No. As Stubborn pointed out, the only difference between doctrine and dogma is the "how" it's taught. Doctrine is handed down, through the ages, based on Tradition. It is ALL Apostolic teaching, from EVERY truth Christ revealed to the Apostles. It is the essence of the Faith. It is what has been believed "everywhere, always and by all."
Dogma is when the Church clarifies, re-teaches, and authoritatively commands that a truth 1) has always been a doctrine, 2) is part of Tradition/Apostolic teaching, 3) and must be believed to be saved.
True. But this is misleading because 95% of doctrines have not been taught ex-cathedra. All dogmas are doctrine (Apostolic truths) but not all doctrines have needed to be authoritatively taught as dogma (because they were always understood properly).
Yes, we absolutely must accept all doctrines of the Faith. Ex-cathedra statements are very minimal and unique.
The question is: What are the doctrines of the Faith that we must believe? Example: Must we believe that Our Lady is Mediatrix of All Graces? It's not been "defined" so it's optional, right?
No, this would not be an optional belief because Our Lady's role as Mediatrix of All Grace 1) has always been held, down through the ages, being implied as part of other doctrines about Her, 2) all throughout history, saints have declared repeatedly that Our Lady has a special and important role in our salvation, thus it is part of Tradition, 3) it is also part of Scripture when She is declared "full of grace", etc etc
One could write a book on such a topic. Such a belief has always been implicitly held through all the centuries so if the Church decides to make it EXPLICIT (i.e. using an ex-cathedra statement to declare a dogma), the Church would do so to 1) re-teach "that which has always been taught", 2) clarify that this Divine Truth is part of Tradition and Scripture, 3) stop an error or heresy from growing, in order to glorify Our Lady and make devotion to Her increase, for the salvation of souls.
No, not true. 95% of our Faith has never, and will never, be declared dogma. 1) It would be impossible to define every truth 2) it's not necessary as most doctrines aren't questioned because they are so basic.
Well, these types of approvals are not really related to doctrine. An imprimatur means there isn't any MAJOR error in the book. It doesn't mean the book is perfect. And a bishop can never be infallible, only the pope. So an imprimatur can never be infallible.
Sorry if I confused my meaning. I think I had a few typos and couldn't properly finish and I couldn't look over everything before I posted because the baby woke up and I suddenly had to run. 😅
I wasn't saying we don't have to listen or submit to doctrinal matters. I was trying to distinguish the difference between dogma, doctrine and discipline and explain that how even if something isn't "ex-cathedra" and isn't completely defined that we still are required to have "religious consent" to what the ordinary magesterium teaches.
From what I have seen this is the matter where "sedes" and "r&r" seem to disagree the most and really is the issue people should discuss. 😊
R&R agree that all "ex-cathedra" statements must be adhered to but they sometimes seem to toss out the "simple doctrine" and disciplines of the Church as also having to necessarily having to be adhered to by the faithful.
And the sedes believe that all dogma, doctrine, and discipline must be adhered to by the faithful and that the hierarchy as a universal body can not teach or promote anything harmful to the faithful.
I hope that makes sense now as to what I was trying to say? Sorry for the confusion. Maybe I should just read more and post less. 😝
Topic: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II (Read 46104 times)