"Do you not see in front of you a large tower that is being built on the water, with well squared and shining stones? The rectangular shaped tower was in fact built by six young men who had arrived with the gray-haired woman: other men, thousands of them, carried the stones, some collected from the bed of the waters, the others from the land and they handed them to the six young men who used them for building. The stones taken from the bed of the waters were all added to the building, exactly as they were, because they all fitted perfectly, and all their joints matched, in fact they fitted so tightly that the grooves became invisible and the tower seemed to have been apparently built out of one single stone." .

This extract we have used as an introduction, taken from the Shepard of Erma, brings to the minds of Christians the vision of a tower that unlike the biblical one in Babel has not been built on the ground but on water; this is not a mark of divisions, but an expression of unity. It is without doubt a representation of the Church that finds its origins and its strength in the water of baptism; because it is in the water of baptism that sacramental life begins alongside the decision to place oneself in the sequela Christi. The stones –we the believers- that are taken from the water are represented as fully coherent, they tally to the point that the tower does not allow any visible division between one stone and another. It is the Church of Christ. It is the image of a building that is not yet finished and that however is identifiable by its deep unity.

Its strength consists in the fact that each single stone is made for the other in such a way that by occupying that specific place, nobody may feel either isolated or useless but on the contrary, a necessary and indispensable element for the unity and the harmony of the tower.

In this perspective, The Shepherd of Erma is linked to the St. Peter’s vision which completes it:

"Draw near to Him, He is the living antitype of that stone which men rejected, which God has chosen and prized, you too must be built up on Him, stones that live and breathe into a spiritual fabric, you must be a holy priesthood, to offer up that spiritual sacrifice which God accepts through Jesus Christ" (1 Pt 2,4-5).

This vision joins the others that almost create a "family album" of the Church. "Body of Christ", "bride of the Lord", "people of the alliance", "the vine that the Lord takes care of", "home of the Lord" and His "temple", "columns and support of the truth", "holy assembly", "priestly race", "God’s flock"... and any other words that the mind has found for a description are only needed for attempting to illuminate what the Second Vatican Council using a concise expression defined: "one complex reality" (LG 8). This is what the theologian encounters: "one complex realty" that, depending on different historical eras, he tries to comprehend while attempting to provide his contemporaries with an ever deeper understanding of the mystery of the presence of God in the midst of their history.

There is no doubt that the Second Vatican Council has marked the history of this century and will be remembered as the most important event in the history of the Church of the twentieth century.

It is difficult, after only a few decades, to fully appreciate the richness provided and the inevitable limitations resulting from the different interpretations that have been given. Of course changes may occur during the life of the Church, the tensions that are present and the aspirations towards which the Church works at the beginning of this third millennium of its history.

What we believe must become a compulsory reference point for all hermeneutics are the

teachings offered by Pope Paul VI when closing the third session of the council:

"The doctrine of the Church has been studied and described; hence the doctrinal work of the First Ecumenical Vatican Council has been accomplished; the mystery of the Church has been examined and the divine plan of its fundamental constitution has been outlined…Nothing in effect changes in traditional doctrine. What has been remains. All that the Church has taught for centuries we shall continue to teach. Only what had simply been experienced is now expressed; what appeared uncertain has been clarified; what has been meditated, discussed, also in part controversial, now reaches a serene formulation". It is within this continuity that one can understand coherently the event of the Council and ecclesiological doctrine. The teaching offered in the constitutions Pastor aeternus e Dei Filius in which the Church encounters believers as the mediator of the revelation remain as a backdrop; the session of the encyclical Mystici Corporis by Pius XII in 1943 allows one to go beyond the vision of the Church as a "society" to prepare for the Lumen gentium in the sacramentum salutis. This remains the fundamental formula of the Council’s concept and that of the Second Vatican Council fully synthesizing both doctrine and meaning of the Lumen gentium combining it with that of communio and, in a different manner, with that of the people of God.

It is not our intention at this time to once again examine the different "models" that have been used, immediately following the council and later, for the interpretation of an ecclesiology. It is sufficient to remember briefly the different classifications that remind us of trends and the theologians who, in various ways, represented them.

A first current is the one created in the time between the Council and its immediate conclusion.

The transition from apologetic interpretation to a more dogmatic one is obvious, but the

marks left by the first remain ineffaceable and the new perspective is still unable to dominate.

This tendency gathers around a model that, using different names, expresses the same

realty; some define it as theandrical and other juridical. Essentially, it is based on the

insistence concerning the human-divine composition of the Church and the preferential

reference to the subject of the "body of Christ" appears to be the most immediate for

justifying the institutional form of the Church. Another model that progressively becomes stronger is that of communion. This perspective strengthens fundamentally starting with the distinction that took place in society during the previous decades between Gesellschaft and Gemeinschaft, society and community. Ecclesiology of this type, fundamentally tends to express the principle of the union of love that makes up the Trinity; it is on this element that the communial principle of the Church is structured allowing an agreement between the various components that create it. The sacramental model, also represents another step forward;

it starts with the attempt to overcome an eventual antithesis between institution and communion and proposes the mystery of the Church in the light of sacramental symbolism; the Church is therefore seen in the light of the Ursakrament, as the basic and primary sacrament. The pneumatic model represents the attempt to interpret the work of the Church in the light of the actions of the Holy Ghost as He who vivifies and distributes the charismas for the creation of the community. Everything that the ecclesiology of communion indicates as a Trinitarian expression,

is carried forth here as a charismatic dimension with the intention of affecting an interpretation of the Church that is not limited to the precision of the laws or determined by its institutional role.

The ecumenical and missionary model at various levels expresses an idea that is essentially the same: the recovery of unity as the ferment of an evangelization capable of qualifying the actions of the Church. The Church must live the effectiveness of eschatological tension both when announcing redemption to everyone, and in expressing signals that draw attention to the search for true unity beyond historical divisions.

These are the main models. Others could be added and expressed, running the risk however of providing a fragmentary presentation. Each says something, not everything. On the contrary, should in fact one believe that a single model could enclose the entire reality of the Church, then one would be faced not with the contents of faith and theological analyses, but rather a hybrid of elements which would state a great deal with the exception of the Church of Christ. Positive and negative aspects of these models have been sufficiently assessed to the point of allowing us to look towards other subjects. One cannot deny that a number of key words became popular immediately after the Council, encouraging the renewed awareness of the Church, in particular the subject of the people of God, the meaning and the role of lay people, the relations between the Church and the contemporary world, in the light of Gaudium et spes without forgetting the great subject of ecumenical aperture and the dialogue with the other religions. Of particular interest is the subject of the interpretation of the subsistit in from LG 8, which also underwent a clarifying intervention by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1985. Cardinal Ratzinger, in his speech at the Congress on the Second Vatican Council organized during the Jubilee of the year 2000, strongly stressed the original idea of the Council Fathers: "With the subsistit the council wished to express the singularity and not the multiplicability of the Catholic Church: the Church exists as a subject in a historical reality.

The difference between subsistit and est includes however the drama of ecclesial division.

Although the Church is only one and it "exists" as a single subject, there are ecclesial realities that exist also outside this reality –real local Churches and various ecclesial communities.

Since sin is a contradiction, this difference between subsistit and est cannot be totally solved from a logical point of view" (p. 79). The responsibility of bearing the mark of this realty must lead the Catholic Church to express more and more fully the mystery that surrounds it and confront the faithfulness it is called to. Other problems however appear on the horizon and will see theologians committed to the research and the acquisition of data as of yet unexplored. I am thinking of the great subject of the leadership of the Pope, dealt with in the encyclical Ut unum sint;

the meaning of the collegiate of bishops, the revaluation of local Churches… even these simple reminders bring to mind ecclesiological problems the importance of which we know so well and that will occupy us over the future decades.

It is impossible however to leave out of this consideration, the influential interpretation of the ecclesiology of the Second Vatican Council provided by the Synod of the Bishops in 1985: "The ecclesiology of communion is the central and fundamental idea in the documents of the Council". It is by starting from this indication that it is necessary to represent a theological interpretation capable of presenting the mystery of the Church in a systematic manner. Communio on the other hand, because of its deep biblical meaning, assumes an incalculable theological value. As a category it manages to express coherently the theo-logical

and Cristo-logical character of ecclesiology placing it within the historical-redeeming vision characteristic of the Second Vatican Council. In this context the emergence of the sacramental value we have referred to should not be underestimated. The expression of a ecclesiology in the light of the communio allows the verification of the eucharistic characteristics that are impressed in its nature and if, on one hand, it allows the perception of the unity with the mystery of the person of Christ, on the other it underlines the universal characteristic that is peculiar and that belong to the Church. Unity and multiplicity, in this synthesis, they are conjugated in such a manner that it is possible to grasp the plurality of the ministries and of vocations in view of the creation of only one body. A new vision appears at the horizon, that of nuptial ecclesiology.

The face of the Church Il remains only one and it is that of the bride of Christ. A single face that assumes different expressions and features. That of the bride committed to verifying the identity of the Church in its becoming the "body" of Christ and hence "one" with her Lord, but at the same time is also "other" than Him and to Him she must answer and rely on in the active obedience of faith. In this context, the icon of Mary emerges as a paradigm in which the Church conjugates its availability to be led by the Spirit of He who has Risen.

Among the causes that have encouraged the renewal of ecclesiology in the Council, one is certainly that of the "reawakening of communitarian sense". In far off 1921 R. Guardini revealed in his Vom Sinn der Kirche:

"A process of incalculable importance has begun: the reawakening of the Church in souls". So that this reawakening may continue it is important to recover the sense of belonging to the Church. We shall not tire of stressing where our roots originate, where and how our history and traditions speak. The sense of belonging to the Church overcomes national and linguistic boundaries so as to express deeply one’s Catholicism, representing the universality of the Church of Christ.. The lack of a ecclesial conscience remains a risk that must not be underestimated especially because of the responsibility we hold for the future. Henri de Lubac found a fortunate and extremely meaningful title for one of his ecclesiological works: The paradox and mystery of the Church. That is exactly what the Church is: a mystery seen through the eyes of faith when one contemplates its existence, its birth and permanent evolution in history; a paradox when observed from the outside with curiosity that is often superficial and when its apparent contradictoriness is observed, a contradictoriness that a more dispassionate and impartial analyses can instead lead to coherence.

A return to the words of the Council, at this point, is the best conclusion. A return to personal responsibility lies in them, so that this Church that we love may be rightfully announced as a content faith and, at the same time, not darkening its original sanctity with our sins: "We wish to hope that the doctrine of the mystery of the Church, illustrated and proclaimed by this Council will as from now have happy repercussions especially in the souls of the Catholics: that all the faithful may have a clearer vision of the genuine face of the Bride of Christ outlined and revealed, that they may see the beauty of their mother and teacher, the simplicity and majesty of the features of such a venerable institution, that they may admire a marvel of historical loyalty, of wonderful sociology, superlative legislation, an advancing reign where the divine and the human elements merge so as to reflect upon a believing mankind the plan of Incarnation and of Redemption…

The Church is for the whole world. The Church as any other earthly power only wishes for itself all that enables it to serve and to love. By perfecting its thoughts and its structure the Church does not aim to isolate itself from the experience that belongs to mankind in modern times, but rather it tends to understand them better, to better share their suffering and their good intentions, to better comfort the effort made by modern man for his prosperity, his freedom, his peace".