Catholic Planet www.catholicplanet.com [ Home | Theology | Articles | Poetry | Music | Resources | Links | Contact ] Roman Catholic Theology and Biblical Studies

1. The Magisterium is incapable of fully understanding every truth found in the Deposit of Faith, for the Faith contains mysteries beyond complete human comprehension. Therefore, the teachings of the Magisterium are always necessarily significantly limited in their understanding of the teachings of the Deposit of Faith.

2. The Magisterium is incapable of fully expressing every truth found in the Deposit of Faith, for the Faith contains truths beyond the ability of mere human language to fully express. Therefore, the teachings of the Magisterium are always necessarily a limited expression of the ineffable truths found in the Deposit of Faith.

3. The Magisterium is incapable of teaching every truth, each one of which, individually, it is capable of teaching. For the Deposit of Faith contains so many truths that, “if each one was written, the world itself, I suppose, would be unable to hold the books that would be written.” (Jn 21:25).

Therefore, the sum total of all the teachings of the Magisterium, in understanding, expression, and number, is necessarily always significantly less than the sum total of all the teachings of the Deposit of Faith. And further development in the understanding, expression, and number of truths taught is always possible. For God is infinite Truth.


4. The Magisterium can only be exercised by the Bishops and the Pope. Individual Bishops, other than the Pope, can only exercise the Magisterium non-infallibly.

5. The Magisterium teaches infallibly only under certain conditions; whenever those conditions are lacking, the teaching is non-infallible. All non-infallible teachings allow for the limited possibility of error, but never to such an extent as to lead the faithful away from salvation.

6. The Magisterium is limited to teaching the truths found, explicitly or implicitly, in the Deposit of Faith (Tradition and Scripture). Nothing outside of the Deposit of Faith can be taught by the Magisterium, even under the non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium. All things to the contrary not withstanding.


7. The faithful are only required to believe with theological faith, that is, with the full assent of faith properly due to the teachings of Christ, the infallible teachings of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium. Any requirement to adhere to the non-infallible teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium must always necessarily have significant limitations in the type and degree of assent, and must always necessarily permit the possibility of limited faithful dissent. For the non-infallible teachings admit a limited possibility of error, but belief in error is never required by Christ.

8. It is not always clear which teachings are infallible and which are non-infallible. It is not always clear whether an idea is a teaching of the Magisterium at all. Nor will it ever be completely clear, prior to the Return of Jesus Christ.

9. The temporal decisions of the Pope and the Bishops are not teachings, but judgments of the prudential order. Any exercise of the temporal authority of the Church is fallible.


10. The Pope and the Bishops, in whom the ability and authority of the Magisterium solely resides, are imperfect and are sinners. As a result, they teach less clearly and less fully than they otherwise could teach, and their ordinary non-infallible teaching contain more errors and more imperfections than it otherwise would contain.

11. The Magisterium often teaches later, rather than sooner. As time passes, the truths of the Faith become clearer to the Church on earth, and this understanding eventually, and usually very slowly, makes its way into the teachings of the Magisterium.

12. The Magisterium is unresponsive to the immediate needs of the faithful for guidance on particular questions of faith and morals. The Magisterium does not respond, in a timely manner, to each and every error of faith or morals that develops in the world, or among the faithful, or even among the Bishops. Thus, the faithful are often left, for a considerable period of time, without the guidance of the Magisterium on a particular question of importance to their salvation.

The Limits of the Faithful

Since the Magisterium, which resides in the body of Bishops united with the Pope, is limited, so too must each individual layperson, theologian, religious, deacon, and priest be likewise limited in their understanding, expression, teaching, belief, and practice of the Roman Catholic Faith.


Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium

Divine Revelation is the Sacred Deposit of Faith. The Deposit of Faith consists solely of Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. Tradition is “the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation.” (Dei Verbum, n. 2.) Tradition is unwritten and unworded; it is deeds, not words. Tradition can be described by words, but it cannot be put into words without ceasing to be Tradition. Scripture is the Bible. Scripture is words written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Tradition and Scripture are both entirely infallible in all that they assert as true: on matters of faith and morals, on matters that pertain to salvation, and on all other matters about which they make any assertion.

Tradition is also the deeds wrought by Christ in the history of salvation, for Christ is God. An example of a deed of God in salvation history is the act whereby Christ suffered and died for our salvation. This deed is described infallibly in Sacred Scripture. But even infallible words about that deed are not salvific apart from the actual deed itself. Tradition cannot be anything other than the deeds of God, because without those deeds there would be no salvation at all. Thus, when Tradition is defined as the deeds of God in salvation history, salvation is found within the Sacred Deposit of Faith. But if Tradition were to be defined as an oral tradition, or as the words handed down from the Apostles, then the Deposit of Faith would lack salvific power because the salvific deeds would be outside the Deposit of Faith.

The Deposit of Faith is transmitted by the words and deeds of the faithful, and moreover by their very lives, from the Apostles and Church Fathers even down to the least of the followers of Christ. Tradition and Scripture are lived by the members of the Church. In this way, the Deposit of Faith is transmitted throughout each generation and from one generation to another. The transmission of Tradition is sometimes called a living Tradition, but this is not to be confused with Tradition itself. The living Tradition is the truths of Tradition as they are being transmitted by the lives of the faithful, whereas Tradition itself is the very deeds of God that began this handing down of truth in word and deed and life. And, although Scripture is transmitted in writing, it is also truly transmitted by the lives of the faithful, who live out the meaning of the Scriptures. Thus, even if every written Bible were taken away, Scripture would continue to exist in their lives and continue to be transmitted from generation to generation.

The Magisterium teaches only from the Deposit of Faith (Tradition and Scripture). The Magisterium has no ability or authority to teach any truths not explicit or implicit in Tradition or Scripture. The truths of Divine Revelation, that is, of the Deposit of Faith, mainly concern faith and morals, as these two types of truths are essential to our salvation. However, Divine Revelation also contains other truths, beyond those of faith and morals, and these truths too are infallibly taught by Tradition and Scripture. The Magisterium can teach any of the truths found in the Deposit of Faith, including, but not limited to, truths of faith and morals. Any of these truths can be taught either infallibly or non-infallibly by the Magisterium.

Terminology

The spiritual authority of the Church, called the Magisterium, can be divided into two types: the infallible Sacred Magisterium and the non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium. The term ‘the ordinary and universal Magisterium’ is actually a function of the infallible Sacred Magisterium, not the non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium. The term ‘ordinary and universal Magisterium’ is more aptly rendered as simply ‘the universal Magisterium.’ Whenever the Church teaches infallibly, the teaching falls under the Sacred Magisterium. Whenever the Church teaches non-infallibly, the teaching falls under the Ordinary Magisterium. Theological opinion, even when expressed by the Pope or the Bishops, does not fall under the Magisterium at all, and is fallible.

The Magisterium and the Church

The Church has two types of authority: spiritual and temporal. The temporal authority of the Church is the ability and authority to make practical decisions and specific rules for the Church on earth. Included under the temporal authority are decisions about individual cases, particular judgments of facts and circumstances, rules for religious orders, decisions about the organization of dioceses and parishes, and many other similar decisions.

The spiritual authority of the Church is the Magisterium. The Magisterium is the ability and authority of the Church to teach from the Deposit of Faith. It is not by authority alone that the Magisterium teaches, but also by ability, given as a gift by the Spirit of God. The Magisterium is an ability and authority given by the Holy Spirit as a gift to the whole Church; however, this divine charism resides only in those who are validly ordained to the Episcopate. Only validly ordained Bishops, including the Pope (who must always be a Bishop), have this divine charism called the Magisterium The teaching of the Magisterium must be believed because those teachings are true, not merely because proper authority requires the belief.

The Magisterium is not the Church and the Church is not the Magisterium. The Church is all the people of God, living under the grace, providence, and blessing of the Most Holy Trinity. The Magisterium is not the leadership of the Church. The Magisterium is not a group of people; it is not the Pope and the Bishops. The Magisterium is not the Pope and the Cardinals, nor the offices of the Holy See by themselves. The Magisterium is not the persons or roles of Pope and Bishop; it is a gift exercised by those persons, within those roles.

The teaching of the Magisterium is not identical to the teaching of the Church. The teaching of the Church is everything taught explicitly or implicitly by Tradition and Scripture. The teaching of the Church is entirely infallible and consists only of the teachings of Tradition and Scripture.

The teaching of the Magisterium is drawn only from the truths of Tradition and Scripture. The Magisterium defines, clarifies, and interprets those truths with Divine assistance. But the Magisterium has not defined or taught every truth of Tradition and Scripture. Nor is it able to do so. For the truths of Divine Revelation include mysteries beyond complete human comprehension and include truths that cannot be entirely put into words. The teaching of the Magisterium is a subset of the teaching of the Church. The teaching of the Magisterium, when infallible, is merely a restatement and clarification of the infallible teachings of Tradition and Scripture. All true teachings of the Magisterium are merely restatements of the true teachings of Tradition and Scripture.

Any errors found in non-infallible ordinary teachings of the Magisterium are not truly the teaching of the Church, and will eventually fall away from the teachings of the Magisterium.

Explicit or Implicit

Does the teaching of the Magisterium include truths which are not found in Divine Revelation?

“88 The Church’s Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes in a definitive way truths having a necessary connection with them.”

The latter part of this description refers to truths implicit in the Deposit of Faith. Certain truths, found in Divine Revelation, are described as having a necessary connection with other truths, not found in Divine Revelation. But these other truths can also truly be said to be contained in Divine Revelation implicitly. Whenever the truths of Divine Revelation, properly understood, necessarily imply certain other truths, then those other truths are implicit in Divine Revelation. Alternately, one can use the wording that they are not contained in, but instead have a necessary connection with, Divine Revelation. The difference is a matter of terminology; the meaning is the same. This article will use the simpler and clearer explanation that all truths taught by the Magisterium are found in Divine Revelation, either explicitly or implicitly.

As an example, neither Tradition nor Scripture explicitly mention new modern medical offenses, such as human cloning or in vitro fertilization. However, the whole moral law is contained in Tradition and Scripture, at least implicitly. From truths of morality found explicitly in Divine Revelation, the Magisterium is able understand those truths which are implicit, and from both of these the Magisterium is able to teach, even infallibly, which kinds of acts are always gravely immoral, even if these acts are not mentioned in Divine Revelation. Thus the Magisterium can teach against sins associated with new kinds of medical or technological invention, even though such things are not explicit in the Deposit of Faith.

Nothing Beyond the Deposit of Faith

The Magisterium is entirely unable to teach, either infallibly or non-infallibly, any truths not found, at least implicitly, in Divine Revelation (Tradition and Scripture).

Now some fallible use can be made of truths outside of the Deposit of Faith in explaining the truths within the Deposit of Faith. Certainly, the Magisterium may make use of reason and of various fields of human knowledge, when teaching the Faith. But only those truths drawn from Tradition and Scripture can be taught authoritatively. The Magisterium may make reference to various truths outside of that Deposit of Faith, as comparative examples, as relevant observations, or incidentally when correcting the moral errors of modern science or society. But such sources can never be used as an essential or necessary component to any required belief, to any infallible or non-infallible teaching, to any truth of faith and morals.

For example, an observed truth about the state of modern society (e.g. the decline of moral values concerning sexuality) may be included in a document on a particular moral teaching (e.g. against contraception). Such an observed truth can be stated by the Magisterium and used in the document as supporting or introducing an authoritative teaching. However, such observations are not to be understood as the teaching of the Church or of the Magisterium, neither infallibly nor non-infallibly. Such observations and comments, which are outside of Divine Revelation, are properly used by the Magisterium when teaching the truths of the Faith, because reason itself was given by God to humanity for use in the service of Faith. The Magisterium, no less than any of the faithful, can use reason in the service of Faith.

Fallible Temporal Authority

The temporal authority of the Church is always fallible, never infallible. The reason that the temporal authority is fallible is that it does not teach solely from infallible Divine Revelation, but merely makes practical decisions and judgments in particular cases. Such decisions and judgments are based on faith and reason, but are also necessarily based on human observations, subjective reports, uncertain claims, and fallible sources of information. The Holy Spirit guides the temporal authority of the Church to a certain extent, but not so much as to make all decisions of all Bishops and all Popes without flaw, omission, or imperfection. Also, decisions of the temporal authority of the Church are never final because the Church always has the ability to change its own decisions in such matters.

Such a gift, of complete infallibility in everything, is not given to the Church, nor is it needed. The Church on earth includes very many fallible and sinful human persons. God permits even the Pope and the Bishops to be fallible and sinful. Otherwise, we might begin to treat the Pope and the Bishops as if they were idols to be worshipped, instead of as fellow children of God. In His Wisdom, God permits errors in the ordinary teachings of the Magisterium, so that we will worship God, not the Magisterium, and so that we will each seek God in our hearts and minds, through uncertainty and unknowing, walking the dark and rocky road of Calvary, proving that our love for God is not mere obedience to authority, but is the full obedience of love and truth and faithfulness.

Infallible Sacred Magisterium

The spiritual authority of the Church, called the Magisterium, can be divided into two types: the infallible Sacred Magisterium and the non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium. All non-infallible teachings allow for a limited possibility of error.

The infallible Sacred Magisterium is infallible for three reasons: First, because the Church was created with an intrinsic gift of infallibility. Second, because the Magisterium teaches only from infallible Sacred Tradition and infallible Sacred Scripture. Third, because the Sacred Magisterium is guided and protected from all error by the Holy Spirit.

Although Tradition and Scripture are infallible, any individual believer might misunderstand or misinterpret an infallible source. Therefore, the Church needs an infallible Magisterium to be able to access the infallible teachings of Tradition and Scripture. Without an infallible Magisterium, the infallibility of Tradition and Scripture would be much less useful; we would not know which of very many different opinions to adhere to on matters of grave importance to faith and morals.

The infallible Sacred Magisterium can only be exercised by either the Pope alone, or by the body of bishops led by the Pope. Individual Bishops, Cardinals, and even Congregations of the Holy See acting with the Pope’s approval, cannot exercise the infallible Sacred Magisterium. They can teach doctrines which have been previously infallibly taught; but their teaching, in and of itself, is never infallible.

The Usefulness of Fallibility

The Ordinary Magisterium also teaches only from infallible Sacred Tradition and infallible Sacred Scripture. And it too has guidance from the Holy Spirit. However, it is not protected from all error by the Holy Spirit, for this is not necessary to the Faith. It is sufficient, for the protection the Faith and the salvation of souls, for the Magisterium to teach infallibly only under certain conditions and at certain times.

In truth, it is very beneficial to the faithful that the Magisterium is not infallible in all that it teaches. This lack of complete certainty about every question of faith or morals makes some Catholics nervous. But it is important to the Faith to have unanswered questions or questions with more than one possible answer. This lack of certainty permits differing points of view to develop, and when mature, to contribute to the development of doctrine and to the spiritual life of the faithful. Permitting differing and even opposing points of view on the same questions of faith and morals allows the faithful to explore the infinite Wisdom of God and open themselves to new truths and new ways of seeing the truth. It allows for differing ways of understanding and expressing the same truths. This lack of complete infallibility, in the body of teachings of the Magisterium as a whole, provides the faithful with room to breathe, so that they may consider the faith for themselves, and may understand some measure of its profound truths each in his or her own way. It also prevents the Pope and the Bishops from thinking that they are, in and of themselves, infallible. And it prevents the faithful from treating the Pope and the Bishops as if they were gods. It prevents the faithful from mistakenly thinking that they know and believe all that the Church teaches. Therefore, it is good to have some truths of the Deposit of Faith which are a matter of discussion and inquiry and pious opinion, and are not taught under the infallible Magisterium.

Now there are some Catholics who think that their own limited and fallible misunderstanding of the Faith is the Faith itself. They permit no other points of view. They permit no one to even describe the same truths with different words, or from a different point of view. And they think that every question of the Faith of any consequence has already been decided by the Magisterium. They say that those who disagree have gone astray from the Faith. Yet they are the ones who are lost.

God, in His subtle yet profound Wisdom, knows that no human mind can completely comprehend the entire Catholic Christian Faith, and that every truth can be described in a myriad of different ways, and that the whole truth is beyond the ability of mere words to express. Thus, the Magisterium, even with its infallible faculty, cannot express every truth in all its fullness. For the Truths of Divine Wisdom are beyond the reach of mere words.

Thus the faithful must live these profound truths without completely understanding them.

Uncertainty is an irrevocable part of the Catholic Faith. And so, no one can tell each devout disciple of Christ exactly what they should do in every circumstance and how they should do it, for the fullness of truth exceeds all words and all instructions. You must live the Catholic Faith with a certain degree of pious uncertainty, and even the infallible Sacred Magisterium is unable tell you just exactly how to apply the Way of Christ to your own mind and heart and soul and life.

Therefore, happily, the Ordinary Magisterium is non-infallible and can, on occasion, teach something that is in error. Now for such errors to be beneficial to the faithful, the faithful must be able to discuss these errors and so arrive at a more profound understanding of the unfathomable truths of God. The faithful are rightly required to adhere to the ordinary and non-infallible teachings of the Magisterium, because these teachings can never lead the faithful away from salvation, and are, as a set of teachings, necessary to the living of the Catholic Faith. However, any faithful Christian, who believes and lives the Faith, may find a reason to question an ordinary teaching, or to improve that teaching with a better understanding, or to correct an error within an ordinary teaching, all without incurring guilt. The questioning and correction of ordinary teachings of the Magisterium is the right of every devout member of the faithful. But it must be based on a principle that is higher than the teaching being questioned. It cannot be based on the ideas of sinful secular society, or on the mere majority opinion within that society.

The most common example of error occurs when an individual Bishop goes astray from the teaching of the body of Bishops united with the Pope. The faithful can and should reject such an erroneous teaching. They can discuss this error among themselves, and with priests, deacons, and religious, and consider what the correct understanding may be. This correction may be immediately evident from the established teaching of the Magisterium. On other occasions, a Bishop may go astray, but in a way that does not directly contradict a prior definitive teaching of the Magisterium. Again, the faithful are free to discuss and to disagree, but only if they can resort to a higher principle, such as Tradition, or Scripture, or a prior Magisterial teaching.

Less often, the Ordinary Magisterium may err, in some limited manner, at the level of a group of Bishops, or a congregation of the Holy See, or, least often, at the level of a non-infallible teaching of a Pope. Even in such cases, any member of the faithful who believes and lives the Faith can question such an ordinary, possibly erroneous, teaching. Again, the basis for questioning such a teaching must be firmly grounded in Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium. In truth, the Ordinary Magisterium does err and should be corrected by faithful Catholics who understand a particular point of truth more profoundly than some of those who exercise the Magisterium.

However, the faithful cannot declare that such a correction or additional insight is an infallible teaching; they must wait for the Magisterium to declare it. John outran Peter and reached the tomb of our Lord first, but he waited until Peter arrived before entering. Similarly, sometimes the faithful understand a truth before the Magisterium, but they must wait for the Magisterium to catch up with them, and to declare it infallibly, or to improve and correct it further, before teaching it infallibly.

The Limits of Conferences of Local Bishops

The Bishop of various nations or regions of the world have formed Conferences, that is, bodies of local Bishops which exercise the spiritual and temporal authority of the Church. The formation of these Conferences is approved by the Holy See. However, they are a group of Bishops, not the universal body of Bishops. And their head is a local Bishop elected by the Conference. Therefore, by themselves, they can never teach using the infallible Sacred Magisterium. Their teaching is always limited to the non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium and can contain errors.

Certain problems can arise when a group of local Bishops issues teachings and decisions from their Conference. They generally act without the direct participation of the Pope, so at times they may teach or act in opposition to the will of the Pope. They can err in their teachings, but they are harder to correct because they are a body, not an individual.

God designed the Church, wisely, to have the Pope as its head. The Pope has the charism not only to teach infallibly under the charism of papal infallibility, but also to authoritatively lead and teach the Bishops as they participate in the charism of the Magisterium. Thus no Ecumenical Council is valid without the Pope as its head. And no exercise of the infallible universal Magisterium (the ‘ordinary and universal magisterium’) is possible without the Pope as its head.

A local Bishops Conference elects a local Bishops as its head, but he is not the Pope. The Bishops typically vote on various decisions and documents to be issued by the Conference, as if the Church were a democracy. They may have some communication with the Holy See and the Pope, but the deliberations, decisions, and teachings of such a Conference generally takes place apart from the direct authority, teaching, and leadership of the Pope. The end result is that Bishops Conferences can go astray from the teaching of the Church and the will of the Pope. Then, being a body of numerous Bishops, they are much more difficult to correct that an individual Bishop.

Examples of doctrinal errors by groups of local Bishops is found in the ‘teaching document’ issued by the Bishops’ Conferences of England and Wales, and of Scotland entitled, ‘the Gift of Scripture.’ The document is full of the errors of modernist Biblical scholars and, in my view, openly contradicts the past teachings of numerous Popes on the infallibility of the Bible. So, how could such a group of Bishops have gone so far astray? It is because they act like a body without a head: they devised this document on their own, apart from the authority, teaching, and leadership of the Pope.

An example of a local Bishops’ Conference opposing and undermining the will of the Pope is found in the actions of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops concerning the New American Bible version. Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger (who at that time was both the Prefect of the CDF and the head of the Pontifical Biblical Association) objected to the use of inclusive language in that Bible version. The U.S. Bishops Conference eventually reluctantly made the minimum number of changes to the text of the Bible to permit them to use it in liturgical services. But they continue to offer only the unamended version both on their official web site and in printed Bibles which they allow to be published. One Bishop alone would not have been able to withstand the authority of the Holy See in this matter. But as a group, they fended off the manifest will of the Pope, and acted as if they had a separate authority apart from him.

A body of local Bishops, acting apart from the Pope, is like a chicken without a head. It runs around aimlessly and without purpose. Local conferences of Bishops should work as closely and directly as possible with the Pope himself and with the Holy See. And they should not act in any significant matter of faith or morals without the authority, teaching, and leadership of the Pope. It is not sufficient for them to consult with the Holy See after they have made a decision or written a teaching document. The Pope and the Holy See should be involved in the entire process of any exercise of the temporal and spiritual authority of the Church by a group of Bishops.

Another limit to local Conferences of Bishops is that they can only exercise even the Ordinary Magisterium when their teachings come from the Bishops of the Conference. Because of the influence of modern secular society, some Conferences of Bishops have incorporated numerous non-Bishops (priests, deacons, religious, laypersons) into their organization. Thus, while the Bishops themselves are dispersed throughout a nation or region, the numerous non-Bishops have full time positions at the organization’s headquarters. And the number of active Bishops in the nation represented by the Conference is sometimes exceeded by the number of non-Bishop positions. In addition, some Bishops have positions in the Conference that give them a great deal of influence over the decisions of the Conference, whereas other active Bishops have very little influence over the Conference.

As a result, many non-Bishops—persons who are entirely without the charism of the Magisterium—have more influence and are more involved in composing teaching documents and influencing doctrinal decisions than some of the active Bishops of that region. If a teaching document or a doctrinal decision proceeds mainly from these non-Bishops, such teachings and decisions lack the charism and authority of even the Ordinary Magisterium. If a temporal decision proceeds mainly from these non-Bishops, such decisions lack the force of even the temporal authority of the Church. The Bishops entirely lack the ability and authority to delegate the charism and authority intrinsic to their ordination as Bishops to any other persons who are not ordained to the Episcopate.

When Does the Ordinary Magisterium Err?

The Ordinary Magisterium can be exercised by any individual Bishop, or even by the Pope when he teaches non-infallibly. There are many Bishops in the world today. By mere observation it is clear that the teachings of some individual Bishops – teachings that these few Bishops claim are the teaching of Christ – are in fundamental conflict with the teaching of the main body of Bishops and of the Pope, and of the Church throughout its history. Thus it is clear that the Ordinary Magisterium, especially in the case of individual Bishops, can and does err. The frequency with which individual Bishops err in their exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium varies with the holiness, or lack thereof, of the Bishop. It is affected by the degree of sinfulness or holiness of the community of believers. Even the secular world can have an effect on the particular errors of individual Bishops.

Jesus, in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 23, teaches us that, at times, even many of those in authority in the Church may go astray, like the scribes and Pharisees. There are times in Church history when many holy leaders are given to the Church; and there are other times when many sins are found even in Bishops and successive Popes. However, during any time in Church history, the teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium can and does contain some errors. Errors in teachings of the Magisterium are more common in the teachings of individual Bishops or groups of Bishops, and less common in the ordinary teachings of Pope and the Holy See. Errors are also more likely in certain time periods; for example, in the current time period, many Bishops have erred in one way or another due to the excessive influence of a particularly sinful secular society. Errors are less likely during holier times on earth. But error in the teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium do occur.

Types of Errors

There are three possible types of error: (1) omission of an essential truth, (2) inclusion of a falsehood, or (3) a distortion of the truth.

1. An example of an error of omission is found in the teaching document called ‘The Gift of Scripture,’ published and approved by the Bishops’ Conferences of England and Wales, and of Scotland. This document has an entire section (section 53, p. 40) entitled ‘Luke’s stories of the birth of Jesus.’ The subject is the conception and birth of Jesus as described in Luke’s Gospel. The word ‘Incarnation’ is not used, nor is the concept mentioned using any wording at all. The Blessed Virgin Mary is only referred to as ‘Mary,’ and her perfect virginity is not mentioned. The conception of Jesus is not called a ‘virgin conception,’ nor is that concept clearly taught. This entire section, and many other sections of this document as well, omit any mention of various fundamental doctrines that are found in the teachings of the Church and based on Scripture. Such errors of omission weaken and undermine the true doctrines of the Faith.

Another example of an error of omission is found in the words and deeds of a few U.S. Bishops, in regard to the Vatican instruction prohibiting the admission of homosexuals to ordination. Some Bishops publicly stated that they would continue to admit homosexuals, and they spoke as if there were no difference between a celibate heterosexual priest and a celibate homosexual priest. They showed no acknowledgement in word or deed of the Church’s teaching that a homosexual orientation is intrinsically and gravely disordered, whereas a heterosexual orientation is not. This is a type of error of omission, found in both word and deed, because a true teaching of the Church is omitted in such a way as to suggest that it is not true.

2. An example of the inclusion of a falsehood is found in the claim, made in the document called ‘The Gift of Scripture,’ that Scripture contains errors on matters not pertaining to salvation. On the contrary, the Encyclical Providentissimus Deus, by Pope Leo XIII, emphatically and definitively taught that there are no errors in Scripture at all and that the infallibility of Scripture extends even beyond what pertains to salvation, or to faith and morals. And other Popes have taught the same.

3. An example of an error of distortion is found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, where the Catechism misquotes the Second Vatican Council document Dei Verbum on the point of Tradition and its transmission.

“This living transmission, accomplished in the Holy Spirit, is called Tradition, since it is distinct from Sacred Scripture, though closely connected to it. Through Tradition, ‘the Church, in her doctrine, life, and worship perpetuates and transmits to every generation all that she herself is, all that she believes.’ ” (CCC, 78. The inner quote is from Dei Verbum, 8)

On the contrary, Tradition is not a process of transmission; if it were, then what is being transmitted? The Deposit of Faith is Tradition and Scripture, which is Divine Revelation given through the deeds and words of God. The process of the transmission of Tradition is distinct from Tradition itself. This confusion between Tradition and its transmission is fairly common in the Church today. Scripture itself is also transmitted, in writing and in the lives of those who live according to Scripture. Yet no one confuses Scripture with its transmission.

Another example of an error of distortion is found in the use of the term ‘Mediatrix of all graces’ in some magisterial documents, including the Encyclical of Pope Pius XI, Caritate Christi Compulsi: “Let them pray to Him, interposing likewise the powerful patronage of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mediatrix of all graces” (n. 31). Certainly, the Virgin Mary is the “Mediatrix to the Mediator” (Fidentem Piumque Animum, Pope Leo XIII, n. 3), assisting Christ is his work as the one Mediator. However, Mary is not and cannot be the Mediatrix of all graces. She is not the Mediatrix of graces given to the human nature of Christ from His Divine Nature. She is also not the Mediatrix of the graces that she herself receives, in which case she is the recipient. These two exceptions are not trivial; the importance of the graces given to Christ and Mary is inestimable. In all other cases, she is the Mediatrix of grace. Therefore, because of these two exceptions, Mary cannot be correctly called the Mediatrix of all graces. That term is a distortion of true doctrine.

There are other errors in the teachings of the Magisterium. Most are found at the level of individual Bishops and Cardinals, or at the level of groups of Bishops. Far fewer errors are found at the level of the Holy See, or at the level of the ordinary teaching of the Pope.

The Limits of the Infallible Sacred Magisterium

The Magisterium teaches infallibly only under certain conditions; all other teachings are non-infallible. The Sacred Magisterium teaches infallibly through three charisms. See my article, “The Three Charisms of the Sacred Magisterium,” for more on this point.

The Limits of Papal Infallibility

Papal Infallibility is the ability and authority of the Pope to point to something that is already in the Deposit of Faith, and to say, “This too is the teaching of Christ,” and then to define and clarify it, and require it to be believed and lived. The limits on papal infallibility are several.

First, papal infallibility is limited to the Pope himself. No individual Bishop, or group of Bishops, or Cardinal can teach under papal infallibility. Even a Congregation of the Holy See, issuing a teaching with the approval of the Pope, cannot teach under papal infallibility. And the definitive teachings of the man who is Pope, but taught before he became Pope, do not fall under papal infallibility.

Second, papal infallibility does not apply to every teaching of the Pope, but only to his teachings as leader and teacher of the entire Church on earth. His teachings to a small group, such as to Bishops during an ‘ad limina’ visit are non-infallible. His teachings during sermons, unless the sermon is to the whole world, is not infallible.

Third, the teaching must be a definitive decision or definition of doctrine. The Pope’s ordinary teachings, even as Shepherd of the universal Church, are not infallible. When he gives a sermon, it is not infallible. When the Pope writes an Encyclical, its teachings are not necessarily infallible. The Pope’s personal opinions, beliefs, and practices are not infallible.

Fourth, papal infallibility, like the Magisterium itself, cannot teach anything outside of the Deposit of Faith. Any truth not found in Tradition or Scripture cannot be taught by the Magisterium at all, even under papal infallibility. And the temporal decisions of the Pope, such as who to canonize, are never infallible. The Pope can change Canon Law on his own initiative, but such decisions are not teachings and so cannot fall under papal infallibility.

Fifth, papal infallibility only applies to those teachings which are binding on the whole Church. So even if the Pope preaches or teaches very definitively about the faith, his teaching cannot fall under papal infallibility unless it is binding on the universal Church.

The Limits of Ecumenical Councils and Similar Gatherings

An Ecumenical Council, or any similar gathering of the body of Bishops with the Pope, can teach infallibly. The gathering need not be called a Council, nor does it need to be a gathering in Place. It can be a gathering by means of communication over distance. However, all such gatherings must necessarily include the Pope. The Pope must exercise his charism of authority, teaching, and leadership over such a gathering in order for that gathering to be able to teach infallibly.

Without a Pope, an Ecumenical Council is not an Ecumenical Council, that is to say, it is not a type of gathering that can teach infallibly. If a Pope dies while an Ecumenical Council is gathered, then the Council immediately cease to be a Council and it loses its authority to teach infallibly.

If a group of Bishops, even representative of the Church worldwide, were to gather apart from the Pope (without his participation even by means of communication over distance), then their definitive decisions on doctrine would not be infallible, even if later approved by the Pope. Of course, those same doctrinal decisions can be taught infallibly under papal infallibility, if the Pope so chooses, or under the universal Magisterium. But they do not fall under that particular type of infallibility whereby the body of bishops gather under the authority, teaching, and leadership of the Pope.

Ecumenical Councils and similar gatherings have the same limits as the Sacred Magisterium in general, including the limit that they can only teach truths found in the Deposit of Faith (Tradition and Scripture). Also, such gatherings are not infallible in everything that they teach. Their teaching is only infallible when it meets the criteria for infallible teachings of the Sacred Magisterium. (See my article: The Three Charisms of the Sacred Magisterium.) All other teachings of Ecumenical Councils and similar gatherings fall under the non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium.

Ecumenical Councils and similar gatherings can also exercise the temporal authority of the Church, but such authority is never infallible. Even Ecumenical Councils are fallible in their exercise of the temporal authority of the Church. An example of an error by an Ecumenical Council in its exercise of temporal authority is found in the condemnation of Pope Honorius I, many years after his death, for failing to teach that Christ has two wills, not one will. The Pope did not fall into heresy, as the Council strongly implied, for the Magisterium (which is not the persons of the Pope and the Bishops, but rather a gift which resides in them) had not decided the question of whether Christ had one will or two at that time. Also, the Council lacks the authority to excommunicate someone after their death. They did, however, have the authority to condemn the idea that Christ has only one will; this authority falls under the spiritual authority of the Church, i.e. the Magisterium.

There is a recent example of the use of the infallible Sacred Magisterium, by the body of Bishops led by the Pope, who were gathered by means of communication over distance and not in an Ecumenical Council. The result was three infallible definitions which fall under the very same type of infallibility exercised by Ecumenical Councils. The Encyclical Evangelium Vitae contains three infallible teachings defined under this type of infallibility. The Pope first gathered in one place with the body of Cardinals, who were also Bishops and who were representative of the universal Church on earth. Then the Pope communicated with the Bishops throughout the world. Finally, based on the meeting in one place with the Cardinals and the meeting by means of communication with the Bishops dispersed throughout the world, the Pope infallibly defined three teachings condemning acts that are always gravely immoral: one teaching against abortion, one teaching against euthanasia, and a third teaching against the direct and voluntary killing of innocent human beings in general.

The Limits of the Universal Magisterium

The ‘ordinary and universal Magisterium’ (also called ‘universal Magisterium,’ to avoid confusion with the non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium) occurs when the body of Bishops and the Pope all teach the same teaching, from the Deposit of Faith, as the teaching of Christ, but without a particular solemn definition. In such cases, there is no one document that establishes the teaching as infallible, nor is there a written doctrinal definition which is proclaimed infallibly. Instead, the teaching must be taught definitively by the Bishops dispersed throughout the world, and by the Pope. This teaching must subsist across place and time.

The exercise of the universal Magisterium must include the body of Bishops led by the Pope. It cannot be merely the teaching of a few Bishops, or of a local group of Bishop. The body of Bishops must be representative of the universal Church. Neither does the teaching of the Pope by himself fall under this type of infallibility. It must be exercised by the body of Bishops united with the Pope. Thus, it must be widespread within the Magisterium.

This exercise of the universal Magisterium must be widespread in Place and Time. (If the body of Bishops united with the Pope were to decide a question of doctrine in one place at one time, then such a gathering would constitute an Ecumenical Council, not an exercise of the universal Magisterium.) This teaching must also have been the teaching of the Bishops and the Popes through more than a few generations. Thus, it must be a teaching widespread in Time. It cannot be a new teaching; but it can be a relatively new application of an old teaching (e.g. applying a well-established principle of the moral law to some new medical or technological development).

The teaching of the universal Magisterium must be drawn from Tradition and Scripture. As with every exercise of the Magisterium whatsoever, the universal Magisterium can only teach truths found, at least implicitly, within the Sacred Deposit of Faith.

One of the practical limits on the ordinary and universal Magisterium is the difficult of discerning which teachings fall under this type of infallibility. If one cannot be certain that a teaching has been taught infallibly, then the effect is to limit the usefulness of that infallible teaching. The faithful often have difficulty discerning which teachings fall under this type of infallibility. The Ordinary Magisterium can guide the faithful in this matter, but such guidance is itself fallible. If the Magisterium were to act infallibly in such a matter, other than with the universal Magisterium, then the teaching would fall under a different type of infallibility.

Such teachings generally begin under the fallible Ordinary Magisterium, and progress to the infallible Sacred Magisterium. The exact point at which a teaching has been taught widely enough and often enough to be a teaching of the universal Magisterium is nearly impossible to determine. Generally, the realization that a teaching falls under this type of infallibility occurs years after that point has been reached. Thus, it is practically impossible to determine in every case which teachings have been taught infallibly.

Which Teachings Are Infallible?

It is not always clear which type of infallibility a teaching falls under, or whether a teaching falls under infallibility at all.

For example, the teaching of the Pope in Ordinatio Sacredotalis, in my view, meets all of the criteria for papal infallibility. (See my article: The Three Charism of the Sacred Magisterium.) However, then prefect of the CDF Cardinal Ratzinger stated that it was an exercise of the Ordinary Magisterium, teaching from infallible Tradition and Scripture. There is also a dispute as to whether or not canonizations fall under papal infallibility. In my view, explained below, they certainly do not. In fact, the only two exercises of papal infallibility that are generally agreed upon are those for the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. Every other claimed use of papal infallibility is disputed. And the disputes have not been resolved by the Magisterium; they have been allowed to fester.

In another example, the three infallible teachings of Evangelium Vitae, discussed above, are usually said to fall under papal infallibility or under the universal Magisterium. But in my view they fall under the same type of infallibility as an Ecumenical Council. Now some may say that, as long as it is known to be taught infallibly, it does not matter which type of infallibility. But if some say a teaching does not fall under the first type, and some say not the second type, and some say not the third type, then others may rightly say that perhaps it is not infallible at all. If one cannot with certitude know the basis for the infallibility, how can one know that it was taught under infallibility? What is infallible cannot be based, in a fundamental and necessary manner, on what is fallible.

The infallible teachings of the universal Magisterium, by definition, lack a solemn definition. In other words, this type of infallibility refers to teachings that have not been issued in one definitive statement or paragraph, in one particular document, at one particular point in time. The body of Bishops led by the Pope continuously teach the Faith, and so, when they are in agreement, across Place and Time, on one position definitively to be held because it is the teaching of Tradition and Scripture for the entire Church, then that teaching is infallible. However, lacking a solemn definition, such teachings are difficult to discern and are a matter of much dispute. Some Catholics hold that nearly every teaching of the Faith has been taught infallibly under the universal Magisterium. Other Catholics narrow the number of such infallible teachings. But no individual Catholic can make a list of those teachings that fall under this type of infallibility, because each teaching is not taught in a particular place, time, and document.

The result of all this uncertainty is that Catholics often cannot be certain which teachings have been taught infallibly by the Magisterium and which have been taught only under the fallible Ordinary Magisterium. They must live by Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium, not merely by that which has been infallibly taught and defined by the Sacred Magisterium. Otherwise, they would be heretics, rejecting large portions of the faith. Otherwise they would be unable to understand the infallible teachings by putting them into other words, by expounding upon them and discoursing about them. The attempt by some to believe only the infallible teachings of the Magisterium is a vain attempt to avoid the inevitable uncertainties of living by faith, and to construct a new heretical religion not based on Tradition and Scripture, but on Magisterium alone.

Is it the Teaching of the Magisterium?

In order for a teaching to qualify as a teaching of the Magisterium, it must have been taught by at least one validly ordained Bishop of the Catholic Church. No matter how many laypersons, theologians, religious, deacons, or priests teach an idea, it is not a teaching of the Magisterium unless it has been taught by a Bishop or the Pope. But it may still be a teaching of the Church.

The teachings and doctrinal decisions of groups of non-Bishops (laypersons, religious, deacons, priests) do not have the ability or authority of the Magisterium, even if such groups have been appointed by a Bishop or group of Bishops. The temporal decisions of groups of non-Bishops (laypersons, religious, deacons, priests) do not have the authority of the Church or the Bishops, even when such groups have been appointed by a Bishop or group of Bishops. No Bishop, nor group of Bishops, nor the entire body of Bishops, nor the Pope himself, has the ability or authority to transfer or delegate the spiritual or temporal authority of the Church from the body of Bishops united with the Pope to any other persons or groups.

When a teaching has been decided upon by a Bishop or group of Bishops, they may authorize priests, deacons, religious, and laypersons to teach these doctrinal decisions of the Bishops. But even priests and deacons cannot be appointed by Bishops to make doctrinal decisions with the ability or authority of the Magisterium. Ordination to the Episcopate give the ordained Bishop the ability and authority of the Magisterium. Persons not ordained to the Episcopate cannot obtain such ability and authority in any other way.

Is it the Teaching of the Church?

The true teachings of the Magisterium are a subset of the teachings of the Church. Every truth taught by the Magisterium, from Tradition or Scripture, is both a teaching of the Magisterium and of the Church. Any errors taught by the Magisterium are not teachings of the Church and will eventually fall away from the teachings of the Magisterium. Many teachings of the Church have never been taught by the Magisterium. Some teachings of the Church have been understood, believed, lived, and taught by the faithful, but have not yet been taught at all by the Magisterium. Sometimes the faithful understand a teaching first, then that teaching slowly makes its way into the teaching of the Magisterium.

A theologian may possibly teach a true teaching of the Church, based on Tradition and Scripture, which is not found at all in the teachings of the Magisterium. Theologians who teach from Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium are pleasing to God. Theologians who teach only what the Magisterium teaches, ignoring Tradition and Scripture, rejecting all that has not been taught by the Magisterium, are heretics and idolaters, who treat the Magisterium as if it were God. Theologians who teach so as to undermine or contradict the true teachings of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium are heretics and traitors who will be punished by God.

The Scope of Infallible Teachings

Any teaching of the Magisterium, which does not fall under one or another type of infallibility under the Sacred Magisterium, must therefore fall under the fallible Ordinary Magisterium. All of the teachings of the Magisterium which are not infallible are necessarily fallible. However, each and every teaching of Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture is infallible and is necessarily the teaching of the Church, regardless of whether or not the Magisterium has explicitly taught the same.

All infallible teachings are necessarily completely true, when properly understood. Each individual infallible teaching can only be properly and fully understood in the context of the entire Deposit of Faith. The Faith is full of the mysteries of Divine Revelation, which are beyond complete human comprehension. Nevertheless, all such infallible teachings about these mysteries are entirely true, for the mysteries of God can be understood to a significant extent by faithful human persons.

The Code of Canon Law, 749 §3, states: “No doctrine is understood as defined infallibly unless this is manifestly evident.”

Infallible teachings are limited, in their infallibility, to the precise meaning of that infallible teaching. As one expounds and discusses the infallible doctrine, invariably other assertions are made and other conclusions are reached, beyond what has been infallibly defined. The result is that any theological discourse on an infallible teaching, even by a Pope or Bishop, will generally contain numerous non-infallible teachings, assertions, and conclusions. Thus, the faithful cannot limit their faith solely to what has been taught infallibly. Nor can the faithful live only according to infallible teachings of the Magisterium. Nor can they reject all that has not been taught infallibly by the Magisterium. For the infallible teachings of the Magisterium are necessarily connected with, and essentially supported by, its fallible ordinary teachings.

The Limits of the Fallible Ordinary Magisterium

Everything taught explicitly or implicitly by Tradition or Scripture is infallible truth. The teaching of the Church is nothing other than the teachings of Tradition and Scripture. The teachings of the Magisterium, even when infallible, may clarify and explicitly express what has always been implicit in Tradition and Scripture, but they may never add, subtract, or change any of the truths in the Deposit of Faith. The infallible teachings of the Sacred Magisterium, along with every true teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium, are a part of the teaching of the Church, but only because these are already present, at least implicitly, in Tradition or Scripture. Any erroneous or false ideas taught under the fallible Ordinary Magisterium are not a part of the teaching of the Church and will eventually fall away from the teaching of the Magisterium.

Any individual Bishop, or group of local Bishops, can exercise the fallible Ordinary Magisterium. The Cardinals of the Holy See, and the other Cardinals dispersed through the world, teach under the Ordinary Magisterium. Even the Pope can and does teach from the fallible Ordinary Magisterium, when he is not teaching under any of the three types of infallibility. Priests, deacons, religious, and members of the faithful, including lay theologians, do not and cannot exercise even the fallible Ordinary Magisterium.

Since each and every Bishop worldwide can teach under the Ordinary Magisterium, their teaching on various points of doctrine does not always agree. This variation in the teaching of doctrine by the Bishops occurs because so many Bishops are teaching and each is teaching non-infallibly under the Ordinary Magisterium. This variation in the teachings of individual Bishops has the advantage of allowing the faithful to consider various ideas within the Faith. And it has the disadvantage of causing some confusion on important points of doctrine among the faithful.

The Ordinary Magisterium can only teach non-infallibly, never infallibly, and it can only teach from the Deposit of Faith. Every teaching of the Magisterium which does not fall under the infallible Sacred Magisterium necessarily falls under the fallible Ordinary Magisterium. However, it is not always clear to the faithful whether or not a teaching falls under the infallible or the fallible Magisterium.

The Magisterium has many teachings which are taught non-infallibly, and some of those teachings are in error, but the errors are limited in scope, pertaining only to certain specific points of doctrine about which the Fathers, Doctors, and Saints of the Church may have disagreed or held some uncertainty or which they did not discuss. In general, the ordinary teachings of the Magisterium are reliable and trustworthy, despite being non-infallible. The vast majority of non-infallible teachings of the Magisterium are also true teachings.

The Ordinary Magisterium is limited in that it cannot teach infallibly. Therefore, its teaching contains some errors and falsehoods. Thus another limit necessarily results: the degree and type of assent, which the faithful owe to a teaching, is significantly different for the Ordinary Magisterium than for the Sacred Magisterium.

Types of Assent

The Sacred Magisterium teaches infallibly from the Deposit of Faith (Tradition and Scripture). Therefore its teachings must be adhered to with the fullness of faith and devotion due to the teachings of Christ, who is God. The requirement to assent to these truths cannot be refused nor diminished by anyone. This type of assent is called the assent of faith, or sacred assent.

However, each faithful Catholic can understand and express these very same truths in their own way. Some would require each truth to be, not only believed, but also expressed solely in the exact formulation of words used in a particular magisterial document. Such a requirement has never been and can never be a part of the Catholic Faith.

The Ordinary Magisterium teaches non-infallibly, with a real and significant (but limited) possibility of error, from the infallible Deposit of Faith, and with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Since the teachings are drawn from what is infallible, with the guidance of God, its teachings also require a certain assent from the faithful. But because the teachings are non-infallible, the type and degree of assent is different from the assent due to the Sacred Magisterium.

No one is ever required, by the Catholic Faith or by God Himself, to believe any falsehood, to reject any truth, or to adhere to any distortion of doctrine. God cannot require this, for it would contradict His very Nature: God is Truth. The Pope and all the Bishops put together cannot require this, for their authority comes from God.

Now some Bishops or Popes may, at times, state that the faithful are required to believe a particular teaching, but if that teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium is in error, no one is required to believe it. The Pope or the Bishops at times teach erroneously, because they do not yet realize the whole truth about a particular doctrine. Eventually, all such errors will fall away from the teaching of the Magisterium.

In the mean time, if an individual understands that a teachings is in error, that individual is not required to believe or adhere to that error in the least. However, such an individual can only contradict, or add significantly to, or correct a teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium if his understanding is based on Tradition, or Scripture, or other teachings of the Magisterium. Furthermore, he has a duty to the Church to express his understanding of correct doctrine on the very same question of faith or morals, and to accept the possibility that he himself may be in error. So may the teaching of even the fallible Ordinary Magisterium progress and grow in the sight of God.

As to those teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium not understood to be in error, these still cannot and should not be believed with the full assent of faith given to infallible teachings. For the teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium may still contain some errors, to some degree, which are not yet understood as errors. Therefore, all of the fallible teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium require a different type of assent: not the full assent of faith, but rather a religious submission of the intellect and will. When a member of the faithful does not understand a teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium to be in error, based on a higher principle from Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium, then it must be believed.

Also, every Catholic is required to give the full assent of faith to every teaching of Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, regardless of whether or not it has been taught infallibly by the Sacred Magisterium. If anyone believes solely what the Magisterium teaches, rejecting the teachings of Tradition and Scripture when these have not been taught explicitly by the Magisterium, then that person is a heretic who has fallen away from the true Catholic Faith in order to worship the Magisterium, as if it were an idol.

Now some would require essentially the same assent for ordinary teachings as for infallible teachings. They use different terminology to refer to the two types of assent, but within their descriptions of these two types of assent, there is no practical difference. This approach is incorrect. The Magisterium itself teaches that there are truly two types of assent required. To interpret this teaching in such a way that the differences are negligible or irrelevant is to nullify a teaching of the Magisterium. The type of assent given to ordinary teachings must necessarily be significantly different in degree and type from that required of infallible teachings. For some ordinary teachings of the Magisterium are in error, and will fall away from the teaching of the Magisterium, and were never truly part of the teaching of the Church itself. The Magisterium is not the same as the Church, and the teachings of the Magisterium are not the same as the teachings of the Church.

Faithful Dissent

In the world today, there is so much unfaithful dissent that some Catholic have begun to think that all dissent is contrary to the Faith.

The unfaithful dissent includes undermining the authority of the Bible, contradicting the Bible, claiming that the Bible is unreliable and full of errors, and other attacks on Scripture, both subtle and not so subtle. Unfaithful dissent includes undermining the idea of Tradition to the point where it becomes meaningless or useless as a guide to the faithful. The reliability of the Fathers, Doctors, and Saints of the Church is also undermined or completely ignored in unfaithful dissent. Having subverted Tradition and Scripture, so that neither is seen as a reliable source of truth or guidance, the unfaithful also attack the Magisterium. They narrow the number of doctrines seen as infallible. They ignore much of what the Magisterium says on any topic, preferring instead philosophers and heterodox theologians. They undermine the authority of the Popes and the Ecumenical Councils. All such dissent is untenable, the work of heretics and virtual apostates, who are Catholic or Christian in name only.

However, faithful dissent is still possible. In fact, faithful dissent is the duty of every faithful member of the Church. Faithful dissent does not include rejecting any of the truths of Tradition or Scripture, nor can it include ideas which undermine or nullify or ignore the force and meaning of those truths. Faithful dissent does not include rejecting any of the truths of the infallible Sacred Magisterium, nor does it include ideas which undermine or nullify or ignore the force and meaning of those truths. Faithful dissent cannot broadly reject the teachings of the fallible Ordinary Magisterium.

What can faithful dissent do? The faithful can argue against particular teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium, when that argument is based on Tradition, or Scripture, or other teachings of the Magisterium. The faithful can choose to adhere to the teachings of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium over a particular fallible teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium. Now this most often occurs when one individual Bishops, or perhaps a group of local Bishops, has a teaching that is contrary to the teaching of the universal Church. Occasionally, it may happen that a Pope or a congregation of the Holy See teaches non-infallibly and incorrectly. Even then, any faithful Catholic can dissent from a non-infallible teaching as long as the reason for dissent is based on Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium.

Faithful dissent cannot be based on reason alone, for reason is damaged by original sin and by personal sin. Nor can it be based on the ideas of modern secular sinful society, (like most unfaithful dissent). Faithful dissent must be based on a more authoritative teaching from infallible Sacred Tradition, or infallible Sacred Scripture, or infallible Sacred Magisterium, or even a more authoritative teaching of Ordinary Magisterium. And faithful dissent must always give the best possible interpretation to the teaching from which it dissents. If anyone uses an uncharitable interpretation of a magisterial teaching to claim faithful dissent, such dissent is neither faithful nor loving. True faithful dissent includes a continuing love, faith, and hope in the Church, its teachings, and its ministers. (Unfaithful dissent tends to be unloving, filled with harshness, bitterness, anger, frustration, resentment, and despair.)

Faithful dissent must also include the understanding that the dissenting Catholic is fallible and may need to amend or retract his or her dissent. The teaching of God contains truths beyond the full reach of the human mind and soul, therefore, any faithful Catholic, dissenting piously from an ordinary teaching, could be in error through a misunderstanding of the mysteries and infinite truths of God.

But those to whom the Magisterium is entrusted must likewise be charitable and loving towards those who piously dissent. For even the Magisterium itself is unable to fully comprehend the mysteries of God.

Faithful Disobedience

While faithful dissent refers to the fallible teachings of the Magisterium (the spiritual authority of the Church), faithful disobedience refers to the fallible temporal authority of the Church. Again, this most often applies to a local Bishop whose orders, rules, or decisions in a particular case are fallible and incorrect. Occasionally, the Pope or the Holy See may make a temporal decision which is erroneous. Even Ecumenical Councils are not infallible when making temporal decisions.

For example, the condemnation of Pope Honorius I, long after his death, by the Third Council of Constantinople. This was an error because the Pope had not taught in favor of the heretical doctrine (that Christ had one will, not two); he merely left the question unsettled, even in his own mind. Note that, during the time of Honorius I, several prominent Bishops held to and taught this heretical view. I disagree with the decision of that Ecumenical Council against Pope Honorius I and so I will not abide by it. The Pope was not a heretic, because the question was as yet undecided by the Church. Furthermore, my theology concerning the Magisterium holds, in contradiction to the temporal decision of that Council, that no Pope can ever fall into the sin of heresy.

In another example, Pope John Paul II and then Cardinal Ratzinger, said that the teaching of the Pope in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, against the ordination of women to the priesthood, was an exercise of the non-infallible Magisterium witnessing to an infallible teaching of Tradition and Scripture. I disagree; in my view it is a clear example of papal infallibility. I treat it as such and I teach in my writings that it is so, in contradiction to the statements of Pope John Paul II and then Cardinal Ratzinger (who has not revisited the question since his election, to my knowledge).

In a common example, the Bishop of Mostar has been entrusted by the Holy See with decisions about claimed private revelations in his diocese, including Medjugorje. His decision has been clearly and consistently against a supernatural and heavenly origin for the apparitions and messages of Medjugorje. Yet I and many others still adhere to Medjugorje as a source of true private revelation. Many Bishops permit their parishes to send pilgrimages to Medjugorje; many priests and religious have made pilgrimages there. All this in contradiction to the temporal decision of proper Church authority in this matter. But the Bishop of Mostar made a fallible and incorrect decision. And the faithful have the right to disobey an order, decision, or ruling from a Bishop which contradicts the will of God. The Almighty continues to grant these apparitions and messages through His lowly handmaid Mary, so the faithful can answer the call of God. (Note, however, that some Franciscans have been disobedient to the Bishop, refusing to hand over control of certain parishes to the proper authority of the diocese. Such disobedience is not justified by the fact that the Franciscans support the apparitions and the Bishop does not.)

Obedience to the fallible temporal authority of the Church is limited and contingent, because there exists the possibility of errors contrary to the will of God. Obedience to God is absolute and unlimited. Obedience to the temporal authority of the Church is not.

Some Practical Limits

Numbers

Currently (Feb. 2006), the estimated number of Catholics in the world is about 1.1 billion. The number of Bishops in the world is in the range of several thousand. And there is only one Holy See and one Pope. The sheer number of Catholics in the world makes it impossible for the Pope or the Holy See to give a definitive answer on questions of faith and morals to each member of the Church on earth.

The Holy See does not always respond to written questions about matters of faith and morals. Many members of the faithful write to the Holy See on such matters and receive no response. This inaccessibility of the Holy See to the faithful is partly due to sheer numbers. But it is also due to a reluctance on the part of some Cardinals to decide a question that is still a matter of some dispute among the Bishops.

When the faithful have a question about the teaching of the Church, they may ask their parish priest, but his answer is not definitive. They may ask the Bishop of their diocese, but there are few Bishops in each diocese and there are many questions. The answer given by an individual local Bishop is an answer from the Magisterium, but such an answer from a local Bishop is never infallible. Different Bishops may give very different answers to the same questions. Some Bishops are reluctant to answer theological questions. Some Bishops are rather inaccessible. Some Bishops are good administrators, but not good Apostles.

Interpretation

When the Magisterium has a written document teaching on a particular point of doctrine, various interpretations might be given to that teaching. The Magisterium often chooses not to further clarify the doctrine at the present time. The result is some degree of uncertainty about what the Magisterium is teaching and how it is to be understood and applied. Even if the Magisterium issues further clarification, there is usually a point beyond which uncertainty or varying interpretations prevail. Also, those clarifications are almost always given according to the fallible Ordinary Magisterium or the fallible temporal authority, not the infallible Sacred Magisterium.

Sometimes, those who claim that the Magisterium teaches one thing or another are in error, because they have misinterpreted the teachings of the Magisterium. They quote a document, which they themselves have not even read in its entirety. They look for quotes to support their prejudgments on a subject. Their interpretations of those quotes are influenced by their own fallible ideas and weaknesses. Yet they then claim that anyone who disagrees with their misinterpretation of a teaching of the Magisterium has gone astray from the Faith.

Thus it is helpful to the faithful to understand that the teachings of the Ordinary Magisterium are subject to error as well as to misinterpretation.

Magisterium Only?

These limits of the Magisterium clearly demonstrate that the faithful should not and cannot base their faith solely on the teachings of the Magisterium. The Catholic Faith is based primarily on Tradition, secondarily on Scripture, and thirdly on Magisterium. These three are a reflection of the Most Holy Trinity, and are therefore complimentary and inseparable. The recent tendency among many Catholics to believe only what is explicitly taught by the Magisterium has left these members of the faithful confused about the true teaching of the Church and cut off from the teachings of Tradition and Scripture, except for those select teachings explicitly taught by the Magisterium. And when some of these have misunderstood one teaching or another of the Magisterium, they then refuse to be corrected by Tradition or Scripture or other members of the faithful. They think that they are believing what the Church teaches, but in some cases they are believing their own misunderstandings. The limits of the Magisterium make the Magisterium unsuitable as an object of idolatrous worship by the faithful.

Examples of things that are not Magisterial teachings

The fact that an idea is asserted by some person—other than a Bishop or the Pope—does not make that idea a teaching of the Magisterium, even if that person is a priest, deacon, religious, or theologian, and even if they claim that it is a teaching of the Magisterium or of the Church. Only a teaching of a Bishop or the Pope can be considered a teaching of the Magisterium.

The Bishop, group of Bishops, or the Pope must be teaching in their official role as Bishop or Pope, not merely speaking as a private person, in order for a teaching to fall under the Magisterium. Personal remarks, such as that the Pope favors a particular book or a particular private revelation, do not constitute a teaching of the Magisterium. Comments in personal letters or in a book written as a private person also do not rise to the level of a teaching of the Magisterium. Even if a Cardinal or Bishop or Pope were to write a book of theology, published as a private person, not as an official magisterial document, the assertions of that book would not, in and of themselves, constitute teachings of the Magisterium.

The mere location of a document on the official Vatican web site (vatican.va) is not sufficient to make that document or its contents the official teaching of the Magisterium. Papal documents and documents by Congregations of the Holy See are and must be clearly marked as such, in order for their contents to be considered teachings of the Magisterium.

The mere mention of an idea in a document of the Magisterium does not establish that idea as a teaching of even the Ordinary Magisterium. The mere mention of an idea in sermon or talk given by a Bishop or Pope does not establish that idea as a teaching of even the Ordinary Magisterium. Things that are asserted in a document or talk, when illustrating or introducing a particular point, are not official teachings of even the Ordinary Magisterium. The idea must be asserted in some manner as a teaching of the Church, or of Christ, or of the Faith, or of Tradition, or of Scripture, or it must in some other manner indicate that the idea is more than an idea or a consideration, but a part of the Faith. The mere fact that a Bishop or Pope themselves believes an idea, is not sufficient to make that idea a teaching of the Magisterium.

Only when a Bishop or Pope asserts that a truth is found in Tradition or Scripture, at least implicitly, can an idea be considered a teaching of the Magisterium. Now this assertion can be implied, as when a Bishop or Pope states or implies that an idea is of Christ, or is part of the Faith, or any such similar statement. If a Bishop or Pope merely mentions an idea, even if he asserts it as true, such is not sufficient to make that mention a teaching of the Magisterium.

The Process of Development of Doctrine

The Magisterium can only teach from Tradition and Scripture. But the teachings of the Magisterium, as the centuries pass, tend to come more and more from a development of doctrine, that is, from teachings only implicit in Tradition and Scripture. How do these teachings develop, moving from implicit teachings in the Deposit of Faith to explicit teachings of the Magisterium? Do the Bishop regularly meet and discuss their latest theological insights? Does this process of Bishops discussing theology eventually lead to a new teaching of the Magisterium? This should be common, but it is rare.

Generally, new insights into Tradition or Scripture develop first outside of the Magisterium. As the faithful, including laypersons, religious, deacons, priests, and Bishops, live the faith and meditate upon Tradition and Scripture, they arrive at new insights into the Faith. (The Bishops do not participate in this process as much as they should, but then neither does any of these groups.) These new insights develop as they are lived and discussed among the faithful. They develop through prayer and through writing. Other members of the faithful hear about these insights and they also participate in this development process: they pray and write and meditate and discuss and live the Faith.

Eventually the new insight encounters significant opposition. It is almost inevitable that some persons will piously doubt the insight and suggest other possible explanations on that point of doctrine. Sometimes the controversy develops such that the new insight has very broad opposition. Long ago, when the idea of the Immaculate Conception was a controversial idea and not yet an infallible doctrine, it had broad opposition. In some other cases, the idea, or its proponent, is condemned by some Bishops who do not agree with the insight. Such was the case with Henri de Lubac (whose ideas eventually influenced the Second Vatican Council).

Many years or decades or centuries later, the Magisterium then begins to teach the new insight as part of its ordinary teaching. The faithful continue to pray and to live this teaching, which originated in their midst. Then, after many more years have passed and the teaching has become widely accepted, the Magisterium may define the teaching infallibly.

Now the situation varies with different ideas and teachings. Sometimes the idea changes very significantly during the development process. Sometimes an idea that seems like a new insight into the faith is actually a heresy that is eventually infallibly condemned by the Magisterium. The process may be short and quick in a few cases, but it is generally (wisely) a longer process involving very many persons and years. But in either case, seldom does the new insight originate with the Magisterium. Even if a Bishop or a Pope were the one who began the process, he begins it as a private person having an individual insight into the Faith; a new insight does not and generally cannot go immediately into the teaching of the Magisterium. It must be tested by the faithful first. Therefore, the ability and authority of the faithful to consider new insights into the Faith is essential to the proper functioning of the Magisterium. For the Magisterium does not exist to exalt itself, but to serve the faithful. And all those in whom the Magisterium resides are also members of the faithful.

Consider the story of Jonah’s preaching. The idea (repent) begins with one man, Jonah. It spreads to the common people of the city. Finally, it reaches those in authority and they make it official, even though nearly all the common people are already following the idea.

{3:4} And Jonah began to enter into the city one day’s journey. And he cried out and said, “Forty days more and Nineveh shall be destroyed.”
{3:5} And the men of Nineveh believed in God. And they proclaimed a fast, and they put on sackcloth, from the greatest all the way to the least.
{3:6} And word reached the king of Nineveh. And he rose from his throne, and he threw off his robe from himself and was clothed in sackcloth, and he sat in ashes.
{3:7} And he cried out and spoke: “In Nineveh, from the mouth of the king and of his princes, let it be said: Men and beasts and oxen and sheep may not taste anything. Neither shall they feed or drink water.
{3:8} And let men and beasts be covered with sackcloth, and let them cry out to the Lord with strength, and may man be converted from his evil way, and from the iniquity that is in their hands.
{3:9} Who knows if God may turn and forgive, and may turn away from his furious wrath, so that we might not perish?”

In the story of Jonah: First, the truth is taught unofficially, even controversially, by Jonah. Then, the people generally accept and act upon that truth by fasting. Lastly, king makes this truth official and proclaims the fast.

In the Magisterium: First, the truth is taught unofficially, even controversially, by some few members of the faithful (including ordained and non-ordained persons), who learned the truth directly from Tradition and Scripture. Then, more members of the faithful gradually learn and accept that truth. Lastly, the Bishops and the Pope teach this truth under the Magisterium, first non-infallibly and much later infallibly.

If this is the plan and will of God, then so be it.


by Ronald L. Conte Jr.
March 3, 2006