The guidance of the Holy Spirit isn’t only for the clergy; it is also for anyone who has the Spirit of Truth within them (cf. 1Corinthians 2:9-16; 1John 2:20,27). This is a basic to Christianity, and should be made use of in spite of its possible misuse.
No doubt. My point though is that we can have a confidence in what is passed down to us through the Magisterium that we cannot have with non-Magisterium. Case in point, as a Theologian, I have multiple years of study under my belt and so someone may come to be for an explanation of something in the faith. While I certainly have the ability to explain it, I am not infallible, nor am I free to put forward an interpretation that is contrary to the faith. As a Theologian, I am obligated to teach within the framework of what the Magisterium as laid down. All laity, deacons, and priests have this obligation, to learn and teach the faith in accord with the Magisterium (Pope and bishops in union with him.)
Vatican II's Lumen Gentium 12 says: "The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One, (111) cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith when "from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful" (8*) they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals. That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth."
The Church recognizes that inerrancy from supernatural discernment (sensu fidei) is not restricted to only the hierarchy.
I think that approved Church theologians have obligations to the magisterium that the rest of us do not have; otherwise, they would not be approved.
Most certainly. The Sensus Fidelium is an important charism in the Church. But the Sensus Fidelium is not private interpretation. That is my point. The Sensus Fidelium is also bound up in the Magisterium of the Church. There can be no contradiction between the Magisterium and the Sensus Fidelium. My point in the reflection is that private interpretation leads to contradiction and error.
Lumen Gentium 12 uses the term ‘sensu fidei’. Spiritual discernment is both individual and collective. When it is used individually, it informs the conscience in a way that is not possible for the person who does not have the Spirit of Truth. If so, required assent is an infringement of personal conscience. True individual spiritual discernment does not inevitably lead to contradiction and error.
At times, basic Christianity is not as tidy and some would like it to be. There were many differences of opinion that were unavoidable even in the New Testament Church.
I have seen it referenced both ways. Regardless, it still does not reference private interpretation. The guidance of the Holy Spirit in the Magisterium does not remove differences of opinion. Those will be there, regardless. What it does do is give the definitive judgment on which opinion is correct. Even in New Testament times, there was a judgment where necessary. See Council of Jerusalem. Many did not hold the opinion that was promulgated there. But, as Catholics, they were bound by it.
The guidance of the Holy Spirit isn’t only for the clergy; it is also for anyone who has the Spirit of Truth within them (cf. 1Corinthians 2:9-16; 1John 2:20,27). This is a basic to Christianity, and should be made use of in spite of its possible misuse.
No doubt. My point though is that we can have a confidence in what is passed down to us through the Magisterium that we cannot have with non-Magisterium. Case in point, as a Theologian, I have multiple years of study under my belt and so someone may come to be for an explanation of something in the faith. While I certainly have the ability to explain it, I am not infallible, nor am I free to put forward an interpretation that is contrary to the faith. As a Theologian, I am obligated to teach within the framework of what the Magisterium as laid down. All laity, deacons, and priests have this obligation, to learn and teach the faith in accord with the Magisterium (Pope and bishops in union with him.)
Vatican II's Lumen Gentium 12 says: "The entire body of the faithful, anointed as they are by the Holy One, (111) cannot err in matters of belief. They manifest this special property by means of the whole peoples' supernatural discernment in matters of faith when "from the Bishops down to the last of the lay faithful" (8*) they show universal agreement in matters of faith and morals. That discernment in matters of faith is aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth."
The Church recognizes that inerrancy from supernatural discernment (sensu fidei) is not restricted to only the hierarchy.
I think that approved Church theologians have obligations to the magisterium that the rest of us do not have; otherwise, they would not be approved.
Most certainly. The Sensus Fidelium is an important charism in the Church. But the Sensus Fidelium is not private interpretation. That is my point. The Sensus Fidelium is also bound up in the Magisterium of the Church. There can be no contradiction between the Magisterium and the Sensus Fidelium. My point in the reflection is that private interpretation leads to contradiction and error.
Lumen Gentium 12 uses the term ‘sensu fidei’. Spiritual discernment is both individual and collective. When it is used individually, it informs the conscience in a way that is not possible for the person who does not have the Spirit of Truth. If so, required assent is an infringement of personal conscience. True individual spiritual discernment does not inevitably lead to contradiction and error.
At times, basic Christianity is not as tidy and some would like it to be. There were many differences of opinion that were unavoidable even in the New Testament Church.
I have seen it referenced both ways. Regardless, it still does not reference private interpretation. The guidance of the Holy Spirit in the Magisterium does not remove differences of opinion. Those will be there, regardless. What it does do is give the definitive judgment on which opinion is correct. Even in New Testament times, there was a judgment where necessary. See Council of Jerusalem. Many did not hold the opinion that was promulgated there. But, as Catholics, they were bound by it.
Yes, indeed and thanks be to God!