StatCounter - Free Web Tracker and Counter

Theological Dissent and Authority in the Catholic Church

Synopsis

In this essay I have first explained the distinction between teachings of the Catholic Church which require the complete assent of the faithful, and teachings from which dissent is permissible. I have then summarised the Catholic position in regard to freedom of conscience and the role of the Magisterium.

Particular attention is next given to the living tradition of the Church as a source of Divine Revelation. I will argue that it is the task of the Church to continually listen and reflect prayerfully as it endeavours to faithfully present the truth of the gospel to each succeeding generation. However in its efforts to shine the light of the gospel on problems of the human condition, I will point out that those who teach with the authority of the Church can sometimes be in error, and it will be argued that whenever those in authority fail in their responsibility to listen for the voice of the Spirit in its many diverse manifestations, the risk of error is increased.

I will also suggest that the Church's attitude towards dissent has been and remains somewhat ambivalent despite the relatively recent publication of norms for expressing dissent within the Church.

Finally I will argue that lively debate and the opportunity to express dissent in appropriate ways is essential for the ongoing health of the Church.

Essay

A central belief of the Catholic Church is that it has been entrusted with the task of preserving and teaching the truth revealed by God. It is a further belief that in certain circumstances when carrying out its teaching role the Church cannot be in error. The special exercising of their teaching office by either the Pope and bishops together, or the Pope alone when speaking ex cathedra on a matter of faith or morals (Extraordinary Magisterium) is one such circumstance. Where there is complete agreement, or fairly close to complete agreement, among the Catholic Bishops of the world that a particular doctrine is certainly true, even without a solemn definition (an exercise of the Church's Ordinary Universal Magisterium) the Church would also claim infallibility. [1] This flows from the conviction that "the whole body of the faithful cannot err in matters of belief. And this characteristic is shown in the supernatural sense of the faith of the whole people when from the bishops to the last of the faithful they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals" [2]

It clearly follows then that individual Catholics are obliged to give assent to those doctrines that are fundamental to the very identity of what it means to be Catholic. What is less clear is the degree of assent required to statements and teachings proclaimed in the course of the exercise of the Church's Ordinary Magisterium. Included in this category would be Papal encyclicals, the teaching of individual Bishops in their dioceses, statements issued by regional Bishops Conferences, Instructions issued by the various Sacred Congregations of the Vatican etc. It should also be noted that not all statements and documents of the Ordinary Magisterium carry equal authority, but nevertheless the obligation on Catholics to obey the Church's official teaching authority in its various forms, is a serious one. "In matters of faith and morals the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent of the soul."[3]

At the same time Catholics are also required to follow their conscience. As the catechism states "Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters." [4]

Of course not only is there an obligation to follow one's conscience, there is also an obligation to develop a correctly formed conscience. A conscience is formed through a sincere search for the truth. Once recognized, the truth then ought be the basis for freely choosing one's course of action, whilst still remaining open to changing that way of acting if it is subsequently learned that what one believed to be true turns out to be false. As noted above, since the Church believes that it is the principal custodian of the truth revealed by God, it is expected that it is to the Church that the individual catholic must look for guidance for the correct formation of conscience.

The essence of the Church's mission is to proclaim the gospel. In this it clearly has the duty and responsibility to be faithful to the teaching and message of Jesus. It is part of the role of the Pope and Bishops to protect the deposit of faith - God's Revelation that is preserved in the writings of both the Old and New Testaments and the Tradition of the Church. Together the Pope and bishops constitute the authentic Magisterium of the Church and as noted above, even their non-infallible teaching is owed a 'presumption of truth' on the part of the Catholic faithful. The Magisterium of the Church also has the right and duty to correct and discipline those in error. [5] This authority however is derived from the gospels and its use must reflect the values of the gospel. It is exercised in a spirit of service rather than of power or control. [6]

The different manifestations of God's Revelation stem from a common source - the Holy Spirit. "Christ speaks to all his members through the Holy Spirit in their minds and consciences and through the gospel which he delivered to the apostles and which they handed on in two forms, a collection of writings (the New Testament) which remains normative for the Church, and the living tradition of the Church." [7]

This living tradition means that "the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and interpreting them in the light of the gospel." [8] A living tradition also means that the truths of faith must be presented anew to each generation in appropriate language making use of new symbols and new formulations. [9]

Thus it is a responsibility of all in the Church, especially those who exercise a teaching role, that they be attentive to the voice of the Spirit, first in their own hearts, secondly in the hearts of the whole body of the faithful and finally even in voices that may be from outside of the Church. The whole Church is therefore first of all a listening Church. [10] Whilst bishops have an important teaching role in the Church, it is not an exclusive role. In fact the primary role of bishops is a pastoral one. Priests, theologians, catholic teachers and initially, and arguably most importantly, catholic parents, all teach in the name of the Church. The whole Church is therefore also a teaching Church. [11]

If the Church is both listening and teaching, it follows that it is also thinking. This process of thinking and reflection must be in the context of prayer if the Church is to be attentive to the Holy Spirit. Finally discussion and dialogue must also form part of the discernment process if the Church is to be truly open to the action of the Spirit and faithful to its mission. [12]

This dialogue is also something that is engaged in with those outside the Church. Insights gained from fields of study such as biology, psychology and sociology have much to offer in the quest for truth.
"With the help of the Holy Spirit it is the task of the entire people of God, especially pastors and theologians, to hear, distinguish, and interpret the many voices of our age and to judge them in the light of the Divine Word. In this way revealed truth can always be more deeply penetrated, better understood, and set forth to greater advantage." [13]

Despite its divine origin and the promise of Christ to always be with it (Matt 28:20) the Church also remains a human institution. Despite its call to holiness it can also be a sinful Church. Thus there can be times when 'the presumption of truth' that is to be afforded the Magisterium can be undermined. If the New Testament model of authority as leadership and service is replaced by the exercise of power and control, or if the administrative structure of the Church comes to be seen as the authority rather than as an instrument of the authority then the Magisterium loses credibility. If those who teach in the name of the Church fail in their responsibility to listen and engage in dialogue, or act from expediency, political considerations or some other lesser motive, then the authority of the Church is weakened. [14]

Historically the Church has functioned through a variety of structures due in part to the need to adapt to the prevailing historical and cultural context at a particular time. The current identification of the Magisterium with the Pope, Bishops and Roman Curia for example, is a relatively recent development. [15] A danger associated with the centralization of the Church's teaching authority in this way is that the voice of the Spirit may be stifled. If the Magisterium is largely male, celibate and European in its composition for example one can legitimately ask how open is the Church to the insights offered by women? or members of the laity? or how open is it to different cultural patterns of thinking?

The reality too is that history is replete with many examples of statements of the Church's Ordinary Magisterium that have subsequently been judged to have been in error. The condemnation of Galileo, the excommunication of Mary McKillop, the development of the doctrine of religious freedom are just three examples. Given all of this, how then should a theologian, or any individual member of the Church for that matter, respond on finding that in good conscience they cannot agree with non-infallible Church teaching?

Part of the role of the theologian is to assist the Church in its striving to ensure that its teaching accurately reflects the gospel at a particular time and in a particular culture. In fulfilling this role it is recognized that the theologian requires an appropriate freedom of research that is nevertheless exercised within the context of the faith of the Church [16]

Whilst the Council Fathers at Vatican II did not explicitly teach the legitimacy of dissent from non-infallible Church teaching, it implied that such dissent could be legitimate. It was left first to the German Bishops in a pastoral letter in 1967, and secondly to the United States Bishops in a pastoral letter issued the following year, to set out some norms for such dissent. [17] These norms can be summarised as follows. The reasons for the dissent must be serious and well-founded and expressed only after long and careful consideration in which the theologian's own motivations are examined and reflected upon. Appropriate deference must be given to the wisdom of the wider Church which is entitled to the 'presumption of truth' noted earlier. The manner in which the dissent is expressed is also important. The expression of dissent must not question or impugn the teaching authority of the Church, nor must it give scandal. [18] Finally the distinction between a privately held belief and what is taught in the name of the Church is stressed "even responsible dissent does not excuse one from faithful presentation of the authentic doctrine of the Church when one is performing a pastoral ministry in her name"[19]

Throughout its history the Church has struggled to achieve a balance between the need to preserve the purity and truth of its teaching, and the need to apply the teachings of the gospel to new times and situations. It has not always been successful in achieving that balance. Probably it would be fair to say it has tended to err on the side of caution and has been slow to adapt or modify its teaching. At the same time the Church has a long tradition of recognizing prophets in its midst (albeit often belatedly). Catherine of Sienna is an example of a laywoman who was able to successfully challenge the Church leadership of her day. Nevertheless it would also be fair to say that the Church has been, and still remains, uncomfortable with the idea of internal dissent. It would be more inclined to regard dissent as a problem with which to be dealt rather than an opportunity to reach a deeper understanding of the truth. As McCormick suggests, the real problem facing the Church is not the dissent itself but how to constructively use dissent. [20]

Critical evaluation is essential for doctrinal development. Without vigorous debate and open discussion, teaching becomes indoctrination, the action of the Spirit is blocked and the search for truth compromised. In practice too, the suppression of dissent can be counterproductive. Heavy handed silencing of theologians or critics of the Church can fuel the suspicion that the collective wisdom of the Church is not been used to formulate a particular position, thus providing further grounds for dissent. [21] A coercive ecclesial atmosphere therefore weakens the teaching authority of the Church whilst denying itself the gift of the insights that may be otherwise offered by theologians. It can be destructive of the morale of those within the Church and can reduce the laity to the role of passive recipients. In an age where generally speaking the laity is highly educated (at least in the western world) such an approach is both inappropriate and alienating. The modern catholic looks to a Magisterium that attempts to inspire, enlighten, lead, invite and encourage rather than control. [22]

FOOTNOTES

[1] J Young,
The Church's Magisterium
Online article at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/jyoung.html

[2] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, 4
as listed and published on the Internet at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/doc_doc_index.htm

[3] 'Lumen Gentium' (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church) 25 in "The Documents of Vatican II"
Walter J Abbott SJ (ed)
(Geoffrey Chapman, London 1967) p48

[4] Catechism of the Catholic Church 1782
Online edition at www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

[5] R A McCormick SJ
Corrective Visions: Explorations in Moral Theology,
(Sheed & Ward 1994) p82

[6] R Murray SJ,
"The Teaching Church and the Thinking Church"
in The Month 23 (1990:8) p313

[7] Murray "The Teaching Church and the Thinking Church" p312

[8] "Gaudium et Spes" (Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World) 4 in "The Documents of Vatican II"
Walter J Abbott SJ (ed)
(Geoffrey Chapman, London 1967) p201

[9] McCormick Corrective Visions: Explorations in Moral Theology, p74

[10] Murray "The Teaching Church and the Thinking Church" p312

[11] Murray "The Teaching Church and the Thinking Church" p313

[12] Murray "The Teaching Church and the Thinking Church" p312

[13] Gaudium et Spes 44

[14] McCormick Corrective Visions: Explorations in Moral Theology, p73

[15] Murray "The Teaching Church and the Thinking Church" p314

[16] Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, 11

[17] A Dulles,
"Authority and Conscience"
Readings in Moral Theology No 6, p108

[18] Dulles, Readings in Moral Theology No 6, pp108-109

[19] National Conference of [USA] Catholic Bishops,
Norms of Licit Theological Dissent
in Curran & McCormick, Readings in Moral Theology No 6, p128

[20] McCormick Corrective Visions: Explorations in Moral Theology, p76

[21] McCormick Corrective Visions: Explorations in Moral Theology, pp76-80

[22] McCormick Corrective Visions: Explorations in Moral Theology, p97

Bibliography

Abbott, Walter M, SJ (ed)
The Documents of Vatican II
Geoffrey Chapman,London 1967

Catechism of the Catholic Church
Online edition at www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian as listed and published on the Internet at http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/doc_doc_index.htm

Dulles, Avery
"Authority and Conscience" Readings in Moral Theology No 6, pp97-111

McCormick R A
The Search for Truth in the Catholic Context Ch6 and Theologians and the Magisterium Ch 7 in Corrective Visions: Explorations in Moral Theology, Sheed & Ward 1994

Murray, Robert SJ,
"The Teaching Church and the Thinking Church" in "The Month" 23 (1990:8)310-319

National Conference of [USA] Catholic Bishops,
Norms of Licit Theological Dissent in Curran & McCormick, Readings in Moral Theology No 6, pp127-128

Weakland, Rembert G
The Price of Orthodoxy in Readings in Moral Theology No 6, pp184-188

Young, John
"The Church's Magisterium"
Online article at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/jyoung.html

Return to Essays Page

HOME

1