After getting some sleep, it was easier to follow the thread. It does indeed appear to be an unmistakeably infallible teaching, whether it’s ex cathedra or not. Even Hans Kung thought so, which really clinched it for me!
I really like the idea someone mentioned that even though the Pope has said it’s part of the ordinary Magisterium, his comment used ex cathedra type language, and maybe the Holy Spirit is trying to tell us something–cool! Perhaps some day it will be a dogma. Reading it, it certainly seems to me to be ex cathedra language…but it’s not, if the Pope says it’s not. Of course, if he
fallibly says it’s not…aaaarrghhh!!! Actually, the reason I feel it’s not ex cathedra, also, is that it really isn’t unmistakably clear, is it, if there’s any debate at all. If it were ex cathedra, the pro-women’s ordination people would keep quiet. No matter, it’s still infallible and binding.
Seriously, though, I maintain that I have a valid point and didn’t deserve the quasi-rebuke of that post. A new convert coming into the church with no Catholic exposure whatsoever, trying to sort through history and doctrine, faces quite a challenge. I’ve always been only interested in being faithful to the Magisterium. And yet, it’s been like pulling teeth to find answers to questions which all Catholics deserve to know
clearly. In an article in this month’s issue of This Rock, “Making Converts of Cradle Catholics”, the author puts it much more clearly than I did. She was referring to how to get the truths of the Faith across (evangelization), and said “We also must clarify how to discern the Church’s true voice and how to distinguish what cannot be changed from what can be altered as the Holy Spirit directs–in other words, distinguishing Tradition from traditions and doctrine from discipline.” Honestly, I still really don’t know
clearly what is Tradition and what is tradition. This does have a real-world implication, as in—if I can’t get some handle on what we believe and why, how am I ever going to answer my husband’s questions (he’s still a non-Catholic)? How can one do apologetics if you don’t have any answers
I maintain that this is a basic right of believers…we need to know what are the unchangeable doctrines, and what are simply disciplines, and what sort of adherence must be given to each. Why? Our salvation is at stake–I’d say it’s important to know what must be held as coming from Christ and what must be held definitively, as opposed to disciplines. Otherwise we find ourselves arguing as though against heretics about something like priestly celibacy, which isn’t an issue to get all excited about.
I think cradle Catholics just don’t realize how completely in the dark new converts are–and we aren’t getting the answers in RCIA, because–for instance, I would ask questions
in good faith, intending to be loyal, with no personal agendas (mostly because I was ignorant of the factions in the Church at the time), and people would get all defensive, and say things that only clouded the issue. Until I did much more reading, I felt like I had entered the Twilight Zone. It’s like the police say, I’d get “hinky” feelings. Now of course I understand that almost all the confusion is due to people who want to have their own way, regardless of what Christ’s and his church want. Now…maybe the posters of this thread are superhuman, saintly folks who are never tempted by despair, but I’m not one of them. I don’t seriously think you all are either, so don’t go getting all preachy on me, ok?
Yes, we must be obedient to all teachings, even disciplines (I
think, anyway–from what I’ve been able to figure out). But it’s important to teach clearly which is which.
That being said, this quote (from the same article) applies: “About Jesus Christ and the Church I simply know they’re just one thing, and we shouldn’t complicate the matter.” (St. Joan of Arc) Actually, for apologetics purposes, this may be enough. Just follow the Pope’s teachings, and don’t worry so much. Submitting to authority is a totally new experience for me, and really quite easy. But my brain is still formed by a lifetime of Lutheran theology. Intellectual protest and wanting “the answers” is not an easy zeitgeist to shake off.
I’ll grant that I was tired, didn’t read the whole thread, and interjected a personal thought into an intellectual discussion–sorry about that–but I maintain there seems to be a lot of pomposity going around. Oh yes, and how about a little sensitivity for the ordinary educated, reading and thinking new Catholic convert who feels like a sheep who fell in a ditch much of the time…hmmm?
God bless–I’ve learned a great deal from struggling through this complicated thread.
)
