Skip to main content

Everything You wanted to know the Infallibility of the Catholic Church but were afraid to ask about - Part 7

Further along this theme, another resource on infallibility.

source



UNDERSTANDING THE INFALLIBILITY TEACHING

Are Catholics under the impression that unless a doctrine is infallibly  taught, they 
don't have to abide by it?

By Russell Shaw

 By declaring that the doctrine barring women's ordination as priests has  been taught 
infallibly, the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith cited the  infallibility 
of the "ordinary and universal magisterium." Quite apart from the women's ordination 
issue,  that was an unusual, important and widely misunderstood step.

 Many people seem to have thought the Nov. 18 statement was referring to  papal 
infallibility. That was the case, for example, with The New Republic, in an editorial  
criticizing the Vatican. Even Catholic News Service moved a story reporting that the 
doctrinal  congregation said the doctrine on women's ordination "has been taught 
'infallibly,' by Pope John Paul  II."

 That isn't exactly what the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith  said. The 
congregation did not speak of papal infallibility. It said the teaching on women's  
ordination "has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal magisterium."

 The distinction -- between papal infallibility and the infallibility of  the "ordinary and 
universal magisterium" -- is important. But because relatively little has been said  about 
the latter -- even the Vatican has been mum about it up to now -- the distinction isn't  
widely understood.

What it means

 Most people have some idea of what papal infallibility means. That dogma,  defined 
by the First Vatican Council and Pope Pius IX in 1870, affirms that God preserves the  
pope from error when he definitively teaches a doctrine of faith or morals.

 The dogma of papal infallibility was reaffirmed by the Second Vatican  Council (1962-
1965) in <Lumen Gentium> (the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church). Here, the  
council also made several other crucial points.

 One is that infallibility is essentially a gift of God to the Church.  When the pope 
teaches infallibly, one might say, he is exercising this divine gift on the Church's behalf.  
The same thing is true, the council remarks, when the pope and bishops convened in an 
ecumenical  council join in a solemn teaching act.

 Another important point made by Vatican II concerns the infallibility of  the "ordinary 
magisterium" -- that is, the teaching authority of bishops in union with  the pope, 
exercised in "ordinary" acts of teaching outside an ecumenical council.

 Not everything taught by bishops in union with the pope is infallibly  taught, but some 
things are. Section 25 of <Lumen Gentium> explains when.

 "Taken individually," it says, bishops "do not enjoy the privilege of  infallibility." Yet, 
under certain circumstances, they do "proclaim infallibly the doctrine of Christ."

 As written in <Lumen Gentium>, that is so "when, even though  dispersed throughout 
the world but preserving for all that amongst themselves and with Peter's successor  
[the pope] the bond of communion, in their authoritative teaching concerning matters 
of faith  and morals, they [the bishops] are in agreement that a particular teaching is to 
be held  definitively and absolutely."

 The Second Vatican Council teaching states that four conditions must be  met for an 
infallible exercise of the ordinary magisterium of bishops around the world. These  are:

 1. That the bishops be in communion with one another and with the pope.

 2. That they teach authoritatively on a matter of faith or morals.

 3. That they agree in one judgment.

 4. That they propose this as something to be held definitively by the  faithful.

Conditions met

 In appealing to the infallibility of "the ordinary and universal  magisterium," in its 
Nov. 18 statement, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith implicitly was  saying 
these conditions are met in the case of the teaching that women cannot be ordained as  
priests. The statement cited <Lumen Gentium>.

 The doctrinal congregation did not develop this argument. Presumably,  though, it was 
making the point that, whenever in the history of the Church the question of  ordaining 
women as priests has come up, bishops with virtual -- though not necessarily absolute -
-  unanimity have taken the position that it simply cannot be done because it is contrary 
to the will  of Christ.

 Not much has been said about the infallibility of the ordinary  magisterium since 
Vatican II adopted and Pope Paul VI approved <Lumen Gentium> in 1964. For  
obvious reasons, this is not a doctrine dissenting theologians call attention to. Even the 
Vatican has  said very little about it, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church barely 
alludes to it (see no. 891).

 In 1978, however, two American moral theologians -- Jesuit Father John  Ford and 
Germain Grisez -- published what is probably the most important theological  article to 
date analyzing and applying Vatican II's doctrine.

 The article, in the journal Theological Studies, argued at length that  the teaching that 
every act of contraception is intrinsically wrong has been proposed infallibly by the  
ordinary magisterium.

 In reaching this conclusion, Father Ford and Grisez traced the history of  the teaching 
on contraception over many centuries and examined the manner in which it was  
proposed by countless bishops in their individual exercise of teaching authority.

 Even if a substantial number of bishops now or at some time in the future  were to be 
doubtful about the teaching or not accept it, that would have no bearing on the  fact 
that the conditions for infallible teaching already have been met, they argued.

 The Father Ford-Grisez thesis has not been widely embraced by  theologians, and the 
Vatican officially has not said anything about it. But their argument, though  
challenged or ignored by dissenters, has never been refuted. And, as they pointed out 
at the time,  the same argument, if correct, applies not only to contraception but also to 
many other matters  taught by the ordinary magisterium.

 In a Nov. 24 address to members of the Congregation for the Doctrine of  the Faith, 
Pope John Paul expressed regret that many Catholics apparently think they are at  
liberty to dismiss doctrines they don't agree with unless it is formally stated that they 
are  infallibly proposed.

 Different teachings do have different degrees of authority, he said. But  he added, 
"That does not authorize people to think that pronouncements and doctrinal decisions 
of  the magisterium require irrevocable assent only when it presents them with a 
solemn judgment or  definitive act."

 The Pope's regret was well-founded. Apparently, the Vatican concluded  that nothing 
less than invoking infallibility would put an end to pressure for women's  ordination -- 
and it remains to be seen whether even that will work.

 In basing its case against ordaining women on the infallibility of the  ordinary 
magisterium, however, the Vatican has made use of a tool with many other applications  
besides this one. When, whether and in what context it will use the tool again are 
weighty  questions.

Shaw is Our Sunday Visitor's Washington correspondent and director of  public 
information for the Knights of Columbus

This article was taken from the December 17, 1995 issue of Our Sunday Visitor. To 
subscribe write Our Sunday Visitor, Inc, Huntington, In 46750. 

Our Sunday Visitor is published weekly at a subscription rate of $36.00 per year. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
   
Provided courtesy of:
Eternal Word Television Network
5817 Old Leeds Road
Irondale, AL 35210
www.ewtn.com

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...