Editing Lumen gentium (section)

===Chapter 3: The Hierarchical Structure of the Church and In Particular on the Episcopate (18–29)===
The third chapter of the document, which spoke of the bishops as a "college"(22) that, within the Church, succeeds to the place of the "college" or "stable group" of the [[Apostles in the New Testament|apostles]](19) and is "the subject of supreme and full power over the universal Church, provided we understand this body together with its head, the Roman Pontiff."(22)

Conservative bishops in the council were fearful that the idea of the College of Bishops would be interpreted as a new [[conciliarism]], a 15th-century idea that an ecumenical council was the supreme authority under Christ in the Catholic Church. Of the members of the council, 322, a substantial minority, voted against any mention whatever in the document of a "college" of bishops),<ref name=Salvatori>[https://books.google.com/books?id=of0fawR6LXIC&pg=PA347 Davide Salvatori, L'oggetto del magistero definitivo della Chiesa] ({{ISBN|8876529012}}), pp. 347–348</ref> and were now proposing 47 amendments to chapter III.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=cf5CAAAAIAAJ&q=%22nota+explicativa%22+praevia Herbert Vorgrimler, ''Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II'' (Herder and Herder 1967), p. 195]</ref><ref name=Jedin/> Accordingly, a "Preliminary Note of Explanation" (in [[Latin]], {{lang|la|Nota explicativa praevia}}, often referred to as "the {{lang|la|Nota praevia}}") intended to reconcile them with the text<ref name=Jedin>[https://books.google.com/books?id=LjLQwToInS4C&pg=PA131 Hubert Jedin, Gabriel Adriányi, John Dolan, ''The Church in the modern age'', 1999] {{ISBN|0-86012-092-9}}, p. 131</ref> was added on 16 November 1964. The Note reaffirmed that the college of bishops exercises its authority only with the assent of the pope,<ref name=Jedin/> thus safeguarding the primacy and pastoral independence of the pope.<ref>[[Adrian Hastings]], ''[https://books.google.com/books?id=zdgRAQAAIAAJ&q=%22nota+explicativa%22+praevia Modern Catholicism: Vatican II and after]'', p. 88</ref>

The Note achieved its purpose: on the following day, 17 November, the No votes against chapter III dropped to 46, a number that may have included some who opposed it because they felt the Preliminary Note of Explanation had weakened the concept of collegiality.<ref name=Jedin/> In the final vote on 18 November only five of the 2200+ participants voted against the dogmatic constitution as a whole.<ref name=Salvatori/><ref name=Jedin/>

The Note is introduced by the following words: "A preliminary note of explanation is being given to the Council Fathers from higher authority, regarding the Modi bearing on Chapter III of the Schema de Ecclesia; the doctrine set forth in Chapter III ought to be explained and understood in accordance with the meaning and intent of this explanatory note." "Higher authority" refers to the Pope, [[Paul VI]], and "the Schema de Ecclesia" to the draft text for the dogmatic constitution {{Lang|la|Lumen gentium}}. By "the Modi" is meant the proposals for amendments of that draft text which some of the Council participants had presented.

The Note was thus added by papal authority, consistently with the idea that the consent of the Pope, as head of the College of Bishops was necessary, and that he had the "right to make his consent dependent on an interpretation determined in advance".<ref name=Jedin/>

The Preliminary Note of Explanation did not in fact alter the value of the statement on collegiality in the text of {{Lang|la|Lumen gentium}}: it "strengthened the adherence to the doctrine of the First Vatican Council on the primacy, but it did not subsequently strike out anything from the direct divine origin of the episcopal office and its function, and the responsibility of the College of Bishops for the Universal Church."<ref name=Jedin/>

Part 4 of the Note reads:

{{quote|As Supreme Pastor of the Church, the Supreme Pontiff can always exercise his power at will, as his very office demands. Though it is always in existence, the College is not as a result permanently engaged in strictly collegial activity; the Church's Tradition makes this clear. In other words, the College is not always fully active [in actu pleno]; rather, it acts as a college in the strict sense only from time to time and only with the consent of its head. The phrase 'with the consent of its head' is used to avoid the idea of dependence on some kind of outsider; the term "consent" suggests rather communion between the head and the members, and implies the need for an act which belongs properly to the competence of the head. This is explicitly affirmed in n. 22, 12{{efn|A reference to part of the text of {{Lang|la|Lumen gentium}}}} and is explained at the end of that section. The word "only" takes in all cases. It is evident from this that the norms approved by the supreme authority must always be observed. Cf. Modus 84

It is clear throughout that it is a question of the bishops acting in conjunction with their head, never of the bishops acting independently of the Pope. In the latter instance, without the action of the head, the bishops are not able to act as a College: this is clear from the concept of "College." This hierarchical communion of all the bishops with the Supreme Pontiff is certainly firmly established in Tradition.<ref>''Lumen gentium'', Appendix – From the Acts of the Council</ref>}}

Bishop [[Christopher Butler (bishop)|Christopher Butler]], a major contributor to the council and strong proponent of its teachings,<ref>Rice, Valentine, Men Who Make the Council, University of Notre Dame Press, 1965.</ref> finds that the document gives a "reaffirmation" to "a genuine sacramental episcopal collegiality" which was thrown into the background by the premature ending of Vatican I. He goes on to say:

{{blockquote|This seems to afford the basis for a recovery of the principle that the papacy—and now we must add the episcopate—is not the source of the actual life of the Church, but the coordinator of that life's various and peripheral spontaneities. This principle of subsidiarity is carried through to the point at which the lay Catholic is seen as a genuine creative force in the life of the People of God; and to the further point where it is realised that the whole human family, insofar as good will prevails, is a theatre of the operations of the grace-gifts of the Holy Spirit, and is cooperating in the building up of Christ's kingdom.}}

He concludes that the Church which makes contemporary the saving truth of the gospel "is the sign and the instrument of the unity of the whole human race."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://vatican2voice.org/3butlerwrites/aggiorna.htm|title=Aggiornamento of Vatican II|website=vatican2voice.org|access-date=2024-12-24}}</ref>

This part of the document also endorsed the revival of the office of deacon as found in the early church, as a permanent vocation rather than a stage through which candidates for the priesthood pass, as had been the case since about the 5th century, and that it should open to married men. It said that:<ref>{{cite web|title=Dogmatic Constitution on the Church | date= 21 November 1964|url=https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html|publisher=The Holy See|access-date=8 August 2016| postscript=,}} chapter III, paragraph 29.</ref>

{{Quote|[T]he diaconate can in the future be restored as a proper and permanent rank of the hierarchy. It pertains to the competent territorial bodies of bishops, of one kind or another, with the approval of the Supreme Pontiff, to decide whether and where it is opportune for such deacons to be established for the care of souls. With the consent of the Roman Pontiff, this diaconate can, in the future, be conferred upon men of more mature age, even upon those living in the married state. It may also be conferred upon suitable young men, for whom the law of celibacy must remain intact.}}