Plinio Corrêa de Oliveira

An explanation needs to be made in regard to the texts of Vatican Council I quoted in Chapter IV, in the third and fourth paragraphs.

Those texts perfectly define a doctrine common to all theologians, that is, that Holy Mother Church, by divine institution, is an unequal society in which there is a hierarchy charged with sanctifying, governing and teaching, and the faithful, who are to be sanctified, governed and taught. With his habitual clarity, Father Felix M. Cappello, a notable professor at the Gregorian University, in his Summa Iuris Publici Ecclesiastici, n. 324, thus expresses this common doctrine:

The whole body of the Church, by divine institution, is divided in two classes, of which one is the people, whose components are called laymen; and another, whose members are called clergy, charged with carrying out the proximate ends of the Church, that is, to sanctify souls and exercise ecclesiastical power (can. 107: Conc. Trid. Sess. XXIII, de ordine, can. 4 Cf. Billot, Tract. de Ecclesia Christi, p. 269 ss. ed. 3rd.; Pesch, Praelectiones Dogmaticae, I, n. 238 ss; Wilmers, De Christi Ecclesia, n. 385 ss; Palmieri, De Romano Pontificae—Proleg. de Ecclesia, 11).

The distinction between hierarchy and people, governors and governed could not be affirmed in a better way. And since this is a common doctrine of the Church normally accepted by theologians as revealed doctrine, it is not licit for any of the faithful to deny it. Therefore, the whole argumentation we established with the aforementioned texts of the Vatican Council is based on an indisputable doctrinal foundation.

However, it must be said that, contrary to what we erroneously stated in Part I, Chapter 4, (1) the texts of the Vatican Council were not defined by the Council Fathers. This is not a defined matter but a schema presented at the Council, which, due to the interruption of that august assembly, wound up not being proposed for the deliberations of the Fathers.

Therefore, for the reasons expounded above, to deny the doctrine contained in these texts would be to revolt against a truth always deemed in the Church as revealed.

As for the nature of subject organizations such as Catholic Action, that exist to help the Sacred Hierarchy in its teaching function, there are very decisive texts by the Sovereign Pontiffs.

In the encyclical Sapientiae Christianae, of January 10, 1890 the Holy Father Leo XIII, speaking about the apostolate of laymen in general, after recalling that the teaching function belongs to the hierarchy by divine right, says:

No one, however, must entertain the notion that private individuals are prevented from taking some active part in this duty of teaching, especially those on whom God has bestowed gifts of mind with the strong wish of rendering themselves useful. These, so often as circumstances demand, may take upon themselves, not, indeed, the office of the pastor, but the task of communicating to others what they have themselves received, becoming, as it were, living echoes of their masters in the faith. (2)

In the encyclical Vehementer, of February 11, 1906 His Holiness Pius X defined the same principles in other terms:

The Scripture teaches us, and the tradition of the Fathers confirms the teaching, that the Church is the mystical body of Christ, ruled by the Pastors and Doctors (I Ephes. iv. II sqq.) -- a society of men containing within its own fold chiefs who have full and perfect powers for ruling, teaching and judging (Matt. 33: 18-20; 16:18,19; 18:17; Tit. 2:15; 2 Cor. 10:6; xiii. 10. & c.) It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock, those who occupy a rank in the different degrees of the hierarchy and the multitude of the faithful. So distinct are these categories that with the pastoral body only rests the necessary right and authority for promoting the end of the society and directing all its members towards that end; the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors. (3)

Let it not be said that the directions of Pius XI in this sense introduced any innovation. In his speech to Catholic journalists of June 26, 1929 the Pope expresses the desire that Catholic Action, “not only help the Good Press in a powerful way but by the very force of things, make this into one of the most important functions, activities and energies of Catholic Action itself." In other words, the apostolate of the Press is a typical apostolate of Catholic Action.

Now, for Pius XI, this apostolate pertains clearly to the learning Church:

Catholic journalists are thus precious speakers for the Church, her hierarchy and teaching: therefore, they are the noblest and highest speakers of everything that Holy Mother Church says and does. By performing this function the Catholic Press does not become part of the teaching Church; it remains in the learning Church but does not thereby cease to be the messenger of the discipline of the teaching Church in all directions, this Church in charge of teaching the nations of the world.

Therefore, in regard to the hierarchy in general and to the Magisterium that belongs to the hierarchy in particular, the doctrine of the Pontiffs and the common teaching of theologians fully confirm the proposal made at the Vatican Council; and the arguments we developed in Part I, Chapter 4 are founded on truths that are not licit for anyone to deny, under penalty, if not of heresy, at least of erring in the Faith.

Notes:

1) [Trans.: In the sections titled “The Elements of the Issue” and “The Error Common to the Two Statements We Refute.”]

2) Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, no. 16.

3) St. Pius X, Encyclical Vehementer Nos, no. 8.

Table of Contents

Prev