Douglas P. McManaman
Aug 27, 2020
Reproduced with Permission
About 20 years ago when corresponding with Germain Grisez about a number of moral and theological issues, he made two remarks that puzzled me at the time; one, made shortly after my ordination, had to do with the "new clericalism" making its way into the Church; the other had to do with the negative but subtle influence of Neoplatonism that can be detected in the writings of a great many Catholic spiritual and moral writers throughout the centuries. The very word "clericalism" conjured up images of life in Quebec during the pre-conciliar years, so I had imagined it was a thing of the past. And, I was skeptical of Grisez' contention regarding Neoplatonism, in particular his objection to the reduction of intelligible human goods to merely temporal goods instrumental to an eternal life of pure contemplation. It wasn't too long after ordination, however, that I began to see what he was referring to with respect to a resurrection of the old clericalism; the subtle influence of Neoplatonism took a little longer for me to notice, but I eventually came to see the legitimacy of his concern here as well.
Recently, a priest relatively indifferent to Vatican II said to me that the Council was a product of its time; he seemed to be suggesting that its time has passed. I think this might be an indication of the subtle influence of Platonism - neo or otherwise - lurking in the background; for every single ecumenical council in the history of the Church was a product of its time. We exist in time, and everything we do is a response to historical and geographic conditions. The bible itself is a product of its many periods of time in history, but that certainly does not mean that it is not inspired by God. My friend's remark seems to imply that it is possible that an ecumenical council not be a product of its time, as though it should really be a product of eternity alone (an emanation from above), and not in any way "of time" (from below). The implication, it seems to me, is that Vatican II was "merely" a product of its time, which would mean that it did not come from God, who is eternal. But how could one know such a thing?
Among a number of other cognitive habits, the recent negative commentary on Vatican II seems to be firmly rooted in the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy (after this, therefore, because of this). It is as if the Individualism of the 60s, the Sexual Revolution and the resulting decline in marriage, the Hedonism of the swinging 70s, the irreverent humor of 80s pop culture and the Nihilism of the 90s, not to mention the ensuing postmodern deconstruction of cultural norms, the fundamentals of ethics, science, etc., with all its social repercussions, including declining Church attendance, would never have materialized had Vatican II not occurred.
But for all we know, things might have been unimaginably worse for the Church had there been no Second Vatican Council. More to the point, history is exceedingly complex; for there are innumerable factors and combinations of factors that account for what we have witnessed in the post conciliar years. Understanding history is not like watching a single passenger train go by; rather, it is more like being inside one train among countless others, assigned to one seat and looking out the window. No matter how much we study history, in the end we are only left with one or more relatively thin fibers of a narrative. To make grand and absolute cause and effect assertions about history often reveals a lack of appreciation for the limitations that matter, sense perception, time, and place, etc., impose on human knowledge; our truth claims bearing upon the contingencies of history are for the most part tentative. The reason is that our conclusions are information sensitive; for they are underdetermined estimates, possibly our best estimates at the moment, the maximally plausible estimates formulated on the basis of the limited data currently available.[1]
Within a Platonic frame of mind, being and essence (ousia) are one and the same. "To be" is identical to being a certain kind of thing. Both Plato and Aristotle were essentialists (universalists); Aquinas, on the other hand, was not. Rather, being and essence are not one and the same, but really distinct. The act of existing (esse) is the "to be" of all the acts of a thing (its form, quantity, time, and other accidental modes of being), and the act of existing is that by virtue of which a being is an individual, that is, a single being. Aquinas is more accurately designated an existentialist;[2] he was without question a particularist. For it is simply not the case that the immaterial is more real than the material; nor is it the case that since time is the measure of motion and "essence" is unchanging, time is not fully real. On the contrary, form, matter, motion, extension, activity, time, etc., are entirely real by virtue of a thing's received act of existing (esse).[3]. Moreover, coming to understand the nature of a thing is time consuming, because we only come to know the natures of things through their activity, and the activities of material things are measured by time.[4]
A persistent and stubborn Platonism, however, continues to shape the reasoning of a good number of Catholic commentators. If nothing is in the intellect that is not first in the senses and sensation is a temporal process, then knowledge acquisition is fundamentally historical. Human reasoning begins in observation and proceeds to the best and most consistent, coherent, or maximally plausible determination.[5] New data, either empirical, historical, or rational, typically upsets the consistency and coherence of our limited set of data, causing us to reform or change our minds. An "essentialist" mind, however, is not disposed to pay much attention to the vicissitudes of history, just as it is not disposed to invest much time in studying the sensible world (i.e., the physical sciences).[6] And if the ideal state is to be created after the pattern of the realm of eternal ideas, then a society so modelled will inevitably resist change, for it is less in need of reform to the degree that it is patterned after the ethereal realm of ideas.
But the ideal state is not patterned after an ethereal world of unchanging forms. Rather, we come to understand the complex nature of a state gradually, through experience, reasoned reflection on that experience, dialogue, more experience and further reflection in light of new ideas and new information. And of course the same is true for the Church, which is a society.[7] The more we understand the pre-conciliar period, as well as the tone and style of previous councils, the easier it is to appreciate the more than 2500 bishops' conviction of the need for such a council. Anyone who is a teacher of young people knows that style (i.e., bedside manner) is almost everything. A person might have great content, but if students detect a whiff of condescension, arrogance, or pretension, the intellectual treasures he/she possesses are not going anywhere.[8] The style of the Second Vatican Council is radically different from every council that has gone before it. The model of the Roman Senate has finally been laid to rest, there are no anathemas, canons or definitions, a much more invitational spirit is evident, not to mention a significant recognition of the limits of human knowing, [9] thus greater stress on the need for dialogue,[10] a new and positive ecumenical attitude, a deeper appreciation for the developmental nature of the Church's self-understanding [11] and a recognition that the Church learns and benefits significantly from the world, among many other things.[12]
The Church is genuinely modernist, in the true sense of that word - as opposed to the false modernism that is nothing but Hegelian reductionism. In fact, the Church cannot help being modernist, for her mission is to proclaim Christ, who is the Word, who is the Truth (Jn 14, 6), and the Truth became flesh, that is, the Truth became historical, and the Holy Spirit that Christ sent leads the Church through history to the complete truth (Jn 16, 13). The Church always reflects upon her own experience, penetrating more and more deeply into the meaning of the gospel. The Church continually moves forward without leaving her treasures behind, gathering up her past in an embrace of all that is true and good.
Those who reject the Council and see nothing but what they regard as its negative fruits are in some ways like a mother who cannot see positive developments that were the result of her son's move into adolescence: life was wonderful when he was 6, 7, 8, etc. We got along so well, she says to herself; he was obedient and sweet. Then suddenly he's a teenager, and life becomes a mess. Only an utterly ahistorical habit of mind would regard this stage of development as unnecessary; for it is very necessary in view of the tremendous good that lies ahead. The terms of this analogy refer to the Church as a whole, not individuals, and the analogy highlights something about the nature of development. Vatican II was a genuine development, but with every new stage of development there are undesirable and, most importantly, unforeseeable side effects, as we know through the move into adolescence or any other stage. We would like for our children to remain at a grade 6 level of likeability, but that is unrealistic. A great deal of good lies ahead, and the price we pay to get them there is adolescence, which has its charms, but overall can be a rather difficult and obnoxious stage to endure. It is an existential/developmental frame of mind that is important here, as opposed to the old "essentialist" mind frame, which tends to abstract from the very motion of the Church, that is, the movement of the Church through history towards eschatological completion.
Notes
- [1] The same is true with respect to predictions, which are underdetermined inferences bearing upon the future, and many who dismiss Vatican II believe they know how things would have turned out had there been no council. Prediction, however, is always risky. Nicholas Rescher points out: "...no consideration of theoretical general principles can eliminate the prospect of predictive error as long as the possibility of further relevant information remains open, which is to say effectively always . In view of the inevitable incompleteness of our information, we cannot eliminate the risk of error in prediction; even the best of predictions can in principle go awry. Any sort of prediction, however well evidentiated by available data, is inherently risky. It is information sensitive in such a way that a (merely) growing body of information (in contrast to one that is actually changing ) can engender changes in the predictions we are rationally authorized to accept. The rationally appropriate answer to a predictive question relative to a given body of information can always become unstuck when that body of information is not actually revised but merely enlarged." Predicting the Future: An Introduction to the Theory of Forecasting . New York: State University of New York Press, 1998. P. 59.
- [2] "...Thomistic metaphysics is existential in its own right. Yet, Thomistic philosophy is no existentialism, at least as the word is now understood, unless one prefers to say that it is existentialism as it should be understood." Etienne Gilson. Being and Some Philosophers. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1961. p. 167.
- [3] Etienne Gilson writes: "To posit essence or supreme essentiality as the supreme degree of reality is therefore the most disastrous of all metaphysical mistakes, because it is to substitute essentia for esse as the ultimate root of all being….Matter, form, substance, accidents, operations, everything in it directly or indirectly shares in one and the same act of existing. And this is why the thing is both being and one. Existence is not what keeps elements apart, it is what blends them together as constituent elements of the same being. For the same reason, temporal existence is neither the ceaseless breaking up of eternity nor the perpetual parceling out of being; it is rather their progressive achievement through becoming. Thus, becoming through esse is the road to fully determined being, just as time is the road to eternity. Man is not struggling in time not to lose eternity, since, like all true spiritual substances, he is eternal in his own right; but, if he must become in order the more fully to be, it is of the essence of man to be, in time, a self-achieving and self-eternalizing being." Ibid ., p. 183
- [4] "The full import of this conclusion will perhaps appear more clearly if we consider a third characteristic of existential being, namely, its intrinsic dynamism. Because abstract essence is static, while existence is dynamic, such a metaphysics of being must needs be a dynamic one…And the very first thing which "to be" does, is to make its own essence to be, that is, "to be a being." This is done at once, completely and definitively, for, between to be or not to be, there is no intermediate position. But the next thing which "to be" does, is to begin bringing its own individual essence somewhat nearer its completion. It begins doing it at once, but the work will take time and, in the case of such corporeal beings as men, for instance, it is bound to be a slow process. It takes each of us a lifetime to achieve his own temporal individuality. True enough, essence itself is there from the very beginning, and, in a way, it is whole, but its wholeness is not that of a thing. The essence of the symphony is in the mind of the composer, and, since it is its essence to be a symphony, it will have to be it, but it will not exist until the last bar of its score has been orchestrated, and even that will not be the end of its becoming. So also with natural essences. Each of them is the progressive becoming of its own end. In short, the actual perfecting of essences is the final cause of their existences, and it takes many operations to achieve it.
Existence can perform those operations. Because to be is to be act, it also is to be able to act. Now, as an act is, so will be its operation. If a being acts qua being, it will because of being. Ibid ., p. 184
- [5] See Nicholas Rescher. Epistemology . New York: State University of New York Press, 2003, pp. 131-147. See also Epistemic Principles: A Primer for the Theory of Knowledge . New York: Peter Lang Publishing, 2017, p. 144-153.
- [6] Strictly speaking, this is not entirely true, for Aristotle was an "essentialist", but he was very interested in the physical world. It is certainly true, however, for the Neoplatonic "essentialist". Evil is the result of focusing our attention downwards towards the material world, rather than upwards towards the intelligible world, the world of ideas or forms.
- [7] "The Church also realizes that in working out her relationship with the world she always has great need of the ripening which comes with the experience of the centuries. Led by the Holy Spirit, Mother Church unceasingly exhorts her sons "to purify and renew themselves so that the sign of Christ can shine more brightly on the face of the Church." Gaudium et Spes , 43.
- [8] John XXIII writes: "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 in character." Address in St. Peter's Basilica on the opening day of the Council , October 11, 1962.
- [9] "The church is guardian of the deposit of God's word and draws religious and moral principles from it, but it does not always have a ready answer to every question. Still, it is eager to associate the light of revelation with the experience of humanity in trying to clarify the course upon which it has recently entered." GS, 33. Further on we read: "Laymen should also know that it is generally the function of their well-formed Christian conscience to see that the divine law is inscribed in the life of the earthly city; from priests they may look for spiritual light and nourishment. Let the layman not imagine that his pastors are always such experts, that to every problem which arises, however complicated, they can readily give him a concrete solution, or even that such is their mission. Rather, enlightened by Christian wisdom and giving close attention to the teaching authority of the Church, let the layman take on his own distinctive role". GS 43.
- [10] "Often enough the Christian view of things will itself suggest some specific solution in certain circumstances. Yet it happens rather frequently, and legitimately so, that with equal sincerity some of the faithful will disagree with others on a given matter. Even against the intentions of their proponents, however, solutions proposed on one side or another may be easily confused by many people with the Gospel message. Hence it is necessary for people to remember that no one is allowed in the aforementioned situations to appropriate the Church's authority for his opinion. They should always try to enlighten one another through honest discussion, preserving mutual charity and caring above all for the common good." GS 43. In the same section, we read: "By unremitting study they [bishops] should fit themselves to do their part in establishing dialogue with the world and with men of all shades of opinion." GS 43. Earlier on, we read: "While rejecting atheism, root and branch, the Church sincerely professes that all men, believers and unbelievers alike, ought to work for the rightful betterment of this world in which all alike live; such an ideal cannot be realized, however, apart from sincere and prudent dialogue". GS 21. A little further on we read: "Respect and love ought to be extended also to those who think or act differently than we do in social, political and even religious matters. In fact, the more deeply we come to understand their ways of thinking through such courtesy and love, the more easily will we be able to enter into dialogue with them". GS 28. See also GS 25.
- [11] "The experience of past ages, the progress of the sciences, and the treasures hidden in the various forms of human culture, by all of which the nature of man himself is more clearly revealed and new roads to truth are opened, these profit the Church, too. For, from the beginning of her history she has learned to express the message of Christ with the help of the ideas and terminology of various philosophers, and has tried to clarify it with their wisdom, too. Her purpose has been to adapt the Gospel to the grasp of all as well as to the needs of the learned, insofar as such was appropriate. Indeed this accommodated preaching of the revealed word ought to remain the law of all evangelization. For thus the ability to express Christ's message in its own way is developed in each nation, and at the same time there is fostered a living exchange between the Church and the diverse cultures of people. To promote such exchange, especially in our days, the Church requires the special help of those who live in the world, are versed in different institutions and specialties, and grasp their innermost significance in the eyes of both believers and unbelievers. With the help of the Holy Spirit, it is the task of the entire People of God, especially pastors and theologians, to hear, distinguish and interpret the many voices of our age, and to judge them in the light of the divine word, so that revealed truth can always be more deeply penetrated, better understood and set forth to greater advantage [emphases mine]". GS 44.
- [12] "Since the Church has a visible and social structure as a sign of her unity in Christ, she can and ought to be enriched by the development of human social life, not that there is any lack in the constitution given her by Christ, but that she can understand it more penetratingly, express it better, and adjust it more successfully to our times. Moreover, she gratefully understands that in her community life no less than in her individual sons, she receives a variety of helps from men of every rank and condition, for whoever promotes the human community at the family level, culturally, in its economic, social and political dimensions, both nationally and internationally, such a one, according to God's design, is contributing greatly to the Church as well, to the extent that she depends on things outside herself. Indeed, the Church admits that she has greatly profited and still profits from the antagonism of those who oppose or who persecute her". GS , 43.
Top