Gorman 64,
For example, let’s say you and I lived under the papacy of John XXII, and had the honor to be present at one of his sermons. Let’s say that John XXII taught in this sermon that there is no Beatific Vision of God for anyone until the last judgment. This (at that time) was contrary to the “usual opinion” of the theologians. This begs the question: Did he intend to make such a seemingly erroneous teaching binding upon the faithful?
We are certain that he is indeed the Roman Pontiff (duly elected) and that we are to submit to his mind and will on doctrinal matters. But was he giving his theological opinion, or was he formally and authoritatively promulgating such a teaching as papal doctrine. That’s the question that must be discerned. But how? “His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.” (
Lumen Gentium, 25). Perhaps simply asking him what he meant is the better than charging him with heresy, no?
St. Pius X, in his allocution, said: "
Quando si ama una persona si cerca di uniformarsi in tutto ai suoi pensieri, di esequirne i voleri, di interpretarne i desideri." Which I think means roughly, "***
When one is loved, all of that person’s thoughts (pensieri), wills (voleri), and desires (desideri) are sought out (cerca, ie. “attempts, tries”) for assent *****(uniformasi, ie. “conformity”).
Thus, in our John XXII example, by virtue of his pastoral authority we owe our religious submission of intellect and will to the sermon of John XXII, but in accord with
his intent,
his thoughts, will, desire.
Now, in the above incident John XXII’s “enemies made use of [his teaching] to discredit him.” (
Catholic Encyclopedia - John XXII). Why? Because this was not the “usual opinion” of the theologians. How would you characterize the reaction of those who sought to discredit him? Does that sound like seeking (ie attempting, Ital. “
cerca”) to know that person’s thoughts (
pensieri), wills (
voleri), and desires (
desideri) so as to assent or conform (It. “
uniformasi”) to it?
Other more noble Catholics sought not to discredit him, but instead to better understand, to discuss, to answer the question: Did the Pope assert that which I am bound to assent or risk eternal salvation, or was it merely something he did not intend to make binding, and thus still a matter of free opinion? “Pope John wrote to King Philip IV on the matter (November, 1333), and emphasized the fact that, as long as the Holy See had not given a decision, the theologians enjoyed perfect freedom in this matter.” (ibid). So it appears that not every utterance from the pope, even in his sermons, is considered
sententia certa which is binding upon the all the faithful. Moreover, the Catholics who sought first to understand the mind of the Roman Pontiff were more nobel than those who sought to discredit him.
“John appointed a commission at Avignon to study the writings of the Fathers, and to discuss further the disputed question. In a consistory held on 3 January, 1334, the pope explicitly declared that he had never meant to teach aught contrary to Holy Scripture or the rule of faith and in fact had not intended to give any decision whatever. Before his death he withdrew his former opinion, and declared his belief that souls separated from their bodies enjoyed in heaven the Beatific Vision.” (ibid.).
With regard to scandal of “dissent”, Cardinal Ratzinger gave the following instruction:
Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of Theologian ****
