Tea at Trianon: The Indefectibility of the Church

John Wilson Croker on Marie-Antoinette

"We have followed the history of Marie Antoinette with the greatest diligence and scrupulosity. We have lived in those times. We have talked with some of her friends and some of her enemies; we have read, certainly not all, but hundreds of the libels written against her; and we have, in short, examined her life with– if we may be allowed to say so of ourselves– something of the accuracy of contemporaries, the diligence of inquirers, and the impartiality of historians, all combined; and we feel it our duty to declare, in as a solemn a manner as literature admits of, our well-matured opinion that every reproach against the morals of the queen was a gross calumny– that she was, as we have said, one of the purest of human beings."

~from History of the Guillotine by John Wilson Croker, 1844

Edmund Burke on Marie-Antoinette

"It is now sixteen or seventeen years since I saw the queen of France, then dauphiness, at Versailles; and surely there never lighted on this orb, which she hardly seemed to touch, a more delightful vision. I saw her just above the horizon, decorating and cheering the elevated sphere she had just begun to move in, glittering like a morning star full of life and splendor and joy. Oh, what a revolution....Little did I dream that I should have lived to see such disasters fall upon her, in a nation of gallant men, in a nation of men of honor and of cavaliers! I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards, to avenge even a look which threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone; that of sophisters, economists, and calculators has succeeded...."

~Edmund Burke, October 1790

Monday, November 20, 2017

The Indefectibility of the Church

From Emmett O'Regan writing for La Stampa:

In the ongoing debate surrounding the authority of Amoris laetitia, a key issue has arisen, centering around whether or not the Divine assistance of the Holy Spirit is offered towards the successors of St. Peter to protect them from erring in matters pertaining to faith and morals even in the non-definitive teachings of the ordinary Magisterium. Some of the defenders of Pope Francis in this issue, such as Stephen Walford, argue forcibly that such Divine assistance is indeed given in the non-definitive, non-infallible teachings of the ordinary Magisterium (I). The opponents of Pope Francis’ reforms argue that this position is a logical fallacy, since the exercise of papal infallibility is limited to the extraordinary Magisterium and the ordinary and Universal Magisterium. They argue that if the Roman Pontiff cannot err in matters of faith and morals in the non-definitive teachings of the ordinary Magisterium, this would mean that he is infallible even in this respect (II). Christopher Ferrara has mockingly referred to this idea as the “fallible infallible Magisterium” (III). Such an idea is obviously untrue, since the non-definitive teachings of the ordinary Magisterium are non-infallible in nature.

In response, some conservatively minded Catholics have asserted that the claim to protection from error in faith and morals by way of Divine assistance falls into the category of ultramontanism, and the conclusion is then made that the pope actually can teach error in faith and morals by way of his ordinary Magisterium. Such a scenario is a very serious matter, since it would mean that the pope is in effect capable of binding the faithful to heresy in the ordinary Magisterium.

In the following article, I hope to be able to demonstrate that the protection from error in faith and morals offered towards the ordinary Magisterium through the Divine assistance of the Holy Spirit does not stem from the gift of infallibility, but is instead an essential corollary of the dogma of the indefectibility of the Church. A necessary ancillary means through which the perpetuity of the successors of St. Peter is nourished and maintained, which is independent of, albeit related to, the dogma of papal infallibility. This means that the pope cannot impose error on matters of faith and morals not only because of papal infallibility but also because of the Divine assistance implicit in the gift of indefectibility. As the document issued by the International Theological Commission “The Interpretation of Dogma” states: “The apostolic tradition in the Church cannot undergo any essential corruption because of the permanent assistance of the Holy Spirit which guarantees its indefectibility.” (IV)

Before we go on to examine how the Divine assistance of the Holy Spirit is primarily promised to ensure the indefectibility of the Church, rather than its infallibility, it will be worth first briefly addressing one of the chief issues raised above - concerning the proposed logical fallacy of the “infallibility” of the non-infallible ordinary Magisterium. The scope of papal infallibility is limited to the organs of the extraordinary and ordinary and Universal Magisterium, and concerns those teachings which have been definitively established by the Church, and which by definition are irreformable of themselves. They are also subject to either the response of an assent of faith, or are to be firmly held by the believer (depending on whether they are credenda or tenenda dogmas, which are both different levels of infallible teaching). The teachings found in the ordinary or authentic Magisterium are usually reformable of themselves (meaning they are subject to further refinement and/or doctrinal development), and also non-definitive in nature, which is why they are regarded as non-infallible. The level of assent required of these teachings is that of the submission of the will and intellect in obedience to the ordinary Magisterium. (Read more.)