What wording makes a statement dogmatic?
#1
For instance, is every word of Trent infallible? I remember someone on this forum says that Trent was wrong on the subject of ensoulment.

So what qualifies a statement as part of the Extraordinary Magisterium?

And what is obligatory for our belief as Catholics?

And what is the definition of the Church's Ordinary Universal Magisterium? What makes something a teaching of it and thus infallible?
Reply
#2
I'm not sure it's a matter of a particular wording.
For the general magisterium all that is required is that it has always and everywhere been believed and taught.
For the specific magisterium I would look for wording "all who believe / teach A, let them be anathema" (the opposite being the dogma, its usually clear from context)
For papal infallibility it's usually pretty clear.
"In my/our authority ......."

(e.g. For which reason, after we have poured forth prayers of supplication again and again to God, and have invoked the light of the Spirit of Truth, for the glory of Almighty God who has lavished his special affection upon the Virgin Mary, for the honor of her Son, the immortal King of the Ages and the Victor over sin and death, for the increase of the glory of that same august Mother, and for the joy and exultation of the entire Church; 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: 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.
 Hence if anyone, which God forbid, should dare willfully to deny or to call into doubt that which we have defined, let him know that he has fallen away completely from the divine and Catholic Faith.")
Munificentissimus Deus (Defining the Dogma of the Assumption) November 1, 1950 [Apostolic Constitution]


Reply
#3
What kjvail said, but in addition, the ordinary magisterium is very nebulous.  Even the CE entry admits this, if one cares to read it.

I personally read it as "if the preponderance of the doctrinal teachings says X, then X is infallible"

It seems to me that things that are of great importance that are infallible by the ordinary magisterium are often eventually proclaimed de fide by the extraordinary magisterium.  Not to say the rest isn't important, but, oh, you know what I mean.


Reply
#4
Quote:
For instance, is every word of Trent infallible? I remember someone on this forum says that Trent was wrong on the subject of ensoulment.

I think you got this from me. And I said the catechism erred on ensoulment.

Reply
#5
Quote:And I said the catechism erred on ensoulment.
How does it err and does it still err?
Reply
#6
I have to get the exact quote again, but it states that the ensoulment of a person is delayed a while after conception.

Pius IX declared that Mary was free from original sin in "the first isntance of her conception." Impossible to be free from anything if there were no soul.

As far as I know, the catechism has not been changed, and it's not necessary as we know what the Extraordinary Magisterium has said on this matter.


Reply
#7
Ah ha got it.

"in the natural order no body can be informed by a human soul except after the prescribed space of time." This was in reference to Jesus' conception, saying if He had a soul it would have been miraculous because of the reasons stated above.

St. Alphonsus Ligouri and the Holy Office in 1713 said the same thing.
Reply
#8
didishroom Wrote:"in the natural order no body can be informed by a human soul except after the prescribed space of time." This was in reference to Jesus' conception, saying if He had a soul it would have been miraculous because of the reasons stated above.
Well, what exactly is this statement trying to say? The human body does go through a time of gestation. What does the word "inform" mean here? And when exactly does the human soul inform the physical human body? Do you have the Latin so we can know the precise meaning of the word?
I'm not sure but to me the statement isn't even talking about conception or ensoulment, but only about when the already created human soul tells the human body to form. And that sounds like gestation to me, which could be that "prescribed space of time". The body does not start to "form" until a time after conception. Could you quote the whole paragraph please so that we can understand its whole thought?
Here are some definitions of the word "inform":
[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/inform Wrote:inform[/url]]–verb (used with object)
  1. to give or impart knowledge of a fact or circumstance to: He informed them of his arrival.
  2. to supply (oneself) with knowledge of a matter or subject: She informed herself of all the pertinent facts.
  3. to give evident substance, character, or distinction to; pervade or permeate with manifest effect: A love of nature informed his writing.
  4. to animate or inspire.
[url=http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/inform Wrote:inform[/url]]2. To give form or character to; imbue with a quality or an essence: "A society's strength is measured by . . . its ability to inform a future generation with its moral standards" (Vanity Fair).
Reply
#9
kjvail Wrote:For the specific magisterium I would look for wording "all who believe / teach A, let them be anathema" (the opposite being the dogma, its usually clear from context)
So then anathemas are dogmatic and a use of the Extraordinary Papal Magisterium?

Quote:For papal infallibility it's usually pretty clear.
"In my/our authority ......."
What about conciliar anathemas then, like Trent's and the other Ecumenical Councils' canons?
Reply
#10
Quote:For papal infallibility it's usually pretty clear.
"In my/our authority ......."
What about conciliar anathemas then, like Trent's and the other Ecumenical Councils' canons?
[/quote]

To my knowledge, yes.  The anathemas in ecumenical councils are to be considered infallible declarations.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)