Freedom and the Dilemma of "Autonomy – Theonomy": On a Possible Reading of Gaudium et Spes
Abstract
The aim of this article is to consider a particular issue present in the constitution Gaudium et spes of the Second Vatican Council. The anthropological discourse employed in this constitution reveals a significant interest in the issue of autonomy. The present study explores the contemporary issue of the tension between autonomy and theonomy, a tension which has characterized both the teaching of the Church and modern thought and culture. The analysis outlines how the Council transcends historical conflicts in this domain, thereby establishing a forum for dialogue without relinquishing its position regarding the primacy of God in the context of human freedom. Following the presentation of the problem and the modern context, the main section of the article provides an analysis of selected passages from Gaudium et spes that are considered to be pertinent in providing an answer to the aforementioned question. This is followed by an interpretation of the results of that analysis. It has been demonstrated that the Council deviates from the confrontational presentation of theonomy against autonomy. The approach employed here is to direct attention towards the concept of concrete freedom, which is characterized by its ambivalence and limitations. This, in turn, engenders an openness to the recognition of its foundation in God. The study concludes with a summary, which also draws attention to the topicality of the issue.
Keywords:
Gaudium et spes, theological anthropology, Second Vatican Council, autonomy, freedomReferences
Bosschaert, Dries. 2017. “Understanding the Shift in Gaudium et Spes: From Theology of History to Christian Anthropology.” Theological Studies 78 (3): 634–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040563917714620.
Bosschaert, Dries. 2019. The Anthropological Turn, Christian Humanism, and Vatican II: Louvain Theologians Preparing the Path for Gaudium et Spes (1942–1965). Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium 303. Leuven: Peeters.
Bujak, Janusz. 2011. “Wybrane aspekty antropologii teologicznej konstytucji duszpasterskiej Gaudium et spes 22. Soboru Watykańskiego II.” Studia Koszalińsko-Kołobrzeskie 16:19–31.
Hilpert, Konrad. 2013. “Das Konzil und die Kultur der Freiheit.” Münchener Theologische Zeitschrift 64 (4): 425–35. https://doi.org/10.5282/mthz/4741.
Höver, Gerhard. 1993. “Autonomie: II. Theologisch-Ethisch.” In Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, 3rd ed., edited by Walter Kasper et al., 1:1296–97. Freiburg: Herder.
Kasper, Walter. 2019a. “Christliche Freiheit und Neuzeitliche Autonomie.” In Gesammelte Schriften, edited by George Augustin and Klaus Krämer, 33–71. Freiburg: Herder.
Kasper, Walter. 2019b. “Die Theologische Anthropologie von Gaudium et spes.” In Gesammelte Schriften, edited by George Augustin and Klaus Krämer, 591–603. Freiburg: Herder.
Losinger, Anton. 1989. Iusta autonomia: Studien zu einem Schlüsselbegriff des II. Vatikanischen Konzils. Abhandlungen zur Sozialethik. Paderborn: Schöningh.
Lubac, Henri de. 1995. The Drama of Atheist Humanism. San Francisco: Ignatius Press. Schelkshorn, Hans. 2012. “Das Zweite Vatikanische Konzil als kirchlicher Diskurs über die Moderne: Ein philosophischer Beitrag zur Frage nach der Hermeneutik des Konzils.” In Erinnerung
an die Zukunft: Das Zweite Vatikanische Konzil, edited by Jan-Heiner Tück, 54–84. Freiburg: Herder.
Second Vatican Council. 1965. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et Spes. (= GS). https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651207_gaudium-et-spes_en.html.
Wąsek, Damian, and Sławomir Zieliński. 2025. “Freedom as a Polyphonic Concept in the Vota for the Second Vatican Council.” Verbum Vitae 43 (1): 185–99. https://doi.org/10.31743/vv.17759.
Xavier, Joseph. 2010. “Theological Anthropology of Gaudium et Spes and Fundamental Theology.” Gregorianum 91 (1): 124–36.
University of Silesia in Katowice https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1965-785X
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The author(s) grant (s) to the Licensee a non-exclusive and royalty-free license in accordance with the provisions of the Appendix: LICENSE TO USE THE WORK
