Pope John XXIII Traditionalist?
For decades Pope John XXIII has been championed by many “Spirit of Vatican II” Catholics as the visionary who opened the Second Vatican Council by calling for “aggiornamento”, an updating of the Catholic Church for the modern era.
In the years since the Council a narrative which promotes rupture over continuity has been taught by many within the Church, particularly at the parish level. Many on the left, often those in positions of authority, have presented the faithful with a new form of Catholicism which never existed prior to the Council.
Veterum Sapientia
It is safe to say that very few Catholics today would label Pope John XXIII as a traditionalist. After all, didn’t he first announce the need for a new council only three months into his papacy?
However, consider Veterum Sapientia, Pope John XXIII’s Apostolic Constitution on the study of Latin which was released in February of 1962, just eight months before the opening of the Council. In the years since it’s release this document has drifted into obscurity. In fact the Vatican’s own website does not even provide an English translation of it.
Reading Veterum Sapientia today one might think they are studying the work of an ardent Traditionalist.
Has there been a more definitive litmus test in the years since the Council than one’s view of Latin and its necessity? After all, didn’t the post-conciliar Church honor the the spirit of “aggiornamento” by effectively expelling the lingua antiqua from the everyday life of the faithful?
Unceremoniously Cast Out
Romano Amerio (1905-1997) who taught for decades at the Academy of Lugano in Switzerland, also attended the Second Vatican Council as a peritus (expert). Professor Amerio noted the unceremonious treatment given Veterum Sapientia in his magnum opus Iota Unum:
…(the document) which had been so loudly praised as useful and opportune, was completely wiped from memory and is not cited in any conciliar document. Some biographies of John XXIII do not mention it at all, just as if it did not exist, and never had; while the more arrogant accounts mention it simply as an error.
There is not, in the whole history of the Church, another instance of a document’s being so solemnly emphasized, and then being so unceremoniously cast out so soon afterwards, like the corpse of an executed criminal.
There has been a great deal of attention once again paid to Pope John XXIII this past year due in part to the commencement of the Year of Faith, as well as the commemoration of the opening of the Second Vatican Council and more recently the announcement of his canonization scheduled for April 2014.
In order to provide a more accurate and complete picture of Pope John XXIII and his defense of tradition, it is important to look at the document which has been “completely wiped from memory” in the post-Conciliar years.
Veterum Sapientia -Selected Excerpts (emphasis mine)
“But amid this variety of languages a primary place must surely be given to that language which had its origins in Latium, and later proved so admirable a means for the spreading of Christianity throughout the West. And since in God’s special Providence this language united so many nations together under the authority of the Roman Empire — and that for so many centuries — it also became the rightful language of the Apostolic See. Preserved for posterity, it proved to be a bond of unity for the Christian peoples of Europe.”
“Of its very nature Latin is most suitable for promoting every form of culture among peoples….It does not favor any one nation, but presents itself with equal impartiality to all and is equally acceptable to all.”
“For these reasons the Apostolic See has always been at pains to preserve Latin, deeming it worthy of being used in the exercise of her teaching authority “as the splendid vesture of her heavenly doctrine and sacred laws…”
“These are the words of Our Predecessor Pius XI, who conducted a scientific inquiry into this whole subject, and indicated three qualities of the Latin language which harmonize to a remarkable degree with the Church’s nature. “For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”
“Since every Church must assemble round the Roman Church, and since the Supreme Pontiffs have “true episcopal power, ordinary and immediate, over each and every Church and each and every Pastor, as well as over the faithful” of every rite and language, it seems particularly desirable that the instrument of mutual communication be uniform and universal , especially between the Apostolic See and the Churches which use the same Latin rite.”
“Furthermore, the Church’s language must be not only universal but also immutable. Modern languages are liable to change, and no single one of them is superior to the others in authority. Thus if the truths of the Catholic Church were entrusted to an unspecified number of them, the meaning of these truths, varied as they are, would not be manifested to everyone with sufficient clarity and precision. There would, moreover, be no language which could serve as a common and constant norm by which to gauge the exact meaning of other renderings.
But Latin is indeed such a language. It is set and unchanging. it has long since ceased to be affected by those alterations in the meaning of words which are the normal result of daily, popular use.”
“Finally, the Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord. It is altogether fitting, therefore, that the language it uses should be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular.”
“In addition, the Latin language “can be called truly catholic.” It has been consecrated through constant use by the Apostolic See, the mother and teacher of all Churches, and must be esteemed “a treasure … of incomparable worth.”. It is a general passport to the proper understanding of the Christian writers of antiquity and the documents of the Church’s teaching. It is also a most effective bond, binding the Church of today with that of the past and of the future in wonderful continuity.”
“It will be quite clear from these considerations why the Roman Pontiffs have so often extolled the excellence and importance of Latin, and why they have prescribed its study and use by the secular and regular clergy, forecasting the dangers that would result from its neglect”.
“The employment of Latin has recently been contested in many quarters, and many are asking what the mind of the Apostolic See is in this matter. We have therefore decided to issue the timely directives…so as to ensure that the ancient and uninterrupted use of Latin be maintained and, where necessary, restored.”
“In the exercise of their paternal care they (Bishops and superiors-general of religious orders) shall be on their guard lest anyone under their jurisdiction, eager for revolutionary changes, writes against the use of Latin in the teaching of the higher sacred studies or in the Liturgy, or through prejudice makes light of the Holy See’s will in this regard or interprets it falsely.”
Recovering the Wisdom of Veterum Sapientia
That the Church as been slowly recovering the sentiment and wisdom of Veterum Sapientia was made evident upon its 40th anniversary in 2002 when Pope John Paul II recommended the use of Latin in the Roman liturgy and in seminary training. The Holy Father’s message to a conference being held in Rome at the Salesian University also expressed his desire that “the love of that language would grow ever strong among candidates for the priesthood.”
In agreement with his predecessor, John Paul II affirmed that the use of Latin “is an indispensable condition for a proper relationship between modernity and antiquity, for dialogue among different cultures, and for reaffirming the identity of the Catholic priesthood.”
Pope John XXIII, in defense of tradition, quotes Pope Pius XI in Veterum Sapientia when he states “For the Church, precisely because it embraces all nations and is destined to endure to the end of time … of its very nature requires a language which is universal, immutable, and non-vernacular.”
One wonders just how many “Spirit of Vatican II” Catholics have ever actually read Veterum Sapientia.
Share this:
Posted on November 4, 2013, in holiness and tagged iota unum, john xxiii, romano amerio, spirit of vatican ii, the study of latin, veterum sapientia. Bookmark the permalink. 9 Comments.
liturgy guy 
I have admittedly been somewhat uncomfortable, as I am sure many others have, with Blesseds John XXIII and John Paul II being canonized together as they will be next year. On the one hand, it almost seems as though the one who “stirred up the ruckus,” so to speak, and the one who then spent years calming it down are both being placed somehow on the same level–that is, until someone such as yourself clarifies the fact that John XXIII, in reality far more traditional than most Catholics today, began a process through the calling forth of Vatican II which JPII then solidified and made sense of for all time through the new Catechism and his many other solid encyclicals, and all done as one who had attended and supported Vatican II himself, as did Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. The very two Popes who supposedly, in the eyes of some, rained on the parade of clown Masses and “womynpriests” and the like are the only two in history who attended Vatican II and took active part in it, and then lived long enough to help interpret, first-hand, its significance to the world.
Further, I think it is worth noting that JPII is named after the three previous Popes, as well as the patron saints behind each of them, and the first of those was John XXIII, who began the Council, and then Paul VI, who finished the Council while remaining far too traditional for the same folks who today would see the Church become a mere social club or society. They (John XIII and JPII) truly do “bookend” and seal the deal on the REAL “spirit of Vatican II,” and each of them have given an immense gift to the Church in the modern world. And yes, as you stated, and as is indeed true of Pope Francis as well, were men of God who carried, albeit in very different ways, the unchanging Tradition of Catholicism without in that process forgetting that we are now in the 20th/21st century. And that, in fact, was the main purpose of Vatican II all along.
Lastly, I find it ironic, as I now am part of and attend a parish run by the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter, that the very version of the Tridentine Mass which we use is from the 1962 Missal, and that particular Missal was issued during John XXIII’s reign as vicar of Christ on earth! He not only promoted the Latin Mass but helped to solidify its place in the Church, as he also did with Veterum Sapientia, as you so lucidly point out.
Maybe they do belong together after all (these two Blessed Popes, that is!). Thanks so much for a nice article, and for pointing out a document not only worth reading but which was literally given to us from the very hands of the one who signed Vatican II into existence. There is no conflict between the two Popes nor the pre or post-Vatican II Church. Both are valid and necessary.
Reblogged this on Catholicboyrichard 2.0 and commented:
RICHARD’S THOUGHTS–I have admittedly been somewhat uncomfortable, as I am sure many others have, with Blesseds John XXIII and John Paul II being canonized together as they will be next year. On the one hand, it almost seems as though the one who “stirred up the ruckus,” so to speak, and the one who then spent years calming it down are both being placed somehow on the same level–that is, until someone such as yourself clarifies the fact that John XXIII, in reality far more traditional than most Catholics today, began a process through the calling forth of Vatican II which JPII then solidified and made sense of for all time through the new Catechism and his many other solid encyclicals, and all done as one who had attended and supported Vatican II himself, as did Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. The very two Popes who supposedly, in the eyes of some, rained on the parade of clown Masses and “womynpriests” and the like are the only two in history who attended Vatican II and took active part in it, and then lived long enough to help interpret, first-hand, its significance to the world.
Further, I think it is worth noting that JPII is named after the three previous Popes, as well as the patron saints behind each of them, and the first of those was John XXIII, who began the Council, and then Paul VI, who finished the Council while remaining far too traditional for the same folks who today would see the Church become a mere social club or society. They (John XIII and JPII) truly do “bookend” and seal the deal on the REAL “spirit of Vatican II,” and each of them have given an immense gift to the Church in the modern world. And yes, as you stated, and as is indeed true of Pope Francis as well, were men of God who carried, albeit in very different ways, the unchanging Tradition of Catholicism without in that process forgetting that we are now in the 20th/21st century. And that, in fact, was the main purpose of Vatican II all along.
Lastly, I find it ironic, as I now am part of and attend a parish run by the Priestly Fraternity of St Peter, that the very version of the Tridentine Mass which we use is from the 1962 Missal, and that particular Missal was issued during John XXIII’s reign as vicar of Christ on earth! He not only promoted the Latin Mass but helped to solidify its place in the Church, as he also did with Veterum Sapientia, as you so lucidly point out.
Maybe they do belong together after all (these two Blessed Popes, that is!). Thanks so much for a nice article, and for pointing out a document not only worth reading but which was literally given to us from the very hands of the one who signed Vatican II into existence. There is no conflict between the two Popes nor the pre or post-Vatican II Church. Both are valid and necessary.
I would not label him a traditionalist. Traditionalism is really a backlash against liberalism. God calls us to neither. God calls us to be orthodox to the Seat of Peter. He is orthodox to the Seat of Peter; the Church universal. No, he’s not a traditionalist.
Magnificent and true on the part of S. S. Sanctvs Ioannes pp XXIII, S. S. Sanctvs Ioannes Pavlvs pp II and S. S. Pivs pp XI. Latin needs to be the true language of the Holy Roman Church and its Mass.
Pope John XXIII loved much of the traditional ritual. He was the last Pontiff to use full Papal trappings and ceremony. More than Pius XXII even. I also doubt full vernacular was the Council Fathers’ intent. pImage Sacrosanctum Concilium perrmiited and encouraged use of the vernacular in parts of the Mass, in addition to Lattin. It specifically stated that Latin must be given pride of place. That’s not what happened. Instead Paul VI handed the implementation to someone John had removed from the Council and sent to a monastery for reflection. Paul appointed someone who John had effectively banished and exiled. .Had John XXIII lived longer it’s likely a different person would have been chosen to handle the implementation.
As an undergraduate in a Liturgical Latin class in 1963 I was made to translate Veterum Sapientia. I was stunned by how reactionary the MS. seemed to everything John XXIII stood for up to that point. Even as a kid I recognized that.. But my professor whispered that arch-conservative Cardinal Ottaviani had pressured the Pope Into issuing this last gasp of traditionalism even as the vernacular Mass was unfolding. I always considered it appropriately ironic that Ottaviani began to go blind shortly after this.
Thanks for this post.
Then there is the complete eradication of the Roman Synod of 1960, which was a trial ballon for Vatican II. It was completely suppressed due to its absolute Orthodoxy. Can’t find it anywhere except references to it.
Pax Christi
I was present as a second year seminarian when Pope John XXIII announced “Veterum Sapientia” to the audience in St. Peters filled to capacity by bishops, priests and us seminarians. We were to hear that Latin would be restored to its appropriate place in the churches/seminaries throughout the world. Our first shock about this announcement was that the pope spoke to us in Italian! If any audience could have understood Latin, it would have been us! And afterward some of our American seminarians were upstairs in his apartment where he told them he was not going to follow through on this call to restore Latin. He said that the establishment authorities in the Vatican thought they had control of him, but clearly did not. Latin disappeared as reported in this article.
Pingback: Sunday Thoughts: Was Satan Present During The Second Vatican Council? | Trekking Toward The Truth