Jag fortsätter att läsa ur Yves Congars My Journal of the Council, dagboksanteckningar dag för dag från vardagsarbetet under Andra Vatikankonciliet 50 år senare. Congar deltog som sakkunnig teolog. Vi är framme i mars 1963, och man diskuterade schemat som skulle bli grundkonstitutionen om Kyrkan, Lumen Gentium.

Det är intressant att se hur samma motsättningar och dialektik som rådde i början på 1900-talet och som fortfarande går igen i vår tids polaritet mellan reformism och traditionalism i kyrkan också var föremål för bearbetning under konciliet.

Av texterna kan man förstå att de utrsprungliga förslag som förberetts av kurian var väldigt konservativt skrivna och innebar inte mycket till utveckling och förnyelse. Konciliefäderna tog under konciliet direkt kontroll över processen och tillsatte arbetsgrupper där texterna omarbetades.

4 mars skriver Congar:

”Above all, the worst has been avoided at the joint Commission on Tradition. There is no longer any question of sources (in the sense in which ‘they’ would like to speak of them); there is no longer any question of the material being distributed between Scripture and Tradition, as though they were two drawers, in one of which could be found what could not be found in the other. Personally, I find the current text bad; flat, superficial. I am told, however, that I ought to see what they started with, and what they have avoided!!! That had been tough going, and it took eight days.”

9 mars beskriver Congar vissa gruppers ultramontanistiska tankegångar:

”…when we came to the prologue to Chapter II, great conflict over ‘in fundamento Petri et Apostolorum’ [on the foundation of Peter and the Apostles]. The Romans wanted absolutely to distinguish expressly between the way in which Peter (the pope) is the foundation and the way in which the other Apostles are. The Romans: 1) reduce the Apostles of Ephesians 2:20 to the same status as the prophets: the reference is only to preaching. So not to the juridical function. So not very important. 2) they rule out Apocalypse 21 by saying that it is metaphorical and refers to the heavenly Jerusalem, hence not to the visible Church on earth. ‘They’ think of only ONE thing: putting the pope in everywhere, putting him above everything, seeing only him, making the entire Church consist only in him! ”