Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Denzinger Jansenist Error #1105  (Read 2125 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Johannes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 613
  • Reputation: +92/-284
  • Gender: Male
Denzinger Jansenist Error #1105
« on: November 15, 2024, 01:31:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • This one perplexes me, and I thought it would be interesting to see what others think:

    5. Although it is evidently established by you that Peter is a heretic, you are not bound to denounce [him], if you cannot prove it. 1105

    Thanks!
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47006
    • Reputation: +27854/-5169
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Denzinger Jansenist Error #1105
    « Reply #1 on: November 15, 2024, 03:46:34 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I haven't the slightest.  I looked online and couldn't find any commentary.

    I'm not sure if this "Peter" is a reference to any given Pope or to a Pope at all, or just some random name thrown in there by way of example, ala the casuists.

    Since these are condemned, the opposite would be true that if you establish that Peter (a pope or just anyone?) is a heretic, you ARE bound to denounce him, even if you can't prove it.

    To understand some of this stuff you actually have to find the reference in the works that they were taken from.

    Same thing is actually true regarding the condemnation of Baius, where there's a passage that people try to use to condemn Father Feeney, but if you look into it, that's not what it's condeming at all, but some crazy idea Baius had.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 47006
    • Reputation: +27854/-5169
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Denzinger Jansenist Error #1105
    « Reply #2 on: November 15, 2024, 04:58:57 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: Johannes on November 15, 2024, 04:19:45 PM
    I am thinking it is the pope in general and not some random guy name Petey, John, what have you. I have been working my way through Denzinger and have yet to see that Casuist style i.e., "Titus is a priest who..." used in any other condemnations, but when referring to the pope, "Peter" is often used.

    Well, Peter could be a reference to the pope, but the "casuists" sometimes would use random names in their scenario stories.  As I said, you'd almost have to find the original text that's being condemned, as they're often verbatim lifted from texts that some Jansenist wrote.
    Logged

    Offline Yeti

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 4132
    • Reputation: +2431/-528
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Denzinger Jansenist Error #1105
    « Reply #3 on: November 15, 2024, 05:38:50 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I think "Peter" is a designation of a random person. I think it's similar to the English expression "Joe Blow". So the sense is, "If you know that someone is a heretic, you must denounce him even if you can't prove it."

    I don't think it has anything to do with St. Peter or the papacy.
    Logged
    Pages: [1]
    « previous next »