Pope Eugene IV's Papal Bull "Cantate Domino": How "weighty"?

[thinkandmull]

Paul circumcized Timothy don’t forget

 

[ahs]

oh there’s the quote

In fairness, Pope Pius XII didn’t write that in an Encyclical (that I know of). So we have to look broadly at many different facts/evidences/historical contexts, etc…

Yes, I’ve considered Timothy’s circumcision. I think Pope Eugene IV alludes to it (generally…not specifically) in that Bull.

 

[Hockeygurl]

From what I understand this is what the whole council of Jerusalem was about in the NT. I understand that it was decided that Gentiles would not be required to observe the Jewish tradition of circumcision, but not that it was NOT allowed.

As a Nurse Practitioner, I have a skewed view on things and I try hard to keep it separate… but it’s amazing that Jewish practices of washing ones hands and keeping away from dead bodies (and many more references) helped to keep infection away. BUT, the bible is not meant to be a history book (but still amazing to me).

In reality, if one cares for ones hygiene…circumcision is not medically necessary, except in severe circumstances.

 

[fhansen]

What is the authority of a Papal Bull? I have a list tucked away that explains Encyclicals, Apostolic Constitutions, Decrees, etc…but no where on that list is “Papal Bull”. Can someone please explain to me about Papal Bulls?

The reason I ask is that I was directed recently to “Cantate Domino” by Eugene IV, in regards to the Council of Florence, regarding the Mosaic law observances, specifically on circumcision.

**Disclaimer: I am not here to debate circumcision. I want to know what to make of Pope Eugene’s statement and to know how “weighty” a Papal Bull is.

catholicism.org/cantate-domino.html

I get that there are language differences, manners of speech, key words that give a deeper meaning, and that some statements are rather easy to twist into a message that was not intended. But I am really scratching my head on the part about circumcision. Here is the pertinent quote:

"It firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally. Yet it does not deny that after the passion of Christ up to the promulgation of the Gospel they could have been observed until they were believed to be in no way necessary for salvation; but after the promulgation of the Gospel it asserts that they cannot be observed without the loss of eternal salvation. All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism, to cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal salvation. "

This just means what the New Covenant proclaims: that the Law can justify no one-and if we’re relying on it to make us righteous in the eyes of a God we’re totally off-track, out of sync with true Christianity.

 

[ahs]

By the way, I searched as well and I have to agree with Mark on the “Council of Salzburg-Vienna” and St. Victorinus’ writing. I searched and searched and found no mention of such a Council in 1267, and exactly what St. Victorinus was talking about isn’t so easily to discern as to use it as evidence in this case. He was explaining the book of Revelation. Here’s the link to that quote (scroll to “From the Seventeenth Chapter”) :
newadvent.org/fathers/0712.htm

 

[ahs]

Found a bit about the “twenty-second Salzburg provincial council, held at Vienna in 1267”. It was referred to as a “provincial council”. The most descriptive information I was able to find came from the Jewsih Encyclopedia: “The ecclesiastical legislation, especially the measures of the twenty-second Salzburg provincial council, held at Vienna in 1267, contained numerous oppressive regulations concerning the Jews.” ( jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13052-salzburg )
I cannot find anything specific about the writings within that council, but it appears to be a strictly local set of ordinaces to prevent Jews from enticing Christians to circumcise. Unlike Pope Eugene’s Bull from an actual Ecumenical Council, this statement from Salzburg-Vienna cannot be applied to the whole Church.