Let me joke a little bit and do not get angry:I never really got an answer to this question so I’m asking again.
- can two bishops disagree with each other over a non-infallible Church teaching (a teaching that allows licit dissent under certain conditions).
- if so, then which teaching is Magisterial?
There is no “licit dissent” under any “conditions” from any doctrine on faith or morals.fakename
can two bishops disagree with each other over a non-infallible Church teaching (a teaching that allows licit dissent under certain conditions).
There exist in the Church a lawful freedom of inquiry and of thought and also general norms of licit dissent. This is particularly true in the area of legitimate theological speculation and research. When conclusions reached by such professional theological work prompt a scholar to dissent from non-infallible received teaching the norms of licit dissent come into play. They require of him careful respect for the consciences of those who lack his special competence or opportunity for judicious investigation. These norms also require setting forth his dissent with propriety and with regard for the gravity of the matter and the deference due the authority which has pronounced on it.There is no “licit dissent” under any “conditions” from any doctrine on faith or morals.
There has never been, and is no, “licit dissent” as Pope John Paul II has confirmed: “It is sometimes claimed that dissent from the Magisterium is totally compatible with being a ‘good Catholic’ and poses no obstacle to the reception of the sacraments. This is a grave error that challenges the teaching office of the bishops of the United States and elsewhere.” [Meeting with US Bishops at Our Lady Queen of Angels Minor Seminary, Los Angeles, Sept 16, 1987].
There is no right to dissent and, in fact, this is because the teaching of Vatican II in the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, 25, is clear as to even non-infallible doctrine on faith or morals:
“This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme Magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will.”
False.fakename
There exist in the Church a lawful freedom of inquiry and of thought and also general norms of licit dissent.
Well, 1) that theologians have to defend religion is true, but the question is what does that religion hold? Clearly I think it holds that licit dissent is possible. So theologians could defend licit dissent.False.
Such a prejudice denigrates Blessed John Paul II whose straight talking you now know.
Sections 25-31 covers “not irreformable” teaching even for theologians in the Instruction On the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, (Donum Veritatis) [DV] 1990, for those who “feel” that they cannot give “intellectual assent,” they have “the duty to remain open to a deeper examination of the question.” (31).
For the non-infallible doctrines the Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, 23, affirms: “This kind of response cannot be simply exterior or disciplinary but must be understood within the logic of faith and under the impulse of obedience to the faith.”
And #36: “The freedom of the act of faith cannot justify a right to dissent.”
#37 has this caution:
“Moreover, the theologian who is not disposed to think with the Church (“sentire cum Ecclesia”) contradicts the commitment he freely and knowingly accepted to teach in the name of the Church.”
#38: “The right conscience of the Catholic theologian presumes not only faith in the Word of God whose riches he must explore, but also love for the Church from whom he receives his mission, and respect for her divinely assisted Magisterium. Setting up a supreme Magisterium of conscience in opposition to the Magisterium of the Church means adopting a principle of free examination incompatible with the economy of Revelation and its transmission in the Church and thus also with a correct understanding of theology and the role of the theologian. The propositions of faith are not the product of mere individual research and free criticism of the Word of God but constitute an ecclesial heritage. If there occur a separation from the Bishops who watch over and keep the apostolic tradition alive, it is the bond with Christ which is irreparably compromised(38).
(38) Cf. Paul VI, Apost. Exhort. Paterna cum benevolentia, n. 4: AAS 67 (1975)15.
Do you really believe that this person is intentionally denigrating the pope? If not, then why are doing so? Just to denigrate others and chase them away from the faith, or for some other reason?False.
Such a prejudice denigrates Blessed John Paul II whose straight talking you now know.
It is illogical to try to pit bishops against the Pope, especially after it is known what *Donum Veritatis *teaches, and that the Pope has admonished the bishops in post #4:Fakename, #8
the question is what does that religion hold? Clearly I think it holds that licit dissent is possible. So theologians could defend licit dissent.
what I quoted from EWTN was a pastoral letter that basically “let the cat out of the bag” as regards whether there exists licit dissent (which corrects and revises non-fallible doctrines). Bishops of the american hierarchy can be considered experts in their field and as such, it is highly unlikely that they would get it wrong and say that such a thing as licit dissent did exist when it didn’t.