CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholic Continuing Education > Teaching Series - dogmatic theology
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10th May 2007, 11:54 AM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Angel View Post
Ron, I believe papal Encyclicals like 'Supreme Apostolatus' of Leo Xlll and 'Caritate Christi' of Pius Xl,
in which Mary is given the title "Mediatrix of (all) Graces", fall under the Ordinary Magisterium. There are
even encyclicals which refer to Mary as "co-Redemptrix". Do these titles constitute official doctrinal teachings?

Encyclicals are neither infallible or non-infallible. Only particular teachings within an encyclical are either infallible or non-infallible. Encyclicals can also contain material which is not a teaching at all, such as an exercise of the temporal authority of the Church.

The mere use of a title is not a teaching at all. When the Immaculate Conception was defined, the definition explained what that term means (without even using the term).

There have been a number of explanations under the OM of Mary's role as expressed in those titles, so it is more than the use of a title. However, it is not an infallible teaching (dogma). It may well fall under the non-infallible Magisterium.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10th May 2007, 11:57 AM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,586
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love The Fisherman View Post
Hi Ron,
It appears to me that it is the Non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium (The Local Bishop) that investigates and Rules in matters concerning Apparitions/Messages from Heaven. How can we then say that 'The Church' approves certain Apparition Sites? (like Akita). Also If the Non-infallible Ordinary Magisterium condemns certain 'Messages' Do I understand you correctly in saying that they cannot Err when doing so? I guess Im confused!

No. The local Bishops determination falls under the fallible temporal authority of the Church. It is not correct to say that the Church approves or disapproves of an apparition merely because the local Bishop has done so. The CCC says that it is for the sensus fidelium, the mind of the faithful, to judge such things.

The non-infallible Magisterium can err, otherwise it would be infallible. The extent of errors possible is limited.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10th May 2007, 12:32 PM
js1975 js1975 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 914
Default Communion of Saints

Ron,

Thank you so much for clarifying this. I could never find a reliable source anywhere that confirmed my misunderstandings. I think the Communion of Saints may be one of the most misunderstood topics.

-jay
__________________
2cor 7:1 Therefore, having these promises, most beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of the flesh and of the spirit, perfecting sanctification in the fear of God.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10th May 2007, 01:21 PM
Justin Angel Justin Angel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Korea
Posts: 163
Cool Cannonization of Saints

Jay, let us keep in mind that Blessed Christopher was eventually stripped of his sainthood and demoted.
So how can one infallibly judge who is a saint and who isn't? I was disappointed when I heard
the news about Blessed Christopher, for I chose his name when I was confirmed.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10th May 2007, 01:48 PM
Justin Angel Justin Angel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Korea
Posts: 163
Cool Marian Titles and Private Revelations

There have been a number of explanations under the OM of Mary's role as expressed in those titles, so it is more than the use of a title. However, it is not an infallible teaching (dogma). It may well fall under the non-infallible Magisterium.[/quote]

Yes, Ron. I meant what the titles denote according to papal explanations concerning
the role of Mary. I take it that Catholics are bound to give an ordinary assent to these
explanations or teachings concerning the passive, redemptive role of Mary. But because
her role as Mediatrix, co-Redemptrix, and Advocatrix has not yet been solemnly
defined as dogma, I find it hard to believe that the Blessed Virgin would herself use
these titles in her alleged appearances to several seers this past century. I for one
prefer a solemn definition and a certain explanation than an ambiguous title which most
Catholics have little or no idea of.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10th May 2007, 02:21 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,586
Default

I think that Mary's true role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix will not be defined under papal infallibility, but will eventually be defined by an Ecumenical Council (probably the one of 2028 to 2032).



Ron
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10th May 2007, 03:14 PM
js1975 js1975 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 914
Default

Justin Angel,

I think I read you mention this somewhere else. I don't know anything about this event. I did quick Google on it and came up empty. I wonder if the canonization process can be reversed? In his case, the canonization process must have been found faulty. The Congregation for the Causes of Saints was not formed until 1588, and prior to that I do not think that there was a formal process but instead I believe it was based on popularity and opinion. I could be wrong.

Regardless, even if you are not canonized, you can still be a saint in the Communion of Saints. To me this is a measure of hope and reason to be excited.
__________________
2cor 7:1 Therefore, having these promises, most beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of the flesh and of the spirit, perfecting sanctification in the fear of God.

Last edited by js1975 : 10th May 2007 at 03:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11th May 2007, 07:06 AM
Justin Angel Justin Angel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Korea
Posts: 163
Cool Canonization of Saints

Jay, you're probably right. (St.) Blessed Christopher was regarded as a third century martyr
who helped carry people over a dangerous stream. That is why he became the patron saint
of travellers for many centuries until the Vatican stripped him of his sainthood in 1969, because
the Holy See concluded there was no evidence that he had actually existed; he was probably
just a popular legend. However, St. Christopher medals are still being produced for Catholics
who believe that he had actually existed and is still a saint in heaven. We are free to piously assent
to this belief, for it is no threat to our salvation and may even serve to bolster our faith. Today
many Catholics ask (St.) Blessed Christopher to protect them in their travels. Meanwhile, the Vatican
cannot be absolutely sure whether he had actually existed and died for the faith, which would make
him a saint along with Stephen, Polycarp, Justin, and many other martyrs of the Church.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12th May 2007, 06:29 PM
js1975 js1975 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 914
Default

Well, thanks for that lesson. I had absolutely no idea, and Google didn't either!
__________________
2cor 7:1 Therefore, having these promises, most beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of the flesh and of the spirit, perfecting sanctification in the fear of God.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.