July 31, 2012 Martin Mallon (Ireland) Martin's previous articles
CHURCH GOVERNANCE AND CONSCIENCE
Pope
Benedict XVI and the curia appear to be aiming for a pre-Vatican II type,
smaller conforming Church where the Pope/Curia dictate teachings and the rest of
the People of God obey.
If,
as the Reform of the Reform makes clear, Pope Benedict XVI
believes the teachings of the Second Vatican Council are wrong if not
interpreted conservatively, with the hermeneutic of continuity, he has three
options:
1)
Call another Ecumenical Council and together with the People of God, under the
guidance of the Holy Spirit, the Council can debate and attempt to correct any
errors believed to have been promulgated by Vatican II.
2)
Make ex-cathedra statements condemning any errors the Pope thinks there are in
the teachings of Vatican II.
3)
Load the
The
first option will never happen under the present Pope. He has demonstrated that
he does not believe in the collegiality of the bishops or in subsidiarity, he
gives no weight to local bishops conferences and has centralised power and
authority, more and more, in
The
second option raises the question of who holds the most authority in the Church,
an Ecumenical Council of the Pope and all the bishops or the Pope; a no-brainer
so we can rule this option out.
The
third option appears to be the present policy of the Pope, but it is slow and
there are many bishops, priests and laity who legitimately disagree and could
capsize the Pope’s boat. This route would lead to a small uniform Church,
where there would be no dissent or questioning of Church teaching and,
therefore, no development of doctrine.
To
get around this problem Cardinal Ratzinger and Pope John Paul II introduced a
completely new type of teaching to the Church, a “definitive” teaching which
is irreformable if not infallible. This form of teaching has no precedent in
scripture or tradition and breaches the hermeneutic of continuity promulgated by
Pope Benedict. So the Pope is contradicting himself with this development of
doctrine.
See my article of July 17: Inconsistent methodology
What
are the People of God to do when faced with a hierarchy that is ignoring some of
the main teachings of an Ecumenical Council?
Augustinian
theologian Fr Gabriel Daly, writing in The Irish Times, points out a serious
problem in the Church; curia fundamentalism, secrecy and control.
Some
excerpts from the article are interesting:
Theologian
Fr Gabriel Daly has said “one party is now in control and is presenting its
views as ‘the teaching of the church’.”…
Aided
“by secrecy and the unchallenged exercise of power, the Curia has established
effective control over the whole church”. Fr Daly observed that “there is
little or no concern for those faithful Catholics who are quietly appalled by
what is happening. They are seen as simply wrong,” he said.
Most churches and religions had “a fundamentalist wing that sees itself as the sole possessor of authentic truth that has to be proclaimed and defended firmly against challenge. It would appear that there has to be an enemy that one can condemn to be assured of one’s own orthodoxy.”…
When
the Magisterium gets it wrong, as in the Arian crisis (see below), the Church,
the People of God are alerted by the Holy Spirit: “When the Spirit of truth
comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John
In
a similar fashion JPII suggested this sense of the faith (sensus fidei) may be
used to judge past actions of the Magisterium:
”…in his letter to the 1998 Inquisition Symposium, Pope John Paul II suggested that sensus fidei may also be used in the other direction, i.e. to reflect on the past actions of the Magisterium. He stated that:
One
must appeal to the "sensus fidei" to find the criteria for a just
judgment on the past of the life of the Church.
The
pontiff then referred to the freedoms provided in the context of Dignitatis
Humanae, stating that: ‘The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its
own truth, as it wins over the mind with both gentleness and power.’”
The
importance of the sense of the faithful (sensus
fidelium) can be seen from its use in the development of the dogma of the
Immaculate Conception:
”A
key example of the recent use of sensus fidelium was the development of the
dogma of the Immaculate Conception, as defined by Pope Pius IX. It came about
not so much because of proofs in scripture or ancient tradition, but due to a
sensus fidelium shared by the faithful and the Magisterium. The
If
the popular praises of the Blessed Virgin Mary be given the careful
consideration they deserve, who will dare to doubt that she, who was purer than
the angels and at all times pure, was at any moment, even for the briefest
instant, not free from every stain of sin?”
Today
the voice of the People of God as a whole seems to be ignored by the hierarchy;
it would appear that the hierarchy does not believe that the People of God have
the sensus fidei.
The
Catechism of the Catholic Church also states:
Participation
in Christ's prophetic office
904 "Christ . . . fulfills this prophetic office, not only by the hierarchy . . . but also by the laity. He accordingly both establishes them as witnesses and provides them with the sense of the faith [sensus fidei] and the grace of the word"
”This
tradition which comes from the Apostles develops in the Church with the help of
the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and
the words which have been handed down. This happens through the contemplation
and study made by believers, who treasure these things in their hearts (see
Luke, 2:19, 51) through a penetrating understanding of the spiritual realities
which they experience, and through the preaching of those who have received
through Episcopal succession the sure gift of truth. For as the centuries
succeed one another, the Church constantly moves forward toward the fullness of
divine truth until the words of God reach their complete fulfillment in her.
The
words of the holy fathers witness to the presence of this living tradition,
whose wealth is poured into the practice and life of the believing and praying
Church. Through the same tradition the Church's full canon of the sacred books
is known, and the sacred writings themselves are more profoundly understood and
unceasingly made active in her; and thus God, who spoke of old, uninterruptedly
converses with the bride of His beloved Son; and the Holy Spirit, through whom
the living voice of the Gospel resounds in the Church, and through her, in the
world, leads unto all truth those who believe and makes the word of Christ dwell
abundantly in them (see Col. 3:16).”
As
can be seen the Holy Spirit has guaranteed the truth to the Church, the People
of God, which is the full Magisterium and is what gives authenicity to the
Magisterium of the hierarchy.
In
the fourth century the Church taught that Jesus was not divine for over 30 years
during the Arian crisis. This was in opposition to the teaching of the Council
of Nicea in 325 AD. St Athanasius, a few other bishops, many priests and
the majority of the laity would not accept “Church” teaching, that of the
Pope and majority of bishops. During this period Athanasius was exiled a number
of times for continuing to believe that Jesus was divine.
St
Athanasius and the laity ignored official Church teaching and listened to the
conscience God gave them until the teaching of the divinity of Christ was
restored.
If
another St Athanasius is required we can be sure the Holy Spirit will inspire
one of our bishops. Who could this bishop be?
John
Henry Newman was a recognised expert on the Church Fathers and he wrote the
foundational work on the Arian Crisis. The full text of Blessed John Henry
Newman’s Arians of the Fourth Century can
be read here:
An
enlightening excerpt:
“{445}
THE episcopate, whose action was so prompt and concordant at Nicća on the rise
of Arianism, did not, as a class or order of men, play a good part in the
troubles consequent upon the Council; and the laity did. The Catholic people, in
the length and breadth of Christendom, were the obstinate champions of Catholic
truth, and the bishops were not. Of course there were great and illustrious
exceptions; first, Athanasius, Hilary, the Latin Eusebius, and Phśbadius; and
after them, Basil, the two Gregories, and Ambrose; there are others, too, who
suffered, if they did nothing else, as Eustathius, Paulus, Paulinus, and
Dionysius; and the Egyptian bishops, whose weight was small in the Church in
proportion to the great power of their Patriarch. And, on the other hand, as I
shall say presently, there were exceptions to the Christian heroism of the
laity, especially in some of the great towns. And again, in speaking of the
laity, I speak inclusively of their parish-priests (so to call them), at least
in many places; but on the whole, taking a wide view of the history, we are
obliged to say that the governing body of the Church came short, and the
governed were pre-eminent in faith, zeal, courage, and constancy.”
And
another:
“...the
body of the Episcopate was unfaithful to its commission, while the body of the
laity was faithful to its baptism; that at one time the pope, at other times a
patriarchal, metropolitan, or other great see, at {466} other times general
councils, said what they should not have said, or did what obscured and
compromised revealed truth; while, on the other hand, it was the Christian
people, who, under Providence, were the ecclesiastical strength of Athanasius,
Hilary, Eusebius of Vercellć, and other great solitary confessors, who would
have failed without them ...”
All
of this was fulfilling the prophecy of Jesus to his disciples: “When the
Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (John
This
point cannot be emphasised enough; as Newman says “The Catholic people, in the
length and breadth of Christendom, were the obstinate champions of Catholic
truth, and the bishops were not.”
When
we talk about Magisterium, encyclicals, official pronouncements, etc we must
always remember the primacy of conscience, and the Arian crisis drives home that
Jesus told us, His disciples: “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide
you into all the truth” (John 16:13)
We
must never forget, as mentioned above, that the Holy Spirit has guarenteed the
truth to the Church, the People of God, which is the full Magisterium and this
is what gives authenicity to the Magisterium of the hierarchy. Let us hope and
pray that the Pope and the curia do not forget.
With
Sunday’s second reading in mind, Ephesians 4:1-6, where Paul asks us to “Do
all you can to preserve the unity of the Spirit by the peace that binds you
together” it is to be hoped that the Hierarchy keep the whole People of God
and their sensum fidei in mind. This would help “preserve the unity of the
Spirit” and let us all pray and do what we can to ensure that this “unity of
the Spirit” is preserved.