Thirty-eight years ago David Wells published Revolution in Rome, a book designed to help Protestants get a handle on recent developments in Roman Catholic doctrine. Â The Second Vatican Council concluded in 1965 and Rome’s progressive theologians were left with an open field of creative theological opportunities. Â In the years following Vatican II, Catholic theologians thought it was inevitable the Church would convene for another council, a Vatican III, that would set forth the theological trajectory without the traditionalist compromises that kept Vatican II from finalizing the direction so many progressives desired to set. Â Wells wrote:
The existence of these two theologies in the documents explains why some progressive theologians, in private, are now predicting that Vatican III is already on the horizon. Â It will take place, they say, not much later than 1980. Â At this time, they feel, the progressive viewpoint will enjoy sufficiently widespread acceptance in the Church that the new Council will be able to rewrite its theology wholly in terms of the progressive stance. Â Vatican III, then, will not be forced into the doctrinal compromises and ambiguities of Vatican II. Â Vatican II, as they see it, is merely the means of transition from “old-world” to “new-world” Catholicism. Â It is simply a stepping stone between the two orders. [David Wells, Revolution in Rome (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1972), 35.]
Needless to say, Vatican III has yet to become reality. Â But the question before us nearly two generations later is whether it will happen at all. Â Recently, I spoke with a Roman Catholic friend who suggested a rise in traditionalist Roman Catholic thought was underway. Â This may, in part, be fueled by the same sentiment that leads some young Protestants to Rome. Â The structure and tradition can be quite attractive in the face of evangelicalism’s nebulousness, and the fallout of postmodernity has given Rome a boost in recruiting these disgruntled young theologians. Â Though this is an interesting thought experiment, at this point I doubt the force of this movement is significant enough to move the Roman Church from the path set by Vatican II. Â It may take several decades for the Catholic Church to sort out its current scandals, but if and when it does, a Vatican III may not be necessary.
I should add a note about the irony of all this. Out of frustration with the postmodern stripe of the evangelical church – particularly its ecclesiology – some see the clear authority structure of Rome as an attractive alternative. However, the intentional ambiguity of the church’s conciliar documents coupled with the typical postmodern view of tradition leaves these pilgrims lacking what they desire. Running to Rome as an alternative to postmodern-influenced organizations doesn’t get you much.