Pio Nono Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 [quote name='StColette' date='Jan 27 2005, 07:42 PM'] To make a long article short "There are 17 official documents, given above, teaching Our Lady's immediate cooperation in the objective redemption. Repetition on the ordinary level makes a teaching infallible. Seventeen repetitions is far more than enough." [url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/COOPRED.TXT"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/COOPRED.TXT[/url] by Fr. William Most It gives quotes from the encyclicals that teach this. [/quote] JMJ 1/28 - St. Thomas Aquinas Thanks a bunch for these messages. I have two concerns - A.) "There are 17 official documents" - The two documents that use the term "Co-Redemptrix" are NOT official; one is a radio message (#7) and another is an allocution (#17), neither of which are operations of the Ordinary and Universal Magesterium (so I've been led to believe). I will grant, though, that these documents do transmit the [i]idea[/i] of the co-Redemptrix. It seems, though, that great importance lay in the term itself. B.) If these are official statements (thus having the charism of infallibility), then my earlier concern was not addressed - why is there still a movement to have Mary proclaimed as co-Redemptrix? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 [quote name='Pio Nono' date='Jan 28 2005, 01:13 AM']JMJ 1/28 - St. Thomas Aquinas Thanks a bunch for these messages. I have two concerns - A.) "There are 17 official documents" - The two documents that use the term "Co-Redemptrix" are NOT official; one is a radio message (#7) and another is an allocution (#17), neither of which are operations of the Ordinary and Universal Magesterium (so I've been led to believe). I will grant, though, that these documents do transmit the [i]idea[/i] of the co-Redemptrix. It seems, though, that great importance lay in the term itself.[/quote] In the [i]official relatio[/i] delivered by Bishop Gasser at the First Vatican Council explaining the dogmatic definition on Papal infallibility it was made clear to the assembled Fathers that the Pope did not have to use any particular manner of teaching or any specific type of document in order to bind the Church to a doctrine as either [i]de fide tenenda[/i] or [i]de fide credenda[/i]. Thus, the Pope could issue a definitive teaching on a paper napkin if he so desired, because the type of document is irrelevant, but what is important is the Pope's intention to bind the Church, which is expressed by either a single Pope or a series of Pope's in succession. Now because the Pope is the head of the Episcopal College, his Magisterium, understood in both a synchronic and a diachronic sense, is an expression of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, and there is no requirement that the Pope consult the bishops prior to issuing a definitive teaching, for as Msgr. Fenton has explained, "In such a case, the Holy Father's teaching is universal. He exercises, according to the divine constitution of the Church itself, a true and episcopal jurisdiction over every one of the faithful and over every one of the other pastors within the Church militant. Thus there is nothing whatsoever to prevent the [i]magisterium ordinarium[/i] of the Holy Father from being considered as a [i]magisterium universale[/i]." [Joseph Clifford Fenton, "Humani Generis and the Holy Father's Ordinary Magisterium," [u]American Ecclesiastical Review[/u] 125 (1951): 53-62] Since the Second Vatican Council many theologians have exhibited a tendency contrary to the doctrine of the Church, and have tried to limit the infallible Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff to his extraordinary acts alone, but clearly this does not reflect the tradition of the Church as it concerns the Papal teaching office. It is a part of the apostolic tradition that the Pope's Ordinary Magisterium also participates in the infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium of the Church Universal, because as Cardinal Ratzinger has said, "In the case of a non-defining act, a doctrine is taught infallibly by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium of the Bishops dispersed throughout the world who are in communion with the Successor of Peter. Such a doctrine can be confirmed or reaffirmed by the Roman Pontiff, even without recourse to a solemn definition, by declaring explicitly that it belongs to the teaching of the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium as a truth that is divinely revealed or as a truth of Catholic doctrine. Consequently, when there has not been a judgment on a doctrine in the solemn form of a definition, but this doctrine, belonging to the inheritance of the [i]depositum fidei[/i], is taught by the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium, which necessarily includes the Pope, such a doctrine is to be understood as having been set forth infallibly." [CDF [u]Official Doctrinal Commentary on the Professio Fidei[/u], no. 9] Ratzinger's statements on this topic were confirmed by Cardinal Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone in an article published in [u]L'Osservatore Romano[/u], where he, in speaking about various ordinary acts of Pope John Paul II's pontificate, said that, "In the light of these considerations, it seems a pseudo-problem to wonder whether this papal act of confirming a teaching of the ordinary, universal Magisterium is infallible or not. In fact, although it is not [i]per se[/i] a dogmatic definition (like the Trinitarian dogma of Nicaea, the Christological dogma of Chalcedon or the Marian dogmas), a papal pronouncement of confirmation enjoys the same infallibility as the teaching of the ordinary, universal Magisterium, which includes the Pope not as a mere Bishop but as the Head of the Episcopal College." [Archbishop Tarcisio Bertone, Magisterial Documents and Public Dissent, part 1, no. 2, [u]L'Osservatore Romano[/u], 29 Jan. 1997] [quote name='Pio Nono' date='Jan 28 2005, 01:13 AM']B.) If these are official statements (thus having the charism of infallibility), then my earlier concern was not addressed - why is there still a movement to have Mary proclaimed as co-Redemptrix?[/quote] At present time the doctrine of Marian coredemption is [i]definitive tenenda[/i], because it is a doctrine that is implicitly contained within the deposit of faith, but what some people want is for it to be declared a dogma of divine and catholic faith. But regardless, it is definitive nonetheless and thus it is not something that a Catholic can deny. Moreover, this doctrine is related to the fact that the Church herself, which is an icon of Mary, works with the Savior in order to bring about the salvation of mankind. The Church, and all her members, are "co-redeemers," and this teaching has been affirmed by the Church from the beginning, because unlike the Protestant Reformers, the Catholic Church has always held that man cooperates in the act of redemption, and that a true synergy between God and man brings about the salvation of all who have been justified by grace. God bless, Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pio Nono Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 JMJ 1/28 - St. Thomas Aquinas I'm a philosopher, not a theologian. I ask you to condescend to my level and use simple language. Long Latin words mean nothing to me. Pretend like I don't know much Latin and that I don't have much of a theological background (both of which are true). However, I appreciate your argument for (A), and thus (if I read it correctly, though it's about as easy to read as one of my Italian papers) it seems that the idea and title of co-Redemptrix is an infallible teaching of the Church. However, (B) was not addressed at all - in fact, it seems as if you're introducing a needless distinction between what I take as "normal" beliefs and "divine" beliefs. I need to see an argument that allows for such a distinction - either something is a dogma of our Divinely Revealed Faith or it is not, and it seems as if there's no common ground. Then again, I'm a simple philosopher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now