Faith and the Human Enterprise: A Post-Vatican II Vision.

A Post-Vatican II Vision

Rembert G. Weakland

Orbis Books, $14.95, 168 pp.

Recently I was part of a large gathering of theologians, mainly Catholic, who were honoring Milwaukee's Archbishop Rembert Weakland. In his address, the archbishop shared with us several personal stories that touched upon subjects ranging from his background in music to his hopes and dreams for the church. The standing ovation that he received was not only enthusiastic; it was intense and impassioned. It was a rare instance of what is possible when an apostolic leader expresses and embodies a vision that harmonizes with the prevailing convictions and experiences of moderate-to-liberal theologians in the U.S.

Such a moment of enthusiasm (though I am sure there were some among us who were not so moved) inevitably leads to moments of critical reflection. The appearance of Faith and the Human Enterprise, a collection of the archbishop's talks and articles written over the last decade, offers such an opportunity. The essays offer sustained intellectual argument and reflection, with a surprising scarcity of personal stories or specific examples. This is a rather heady book, not for those in search of feel-good homilies.

Many chapters discuss the writing and reception of "Economic Justice for All" (1986), the U.S. bishops' pastoral for which Weakland served as the committee chair. These pieces, along with some material on religion and public policy, form the heart of the book. Opening and closing chapters on Vatican II and the current state of the church provide a framework.

Although there is some unavoidable repetition, the material on the economic pastoral reveals Weakland at his best. Here his concern for the poor balances off his penchant for abstract analysis. His prophetic righteousness is itself balanced by his evident capacity to listen to criticism and to make necessary adjustments. The archbishop treats those who have a serious interest in the pastoral letter to an in-depth analysis of its historical development. He also discusses its scriptural underpinnings, its connection with the principles of Catholic social teaching, its reflection of--and yet challenge to--U. S. culture, its troubled marriage between Enlightenment and Catholic ideals, and its reception in the third world. He even gives his own frank assessment of the letter's many limitations

His essays on the pastoral alone make this a valuable volume. What is more immediately topical, however, are the framing chapters concerning Vatican II and the church. Many will read the archbishop's work as the antithesis to The Ratzinger Report (Ignatius, 1985). Indeed, Weakland cites the book-length interview with Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, several times, making clear his distance from the cardinal's efforts toward "restoration" and opposition to the modern world.

Yet some underlying similarities between Ratzinger and Weakland are worth noting. Each offers the reader access to the ideological moorings of a high-ranking official within the Catholic church. Each represents a popular but controversial school of thought. Each exhibits the benefits of contemporary scholarship without being primarily scholarly. Each easily lends itself to lavish praise from devotees and to harsh criticism from opponents. And each laments many elements of the present state of the church and seeks a solution to the church's current dilemmas in renewed attention to the documents of Vatican II.

This last similarity, in my mind, is an important one, in that it highlights how deeply both of these leaders remain part of the same church in the same period of history. When one asks precisely how the documents of Vatican II are to be interpreted and implemented, however, the only remaining similarity between these men seems to be that each wears a Roman collar.

Of the sixteen documents of Vatican II, Weakland quotes most frequently from the socially progressive "Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World" (Gaudium et spes). He wholeheartedly endorses Karl Rahner's naming of Vatican II's most defining achievement as the church becoming truly a world church, inculturating the gospel in diverse ways throughout the globe. The archbishop consistently emphasizes the most socially progressive elements of the documents, such as the political dimensions of the church's mission, social justice, ecumenism, dialogue with world religions, religious liberty, collegiality, and the common priesthood of the faithful. He lauds the image of the church as the "People of God." He believes that interpretation of the council must go beyond the documents themselves to take further developments into account.

In other words, Weakland interprets the council as having established certain principles and set in motion certain forces in a definite trajectory. Church teachings need to be appropriated and applied within the framework of contemporary concerns. In these presuppositions he finds the grounds for championing progress in matters such as decentralizing decision making in the church and advancing the role of women.

Ratzinger, in contrast, interprets the most progressive change at the council as the renewed affirmation of the mystery of the church. The cardinal accepts other progressive changes, but he subordinates them to this new focus on mystery, which includes an emphasis on essential church structures that represent the will of Christ. He subordinates Weakland's preferred image of the People of God to images that highlight the Christological nature of the church, such as the Body of Christ. Ratzinger frequently cites the text of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen gentium), rarely Gaudium et spes which Weakland so favors. For the cardinal, the documents are to be read anew apart from what he sees as one-sided developments falsely linked to the spirit of the council.

And so there does remain another similarity between the archbishop and the cardinal: each assesses the interpretation of the other to be one-sided. Weakland remarks that Ratzinger's agenda "seems to be inspired by the desire to turn back the clock, not to the pre-Vatican II period, but to the texts themselves, as if there had been no development since then, to interpret them in the light of only one side of the debate during the council itself, and to begin the implementation all over again, but in a controlled and highly centralized way." Similarly, one might find an anticipation of Weakland's approach in many of Ratzinger's laments concerning dubious progressive interpretations of the council.

In mutual accusations of one-sidedness there is room for hope, because each acknowledges, at least implicitly, that there is more than one side, and that all sides need to be taken into account. In Weakland's favor, he seems more inclined than Ratzinger to admit this explicitly. And so I continue my applause for the archbishop, though perhaps somewhat tempered by the awareness of a world Catholicism that offers many contending approaches to Vatican II. Weakland's approach is particular, selective, and one-sided; but oh, what a side!