Papal infallibility in documents

  • Thread starter Thread starter friardchips
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

friardchips

Guest
I was criticized by some in the thread-QUIZ yesterday because they evidently did not understand the seriousness or meaning of the claim being made. Some did not like the concept. So, here it is, in plain-speak:

Reading upon the Apostolic Exhortation, Marialis Cultis (St. Pope Paul VI), we see that the words summarise the understanding that within the celebration of the Immaculate Conception is textual recognition of the fact that the Immaculate Conception is the ‘beginning of the Church’:

http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_p-vi_exh_19740202_marialis-cultus.html ’
  1. As we examine the texts of the revised Missal we see how the great Marian themes of the Roman prayerbook have been accepted in perfect doctrinal continuity with the past. Thus, for example, we have the themes of Mary’s Immaculate Conception and fullness of grace, the divine motherhood, the unblemished and fruitful virginity, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, Mary’s cooperation in the work of her Son, her exemplary sanctity, merciful intercession, Assumption into heaven, maternal Queenship and many other themes. We also see how other themes, in a certain sense new ones, have been introduced in equally perfect harmony with the theological developments of the present day. Thus, for example, we have the theme of Mary and the Church, which has been inserted into the texts of the Missal in a variety of aspects, a variety that matches the many and varied relations that exist between the Mother of Christ and the Church. For example, in the celebration of the Immaculate Conception which texts recognize the beginning of the Church, the spotless Bride of Christ.(25) In the Assumption they recognize the beginning that has already been made and the image of what, for the whole Church, must still come to pass.(26) In the mystery of Mary’s motherhood they confess that she is the Mother of the Head and of the members-the holy Mother of God and therefore the provident Mother of the Church.(27)’
As I understand it, an Apostolic Exhortation (from researching this today) can be infallible, especially when reiterating and drawing upon truths already defined within the Church, and this is particularly evident here, in this document.

It occurs to me, that this is probably why St. Pope Paul VI structured the sentence as he did, when he said:

‘For example, in the celebration of the Immaculate Conception which texts recognize the beginning of the Church, the spotless Bride of Christ.’

In other words, this is an Apostolic Exhortation that points towards understood truths already present in other texts celebrating defined knowledge, and therefore this Apostolic Exhortation represents the Church’s recognition of infallibly defined truth.
 
Last edited:
The word “which” attached to “texts” refers back to the Mass of the Immaculate Conception. It is not saying that the Immaculate Conception is the beginning of the Church, just that the Mass of that feast has texts which refer to the beginning of the Church. If you’d like, I can use the Latin to demonstrate this. But it’s fairly clear in English.

-Fr ACEGC
 
Last edited:
It’s not ambiguous. The passage just doesn’t mean what you’re trying to make it mean. It’s not a discussion of infallibility or authority of documents or anything. It’s about what the words mean, and they don’t mean what you would like for them to mean.
 
I agree with edward_george. I think you’re misreading that sentence. It took me a few passes to get it. It’s wording was a little tough for me to process.

It helped me to replace the word “which” with “the”, and then it makes better readin’ sense.
 
Last edited:
friardchips said:
Because you state the language of Latin you expect me to jump in awe. Not at all.
Click to expand...
You can read the English translation however you like. As with all things in the Church, the only wording that matters is Latin. The English translation is not binding, the Latin wording is. Holding up the English translation as definitive proof while rejecting the primacy of the original Latin phrasing is a poor argument at best.
 
So those who translated did not do it properly? 🤨
 
Last edited:
I believe the text means what it says and is therefore not “ambiguous”.

It is “ambiguous” if you argue that it is “ambiguous”.

You said that it is not an “ambiguous” statement and therefore there is no argument.

The text says what it means.
 
Last edited:
I think we can trust that the translation is fine. Otherwise, we might as well all go and sell our Bibles, take down our sign posts and make public demonstration outside the Vatican for not rewriting the whole world into Latin.
 
The first means that you either trust or you might as well stop reading because the world is made up of many languages.
 
i Agree with edward_george1, It is not proper to single out a line and sentence and assuming things not meant to be and confusing yourself and others without reading the whole paragraph as a whole.
friardchips said:
As we examine the texts of the revised Missal we see how the great Marian themes of the Roman prayerbook have been accepted in perfect doctrinal continuity with the past.
Click to expand...
friardchips said:
Thus, for example, we have the theme of Mary and the Church, which has been inserted into the texts of the Missal in a variety of aspects, a variety that matches the many and varied relations that exist between the Mother of Christ and the Church. For example, in the celebration of the Immaculate Conception which texts recognize the beginning of the Church, the spotless Bride of Christ.(25) In the Assumption they recognize the beginning that has already been made and the image of what, for the whole Church, must still come to pass
Click to expand...
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p123a9p6.htm
Paragraph 6. Mary - Mother of Christ, Mother of the Church

**[963]
Since the Virgin Mary’s role in the mystery of Christ and the Spirit has been treated, it is fitting now to consider her place in the mystery of the Church. "The Virgin Mary . . . is acknowledged and honored as being truly the Mother of God and of the redeemer. . . . She is ‘clearly the mother of the members of Christ’ . . . since she has by her charity joined in bringing about the birth of believers in the Church, who are members of its head."502 "Mary, Mother of Christ, Mother of the Church."503
 
Last edited:
Well chosen in support of the thread. Thank you.

(Note: the above final post from ‘Francis’ consists of snippets - in the grey areas - from Marialis Cultis).
 
Last edited:
Let’s look at your snippets:

‘As we examine the texts of the revised Missal we see how the great Marian themes of the Roman prayerbook have been accepted in perfect doctrinal continuity with the past.’

The qualifier in this sentence is ‘perfect doctrinal continuity’.

’ Thus, for example, we have the theme of Mary and the Church, which has been inserted into the texts of the Missal** in a variety of aspects, a variety that matches the many and varied relations that exist between the Mother of Christ and the Church. For example, in the celebration of the Immaculate Conception which texts recognize the beginning of the Church, the spotless Bride of Christ.(25) In the Assumption they recognize the beginning that has already been made and the image of what, for the whole Church, must still come to pass…’

From this sentence, we are told that in the Assumption, we recognise the beginning that was the Immaculate Conception.

It is there for all to read and understand.
 
Last edited:
Let’s take a look at what is going on.

You are taking one sentence from a document and insisting that the way you are reading it is the only way to read it. This is despite the fact that a priest who knows the Latin original disagrees with your reading. Despite the fact that numerous other Church documents state that Pentecost is the “birthday” of the Church.

Does that not give you pause to consider that maybe, just maybe, you are misinterpreting the passage?

I’m all for discussion. I could even entertain a theological debate about how one might perceive that the Immaculate Conception is the start of the Church (in light of Mary being an archetype of the Church and all). But it’s a bit off-putting when you dismiss out of hand any opinion that disagrees with yours even while no one else has come forward to agree with you.

In looking at the way you read the passage versus the way Father reads the passage, Father’s understanding makes more sense, fits better in the context, fits better with other statements by other popes, and just sounds more believable.
 
The footnote from that sentence references:
25) Cf. Roman Missal, 8 December, Preface.

What does this text say?
 
friardchips said:
‘Proof in point’.

‘Proof is in the pudding’.

…two known sayings; both applicable.
Click to expand...
I already know what those mean. That was not what I was asking about.
friardchips said:
The first means that you either trust or you might as well stop reading because the world is made up of many languages.
Click to expand...
How funny that you should mention trust! So who should I trust in this? A lay person with no knowledge of Latin and a history of making obfuscating points, or a priest who has spent nearly a decade studying Latin, the language those very documents are written in and considered as the official and binding version, and the doctrines and dogmas that come from them?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top