The texts of Vatican II were the object of intense reading, assimilation and application by the generations contemporary to the conciliar event. But this task must be continued again and again by the new generations, who run the risk of looking at the Council as one among many, and even of not appreciating the scope of its affirmations, which can be very obvious to them. In part this obviousness is something positive, because it means a high Degree of assimilation of Vatican II in the Christian existence. But this obviousness would also mean ignoring the magnitude of the renewal that the Council brought about. Let us look at some examples.

At the beginning of the 20th century, as a reaction to Protestant anti-hierarchical thinking, the distinction between pastors and faithful was accentuated, to the point of becoming the starting point for describing the Church. For example, the first outline of Ecclesia prepared for Vatican I read: "The Church of Christ is not a community of equals, in which all believers have the same rights, but it is a society of unequals, not only because among believers some are clerics and others are laymen, but in a special way, because in the Church resides the power of God, by which it is given to some to sanctify, teach and govern and not to others". The idea is then reiterated in official documents of later decades. Compare it with the one offered by Vatican II: "Pastors know that they have not been instituted by Christ to assume alone the whole salvific mission statement of the Church in the world, but that their eminent function consists in shepherding the faithful and recognizing their services and charisms in such a way that all, in their own way, cooperate unanimously in the common work. [...] [In the Church] the dignity of the members is common, deriving from their regeneration in Christ; the grace of sonship is common; the call to perfection is common: one salvation, one hope, and charity undivided. [Even though some, by the will of Christ, have been constituted teachers, dispensers of the mysteries and pastors for the others, there is an authentic equality among all in the dignity and action common to all the faithful in order to Building the Body of Christ" (Lumen gentium, nn. 30.32).

Promoting ecumenism

What to say about Christians separated from the Catholic Church? In a well-known guide of the first half of the twentieth century, one could read: "All the dissident Churches [the author refers to the Orthodox Churches], precisely insofar as they are religious bodies, are totally useless for salvation; moreover, they are to be considered as great obstacles to salvation and instruments of death, insofar as they keep people far from the true ark of salvation". Compare this text of Unitatis redintegratio n. 3: "Even if we believe that the separated Churches and communities have their defects, they are not devoid of meaning and value in the mystery of salvation, because the Spirit of Christ does not refuse to make use of them as means of salvation, whose virtue derives from the very fullness of grace and truth entrusted to the Church".

Another central affirmation of Lumen gentium reads as follows: "All the faithful, Christians of every condition and state, [...] are called by the Lord, each in his own way, to the perfection of that holiness with which the Father himself is perfect. [...]. It is therefore quite clear that all the faithful, whatever their state or condition, are called to the fullness of the Christian life and to the perfection of charity" (nn. 11.32). At the time, Karl Rahner called these words an "astonishing event," in view of the fact that for centuries such a statement was far from self-evident. On the contrary, it was customary to distinguish two paths or ways of Christian life, that of the fulfillment of the ten commandments - the precepts - for the generality of Christians, and that of the counsels for those called to the state of perfection.

It would be simplistic to see in these examples - they could be multiplied - a contradictory break with the previous Catholic tradition. Vatican II does not call into question the consecrated life, nor does it ignore the serious deficiencies of the communities separated from the Catholic Church, nor does it ignore the difference between pastors and faithful. The novelty of the Council consists in honoring the whole truth and re-establishing the proportions between all the elements of the tradition, after the unilateral accentuation of only some of them. This is the permanent bequest of Vatican II: neither revolution nor stagnation, but renewal in fidelity to the Gospel.