Theological Studies Faculty Works Theological Studies

1988

Talking Back to Rome? J.R. Dionne on Papal Magisterium and the Church

Thomas P. Rausch Loyola Marymount University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/theo_fac

Part of the Catholic Studies Commons

Recommended Citation Rausch, Thomas P. “Talking Back to Rome? J.R. Dionne on Papal Magisterium and the Church,” One in Christ 24 (1988) 180-189.

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Theological Studies at Digital Commons @ Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theological Studies Faculty Works by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Talking Back to Rome? J. R. Dionne on Papal Magisterium and the Church

In the last few years the controversy over authority and what in the United States is called - perhaps unfortunately - 'dissent' 1 has had wide reaching implications. It has focused attention, not just on the role of theologians vis-a-vis the magisterium, but on the nature of ecclcsial authority, and thus, on the nature of the Church itself. ls teaching authority fundament­ ally a hierarchical charism, that is, a charism which is possessed solely by those who have been sacramentally incorporated into what the Second Vatican Council described as that divine mission entrusted to the apostles and their successors 'in this hierarchically structured society'?' Or is it a function of officeholders and others, through which the faith entrusted to the whole Church comes to expression? In terms of the contemporary debate, is the Church fundamentally a hierarchical instituion,' or is it fundamentally a charismatic 'discipleship of equals',' some of whom have a teaching authority based either on their office or on their professional competence and training? There is general agreement that theologians have an important role to play in formulating the faith experience of the Christian community, probing its tradition in light of contemporary issues, and re-expressing its faith in a more contemporary idiom. But what happens when a theological consensus begins to emerge against a consistent teaching of the magis­ terium? This is where the difficultiesbegin. In justifying his own dissent from the magisterium on certain questions concerning sexual ethics, Charles Curran has emphasised the distinction between infallible and non-infallible teaching, and the different assents which are owed to each; 'the faithful owe the assent of faith to infallible teaching and the obsequium religiosum of intellect and will to authorita­ tive or authentic, non-infallible teaching'.' Obsequium religiosum is

*Fr Thomas Rausch, S.J., is Professor of Theology at Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, California. He belongs to the Archdiocese's Theological and Ecumenical Commissions, and is also a member of the Los Angeles Lutheran - RC Committee. He has wide involvement in teaching and writing. 1. Ladislas Orsy has pointed out that the term 'dissent' is both too vague and too broad in connotation to be useful in theological debates; see 'Magisterium: Assent and Dissent', Theological Studies 48 (1987), pp. 490-91. 2. Lumen gentium, no. 20; tr. The Documents of Vatican II, ed. Walter M. Abbott (New York: America, 1966), p. 39. 3. See A very Dulles, 'Institution and Charism in the Church', in his A Church to Believe In (New York: 9ossroad, 1982), pp. 19-40; also his 'The Church as Institution' in Models of the Church (Garden City, New York: Doubleday, 1974), pp. 31-42. 4. This term is used by Elisabeth Schiissler Fiorenza to describe 'the Jesus movement'; In Memory of Her (New York: Crossroad, 1983), p. 107. A similar ris I R. Dionne on and the Church One in Ch t 182 on t e a oman at olic t eor h w y a ue t e o ial R C h h y trans ated as su mi sio u _ u an otes and the Church, rg s that h ffic 11 l b s n' , b tr rr n th a tt h e armo it t raxis · . ct o ot ll ny w h i s p . ex ress on a so trans ated as due res ect o s1m ' as re ect aut o t i ns is n fu y in h onne and p i is l l ' p '' r p,y ' sp ' ., h ri y fun loso ro t e orb , . . . . o a a octo ate phy f m h S urran . . t a on a i le teac i s o t a 1ste o e h s d r in phi i a C s p01m is h t n -mf ll b h ng f he . m g num d Di nn , wh o ica o t read s w y . o not · o o t e n ersit f Ch g , h s h exc ud e e oss i it o error· cco to e e al cce te a ot e t eo fr m h U iv y and , th p ib l y f ' 'A rd.mg g n r ! p d n h r in h l gy e calls m i alis s' o t o s o t o e ' in m t t eo o . ca .nter retations t e e a resum tion o e et ee t e si i n f h s h h l gi l i p , h r is p p f truth m_Y t ca fully b w n h p n mali ts mai ai avour of r a al n all l t e m i s ' nt n 1 . . t e ss e o f ibi i y.Th i suc tea in and t e a olic must a e a s ce e e o . a a th i u f p p i tea in is • h ch g h C th m k m r ff r t t o give 'm xim lis s' on re ect on o a a 1t e o u e uent i f p p l ch g te e tua a se · ut suc teac 1n can e e o eous at ca o c a and/ r s bs q j m ll c l s nt b h h· g b rr n ' , It is ti n, h ng 12 maximal st ar ue at i n th modifi all i t e i s g 'th ss. .. t o err r 't at e ounds t e t eolo , · . e t a a st a al li y' (29). Th o ss a ar g in p p inf ib umsta ces po 1b1h y f o h h gr h h gian· s ng· ht t di ent n gum n ma under certain cir n , al ma te m c ra ·1s u ·i a a so as ar ued t at a c it cal a oac t eo ian t e or a a riu ... y, t e F nc S ll v n l h g h r i ppr h by h 1· g s din ry p p gis _ ile t e os t n o h all l t h p i io f h o teac t e ordina ma isterium s ec call t e case ; e c ar ibi i y' (29) u Wh t _hmgs o! h ry g - p ifi y in h th h ism of inf ui et een t e o papal enjoy t e a lure o stin sh b w h enc c ica s usti ed i cases e e suc tea i ts co o e ir f i t di g s yo d al mpr mis d by h o t e maxi y l l - is J fi n wh r h ch n ' b the minim is is al ma ster um t at ­ e e traor ar a gi i , h f h astora ex o tion and de e ce t e doctr ne o a � a; on ar a th x din y p p i p l p si f n of h i f th/f ft�e e� ordin y nd s a e ul anal sis o cases ch to ue t o onne f y f wh t e c ar ter o trictl t eolo ical discourse en � �: /e al a e s i n by Di ' c r e h h �c f s y h g '.' Wh h achmg m ists is c ll d in q a al ma isteriu a , teac t e o nar p g m h v et er e c c c ls or in ec a ation o t e on e atl.o o t e c te hings of h rdi y p wh h m n y li a d l r s f h C w h onsis nt tal in ac to t e gr g n for the show h esult o t eolo ians k' h · .. e o e er e as a f h g ' k g b octrine o t e a1t seems to re ect a articular t eolo a l t ee mo r r v s d r care ul D f h F h , fl p h gic l b n difi d ortant ot or t e ly o e s stud s m , b h f h f e ati e o e most de es e ted t e lo cal o i o o o me nn ' y i i p n v th :,vi ly r p c h o gi p ni ��.:�:�: bish p f Ro . Di ec lesiolo i al im lications , e es ts a d o t e g c p ��r;�eo� o a : as t e t to ex ess criticism o at e oc me te e am les h pr en n f r h c _ gi n h ngh pr f wh h u n d x p a ument or she d c a e m l t is . e ce es to e a strict t eolo ica o tion e en en it is in or c e a s r r i p ici in h rg _p' r iv b ly h g l p v wh c porated whi h h dr w o whi h _ 111 mto a document of the ordinary magisteriu�' e o t e asic is ues t at eme e e doctrinal On f h b s h r · h Modalities of Reception or t e ost art to e con nes msel m p ut it a i sent t e uestio a al o fi hi f f h e h r y nd s _ is h q ! �/��w a�:�:r::/;;����::�n°�:r > In his n ysis Di nn s et e m nistr � o o ome i exerc hi P rin i y; h � � ce ta e t e f R n ising 1 1 sta n by h Bish p • e ocuses on n s k oman on re at ns f ne ec s o s o t e c g g io . H oe ot e am i i n f h R ecause ,:,::,:;:::::;:�::,:·,:g:;:', d:,�:,�:::��:,� ,:::::: ':::":;'�:; :� ,;: ) d s n x i d s uccesso s ic 7' . o e t us and r wh h,b ues o oct ine tau Pi IX hi s ssue o co le a t o a ma o o o ert i nne , 1,h p apacy f d r gh by cr t al rece tion i l gi h y.N w j r w rk by J.R b D o e. four iss i e ot o it e and p ) al t e o ece tion b h p s iv i ic o t e s' f r p ( . ., or e ersed f h ir 'mod i i ultimatel modi e at ol c urc e e y fi d r v e est o e h i Ch h,w r t e by th r f th C es care ul anal s s o ounc l ionne ro f y i f h a ach hasisin th a i · a n h a s tic nat th a t e eco d at ca i . D p vid g g S n V i n C o ac issue in terms ppro , emp e e l t d . c n· ure of e e rly Church by h e ues o in e ard , s ta n na wnsm an ;;ower s a d tate o ti n r g t e h i ke by Leo rdo Eoff Chw:�;.�f (New York: Cros road, ec e teac n s f th q onl r e , pr is hing lo c e e e can y b i fly sta ement a d i ternal gi . H r w 1985), pp.112-113. o o explicit t n n h an Faithful Dissent ansas it h ar · f b th · . le E.Curr , (K C y, Mo.: S eed & W d 1986)··. sum a se <; n n nt mc m a i i . ' ' . ere a ut or ; :� �ume gen//um (Docume s . i · m ri ian el io s t ny tr h · 5 · o 25 48) s· e · f H b l ty belongs at ol c an n R ig n . ls h ' th h ch i an n t n hm s h i ism d No -Christ to o e t e properly to e C ur tself d o ly b ex e g it is more orrect 1. C reli ions co in Di nn , h c ound n no r stia g ? Ac rd g s a the magist i ai in/a ct :����fa���f f an s oo to e i n-Ch i n uest o to pe k of er um procl m do r Y or o exerci e of the g d b f ati e a s er to t is i n. tra a a ist i u ece itate a ne v n w h q g teac o o e s IX n ss g ex ordm ry m er um. hings f P p Pi em ation n um e r t h ist h th t an th h .t .an nsci n e oes e on t e c i n b r 16 of 6. He refe s o C r op er Butler ' 0'Au i r· y d e C ns Co e ce', o e ta s o nt b y d h ond n _ l s blish hi p i , h g reted as e merel ClergyReview 60 (1975), p.16 T c could e terp b ing y . t e Syllabus of Errors (1864) , whi h b in 7. As m James A Coriden Th .J G reen, and Donald E.He intschel, eds., h The Code of Cano� Law: A' Teit::s c ent ry a ist �;� � (New York: P ul , 1985), can n a s a s a ns n t a a of Praxis and o 752, p. 548; l o L di l s Or:y, e ect o o the C non' nd the Church: A Study l Tex of . t nn The Papacy a America a c nt s has a· that o sequzum· Dio e, i s hi a i a 154 (17 M y 1986) , p · 397 More re e ly Or y s 1 d b ' 11. J. Rober tive op c l L br ry, 1987). s t an att. a th r r .m . c s c n in Ecumenical Perspec (New York: Ph lo a nn · , Receptio ? n ry, t an ref er o itude tow rd e Chu e h te d 1ove; ,t ould be "re pe t" or it n in Infallible An I qui r s. Edw rd Qui c s mis i n n · n �� r h ch as m s t ans Kli g , ould be " ub s o " depe dmg o e p ogress the C ur h ade in 12. He refer o H a rst n 1971). a i in ts n , a m _ ss nt an s nt ar n it Doubled y, 1983) (fi editio Christi n cl r fy g i ow belief ,'. 'M g·1s t enu .A e d Drn e ' ' p . ..1.90 . (G de C y, New York: a a a De Ecclesia i th si i n a n verri de l Torre, a r an t . . e t n t man at c cit e po t o of Jo qui S l a ca ca t ca 8. Ch reI s E C u r 'A h d i he Rq John Courtney Murray points out that the values of those cultures appears. Finally the Second Vatican Council document was the most controversial of the whole Council precisely reversed the doctrinal stance of Pius IX. Nostra aetate (Declaration on the because of the issue of the d·evclopmcnt of doctrine that it raised.This, he Relationship of the Church to non-Christian Religions) specifically says, and not the issue of religious freedom itself, 'was the real sticking acknowledged that non-Christian religions reflecta ray of divine truth and point for many of those who opposed the Declaration even to the end'.'" 1 therefore contain some truth or good.'' Ad Gentes (Decree on the Murray left it to later theologians to explain the development from the Missionary Activity of the Church) was more cautious, pointing out that Syllabus of Errors to the Declaration. whatever truth and grace is present among the nations may be tainted with According to Dionne, Murray's assessment may turn out to be an evil. 17 Nevertheless, as Dionne states, 'the tack the Council was taking understatement. Dionne argues that even though the Declaration claims relative to possible truth or good in non-Christian religions was contrary that it 'leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty to the earlier teaching of the ordinary papal magisterium' (124). of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church 2. Relationship Between Church and State. While the Council of Christ' ,21 in fact 'there is a sense in which the Council Fathers reversed Fathers at Vatican II may have been less familiar with the position of the the teaching of the ordinary papal magestcrium' (193). The teaching of papal magisterium on the previous question, Dionne argues that they Pius IX on religious freedom did not depart essentially from that of his knew well its position on the relationship between Church and state and predecessors. In number 15 of the Syllabus Pius IX condemned the error the correlative question of religious freedom. On these issues the papal of saying that a human being may'... embrace and practice that religion magisterium had been consistent for the preceding seven generations. which by the light of reason he [ or she] thinks true'.'' Pius XI had condemned the proposition that 'The Church is to be Reconstructing the position of Pius IX, Dionne identifies two basic separated from the state and the state from the Church' in number 55 of arguments. Negatively, the Pope was against what he considered to be a the Syllabus. Dionne reconstructs his position on the basis of his remarks false idea of religious freedom as an objective right, understood in the in the allocution Acerbissimum given to the Cardinals on 27 September context of the Enlightenment which presupposed the separation of 1852 and in the encyclical Quanta cura, promulgated along with the Church and state and exalted reason independently of faith.Positively, he Syllabus on 8 December 1864: 'For Pius IX, (1) the ideal relation between assumed that since the Catholic religion was the only true one, there could Church and state seems to have entailed a union in which. (a) Catholicism be no objective right for a person to take a contrary position. However non-Catholic religious practice could be tolerated, for the sake of the

15. Dionne, Papacy and Church, 117-119 refers to Alois Knopfler, 'Die 18. Papacy and Church, 126. italics in original. Italics in quotations will be used Akkommodation im altchristlichen Missionswesen', Zeitschrift fur Missions­ only when they appear in the original. wissenschaft1 (1911), pp. 41-51 and Johannes Thauren, Bie Akkommodation im 19. See the paragraph in the Declaration on Religious Freedom (Dignitatis katholischen Heidenapostolat: eine Missionstheoretische Studie (Munster im West­ humanae personae), no.6 which ends with footnote 17, Abbott, p.685. falen: Verlag der Achendorffschen Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1927). 20. Abbott, p.673. 16. Nostra aetate no.2, Abbott, p. 662. 21. Dignitatis humanae personae, no. 1, Abbott, p.677. 17. Ad gentesno. 9, Abbott, pp.595-96. 22. Cited by Dio�ne, Papacy and Church, p. 152. J. R. Dionne on Papal 185 186 One in Christ

r la i s membership. How­ c mrnon good." Once again, the teaching of Pius was systematised by question of identity and the cor e t ve que tion of � s a h i a h s in the famous sub ti­ his successor Leo XIII, and did not change substantially until the Second ever, after considerable deb te, t e Counc l F t er a gentium Vatican Council, with possibly the exception of John XXIII's encyclical tution of 'subsists in' for 'is' in wha t bec me no. 8 of Lumen i s i away from the ly changed the position of P u XII by mov ng Pacem in terris. effective is as r h stical Body of Chr t But the Council did change the traditional teaching. In spite of the relation of identity he had se ted between t e My li h r h a s he text of Orientalium efforts of the Council Fathers to affirm continuity with the ordinary papal and the Roman C atho c C u c . Bec u e t h h i ha i h gentium, t e two magisterium, in Dignitatis humanae they went beyond the previous Ecclesiarum was not broug t nto rmony w t Lumen position of the magisterium which held that error could be tolerated for documents remain inconsistent with each other. shi h il F athers, ' in the sake of the common good. The Declaration, in grounding religious On the related question of member p, t e Counc hris ia s a s of the Church freedom in the human person, implicitly affirms what the sense of the refusing to say that non-Catholic C t n re member i a h s ly in degree or ievel of papal magisterium had previously denied, specifically, that in the present and in refusing to say they d ffer from C t olic on h ha a t art totally from t e economy of salvation, a human being has an objective right to worship membership', seemed not to ve w nted o dep h i i his position slightly. God in accordance with a responsible use of intellect. Even though the position of Pius XII (233). But t ey d d mod fy h h _ s _ underlymg Council did not specifically use the term objective right, according to Dionne explains the shift in terms of t e t eone or ontolog1es a h si s an be described s Dionne it affirmed 'that the right to religious freedom is based on the different points of view. T e po tion of Piu XII c the h h x lai s a i s i of membership on t e dignity of the human person and is grounded in revelation itself. In that presupposing a theory whic e p n v r ou k nds The Counc1l Fathers sense, there can be no doubt whatever that the Council reversed the basis of Jif-ferent levels of being (:fchichtenthcorie). is a i s or 'modalities' of position of Pius IX and his successors, with the possible exception of John moved to a position which recogn ed v r ou modes ha h i so far as to embrace XXIII (193)'." membership (Modalitattheorie). W t t ey d d not go shi 27 4. Church and Church Membership. More widely known is the fact was a theory of different degrees of member p (Stufentheorie). al i s ion', Dionne shows that the Second Vatican Council reversed the exclusive identification of In a chapter entitled 'Prior Mod it e of Recept h la h a al opposition' in t e the Roman Catholic Church with the Mystical Body of Christ, made by how a minority of theologians p yed t e role of 'loy s s h dissent; instead he s i his a h i ars prior to Vatican II. He doe not u e t e word Pope Piu XII n encyclic l Mystici corporis (1943)." T e ident fication ye _ h i i is h a scholarship, and t e of the Church - understood as the Roman Catholic Church - with the stresses the ' appropriate cr t c m', t e c reful i t i ars such as Bishop Mystical Body of Christ had already been made in the encyclical 'talking back' to the pa pal mag s er um by schol i ha a r a a Morel, P. M c lon, nd Mortalium animos (1928) by Pius XI, who went on to the harsh conclusion Dupanloup, John Cou tney Murr y, V letin hi h a h ay for the develop­ ha h is i i h i is a s arl Rahner, among others, w c prep red t e w t t 'W oever not un ted w t t not member of it nor doe he K a sals h i a papal m agisterium t communicate with its Head Who is Christ'. 21' In which ments, modifications or rever of t e ord n ry Mystici corporis, l ha s hi needs to be acknow edged, Dionne says must be interpreted with reference to Humanae generis, the Vatican II which we ve just urveyed. T s l si h ial C atholicism has pos i i s as a h h h i h s as D ionne emphasises i n his conc u on: 'W at offic it on of P u XII w more nu nced. T oug e dentifiedt e My tical ha a hi h papal magisterium s Body of Christ with the Roman Catholic Church and concluded that non­ never admitted is that the te c ng of t e ordinary a iti s i a ause of the mod l e Catholic Christians are not really members of the Church, Dionne argues sometimes had to be mod fied nd/or reversed bec that the internal logic of his statements suggests that he, like the older of its reception' (362). Catholic tradition, considered non-Catholic Christians as belonging t'o the s l h h r h Ecclesiological Implications ou of t e C u c (196). h ill s ha h an C atholic C hurc w Both the Dionne suggests a t t he out et t t t e Rom Decree on Eastern Catholic Churches (Orientalium Ecclesi­ s i s raxis i s i al a i s when it allow t p a a l r ra s h a ance considerably in t ecumen c rel t on arum) nd the e r ie d ft of t e Dogmatic Constitution on the Church dv l a s ha it might be helpful to sing e ll h r a i to transform its theory (27). Tow rd t t end, (Lumen gentium) fo owed t e o ient t on of Mystici corporis on the t s al i li a i h ra s in the final sec ion out some of the ecclesiologic mp c t ons e d w 23. Papacy and Church, pp. 152-154. of his book. 24. Cf. Dignitatis humanae, no. 4, Abbott, p. 682. 27. Papacy and Church, pp. 230-35; on p. 232 Dionne notes that a paragraph 25. See for example Avery Dulles, The Resilient Church (Garden City, New _ which appeared for the first time in the draft of Lumen genuum submitted to the York: Doubleday, 1977), pp. 139-40. Council Fathers in July ]964 speaks of Catholics, others who believe m Chnst, and 26. Cited by Dionne, Papacy and Church 195; text in· Mortalium animos _ all of humanity as belonging 'in various ways' [variis modis] to the oneness of the (Washington, D.C.: Rasdell, 1928), p. 15. (National Catholic Welfare Conference Church; LG no.,13; Abbott, p. 32. translation.) J. R. Dionne on Papal Magisterium and the Church 188 One in Christ

In defining its fa a a a L ith, the Church h s functioned s community of the conditions for judging that the ordinary universal magisterium has believers. Dionne describes a a the Church s 'koinonia on the level f infallibly taught a particular doctrine: 'Although the individual bishops do word'. His concern is to a a r a rgue th t the Chu ch c nnot be understo:d not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they can nevertheless proclaim simply as institution, for it a a a lso involves ' ssoci tive elements' even on the Christ's doctrine infallibly. This is so, even when they are dispersed around level of doctrine and dogma r a (297). He derives the te m ' ssociative' the world, provided that while maintaining the bond of unity among Ernst Troeltsch, who a o a divided Christi nity int two b sic themselves and with Peter's successor, and while teaching authentically forms, the church-typ e or institution ;nd the sect type." a a r i r r l r a single viewpoint as the one a a on m tte of fa th o mo a s, they concu in ch r cterises the church-type a a r 31 s tending to exercise utho ity from the top which must be held conclusively [tanquam definitivetenendam]'. down, while the sect-type tends o to do so from the b ttom up; he refers to Dionne maintains that the conditions necessary for judging that the the former as the institutiona a a r a . l model nd the l tte s the associative (28). ordinary universal magisteriurn has infallibly taught a particular doctrine Later he pomts a to mutu l dependence and koinonia as associative are ambiguous as given in LG 25. It is insufficient to suggest that a elements · ·• (297). doctrine is infallibly taught merely because the bishops concur with the a That ssociative a a elements enter into the rticul tion of doctrine is clear Pope in judging that one view is to b'e held definitively, for their con­ from his study o a r f the c ses previously conside ed where critical modes of currence may be based more on obedience than on judgement that the rec ption a o a � on the p rt of the logi ns led ultimately to changes in question pertains to the substance of the faith. Dionne's basic o in the point rdmary papal ma a gisterium. But does this s me blending of institutional argument is to show that teaching of the papal magisterium upheld by the and associa tive elements occur on the level of dogma? bishops over several generations as definitive tenendum were actually D onn ar a ! � c efully reviews the two c ses where the extraordinary papal reversed by the bishops and Pope of a later generation. He suggests that it mag1stenum a h s been exercised, the proclamations of the dogmas of the may be necessary to add a phrase indicating that the bishops together with Immacula a te Conception (1854) nd Assumption (1950) of Mary. teach infallibly when they judge that a single viewpoint is to be a In both the Pope c ses the a a a dogm s were defined only fter process of consultin held definitivelyas pertaining to the substance of the faith. Otherwise, the r g the Chu ch through a o r p lling of the bishops. The eview shows that associa­ magisterium remains faced with the dilemma posed by Hans Kling: either tive elements a b sed on the sens us fideliumwe re present in the process that to acknowledge that the Church's position on artificial contraception has led to both ex cathedra definitions. Thus he concludes that 'even .on the been taught infallibly by the universal ordinary magisterium or to repudi­ level of the ra r ar a a a r ext o din y p p l m giste ium, Church as association was ate infallibility itself (353). intimately involved with Church as institution' (336). 3. A new understanding of the ordinary papal magisterium is neces- As a consequence of this, Dionne suggests that the distinction between sary. Dionne's study of the way doctrine has developed since Pius IX ecclesia a r a docens [te ching Chu ch] nd ecclesia discens [learning Church] indicates the need for a new understanding of how the ordinary p apal may not ar a b� as cle -cut s previously supposed (348). His position here, magisterium functions. Maximalist attempts to maintain that a doctrine though arnved a a a t independently, 29 is simil r to th t of Leonardo Boff who taught by a series of Popes over a n extended period of time is taught argues tha a ar t docens nd discens e two functions of one community; they infallibly 'are utterly shattered . . . against the rock of Catholicism's cannot be a ar o understood s two p ts r divisions within the Church. 111 praxis' (357). Dionne's conclusion on this point is stated cautiously: 'From ionne ar J? do?s not go quite so f in what he says explicitly, but the implica­ a Catholic point of view it may be possible to argue that the teaching of the tions of ar a a his gument suggest th t new master image of Church, ordinary papal magisterium may be judged to be unerring only when it has better a r ra a a ble to inco po te the ssoci tive elements he has illustrated been so received by the rest of the Catholic Church' (357). ay ar r ro '.'° ?e necess y. As he st esses th ughout the book, 'praxis not on!; 4. The extraordinary magisterium: a partial solution on the basis of 11lummes r ra r theo y but t nsfo ms it' (344). praxis. Dionne acknowledges that there is a tension between the associa­ 2. ar a a r P t of LG 25 m y h ve to be evised by a future ecumenical tive elements and what he calls 'the determinative factors in the council. a a a Dionne c lls ttention to wh t Lumen Gentium no. 25 says about Petrine function inasmuch as they have to do with so-called papal infallibility', specifically, the implications of the ex sese clause of the o c a 28 See Ernst constitution Pastor aeternus f Vati an I which states th t ex cathedra : Troeltsch, The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, trans. Olive Wyon, 2 vols. definitions are 'irreformable of themselves [ex sese], and not from the (New York: Harper & Row, Harper Torchbooks 1960) 2: 461. ' ' 29. Sec Primacy and Church, p. 465, ftnt. 7. 30. Leonardo Boff, Church: Charism and Power, pp. 138-39. 31. LG no. 25, Abbott, p. 48. J. R. Dionne on Papal Magisterium and the Church

2 consent of the Church'. 3 He argues that the ex sese clau_se means exercising the extraordinary papal magisterium the Roman Bishop not need in any strict or absolute sense the prior or subsequent ag,rei::m,en1t·> of the rest of the Catholic Church' (302). 33 However, a review of what actually happened in the definition ofthe two Marian dogmas shows that this determinative factor was not opera- tive. The definitions were made only after consulting the Church, and thus, associative elements were present. Because of this, Dionne con-­ eludes that 'the determinative factors in the Petrine function, inasmuch as they have to do with papal infallibility, are for officialCatholici sm a value· · having to do more with principle than with practice' (359). Thougha doctrine of papal infallibility which holds that the rest of the Church has to agree with the extraordinary papal magisterium remains an ecumenical problem on the level of theory, Dionne suggests that a prac­ tical solution can be found on the level of what has in fact been the Church's praxis. His own study has indicated that whatever papal authori­ tarianism .wasexhibited in the period under discussion took place on level of the ordinary papal magisterium, not that of the extraordinary. And it was precisely the teaching of the ordinary papal magisterium which was changed in a number of cases through the modalities of its reception. The Church's actual practice suggests that it functions as a koinonia on the level of word (359). There are obviously important ecumenical implications here, and Dionne notes them at the end of his book: 'Non-Catholic Christians should perhaps take another look at the way authority functions within [the Roman Catholic Church]; the Roman Bishops and their advisors should perhaps ask themselves whether their theory about the function of the ordinary papal magisterium is fully in harmony with Catholicism's praxis' (362). If the Church's theory on the subject of papal authority were to be transformed on the basis of the Church's praxis, that could indeed move the ecumenical dialogue significantlyforward. THOMAS P. RAUSCH, S.J. Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles

32. DS3074. 33. According to Dionne the mind of the Council Fathers was that the Pope should consult the rest of the Church prior to a definition,but they rejected the idea that he must do so; see Papacy and Church, pp. 337-343. Others would argue that the ex sese clause means only that ex cathedra definitions do not need subsequent juridical validation.by a higher tribunal; see J.M.R. Tillard, TheBishop of Rome, trans. John de Satge (Wilmington, DE.: Michael Glazier, 1983), pp. 174-76; also Patrick Granfield, The Limits of the Papacy (New York: Crossroad, 1987), p. 69, p.144.