In light of this, I think it would be helpful to take a brief look at the Church's rules when it comes to criticism and dissent from papal teaching, with some focus on the teaching of Donum Veritatis. This will be just a brief look here, as I have done a more thorough look at this subject elsewhere.
The basic teaching on this matter is expressed in the Vatican II document Lumen Gentium:
Among the principal duties of bishops the preaching of the Gospel occupies an eminent place.(39*) For bishops are preachers of the faith, who lead new disciples to Christ, and they are authentic teachers, that is, teachers endowed with the authority of Christ, who preach to the people committed to them the faith they must believe and put into practice, and by the light of the Holy Spirit illustrate that faith. They bring forth from the treasury of Revelation new things and old,(164) making it bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors that threaten their flock.(165) Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking. (Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium, #25)
Here we see that the Church requires assent to all her teaching, whether that teaching comes from the universal episcopate of all the bishops or from the head of the bishops, the Pope, the Bishop of Rome. With regard to papal teaching, we must adhere to all of it according to the Pope's intention in giving it to us, his "manifest mind and will."
The Church has reiterated this in her Code of Canon Law as well:
Can. 750 §1. A person must believe with divine and Catholic faith all those things contained in the word of God, written or handed on, that is, in the one deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn magisterium of the Church or by its ordinary and universal magisterium which is manifested by the common adherence of the Christian faithful under the leadership of the sacred magisterium; therefore all are bound to avoid any doctrines whatsoever contrary to them.
§2. Each and every thing which is proposed definitively by the magisterium of the Church concerning the doctrine of faith and morals, that is, each and every thing which is required to safeguard reverently and to expound faithfully the same deposit of faith, is also to be firm-ly embraced and retained; therefore, one who rejects those propositions which are to be held definitively is opposed to the doctrine of the Catholic Church. . . .
Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it. . . .
Can. 754 All the Christian faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which the legitimate authority of the Church issues in order to propose doctrine and to proscribe erroneous opinions, particularly those which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops puts forth.
We see here that Church teaching, whether from the bishops as a whole or from the Pope, can be definitive or non-definitive. Both forms of teaching are to be adhered to. Both are binding.
This teaching was elaborated upon by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in a document written up as a commentary on a required profession of faith promulgated by Pope John Paul II ("Doctrinal Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Professio fidei"). In this document, the Congregation defines more particularly the nature of the non-definitive teaching of the Church and the form of adherence required with regard to it:
10. The third proposition of the Professio fidei states: "Moreover, I adhere with religious submission of will and intellect to the teachings which either the Roman Pontiff or the College of Bishops enunciate when they exercise their authentic Magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim these teachings by a definitive act." To this paragraph belong all those teachings on faith and morals - presented as true or at least as sure, even if they have not been defined with a solemn judgment or proposed as definitive by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. Such teachings are, however, an authentic expression of the ordinary Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff or of the College of Bishops and therefore require religious submission of will and intellect.18 They are set forth in order to arrive at a deeper understanding of revelation, or to recall the conformity of a teaching with the truths of faith, or lastly to warn against ideas incompatible with these truths or against dangerous opinions that can lead to error.19A proposition contrary to these doctrines can be qualified as erroneous or, in the case of teachings of the prudential order, as rash or dangerous and therefore 'tuto doceri non potest'.20 . . .As examples of doctrines belonging to the third paragraph, one can point in general to teachings set forth by the authentic ordinary Magisterium in a non-definitive way, which require degrees of adherence differentiated according to the mind and the will manifested; this is shown especially by the nature of the documents, by the frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or by the tenor of the verbal expression.38
Again, we see that the non-definitive teachings of the Church, just like the definitive teachings, require the assent of the faithful. We are not allowed to dissent from them. However, there are "degrees of adherence differentiated according to the mind and the will manifested." The intention of the bishops or the Pope, as they manifest this intention in their teaching, determines the degree of adherence required in any particular case. This is of particular importance to emphasize, because this is where those who wish to dissent erroneously from papal teachings often go wrong. They recognize, correctly, that there are degrees of adherence required of various magisterial teachings. As they say, and as we'll see more in a moment, this does indeed mean that we can criticize and even disagree with some of things the bishops and the Pope say. But the real question is, Who determines the degree and form of assent required in any particular case? The erroneous dissenters make themselves and their own judgment the determining factor in deciding what they are required to assent to and to what degree they are required to assent. But the Church teaches that it is the bishops and the Pope who make that determination. We don't get to subject the teachings of the bishops and the Pope to our own judgment and decide, even against their intentions and requirements, what we will agree with and what we will disagree with. We must assent to their teaching according to their manifest mind and will.
As I mentioned, erroneous dissenters sometimes appeal to the document from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith called Donum Veritatis to justify their dissent. (There is a kind of logical absurdity in this endeavor, actually--to appeal to Church teaching in order to justify refusing to submit to Church teaching. If one can subject Church teaching to one's own judgment and reject what one doesn't approve of, why trust the judgment of Donum Veritatis to confirm one in this practice?) So let's see what Donum Veritatis says about when we can criticize or disagree with Church teaching:
23. When the Magisterium of the Church makes an infallible pronouncement and solemnly declares that a teaching is found in Revelation, the assent called for is that of theological faith. This kind of adherence is to be given even to the teaching of the ordinary and universal Magisterium when it proposes for belief a teaching of faith as divinely revealed.
When the Magisterium proposes "in a definitive way" truths concerning faith and morals, which, even if not divinely revealed, are nevertheless strictly and intimately connected with Revelation, these must be firmly accepted and held.(22)
When the Magisterium, not intending to act "definitively", teaches a doctrine to aid a better understanding of Revelation and make explicit its contents, or to recall how some teaching is in conformity with the truths of faith, or finally to guard against ideas that are incompatible with these truths, the response called for is that of the religious submission of will and intellect.(23) This kind of response cannot be simply exterior or disciplinary but must be understood within the logic of faith and under the impulse of obedience to the faith.
24. Finally, in order to serve the People of God as well as possible, in particular, by warning them of dangerous opinions which could lead to error, the Magisterium can intervene in questions under discussion which involve, in addition to solid principles, certain contingent and conjectural elements. It often only becomes possible with the passage of time to distinguish between what is necessary and what is contingent.
The willingness to submit loyally to the teaching of the Magisterium on matters per se not irreformable must be the rule. It can happen, however, that a theologian may, according to the case, raise questions regarding the timeliness, the form, or even the contents of magisterial interventions. Here the theologian will need, first of all, to assess accurately the authoritativeness of the interventions which becomes clear from the nature of the documents, the insistence with which a teaching is repeated, and the very way in which it is expressed.(24)
We see here the same reiteration of the various forms of Church teaching we saw earlier. We also see here the same requirement of assent to all Church teaching, whether definitive or non-definitive. We do see that sometimes "a theologian may, according to the case, raise questions regarding the timeliness, the form, or even the contents of magisterial interventions." So some criticism and disagreement may be allowed. But notice two things: 1. The rule is submission. Unless one can prove a basis for disagreement, there must be submission. The burden of proof is on those who advocate disagreement. 2. The forms and degrees of criticism and disagreement allowed are determined by "the authoritativeness of the interventions which becomes clear from the nature of the documents, the insistence with which a teaching is repeated, and the very way in which it is expressed." This the same language we've seen before. How do we know when and to what extent we can criticize? We must look to the manifest mind and will of the magisterial teachers. Donum Veritatis does not alter or even add anything to what we've already seen. It reaffirms that we are to submit to all Church teaching, definitive or non-definitive, to the extent and in the form required according to the intention and requirements of the magisterial teachers. Once again, we are not allowed to decide for ourselves, even against the intentions and requirements of Church teachers, when and how much criticism and disagreement is permitted to us.
In conclusion, then, we are indeed allowed at times to criticize and even disagree with the teaching of the bishops of the Church and of the Pope. But, if we want to do this, we must first prove that the bishops or the Pope have allowed disagreement in any particular case. If we cannot do this, we must submit and assent to the teaching. If the evidence says that the bishops or the Pope intend their teaching to be binding and accepted by the faithful, then the faithful are required to submit. In this way, truth and unity will be preserved and error and schism avoided as we all agree in mind and will with what the Church is teaching us.
This gift of truth and never-failing faith was therefore divinely conferred on Peter and his successors in this See so that they might discharge their exalted office for the salvation of all, and so that the whole flock of Christ might be kept away by them from the poisonous food of error and be nourished with the sustenance of heavenly doctrine. Thus the tendency to schism is removed and the whole Church is preserved in unity, and, resting on its foundation, can stand firm against the gates of hell. (Vatican I, Chapter 4, Section 7, as found on the EWTN website. "The translation found here is that which appears in Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils ed. Norman Tanner. S.J. The numbering of the canons is however found in Tanner's text.")
For more, see here.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment