Which introduces the next problem with +Williamson's EC regarding the "living magisterium" to reformulate perennial truths to a changing world. This is the same thing Pope John XXIII said in his opening remarks at Vatican II, and it was the core principle of Pope Benedict XVI "hermeneutic of continuity" which directly referenced John XXIII's quotation.
Your term "reformulate" does not appear in the EC. Doesn't the "living magisterium" simply apply unvarying truths to contemporary situations? Vatican II fathers abused this principle to introduce ambiguity. This then served as a shield of plausible deniability for heresy.
The "living magisterium" can be defended from such abuse without it being discarded. Or if we judge this term as having been ruined, how should we now refer to the principle of applying the unvarying truths to contemporary situations?
Columba:
"Church needs living Masters to vary all the time the presentation and explanation of the unvarying truths."
Well, if the "Masters" must "vary all the time" the "unvarying truths" there is a problem. It ultimately means that we follow the "Masters" and not the "truths." I have called this change in "presentation" a "reformulation" of those truths. I do not think that this is an unfair characterization of what is being said.
EC is not intended as a theological treatise and I am not a theologian anyway, so I am not trying to make any accusation against +Williamson, whom I personally like and respect very much, based upon an informal communication such as EC. However, I have exchanged communications with Bishop Williamson in the past regarding my concerns about two points that I know to be absolutely essential to the defense of the Catholic faith. The first is the primacy and immutability of dogma, and the second is the fact that immemorial ecclesiastical traditions are not, and cannot be, matters of mere discipline.
The
"unvarying truths" are just that. They are the dogmatic formulations that constitute the formal objects of divine and Catholic faith. They are expressed in the form of universal categorical propositions that can only be always and everywhere true or always and everywhere false. They are revealed truths from God Himself and it is because He reveals them that we believe them. No human authority whatsoever has the right to
"vary all the time" these
"unvarying truths." The function of the Church authority, as Bishop Williamson said, is
"to guard and expound faithfully.... the Deposit of Faith" and the faithful "exposition" of doctrine is what dogma is. And this faithful exposition is infallibly true because it is the work of the Holy Ghost which Jesus Christ promised to His Church,
"the Spirit of truth... (that) will teach you all truth..... he shall shew you. He shall glorify me; because he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it to you. All things whatsoever the Father hath, are mine. Therefore I said, that he shall receive of mine, and shew it to you." (John 16:13-15) Dogma is the Holy Ghost "shewing" the "truth." To claim that the infallible "exposition" requires further non-infallible "exposition" by a "living magisterium" is to destroy the very idea of infallibility. This is why the Church has taught that dogma is suitable for all the faithful. Its tools for understanding are correct grammar and proper definition of terms, not a necessary theological competency.
The term
"living magisterium" is not a legitimate theological term but rather a neologism employed to further an ideology. I am not aware of it having any historical usage before 1900. Fr. Jean Vincent Bainvel, S.J. may have actually coined the term. He was the theological expert who wrote
"Tradition and the Living Magisterium" for the 1912 edition of the Catholic Encyclopedia. He is also the author of the book,
Is There Salvation Outside the Catholic Church?, in which he distinguishes between the soul of the Church and the Body of the Church and places schismatics, heretics, infidels, pagans, etc., on the road of salvation because they are members of the soul of the Church. This theology was officially articulated in the 1949 Holy Office Letter that censored Fr. Feeney's defense of the dogma EENS.
We see that a soul may belong to the Church in desire, without suspecting at all that there is such a thing as a Church… Is it not this desire that we spontaneously recognise in the case of our separated brethren, for example, in the case of Anglicans and the orthodox Russians, when we see them adhering to Christ by faith and by works of faith, yet all the while in invincible ignorance of the exclusive rights of the Roman Church? They are faithful sheep, yet they wander, unconsciously it is true, in the midst of a strange flock; but we regard them as members of the true flock of Christ because at heart, despite their errors, they are in the sheepfold of Christ. The same is the case, other things being equal, with those who live outside all visible relation with Christ of any of the Christian sects.” Is There Salvation Outside the Catholic Church?(Chap. 6, pp. 57-58)
Hence it will be understood that the living magisterium searches in the past, now for authorities in favour of its present thought in order to defend it against attacks or dangers of mutilation, now for light to walk the right road without straying. The thought of the Church is essentially a traditional thought and the living magisterium by taking cognizance of ancient formulas of this thought thereby recruits its strength and prepares to give to immutable truth a new expression which shall be in harmony with the circuмstances of the day and within reach of contemporary minds. [.....] There is, therefore in the Church progress of dogma, progress of theology, progress to a certain extent of faith itself, but this progress does not consist in the addition of fresh information nor the change of ideas. What is believed has always been believed, but in time it is more commonly and thoroughly understood and explicitly expressed. The Catholic Encyclopedia, "Tradition and the Living Magisterium," entry written by Fr. Jean Bainvel
Fr. Bainvel employs the
"living magisterium" in the
"progress of dogma" so that the
"immutable truths" that the Church has once dogmatically defined as necessary for salvation including Church membership, explicit faith, reception of the sacraments, and submission to the Roman Pontiff, are now understood with
"a new expression which is in harmony with the circuмstances of the day and within the reach of contemporary minds." If the term, "living magisterium" actually conveyed a legitimate concept rather than just a propaganda tool in the service of an ideology there would be common theological terms that formulate contrary concepts, like "dead magisterium" and "sick magisterium" etc. The term has come into common usage as a tool to justify
'varying all the time the unvarying truths' and deserves to be discarded.
The modernists theologically now argue that dogma is analogous to a living plant, like an oak tree, which changes over time yet remains the same tree. They say that the form of dogma is the perennial doctrinal truth and the matter is the historical language. The language is regarded as accidental to the dogma and thus any change of formulation is only an accidental change. This is what Pope John XXIII said at the opening of Vatican II which was approvingly referenced by Benedict XVI in his "hermeneutic of continuity" theology. If this characterization is accepted, it is the end of faith.
As St. Pius X said, "they are looking for that progress of dogmas which is, in reality, nothing but the corruption of dogmas." (Lamentabili). For example:
Citing Newman to support the fact that Catholic doctrine is developed according to the principle of analogy, I made the comparison with the way in which a plant or any living being grows: we have here that continuity in progress of which the Pope speaks. But this conjunction of continuity (permanence) and progress (change) is understood only if we consider the fact that a living being develops and evolves according to the principle of analogy; indeed, the merit of thinking by analogy is that it unites the identical (one) and the different (many).
If, instead, we stop at only a univocal type of thought, that conjunction
seems to us absurd and contradictory. In fact, for univocity development does not make the new rise from the old, but adds the new to the old without it becoming new. The growth of a living being—and thought is a vital phenonemon—is not like the construction of a building with some bricks, by which one floor is added to another, but is as if a building, already complete in itself from the beginning, were augmented in volume with the passage of time.
Fr. Giovanni Cavolcol, O.P., The Infallibility of Vatican II
The deposit of faith is no longer a deposit to be faithfully guarded and handed on but is now a "living being" that "evolves according to the principle of analogy." "To be” is replaced with “becoming;” the objective truth with changing subjective perceptions of that truth. The faith, according to these lights, will be better known by our children just as we know it better than our parents. This is nothing but a formula to destroy the faith.
Lamentabili[/i]]22. The dogmas the Church holds out as revealed are not truths which have fallen from heaven. They are an interpretation of religious facts which the human mind has acquired by laborious effort. CONDEMNED
The Magisterium is the office of the Church that corresponds to the attribute of infallibility. Living men occupy this office and can engage this power to teach infallibly. The living men change but the office and the power remains. When the truth is revealed is has a universal character. The understanding of that truth may be enriched but ultimately the objects of faith are not self-evident to the intellect. They are truths that the will by supernatural faith submits to. Our faith is incarnational and the formal objects of our faith are
"truths fallen from heaven." It is God Himself who has formulated these truths.
If we judge this term (living magisterium) as having been ruined, how should we now refer to the principle of applying the unvarying truths to contemporary situations?
The application of "unvarying truths to contemporary situations" is the field of moral theology and the Church has always done this from the beginning without employing the term "living magisterium." It is what every Catholic does to insure that he acts with conscience that is both true and certain. The correct application of unvarying principles to changing "situations" is what we are
"to do" to save our souls. But, the universal truths of faith are not contextualized by any historical "situation." They are objective truths revealed by God that are the formal objects of supernatural faith. They are what we are
"to know" and must know to save our souls.
We are forced to agree with those who hold that the chief cause of the present indifference and, as it were, infirmity of soul, and the serious evils that result from it, is to be found above all in ignorance of things divine.[......] It is a common complaint, unfortunately too well founded, that there are large numbers of Christians in our own time who are entirely ignorant of those truths necessary for salvation. [.....] Our Predecessor, Benedict XIV, had just cause to write: "We declare that a great number of those who are condemned to eternal punishment suffer that everlasting calamity because of ignorance of those mysteries of faith which must be known and believed in order to be numbered among the elect." [......] We pray and entreat you to reflect on the great loss of souls due solely to ignorance of divine things. St. Pius X, Acerbo Nimis
The only thing still needed for salvation after faith and keeping the commandments is
"to be" a child of God and that grace is given to us in the sacrament of Baptism.
Drew
Topic: ELEISON COMMENTS CCCLXVI (366) July 19,2014 A.D. (Read 41504 times)