No more Limbo??
(08-07-2018, 09:29 PM)MagisterMusicae Wrote:
(08-07-2018, 01:17 PM)pabbie Wrote: Again, you're misunderstanding of the ordinary magisterium has led you to erroneous conclusions.

Pabbie, it's you who misunderstand, and thus make wrong conclusions.

(08-07-2018, 01:17 PM)pabbie Wrote: When Pope Leo XIII approved of the Baltimore catechism being used in Catholic schools, there were easily 10,000 priests and bishops in the US who read that catechism afterward. If there were errors or heresy contained, the Holy Ghost would guarantee the network of clergy would catch the problem and correct it.

There's no error, but neither is everything taught in it de fide.

Two possible Catholic opinions on Limbo exist (so say five undeniably orthodox Popes, as shown above), and the Baltimore Catechism has decided to present one of those, which is the more common.

(08-07-2018, 01:17 PM)pabbie Wrote: There is a difference between someone giving an opinion, and someone one HOLDING to an opinion. If St. Augustine were alive today, he would see the Church has settled on a different opinion than he had originally on Limbo.

The Church has not settled on a different opinion. The different opinion is the more common opinion, but again, five orthodox Popes clearly have stated that St. Augustine's opinion is "safe" or "harmless" or even "Catholic."

You are ignoring the teaching of five different Popes (surely that's part of the ordinary magisterium) and claiming that the ordinary magisterium teaches as de fide the opposite of what these Popes clearly taught.

(08-07-2018, 01:17 PM)pabbie Wrote: No doubt the underlying reason for your distrust of catechisms is because the CCC is the first catechism that has major differences compared to all catechisms that preceded it.

No.

I have no "distrust" of Catechisms, but neither do I take anything written in them as dogmatically settled, only what actually is dogmatically settled and approved. That's the Catholic approach.


Dogmatically settled? The Church teaches, "...a revealed truth becomes a dogma even when proposed by the Church through her ordinary magisterium or teaching office” (Catholic Encyclopedia). If it's taught continuously, it's settled.

The CE also describes the magisterium as: "The official activity of teaching may be exercised either in the ordinary, or daily, magisterium, or by occasional solemn decisions. The former goes on uninterruptedly; the latter are called forth in times of great danger, especially of growing heresies."

When the Church allows the Summa and catechisms to be used uninterruptedly in schools and seminaries for centuries at a time, that fits the definition of ordinary magisterium exactly. To say otherwise is to be in a very serious state of denial.

Now you're say I'm ignoring the teaching of 5 Popes. What does this say but that all of the Popes of the 20th century contradicted the Popes you are speaking of. Another example of the endless contradictions used by those in the Novus ordo.

Ultimately what your argument comes down to is the Popes approve resources like the Summa and Catechisms for use in schools and seminaries, but then they add the caveat that what is contained may be true or may not be true, and that is up for the faithful to figure out. That is not Catholic.
Reply
(08-09-2018, 03:32 PM)pabbie Wrote: Now you're say I'm ignoring the teaching of 5 Popes. What does this say but that all of the Popes of the 20th century contradicted the Popes you are speaking of. Another example of the endless contradictions used by those in the Novus ordo.

Pabbie,

You claim that a certain teaching (Limbo) is to be dogmatically held as taught by the ordinary magisterium.

Five different popes from the 16th through 17th century (which the Limbo debate was in full swing) said that the Augustinian denial of Limbo was "safe" and "Catholic".

The teaching of the Augustinians : the denial of Limbo (a view I do not hold, so this is not me trying to justify myself) is "safe" and "Catholic". Is not the fact that by 5 separate popes have upheld this opinion against the proponents of Limbo, all of which popes could in no way accused of modernism, an example of the ordinary magisterium?

That has nothing to do with 20th century Popes. That's a red herring.

Who's being inconsistent?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)