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
  #21  
Old 22nd April 2007, 01:28 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRW View Post
He is merely saying that after death and after purgatory (if necessary), the souls of the just have the Beatific Vision, even before being resurrected at the general judgment.

My understanding of your answer; souls still in purgatory, on the day of final judgment, will be received in Heaven and experience the Beatific Vison, and then be call to the final judgment...

Cecil

I don't think that the Pope answered that question in his statement. He is not considering the case of those still in Purgatory at the time of the general resurrection, nor the case of those still alive on earth at that time.

My opinion is that the souls in Purgatory at the time of the general resurrection receive their bodies first, then go to Heaven (though what you said is also a viable opinion). Those alive on earth will receive the benefits of the resurrection without having died and risen, in my opinion, and then they go to Heaven.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 22nd April 2007, 01:35 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRW View Post
“Pope Innocent’s teaching is to the effect that those dying with only original sin on their souls will suffer ‘no other pain, whether from material fire or from the worm of conscience, except the pain of being deprived forever of the vision of God.’ It should be noted, however, that this poena damni incurred for original sin implied, with Abelard and most of the early Scholastics, a certain degree of spiritual torment.” (Toner, Catholic Encyclopedia 1910, Limbo)

That teaching is probably not infallible, but instead falls under the non-infallible ordinary Magisterium. I don't want to get too far off topic here. My understanding of this is found in my article
http://www.catholicplanet.com/RCC/mystical-baptism.htm

Those adult who die without an actual mortal sin on their conscience, except the mortal sin of omission of not having found sanctifying grace in their life (neither through formal baptism nor through a mystical baptism) deserve Hell for that sin of omission, but with lesser punishment (as the Council of Florence said). This does not apply to infants, prenatals, or young children, who I believe obtain a mystical baptism by means of their premature deaths, for in this way they become united with Christ on the Cross, and so receive sanctifying grace at least in the last moment of life.

Recall the parable of the servants who were given talents. One servant hid his one talent and did nothing with it; he was condemned for his omission. This is analogous to those who fail to find sanctifying grace even into their adult years.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 22nd April 2007, 01:37 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,585
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love The Fisherman View Post
5, This Criteria is not met, Ron.

What is being taught infallibly is the Doctrine of The Particular Judgement.

It's a matter of opinion as to whether or not this document meets all of the criteria.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 22nd April 2007, 01:41 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,585
Default

Now let's consider this statement:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/jo...otalis_en.html

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.

Does it meet the criteria or not?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 22nd April 2007, 02:32 PM
Padraig
 
Posts: n/a
Default

It is handy having the five criteria to judge if something is infallible or not, but as I understand it you can judge something as infallible even though it has not the full five criteria?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 22nd April 2007, 02:32 PM
Rob Rob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sicily, Italy
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
Now let's consider this statement:

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/jo...otalis_en.html

"Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful."

Does it meet the criteria or not?


1.“the Roman Pontiff”
2. “speaks ex cathedra” (“that is, when in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority….”)
3. “he defines”
4. “that a doctrine concerning faith or morals”
5. “must be held by the whole Church



1. It’s Pope John Paul II writing an apostolic letter concerning the ordination of women, this is not a temporal decision, it’s a teaching about the Faith, so the first criterion is met

2. “in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32)” pope John Paul II is speaking as successor of saint Peter, not as private doctor, the pope is aware that he is making an infallible statement, because he is referring to Luke 22:32, the pope does not need to be aware that he is making an infallible statement for it to be infallible, truly is the Holy Spirit talking through him, second criterion is met

3. “I declare”, "in order that all doubt may be removed", "a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself" the definition is solemn, a final decision on a subject pertaining to Faith, all doubts are removed, the teaching pertains to divine constitution, the solemnity is evident, so the third criterion is met

4. “the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women” , the teaching is quite clear, no woman can be ever be validly ordained priest, notice that the teaching says “priestly ordination” no “deacon ordination”, so in future women could be ordained deacons without contradicting this teaching, fourth criterion is met.

5. “this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful”,this formal teaching is to be held by the entire Church, not just bishops or a group of people, the fifth criterion is met

In my opinion this apostolic letter is infallibly taught, because this apostolic letter fulfils all conditions for an infallible papal statement as infallibly defined in Vatican I. This is an infallible teaching and is therefore part of the Sacred Deposit of Faith.


Roberto
__________________
For to me, to live is Christ; and to die is gain (Phil 1:21)

Last edited by Rob : 22nd April 2007 at 02:37 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 22nd April 2007, 03:03 PM
CRW
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Pope John Paull II, teaching is infallibly through Sacred Magisterium. All five criterias have been fulfill and this question, in my opinion, is once and for all a dogma of the Church.

Cecil

Last edited by CRW : 22nd April 2007 at 03:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 22nd April 2007, 03:24 PM
Padraig
 
Posts: n/a
Smile

Cecil, can you show this through quoting the five criteria?

Just curious, this is interesting!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 22nd April 2007, 03:52 PM
CRW
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Padraig,

IMHO

Apostolic Letter Ordinatio Sacerdotalis of John Paul II ( 1 and 2 below)

The position of the Catholic Church: "She holds that it is not admissible to ordain women to the priesthood, for very fundamental reasons. These reasons include: the example recorded in the Sacred Scriptures of Christ choosing his Apostles only from among men; the constant practice of the Church, which has imitated Christ in choosing only men; and her living teaching authority which has consistently held that the exclusion of women from the priesthood is in accordance with God's plan for his Church (3 below)

In fact the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles attest that this call was made in accordance with God's eternal plan; Christ chose those whom he willed (cf. Mk 3:13-14; Jn 6:70), and he did so in union with the Father, "through the Holy Spirit" (Acts 1:2), after having spent the night in prayer (cf. Lk 6:12). Therefore, in granting admission to the ministerial priesthood,(6) the Church has always acknowledged as a perennial norm her Lord's way of acting in choosing the twelve men whom he made the foundation of his Church (cf. Rv 21:14). (teach infallibly (Sacred Magisterium)

Although the teaching that priestly ordination is to be reserved to men alone has been preserved by the constant and universal Tradition of the Church and firmly taught by the Magisterium ( 4 below)
Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful. (3 and 5 below)
Invoking an abundance of divine assistance upon you, venerable brothers, and upon all the faithful, I impart my apostolic blessing.
1. “the Roman Pontiff”
2. “in virtue of his office, when as the supreme shepherd and teacher of all the faithful, who confirms his brethren in their faith (cf. Lk 22:32),”
3. “by a definitive act, he proclaims”
4. “a doctrine of faith or morals” (“And this infallibility…in defining doctrine of faith and morals, extends as far as the deposit of revelation extends”)
5. “in accordance with revelation itself, which all are obliged to abide by and be in conformity with”

Cecil
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 22nd April 2007, 04:19 PM
Padraig
 
Posts: n/a
Cool

Thanks Doctor Cecil! I think I will put you in for Bishop!! I agree with you. I also recall JPII saying at the time that this matter was closed and no longer a matter for public discussion.
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 03:30 PM.


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