This is totally incorrect. Sorry.
This is totally incorrect. Sorry.
A sorry bare denial, which is contrary to the evidence. And which also applies to those who dissent in part from modern V2 teaching.
First, the pope certainly has a right and function to discern new developments and to teach what Catholic teaching is in the light of social developments, including ecological damage and economy, like as as Pope John XXIII did in Mater et magistra in teaching what Catholic morality demands as regarding determining a just wage.
As a RC commentator states,
Human beings are by nature social animals. If our lives are to be led within society, then it surely would be odd if the Church, whose precepts we must follow if we hope to reach eternal life, could have nothing to say about one of the central aspects of human social life, our economic conduct. Those who endeavor to restrict the Church’s teaching are trying to erect an arbitrary and artificial limitation on her authority. This is not compatible with Catholic orthodoxy. As Pius XI wrote in his first encyclical, Ubi Arcano (1922), concerning those who do not conform their thinking and writing to the social teachings of the popes: “In all this we recognize a kind of moral, judicial, and social Modernism, and We condemn it as strongly as We do dogmatic Modernism” (#61). - https://ethikapolitika.org/2014/09/29/authority-catholic-social-teaching/
The "Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church" (2005) states,
80. In the Church’s social doctrine the Magisterium is at work in all its various components and expressions. … Insofar as it is part of the Church’s moral teaching, the Church’s social doctrine has the same dignity and authority as her moral teaching. It is authentic Magisterium, which obligates the faithful to adhere to it. - http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
They have the duty of observing the constitutions and decrees conveyed by the legitimate authority of the Church. Even if they concern disciplinary matters, these determinations call for docility in charity. - Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2037.
And it is evidenced that the popes last encyclical (http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html) is intended to teach what the Church's moral teaching demands as regards ecology and economy.
For the pope presents his teaching as based upon Catholic teaching. Francis first invokes Pope Saint John XXIII who fifty years ago wrote an Encyclical which addressed his message Pacem in Terris to the entire “Catholic world” and indeed “to all men and women of good will,” as a precedent for this Encyclical.
Next he invokes Pope Paul VI who in 1971 referred to the ecological concern as “a tragic consequence” of unchecked human activity:
Then Francis calls upon Saint John Paul II who In his first Encyclical warned that human beings frequently seem “to see no other meaning in their natural environment than what serves for immediate use and consumption”.
And next he cites predecessor Benedict XVI as having likewise proposed “eliminating the structural causes of the dysfunctions of the world economy and correcting models of growth which have proved incapable of ensuring respect for the environment.”
Then he enlists Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew as speaking in particular of the need for each of us to repent of the ways we have harmed the planet, for “inasmuch as we all generate small ecological damage.”
Next Saint Francis of Assisi is appealed to as the patron saint of all who study and work in the area of ecology,
Francis proceeds to invoke church teaching as foundational to his concerns.
The development of the Church’s social teaching represents such a synthesis with regard to social issues; this teaching is called to be enriched by taking up new challenges.
He next cites "THE WISDOM OF THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS" regarding about the relationship of human beings with the world, and as how the "originally harmonious relationship between human beings and nature became conflictual" (cf. Gen 3:17-19). And that "the unbridled exploitation of nature by painting him as domineering and destructive by nature...is not a correct interpretation of the Bible as understood by the Church."
He proceeds to invoke the story of Cain and Abel, and numerous other texts for support. And how "The work of the Church seeks not only to remind everyone of the duty to care for nature, but at the same time “she must above all protect mankind from self-destruction”"
And that "In our time, the Church does not simply state that other creatures are completely subordinated to the good of human beings, as if they have no worth in themselves and can be treated as we wish." And how The Catechism clearly and forcefully criticizes a distorted anthropocentrism...
Francis further calls upon Saint John Paul II as teaching, stating that “God gave the earth to the whole human race for the sustenance of all its members, without excluding or favouring anyone”.
Moving on, under New biological technologies, he states that the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that experimentation on animals is morally acceptable only “if it remains within reasonable limits..." and goes on to "recall the balanced position of Saint John Paul II."
Francis does on to invoke Benedict XVI as affirming "there is urgent need of a true world political authority, as my predecessor Blessed John XXIII indicated some years ago”
And how the Church set before the world the ideal of a “civilization of love”. And imagines "the Eucharist is itself an act of cosmic love.."
Finally, 172 references in this encyclical cite church teaching and prelates for support.
2. The authority of papal encyclicals is understood as being "undoubtedly great. It is, in a sense, sovereign. It is the teaching of the supreme pastor and teacher of the Church. Hence the faithful have a strict obligation to receive this teaching with an infinite respect. A man must not be content simply not to contradict it openly and in a more or less scandalous fashion. An internal mental assent is demanded. It should be received as the teaching sovereignly authorized within the Church." - Encyclicals: http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/encyclicals/docauthority.htm
20. Nor must it be thought that what is expounded in Encyclical Letters does not of itself demand consent , since in writing such Letters the Popes do not exercise the supreme power of their Teaching Authority. For these matters are taught with the ordinary teaching authority, of which it is true to say: "He who heareth you, heareth me";[3] and generally what is expounded and inculcated in Encyclical Letters already for other reasons appertains to Catholic doctrine. But if the Supreme Pontiffs in their official documents purposely pass judgment on a matter up to that time under dispute, it is obvious that that matter, according to the mind and will of the Pontiffs, cannot be any longer considered a question open to discussion among theologians. - PIUS XII, HUMANI GENERI, August 1950; http://w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html
In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will.- POPE PAUL VI, LUMEN GENTIUM; http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html-
And it is obvious that Francis sees Climate Change as a dire threat, and that RC faith and morality requires the response he provides, and thus all RCs are to do likewise, and not publicly dissent.
It follows that the Church is essentially an unequal society, that is, a society comprising two categories of per sons, the Pastors and the flock...the one duty of the multitude is to allow themselves to be led, and, like a docile flock, to follow the Pastors . - VEHEMENTER NOS, an Encyclical of Pope Pius X promulgated on February 11, 1906.
Which type of submission has some weighty endorsement:
I say with Cardinal Bellarmine whether the Pope be infallible or not in any pronouncement, anyhow he is to be obeyed . No good can come from disobedience. His facts and his warnings may be all wrong; his deliberations may have been biassed. He may have been misled. Imperiousness and craft, tyranny and cruelty, may be patent in the conduct of his advisers and instruments. But when he speaks formally and authoritatively he speaks as our Lord would have him speak, and all those imperfections and sins of individuals are overruled for that result which our Lord intends (just as the action of the wicked and of enemies to the Church are overruled) and therefore the Pope's word stands, and a blessing goes with obedience to it, and no blessing with disobedience. - Life of Cardinal Newman, Vol. 2; Chapter 26. The Deadlock in Higher Education (1867); http://www.newmanreader.org/biography/ward/volume2/chapter26.html
when we love the Pope, there are no discussions regarding what he orders or demands, or up to what point obedience must go, and in what things he is to be obeyed ; when we love the Pope, we do not say that he has not spoken clearly enough, almost as if he were forced to repeat to the ear of each one the will clearly expressed so many times not only in person, but with letters and other public documents ; we do not place his orders in doubt, adding the facile pretext of those unwilling to obey – that it is not the Pope who commands, but those who surround him; we do not limit the field in which he might and must exercise his authority ; we do not set above the authority of the Pope that of other persons, however learned, who dissent from the Pope, who, even though learned, are not holy, because whoever is holy cannot dissent from the Pope.
The Bishops form the most sacred part of the Church, that which instructs and governs men by divine right; and so he who resists them and stubbornly refuses to obey their word places himself outside the Church [cf. Matt. 18:18]. But obedience must not limit itself to matters which touch the faith: its sphere is much more vast: it extends to all matters which the episcopal power embraces. - (Pope Saint Pius X, Allocution Vi ringrazio to priests on the 50th anniversary of the Apostolic Union, November 18, 1912, as found at http://www.christorchaos.com/?q=content/choosing-ignore-pope-leo-xiii-and-pope-saint-pius-x
to scrutinize the actions of a bishop, to criticize them, does not belong to individual Catholics, but concerns only those who, in the sacred hierarchy, have a superior power; above all, it concerns the Supreme Pontiff, for it is to him that Christ confided the care of feeding not only all the lambs, but even the sheep [cf. John 21:17]. - Est Sane Molestum (1888) Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.novusordowatch.org/est-sane-molestum-leo-xiii.htm
To the shepherds alone was given all power to teach, to judge, to direct; on the faithful was imposed the duty of following their teaching, of submitting with docility to their judgment, and of allowing themselves to be governed, corrected, and guided by them in the way of salvation. Thus, it is an absolute necessity for the simple faithful to submit in mind and heart to their own pastors, and for the latter to submit with them to the Head and Supreme Pastor....
Similarly, it is to give proof of a submission which is far from sincere to set up some kind of opposition between one Pontiff and another. Those who, faced with two differing directives, reject the present one to hold to the past, are not giving proof of obedience to the authority which has the right and duty to guide them; and in some ways they resemble those who, on receiving a condemnation, would wish to appeal to a future council, or to a Pope who is better informed.
On this point what must be remembered is that in the government of the Church, except for the essential duties imposed on all Pontiffs by their apostolic office, each of them can adopt the attitude which he judges best according to times and circumstances. Of this he alone is the judge. It is true that for this he has not only special lights, but still more the knowledge of the needs and conditions of the whole of Christendom, for which, it is fitting, his apostolic care must provide. - Epistola Tua (1885), Apostolic Letter of Pope Leo XIII; http://www.ewtn.com/vexperts/showmessage_print.asp?number=403215&language=en
The above source thus asks, "Again, are these obsolete? Do they only apply when we agree? If we don't follow the advise above, are we not just Protestants?"
Such assent is what sanctioned teaching as these exhort:
“All that we must do [as must be patent enough now] is to submit our judgment and conform our beliefs to the authority Almighty God has set up on earth to teach us; this, and nothing else.”
“Absolute, immediate, and unfaltering submission to the teaching of God's Church on matters of faith and morals-----this is what all must give..”
“The Vicar of Christ is the Vicar of God; to us the voice of the Pope is the voice of God. This, too, is why Catholics would never dream of calling in question the utterance of a priest in expounding Christian doctrine according to the teaching of the Church;”
“He is as sure of a truth when declared by the Catholic Church as he would be if he saw Jesus Christ standing before him and heard Him declaring it with His Own Divine lips.”
“So if God [via Rome] declares that the Blessed Virgin was conceived Immaculate, or that there is a Purgatory, or that the Holy Eucharist is the real Body and Blood of Jesus Christ, shall we say, "I am not sure about that. I must examine it for myself; I must see whether it is true, whether it is Scriptural?"
“..our act of confidence and of blind obedience is highly honoring to Almighty God,..” —“Henry G. Graham, "What Faith Really Means", (Nihil Obstat:C. SCHUT, S. T.D., Censor Deputatus, Imprimatur: EDM. CANONICUS SURMONT, D.D.,Vicarius Generalis. WESTMONASTERII, Die 30 Septembris, 1914 )]
"The intolerance of the Church toward error, the natural position of one who is the custodian of truth, her only reasonable attitude makes her forbid her children to read or to listen to heretical controversy, or to endeavor to discover religious truths by examining both sides of the question. This places the Catholic in a position whereby he must stand aloof from all manner of doctrinal teaching other than that delivered by his Church through her accredited ministers."
The reason of this stand of his is that, for him, there can be no two sides to a question which for him is settled; for him, there is no seeking after the truth: he possesses it in its fulness, as far as God and religion are concerned. His Church gives him all there is to be had; all else is counterfeit... (John H. Stapleton, Explanation of Catholic Morals, Chapters XIX, XXIII. the consistent believer (1904); Nihil Obstat. Remy Lafort, Censor Librorum. Imprimatur, John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York ) Therefore, although RCs censure evangelicals for seeking to ascertain the veracity of RC teaching by examination of Scripture as their supreme authority, even holding that one must have faith that Rome is authoritative and infallible (which premise is supposed to be the basis for RC assurance of Truth) to even validly know what Scripture consists, yet the fact is that RCs themselves engage in interpretation of their supreme authority. Such as what magisterial level many teachings fall under and thus the degree of required assent, as well as the meaning of such.
This results in disunity, with Rome today being an amalgamation of liberal and conservatives, and with those who dissent in part from V2 teaching and those who profess assent to all. Therefore you have the above teaching requiring implicit assent to basically all public papal teaching, and at the least forbidding public dissent, some of which comes from your own comrades who invoke it in refuting the "recognize but resist" stance of other conservative RCs.
And which you must reject or explain away (unless you will reject modern popes) in order for you to deny that you are bound to give assent of mind and will to social teaching, including the latest papal encyclical, and not to engage in public dissent. Although (unlike infallible teaching) you may internally disagree.