Editing Nostra aetate (section)

====Cardinal Felici's letters, return to the SECU====

The political backlash was immediate: [[Salah al-Din al-Bitar]], the Ba'athist [[Prime Minister of Syria]] announced "world Zionism and Israel are trying to mobilize Catholics against the Arabs" and that the declaration "cannot be considered to be a purely religious matter.”<ref name="roddy"/> [[Charles Helou]], the [[President of Lebanon]] arranged for ten Bishops from the Levant and North Africa to telegram the Pope stating that the "Gospels teach clearly the Jewish crime of deicide. In this matter of the Jewish declaration we see clearly the intrigues of Zionist politics."<ref name="roddy"/> Similar statements were made by the [[Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria]], at the insistence of the Egyptian government.<ref name="roddy"/> The political implications of the document was discussed privately at the [[Egypt and the Non-Aligned Movement|Cairo Conference]] of the [[Non-Aligned Movement]] in October 1964 between Syrian, Lebanese and Egyptian delegates. It was agreed that they would not make a public statement on the issue at the Conference but that [[Sukarno]], [[President of Indonesia]], would discuss it with Paul VI during his visit on 12 October 1964. At this meeting, Sukarno warned that all Vatican diplomatic missions in Arab countries might be closed if the document was adopted. At the same time that Sukarno was visiting Rome, a [[Holy See–Palestine relations|Palestinian delegation]] lodged a complaint with the Vatican about the document, seeing it as favouring Zionism by proxy, despite the assurances of the Vatican that it was not political in nature.<ref name="roddy"/>

[[File:Stadtarchiv Kerpen - BA 05801 - Kardinal Joseph Frings auf der Kölner Straße 1959 crop.tif|240px|thumb|right|Cardinal [[Josef Frings]] organised a letter of protest against elements within the [[Roman Curia]] who wanted to cancel the document during the Third Session.]]
In the middle of this crisis, two letters had been received by Bea from Cardinal [[Pericle Felici]], Secretary General of the council on 9 October 1964.<ref name="dny"/> It dealt with two key documents under the auspices of the SECU; "[[Dignitatis humanae|On Religious Liberty]]" and "On the Jews and Non-Christians".<ref name="dny"/> The letter stated that Paul VI wanted a completely new text to be drafted on religious liberty, with a more mixed commission involved in creating the draft; including the addition of Archbishop [[Marcel Lefebvre]] (Superior General of the [[Holy Ghost Fathers]]), Cardinal [[Michael Browne (cardinal)|Michael Browne]], Fr. Aniceto Fernández Alonso ([[Master of the Order of Preachers]]) and Cardinal [[Giovanni Colombo]]. Of these men, the first three were unambiguously hostile to the document and the latter was a personal favourite of Paul VI.<ref name="dny"/> Meanwhile, the Jewish issue would not be addressed in a stand-alone document, but would become part of ''Schema 13''. This too would be rewritten by a more mixed commission including members drawn from Bea's Secretariat and Cardinal [[Alfredo Ottaviani]]'s [[Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith|Doctrinal Commission]].<ref name="dny"/> Cardinal Felici's two letters were "leaked" by Malachi Martin and became features in publications such as ''The New York Times''.<ref name="dny"/><ref name="nyt">[https://dignityny.org/sites/default/files/ADVENT%20SERIES%20Session%203.pdf NYT. (October 13, 1964). GROUP AT COUNCIL URGES POPE BACK SCHEMA ON JEWS; Cardinals Ask Him to Resist Conservative Pressure for Modified Statement; HE IS EXPECTED TO ACT; Religious Liberty Also Issue as Progressives Move to Bolster Majority View, December 1963 to September 1964. New York Times]</ref>

The liberals, drawn from the Rhineland Alliance and the American Cardinals, arranged a memorandum to be issued to the Pope to protest this in the strongest terms. A gathering took place at the residence of Cardinal [[Josef Frings]] of Cologne, where a number of other Cardinals added their voice to the petition. Supporters of the Frings motion explicitly named by the media included longtime interested parties Cardinals Ritter, Meyer, König, Liénart and Lercaro, along with Cardinals [[Raúl Silva Henríquez]] of Chile, [[Julius Döpfner]] of Munich, [[Joseph-Charles Lefèbvre]] of Bourges, [[Bernardus Johannes Alfrink]] of Utrecht and [[Leo Joseph Suenens]] of Brussels.<ref name="nyt"/><ref>See Oestereicher, pp.&nbsp;195ff.</ref> This was highly significant as it included three out of four Moderators of the Second Vatical Council (only the Eastern Catholic Moderator, Cardinal Gregorio Pietro Agagianian, did not sign up to it). They wanted the return of the Jewish document and the document on religious liberty to the SECU, they wanted to complain that the conservative minority were already able to "water down" some of the more radical elements in documents that had already been voted on and they were opposed to delaying the Council any further (rumours had abounded that Paul VI wanted to delay the council as it stood for three years, so the subjects covered could mature for a Fourth Session). With this memorandum in hand, the leader of the faction, Cardinal Frings held a meeting with Paul VI on 13 November 1964 to express the concerns of the liberal Council fathers.<ref name="roddy"/> Frings demanded that the Pope not intervene unilaterally (invoking the recent victories for Collegiality) and to follow the procedural rules established by the council. Paul VI intimated that he would take into consideration concerns, but also wanted to go more slowly, holding that radical steps would confuse and alienate the Catholic faithful in places like Italy, Spain and [[Latin America]].<ref name="roddy"/>

Not just on this question, but in general, the Third Session of the Second Vatican Council had been a disaster for the conservative faction in the lead up to the presentation of the Jewish document in September 1964.<ref name="roddy"/> ''[[Lumen gentium]]'' had been voted in favour of which endorsed [[Collegiality in the Catholic Church|Collegiality]] and married lay [[deacon]]s. ''[[Unitatis redintegratio]]'' allowed for closer ecumenical ties with non-Catholics and allowed for all who are baptised the "right to be called Christian", endorsing in some cases for common worship.<ref name="roddy"/> The proposed stand-alone document on [[Mariology]], which was to declare the [[Blessed Virgin Mary]] the [[Mediatrix of all graces|Mediatrix of All Graces]] (something Protestants would not accept), was thrown out and subsumed under ''Lumen gentium''. As well as the document on the Jews, there was still outstanding a document proclaiming religious liberty and also ''[[Gaudium et spes|Schema 13]]'' on the horizon, with debates on issues such as [[contraception]], [[birth control]], [[conscientious objection]], [[disarmament]], etc., no longer completely off the table. Thus, the conservative minority were fighting a rear-guard action on numerous fronts.<ref name="roddy"/> At a meeting held on the same day as Frings’ audience with Paul VI, the conservative grouping the ''[[Coetus Internationalis Patrum]]'' under the Presidency of Archbishop [[Geraldo de Proença Sigaud]] met with Cardinal Ruffini in attendance to discuss what they should do next. They were confidence that Paul VI would never allow a stand-alone Jewish document due to the mounting Arab political pressure and decided, contrary to what Cardinal Felici had laid out, they would work against the Jewish issue being covered in ''Schema 13'' (this document, ''On the Church in the Modern World'', was going to pass, just its final composition was still in play and if the Jewish issue was under it then it could slip through). This would prove to be a tactical blunder.<ref name="roddy"/>