Unitatis Redintegratio and Nostra Aetate - Reception at the Fifty Year Mark in the New Era of Pope Francis

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Oliver

Explores how Unitatis redintegratio and Nostra aetate were received across the fifty years after Vatican II, weighing expectations for reform against the slower, controlled implementation that followed the Council of Trent. Traces how adages about taking “a hundred years to receive a council” reflect impatience and resignation, then turns to historical mechanisms in Rome: censorship, the Index, congregations regulating publication, and continued abuses after Trent. Concludes by setting Trent’s legacy beside later openings and ecumenical aims.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryReligion & Spirituality

FormatPDF

Pages16

Reading Time40 min

AccessFree to download

Ecumenism and Interreligious Dialogue

Reception at the Fifty Year Mark in the New Era of Pope Francis

The Council of Trent and the long implementation of reform

From Trent to Vatican II: expectations, interpretation, and change

Unitatis Redintegratio and Nostra Aetate:Reception at the Fifty Year Mark in theNew Era of Pope Francis By John Borelli banned Sarpi's history of the council.The reform of the churchcalled for by Trent was tightly controlled by Rome. "It takes a hundred years to receive a council."I have heardthis adage in many places and at many times over the past_fifty years.It is almost a commonplace observation thesedays about Vatican II,although I have not found any consistenttestimony as to who said it first.Another post-Vatican II adagethat we ecumenists hear often enough goes something like this,"Ecumenism is dead in the water.”To say"it takes a hundred yearsto receive a council”conveys impatience,frustration,and,in thelast analysis,wisdom.Worry,dread,and resignation,benign,happy or sad,tinge any observation that a grand undertaking suchas the ecumenical movement is dead in the water.A century toreceive a council implies“We are nowhere near where we shouldbe”fifty years after Vatican II,while declaring ecumenism with-out life or any future whatsoever implies"We aren't going to makeit."To be an ecumenist is to be an optimist,and both attitudes,atfirst,seem adverse to that hopeful spirit. While O'Malley reports examples of a more sober and lessostentatious situation in Rome surrounding the papacy after Trentthan before it,he also records continuing abuses and accumulationof wealth by bishops and clergy for decades afterwards.As late as1652,at the 89 year mark,the bishop of Autun complained ofwidespread clerical concubinage,which,he feared,Catholicsaccepted as the norm."The diocese of Autun was not unique,"O'Malley writes.Yet,he concludes from the evidence of historythat no matter the resistance to change of certain Renaissance sys-tems,the climate in which they operated was gradually changing. How much of the change in climate was directly due to theCouncil of Trent?A great deal,surely,but greater precision ishard to come by.During the council Catholic leaders of allstripes had their eyes fixed on it,and many were determined orunder pressure to make its enactments operative.In the eyes ofcontemporaries the council stood at center stage.⁵ John O'Malley reminds us in his recent book on the Councilof Trent that Paolo Sarpi,a Venetian Servite Brother,had to pub-lish his history of the Council of Trent pseudonymously and inLondon in 1619,fifty-six years after the close of that council,because he“interpreted Trent as a tragic story of the failure of atrue reform to carry the day and the triumph of papal abuse ofpower.”The book was immediately put on the Index of ProhibitedBooks.Forty years later and closer to the one hundred year markafter Trent,Jesuit Sforza Pallavicino published a two-volume re-joinder to Sarpi.²After Trent,Pius IV confirmed its decrees,es-tablished the Congregation of the Council,which remained inexistence until 1966,and forbad the printing of commentaries andnotes without the permission of the Holy See.His successor,PiusV,established a Congregation of the Index,with instructions forcensorship and the banning of books far more restrictive than theCouncil of Trent had suggested.3 This was the Congregation that One measure of Trent's success was that it was not for another300 years before a pope was up to calling a council and 400 yearsbefore a pope called a reform council.At the end of that council,Vatican I,Paul VI reformed the curia and left the interpretationand record of the council open,unlike his predecessors after Trent. continued on page 2 Dr.John Borelli served for sixteen years in ecumenical andinterreligious relations at the U.S.Conference of Catholic Bishops,staffing the dialogue with the Orthodox Church and with theEpiscopal Church and other ecumenical and interreligiousrelationships.He is currently Special Assistant to the President ofGeorgetown University and also serves as National Coordinatorfor Interreligious Dialogue and Relations for the U.S.JesuitConference. IN THIS ISSUE G- Vatica

FAQs

What does the essay suggest about the pace of receiving a council’s reforms?

It contrasts the impatience implied by the adage “a hundred years to receive a council” with the reality that major reforms unfold over long periods. The author links expectations after Vatican II to the slower climate of change seen after Trent.

How did the Council of Trent’s implementation relate to papal and Roman control?

The essay states that the reform called for by Trent was tightly controlled by Rome. It also describes subsequent mechanisms—such as the Congregation of the Council and censorship measures—that constrained how commentary and notes could be published.

Who is associated with the ecumenical and interreligious roles mentioned in the text?

Dr. John Borelli is identified as having served for sixteen years in ecumenical and interreligious relations at the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. The text also notes his current roles at Georgetown University and the U.S. Jesuit Conference.

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Oliver