Thursday, January 12, 2012

What should be our attitude toward the Magisterial teaching of the Church?

In her most recent blog post, Stacy Trasancos, a Catholic writer who contributes a regular column for The Catholic Free Press, writes, "One thing I learned very quickly about Catholicism was that Catholics argue a lot. I wanted to be faithful to the Magisterium but I was often confused about the details. If I listened to this argument from a trusted theologian, and learned it, then I thought I was being sufficiently faithful. I thought, naively, that theologians all learned the same things, kind of like mathematicians, and they just taught it. I even began a Masters degree in theology with that purpose in mind — I want to be able to communicate the faith better.

Then I began to encounter opposing theological arguments, and that left me confused. Who is right? 'Wait! I thought we all just learned the catechism and spread the word.' It’s not so simple. Theologians, laity all the way to the Pope, often disagree. Church Councils dealt with disagreements. There have always been disagreements, even among the Apostles. Over time I realized something really quite profound. Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other, and in doing so they aid in the maturation of our understanding of revealed truth. In this way we aid the Magisterium, remaining in service to this authority, not in opposition to it. We grow together." (See here).

What of this?  May a Catholic disagree with [dissent from] the Magisterial teaching of the Church?  Is there such a thing as "faithful dissent"?  In a word, no.  In its 1990 Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith addressed this matter in detail and, in so doing, provided us with a helpful commentary on the nature of what Vatican II (Lumen Gentium, No. 25) refers to as "religious submission of soul" or of "will and mind" which all of the faithful - including theologians - must give to authoritative Magisterial teachings, even when they are proposed noninfallibly.

First of all, let's see what Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council had to say:


"Among the principal duties of bishops the preaching of the Gospel occupies an eminent place. 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, making it bear fruit and vigilantly warding off any errors that threaten their flock. 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."


Getting back to the CDF's Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, the document clearly differentiates, in No. 24, between questioning and dissent [or disagreement] by ephasizing that "the willingness to submit loyally to the teachings of the Magisterium...must be the rule" when questioning Magisterial teachings.  Any questioning of Magisterial teachings by the theologian must take place within the context of the religious submission of mind and will which is owed to the more-than-human authority within the Church.  What do we mean by "more-than-human-authority"?  Read the second sentence of Lumen Gentium 25 above: "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.."

The CDF Instruction goes on to clearly repudiate the false claim that dissent is somehow reconcilable with Church teaching.  In his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, No. 113, Pope John Paul II emphasizes that, "dissent, in the form of carefully orchestrated protests and polemics carried on in the media, is opposed to ecclesial communion and to a correct understanding of the hierarchical constitution of the People of God."

May Catholics challenge the Magisterium by disagreeing with it?  Not if they wish to remain in communion with the Church.  It is important to recall the teaching of Dei Verbum of the Second Vatican Council: "..the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on, has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church,  whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed."


The issue here is: Who speaks for the Church?  Who has the authority from Christ Jesus to settle disputes which may arise within the Church?  The answer is that is that this authority is vested exclusively in the Pope and the Bishops in communion with the Holy Father.  The Church is Mater et Magistra (the title of an Encyclical Letter of Pope John XXIII), Mother and Teacher.  The Magisterium alone has been entrusted with the task of authentically interpreting the Word of God, whether found in Sacred Scripture or Tradition.

This post should not be interpreted as a criticism of Stacy Trasancos' person.  She comes across as a delightful young lady who is bright and personable.  She has so much good to offer.  It is offered only in the service of truth and charity.

Code of Canon Law:

Canon 750 – § 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.


§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.

Related reading on the sensus fidelium here.

27 comments:

Ellen Wironken said...

You're absolutely right Paul. Thanks for posting this. No Catholic has a right to challenge the Magisterium or to disagree with her teaching. To disagree with the Magisterium is to argue with the Lord.

Michelle said...

It is clear that Stacy is referring to dissent here and not mere questioning because she writes, "There have always been disagreements, even among the Apostles." And then she writes, "Over time I realized something really quite profound. Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other.."

But, as you note, we aren't supposed to "challenge" the Magisterium. To challenge the Magisterium is to contest the mind of Christ which we are supposed to give submission of mind and will to.

Hopefully Stacy makes this right at her website.

Jonathan said...

Which is why it is so offensive that Terence Weldon is allowed by Archbishop Nichols, his Bishop, to publically dissent from the Church's teaching relative to homosexuality.

When will the Archbishop act? When will he insist that Mr. Weldon not only step down as an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist but that he refrain from receiving Holy Communion while he obstinately persists in manifest grave sin? (Canon 915).

ACatholicinClinton said...

One thing is for certain, The Catholic Free Press has proven itself to be unreliable over the years. The paper has published dissent in many forms. For years the CFP ran the weekly column of Father Richard McBrien. Thanks to your efforts, his dissent-column was finally removed. I hope Trasancos doesn't start writing such nonsense for the CFP. We don't need more chaff in the CFP.

BostonCatholic2011 said...

Bishop Samuel Aquila of Fargo, North Dakota has said that the notion of "faithful dissent" is demonic in origin. I would exhort Stacy Trasancos to reflect upon that!

Anonymous said...

Um, you're taking this completely out of context. Read Stacy's entire post. It's about geocentrism, which was officially refuted by the Church in 1822.

The post has nothing to do with current Magisterial teaching.

Ashley Pelletier said...

Pope John Paul II once said, "It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the Magisterium is totally compatible with being a 'good Catholic' and poses no obstacle to the reception of the Sacraments. This is a grave error that challenges the teaching office of the Bishops of the United States and elsewhere."

So you are correct Jonathan. Terence Weldon should not be permitted to receive the Eucharist.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

You are mistaken anonymous. Stacy refers to the fact that she began to "encounter opposing theological arguments" which left her confused. Then she asserts that over time she realized "..something really quite profound. Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other, and in doing so they aid in the maturation of our understanding of revealed truth. In this way we aid the Magisterium, remaining in service to this authority, not in opposition to it. We grow together."

Stacy was referring to revealed truths. And it is the Magisterium which interprets these, whether handed down by the Word of God or Tradition. She was writing in this context about theology, not simply geocentrism. Which is why she refers to "opposing theological arguments."

No theologian has the freedom to oppose the Magisterium or to prefer theological opinions which are in opposition to the teaching of the Magisterium.

Understand?

Stacy Trasancos said...

Wow Paul. I knew I was posting about a controversial topic, but when an atheist cosmologist says the Earth might be the center of the universe, there's absolutely nothing wrong with asking questions and reading the arguments to understand them better.

I have made it known to many people that one thing I will never do is to publicly attack another Catholic. Not ever.

Please read this post, "Theologians and Dissent, and read every last word before you attack me in public any further. I reference the Bible, Vatican I, Vatican II, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, a priest and a theologian who were in good standing with the Church. I would never do otherwise. I'd stick my hand in fire first.

And pay particular attention to "Instruction Donum Veritatis on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian."

Sorry if I come off as upset. I am. I am sick to my eyeballs of Catholics fighting all the time. I was trying to bring some peaceful clarity to an important issue. My attitude toward the Magisterial teaching of the Church is one of complete assent. Wrote about that too, Submission.

This...right here is a disagreement, the kind I'm talking about. It should be handled like members of a family, in charity.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

I'm sorry that you found my post to be uncharitable. First of all, I specifically wrote that "This post should not be interpreted as a criticism of Stacy Trasancos' person. She comes across as a delightful young lady who is bright and personable. She has so much good to offer. It is offered only in the srevice of truth and charity."

Apparently you missed that paragraph in your reading of this post. You even accuse me of "attacking" you. But fraternal correction should never be interpreted as an "attack."

You specifically wrote, "Theologians, laity all the way to the Pope, often disagree. Church Councils dealt with disagreements. There have always been disagreements, even among the Apostles. Over time I realized something really quite profound. Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other, and in doing so they aid in the maturation of our understanding of revealed truth. In this way we aid the Magisterium.."

This passage is troubling because it gives the impression that Catholics "aid the Magisterium" by challenging it. First you wrote, "Theologians, laity all the way to the Pope, often disagree," then you asserted that "Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other," and then concluded by saying, "in doing so they aid in the maturation of our understanding of revealed truth. In this way we aid the Magisterium.."

This passage gives the impression that Catholics aid the Magisterium by challenging/dissenting from its teaching.

I would rewrite the passage.

I am heartened if that's not what you meant to convey. But words do have meaning.

Jennifer Goguen said...

Paul, you were nothing but charitable with Stacy. And you are spot on correct. Her wording was very suspect in that Blog post.

But you know what really concerns me? It is Stacy's lack of charity toward women who have had an abortion. Objectively speaking, of course, every procured abortion is a mortal sin. But so many women who have one do so out of fear or because they feel alone. The Church, while condemning the sin, offers reconciliation and hope for such women. Father Frank Pavone has said so.

But in her column in this week's Catholic Free Press, Stacy, referring to a woman who has had an abortion, says that "Something is terribly wrong in her soul and in her life." That comes across as a bit judgmental. Gaudium et Spes says that "God alone is the judge and searcher of hearts, for that reason He forbids us to make judgments about the internal guilt of anyone.."

To me, Stacy's statement is just that: a judgment about the internal guilt of a woman who has had an abortion. And she should refrain from making judgments about a person's soul.

Just as we cannot absolve such a woman of all internal guilt, neither can we render any judgment about her internal guilt.

That is for God alone. It is in this sense that we should not judge.

David said...

Challenging the Magisterium? If that's not dissent, what do you call it?

Bizarre.

ACatholicinClinton said...

Jennifer, often columnists or television personalities will begin to believe that they - or their work - are above any criticism whatsoever, no matter how charitable the criticism is. But they do not hesitate to criticize other persons or to hold them up to ridicule. I too thought that column was a bit harsh.

Edward R. Murrow said that, "Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar."

Some easily forget this.

Roger Vaste said...

Trasancos says that theologians and laity "all the way to the Pope" often disagree, that "there have always been disagreements, even among the Apostles." And then she claims "Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other."

I view this as asserting that Catholics are supposed to challenge each other - "all the way to the Pope."

Now one her readers is suggesting that my "silence" at her Blog is "deafening" because I won't argue with him about this at that forum.

Obviously charity plays an important role in his dialogue. You're right Clinton. The message there is loud and clear....Trasancos is above any criticism. But all others are fair game - no matter how ugly the criticism.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

I received four comments from Stacy. She was most upset and accused me of attacking her at this Blog. This even though I wrote "This post should not be interpreted as a criticism of Stacy Trasancos' person. She comes across as a delightful young lady who is bright and personable. She has so much good to offer. It is offered only in the srevice of truth and charity."

I was told that I should read the CDF's 1990 Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian even though a significant portion of my post refers specifically to that document.

It is my impression that Stacy didn't really read this post with care. If she had, she would have read my statement that this post wasn't intended as a criticism of her person and she would have noticed that I cite the CDF document referred to above.

This Blog post was written to clarify the fact that Catholics are not free to "challenge" the Magisterium. It is unfortunate that it was interpreted as an "attack."

Roger Vaste said...

Stacy's post was poorly written and, as a result, confusing. And when I merely wrote the following comment at her Blog: "There is no such thing as faithful dissent or a right to "challenge" the Catholic Church's Magisterium. I urge you to reconsider your blog post," I was denounced by a follower of hers - Rick Delano - as having engaged in "thunderous condemnations."

Thunderous condemnations? Really. It would certainly appear that Stacy Trasancos believes herself to be "above criticism" and so do her followers.

And that is most peculiar.

Amanda said...

I think you must have hit a nerve Paul. Four comments? Now the author of that blog post is suggesting that you slandered her and that you are accusing her of being "in dissent." This you never did.

Pride objects to any and all criticism. Even fraternal correction. But you were right to clarify what amounted to a very confusing blog post.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

Amanda, if I am being accused of engaging in calumny against Stacy Trasancos, that would be most unfortunate and would, in itself, constitute calumny.

The Catechism teaches us that, "He becomes guilty - of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them." (CCC, 2477).

It is false for anyone to suggest that I said Stacy Trasancos is dissenting from Church teaching. I was merely clarifying that Catholics are not free to "challenge" the Magisterium. Stacy's Blog post seemed to suggest that Catholics may aid the Magisterium by challenging it. The key phrase here is "seemed to suggest."

In my Blog post, I clearly said (and this is the last time I will repeat this): "This post should not be interpreted as a criticism of Stacy Trasancos' person. She comes across as a delightful young lady who is bright and personable. She has so much good to offer. It is offered only in the service of truth and charity."

If I had been accusing Stacy of dissent, I would not have written that my post "should not be interpreted as a criticism of Stacy Trasancos' person." If I felt that she was intentionally promoting dissent in a public forum, I would have said so.

You hit the nail on the head when you write, "Pride objects to any and all criticism. Even fraternal correction."

My criticism was with Stacy's post. Not Stacy herself. If it wounded her deep down, that was not my intention. But one would have to ask why her response has been so harsh? Especially since I said to her in this comments thread, "I'm sorry that you found my post to be uncharitable...fraternal correction should never be interpreted as an 'attack'"

When Stacy engages in constructive criticism herself at her Blog, is she too engaging in "calumny"?

Michelle said...

You know what troubles me even more Jennifer? While Stacy is quick to condemn others, it has been reported that:

"Trasancos is a Baptist convert to Catholicism, and it’s ironic that she’s so judgmental, considering her own colorful background. Now a married, 42-year-old stay-at-home mom, she wrote on the website Catholic Online that she got pregnant in college. Her seven children are from three different men. She’s been divorced and has had an abortion. She’s taken drugs and worked as a stripper..."

Source:
http://www.telegram.com/
article/20110922/COLUMN01/
109229500

Now I'm obviously not a fan of Dianne Williamson. She has her own issues and agenda. But she couldn't write this and have it published if it weren't true.

One would think that someone with that background would think twice before condeming others falsely of having been "uncharitable."

I think Ms. Trasancos is a very unhappy person.

Jennifer Goguen said...

So the same woman who writes - in this week's Catholic Free Press - that "Something is terribly wrong" in the "soul and..life" of a woman who has had an abortion has herself had an abortion? And has led a promiscuous life filled with drugs?

Good to know.

Now I will take whatever she says cum grano salis. Better yet, I'll simply ignore it.

Holy Cross Student said...

I wonder if Trasancos believes there is something terribly wrong in her own soul and in her life? With her sordid past, she might want to refrain from passing judgment on others. Unbelievable. When I think of what she wrote about women who have sinned through abortion, I am OUTRAGED!

Unbelievable.

Peter S. said...

It is pretty offensive Holy Cross Student. And hypocritical.

Stewart said...

You handled Trasancos' faux pas with remarkable restraint and charity. If she's that thin-skinned and cannot tolerate any legitimate criticism of her ideas, she shouldn't offer her writing for publication or publish her ideas in any public forum.

If you can't stand the heat....you know the rest.

Roger Vaste said...

Trasancos is now trying to weasel her way out of what she wrote in her original post. She now writes, "The only reason I mentioned that the faithful laity may have disagreements between them (between them, not with the Magisterial teaching) is because I wanted to explain why I was exploring the geocentrism arguments, a hot issue that Catholics disagree on."

But that's not what she originally wrote. She wrote that, "Theologians, laity all the way to the Pope, often disagree...
Catholics, unified though we are, are also supposed to challenge each other, and in doing so they aid in the maturation of our understanding of revealed truth."

She was clearly speaking here not just of disagreements between the laity but disagreements between "theologians, laity all the way to the Pope." These words are clear in their meaning. And then she added, "In this way we aid the Magisterium."

Trasancos wasn't simply talking about "the geocentrism arguments." She was talking about revealed truth, saying "we are also supposed to challenge each other, and in doing so..aid in the maturation of our understanding of revealed truth."

Trasancos should just admit that she made a huge blunder here.

Francis said...

Her post seemed reminiscent of Charles Curran's notion of "faithful dissent." I agree with you. Her wording was most problematic and gave the impression that she believes the laity can "aid" the Magisterium in intrepeting revealed truth.

That particular task - interpreting revealed truth - is the exclusive task of the Magisterium.

Thomas said...

I would like to see her column replaced by one written by a priest faithful to the magisterium.

ACatholicinClinton said...

More to do with egocentrism than geocentrism. Stacy says we should challenge each other but objects when someone challenges her ideas or the manner in which they are expressed.

Site Meter