 |
 |
 |
|
|
|---|
|
Rome maintains that the ban on women
priests has been infallibly decided by the ‘ordinary universal
magisterium’. However, Rome is mistaken about this presumed infallible
teaching by the ordinary universal magisterium on women priests, because the
five conditions required by Council documents have not been fulfilled.
What is the ‘ordinary universal
magisterium’?
Jesus Christ entrusted teaching authority to the Pope and the bishops,
who are the successors to Peter and the apostles. The question naturally
arises: do they only teach infallibly when they are assembled in an general
council? The answer is: no. The collective episcopate, united to the Holy
Father, can teach with its highest authority also when the bishops are
dispersed throughout the world.
The term ‘universal ordinary magisterium’ refers to the
concordant teaching of all Catholic bishops together with the Pope, outside the
rather rare occasions when the bishops are gathered in an ecumenical
council.
The First Vatican Council presupposed this universal ordinary
magisterium when it declared in its Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic
Faith: ‘All those things are to be believed with Catholic and divine
faith which are contained in the Word of God, written or handed on, and are
proposed by the Church either by a solemn judgment or by its ordinary and
universal magisterium as divinely revealed and to be believed as such’
(Denzinger-Schönmetz, no 3011).
Note. It is clear from the Acta of
Vatican I (Mansi 51,322) that the term ‘universal magisterium’ refers
to the teaching of the whole episcopate with the Pope, and not to the teaching
of the Pope alone, even when this is directed to the universal Church.
When does the universal ordinary magisterium teach
infallibly?
The Second Vatican Council described the universal ordinary magisterium
more precisely and expressed the conditions under which it operates:
“Although the individual bishops do not enjoy the prerogative of
infallibility, they nevertheless proclaim Christ's doctrine infallibly
whenever, even though dispersed through the world, but still maintaining the
bond of communion among themselves and with the successor of Peter, and
authentically teaching matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement on
one position as definitively to be held.” Lumen Gentium § 25d.
From this Council text and other texts on which it depends, five
conditions can clearly be recognised:
- Collegial action.
It is clear that the bishops must be
involved in a collegial exercise of teaching authority.
- As ‘judges’.
The bishops must be free to express
their own considered opinion.
- In the service of the faith of the whole Church.
The
bishops must listen to the Word of God and the ‘sensus fidelium’.
- Regarding faith and morals.
The teaching must concern
matters relating to the object of faith.
- In a teaching consciously imposed as
‘definitive’.
The bishops must want to impose the doctrine as
definitely to be held.
Now it is abundantly clear that these conditions have not been met in
the case of the ban on the ordination of women.
The theological principle should here be applied that “no
doctrine is understood to be infallibly defined unless it is clearly
established as such.” Canon
749, § 3.
Conclusion: Therefore, the question has not been decided
infallibly by the universal ordinary magisterium.
Read further about this:
- a detailed discussion of the five
conditions and why they have not been met.
- A summary of the assessment by key
theologians from around the world.
John Wijngaards
Follow @JohnWijngaards
Join our Women Priests' Mailing List
for occasional newsletters:
An email will be immediately sent to you
requesting your confirmation.
Please, credit this document
as published by www.womenpriests.org!