I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution
(06-21-2019, 11:57 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(06-20-2019, 04:28 PM)cassini Wrote: As alphonse will see I have placed emphasis on the question you keep asking. How many times must I point out that if it was not considered an act of the Pope's ordinary magisterium, in forma specifica, Pope Urban VIII could not have charged Galileo with heresy.

This is the first reply to which you have even addressed the in forma specifica question.

I can't read your mind, so when I ask for A and you instead provide J, because you think J proves D which presume E, which was proven by B which K considers to be suggesting the relevance of C and C could only be true if A were true, so A, I can't follow that logic.

So, thank you for at least indicating that you at least admit and recognize we need an in forma specifica approval of the Congregation of the Index decree.

I would note that by admitting this you then admit that your early claim that the Congregation of the Index was a section of the Holy Office in 1616 and all of the decrees of the Holy Office are necessarily from the Pope Himself sharing his infallibility. Is that a correct assumption? You now admit that statement was incorrect?

If so, then why would you say that Urban VIII charged Galileo with heresy? It was the Holy Office that did so, and Urban VIII never approved that condemnation in forma specifica, nor did he apply it more broadly in another Papal manner. Since I assume you are aware of the difference between Common Law jurisprudence and the Roman Rotal jurisprudence (which includes Papal decisions on juridical cases) you would know that such Private judgements, even if they are made by the Pope do not create precedents, and certainly do not engage the Magisterium (part of the Executive Power of the Pope) but the Juridical Power. Rotal and Papal judgements in juridical cases can be used as safe means of judging other cases, but do not create the same kind of precedent one finds in the U.S. and other Common Law countries. That's first year Canon Law stuff, though, so I assume you're familiar.

Now if I show that the record shows Pope Urban VIII personally ordered all that occurred in 1633, could we call it a day? First though I repeat:

In the wake of the Protestant rebellion, Pope Paul III (1534-1549) set up various congregations to assist the popes in their task of safeguarding the apostolic faith held ‘in agreement with Sacred Scripture and apostolic tradition.’ One of the most important of these was the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition, otherwise known as the Congregation of the Holy Office, set up in 1542. The function of this body was specifically to maintain and defend the integrity of the faith, to examine and proscribe errors and false doctrines by way of the censorship of books etc., but most of all to combat heresy at the highest level.
Later, in 1588; Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) gave the Holy Office even more explicit powers in the Bull Immensa Dei (God who cannot be encompassed). In this directive he made the reigning pope, whoever he may be, Prefect of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Inquisition. This gave the Catholic world to understand that decisions assigned to its judgment, before publication, would invariably be examined and ratified by the Pope himself as supreme judge of the Holy See, and would go forward clothed with such formal papal authority.
 
‘I found it laid down by such distinguished repre­sentatives of the Ultramontane school as Cardenas, La Croix, Zaccaria, and Bouix, that Congregational decrees, confirmed by the Pope and published by his express order, emanate from the Pontiff in his capacity of Head of the Church, and are ex cathedrâ in such sense as to make it infallibly certain that doctrines so propounded as true, are true.’ --- Fr W. Roberts.

Now I have shown you all this before Magister but you chose to ignore it and want me to show all where the pope climbed up atop St Peters and shouted to the world, 'I have made helliocentrism formal heresy.'

But back to basics, you claim above:  'If so, then why would you say that Urban VIII charged Galileo with heresy? It was the Holy Office that did so, and Urban VIII never approved that condemnation in forma specifica, nor did he apply it more broadly in another Papal manner.'

Before going on let us see what constitutes in forma specifica

In forma specifica (In specific form). This is a legislative term associated primarily with canon law. An ecclesial document or act or law (e.g., one issuing from some Vatican dicastery, such as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, that is given in forma specifica means that the Pope has approved this document, act, or law, in a special such that no further appeal to the Pope directly is possible (unless the Pope himself should specifically mandate such an appeal). The expression in forma specifica indicates that the Pope has reviewed the document and makes it his own by express approbation, and thus the document acquires the canonical force of a formal papal act.

Be aware also I told you popes did not personally sign off their orders to the Holy Office with pen on paper in those days.

I have said before that Pope Urban VIII personally presided over the arrest, trial, verdict and punishment of Galileo. In MA Finocchiaro's book on page 26 he begins:

'2.1 Nuncios and Inquisitors:
Pope Urban VIII's Orders (July 1633)

'The Inquisition's orders were contained in a letter signed by Pope Urban's brother. Finocchiaro quotes from this letter all that the pope ordered, the ban on books, the trial, the sentence, the abjuration, and that the documents were to be sent to vicars, professors of philosophy and mathematics. 'we know today' wrote Finocchiaro, 'that such a promulgation of Galileo's condemnation had been decided at the Inquisition meeting of 16th june 1633, presided over by Pope Urban VIII.. the pope reached a decision on its conclusion, the verdict and the penalty. (reference: Favaro 19:282-283, 360-61; Pagano 1984, 154, 229) [Favaro we know was one of the first allowed resesrch the Galileo file in the secvret archives.] The Plan was reaffirmed at a meeting on June 30th, when Pope Urban VIII was again presiding over the Inquisition meeting and was a little more explicit about its details.'

Now once again, what did Pope Urban VIII copndemn Galileo for:

The sentence continued: “Invoking, then, the most holy Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that of His most glorious Mother Mary ever Virgin, by this our definitive sentence we say, pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo, on account of these things proved against you by documentary evidence, and which have been confessed by you as aforesaid, have rendered yourself to this Holy Office vehemently suspected of heresy, that is, of having believed and held a doctrine which is false and contrary to the sacred and divine Scriptures -to wit, that the sun is in the centre of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the Earth moves, and is not the centre of the universe; and that an opinion can be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture.
After this Pope Urban VIII ordered the sentence and abjuration by made public for all to obey in Chrisdtendom.

In forma specifica (In specific form). This is a legislative term associated primarily with canon law. An ecclesial document or act or law (such as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, that is given in forma specifica means that the Pope has approved this document, act, or law, in a special such that no further appeal to the Pope directly is possible (unless the Pope himself should specifically mandate such an appeal). The expression in forma specifica indicates that the Pope has reviewed the document and makes it his own by express approbation, and thus the document acquires the canonical force of a formal papal act.

It is clear to me then that the Church's record show Pope Urban VIII APPROVED IN FORMA SPECIFICA the irreversibility of the 1616 decree in the words 'that an opinion can be held and defended as probable after it has been declared and defined to be contrary to Holy Scripture.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution - by cassini - 06-22-2019, 02:12 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)