If one word has to be found to describe the mood of the council fathers on the eve of the second session, it might be “expectancy.” Last year, the word would have been “uncertainly.” There is a difference, spelled out in the attitudes of the bishops who have been piling into Fumecino Airport all week; in the officials of the Curial; even in the off-handed way in which the San Pietrini (the caretakers of St. Peter’s) are getting things ready.

I walked through the Basiclica Friday, after our liturgy commission meeting, and although the opening was only hours away, the canopy-raisers, broom handlers, and even the guides seemed to be getting ready for a business meeting rather than the spectacle that dazzled the world in October of 1962.

The difference, of course, lies in the turning of the pages of history. A year ago, the man sent from God whose name was John had unleashed a force within the Church that no one could quite explain or contain. In brave and dogged steps, he had called the Council, insisted upon its opening date, smoothed over the inevitable differences, prayed and worked for three years to nurture it. When it opened, he poured out his heart to all of us -it had to be pastoral, he insisted, not doctrinal; it had to be positive and forward, not condemnatory and devious. That allocution of October 11, 1962, written in Pope John’s free style, spoke of mercy instead of severity, of the need of improving the spirit of our ministry, even while keeping the substance of doctrine intact. The world heard the pope, but it was watching the bishops. What would their response be?

It took time for some 2,400 of us to get acquainted, to bridge the barriers of language-the varieties of German Latin, Italian Latin, American Latin, Japanese Latin, and so on. It took time for us to grasp the deep roots of the issues, to go back to our seminary days for study, but seminaries that were coming alive with new insights into the Bible, into the liturgy, moral theology, social action, and a score of other fields. It took time to understand that Pope John meant that the bishops were called to Rome to govern the Church with him.

In a mighty crescendo of understanding and action, the response came to those closing weeks. In the only area in which the Council Fathers voted-the liturgy-the ballots for the Churches’ renewal were overwhelming. The uncertainty was over the expectancy there. The last week of the session combined all the exciting and heart-warming elements of a national presidential convention, a family homecoming at Christmas, and a particularly good confession.

Then Pope John died. Pope Paul VI was elected. He immediately reconvened the Council, and our commissions continued their work. In August, nearly 150 American bishops met in Chicago to hear progress reports by the twenty Americans serving on various commissions. The myth of the apathy of the U.S. hierarchy, so carefully advanced by correspondents who missed the point, was shattered. The point they missed was that at every level of the Council-in the preparatory commissions, in the debates, in the Council commissions, in the presidency and secretariat, in the handling of the press by the unique panel of experts, in the weekly meetings to hear scholars-the bishops of the United States carried their role as Council Fathers with thorough competence and a full sense of the historic significance of what they were doing. In this, they were assisted by excellent periti, the priest-specialists who did the research, the formulation, and gave scholarly depth to the American contribution.

now, we are all back, expectant. As we traveled through France and Germany last week, there was a keen sense of anticipation. From all over the world, bishops were converging on the Eternal City. Eagerly, we grabbed American newspapers, and haltingly translated foreign journals to read of new developments. Several things will be quite different this time.

Pope Paul made it quite clear that the work of the Roman Curia, loyal and competent over the decades, must now be updated and revitalized. The “archaic and superfluous” must give way to what is “vital and healthy.” The pope listed the accusations against the Curia carefully and said that he did not believe these charges. But, as one American magazine said, “In a way, his denial amounted to a review of the same charges.” It was strong language, and the Curia will now be expected to reform itself.

Certain Laymen have been invited to attend the Council. It is certainly in keeping with the new spirit of the Church, that they will be present at the birth of the new magna carta for the laity which may be on the agenda for this fall.

The “decentralization” and “internationalization” of the government of the Church is on everyone’s lips. The German newspaper, Deutshe Zeitung, called the pope’s speech to the Curia “surprising”, and warmly endorsed Cardinal Alfrink’s proposal that the coordinating commission of the council should become a permanent part of the Curia. Raymond Millet, a correspondent for Le Figaro of Paris, saw it as “a continuous dialogue” between Rome and the Catholic world.. a permanent consultative corps.”

What might strike a layman as merely a Rome fashion note is really a symbol of the reality called for by Pope Paul. When a bishop is in his own diocese, he wears a mozzetta, a short violet cape of wool, the symbol of his jurisdiction. When he is outside this diocese, he wears the mantelletta, similar to monsignors. Previously, in Rome, bishops always wore only the mantelletta. Now the pope has authorized the bishops to wear their mozzettas in his presence. It’s a small item, but full of significance. The Council Fathers, by the fact that they are bishops, share in the pope’s government. The theological, administrative and especially the ecumenical implications are obvious.

Paul J. Hallinan

Archbishop Of Atlanta