Paying Attention To The Sky

An Illustration From The Baltimore Catechism

Having recalled that the word of God is present in both Scripture and Tradition, the Constitution Dei Verbum of the Second Vatican Council has stated emphatically: “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture comprise a single sacred deposit of the word of God entrusted to the Church. Embracing this deposit and united with their pastors, the People of God remain always faithful to the teaching of the Apostles” (Dei Verbum, Ch2 10). Scripture, therefore, is not the Church’s sole point of reference and, as John Paul II pointed out in Fides Et Ratio, this is the kind of assertion we find in Biblicism or Christian fundamentalism. Rather the “supreme rule of our Catholic faith” derives from the unity which the Spirit has created between Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church in a reciprocity which means that none of the three can survive without the two others.

The task of the Magisterium becomes “giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 85) and this is a task that has been entrusted only to the Magisterium. It cannot be performed by theologians or biblical exegetes, for example (protestations to the contrary). We can find the reason for this in the catechism: “The authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 85) “The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abide in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 890) 

The rule of what we must believe as Catholics was defined by the First Vatican Council (1870). Thus: “Further, all those things are to be believed with divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the Word of God, written or handed down, and which the Church, either by a solemn judgment or by her ordinary and universal teaching [magisterium], proposes for belief as having been divinely revealed” (Dogmatic Constitution, De Fide, Ch 3).   Note that the “solemn judgment”, also referred to at times as the extraordinary Magisterium, refers to an infallible teaching emanating from the sacred deposit of faith and derives from the sensus fidelium (or the supernatural sense of faith – sensus fidei) of the Church. Sensus fidelium is the “sense of the faithful” and refers to the idea that beliefs, consciences and experiences of the faithful is one of the valid sources of truth in Catholic theology. Its very nature preserves it from fundamental error and is rooted in the promise of Christ to protect his Church (the mystical body of Christ) from error through the guidance of the Spirit.

So while nostrums such as “everyone makes mistakes” and “no one is infallible” may guide the ordinary citizen in the conduct of his secular affairs, when it comes to matters of the extraordinary Magisterium and its guidance by the Holy Spirit, these apparent common sense maxims no longer apply – derisive comments by the Church’s cultural detractors not withstanding. And it is here one must understand that the extraordinary Magisterium is just that: something rarely invoked (only twice in the past couple hundred years: Pope Pius IX’s definition of the Immaculate Conception of Mary (1854), and Pope Pius XII’s definition of the Assumption of Mary (1950)) and begs to be distinguished from the ordinary and universal Magisterium which pours out thousands upon thousands of encyclicals, exhortations, homilies, addresses, letters and messages (estimated to be more in the last forty years that the previous 1960).

“Ordinary” means that it is accomplished via the ordinary means of teaching that the Church uses, and “universal” means that it is taught by the entire body of bishops, and usually over a period of time. For generally when a doctrine has been taught as authoritative over time and by many popes and bishops, this indicates that it is a teaching of the ordinary and universal Magisterium and must be received and believed as faithfully as teaching that is solemnly defined by pope or council. The Second Vatican Council in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, no. 25, taught, “Although the bishops, taken individually, do not enjoy the privilege of infallibility, they do, however, proclaim infallibly the doctrine of Christ on the following conditions: namely, when, even though dispersed throughout the world but preserving for all that amongst themselves and with Peter’s successor the bond of communion, in their authoritative teaching concerning matters of faith or morals, they are in agreement that a particular teaching is to be held definitively and absolutely.”

Much of the moral teaching of the Church is taught only by this ordinary and universal Magisterium. For example, abortion: “There can obviously be no room for any legitimate dispute among Catholics about the moral evil of abortion. Yet there has never been a solemn definition accompanied by anathemas against this heinous practice. But there is no need for one, since abortion has been condemned in numerous documents of the Church, starting with the Didache, a very early Catholic writing probably dating from between 80 to 90 A.D., and continuing on to the numerous documents and sermons of John Paul II and of many other contemporary bishops throughout the world. And whether or not the encyclical Humanae Vitae of Paul VI (1968) was infallible of itself, as some have argued, its teaching clearly was, for the doctrine that contraceptive acts violate the natural law has always been taught in the Church. Thus Catholics must reject any minimalist understanding of doctrine that would reduce it to only those pronouncements that have been solemnly made.” (Thomas Storck, “What Is the Magisterium?” Catholic Faith Magazine July/August 2001).

Moreover, we must distinguish the “ordinary and universal Magisterium” from simply “the ordinary Magisterium.” This latter is authoritatively discussed in the encyclical Humani Generis of Pius XII (1950) and the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, of the Second Vatican Council (1964). Pope Pius XII wrote: “Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such… does not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority [Magisterium]. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority [Magisterio enim ordinario haec docentur], of which it is true to say: “He who heareth you,…heareth me” (Lumen Gentium no. 20).  

Lumen Gentium teaches that Bishops who teach in communion with the Roman Pontiff are to be revered by all as witnesses of divine and Catholic truth; the faithful, for their part, are obliged to submit to their bishops’ decision, made in the name of Christ, in matters of faith and morals, and to adhere to it with a ready and respectful allegiance of mind. This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and sincere assent be given to decisions made by him, conformably with his manifest mind and intention, which is made known principally either by the character of the documents in question, or by the frequency with which a certain doctrine is proposed, or by the manner in which the doctrine is formulated (Lumen Gentium no. 25).  In this case the Magisterium is ordinary but not universal. Even so, it demands a “loyal submission of the will and intellect” on the part of the whole Church. It must be emphasized, though, that when this passage refers to bishops, it is speaking only about those bishops “who teach in communion with the Roman Pontiff.”

How does the charism of infallibility work? “There is something like a Catch 22 here (in the idea of sensus fidelium, which the Magisterium interprets). If the sense of the faithful is measured by the belief of those who are faithful, then those who are not faithful to the Church’s teaching do not have a voice in defining what is the Church’s teaching. One may be forgiven for suspecting an element of circularity in this reasoning. Those who disagree with the official Magisterium are, by definition not faithful and therefore are not part of the sensus fidelium that bears witness to the truth of what the Magisterium teaches. In untangling this knotty question it may be useful to recall Cardinal Newman’s example of how the faithful held out for what would come to be recognized as orthodoxy when most of the bishops were leaning toward the Arian heresy (the belief that the Son is not co-equally God with the Father). In the liturgy and devotional life of the Church the faithful intuited the necessity of affirming that Jesus Christ is at once God and true man. They knew they worshiped Jesus Christ as God and, if he were not God, they would be guilty of idolatry. The bishops assembled in council would in time be led by the Spirit to recognize and ratify what the faithful believed. (Richard John Neuhaus, Catholic Matters: Confusion, Controversy, and the Splendor of Truth, (Basic Books;New York,2006) What Augustine called the City of God is, like the earthly city, a creature of time. Unlike the earthly city, its destination is eternal life, the New Jerusalem. That is the Tradition, the truth that is passed on from generation to generation. The oft-quoted words of Jaroslav Pelikan are in order: “Tradition is the living faith of the dead; traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. Tradition lives in conversation with the past, while remembering where we are and when we are and that it is we who have to decide.” (Richard John Neuhaus, Catholic Matters).

 “Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it (the sacred deposit of faith). At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication, and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 86) Hence the reciprocity noted earlier between it and Sacred Scripture and Tradition. Tradition is like the conscience of a community or the principle of identity that links one generation with another; it enables them to remain the same people as they go forward throughout history, which transforms all things. Yves Congar has written that “Tradition is memory, and memory enriches experience. If we remembered nothing it would be impossible to advance; the same would be true if we were bound to a slavish imitation of the past. True tradition is not servility but fidelity.” (Y.M.J. Congar, Tradition and Traditions: An Historical and a Theological Essay (London: 1966)

Here is another Fr. Neuhaus analogy that I liked concerning the Church and the Magisterium:

“The Church is called the barque of Peter on its way to the destination of the promised Kingdom. In the third Eucharistic prayer we ask God “to strengthen the faith and love of your pilgrim Church on earth.” The images speak of stability and movement, of communal identity through time. Employing the nautical imagery, the Magisterium is in command on the bridge. Once may be asked to help out from time to time, but one is not in charge. In a different turn on that image, Newman said that, all in all, he was very happy in the barque of Peter, and he was happier the farther he was from the engine room. Those on the bridge and in the engine room have their appointed tasks and, we are assured, the charisms necessary for carrying them out. As do we all. We are pilgrims and passengers and members of the crew beckoned onward by what the Church calls “the universal call to holiness.” Which is to say, beckoned on by Christ and the promise of the Kingdom. What is expected of us is to respond to the call where we are, and in doing so to allow ourselves to be carried where we are to be.” (Y.M.J. Congar, Tradition and Traditions)

Thinking of the Jaroslav Pelikan quote above, I would posit that the life of the Church can be understood as a continuing conversation. If seen in this way, then the Magisterium is the moderator of the conversation and sets the rules, making sure it is a conversation and not a shouting contest. Tradition said Chesterton, is the democracy of the dead, and the Magisterium assures that, in that sense, the conversation is democratic. The conversation is not about whatever anybody wants to talk about it. It is about, in the words of the New Testament letter of Jude, “the faith once delivered to the saints” (Jude 1:3). What is called “the deposit of faith” — the truth (comprised of particular truths) by which the Church is constituted; the revelation of God in the history of Israel and preeminently in the incarnation of the God-man, Jesus Christ, and witnessed by the divinely inspired Scriptures. St. Ignatius of Loyola’s sentire cum ecclesia – thinking with the Church — begins with thinking. Theology has been described as fides quaerens intellectum – faith in search of understanding. In this sense, every faithful Christian is a theologian trying to think his way more deeply into the faith once delivered to the saints with the help of the Magisterium via sentire cum ecclesia.  

Not just sometimes but at the deepest level we confess, “I do not understand, but I believe.” And in believing we understand in a way that, as the prophet Isaiah wrote is “a peace that surpasses understanding” (Isaiah 26:3). We are finite, God is infinite. In the twelfth century, St. Anselm wrote, “God is greater than that which cannot be thought.” (Anselm in Proslogion, Ch. 15) The Church, through the Magisterium, teaches us how to think and speak rightly about that which cannot be adequately thought or spoken….Fr. Neuhaus again: “When the Church speaks infallibly, the faithful Catholic assents with heart and mind. We may not understand the pronouncement, we may think the teaching poorly expressed or inadequately supported by argument, but we obey, remembering that the etymology of obedience is “responsive listening.” …The alternative to obedience is to turn the conversation into a cacophony of Christians making it up as they go along. Obedience does not come easily for there is in all of us the rebellious spirit of John Milton’s Satan (Non serviam), who would rather rule in hell than obey in heaven” (Anselm in Proslogion, Ch. 15)

Obedience clashes with the current cultural ethos that exalts freedom. The Church remains profoundly misunderstood by not only its secular critics but by those who sit in her pews on Sundays. The Church is not primarily a bureaucratic institution — although there are, to be sure, bureaucracies to carry out many of the Church’s activities and, sadly, bureaucracy may often be the face of many parishes. Nor is the Papacy or the Magisterium, as the secularists would have us believe, political offices that exist primarily to carry out executive and legislative functions. Rather, the Church is the Mystical Body of Christ, the People of God. This claim, which is part of our faith, is sheer nonsense to our scientific-materialist detractors. The papacy and the episcopate were established by Christ himself, not to legislate, but to teach Christ’s savings truths to his people. Contrary to its depiction in the Boston Globe and other secular media, the Magisterium does not ”ban” abortion or contraception or homosexual activity; banning is a legislative act — rather the Magisterium teaches the truth that such acts are intrinsically immoral, contrary to Christ’s saving truths and incompatible with the sharing of divine life.

Robert George, writing in The Clash of Orthodoxies, explains: “Understanding the nature of the Church and its authority makes all the difference when it comes to issues of moral consequence. People who view the Church as essentially a political body and the Magisterium as a legislative office will chafe under the authority of decisions that strike them as restricting freedoms they enjoy. They will test those decisions by appeal to conscience — understood now, not as a judgment of what one is morally required to do or not do, but, rather, as one’s feeling about whether a certain activity — abortion, premarital sex, or whatever — is in fact morally available for one’s choice, the Church’s teaching about the wrongfulness of that activity notwithstanding. By contrast, people who understand the essentially mystical reality of the Church and the function of the Magisterium as teacher of Christ’s saving truths will adopt an attitude of humble — and grateful — submission to the Church’s moral teachings. They understand those teachings as making known the mind of Christ and thus helping to make possible our salvation. Such people will treat those teachings as principles of the formation of their consciences. And they will struggle to live in accordance with them.”