Geremia - The use of the word "and" connecting the two tells you that the anathema applies when the two are combined. If "or" connected the two, then you could say the anathema applies to them separately, but also equally.
You are however onto something. I thought over this same thing with regard to papal condemnations of erroneous sentences and perhaps anathemas like this. And, I can recall, but cannot give an example at the moment, that some condemned sentences of heretics had ideas in them that were not in themselves erroneous or warranting of a condemnation. But, attached to or combined with these ideas were clearly erroneous ideas that warranted a condemnation. What is debatable is if it warrants a "wholesale" condemnation(baby with the bathwater).
Erroneous ideas would often use non erroneous ideas as a vehicle. This was not like modernism where you have completely contradictory ideas combined. But, error was combined with a permissible position. But, none the less, in situations, the whole sentence and all ideas contained within were condemned. However, that is not to say that the permissible idea is actually condemned. Because, there is the "context" card trick that authorities have up their sleeve. And, they use it. However, that is imperfect. And, I think it is a sloppy. Canon Hesse even mentioned how there have been inconvenient or perhaps imprudent papal judgments/decisions made that had regrettable consequences later.
Topic: Logic of Dogmas Expressed as Anathematizations (Read 2039 times)