Bill O' Reilly: Doctrine vs Dogma

[monina]

Radio Commentator Bill O’ Reilly, a Catholic, defended his right to disagree with the Church on certain issues. He stated (paraphrasing) that there is a difference between dogma and doctrine–dogma was God given while doctrine was man given. He believes Catholics may disagree with the Church on doctrinal issues.

Is this correct?

He cited an example of Catholic teaching that one would go to hell for eating meat on Fridays. He said (again, paraphrasing), “I hope that there was a huge exodus from hell for all those poor condemned souls the day they changed that rule!”

Please comment.

Thank you.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

monina:

Radio Commentator Bill O’ Reilly, a Catholic, defended his right to disagree with the Church on certain issues. He stated (paraphrasing) that there is a difference between dogma and doctrine–dogma was God given while doctrine was man given. He believes Catholics may disagree with the Church on doctrinal issues.

Is this correct?

He cited an example of Catholic teaching that one would go to hell for eating meat on Fridays. He said (again, paraphrasing), “I hope that there was a huge exodus from hell for all those poor condemned souls the day they changed that rule!”

Please comment.

Thank you.

This of course shows that he is not well versed in the Faith he professes. Neither Doctrine or Dogma can be ignored.

He does have the second part right in a round-about way. Would one have gone to Hell for eating meat on Friday? Of course, but not specifically for eating meat but for intentionally and willfully committing a mortal sin. The Church in the past speaking for Christ, defined that all Catholics would abstain from meat on all Fridays and this was binding under pain of mortal sin. A Catholic who understood this and intentionally ignored it, if they died unrepentent, could become a “smoker”.

 

[justinmatter]

first, bill o’reilly, has definitely got the meanings of dogma and doctrine wrong. i don’t remember the exact definitions but what he says is almost certainly not it.

second, we can’t disagree with doctrine. the church was given the authority and the power to teach infallibly on matters of faith and morals, and define doctrines on these.

the example he gives is not one of doctrine, but of practice. an incorrect understanding of doctrine and practice is the root of several misconceptions about the catholic faith.

doctrine includes things like trinity, resurrection, real presence, etc. these are never going to change. they are infallibly defined.

practice includes stuff like no meat on fridays, priestly celibacy, etc. these can be changed by the church as and when she sees fit. however, this does not mean that we are allowed to disagree with the church on these matters or disobey them. as long as the church told us to abstain from meat on fridays as a mortification, we were to do so in obedience.

what we are free to disagree on, are those things on which the church does not have a fixed position as yet(and may never have). this includes stuff like evolution/creation debate.

i hope this was of some help

 

[Bill_Rutland]

Bill O’ Reilly drives me crazy with comments like the one above. I listen to his radio show from time to time and have heard him make other bone-headed comments like the one you cite. I am in agreement with others on this thread that Brother Bill doesn’t know what a doctrine or a dogma is, nor does he know the difference.

A doctrine is a revealed truth handed down to us from Jesus and His apostles. A dogma on the other hand is a special definition or explanation of a doctrine by the Church for the purpose of clarification. As such, we cannot in good faith disagree with any Church doctrine or dogma.

The meat of Friday prohibition was not a dogma or a doctrine, it was a Church discipline. I get the same old argument as was cited from Brother Bill all the time (mostly from Protestants but also sadly from Catholics too). The mortal sin involved here is not the eating of meat, but the blatant disobedience toward the Church.

Comments like these from O’ Reilly only serve to strengthen the misconceptions that non-Catholics have about the Church. Brother Bill owes it to his faith and to us to get his facts straight before shooting his mouth off.

PAX CHRISTI

Bill

 

[jimmy]

monina:

Radio Commentator Bill O’ Reilly, a Catholic, defended his right to disagree with the Church on certain issues. He stated (paraphrasing) that there is a difference between dogma and doctrine–dogma was God given while doctrine was man given. He believes Catholics may disagree with the Church on doctrinal issues.

Is this correct?

He cited an example of Catholic teaching that one would go to hell for eating meat on Fridays. He said (again, paraphrasing), “I hope that there was a huge exodus from hell for all those poor condemned souls the day they changed that rule!”

Please comment.

Thank you.

He misunderstands what doctrine and dogma are. Dogma is doctrine with a high degree that is definitly correct.

Not eating meat on Fridays is not a doctrine. it is a discipline. It can easily be changed.