Monday 29 October 1962
Conversation with Canon Boulard. … One of the results of the Council, he believes, will be the emergence of a new kind of bishop. Just as after Trent a new type of bishop emerged, more pastoral than feudal, so now, in the middle of the twentieth century. This new kind of bishop will be characterized by the presence of the Church to the world. Not only in creating structures for parishes and other works, but, in addition to these structures, ensuring that the bishop is in touch with the problems of the world, together with his priests, who will keep him informed and whom he will inform, organize, animate, supervise and encourage.
But, once again, that all seems to me to depend on the country, and on the relationship between the Church and the world in each country. For a start, that supposes that one has acknowledged the existence of the world at large. This in turn implies 1) the existence of a mature laity; 2) the presence of the Church, not in the form of clerical authority but in the form of a prophetic awareness of what it means to be human. …
Msgr. Felici said that enough had been said about the use of Latin! In fact, the discussion to follow was to be about hardly anything else. I have not noted down everything, as it is very tedious. Moreover, before long I was to count at least a quarter of the places empty: the bishops were crowding into the bars!
An Italian bishop: 1) mention Mary in the schema; 2) ensure agreement between the bishops of neighbouring episcopal conferences; 3) in favor of Latin! …
Franić: in Dalmatia, the Roman liturgy is celebrated in a Slavic language.
An Italian bishop: proposed three PRINCIPLES: 1) the purpose of the liturgy is first the glory of God, and secondly the salvation of souls, which is subordinate to the primary purpose; 2) Christ committed the deposit of faith to the Apostles alone, and to their successors; 3) Peter’s mission is to confirm. Conclusion: have recourse to his magisterium. —What ecclesiology!
A German bishop from East Germany: Atheism has access to not only enormous means of propagation (reserved exclusively for its own use), but a veritable liturgy which takes the place of our sacraments by copying them, and which is very effective. Remedy: a liturgy adapted to educating people.
A bishop from Asunción (Paraguay): adaptation to the mentality of today. Many rites relate to the mentality of ages long past.
After a mind-numbing Spanish bishop, a Coptic bishop (Candal?) suggested the example of the Copts who have not retained the Coptic language (which no-one understands today) except for the Consecration, using Arabic for the rest.
An auxiliary bishop from Sao Paulo: barely able to read his paper, written in a Latin worthy of the Merovingian era; he stuttered in places.
A Spanish bishop: Veterum Sapientia [Apostolic Constitution of 22 February 1962, which made the use of Latin compulsory in the training of clerics.] deals with clerical studies and does not forbid adaptation. In favor of a via media. But everything through the Holy See: nothing through the episcopal conferences.
Msgr. Simons (India): Look at the present state of the use of Latin! Priests never speak it; the Pope speaks in Italian or French; like international conferences, the Council itself could have used the major modern languages. They are used even in communications with the Holy See. Official translations of encyclicals are published; theologians publish their work in the vernacular. A word about regions with mixed languages. Far from being a factor of unity, Latin is rather one of division. …
The Infant from Agrigento, the pitiable Mgr Peruzzo spoke again with his hateful ‘quaver’ and his great tones of solemn entreaty: civis Romanus sum: [‘I am a Roman citizen’ (expression attributed by Cicero to a Sicilian in one of his speeches against Verres).] all holy bishops have been in favor of Latin, etc. Wretched creature, as full of piosity as he is limited in outlook.
A beginning was made on Chapter II: the celebration of the Eucharist.
Cardinal Spellman: against communion under both kinds and concelebration.
Ruffini: against communion under both kinds; the Council of Constance, the condemnation of Luther and the Council of Trent all condemned it . . . and confirmed the change of rite with reference to that of the early Church. Trent reserved the matter to the pope.There are other disadvantages: the number of communicants matters of hygiene. ‘Fortasse concedi posset in sacerdotali ordinatione et in aliqua extraordinaria occasione, praevia concessione S Sedis . . .’ [perhaps it could be allowed for priestly ordinations and other special occasions, with the prior permission of the Holy See]. Against concelebration: When there is a large number of priests (such as pilgrimages, ‘in coetibus ecclesiasticis’ [in meetings of clergy], and there is a shortage of altars, each priest should celebrate every other day and simply receive communion on the day between.
Cardinal Léger: (made a great impression by his moderation and his tone which breathed honesty and peace): in favour of amplification [extending] the use of concelebration. He asked for the text to be altered, as it seems only to CONCEDE it, in the absence of anything better. State the fact in positive terms giving the following reasons: ‘Ex eo quod natura sua concelebratio pietatem sacerdotum fovet et unitatem manifestat’ [due to the fact that, of its nature, concelebration promotes the piety of the priests and expresses their unity].