Infallibility of Church Discipline (Goupil, 1941)
Nov 19, 2017 14:26:33 GMT -5
Voxxkowalski likes this
Post by Pacelli on Nov 19, 2017 14:26:33 GMT -5
I was re-reading this gem on the Bellarmine Forums, and wanted to post it here to bring it back to light. The original post was from Michael Wilson, September 25, 2011. It is a magnificent explanation of "Secondary Infallibility."
SOURCE
SOURCE
R. P. AUGUSTE-ALEXIS GOUPIL, S.J.
LA RÈGLE DE LA FOI pg. 22:
SOURCE
The Proximate Rule of Faith
Infallibility of Church Discipline:
37.- A. The Church is infallible in Her discipline.
What is an example of a disciplinary law? They are not Divine ordinances, as for example the indissolubility of Holy Matrimony; rather ecclesiastical laws enacted by the authority of the Church; for example: The celibacy of the Clergy; the keeping of Sunday as a Holy Day. These laws are general laws as opposed to laws restricted to a particular country or province, as for example the keeping of certain feasts as holy days of obligation; rather, general or universal laws for the whole Church or at least for a branch of the Church; therefore the Code of Canon Law for the Latin rite is considered a universal law.
It is certain that the Church has the same authority to not only enact laws, but also to reform or abrogate these same laws; therefore all of Her laws can be modified.
How does a disciplinary law participate in a dogmatic truth? A law, in itself, strictly speaking, is neither true nor false; it does not expressly affirm or deny anything; it orders or prohibits us from doing something. Therefore, it does not fall under a definition of the Magisterium; rather it belongs to the Church’s power of jurisdiction. Nonetheless, a disciplinary decree includes a dogmatic decree. For when the Church issues a law, She affirms that the law is just, which implies two conditions: a) That this law is in conformity with faith and morals of the Divine Law; consequently any doctrine touching faith or morals is included in that Ecclesiastical law, this law is infallibly true. Therefore if the Church commands that prayers should be offered for the departed; one can conclude infallibly that the prayers of the living are useful for the souls in Purgatory.
b) In addition, that the above mentioned just law tends towards the good of the society. It is therefore impossible that a universal law of the Church should be harmful to the Christian society. We do not pretend to affirm that an ecclesiastical law which is generally good, cannot cause some particular inconveniences; we do however affirm that the common good is procured through this law, and that it offers more advantages than inconveniences.
We do not state that a Church law is the very best in each case, nor the most opportune, that is why it is permissible to respectfully seek its modification or even abrogation; but we affirm that as such, it is useful for the good of souls.
Finally, its possible that a good law may result in causing harm to a particular individual who becomes guilty of infringing on the law; but this prejudice comes from the individuals malice, and not from the law itself, according to the words of St. Paul: “And I died. And the commandment that was ordained to life, the same was found to be unto death to me.” (Rom. 7.10).
Proofs:
From Sacred Scripture in the acts of the Apostles XV, 28, the Apostles issued a disciplinary law and they declared that it emanated from the Holy Ghost as well as themselves: “For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things.”
Ecclessiastical Documents:
The Council of Trent declares (Denzinger-954 Can. 7.): “ If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of Masses, are incentives to impiety rather than the services of piety: let him be anathema.’’
St. Thomas in the Summa responds to the arguments against the rites of the Mass by affirming that [IIIa q.LXXXIII, 5, sed contra]: On the contrary, The custom of the Church stands for these things: and the Church cannot err, since she is taught by the Holy Ghost.
Theological Reason:
In the Church, the power of the Magisterium and that of government cannot be separated; one implies the other; it is the same individuals who teach and govern, and they teach because they govern (see n. 7). Thus the very same universal disciplinary law emmanates from the supreme power of jurisdiction which is infallible. As a consequence, a practical decree that would incluye a profession of error would be the equivalent of an erroneous doctrinal decree, which is impossible.
Note.
One can easily see that the present question belongs to the mixed object of the Magisterium. In effect, the fact that a disciplinary law is in concordance with the Divine rule of faith and morals, has a relation to the principal object (a revealed truth); that this same law is useful to the common good, is a question that belongs to the secondary object (a dogmatic fact). These together constitute the mixed object.
LA RÈGLE DE LA FOI pg. 22:
SOURCE
The Proximate Rule of Faith
Infallibility of Church Discipline:
37.- A. The Church is infallible in Her discipline.
What is an example of a disciplinary law? They are not Divine ordinances, as for example the indissolubility of Holy Matrimony; rather ecclesiastical laws enacted by the authority of the Church; for example: The celibacy of the Clergy; the keeping of Sunday as a Holy Day. These laws are general laws as opposed to laws restricted to a particular country or province, as for example the keeping of certain feasts as holy days of obligation; rather, general or universal laws for the whole Church or at least for a branch of the Church; therefore the Code of Canon Law for the Latin rite is considered a universal law.
It is certain that the Church has the same authority to not only enact laws, but also to reform or abrogate these same laws; therefore all of Her laws can be modified.
How does a disciplinary law participate in a dogmatic truth? A law, in itself, strictly speaking, is neither true nor false; it does not expressly affirm or deny anything; it orders or prohibits us from doing something. Therefore, it does not fall under a definition of the Magisterium; rather it belongs to the Church’s power of jurisdiction. Nonetheless, a disciplinary decree includes a dogmatic decree. For when the Church issues a law, She affirms that the law is just, which implies two conditions: a) That this law is in conformity with faith and morals of the Divine Law; consequently any doctrine touching faith or morals is included in that Ecclesiastical law, this law is infallibly true. Therefore if the Church commands that prayers should be offered for the departed; one can conclude infallibly that the prayers of the living are useful for the souls in Purgatory.
b) In addition, that the above mentioned just law tends towards the good of the society. It is therefore impossible that a universal law of the Church should be harmful to the Christian society. We do not pretend to affirm that an ecclesiastical law which is generally good, cannot cause some particular inconveniences; we do however affirm that the common good is procured through this law, and that it offers more advantages than inconveniences.
We do not state that a Church law is the very best in each case, nor the most opportune, that is why it is permissible to respectfully seek its modification or even abrogation; but we affirm that as such, it is useful for the good of souls.
Finally, its possible that a good law may result in causing harm to a particular individual who becomes guilty of infringing on the law; but this prejudice comes from the individuals malice, and not from the law itself, according to the words of St. Paul: “And I died. And the commandment that was ordained to life, the same was found to be unto death to me.” (Rom. 7.10).
Proofs:
From Sacred Scripture in the acts of the Apostles XV, 28, the Apostles issued a disciplinary law and they declared that it emanated from the Holy Ghost as well as themselves: “For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things.”
Ecclessiastical Documents:
The Council of Trent declares (Denzinger-954 Can. 7.): “ If anyone says that the ceremonies, vestments, and outward signs, which the Catholic Church uses in the celebration of Masses, are incentives to impiety rather than the services of piety: let him be anathema.’’
St. Thomas in the Summa responds to the arguments against the rites of the Mass by affirming that [IIIa q.LXXXIII, 5, sed contra]: On the contrary, The custom of the Church stands for these things: and the Church cannot err, since she is taught by the Holy Ghost.
Theological Reason:
In the Church, the power of the Magisterium and that of government cannot be separated; one implies the other; it is the same individuals who teach and govern, and they teach because they govern (see n. 7). Thus the very same universal disciplinary law emmanates from the supreme power of jurisdiction which is infallible. As a consequence, a practical decree that would incluye a profession of error would be the equivalent of an erroneous doctrinal decree, which is impossible.
Note.
One can easily see that the present question belongs to the mixed object of the Magisterium. In effect, the fact that a disciplinary law is in concordance with the Divine rule of faith and morals, has a relation to the principal object (a revealed truth); that this same law is useful to the common good, is a question that belongs to the secondary object (a dogmatic fact). These together constitute the mixed object.