From: 15942@brahms.udel.edu (Stephen Barr)
Subject: Re: Role of the Papacy (was Re: Homosexual acts)
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 20:15:16 GMT

     There are problems with your conception of the
workings of the magisterium.
     (1) Though the Pope and bishops do not have an
infused knowledge or direct revelation, they do have
special "assistance" in performing their teaching 
function from the Holy Spirit. This assistentia is
something supernatural.             
     (2) The model you are assuming is a scientific
one. Theology is a science, but its data unlike any
other science come from revelation. Authority plays
a role in theology that finds no counterpart in any
other science. 
     (3) The techniques of historical criticism of the
Scriptures and of other modern scientific disciplines
take one only so far. There are brilliant and thoroughly
competent Scripture scholars who are Catholic, Protestant,
Jewish, and Atheist. There are Ph.D.s in Psychology who
believe that fornication is a mortal sin and who believe
that it is morally justifiable. There are authoritative
historians who believe that Christ instituted the Papacy
and others equally respevted who would deny that Christ           
intended to even found the Church. 
      The point is that it is very naive to believe that
mere scientific inquiry can converge on the correct
answer to any theological question. The role of such
research is somewhat secondary and ancillary. 
     (4) Catholic doctrine does not develope (either
in theory, or in fact historically) primarily through
better texts, more scientific examinations of the 
"literal sense" of Scripture, discoveries in archeology,
or refinements in the various ancillary sciences.
The Faith, in principle, does not change. It is the faith
once delivered to the saints. New developments in doctrine
result from a more profound penetration into the full
meaning of what the Church has always believed. Ultimately,
the guarantor of the fidelity of the Church in making
these new developments is the Holy Spirit, not the skill
of experts. If it were the skill of experts then the
heresies of the past would not have arisen in many cases,
because there was no shortage of experts among the
adherents of these ideas. Montanism had Tertullian who was
the very founder of Latin theology. Origen, the greatest
of the Greek theologians intellectually had many ideas
of dubious orthodoxy. (Some of his ideas were later condemned
by Ecumenical Councils, indeed.) Theodore of Mopsuestia,
and the other leaders of Nestorianism were very sophisticated
theologians. I have not heard that Calvinism, Lutheranism,
or other Protestant groups have been lacking in great scholars,
philosophers, and theologians. 
    What gave rise and gives rise to heresy is not inadequate
scholarship, and what has preserved the Church is not
scholarly excellence. It is the Spirit which "leads [the
Church] into all truth". It was to the Apostles (and by
implication their successors) that Christ addressed the words
"what you bind on earth...."  Christ did not choose learned
people to be Apostles. He chose fisherman and other unlearned
types. 
   (5) In point of fact, the Popes have consulted with experts.
There is such a thing as the International Theological Commission.
The Vatican does not only rely on neo-Scholastics. The
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith keeps in constant
dialogue with and is in touch with theological activity
all over the world. Cardinal Ratzinger himself is highly
respected as a theologian. (And having read certain things
written by him, I would say he is a brilliant and profound
intellect). There are many theologians and biblical scholars
who agree with the teaching of the Popes and bishops on
such controverted matters as women priests, homosexuality,
contraception. That shows that these teachings are at least
consistent with latest scholarship. To expect that scholarship
lead uniquely to these views would be absurd. The latest
scholarship is consistent with the view that Christ is not 
God. How can we expect that scholarship alone would converge
on a unique answer to any other theological question?
     Christ did not appoint scholars but bishops, shepherds.
I do not mininmize the importance of scholarship. I am a
scholar. But you expect from scholarship what it cannot give.
To trust the speculations of professors more than two millenia
of Christian tradition is to give professors a lot more credit
than any of them would deserve. (I speak as a professor
and one who has published a lot of speculative ideas in my
field of physics.)SteVE bARR