The thesis to be discussed below argues against the notion that papal infallibility is restricted only to the Solemn or Extraordinary Magisterium. It proposes that the distinction between "ordinary" and "extraordinary" magisterium is a matter of degree of solemnity, not of nature. Using the analogy between a Low Mass and a Solemn High Mass, the thesis maintains that both acts are intrinsically solemn, varying only in their external ceremony. Consequently, the Pope's Ordinary Magisterium should not be interpreted as a personal opinion but as the authentic teaching of the Vicar of Christ, citing as examples the condemnations of modernism and ecumenism through encyclicals. The thesis asserts that even if a Pope were not infallible in the ordinary magisterium, he could not teach or promote heresies already condemned. It concludes, based on citations from St. Pius X and Rev. Edmund O'Reilly, that obedience to the Pope is due in his teachings, and that he is always infallible when teaching as the supreme pastor on faith and morals to the entire Church, as defined by the constitution Pastor Aeternus.
🏛️Analysis of the Thesis in Light of Liturgical CriticismThe presented thesis raises crucial questions about the nature and limits of the magisterial authority of the Roman Pontiff. The central premise that papal authority is not limited to rare ex cathedra declarations is in full conformity with Catholic theology. Indeed, the divine protection promised to Peter and his successors extends to their continuous teaching, ensuring that the universal Church is not led into error in matters of faith and morals. However, the application of this solid premise must be extended to its logical consequences, especially concerning the universal discipline of the Church, where the liturgy holds a preeminent place.
Catholic theology has always maintained that the Pope's power to teach (potestas magisterii) is intrinsically linked to his power to govern (potestas iurisdictionis). This means that universal disciplinary laws promulgated by a Pope, such as a new rite of the Mass, cannot be harmful to souls or contradictory to the doctrine of the faith. The adage lex orandi, lex credendi (the law of prayer is the law of faith) encapsulates this truth: the liturgy of the Church is the faith in action and must therefore be a safe vehicle of orthodox doctrine. Thus, a rite universally imposed by a legitimate Pontiff enjoys, at the very least, a negative infallibility—that is, the guarantee that it contains no doctrinal errors or precepts that are dangerous to the faith.
📉The Doctrinal Rupture of the Novus Ordo Missae
It is precisely at this point that the application of the thesis becomes problematic when confronted with the post-conciliar liturgical reform. A detailed theological analysis of the Mass of Paul VI reveals not a mere change in solemnity, but a profound rupture with the Catholic theology of the Holy Mass, the priesthood, and the Real Presence. The new liturgy, rather than reflecting and protecting the traditional faith, systematically obscures it.
For instance, the definition of the Mass presented in the 1969 General Instruction of the Roman Missal describes it as "the Lord's Supper or Mass is the sacred assembly or congregation of the people of God," where Christ is present primarily in the gathered assembly (Cekada, 2010, p. 142-147). This definition echoes Protestant theology and minimizes the central doctrine that the Mass is the propitiatory Sacrifice of Calvary, made present in an unbloody manner on the altar.
This conceptual shift is reinforced by the almost total suppression of the traditional Offertory rite. Prayers such as the Suscipe, Sancte Pater and the Offerimus tibi, Domine, which unequivocally expressed the sacrificial and propitiatory nature of the offering, were replaced by Jewish-inspired blessings that resemble a simple preparation of the table (Cekada, 2010, p. 347-352). The very structure of Eucharistic Prayer II, the most commonly used, has been criticized for its "deplorable impoverishment" and its ambiguity regarding the sacrificial character of the Mass (Cekada, 2010, p. 407-410).
Additionally, the systematic revision of the Collect prayers resulted in the elimination of fundamental themes of Catholic spirituality, such as detachment from the world, God's wrath against sin, the need for penance, the merits of the saints, and the reality of miracles, promoting instead a "new outlook" of engagement with worldly values (Cekada, 2010, p. 283-295).
⚖️The Inevitable Conclusion: Authority and the Promulgation of a Harmful Rite
If, as the thesis correctly affirms, the Pope enjoys broad authority and divine protection in his magisterium, and if this authority extends to universal discipline, it becomes theologically impossible for a true Roman Pontiff to promulgate and impose upon the entire Church a rite that is, in itself, doctrinally ambiguous, Protestantized, and dangerous to the faith of the faithful. The promulgation of the Mass of Paul VI cannot be compared to an encyclical condemning an error; on the contrary, it is a universal disciplinary act that, in practice, institutionalizes error and ambiguity.
Therefore, the strength of the thesis's argument regarding papal authority, when applied consistently, does not lead to the conclusion that Catholics must accept the new liturgy in obedience. Instead, it leads to a much more serious conclusion: a rite that represents a "rupture with tradition" and the "destruction of Catholic doctrine" (Cekada, 2010, p. 471-478) could not have been promulgated with the authority of Christ. The question, therefore, is not about the limits of obedience to a legitimate Pope, but about whether the authority that promulgated a "work of human hands" was, in fact, legitimate.
🏁Conclusion
The thesis under discussion correctly defends the breadth of the Pope's magisterial authority, beyond solemn definitions. However, it fails to apply this principle to the liturgical crisis. If the Pope is protected from imposing universal laws harmful to the Church, then the intrinsically problematic nature of the Mass of Paul VI constitutes irrefutable evidence that something fundamentally anomalous has occurred. Theological consistency demands the recognition that a rite that obscures the faith cannot emanate from the authority whose principal charism is to confirm it.
📚References
Cekada, Anthony. Work of Human Hands: A Theological Critique of the Mass of Paul VI. 2nd ed. West Chester: Philothea Press, 2010.