The outline below is divided into three sections:  the first section deals with the Extraordinary Magisterium, the second section deals with the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, and the third and final section covers the Authentic Magisterium.

It should be noted that the teaching of the Magisterium is to be understood in a diachronic sense, and thus it is the living Magisterium of all times that one must follow; but of course the diachronic nature of Magisterial teaching does not exclude the possibility that legitimate clarifications of doctrine can occur during specific periods in the Church's life.  A few examples of this can be seen by looking at the legitimate clarifications of doctrine brought about by the First Council of Nicaea (AD 325) on the Trinity, and the dogmatic clarifications formulated by the Christological councils of the 5th century.  Clearly these doctrinal clarifications occurred at specific moments in history, but they are not to be understood as changes in the faith of the Church, but as the explication of what was already implicitly believed.  The same kind of clarification can be seen in the present Pope's Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis [15], where he has explicitly and formally confirmed that women cannot be ordained to the priesthood and has indicated that this teaching has been infallibly taught by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium as a doctrine de fide tenenda. [16]  Similarly, when Pope Paul VI issued the Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae in 1968, he was confirming the constant and irreformable teaching of the Catholic Church as it relates to contraception. [17]  In reference to Paul VI's teaching, Pope John Paul II has said that:  "By describing the contraceptive act as intrinsically illicit, Paul VI meant to teach that the moral norm is such that it did not admit exceptions.  No personal or social circumstances could ever, can now, or will ever, render such an act lawful in itself.  The existence of particular norms regarding man's way of acting in the world, which are endowed with a binding force that excludes always and in whatever situation the possibility of exceptions, is a constant teaching of tradition and of the Church's Magisterium which cannot be called into question by the Catholic theologian." [18]  So, the Magisterium, like the Church herself, is a living body, a single person stretching throughout time, and this person is Christ the Teacher.  To reject the teaching of the Magisterium, is to reject the teaching of Christ; and it follows that any doctrinal positions based on the private judgments of members of the lay faithful, or even of trained theologians and clerics, that in any way contradict the teachings of the series of popes in succession or of the universal episcopal college [19], would not qualify as legitimate clarifications of doctrine, but would in fact be corruptions of the faith.

I originally wrote this outline

for a young man who was entering

seminary.

Steven Todd Kaster

12 November 2002

(Revised 2007)

_____________________________________

End Notes:

[1] See the CDF Official Doctrinal Commentary on the Professio Fidei, no. 9.  As Cardinal Ratzinger has explained:  “In the case of a defining act, a truth is solemnly defined by an ‘ex cathedra’ pronouncement by the Roman Pontiff or by the action of an ecumenical council.”

[2] See Vatican 1, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, chap. 3, no. 8; see also CIC, canon 750 § 1 and § 2; see also CCEO, canon 598 § 1 and § 2; see also Pope John Paul II, Motu Proprio Ad Tuendam Fidem, no. 4; see also CDF Official Doctrinal Commentary on the Professio Fidei, nos. 5-8.

[3] See Vatican 1, Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus, chap. 4; see also Vatican 2, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, no. 25; see also Vatican 2, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, Preliminary Explanatory Note, nos. 3 and 4.

[4] See the CDF Official Doctrinal Commentary on the Professio Fidei, no. 9.  "In the case of a non-defining act, a doctrine is taught infallibly by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Bishops dispersed throughout the world who are in communion with the Successor of Peter.  Such a doctrine can be confirmed or reaffirmed by the Roman Pontiff, even without recourse to a solemn definition, by declaring explicitly that it belongs to the teaching of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium as a truth that is divinely revealed or as a truth of Catholic doctrine.  Consequently, when there has not been a judgment on a doctrine in the solemn form of a definition, but this doctrine, belonging to the inheritance of the depositum fidei, is taught by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, which necessarily includes the Pope, such a doctrine is to be understood as having been set forth infallibly."

[5] See Vatican 1, Dogmatic Constitution Dei Filius, chap. 3, no. 8; see also CIC, canon 750 § 1 and § 2; see also CCEO, canon 598 § 1 and § 2; see also Pope John Paul II, Motu Proprio Ad Tuendam Fidem, no. 4; see also the CDF Official Doctrinal Commentary on the Professio Fidei, nos. 5-8.

[6] See Vatican 2, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, no. 25; see also CIC, canon 750 § 1 and § 2; see also CCEO, canon 598 § 1 and § 2; see also Pope John Paul II, Motu Proprio Ad Tuendam Fidem, no. 4; see also Dom Paul Nau, O.S.B. (Solesmes), "An Essay on the Authority of the Teachings of the Sovereign Pontiff" (July 1956), in Pope or Church?  Essays on the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium, translated by Arthur E. Slater, (Angelus Press, 1998), pages 12-19.  As Dom Paul Nau indicates in his article, the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium itself teaches doctrines infallibly in two diachronic modes:  first, through the teaching of the Pope and all the Bishops in communion with him; and second, through the teaching of the Ordinary Papal Magisterium.  Thus, the Ordinary Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff is infallible when he teaches a doctrine that has constantly been proposed by his predecessors as a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed or to be held definitively.  Such doctrines, whether taught by the Pope and all the Bishops in communion with him, i.e., the teaching of the Universal Episcopate in communion with its head, or by the Roman See alone, i.e., by the series of Popes in succession, are to be understood as having been certainly and definitively, and thus infallibly, proposed.  So, as Dom Paul Nau points out, there is a parity between the teaching of the Universal Church and the Roman See.  See also Joseph Clifford Fenton, "Humani Generis and the Holy Father's Ordinary Magisterium," American Ecclesiastical Review 125 (1951): 53-62.  Just as the teaching of the series of Popes in succession is an expression of the infallible Ordinary Universal Magisterium, so too, as Msgr. Fenton points out in his article, is the teaching of the reigning Pontiff taken alone; and so the infallibility of the Ordinary Papal Magisterium is not only a diachronic, but is also a synchronic reality.  Therefore, whenever the Pope, through either a solemn judgment or through his Ordinary Magisterium, intends to bind the faithful, in an irrevocable manner, to a particular doctrine, the teaching in question is to be understood as having been proposed infallibly.  As Msgr. Fenton explains:  "In such a case, the Holy Father's teaching is universal.  He exercises, according to the divine constitution of the Church itself, a true and episcopal jurisdiction over every one of the faithful and over every one of the other pastors within the Church militant.  Thus there is nothing whatsoever to prevent the 'magisterium ordinarium' of the Holy Father from being considered as a 'magisterium universale'."

[7] See Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, no. 20.  As Pope Pius XII stated:  "Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent, since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority.  For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say:  'He who heareth you, heareth me' (Luke 10:16); and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine.  But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians."  See also Joseph Clifford Fenton, "Humani Generis and the Holy Father's Ordinary Magisterium," American Ecclesiastical Review 125 (1951): 53-62.  In reference to Pius XII's statement about the Roman Pontiff's supreme teaching power, Msgr. Fenton explains that, "This 'suprema magisterii potestas' is in no way limited to the solemn teaching activity of the Holy Father, to the exclusion of the doctrinal pronouncements he makes in the ordinary manner.  Neither is it in any way restricted to the primary object of the Church's doctrinal competence to the exclusion of those truths which lie within what is known as the secondary object of the Church's infallible teaching power.  The Holy Father actually exercises his 'suprema magisterii potestas' whenever he issues an infallible or irrevocable doctrinal decision or pronouncement binding upon the universal Church militant.  The mode or manner of such a pronouncement may be either solemn and extraordinary or ordinary.  . . . [W]here the decision is final and is addressed to and binding upon the universal Church militant, the utterance is an exercise of the 'suprema magisterii potestas'.  This holds true, we must remember, whether the statement be one of solemn judgment or an utterance of the Ordinary Magisterium."

[8] See Luke 22:31-32; see also Pope John Paul II, The Magisterium Exercises Authority in Christ's Name (L'Osservatore Romano, 24 Nov. 1995); see also Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Magisterial Documents and Public Dissent, part 1, no. 2, (L'Osservatore Romano, 29 Jan. 1997).  The fact that the Pope has the authority to confirm or reaffirm that a doctrine has been infallibly taught by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, even without recourse to a new solemn dogmatic definition, was clarified by Cardinal Bertone in an article he wrote for the Vatican's official newspaper.  In the essay he explained that the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, and the other recent interventions by the Papal Magisterium on doctrinal matters, were an expression of the common certitude already possessed by the Church on these issues, and he then went on to say that:  “In the light of these considerations, it seems a pseudo-problem to wonder whether this papal act of confirming a teaching of the ordinary, universal Magisterium is infallible or not.  In fact, although it is not per se a dogmatic definition (like the Trinitarian dogma of Nicaea, the Christological dogma of Chalcedon or the Marian dogmas), a papal pronouncement of confirmation enjoys the same infallibility as the teaching of the ordinary, universal Magisterium, which includes the Pope not as a mere Bishop but as the Head of the Episcopal College.”

[9] See Fr. Joachim Salaverri, Sacrae Theologiae Summa, (Madrid, B.A.C., 5th edition, 1962), vol. 1, nos. 645-647.

[10] CDF Official Doctrinal Commentary on the Professio Fidei, no. 9.

[11] See Vatican 1, Dogmatic Constitution Pastor Aeternus, chap. 3, nos. 2-4.  The Fathers of the First Vatican Council infallibly defined the primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff, and the type of obedience required of the Catholic faithful to the decisions of governance and discipline issued by him, when they declared that ". . . by divine ordinance, the Roman Church possesses a pre-eminence of ordinary power over every other Church, and that this  jurisdictional power of the Roman Pontiff is both episcopal and immediate.  Both clergy and faithful, of whatever rite and dignity, both singly and collectively, are bound to submit to this power by the duty of hierarchical subordination and true obedience, and this not only in matters concerning faith and morals, but also in those which regard the discipline and government of the Church throughout the world.  In this way, by unity with the Roman Pontiff in communion and in profession of the same faith, the Church of Christ becomes one flock under one supreme shepherd.  This is the teaching of the Catholic truth, and no one can depart from it without endangering his faith and salvation."  Thus even in matters of government and discipline the Catholic faithful are, as a matter of divine faith, required to submit to the authority of the Roman Pontiff; and so it is clear that no dissent from a decision made by the Pope, even on a matter of discipline, is permitted.  See also Vatican 2, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, no. 25; see also CIC, canons 11-12, 16 § 1-2, 331, 332 § 1, 333 § 1-3, 752, and 1404; see also CCEO, canons 1491 § 1-2, 1498 § 1-2, 43, 44 § 1, 45 § 1-3, 599,  and 1058; see also the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 882.

[12] See Matthew 10:40, Luke 10:16, John 13:20.

[13] See Vatican 2, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, no. 25; see also CIC, canon 752; see also CCEO, canon 599.

[14] CDF Instruction Donum Veritatis, no. 23.

[15] See Pope John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, no. 4.  The Pope concludes this letter by saying:  "Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

[16] See Pope John Paul II, The Magisterium Exercises Authority in Christ's Name, no. 6, (L'Osservatore Romano, 24 Nov. 1995).  In this speech, which the Pope delivered to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, John Paul indicated that there are various degrees of authority to magisterial pronouncements, but he concluded the talk by saying:  "However, this does not entitle one to hold that the pronouncements and doctrinal decisions of the Magisterium call for irrevocable assent only when it states them in a solemn judgment or definitive act, and that, consequently, in all other cases one need only consider the arguments or reasons employed.  In the Encyclicals Veritatis Splendor and Evangelium Vitae, as well as in the Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, I wished once again to set forth the constant doctrine of the Church's faith with an act confirming truths which are clearly witnessed to by Scripture, the apostolic Tradition and the unanimous teaching of the Pastors.  These declarations, by virtue of the authority handed down to the Successor of Peter to 'confirm the brethren' (Lk 22:32), thus express the common certitude present in the life and teaching of the Church."  See also the CDF Responsum ad Dubium on Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, 28 October 1995.  In reference to the reservation of ordination to men alone, the CDF Responsum states that:  "This teaching requires definitive assent, since, founded on the written Word of God, and from the beginning constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium (cf., Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, 25, no. 2).  Thus, in the present circumstances, the Roman Pontiff, exercising his proper office of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32), has handed on this same teaching by a formal declaration, explicitly stating what is to be held always, everywhere, and by all, as belonging to the deposit of the faith."  See also James T. O'Connor (Editor), The Gift of Infallibility:  The Official Relatio on Infallibility of Bishop Vincent Gasser at Vatican I, (Pauline Books and Media, 1986), page 48.  Some theologians have argued that this doctrine cannot be held as having been infallibly taught, because the Pope did not consult the bishops prior to issuing Ordinatio Sacerdotalis; but this point was clarified in the Official Relatio of Bishop Gasser at the First Vatican Council, when he said that:  "Indeed it cannot be denied that, in the relation of Peter to the Church, to which Christ willed that the infallibility of Peter be joined, there is contained a special relation of Peter to the Apostles and therefore also to the bishops, since Christ said to Peter:  'I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail, and you, once turned, confirm your brothers' (Lk. 22:32).  This, therefore, is the relation of the Pontiff to the bishops which is contained in the promise of Christ.  If these words of Christ are to have their necessary force, then it seems to me that one should conclude that the brothers, that is, the bishops, in order that they be firm in the faith, need the aid and advice of Peter and his successors, and not vice versa." See also Fr Adriano Garuti, O.F.M., The Problem of Dissent in Light of the 'Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Profession of Faith', (L'Osservatore Romano, 22 July 1998).

[17] See Pope Paul VI, Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, nos. 4-6; see also John C. Ford and Germain Grisez, "Contraception and the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium," Theological Studies 39, Issue 2 (Jun 1978): 258-312.

[18] Pope John Paul II, Truth in the Magisterium, (L'Osservatore Romano, 12 Nov. 1988).

[19] See Vatican 2, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen Gentium, no. 25.  As Vatican 2 indicates, the religious submission of intellect and will given by the faithful to the Authentic Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff must be ". . . according to his manifest mind and will."  Thus to privately interpret the documents issued by the Magisterium, giving them a meaning that is different from that intended by the Pope, would be to fall into error.  See also note no. 6 above for information on the diachronic nature of papal teaching (i.e., on the doctrinal importance of the series of popes understood in succession).