infallibility misunderstood

Father Mateo (76776.306@compuserve.com)
29 Feb 96 21:23:04 EST

To: cinaskf@catinfo.cts.com
960212.04
> From: Gerard Haffner <ghaffner@saturn.apana.org.au>
> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 1996 17:07:17 +1000
> Subject: Re: "infallibility of the Magisterium"?
>
> On page 116 of his book "Origins of Papal Infallibility" Brian
> Tierney writes that Pope John XXII in his Bull of 23 Nov 1324
> *QUIA QUORUNDAM* condemned the view that "What the Roman pontiffs
> have once defined in faith and morals with the key of knowledge
> stands so immutably that it is not permitted to a successor to
> revoke it ...". How is John XXII's Bull reconcilable with Vatican
> I's declaration on papal infallibility? Is he condemning
> ex-cathedra papal infallibility or merely key-of-knowledge papal
> infallibility? If the latter then what is key-of-knowledge
> infallibility as opposed to ex-cathedra infallibility?

Dear Gerard,

In the reign of Pope John XXII (1313-1334), a puritanical sect
within the Franciscan Order who called themselves "the
Spirituals" held that their interpretation of the rule and
lifestyle of Saint Francis, especially in the matter of
practicing poverty, was the ONLY LEGITIMATE WAY TO FOLLOW JESUS
CHRIST. They taught that their rule of life was identically the
same as the Gospel, the very way of life led by Christ and his
Apostles, inspired by the Holy Spirit as were the Scriptures.

They further held that approval of their rule by earlier popes
was a matter pertaining to faith and morals; and since the rule
was equal to the Gospel (they said), no subsequent Pope could
change or revoke it.

Pope John rejected this fantastic doctrine in a bull of 1324
entitled QUIA QUORUNDAM. He denied the "Spirituals'" contention
that their rule and style of poverty was equal to the Gospel and
he pointed out that papal approval of a religious order and its
rule was a matter of Church legislation, not of faith or morals.
Therefore, he taught, a pope could (and sometimes might have to )
modify an earlier pope's legislation or revoke it.

In the course of the encyclical, Pope John denied the existence of
a "key of knowledge", in virtue of which the "Spirituals"
contended that earlier popes had unchangeably established this
rule and lifestyle. (The phrase `key of knowledge' comes from
Luke 11:52, which the "Spirituals" misused).

Pope John was not dealing with an issue of doctrinal
infallibility, but with a defective understanding of the Church's
governing power as invested in the Pope.

Infallibility, as defined in the First Vatican Council, requires
that the faith of the whole Church be the norm of papal
definitions; that these definitions be according to Scripture;
that the pope speaks infallibly only when he speaks as teacher
and pastor of all the faithful, with the infallibility with which
Christ endowed his Church as a whole. This is `ex cathedra'
infallibility.

Tierney is not a reliable guide in understanding our doctrine of
infallibility. His book "Origins" wins the praise of such
dissidents as Hans Kung and Richard McBrien. If you want to
correct his views, read James Heft's "John XXII and Papal
Teaching Authority". Heft is at the University of Dayton - 300
College Park Avenue - Dayton, OH 45469 - tel. 513-229-1000.
Write or call him to ask if his book is still in print.

Sincerely in Christ,
Father Mateo

- Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit -

--
| CIN (619-449-6030) Fido: (1:202/1613) http://www.cin.org/cin 
| St. Gabriel Gift & Book Nook: http://www.stgabriel.com/gabriel