October 4, 2026
Dear St. Rita Parishioners,
Cardinal Ratzinger, later Pope Benedict XVI, was famous for saying that truth is not determined by a majority vote. Some of you may have even had the T-shirt (from the now defunct website ratzingerfanclub.com), which sported the quote on the back and left countless people with a pithy and memorable saying that still packs a punch. In this light, we read Pope Leo’s comment that “the truth is a gift to be shared, not a possession to be monopolized” (MH 25). There is a certain fundamentalist attitude towards truth, which for some, in contrast to “Scripture alone” (sola Scriptura), might be called “Church alone” – sola Ecclesia.
The Church, you will recall, is notably reticent to define doctrine. She only does so when it is necessary, and even then, She is very limited in the language surrounding the definition. The full canon of Scripture was only defined by the Council of Trent in the 16th Century, and that because it was challenged and rejected by the Protestants. The definition of the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception in 1854 by Bl. Pius IX, while placed within the Encyclical Ineffabilis Deus, is itself a single sentence. One of the reasons for this limited and reticent approach by the Church is precisely the discernment about truth that Pope Leo mentions in Magnifica Humanitas. New definition of dogma is rooted in the question of whether this particular Truth is a necessary corollary of other revealed Truth and therefore cannot be denied without likewise denying those other revealed Truths. It also requires discernment about the necessity of clarifying the status of said Truth. Though eminently necessary to all things, the Church has never produced a document to demand that we believe that God exists.
One the one hand, it would seem much simpler if there were an easy list of all the Catholic teachings that we could easily point to when evaluating particular statements in order to determine their veracity. But when you try to make a list like that, you get something like the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Even Ludwig Ott’s Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, which is a wonderful book, is a tome! Any philosophers out there who have read Gottfried Leibniz likewise know that systematically and syllogistically creating a system of truths and their interrelations turns very quickly into mathematics, which is obviously useful and good, but as humans, we need more than that.
Therefore, when I say that a “sola Ecclesia” attitude towards truth can be fundamentalist, I certainly do NOT mean that God wants to supplement His Revelation to, in, and through the Church with some other method. That would be, well, heresy. We are not awaiting any more new, public Revelation from God. That has been accomplished, and the Church is the bearer of that Revelation, which is handed on (trado, tradere, in Latin) down through the ages in what we call Tradition. Truth is not determined by a majority vote. It has been revealed to us, and we have the responsibility of preserving it and handing it on.
This is true also for the Social Doctrine of the Church. And yet, while the principles of Catholic Social Teaching remain the same – they are simply facets of Charity – the application of those principles require “shared discernment” (MH 27). The Church cannot and should not employ a top-down approach to certain questions of, for example, artificial intelligence and its employ in society. The Church cannot do this because, while She has much to say about the effect of AI on the human person and society at large, She does not have the technical expertise to deal in many of the particulars. Because the technical expertise is lacking, the Church should not speak if She cannot do so coherently and intelligently.
A fundamentalist “Sola Ecclesia” approach would limit the Church’s conversation with others who have both the experience and expertise that the Church in Her humanity is naturally lacking. If St. Thomas Aquinas had been unable to read, ponder, and comment upon the pagan Aristotle, we would not have some of his greatest works. Indeed, even Aquinas’ access to Aristotle was through Muslim philosophers! Therefore, we cannot discount the voices even of those outside the Faith when it comes to pondering and speaking about the issues of our day.
One might object, here, that Aquinas’ goal was, in the end, the conversion of Muslims (see the Summa Contra Gentiles) and the exaltation of the Faith, whereas language of “shared discernment” feels like putting other voices on the same plane as the Church. On the contrary, it is meant to engage the other voices so that the Church’s proclamation does not remain in an ivory tower. We can see, here, how the way in which I as a Catholic relate to Truth is precisely the aim of the Pope’s statement quoted at the beginning. Do I possess Truth? Truth, rather, should possess me. And Truth, though unchangeable, cannot be separated from Charity, which means practically that its expression is conditioned to the state or mode of the audience.
Truth preached “to” an audience versus “at” an audience, does not mean that it is watered down. It means, rather, that space is made first within me, the preacher, for the Truth to take root. This personal conversion enables all the more effective engagement with the world because I have discovered both the personal cost of conversion and also its even greater good effect within me. Such conversion also prevents me from monopolizing the Truth I have received, because, due to the presence and love of Truth within me, I rejoice whenever I discover Truth in another. And this reality brings us to the positive meaning of “Sola Ecclesia”, which is that wherever Truth is found, there also is the Church (“Ubi Veritas Ibi Ecclesia”?). And while the fullness of Truth is only found in Christ, whose Body the Church is, instances of said Truth in another are reasons to rejoice and opportunities for conversation, friendship, and deeper entry into that Fullness, who is Jesus Christ Himself.
In Christ,
Fr. Christensen