Doctrine

proved by an overwhelming major- ity of the Council Fathers (2,308 to 70), Lefebvre founded a traditional- Development or Discontinuity? ist movement that ended in schism The and Religious Freedom from .

There are some factual errors here. Archbishop Lefebvre was by no means the most notable of the critics of during Vatican II. Alfredo Cardinal Ottavi- ani, Prefect of the Holy Office (now the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), and President of the Council’s Theological Commission was the most prominent opponent of the declaration, which was also opposed by such cardinals as Ernesto Ruffini of Pal- by Michael Davies ermo, the outstanding Irish theologian Michael Browne he journal First Things of language, and contains of the , de Arriba y TDecember 2001 published the very detailed documenta- Castro of Tarragona, Santos text of a lecture delivered by Avery tion on the classic of Manila, Florit of Florence, and Cardinal Dulles in New York City. teaching on Church and State, the Giuseppe Siri of , and Father It was entitled “Religious Freedom: debates on religious liberty during Anicito Fernandez, Master General Innovation and Development” and the Second Vatican Council, and the of the Dominicans. was a defense of Dignitatis Hu- final text of Dignitatis Humanae, Archbishop Lefebvre did not manae (DH), the Declaration on contrasting it with the classic papal found the Society of Saint Pius X in Religious Freedom of the Second teaching. Those wishing to go to reaction to the Council’s approval Vatican Council, dated December 7, the original source of the quotations of the declaration. His society was 1965. The fact that a scholar of the in this article will find them on the canonically established on Novem- eminence of Cardinal Dulles feels pages indicated. ber 1, 1970 with the full approval of that it is still necessary to defend Cardinal Dulles describes Dig- the and his seminary was the declaration thirty-six years after nitatis Humanae praised in 1971 its promulgation is significant in as “one of the Cardinal Dulles describes by John Cardinal itself. In the course of this essay I most striking Dignitatis Humanae as Wright, Prefect of will make frequent references to my developments in the Congregation book The Second Vatican Council twentieth-century “one of the most striking for the Clergy.1 and Religious Liberty (SVCRL), Catholicism,” and developments in twentieth- The figure which is, to the best of my knowl- informs us that: of a 2,308-to-70 edge, the only detailed critique of century Catholicism.” vote of approval Dignitatis Humanae in the English At the Council of Dignitatis itself some conservative bishops, Humanae cited by Cardinal Dulles Michael Davies is president of Una most notably, does not give a correct picture of Voce International and the author of held that Dignitatis Humanae was the opposition to the Declaration many books on Catholic history and contrary to established Catholic within the Council. Voting for the liturgy. Lead Kindly Light, his new teaching and could not be adopted sixth and final schema (draft docu- biography of Cardinal Newman, is without violence to the Catholic ment) took place on November 19, reviewed elsewhere in this issue. faith. When, notwithstanding his 1965, and the vote was 1954 to 249.2 protests, the Declaration was ap- On December 3, Msgr. Giuseppe

48 Spring 2002 Development or Discontinuity? Doctrine di Meglio, an Italian specialist in like wise Sir Joseph Porter, K.C.B., nature, cannot be compelled. international law, circulated a letter ‘We always voted at our party’s call; stating that the voting figures indi- we never thought of thinking for It is, of course, traditional cated that: ourselves at all.’”4 teaching that the act of faith, being Cardinal Dulles concedes, “If free, by its very nature, cannot be For a notable number of Council Dignitatis Humanae is compared compelled. Saint Thomas Aquinas Fathers the teaching and practical with earlier official Catholic teach- taught that unbelievers such as the applications of the schema are not ing, it represents an undeniable, heathens and the who have acceptable in conscience. In fact, even a dramatic, change. The ques- never received the Faith should by the fundamental principle of the tion must therefore be asked: Was no means be compelled to believe schema has remained unchanged the Declaration a homogeneous because the act of belief depends on despite the amendments that have development within the Catholic the will. They should, he adds, be been introduced: that is, the right tradition, or was it a repudiation of prevented from hindering the faith of error...Since the declaration on previous Church doctrine?” He goes of believers by blasphemies, evil religious freedom has no dogmatic persuasions, or open persecution. value, the negative votes of the Even when Christ’s faithful wage Council Fathers will constitute a victorious war with unbelievers a factor of great importance for in defense of the Faith the defeated future studies of the Declaration party should not be forcibly con- itself, and particularly for the verted.5 This teaching is echoed by emphasis to be placed upon it (my Leo XIII in his encyclical Im- emphasis).3 mortale Dei: “The Church is wont to take earnest heed that no one shall Following this vote Pope Paul VI be forced to embrace the Catholic approved the sixth schema. Accord- faith against his will, for, as Saint ing to the accepted etiquette, once a Augustine wisely reminds us, ‘Man schema became a papally approved cannot believe otherwise than by his Archbishop R. J. Dwyer conciliar document even those who own free will.’” had voted against the final schema on: The apparent repudiation of should vote placet (yes) in the vote previous Church doctrine is found for the papally approved text. The The Council taught that all human in the first of the three sentences fact that 70 voted non placet (no) persons have by nature an inalien- cited, “that all human persons have therefore holds considerable signifi- able right to be free in seeking by nature an inalienable right to be cance. The true feelings of Council religious truth, in living and wor- free…in bearing witness to their Fathers were manifested by their shipping according to their reli- beliefs without hindrance from any votes for the final draft, and not for gious convictions, and in bearing human power.” Cardinal Dulles the actual document. It adds that: “The Council should not be imagined Archbishop Lefebvre did not found the Society of taught that the State has that the majority of the Saint Pius X in reaction to the Council’s approval an obligation to protect majority who voted in of the Declaration (Dignitatis Humanae). His the inviolable rights of favor of the Declaration all citizens, including were familiar with, or society was canonically established on November 1, the right of religious even interested in, the 1970 with the full approval of the Holy See… freedom. It did not serious issues involved. teach that the State was As was the case throughout the witness to their beliefs without hin- obliged to give legal Council, the majority of the Fathers drance from any human power. This privileges to or Catholi- voted with the majority simply principle was theologically ground- cism, although it did not rule out because it was the majority. Arch- ed in the fact that God, respecting such arrangements. It did deny that bishop R. J. Dwyer of Portland, the dignity of the human person, civil government had the authority Oregon, one of the most erudite of invites a voluntary and uncoerced to command or prohibit religious the American bishops, remarked: adherence to religious truth. The acts.” “And when the vote came around, act of faith, being free by its very To put it briefly, the Cardinal

Spring 2002 49 Doctrine Development or Discontinuity? interprets Dignitatis Humanae as firming that Dignitatis Humanae did of theology in the United States, stating that all human persons have a not affirm that anyone has a natural carried out a consistent defense of natural right to bear witness to their right, a moral right, to believe in or the traditional papal teaching on beliefs without hindrance from the to propagate error, but upheld the Church and State, including articles civil government, and in describ- traditional teaching in this respect. contributed by Cardinal Ottaviani. ing this as “an undeniable, even a The Declaration affirmed not a mor- In a criticism of those who rejected dramatic change” al but a civil liberty, the traditional teaching the Cardinal from previous official and so the question wrote: Catholic teaching he must be considered is certainly correct. from a purely juridical To justify themselves these people Before examining standpoint. assert that in the body of teaching the previous official It seems impos- imparted within the Church there Catholic teaching sible to reconcile the are to be distinguished two ele- it is necessary to Cardinal’s affirmation ments, the one permanent, and the make a distinction of of a natural right not other transient. This latter is sup- crucial importance to be prevented from posed to be due to the reflection of that must be kept in propagating error in particular contemporary conditions. mind throughout this the public forum with Unfortunately, they carry this article. This is the the homogeneous tactic so far as to apply it to the distinction between corpus of previous principles taught in pontifical religious liberty Alfredo Cardinal Ottaviani papal teaching. This documents, principles on which considered from a legal or juridi- teaching had been attacked in the the teachings of the have cal standpoint (as a civil right) and decades preceding the Council by remained constant so as to make from a theological standpoint. The Father John Courtney Murray, S.J. these principles a part of the pat- juridical standpoint examines the In 1955 his superiors forbade him rimony of Catholic doctrine (my grounds for and the extent of the to continue propagating his anti-tra- emphasis).8 legal coercion to be applied to the ditional thesis.6 This thesis became expression of religious belief in the official teaching of the Church Cardinal Dulles duly informs us the external public forum. Consid- in Dignitatis Humanae, which in that the popes who formulated the ered from a theological standpoint, every important respect was written traditional doctrine “were speaking that is, a standpoint based upon by Murray, as were the speeches in within the relatively narrow hori- the nature and will of God zon of Catholic Europe as revealed to man, there The question must therefore be asked: Was and Latin America, where can be no question of any traditional religion was natural right to believe or the Declaration a homogeneous development under attack from militant to propagate error. As Pope within the Catholic tradition, or was it a secularist .” Leo XIII teaches, man has a repudiation of previous Church doctrine? What, then, is the natural right only to follow traditional papal teaching the will of God and obey concerning the propagation His commandments. In the Liberal defense of its successive drafts made of a false religion within a Catholic sense, liberty of conscience is the by Cardinal Spellman and Council state such as Spain or Colombia? In right of an individual to think and Fathers from a number of countries, considering the question of religious believe whatsoever he wants, even most notably the famous defense liberty from the juridical standpoint in religion and morality; to express of the schema read by the Belgian the following distinctions must his views publicly, and to persuade Bishop Emile de Smedt, to which be kept in mind. The first is that others to adopt them, using word of Cardinal Dulles makes several refer- between the internal forum and the mouth, the public press, or any other ences without once indicating that it external forum. The internal forum means. He has the right to choose had been written by Murray.7 refers to what a man does in private, any religion or to have no religion, In the decades before Vatican II the external forum to what he does and this, Liberals claim, is a natural the editors of the American Eccle- in public. The second distinction right. siastical Review (AER), the most is between not being forced to act Cardinal Dulles is correct in af- authoritative and respected journal against one’s conscience – i.e., free-

50 Spring 2002 Development or Discontinuity? Doctrine dom from coercion – and freedom AER, what a man does in private must acknowledge that the more a not to be restrained from acting in affects only himself and his family, state is driven to tolerate evil the accordance with one’s conscience. but when he acts in public the rights further it is from perfection; and that The traditional Catholic teaching of other citizens are involved: “It the tolerance of evil which is dic- is that in religious matters: (1) no is fully within their [civil rulers’] tated by political prudence should one must be forced to act against right to restrict and to prevent public be strictly confined to the limits his conscience in private; (2) no functions and activities of false reli- which its justifying cause, the public one must be forced to act against gions which are likely to be detri- welfare, requires.” his conscience in public; (3) no one mental to the spiritual welfare of the This was official teaching of the must be prevented from acting in Catholic citizens or insulting to the Church up to and during the Coun- accordance with his conscience in true religion of cil. Writing in private; (4) the right of acting in Christ.”9 “The Church is wont to the AER in 1950, accordance with one’s conscience in The word “tol- take earnest heed that Msgr. George W. public can be restricted. eration” is of cru- Shea insisted that Let us take a specific example. cial importance no one shall be forced to what is at issue Before Vatican II, Jehovah’s Wit- for understanding embrace the Catholic faith here is a ques- nesses in Spain were allowed to the discontinuity against his will, for, as Saint tion of principle, practice their bizarre religion within between Dignita- i.e., “the relations the privacy of their homes, and to tis Humanae and Augustine wisely reminds which should per meet together in private with other the classic papal us, ‘Man cannot believe se obtain by rea- members of their sect. They were teaching. Pope otherwise than by his own son of the nature not forced to take part in public Leo XIII taught in of Church and Catholic worship. In accordance Libertas Humana: free will.’” State in a Catholic with (4) above, however, they were “While not conceding any right to society, so that any deviation from not permitted to interfere with the anything save what is true and hon- these relations, while tolerable per- faith of Catholics by visiting their est, she does not forbid public au- haps as a concession prompted by homes with the object of perverting thority to tolerate what is at variance expediency, could not merit approval their faith, to publish anti-Catholic with truth and justice, for the sake on principle” (my emphasis).10 literature, or to propagate their of avoiding some greater evil, or of There is not the least suggestion errors through the radio or televi- obtaining or preserving some greater in the teaching of any pre-Vatican sion or by holding public meetings. good.” This was the consistent II pope that there could be a natural The same policy was teaching of the Popes up to and right on the part of non-Catholics followed in including Pope Pius XII. Those not to be prevented from propagat- a number of in error had no natural right to ing their errors in public. It is evi- other Catho- propagate their views – the dent that if, as Cardinal Dulles tells lic countries. propagation us, Dignitatis Humanae teaches that I had the of error is non-Catholics possess a natural right privilege of an evil – not to be prevented from propagat- witnessing it but it could ing error in a Catholic state, then myself while be toler- such a right could not possibly be serving as a ated in the the subject of toleration. The State soldier in Malta interests of is bound in justice to accord to a during the Suez the common citizen what he possesses as a right. Crisis. I took no good (“pub- It is only what cannot be demanded little pleasure in lic welfare”) as a right that can be conceded as an the fact Anglican to prevent a act of toleration. army were greater evil such as civil unrest. The traditional teaching, described not allowed to wear Pope Leo XIII insisted in Lib- by Cardinal Ottaviani as “part of the their Roman collars ertas Humana that the over- patrimony of Catholic doctrine,” was outside military estab- riding criterion in the question upheld time and again during the lishments. As Father of toleration is the common good. conciliar debates. Cardinal Siri of Francis J. Connell explained in the “To judge aright,” he explained, “we Genoa warned:

Spring 2002 51 Doctrine Development or Discontinuity?

We cannot legitimize what God has the duty and the right to merely tolerates; we can only toler- preach the Gospel. That is why ate it, and that within the limits proselytism on the part of non- of the common good. We cannot Catholics among Catholics is therefore accept the proposed sche- illicit and should be prevented by ma insofar as it recommends liber- the civil authorities as well as by ty for all without discrimination…. the Church, as the common good We should therefore consider requires…. The Council must more carefully the contribution of be careful not to decree the ruin theological sources to this problem of Catholicism in those coun- of religious liberty and determine tries where it is in fact the only whether or not the contents of this religion. schema can be reconciled with the teaching of Leo XIII, Pius XI, and It is no exaggeration to state that Pius XII. Otherwise, we weaken the changing of the Spanish Consti- our own authority and compromise tution to correspond with Dignitatis our apostolic effort. Humanae has indeed brought about the ruin of Catholicism in that coun- Pope Leo XIII Bishop Emilio Tagle Cova- try. During the of European a state is driven to tolerate evil the rrabuias of Valparaiso, Chile, spoke Bishops in October 1999, Arch- further it is from perfection.” in the name of forty-five Latin bishop Fernando Sebastián Aguilar Cardinal Dulles assures us that American bishops when he stated: of Pamplona lamented the fact that Dignitatis Humanae is compatible in Spain “the cultural convictions with the previous papal teaching I am very much against this on which social life is based are because: “During the Council, schema. It merely rearranges the undermined and are more atheistic Bishop Émile De Smedt of Bruges, previous version, and it contains than Christian.” Divorce, abortion, as the official spokesman (relator) a number of contradictions…. homosexual acts, contraception and for the commission that composed Many passages are too complacent proselytism by Protestant sects, the document, defended its com- towards false religions and run the which were all illegal prior to Digni- patibility with earlier Catholic risk of indifferentism and Liberal- tatis Humanae, have been legalized. teaching…. In Murray’s words, ism. It does not Spain now has Dignitatis Humanae represented seem possible As Pope Leo XIII teaches, the lowest birth- ‘an authentic development of to grant the rate in Europe, doctrine in the sense of Vincent of same rights to man has a natural right only and there is a Lérins, an authentic progress, not a all religions in- to follow the will of God and Mormon temple change, of the Faith.’” discriminately. in Madrid. For Murray to assert compatibili- Only the one obey His commandments. Cardinal ty between the pre- and post-Vatican true Church has Dulles con- II teaching is one thing; to prove it is the right to religious liberty, strictly cedes: “Dignitatis Humanae went another. It would have been surpris- speaking. Other religions can only beyond Leo XIII in affirming that ing if he had not claimed continuity be tolerated, depending upon the people in error have certain human since Dignitatis Humanae is, to all circumstances and persons. rights.” This must be the understate- intents and purposes, his composi- ment of the present millennium. The tion, and it would be equally sur- Cardinal de Arriba y Castro of only right accorded to those in error prising had De Smedt not endorsed Tarragona defended the traditional by Leo XIII was that of not being Murray’s position since Murray had papal teaching as follows: forced to embrace the Catholic faith. written his speech for him. Where propagating their errors in What is the real significance of This is probably the most delicate public was concerned, Pope Leo Dignitatis Humanae? Why and how problem of the whole Council agreed with his predecessors and his was the teaching of a long series with respect to the Faith. We must successors that this was an evil and of popes, “part of the patrimony of clearly affirm this basic prin- should only be tolerated to prevent Catholic doctrine,” to quote Cardinal ciple: only the some great evil, and that “the more Ottaviani once more, replaced by

52 Spring 2002 Development or Discontinuity? Doctrine principles drawn from the American The fact is the right to religious conservation of its past. He also Constitution? The answer is simple. freedom has already been accepted notes that the word “development” During the Council the schema on and affirmed by the common con- is commonly used with an unfor- religious liberty was often called sciousness of mankind.”13 (Did he tunate lack of precision, and that “the American schema,” and its include the world of Islam in this even a doctrine that is unfaithful to author, Father Murray, attributed its assertion?) the idea from which it developed is success to “the solid and consistent What had taken place was de- sometimes termed a development. support of the American bishops scribed with complete accuracy and Thus, where the previous doctrine and their numerous interventions” with total approval in the July 20, is contradicted we are faced not – interventions that he had written 1992 issue of The Catholic Virgin- with a development but an inno- for them. “Undoubtedly,” Father ian by Father G.P. Fogarty, S.J., vation. Newman explains that a Murray explained, “the support President of the American Catholic developed doctrine that reverses derived its basic inspiration from the Historical Association, who gave the course of the development that American experience, from which Father Murray credit for the fact that has preceded it is no true develop- the Church has learned the practical Dignitatis Humanae “made uni- ment but is more properly called a value of the free-exercise clause of versal Catholic teaching what had corruption.14 I would suggest, with the First Amendment…. The object previously been considered an aber- the most profound possible respect, or content of the right to religious ration of the American Church.” that this is a point to which His freedom, as specified both in the Cardinal Dulles poses the Eminence might like to give some Declaration and in the American question as to whether Dignitatis consideration. constitutional system, is identical” Humanae is “a repudiation of previ- 11 (my emphasis). ous Church doctrine.” The previous Notes In his book American Participa- 1 The full background to the establishment of the Society of Saint Pius X can be found in my book Apologia pro tion in the Second Vatican Council, Marcel Lefebvre, available from the Angelus Press, 2916 Msgr. V. A. Yzermans writes: “It Forest Avenue, Kansas City, MO 64109. 2 The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty was a delightful victory for the (Neumann Press, Long Prairie, MN 56347, 1999), p. 158. American hierarchy.”12 He would Referred to in subsequent notes as SVCRL. 3 SVCRL, p. 159. have been more accurate in de- 4 Twin Circle, October 26, 1963, p. 2. scribing it as a delightful victory 5 Summa Theologica, II, II, Q. 10, art. 8, ad 1. for Father Murray, in view of the 6 SVCRL, pp. 100-101. 7 SVCRL, Chapter XIV. fact that, as one American prelate 8 SVCRL, p. 33. expressed it, “The voices are the 9 SVCRL, p. 44. voices of United States’ bishops, 10 SVCRL, p. 45. 11 SVCRL, p. 101. but the thoughts are the thoughts 12 SVCRL, p. 101. of John Courtney Murray!” In his 13 SVCRL, p. 101. book John Courtney Murray: Theo- 14 SVCRL, p. 110. logian in Conflict, Father Donald E. Pelotte has no doubt that although John Courtney Murray, S.J. Pilgrimage Reminder other members of the commission doctrine was that the public propa- helped to pen the final text of the gation of error in a Catholic state The Seventh Annual Declaration, “Murray’s contribution was an evil to be prevented when- Pilgrimage for the was decisive. The very acceptance ever possible and tolerated only to of Murray’s basic thrust, only ten prevent some greater evil. Digni- Restoration 2002 years after his admonition from the tatis Humanae teaches that “all September฀18-21 Jesuit Curia in Rome, was itself a human persons have by nature an to the singular recognition.” And what inalienable right” to propagate their Shrine of the North was Murray’s own appraisal of his views. Cardinal Dulles claims that American Martyrs delightful victory? He claimed: “Its this is a development in the sense in Auriesville, New York [the Declaration’s] achievement explained by Newman, but among for more information call was simply to bring the Church the seven requirements for a true (610) 882-3124 or on the web at abreast of the developments that development Newman lists continu- www.national-coalition.org/pilgrim/ have occurred in the secular world. ity of principle, logical sequence,

Spring 2002 53