Earlier, I mentioned that two aspects, deeply embedded in Italian culture, seemed to have shaped the Second Vatican Council: the notion of aggiornamento and Renaissance humanism. Having already explored the Italian term aggiornamento, let’s now turn to the influence of Italian Renaissance humanism on the Council documents themselves.
“The medium is the message.”
- Marshall McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (1964)
LANGUAGE
[1] The Second Vatican Council was a turning point in the Church’s history. Whereas past councils were shaped by rigid scholasticism, the approach of Vatican II was pastoral, eloquent, and inviting. Their language echoed the eloquence of the Italian Renaissance, when humanists believed that truth was most persuasive when expressed through beauty. Here was a graceful way in which Italian culture influenced Vatican II.
RENAISSANCE HUMANISM
[2] Inspired by the Roman philosopher Cicero and his vision of the orator’s task – to teach (docere), to delight (delectare) and to move (movere) – Italian humanists, such as Petrarch and Salutati, rediscovered this triad, uniting ratio et eloquentia – reason with the grace of classical rhetoric.
[3] At the core of the poetic Renaissance language was a philosophical conviction: that truth found its natural expression in eloquence, and that the harmony of truth and beauty was necessary in order to serve humanity. (Petrarch 15-17) When truth is expressed without beauty, it loses its persuasiveness. And beauty without truth, loses its moral force. (Salutati 26)
VATICAN II
[4] Centuries later, Vatican II appeared to renew the humanist eloquence of the Renaissance. Echoing this earlier tradition, the Council’s message lay not only in what it said, but how it said it. It did not just describe an idea, it enacted it. By writing in a pastoral, invitational and persuasive tone, the Council’s renewal was expressed as much through this humanist eloquence as through its theology.*
MARSHALL MCLUHAN
[5] Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuhan – often regarded as the father of media studies for his work on the influence of media on human thought – echoed this idea that content and form are inseparable when he observed, “The medium is the message.” He explains that the form of communication is essential because it creates the conditions in which content is experienced and given meaning. (McLuhan 3)
“The electric light,” he writes, “escapes attention as a communication medium just because it has no ‘content.’ … It is not till the electric light is used to spell out some brand name that it is noticed as a medium.” (McLuhan 5)
MORAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE MEDIUM
[6] Echoing the thought of the Renaissance humanists, McLuhan believed that communicating through a particular medium comes with an ethical responsibility because the medium has a quiet but powerful influence on people. What often goes unnoticed, McLuhan warns, is how the medium shapes how people think and act. (McLuhan 3)
He explains that the printing press created individualism and nationalism in the 16th century, not because of the content of any single book, but because it changed how ideas could circulate. (McLuhan 11) The railway created new types of cities, work, and leisure, regardless of whether the trains travelled in a tropical or cold climate, or what cargo they were carrying. (McLuhan 3)
QUESTIONS
[7] Applying this philosophy to Vatican II, we can see its language was not merely a vehicle for doctrine – it was the message itself. The Council’s pastoral form of expression – its tone, rhythm and style – was inseparable from its content and shaped the church’s encounter with the modern world.
[8a] But how?
[8b] What subliminal charge did this pastoral writing itself have on people?
[8c] What was the magic of this particular medium?
[8d] What pattern did it have that reorganized perception?
[9] These questions move beyond theology into the realm of communication and culture – questions that ask not only what the Council said, but how the very form of its language invited renewal.
WHY THE MEDIUM MATTERS
[10] Many studies have been done on the impact of the content of the council documents on the world. But fewer studies have explored the impact of the medium itself – its language – on the Christian imagination. It would be interesting to hear how a media studies or communication scholar together with a theologian might approach the questions above today.
[11] Anyone studying or teaching Vatican II might consider not only the content of the documents, but also the language as part of the Council’s message – to fully understand the depth of its meaning and the transformative effect, if any, its particular form of expression had on the church and the world.
[12] To me, the language of Vatican II seems to reflect the Italian conviction, rooted in Renaissance humanism, that eloquence and truth are inseparable, that beauty itself can be a form of truth, and that the way we speak may shape faith itself. If we tried to answer the above questions by looking at the language of the Renaissance humanists, we might find the key to understanding the voice of Vatican II: it did not invent a new medium, but renewed an ancient one.
*To see this continuity between Renaissance eloquence and Vatican II, you can find many examples of Cicero’s classical triad in the language throughout the Council’s Constitutions. (For example, Vatican II teaches in Dei Verbum §8, delights in Lumen Gentium §1, and moves in Gaudium et Spes §12)
Works Cited
Dei Verbum. Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation. Second Vatican Council, 18 Nov. 1965. Vatican.va, Holy See,
Lumen Gentium. Dogmatic Constitution on the Church. Second Vatican Council, 21 Nov. 1964. Vatican.va, Holy See,
Gaudium et Spes. Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World. Second Vatican Council, 7 Dec. 1965. Vatican.va, Holy See,
McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. 1964. Gingko Press, 2013.
Petrarch, Francesco. “Letter to Tommaso da Messina, Concerning the Study of Eloquence.” In Renaissance Debates on Rhetoric, edited and translated by Wayne A. Rebhorn, Cornell University Press, 2019, pp. 14–17.
Salutati, Coluccio. “On Petrarch’s Eloquence.” In Renaissance Debates on Rhetoric, edited and translated by Wayne A. Rebhorn, Cornell University Press, 2019, pp. 18–26.
Recommended Citation
Miatello, Claudia. “The language of Renaissance Humanism and Vatican II” Bibliosofia e Arte, What An Extraordinary Life. Toronto, ON: Claudia Miatello, 2025. https://whatanextraordinarylife.com/blogs/bibliosofia-arte/renaissance-humanism-and-vatican-II/<paragraph number>
Comments (3)
È interessante perché già durante il Rinascimento la Chiesa aveva un rapporto complesso con l’umanesimo. Alcune figure ecclesiastiche, che erano anche grandi mecenati delle arti, lo abbracciarono (come Papa Pio II e Leone X), mentre altre temevano che potesse portare a una deriva secolarista.
Con il Concilio Vaticano II, però, la Chiesa si era ormai in gran parte riconciliata con l’umanesimo, soprattutto attraverso il concetto di umanesimo cristiano, cioè la convinzione che in Cristo si riveli la verità più piena sull’uomo. Si può dire, quindi, che l’influenza dell’umanesimo rinascimentale sul Vaticano II sia stata percepita come un compimento, o meglio come un recupero di ciò che c’era di più autentico in quella tradizione: la dignità, la libertà e l’intelligenza creativa della persona umana, creata a immagine di Dio.
In effetti, nel 1967 Paolo VI usò esplicitamente il termine «vero umanesimo» nella sua enciclica Populorum Progressio, che in un certo senso «battezzò» gli ideali dell’umanesimo rinascimentale, mostrando la loro sorgente ultima nell’Incarnazione. Il Concilio, e anche il periodo immediatamente successivo, sembrano dunque aperti al linguaggio e alle idee dell’umanesimo rinascimentale, non come prestiti secolari, ma come ideali cristianamente rinnovati.
Do you know what else would be interesting as a study on how Italian culture shaped Vatican II? To study the influence of Italian journalism and media in the 1960s that covered the Council – and how they shaped public perception in Italy and globally. This could be explored through the lens of Marshall McLuhan’s idea that “the medium is the message”. How did the Italian media transmit, filter, and (re)interpret VII through Italy’s modern communicative lens? And what influence might this have had on the public’s understanding and / or faith?
So thoughtfully written! McLuhan’s thoughts are so well applied here! It makes you think about the mediums of communication used in the modern day and how they affect us today.