Moneybyte:
Here, I would offer a thesis that Newman did not consider. He presumed that all pontifical teaching or teaching from bishops concerning doctrine and morals is magisterial. I propose that any pontifical teaching or teaching from bishops that overtly and deliberately contradicts the perennial teaching of previous councils and pontiffs is not magisterial teaching, precisely because it does not fall within the past magisterial doctrinal teaching. The pope or a bishop may be, by necessity of his office, a member of the magisterium, but his teaching, if it contradicts the received previous magisterial teaching, is not magisterial. Such false teaching simply fails to meet the criteria necessary to be magisterial. It possesses no ecclesial authoritative credentials. Rather, it is simply an ambiguous or flawed statement that attempts or pretends to be magisterial when it is not.
On the relevance and reality of the development of doctrine today
Given the misrepresentation of what constitutes true and authentic doctrinal and moral development, it is beneficial to examine what Cardinal Newman teaches, and how and why it is extremely relevant in light of today’s contentious ecclesial milieu.
4 comments:
Cardinal Newman, if he were teaching at the Detroit Archdiocesan Seminary today, would be fired!
Ahh, I said that in my post below this one. I thought I saw it before here.
Indeed he would. And yet somehow, surely, Mike Lewis will use this as evidence of the TLM's satanic ideology of rejecting the Council, even though Fr. Weinandy co-wrote a (notably flawed) multi-piece work supporting the NO over the TLM.
Nick
If revelation through Christ is, somehow, insufficient, then, the "Moneybyte" seems to be the best approach in our modern age. Newman's arguments strike me as very reasonable (after a brief skim), it is what could be done to that which should be timeless in the here and now that requires fortification.
Post a Comment