So one of the questions remaining is whether the commissions (and subcommissions thereof) appointed by the council have more authority than the council itself. This is where I get confused.
In Church governance there is the principle of delegation. For example, when we say “The Holy See” or “The Apostolic See” it refers to the pope. However, in reality, the pope rarely deals with any of these issues or hears about them. Most popes have their own work to do and can’t take care of 20 million issues that occur each day around the world. Therefore, the Holy See has congregations, commissions, institutes, departments, etc to deal with very specific issues. As long as each of these does what has been delegated to it by the Pontiff, until the Pontiff says differently, one assumes that whatever comes out of them is his will. They have been “deputized” to speak authoritatively for him. Observe quotation marks. I couldn’t think of a better word in English.
The Council followed the same structure. It appointed commissions to deal with subjects that could not be dealt with in the general sessions. These commissions speak with authority, because they speak in the name of the Council. The only one who can speak over the Council is the pope.
This is the big issue that some people have with Vatican II. Some people say, “There is room to criticize Vatican II.” However, the last word that we had from the pope himself came from Pope Benedict when he addressed the SSPX and said that Vatican II and its documents must be accepted as they are. If we understand “Vaticanese”. This translates into “There is no room for discussion here.” or “It is what it is.”
But we will always have stubborn people who will insist that until the pope sits on his chair and says something like, “I solemnly declare and define that the Vatican II documents are to be accepted as they are, without criticism and without further arguments,” they can still argue.
This is yes and no. Yes in the sense that there is no commandment that says “Though shall not argue.” No in the sense that the Church is not willing to hear what you have to say, because she has made up her mind and is not interested in your opinion or mine. Until another pope comes around and says, “Ok, what do you want to say to me about these documents?” all of this discussion about the documents never makes it off the printed page.
Our current pope, Francis, is equally disinterested in entertaining a conversation about Vatican II and its documents. Therefore, those who continue to write and speak against them are actually just entertaining audiences, but not really putting a dent in the way that the popes have set up. The Church has no problems with entertainment that is moral. If people want to entertain themselves and others griping, complaining, denouncing, and pointing fingers at Vatican II and its documents, they are free to do so. For the moment, do not expect to be heard or expect an answer from the Holly Father. Pope Francis is very much of the same bolt of cloth as Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI.
My recommendation to people is to focus on what is immediately before them and leave these arguments to theologians and bishops who have the pope’s ear, if and when the pope chooses to listen. At the end of the day, my salvation does not depend on whether Vatican II says “the Church of Jesus Christ subsists in the Catholic Church” or “the Catholic Church is the Church of Jesus Christ” Whichever wording I choose is not going to get me one single step closer to heaven. However, every single word that I say which violates charity, respect, and humility, because I don’t like the wording, will place me one step further from my eternal salvation. As Scripture says. We are saved by faith, hope and love and the greatest of these is love.
All too often human beings get so wrapped up in language that they lose control of their passions and they sin as a result. It is rather interesting how we often point the finger at Muslims for this, but we Catholics do the same thing. We do not endorse physical terrorism, but I wonder if what we do to our psyche is not just as bad. Really, it makes no sense to damage our psyche with all of these angry thoughts that do nothing for us or for the Church. There is an intimate connection between how we feel think and choose to act.
