Argh...magisterium

[Bruce S]

Anyone want to simplify this one for me? Reread it a few times, and it still is slippery...

What Is the Magisterium?
by Thomas Storck
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The crisis that has afflicted the Catholic Church since the middle of the 1960s has been a crisis of both faith and morals, that is, a crisis that has made many Catholics no longer know what to believe or what kind of conduct God expects of us. What is needed as a remedy for this is a firm standard, a reliable guide or teacher who can tell us both what we must believe and what we must do. And, of course, in Christ’s true Church we do have such a reliable standard and guide. But even Catholics of good will can sometimes be confused about exactly which voices within the Church they are to follow.
In the past the average Catholic could depend on the word of his parish priest if he had any doubts about correct Catholic belief or conduct, or even on the example of the many good Catholics about him. But today one can no longer trust everything that is said by just any priest or theologian, and our fellow parishioners are likely to be totally confused about what the Church proclaims to have been revealed by God. And so it behooves us to understand a word and concept that is apt to be unfamiliar or confusing. This word is Magisterium. Now the Latin word magisterium originally meant the duty or office of a teacher, tutor, master, etc. And in the case of the Church it means simply the teaching authority or office of the Church. The Magisterium is the teaching office of the Church, accomplished by the Holy Father and the bishops teaching in union with him.

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.1

This quotation brings up several points that must be explained. In the first place, the decree speaks of the “Word of God, written or handed down,” that is, recorded either in Sacred Scripture or in Sacred Tradition. Now at first it might seem as if Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition are two separate sources of divine revelation. But the Second Vatican Council explained that in fact, “Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God, which is entrusted to the Church.”2 In other words, the truths which God has revealed to his Church come to us through two modes, but they constitute one body of truth, the Word of God. Therefore the Protestant practice of equating the Word of God with only the written Bible is an error. Moreover, as should be obvious from a little reflection and historical knowledge, Sacred Scripture is itself a product of the Church’s thought and activity, and in this sense a product of Sacred Tradition. This is true even though Scripture has God for its author and is itself a mode of revelation, for the human authors of the New Testament wrote from within the Church and took for granted the Church’s teaching and worship as they wrote.

The second point raised by the statement from the First Vatican Council is the distinction between the Church’s extraordinary Magisterium and her ordinary and universal Magisterium, that is between what is taught “by a solemn judgment or by her ordinary and universal teaching.” Thus the Magisterium operates via two methods. The solemn or extraordinary Magisterium is seen in solemn definitions either by a pope, as for example, the definition of the dogma of the Assumption of Mary into Heaven in 1950, or by one of the Ecumenical Councils of the Catholic Church ratified by the pope, as the definitions made by the Council of Trent (1545-1563) to reaffirm the Catholic faith against the Protestants or the definition of papal infallibility by the First Vatican Council in 1870.

The ordinary and universal Magisterium, on the other hand, is the ordinary teaching of the Church, accomplished via papal pronouncements, statements of bishops, catechisms, homilies, etc. This is not to say that everything that any pope, bishop or priest has ever said on any occasion is part of the ordinary and universal Magisterium, but that it is via such means that this teaching is generally made known to the faithful. Note that the First Vatican Council speaks of it as both “ordinary and universal.” “Ordinary” means that it is accomplished via the ordinary means of teaching that the Church uses, but “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.3

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.

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 . . . 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” . . . 4

And Lumen Gentium teaches:

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.5

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.”

Finally, in its definition that I quoted above, the First Vatican Council is looking at the Magisterium chiefly in its historical working, that is, over the centuries the Church has proposed certain things which must be held as of faith. But another aspect of the Magisterium was further highlighted by the Second Vatican Council in 1965, namely its function of giving ongoing guidance and interpretation of doctrine to the faithful. “But the task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living, teaching office of the Church alone.”6 In other words, the Magisterium can be looked at as both the accumulated tradition of its acts and decrees through the ages as well as a living voice, capable of responding to new issues that arise and deciding definitively about points of doctrine, as necessary for the welfare of the people of God. But in doing so, the Magisterium does not invent new doctrines, for “this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it.”7

Moreover, as we saw, the teaching of the Magisterium extends to matters of both faith and morals. “The ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Pope and the bishops in communion with him teach the faithful the truth to believe, the charity to practice, the beatitude to hope for” (CCC 2034). Thus the Church’s Magisterium guides our conduct and even the conduct of society as a whole.

To the Church belongs the right always and everywhere to announce moral principles, including those pertaining to the social order, and to make judgments on any human affairs to the extent that they are required by the fundamental rights of the human person or the salvation of souls (CCC 2032).

Some Catholics object when the Church makes statements which they think tend to interfere with their conduct in society, especially on economic matters. But, in fact, the Church has always done this,

not indeed in technical matters, for which she has neither the equipment nor the mission, but in all those that have a bearing on moral conduct. For the deposit of truth entrusted to Us by God, and Our weighty office of propagating, interpreting and urging in season and out of season the entire moral law, demand that both social and economic questions be brought within Our supreme jurisdiction, in so far as they refer to moral issues.

For, though economic activity and moral discipline are guided each by its own principles in its own sphere, it is false that the two orders are so distinct and alien that the former in no way depends on the latter.8

It is only on the moral aspects of economic activity that the Church pronounces, but when she does so, Catholics are as bound to obey her voice as on matters pertaining to the truths of faith or to purely individual moral conduct.

There remain two additional matters to take up in this discussion of the Magisterium of the Church. The first is the question of private revelations. Private revelations, real or spurious, have a more important place in Catholic life today than formerly. On one hand, we have private revelations, such as Lourdes or Fátima, which have been approved by the Church and which offer to the faithful both concrete physical help (such as the many healings at Lourdes) and beneficial spiritual guidance (such as the many directions for our spiritual life given at Fátima). This is all to the good. Genuine private revelations always point in some way toward the central truths of the Faith. But the multiplication of private revelations that have not been approved by the Church, and especially those that have been condemned by her, can distract from the message of the Gospel. And even at their best, private revelations “do not belong . . . to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history” (CCC 67). As long as we keep to those private revelations only on which the Church has bestowed her approval and cultivate our devotion according to the mind of the Church, then these revelations can have a good effect on our Christian life and foster our piety, especially our love for the Blessed Mother of God.

One reason spurious private revelations have become so common in the Church is the doctrinal confusion following the Second Vatican Council. Many of the faithful who are not well instructed are attracted to anything which seems holy and traditional in the face of the widespread dissent among the clergy. This leads to my last topic, for sometimes this dissent and disobedience have been justified by the assertion that there is a magisterium of theologians parallel to the Magisterium of the pope and bishops, and that this magisterium of the theologians may rightly teach things contrary to what is taught by the hierarchical Magisterium. But this is not true. Although theologians have a very important place in the Church, and although great freedom of discussion must be allotted to anyone seeking to probe faithfully the mysteries of the Faith, this freedom must always be within the bounds of revealed doctrine as defined by the official Magisterium. There is no right of dissent from Catholic doctrine, including the teaching of the ordinary Magisterium.9 Catholicism is not a religion in which a cadre of select initiates passes on secret doctrines while the majority of the faithful adheres to the public revelation of the Church. Although obviously one versed in theology and philosophy will have a deeper understanding of the truths of the Faith than other Catholics, [b]all Catholics, whether clergy or lay, scholar or peasant, must believe the same things and observe the same commandments, if they hope to reach Heaven.10[/b]

The importance of the Magisterium is in fact the importance of our life as Christians. What is the good news which Jesus Christ has entrusted to His Church for our salvation? What is the saving faith which we need in order to attain eternal life? It is only because of the Magisterium, the teaching office and authority of the Church, that Catholics can know what they must believe and do, and thus live a life pleasing to Almighty God, in order to obtain eternal salvation.

[yiannii]

Can't be bothered reading all that, you wanna summarise?

[Bruce S]

I couldn't get through the prose, that is why I asked for a concise answer...

[MC Just]

Arghh. Anarchy. Every attack on the Papacy has to do with people not wanting to submit to authority. Moses was attack because of his Authority.

MAGISTERIUM EXERCISES AUTHORITY IN CHRIST'S NAME
Pope John Paul II
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Address to Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith 24 November 1995
Your Eminence, Venerable Brothers in the Episcopate and Priesthood,

1. I would first of all like to express my joy at being able to meet you at the end of your plenary assembly. This is a fitting occasion to show you my gratitude. Your work, difficult and demanding in so many respects, is of fundamental importance to the Christian life. Indeed, it seeks to promote and defend the integrity and purity of the faith, which are essential conditions so that the men and women of our time can find the light to embark on the way of salvation.

I thank Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger for the sentiments expressed in his address and for explaining the work you have done during your plenary assembly, which was particularly devoted to the problem of the reception of the pronouncements made by the ecclesiastical Magisterium.

2. The continual dialogue with Pastors and theologians throughout the world enables you to be attentive to the demands of understanding and reflecting more deeply on the doctrine of the faith, which theology interprets, and at the same time, it informs you of the useful efforts being made to foster and strengthen the unity of the faith and the Magisterium's guiding role in understanding the truth and in building up ecclesial communion in charity.

The unity of the faith, for the sake of which the Magisterium has authority and ultimate deliberative power in interpreting the Word of God written and handed down, is a primary value, which, if respected, does not involve the stifling of theological research, but provides it with a stable foundation. Theology, in its task of making explicit the intelligible content of the faith, expresses the intrinsic orientation of human intelligence to the truth and the believer's irrepressible need rationally to explore the revealed mystery.

To achieve this end, theology can never be reduced to the "private" reflection of a theologian or group of theologians.

The Church is the theologian's vital environment, and in order to remain faithful to its identity, theology cannot fail to participate deeply in the fabric of the Church's life, doctrine, holiness and prayer.

Magisterium Is a Service to the Truth

3. This is the context in which the conviction that theology needs the living and clarifying word of the Magisterium becomes fully understandable and perfectly consistent with the logic of the Christian faith. The meaning of the Church's Magisterium must be considered in relation to the truth of Christian doctrine. This is what your Congregation has carefully explained and spelled out in the Instruction Donum veritatis on the ecclesial vocation of the theologian.

The fact that the dogmatic development which culminated in the solemn definition of the First Vatican Council has stressed the Magisterium's charism of infallibility and clarified the conditions of its exercise must not lead to the Magisterium's being considered only from this standpoint. Its power and its authority are actually the power and authority of Christian truth, to which it bears witness. The Magisterium, whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ (cf. Dei Verbum, n. 10), is an organ of service to the truth and is responsible for seeing that the truth does not cease to be faithfully handed on throughout human history.

4. Today we must note a widespread misunderstanding of the meaning and role of the Church's Magisterium. This is at the root of the criticisms and protests regarding its pronouncements, as you have particularly pointed out with respect to the reactions in not a few theological and ecclesiastical circles to the most recent documents of the papal Magisterium: the Encyclicals Veritatis splendor, on the principles of moral doctrine and life, and Evangelium vitae, on the value and inviolability of human life; the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis, on the impossibility of conferring priestly ordination on women; and the Letter of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on the reception of Eucharistic Communion by divorced and remarried faithful.

In this regard, it is certainly necessary to distinguish the attitude of theologians who, in a spirit of cooperation and ecclesial communion, present their difficulties and questions, and thus positively contribute to the maturing of reflection on the deposit of faith, form the public stance of opposition to the Magisterium, which is described as "dissent"; the latter tends to set up a kind of counter-magisterium, presenting believers with alternative positions and forms of behavior. The plurality of cultures and of theological approaches and systems themselves has its legitimacy only if the unity of the faith is presupposed in its objective meaning. The very freedom proper to theological research is never freedom with regard to the truth, but is justified and realized when the individual complies with the moral obligation of obeying the truth presented by Revelation and accepted in faith.

5. At the same time, as you have rightly considered in your assembly, it is necessary today to foster a climate of positive reception and acceptance of the Magisterium's documents, calling attention to their style and language, so as to harmonize the solidity and clarity of the doctrine with the pastoral concern to use forms of communication and means of expression that are incisive and effective for the consciousness of contemporary man.

It is not possible, however, to overlook one of the decisive aspects that lies at the base of the malaise and uneasiness in certain parts of the ecclesiastical world: it is a question of the way authority is conceived. In the case of the Magisterium, authority is not exercised only when the charism of infallibility is involved; its exercise has a wider field, which is required by the appropriate defense of the revealed deposit.

For a community based essentially on shared adherence to the Word of God and on the resulting certainty of living in the truth, authority for determining the content to be believed and professed is something that cannot be renounced. That this authority includes various degrees of teaching has been clearly stated in two recent documents of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: the Professio Fidei and the Instruction Donum veritatis. This hierarchy of degrees should not be considered an impediment but a stimulus to theology.

Authentic Concept of Authority Must Be Recovered

6. However, this does not entitle one to hold that the pronouncements and doctrinal decisions of the Magisterium call for irrevocable assent only when it states them in a solemn judgment or definitive act, and that, consequently, in all other cases one need only consider the arguments or reasons employed.

In the Encyclicals Veritatis splendor and Evangelium vitae, as well as in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio sacerdotalis, I wished once again to set forth the constant doctrine of the Church's faith with an act confirming truths which are clearly witnessed to by Scripture, the apostolic Tradition and the unanimous teaching of the Pastors. These declarations, by virtue of the authority handed down to the Successor of Peter to "confirm the brethren" (Lk 22:32), thus express the common certitude present in the life and teaching of the Church.

It therefore seems urgently necessary to recover the authentic concept of authority, not only from the formal juridical standpoint, but more profoundly, as a means of guaranteeing, safeguarding and guiding the Christian community in fidelity to and continuity with Tradition, to make it possible for believers to be in contact with the preaching of the Apostles and with the source of the Christian reality itself.

7. As I rejoice with you, dear Brothers in Christ, over the intense, arduous and valuable ministry you carry out in service to the Apostolic See and for the benefit of the entire Church, I offer you my encouragement to continue firmly and confidently in the task entrusted to you, in order thus to help guide and preserve everyone in the freedom of the truth.

With these sentiments I cordially impart my Blessing to you all, as a pledge of affection and gratitude.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[MC Just]

Magisterium (Lat. magister, a master):

The Church's divinely appointed authority to teach the truths of religion,
"Going therefore, teach ye all nations... teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matt. xxviii, 19-20). This teaching is infallible: "And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world" (ibid.).
The solemn magisterium is that which is exercised only rarely by formal and authentic definitions of councils or popes. Its matter comprises dogmatic definitions of æcumenical councils or of the popes teaching ex cathedra, or of particular councils, if their decrees are universally accepted or approved in solemn form by the pope; also creeds and professions of faith put forward or solemnly approved by pope or æcumenical council. The ordinary magisterium is continually exercised by the Church especially in her universal practices connected with faith and morals, in the unanimous consent of the Fathers (q.v.) and theologians, in the decisions of Roman Congregations concerning faith and morals, in the common sense (q.v.) of the faithful, and various historical documents in which the faith is declared. All these are founts of a teaching which as a whole is infallible. They have to be studied separately to determine how far and in what conditions each of them is an infallible source of truth.

[the lumberjack]

so whats the concise answer?

remember, I'm a laymen...not a theologian.

and I don't speak the language of lawyer most of your documents were written in.

[dUSt]

[quote name='the lumberjack' date='Apr 12 2004, 11:01 AM'] so whats the concise answer? [/quote]
The Church will provide.

[the lumberjack]

I'll leave that up to Christ and His Holy Spirit.

[dUSt]

[quote name='the lumberjack' date='Apr 12 2004, 01:02 PM'] I'll leave that up to Christ and His Holy Spirit. [/quote]
We think alike.

Only... I believe that Christ and the Holy Spirit work through the Church to the individual. You believe that Christ and the Holy Spirit skip the Church and go directly to the individual. A simple difference in theology.

Only... According to you, I'm saved. According to me, while it might be possible that you are saved, there's no assurance of that.

[Jake Huether]

[quote name='the lumberjack' date='Apr 12 2004, 12:02 PM'] I'll leave that up to Christ and His Holy Spirit. [/quote]
Well then, I guess the Church will provide... Just like Christ and His Holy Spirit have said.

[the lumberjack]

[quote name='dUSt' date='Apr 12 2004, 01:08 PM'] We think alike.

Only... I believe that Christ and the Holy Spirit work through the Church to the individual. You believe that Christ and the Holy Spirit skip the Church and go directly to the individual. A simple difference in theology.

Only... According to you, I'm saved. According to me, while it might be possible that you are saved, there's no assurance of that. [/quote]
even with all the stuff Protestants consider "extra", yes, you are saved...

and no, we don't believe that God skips the church completely. the church IS the body of believers! From the Pastors down to the "lowliest" position held in the church to the laymen...

we are all part of the body...

when the Apostles wrote to a church, they didn't open the letter by saying, "to the bishop of blah blah blah" they addressed it:

"And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:"

...or

"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus"

....or however the intro was. the group of believers was the local church, part of the catholic Church of Christ.

and I am saved...whether or not you believe it, I am. and so long as I walk my walk in Christ, I am assured of that salvation. ups and downs, sure, but I walk with Christ...always.

[dUSt]

Lumberjack, don't you see? The Catholic Church believes that the Holy Spirit works through ALL of us--just like you believe. The Church is the body of believers. That's all it is!

The difference is that we believe that the Church is unified under one set of beliefs, and organized with a head--and believe Christ set it up this way so that we can [b]remain[/b] unified.

You too believe that the Church is the body of believers, but where's the unity?

You believe that the Church is a body made up of millions of individuals--we believe that the millions of individuals make up the body of the Church.

When it comes down to it, you believe Christ instituted an unstructured Church--Catholics believe that He instituted a structured Church.

Is this not correct?

[the lumberjack]

[quote]When it comes down to it, you believe Christ instituted an unstructured Church--Catholics believe that He instituted a structured Church.[/quote]

no, and going to ANY of the churches I've been to would prove that.

you have your supposed apostolic succession...but I see no where in the Bible that says that Peter chose so and so to lead the church at Galatia...or that Paul chose so and so to run the Church at Ephesus, Thytria or anywhere else for that matter.

Pastors, associate pastors, all the way down to the ushers and parking lot people...they all step up because they are lead by the Holy Spirit in thier walk to do what they do. and they do it quite well.

God will never put anyone anywhere that HE (God) can not do the job. If God left it up to man to run things...well, you can see what happens when man has his own preconceived notions of what God is...mormonism and all the other cults and sects.

I would dare you to come to my church for one year and not walk away knowing that it indeed IS the house of God...whether we held it in a "church" building, the backyard, or my garage... you would see nothing but the living word of the Living God being preached.

[url="http://www.therocksandiego.org"]MY CHURCH...THE ROCK![/url]

the pastor of my church was called to start his own church. he was the youth pastor at Horizon (San Diego) for a long time. it started off with 27 people in a house 3 years ago...now its more than 4,000 people made up of about 100 small bible study groups... now I'm sure we've got our snakes and hypocrites, as ANY church does, but the Christians that love God are ON FIRE for Him and dedicated to making Him known.

[mulls]

wow, that's the hottest name for a church EVER!!




and i like the fact that it has a ton of ministries

[dUSt]

Founded by an ex-NFL player with an apparent heavy emphasis on entertainment... If I was a member of that Church, it would be very hard for me to discern whether I was truly there for Christ, or if it was because of the atmosphere... but I'm weak like that.

I'm actually against such movements within the Church as I feel it distracts us from what we should be focusing on. In fact, back in my younger days I started attending a non-denominational Church because the band was dope--then I realized, "am I here for the band or for God"?

Just be careful man.