Reader Bleg

I am looking for a book that has a good, trustworthy account of Vatican II. It should give the history and background of the council, and summarize the important points of the documents.

It should not, of course, be written from a schismatic "Vatican II was
evil" point of view -- and neither should it be written from a
dissident "Everything before Vatican II was evil" point of view.
Instead, it should have an orthodox catholic point of view and show
the developments at the council without exaggerating or minimizing
them.

Our Protestant/Catholic book discussion group is seeking such a
book!

Comments

[Cecil]

Rotsa ruck. I've been looking for something like that for years. Let us know if you fare any better.
Cecil

[Brendan]

Amy,

I think that you are probably going to have difficulty because there are so many agenda-based books. However, a trusted source would be Ralph McInnerny's "The Murky Water's of Vatican II". Another book of interest may be "The Rhine Flows into the Tiber" or something to that effect.

However, I also think some encyclicals like "Mediatior Dei-a precursor to the documents on the liturgy may be a good start also if one is interested in the liturgical movement and sacrosanct concilium.

[David]

Vatican Council II, by Xavier Rynne. (gossipy, progressivish)

The Rhine flows into the Tiber; the unknown Council, by Ralph M. Wiltgen. (gossipy, conservativish)

Or you could subject them to Fr. Joseph Komonchak's five-volume History of Vatican II. But that would be cruel.

[Don Boyle]

It's a pity that there isn't such a book, as far as I know. You might take two books, each from one of the two opposing perspectives (e.g., McInerny's book and "Xavier Rhynne's" book) and try to figure out the truth there.

There's always reading the documents themselves -- no one can fight about what they say (I think -- though I have seen editions in "inclusive language" -- whew). Maybe study the four great Constitutions:
Sacrosanctum Concilium (on the liturgy)
Dei Verbum (on divine Revelation)
Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Const. on the Church)
Gaudium et Spes (Pastoral Const. on the Church in the Modern World)

[Mark Windsor]

I heard about this a while back. I have no idea what kind of perspective it takes, but it's big at 6 volumes.

http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/100402/100402i.htm

There was also a very good documentary run about 3 years ago on PBS. Can't remember the name tho. I know one of the producers. If I can track her down I'll get the name and see if there's any chance of getting a tape. Interesting thing...part of it was shot at my parish and there are several local priests featured in a few shots.

[Colleen]

I found "The Desolate City: Revolution in the Catholic Church" by Anne Roche Muggeridge (d-i-l of Malcolm) a factual and dispassionate book about Vatican II (she leaves her own opinion out until the last chapter). I've read about Vat II from both the progressive and radtrad pov's and came away confused and/or cynical and empty - until I read The Desolate City. Despite the title, it is excellent, thought provoking, researched and footnoted extensively. It took me a bit to get through it because I had to put it down and really digest what I had read. I couldn't find gratuitous or blanket statements in it which undermine the credibility and agenda of the author - rare on this subject.

I think I have seen Fr. Wilson recommend this book before.

It's out of print but available on amazon through 3rd party sales and some of the copies are pretty cheap.

[Dan Gallaugher]

I am currently taking a seminary class on the Vatican II documents. The professor recommended we read the Vatican II article in the New Catholic Encyclopedia. It's rather, um, encyclopedia-ish, and is perhaps heavier on the events and developments of the council than on the documents themselves, but I recommmend it.

[Hibernicus]

One problem with THE DESOLATE CITY is that it was written in the early 80s and a bit more optimistic about a speedy & general reassertion of orthodoxy than has proven to be the case. One of the signs of hope which she mentions is the appointment of Cardinal Groer to Vienna!

[Lawrence King]

Alan Schreck is supposedly writing a book that will be due out in 2004. I have hopes for that.

Maybe it's just too early? Historians say that as long as living memory exists, history can't be written. In the USA there is finally a book on the Franco regime that just tells the facts (by Stanley Payne), but in Spain every book is either pro-Franco or anti-Franco. The reason is obvious: anyone who cares enough about this subject to spend a year writing a book also cares enough to have a strong opinion!

[Kevin Jones]

I found _The Rhine Flows into the Tiber_ by Ralph Wiltgen to be a thorough, albeit dry, account of the Council. Wiltgen's thesis is that German bishops were the only ones who had an organized plan of action. Since John XXIII didn't limit episcopal involvement in the council to rubber-stamping papal pronouncements, the Germans largely got their way. He goes into detail on the workings of the council, summarizing documents and their drafts. It's about 3-400 pages, if memory serves.

The history is published by TAN press, which puts out many cranky traditionalist books of low quality. _The Rhine flows into the Tiber_ is not one of them. Fr. Edward T. Oakes, a solid Jesuit who has taught at the seminary here in Denver and is quite a theologian in his own right, recommended the book to me, so I have a high opinion of its reliability.

[Kevin Miller]

Rhine's thesis is problematic - Wiltgen clearly has an agenda, and it also colors his historiography (was Bishop Wojtyla German? de Lubac? Congar? - and, was Ratzinger "German" in Wiltgen's sense of the term? [don't forget: the periti were important too]).

I second the suggestion that one do a careful study of the four constitutions, in lieu of trying to find some good secondary lit.

Other than that, I think that the best guide to the Council is ... John Paul II. Not that he's expanded in detail on every Conciliar teaching.

On the Council on the Church-world relationship (a favorite topic of mine), best thing besides JPII is David Schindler's work.

[Bill]

Although it doesn't sound like it is what you are looking for and you may choose to dismiss it as "schismatic", Iota Unum: A Study of Changes in the Catholic Church in the Twentieth Century by Romano Amerio is, without exception, the finest analysis of Vatican II I've read.

[Kevin Miller]

Schismatic is as schismatic does. And the Council, rightly understood, has zero to do with schism or anything anywhere near it.

[Bill]

Kevin,

I agree. Of course, it is hardly schimatic to point out that there are aspects of the Council, rightly understood, that were regrettable.

[Kevin Miller]

Perhaps not, depending on just how (and what sort of) "regrettable" you have in mind (among other things, we do have to assent to all Church teachings - not only infallible ones). At the same time, I think that the idea that any major aspect of the Council's teaching was "regrettable" is overwhemingly likely to reflect a misunderstanding of said teaching.

[Bill]

I don't know if you would consider the Liturgy Constitution to be a major aspect of the Church's teaching, but it certainly was regrettable, give that the subsequent Novus Ordo Mass was a legitimate result of it. I know that there are people (and I have no idea if you are among them, Kevin) who believe that the Constitution on the Liturgy is a license for further tinkering in order to produce the Mass the Council "really intended", someithing more devout than we have now. Implicit in this is that the Novus Ordo is something other than what the Council authorized and that the Liturgy Constitution has yet to be "properly understood". However, I don't find such arguments convincing. I think that the Novus Ordo (the validity of which I assent to) is clearly the legitimate result of the Council and is just as clearly regrettable.

[Kevin Miller]

First, Bill, I'd say it's probably "a" legit result, but also probably not the "most" legit one, and I do count myself more or less among the "reform of the reform" crowd. Second, I don't find the liturgical reform, on balance, "regrettable." Still less do I find the theological principles enunciated by Sacrosanctum Concilium at all "regrettable." Nor do I think one is at liberty to take that view.

[Keith R]

For a readable book that takes the 4 great constitutions of Vatican II, organizes excerpts in a logical manner, and places them in the context of scripture and tradition, consider reading the Catechism.