In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Chapter 9 Matters of Free Theological Debate At aJune, 1987 meeting of natural family planningexperts, John Paul II stated that the Church's teaching against contraception is "clear" and "not... debatable." As he put it: "What is taught by the Church on contraception does not belong to material freely debatable among theologians ."1 This statement immediatelycalls to mind a similar statement of Pius XII in Humani Generis. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their statements (in actis suis) deliberately state an opinion about a matter hitherto controverted, it is clear to all that matter, according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs, can no longer be held to be a question of free debate among theologians.2 Avery Dulles, S.J., in discussing the functional specialties of the hierarchical magisterium, refers to this statement of Pius XII as pertaining to the judicial function of that magisterium.He notes: Others [than irreformable definitions] may be reformable decisions which nevertheless carry with them a certain presumption of truth and which may carry with them an implied command to terminate a theological debate. The position of Pius XII to this effect in Humani generis (DS 3885), even though not explicitly repeated by Vatican II, still seems to stand, especially in view of its reaffirmation by Paul VI.3 The "reaffirmation by Paul VI" is a reference to that pontiffs 1964 speech to the CollegeofCardinals.4 The pope alludedto the ongoing debate on birth regulation and asserted that to that point he could not find sufficient reason for modifying the norms of Pius XII. He then added: 164 / Richard A. McCormick, S.J. In a matterofsuch great gravity,it seems well that Catholicsshould wish to follow a single (unka) law,that which the Churchauthoritatively proposesvAnd it therefore seems opportune to recommend (raccomandare; ["enjoin"?]) that no one for the present presume to speak (siarroghi dipronunciarsi ) in terms divergent from the prevailing norm.5 In this brief chapter I am not directly interested in discussion of birth regulation. Rather I am interested in exploring the meaning of statements such as "does not belong to material freely debatable among theologians" (John Paul II), "no one ... presume to speak in terms divergent from the prevailing norm" (Paul VI), and "can no longer be held to be a question of free debate among theologians" (Pius XII). In the process of doing this, I shall liberally enlist the aid of colleagues in ecclesiology, notably Avery Dulles, S.J., and Yves Congar, O.P. It seems fairly clear that John Paul II was using the concepts and language of Pius XII. Pius XII's assertion seems basically to be this: when the pope expresses hissententia, that gives the matter a doctrinal status it did not previously have. What was previously controverted, by the very fact of the expression of the papal sententia no longer is. The papal sententia has decided the matter. Given the atmosphere and ecclesiology of Pius' time, I believe that by the words "no longer be held to be a question of free debate among theologians" he meant to exclude any public disagreement with the papal position. He stated a factual situation (no longer a question of free debate) that he saw as the immediate inferenceof his ecclesiology: that any public disagreement with the papal position was unjustified. That was the way he conceived the ordinary noninfallible magisterium. It was simply decisive. "He who hears you hears me." Congar reflects this in his statement that the ordinary magisterium "in the light of an intense 'devotion to the pope', has been almost assimilated, in current opinion, to the prerogatives of the extraordinary magisterium."6 For Pius XII, "according to the mind and will of the same Pontiffs" meant absolute obedience. It is another question whether the same words used in a different era should be understood as Pius understood them. Overall, however, the usage of Pius XII does seem to conform to Dulles' description of it as an implied command. Where Paul VI's 1964 intervention is concerned, the same is not true. The command isexplicit. Paul VI made two distinct moves. First, he passed judgment (his sententia) on the reasons adduced to that point to modify the norms of Pius XII on contraception. He found them wanting. As he worded it, "We say frankly that We do not so far see any adequate reason for considering the relevant norms of Pius XII superseded and therefore no longer obligatory."7 The pope immediately added: "They should, therefore...

Share