Sixty years ago, Gaudium et Spes and Dignitatis Humanae emerged as pivotal Vatican II documents, addressing the Catholic Church’s understanding and commitment to freedom. In the changing context of the long 1960s, with its shifting socio-political dynamics, the concept of freedom was reframed as both a theological and social imperative, influencing how Catholics engage with personal liberty, human rights, religious freedom, and the interaction between religion and state. This panel invites papers exploring the conciliar legacy of freedom, including historical expressions in the reception of the Council and its evolving conceptualization, by addressing questions such as: How did the concept shape discussions on human autonomy and the Church’s engagement with modernity? In what ways did it influence or continue to influence theological and political responses to the tensions between authoritarianism and revolution? How do rejecting and overextending freedoms shape and navigate the council's legacy, both past and present? How have receptions and interpretations of conciliar freedom impacted debates on personal and collective rights, as well as inspire concrete action for social justice?
This paper examines the role of Catholic Church doctrine, hierarchical leadership, and episcopal support in the rise of Christian Nationalism and Catholic Integralism, focusing on the current U.S. Presidential Administration. While Dignitatis Humanae and Gaudium et Spes affirmed the Church’s commitment to religious freedom and human dignity, certain bishops and Catholic leaders have actively worked to undermine Vatican II’s vision by aligning with nationalist movements. Drawing on recent examples from the U.S., Hungary, and Brazil, this paper explores how episcopal endorsements of political leaders have contributed to an authoritarian turn in Catholic engagement with the state. It also highlights Pope Francis’s recent rebuke of JD Vance over ordo amoris, underscoring the tension between Vatican II’s teachings and contemporary Catholic political movements. Ultimately, this paper argues that the struggle over Vatican II’s legacy of freedom shapes the twenty-first century's ecclesial and political landscapes.
Pope Francis has made parrhesia a signature word of his papacy, framing “speaking freely” and “courage, frankness, and boldness” as necessities for a synodal church. This paper aims to explore both the theoretical and practical dimensions of parrhesia. First, it traces the lineage of the ancient term as laid out by Michel Foucault, before explicating Francis’s innovation of parrhesia. Then, it takes a practical turn, considering what this ecclesial culture shift towards parrhesia might require, through four case studies of postconciliar theologians whose freedom to theologize had been curtailed by the institutional church: Jacques Dupuis, Gustavo Gutierrez, Elizabeth Johnson, and Ivone Gebara. Looking to them as exemplars of parrhesia, this paper concludes by considering what role theologians could play in a synodal church characterized by freer speech.
This presentation offers a comparative-contextual analysis of the Catholic Church's Vatican II discourses on 'religious freedom' in the People's Republic of China and the United States. The local Chinese Catholic and American Catholic churches have not received Vatican II's teachings in a vacuum but inevitably must situate the optimistic vision of Dignitatis Humanae and Gaudium et Spes along alongside diverse existing local traditions which may or may not be complementary. In particular, the 21st century rise of Han Confucian and white Christian ethno-religious nationalisms in China and the U.S. make it especially urgent that contextual theologians engage in comparative dialogue with the internally quite diverse Confucian/Chinese and Protestant/American religio-moral discourses of their context, which may variously serve or resist the trends towards ethno-religious nationalism and autocratic rule.