Visit Vatican.Va for a complete list of documents of the
Church.
CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH
RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS
OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH
INTRODUCTION
The Second Vatican Council, with its Dogmatic
Constitution Lumen gentium, and its Decrees on Ecumenism
(Unitatis redintegratio) and the Oriental Churches
(Orientalium Ecclesiarum), has contributed in a decisive
way to the renewal of Catholic ecclesiology. The Supreme
Pontiffs have also contributed to this renewal by
offering their own insights and orientations for praxis:
Paul VI in his Encyclical Letter Ecclesiam suam (1964)
and John Paul II in his Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint
(1995).
The consequent duty of theologians to expound with
greater clarity the diverse aspects of ecclesiology has
resulted in a flowering of writing in this field. In fact
it has become evident that this theme is a most fruitful
one which, however, has also at times required
clarification by way of precise definition and
correction, for instance in the declaration Mysterium
Ecclesiae (1973), the Letter addressed to the Bishops of
the Catholic Church Communionis notio (1992), and the
declaration Dominus Iesus (2000), all published by the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
The vastness of the subject matter and the novelty of
many of the themes involved continue to provoke
theological reflection. Among the many new contributions
to the field, some are not immune from erroneous
interpretation which in turn give rise to confusion and
doubt. A number of these interpretations have been
referred to the attention of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith. Given the universality of Catholic
doctrine on the Church, the Congregation wishes to
respond to these questions by clarifying the authentic
meaning of some ecclesiological expressions used by the
magisterium which are open to misunderstanding in the
theological debate.
RESPONSES TO THE QUESTIONS
FIRST QUESTION
Did the Second Vatican Council change the Catholic
doctrine on the Church?
RESPONSE
The Second Vatican Council neither changed nor intended
to change this doctrine, rather it developed, deepened
and more fully explained it.
This was exactly what John XXIII said at the beginning of
the Council.[1] Paul VI affirmed it[2] and commented in
the act of promulgating the Constitution Lumen gentium:
“There is no better comment to make than to say that this
promulgation really changes nothing of the traditional
doctrine. What Christ willed, we also will. What was,
still is. What the Church has taught down through the
centuries, we also teach. In simple terms that which was
assumed, is now explicit; that which was uncertain, is
now clarified; that which was meditated upon, discussed
and sometimes argued over, is now put together in one
clear formulation”.[3] The Bishops repeatedly expressed
and fulfilled this intention.[4]
SECOND QUESTION
What is the meaning of the affirmation that the Church of
Christ subsists in the Catholic Church?
RESPONSE
Christ “established here on earth” only one Church and
instituted it as a “visible and spiritual community”[5],
that from its beginning and throughout the centuries has
always existed and will always exist, and in which alone
are found all the elements that Christ himself
instituted.[6] “This one Church of Christ, which we
confess in the Creed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic
[…]. This Church, constituted and organised in this world
as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, governed
by the successor of Peter and the Bishops in communion
with him”.[7]
In number 8 of the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium
‘subsistence’ means this perduring, historical continuity
and the permanence of all the elements instituted by
Christ in the Catholic Church[8], in which the Church of
Christ is concretely found on this earth.
It is possible, according to Catholic doctrine, to affirm
correctly that the Church of Christ is present and
operative in the churches and ecclesial Communities not
yet fully in communion with the Catholic Church, on
account of the elements of sanctification and truth that
are present in them.[9] Nevertheless, the word “subsists”
can only be attributed to the Catholic Church alone
precisely because it refers to the mark of unity that we
profess in the symbols of the faith (I believe... in the
“one” Church); and this “one” Church subsists in the
Catholic Church.[10]
THIRD QUESTION
Why was the expression “subsists in” adopted instead of
the simple word “is”?
RESPONSE
The use of this expression, which indicates the full
identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic
Church, does not change the doctrine on the Church.
Rather, it comes from and brings out more clearly the
fact that there are “numerous elements of sanctification
and of truth” which are found outside her structure, but
which “as gifts properly belonging to the Church of
Christ, impel towards Catholic Unity”.[11]
“It follows that these separated churches and
Communities, though we believe they suffer from defects,
are deprived neither of significance nor importance in
the mystery of salvation. In fact the Spirit of Christ
has not refrained from using them as instruments of
salvation, whose value derives from that fullness of
grace and of truth which has been entrusted to the
Catholic Church”[12].
FOURTH QUESTION
Why does the Second Vatican Council use the term “Church”
in reference to the oriental Churches separated from full
communion with the Catholic Church?
RESPONSE
The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of the
term. “Because these Churches, although separated, have
true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic
succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means
of which they remain linked to us by very close
bonds”[13], they merit the title of “particular or local
Churches”[14], and are called sister Churches of the
particular Catholic Churches.[15]
“It is through the celebration of the Eucharist of the
Lord in each of these Churches that the Church of God is
built up and grows in stature”.[16] However, since
communion with the Catholic Church, the visible head of
which is the Bishop of Rome and the Successor of Peter,
is not some external complement to a particular Church
but rather one of its internal constitutive principles,
these venerable Christian communities lack something in
their condition as particular churches.[17]
On the other hand, because of the division between
Christians, the fullness of universality, which is proper
to the Church governed by the Successor of Peter and the
Bishops in communion with him, is not fully realised in
history.[18]
FIFTH QUESTION
Why do the texts of the Council and those of the
Magisterium since the Council not use the title of
“Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born
out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?
RESPONSE
According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not
enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders,
and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of
the Church. These ecclesial Communities which,
specifically because of the absence of the sacramental
priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral
substance of the Eucharistic Mystery[19] cannot,
according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in
the proper sense[20].
The Supreme Pontiff Benedict XVI, at the Audience granted
to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation
for the Doctrine of the Faith, ratified and confirmed
these Responses, adopted in the Plenary Session of the
Congregation, and ordered their publication.
Rome, from the Offices of the Congregation for the
Doctrine of the Faith, June 29, 2007, the Solemnity of
the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul.
William Cardinal Levada
Prefect
Angelo Amato, S.D.B.
Titular Archbishop of Sila
Secretary
[1] John XXIII, Address of 11 October 1962: “…The
Council…wishes to transmit Catholic doctrine, whole and
entire, without alteration or deviation…To be sure, at
the present time, it is necessary that Christian doctrine
in its entirety, and with nothing taken away from it, is
accepted with renewed enthusiasm, and serene and tranquil
adherence… it is necessary that the very same doctrine be
understood more widely and more profoundly as all those
who sincerely adhere to the Christian, Catholic and
Apostolic faith strongly desire …it is necessary that
this certain and unchangeable doctrine, to which is owed
the obedience of faith, be explored and expounded in the
manner required by our times. For the deposit of faith
itself, or the truths which are contained in our
venerable doctrine, are one thing; another thing is the
way in which they are expressed, with however the same
meaning and signification”: AAS 54 [1962] 791-792
[2] Cf. Paul VI, Address of 29 September 1963: AAS 55
[1963] 847-852.
[3] Paul VI, Address of 21 November 1964: AAS 56 [1964]
1009-1010.
[4] The Council wished to express the identity of the
Church of Christ with the Catholic Church. This is clear
from the discussions on the decree Unitatis
redintegratio. The Schema of the Decree was proposed on
the floor of the Council on 23.9.1964 with a Relatio (Act
Syn III/II 296-344). The Secretariat for the Unity of
Christians responded on 10.11.1964 to the suggestions
sent by Bishops in the months that followed (Act Syn
III/VII 11-49). Herewith are quoted four texts from this
Expensio modorum concerning this first response.
A) [In Nr. 1 (Prooemium) Schema Decreti: Act Syn III/II
296, 3-6]
“Pag. 5, lin. 3-6: Videtur etiam Ecclesiam catholicam
inter illas Communiones comprehendi, quod falsum esset.
R(espondetur): Hic tantum factum, prout ab omnibus
conspicitur, describendum est. Postea clare affirmatur
solam Ecclesiam catholicam esse veram Ecclesiam Christi”
(Act Syn III/VII 12).
B) [In Caput I in genere: Act Syn III/II 297-301]
“4 - Expressius dicatur unam solam esse veram Ecclesiam
Christi; hanc esse Catholicam Apostolicam Romanam; omnes
debere inquirere, ut eam cognoscant et ingrediantur ad
salutem obtinendam...
R(espondetur): In toto textu sufficienter effertur, quod
postulatur. Ex altera parte non est tacendum etiam in
aliis communitatibus christianis inveniri veritates
revelatas et elementa ecclesialia”(Act Syn III/VII 15).
Cf. also ibid pt. 5.
C) [In Caput I in genere: Act Syn III/II 296s]
“5 - Clarius dicendum esset veram Ecclesiam esse solam
Ecclesiam catholicam romanam...
R(espondetur): Textus supponit doctrinam in constitutione
‘De Ecclesia’ expositam, ut pag. 5, lin. 24-25
affirmatur” (Act Syn III/VII 15). Thus the commission
whose task it was to evaluate the responses to the Decree
Unitatis redintegratio clearly expressed the identity of
the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church and its
unicity, and understood this doctrine to be founded in
the Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium.
D) [In Nr. 2 Schema Decreti: Act Syn III/II 297s]
“Pag. 6, lin. 1- 24: Clarius exprimatur unicitas
Ecclesiae. Non sufficit inculcare, ut in textu fit,
unitatem Ecclesiae.
R(espondetur): a) Ex toto textu clare apparet
identificatio Ecclesiae Christi cum Ecclesia catholica,
quamvis, ut oportet, efferantur elementa ecclesialia
aliarum communitatum”.
“Pag. 7, lin. 5: Ecclesia a successoribus Apostolorum cum
Petri successore capite gubernata (cf. novum textum ad
pag. 6, lin.33-34) explicite dicitur ‘unicus Dei grex’ et
lin. 13 ‘una et unica Dei Ecclesia’ ” (Act Syn III/VII).
The two expressions quoted are those of Unitatis
redintegratio 2.5 e 3.1.
[5] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution
Lumen gentium, 8.1.
[6] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis
redintegratio, 3.2; 3.4; 3.5; 4.6.
[7] Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution, Lumen
gentium, 8.2.
[8] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae, 1.1: AAS 65 [1973] 397;
Declaration Dominus Iesus, 16.3: AAS 92 [2000-II]
757-758; Notification on the Book of Leonardo Boff, OFM,
“Church: Charism and Power”: AAS 77 [1985] 758-759.
[9] Cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Ut unum sint,
11.3: AAS 87 [1995-II] 928.
[10] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution
Lumen gentium, 8.2.
[11] Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen
gentium, 8.2.
[12] Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis
redintegratio, 3.4.
[13] Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis
redintegratio, 15.3; cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of
the Faith, Letter Communionis notio, 17.2: AAS, 85
[1993-II] 848.
[14] Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis
redintegratio, 14.1.
[15] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis
redintegratio, 14.1; John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Ut
unum sint, 56 f: AAS 87 [1995-II] 954 ff.
[16] Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis
redintegratio, 15.1.
[17] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Letter Communionis notio, 17.3: AAS 85 [1993-II] 849.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Cf. Second Vatican Council, Decree Unitatis
redintegratio, 22.3.
[20] Cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,
Declaration Dominus Iesus, 17.2: AAS 92 [2000-II] 758.