In an earlier post, I reviewed some opinions that had been expressed recently about the importance, for the future of the Catholic Church, of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, known as Vatican II.  In my last post, I discussed one of the documents produced by the council, Dei Verbum, which explains how Catholics should read the Bible for the purpose of understanding God’s will as revealed through Christ.  In this post, I will review Part 1 of another document from Vatican II, the Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World, which explains how the church should interact with a world that has been deeply transformed by science and technology and is facing challenges unforeseen by theologians of an earlier age.

In the present discussion, quotations from the document are italicized.  The document’s stated intent is to address itself “not only to the sons of the Church and to all who invoke the name of Christ, but to the whole of humanity. For the council yearns to explain to everyone how it conceives of the presence and activity of the Church in the world of today.”  In a rather lengthy introductory section, it explains why the problems faced by humanity in modern times call for a revised form of engagement by the church so that mankind may achieve its full potential in accordance with the divine will.  The Church’s objective is to help humans achieve their destiny while maintaining their dignity.

In Chapter 1, it is emphasized that human activities should all be “related to man as their center and crown.”  Since confusion exists among humans about what truly matters, the Church has a role to play in providing direction:

Endowed with light from God, she can offer solutions to them, so that man’s true situation can be portrayed and his defects explained, while at the same time his dignity and destiny are justly acknowledged.

A good starting point is what Scripture says about the place of humankind in the universe:

For Sacred Scripture teaches that man was created “to the image of God,” is capable of knowing and loving his Creator, and was appointed by Him as master of all earthly creatures that he might subdue them and use them to God’s glory. “What is man that you should care for him? You have made him little less than the angels, and crowned him with glory and honor. You have given him rule over the works of your hands, putting all things under his feet” (Ps. 8:5-7).

In addition to the above acknowledgement of humankind’s responsibility to take care of God’s creation, there is a recognition of the human need for socialization:

But God did not create man as a solitary, for from the beginning “male and female he created them” (Gen. 1:27). Their companionship produces the primary form of interpersonal communion. For by his innermost nature man is a social being, and unless he relates himself to others he can neither live nor develop his potential.

In other words, humans are not complete if they do not socialize.  As I discussed in another post, evangelicals such as the Southern Baptists have, lately, rejected the notion of group responsibility, putting a strange emphasis on individualism in their attempt to denounce critical race theory.  In fact, some of them read Genesis 1:27 as a statement that calls attention to the individuality of each of the males and females in God’s creation.  The different interpretation offered above by the writers of the Vatican II document happens to be more aligned with the biblical narrative (See for example Genesis 2:25).

The story of the fall (Genesis 3) is presented as follows: Man “was made by God in a state of holiness.”  But he “abused his liberty,” and “set himself against God and sought to attain his goal apart from God. Although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, but their senseless minds were darkened and they served the creature rather than the Creator.”

Because he chose not to fully trust God, man “is split within himself. As a result, all of human life, whether individual or collective, shows itself to be a dramatic struggle between good and evil, between light and darkness. Indeed, man finds that by himself he is incapable of battling the assaults of evil successfully, so that everyone feels as though he is bound by chains. But the Lord Himself came to free and strengthen man, renewing him inwardly and casting out that “prince of this world” (John 12:31) who held him in the bondage of sin. For sin has diminished man, blocking his path to fulfillment.”

This is not to say that man is, as the gnostics believed, split between an evil body and a good spirit.  Man’s body and soul are part of a unity that is the crown of God’s creation.

For this reason man is not allowed to despise his bodily life, rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and honorable since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day. Nevertheless, wounded by sin, man experiences rebellious stirrings in his body. But the very dignity of man postulates that man glorify God in his body and forbid it to serve the evil inclinations of his heart.

Man, created in God’s image, has a spiritual and immortal soul and “by his intellect he surpasses the material universe, for he shares in the light of the divine mind. By relentlessly employing his talents through the ages he has indeed made progress in the practical sciences and in technology and the liberal arts.”

This admission that human intellect is God-given and a powerful tool to probe God’s creation is, of course, a rejection of the older tendency to cast science as opposed to religion.  However, the document warns that intellect alone is inadequate unless it is guided by wisdom:

The intellectual nature of the human person is perfected by wisdom and needs to be, for wisdom gently attracts the mind of man to a quest and a love for what is true and good. Steeped in wisdom. man passes through visible realities to those which are unseen.

Our era needs such wisdom more than bygone ages if the discoveries made by man are to be further humanized. For the future of the world stands in peril unless wiser men are forthcoming.

Wisdom is imparted to humans with help from the Holy Spirit in a process that leads them to discover a divine law written in their consciences:

In the depths of his conscience, man detects a law which he does not impose upon himself, but which holds him to obedience. Always summoning him to love good and avoid evil, the voice of conscience when necessary speaks to his heart: do this, shun that. For man has in his heart a law written by God; to obey it is the very dignity of man; according to it he will be judged.

The above-mentioned law, however, should not be viewed as a set of commands and decrees with appropriate punishment when they are violated.  It is Jesus’ law of love:

In a wonderful manner conscience reveals that law which is fulfilled by love of God and neighbor. In fidelity to conscience, Christians are joined with the rest of men in the search for truth, and for the genuine solution to the numerous problems which arise in the life of individuals from social relationships.

Here, it becomes clear that the law of love is to guide human interactions in the pursuit of destiny and dignity for all.  Additionally, this must be done in total freedom, with no attempt to exercise any form of coercion:

Only in freedom can man direct himself toward goodness. Our contemporaries make much of this freedom and pursue it eagerly; and rightly to be sure. Often however they foster it perversely as a license for doing whatever pleases them, even if it is evil. For its part, authentic freedom is an exceptional sign of the divine image within man. For God has willed that man remain “under the control of his own decisions,” so that he can seek his Creator spontaneously, and come freely to utter and blissful perfection through loyalty to Him. Hence man’s dignity demands that he act according to a knowing and free choice that is personally motivated and prompted from within, not under blind internal impulse nor by mere external pressure.

It is difficult to read the above statement without reflecting on the awful example Christendom has historically presented to the world with its religious wars, its use of violence as a tool of oppression, its inquisitions, its witch hunts, etc.  In this alone, Vatican II seems revolutionary.  These violations of Christian principles by the Church stand out even more when the document denounces atheism:

Undeniably, those who willfully shut out God from their hearts and try to dodge religious questions are not following the dictates of their consciences, and hence are not free of blame; yet believers themselves frequently bear some responsibility for this situation. For, taken as a whole, atheism is not a spontaneous development but stems from a variety of causes, including a critical reaction against religious beliefs, and in some places against the Christian religion in particular. Hence believers can have more than a little to do with the birth of atheism. To the extent that they neglect their own training in the faith, or teach erroneous doctrine, or are deficient in their religious, moral or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than reveal the authentic face of God and religion.

There is no doubt that both Catholic and Protestant churches, by failing to be Christ-like in their interactions with the world, have greatly contributed to the rise of atheism.  What credibility does a church that claims to serve Christ have when it is becomes known for its abundant use of coercion and violence?  Today, many Christians still refuse to recognize that Jesus stood for non-violence.

Nevertheless, the document writers vehemently denounced two forms of modern atheism:

• A form of atheism that rejects any dependence on God and promotes the notion that a human being should be “the sole artisan and creator of his own history.” Advocates of this view feel particularly empowered by progress in science and technology and have no need for the divine.
• A form of atheism that “anticipates the liberation of man especially through his economic and social emancipation. This form argues that by its nature religion thwarts this liberation by arousing man’s hope for a deceptive future life, thereby diverting him from the constructing of the earthly city. Consequently when the proponents of this doctrine gain governmental power they vigorously fight against religion, and promote atheism by using, especially in the education of youth, those means of pressure which public power has at its disposal.” Clearly, this criticism is directly against the socialist and communist regimes of this world.

To the writers’ credit, the document welcomes a “sincere and prudent dialogue” with atheists, recognizing that the only way to promote a Christian way of life is to show the world, by example, what it really means to follow Christ:

The remedy which must be applied to atheism, however, is to be sought in a proper presentation of the Church’s teaching as well as in the integral life of the Church and her members. For it is the function of the Church, led by the Holy Spirit Who renews and purifies her ceaselessly, to make God the Father and His Incarnate Son present and in a sense visible. This result is achieved chiefly by the witness of a living and mature faith, namely, one trained to see difficulties clearly and to master them. Many martyrs have given luminous witness to this faith and continue to do so. This faith needs to prove its fruitfulness by penetrating the believer’s entire life, including its worldly dimensions, and by activating him toward justice and love, especially regarding the needy. What does the most reveal God’s presence, however, is the brotherly charity of the faithful who are united in spirit as they work together for the faith of the Gospel and who prove themselves a sign of unity.

The ideas promoted by Vatican II for the building of the community of humankind reflect Jesus’ preaching about the kingdom of God, a realm within which loving God and loving one’s neighbor are the guiding principles:

God, Who has fatherly concern for everyone, has willed that all men should constitute one family and treat one another in a spirit of brotherhood. For having been created in the image of God, Who “from one man has created the whole human race and made them live all over the face of the earth” (Acts 17:26), all men are called to one and the same goal, namely God Himself.

For this reason, love for God and neighbor is the first and greatest commandment. Sacred Scripture, however, teaches us that the love of God cannot be separated from love of neighbor: “If there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying: Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself…. Love therefore is the fulfillment of the Law” (Rom. 13:9-10; cf. 1 John 4:20). To men growing daily more dependent on one another, and to a world becoming more unified every day, this truth proves to be of paramount importance.

Since, for humans, individual development cannot be separated from the need for social life, Vatican II encouraged the building of social institutions whose focus is to assert human dignity.  It also recognized that both external circumstances (social, economic) and, more importantly, internal ones (pride, selfishness) can present obstacles to achieving this goal.  This means success is possible only through an intense and sustained effort and reliance on God’s grace.

The task is rendered even more difficult by the fact that human interactions are more complex than they used to be and one must account for worldwide interconnectivity.  This means groups distributed over the whole world must be included in the definition of the common good.  At the same time, there is an increased awareness of individual rights which must be respected to maintain human dignity.  Those rights are listed:

Therefore, there must be made available to all men everything necessary for leading a life truly human, such as food, clothing, and shelter; the right to choose a state of life freely and to found a family, the right to education, to employment, to a good reputation, to respect, to appropriate information, to activity in accord with the upright norm of one’s own conscience, to protection of privacy and rightful freedom even in matters religious.

The guidance offered by the council is as follows:

Coming down to practical and particularly urgent consequences, this council lays stress on reverence for man; everyone must consider his every neighbor without exception as another self, taking into account first of all His life and the means necessary to living it with dignity (Jas. 2:15-16), so as not to imitate the rich man who had no concern for the poor man Lazarus.( Luke 16:18-31)

In our times a special obligation binds us to make ourselves the neighbor of every person without exception and of actively helping him when he comes across our path, whether he be an old person abandoned by all, a foreign laborer unjustly looked down upon, a refugee, a child born of an unlawful union and wrongly suffering for a sin he did not commit, or a hungry person who disturbs our conscience by recalling the voice of the Lord, “As long as you did it for one of these the least of my brethren, you did it for me” (Matt. 25:40).

Clearly, the universal scope of this advice is bound to be in conflict with the boundaries set by the nations of the world.  By definition, the kingdom of God, as defined by Jesus, differs from earthly kingdoms and has in mind the interests of all humans rather than the interests of a nation.

Maintaining human dignity also involves rejecting anything that leads to the destruction of human lives or causes harm, whether physical or spiritual.  The pro-life stance embraced by Vatican II goes far beyond the sole focus of evangelicals on the abortion issue.

Furthermore, whatever is opposed to life itself, such as any type of murder, genocide, abortion, euthanasia or willful self-destruction, whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, torments inflicted on body or mind, attempts to coerce the will itself; whatever insults human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution, the selling of women and children; as well as disgraceful working conditions, where men are treated as mere tools for profit, rather than as free and responsible persons; all these things and others of their like are infamies indeed. They poison human society, but they do more harm to those who practice them than those who suffer from the injury. Moreover, they are supreme dishonor to the Creator.

In contrast to the intolerance that had characterized the Church in earlier centuries, Vatican II urged the Church to extend this respect for human dignity to those who have different worldviews:

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.

In fact, even though Christians have a duty to affirm and share the religious truths that are the object of their faith, they are urged to follow the teaching of Jesus and be exceedingly tolerant and respectful of others:

This love and good will, to be sure, must in no way render us indifferent to truth and goodness. Indeed love itself impels the disciples of Christ to speak the saving truth to all men. But it is necessary to distinguish between error, which always merits repudiation, and the person in error, who never loses the dignity of being a person even when he is flawed by false or inadequate religious notions. God alone is the judge and searcher of hearts, for that reason He forbids us to make judgments about the internal guilt of anyone.

The teaching of Christ even requires that we forgive injuries, and extends the law of love to include every enemy, according to the command of the New Law: “You have heard that it was said: Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thy enemy. But I say to you: love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who persecute and calumniate you” (Matt. 5:43-44).

It should be obvious that those who are called to love their neighbor as themselves should strongly support the concept of equality and reject any form of discrimination:

Since all men possess a rational soul and are created in God’s likeness, since they have the same nature and origin, have been redeemed by Christ and enjoy the same divine calling and destiny, the basic equality of all must receive increasingly greater recognition.

True, all men are not alike from the point of view of varying physical power and the diversity of intellectual and moral resources. Nevertheless, with respect to the fundamental rights of the person, every type of discrimination, whether social or cultural, whether based on sex, race, color, social condition, language or religion, is to be overcome and eradicated as contrary to God’s intent. For in truth it must still be regretted that fundamental personal rights are still not being universally honored. Such is the case of a woman who is denied the right to choose a husband freely, to embrace a state of life or to acquire an education or cultural benefits equal to those recognized for men.

Therefore, although rightful differences exist between men, the equal dignity of persons demands that a more humane and just condition of life be brought about. For excessive economic and social differences between the members of the one human family or population groups cause scandal, and militate against social justice, equity, the dignity of the human person, as well as social and international peace.

This statement obviously puts responsibility on believers to fight against patriarchy, racism, discrimination against the poor and non-Christians, and promotes social justice and equity, two terms that are often vilified by conservative Christians.  It also sees inequalities and discrimination as obstacles to the pursuit of peace.  Christians are encouraged to promote and assist “the public and private institutions dedicated to bettering the conditions of human life.”  Vatican II rejected any tendency toward “a merely individualistic morality,” or toward detachment from the needs of society.  It also denounced attempts to impede government work that aims at improving social conditions:

Many in various places even make light of social laws and precepts, and do not hesitate to resort to various frauds and deceptions in avoiding just taxes or other debts due to society. Others think little of certain norms of social life, for example those designed for the protection of health, or laws establishing speed limits; they do not even avert to the fact that by such indifference they imperil their own life and that of others.

Human activity in the world includes work and efforts to improve the human condition.  Such activity saw an explosion with the advances made in science and technology.  Unfortunately, history shows that these advances, in many cases, set the Church and the scientific community in conflict with each other.  Vatican II recognized that this conflict should not have existed in the first place:

Thus, far from thinking that works produced by man’s own talent and energy are in opposition to God’s power, and that the rational creature exists as a kind of rival to the Creator, Christians are convinced that the triumphs of the human race are a sign of God’s grace and the flowering of His own mysterious design. For the greater man’s power becomes, the farther his individual and community responsibility extends. Hence it is clear that men are not deterred by the Christian message from building up the world, or impelled to neglect the welfare of their fellows, but that they are rather more stringently bound to do these very things.

Given the history of the Church, including harassment of the early scientists by agents of the Inquisition, the above statement implies a substantial change in the way Catholic authorities read the Bible.  In my previous post, I discussed the fact that the writers of the Vatican II documents, unlike evangelical scholars (who believe that the Bible is inerrant on all matters it addresses), assume that Scripture is without error on “that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation.”  That kind of approach to the Bible makes it possible to remove any notion of competition between Scripture and science as sources of knowledge and welcome scientific innovations as long as they are always put at the service of humankind:

Hence, the norm of human activity is this: that in accord with the divine plan and will, it harmonize with the genuine good of the human race, and that it allow men as individuals and as members of society to pursue their total vocation and fulfill it.

In the New Testament, the kingdom of God is presented as an alternative to the world and is expected to replace world governments in time.  Vatican II provided insights into the relationship between the Church and the world during the time leading to the future consummation of the kingdom of God.  The ideas discussed so far for the purpose of preserving human dignity are central to that relationship.  The document writers state the following:

Coming forth from the eternal Father’s love, founded in time by Christ the Redeemer and made one in the Holy Spirit, the Church has a saving and an eschatological purpose which can be fully attained only in the future world. But she is already present in this world, and is composed of men, that is, of members of the earthly city who have a call to form the family of God’s children during the present history of the human race, and to keep increasing it until the Lord returns. United on behalf of heavenly values and enriched by them, this family has been “constituted and structured as a society in this world” by Christ, and is equipped “by appropriate means for visible and social union.” Thus the Church, at once “a visible association and a spiritual community,” goes forward together with humanity and experiences the same earthly lot which the world does. She serves as a leaven and as a kind of soul for human society as it is to be renewed in Christ and transformed into God’s family.

According to this statement, the kingdom of God “can be attained only in the future world,” but “is already present in this world” as the Church.  The Church, according to Vatican II, has been equipped by Christ to carry out his vision for humanity on earth, to grow, to enlighten the world and transform it without being corrupted by it.  The believers’ allegiance is to God only and the Church is the conscience of the world. This view stands in contrast to the view expressed by Protestant leaders such as John Calvin who was greatly influenced by Augustine, one of the thinkers who shaped the theology of the Catholic Church in the Middle-Ages.  Calvin believed that the kingdom of God could not be achieved on earth and that the Church and the state were both called by God to work in partnership.  The Church was to focus on spiritual matters, while the state was empowered by God to maintain order and ensure the proper conduct of religion, using coercion as necessary.  This erroneous view, which justifies violence done by the state supposedly in God’s name, came from the unholy marriage between the Church and the Roman Empire and appears to be prevalent among many Protestants even today.  Accordingly, the idea of separation of state and religion, which is in fact consistent with the non-coercive nature of the Gospel of Christ, is seen today by many conservative Christians as an attempt by atheists to keep them from doing what they see as God’s work.

As discussed earlier, Vatican II rejects coercion and affirms the right of humans to remain “in control of their own decisions.”  Therefore, the Church is well-positioned to affirms the need to respect human rights in the modern world, and supports efforts to promote them as long as those efforts do not push for autonomy from God:

The Church, therefore, by virtue of the Gospel committed to her, proclaims the rights of man; she acknowledges and greatly esteems the dynamic movements of today by which these rights are everywhere fostered. Yet these movements must be penetrated by the spirit of the Gospel and protected against any kind of false autonomy. For we are tempted to think that our personal rights are fully ensured only when we are exempt from every requirement of divine law. But this way lies not the maintenance of the dignity of the human person, but its annihilation.

Similarly, given its focus on achieving unity under Christ, the Church can be a force in the modern world in the effort to consolidate the human community by supporting and initiating “activities on behalf of all men, especially those designed for the needy, such as the works of mercy and similar undertakings.”

But again, the Church will not associate herself with any form of coercion:

Thus she shows the world that an authentic union, social and external, results from a union of minds and hearts, namely from that faith and charity by which her own unity is unbreakably rooted in the Holy Spirit. For the force which the Church can inject into the modern society of man consists in that faith and charity put into vital practice, not in any external dominion exercised by merely human means.

Vatican II also rejected the notion that Christians must solely focus on the world to come, as if the affairs of the world they live in were of no consequence to them.  Instead, Christians are urged to be fully engaged in the building of a better world while being careful not to treat their work in the world as if it can be separated from their religious faith:

This council exhorts Christians, as citizens of two cities, to strive to discharge their earthly duties conscientiously and in response to the Gospel spirit. They are mistaken who, knowing that we have here no abiding city but seek one which is to come, think that they may therefore shirk their earthly responsibilities. For they are forgetting that by the faith itself they are more obliged than ever to measure up to these duties, each according to his proper vocation. Nor, on the contrary, are they any less wide of the mark who think that religion consists in acts of worship alone and in the discharge of certain moral obligations, and who imagine they can plunge themselves into earthly affairs in such a way as to imply that these are altogether divorced from the religious life. This split between the faith which many profess and their daily lives deserves to be counted among the more serious errors of our age. Long since, the Prophets of the Old Testament fought vehemently against this scandal and even more so did Jesus Christ Himself in the New Testament threaten it with grave punishments. Therefore, let there be no false opposition between professional and social activities on the one part, and religious life on the other. The Christian who neglects his temporal duties, neglects his duties toward his neighbor and even God, and jeopardizes his eternal salvation. Christians should rather rejoice that, following the example of Christ Who worked as an artisan, they are free to give proper exercise to all their earthly activities and to their humane, domestic, professional, social and technical enterprises by gathering them into one vital synthesis with religious values, under whose supreme direction all things are harmonized unto God’s glory.

Indeed, Jesus said: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21).  That warning becomes more explicit in Matthew 25:31-46, where Jesus had strong words of condemnation for those who claim to follow him but are insensitive to the plight of “the least of these,” namely the hungry, the thirty, the strangers, the naked, the sick, the prisoners.