?Distinction between doctrine and dogma?

[losh14]

Our holy Mother deserves all the recognition she has merited. Have we always and everywhere called her Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix? Therefore is this the sense of some faithful and not all the faithful? Is it earnest and pious desire in the joy of love for our Mother and not a doctrine?

Good question - should it therefore remain a doctrine (an official teaching and belief in such is binding upon all the faithful), or should it be elevated (as some groups have petitioned) to dogma?

Relatedly, considering the ubiquity of belief in the Immaculate Conception, what was the point of elevating the teaching to dogma? It wasn’t dissent within Catholic ranks, or if it were, there’s no such record of it. In other words, if something’s true, what’s the purpose of saying “Yes, this is really absolutely, ineffably without a doubt true.” Therein probably lies the distinction between doctrine and dogma. Some aspects are asserted with greater strength and in more obvious ways than others.

 

[atassina]

losh14:
I didn’t make myself clear. I am not sure if those title of our holy Mother are simply pious belief and therefore not doctrine, or are they part of the faithful senses of the people and therefore doctrine. Which is it and why?

 

[losh14]

losh14:
I didn’t make myself clear. I am not sure if those title of our holy Mother are simply pious belief and therefore not doctrine, or are they part of the faithful senses of the people and therefore doctrine. Which is it and why?

Oh I see, thanks. Someone more qualified than I can definitively say so, but to the best of my knowledge they are indeed doctrine, not just pious teachings. I think they’re doctrine because there is theological explanation behind them, and fairly substantial.

As for other Marian titles - Star of the Sea, Untier of Knots, spouse of the Holy Spirit - these I would think are pious but not mandatory. Having personally debated the concept of Mary as spouse of the Holy Spirit I don’t think this has been defined to the extent that would be expected if it were a required belief. Likewise the Rosary, while pious, is not a doctrine but rather a devotion, which is why you will not hear a Pope exhort dogmatically that one must pray the Rosary to find salvation, and why there are different versions of the Rosary allowed and practiced by the various orders (ie, some include intentions along with the Mysteries, some switch a Jesus Prayer for a Fatima Prayer, and as far as I know there is no harm in saying an Anglican or Orthodox Rosary instead of the one we’re all more familiar with).

 

[atassina]

that’s a good general answer, thanks.

 

[DavidFilmer]

Have we always and everywhere called her Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix?

Vatican II (Lumen gentium) referred to Mary as “Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix and Mediatrix.” These titles may thus be considered Doctrinal.

The term “Co-redemptrix” has never been taught by the Catholic Church as doctrine, and it has no official definition (meaning nobody can say what the title really means).

There are some who want the Church to designate Mary as the “Mediatrix of all Graces” according to a definition of the title offered by Fr. François Godts in 1904. So far, the Church has not done so (and it doesn’t look like it will happen anytime soon).

 

[atassina]

I’ll take a look at Lumen Gentium. Thanks

 

[Corki]

**The Catholic Church has never officially made any distinction between the two terms.**Many modern Catholic theologians use the term “dogma” to refer to teachings which have been clearly promulgated de Fide. In very modern times you will occasionally see the terms used in this manner (without explanation) in official Church documents. I suspect that in the centuries to come, this form of usage will increase.

The distinction is completely irrelevant to the average Catholic layperson. We are expected to accept ALL teachings of the Magesterium, regardless of whether they have been promulgated de Fide. This would even include, for example, daily Papal addresses from the Pope’s balcony - you will sometimes see such addresses cited on this forum to establish the authority of a particular teaching, even though no Pope would ever officially promulgate ex Cathedra teaching in this manner.

Exactly. For most of us trying to live our lives as good Catholics, there is absolutely no distinction. We owe assent of faith to BOTH doctine and dogma. To do otherwise is heresy. We owe obedience to matters of discipline. To do otherwise is dissidence.

 

[atassina]

I wonder if Blessed Mother Teresa ever pondered upon this issue. Now it doesn’t matter, she sees Truth Himself.

 

[losh14]

Vatican II (Lumen gentium) referred to Mary as “Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix and Mediatrix.” These titles may thus be considered Doctrinal.

Agreed on three of the four - Adjutrix I’ve not specifically seen as much definition on as the others. Maybe I’m not reading the right documents.

The term “Co-redemptrix” has never been taught by the Catholic Church as doctrine, and it has no official definition (meaning nobody can say what the title really means).

Agreed as well. There’s considerable debate over what it means. I think dogmatizing the title would only lead to more confusion.

There are some who want the Church to designate Mary as the “Mediatrix of all Graces” according to a definition of the title offered by Fr. François Godts in 1904. So far, the Church has not done so (and it doesn’t look like it will happen anytime soon).

I’m not sure what the purpose would be of doing so, other than giving recognition to a number of Marian apostolates who have been clamoring for this for more than a century.

I wonder if Blessed Mother Teresa ever pondered upon this issue. Now it doesn’t matter, she sees Truth Himself.

She may never have cared. Blessed Teresa was a simple soul. I admire her ability to accept the doctrine without question.