THE DOCTRINAL VALUE OF THE ORDINARY TEACHING OF THE HOLY FATHER

We should keep in mind that the CCC is part of the ordinary magisterium when we consider the teaching of Pope Pius XII:

It is not to be thought that what is set down in Encyclical Letters does not demand assent in itself, because in these the popes do not exercise the supreme powers of their magisterium. For these matters are taught by the ordinary magisterium, regarding which the following is pertinent ‘He who heareth you, heareth me.’; and usually what is set forth and inculcated in Encyclical Letters, already pertains to Catholic doctrine.” (Humani Generis {1950}, DZ 2313).

From the Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, Pope JPII:

THE DOCTRINAL VALUE OF THE TEXT ~ The Catechism of the Catholic Church, which I approved 25 June last and the publication of which I today order by virtue of my Apostolic Authority, is a statement of the Church's faith and of Catholic doctrine, attested to or illumined by Sacred Scripture, Apostolic Tradition and the Church's Magisterium. I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith.

THE DOCTRINAL VALUE OF THE ORDINARY TEACHING OF THE HOLY FATHER IN VIEW OF THE HUMANI GENERIS

Extracts from the old St. Robert Bellarmine forum: “(The following is an exact reproduction of the text taken from the Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Convention of The Catholic Theological Society of America, 78-111. The Convention took place in Detroit, Michigan on June 25-27, 1951. Imprimatur, Francis Cardinal Spellman, D.D., Archbishop of New York, December 3, 1951)” [Footnote references removed; bolding mine]:

‘Humani generis insists clearly upon the Encyclical Letter as an organ of the Ordinary Magisterium. Pope Pius XII reprehends the position of those who would say that Encyclicals do not per se demand assent (assensum) because in them the Sovereign Pontiffs do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. He calls to our attention the fact that what is taught by the Ordinary Magisterium is the living teaching of Christ in His Church, as well as what is taught by the Solemn or Extraordinary Magisterium. Note that there is no mention of infallibility here; the precise point is the assent demanded independent of infallibility; and the position reproved is that of the possibility of withholding assent on the grounds that a Papal declaration is not infallible. The reigning Pontiff also reminds us that “plerumque quae in Encyclicis Litteris proponuntur et inculcantur, iam aliunde ad doctrinam catholicam pertinent.”

'(2) The Pope employs his Ordinary Magisterium when he speaks to the faithful, indeed as their supreme Pastor and Teacher, but in order to expound, explain, present Catholic teaching, or to admonish, persuade, enlighten, warn, and encourage the faithful; without calling upon the supreme exercise of his Apostolic Authority, and without, in the strict sense, defining a doctrine. In this case he does not speak ex cathedra and the Ordinary Magisterium is hence not de se infallible.

'Humani Generis

'First, some general observations.

'Humani generis insists clearly upon the Encyclical Letter as an organ of the Ordinary Magisterium. Pope Pius XII reprehends the position of those who would say that Encyclicals do not per se demand assent (assensum) because in them the Sovereign Pontiffs do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. He calls to our attention the fact that what is taught by the Ordinary Magisterium is the living teaching of Christ in His Church, as well as what is taught by the Solemn or Extraordinary Magisterium. Note that there is no mention of infallibility here; the precise point is the assent demanded independent of infallibility; and the position reproved is that of the possibility of withholding assent on the grounds that a Papal declaration is not infallible.

'What Humani generis unquestionably does intend to do is to stress (in this section, obviously) two major points: the assent that is due to the pronouncements made by the Sovereign Pontiffs in their Encyclical Letters, and the fact that when the Popes data opera sententiam ferunt on a matter up to that time controverted, this matter can no longer be considered open to dispute among theologians.

'The Assent Required

'There are three general classes of assent involved when we speak of the reception of the teachings of the Magisteria of the Church and Pope. […] The third class of assent we give to non-infallible utterances. It is this assent which the Holy Father stresses in the Encyclical Humani generis. It is generally characterized as “internal religious assent.”

'Now the Holy Father may certainly, in his Ordinary Magisterium, propose a truth for which there is real intrinsic evidence. If the intrinsic evidence is present and perceived in its demonstrative force by the assentor, then the assent given is characterized as knowledge (scientia). There is, of course, no difficulty here. Where we must more carefully examine the psychological nature of the act of assent is in cases – the very frequent cases – where belief or opinion, and knowledge, is involved. A truth may lack intrinsic evidence, or I may not be capable of grasping the force of the evidence; or the Papal pronouncement may deal with what is a matter of opinion, not of certain truth. But in these cases also, I am obligated to a real internal assent. It is on the strength of this fact that critics of the Church most often expatiate on what they regard as the intellectual tyranny of Rome.

'In the light of these Thomistic principles [omitted], we can clarify the assent required in the case of Papal pronouncements in matters of belief and opinion.

'Belief. When we accept a statement on the extrinsic grounds of the authority of him who states it, we make an act of belief. Thus, we believe things taught by the Pope in his Ordinary Magisterium. But this act of belief is by no means an unreasonable, or irrational act. My will does not “do violence” to my reason, and “force” it to accept something against which, on rational grounds, it rebels. This is, I grant, the picture that critics of the Church’s Teaching Authority like to paint, but it is an absurd caricature.

'Belief is not a sort of diminutive of knowledge. It is a way of attaining truth that otherwise could not be attained; for when intrinsic evidence is lacking – as it is for by far the great majority of the truths to which we assent, there is no road by which we can arrive at truth except the road of belief.

'No it is true that in every act of belief there is an act of the will. As St. Thomas insists in the Summa, in belief the intellect assents to something, not because it is sufficiently moved to that assent by its own proper object, but because it is moved by the will. [...]

'Applying this to the assent of belief demanded by a pronouncement of the Ordinary Magisterium, this is what we find. When the truth to be believed is presented to us by the Pope, the intellect, lacking instrinsic evidence for the truth itself, nevertheless does have a tremendously powerful and eminently rational extrinsic reason for assent: the authority and doctrinal competence of the Supreme Teacher of Christendom. This reason, since it is extrinsic, does not coerce the intellectual assent; it is not a necessitating reason, but it is a sufficient reason; and only on the intellectual judgment that the Papal Teaching Authority is a sufficient reason does the will move the intellect to assent. The act of belief, then, involving the will as it does, is neither unmotivated nor merely spontaneous. It presupposes a sufficient reason which of itself can determine it; it does not and cannot, from the nature of the intellect and will presuppose a sufficient reason which necessarily determines it. The reason, as a reason, is ontologically to be classified as potential being.

'May I repeat that our assent to the teaching of the Ordinary Magisterium is a fitting act for reasonable men because of the authority and competence of the Teacher who proposes the truth to be believed. Our belief is fundamentally a rational act and a justified act; and any charges of “intellectual tyranny” are just so much nonsense.

'So far we have been dealing with the assent required for what is set forth by the Pope as a certain truth. Admittedly the truth is not guaranteed by the charisma of infallibility; also, in the case of belief, the certitude is neither metaphysical nor physical. But we do have a high degree of moral certitude of the truth itself. When the Pope, however calls upon our assent in a matter of opinion, there are other elements to be considered.

'Opinion. Opinion, of its very nature, does not include certitude of the proposition opined; certitude always involves freedom from any fear of error, but opinion “accipit alterum oppositorum cum formidine alterius.” It would seem that the assent required in the case of an opinion is more complex than that we give to a proposition set forth as containing a certain truth.

'Before examining briefly the nature of the psychological act, however, it must be noted that the Sovereign Pontiffs certainly do require a dutiful submission to the Teaching Authority in matters of opinion. Pius XII, in Humani generis, recalls to attention the canon of the Vatican Council that stresses the obligation incumbent on the faithful not only to avoid heresy, but also those errors that more or less approach heresy, “and accordingly ‘to keep also the constitutions and decrees by which such evil opinions are proscribed and forbidden by the Holy See.’” In Humani generisthe injunction (following the wording of the Council) is given a negative turn – the obligation to repudiate a proscribed opinion. There is an even stronger admonition – affirmatively or positively phrased – in the Encyclical Immortale Dei.
Pope Leo XIII wrote:

If in the difficult times in which our lot is cast, Catholics will give ear to Us, as it behooves them to do, they will readily see what are the duties of each one in matters of opinion as well as action. As regards opinion, whatever the Roman Pontiffs have hitherto taught, or shall hereafter teach, must be held with a firm grasp of mind, and as often as occasion requires, must be openly professed.

'What constitutes, exactly, the “internal religious assent” that we elicit in a matter of opinion? I think it is two-fold. As regards the opinion itself, we do not, of course, have certitude that what the proposition states is true. If we did have that certitude, we would no longer be in the field of opinion, and it is precisely as an opinion that the matter is presented to us. Motivated by the authority and competency of the Holy Father, we hold the matter precisely as an opinion. This is one aspect of the act of assent we make regarding a matter of opinion.

'I believe, however, that there is something more than this required for the integral unconditional internal assent we owe to the Pontifical assent even in the field of opinion. We also assent unconditionally, with no fear of error, to the fact that the opinion the Pope sets forth is well founded and safe, and is the opinion that we as Catholics are to act upon and follow. This two-fold view of the act of assent safeguards both the psychological reality involved and the docility due to the Teaching Authority of the Holy Father.

'There remains just one final word to be said in this section regarding the religious quality of the assent. Even where infallibility is not involved, nevertheless our assent, while not as intimately connected with divine faith as is the “fides mediate divina” we give to pronouncements regarding the secondary objects of infallibility, does ultimately depend on our faith in the Teaching Authority of the Vicar of Christ on earth. We assent as Catholics; with the humility and docility and whole-heartedness proper to a religious act. We assent not hesitatingly, not grudgingly, but gladly; not as slaves but as men eminently free. For we have seen the Truth, and it is the Truth that makes men free.’

The author of the article is:

Edmond D. Benard
The Catholic University of America
Washington, D.C.

Sorry for the duplicate paragraph that begins: ‘Humani generis insists clearly upon the Encyclical Letter as an organ of the Ordinary Magisterium.'

I would edit it if I had the capacity to do so.