It is the difference between dogma and doctrine. A dogma is a solemnly proclaimed statement about a matter of Faith or Morals.
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.
A doctrine is a religious belief held by the Church which has never been officially proclaimed excathedra but which we a Catholics hold through the traditions and customs of the Church and the authority of Her hierarchy and ministers.
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). The issue which people really should be discussing then is whether a person is obliged to accept all doctrines of the Church that have not been declared ex cathedra as doctrine.
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.
In my opinion it seems that until something has not been declared a dogma it is not "de fide"
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.
Yet, doctrinal matters given through the normal ordinary teaching authority of the Church are something that all faithful Catholics should give assent to. For example, if one's bishop approved or disapproved of a book and gave it a "prohibitation" or "imprimatur" people should follow that.
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.
Topic: Bergolio says that there are many American Catholics who won’t accept Vatican II (Read 46146 times)