H
HopkinsReb
Guest
I’ll let you know if I ever get up to three.
- Status
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
The document was a Papal Bull. There have been dogmatic proclamations on bulls, but, simply writing on parchment with the silk cords and seals does not make the document infallible.
The specific document you speak of outlined very narrow and specific situations when torture might be used. This was never a doctrine.
K
Kullervo
Guest
How can we be than sure what’s actually binding for us if it can change? I presume we should live how the Church teaches it now and hope it’s correct.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
Yes, begin with Ott’s “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma”
K
Kullervo
Guest
Ok, that would resolve the issue. How do we know what’s actual doctrine and what’s in the same category as this bull and thus is not binding? I presume the catechism and what else if anything?
H
HopkinsReb
Guest
Everything current is binding, even those things which are not doctrinal/dogmatic. The Church has the authority to infallibly declare doctrines and dogmas and the authority to decide on matters of discipline that are not subject to infallibility.
For another example, look at married priests. It is the discipline of the Western Church not to allow married clergy (with a few exceptions). It is the discipline of the Eastern Church to allow married clergy. It is the discipline of the Western Church to abstain from meat on Fridays. None of these things are infallibly declared; they are practices of the Church, not teachings on doctrine or morals (though they do reflect those teachings).
The question to ask yourself is the nature of the document and the nature of the thing addressed. A bull addressing the currently preferred approach to dealing with heretics is, basically, an internal memo. It’s a statement of procedure, not a statement of doctrine or morals.
The Church makes no claim to its infallibility in these matters; she is capable of erring in matters of discipline. That doesn’t make its decisions in this regard any less binding on us, but it does mean that they’re subject to change.
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
The book that I suggested will help you understand the Dogmas of the Church.
The dogmas and doctrines relate to faith and morals. Procedural things are disciplines.
The dogmas and doctrines relate to faith and morals. Procedural things are disciplines.
Last edited:
J
JanetF
Guest
I suggest that you check this out:
www.catholic.com
and, this
www.catholic.com
Infallibility
Infallibility, in theological usage, is the supernatural prerogative by which the Church of Christ is, by a special Divine assistance, preserved from liability to error in her definitive dogmatic teaching regarding matters of faith and morals.
and, this
Which Church teachings have been declared infallible?
The Church has not yet compiled a list of all infallible teachings or dogmatic definitions. However, all of the teachings you name are infallible. Some of them—...
Last edited:
K
Kullervo
Guest
Thanks for all the answers and the resources for further reading!
W
whatistrue
Guest
If you add up all the fractions of the various languages I either studied in school a long time ago or was exposed to during 10 years travelling the world courtesy of my rich uncle Samuel, such as knowing how to ask for directions to the nearest toilet, and maybe knowing just enough to get my face slapped when I mispronounce something, it might add up to a second…
There are two: the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and her Immaculate Conception.
The dogma of the Assumption, as discussed in another forum here recently, does not require us to believe either that Mary was assumed before she died, or that she died before she was assumed. We simply don’t know. There is more evidence that she did in fact die first, but we do not know this with absolute certainty. So that part’s not dogmatic either way. The Church phrased this carefully in proclaiming the dogma.
S
SeekSalvation
Guest
You need to learn what ‘DOGMA’ is. Apparently by your response you don’t!!!
The Catholic Church teaches both of these things as dogma.
Please provide your definition of the word dogma, and what would be examples of dogma according to your definition.
Please provide your definition of the word dogma, and what would be examples of dogma according to your definition.
You are quite right, and I did not phrase this clearly enough. I meant that these are the only two dogmas the Pope has taught ex cathedra and infallibly, after the doctrine of papal infallibility was proclaimed in 1870 (which was itself an infallible declaration). There are many de fide infallible dogmas, just not proclaimed in this fashion.
Father Ott’s volume (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma), as well as Jone’s Moral Theology, should be in every Catholic home. Both are hard to find and fairly pricey.
Father Ott’s volume (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma), as well as Jone’s Moral Theology, should be in every Catholic home. Both are hard to find and fairly pricey.
Last edited:
G
Genesis315
Guest
You need to understand when the Pope must be infallible. Generally he is a person like the rest of us.
Papal infallibility is a necessary consequence of the permanence of the primacy in the Church. The particular church in primacy (the Church of Rome–the Apostolic See) cannot be separated from the universal Church nor the universal Church from it. The universal Church therefore must hold the same faith as the Church of Rome.
Should the Church of Rome require an error to be believed in order to have communion with it, either the Church of Rome would defect from the universal Church or the entire Church would defect into error following Rome–and both things are impossible.
Therefore, in as much as the bishop of Rome–the authorized teacher of the Church of Rome–provides a judgment as to a doctrine that must be held be held in order to maintain communion in the Church, it must be true, otherwise it would lead to one of the two impossible conditions above.
Popes do and say tons of stuff that has no consequence on communion in the Church–contradictions here may be ascribed to human error or simply different prudential judgments. That being said, despite the myth that they have only done so twice, they do often definitively judge what must be believed or held in order to maintain communion in the Church. There are no contradictions here, otherwise the whole Church would have defected or lost the primacy.
Last edited:
T
TheLittleLady
Guest
There are many infallible dogmas of the Church
- Status