Sources of Divine Revelation

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Peace be with you all in Jesus sweet and holy name.

Are there sources of divine revelation outside of Holy scripture and The Magesterium? 

I'm thinking yes that for this to be truth it should reflect the holy trinity so i'm guessing we can get divine revelation through the Holy sacraments and what i call the un official sacrament which is prayer,meditation and contemplation if these are done in the spirit of seeking the truth which is God whom is Good.

Discuss please because i don't know if i'm correct. It sounds correct but what sounds correct isn't always correct. And yes i prob shouldn't have added the reflect the trinity coz it sounds kind of superstitious towards the number 3, which perhaps it may be and childish, but than again perhaps it may not be and no i don't get down on my knees and worship every time i see a number three or a succession of 3 etc, but also yes i do have a thing for 3's.

 

God is Good.

Edited July 21, 2015 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Nihil Obstat]

The three sources of Revelation are Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium, all three of which are infallible.

[Era Might]

I don't think the magisterium is considered a "source" of revelation. Scripture and tradition are considered the only "public" revelation, but of course God continues to act privately through the saints, our prayer lives, etc 

Edited July 21, 2015 by Era Might

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

is that tradition or sacred tradition?  So are prayer,meditation and contemplation in the spirit of seeking the truth which is God whom is good a part of sacred tradition.

I don't think the magisterium is considered a "source" of revelation. Scripture and tradition are considered the only "public" revelation.

wow, please explain further your knowledge and understanding on what you have thus revealed.

Edited July 21, 2015 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Nihil Obstat]

I don't think the magisterium is considered a "source" of revelation. Scripture and tradition are considered the only "public" revelation, but of course God continues to act privately through the saints, our prayer lives, etc 

This is more correct. The Magisterium is the authentic interpreter of Scripture and Tradition.

 

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."⁴⁷ This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."⁴⁸

87 Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me",⁴⁹ the faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

is that tradition or sacred tradition?  

Please do not be obtuse.

 

So are prayer,meditation and contemplation in the spirit of seeking the truth which is God whom is good a part of sacred tradition.

No, that is not what is meant by Tradition. 

From the First Vatican Council, in De Fide Catholica:

 

Chapter 2 
On revelation

1. The same Holy mother Church holds and teaches that God, the source and end of all things, can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason : ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. [13] 2. It was, however, pleasing to his wisdom and goodness to reveal himself and the eternal laws of his will to the human race by another, and that a supernatural, way. This is how the Apostle puts it : In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son [14].

3. It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation, that those matters concerning God which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error.

4. It is not because of this that one must hold revelation to be absolutely necessary; the reason is that God directed human beings to a supernatural end, that is a sharing in the good things of God that utterly surpasses the understanding of the human mind; indeed eye has not seen, neither has ear heard, nor has it come into our hearts to conceive what things God has prepared for those who love him [15].

5. Now this supernatural revelation, according to the belief of the universal Church, as declared by the sacred Council of Trent, is contained in written books and unwritten traditions, which were received by the apostles from the lips of Christ himself, or came to the apostles by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, and were passed on as it were from hand to hand until they reached us [16].

6. The complete books of the old and the new Testament with all their parts, as they are listed in the decree of the said Council and as they are found in the old Latin Vulgate edition, are to be received as sacred and canonical.

7. These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the Church.

8. Now since the decree on the interpretation of Holy Scripture, profitably made by the Council of Trent, with the intention of constraining rash speculation, has been wrongly interpreted by some, we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of Holy Scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of Holy Scripture.

9. In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret Holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers.

[Amppax]

Tab, you should read Dei Verbum. It does a great job of answering your question. 

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Now we are getting somewhere, alleluia. So the magesterium alone has the rite to interpret scripture infallibly, though i'm guessing by the chance of grace anyone can get it right at least sometimes. And 3. It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation, that those matters concerning God which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error.

and...

 we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of Holy Scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of Holy Scripture.

and...

9. In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret Holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers.

 

I agree with all of this of course, but this is something missing, i was told that the holy mother church does not speak infallibly on all of scripture and that there is much of it that is open to the interpretation of communal or personal revelation, for the Catechism also states that there are 4 ways to read holy scripture and discern it's meaning, and scripture also says the truth is a double edged sword., which i took to mean doesn't always literally mean 1 thing. Why would we even read the bible anyway if the magesterium had discerned infallibly the whole thing, why would we not just be told what it means in the homilies? And of course i adhere to the discernment of any scriptures the magesterium has spoken on infallibly.

And if any of my interpretation of scripture is wrong than may it be one of our fathers to tell me otherwise, same goes smelly toes for church documents i assume, but also i really respect everything you all are revealing to me and i hae already come forward in my understanding of church teachings, is there any documents about the discernment of church documents?

Whether that is soley in the hands of the magesterium and perhaps those with a theological degree?

Edited July 22, 2015 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Nihil Obstat]

When the Magisterium chooses to exercise its authority as authentic interpreter, it always does infallibly. It does not always choose to exercise that authority.

[Amppax]

Now we are getting somewhere, alleluia. So the magesterium alone has the rite to interpret scripture infallibly, though i'm guessing by the chance of grace anyone can get it right at least sometimes. And 3. It is indeed thanks to this divine revelation, that those matters concerning God which are not of themselves beyond the scope of human reason, can, even in the present state of the human race, be known by everyone without difficulty, with firm certitude and with no intermingling of error.

and...

 we renew that decree and declare its meaning to be as follows: that in matters of faith and morals, belonging as they do to the establishing of Christian doctrine, that meaning of Holy Scripture must be held to be the true one, which Holy mother Church held and holds, since it is her right to judge of the true meaning and interpretation of Holy Scripture.

and...

9. In consequence, it is not permissible for anyone to interpret Holy Scripture in a sense contrary to this, or indeed against the unanimous consent of the fathers.

 

I agree with all of this of course, but this is something missing, i was told that the holy mother church does not speak infallibly on all of scripture and that there is much of it that is open to the interpretation of communal or personal revelation, for the Catechism also states that there are 4 ways to read holy scripture and discern it's meaning, and scripture also says the truth is a double edged sword., which i took to mean doesn't always literally mean 1 thing. Why would we even read the bible anyway if the magesterium had discerned infallibly the whole thing, why would we not just be told what it means in the homilies? And of course i adhere to the discernment of any scriptures the magesterium has spoken on infallibly.

And if any of my interpretation of scripture is wrong than may it be one of our fathers to tell me otherwise, same goes smelly toes for church documents i assume, but also i really respect everything you all are revealing to me and i hae already come forward in my understanding of church teachings, is there any documents about the discernment of church documents?

Whether that is soley in the hands of the magesterium and perhaps those with a theological degree?

In terms of reading Church documents, here you go! https://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDFADTU.HTM

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

When the Magisterium chooses to exercise its authority as authentic interpreter, it always does infallibly. It does not always choose to exercise that authority.

I know this and have stated this multiple times but you seemed to disagree. Not all documents from the church fall under the category of infallible.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

Thanks amppax but the document you have shown me uses words like definitive and 'ex cathedra' and when the college of bishops gather and agree on something, i agree with all documents coming from such as being infallible, but also again i don't believe all documents are infallible that being as an over all judgement not everything contained within the annals of the church is infallible. Holy Scripture warns us that there are going to be weeds amongst the wheat which remain until the final judgement, that's why we don't just blindly follow everything, we must carefully discern and meditate upon all things that don't fall into the category of  infallible.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

 or infallibly proposed for belief by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. See here it proves me correct, it is not that the magesterium is infallible but that the magesterium choose to speak infallibly so to speak. The more documents you guys produce the more you seem to be proving me correct.

Edited July 23, 2015 by Tab'le De'Bah-Rye

[Nihil Obstat]

I know this and have stated this multiple times but you seemed to disagree. Not all documents from the church fall under the category of infallible.

 or infallibly proposed for belief by the ordinary and universal Magisterium. See here it proves me correct, it is not that the magesterium is infallible but that the magesterium choose to speak infallibly so to speak. The more documents you guys produce the more you seem to be proving me correct.

If and when the Magisterium speaks in a formal manner, in a way which exercises its authority, it is infallible. The Magisterium can choose not to exercise its infallibility and leave questions open for reasonable debate, however the Magisterium as an entity is and remains infallible.

[Tab'le De'Bah-Rye]

 

If and when the Magisterium speaks in a formal manner, in a way which exercises its authority, it is infallible. The Magisterium can choose not to exercise its infallibility and leave questions open for reasonable debate, however the Magisterium as an entity is and remains infallible.

You still have not proven this to me without a doubt from the documents you all have produced. Though again of course the Magesterium can speak infallibly.

And also the documents that have been produced dont prove to me that the magesterium, sacred tradition and holy scripture are the only sources of Divine revelation.

[Nihil Obstat]

You still have not proven this to me without a doubt from the documents you all have produced. Though again of course the Magesterium can speak infallibly.

And also the documents that have been produced dont prove to me that the magesterium, sacred tradition and holy scripture are the only sources of Divine revelation.

Yes I have. It is not my fault you refuse to understand the many quotes we have given you.