 |
About Woodstock | Programs | Publications | Search |
[Woodstock Report, June 1995, no. 42, pp. 3-8]
Copyright © 1995 Woodstock Theological Center
All rights reserved
The Woodstock Theological Center sponsored a forum on May 2, 1995, entitled "The Church in the Modern World: A 30-Year Perspective." The forum celebrated the 30th anniversary of the close of the Second Vatican Council and the issuance of the Pastoral Constitution of The Church in The Modern World (Gaudium et spes). The panelists looked back to see how Gaudium et spes has changed the Church's view of itself and its actual mission to the world, especially in its social, cultural, and economic needs. The three panelists were Rev. Kenneth R. Himes, O.F.M., associate professor of moral theology, Washington Theological Union; Most Rev. James W. Malone, Bishop of the Diocese of Youngstown, Ohio; and Monika K. Hellwig, professor of theology, Georgetown University. Mr. Kenneth L. Woodward, religion editor, Newsweek, moderated the discussion. We present an edited and abridged version of the talks. The views expressed at a Woodstock forum do not necessarily reflect the views of the Woodstock Theological Center.
Kenneth R. Himes, O.F.M., is an associate professor in the department of moral theology at the Washington Theological Union. He is co-author of Fullness of Faith: The Public Significance of Theology.
Being here at a Jesuit University, Georgetown, and being on a panel of the Jesuits' Woodstock Center, I am reminded of a remark by Jesuit Father John Courtney Murray. He said that the Decree on Religious Liberty the one he is most remembered for finally settled the agenda of the 19th century, questions like church-state relations, freedom of conscience, the powers of the limited constitutional state. His hope was that now we could move on to the agenda of the 20th century which, he said, was no longer church-state but church-world. That agenda was the subject of the Vatican II Pastoral Constitution entitled The Church in the Modern World. It is the document whose 30th anniversary we celebrate tonight.
There is an interesting history to the birth of this Pastoral Constitution. Such a document was not planned from the outset of the Council. It was toward the close of the first session of the Council, on December 4, 1962, to be exact, that Leo Cardinal Suenens of Belgium spoke of the need for the Church to address the world and not just to be occupied with internal Church matters. The very next day, Cardinal Montini of Milan who was to become Paul VI by the next session seconded Suenens' proposal. And then, on December 6, Cardinal Lercaro of Bologna echoed the views of Montini and Suenens. So, thanks to the support of three of the most influential and respected Council fathers, a statement on church and world became a topic for the next session of the Council!
The final result was the longest document of the Council, indeed the longest document ever produced by any of the 21 ecumenical Councils in a 2,000 year history! It is called Gaudium et spes, the Pastoral Constitution on The Church in the Modern World. The document is divided into two parts. The first part lays out theological and pastoral perspectives and principles about the Church in the world. The second part addresses five areas of what it calls "special urgency." I will focus on the first part of the document and share five comments about its significance.
"The joys and hopes, the griefs and the anxieties of the people of this age, especially those who are poor or in any way afflicted, these are the joys and hopes, the griefs and anxieties of the followers of Christ. Indeed, nothing genuinely human fails to raise an echo in their hearts." (Gaudium et spes #1)
With these opening words the Council acknowledged the profound linkage of the community of faith with all of human history. We rejoice and we suffer together. This world, this modern world, is the locus of discipleship. We cannot be followers of the incarnate Christ by being disembodied, non-historical disciples.
Immediately, therefore, this document shifts our self-understanding as Church away from images like the water-tight barque of Peter sailing majestically through the roiling waters of history, occasionally tossed by the waves of human existence but essentially distinct from, and unchanged by, the sea of temporal life. Rather, this is a Church which will focus its mission on human persons and not just on souls. A Church which is in the modern world, not above the world or set at odds with it. For it is in the world that the God of history will be encountered.
In the first encyclical of his pontificate, Redemptor Hominis, John Paul II makes the following statement: "the name for that deep amazement at human worth and dignity is the Gospel, that is to say: the Good News. It is also called Christianity. This amazement determines the Church's mission in the world, and, perhaps even more so, in the modern world'." (#10)
To summarize the good news of Christianity as "deep amazement at human worth and dignity" is a statement which would not have occurred to Pius IX. Nor a century later would Pius XII have used such an expression. John Paul's formula is a thoroughly post-conciliar statement, deeply indebted to the vision of Vatican II, for it reflects both of the key themes of the Pastoral Constitution human dignity, and the mission of the Church which is determined by this amazement at the worth of the human. It would be hard to gain an understanding of the present pontificate or that of Paul VI without noting how deeply the Christian humanism of these popes is indebted to the vision of the first half of the Pastoral Constitution.
The four chapters of Part I of Gaudium et spes address four interrelated concerns: chapter one, the dignity of the person; chapter two, the person as communitarian; chapter three, the human person's right to freedom and self-expression; and chapter four, the Church and the world in dialogue. The person whose dignity and worth evokes amazement is a person in relation, a creature made for communion with the creator and other creatures. From this fundamental design of humanity, as being persons in relationship, flows a number of consequences, including the right of persons to express themselves freely in social existence so as to become more truly human. Authentic freedom is at the heart of human personhood, freedom for community (#17). Conditions for genuine community include equality (#29) and solidarity (#26).
In short, there are historical conditions which promote and protect human dignity and there are conditions which violate human dignity. "Hence," as the document states, "it is clear that people are not deterred by the Christian message from building up the world, or impelled to neglect the welfare of their fellows, but rather they are more stringently bound to do these very things." (#34)
Once the basic anthropology of Christian humanism is presented in chapters one through three, the fourth chapter moves to a reflection on how the mission of the Church must be redefined. This method of reconceptualizing the mission of the Church is already hinted at in the oft-quoted paragraph four of the introduction to the Constitution: "To carry out such a task, the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel. . . . We must therefore recognize and understand the world in which we live, its expectations, its longings, its often dramatic characteristics." No longer can the Church understand its work solely in terms of being a means of personal conversion and sanctification. Now the Church's work includes being a voice and a force for shaping the temporal world so that human dignity can be realized more extensively and more profoundly.
This rethinking of the Church entails an intense engagement with the world. The Council fathers were men who had experienced two world wars, the horror of the Holocaust, the onset of the nuclear weaponry, the hostility of communism, the awesome and only partially understood impact of science and technology all these elements of their lived experience forced them to a non-internal definition of the Church. The Church had to be understood in its relationship to the world they knew.
I am not suggesting that previous to the Pastoral Constitution Catholic believers were not engaged in worldly pursuits or dedicated to human betterment. But I am suggesting that the Pastoral Constitution provided a theological foundation, rationale, and spirituality for such involvement which was not articulated previously. Membership in the Church came to be seen as integrally linked to concern for social justice, peacemaking, and a defense of human dignity. Ministries arose within the institution which have as their primary focus the Church's concern for building a world that is more human. Spirituality could no longer be seen as a retreat from the world but an invitation to enter into the depth dimension of worldly life.
In sum, it was the contribution of Gaudium et spes to provide the necessary articulation of the Church's self-understanding for its social mission.
The Pastoral Constitution also encouraged a new model of church/world engagement. Previous models were no longer adequate: the minority sect within the Roman empire, the alliance of Church and Constantinian state, the medieval institution of Christendom, the battered and battering Church of post-Reformation Europe, the established Church of the ancien regime, the isolated and triumphalistic Church of the 19th century, the American Catholic subculture with its selected institutional outreach into society (hospitals, Catholic Charities, schools) none of these models seemed adequate to the moment.
Gaudium et spes suggested a Church with a new strategy for the Church's presence in the world, one which emphasized neither withdrawal, triumphalism, nor assimilation, but critical conversation (listening and speaking) along with principled cooperation with other social institutions and communities of people. The meaning of faith could not be exhausted by personal categories. Rather, the mission of the Church must be expressed in social categories and had, therefore, to take seriously the realities of secularization and pluralism. The Pastoral Constitution offered signposts for the way we should walk in such a setting.
Let me close by restating that the Pastoral Constitution was a foundational document, as any Constitution should be.
It promoted an attitude of openness to the reality of the presence of the sacred in dimensions of temporal existence too often understood simply as secular, bereft of religious significance.
It developed a Christian humanism which has shaped the social teaching of both Paul VI and John Paul II.
It provided an understanding of the human which took into account the contemporary concern for human freedom, equality, and solidarity.
It helped to redefine the mission of the Church as the sign and safeguard of human dignity. In doing this the Pastoral Constitution provided a theological basis for the Church's social mission.
Finally, it suggested an ecclesial strategy for how the Church might engage the world with an attitude of respect and reverence for the activity of the Spirit working through the many events, institutions, and communities of our world.
Most Rev. James W. Malone, Bishop of the Diocese of Youngstown, Ohio, served as president of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops from 1983-1986, and as vice president from 1980-1983. He currently serves on the Domestic Policy Section of the Committee for Social Development and World Peace and chairs the Board of the Catholic Television Network of America.
In my brief reflections I hope to do three things: to look back at the document, its origins, development, and contributions; to look around at our Church today, and explore the document's continuing impact and influence; and to look ahead at some new signs of the times, and to suggest some future challenges for those who still seek to advance the vision of Gaudium et spes.
I believe that this Pastoral Constitution remains one of the most significant achievements of the Second Vatican Council. Like so many other aspects of the Council, this outcome was not really anticipated. As a young bishop, I had the privilege of attending the Council and I remember that the development and visibility of Gaudium of spes was full of surprises: how it got started, how hotly it was debated, and how it ended up! All surprises!
The idea of formulating the Vatican Council's Schema 13 is credited to Cardinal Suenens of Belgium who, along with Pope Paul VI, then Cardinal Montini of Milan, urged such a statement on us Council participants in the first session in 1962. It went through many drafts. There were long, long debates.
In the final year of the Council, 1965, the late Peter Hebblethwaithe wrote: "Progress reports on Schema 13 read like medical bulletins on a patient who seems to be in rather bad shape. There are about 2,200 doctors gathered around the patient, not to mention the hundreds of experts, journalists, and lobbyists who react instantly to the slightest turn for the worse or the better. Some Council Fathers want the document amputated. Others want a graft. Some want a blood-letting. Others called for a transfusion."
I remember well that even toward the very end of the Council, many bishops didn't think that Schema 13 would see the light of day. But on December 4th, 1965 (and remember that the Council ended on December 7, 1965), the final draft of Gaudium et spes was voted upon by some 2,200 bishops as follows: 1,710 yes, some 480 no.
Thus, I think was born the dream of an updated Church, solidly rooted in tradition, and yet appealing to modern people.
It is important to remember why this document was and is so significant! While it flows from centuries of Catholic social thought and action, and a series of Papal encyclicals, it brings together this tradition as a comprehensive moral framework, placing the life, dignity, and the rights of the human person at the center of the Church's social mission.
This document clearly legitimized and affirmed the Church's social ministry, decisively contributing to a process of moving social mission from the fringes of Catholic life more toward the center of our community of faith, a journey which still continues today. It pushed the Church further into the public square, with a consistent and comprehensive message of respect for the life, dignity, and rights of the human person. It made the case for the family as the central social institution, and it called for broader global responsibility.
The document was not perfect. It mentioned, but did not clearly reflect, the growing cause of women's rights. In fact, the language of the document, with its constant use of "man" to refer to all of humanity, grates on our ears today. The document barely mentions environmental concerns and some other challenges which have emerged with new significance and urgency. Parts of the document have been overtaken by the collapse of communism and the end of the Cold War, which are issues that are in the document itself. However, more than a quarter century later, the strengths of Gaudium et spes are far more enduring than its limitations.
After 30 years, I am struck by how far we've come! To a significant extent, our Church has moved from whether we ought to be involved in the pursuit of justice and peace to how we ought to carry out our essential mission in this regard.
While there is significant debate on specifics, on tactics and priorities, as there should be, I believe there is more consensus on social doctrine among John Paul II, the bishops of the world, theologians, and other parts of the people of God, than in most other areas of church life. I believe the continuing challenge is to broaden, deepen, and strengthen this consensus, and see that it leads to effective action, especially in our parishes. The crucial test is not what our documents say, but what believers in the communities of faith do.
We've seen remarkable progress over this 30-year period. Let me list a few examples of ecclesial developments which build on the foundations and framework of Gaudium et spes today.
I cite the pastoral letters of our U.S. Bishops Conference on peace, on economic justice, and on racism; and our three more recent statements on Putting Children and Families First, Confronting a Culture of Violence, and The Social Mission of the Parish. I cite the remarkable growth of diocesan and parish social justice structures, diocesan legislative networks, and other Catholic justice and advocacy vehicles. In this connection, I want to acknowledge the many contributions of the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University to the life of the Church in the United States. The Woodstock Forum which brings all of us together tonight is one expression of its many successful and significant enterprises.
I cite also the significant renewal and refocus on the social justice dimension of religious community life, on catholic charities, and health care. I cite as well the consistent concern for human life and human dignity, demonstrated by the U.S. Catholic community in our ongoing defense of children of the womb, and on welfare. Our advocacy of parental leave and employment, parental choice in education, and our support for human rights throughout our world. And I cite our current 1995 advocacy for the unborn and undocumented and for genuine reform of welfare and foreign aid all guided by this vision of Gaudium et spes. This is just a small, and admittedly "churchy," list of streams of justice that flow from this document, Gaudium et spes.
Perhaps the most important insight of the Vatican document is the charge to read and respond to the Gospel, in light of "the signs of the times." The task for believers today is to undertake our own assessment of the signs of the times. Let me suggest a few, some of which parallel the analysis of Gaudium et spes, and others that move beyond it.
The incredible moral, social, cultural, and economic pressures on children and families. One and a half million children die each year from abortion in our land. Thirty-five thousand children die every day from hunger and its consequences in our world. One-quarter of our preschoolers are growing up poor in the richest nation on earth. More children than ever grow up without the love, involvement, and financial support of their fathers, and women struggle to raise children alone.
After the "Cold War," we face a new world with some of the old problems reflected in Gaudium et spes still around. We still have far too much conflict and not enough development. Sadly, the United States ranks near the bottom in development assistance and at the top in exporting arms to Third World nations. Moreover, the "international" structures affirmed in Gaudium et spes have proved ineffective or unable to restrain international conflict, to promote sustainable development, or to protect human rights. In an age of instant global communication and growing interdependence, our own nation is tempted today by renewed isolationism!
Our society is haunted by a growing cultural violence, where increasingly we are tempted to solve our problems with violence: millions of abortions, problem pregnancies, advocacies of euthanasia, and advocacy of the death penalty in response to violent crime. Besides, the most dangerous place in America is the home, with millions of women and children the victims of family violence.
The list of the signs of the times could and should go on: the rise of an environmental justice movement, the continuing impact of discrimination, and, perhaps most profoundly, the growing role and responsibility of women in society and Church.
Let me close these brief remarks by suggesting some continuing challenges for those who seek to follow in the path of Gaudium et spes.
We need further integration of social mission into the center of Catholic life. We need to insist that social ministry is the work of the whole Church, not a task for a few people.
A second challenge: we need renewed attention and further development of lay leadership and responsibility: understanding that justice is pursued more often by believers' activities in their families, in their work, and in their citizenship, than in Church committees and Church commissions.
A third challenge: we need to take on more comprehensively the "culture of death" that haunts our world. We need to preach the Pope's message on the gospel of life in our land of far too many abortions and executions, in our world of too much terrorism, in our society with too much family violence, in our society marred by the slow-motion violence of poverty.
A final challenge: we need to recover a stronger sense of mission. The discussion of orthodoxy and identity are important; but Church does not exist for itself, but to preach the gospel, to serve the least of these, and to build the kingdom.
I conclude by saying: the central message of Gaudium et spes focuses on the social vocation of the Church. Now is not the time to turn inward, preoccupied by our institutional difficulties and internal disputes. Rather, now is the time to build bridges across the lines of race, gender, nation, and economics, and to renew the earth.
Thirty years after the Council, Gaudium et spes still shows us the way and still offers us principles, which can help "the Church" really be "The Church in the Modern World."
Monika K. Hellwig is a professor in the theology department of Georgetown University. She served as president of the Catholic Theological Society of America from 1986-1987. Her publications include: A Catholic Scholar's Journey through the Twentieth Century; The Role of the Theologian; Christian Women in A Troubled World; and Catholic Faith and Contemporary Questions.
Ken Himes reflected on Part I (## 11-45) of Gaudium et spes, namely, major perspectives and principles. I will reflect on Part II (## 46-90) and the five special problems that Gaudium et spes isolated. When I do so two things occur to me.
First, I notice how bland it sounds to me. Everybody is talking about these "special problems" now: family, culture and education, economic structures, the political community, and international peace. I see that sense of "blandness" as one measure of the Pastoral Constitution's success: these are issues toward which public attention has been turned, and the Council document was part, I am sure, of bringing that about.
But when I look at those five items, I also notice, as my second almost simultaneous reaction, that the character of our life together in those five categories hasn't improved a great deal in the decades since Vatican II. In some sense the problems have become worse. And that shows how difficult it is for us, as Church, to do anything about it. The measure of this difficulty can be seen very clearly in two examples.
The first example is the results in Latin America of liberation theology and basic ecclesial communities. The impact they have had shows us where most of us, in the United States, really stand in the Church. We may gladly assent to the general principles of Gaudium et spes, but when it comes to questioning those structures in which we presently find our security, and when it comes to questioning our relative material and other advantages, then there is a kind of unmasking of where we really stand. And that illustrates the measure of difficulty of implementing Gaudium et spes.
The second example, of course, is the response that the U.S. bishops' pastoral letters on the economy, on armaments, and on race actually received. Once again, when the principles of Gaudium et spes that sound so bland become concrete in our own cultural setting, there is a great unveiling of where the resistances really are. And in that sense I think that the agenda of Gaudium et spes looms just as large now as it did 30 years ago.
What makes Gaudium et spes genuinely significant is the way it defined the Church: not as an institution established in the past and still conducting a self-maintenance operation, but in terms of its task in the world. Moreover, along with Lumen gentium (the other Vatican II document on Church), the Church of Gaudium et spes is reaching towards eschatological goals, reaching towards a fullness of community life under God, a fullness of justice and peace, a sharing of resources, a building of relationships.
That doesn't sound so new to us today, but it is new. From the 15th century until Vatican II, the predominant definition of Church was in terms of an institution that maintained itself, that had largely, and primarily, a sacramental function within the community.
I think Gaudium et spes is also extraordinarily significant in that social concerns are presented as the essence of being a disciple of Jesus. To be a member of the Church is to be a member of the community of the resurrection that is supposed to have a transforming impact in the world. Bishop Malone said Gaudium et spes was extraordinary as a document because it gave a coherent picture of Catholic social teaching. I would say it goes even further than that. It gives a new and coherent picture of what is essential to being a Christian, what is essential to being Church in the world.
I was asked particularly to say a few things about what I see as the message of Gaudium et spes for our future as Church. In answer, I would say that four things are indicated for our times by Gaudium et spes.
The first message is ecumenical collaboration. We have been set a task in Gaudium et spes that isn't simply a Catholic task. It isn't even only a Christian task. It is a human task. And part of our challenge is to find ways to share the vision of Gaudium et spes and the action it prescribes with other people on the broadest ecumenical basis.
A second need and challenge comes after the initial enthusiasm has settled down and we're trying to do the proper task. It is recognition that technical research and analysis is an indispensable part of Christian efforts to transform the world. It complements and implements our Christian vision of how the world might be transformed.
We need a much sharper focus than we've had so far on "the wretched of the earth." In sheer numbers we've got a lot more wretched people now than we had at the end of Vatican II. And that's a terrible thing. We have a lot more people who have been driven out of their homelands, a lot of people who are in their homelands but can't be safe there. A lot more people who are starving and disease-ridden. It seems to me that the actual attention, effective attention, that we have given to the wretched of the earth has not been enough, that it hasn't been the kind of focus that a logical follow-through from Gaudium et spes would ask for.
And the fourth point I want to make about moving into the future is that we have in the world now something that Vatican II wasn't in a position to recognize. It has developed since that time. We now see newly uncovered hostilities which before were held in check by dictatorial control. I am speaking about the terrible, terrible ethnic and traditional tensions that have been unleashed in various parts of what was the Soviet Union. The same kind of thing has been unleashed in several parts of Africa: in South Africa because of its previous policies and in other parts of black Africa because of the long restraining hand of colonialism.
This presents us with a whole new set of problems that we need to address in the most serious way. What ways of reconciliation, of building community across these hostilities and tensions, can we discover? The answers to these questions require research, analysis, and a lot of commitment of people, effort, finances, and world attention. What should be the specifically Christian and Church task within that overall effort? Three things, I think: (a) discernment of this situation in the light of the risen Christ and the possibilities revealed by the risen Christ; (b) penetration of those structures by which a difference can be made, gaining access to the places where influence can be exerted and change effected; (c) solidarity: building up in sheer strength the numbers of people working together for peace, for justice, and for community.
Question: Bishop Malone, what would you have done differently if there hadn't been a Council? Was the experience of attending and participating in the Second Vatican Council really transforming?
Bishop Malone: Well, like everybody else in 1960, I was part of the American scene. It was a kind of an exhilarating time in America. Remember, we elected Kennedy, a Catholic, for the first time. We were experiencing good economic times, particularly in the Catholic community. I came out of the Baltimore catechism, which I studied in Catholic elementary school. I went to a seminary that pronounced me ready for ordination in 1945. When, in the spring of 1962, I received the draft documents I was supposed to carry to the Council and comment upon, I felt very comfortable because there was nothing new in them. The change came in the opening session of the Council. When these bland documents were presented, the leadership from the European bishops said, "This is not what the Council is supposed to be about." And a new agenda was presented. I learned from the new agenda, and I came back in '65 a different person than I was when I went in '62.
As to my natural affinity for the topics that were discussed, I'd say, yes, I found them to be very compatible to my views. I come out of a blue collar union family, steel mill workers. We had to endure being knocked over the head and bleeding for the organization. So, I had personal feelings for social activity and social action. But these were not really based in any way upon my religious faith. They were based more upon the economic condition of my family. I believe that the Council allowed me to see that the social gospel is the gospel I can preach with authenticity and with enthusiasm.
Question: Gaudium et spes speaks of the social mission of the Church, but I think one of the major needs for Catholics today is a sense of identity. Shouldn't the Church be giving meaning to my life, helping me to discover who I am in this world and, therefore, what I should be doing?
Ken Himes: Part of the reason there is a crisis of meaning for some people is because people lead fragmented lives. Their world of meaning in the workplace is very different from their world of meaning in the intimacy of their home. Part of what has broken down is precisely the ability of religion to be that sort of over-arching framework, which integrates all the various realms of people's existence. Therefore, if you are going to talk about religion providing meaning, it has to provide meaning not just in a privatized sense, but in a public sense. It has to help me make sense of the meaning of my work life, the meaning of my marriage, the meaning of my friendships, the meaning of my experiences as a consumer or an employer, or whatever. We need a catechesis that helps people integrate their lives, both their public experiences as well as their more personal or intimate experiences.
Question: I would like to continue this line of questioning. Gaudium et spes speaks to the social order and the major issues to be found there. Is there a document of Vatican II that gives advice and inspiration about leading our own spiritual lives with greater fidelity and profit?
Bishop Malone: Vatican II's Lumen gentium, the Constitution on the Church, outlines very clearly the role of lay persons as members of the Church. It speaks of the responsibility of the believer in relationship to God and in "horizontal" relationship to the neighbor. I believe one of the important contributions of Vatican II was the integration of both of those relationships, with special emphasis on the horizontal relationship that previously had not received appropriate focus and emphasis. I would say that, as believers, we need a stronger sense of mission. Church and Church members do not exist for itself or for themselves, but to preach the gospel, to serve the least, and to build a kingdom. And the principle thrust of Gaudium et spes builds and focuses on the social vocation of the Church.
Question: Why haven't we been able to communicate the message and vision of Vatican II more creatively, especially to young people? Why are they not more involved?
Ken Himes: About youth and their involvement, I would say that this is not a problem simply for youth. John Coleman, a Jesuit sociologist, did research on American Catholicism in the 1980s. First of all he concludes that American Catholicism is not experiencing a spiritual crisis, but in fact a spiritual renaissance. There is a tremendous vitality of faith within the Catholic community. He also concludes that what we are experiencing is a structural crisis. As an institution, we don't know what to do with all the life that is out there. The real problem is finding ways whereby people can act upon the spirituality and the vitality and the faith that they have. That is the real issue, and not just for the young.
Question: The document itself is very progressive and optimistic. Does it stand the test of time?
Monika Hellwig: The document has as one of its major headings: hope and anguish. The members of the Council were very much aware of apparently insoluble problems, as well as of projections of hope.
Ken Himes: I think John XXIII's optimism clearly was infectious at the Council. He was very optimistic about the possibilities of change. He had seen Europe rebuilt in a very short period of time. He was very optimistic about the possibilities of economic development in the Third World. I think John died thinking that the development decade of the 1960s was going to be a success.
Remember that Third World bishops were not all that influential at Vatican II. The voice of those who were marginalized in the world was not heard as clearly as those voices who spoke for the traditional centers of European Catholicism. So there is an optimistic tone and even a certain naiveté‚ in certain places in Gaudium et spes about certain issues. But I think the underlying theological principles of Gaudium et spes hold up over time.