Comments on: Re: Are Social Encyclicals Binding on Catholics?

By: First Thoughts — A First Things Blog

First Thoughts — A First Things Blog — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 06:31:52 +0000

[...] Stephen Barr responds: Catholic teaching itself distinguishes different levels of authoritativeness for different kinds of teaching and different kinds of Church pronouncements. Some teaching is de fide (of faith) and must be accepted with “the assent of faith.” Such teaching is binding in an absolute and irrevocable way. Below that is teaching which, while not de fide, is nevertheless authoritative. Such teaching must be accepted with an obsequium religiosum, usually explained to mean “a religious assent of intellect and will.” Authoritative teaching is also binding, but not in an absolute and irrevocable way. One can entertain as a real though remote possibility that the teaching is false, but the benefit of the doubt goes to the Church, and there is a strong presumption that the teaching is correct. Such authoritative-but-not-de-fide teaching is like that of good parents: it may not be infallible (as de fide teaching is), but it is highly reliable and one is subject to it. [...]

By: TomG

TomG — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:38:17 +0000

Very helpful, Prof. Barr; thank you very much. And may we add capital punishment to the list of those pronouncements that are “highly authoritative”?

By: Shaun Kenney

Shaun Kenney — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:17:36 +0000

I’ve been trying to make this point for the last two days it seems:

I do think that it would be better if Catholics were not so disposed to pick these documents apart like an English teacher grading a student paper. A little more obsequium would be nice, even as we recognize that not everything in these documents is of equal weight.

Benedict XVI even went so far as to explain how Paul VI’s works had to be taken in the context of a corpus… the compartmentalization was the very problem Benedict XVI was trying to address, whether that’s at the macro level, with the encyclical itself, development, etc.

Insofar as the authority of the social encyclical, respect is a far better word. Benedict XVI literally went out of his way to explain the difference between technique and moral ends. Points such as those are natural victims to the cut-and-paste approach.

Excellent post. Well said, sir.

By: Stephen M. Barr

Stephen M. Barr — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:13:12 +0000

Two amendments to what I wrote: (a) obsequium religiosum is often explained as religious submission of “intellect and will” rather than “mind and will”, as I sloppily wrote. (b) More useful than Ad Tuendam Fidem, is the Doctrinal Commentary on Ad Tuendam Fidem, which was simultaneously issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF). This Commentary can also easily be found on the web. Ad Tuendam Fidem itself was issued not by the CDF but by Pope John Paul II himself.