tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post4327679429990195532..comments2024-03-22T16:09:48.895-04:00Comments on Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Sitting in the Chair of PeterJames Swanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-41745625937061849322024-03-08T14:49:06.425-05:002024-03-08T14:49:06.425-05:00Indeed, I found John Bugay's message yesterday...Indeed, I found John Bugay's message yesterday!Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-60325903596921571132024-03-08T11:25:56.908-05:002024-03-08T11:25:56.908-05:00Belated? 14 years!Belated? 14 years!James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-6662248280580682222024-03-07T11:51:58.630-05:002024-03-07T11:51:58.630-05:00Belated answer to John Bugay:
Does the Chair of P...Belated answer to John Bugay:<br /><br /><a href="https://greatbishopofgeneva.blogspot.com/2024/03/does-chair-of-peter-exist.html" rel="nofollow">Does the Chair of Peter Exist?<br /><i>Great Bishop of Geneva! | Thursday 7 March 2024</i><br />https://greatbishopofgeneva.blogspot.com/2024/03/does-chair-of-peter-exist.html</a>Hans Georg Lundahlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01055583255516264955noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-60819220310794183292010-07-09T13:42:26.773-04:002010-07-09T13:42:26.773-04:00Dozie writes:
If you want to know about American ...Dozie writes:<br /><br /><i>If you want to know about American history that is even semi reliable, don't go asking somebody who is anti-American. If you do, you will get all sorts of unfortunate answers. Similarly, if you want to know things Catholic, you should know not to inquire about those things from the enemies of the Church. If you do, you will get the only possible answers - distortions. </i><br /><br />If you want to know about Reformation history that is even semi reliable, don't consult an anti-Reformation source, like the decrees of the Council of Trent. If you want to know things Protestant, you should not inquire about these things from Catholic apologists. If you do, you will only get distortions of what Protestants believe.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12784922935749497931noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-23265225777984577912010-07-09T13:38:42.350-04:002010-07-09T13:38:42.350-04:00It seems the policy is any source but Catholic; it...<i>It seems the policy is any source but Catholic; it does not matter that what is being studied is a Catholic question.</i><br /><br />Raymond Brown is a Catholic. I've cited him many times. Francis Sullivan is a Catholic. I've cited him many times. Eamon Duffy is a Catholic. I've cited him many times.<br /><br />There is a double standard here, emanating from your side, and the problem is not that we don't provide Catholic sources. It's that we provide Catholic sources that you don't want to hear from.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-56891110607391376962010-07-09T13:32:06.076-04:002010-07-09T13:32:06.076-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15030792638120558640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-85299015830574594672010-07-09T13:31:30.420-04:002010-07-09T13:31:30.420-04:00"In any case, anyone who can use this blog si..."In any case, anyone who can use this blog site can find a Catholic source on their own for questions pertaining to the Church."<br /><br />You are the one who came in disputing the answer John gave as being distorted. The request for you to provide the undistorted answer is reasonable. Thanks for the link anyway. I note however that perusing the relevant section doesn't appear to conflict with anything that John stated, so I'm not sure what you are disputing. Is there something specific that he said that you disagree with?<br /><br />The relevant section seems to be in section III: "Organs of Infallibility", subheading B. "The Pope". The relevant text is reproduced below and reformatted for readability:<br /><br />------<br /><br />In the third place, infallibility is not attributed to every doctrinal act of the pope, but only to his ex cathedra teaching; and the conditions required for ex cathedra teaching are mentioned in the Vatican decree:<br /><br />(a) The pontiff must teach in his public and official capacity as pastor and doctor of all Christians, not merely in his private capacity as a theologian, preacher or allocutionist, nor in his capacity as a temporal prince or as a mere ordinary of the Diocese of Rome. It must be clear that he speaks as spiritual head of the Church universal.<br /><br />(b) Then it is only when in this capacity, he teaches some doctrine of faith or morals that he is infallible (see below, IV).<br /><br />(c) Further it must be sufficiently evident that he intends to teach with all the fullness and finality of his supreme Apostolic authority, in other words that he wishes to determine some point of doctrine in an absolutely final and irrevocable way, or to define it in the technical sense (see Theological Definition). These are well-recognized formulae by means of which the defining intention may be manifested.<br /><br />(d) Finally for an ex cathedra decision it must be clear that the pope intends to bind the whole Church, to demand internal assent from all the faithful to his teaching under pain of incurring spiritual shipwreck (naufragium fidei), according to the expression used by Pius IX in defining the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin. Theoretically, this intention might be made sufficiently clear in a papal decision which is addressed only to a particular Church; but in present day conditions, when it is so easy to communicate with the most distant parts of the earth and to secure a literally universal promulgation of papal acts, the presumption is that unless the pope formally addresses the whole Church in the recognized official way, he does not intend his doctrinal teaching to be held by all the faithful as ex cathedra and infallible.Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15030792638120558640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-2286382992594769012010-07-09T12:45:20.888-04:002010-07-09T12:45:20.888-04:00“Neal -- this is Wikipedia…”
It seems the policy ...“Neal -- this is Wikipedia…”<br /><br />It seems the policy is any source but Catholic; it does not matter that what is being studied is a Catholic question.<br /><br />In any case, anyone who can use this blog site can find a Catholic source on their own for questions pertaining to the Church. <br /><br />I may be wrong, then:<br />http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=InfallibilityAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-83535427310141021942010-07-09T12:17:08.303-04:002010-07-09T12:17:08.303-04:00Neal -- this is Wikipedia, so it's not the be-...Neal -- this is Wikipedia, so it's not the be-all, end-all. (I don't think there is one.) But it can give you a start on where to start looking:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Instances_of_papal_infallibility <br /><br />Regarding historical papal documents, Catholic theologian and church historian Klaus Schatz made a thorough study, published in 1985, that identified the following list of ex cathedra documents (see <i>Creative Fidelity: Weighing and Interpreting Documents of the Magisterium,</i> by Francis A. Sullivan, chapter 6):<br /><br /> * "Tome to Flavian", Pope Leo I, 449, on the two natures in Christ, received by the Council of Chalcedon;<br /> * Letter of Pope Agatho, 680, on the two wills of Christ, received by the Third Council of Constantinople;<br /> * Benedictus Deus, Pope Benedict XII, 1336, on the beatific vision of the just prior to final judgment;<br /> * Cum occasione, Pope Innocent X, 1653, condemning five propositions of Jansen as heretical;<br /> * Auctorem fidei, Pope Pius VI, 1794, condemning seven Jansenist propositions of the Synod of Pistoia as heretical;<br /> * Ineffabilis Deus, Pope Pius IX, 1854, defining the immaculate conception; and<br /> * Munificentissimus Deus, Pope Pius XII, 1950, defining the assumption of Mary.<br /><br />* * * <br /><br />For modern-day Church documents, there is no need for speculation as to which are officially ex cathedra, because the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith can be consulted directly on this question.<br /><br />* * * <br /><br />The Vatican itself has given no complete list of papal statements considered to be infallible. A 1998 commentary on <i>Ad Tuendam Fidem,</i> written by Cardinals Ratzinger (the later Pope Benedict XVI) and Bertone, the prefect and secretary of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, listed a number of instances of infallible pronouncements by popes and by ecumenical councils, but explicitly stated (at no. 11) that this was not meant to be a complete list.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-29965156571939991962010-07-09T11:46:36.682-04:002010-07-09T11:46:36.682-04:00Dozie,
So what is the undistorted answer to the q...Dozie,<br /><br />So what is the undistorted answer to the question? (I'll even accept a link if you prefer)Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15030792638120558640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-59581734287144840132010-07-09T11:39:43.079-04:002010-07-09T11:39:43.079-04:00Maybe you would care to enlighten us then, rather ...Maybe you would care to enlighten us then, rather than just scoff.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-74468691572799809152010-07-09T11:35:30.715-04:002010-07-09T11:35:30.715-04:00"Is there a clear teaching of the RCC to dete..."Is there a clear teaching of the RCC to determine when the pope is, and is not, speaking ex cathedra?"<br /><br />If you want to know about American history that is even semi reliable, don't go asking somebody who is anti-American. If you do, you will get all sorts of unfortunate answers. Similarly, if you want to know things Catholic, you should know not to inquire about those things from the enemies of the Church. If you do, you will get the only possible answers - distortions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-9969221567481753142010-07-09T10:34:15.014-04:002010-07-09T10:34:15.014-04:00Hi Neal -- You will see lots of disagreement, even...Hi Neal -- You will see lots of disagreement, even "official" disagreement on that. Since the 1870 council, there has only been one "infallible" dogma pronounced, the 1950 document "Munificentissimus Deus:"<br /><br />http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius12/P12MUNIF.HTM<br /><br />And it's not the whole document that's got this kind of "infallibility," just the one sentence (the part after the colon):<br /><br /><i>by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own authority, we pronounce, declare, and define it to be a divinely revealed dogma: <b>that the Immaculate Mother of God, the ever Virgin Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory. </b></i><br /><br />In my view, that's the only "ex cathedra" dogma that's been defined according to the Vatican I definition. You'll find similar "pronounce, declare, and define" language in other pronouncements. It would seem as if other popes intended for these statements to have the "ex cathedra" character to them. Such as the 1854 declaration about the "Immaculate Conception." But even that was prior to 1870 -- seems as if Pius IX was the kind of pope who was willing to push the system in the direction he wanted it to go.<br /><br />But you'll find Catholics arguing about such statements as "Unam Sanctam," which uses similar "we declare, define" etc. language, saying, "well, it only applies in the political realm," or qualifying it in other ways.<br /><br />I really don't think there's a straight answer to your question.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-10706848208377251352010-07-09T10:12:45.405-04:002010-07-09T10:12:45.405-04:00Question: Is there a clear teaching of the RCC to ...Question: Is there a clear teaching of the RCC to determine when the pope is, and is not, speaking ex cathedra?Nealhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15030792638120558640noreply@blogger.com