Richard McCormick, S.J., and the Magisterium

    Lumen Gentium 25 reads in part: “Bishops, teaching in communion with the Roman Pontiff, are to be respected by all as witnesses to divine and Catholic truth. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra . . . .”  (Emphasis added). As many theologians have noted the term submission is a translation from the latin, “obsequium,” and is itself not an infallible teaching of the Church. Chapter 7 of the late Richard McCormick’s outstanding book Corrective Vision discusses this issue in important ways. He points out that respected theologians reject the view that “submission” is to be understood in an absolute way. Karl Rahner did not think the expression was sufficiently nuanced. Andre Naud rejected the “rigid” reading of the passage. And, as was made clear again at the conference in Seattle, Francis Sullivan, S.J. argues that the absolutist reading is based on a misunderstanding of the meaning of obsequium. McCormick suggests that what is required is a “docile personal attempt to assimilate the teaching, an attempt that can end in an ‘inability to assimilate.’”

     Beyond this, McCormick quotes Karl Rahner: “Apart from wholly universal norms of an abstract kind, and apart from a radical orientation of human life towards God as the outcome of a supernatural and grace-given self-commitment, there are hardly any particular or individual norms of Christian morality which could be proclaimed . . . in such a way that they could be unequivocally and certainly declared to have the force of dogmas.” McCormick maintains that the Church has a duty to provide concrete moral guidance, but this guidance is not “buttressed by the certainty and stability” associated with other teachings of the Church. “We cannot be accused of washing dirty linen in public when we candidly acknowledge that our tradition is not free of distortion and error.”

    Error, McCormick argues, is particularly likely to occur in a coercive ecclesial atmosphere where Bishops are appointed only if they ideologically conform and theologians are disciplined. McCormick maintains that the coercive atmosphere in fact exists in the Church. He doubts that that is possible to show what the Bishops have taught for decades on birth control because a coercive atmosphere has had silencing effects. He argues that the formal or informal silencing of theologians, priests, and the laity has also undermined the force of the magisterium because he believes that the Holy Spirit works through the whole Church.

 McCormick writes that: “Contemporary men and women want a magisterium that truly educates, i.e., opens eyes to unsuspected beauty and challenge in our lives. They want teachers who truly teach and maximize the potential of those taught. They will continue to reject a teaching office that is more concerned with control.”