The question of the relationship between the task of theologians and the magisterium of the bishops is a recurring one. The question goes back to a previous budget . Obviously, every human being can and must reflect on the divine mystery and the meaning of existence, and in the internship every person always possesses some "implicit theology". When this thinking is carried out from the Christian faith, such reflection, by its very nature, arises from adherence staff to faith in God revealed in Jesus Christ in the bosom of the Church, which is the community that transmits the Gospel. In this sense, it makes no sense to speak of limits imposed on Christian theology as coming from outside of itself. It is in the light of this faith that theology wishes to penetrate intellectually into the knowledge of God and his plan of salvation in history. For this reason, one can hardly find a theologian who rejects tradition and the ecclesial magisterium as integral elements of theology.

For their part, the task of pastors is to proclaim this same faith and, when necessary, to delimit its content - for example, in the Councils - in the face of interpretations that are alien to the apostolic faith. Theologians cannot do without the pastoral magisterium, nor can other Christians do without the pastoral magisterium, nor do pastors replace theologians. The magisterium and theology have complementary functions.

Theological reflection is based on trust in the intelligibility of God and his action in the world, even if it is not totally transparent to the human mind. This stimulates theologians to propose hypotheses that can facilitate the reasonableness of faith. This task requires freedom in the exploration of new perspectives. The ecclesial tradition has recognized this freedom since the first centuries (diversity of schools). But disagreements arise when some hypotheses are not coherent with the faith that one aspires to explain. On more than a few occasions, the task of clarifying such hypotheses has fallen to pastors, who thus exercise their responsibility in the Church. But we should ask ourselves if this phenomenon is not produced, at least in part, by the withdrawal of another characteristic function of theology itself.

In reality, the theological task has a communitarian and collegial dimension, so that the hypotheses are proposed first of all to the evaluation of the community of theologians. It is enough to think of the tradition of the "disputed questions". It is precisely the contribution of other colleagues that constitutes one of the reciprocal services that theologians must render to each other, and which makes the correction of pastors unnecessary. Perhaps we theologians are not exercising this fraternal solidarity in a climate of serene dialogue and mutual listening.