Sensus Fidei

Sensus Fidei to Consensus Fidelium Herbert Vorgrimler

1. Distinctions: a. Sensus Fidei: the sense of the faith (the instinct) i. Individual consciousness illuminated by faith (God himself) b. Sensus Fidelium: the sense of the faithful i. Refers to collective Christian community ii. Their instinct for the truth c. Consensus Fidelium: the agreement among the faithful\ i. Results from the sensus fidei 2. Biblical grounds for Sensus Fidei: no explicit grounds/assertion for sensus fidei/lium a. No post-Easter mention of any special gift of knowledge of the faith b. Early Christianity resisted temptation of elite knowledge c. Because of heretic teaching, office-bearers were necessary to safeguard truth 3. Early Church: Church: a theological dev’t of reformulation according a ccording to needs a. Church fathers: aware of the importance of multitude’s sense of faith b. Agreement of the faithful was a criterion of the genuineness and truth of a tenet of faith 4. Gregorian Reform: Reform: a movement toward a centralized papal “plenitude of power” a. Sense of the faith equated more and a nd more with doctrinal infallibility 5. Post-Tridentine Roman Theology: 2 forms of infallibility inscribed a. Pope: infallibility in docendo (in teaching) b. Faithful: infallibility in credendo (in believing) 6. Vatican I: 2 distinctions of infallibility a. Popes: have active doctrinal infallibility i. Pope does NOT need the consent of the whole Church when exercising his teaching authority b. Faithful: have passive infallibility which belongs to Church as a whole sense of faith and consensus 7. Vatican II: II: had recourse to ancient Church’s theology of the sense a. Church’s infallibility is found in its totality b. Distinction between active and passive infallibility dropped c. “The whole body of the faithful who have an anointing cannot err in matter of belief” d. “from the bishops to the last faithful” they manifest a universal consent in matter of faith and morals (LG 12) e. Infallibility lies deep within the totality of the People of God Sensus Fidei – Herbert Vorgrimler 1

8. 2 Questions: a. Are all believers, on the basis of their sense of faith, in some way competent to express and teach the faith, even in matters of theoretical truth? i. Rahner’s two-fold distinction: 1. Individual faith: we each have our own hierarchy of truths 2. Collective faith: the total wealth of the deposit of revelation a. Does NOT need to be present on all occasions in all believers ii. Role of Magisterium: 1. Subject to the Word to guard and interpret it 2. Obliged to listen to the “people” and take into account their FAITHEXPERIENCE

iii. THEREFORE: Ordinary believers, when they articulate their faith:

1. Do have teaching authority 2. Which comes from their dignity of being recipients of God’s prime revelation 3. Forms of articulation: a different language than magisterium a. Daily life of faith b. Devotional practices c. Parenting styles d. Narrative form e. Oral history f. Attempts in feminism, Latin America, Africa b. How and where can we discover the consensus regarding the particular items of faith

which come from sensus fidei? i. Proper and easier consensus: 1. Consensus considered as the concrete performance of faith in terms of human life 2. RATHER than a propositional articulation of faith 3. IN CONCRETE PRAXIS OF FAITH a. Nourished by a fundamental faith b. Rather than theoretical matters of faith ii. A deep connection with the simple, practical proclamation of Jesus 1. Shows to be very meaningful for the “people” iii. A witness of faith rooted in proclamation of Jesus 1. Consensus is greater when our praxis of faith is closer in spirit to the proclamation of Jesus 2. Beyond social groups or individuals 3. Becomes a faith-witness common to all believers

Sensus Fidei – Herbert Vorgrimler 2