Phatmass Phorum - Catholic Forum and Community: Nihil Obstat - Viewing Profile - Phatmass Phorum - Catholic Forum and Community

"Do you ever worry that, say, five ten or twenty years down the road, you might realize that you've made the wrong choice? Or think that you might have? If you do have that worry, how do you deal with it? If that were to happen, how would you respond?"

Merged. :)

mommas_boy, on 08 September 2010 - 11:30 PM, said:

That would be part of it, certainly. I've heard the argument that Latin doesn't favour one culture over another. Non vernacular also reinforces immutable, in my mind. A vernacular language is constantly affected by words taking on new connotations... think "fag", "retarded", etc..
Also, and this is speculation, I'm assuming that a vernacular language could be considered to seem less dignified because of its being taken for granted in everyday life. Use of a language with which we're not familiar could be said to provide a certain dignity by shaking us into paying attention, so to speak.

I apologize for posting in a thread that you locked, but I just want to clarify a little bit.

30. does indeed say "In cases like these, the theologian should avoid turning to the "mass media", but have recourse to the responsible authority, for it is not by seeking to exert the pressure of public opinion that one contributes to the clarification of doctrinal issues and renders servite to the truth."
We have to make sure we're checking what "cases like these" refers to. We're not dealing with the same section that Slappo quoted. The immediately preceding passages in 28, 29 and 30 present the cases to which we are referring:

28. The preceding considerations have a particular application to the case of the theologian who might have serious difficulties, for reasons which appear to him wellfounded, in accepting a non-irreformable magisterial teaching.

Such a disagreement could not be justified if it were based solely upon the fact that the validity of the given teaching is not evident or upon the opinion that the opposite position would be the more probable. Nor, furthermore, would the judgment of the subjective conscience of the theologian justify it because conscience does not constitute an autonomous and exclusive authority for deciding the truth of a doctrine.
29. In any case there should never be a diminishment of that fundamental openness loyally to accept the teaching of the Magisterium as is fitting for every believer by reason of the obedience of faith. The theologian will strive then to understand this teaching in its contents, arguments, and purposes. This will mean an intense and patient reflection on his part and a readiness, if need be, to revise his own opinions and examine the objections which his colleagues might offer him.

30. If, despite a loyal effort on the theologian's part, the difficulties persist, the theologian has the duty to make known to the Magisterial authorities the problems raised by the teaching in itself, in the arguments proposed to justify it, or even in the manner in which it is presented. He should do this in an evangelical spirit and with a profound desire to resolve the difficulties. His objections could then contribute to real progress and provide a stimulus to the Magisterium to propose the teaching of the Church in greater depth and with a clearer presentation of the arguments.


Non-irreformable would be infallible teachings. This is what we're referring to in the latter part of section 30.

So yea, just clarification. Knowledge is power, yea? Again, I apologize for my presumption in posting on a thread you locked. I won't make a habit of it.

Mr Cat, on 08 September 2010 - 09:02 PM, said:

I apologize. I missed your own apology to KnightofChrist.