My qualifications as a Roman Catholic theologian

[Pontifex]

To quote the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith in its instruction on the ecclesial vocation of the theologian, I also found this passage where you have assisted me in better understanding the degree of authority of the Church when it comes to its prudential order.

'When it comes to the question of interventions in the prudential order, it could happen that some Magisterial documents might not be free from all deficiencies. Bishops and their advisors have not always taken into immediate consideration every aspect or the entire complexity of a question. But it would be contrary to the truth, if, proceeding from some particular cases, one were to conclude that the Church's Magisterium can be habitually mistaken in its prudential judgments, or that it does not enjoy divine assistance in the integral exercise of its mission. In fact, the theologian, who cannot pursue his discipline well without a certain competence in history, is aware of the filtering which occurs with the passage of time. This is not to be understood in the sense of a relativization of the tenets of the faith. The theologian knows that some judgments of the Magisterium could be justified at the time in which they were made, because while the pronouncements contained true assertions and others which were not sure both types were inextricably connected. Only time has permitted discernment and, after deeper study, the attainment of true doctrinal progress.'

[Ron Conte]

The document that you quote, Donum Veritatis (the gift of truth), is important in that it explicitly states that sometimes the Magisterium teaches infallibly, and other times non-infallibly. It also describes judgments of the prudential order by the Church in a way that makes clear that these are fallible.

DV argues against dissent from Magisterial teaching, while still allowing for the possibilty that a theologian might faithfully disagree with a non-infallible teaching.

My criticism of DV is that it [1] over-emphasizes the situation of unfaithful dissent versus obedience to the Magisterium, and [2] under-emphasizes the difficulty of legitimate faithful dissent versus the possibility that the non-infallible Magisterium might have erred.

However, there are some clear statements of the latter [2].

"Even when collaboration takes place under the best conditions, the possibility cannot be excluded that tensions may arise between the theologian and the Magisterium....

"If, despite a loyal effort on the theologian's part, the difficulties persist, the theologian has the duty to make known to the Magisterial authorities the problems raised by the teaching in itself, in the arguments proposed to justify it, or even in the manner in which it is presented. He should do this in an evangelical spirit and with a profound desire to resolve the difficulties. His objections could then contribute to real progress and provide a stimulus to the Magisterium to propose the teaching of the Church in greater depth and with a clearer presentation of the arguments."

[Pontifex]

Originally Posted by Ron Conte

The document that you quote, Donum Veritatis (the gift of truth), is important in that it explicitly states that sometimes the Magisterium teaches infallibly, and other times non-infallibly. It also describes judgments of the prudential order by the Church in a way that makes clear that these are fallible.

DV argues against dissent from Magisterial teaching, while still allowing for the possibilty that a theologian might faithfully disagree with a non-infallible teaching.

My criticism of DV is that it [1] over-emphasizes the situation of unfaithful dissent versus obedience to the Magisterium, and [2] under-emphasizes the difficulty of legitimate faithful dissent versus the possibility that the non-infallible Magisterium might have erred.

However, there are some clear statements of the latter [2].

"Even when collaboration takes place under the best conditions, the possibility cannot be excluded that tensions may arise between the theologian and the Magisterium....

"If, despite a loyal effort on the theologian's part, the difficulties persist, the theologian has the duty to make known to the Magisterial authorities the problems raised by the teaching in itself, in the arguments proposed to justify it, or even in the manner in which it is presented. He should do this in an evangelical spirit and with a profound desire to resolve the difficulties. His objections could then contribute to real progress and provide a stimulus to the Magisterium to propose the teaching of the Church in greater depth and with a clearer presentation of the arguments."

It seems though that because DV defines three levels of assent some will take this to mean that in effect the faithful are bound to accept and obey the teachings of the Church. No matter which current issue is being examined, we are under an obligation to have faith in our Tradition and in the Magisterium of the Church as well as in Scripture, and to exercise the obedience of faith. And this goes to your point that DV under-emphasizes the difficulty of legitimate faithful dissent versus the possibility that the non-infallible Magisterium might have erred.

[Ron Conte]

"One must therefore take into account the proper character of every exercise of the Magisterium, considering the extent to which its authority is engaged."

Infallible teachings require the full assent of faith (sacred assent in my terminology); no faithful dissent is possible, but some difference interpretation or application may be possible.

"Certainly, it is one of the theologian's tasks to give a correct interpretation to the texts of the Magisterium...."

Non-infallible teachings require the religious submission of will and intellect (ordinary assent); some faithful dissent is possible, to the same extent as the possibility of error, i.e. to a substantially limited extent. A difference in interpretation or application is also possible.

DV calls some authentic teachings of the magisterium 'non-infallible' and 'non-irreformable'.

Fallible decisions of the temporal authority, i.e. judgments of the prudential order, generally call for the adherence and cooperation of the faithful; some faithful disobedience is possible, since such decisions are fallible. Again, this is limited in extent because the Church's temporal authority, though fallible, was given to Her by Christ.

"For this same reason, magisterial decisions in matters of discipline, even if they are not guaranteed by the charism of infallibility, are not without divine assistance and call for the adherence of the faithful."

Decisions in matters of discipline, also called judgments of the prudential order, are not infallible. These decisions require neither the full assent of faith, nor the religious submission of will and intellect. They generally require adherence and cooperation, but some faithful disagreement with particular decisions in particular cases is possible.

"If, despite a loyal effort on the theologian's part, the difficulties persist, the theologian has the duty to make known to the Magisterial authorities the problems raised by the teaching in itself, in the arguments proposed to justify it, or even in the manner in which it is presented. He should do this in an evangelical spirit and with a profound desire to resolve the difficulties. His objections could then contribute to real progress and provide a stimulus to the Magisterium to propose the teaching of the Church in greater depth and with a clearer presentation of the arguments."

The theologian may disagree with a non-infallible teaching, or with a decision of discipline, even when the Pope is teaching or deciding, but more so when it is the local Bishop, or the local Conference of Bishops.

[zouxi]

God bless you Ron. It is such a blessing to know that there still exists a decent and faithful theologians devoted to write and cover thoroughly the majority of catholic theology fields...

When we have doubt we call Ron for explanation...
When we have a question we call Ron for an appropriate answer...

God bless you...

[ExCelciuS]

Originally Posted by zouxi

...
When we have doubt we call Ron for explanation...
When we have a question we call Ron for an appropriate answer...

God bless you...