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

« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 22

Author Topic: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible  (Read 18703 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Pax Vobis

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 12109
  • Reputation: +7629/-2305
  • Gender: Male
Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
« Reply #150 on: August 28, 2018, 11:43:10 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Cantarella, in your opinion, are canonizations "de fide"?  Meaning, simply a "question or concern" that St X is a saint is a heresy?  Yes or no.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #151 on: August 28, 2018, 11:46:40 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!4
    • Quote from: Cantarella on August 28, 2018, 11:02:41 AM
    Canonizations have always been a part of the Church’s Tradition, implicitly complementing the article of Faith in the Apostles Creed: I believe in the communion of saints.

    The communion of saints must necessarily include those who are in Heaven, and not in Hell. That is why it is impossible for the Church to err in this regard. Proposing a person for the faithful to pray to, when the person is actually in Hell, completely obliterates the dogma.

    Really, it is just matter of common sense.

    No:

    Tradition is the oral teachings of the Apostles not contained in scripture, as well as the doctrine implicit in those teachings.

    Declaring JPII a saint would have absolutely no relevance to tradition or the deposit of faith, and to attempt to make such declarations obligatory (ie., de fide), is to violate VI by declaring new doctrine.

    Ps: How could the damnation of a venerated person ever be proven, and result in the imagined “obliteration” you dream of?
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #152 on: August 28, 2018, 11:56:22 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!4
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 28, 2018, 11:30:03 AM
    You know nothing of theology, Johnson.  There are truths that, while not directly revealed, are so logically connected with revealed truths that their denial would result in the implicit denial of some revealed truth.  Those then are capable of being defined and taught infallibly by the Church and must be held de fide.  These are those truths theologians refer to as de fide ecclesiastica.  But then Johnson ignored the entire previous post.  Johnson considers St. Thomas Aquinas to be an idiot.  Johnson considers the nearly unanimous consensus of pre-Vatican II theologians to the nothing but the collective ravings of idiots.  Johnson thereby proves himself to be the idiot.

    It is de fide that Eugenio Pacelli reigned legitimately as Pope Pius XII.  If you deny this you are a heretic.  How can this be if it's not revealed truth?  Because if you claim that his legitimacy is not known with the certainty of faith, then you cannot then know with the certainty of faith that Our Lady was assumed into heaven.
    Loudestmouth-

    Perhaps you should read the 4-5 explanations I have written in this thread on this very point (which you have not addressed), and which you have very obviously chosen to ignore:

    “If I just keep repeating myself, maybe I can bury Johnson’s responses, and the lazy reader will not go back through what is sure to become hundreds of pages, and discover he has repeatedly, and at all turns, decimated every ignorant objection I could conceive.”
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #153 on: August 28, 2018, 11:59:29 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!5
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 28, 2018, 11:32:31 AM
    Please see the bolded section of your own quote, John.  St. Thomas explains why this is the case for canonizations.

    Nope:

    Unless a canonization is either of a biblical saint, or of a saint which would constitute a dogmatic fact (like Jerome, but unlike any other canonization in recent Church history), they cannot be infallible.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #154 on: August 28, 2018, 12:36:57 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 28, 2018, 10:07:45 AM
    Do you admit that such canonizations only require conditional assent?  If so, then we agree.  If however, you want to put a canonization on par with a dogma, requiring UNCONDITIONAL assent, then I absolutely disagree.

    When a pope declares and defines that person X is a saint and that veneration of X is part of the liturgy of the Church (saints' feast days are an integral part of the liturgy), then I'd have to reject the liturgy of the Church to not venerate X.

    To me that seems not a question of faith nor primarily a question whether the act of canonization is infallible. There are purely practical questions that come first.

    Does the Church venerate damned souls in hell?
    Do I reject the veneration of persons which the Church venerates as saints?

    Do I obey the pope when he declares and defines that person X is a saint and orders the church to venerate X in the liturgy? Or do I choose to ignore the Vicar of Christ and prefer to listen to a Dr. John R. T. Lamont, author at onepeterfive.com. Why would a Catholic listen to any person whomsoever telling him to not follow the Vicar of Christ, to reject what the Vicar of Christ solemnly declares and defines (whether the act be fallible or infallible)?

    The Vicar of Christ is sent to feed us, not the layman Dr. John R. T. Lamont from acu-au.academia.edu.
    Logged

    Offline Last Tradhican

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6293
    • Reputation: +3330/-1939
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #155 on: August 28, 2018, 12:46:27 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • All very interesting Dr. Struthio, thank you for your time, keep up the good work. 
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #156 on: August 28, 2018, 12:56:40 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 28, 2018, 11:59:29 AM
    Unless a canonization is either of a biblical saint, or of a saint which would constitute a dogmatic fact (like Jerome, but unlike any other canonization in recent Church history), they cannot be infallible.

    Then you need to revise your quote because "pertains to" faith and is revealed are completely different things.  You're sloppy in your use of language ... and in your thinking.

    You are alone in believing that Church can only define things that are directly revealed rather than relating in other logical ways to the Deposit.

    You reject St. Thomas and the vast majority of Catholic theologians on this matter ... when you can barely construct a logically correct proposition.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #157 on: August 28, 2018, 12:58:13 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 28, 2018, 11:56:22 AM
    Perhaps you should read the 4-5 explanations I have written in this thread on this very point ...

    Your idiotic rants do not address the points I am making, because you are simply too obtuse to understand the logic involved here.
    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12109
    • Reputation: +7629/-2305
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #158 on: August 28, 2018, 01:03:14 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote
    Does the Church venerate damned souls in hell?
    Do I reject the veneration of persons which the Church venerates as saints?
    Is the Liturgy both Divine and human?  Yes.
    Is the Liturgical Calendar both Divine and human?  Yes.
    Is the Calendar of Saints part of the Liturgy?  Yes.
    Is the Calendar of Saints of human origin?  Yes, since Saints are human.

    Is the Calendar of Saints a COMPLETE and PERFECT record of ALL saints?  Surely not.
    Are there saints (i.e. non canonized persons who are in heaven) which the Church has not recognized?  Yes.
    Has the Church made changes to the Calendar of Saints over the years, which are contradictory?  In the post-V2 era, Yes.
    For example, how many saints were removed post-V2 from the calendar, which were there for centuries?  MANY  (St Philomena a great example).
    Does the Church have the power to 'bind and loose' such things?  Yes.
    Therefore, are such changes part of Her human, fallible decision making?  In theory, Yes.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #159 on: August 28, 2018, 02:20:38 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!3
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 28, 2018, 12:58:13 PM
    Your idiotic rants do not address the points I am making, because you are simply too obtuse to understand the logic involved here.
    Loudestmouth-

    It is interesting, psychologically, how nearly every one of your posts is a projection of your own inadequacies onto your opponents:

    -You pretend they avoid your arguments, as they address them head-on (eg., dogmatic facts; many theologians denying the infallibility of canonizations; etc);

    -You accuse them of not having been able to comprehend your arguments, when in fact they are refuting them;

    -Reverting to your “Deb from Napoleon Dynamite” script, you disregard (not refute) arguments which clearly refute your untenable position, and blurt them out again and again, hoping to win by stamina what you could not win by argumentation.

    At the end of the day, you have no interest in learning, but rather, a tenacious desire to overcome those arguments which run contrary to your preconceptions.

    Unless you can conquer this defect, you will likely never arrive at truth.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #160 on: August 28, 2018, 03:10:11 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on August 28, 2018, 02:20:38 PM
    It is interesting, psychologically, how nearly every one of your posts is a projection of your own inadequacies onto your opponents:

    :sleep:

    Logged

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12109
    • Reputation: +7629/-2305
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #161 on: August 28, 2018, 04:11:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Ladislaus, are you going to answer my question?  I've posted it twice now.

    Cantarella, waiting for you as well.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #162 on: August 28, 2018, 08:01:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 28, 2018, 04:11:38 PM
    Ladislaus, are you going to answer my question?  I've posted it twice now.

    Cantarella, waiting for you as well.

    Which question?

    I've already addressed all the points you're trying to make.

    The fact that canonized saints are in heaven is in fact de fide ecclesiastica ... please read my posts on that subject.

    As for canonization infallibility being sententia communis, I have already addressed that also.  SOME theologians hold that it has that note.  Most assign to it at least the status of theologically certain and a few even de fide.  But the simple fact is that no Catholic theologians teach that they are not in fact infallible, disagreeing merely on the theological note to be assigned.  That was laid out clearly in the Catholic Encyclopedia article.  I don't understand why you're rehashing the same points over and over again.

    You guys reject one long-standing theological teaching after another ... ANYTHING to defend the heretic usurpers of the Catholic hierarchy.
    Logged

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46600
    • Reputation: +27457/-5070
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #163 on: August 28, 2018, 08:06:07 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Pax Vobis on August 28, 2018, 01:03:14 PM
    Is the Calendar of Saints a COMPLETE and PERFECT record of ALL saints?  Surely not.
    Are there saints (i.e. non canonized persons who are in heaven) which the Church has not recognized?  Yes.
    Has the Church made changes to the Calendar of Saints over the years, which are contradictory?  In the post-V2 era, Yes.
    For example, how many saints were removed post-V2 from the calendar, which were there for centuries?  MANY  (St Philomena a great example).

    What are you babbling on about?  Nobody says that the Church is infallible in terms of being unable to fail to include some saint in the calendar.  And even among canonized saints, who are and who are not on the Universal Calendar has been subject to change for various practical and prudential reasons since the beginning.  Leaving a saint off the calendar doesn't de-canonize them, just removes them from the liturgical cycle.

    What's at issue here is that if the Church canonizes and individual it's infallible certain that the individual is in fact in heaven.
    Logged

    Offline Struthio

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1650
    • Reputation: +454/-366
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Magisterium Does Not Teach Canonizations are Infallible
    « Reply #164 on: August 28, 2018, 09:26:02 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Ladislaus on August 28, 2018, 08:01:02 PM
    You guys reject one long-standing theological teaching after another ...

    True, but that is not a problem. Catholics do not believe in any felt average opinion of theologians. Opinions of theologians practically always differ. And there is no problem in case one theologian or even a layman has an opinion different from all (other) theologians.


    Quote from: Ladislaus on August 28, 2018, 08:01:02 PM
    As for canonization infallibility being sententia communis, I have already addressed that also.  SOME theologians hold that it has that note.  Most assign to it at least the status of theologically certain and a few even de fide.

    That's probably true, but it does not bind anyone. A Catholic, theologian or not, is free to hold that the degree of certainty of the proposition is plain false.

    Noone is forced to follow this or that or no group of theologians. Even if all theologians held all the exact same opionon. We're forced to follow the pope and the bishops. We believe what they extraordinarily or ordinarily teach.


    The fact that canonized saints are in heaven is true, since the proposition that the Church venerates those damned in hell is simply absurd. Even in extreme desperation it is impossible to come up with such a lunatic idea: Catholics, every once in a while, ask damned sinners in hell for intercession. Cantarella said it on the previous page: it's a matter of common sense.

    The question, whether the act of canonization is infallible, asked in the context of the current situation, promotes the idea that the Bride of Christ may be a bunch of lunatics not guided by the Holy Spirit. I won't blame anyone, given the fact that that's the general appearance of the "Church of the new pentecost".
    Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 9 10 [11] 12 13 ... 22
    « previous next »