CA Tracts have Imprimatur

  • Thread starter Thread starter anon50111284
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Great, but what about the voter’s guide? Any news on that end?

+veritas+
 
I know that the tracts on the Rosary and common Catholic prayers have been pronounced free of moral errors, but I am curious as to when anyone was planning to add anything about the Luminous Mysteries to these tracts?
 
Great News!!!
The CA tracts are great, I just love them.

I would just like to mention again that this does NOT include the Voters Guide.
 
THAT IS SOOOO AWESOME!!! I don’t know why I’m so excited, but I am. Now does that mean that I can quote from it and say it’s Church teaching? What’s the dillio?
 
40.png
jackpuffin:
THAT IS SOOOO AWESOME!!! I don’t know why I’m so excited, but I am. Now does that mean that I can quote from it and say it’s Church teaching? What’s the dillio?
Click to expand...
One cannot rely on an Imprimatur by itself as evidence that a particular work is free of doctrinal error. Reason being is that individual bishops, except for the Pope, do not enjoy the privilege of infallibility. The only time they exercise the privilige of infallibility is when in communion with the Pope, on a matter pertaining to faith or morals, they are in agreement that a particular teaching is to be held definitively and absolutely (Vat II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church).

So when a bishop affixes the Imprimatur to a book or pamphlet, stating that it is free of doctrinal error, this is not an infallible teaching. What it boils down to is that in his opinion it is free of doctrinal error. The value of an individual bishop’s Imprimatur is soley dependent upon his human capabilities, though the Holy Spirit can obviously assist, if requested, when making such a decision.

This is why a few years back the Nihil Obstat and Imprimatur practically disappeared from view. They were practically worthless due to bishops issuing them for documents that weren’t even close to being free of doctrinal error, to put it mildly. So today, as always, one still has to be on his/her individual guard when trying to ascertain whether a work is orthodox or not.

I would, however, put a much higher degree of credibility in the Imprimatur for a work by a known orthodox quantity, such as Catholic Answers, then many other groups, even religious orders. I trust CA, but not completely as they could still make a mistake regarding teachings, even with the best of intentions. The only one who is guaranteed to teach infallibly is the Pope, and all the bishops collectively when in union with him as noted above.
 
ni-hil ob-stat (nihil obstat, -stat, ne-)n. 1. Roman Catholic Church. An attestation by a church censor that a book contains nothing damaging to faith or morals. 2. Official approval, especially of an artistic work.[Latin, nothing hinders : nihil, nothing + obstat, third person sing. present tense of obstare, to hinder.]

[New Latin imprimatur, let it be printed, third person sing. present subjunctive passive of Latin imprimere, to imprint. See IMPRESS1.]
Excerpted from American Heritage Talking Dictionary
Copyright © 1997 The Learning Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Noted in the ,“3rd Person…”
 
Joe Oberr, You are absolutely correct about infallibility.

But wait. If the Catholic Answers Tracts do have the Imprinture, then they have at least the oversight of an authority. They are not something cobbled up by a scholar on his mountain top.
 
40.png
Exporter:
Joe Oberr, You are absolutely correct about infallibility.

But wait. If the Catholic Answers Tracts do have the Imprinture, then they have at least the oversight of an authority. They are not something cobbled up by a scholar on his mountain top.
Click to expand...
Agree.

Joe
 
An imprimatur endows it with a certain degree of authority.

Thanks be to God.

Gerry 🙂
 
I remember a few years back a “Bible Christian” approached me and handed me a track. I believe it was the “Roman Road” or something like that. As he began to walk away I said “wait a minute”, and handed him a CA tract. You had to see for yourself the look on this guys face when he saw it was a Catholic tract. “Bible Christians” or Evangelicals are not used to receiving a tract by a Catholic. In fact most non-Catholics are surprised to see a Catholic with tracts. I always keep a few with me. I will leave them on a bus, or slip one in a library book.
 
40.png
Sirach14:
I remember a few years back a “Bible Christian” approached me and handed me a track. I believe it was the “Roman Road” or something like that. As he began to walk away I said “wait a minute”, and handed him a CA tract. You had to see for yourself the look on this guys face when he saw it was a Catholic tract. “Bible Christians” or Evangelicals are not used to receiving a tract by a Catholic. In fact most non-Catholics are surprised to see a Catholic with tracts. I always keep a few with me. I will leave them on a bus, or slip one in a library book.
Click to expand...
Sirach14 (one of my favorite books by the way)

Keep up the good work. I usually can’t bring myself to part with my copies of the CA tracts even after I’ve read one two or three times. They are so concise and so enlightening.
You are correct about evangelicals being surprised when a Catholic is ready to respond. It is easier to engage a Mormon missionary or a Jehovah’s Witness than an evangelical - especially if you want to talk about history or taking a bible verse in context. For instance all of John chapter 3 and not just verse 16.
Newman60
 
40.png
Newman60:
Sirach14 (one of my favorite books by the way)

Keep up the good work. I usually can’t bring myself to part with my copies of the CA tracts even after I’ve read one two or three times. They are so concise and so enlightening.
You are correct about evangelicals being surprised when a Catholic is ready to respond. It is easier to engage a Mormon missionary or a Jehovah’s Witness than an evangelical - especially if you want to talk about history or taking a bible verse in context. For instance all of John chapter 3 and not just verse 16.
Newman60
Click to expand...
What in chapter 3 are you confused with?

exrc
 
40.png
exrc:
Newman60
What in chapter 3 are you confused with?
exrc
Click to expand...
The confusion is not on Newman60’s part. He’s saying that non-Catholics are taking a selected verse out of context. When the entire letter is understood, it is entirely Catholic.
 
JOE OBERR:
One cannot rely on an Imprimatur by itself as evidence that a particular work is free of doctrinal error. . . I would, however, put a much higher degree of credibility in the Imprimatur for a work by a known orthodox quantity, such as Catholic Answers.
Click to expand...
I agree that the NO/I adds a bit to the tracts’ credibility. But I suspect the primary purpose is not so much to bolster credibility, but rather to address a key objection of those (“Catholics” apparently) who are trying to keep orthodox teachings out of the hands of the faithful. The lack of the NO/I was probably being used as a cudgel to keep the tracts off church literature racks. After all, Protestant’s will rarely be influenced by the presence of the NO/I.
 
40.png
Veritas:
I agree that the NO/I adds a bit to the tracts’ credibility. But I suspect the primary purpose is not so much to bolster credibility, but rather to address a key objection of those (“Catholics” apparently) who are trying to keep orthodox teachings out of the hands of the faithful. The lack of the NO/I was probably being used as a cudgel to keep the tracts off church literature racks. After all, Protestant’s will rarely be influenced by the presence of the NO/I.
Click to expand...
Good point.

Joe
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top