Rejection/acceptance of a "teaching"

[choose_to_love]

Every so often in online discussion, I find that someone will make the claim that, and I’m somewhat paraphrasing here, “a teaching of the Magisterium must be accepted by the faithful to be binding/legit”, or conversely, if “a teaching is rejected by the faithful/People of God, then it is not binding/true”. I have asked for citations, but the one reference I got to canon law (around C. 750, give or take a few sections) did not seem to address those issues at all.

Has anyone encountered this argument? Is it expounded or explained anywhere? I am assuming someone must have published this position somewhere along the line.

 

[Joe_5859]

Yes, I’ve heard such arguments before. I think a lot of it comes from a misinterpretation of passages like 35Lumen Gentium regarding the sensus fidei – the “sense of the faith/ful”.

Unfortunately, some people take this to the extreme to mean that, if the majority of Catholics don’t agree with a doctrine, then it’s not really a Catholic doctrine. That’s a severe misunderstanding of what the sensus fidei is all about.

The sensus fidei is more about looking at history to see what the Church as a whole has held to be true consistently. Instead, these people want to turn into some negative check-and-balance for the “hierarchy” so that it means that, if Catholics reject something en masse, it is no longer part of the deposit of faith.

 

[Ubenedictus]

Let me try

Every so often in online discussion, I find that someone will make the claim that, and I’m somewhat paraphrasing here, “a teaching of the Magisterium must be accepted by the faithful to be binding/legit”

this is true ‘faith is assent to the whole truth…’ not just chosing

, or conversely, if “a teaching is rejected by the faithful/People of God, then it is not binding/true”.

VERY WRONG. What we think does not and cannot turn truth to lie. A revealed truth remains truth even if none of the faithful agree

I have asked for citations, but the one reference I got to canon law (around C. 750, give or take a few sections) did not seem to address those issues at all.

Has anyone encountered this argument? Is it expounded or explained anywhere? I am assuming someone must have published this position somewhere along the line.

i think d ccc par 144 dowards will help.
Ubenedictus

 

[Ubenedictus]

Let me try this is true ‘faith is assent to the whole truth…’ not just chosing VERY WRONG. What we think does not and cannot turn truth to lie. A revealed truth remains truth even if none of the faithful agree

I have asked for citations, but the one reference I got to canon law (around C. 750, give or take a few sections) did not seem to address those issues at all.

 

[choose_to_love]

Ubenedictus: I know that the arguments proposed in my initial post are nonsense, but my point is that I have seen these positions seriously advanced. I suspect that there is some person or persons who have laid out this argument somewhere online. I would like to know where, not because I think it is right, but so I can argue against it from the source.

ETA: for an example, read almost any lengthy comment stream at the National Catholic Reporter. On the one hand it’s a hoot, but on the other hand it is sobering that people actually believe these sorts of things.

 

[fix]

Every so often in online discussion, I find that someone will make the claim that, and I’m somewhat paraphrasing here, “a teaching of the Magisterium must be accepted by the faithful to be binding/legit”, or conversely, if “a teaching is rejected by the faithful/People of God, then it is not binding/true”. I have asked for citations, but the one reference I got to canon law (around C. 750, give or take a few sections) did not seem to address those issues at all.

Has anyone encountered this argument? Is it expounded or explained anywhere? I am assuming someone must have published this position somewhere along the line.

I would ask them how many must reject it for it to be nonbinding? I would ask if the holy Spirit contradicts Himself telling the pope one thing and other people other things? I would ask who is the authority?

 

[choose_to_love]

@fix: yeah, I know, it’s kind of a down the rabbit hole kind of thing, but in my experience anyone who would advance the theories proposed above will just say that the pope/magisterium is wrong in the case of conflict between “the people of God” and the pope/magisterium. They hint and imply that it is based in canon law and/or Vatican I, but no one can ever seem to provide a definitive citation.

 

[Ubenedictus]

Ubenedictus: I know that the arguments proposed in my initial post are nonsense, but my point is that I have seen these positions seriously advanced. I suspect that there is some person or persons who have laid out this argument somewhere online. I would like to know where, not because I think it is right, but so I can argue against it from the source.

ETA: for an example, read almost any lengthy comment stream at the National Catholic Reporter. On the one hand it’s a hoot, but on the other hand it is sobering that people actually believe these sorts of things.

sorry for the misunderstanding, im a bit jumpy.
Ubenedictus

 

[StevenFrancis]

This is from the CCC. Does this help at all? It’s my understanding that we are to be obedient to the magisterium regarding all matters of faith and morals which are promulgated as articles of the faith.

The teaching office

888 Bishops, with priests as co-workers, have as their first task “to preach the Gospel of God to all men,” in keeping with the Lord’s command.415 They are “heralds of faith, who draw new disciples to Christ; they are authentic teachers” of the apostolic faith "endowed with the authority of Christ."416

889 In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a “supernatural sense of faith” the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, "unfailingly adheres to this faith."417

890 The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals. the exercise of this charism takes several forms:

891 “The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals… the infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,” above all in an Ecumenical Council.418 When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine "for belief as being divinely revealed,"419 and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions "must be adhered to with the obedience of faith."420 This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.421