p. 23 (p. XXXIII); idem, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, p. 148 (p. 695). Congar, ‘Unbelief’, II, p. 25 (pp. 247–248). Granfield, Theologians at Work, pp. 251–252. Congar’s reflections are recorded here many years after these events.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 51

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

51

Congar expressed his desire to become actively involved in the work of renewal and reform of the Church the year after he wrote the conclusion to the survey on unbelief carried out by La Vie intellectuelle in 1935. This desire was based on his belief that the movement for reform was born of the Holy Spirit. Congar describes his aspiration to serve the renewal of the Church as follows: ‘Very naturally, the desire was born to contribute to this renewal of the Church and to place oneself at the service of a movement evidently created by the Holy Spirit.’160 The foregoing outline of Congar’s theory of the Church’s role in the world shows that his ecclesiology is based on an essentially sacramental understanding of the Church.161 It points to the Church as the central element in the plan of God for the salvation of humanity. In response to the problems of modern unbelief and indifference, Congar calls for a bold proclamation of a lived Christian faith, thereby emphasizing the importance of mission in his vision of the Church. A consideration of how Vatican II became a catalyst for the theologians, especially the French and Germans, who had worked for the renewal of ecclesiology in the difficult period before the Council, would reveal that Congar’s contribution to ecclesiology is at the heart of the renewal in Roman Catholic theology. I will not, however, present a full analysis of Congar’s influence on the Second Vatican Council since not only would such a study be premature because the history of the Council is still incomplete,162 but it would also be technically impossible, at present, as the ordering of Congar’s archives has not yet been concluded. Nonetheless, Vatican II was the high point in the renewal of ecclesiology in the twentieth century. It is also a decisively important element in Congar’s ecclesiology that is impossible to understand without reference to the Council.163 Vatican II: The Council of the Church The state of Roman Catholic ecclesiology before Vatican II has been described in the following terms: 160 161

162

163

Congar, ‘Autour du renouveau de l’ecclésiologie’, p. 11. Congar, TCIL, p. 59 (p. 61). Congar writes: ‘What is the role of the new formula, “the Church, universal sacrament of salvation,” in our theology? It seems to us that this formula replaces the old formula, “Outside the Church there is no salvation”.’ A full consideration of Congar’s notion of the Church as sacrament of salvation will be presented in Chapter 2. History of Vatican II: Announcing and Preparing Vatican Council II, ed. by Giuseppe Alberigo. English version ed. by Joseph A. Komonchak, 5 vols (Maryknoll: Orbis; Louvain: Peeters, 1995), I. See Noëlle Hausman, ‘Le Père Congar au Concile Vatican II’, Nouvelle revue théologique, (hereafter NRT), 120 (1998), 267–281.

congar pages

52

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 52

Yves Congar’s Vision By and large the theological edifice seemed complete and its defences – for it was largely, if not primarily, as a defensive system that it was seen – capable of withstanding any conceivable attack. This was true above all of ecclesiology.164

The dominant effect of the First Vatican Council was to contribute to the apologetic tendency, which for so long had been the defining characteristic of Roman Catholic ecclesiology. This situation was effectively ended with the reforms of Vatican II. The Second Vatican Council helped restore equilibrium in the Roman Catholic approach to the Church by emphasizing its human, as well as its divine, elements and by stressing the need for ongoing reform and renewal in the human dimension of the Church.165 The categories of Chalcedonian dogma, when applied to the reform of the Church, point to its human element as the proper subject of reform. Thus, the acceptance at Vatican II that true reform is possible only in the human dimension of the Church is evidence of a continuity between that Council and what was best in the Councils of the Church that preceded it. Congar treats of the transformation of the Church at Vatican II in a way that acknowledges its momentous consequences: Something happened at the Council and the dominant values in our way of looking at the Church were changed by the Council. […] A Church of the people is being reborn and it promises to be both serious and lasting because it has its martyrs. It is no longer, as it did in the past, claiming priestly power in the sphere of political power. It is trying to let the Gospel, as experienced in the lives of Christians, be effective and influential. How should I define the new form that this Church takes? I would say that it is that of the Gospel lived in the realities of human lives on earth or their ‘temporal’ experience. It is in that life that the Gospel is spread and is able to act in souls.166

The contribution of theology to the life of the Church today is, perhaps, nowhere more evident than in the field of ecclesiology. A successful renewal in the life and activity of the Church is not possible without a renewed ecclesiology. In the period before and after Vatican II, Congar, who from the beginning of his career accepted Roman Catholic ecclesiology as his main task, was one of the leading architects of this renewal. As a young professor at Le Saulchoir, both at Kain-la-Tombe and Étiolles, Congar taught ecclesiology and fundamental theology. Ecclesiology was his chosen field of study. He 164

165 166

Kevin McNamara, ‘From Möhler to Vatican II: The Modern Movement in Ecclesiology’, in The Church: A Theological and Pastoral Commentary on the Constitution on the Church, ed. by Kevin McNamara (Dublin: Veritas, 1983), pp. 9–35 (p. 9). Ibid., p. 27. Congar, ‘Moving Towards a Pilgrim Church’, in Vatican II By Those Who Were There, ed. by Alberic Stacpoole, pp. 129–152 (pp. 129, 148). See Leonard Swidler, Toward A Catholic Constitution (New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1996), pp. 3–94.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 53

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

53

writes: ‘I recognised my vocation to ecumenism in 1929, when I had already directed my studies to ecclesiology.’167 Congar was one of a number of leading Dominican (Le Saulchoir, Paris) and Jesuit (Lyons, Fourvière) theologians who, in the face of adversity, showed remarkable tenacity in the pursuit of the goal of reform of the Church.168 These theologians made an original contribution to the inner transformation of the Roman Catholic Church, its theology, its mission and its relationship to the world. The theological objectives of Congar and other reforming theologians were realized at Vatican II.169 In characteristic fashion, Congar considered that it was better to work wholeheartedly within the Council than to criticize it from without.170 Gradually, he became deeply engaged in the preparation of some of the most important Council documents. Perhaps a few words should be said at once about Congar’s role in the drafting of texts as he describes it in Mon journal du Concile. To prevent any misunderstanding, it should be pointed out that Congar added a very useful note in the diary, ‘Sont de moi’,171 to indicate his precise part in the genesis of the Council’s documents. However, I do not want to discuss this question, important though it is. What I want to do is to indicate succinctly Congar’s contribution to the composition of texts because of its relevance to the present discussion. In the diary, Congar provides a precise description of his role in what was undoubtedly the most important aspect of the Council’s entire enterprise. He says that he worked on Lumen gentium, especially the first draft of many numbers of Chapter I, and on numbers 9, 13, 16, and 17 of Chapter II, as well as on some specific passages. In De Revelatione, he worked on Chapter II, and on number 21 which came from a first draft by him. In De oecumenismo, the preamble and the conclusion are, he says, more or less authored by him. Likewise, in the Declaration on Non-Christian Religions, the introduction and the conclusion are, he says, more or less his. In Schema XIII ~ Gaudium et spes, he worked on Chapters I and IV. He wrote all of Chapter I of De Missionibus, while Joseph Ratzinger contributed to number 8. In De libertate religiosa, Congar says that he cooperated with the entire project, most 167 168 169

170

171

Congar, DBC, p. 2 (p. X). See above, pp. 34–35. Klaus Wittstadt, ‘On the Eve of the Second Vatican Council (July 1–October 10, 1962)’, in History of Vatican II, ed. by Alberigo, I, pp. 405–500 (p. 457). See also Chapter 1, footnote 2. Duval, ‘Yves Congar: A Life for the Truth’, trans. by Boniface Ramsey, Thomist, 48 (1984), 505–511 (p. 510); also idem, ‘Yves Congar: un homme, une oeuvre’, Choisir, 245 (1980), 12–16 (p. 15). See Fouilloux, ‘Comment devient-on expert à Vatican II? Le cas du Père Yves Congar’, in Le deuxième concile du Vatican (1959–1965): actes du colloque organisé par l’École française de Rome (Rome 28–30 mai 1986), by John Paul II and others, Collection de l’École française de Rome, 113 (Rome: École française de Rome, 1989), pp. 307–331. Congar, Mon journal du Concile, II, p. 511 (7 December 1965).

congar pages

54

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 54

Yves Congar’s Vision

particularly with the numbers of the theological part, and on the preamble which was entirely his own. Congar notes that the drafting of De Presbyteris was undertaken by three scholars: Joseph Lécuyer, a professor at the Lateran University and subsequently head of the Holy Ghost Congregation; Willy Onclin, a priest of the diocese of Liège and professor of canon law at the University of Louvain; and, of course, Congar himself. Congar indicates that he reworked the preamble of De Presbyteris, as well as numbers 2–3, while also writing the first draft of numbers 4–6, and revising numbers 7–9, 12–14 and the conclusion, of which he compiled the second paragraph.172 At the Council the previously powerful and dominant group of conservative theologians were ultimately obliged to give way to the more progressive reforming theologians. Some of these reformers, whose writings had been subjected to various restrictive measures, were among the periti at the Council and exercised a great deal of influence on the drafting of conciliar documents. After the Council, certain of these authors were made cardinals. Thus it is possible to observe a certain evolution, not unfamiliar to historians, by which those who at one point were isolated or even rejected come to exercise great influence on the course of events.173 The great movements of renewal that emerged at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth in biblical studies, liturgy, early Christian literature and the apostolate of the laity all exercised an influence on the conciliar documents. The greatest innovators were from German- and French-speaking countries.174 According to Klaus Wittstadt, many of the Council Fathers were indebted to Congar for a broadening of their notion of the Church.175 It is to Congar, among others, that credit must also be given for one of the most important achievements of the Council – namely, the transition from a predominantly juridical conception of the Church to a more eschatological vision of the Church as the People of God, centred again on the paschal mystery.176 172

173

174

175

176

Ibid., II, p. 511 (7 December 1965). See also Chapter 1, footnote 31; Bernard Dupuy, ‘Préface’ in ibid., I, pp. III–XXIV (p. XXIII). Dupuy, who succeeded Congar as professor of fundamental theology at Le Saulchoir in 1960, presents an incisive, uniquely informed assessment of Congar’s diary. Martina, ‘The Historical Context in Which the Idea of a New Ecumenical Council Was Born’, in Vatican II: Assessment and Perspectives Twenty-Five Years After (1962–1987), ed. by Latourelle, 3 vols (New York: Panlist Press, 1988), I, p. 22. Joseph Comblin, ‘La théologie catholique depuis la fin du pontificat de Pie XII’, in Bilan de la théologie du XXe Siècle, ed. by Robert Vander Gucht and Herbert Vorgrimler (Paris: Casterman, 1970), I, pp. 479–496 (p. 479). Wittstadt, ‘On the Eve of the Second Vatican Council (July 1–October 10, 1962)’, in History of Vatican II, ed. by Alberigo, I, p. 459. Le Guillou, ‘Yves Congar’, in Bilan de la théologie du XXe siècle, II, p. 799. See also Congar, ‘Foreword’, in Frank B. Norris, God’s Own People: An Introductory Study of the Church (Dublin: Helicon Press, 1962), pp. III–V.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 55

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

55

There was, of course, another dynamic at work within the Council: the transformative effect it had on those who participated in it. Vatican II provided a milieu in and through which the Holy Spirit accomplished a renewal in the lives of individual believers, in the universal Church and in the world. Congar, who views Councils of the Church as the locus classicus for defining the laws of the universal Church, points to the unique and special presence of the Holy Spirit at these Councils: The council is truly assembled, congregata. It is assembled by and in the Holy Spirit who, unseen, is the most important person in the gathering – ‘in the presence of the Holy Spirit and his angels’, as the Council of Arles (AD 314) has it. […] Christ and the Holy Spirit are not there passively; they bring about the council, in a supreme way; they constitute it as an assembly united in truth. […] There are countless examples to show that the councils felt themselves to be ‘inspired’, that is, to have been visited by the Holy Spirit. […] The councils simply serve as human organs for the Holy Spirit, to formulate decisions ‘which the Holy Spirit has published through their mouths’. Unanimity is at the same time the fruit and the sign of this active presence of the Holy Spirit; it is a sign or criterion for those who observe it.177

Congar argues that ‘a council is not a parliament, it is a manifestation of the unanimity of the Church in the faith. […] The conciliar law is not that of a majority, but of unanimity.’178 Support for this view may be found in the tradition of the early Church that stressed the importance of unanimity in conciliar decisions. It should be noted, however, that unanimity can only be achieved with great effort.179 Furthermore, as Hubert Jedin remarks, councils are inevitably affected by the weaknesses of the human character.180 177

178 179

180

Congar, ‘The Council as an Assembly and the Church as Essentially Conciliar’, in One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic, ed. by Vorgrimler, pp. 44–88 (pp. 64–67). See also Hans Küng, Structures of the Church, trans. by Salvator Attanasio (London: Burns & Oates, 1965), p. 29; also idem, Strukturen der Kirche (Freiburg: Herder, ‘[n.d.]’). Congar, SE, pp. 310–311. The question of unanimity is of particular importance in relation to papal infallibility that is presented in the second decree of Vatican I, ‘Constitution on the Church of Christ’, Pastor aeternus, 18 July 1870. The definition of papal infallibility presupposes that of papal primacy; both were included in Pastor aeternus. See August Bernhard Hasler, How the Pope Became Infallible: Pius IX and the Politics of Persuasion, trans. by Peter Heinegg (New York: Doubleday, 1981); also idem, Wie Der Papst Unfehlbar Wurde: Macht und Ohnmacht eines Dogmas (Munich: Piper, 1979). See also John Henry Newman, ‘To Alexander Goss, Bishop of Liverpool’, 1 April 1870, in The Letters and Diaries of John Henry Newman, ed. with notes and an introduction by Charles Stephen Dessain and Thomas Gornall, 30 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), XXV, pp. 75–76; Küng, Structures of the Church, pp. 28–36; also idem, Infallible? An Enquiry, trans. by Eric Mosbacher (London: Collins, 1971), pp. 71–114; idem, Unfehlbar? (‘[n.p.]’: Benziger, 1970). Hubert Jedin, Ecumenical Councils of the Catholic Church: An Historical Outline, trans. by Ernest Graf (Edinburgh: Nelson, 1960), pp. 235–236; idem, Kleine Konziliengeschichte (Freiburg: Herder, 1959).

congar pages

56

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 56

Yves Congar’s Vision

It is significant, therefore, that Congar, in stressing the importance of unanimity at councils of the Church, also points to the Holy Spirit as its author: Unanimity must come sooner or later. Should it not be achieved, it would then be a sign that the Council does not represent the ecumenical Church in her fullness. Unanimity and fellowship are the work of the Holy Spirit (see II Cor. 13.13, koinônia). In order to grasp the deeper meaning of councils, we must take into consideration the Holy Spirit as the person deciding. Councils always call themselves ‘assemblies in the Holy Spirit’ at which Christ invisibly presides.181

Congar points out that the single most important element of Vatican II for the theologians and bishops was their participation in a conciliar experience. He often quoted the question posed by Joseph de Maistre in 1819 – ‘Why is an ecumenical council necessary, when it is enough to have a pillory?’182 – thereby contrasting his positive assessment of Church councils with de Maistre’s clearly negative evaluation. Congar dismisses those who question the usefulness of a Council – a question that continued to be debated after Vatican II – as a sign of a simplistic ecclesiology and a lack of a proper understanding of what a Council is really about. He highlights two major consequences of Vatican II. First, the Council was an original experience (expérience originale) for those who participated in it. Second, it brought about the rediscovery of the conciliar chapter in the life of the Church – something which had never been totally closed – as well as an awareness of the fact that conciliarity is an essential element of the Church’s life.183 It was the rediscovery of its conciliar nature that helped the Church to overcome the apologetic and defensive ecclesiology of what has been referred to as Tridentinism, but which Congar distinguishes from the Council of Trent itself.184 That the Second Vatican Council had a transformative effect on those who participated in it is an important observation in that it points to the role of the Spirit as the convenor of, and continued inspiration for, the Council and its participants. Congar was therefore not only working for the Second Vatican Council, he was also transformed by it – that is, by the Holy Spirit whose role in the Councils of the Church he has described in his writings. Vatican II was a pastoral Council. In an interview on 24 January 1960, Cardinal Dominici Tardini commented: ‘As far as one can know now, it will 181 182

183

184

Congar, SE, p. 311. See also Chapter 2, footnotes 190–194. Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, in Vatican II By Those Who Were There, ed. by Stacpoole, p. 338 (p. 775). See Congar, ‘Les théologiens, Vatican II et la théologie’, in Le Concile: 20 ans de notre histoire, ed. by Gérard Defois (Paris: Desclée, 1982), pp. 171–183 (pp. 171–173); Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, pp. 339, 341 (pp. 777, 779). Congar, Fifty Years of Catholic Theology, p. 3 (p. 9).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 57

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

57

be a Council of a real, practical [pratique] kind rather than a Council concentrating on doctrine. But doctrine will not be entirely excluded.’185 While the Second Vatican Council sought to avoid a dualism between the pastoral and the doctrinal, there were those who felt that it displayed a certain timidity with regard to doctrine. Congar, however, does not accept the characterization of Vatican II as solely pastoral: A pastoral approach is not without doctrine. It is doctrinal, but in a way that is not satisfied with conceptualizations, definitions, deductions and anathemas. It intends to present the truth of salvation in a way which is close to men and women of today and which accepts their difficulties and tries to answer their questions. It even does that in a doctrinal form of expression. Vatican II was undoubtedly doctrinal.186

In Congar’s view, the pastoral intention of Vatican II determined the style of its theologizing. The positive desire of the majority of the Council Fathers was that the Council texts correspond with the biblical and patristic ressourcement and that they have a genuine pastoral and ecumenical value. In this, Vatican II officially accepted the work done for the renewal of theology in the decades that preceded it. Congar’s description of these developments in theology indicates their importance for ecclesial renewal: For more than thirty years, intensive work had been done in most countries but particularly in France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, and also Latin America (Chile), in various fields: in ecclesiology Paul VI paid a solemn tribute to this work (Ecclesiam suam, 6, 8, 1964; cf. AAS, p.619 and 621); on the notions of tradition […] on the laity […] on the reality of missionary work, in liaison with apostolic efforts in a dechristianised world; on the liturgy […] on the sacraments, on anthropology; and, last but not least, in the field of ecumenism. […] The men responsible for this work belonged to what can be called the periphery of the Church, or its body, rather than its head or centre.187

The theology of Vatican II was also a clear expression of the conciliar intentions of the two popes of the Council. In his opening speech at Vatican II, Pope John XXIII expressed sentiments which Paul VI later reiterated: The substance of the ancient doctrine of the deposit of faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another. And it is the latter that must be taken into great consideration with patience if necessary, everything being measured in the forms and proportions of a magisterium which is predominantly pastoral 185

186

187

Dominici Tardini, ‘Consultatio’, 24 January 1960, in Acta et Documenta Concilio Oecumenico Vaticano II Apparando, Series 1 (Antepraeparatoria), 4 vols (Vatican: 1960), I, pp. 159–163 (p. 159). Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, p. 347 (pp. 784–785). See also idem, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 210 (14 November 1962). Congar writes: ‘The first objective of the Council is doctrinal: to protect the doctrine, the deposit.’ Congar, ‘Theology in the Council’, AER, 155 (1966), p. 220 (p. 4).

congar pages

58

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 58

Yves Congar’s Vision in character. […] She [the Church] considers that she meets the needs of the present day by demonstrating the validity of her teaching rather than by condemnations.188

A fundamental question which must be asked at this point concerns the identity of the true architects of the Second Vatican Council. Leonard Swidler makes the important observation that ‘theologians were the engineers of the massive reforms that were initiated at Vatican II’,189 mentioning Hans Küng, Rahner, John Courtney Murray, Congar and Daniélou as being among these. But Swidler’s analysis neglects the pivotal role of the Doctrinal Commission in the drafting of the Council texts,190 as well as the supervisory role exercised from the beginning of the second session by Pope Paul VI.191 Congar’s understanding of the theologians’ role at the Council is, however, radically different from that proposed by Swidler. Simply stated, he viewed them as collaborators with the bishops: This time I must say that I was completely gratified because what I had worked and prepared for reached the highest level of the Church’s life – indeed the official status that Vatican II, the great Council of our century, gave to all the themes of my work: reform within the Church, ecumenism, the laity, the missions. In all of this I was able to be of use at the highest level. We were at the service of the bishops, in a technical sense, but this also provided the context in which to make suggestions to the bishops – which often happened. If there is a theology of Congar, that is where it is to be found.192 188

189

190

191

192

John XXIII, ‘Pope John’s Opening Speech to the Council’, 11 October 1962, in The Documents of Vatican II: Introductions and Commentaries by Catholic Bishops and Experts, ed. by Walter M. Abbott, trans. and ed. by Joseph Gallagher (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966), pp. 710–719 (pp. 715–716). See John Finnis, ‘What Pope John said’, Tablet, 246 (1992), p. 14. By adding the words ‘eodem sensu eademque sententia’, a phrase not contained in the text that had been circulated in advance, Pope John indicated, as Finnis notes, that ‘developments of doctrine must be consistent with all the propositions hitherto defined’. See Pius X, ‘Litt. motu proprio “Sacrorum antistitum”’, 1 September 1910, in Enchiridion symbolorum: definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum, ed. by Henricus Denzinger and Adolfus Schönmetzer, (hereafter Denzinger), 36th edn (Freiburg: Herder, 1976), paras 3537–3550 (para. 3541). Leonard Swidler, ‘The Context: Breaking Reform by Breaking Theologians and Religious’, in The Church in Anguish: Has the Vatican Betrayed Vatican II?, ed. by Küng and Swidler (San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1987), pp. 189–192 (p. 189). Portions of this work were originally published in German as: Katholische KircheWohin? Wider den Verrat am Konzil (Munich: Piper, 1986). See Giuseppe Alberigo, ‘Introduction’, in Constitutionis Dogmaticae Lumen Gentium: Synopsis Historica, ed. by Giuseppe Alberigo and Franca Magistretti, trans. by J.S. Clegg and F. Guisberti (Bologna: Istituto per le Scienze Religiose, 1975), pp. XVII–XXII (p. XVIII). John F. Kobler, ‘Were Theologians the Engineers of Vatican II?’, Gregorianum, 70 (1989), 233–250 (p. 236). Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 215.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 59

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

59

Moreover, Congar views the Council as the domain of the bishops who worked in cooperation with the theologians, their expert assistants: Concilium episcoporum est: ‘the council is the concern of the bishops’: it is a saying of the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon. It expresses the truth of what we have lived, we, theologians, at Rome. We were at the service of the bishops. It is true that one of the means of serving them was to inform them of developments [acquis] in Christian thought, to urge them to intervene, to prepare for them the elements of their intervention. But they remained the judges, the masters. […] At Vatican II, the Council Fathers and ‘Experts’ most often worked together.193

Congar insists that the theologians are not the ‘teaching Church’ (Église enseignante) but are what he refers to as the ‘informing Church’ (Église renseignante). They worked in the commissions and subcommissions and helped create the climate of the Council.194 He expresses profound disagreement with Küng concerning the theologians’ doctrinal authority. For Congar, the bishops are both pastors and doctors: I have often denounced [dénoncé], in Hans Küng, a tendency to reserve doctrinal authority to theologians, and likewise to faculty professors, in defining the pastorate of bishops and priests in terms of ‘leadership’. […] The fact that the bishops unite these two functions is ecclesiologically important. It corresponds to the structure of the Church which, as the lay theologian Friedrich Pilgram wrote of it in 1860, ‘is a communion existing in the form of society’.195

However, he acknowledges that the theologians were indispensable to the Council’s work: Their contribution at the Second Vatican Council was remarkable. A model collaboration was realized there between the conciliar Fathers and the ‘experts’. They were involved in the work in a more direct and simple fashion than at Trent, where their collaboration had already been fruitful. The bishops of Vatican II were aware of the importance of the theologians.196

193

194 195

196

Congar, ‘Les théologiens, Vatican II et la théologie’, in Le Concile: 20 ans de notre histoire, ed. by Gérard Defois, p. 172. See also Congar, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 177 (31 October 1962). Congar insists that it is the bishops ‘who are the Council’. See Marie-Dominique Chenu, ‘Theology as an Ecclesial Science’, trans. by J. R. Foster, Concilium, 1 (1967), 47–52 (p. 51). Chenu, like Congar, considers the theologians to be ‘at the service of the episcopate’. See Congar, ‘Theology in the Council’, AER, 155 (1966), p. 222 (p. 6). Congar, ‘Le Théologien dans l’Église aujourd’hui’, Quatre Fleuves: cahiers de recherche et de réflexion religieuses, 12 (1980), 7–27 (p. 11). See also Joseph Ratzinger, ‘What Unites and Divides Denominations?’, Communio, 2 (1972), 115–119 (p. 116). Congar, ‘Le Théologien dans l’Église aujourd’hui’, p. 12.

congar pages

60

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 60

Yves Congar’s Vision

At the opening session of the International Congress on the Theology of the Second Vatican Council in September 1966, Paul VI thanked the theologians for their contribution to the work of the Council: Lastly, we especially thank all the speakers many of whom, as we know, have outstandingly contributed to the elaboration of the conciliar documents. […] The fact that the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council pursued eminently pastoral aims in no way attenuates or diminishes the importance of the tasks of theologians. Indeed, now more than ever, it is required for pastoral reasons that the life of the faithful should rest on the firmness of truth and that they receive secure orientations that they may be protected from the dangers of modern ideologies of such virulence that they threaten to subvert even the rational bases of faith.197

The Second Vatican Council gave new impetus to theology. Since it had not completed its deliberations on many questions under consideration, the Council called for new initiatives in the field of theology. Among the difficult tasks bequeathed to theology by the Council Fathers, Congar refers, in particular, to the challenge of ecumenical dialogue. Pope Paul VI stressed that the success of the Council could only be assured if the vital seed deposited in the soil of the Church came to full fruition. The key to success, in his view, lay in the rich doctrinal heritage of Vatican II being investigated, known and possessed. This is precisely the domain of the theologians. Pope Paul articulates the nature of the service expected of theologians by the Council as follows: The Council, that is, asks theologians to develop a theology which is no less pastoral than scientific, a theology that remains in close contact with patristic, liturgical and particularly with Biblical sources; a theology which always holds the teaching authority of the Church and particularly of the vicar of Christ in highest esteem; a theology which concerns humanity as seen in history and in concrete actuality; a theology which is frankly ecumenical and sincerely Catholic. Arduous work of vast importance is therefore put before the theologians for their study.198

The pope’s ‘Address to Theologians’ is significant for my study. An outline of the post-conciliar programme for Roman Catholic theology, it also contains many of the elements of Congar’s entire theological project. Pope Paul’s statement shows that Congar’s theology is enshrined in Vatican II and that it constitutes an important part of the theological agenda in the postconciliar period. Earlier, Romano Guardini had said that the twentieth century would be the century of the Church.199 Congar, who was always acutely aware of the 197

198 199

Paul VI, ‘Pope’s Address to Theologians’, trans. by NCWC Documentary Service, AER, 155 (1966), 403–407 (pp. 403–404). Ibid., p. 405. Granfield, ‘The Mystery of the Church’, AER, 160 (1968), 1–19 (p. 1). See also Romano Guardini, The Church and the Catholic and The Spirit of the Liturgy, trans. by Ada Lane (New York: Sheed & Ward, 1940), p. 75.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 61

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

61

absolute necessity of the Church, agreed.200 Vatican II confirmed their prophetic words. If the Church is to retain its transformative influence on public life, then the renewal and reform of its life and structures must be an ongoing and always urgent task that requires the cooperation of all its members, particularly its pastors and theologians. Pope John XXIII proposed an aggiornamento of the Church that would bring it into dialogue with the modern world. In this, Pope John’s approach was profoundly pastoral. His proposed programme of reform involved a global rethinking of the nature of the Church.201 The Council was drawn to a successful conclusion under the direction of Pope Paul VI, a skilled administrator and a willing heir of the renewal of the Church. In his writings before his elevation to the papacy, Pope Paul did not hesitate to speak of the reform of the Church. He now welcomed and extended Pope John’s aggiornamento.202 Congar points to the style of papacy inaugurated by John XXIII and which Paul VI continued, though in a somewhat different way, as an important factor in the success of the changes which these reforming popes introduced into the Church. He comments: ‘With them the papacy shows itself as an ecumenical paternity. It no longer has the monolithic appearance of an imperial monarchy: it has that of a sign and a service of unity.’203 Vatican II ranks beside Trent as a great Council of reform in the early modern period of Church history. Although various councils before Trent failed to achieve a comprehensive reform of the Church, Roman Catholic reform nonetheless tentatively put forth shoots. Furthermore, these were not the first, since the Church of the late Middle Ages was at no time unconscious of the ideals integral to reform.204 Although the Protestant Reformation opened the way for the reforms of Trent, it was not until four centuries later that the Roman Catholic tradition of reform attained its fullest expression at the Second Vatican Council.205 The programme of reforms 200

201

202

203

204

205

Congar, ‘Bulletin de théologie spéculative: Ecclésiologie’, RSPT, 21 (1932), 680–686 (p. 680). See E.E.Y. Hales, Pope John and His Revolution (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1965), pp. 200–201, 205. See Robert Rouquette, ‘Paul VI: Héritier de Jean XXIII’, Études, 319 (1963), 245–259 (p. 248). Congar, ‘Entretien avec le Père Congar’, in Sept Problèmes Capitaux de l’Église, by Congar and others (Paris: Fayard, 1969), pp. 9–15 (p. 13). See Hubert Jedin, A History of the Council of Trent, trans. by Ernest Graf, 2 vols (London: Nelson, 1957), I, p. 31; also idem, Geschichte des Konzils von Trient, 2 vols (Freiburg: Herder, 1949), I. John W. O’Malley, Trent And All That: Renaming Catholicism in the Early Modern Era, 2nd edn (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000), pp. 46–71. See also Chapter 1, footnote 222. See René Latourelle, ‘Introduction’, in Latourelle, Vatican II: Assessment and Perspectives, I, pp. XV–XIX (p. XV).

congar pages

62

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 62

Yves Congar’s Vision

enacted by Vatican II effectively brought to completion the work of the two major Councils of reform that preceded it.206 The fundamental notion of the Church at Vatican II was the concept of the universal Church. At the same time, however, this Council also presents some of the essential elements of the theology of the local Church, although this was developed more fully in the conciliar decrees drafted after Lumen gentium and, subsequently, in post-conciliar ecclesiology.207 Thus, Vatican II attempted to construct a unified and balanced theology of the Church. The Council recognizes that there is one Church that is universal in nature of which the local Church is a part – albeit a critically important part.208 In Congar’s view, the Council showed that the Church does not have answers to every problem and that it is not monolithic; rather it contains a diversity of opinions.209 Vatican II was a Council which concentrated upon ecclesiology as no other Council had. It proposed a new image of the Church that was intended to help the Church become what it is truly intended to be in the world.210 It also tried to take advantage of a new dynamism in the Church in order to facilitate a more comprehensive and creative response to the ever-increasing needs of humanity, in a world that was drifting increasingly away from Christ. No other Council in the history of the Church had placed such emphasis on the missionary responsibility of all the People of God. According to Pope Paul VI, the teaching of Vatican II can be summed up in a single objective: ‘To ensure that the Church of the twentieth century may emerge ever better equipped to proclaim the Gospel to the people of this century.’211 Essentially, the Council sought to achieve an inner renewal of the Roman Catholic Church and to foster a more positive and open 206

207

208

209 210

211

Jedin, Crisis and Closure of the Council of Trent: A Retrospective View from the Second Vatican Council, trans. by N.D. Smith (London: Sheed and Ward, 1967), p. 187; also idem, Krisis und Abschluss des Trienter Konzils 1562/3 (Freiburg: Herder, 1964). Angel Antón, ‘Postconciliar Ecclesiology: Expectations, Results, and Prospects for the Future’, in Vatican II: Assessment and Perspectives, ed. by Latourelle, I, pp. 407–438 (p. 426). See also AG, paras 15, 19–22; ‘Decree on the Pastoral Office of Bishops in the Church, Vatican II, Christus Dominus’, 28 October 1965, (hereafter CD), in Vatican Council II, ed. by Flannery, I, paras 4–21, 36–38. LG, para. 4. See Henri de Lubac, ‘Petrine Office and Particular Churches’, Communio, 4 (1972), 220–229 (pp. 220, 229); Joseph A. Komonchak, ‘The Church Universal as the Communion of Local Churches’, Concilium, 146 (1981), 30–35 (p. 32). See Congar, ‘Entretien avec le Père Congar’, p. 10. Karl Rahner, ‘The New Image of the Church’, in TI, trans. by David Bourke (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1973), X, pp. 3–29 (p. 4); idem, ‘Das neue Bild der Kirche’, in ST (Einsiedeln: Benziger, 1967), VIII, pp. 329–354 (p. 330). Paul VI, ‘Evangelisation in the Modern World, Evangelii nuntiandi, 8 December 1975, in Vatican Council II: More Postconciliar Documents, ed. by Austin Flannery, 1st edn, 2 vols (Dublin: Dominican Publications, 1982), II, para. 2.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 63

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

63

relationship with the other Churches and with all of humanity. These two goals should not be viewed in isolation from each other.212 Vatican II, a Council rich in promise, also heralded a period of turmoil and inner questioning, resulting in an identity crisis that profoundly affected the confidence, and ultimately the mission, of the Church. Congar points out that the post-conciliar crisis in the Church was not entirely due to the Council which had, in his view, produced many very substantial fruits. He proposes a sacramental model of the Church that comes from below, thereby facilitating greater involvement by all in the life and mission of the Church, as a means of overcoming this crisis: Vatican II, however, taught an ecclesiology of Christian existence structured as a Church that is basically sacramental. The vitality of such a Church comes much more from its base, consisting of people who, filled with enthusiasm for the Gospel, create more or less formal communities. This encourages not individualism, but a situation of personal choice motivated by deep conviction.213

Congar, however, does not refer here to the role of the ordained ministry. This is a rather surprising omission and constitutes a serious weakness in his proposals.214 It would, of course, be futile and indeed backwardlooking to return to the old juridical definition of the Church as a societas perfecta, of which Congar writes ‘the first article of that unequal and hierarchical structure was the difference by divine right between clergy and laity’.215 The renewal of the Church requires the collaboration of an empowered laity and a holy priesthood engaged together in active service of the Church.216 This proposal is true to the Council’s original intention. In an address to the Central Preparatory Commission for the Council, Pope John XXIII provides a rich source of the original goals of the hoped for renewal in the Church: To say it briefly and to say it all, the Council aims at making the clergy [cleri] put on a new splendour and holiness [sanctitate]; that the people be effectively instructed in the truths of Christian faith and morality; that the new generation that grows up in the hope of better times be properly educated; that our social

212

213 214

215 216

See Avery Dulles, The Resilient Church: The Necessity and Limits of Adaptation (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1978), p. 1. Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, pp. 352–353 (p. 790). See Congar, Laity, Church and World, pp. 25, 57, 85 (pp. 41, 86, 122). See also Introduction, footnotes 45–46. Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, p. 352 (p. 790). According to the Second Vatican Council, the ordained priesthood differs, not only in degree but also in kind, from the priesthood of all believers. See ‘Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests: Presbyterorum ordinis’, 7 December 1965, (hereafter PO), in Vatican Council II, ed. by Flannery, I, para. 2; also LG, para. 10.

congar pages

64

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 64

Yves Congar’s Vision mission be cared for; that Christians may be missionaries from the heart, which is to say, fraternal and loving to all and with all.217

What was proposed by Pope John and the Council that he initiated and presided over was a renewed Church modelled on the life of Christ. The relationship between Christ and the Church is an underlying, defining feature of Roman Catholic theology. The mission of the Church therefore cannot be understood in isolation from the mission of Christ. This is precisely the understanding of the Church presented in the ecclesiology of Vatican II and is also a theme that was highlighted by John XXIII at the opening of the Council.218 As we have seen, the reforms of Vatican II, while not excluding doctrine, were essentially pastoral and missionary.219 It scarcely needs saying that they were aimed at helping the Church respond better to the needs of its members and to engage more effectively in its missionary task. Hence a clear understanding of its mission and identity is essential if the Church is to proclaim the Gospel of salvation to humanity. The most effective means by which the Church can understand its own nature and reflect the new images proposed for it by the Council is precisely by the exercise of its divine mission of preaching and evangelization in the world.220 In the post-conciliar period, one of the concerns of Church leaders was the achievement of a correct understanding and a sensitive application of the teachings of the Council. Pope Paul VI expresses this succinctly as follows: It is still necessary that the renewing spirit and the breath of the council should penetrate the depths of the life of the Church; it is necessary that the vital germ deposited by the council in the soil of the Church reach full fruition. But this cannot be achieved unless the great riches of the doctrinal patrimony – the gift of the council to the entire Church – are first duly investigated, known and possessed.221

Congar captures something of the profound hopes of the Church after Vatican II in a brief description of its achievement: 217

218

219

220 221

John XXIII, ‘To the Cardinals and Bishops and other Members of the Central Commission for the preparation for the Second Vatican Council’, 20 June 1961, Acta apostolicae sedis, (hereafter AAS), 89 vols (Vatican: 1961), LIII, pp. 499–503 (p. 502). See John XXIII, ‘Pope John’s Opening Speech to the Council’, in The Documents of Vatican II: Introductions and Commentaries by Catholic Bishops and Experts, ed. by Walter M. Abbot, trans. ed. Joseph Gallagher (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966), p. 711. Joseph A. Komonchak, ‘The Struggle for the Council during the Preparation of Vatican II (1960–1962)’, in History of Vatican II, ed. by Alberigo, I, pp. 167–356 (p. 179). See above, pp. 56–57. Rahner, ‘The New Image of the Church’, in TI, X, p. 27 (ST, VIII, p. 352). Paul VI, ‘Pope’s Address to Theologians’, p. 404.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 65

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

65

The Second Vatican Council was a Council of reform: Karl Barth proclaimed that not without a certain emotion. One could also say, very rightly, that it marked the end of the Counter-Reformation. Accomplished by men formed in the scholastic heritage, it spoke the language of the history of salvation and of the kerygma. It was open to ecumenism and to a pluralist world.222

The Second Vatican Council was also concerned to address the problems associated with clericalism in the Church.223 Congar, always conscious of the need for patience in the matter of ecclesiastical reform, expresses disdain for the old clerical Church: All this, like the work of the Council in general, will involve us in a progressive, peaceful and patient revision of the excessively clerical character of our Church. And this clericalism is not only a fact, but it is rooted in the very idea we have of the Church. We no longer accept the Medieval notion, examples of which I have given elsewhere, and according to which ecclesia designated principally the clergy. The Church was the clergy for whom the laity was only a clientele or a zone of influence. Thank God, we are no longer there.224

222

223

224

Congar, Martin Luther sa foi, sa réforme: études de théologie historique, Cogitatio Fidei, 119 (Paris: Cerf, 1983), p. 79. See also Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, p. 343 (p. 780). Congar writes: ‘The date when the Fathers voted to reject the schema on the two sources, Scripture and Tradition, marked the end of the CounterReformation. It was this aspect, I am convinced, that gave Vatican II its greatest ecumenical value.’ Congar’s negative interpretation of the Counter-Reformation has been surpassed by modern scholarship which, on the contrary, sees the Catholic Reformation as a positive movement of reform in the Church. See also Martin F. Larrey, ‘Towards a Reevaluation of the Counter-Reformation’, Communio, 7 (1980) 209–224; O’Malley, Trent And All That, pp. 119–143. O’Malley provides an excellent guide to the concepts of Catholic reform, the CounterReformation and, in his own felicitous term, ‘Early Modern Catholicism’, seen by him as a more comprehensive designation than the other names for reform on the Catholic side in the early modern era. In a major contribution to the debate about terminology, this study constitutes an unsurpassed overview of scholarship on Catholicism in early modern Europe during the past fifty years. John W. O’Malley, The First Jesuits, 7th edn (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2001), pp. 17–18, 284–287, 303–306, 321–327, 369. Early Modern Catholicism: Essays in Honour of John W. O’Malley, S.J., ed. by Kathleen M. Comerford and Hilmar M. Pabel (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2001). See Gilles Pelland, ‘A Few Words on Triumphalism’, in Vatican II: Assessment and Perspectives Twenty-Five Years After (1962–1987), ed. by Latourelle, I, pp. 106–122 (p. 106). Congar and others, The Crucial Questions: On Problems Facing the Church Today (New York: Newman, 1969), p. 13; Congar, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 285 (1 December 1962). Congar, ‘Institutionalised Religion’, (hereafter ‘Religion’) in The Word in History: The St. Xavier Symposium, ed. by T. Patrick Burke (London: Collins, 1968), pp. 133–153 (pp. 149–150). See also idem, ‘Religion et institution’, in Théologie d’aujourd’hui et de demain, ed. by T. Patrick Burke (Paris: Cerf, 1967), pp. 81–97 (p. 96).

congar pages

66

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 66

Yves Congar’s Vision

In relation to the question of clericalism, it should be noted that political forces played an important role in helping to end the struggle between Church and state in France.225 The young Catholic workers’ movement (JOC) acted as a powerful force for unity and also contributed to the revival of French Catholicism in the period after 1930. The active support of the young Catholic workers for the Resistance during the Second World War deepened their unity with the French people. The movement to introduce the Gospel into the sphere of private life, that had begun before the war, continued more forcefully in the post-war period even penetrating daringly into the domain of public and social life. Congar presents his reflections many years after these events: Anyone who did not live through the years 1946 and 1947 in the history of French Catholicism has missed one of the finest moments in the life of the Church. In the course of a slow emergence from privation and with the wide liberty of a fidelity as profound as life, men sought to regain evangelical contact with a world in which we had become involved to an extent unequalled in centuries.226

Vatican II has been described as ‘the most important event in the history of the Roman Catholic Church since the Protestant Reformation’.227 Congar expressed high hopes for the Council which were not to be realized fully in all their dimensions: Some of us saw straightaway in the Council an opportunity for the cause, not only, of unity [unionisme], but also of ecclesiology. We saw it as an occasion, one that needed to be exploited as completely as possible, for accelerating the recovery of the true meaning of Episcopate and Ecclesia, in ecclesiology, and for making substantial progress in matters ecumenical. Personally, I committed myself to the task of stoking [activer] public opinion so that it would expect and demand much. […] The pressure of Christian public opinion must compel the Council to be a real Council and to accomplish something.228

A correct understanding of how Congar’s original contribution to the renewal of ecclesiology helped to prepare for Vatican II and contribute towards its reception in the Church could not be accomplished without a consideration of the Council’s texts and achievements. This has now been 225 226 227

228

See Schoof, Breakthrough: Beginnings of the New Catholic Theology, p. 96. Congar, DBC, p. 32 (p. XLIII). Joseph A. Komonchak, ‘Foreword’, in The Reception of Vatican II, ed. by Giuseppe Alberigo, Jossua and Komonchak, trans. by Matthew J. O’Connell (Washington DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1987), pp. VII–VIII (p. VII). See also Congar, ‘A Last Look At The Council’, p. 339 (p. 777). Congar, Mon journal du Concile, I, p. 4 (end of July 1960). See Alberigo, ‘The Announcement of the Council: From the Security of the Fortress to the Lure of the Quest’, in History of Vatican II, ed. by Alberigo, I, pp. 1–54 (p. 36, footnote 82).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 67

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

67

done and we are therefore in a better position to evaluate how Congar’s preconciliar writing found its de facto consummation in the conciliar movement. Congar and the Renewal of Ecclesiology at Vatican II The clarion call for reform in the Church that was eventually acknowledged and acted upon at Vatican II was sounded early on in France. As we have seen, Congar was part of a group of French theologians whose contributions to theology helped to prepare the way for the reforms of Vatican II.229 In November 1935, La Vie intellectuelle announced the foundation of a new series entitled Unam Sanctam that was to become an ecclesiological library running to 77 volumes. Its aim was to present a multifaceted study of the mystery of the Church while also, at Congar’s insistence, ‘always keeping in mind its organic unity’.230 Congar was able, under the auspices of this new series, to harness the reforming energies of some of the most brilliant French and European theologians. The prospectus announcing the launch of Unam Sanctam said that the idea of the collection was born of a double observation: On the one hand, in fact, when one reflects on the great Catholic problems of life and development, of modern unbelief or indifference, lastly of the reunion of separated Christians, one is led to think that an improvement of the present state of things, in so far as it depends on us, supposes that a notion of the Church that is broad, rich, living, full of biblical and traditional sap, penetrates Christianity: firstly the clergy, then the Christian elites, then the entire body. On the other hand, an incontestable renewal of the idea of the Church manifests itself on all sides. […] Unam Sanctam aims to provide a better knowledge of the nature or, if you like, of the mystery of the Church.231

The manner in which the contributors to Unam Sanctam realized this goal of a renewal of the mystery of the Church was through the study of the sources: Scripture, the Fathers, liturgy and the life of the ecclesiastical institutions. In the preface to Chrétiens en dialogue, the fiftieth volume of the Unam Sanctam series, Congar outlines his original intentions for the new series: In 1935, however, I was preoccupied with the ecclesiological aspect of the matter [of unbelief]. I decided to start a series of works devoted to the renewal 229

230 231

Subilia, The Problem of Catholicism, p. 85. See also Introduction, footnotes 48–53 and Chapter 1, footnote 240. Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 252. Congar, DBC, p. 24, footnote 14 (p. XXXIV, footnote 11). Only the original French edition, as quoted above, provides a detailed statement of the prospectus for the launch of Unam Sanctam. See Congar, UPU, pp. 46–47.

congar pages

68

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 68

Yves Congar’s Vision of ecclesiology. After some hesitations both about the publisher and the title, La Vie intellectuelle of 25 November 1935 announced the formation, in conjunction with Éditions du Cerf, of the series ‘Unam Sanctam’, the title being taken verbatim from the Credo. The series was designed to promote the revival and restoration to the commerce of ideas of a number of profoundly traditional ecclesiological themes and considerations which the development of a special treatise on the Church had caused to become forgotten or to be submerged under other themes of less depth and of less importance in tradition. Another objective was to restore as far as possible the whole [totalité] of the Catholic heritage and to exploit its resources for the elucidation of some of the present-day problems of the Church. The sources would be re-examined with a view to using them to nourish current thought.232

Unam Sanctam would not, then, be directly concerned either with pure history, apologetics, current affairs, liturgy, missiology or practical ecumenism except to the extent that all of these provide a richer and more profound knowledge of the mystery of the Church.233 It was hoped that the new series would meet a genuine need and provide a solid theological foundation for a movement that had begun under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Writing in 1939, soon after its foundation, and echoing the sentiments of the prospectus introducing Unam Sanctam, Congar comments: ‘Very naturally, the desire was born to contribute to this renewal of the Church and to place oneself at the service of a movement evidently created by the Holy Spirit.’234 In his 1935 study on unbelief, Congar expresses dissatisfaction with the liberal response of Protestantism and the isolationist response of Catholicism to the inexorable march of secular humanism. The response of the Church that Congar wished to see to the rise of a totally secularist universe was a full engagement in life and in secular affairs. He explains: To all growth of humanity, to all ‘progress’, to all extensions of the human in any one of the domains of creation – in knowledge just as much as in action – there must correspond a growth of the Church, an incorporation of faith, an incarnation of grace, a humanisation of God. […] This is the Church, this is catholicity [catholicité]. The Church is not a special little group, isolated, apart, remaining untouched amidst the changes of the world. The Church is the world as believing in Christ, or, what comes to the same thing, it is Christ dwelling in and saving the world by our faith. The Church is religious humanity; it is the universe as transfigured by grace into the image of God.235

Congar’s vision of the Church emphasizes a faith that works through love in order to make the grace of God incarnate in the world. This is quite different 232 233 234 235

Congar, DBC, pp. 23–24 (pp. XXXIII–XXXIV). See Chapter 1, footnote 231. See also Congar, UPU, p. 47. Congar, ‘Autour du renouveau de l’ecclésiologie’, p. 11. Congar, ‘Unbelief’, II, p. 21 (p. 242).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 69

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

69

from the Protestant view with its emphasis on sin and justification by faith.236 Indeed, some Protestants are reluctant to have a theology of the Church at all.237 Congar devoted all his energies to the construction of a renewed model of the Church. Such a Church would be capable of entering into meaningful dialogue with the world through a reinterpretation of scholasticism on the basis of its patristic and scriptural foundations. Another intention in the mind of the initiator of Unam Sanctam was, therefore, to see the Church as a powerful force that would transfigure the world into the image of God through the action of divine grace. Unam Sanctam was to make an important contribution in the fight against modern unbelief by helping to create a more human notion of the Church, which in turn helped to bridge the gap between life and faith. In the course of its history, the French Church has displayed creativity in response to various crises. The challenges facing that Church during the 1930s and the 1940s were immense. This is evidenced most forcibly by the emphatic declaration of Henri Godin who commented in 1943, concerning the state of the Church in France: ‘Yes, here we are indeed in pagan country [pays païen].’238 After their liberation Congar and his compatriots responded by addressing themselves enthusiastically to the challenge of evangelization in a de-Christianized nation. Ultimately, Congar was pleased with the contribution of Unam Sanctam to the mission of the Church,239 remarking that Pope Paul VI had alluded to the work done by himself and other theologians in his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam. This official recognition is testimony to the deep friendship between Congar and Paul VI. The manner in which the pope articulates his appreciation is indicative of his gratitude and even affection: We should like to pay special tribute to those scholars who, especially during these last years, with perfect docility to the teaching authority of the Church and with outstanding gifts of research and expression, have with great dedication undertaken many difficult and fruitful studies on the Church. […] Some of these are of outstanding value and utility.240 236

237 238

239 240

See John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. by Henry Beveridge, 8th edn, 2 vols (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1979), II, pp. 682–683; Edward Yarnold, In Search of Unity: Ecumenical Principles and Prospects (Slough: St Paul Publications, 1989), p. 138. For an account of how Congar’s ecumenism evolved, see below, pp. 142–145. See Dulles, ‘Ecclesiological Options’, Month, 232 (1971), 145, 152 (p. 145). Henri Godin and Yvan Daniel, La France: pays de mission?, 7th edn (Paris: Cerf, 1950), p. 14. See Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 252. Paul VI, Ecclesiam Suam: The Paths of the Church (New York: America Press, 1964), para. 33. See Epîtres de Saint Pierre: texte grec, écrit sur papyrus. Copie la plus ancienne connue des Epîtres de Pierre, datée du IIIe siècle. Fac-similé. Exemplaire offert par le pape Paul VI au Père Congar. In his own hand, the pope wrote: ‘Au Père

congar pages

70

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 70

Yves Congar’s Vision

The remarkable efficacy of Congar’s ecclesiology, as charted in the two previous sections, naturally impels us to raise the question of his theological method in writing about the Church. Congar’s methodology owes much more to the study of biblical and patristic sources than to any systematic exploration of the foundational role of a philosophical anthropology. The method employed by him, far from being planned or systematically formulated, emerged rather in the course of time and is important primarily because it helps us understand the nature and direction of his whole previous enterprise in theology and its ultimate objective of Church renewal, realized in large part at Vatican II. A consideration of the method utilized in Congar’s ecclesiology is also necessary because it defines the dual fidelity that is at the heart of his theological edifice – namely, fidelity to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as well as to contemporary culture and society. Congar’s Theological Method The enhanced standing of ecclesiology as a discipline owes much to the rich legacy of a whole generation of French theologians among whom Congar, de Lubac and Daniélou, symbols of the theological revival, occupy the most important places. The French responded to the forceful advances of modernity by re-presenting the challenge of the Church as the living body of Christ actively engaged in human society. If ecclesiology is to realize its full potentiality, it must be open to the world and to advances in other disciplines. Congar’s methodology constitutes an important part of his theology, providing significant insights into his notion of the Church. As a conclusion to this chapter, therefore, I want to outline the key elements of that methodology and to bring out its implications for Congar’s vision of the Church, which may perhaps help to render the latter more easily intelligible. The Multidisciplinary Nature of Congar’s Theology Congar, although aware of the importance for ecclesiology to be multidisciplinary, proposes a carefully qualified approach to other disciplines. This is quite clear in his use of anthropology and history. His anthropology is neither social nor cultural. It is rather, a theological anthropology concerned to Yves Congar O.P. avec vénération et affection et notre bénédiction apostolique en Christ. Paulus PP. VI – 12 XI 1973,’ (Paris: Bibliothèque du Saulchoir). Stefano M. Paci, ‘Le Pape obéit aussi: Entretien avec le théologien Yves Congar’, 30 Jours dans l’Église et dans le monde, 3 (1993), p. 24. Congar comments: ‘One day Paul VI told me, in a very solemn fashion: “I thank you for what you have done for the Church. And I do not do it in my own name, in the name of the Pope, but in the name of Jesus Christ”.’ Jossua, Père Congar, p. 73.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 71

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

71

serve the pastoral needs of the Church.241 Similarly, Congar proposes an overwhelmingly theological approach to history which is quite different to the various schools of history. For him, history provides a theological understanding of the nature of the Church – a kind of theological phenomenology of the Church with its centre in Christ. He explains: Now for Christians to return to their sources is the same thing as to be recentred, it is always to return to Jesus Christ, the one centre of Christianity. It is to reconsider the meaning of the coming, the presence and the return of Christ, for those are the three great affirmations of the gospel about him: he has come, he is here, and he will return. […] With this point, are we not at the very heart of the Christian notion of history?242

Congar’s approach to ecclesiology is, however, certainly more multidisciplinary than that of Karl Adam or Émile Mersch.243 He views the relationship between faith and science as follows: ‘I consider that the human sciences which are immensely rich put extremely difficult problems to faith today, that we can approach only by situating ourselves within and not without.’244 He also believes that theologians and others in the Church should become competent practitioners in the human sciences: But I do not meet people enough, young people especially. […] I make up by studying history. That’s always attracted me. It’s a school of realism and of truth. Recognising and becoming aware of the historicity of facts and texts resolves many critical difficulties. Theologically and positively it comprises the nourishing study of the witnesses of Tradition: Fathers and councils, liturgy, iconography…I inhabit the Church in which the Fathers and the liturgy speak. That’s no doubt what weighs down my writings with an excessive charge of quotations and references, but all that nourishes me. And alike in Tradition and in our own time I naturally situate what is called the magisterium in its due place. I can’t be accused of having neglected that, but it expresses itself in history: O bull Unam Sanctam! O Syllabus! O encyclical Mystici Corporis! […] The dimension of time in my theologian’s communion not only includes the past but looks to the future.245

In Congar’s view, a knowledge of history contributes to a true understanding of the present moment. It is also important because it provides a healthy relativism, something which is quite different to scepticism: 241

242

243 244

245

Congar, ‘Classical Political Monotheism and the Trinity’, trans. by Paul Burns, Concilium, 143 (1981), 31–36 (p. 35). See Congar, Priest and Layman (hereafter P&L), trans. by P.F. Hepburne-Scott (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1967), pp. 277–278 (p. 307). See Chapter 1, footnote 262. ‘Dialogue Entre Les Pères Congar et Girardi 1960–1970: dix années décisives pour l’Église et pour le monde’, Informations catholiques internationales, 351 (1970), 21–36 (p. 32). Congar, ‘Reflections’, p. 407. See also Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 248.

congar pages

72

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 72

Yves Congar’s Vision Relativism is, on the contrary, a way of being and seeing oneself more truly, and by perceiving the relativity of that which really is relative, it is a way of attributing absoluteness only to what really is absolute. Thanks to history we take proper stock of things, we avoid the mistake of taking for ‘tradition’ that which is only recent and which has altered more than once in the course of time. History helps us to avoid over-dramatising anxieties aroused in us with evil consequences by new ideas and forms. If by history we mean more than mere erudition and journalistic reporting on the past, it can help us find our true place in the present, become more aware of what really is at stake and the meaning of the tensions we experience.246

Congar was aware of the importance of the particular task of Church history – namely, to illuminate the essence of what the Church is and what it should become in the future. There is thus a complementarity between Church history and theology: both are interpretative sciences engaged in the study of a common subject, the Church. A critical function of history, in his view, is to provide a sense of continuity between past and present, thus allowing the Church to move towards the future with greater confidence. Here Congar cites de Chardin: Knowledge of the past, used as a means of situating ourselves better in the present, can help us plan the future. Teilhard de Chardin used to say: ‘The past has revealed to me the construction of the future’. This seems obviously true as far as the history of ecclesiology goes. Knowledge of this history elucidates the work of Vatican II and the direction in which things are moving.247

According to Congar, theology is essentially historical. It involves the study of the sources and the tradition, thus opening up topics which, in the past, were obscured by controversy: In one sense the history of the Church includes everything, even, in its widest sense, the scriptures themselves. It includes ancient epigraphy and iconography, the liturgies and the praxis Ecclesiae often invoked by St. Thomas in sacramental theology, the writings of the Fathers and of theologians, the documents issued by councils and popes, the lives of the saints.248

Congar’s methodology supports the view that the best method in theology is one that is broad-based, informed by history and sensitive to the cultural conditions of all societies. The relationship between Church and culture is a sensitive issue. A good theology defines the Church–culture issue in a way 246

247

248

Congar, ‘Church History as a Branch of Theology’, trans. by Jonathan Cavanagh, Concilium, 7 (1970), 85–96 (p. 88). Ibid., p. 89. See also Congar, ‘Moving Towards A Pilgrim Church’, in Vatican II: By Those Who Were There, ed. by Stacpoole, p. 143. Congar, P&L, pp. 195–199 (pp. 222–226); idem, ‘Where Are We in the Expression of the Faith?’, Concilium, 170 (1983), p. 87. Congar, ‘Church History as a Branch of Theology’, p. 85.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 73

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

73

that avoids compromising the Catholicity of the Church while, at the same time, respecting the integrity and uniqueness of individual cultures.249 A renewed ecclesiology recognizes that the Catholicity of the Church is not concerned with mere conformity to one particular tradition. A true and authentic Catholicity will instead seek to reconcile all that is genuinely valid, rich and true to the Church in the various cultures of the world. The type of Catholicity of the Church that Congar worked to construct is grounded in the Catholicity of Christ, and assimilates the catholicity of human nature: The Catholicity of the Church, regarded as a property of her being, is the dynamic universality of her unity, the capacity of her principles of unity to assimilate, fulfil and raise to God in oneness with Him all men and every man and every human value. Thus understood the Catholicity of the Church is essentially Trinitarian and Christological. It expresses the relation that exists between the unity of God and the multiplicity of the creature – a relation that is established in Jesus Christ and in His body the Church, and it corresponds with the law of the summing up of all things in Christ (Eph. 1.10) and, above all, of the taking of all humanity into His mystical Body. […] Among different nations, languages, temperaments, customs and religious experiences, Catholicity is a guarantee of respect, and indeed of fulfilment, of all that is finest and most authentic.250

It was Congar’s interest in ecclesiology which led him to other related fields of activity, one of which is salvation history.251 Congar, in fidelity to the Bible, would only preach about God in terms of his relationship to the world. For Congar and his colleagues at Le Saulchoir, theology is intellectus fidei: Theology is the unfolding of faith in human reason, and it embraces the resources and methods proper to reason. It depends on the data of revelation, le

249

250

251

See John Henry Newman, Discourses Addressed To Mixed Congregations (London: Longmans, Green, 1902), p. 282. Newman comments: ‘Unlearn Catholicism, and you open the way to your becoming Protestant, Unitarian, Deist, Pantheist, Sceptic, in a dreadful, but inevitable succession.’ Congar, DC, pp. 94–95, 108 (pp. 117, 137). Congar’s understanding of Catholicity underwent development. In his first major work Chrétiens désunis, he placed a strong emphasis on the need to subordinate values outside the Roman Catholic tradition. Later, while remaining faithful to the principle of his earlier position, he came to a recognition of the contribution of other traditions to the enrichment of the Roman Catholic Church in any future reunion, thus overcoming the danger of ignoring the need for reform and renewal in the Roman Catholic Church. The term Heilsgeschichte, variously translated as ‘history of salvation’, ‘redemptive history’ or ‘salvation history’, first came to prominence in nineteenth-century German Protestantism through the work of J.C. von Hofmann (1810–1877) and the Erlangen School. For the history and meaning of the term see Thomas P. McCreesh, ‘Salvation History’, in The New Dictionary of Theology, ed. by Joseph Komonchak, Mary Collins and Dermot A. Lane (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1987), pp. 929-931.

congar pages

74

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 74

Yves Congar’s Vision donné, but it is not solely concerned with the past. Theology must answer the questions that men have. […] I agree with Rahner that theology cannot be merely deductive.252

That Congar sees theology as more than merely deductive is an important point. It indicates that his method is broad and inclusive. Our study has shown that, in Congar’s theology, which is essentially multidisciplinary, there is an organic relationship between the Church and the world, God and humanity, faith and reason. In order to answer the most searching questions confronting humanity in any age, theology must, therefore, refer to history and its related disciplines. Congar outlines his proposals for the realization of the type of renewal that he wished to see in theology: If a renewal is to take place, we think that it would not be by presenting a simple account with commentary of the history of salvation instead of the exposition of a logically worked out synthesis: we have seen that the revealed facts give us the en-soi as well as the pour-nous, the ‘theology for man’ along with the ‘anthropology for God’ or, to borrow the expressions of Karl Rahner, the essential with the existential. But clearly the economic import of revelation will have to be presented better than it has been done oftentimes.253

In order to achieve such a renewal, Congar calls for more contact between exegetes and theologians, and for greater prominence to be given to speculative theology. He also urges theologians to take up once again the contribution of Scripture studies and in particular, the study of the Old Testament as part of salvation history. He describes the renewal which he envisages for Christology: As for Christology, it must take upon itself, as St Thomas did, but with resources that excellent biblical and liturgical studies provide, not only cosmological vision of the Epistles of the Captivity (Teilhard de Chardin), also a theology of the mysteries of the life and Pasch of Christ, centre of whole Economy.254

the the but the

A successful renewal, however, must also be attentive to the needs of humanity, and this constitutes another element in Congar’s method to which I shall now turn.

252 253

254

Granfield, Theologians at Work, p. 246. Congar, ‘Christ in the Economy of Salvation and in our Dogmatic Tracts’, trans. by Aimée Bourneuf, Concilium, 1 (1966), 4–15 (pp. 11–12). See also Rahner, ‘Dogmatik’, in Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, ed. by Josef Höfer and Rahner, 10 vols (Freiburg: Herder, 1959), III, cols 446–450 (cols 449–450). Congar, ‘Christ in the Economy of Salvation and in our Dogmatic Tracts’, p. 12.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 75

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

75

Theology Grounded in Anthropology In Chrétiens en dialogue, published in 1964, Congar expresses his reflections on the article on unbelief that he wrote for La Vie intellectuelle in 1935. He restates his original conclusion in unadulterated terms: To some extent, however, we are to blame for unbelief, and this seemed to me to arise from the fact that the Church shows to men a face which belies rather than expresses her true nature, which conforms to the Gospel and her own profound tradition. The real response would be a renewal of our presentation of the Church and above all, in order to achieve this, a renewal of our own view of the Church transcending the juridical idea of her which has been dominant for so long.255

Congar alludes to an important development in his thought on unbelief in the period between 1935 and 1964 in which he also refers to anthropology: Today I should go still further in suggesting what we should see and present to others. Even more radical than the idea of the Church is the very notion of faith and the correlative idea of revelation. It is the idea of God as the living God which is the indissoluble link in Judaeo-Christian revelation between theology, anthropology and cosmology, the living God, man and the world! The greatest obstacle which men encounter today on the road to faith is in fact the lack of any credibly demonstrable connection between faith in God and the prospect of his reign on one hand, and man and terrestrial creation on the other. There is a pressing need for a clear vision and demonstration of the intimate connection which these realities have with one another as the most effective answer to the reasons for modern unbelief.256

The desire to relate theology to anthropology, and religion to the world remained a constant concern for Congar. In 1967 he expressed his agreement with the anthropological approach of Rahner and Schillebeeckx: The most important work today is to show the unity between theology and anthropology. […] Theologians like Rahner and Schillebeeckx might seem to be studying man more than God. But this is a false impression. They study God in light of modern anthropology, and I agree completely with this approach.257

Although Congar did not construct an anthropology similar to his ecclesiology, his awareness of the importance of the unity between the human and the divine, the Church and the world, conditioned his theological outlook. As he said, ‘you cannot separate God and man’.258 One of the major 255 256

257 258

Congar, DBC, p. 23 (p. XXXIII). Ibid. See also Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, Cross Currents, 12 (1962), p. 148 (p. 695). Granfield, Theologians at Work, pp. 249–250. Ibid., p. 249.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 76

76

Yves Congar’s Vision

achievements of Congar’s theology is its facilitation of a better presentation of the Gospel to the modern person, realized through a renewed awareness of the essential relationship between the Church and the world. It is hardly surprising, then, that Congar rejects any separation of God and the human person: The greatest misfortune perhaps that has afflicted modern Catholicism is to have concerned itself with theory and catechesis about the en soi of God and religion, without adding to this at all times the significance that this has for man.259

Congar’s awareness of the indispensable relationship of anthropology to theology has contributed to the establishment of a renewed ecclesiology that is responsive to the needs of the world. A fundamental limitation in his theology, however, is its failure to respond to the challenge of modern philosophy, just as it failed to unite theology and anthropology.260 Nevertheless, Congar’s achievement is not insignificant. The elements of the vision for a renewed theology espoused by Congar include a renewed concern for unity in theology, a recognition of the importance for theology to benefit from the advances in other disciplines, and the necessity of a right relationship between theology, the ecclesial community and the magisterium. Congar describes this vision, based on a long self-examination in theology, as follows: After having had its very existence called into question and made a groping return, theology seeks a unity over and above the dissociations introduced by Nominalism, the Reformation, theology of the seventeenth century, Rationalism, and Modernism. It wants a unity similar to that which it enjoyed in its golden days of the Middle Ages, yet at the same time enriched by the addition of data, questions, new methods, and by the compilation and assimilation of the auxiliary disciplines which have sprung up since the Middle Ages. At the same time, theology better realises its dependence with regard to the ecclesiastical community and its magisterium.261

A God-centred Ecclesiology A strong point of Congar’s ecclesiology is that it relates his concern for the world and humanity to God and to Christ. Thus, while he resolutely refused to contemplate an entirely Christological theology similar to that of Barth or Mersch,262 he clearly recognizes the essential place of Christ: 259 260 261 262

Congar, ‘Christ in the Economy of Salvation and in our Dogmatic Tracts’, p. 11. See James Bacik, Contemporary Theologians (Cork: Mercier Press, 1989), p. 37. Congar, A History of Theology, p. 195 (col. 444). Émile Mersch (1890–1940), a Jesuit theologian whose life’s aim was to construct a theological synthesis in terms of the mystical Body of Christ. In Le corps mystique du Christ: études de théologie historique, 2nd edn, 2 vols (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer; Brussels: Édition Universelle, 1936), I & II, Mersch outlines the historical development of the doctrine of the Church.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 77

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

77

It does not seem to us that an entirely christological theology should be aimed at, such as Karl Barth proposed, nor should the programme of E. Mersch be followed with its idea of Christ as the ‘prime intelligible’. Of course we reach a knowledge of the intimate mystery of God only through Jesus Christ (ordo inventionis, acquisitionis) and from God (revelationis), but it is only by means of the mystery of God that we can believe fully in the mystery of the incarnation, and therefore, can understand Jesus Christ (ordo judicii). Dogmatic theology must be firmly rooted in the very structure of reality, since after all it is an attempt to reconstruct the great architecture of divine wisdom, a sort of sublime Poétique in the sense of Claudel. Then, too, if Christ is the centre, the end is none other than God himself.263

Congar’s ecclesiological programme is, in fact, rooted in Christ as the ultimate reference point for all renewal and reform in the Church. In his efforts to achieve a reform of the Church without injuring its unity – that is, a true reform – Congar proposes Christ as the test of what is unreformable in the Church: A Christian reform is always a judgement on a certain state of things, in the name of a re-examination of the sources and of the Principle. This return to the sources in the Principle, that is in Jesus Christ, in the Gospel, concerns more than the realm of ideas, although this domain is sovereignly important: Saint Paul speaks of the renewal or remodelling of our judgement (Eph. 4. 23).264

He indicates precisely why Christ is the active principle of the Church and of the world: The Church and the world cannot be identified with each other, but their unity at the end of time means that in a sense they share the same history. This unity also implies that the active principle should be the same and that principle is Christ.265

The Search for Totality (totalité) or Wholeness (tout) in Congar’s Ecclesiology In his opening address at the Second Vatican Council, Pope John XXIII spoke of the importance of a renewed presentation of the Church’s teaching while also adhering to that teaching in its totality. He comments: Our duty is not only to guard this precious treasure [of doctrine], as if we were concerned only with antiquity, but to dedicate ourselves with an earnest will and without fear to that work which our era demands of us, pursuing thus the path which the Church has followed for twenty centuries.266 263 264

265 266

Congar, ‘Christ in the Economy of Salvation and in our Dogmatic Tracts’, p. 12. Congar, ‘Comment L’Église sainte doit se renouveler sans cesse’, (hereafter ‘Comment’), Irénikon, 34 (1961), 322–345 (p. 342). Congar, ‘Moving Towards A Pilgrim Church’, p. 146. John XXIII, ‘Pope John’s Opening Speech to the Council’, p. 715.

congar pages

78

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 78

Yves Congar’s Vision

Congar, an emblematic figure of the theology of the Council, in his efforts to preserve the ‘precious treasure’ of the Church’s past for future generations, worked to construct a complete Roman Catholic theology, faithful to the Gospel yet sensitive to the ever-changing needs of humanity and the world. The search for wholeness is, then, a defining feature of Congar’s theology. It is the golden thread that helps to bind together all his theological projects. Above all, it is associated with a renewal in ecclesiology, of which Congar was one of the chief architects. Thus for him, ‘another objective was to restore as far as possible, the whole of the Catholic heritage and to exploit its resources for the elucidation of some of the present-day problems of the Church’.267 The means proposed by Congar for the accomplishment of the hoped-for renewal in ecclesiology is, as we have seen, a return to the traditional sources. He spells out this point as follows: Ecclesiology consisted almost entirely of a treatise of public law. I coined for this the word ‘hierarchology’ (‘hiérarchologie’), which has been taken up often enough since. But that kind of thing is impotent in drawing men, while Catholic Tradition – in Scripture, the Fathers, and the Liturgy – gave us a different notion of Church: generous, vital, religious. My aim from that point, expressed in the founding of the Unam Sanctam collection (announced in September, 1935) was to recover for ecclesiology the inspiration and the resources of an older and deeper Tradition than the juridical and purely hierarchological schemas that prevailed in first anti-conciliar polemic, then anti-Protestant, and lastly during the revival under the pontificates of Gregory XVI and Pius IX, schemas which also dominated modern manuals of apologetic. Henceforth the Church would no longer appear as merely societas perfecta or societas inaequalis, hierarchica but as the Body of Christ wholly and intimately inspired by his life.268

In his study of the Church, Congar was constantly concerned with achieving the ideal of integration.269 This concern for wholeness or totality may be attributed to the Orthodox influence on Congar’s theology. According to Jossua, it was Congar’s contact with the Orthodox Church that enabled him to move beyond strict Latin conceptualism.270 267 268

269

270

Congar, DBC, p. 24 (p. XXXIV). Congar, ‘Path-Findings’, p. 170 (p. 124). See also Congar, Power and Poverty in the Church, (hereafter PP), trans. by Jennifer Nicholson (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1964), pp. 64, 70; also idem, Pour une Église servante et pauvre, L’Église aux cent visages, 8 (Paris: Cerf, 1963), pp. 57, 61–62. Congar, ‘Norms of Christian Allegiance and Identity in the History of the Church’, trans. by John Griffiths, Concilium, 3 (1973), 11–26 (p. 25). See Joseph Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics: New Essays in Ecclesiology, trans. by Robert Nowell except for Chapter 4, trans. by Frideswide Sandeman (Slough: St Paul Publications; New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1988), p. 24; idem, Kirche, Ökumene und Politik (Cinisello Balsamo Italy: Edizioni Paoline, 1987). Jossua, Père Congar, pp. 85–86.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 79

The Vision of the Church in Congar’s Theology

79

Conclusion Throughout this chapter, the accent has been on Congar’s vision of the Church – a vision defined by love, which facilitates a deeper understanding of the Church. Congar sought to construct a Church that was broad, rich, open and flexible. He achieved this goal by recourse to the vital sap that can only come from the Bible and tradition. His vision was oriented to the attainment of a goal – specifically the regeneration of ecclesiology in order to construct a renewed Church. What has not yet been considered is Congar’s multifaceted definition of the Church and his precise proposals for a treatise on the Church in all its dimensions. A central concern of the next chapter is the exploration of how the various elements of his vision of the Church actually contribute to a renewed Church. In treating this matter, I discuss Congar’s theology of ministries, ecumenism, the significance of the biblical images of the Church to him, and the relationship between the universal Church and local Churches.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 80

CHAPTER 2

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology In his opening address at the Second Session of the Second Vatican Council, Pope Paul VI declared: ‘For the Church is a mystery. It is a reality imbued with the hidden presence of God. It lies, then, within the very nature of the Church to be always open to new and greater exploration.’1 In order to facilitate a more profound understanding of the Church, Congar had already proposed a radical reform of the Church through a return to the sources,2 which would ensure a solid foundation for a renewed ecclesiology. The return to the sources also helped to free Roman Catholic theology from its defensive and isolationist tendencies and to make it a more integral part of the life of the Church, thereby facilitating a better response to the modern world. If theology is to be of genuine service to the Church in the proclamation of the Gospel, it must be the fruit of profound speculation and intimate contact with contemporary society, thereby guarding against obscurantism.3 Our study of the vision of the Church in Congar’s theology has shown the importance of his contribution to the renewal of ecclesiology, to which Vatican II is the clearest testimony.4 An essential feature of Congar’s vision of the Church is the urgent need to overcome obstacles to truth and belief. For Congar, truth is the most unifying force of all, the fundamental element in the unity of the Church. Congar views the Church as the essential milieu of truth.5 In order that the Church may be the source of all truth, it must be renewed, evangelized and converted in its visible body and in its interior being. As Congar comments: ‘The Church has always known the call to examine herself in the mirror of the gospel and to be converted to the truth 1

2 3

4

5

Paul VI, ‘The Task’, in Council Speeches of Vatican II, ed. by Yves Congar, Hans Küng and Daniel O’Hanlon (London: Sheed and Ward, 1964), pp. 15–17 (pp. 15–16). Congar, PP, p. 78 (pp. 67–68). See Joseph Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics: New Essays in Ecclesiology, trans. by Robert Nowell except for Chapter 4, trans. by Frideswide Sandeman (Slough: St Paul Publications; New York: Crossroad Publishing, 1988), p. 7. See Dulles, ‘Catholic Ecclesiology since Vatican II’, Concilium, 188 (1986), 3–13 (p. 3). Congar, ‘L’Église: obstacle ou voie d’accès à la vérité’, Recherches et Débats, 66; Chercher la Vérité: Semaine des intellectuels catholiques (1969), 205–219 (pp. 218–219). See also idem, ‘Norms of Christian Allegiance and Identity in the History of the Church’, Concilium, 3 (1973), p. 12.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 81

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

81

that she professes to be and wishes to be.’6 The most important works in Congar’s ecclesiology are devoted to the achievement of the goal of a renewed Church that would serve as a means of salvation for the world, rather than as an obstacle to truth and belief. The concern for a renewed ecclesiology, so critical to the ultimate success of Congar’s entire theological programme, is an indispensable element in his vision of the Church. Congar’s carefully formulated vision forms the essential foundation on which to construct a renewed Church. The central aim of this chapter, which brings us to the heart of his theology, is the study of the shape of the Church in Congar’s thought. The use of the term ‘shape’ is based primarily on Congar’s application of two verbs to the Church – namely, construire and se réaliser. Shape, in his thought, may then be applied to the construction of the Church. The heavenly Church will be a pure temple, a communion with God, whereas the Church on earth, the means of obtaining that communion, is referred to as a scaffolding (échafaudage) thus indicating its contingent nature.7 A preliminary issue to be considered is Congar’s contribution to the debate surrounding the complex question of defining the Church. Congar outlines the precise parameters for a theological treatise on the Church in order to effect a true reform of the Church. A detailed analysis of the means he proposes for such a reform must also be undertaken in three steps. The first is a study of the images or models which he says we must rediscover in order to restore the true nature of the Church as expressed in the Gospel and in the Christian tradition: People of God, Body of Christ, and Temple of the Holy Spirit.8 Congar believed that the restoration of the biblical images of the Church would achieve a renewal in ecclesiology and thereby assist in overcoming unbelief. These biblical images, which ultimately bore fruit in Vatican II, contribute to a renewal of the understanding of the unity, holiness, Catholicity and apostolicity of the Church.9 Second, a consideration of the theology of the laity, in which Congar was such a dominant and pioneering figure, constitutes a key element in the analysis of 6 7

8

9

Congar, ‘L’Église: obstacle ou voie d’accès à la vérité’, p. 214. See Congar, SE, pp. 63–64, 130, 133–134. In Esquisses du mystère de l’Église, Congar refers to the task of building the Church (construire son Église) entrusted by Christ to the apostles conjointly with the Holy Spirit. See Congar, The Mystery of the Church: Studies by Yves Congar, (hereafter MC), trans. by A.V. Littledale, 2nd edn, rev. (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1965), p. 69. See also idem, Esquisses du mystère de l’Église, (hereafter EME), new edn, Unam Sanctam, 8 (Paris: Cerf, 1953), p. 84; idem, La Pentecote [sic]: Chartres 1956, (hereafter PC), (Paris: Cerf, 1956); idem, CTL, p. 89 (p. 96). Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, Cross Currents, 12 (1962), p. 147 (p. 695). See Congar, L’Église une, sainte, catholique et apostolique, (hereafter USCA), Mysterium Salutis, 15 (Paris: Cerf, 1970).

congar pages

82

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 82

Yves Congar’s Vision

the shape of the Church in his theology. To this end, I examine how the laity exercises a decisive role in initiatives against unbelief and religious indifference in Congar’s model of ministry. His somewhat opaque views on the priesthood will be considered only to the extent to which they influence his theology of the laity since, of all the areas of theology to which he contributed, the theology of the priesthood has undergone the most radical and profound changes since he wrote Jalons in 1953. Congar was critical of a theology of the priesthood that was clerical in nature, and sought to replace it with another that would give a place to the laity. However, his theology of the priesthood has been surpassed by that of other theologians.10 It is hardly necessary to say that Congar’s theology of ministry is comprehensive. His analysis of the place of the papacy, the episcopate and the diaconate is a further contribution to the totality of his vision of the Church.11 Finally, a study of Congar’s original and transformative contribution to the emergence of the ecumenical movement in the Roman Catholic Church is the third major task in this survey. Without unity, ecclesial renewal based on a return to the biblical images of the Church remains incomplete, and the renewed theology of ministry cannot function properly. Congar’s 1935 study on unbelief, ‘Conclusion théologique’, is essential for a thorough understanding of his programme for the renewal of the Church. It convinced him of the urgent need to make Christ incarnate in the world. For every growth of humanity there must be a corresponding growth of the Church, enabling the Church to give its soul to the ever-developing body of humanity. As Congar explains:

10

11

A survey of recent scholarship indicates the widely divergent approaches to the priesthood proposed by Catholic theologians. See Karl Rahner, The Priesthood, trans. by Edward Quinn (New York: Herder and Herder; London: Sheed and Ward, 1973); also idem, Einübung Priesterlicher Existenz (Freiburg: Herder, 1970); Edward Schillebeeckx, Ministry: A Case for Change, trans. by John Bowden (London: SCM, 1981); also idem, Kerkelijk ambt (Bloemendaal: Nelissen, 1980); Hans Küng, Prêtre: pour quoi faire?, trans. by Cerf (Paris: Cerf, 1971). John Paul II, Pastores Dabo Vobis: Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation of His Holiness John Paul II on the Formation of Priests in the Circumstances of the Present Day (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1992); Thomas J. McGovern, Priestly Identity: A Study in the Theology of Priesthood (Dublin: Four Courts Press, 2002); Avery Dulles, The Priestly Office: A Theological Reflection (New York: Paulist Press, 1997). Dulles presents a concise introduction to the question of ordained priesthood in light of Vatican II and recent magisterial and theological teaching. Congar, Église et papauté: regards historiques, Cogitatio Fidei 184 (Paris: Cerf, 1994); L’Épiscopat et l’Église universelle, ed. by Y. Congar and B.-D. Dupuy, Unam Sanctam, 39 (Paris: Cerf, 1962); La collégialité épiscopale: histoire et théologie, by Congar and others, Unam Sanctam, 52 (Paris: Cerf, 1965); Le diacre dans l’Église et le Monde d’aujourd’hui, ed. by P. Winninger and Yves Congar, Unam Sanctam, 59 (Paris: Cerf, 1966).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 83

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

83

We must again fill our world with signs of faith, i.e., just as truly, with the presence of faith. Faith must again become humanly present, like Christ. A policy of presence; not a policy of prestige for some sort of ecclesiastical imperialism, but a policy of the presence of faith in everything that is human, in order to take up every human value, and precisely in that way to manifest the total value of faith with regard to human life.12

Congar was deeply aware that only a renewed Church, founded on Scripture and tradition,13 could effect such a policy of the presence of divine, transformative faith in the world. Thus, an analysis of his proposals for the reform of the Church in Vraie will be presented in conjunction with his treatise on tradition, since Congar viewed tradition as one of the essential conditions for a true reform of the Church.14 A consideration of the place of reform and tradition in his theology will be the main subject of the final chapter. Congar argues that a successful reform of the Church necessitates not only a renewal of our idea of the Church but also our ideas of God and faith. He worked for a revival of faith based on the biblical notion of God in order to ensure the fidelity of the Church to the mission entrusted to it by Christ. Congar’s ideas for renewal are based on a simple yet profound presentation of Christian doctrine which recognizes that the Church’s mandate in the world originates with God. His broad and inclusive vision for renewal guards against the damaging effects of injury to the integrity of the relationship between God and humanity. Congar describes his contention in the following terms: About eight years ago [1953] I came to a new conclusion: it is not only our idea and our presentation of the Church which must be renewed in its source, it is our idea of God as a living God, and in the light of this, our idea of Faith. […] On the internal and profound level, that is, of doctrine and the Christian message itself, it is necessary, without giving up anything of the deposit of Faith developed by centuries of Christian life, to present a simple formulation of doctrine, centred on what is essential. […] One should never separate anthropology and ‘theo-logy’. […] For the God of revelation and of salvation is never more Himself than when He is so for man, in the thread of his human life. In my opinion this is the most important and urgent point of Christian preaching. The most damaging ambiguities and confusions come about when it is badly neglected. If we understand this well, we shall easily recover the spirit of men conquered [vaincus] by Jesus Christ and devoted to His gospel, and we shall find the style of preaching and expression which is awaited by a world hungry for that gospel. This requires a rediscovery of the God of the Bible, the Living God.15 12 13 14

15

Congar, ‘Unbelief’, II, Integration, (December 1938), p. 25 (p. 248). See Congar, CTL, p. 35 (p. 43). Congar, Vraie et fausse réforme dans l’Église, (hereafter VFR), Unam Sanctam, 20 (Paris: Cerf, 1950); also idem, TT, (TT, I & II). Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, pp. 148, 150 (pp. 695, 698). See also idem, Fifty Years of Catholic Theology, ed. by Bernard Lauret, trans. by John Bowden (London: SCM, 1988), p. 61 (p. 80).

congar pages

84

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 84

Yves Congar’s Vision

What is required is an awakening of the sense of the Church among men and women. It is only when the Church, renewed under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, is recognized as the source of truth and the answer to the questions of our age that the ecclesiological renewal enshrined in Vatican II may be called successful. A renewal of the ideas of faith and God, which, in Congar’s view, is essential for a true proclamation of the Gospel, can only be achieved through a renewed Church. Such a programme of Church renewal also depends for its success on a revitalized, exoteric theology that engages in dialogue with the external world. Furthermore, theology attempts to furnish a map which, though incomplete, is crucial for the renewal of the Church and the evangelization of the world.16 I wish to begin with a consideration of the definition of the Church proposed by Congar. Congar’s Proposed Definition of the Church Questions inevitably arise. What is the Church? Is it possible to define the Church? Historically, theologians have always given ample attention to this question. Medieval theologians and canon lawyers in the West, particularly in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, although they knew the doctrine of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ, defined it primarily as a legal institution.17 Orthodox theology, on the other hand, stressed the divine aspect of the Church, the biblical concept of the Body of Christ being its commonest appellation for the Church.18 The question of defining the Church is intricate because the Church is a divine mystery and because of the variety of senses in which the word ‘Church’ is used in Scripture and theology. Congar condemned the medieval notion of the Church defined principally in terms of the clergy. In his view, Chapter II of Lumen gentium on the People of God is clear evidence that the excessively clerical medieval Church belongs to the past. He worked assiduously for the restoration of the true conception of the Church as a communion of persons sharing equally in the life of God, and his description of this endeavour is noteworthy: But still there remains a great deal to do to restore, theoretically and practically, the true conception of the Church. I mean the conception of the Church as a 16

17

18

See Ian T. Ramsey, Christian Discourse: Some Logical Explorations (London: Oxford University Press, 1965), p. 1. See Anton Weiler, ‘Editorial’, trans. by Hubert Hoskins, Concilium, 7 (1971), 7–14 (p. 10). See Georg Denzler, ‘Basic Ecclesiological Structures in the Byzantine Empire’, trans. by David Smith, Concilium, 7 (1971), 61–69 (p. 63).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 85

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

85

communion of persons who all participate in the same goods of the Covenant and are all fully first-class citizens of this Holy City, this family of God.19

For Congar, the Church is primarily the Church of love, a fraternal society striving for sanctity and only secondarily a hierarchical society. The institutional Church must be understood in relation to the Holy Spirit: We must go on, with J. Ratzinger, to the ontological level, to the contemplation of the very nature of the fraternal communion of persons which we find in the Church. And then, just as truly but in second place, we find in the Church a structured and hierarchised society. […] The institution [in Augustine and Aquinas] is referred entirely to the event of the Holy Spirit and to the interior edification of persons. […] ‘No rite dispenses from love. Our Church is the Church of the saints’.20

The difficult task of defining the Church may be best approached from an historical perspective. A preliminary question which must be considered, however, concerns the legitimacy of the theologians’ efforts to define the Church. Congar makes the distinction between a nominal and a real definition. A nominal definition concerned with words only is, in Congar’s view, unproblematic. The discussion among theologians, however, pertains to the possibility of a real definition of the Church, concerning which, Congar notes: ‘Many a theologian, after having studied the question, has concluded that one cannot define the Church other than in a descriptive manner.’21 He points out that Scripture does not give a definition of the Church but rather presents a plurality of terms and images which allude to its unique reality. These images complement and correct each other to present the fullest possible understanding of the Church. In Congar’s view, the scriptural images of the Church ‘tell us less of what God or the supernatural mysteries are in themselves than that which they represent for us and the truth of the religious rapport that we have to realise in order to respond to the divine initiative’.22 The Fathers of the Church and the liturgy present a profound development of the biblical images of the Church. They are concerned with the transcendent nature of the Church through which it reaches beyond its historic forms to embrace not only the saints but also the angels. Congar illustrates the position of the Fathers succinctly: 19

20

21 22

Congar, ‘Religion’, p. 150 (p. 96). See also idem, ‘The Role of the Church in the Modern World’, in Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, ed. by Herbert Vorgrimler and others, trans. by W. J. O’Hara, 5 vols (New York: Herder and Herder; London: Burns & Oates 1969), V, pp. 202–223 (p. 208); also idem, Das Zweite Vatikanische Konzil, Dokumente und Kommentare, Part III (Freiburg: Herder, 1968). Congar, ‘Religion’, pp. 150-151 (p. 97). See also idem, ‘L’Église selon M. Georges Bernanos’, VI, 43 (1936), 387–390 (pp. 388–389). Congar, SE, p. 21. Ibid., p. 22.

congar pages

86

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 86

Yves Congar’s Vision The Fathers have an extraordinarily rich vision of the Church, but they have hardly attempted to construct it systematically. Besides they have known and used the principal notions employed in the search for a defining principle of the Church and of a theological construction of a De Ecclesia treatise. These are, in the order in which we will examine them, the concepts of People of God, Body of Christ, Society and Communion.23

The state of theological debate on the abstruse question of defining the Church may be presented briefly. Congar admits: ‘It is not sure that a definition which conforms to the rules of formal logic is possible.’24 There is a clear recognition, from one point of view, that ‘the reality we call the Church “is too rich to be captured by one concept and to be called by one name” ’.25 From another perspective, however, the Church is seen as a society made up entirely of people, realized in this world, which may be related to other human institutions. The Church can never be seen, however, simply as a human creation. It is, rather, a supernatural reality. Congar observes that: ‘The Church is substantially supernatural, and represents a mystery. It is for this same reason that E. Commer thought that it was impossible to define the Church.’26 Congar’s reference to the encyclical Mystici Corporis presents a particular problem regarding the question of a definition of the Church. In that encyclical, we read: And so to describe this true Church of Christ – which is the Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church – there is no name more noble, none more excellent, none more divine, than ‘the mystical body of Jesus Christ’.27

It should be noted that in Sainte Église, Congar quotes the definition of the Church given by Pius XII in Mystici Corporis without referring to his previous demurral concerning the possibility of a definition.28 The central 23 24 25

26

27

28

Ibid. Ibid., pp. 41–42. Ibid., p. 42. Congar quotes Journet who is, in fact, referring to synonyms for the Church. The crucial point, however, is that Journet, at a later point in his work, outlines the main definitions of the Church and discusses the constitutive elements of the nature of the Church. See Charles Journet, L’Église du verbe incarné, 3 vols (Paris: Desclée de Brouwer, 1951), II, pp. 50–92; also Hans Urs von Balthasar, Church and World, trans. by A. V. Littledale with Alexander Dru (New York: Herder and Herder, 1967), pp. 16–19; also idem, Sponsa Verbi (Einsiedeln: Johannes, ‘[n.d.]’). Congar, SE, p. 42. See also Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, ed. in English by James Bastible, trans. by Patrick Lynch, 4th edn (Cork: Mercier Press, 1960), pp. 101–102; also idem, Grundriss der Katholischen Dogmatik (Freiburg: Herder, 1952). Pius XII, Encyclical Letter (Mystici Corporis Christi): On the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and Our Union with Christ Therein, trans. by George D. Smith (London: Catholic Truth Society, 1960), para. 13. Congar, SE, p. 42.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 87

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

87

argument against a definition is that the Church is a mystery. Congar, nevertheless, like other theologians who express reservations regarding the possibility of a definition of the Church, presents various portrayals of the Church and thereby effectively renders the argument against a definition otiose.29 At the Second Vatican Council, various objections were raised to the title of the first chapter of Lumen gentium. The Council Fathers who objected to the title ‘The Mystery of the Church’ were concerned that it might lead to the abandonment of the truth of the visible Church for the ideology of an invisible Church.30 Congar points out that the leaders of the Protestant Reformation defined the Church as the community of true believers. The response of Roman Catholic apologists was ‘to deal with the Church from the angle of its visibility, of its guarantee of apostolic authenticity, from having to focus on the question: who belongs and who does not belong to the Church?’.31 The challenge for theologians is to maintain the visible and invisible elements of the Church in a dynamic unity.32 Congar observes that the Council intentionally avoided speaking of ‘membris’ because this vocabulary raised difficulties to which no solution could be found. What was essential, therefore, was ‘to mention an interior, spiritual element without, however, transforming the whole notion of belonging to the Church into something invisible as with Wyclif or Huss’.33 Vatican II recognizes that the Church is a multifaceted reality which, as mystery, is at once visible and invisible.34 This points to the legitimacy and the necessity of the theologians’ efforts to define the Church for the sake of the world. An always urgent task for theologians is to ensure that the mystery of the Church is understandable since a mystery is neither mythical nor incomprehensible. Congar’s view on the mystery of the Church brings out a point that seems undeniable – that the Church must be essentially unworldly in order to serve humanity:

29

30

31

32 33 34

See Herwi Rikhof, The Concept of Church: A Methodological Inquiry into the Use of Metaphors in Ecclesiology (London: Sheed and Ward; Shepherdstown, West Virginia: Patmos Press, 1981), p. 220; Avery Dulles, Models of the Church, (hereafter Models) 5th edn (Dublin: Gill and Macmillan, 1983), p. 16. See Aloys Grillmeier, ‘The Mystery of the Church’, in Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, ed. by Vorgrimler and others, trans. by Kevin Smyth (New York: Herder and Herder; London: Burns & Oates, 1967), I, pp. 138–152 (p. 138). Das Zweite Vatikanische Konzil, Dokumente und Kommentare, Part I (Freiburg: Herder, 1966). Congar, ‘What Belonging to the Church Has Come to Mean’, (hereafter ‘Belonging’), trans. by Frances M. Chew, Communio, 4 (1977), 146–160 (p. 146). ‘Sur la transformation du sens de l’appartenance à l’Église’, in Écrits réformateurs, ed. by Jossua, pp. 235–247 (p. 235). Grillmeier, ‘The Mystery of the Church’, p. 146. Congar, ‘Belonging’, p. 151 (p. 239). Congar, LG, para. 8.

congar pages

88

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 88

Yves Congar’s Vision No single formula can exhaust the relations of the spiritual with the temporal; none of the forms taken by these relations fully expresses the reality of a Church whose substance escapes time, being of different order from the things of this world. The Church makes full use of the possibilities that history offers her to live and work in the world; but because she is not of the world she reserves the right to lay aside what has served her for a season, and to use other means or give other expression to her life. […] A Church thus open to free discussion will be a Church of poverty and service too, a Church which has the word of the Gospel to give to men: less of the world and more for the world!35

Despite his apparent reticence concerning the subject, the provision of an adequate definition of the Church is in fact fundamental for Congar’s theology and is the result of many decades of ecclesiological study. It concerns the essential nature of the Church; its structure; mission; ministry; relationship to the world and to other Christian communities. New evaluations are necessary, however, because of profound shifts of perspective in these areas of Church life which are not unaffected by rapid changes in modern society. Congar’s Sainte Église brings together, in one volume, many of his fragmentary studies on the Church. In the foreword to this work, he points out that its first section is devoted to a study of ‘how the Church considers herself and defines herself in the plan of God; her nature, which expresses itself in the classical properties: one, holy, Catholic, apostolic’.36 A brief consideration of the developments in Roman Catholic ecclesiology which facilitated a definition of the Church on the anthropological plane further clarifies those images which best define the shape of the Church in Congar’s theology. The Second Vatican Council was a council of the Church. By making the Church its major theme, Vatican II returned to the incomplete programme of Vatican I on the Church in order both to advance and to balance it by developing the theology of the episcopate and its relationship to the papacy.37 As Pope Paul VI clearly states in his first encyclical, the Church was ‘the principal object of attention of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council’.38 The Council facilitates a fuller understanding by the Church of 35

36 37

38

Congar, PP, pp. 135–136, 140–141 (pp. 131, 136). See also Congar, Mon journal du Concile, ed. by Éric Mahieu, 2 vols (Paris: Cerf, 2002), I, p. 109 (11 October 1962). Ian T. Ramsey, ‘Talking of God: Models, Ancient and Modern’, in Christian Empiricism, ed. by Jerry H. Gill (London: Sheldon Press, 1974), pp. 120–140 (p. 140). Congar, SE, p. 7. See Kevin McNamara, ‘The First Vatican Council’, in The Church: A Theological and Pastoral Commentary on the Constitution on the Church, ed. by Kevin McNamara (Dublin: Veritas, 1983), pp. 36–50 (p. 36). Paul VI, Ecclesiam Suam: The Paths of the Church (New York: America Press, 1964), para. 33.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 89

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

89

its nature and its mission to the world.39 The Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen gentium, is generally accepted as the central pronouncement of Vatican II since it evidently provides the essential foundation for the other 15 documents. One of the reasons why Lumen gentium is considered to be the Council’s outstanding achievement is because it presents, for the first time, a full theology of the Church by a council.40 Why did Roman Catholic theology not produce a full exposition of the doctrine of the Church before the Second Vatican Council?41 There are historical reasons for this failure. It was not until the century before the Reformation that theologians began to construct systematic treatises on the Church.42 The Fathers, though deeply committed to the Church, did not write about it in an organized manner and the scholastics continued this tradition.43 Similarly, the early councils of the Church, while concerned to repel challenges to its unity and teaching, did not produce a systematic exposition of the doctrine of the Church. It was the challenge of the Protestant Reformation that marked the beginning of the golden age of the manuals in Roman Catholic theology. The theology of the manuals was apologetic and polemical in nature. Robert Bellarmine, along with other Jesuits who sought to defend the truth of the Church, stressed its visible nature, its hierarchical structure and the indispensable role of the pope.44 Congar criticizes this approach, which dominated Roman Catholic theology until the nineteenth century, for its reduction of ecclesiology ‘to a somewhat juridical theory of an institution, or a “hierarchiology” ’.45 He welcomed the revision, in the movement for the return to the sources, of the anti-Gallican, 39

40

41 42

43

44

45

Kevin McNamara, ‘The Ecclesiological Movement in Germany in the Twentieth Century’, Irish Ecclesiastical Record, 102 (1964), 345–358 (p. 345). See Albert C. Outler, ‘A Response’, in The Documents of Vatican II, ed. by Walter M. Abbott, trans. ed. Joseph Gallagher (London: Geoffrey Chapman, 1966), pp. 102–106 (p. 102); Gérard Philips, ‘Dogmatic Constitution on the Church: History of the Constitution’, in Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II, ed. by Herbert Vorgrimler and others, trans. by Kevin Smyth, I, pp. 105–137 (p. 105). See Dulles, ‘A Half Century of Ecclesiology’, TS, 50 (1989), p. 419. See Gustave Weigel, ‘The Present Status of Catholic Ecclesiology’, Proceedings of the Society of Catholic College Teachers of Sacred Doctrine, 7 (1961), 21–31 (pp. 22–24). Congar, ‘The Idea of the Church in St. Thomas Aquinas’, Thomist, 1 (1939), 331–359 (pp. 331–332, 348–349). See also Jean-Pierre Torrell, ‘Yves Congar et l’ecclésiologie de Saint Thomas d’Aquin’, RSPT, 82 (1998), p. 215. Among Bellarmine’s writings, the Controverses was the most used by missionaries of the Counter-Reformation. See Robert Bellarmine, Opera Omnia, ed. by Justinus Fèvre, 12 vols (Paris: Vivès, 1870–1874). See also J. de La Servière, La Théologie de Bellarmin (Paris: Beauchesne, 1909); Patrick Granfield, ‘The Mystery of the Church’, AER, 160 (1968), p. 2. Congar, ‘The Church: The People of God’, (hereafter ‘People’), trans. by Kathryn Sullivan, Concilium, 1 (1965), 7–19 (pp. 17–18, footnote 13); idem, ‘L’Église comme peuple de Dieu’, Concilium, 1 (1965), 15–32 (p. 22, footnote 3).

congar pages

90

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 90

Yves Congar’s Vision

anti-Protestant position of the manuals in favour of the wider and deeper vision of the Fathers and of the great scholastics, particularly St Thomas. Those aspects of St Thomas’s idea of the Church which Congar stresses most are his concern for the unity of the visible and invisible elements of the Church and its essentially pneumatological, Christological and sacramental nature.46 The features of a De ecclesia tract which Congar holds to be that of the Fathers and of St Thomas exercise a profound influence on his ecclesiology, which he describes in the following manner: We must use for its making both theo-logical as well as other elements, canonical, juridical, or sociological; and not just these without the first. Without forgetting to complete the more mystical doctrine of the middle ages by the study of more clearly manifest elements, we must not neglect the element which we have termed ecclesiological. It must be sought and separated – from the Trinity, the Divine Missiones, anthropology and ethic, christology and soteriology, Sacraments and hierarchic ministry. So we shall preserve purely, as St Thomas did, the full, large and undefiled Catholic tradition, the inspiration of the Fathers. That tradition can be characterised by three marks: the Church is contemplated as a Spirit-moved, Spirit-known and Spirit-defined reality, as the Body whose living Soul is the Spirit of Life. The Church is contemplated in Christ, as Christ is contemplated in the Church. And the inward Church is not separated from the outward Church, which is its sacramental veil and vehicle.47

It was in Germany that the seeds of the renewal of theology, which prepared the ground for Vatican II’s unprecedented venture in ecclesiological selfexamination, were sown. Johann Michael Sailer (1751–1832),48 a Jesuit until the dissolution of the order in 1773 and thereafter a secular priest, bishop and theological reformer, produced a finely balanced ecclesiology that ultimately included the hierarchy with its juridical duties understood in terms of service to the community. Sailer, whose work incorporated the main features of German Romantic idealism, devised a theological foundation for the Church based on Scripture and tradition. He provided an important stimulus for the creative theology of Johann Sebastian von Drey (1777–1853) and of the entire Tübingen school which, of all the centres of renewal, attracted most attention. Tübingen theologians, most notably Drey, inspired by Sailer’s image of the Church as a living institution, contributed towards a fresh understanding of the Church as an historical, dynamic reality as distinct from a structural and hierarchical institution.49 Drey, perhaps 46 47 48

49

Congar, ‘The Idea of the Church in St. Thomas Aquinas’, p. 350. Ibid., p. 359. See Johann M. Sailer, Neue Beiträge zur Bildung der Geistlichen, 2 vols (Munich: Lentner, 1809–1811). Johann Sebastian von Drey, Die Apologetik als wissenschaftliche Nachweisung der Göttlichkeit des Christentums in seiner Erscheinung, 2nd edn, 3 vols (Mainz: Florian Kupferberg, 1844–1847). See also Donald J. Dietrich, ‘German Historicism and the Changing Image of the Church, 1780–1820’, TS, 42 (1981), 46–73 (p. 73).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 91

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

91

more than any of the Tübingen theologians of the day, exercised an important influence on Möhler who, on the basis of his study of the Fathers, proposed a more scriptural vision of the Church.50 Roman Catholic theology is indebted to Möhler and his successors in the Tübingen school for their rediscovery of the ‘integral’ Catholic notion of the Church.51 Möhler remained, throughout his short life, an apologist for the Roman Catholic faith presenting not only a structural, institutional view of the Church, but also a conception of the Church as an organic body.52 His ecclesiology evolved from being overly juridical and formal to an understanding of the Church as a continuation of the incarnation of Christ. In the final stage of his career, Möhler’s thought progressed even further, shifting from a pneumatic interpretation of the Church to a Christocentric one.53 Möhler’s firm rejection of any division between the authority of Christ and that of the Church shows his profoundly ecclesial sense. He was indebted for his understanding of the Church to Chalcedonian Christology, which declared the divine and human, the visible and invisible elements to be united in the one person of Christ. In contrast with other theologians who were willing to admit a distinction between the visible and invisible Church, before the promulgation of Pope Pius XII’s Mystici corporis, Möhler constantly stressed their unity and interdependence. This synthesis of the visible and invisible dimensions of the Church constitutes the deepest and most valuable aspect of Möhler’s contribution to theology. The achievements of Congar and other theologians of the Church in this century would not have been possible without his pioneering work.54 50 51

52

53

54

See Granfield, ‘The Mystery of the Church’, p. 3. McNamara, ‘The Ecclesiological Movement in Germany in the Twentieth Century’, p. 349. See Johann A. Möhler, L’Unité dans l’Église ou Le Principe du Catholicisme d’après des Pères des trois premiers siècles de l’Église, trans. by André de Lilienfeld, Unam Sanctam, 2 (Paris: Cerf, 1938). See also Introduction, footnotes 32–33; Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 4; Henri de Lubac, The Splendor of the Church, trans. by Michael Mason (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1986), p. 93; idem, Méditation sur l’Église, 2nd edn (Paris: Montaigne, 1953). See Joseph-Rupert Geiselmann, ‘Les aspects divers de l’unité et de l’amour’, in L’Église est une: hommage à Moehler, ed. by Chaillet, pp. 127–193; Peter Riga, ‘The Ecclesiology of Johann Adam Möhler’, TS, 22 (1961), 563–587 (pp. 577–578); Peter C. Erb, ‘Introduction’, in Möhler, Unity in the Church or The Principle of Catholicism: Presented in the Spirit of the Church Fathers of the First Three Centuries, ed. and trans. by Erb (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1996), pp. 1–71 (p. 59). Riga, ‘The Ecclesiology of Johann Adam Möhler’, p. 586. See also Dennis M. Doyle, ‘Möhler, Schleiermacher, and the Roots of Communion Ecclesiology’, TS, 57 (1996), 467–480 (p. 468); idem, ‘Journet, Congar, and the Roots of Communion Ecclesiology’, TS, 58 (1997), 461–479; idem, ‘Henri de Lubac and the Roots of Communion Ecclesiology’, TS, 60 (1999), 209–227.

congar pages

92

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 92

Yves Congar’s Vision

Möhler’s concept of the Church, in which the Holy Spirit exercises a transformative role, deeply influenced Congar’s ecclesiology.55 It was, however, by stressing the visible, institutional and hierarchical nature of the Church, thereby confronting Protestant ecclesiology, that Möhler exerted his most profound influence on Congar’s theology.56 Congar insists on a view of the Church which recognizes that it is both visible and mysterious: The Church is a mystery. She is visible, admittedly, in her hierarchy, in the manifestations of her worship and of her faith. […] But she is above all a mysterious communication of divine life to humanity and to the world, an intimate communion of souls with one another and of all with God in Christ. Mystical body of Christ and living spiritual organism; visible society and hierarchical organisation: it seems that there were two different aspects of the Church that are, however, complimentary and necessary for one another.57

Congar praises a whole line of nineteenth-century ecclesiologists including Möhler, the Tübingen school, and Schrader and Franzelin, both members of the Jesuit school of theology at Rome and among the great theologians of the First Vatican Council, for their contribution to the restoration of the sacramental nature of the Church. As Congar writes: ‘Möhler genuit Passaglia; Passaglia genuit Schrader; Passaglia et Schrader genuerunt Scheeben et Franzelin…’ There are also other currents and personalities: Pilgram in Germany, Newman in England, the liturgical restorations of Dom Guéranger, etc. One could summarize, very succinctly, the fruit of this patristic and dogmatic current by saying that it envisioned the Church in the line of the mysteries of salvation with its sacramental nature, which ensues from its close rapport with the Incarnation, returned to it.58

The most developed and influential expression of Möhler’s theology is Pope Pius XII’s Mystici corporis. The theology of the mystical body movement of the twentieth century found its inspiration particularly in Möhler and Matthias J. Scheeben who took up and developed Möhler’s thought. While theologians such as Adam, Guardini and Mersch gave this movement powerful impetus, it also encountered trenchant opposition. The most serious criticism of the new ecclesiology, expressed most forcibly by the 55

56

57

58

Riga, ‘The Ecclesiology of Johann Adam Möhler’, p. 576. See also Johann A. Möhler, Die Einheit in der Kirche oder das Princip des Katholicismus (Mainz: Grünewald, 1925), pp. 2, 16. Congar, ‘Sur l’évolution et l’interprétation de la pensée de Moehler’, RSPT, 27 (1938), 205–212 (p. 212). Congar, ‘La pensée de Möhler et l’ecclésiologie orthodoxe’, Irénikon, 12 (1935), 321–329 (p. 321). Congar, ‘L’Ecclésiologie de la Révolution Française au Concile du Vatican, sous le signe de l’affirmation de l’autorité’, in L’Ecclésiologie au XIXe siècle, by Maurice Nédoncelle and others, Unam Sanctam, 34 (Paris: Cerf, 1960), pp. 77–114 (p. 107).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 93

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

93

Dominican Dominikus Koster, was that it overemphasized the invisible dimension of the Church to the neglect of the Church’s visible structure. Koster proposed instead the idea of the People of God, which he maintained was superior because it describes the true and real Church while, in his view, the Mystical Body is merely a metaphor.59 Although the theology of the Mystical Body laboured under certain fundamental weaknesses,60 it was, as Kevin McNamara notes, saved from certain loss by Pope Pius XII’s encyclical.61 While the beneficial effects of Mystici corporis were profound and far-reaching, its contribution to ecclesiology was quickly surpassed by new insights – namely, the idea of the Church as the Bride of Christ and as the People of God.62 Hoffmann, who presents a Protestant view, points out that Mystici corporis lagged behind the perceptions of those theologians who had contributed to the Body of Christ concept. Gradually, Roman Catholic theologians moved towards a more historical understanding of the Church, as imperfect and in via, thus preparing the way for the emergence of other concepts of the Church.63 Advances in biblical, patristic and historical studies were among the more profound reasons why theologians began to look to other ideas of the Church as part of their efforts to develop a more comprehensive ecclesiology. The most important and frequently posed question in Congar’s writings concerns the meaning attributed to the Church, a question that can only be answered by reference to the biblical images of the Church. In the next section of this chapter, devoted to a study of the biblical images in Congar’s ecclesiology, I endeavour to identify his spontaneous references for understanding the Church. I shall also consider how his thought evolved from a medieval, scholastic view of the Church to one that is biblical, organic, collegial and pluralist.64 We now proceed to an examination of these biblical images with a clear knowledge of the influences which shaped his thought, keeping in mind Congar’s recognition that a definition of the Church is foundational for his theology.

59

60

61 62 63

64

See Dominikus Koster, Ekklesiologie im Werden (Paderborn: Bonifacius-Druckerei, 1940). See Kevin McNamara, ‘From Möhler to Vatican II: The Modern Movement in Ecclesiology’, in The Church: A Theological and Pastoral Commentary on the Constitution of the Church, ed. by Kevin McNamara, p. 20. Pius XII, Encyclical Letter (Mystici Corpus Christi). McNamara, ‘From Möhler to Vatican II’, p. 22. Manfred Hoffmann, ‘Church and History in Vatican II’s Constitution on the Church: A Protestant Perspective’, TS, 29 (1968), 191–214 (pp. 197–198). See also Congar, DC, pp. 67–68 (pp. 84–85). Congar, DBC, pp. 10, 24 (pp. XIX, XXXV).

congar pages

94

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 94

Yves Congar’s Vision

Biblical Images in Congar’s Ecclesiology Congar remarks that ‘the Church looks at herself in the Gospel’.65 In order to effect a renewal in ecclesiology which, in Congar’s view, was necessary to overcome unbelief – insofar as unbelief depends on the Church – he proposes a return to the scriptural images of the Church.66 The Church must always gaze into the heart of the Gospel to be the true Church of Christ. Congar outlines, in broad strokes, his ideal for a Church rooted in Scripture, bearing witness to Kingdom values, and profoundly concerned for humankind: In a world that has become, or has become again, purely ‘worldly’, the Church finds herself forced, if she would still be anything at all, to be simply the Church, witness to the Gospel and the kingdom of God, through Jesus Christ. […] The characteristics of this style of her presence in conformity with the Gospel are outlined in the Acts of the Apostles and the writings of the New Testament. They can be reduced to three terms, compact with the greatest possible spiritual meaning: Koinonia, Diakonia, Marturia (Fellowship, Service, Witness).67

If this ideal, aptly described in Congar’s frequently repeated expression ‘a Church less of the world and more for the world’68 is to be realized, then our idea of the Church must be renewed and declericalized.69 The reassertion of the sovereign authority of the Church over the kingdoms of the world during the pontificate of Pope Gregory VII in the eleventh century opened a new chapter in the understanding of authority in the Church. Congar describes the results of Gregory VII’s papacy in rather stark terms: An ecclesiology of Christian anthropology has given place to an ecclesiology of supreme power, privileges and rights ‘of the Church’ i.e. of the clergy or the hierarchy. This has occurred especially as a result of the Gregorian reform (last thirty years of the 11th century), and of the conflicts between the Papacy and kings or emperors.70

Congar’s assessment of Pope Gregory VII’s pontificate (1073–1085) is at variance with that of most modern historians who have revised their view of 65 66 67 68

69 70

Jacques Duquesne interroge le Père Chenu, p. 189. Congar, ‘The Council in the Age of Dialogue’, p. 147 (p. 695). Congar, PP, pp. 137–138 (p. 133). Congar, ‘L’Avenir de l’Église’, in L’Avenir: semaine des intellectuels catholiques (6 au 12 novembre 1963), ed. by M. Olivier Lacombe and others (Paris: Fayard, 1964), pp. 207–221 (p. 210). Congar, PP, pp. 64, 70 (pp. 57, 61–62). Congar, ‘Mother Church’, in Theological Burning Points: The Church To-day, by Joseph Ratzinger and others, trans. by M. Ignatius, 2 vols (Cork: Mercier Press, 1967), II, pp. 37–44 (p. 43).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 95

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

95

Gregory, once regarded as a tyrant, and are agreed on the sincerity of his desire for righteousness (iustitia). It is now accepted that Gregory VII worked assiduously for the freedom of the Church from secular powers. In the face of violent opposition, especially in France and Germany, he did much to extend the reform and moral regeneration of the Church by issuing decrees against the simony and incontinence of the clergy in the Lenten Synod of 1074.71 Congar expresses concern regarding the consequences of the reduction of ecclesiology to a treatise on public ecclesiastical law as a result of conflicts between the Church and secular powers, such as Gregory VII’s struggle against the Emperor Henry IV: As one result of this, the Church gave up applying to herself the New Testament themes of conversion, of the war of the spirit against the flesh, etc. (and indeed, given the conditions, this would have been impossible), though the ecclesiological passages of the Fathers and the liturgy are full of such applications. The Fathers never separate the ‘Church’ and the community of the faithful; their ecclesiology is from beginning to end a Christian anthropology.72

Although Congar does not construct a Christian anthropology similar to that of the Fathers, he nonetheless insists indefatigably on the need for an anthropological theology of the Church in which the person, and not the ecclesiastical institution, is the essential reference point. In order, therefore, to correct an obviously false and deleterious view of the Church, Congar proposes ‘a declericalization [décléricalisation] of the idea of the Church’,73 which is too often viewed as a powerful institution. He wished to centre the Church’s life once again on Christ and on the pure spiritual message of the Gospel which had become obscured in the course of the Church’s history.74 What he calls for, in fact, is a ‘radical conversion’ through which the totality of human relationships is transformed by being brought into union with Christ. In particular, Congar recognizes that the relationship of superiority and subordination within the Church can only be changed by the application of the exacting standards of Christian charity and love. As he explains:

71

72 73 74

See The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, ed. by F. L. Cross, 3rd edn, ed. by E.A. Livingstone (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), p. 708. Friedrich Kempf, ‘The Gregorian Reform’, in Handbook of Church History, ed. by Hubert Jedin and John Dolan, trans. by Anselm Biggs, 10 vols (London: Burns & Oates; New York: Herder and Herder, 1969), III, pp. 351–403 (pp. 370–374); also idem, Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte (Freiburg: Herder, 1969). For a more positive presentation of the reforms of Gregory VII by Congar, see Congar, LP, pp. 408–409 (pp. 573–574). Congar, PP, p. 97 (p. 90). Congar, ‘L’Avenir de l’Église’, p. 213. Congar, PP, pp. 111–131 (pp. 107–127). See also Congar, ‘Mother Church’, pp. 41–42.

congar pages

96

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 96

Yves Congar’s Vision We must go back to the true vision of the Gospel: posts of authority in the Church do indeed exist; a real jurisdictional power does exist. […] But this power exists only within the structure of the fundamental religious relationship of the Gospel. […] All this presupposes a radical conversion in us. […] We must, in fact, sacrifice, abandon our human relationships in the form in which we receive them from the physical world of our first birth, which consist of two terms only: man and woman, master and servant; and we must receive them afresh from the hand of the Father as Christian relationships, and let them shape our lives ‘in the Lord’.75

Congar approaches the mystery of the Church with a deference that is expressed in the rich, symbolic, and meaningful language he uses to describe it. For Congar, then, the Church is primarily a reflection of the Trinity,76 and the Spouse of Christ.77 He also describes it in such familiar terms as ‘the old village fountain’.78 It is the same Church that Congar recognizes as personally and perfectly realized in Mary.79 Mary’s essential role in the Church also serves as a reminder of that other metaphor, that the Church is a person, a living organism made up of people, and not an inanimate object that is the subject of mere scientific investigation.80 The place of Mary as a model of holiness at the heart of the Church will be considered below in an analysis of Congar’s understanding of her contribution to the renewal of the Church. Congar, in a consistent concern for unity and totality in theology, indicates that a good ecclesiology, while not part of Christology or pneumatology, will, nevertheless, be both Christological and pneumatological.81 His vision of the Church and of the exercise of authority therein accentuates the importance of the biblical foundations for the renewal of ecclesiology and of the Church.82 Congar’s precise goal is to draw the Church back to its biblical roots for its renewal. I shall be studying the biblical images of the Church in his ecclesiology in order to evaluate how the return to these images contributes to the renewal of the Church. An initial question that must be 75 76 77

78

79

80

81

82

Ibid., pp. 98–100 (pp. 91–92). Congar, ‘La tri-unité de Dieu et l’Église’, VS, 128 (1974), 687–703 (p. 701). See Congar, ‘La Personne “Église” ’, RT, 71 (1971), 613–640 (pp. 629–630); idem, ‘Les leçons de la théologie’, in Le role de la religieuse dans l’Église, by T.R.P. Liévin and others (Paris: Cerf, 1960), pp. 29–57 (p. 47). Congar, ‘L’Église, antique fontaine d’une eau jaillissante et fraiche’, VS, 134 (1980), 31–40 (p. 38). Congar, ‘Les leçons de la théologie’, p. 31. See also Hans Urs von Balthasar, ‘The Marian Principle’, Communio, 15 (1988), 122–130 (p. 130). Congar, ‘La Personne “Église” ’, p. 613. See also idem, HS, II, pp. 19–20 (pp. 32–34); Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 20. Congar, SE, pp. 102–103. See also Kevin McNamara, ‘The Idea of the Church: Modern Developments in Ecclesiology’, ITQ, 33 (1966), 99–113 (p. 104). See Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 18; Roger D. Haight, ‘The Church as Locus of Theology’, Concilium, 6 (1994), 13–22 (p. 21).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 97

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

97

addressed, however, concerns the legitimacy of the use of images, metaphors and models in theology for the purposes of defining the Church and contributing to its renewal. John Macquarrie quite rightly asserts that theological language is one of the most pervasive problems in contemporary theology.83 He argues that theological language abounds in metaphors, some of which are living, while many others are dead.84 Metaphor is, in fact, a complex and pressing topic in theology, but the question of defining metaphor presents the inevitable difficulty that a definition which is applicable to one discipline is unsatisfactory for another.85 The problematic issue of terminological imprecision and a tendency to view the problems of metaphor as being exclusive to religious language point clearly to the need for a systematic study of metaphor.86 Ian T. Ramsey, who links models and metaphors so closely that he uses the two terms indiscriminately,87 popularized the notion that religious and theological language is, in fact, rich in models.88 The use of metaphors helps to provide a necessary contextual setting in which words such as ‘God’ and ‘Church’ can be related to the world in a relevant manner while also ensuring that the sacred is not emptied of meaning.89 A consideration of a number of major studies on the subject reveals that the use of metaphors is not only permissible in, but also necessary to, Christian theology.90 Herwi Rikhof, who ultimately points to the Church ‘communio of the faithful’ as the basic statement of ecclesiology, argues strongly in favour of the use of metaphors and biblical images in ecclesiology as a means of capitalizing on the advances of Vatican II and in order to contribute to the development of an authentically theological vision of the Church.91 Furthermore, the Second Vatican Council strongly affirmed the theological value of the images used in Scripture to describe the Church.92 Congar’s use of images in ecclesiology is clearly inspirational as well as cognitive, thus 83

84 85

86 87

88 89 90

91 92

John Macquarrie, God-Talk: An Examination of the Language and Logic of Theology (London: SCM, 1967), p. 9. Ibid., p. 98. Janet Martin Soskice, Metaphor and Religious Language (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987), p. 15. Ibid., p. x. Ramsey, Christian Discourse, pp. 29, 54, 60; also idem, Models and Mystery (London: Oxford University Press, 1964), pp. 47–71. Ramsey, Models and Mystery, pp. 5–21; also idem, ‘Talking of God’, p. 120, footnote 2. Paul Tillich, Dynamics of Faith (New York: Harper & Row, 1957), p. 41. See Soskice, Metaphor and Religious Language, p. 160; Ian T. Ramsey, ‘Talking about God’, in Words about God: The Philosophy of Religion, ed. by Ian T. Ramsey (London: SCM, 1971), pp. 202–223 (p. 221). John Henry Newman, The Arians of the Fourth Century, new edn (London: Longmans, Green, 1897), p. 145. Dulles, Models, p. 16. Rikhof, The Concept of Church, p. 236. Gustave Weigel, ‘How is the Council Going?’, America, 109 (1963), 730–732 (p. 730).

congar pages

98

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 98

Yves Congar’s Vision

ensuring that his theology also presents an existential understanding of the Church. It is by reference to this profusion of images of the Church that theologians attempt to arrive at a clearer understanding of the Church’s identity.93 The full knowledge of the mystery of that identity is, however, only attainable if the current situation of the Church is also taken into consideration. A critical assessment of Congar’s proposals for the shape of the Christian Church of the future must, then, be examined in conjunction with an analysis of his use of biblical images of the Church94 which constitute one of the most important constituent components of the large and complex mosaic which is his ecclesiology. Congar’s quite definite idea of the important place of Scripture in ecclesiology also contributes to our understanding of the mystery of the Church in his theology. He writes: What exactly is meant by the word ‘Church’? In scholastic Latin one would ask: ‘Pro quo supponit ecclesia?’. The word ‘Church’ in the Fathers and in the liturgy means the community of Christians, the We of the baptised. Ecclesiology is a soteriology and a Christian anthropology. For this reason it best expresses itself in those biblical types who have lived the mystery of the faith and salvation. It is a soteriology founded on baptism and faith.95

‘Biblical types’ refer to God’s action through persons or events in the history of salvation and are therefore not merely concerned with understanding the Church but, by pointing to Christ, are an aid to salvation. Congar’s reading of ecclesiology as soteriological and anthropological shows the salvation of humanity to be his primary concern. Congar’s examination of the biblical images of the Church resulted from his commitment to a renewed Church. In order to contribute to its actualization, he worked on a revitalized De ecclesia tract which, without eclipsing the essential juridical nature of the Church, stresses the element of mystery realized in the biblical images of the Body of Christ and the People of God. It was Congar’s concern for a renewed ecclesiology that provided the motivation for the Unam Sanctam series launched in 193596 and also inspired his Esquisses du mystère de l’Église, a series of essays published in the late 1930s and early 1940s.97 In a letter written in 1985, Congar indicates that his consistent concern has been the achievement of a renewed Church in the sense of the biblical People of God:

93

94 95 96 97

See Emile Poulat, ‘History and the Church: A Mutual View’, trans. by John Griffiths, Concilium, 7 (1971), 17–32 (pp. 29–32). See Congar, ‘Belonging’, pp. 158–160 (pp. 245–247). Congar, ‘Mother Church’, p. 42. See Congar, DBC, p. 24, footnote 14 (p. XXXIV, footnote 11). See Chapter 2, footnote 7.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 99

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

99

My idea was always that of a renewed Church, renewed in the no longer purely juridical sense of a hierarchical society, but in the sense of a people of God on the move along the pathways of humankind, in the lives of men and women, missionary in the midst of the world.98

When Congar calls for a renewal of the Church along these lines, he does not mean to disparage the role of the hierarchy which he sees within the Pauline perspective of building up the Church.99 With its special gifts, the hierarchy ‘gives structural unity to the Mystical Body of Christ’.100 Congar presents an idealized picture of the renewed Church, a full understanding of which depends, in his view, on the degree to which one enters into its fellowship: The Church is not an artificial construction which is or should be built from blueprints by harking back to texts prior and external to it. This is the conception implied in all the Protestant or Reformed standpoints. On the contrary, the Church is a living organism, animated and governed by the Holy Spirit, one which contains, vitally, its law within itself. It cannot be understood from the outside, solely by way of scientific inquiry or criticism. Historical and rational vindications are not lacking, but they are never adequate to the reality; this, in fact, is grasped only by the Church itself and by each individual in the degree in which he lives in it, in its fellowship.101

Congar’s persistent concern to recognize the Church in its totality, as an organic and living whole, is an important contributory factor in the success of his programme of Church renewal.102 A fundamental aim of that programme, as we have seen earlier, is to redress the pernicious effects of unbelief in so far as these seem ‘to strike at one of the essential features of faith which is totality’.103 A more detailed consideration of the significance of totality in Congar’s perception of the Church is presented below in an analysis of his theology of the laity. An accurate understanding of Congar’s proposals for the rejuvenation of the Church by means of a return to its biblical sources is only possible in the light of his call for declericalization and the conversion of relationships within the Church. Since this, along with the question of the use of metaphors and images for Church renewal has been considered, we now turn to those biblical images proposed by Congar. 98 99 100

101 102

103

Congar, ‘Letter’, TD, 32 (1985), pp. 214–215. Congar, ‘Mother Church’, pp. 43–44. Congar, MC, p. 184 (PC, p. 104). See also idem, ‘Le Théologien dans l’Église aujourd’hui’, Quatre Fleuves, 12 (1980), p. 11. Congar, MC, p. XIV (EME, pp. 9–10). Congar, ‘Le peuple fidèle et la fonction prophétique de l’Église’, Irénikon, 24 (1951), 440–466 (p. 445). See also David Granfield, ‘An Initial Problem in Ecclesiology’, AER, 135 (1956), 289–291 (p. 289). Congar, ‘Unbelief’, I, Integration (August 1938), p. 14 (pp. 215–216).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

100

Page 100

Yves Congar’s Vision

The People of God A striking feature of Congar’s analysis of biblical images of the Church is its impartiality. This objective approach enables him to extract what is best from the totality of biblical images for the renewal of the Church.104 The concept of the People of God, by placing the Church at the service of the world, helps to avoid the problem of a ‘hierarchiology’ in theology and in the Church. In order to overcome a predominantly hierarchical, juridical view of the Church, and an ecclesiology reduced to a system of public law, Vatican II presented its ecclesiology of the People of God.105 Congar remarks that, in Chapter II of Lumen gentium, the Council only partially undertook the work of recovering the biblical idea of the People of God.106 He, nevertheless, describes the position of Vatican II in positive terms: The Council returned to a deeper tradition and, without denying the principle of institution and of hierarchy, it re-opened the chances of an ecclesiology of the people of God and of the ontology of grace that is basically sacramental. The most decisive chapter of Lumen gentium is that of the people of God.107

In Congar’s view, Vatican II, without prejudice to the notion of the Mystical Body, put special emphasis on the concept of the People of God, seen by him as offering the richest prospect for ecclesiology.108 Congar notes that the idea of the People of God was firmly re-established in the period 1937–1942 and remained a characteristic feature of Roman Catholic ecclesiology until 1957. The work of Koster and of the Louvain Professor Lucien Cerfaux contributed to the rediscovery of this notion. Koster declares that the definition of the Church’s nature should begin with the People of God, whereas Cerfaux, on Congar’s suggestion, produced a study of the Church in St Paul using philosophical–exegetical methods.109 Congar points out that Cerfaux was more constructive than Koster on the question of the Body of Christ but nevertheless, Cerfaux views the notion of the Body of Christ in St Paul as ‘an attribute, not a definition of the Church and that the basic ecclesiological concept was that of the People of God’.110 104 105

106 107

108 109

110

Congar, ‘People’, p. 16 (pp. 31–32). See also Jossua, Père Congar, pp. 101–111. Congar, ‘The People of God’, in Vatican II: An Interfaith Appraisal, ed. by John H. Miller (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1966), pp. 197–207 (p. 199). Congar, ‘People’, p. 8 (p. 17). See also idem, ‘The People of God’, p. 200. Congar, ‘Autorité, initiative, coresponsabilité’, Maison-Dieu, 97 (1969), 34–57 (p. 37). Congar and others, The Crucial Questions, p. 14. Lucien Cerfaux, La théologie de l’Église suivant saint Paul, Unam Sanctam, 10 (Paris: Cerf, 1942). Congar, Le concile de Vatican II: son Église peuple de Dieu et corps du Christ, Théologie Historique, 71 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1984), p. 127.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 101

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

101

According to Congar, the dissatisfaction of theologians and Scripture scholars with the Pauline notion of the Body of Christ was partly due to the rigorous and exclusive identification in Mystici Corporis of the Mystical Body on earth with the Roman Catholic Church.111 It should not be forgotten that Congar also contributed to the retrieval of the notion of the People of God.112 Why was this idea of the Church seen in such a positive light by theologians and given a prominent place in Lumen gentium?113 The answer is of profound significance in the understanding of the expected fecundity of the People of God motif for the renewal of the Church. Congar viewed the decision of the coordinating commission of Vatican II to insert a chapter on the People of God in the Constitution De ecclesia between the first and third chapters, which were concerned with the mystery of the Church and the hierarchy, as a momentous contribution towards the elimination of juridicism. He evaluated the importance of this initiative not only in terms of the content of the new chapter but also by reference to its title and its place in the Constitution.114 Care must be taken, however, to avoid a misunderstanding or reduction of the mission of the hierarchy on the basis of the position of the chapter on the People of God in Lumen gentium.115 The many advantages of the People of God motif are clearly outlined by Congar.116 In his opinion, its strong emphasis on the historical nature of the Church introduces a ‘dynamic’ element into the Church.117 The view of the Church as the People of God also expresses continuity with Israel and has helped the Church to regain an awareness of its messianic character, thus enabling it to offer the hope of ultimate fulfilment in Christ to an irreligious world. Congar observes that the neglect of the Church’s message of hope for the world served as a preparation for Godless interpretations of history and of the world in the modern era such as those of Marx and Hegel. Congar emphatically rejects any view of the Church or religion that is unconcerned for the world and its salvation: It seems that the presentation of religion primarily as worship and moral obligations, the classic heritage bequeathed by the seventeenth century, deprived us in some ways of the realisation that Christianity presents a hope, a total hope, even for the material world. […] Confronted by religion without a world, men formulated the idea of a world without religion. We are now emerging from this wretched situation; the People of God is rediscovering once 111 112 113 114 115 116 117

Ibid. Congar, ‘People’; idem, ‘L’Église comme peuple de Dieu’. See Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, pp. 17–18. Congar, ‘The People of God’, p. 200. See Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 19. Congar, ‘People’, pp. 10–14 (pp. 20–27). Congar, ‘People’, p. 10 (p. 21).

congar pages

102

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 102

Yves Congar’s Vision again that it possesses a messianic character and that it bears the hope of a fulfilment of the world in Jesus Christ.118

Congar considers eschatology to be one of the great rediscoveries of contemporary Roman Catholic theology. He stresses that the Kingdom is the ultimate destiny of God’s people and points to an essential, dialectical tension between its present reality (the already) and its future expectation (the not yet) in the concept of the Church as the People of God. Congar presents his position on eschatology in the preface to a work on the People of God as follows: There is one aspect of this notion that still needs great emphasis: that is, our understanding of the People of God in an eschatological sense. […] Everything tends toward the Kingdom of God, toward a realisation and a consummation of the whole work. The present, the history which we ourselves are living, derives its meaning from its relation to this expectation. But its relationship with the coming Kingdom is one of tension, and not of preparation only. Both of these aspects are equally true and should be grasped together. It is the union of these two that gives the Church its very status and its situation: which is to be both already and not yet the Kingdom of God.119

In Protestant thought the ‘not yet’ overshadows the ‘already’ because it fails to recognize what is new and definitive in the incarnation of Christ. As a result, the full value of the notion of the Body of Christ is not recognized. This leads Congar to the conclusion that ‘the idea of the People of God, rich and true though it may be, is insufficient of itself to give an adequate idea of the mystery of the Church here and now’.120 Congar’s contribution to the understanding of the Church as the People of God has been criticized by various Protestant commentators for lacking a full awareness of the Church’s historicity because of its apparent failure to acknowledge that the Church is actually subject to fallibility and error.121 Kristen E. Skydsgaard’s imputation that Congar’s ecclesiology leads inevitably to a ‘theology of glory’ cannot be sustained, as a consideration of the place of reform in his theology will show. Congar was, of course, aware of the ecumenical significance of the view of the Church as People of God, especially among Protestants.122 118 119

120 121

122

Ibid. Congar, ‘Foreword’ in Frank B. Norris, God’s Own People: An Introductory Study of the Church (Dublin: Helicon Press, 1962), pp. III–V (p. V). Congar, ‘People’, p. 14 (p. 27). See Manfred Hoffmann, ‘Church and History in Vatican II’s Constitution on the Church: A Protestant Perspective’, TS, 29 (1968), p. 201. Kristen E. Skydsgaard, ‘The Church as Mystery and as People of God’, in Dialogue on the Way: Protestants Report from Rome on the Vatican Council, ed. by George A. Lindbeck (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1965), pp. 145–174 (p. 161). See also Congar, VFR, pp. 19–59. Congar, ‘People’, pp. 13–14 (pp. 26–27). See also Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 16.

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 103

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

103

Lumen gentium twice refers to the People of God by reference to the term ‘messianic people of God’,123 and Congar was personally responsible for this term.124 Its primary importance, in his view, lies in the fact that it offers to humankind the hope of liberation, universal in scope, which is realized both spiritually and eschatologically, and also at the level of effective service to the poor.125 A challenge addressed to the People of God by the present age is the urgent duty to fight effectively against human poverty in the name of God.126 In response to this challenge, Congar presents what he describes as a demanding, progressively widening programme which, although it rejects the use of force, presupposes the practice of spiritual poverty and a willingness to fight against those institutions that tend to keep the poor in a situation of subjection.127 The application of the People of God motif to the real needs of the poor is a profound concern in Congar’s theology and contributes to a stronger, more credible ecclesiology. As he puts it: People will only believe us if our practical works bear witness to our faith and our charity. The spiritual or evangelical poverty of which God speaks in our hearts today is by itself a religious value. It is also meant to allow and sustain an effective service to the poor.128

The Council insists that the concept of the Church as the People of God contributes to unity, peace, hope and greater justice in the world. Congar accepts that this is true but expresses regret that Gaudium et spes ‘did not return more unreservedly to the categories “People of God” and “Messianic People” ’.129 Congar’s positive appraisal of the People of God motif and his high expectations concerning its potential for the renewal of the Church may, in part, be based on the optimistic atmosphere of the conciliar period and its immediate aftermath. Congar argues that the notion of the People of God goes beyond, though without denying, the distinction between clergy and laity which was presented in an overly schematic and thus divisive manner in the definition of the Church as ‘societas inaequalis, hierarchica’.130 The distinction between clergy and laity in the Church is fundamental and should not be either diminished or confused in theology.131 What is required, then, 123 124 125

126 127 128 129 130 131

Congar, LG, para. 9. Congar, Le concile de Vatican II, p. 135. Congar, ‘The Place of Poverty in Christian Life in an Affluent Society’, (hereafter ‘Poverty’), trans. by Theo Westow, Concilium, 5 (1966), 28–39 (p. 38). See also idem, TCIL, pp. 80–81 (p. 84). Congar, ‘Poverty’, p. 36. Ibid., pp. 36–37. Ibid., p. 38. Congar, ‘The People of God’, p. 206. Congar, Le concile de Vatican II, p. 113. See Armando Bandera, ‘The Composition of the People of God’, Thomist, 33 (1969), 405–455 (p. 436).

congar pages

104

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 104

Yves Congar’s Vision

is a distinction between, but not a division of, clergy and laity. The advantage of the People of God motif is that it neither denies nor obfuscates this distinction and, as such, is not apt to mislead.132 In Jalons, Congar presents a precise picture of his hopes for the development of the idea of the People of God. He criticizes Protestantism for having reduced ‘in theory’ the idea of the Church to that of people, thereby rejecting the institutional element and effectively deforming the whole notion. What he proposes instead is a view of the Church composed of people and priesthood engaged in common worship – the antithesis of any form of reductionism: It is simply a taking back into possession and use of that aspect of the Church which Protestantism developed one-sidedly, indeed exclusively, and at the same time deformed: the aspect, that is, whereby the Church is a people, the community of the faithful made by its members. It is for us catholically to integrate a thing that is in fact Catholic; to conceive of a priesthood and a public worship that shall not be without a people.133

In an important article entitled ‘Mon cheminement dans la théologie du laïcat et des ministères’, written in 1970, Congar outlines the stages of development of his theology of the laity. He portrays the Church as the People of God which contains an unequivocal description of the role of the laity and a somewhat ambiguous view of the function of the priesthood: This is in summary form the project of the People of God, the society of the faithful in which hierarchical ministers share equally as Christians. […] Here pastoral authority does not intervene except as witness and guarantor of common orthodoxy. The hierarchical priesthood, depository of jurisdictional authority and sacramental power, does not act in those capacities here. There is then a domain, or rather a zone of action, where Christians are held to act insofar as they are Christian and where the Church does not exert the powers that characterise it as a society with a positive divine law of which the hierarchical priesthood is the ‘subject’ powers sacramental and jurisdictional. This zone where the Church acts not by power but by influence is proper to the lay members of the People of God, without clerics being excluded if they wish to be involved after the manner of the laity.134

This depiction of the People of God is both good and bad. It is good in that it conforms to the teaching of Vatican II regarding the respective spheres of 132

133

134

Congar, Le concile de Vatican II, p. 114. See also Richard R. Gaillardetz, ‘Shifting Meanings in the Lay-Clergy Distinction’, ITQ, 64 (1999), 115–139 (p. 139). In a helpful and perceptive contribution, Gaillardetz comments: ‘If the language of “laity” and “clergy” are to remain theologically coherent, they must find their proper employment within the framework of the whole People of God which has as its mission service to the coming reign of God.’ Congar, LP, p. 58 (p. 83). Congar’s undifferentiated use of the term ‘Protestantism’, particularly in his earlier writings, is open to criticism. Congar, ‘Path-Findings’, pp. 187–188 (pp. 139–140).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 105

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

105

influence of hierarchy and laity in the world. The assertion of equality among all the members of the Church, thereby removing the pre-conciliar emphasis on the superiority of the priesthood, must also be regarded as a positive development.135 His argument that priests may influence the world only by acting like members of the laity must, however, be criticized since the action of priests in the world is not by ‘power’ only, but also by ‘influence’. The sacramental power of priests does not, then, exclude them from acting in other ways. Congar, nevertheless, admits that his thought has evolved and ultimately he recognizes that the hierarchy exercises a prophetic role in the domain proper to the laity through the spiritual influence of prayer and charity.136 Congar sees the actualization of the Church as the People of God as one of the principal tasks for the Church and for theology. He presents an exact programme for the achievement of this goal: There are also promising indications of a true realisation of the idea of the People of God: the apostolate of the laity, greater liturgical participation, the institution of a pastoral council, and so forth. But much remains to be done.137

Another important element in the realization of Congar’s programme for the Church as the People of God is the declericalization of the Church. Congar, as we have seen, views Chapter II of Lumen gentium as an important step in overcoming clericalism.138 Congar’s proposals for realizing the idea of the People of God are open to criticism on one point. His programme for the declericalization of the Church through the renewal of the People of God motif fails to distinguish between clericalism, which is clearly detrimental, and the indispensable contribution to the Church of a holy priesthood.139 Furthermore, it may be suggested that the efforts of Vatican II to overcome the baleful effects of a feudal, clerical Church by a return to the scriptural/patristic model of the Church have been, at best, only partially successful.140 One of the most important achievements of Vatican II is undoubtedly the rediscovery of the full role and significance of the episcopal office in the Church.141 The Council’s efforts to root the Church’s teaching office in the sacrament of 135 136 137 138 139 140 141

Ibid., p. 186 (p. 138). See also Congar, Le concile de Vatican II, p. 114. Congar, ‘Path-Findings’, p. 188 (p. 140). Congar and others, The Crucial Questions, p. 14. Congar, ‘Religion’, p. 150 (p. 96); also idem, ‘The People of God’. See Congar, ‘Religion’, pp. 149–150 (pp. 96–97). See Congar, ‘Letter’, p. 215. See Seamus Ryan, ‘The Hierarchical Structure of the Church’, in The Church: A Theological and Pastoral Commentary on the Constitution on the Church, ed. by McNamara, pp. 163–234 (p. 176); Seamus Ryan, ‘Vatican II: The Re-discovery of the Episcopate’, ITQ, 33 (1966), 208–241 (p. 216).

congar pages

106

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 106

Yves Congar’s Vision

orders is, however, presented in excessively juridical terms.142 It may be argued that Vatican II, having returned to the scriptural/patristic understanding of the Church, reverted to the old juridical model in its presentation on the role of the hierarchy and the relationship between the bishops and the pope.143 Another problem which inevitably arises and has always excited interest in an analysis of proposals for Church renewal concerns the question of participation in Church life. It can hardly be denied that participation in the life of the Church by either priests or laity is not in itself a guarantee of Church renewal, which must ultimately be measured by the altogether different standards of holiness, evangelization and missionary activity. Moreover, participation in the People of God is exacerbated by the secularization of the idea of the People of God, which has come to be understood increasingly in terms of Western democracy.144 Something further must be said about the distinction between hierarchy and laity, since an evaluation of Congar’s ecclesiology must ask whether his analysis of the hierarchy/laity question places him in the juridical model of the Church or in the scriptural/patristic model of renewal. This is a subject to which I shall return in a consideration of Congar’s theology of the laity. It may be said, however, on the basis of our analysis of Congar’s vision for a renewed Church and his proposals for its actualization, that he is unreservedly on the side of the scriptural/patristic model of the Church articulated in Chapters I–II of Lumen gentium. Notwithstanding Congar’s deep commitment to the idea of the People of God,145 he is nonetheless aware of its shortcomings and of the need to relate it to other images of the Church.146 Congar views the People of God motif as insufficiently Christological and pneumatological and therefore incapable of expressing the reality of the Church by itself. He explains his position in the following terms: We see how the idea of the People of God, however rich pastorally and theologically it may be, is alone unable to express the reality of the Church. […] He [St Paul] introduced the idea of the Body of Christ as the essential concept in treating of the Church. This idea was needed to explain what the People of God had become since the incarnation, Easter and Pentecost. The People of God was truly the Body of Christ. Only thus does it secure its adequate Christological reference.147 142 143 144 145

146 147

See Ryan, ‘The Hierarchical Structure of the Church’, p. 206. LG, paras 18–29. Congar, ‘Path-Findings’, p. 184 (p. 136). Congar, ‘Talking to Yves Congar: Interview by Sheerin’, Part II, Africa: St. Patrick’s Missions, (1974), 6–8 (p. 8). Congar, ‘People’, p. 7 (p. 16). Congar, ‘People’, p. 16 (pp. 31–32).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 107

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

107

Congar notes that, following the missions of the Son and the Spirit, the People of God ‘is also Body of Christ and the Temple of the Holy Spirit’.148 The Church enjoys a new identity which Congar associates with the indwelling of the Spirit not merely because the Church is the People of God but also because it is the Body of Christ.149 Congar, like Ratzinger, while recognizing the notion of the People of God, considers the Church to be essentially the Body of Christ thus pointing to the latter as the more fundamental image of the Church.150 In order to indicate a permanent distance between Christ and the Church, Congar, in common with Ratzinger and de Lubac, insists on a distinction between the Body of Christ and the People of God,151 thereby avoiding an unacceptable selfidentification of the Church with Christ. This is critically important, as an inordinate assimilation of the Church with Christ risks placing the Church above legitimate criticism and opening it to a renewed charge of triumphalism. The Body of Christ The term Mystical Body was originally applied to the Eucharist.152 For St Paul and the Fathers, the idea of the Church as Mystical Body was united indissolubly with the real presence of the Lord in the Eucharist.153 Congar points to the manner in which the Mystical Body is built up by the Eucharist which, together with the other sacraments, is the catalyst for uniting the visible Church and the Mystical Body: The Eucharist is, then, the perfect sacrament of our incorporation with Christ. Theologians are unanimous in holding that its special effect is to bring about the unity of the Mystical Body. […] Thus, all the sacraments, together with Christ’s whole life, itself an extension of the sacramental principle, work together to build up the Mystical Body. […] The sacraments, besides, are the point where 148 149 150

151

152

153

Congar, TCIL, p. 66 (p. 68). Congar, ‘People’, p. 15 (p. 30). Ibid., pp. 8–16 (pp. 17–32). See also Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, pp. 9, 19. Congar, ‘People’, p. 15 (p. 30). See also Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 16; Henri de Lubac, Paradoxe et mystère de l’Église (Paris: Aubier-Montaigne, 1967), p. 49, footnote 4. See Congar, Le concile de Vatican II, pp. 137–161. Congar notes that Vatican II admits, in the end, that non-Catholics are members of the Mystical Body and not simply ordinati ad. See also Congar, ‘Belonging’, pp. 150–151 (pp. 238–239); Henri de Lubac, Corpus mysticum: l’eucharistie et l’Église au moyen âge, 2nd edn (Paris: Aubier, 1949). Congar, CTL, p. 51 (p. 59). See also de Lubac, Catholicism: Christ and the Common Destiny of Man, trans. by Lancelot C. Sheppard and Elizabeth Englund (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1988), p. 97 (p. 70).

congar pages

108

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 108

Yves Congar’s Vision the institutional or visible Church and the Mystical Body meet and fuse in an organic unity.154

The idea of the Mystical Body presents a realistic view of the Church by uniting, in a theandric way, the various social and professional activities of humankind with Christ through the action of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5. 25; Romans 12. 1; 1 Corinthians 6. 15–17). Congar outlines his position on the theandric nature of the Church as Mystical Body by referring to the dialectic of gift and task: The mystery of the Mystical Body, like that of the kingdom, brings us in contact with a twofold and paradoxical truth. Everything is already fulfilled in Christ; the Church is simply the manifestation of what is in him, the visible reality animated by his Spirit. Yet, we have still to bring Christ to fulfilment and build up his Body. This twofold truth we would call a dialectic of ‘gift [donné] and task [agi]’; it is closely bound up with the mystery of the theandric reality of the Church, and we meet it also in connection with the sacraments.155

The Body of Christ motif is, then, one of the most vibrant images of the Church.156 It facilitates a transition to the Church as society by showing the essentially communitarian nature of the Church whose members are intimately connected to Christ.157 It may be plainly seen that Congar held firmly to the view that the Mystical Body of Christ and the Church as society are one: If we read quite simply the New Testament texts and the earliest Christian writings of the time before the peace of Constantine we are struck by the plainness and unawareness of distinctions with which the Mystical Body of Christ and the Church as society are treated as a single reality. The Mystical Body is not some spiritual entity unrelated to the world of human facts and activities but it is the visible Church itself.158

The Church, although human and divine, heavenly and earthly, is a single reality constituted as a human society. In Congar’s treatment of the Mystical Body, he stresses the oneness of the Church as well as its essentially penultimate nature: There is one sole Church, of men, angels and saints in the unity of the same life of grace given to them all, and this Church is the mystical Body of Christ. […] It is not perfectly and entirely realised in this world of imperfection and of progress. […] But the same cause that renders humanity at the same time 154 155 156

157 158

Congar, MC, pp. 91–92 (EME, p. 111). Ibid., p. 27 (EME, p. 26). See Paul McPartlan, Sacrament of Salvation: An Introduction to Eucharistic Ecclesiology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1995), p. 41. Congar, MC, p. 25 (EME, p. 23). See also Ratzinger, Church, Ecumenism and Politics, p. 6. Ibid., pp. 41–42 (EME, p. 44).

congar pages

16.05.2004

21.06

Page 109

The Shape of the Church in Congar’s Theology

109

imperfect and capable of progress also brings men together to realise socially their common destiny.159

For Congar, then, the Church on earth, as distinct from the heavenly Church, is necessarily militant and in need of being governed precisely because it is in via and has, therefore, not yet arrived at its final end.160 The Church is not only militant against the world but also against itself, since the Kingdom is not yet fully realized; this also explains the presence of sin within the Church.161 Congar asserts that the gift of the Spirit as the principle of life in the Church effectively changes the conditions under which it is possible to speak of sin in the Church, making it necessary to distinguish between the Church as People of God – that is capable of sin – and the Church as Spouse whose members are united to Christ by an unbreakable bond of mutual love and fidelity.162 Since, on its earthly journey, the Church is subject to weakness and sin, it is the Eucharist that sustains its new identity – an identity based on the indwelling Spirit. Congar expresses this point as follows: ‘The eucharist makes the Body of Christ; the eucharist molds the People of God into the Body of Christ.’163 The view of the Church as Mystical Body helps, as we have seen, to unite the notions of People of God and Society. Nevertheless, the understanding of the Church based on these images is still incomplete, which leads Congar to another image – that of the Church as the universal sacrament of salvation – which better expresses the Christological and pneumatological aspects of the Church.164 To understand the Church as the universal sacrament of salvation, we must refer to the term ‘sacrament’, derived from the Latin sacramentum. Used to translate the Greek must