1 Vatican II, a great ecclesial and missionary event
Pope John XXIII announced Vatican II on January 25, 1959. The Council became an event that marked the Church and, in a very special way, her missionary dimension. Three stages marked the Council: the antepreparatory stage (from January 25, 1959 to June 6, 1960); preparatory stage (June 6 to October 11, 1962); conciliar stage, divided into four periods (from October 11, 1962 to December 8, 1965).

Some Consolata missionaries participated in the Council by right and in fact: Fr. Dominic Fiorina, Superior General; Bishop A. Beltramino, Vicar Apostolic of Iringa, Tanganyika; Bishop Lorenzo Bessone, Vicar Apostolic of Meru, Kenya; Bishop Charles Cavallera, Vicar Apostolic of Nyeri, Kenya; Bishop Carlo Re, former Vicar Apostolic of Nyeri (1931-1946), and, during the Council, Bishop of Ampurias-Tempio in Sardinia, Italy; Bishop Giuseppe Nepote Fus, Prelate of Rio Branco, present diocese of Roraima, Brazil; Bishop Angelo Cuniberti, Vicar Apostolic of Florencia, Colombia; Bishop Servilio Conti, Bishop of Roraima, Brazil. Eight people in all, a rather small minority compared to the 2,300 conciliar members. We are going to see what was their contribution in the three stages of the Council.


ANTEPREPARATORY STAGE

The first preparation of the Council was entrusted to an Antepreparatory Commission appointed on May 17, 1959. Its president was Cardinal Tardini. Its job was to contact all the bishops, the Offices of the Roman Curia and Catholic Universities and Faculties. Its purpose was to collect advice, suggestions, proposals; to write down the general ideas of the themes to be treated; to suggest the composition of the diverse groups that would take care of the preparation of the Council. After having studied with the members of the Antepreparatory Commission how to procede in their work, Cardinal Tardini sent, on June 18, 1959, a circular letter to all Bishops, Prelates and Major Superiors of Religious Institutes telling them that the Pope wanted to know their opinions, suggestions, advice and desires concerning the doctrine and the discipline of the Church in that historical moment it was living in; they could ask advice from other competent ecclesistical persons.

The Pope desired also that Catholic Theological Schools and Universities be consulted the same way that Bishops, Prelates and Major Religious Superiors were been consulted. On July 18, 1959, Cardinal Tardini wrote to all Universities, Academies and Ecclesistical Schools of the world.

From this consultation of Bishops and Prelates, Offices of the Roman Curia and Ecclesiastical Schools and Universities came a pretty substantial amount of suggestions and proposals on a great variety of topics: Dogmatic, biblical, pastoral, missionary, ecumenical, moral, disciplinary.

1. The “Consilia et vota” of the IMC Council Fathers

Five Consolata missionaries answered the letter sent by Card. Tardini on June 18 to the future Council Fathers, sending in proposals and wishes: Bishop C. Cavallera, Bishop of Nyeri, Kenya; Bishop Lorenzo Bessone, Bishop of Meru, Kenya; Bishop A. Beltramino, Bishop of Iringa, Tanzania; Bishop C. Re, Bishop of Ampurias-Tempio, Italy; Fr. Dominic Fiorina, Superior General of the Consolata Missionaries. The following did not answer the letter: Bishop Nepote Fus, prelate of Rio Branco, Brazil; Bishop A. Torasso, Vicar Apostolic of Florencia, Colombia.

Fr. D. Fiorina, Superior General IMC, was the first to answer. Among the “vota” IMC, the most complete and meaningful was, without any doubt, the one of Bishop C. Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya). The shortest one is the one by Bishop A. Beltramino (Iringa, Tanganyika).

The answers of the bishops, collected and published by the Antepreparatory Commission, are a good measuring rod to understand the problematic present in the life of the Church, especially in the young Churches. What did the IMC bishops think about their Churches in those crucial years of their lives? What were their expectations and their pastoral needs? What kind of voice were they going to be in the Council? We can surely say that our bishops’ wishes and proposals did not warrant a deep and wide reform of the Church, neither did they ask for any sort of new Christological thinking. There was one dogmatic proposal, by Bishop C. Re (Ampurias-Tempio, Italy), in which he asked the Council to elaborate a dogmatic constitution on the Church in which the relationship between the Mystical Body of Christ and the Visible Church would be studied in depth. All other IMC proposals expressed in the ‘vota’ had a pastoral character: liturgical adaptation, relationship between bishops and religious and missionary institutes, formation of the local clergy and laity, ecumenical dialogue, and so on.

Liturgical adaptation

The ‘adaptation theme’ is widely present in the ‘vota’ of the African episcopates: it was almost unanimously requested. It was the same for Bishop C. Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya) and for the African conferences of Anglophonic Africa. Such adaptation was needed because of the deep socio-political changes in the continent. For them, it was necessary to free Christianity from its western wrapping by effectively adapting it to the African reality. A conscious and active participation of the faithful in the liturgy demanded the translation of the texts and the use of the vernacular in the liturgy (so for Bishop C. Cavallera, Nyeri, Kenya, and other bishops). Other topics connected with liturgy requested adaptation according to many of the African bishops, such as: the pastoral of the Sacraments, Feasts of obligation, Eucharistic fast, the times for the celebration of the Mass, and other rituals that had been born in a European context and which had no meaning in Africa or were outright difficult to put into practice.

Relationship between bishops and religious and/or missionary institutes

The problem of the relationship between bishops and religious entities, the crisis in the practice of the ‘ius commissionis’ (right of commission) and its drawbacks comes up in the ‘vota’ of some missionary bishops. Those bishops wanted their authority well-defined and reinforced in their own Local Churches. The main reason was that, sometimes, the bishop on one side and the religious or ecclesiastical superior on the other constituted a dual authority, causing a lack of unity in apostolic activities. The legislation of those times, called ‘ius commissionis’, needed updating. Also, the growing numbers of diocesan clergy and the need to consolidate the Local Church warranted that the real power be in the hands of the diocesan authority. As Bishop Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya) put it, the juridical person of the Local Ordinaries in territories entrusted pastorally to religious and missionary institutes had to be defined: it was clear that the Instructions from Propaganda Fide (of December 8, 1929), which regulated the relationship between missionary institutes and local bishops, was no longer adequate.

According to IMC Bishop C. Cavallera, one of the tasks of the Council should be to offer the elements necessary for a renewal of the canonical ordinances of the missions in the light of recent missionary orientations. He asked that the Missionary Jurisdiction be treated as a special part of Canon Law – while taking into consideration the necessary adaptations to the needs of the Young Missionary Churches.
IMC Bishop L. Bessone (Meru, Kenya) considered necessary the clarification of the specific areas of authority between the diocesan authority and the religious institutes. But he also asks, in his ‘vota’, that there be a renewal of the religious institutes along the lines of their primigenita inspiratio (primordial inspiration).

Local clergy: formation, and relationship between local clergy and missionary clergy

The problem of the formation, spirituality, subsistence and distribution of the local clergy occupies a lot of space in the ‘vota’ of Bishop C. Cavallera. He felt that the African diocesan seminaries were not capable of giving an adequate spiritual or humane-philosophical-theological formation. He asks for a reform of the ratio studiorum and its updating to include modern themes and the present-day problematic. Another problem is the subsistence of the local clergy and the need to educate the young Christianities to their duty of cooperating towards the self-sufficiency of the Local Church and the subsistence of their clergy. Bishops L. Bessone and C. Cavallera even speak of grave ecclesiastical sanctions against those Christians who do not fulfill this duty of cooperation. Bishop C. Cavallera acknowledges that the relationshop between the two clergies (diocesan and missionary) are not up to par. He even speaks about clarifying the juridical position of the native clergy.

Lay people

The theme of the Laity is also present in the ‘vota’.
As far as its education is concerned, the problem of the Catholic school in Africa comes up. To the latter, the bishops of Kenya had dedicated enormous energies in the years after the war. Now the Catholic schools are in difficulty. Soon, independence from British rule is going to be a fact: Bishop Bessone asks that the schools be helped through the concordat system. It is in this same context that Bishop C. Cavallera asks for a study of the rapports between Church and State.

Ecumenical dialogue

Ecumenical sensibility is present in the ‘vota’. It is clear that the Catholic communities, especially in Kenya, live in a Protestant environment -- especially with and among Anglicans. The two Consolata bishops in Kenya, Bishops L. Bessone and C. Cavallera, touch in a positive way the problem of the union of the Church with the separated brethren: search for dialogue, expectations, cooperation in biblical, social and cultural areas. Bishop Bessone (Meru, Kenya) speaks of media excogitanda ad comprehensionem fovendam et opiniones praeiudicatas extirpandas inter catholicos et protestantes (finding means and ways to favor understanding between Catholics and Protestants, and ways to eradicate prejudice). Bishop C. Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya) dedicates one paragraph to the union of the Church and suggests the criteria and the methods for ecumenical dialogue. He concludes: Agendi ratio fraterna cum fratribus separatis promovenda est (a fraternal way of dealing with the separate brethren is to be encouraged). He thinks that the present ecclesiastical legislation is not adequate to favor this dialogue. He says: Praevalere deberet spiritus comprehensionis, cooperationis, conatus quidam redeundi ad communem modum sentiendi qui, incipiendo a re sociali, oeconomica et sic dicta ‘sportiva’, extendere se possit etiam ad religionem. Promovenda sunt consociationes studiorum, activitates sociales in communi, communes manifestationes culturales… Manifestando propria principia possibilis est unio (A spirit of understanding and cooperation, a certain need to return to a common manner of feeling which, beginning in the social, economic and sportive areas, might come to extend itself also to matters of religion. Meetings in the field of studies, social and cultural activities done together: These are to be encouraged…. Union is possible through the manifestation of each side’s principles.

As we saw before, besides the bishops and the general superiors, the consultation engaged also Catholic universities and theological faculties. The proposals sent by theological schools make up a rather interesting material, because their authors did not just propose topics that interest the Church: they also offer their scientific justification and their theological motivation. The School of Propaganda Fide (Urbaniana), too, where some Consolata missionaries worked and studied, sent its ‘vota’ to the Antepreparatory Commission. Our Fr. Ugo Viglino was one of its teachers; he was asked to redact, together with Prof. T. Piacentini, the social aspect of the School’s proposals.
This study is called Fundamental Principles of Human Labor. The document defines the nature and the purposes of human labor, and declares labor or work good because it contributes to the development of the human person. “However, work does not effect the alienation of man to that which is outside himself, as affirmed Marx, rather, it is for man a means of fulfillment, an instrument of spiritual interiorization. Full humanization of labor becomes sure divinization because the supernatural dimension is somehow intrinsic to man in his present state.” To humanize labor means taking the first step to divinize it, since the whole of man has been divinized by the Incarnation of the Son of God.

Some of the next paragraphs of the document develop the meaning of professional work. They say that through “personal vocation on earth” the human being assumes a specific, original, inalianable and irreplaceable significance in the historical construction of human civilization and, consequently, in divine glorification. Professional work possesses the connotation of ‘vocation’ because it allows man to collaborate with God.

After speaking of labor as essential collaboration of man with the creative work of God, as per Genesis 1:26, they go on talking about its ascetical value. At the end of their work, the authors summarize their ideas as follows: “Divine Revelation gives us the theological principles that give meaning to labor: Work is human cooperation with the divine work of creation; after original sin, it becomes collaboration in the Christian restoration of man. Revelation raises professional work to the status of practice of the moral and supernatural virtues, and gives all human beings the chance of living as brethren in the Mystical Body of Christ.

Conclusion

The Antepraparatory stage (1959-1960) can be defined as the preparation to the preparation. This sort of vast poll contributed to tell everybody that an important event was taking place in the Church, rather than preparing the writing of the Council documents themselves. And in that everyone was supposed to get involved.


II PREPATORY STAGE

With the Motu Proprio Superno Dei Nutu of June 5, 1960, Pope John XXIII declared terminated the job of the Antepreparatory Commission and set in place the Preparatory Commissions: Ten in all, plus the Central Preparatory Commission, and gave way to the immediate preparation of the Council. The Commissions had the job of elaborationg the topics that would be the basis of the discussions of the Council – using the proposals and suggestions received. The Commissions were composed of cardinals, bishops, and other members chosen from the secular and religious clergy, according to their own qualifications. As they were creating these Commissions, the organs of the Vatican promoted among religious institutes a search for competent people. No invitation was sent to our Superior General, and no Consolata missionary was named member of any Commission.

As center and acme of all these Commissions stood the Central Commission presided over by the Pope himself. It had the purpose of coordinating the work of all the other Commissions and to present it to the Pope. Its main task was to choose the topics to be treated in the Council itself, and to propose the norms that would regulate the running of the Council. During the two years of work, the Commissions prepared 75 topics. These topics were examined by the Central Commission during 7 plenary assemblies, and sent back to the various commissions for re-writing, and thus the number (75) of topics came down to 22. During the summer of 1962, the first texts were ready and sent to the conciliar fathers so that the Council could start after they had studied them.

Within the commissions and the sub-commissions, an enormolus work of cataloguing, examining and correcting documents went on. This kind of work was done by experts and by the sub-commissions, and then sent to the commissions themselves for further examination. The texts would be changed according to the requests, and the new texts were then sent to the conciliar fathers. The texts were written in two columns: In the left column, the text before correction. In the column on the right, the corrected text. In the relations accompanying the texts were written the reasons for the changes, and also explanations of why the observations by the conciliar fathers had been accepted or rejected.


III. THIRD STAGE, THE COUNCIL

In the four sessions of the Council eight IMC Conciliar fathers participated: Three from Latin America: Bishop Giuseppe Nepote Fus, prelate of Rio Branco, Brazil (in 1963, Rio Branco became Roraima), prelate there from 1948 to 1965; Bishop Servilio Conti, bishop of Roraima, Brazil, from 1965 on; Bishop Angelo Cuniberti, Vicar Apostolic of Florencia, Colombia, appointed in 1961. Three from Africa: Bishop C. Cavallera, bishop of Nyeri, Kenya, up to 1964, and afterwards bishop of Marsabit, Kenya; Bishop L. Bessone, Bishop of Meru, Kenya; and Bishop A. Beltramino, Bishop of Iringa, Tanzania. Two from Europe: Bishop C. Re, Bishop of Ampurias-Tempio, Italy; and Fr. D. Fiorina, Superior General of our Institute. Only 6 participated in all the sessions of the Council: Bishops C. Cavallera, L. Bessone, A. Cuniberti, G. Nepote Fus, C. Re and Fr. Dominic Fiorina. Bishop A. Beltramino died during the Council (on October 3, 1965).

Next, we give here the contribution of these our confreres to the debate of some of the conciliar documents. We follow the order of promulgation of the same documents.

1. Constitution Sacrosanctum Concilium on the Sacred Liturgy (December 4, 1963)
The schema De Liturgia (on Sacred Liturgy) was the first to be discussed and approved by the Council. The discussion began during the first session, between October 22 and November 13, 1962. Some alterations were introduced, and the second reading of the schema was partially approved in the 1st session. The Constitution on the Liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC), was approved by the fathers on November 22,1963, and so solemnly declared on Dec. 4. Only one IMC father took active part in the debate on the Liturgy, Bishop G. Nepote Fus (Roraima, Brazil). He did so by subscribing an intervention of Cardinal J. de Barros Câmara (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) on chapter IV (on the Divine Office), during the first session (29th General Assembly, Nov. 28, 1962), in which the importance of the Liturgy of the Hours in the spiritual life is emphasized.

2. Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium on the Church (Nov 21, 1964).
The fist schema De Ecclesia was given to the conciliar fathers on Nov 23, 1962. It was discussed during the 1st session (Dec.1-7, 1962). The conciliar fathers strongly criticised the structure and the content of the schema and rejected it. The theological commission wrote a new shema which it called De Ecclesia: Textus Prior (1963). This schema was discussed during the 2nd session, between Sept 30 and Dec 31, 1963. The text was again rewritten, and voted on. Finally, the assembly promulgated the dogmatic constitution Lumen Gentitum on Nov 21, 1964.

During the debate on he 2nd schema De Ecclesia (Textus Prior, 1963), in the 51st General Assembly (Oct 18, 1963), Bishop Nepote Fus (Roraima, Brazil), subscribed the intervention of J. Barros Câmara (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) on chapter III: De Populo Dei et speciatim de Laicis (On the People of God, especially on the Laity). Bishop Nepote considered that the chapter had very good principles in it and beautiful statements: it however lacked sobriety, clarity and logical arrangement. It should be divided into two parts, following the opinion already expressed of the Coordinating Commission. It needed a clearer illustration of the participation in the priesthood of Christ through the Sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation, so as to make it easier to understand that the essence of the priestly community is based on the character impressed by the Sacraments. He formulated some concrete proposals of corrections to paragraph 24: de sacerdotio universali, necnon de sensu fidei et de charismatibus chistifidelium (on the universal priesthood, and on the sensus fidei and the charisms of the faithful of Christ). These proposals and corrections meant to give emphasis to the special effects of the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation, and also the duties that flow from these sacraments as far as living Christian life and doing apostolate. He also underlined the fact that the munus pastorale must be considered a service.

Later on, during the 57th general assembly (Oct 29, 1963), the Archbishop of Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) participated actively in the debate of the schema De Ecclesia, which Bishop Nepote Fus again subscribed to. Talking about chapter 4 of the De Ecclesia, which dealt with the universal call to holiness, he stated that this chapter deserved consensus – although it caused some reservation when treating the basis of the call to holiness, and also because it contained some confusion in its theological and juridical elements. Several proposals were formulated that meant to better illustrate the foundation of the general call to holiness; to better explain the practice of virtue; to underline more deeply the personal duty of bishops to excell in the practice of evangelical perfection, especially in the spirit of charity; and to eliminate certain juridical elements present in the schema which should be sent to the document De Statibus Perfectionis. Bishop Nepote concluded his intervention saying that the chapter must make it clear that the origin and the end of holiness are in the Trinity.

Some IMC bishops presented suggestions/corrections in writing in their own personal name, or subscribed presentations by other conciliar fathers. For example, Bishop C. Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya) presented a proposal of alteration to ch. I of the De Ecclesia: Textus Prior (1963), by inserting a paragraph on De Ecclesiae catholicitate, i.e., de eius unitate in diversitate (On the Catholicity of the Church, that is, on her unicity in diversity). Bishop Bessone (IMC, Meru, Kenya) presented some observations to ch. II of the De Ecclesia: Textus Prior (1963). These observations were subscribed by IMC Bishop A. Beltramino (Iringa, Tanzania).

Regularly, the IMC conciliar fathers subscribed to proposals made by other Council fathers collectively or individually. Because they were religious, they defended their identity and their vocation: they wanted a chapter on Religious in the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church, a chapter that was proposed by a big group of other Council fathers. To tell the truth, there was no unanimous thinking about this subject among the members of the Council. In the 2nd schema on the Church, De Ecclesia: Textus Prior (1963), the theme on Religious was treated in ch. IV: De vocatione ad sanctitatem in Ecclesia (On the vocation to holiness in the Church). The fundamental question brought up in the discussion was this: Under what title was the state of perfection of Religious to be inserted in the constitution on the Church? The fathers were divided as to the answer: some deemed it necessary to speak of the Religious in the chapter on the universal call to holiness. Others thought it better to write a separate chapter on Religious. A pretty good group of Council members, including all IMC fathers (bishops and superior general), subscribed a request to Pope Paul VI, which was brought to the Council Secretariat on November 26, 1963: this document requested that, on account of the special position occupied by Religious in the Church, a specific chapter on Religious be inserted in the document De Ecclesia. Paul VI sent this request to the Theological Commission; the latter reviewed ch. IV, De vocatione ad sanctitatem in Ecclesia and dedicated a separate chapter to Religious – the present ch. VI: De Religiosibus of the Constitution Lumen Gentium.

Bishop Nepote Fus also subscribed to other suggestions/corrections presented in writing by other Council fathers. During the 3rd session he signed the suggestions by Archbishop M. Gonçalves Cerejeira, Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon (Portugal), on ch. VIII. Bishop A. Cuniberti (Florencia, Colombia) subscribed the written observations by Bishop G. Proença Sigaud (Diamantina, Brazil) and Bishop A. Silva Santiago (Concepciòn, Chile).


3. Decree Unitatis Redintegratio on Ecumenism (November 21, 1964)
The composition of the decree Unitatis Redintegratio on ecumenism was very complex.
Three Preparatory Schemata on the unity of Christians were written: De Oecumenismo, from the schema De Ecclesia; De Ecclesiae Unitate: Ut Omnes Unum Sint; and the schema De Unione Fovenda inter Christianos. Of the three, only De Ecclesiae Unitate: Ut Omnes unum Sint was discussed during the 1st session of the Council (27th-30th General Assembly, Nov 26-30, 1962. During the inter-session, a mixed Commission made up of members of the Secretariat for Unity, of the Theological Commission and of the Commission for the Oriental Churches came up with a new schema: De Oecumenismo (On Ecumenism). This schema was examined in the 2nd session of the Council (69th-79th General Assembly), from Nov. 19 to Dec. 2, 1963. Next, the schema was revised according to the comments made by the Council fathers. The decree Unitatis Redintegratio was promulgated during the 3rd session (Nov. 21, 1964).

During the debate of this document, IMC Bishops A. Cuniberti and G. Nepote Fus subscribed to an intervention by Bishop H. Golland Trindade (Botucatu, Brazil) during the 77th General Assembly (Nov. 28, 1963). In his intervention, the Archbishop of Botucatu examined chapter III: Churches and Ecclesial Communities Separated from the Roman Apostolic See of the schema De Oecumenismo. According to Bishop Henrique, the suggestions in paragraph 6 concerning interior renewal are praiseworthy. They must not become dead letter, relegated to the archives: they must become reality in our lives. Pastors (bishops) must be the first to give the example. The Council can be considered a true grace from God, especially for declaring the call to holiness so urgent and engaging. The world and public opinion expect from the Church, above all and strictly, a presence in holiness. It is only with great difficultly that we might influence them with publicity or propaganda. But we can edify them with the example of our lives, as did John XXIII. The practice of ecumenism consists above all in a life that puts into practice the spirit of the Gospel, a life that overwhelmingly witnesses to the virtues taught us by Jesus Christ and that witnesses to love for the poor, chastity and true obedience.

Still in the document on ecumenism, IMC Bishops A. Cuniberti and G. Nepote Fus subscribed to an written intervention presented by a group of Council fathers of Latin America.


4. Decree Christus Dominus on the munus pastorale of bishops (September 28, 1965)
Most of the matter in this decree was discussed in the 2nd session of the Council (Nov. 5-18, 1963), when the schema De Episcopis ac de Dioecesium Regimine was presented and debated. Following the recommendations received, the Commission for the Bishops and the Government of the Dioceses put together the schemas on the government of the Dioceses and the Care of Souls thus forming a new new schema on the Munus Pastorale of the Bishops in the Church. The Debate on this new schema took place bewteen the 18th and the 24th of September of 1964. Taking into consideration the observations of the Council fathers, the Commission presented a new writing of the schema towards the end of October of 1964. The decree on the Munus Pastorale of the bishops, Christus Dominus, was promulgated on September 28, 1965. The majority of the Council fathers were conscious of the importance of the Episcopal Conferences. This theme was studied during the debate of the schema De Episcopis ac de Dioecesium Regimine (1963): its chapter III (De Nationali Episcoporum Coetu seu Conferentia) made specific reference to the conferences. The discussion on this chapter, which took place during the 65th, 66th and 67th General Assemblies, centered on the nature, foundation and structure of the episcopal conferences. There was a group of Council fathers who wanted to base the authority of the episcopal conferences on collegiality itself. This tendency was strongly faught against by another group led by Bishop L. Carli (Segni, Italy). In his intervention, which IMC Bishop Nepote Fus (Roraima, Brazil) subscribed to, Bishop L. Carli explained that the joint action of a certain episcopal conference cannot have its foundation in episcopal collegiality. In order for it to be a true episcopal action, three elements would be needed that are lacking to an episcopal conference: 1) Meeting of the whole episcopal college; 2) participation of the head of the episcopal college, the Roman Pontiff; 3) discussion of matters that are related to the whole Church. Besides, if it were true that the power of the episcopal conferences had their foundation in episcopal collegiality, then the power of the diocesan bishop, besides being limited by the Supreme Pontiff, would also be limited by the bishops of every region or nation who are members of the episcopal conference. But this is inacceptable -- according to Bishop L. Carli.

5. Decree Ad Gentes on the missionary activity of the Church (December 7, 1965)
This decree had a long preparation, so much so that it was the last document to be approved by Vatican II. The schema De Missionibus that the pre-conciliar Commission on the Missions prepared, was not discussed in any General Assembly. During the first sessions of the Council, the conciliar Commission realized that a new document had to be prepared that would better respond to the expectations of the Council fathers. The Commission for the Missions, whose members had grown in number during the 2nd session of the Council, wrote a new schema De Missionibus (‘On the Missions’), keeping in mind that in the schema “De Ecclesia” a text on the missionary nature of the Church had been inserted, and also remembering the many interventions on the subject that were made by Council fathers during the assemblies. IMC Bishop C. Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya) was now a member of the new Commission on the Missions, to which he had been named personally by Pope Paul VI. The new schema De Missionibus was sent to all Council fathers on January 17, 1964, so that they could send in their observations. The schema was made up of an introduction and 4 chapters. However, a few months later, the General Secretariat of the Council decided to reduce the schema De Missionibus to just a few propositions. At this point, the Commission on the Misssions decided to prepare a minimum text called Schema Propositionum de Activitate Missionali Ecclesiae. This text, rather poor in nature and content, was sent to the Council fathers. The matter treated in the first chapter, “De Principiis doctrinalibus”was omitted by the Commission because, as it said, it had been treated sufficiently in the De Ecclesia. In the 3rd session, the Council fathers began its study: they knew that the Church has received from Christ the unavoidable commission of announcing the Gospel to all peoples. On November 6, 1964, Paul VI himself was present in the assembly to speak on this theme: it was his way of emphasizing the importance of the subject. The schema was discussed subsequently, in the 116th, 117th and 118th General Sessions. Right away, it was clear that the bishops did not like the text, especially the missionary bishops. The text was rejected and sent to be totally re-written. The fathers wanted a text with an adequate theological basis, a text capable of giving a strong impetus to the missionary activity of the Church. The IMC Council fathers, especially those from Kenya, through the speaker of the African Episcopates, lamented that the theme of the mission, so fundamental in the life of the Church, had been treated in such a superficial way and without a sound theological foundation.

The text Propositionum De activitate missionali Ecclesiae had been rejected and called back. The Commission restarted its work under the direction of the Superior General of the Divine Word Missionaries, Fr. Schutte. The work was done between January 12 and January 27 of 1965. The plenary meeting of the Commission approved the new text, Schema Decreti De Activitate Missionali Ecclesiae: Textus Prior. On May 28 it was sent to Pope Paul VI, and then to the Council fathers. It was composed of an introduction, 5 chapters and a conclusion. In its 1st chapter, De Principiis doctrinalibus, the theological foundations are enumerated:
1) Trinitarian origin: the theological foundation of the missionary activity of the Church has its origin mainly in the Trinity.
2) Ecclesiological aspect: The second theological foundation is the ecclesiological dimension and the intimate connection with the constitution De Ecclesia. The exercise of the universal ‘mission’ of the Church belongs to her essence, and is the necessary expression of the universal salvific mission.
3) The notion of ‘mission’: this is founded on the very mission of the apostles. The specific initiatives which the Church uses to exercise its task of Christian penetration among the peoples and groups not yet evangelized are normally called ‘missions’ and are effected in a special way by missionary activity. The reason for the missionary activity of the Church is based on God’s design, to which Christ consecrated himself for the glory of God who had sent him into the world. This missionary activity of the Church is unavoidable and necessary in order to concretize God’s salvific design. Similarly, the whole Church must cooperate in this action, since this commission is for the whole people of God: bishops, priests, lay people, institutes of perfection and Christian communities.

In summary, the rich mission theology found in this new schema is based on the doctrine of the Trinity and is strictly connected to the universal mission of the Church. This understanding is due especially to the contributions of the theologians Yves Congar and Joseph Ratzinger, two of the Council fathers: they had already contributed substantially to the ecclesiology of Lumen Gentium. As periti, or experts, and members of the subcommission in charge of writing chapter I of the document De Principiis Doctrinalibus of the missionary decree, they instilled in the document the aspects of the rich ecclesiology of the Council. IMC Bishop C. Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya) was one of the five bishops who were members of the subcommission De Principibus doctrinalibus. The others were: S. Lokuang (Taiwan), E. D’Souza (India), B. Yago (Ivory Coast), and M. Perrin (Tunisia). The periti-theologians of this subcommission were Y. Congar, J. Ratzinger, D. Grasso, S.J., J. Neuer, S.J., A. Seumois, O.M.I., and V. Che. The Acts of the Council Commissions have not yet been published, so we cannot know now what was the real contribution of our Bishop C. Cavallera (Nyeri, Kenya) to the elaboration of the important doctrinal chapter of the decree Ad Gentes. However, Yves Congor, the main redactor of the Council, says in his diary that Bishop C. Cavallera (already then bishop of Marsabit, Kenya) accepted his (Congar’s) ecclesiology.

In the 4th session of the Council, between the 7th and the 13th of October, 1965, from the 144th to the 148th General Assembly, there took place the second discussion on the decree. The bishops still asked for some minor changes: but the text of the Schema Decreti De Activitate Missionali Ecclesiae: Textus Prior was substantially approved as base for a new corrected writing that was to be again presented to the Council fathers, as was required by the procedures of the Council documents. On Dec. 7, the day of the closing of the Council, the Decretum De Activitate Missionali Ecclesiae: Ad Gentes was promulgated.

The IMC Council fathers gave their contribution to other Council documents. To avoid being too long, I will just mention that they contributed written and/or oral interventions on the dogmatic constitution of the Church in the contemporary world, Gaudium et Spes; and on the decree Presbyterorum Ordinis, on the life and ministry of priests.


Conclusion

As we have seen, the numerical presence of the Consolata missionaries in Vatican II and their contribution to the documents was modest, even when compared to the contribution of other missionary institutes. Most certainly, they received much more than they gave. What they received, after returning to their own local Churches, was enough for them to carry on with dedication and enthusiasm their missionary apostolate.

Our IMC representatives were shepherds in recently formed Christian communities. Most of their work was riveted almost exclusively on developing the structures that would promote their growth and their consolidation. Mainly, they were practical men who knew the people of God whom they shepherded, and they were animated by a great pastoral zeal. Probably, they were not too used to theological reflection, but neither were they closed to the new. They knew their mission and they were ready to give their posts to local bishops. They represented their Churches in the Council, and they spoke of their needs. And afterwards they brought to their Churches what they had learned in the Council.