Rev. Ralph Wiltgen: The Rhine Flows Into the Tiber: A History of Vatican II

[Stone]

THE SECOND SESSION
September 29 to December 4, 1963

WORLD ALLIANCE

On November 15, when Cardinal Lercaro in the presence of the other Moderators, the Coordinating Commission, and the Council Presidency, read a progress report on the second session to Pope Paul VI, he said that the Council could move ahead with much greater speed “if we Moderators can use the same method that we used at the conclusion of the debate on Chapter 2 of the schema on the Church.” According to this method, which had been used in voting on the four points and was now being requested “by many episcopal conferences,” the Moderators—as the Cardinal said— would be empowered to determine “the major aspects of each debate,” and would put them in the form of questions for voting, “so that directive norms could be provided for the commissions.”

The requested authorization was not granted to the Moderators, who very likely could have obtained a majority vote on the Council floor for whatever proposals they might make. If adopted, this method would have given them the power to decide what was the majority opinion, and likewise would have made it possible for them to determine policy for the individual commissions. The Moderators, technically, were supposed to have only administrative authority, with the policy being determined by the general assembly after—not before—the commissions had thoroughly studied both the oral and written interventions, and had revised the schema in accordance with what it considered the mind of the Council Fathers to be. There were no further cases of “points” being formulated by the Moderators.

Having failed in getting this suggestion officially adopted, the Moderators—and the liberals whom they represented—sought other ways to gain more control over the individual commissions. The struggle for theological power was becoming more and more evident.

After November 15, there was increased agitation against so-called “Curia-controlled commissions.” The solution for the problem, presented to the Pope in letters signed by individual Council Fathers and by entire episcopal conferences, was to hold new elections for all presidents, secretaries, and members of all Council commissions. The aim was to increase the number of liberal members on each commission. The European aliiance by this time had full control of the Council majority and was confident that it could replace all conservative members on Council commissions if only it were given the opportunity. Less extreme proposals suggested that elections be held at least for new presidents and secretaries.

Still another proposal was that the number of members on the individual Council commissions should be increased, since this would make more personnel available for subcommissions and then theoretically the work of the commissions could be accomplished more quickly.

On November 21, at the seventy-second General Congregation, the Secretary General announced that the Pope had decided to allow the number of members on each commission to be increased from twenty-five to thirty, “in order that the work of the Council commissions may be carried out more expeditiously and quickly.” In doing so the Pope was responding “to the requests of many Council Fathers.” It was further announced that the Council Fathers were to elect four members and the fifth would be appointed by the Pope, who also authorized each commission to choose from its members an additional vice president and from its periti an additional secretary.

The lengthy announcement also suggested that the presidents of episcopal conferences should assemble their members and name not more than three of them for each commission. These lists were to be submitted to the Secretary General by Monday, November 25, for printing and distribution, so that the election could take place on Thursday, November 28, one week after the announcement was made.

Most significant in the General Secretary’s announcement was this sentence: “It is highly desirable that several conferences should unite and present a combined list.”

With each member of a thirty-man commission representing 3 1/3 per cent of the commission’s voting power, and with four members to be elected, there was at stake in this election 13 1/3 per cent of each commission’s voting power. Realizing this, the European alliance set to work drawing up an unbeatable international list. This work was greatly facilitated since by this time, late in the second session, the European alliance had expanded into a world alliance. In point of fact, the origins of the world alliance went back to the beginning of the first session, and from that time it was always under the dominating influence of the European alliance.

The world alliance during the first session was an undercover group of five or six bishops and archbishops, representing national, regional, or continental episcopal conferences, who met periodically. From the beginning of the second session, when they considered themselves strong enough to act more openly, they held meetings at Domus Mariae each Friday evening and saw their membership grow to twenty-four bishops and archbishops, who represented approximately sixty-five episcopal conferences.

The one who presided over the meetings was Coadjutor Archbishop Pierre Veuillot of Paris, whenever he was in Rome.

Although not juridically organized, the world alliance was able to determine the policy of the controlling liberal majority, and prepared sample letters which individual episcopal conferences then submitted to the Pope, requesting him to take specific action on specific issues. The secretaries of these twenty-four members held a meeting of their own every Tuesday night, thus making possible top level intercommunication twice every week.

When the lists of candidates for Council commissions were ready for distribution by the General Secretariat on November 27, they contained in the first place the combined list presented by the sixty-five episcopal conferences of the world alliance. Other lists were presented by eight national hierarchies, the superiors general, and three groups of Eastern Rite Churches.

When the results of the November 28 election were announced the next day, it was no surprise that all candidates elected to office came from the list proposed by the world alliance. Germans and Austrians had been so well placed on the list that six of them were elected to office. France had to be satisfied with only two.

All candidates presented by the world alliance, however, did not fulfill Pope Paul’s condition of being “truly skilled” in the material to be studied by their commissions. There was the case of the Council Father placed second on the list of candidates for the Theological Commission, who was elected to office with 1448 votes. Some days before the election he presented a substitute schema on the Blessed Virgin Mary to sixty bishops meeting in the Columbus Hotel. When they raised objections against it, he could not answer them and admitted repeatedly that he was no theologian, but was simply presenting to the group a schema which had been drawn up for him by others.

After this election there was no longer need for anyone to doubt about the direction in which the Council was headed. Strangely enough, Pope Paul waited six weeks before publishing the names of his lone candidates for each commission.