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 27th April 2007, 07:58 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob View Post
I must admit that it is much more difficult to spot infallible teachings from the Universal Magisterium than papal infallible definitions. These infallible teachings can be defined over the course of time, even from one generation of bishops to the next one, so it is difficult to track these definitions.

Ron, are there some ways to easily spot infallible teachings of the Universal Magisterium? Cna you give us some examples of documents defined by the infallible magisterium so that we can get some ideas? Thanks

Anyway, I believe that teachings on contraception fall under the Universal Magisterium. Correct?

I agree that Church teaching condemning artificial contraception falls under the Universal Magisterium (UM).

Teachings under the UM are not found in one particular document, as are definitions under the other two types of infallibility. They are difficult to discern because they have no one particular document or written definition. There is no agreement among theologians about which teachings fall under the UM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 28th April 2007, 06:58 AM
Love The Fisherman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Ron,
Did Pope Paul VI not dealt with the whole business of contraception in his Encyclical HUMANAE VITAE.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 28th April 2007, 12:13 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Love The Fisherman View Post
Hi Ron,
Did Pope Paul VI not dealt with the whole business of contraception in his Encyclical HUMANAE VITAE.

Yes, but his encyclical is not considered to contain any infallible statements. So the teaching against contraception, does not fall under papal infallibility. And it has not been addressed by any Council. So if infallible it must be because the Popes and the Bishops are in agreement on one position of faith or morals definitively to be held.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 28th April 2007, 03:25 PM
john
 
Posts: n/a
Default bishops in communion with the pope

Hi Ron,
I am sorry I have been out of the loop for long. We may be relocating, etc., so I have been VERY busy. Anyway, I have been trying to keep up by reading posts. Now I have a question:

It seems to be important for us to be able to recognize the UM when iti is before us. But the UM makes reference to bishops in communion with the pope. What about bishops who say they are in communion with the pope, and who the pope does not censure, but who I may think are not in communion with the pope? Example: Card. Martini. I suspect we are going to get more and more of such cases, and if the official avenues of communication available to the Church to condemn heresy are not used by the pope or the Prefect of the CDF, how am I, a layman, to judge the credibility of bishops claiming to be in communion with the pope?

You probably dealt with this already. If so, sorry!

John
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 28th April 2007, 03:46 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by john View Post
Hi Ron,
I am sorry I have been out of the loop for long. We may be relocating, etc., so I have been VERY busy. Anyway, I have been trying to keep up by reading posts. Now I have a question:

It seems to be important for us to be able to recognize the UM when iti is before us. But the UM makes reference to bishops in communion with the pope. What about bishops who say they are in communion with the pope, and who the pope does not censure, but who I may think are not in communion with the pope? Example: Card. Martini. I suspect we are going to get more and more of such cases, and if the official avenues of communication available to the Church to condemn heresy are not used by the pope or the Prefect of the CDF, how am I, a layman, to judge the credibility of bishops claiming to be in communion with the pope?

You probably dealt with this already. If so, sorry!

John


A teaching only falls under the UM if it is the definitive teaching of the entire body of Bishops (except for a few who have gone astray) and of the Pope. So a few dissenting Bishops does not harm the ability of the Church to teach in this way.

My general advice to the laity on dissenting Bishops is to ignore their dissenting teachings. It is the responsibility of the other Bishops and of the Pope to correct them.

You need not judge each individual Bishop. Instead, look at what the Magisterium as a whole teaches.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 28th April 2007, 10:26 PM
Joan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Abortion, infanticide, euthanasia are intrinsically evil practices, according to the infallible teaching of the Universal Magisterium? Bishops & Pontiff in accord, and in a long succession of unified agreement, on these interrelated issues?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 28th April 2007, 11:41 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan View Post
Abortion, infanticide, euthanasia are intrinsically evil practices, according to the infallible teaching of the Universal Magisterium? Bishops & Pontiff in accord, and in a long succession of unified agreement, on these interrelated issues?

Yes.

And the teaching against these was also defined in Evangelium Vitae.

Ron
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 30th April 2007, 01:51 AM
Bernie
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I would say that the Perpetual Virginity of Our Lady is a teaching of the UM. The Mother of God was established in council; the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption were papal declarations but her Virginity is Universal Magisterium.

Bernie
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 30th April 2007, 02:02 AM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bernie View Post
I would say that the Perpetual Virginity of Our Lady is a teaching of the UM. The Mother of God was established in council; the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption were papal declarations but her Virginity is Universal Magisterium.

Bernie

Yes, I agree.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 30th April 2007, 05:57 AM
Justin Angel Justin Angel is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South Korea
Posts: 163
Cool Humanae Vitae: Infallible or non-Infallible?

In his book 'Humanae Vitae e Infallibilita' Fr Ermenegildo Lio, O.F.M., argues that the teaching
against artificial birth control is infallible. He primarily contends that the encyclical contains
an 'ex cathedra' definition in article 14. Fr Lio claims that 'Humanae Vitae' contains an intrinsically
infallible pronouncement: an instance of papal infallibilty as defined by Vatican Council l. The
conclusion that the encyclical is a non-infallible statement appears to be drawn from the fact
that there is no definition of a "dogma", a point of "revealed" truth to be held as "of faith" ('de fide'),
in the document by Pope Paul Vl. But Fr Lio points out that such definitions, while they represent
the most solemn form of papal teaching, are not the only form which satisfies the conditions for an
'ex cathedra' definition as laid down by the constitution 'Pastor Aeternus' of Vatican l.

In practice "definimus" has usually been the word popes have used for proclaiming strictly revealed
truths. Paul Vl may not have wanted to use the term in his encyclical 'Humanae Vitae',
nor other expressions which might resemble too closely the revealed truths associated with dogmas such
as the Assumption and the Immaculate Conception. The word "definit", on the otherhand, does not have
that restricted meaning, and must be understood to include decisions regarding matters less grave
than revealed dogmas and potential heresies. More restricted wording could have led to confusion over
whether the Pope was making the immorality of contraception a dogma of faith, to be accepted as such
under pain of excommunication. Paul Vl had no intention of creating such a misunderstanding among the
faithful,and so he chose his words circumspectively. Yet he did intend to affirm with "certainty" an
immutable norm of the natural law written by God in the human heart.

[cf.'Infallibility of Humanae Vitae: Ex Cathedra Status of Encylical Humanae Vitae', by Fr Brian W. Harrison, O.S.]

And God blessed them saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth and subdue it." [Genesis 1:28]

"Now, something pertains to faith in two ways: in one way, directly and principally, as for example,
the articles of faith; the other indirectly and secondarily, such as those things from which the
corruption of some article of faith follows." [St.Thomas Aquinas]

Personally, in light of Holy Scripture and Aquinas' view on how something pertains to the Catholic faith,
I believe that Pope Paul's pronouncement against contraception is 'infallible' in spite of the underlying
canonical technicalities and the wording of his encyclical. We must keep in mind that popes have been
making infallible statements ever since the birth of the Catholic Church and long before papal infallibilty
was eventually defined as dogma by Vatican Council l. Any papal statement that condemnns something
contrary to the Word of God and His Will is infallible according to my estimation.
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 02:59 PM.


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