Sin to disagree with Pope?

[Abu]

Ron Conte
Not only the Pope, but also the other Bishops of the Church, are able to exercise the authentic non-infallible teaching authority of the Church. Dissent from a non-infallible teaching can be licit, if one has a reason based on Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium.
The U.S. Bishops have taught that there are norms for licit dissent, in other words, that within certain limits the faithful may dissent from some non-infallible teachings. This teaching on the norms of licit dissent is a teaching of the Magisterium.
Other teachings are non-infallible – some faithful dissent is possible

The teaching of a Bishops Conference is in no sense the Magisterium, unless it is reaffirming the teaching of the Magisterium – Papal dogma or doctrine or of a papally approved Ecumenical Council.

catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=8279
November 15, 2010
“The national bishops’ conference exists to promote collaboration among bishops, not to replace their authority, Pope Benedict XVI said to a visiting group of bishops from Brazil on November 15.
“The episcopal conference ‘must avoid becoming a parallel reality or substituting for the ministry of each individual bishop,’ the Pope said.”

Bishops’ conferences may issue statements on moral and other doctrinal matters only if they pass with a unanimous vote or receive the prior approval of the Vatican, Pope John Paul, II said in his Apostolic Letter (July 23, 1998) The Theological and Juridical Nature of Episcopal Conferences, which said any authority national bishops’ conferences have is delegated to them or flows from their unity with the pope and the universal College of Bishops.

All talk of “licit dissent” is wrong as the Pope and the CDF have made very clear. No “reason” suffices.
Sections 25-31 cover **“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).

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.”

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.”

 

[Joab_Anias]

The link is to the document of a subsequent Pope who corrected his error.
This situation in the history of the Church is well-known, but here is a link that explains it further:
newadvent.org/cathen/08431a.htm

See the paragraph more than half the way through the article beginning with:
“In the last years of John’s pontificate there arose a dogmatic conflict about the Beatific Vision…”

I see that now. At first read I misread as John 23, not 22 so the dates looked off, thought it was a mistaken link and I didn’t get into it.