#325: “It Was A Hell Of A Crossroads”

EXCERPT:
One Hundred and Fifty years ago last week, Confederate gunners fired on Ft. Sumter, ushering America into civil war...The more I watch and read, the more convinced I am that, in many ways the Civil War parallels the Second Vatican Council. Moreover, these parallels are instructive: they help us better comprehend both events!

Both events began small: the bombardment of Ft. Sumter killed but one horse, and John XXIII’s announcement of the Council to a few cardinals triggered only stony silence. No one expected much of either event: Americans in 1861 thought any war would end quickly; the bishops leaving for the Council in 1962 counted on a short stay in Rome.

Yet both events defied such expectations. If Ken Burns wrote, “No one could have predicted the magnitude of the explosion that rocked America following that opening shot,” we Catholics know that no one foresaw the seismic shift the Council unleashed on Catholicism.

Even today, many fail to fathom the profound importance of these events, as if they are simply past history with no present impact. But even then, the men in charge knew better.

Abraham Lincoln called the War “A New Birth of Freedom,” which justifies those who label it our “Second American Revolution.” Popes John XXIII and Paul VI, meanwhile, both called the Council “A New Pentecost”--thus justifying us who regard the Council as the “rebirth” of the Catholic Church….

For both events, the stakes could not have been higher. The War would determine whether the original United States would remain intact into the future; the Council would determine whether Catholicism’s 1500-year dependence on the legacy of the Roman Empire would remain its paradigm for the future. The War preserved the Union; the Council outgrew the Empire.

Both events brought radical change. The War saved the Union only by imposing the historical verdict that slavery, and the plantation economy built on it, were obsolete. The Council reached the historical verdict that the Church’s reliance on Imperial ways was also obsolete.

Thus both events shed light on how past accomplishments had limited present action and future prospects. Before the War, America had a “Union” on paper, but in reality remained two divergent regional cultures. Before the Council, the Church was “Catholic” in name, but in reality had become too dependent on a single (Latin) culture to be truly universal.

Nevertheless, both events involved some who staunchly defended the status quo. Many southerners feared the future without slavery and limited states’ rights would be no future at all. Many traditionalist bishops believed the Council’s efforts were destroying the Catholic Church. Both groups include those who, to this day, feel betrayed by history and refuse to accept defeat.

Thus both events have fallen prey to endless interpretation and reinterpretation; both have defied our ability to establish a consensus understanding of what happened and what it all meant.

Yet both events had unmistakable effects. Historians note that, before the War, Americans commonly used the plural for their country: “The United States of America are….” After, the verbs shifted to singular: “The United States of America is….” The Union was now a reality, not merely a paper term.

Similarly, Catholics no longer experience their Church as a mono-cultural institution, because it now speaks, not in the singular, bygone language of an obsolete empire, but in the plural languages of all the cultures of the world. Before, we professed to be “Catholic” but we acted Roman; now we acknowledge our Roman roots but have become truly Catholic in our worship and teaching and practice.

Those who resist these realities preach the virtues of “continuity” over “discontinuity,” harkening back to the pre-War and pre-Council periods, hoping to retrieve some longed-for mythical “golden age” while pretending that neither event really changed anything….

Ironically, the War left the nation more centralized than ever, while the Council opened the mother of all central hierarchies to a less centralized structure of national conferences and local councils.

Ironically, too, both events followed the adage “If at first you don’t succeed…try again.” When the U.S. Constitution failed to produce the “more perfect union” it proclaimed, the War became the nation’s second attempt at Union. And when the Church’s dependence on Imperial ways bumped up against the limits of European culture in a post-colonial era, the Council became the Church’s second attempt at global reach.…

Of course, while both events changed the face of their respective histories, they could not guarantee a change in the hearts and minds of their people. So both events continue to provide disputed interpretations, applications, and evaluations (Confederate flags and Latin Masses still compete with Union Jacks and vernacular liturgies). But one thing is clear: both events were historic watersheds defining the contemporary scene…

Thus today’s America is, for better or worse, the battle-forged national Union that the Civil War made it. And today’s Catholic Church is, for better or worse, the change-charged global body the Council created.

So as American Catholics note this year’s 150th Civil War anniversary, we might also do well to ponder: how can we best observe next year’s 50th anniversary of Vatican Council II?