Released only in 2000 at the request of Congar, his journal of Vatican II is an intimate, frank, and detailed chronicle of daily interactions among bishops, theologians, curial officers, and other principal participants at the Second Vatican Council. Spanning from July 1960 to September 1966, Congar's journal recounts anteconciliar preparations, fall conciliar sessions, subsequent “in-between sessions” of working groups (usually March through July), and immediate postconciliar work. Congar notes, however,
This journal cannot begin here and now at the end of July 1960, which is when I learned of my appointment as Consultor to the Theological Commission. It must begin further back. I shall undoubtedly have subsequent impressions to record here later on. But I do not begin today from scratch, with a tabula rasa. The decision to hold a Council was announced a year and a half ago, and I have clearly had time to develop a certain number of ideas. It is worthwhile putting them on paper before, perhaps, they are contradicted and replaced by others. (3)
So begins a remarkable journey, recounting the personal insights and impressions, the theological concerns and deliberations, the political frets and irritations, and the indefatigable contributions and assessments of one of the most influential theologians of Vatican II.
The gift of this journal at this time to the Church is inestimable. We are allowed a privileged window into an ecclesial moment exposing the tensions that are still very much with us. Whether the issues center on collegiality, the Petrine ministry, ecumenism, interreligious dialogue, liturgy, or lay ministry, the seeds planted at Vatican II for a biblically grounded, baptismally animated, and mission-centered ecclesiology continue to struggle to yield that garden that John XXIII so desired the Church to be. In this sense, the journal serves as a tutorial in realism for anyone unfamiliar with the workings of the Roman Curia and the jealous prerogatives of minor officials with significant ecclesiastical power. It also serves as a chronicle of the Spirit, laboring despite the limits of this still-unreformed ecclesial structure.
Besides almost nine hundred pages of journal entries, this volume is expertly footnoted and contains excellent introductory essays and appendices to assist the reader toward a fuller contextual reading. Eric Mahieu's stellar introduction should be included in any Church course (graduate and undergraduate) that seeks a concise introduction to Congar's contributions to Vatican II. Mary Cecily Boulding's “Congar at the Second Vatican Council” differs in style from Mahieu and offers a good overview of council logistics and outcomes. Paul Philibert's essay, “Congar's Ecclesiastical Subtext: Intransigent Conservatism” is a must-read for students and theologians alike. Philibert brings into clear focus what was at risk for Congar (and no less for us today) in the “bitter, ideological skirmishes between liberals and conservatives” (xlvii). Citing eight examples of the intégrisme mentality described in the appendix of Congar's first edition of True and False Reform in the Church, this essay raises the question of how contemporary traditionalism mirrors “the spirit of the European intégrisme of the nineteenth century or of the curial intégrisme of the pre-Vatican II world” (lvi). Clearly, My Journal of the Council will instigate conversation and debate around this contemporary question of ecclesial self-understanding.
The church owes an amazing debt of gratitude to all those who made possible this English translation and publication of the council journal of Yves Congar. Particular gratitude belongs to Mary John Ronayne, OP, and Mary Cecily Boulding, OP, translating from French, and to Denis Minns, OP, editor of the English translation.
