Literally, it means “doubt,” but (here’s another case where that whole dynamic/changing language thing gets involved) it means, in modern context, a question.
When a Protestant says Scripture interprets itself, what does that mean? Does he own a bible that mysteriously adds commentary on itself in footnotes to scripture so that the Protestant can be sure of the meaning of a particular verse? Obviously not.
Right, but my point is that Catholics are always arguing as to what the Magesterium says. There is no doubt it is infallible, just as there is no doubt the Scriptures are infallible. That being said, there are very few things that are defined infallibly in such a clear way that nobody can argue the point. For instance: there is not a single statement of Magisterial authority which declares both clearly and infallibly the true nature of EENS. So what we have to do is to try to go through all the Magisterial statements on the matter and try to figure out what the right understanding is, just like Protestants have to go through the Bible and try to figure out what the right understanding is. The closest thing we have is LG 16, but even that is not infallible.
Who says the teaching of LG 16 is not infallible? Unrepentant Feeneyites? SSPX schismatics?
Actually, Benedict XVI has said this, I believe. I do know that most apologists I have heard do say this, including Mr. Akin.Who says the teaching of LG 16 is not infallible? Unrepentant Feeneyites? SSPX schismatics?
Lumen Gentium 16, and the references to LG 16, will give any faithful Catholic all the guidance they need to know the mind of the bishops of Vatican II.
My advice is to simply ignore anyone who claims that they better understand the Catholic faith than the bishops that wrote Lumen Gentium. There are a lot of cafeteria Catholics that believe they are more faithful than the pope, and these dissenters are found among both the “progressives” and the “conservatives”. Don’t let their lack of faith disturb you.
LG 16 references the **LETTER OF THE SACRED CONGREGATION OF THE HOLY OFFICE ** Given on August 8, 1949 explaining the true sense of Catholic doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church.
This important Letter of the Holy Office is introduced by a letter of the Most Reverend Archbishop of Boston.
The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has examined again the problem of Father Leonard Feeney and St. Benedict Center. Having studied carefully the publications issued by the Center, and having considered all the circumstances of this case, the Sacred Congregation has ordered me to publish, in its entirety, the letter which the same Congregation sent me on the 8th of August, 1949. The Supreme Pontiff, His Holiness, Pope Pius XII, has given full approval to this decision. In due obedience, therefore, we publish, in its entirety, the Latin text of the letter as received from the Holy Office with an English translation of the same approved by the Holy See.
Given at Boston, Mass., the 4th day of September, 1952.
Walter J. Furlong, Chancellor
Richard J. Cushing, Archbishop of Boston…If you have never read this letter, now is the time.
“The Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has examined again the problem of Father Leonard Feeney and St. Benedict Center. Having studied carefully the publications issued by the Center, and having considered all the circumstances of this case, the Sacred Congregation has ordered me to publish, in its entirety, the letter which the same Congregation sent me on the 8th of August, 1949. The Supreme Pontiff, His Holiness, Pope Pius XII, has given full approval to this decision.”
David,
Matt16_18 said:
To shed some light on this, let us look at Dominus Iesus. Pope John Paul II asked the CDF to write Dominus Iesus and Pope John Paul II ratified it when it was completed: The Sovereign Pontiff John Paul II, at the Audience of June 16, 2000, granted to the undersigned Cardinal Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, with sure knowledge and by his apostolic authority, ratified and confirmed this Declaration, adopted in Plenary Session and ordered its publication.
You are correct. I retract that portion of my comments with apologies, and I sincerely appreciate the correction.
You must remember that grace is a necessity for salvation. Through baptism we recieve sanctifying grace and are justified and sanctified. We CCC1036 is specifically refering to post baptism. Salvation of those who have not been baptized is left in Gods hands. The objective rule is that baptism is necessary but subjectively it is possible considering that God loves all and desires the salvation of all. God can act seperately from the sacrament if He desires.
That’s because you STILL persist in understanding the meaning of “hell” in the modern context, which (usually) means* “a place of eternal damnation.”* So you persist in equating the “hell” described by Florence as being the **same **“hell” as modern folks understand the word, even though Florence says that the innocent unbaptized have a **DIFFERENT **experience (which the Council does not define).
The Church hasn’t got around to outright saying it yet, but these quotes, this discussion, and my research lead me to think this: The innocent un-baptized go to Purgatory, which is a hell you can get out of. They must be made perfect to enter heaven and Purgatory is where that happens for anyone who dies with the stain of sin on their souls.
The council does not say that they will have different experiences. The council says that they will suffer different punishments, thus defining that there will be punishment for those with only original sin.
Like many Christian doctrines, the Council talking about a different form of hell and Pius IX talking about nobody suffering Eternal punishments doesn’t make sanse if you forget about Purgatory. In Purgatory, people experience a type of Hell. Jesus: “Amen, I say to you that you shall not leave there untill you have repayed every last farthing”.
Ahhh … you missed something very important, my friend.
What are you confused about?
After all of the back and forth opinions on this subject I still cannot tell just what the Roman Catholic church teaches on this subject.