Canonization Is Not Infallible

[kafka]

I disagree with the theological opinion prevalent today. I polished up the post I made in another thread and blogged it.

http://trueandholyeucharist.blogspot.com/2010/01/canonization-is-not-infallible.html

[Laudate_Dominum]

Billy Bass is most displeased.

[IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/1824a85182757578_l.gif[/IMG]




[spoiler][IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/6a00d834523e7969e20105362565a5970b-.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/oh-my-word.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/lolcats/lolcat.jpg[/IMG]
[/spoiler]




[IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/e666b06897ea.gif[/IMG]

[Thy Geekdom Come]

This should be interesting.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='Raphael' date='03 January 2010 - 04:09 PM' timestamp='1262556545' post='2029128']
This should be interesting.
[/quote]

I'll be reading won't get in on it much. All my study time is taken up with the Jews at the moment

[Apotheoun]

I used to think that canonizations were infallible acts, but I really do not think it is all that important anymore.

If prayers and worship are given to a person in the public rites of the sui juris Church of which I am a member, that is sufficient for me, and I do not need an elaborate speculative theory of infallibility in order to accept the legitimacy of the glory given to the person being commemorated.

Edited January 3, 2010 by Apotheoun

[MissyP89]

It's a non-issue for me, too. I don't wait for canonization to ask those who inspire me to intercede.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='kafka' date='03 January 2010 - 04:23 PM' timestamp='1262553798' post='2029116']
I disagree with the theological opinion prevalent today. I polished up the post I made in another thread and blogged it.

http://trueandholyeucharist.blogspot.com/2010/01/canonization-is-not-infallible.html
[/quote]

A truth belonging to the second paragraph of the [i]Professio Fidei[/i] ("I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals") is a truth that has been taught infallibly. (CDF, Doctrinal Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Professio Fidei, no. 6)*

The the canonization of a saint is a truth belonging to the second paragraph of the [i]Professio Fidei[/i]. (CDF, Doctrinal Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Professio Fidei, no. 11)**

Ergo, canonization of a saint is infallible.






*'The second proposition of the Professio fidei states: "I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals." The object taught by this formula includes all those teachings belonging to the dogmatic or moral area, which are necessary for faithfully keeping and expounding the deposit of faith, even if they have not been proposed by the Magisterium of the Church as formally revealed.[b] Such doctrines can be defined solemnly by the Roman Pontiff when he speaks 'ex cathedra' or by the College of Bishops gathered in council, or they can be taught infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium of the Church as a "sententia definitive tenenda".[/b] [b]Every believer, therefore, is required to give firm and definitive assent to these truths, based on faith in the Holy Spirit's assistance to the Church's Magisterium, and on [u]the Catholic doctrine of the infallibility of the Magisterium in these matters.[/u][/b] Whoever denies these truths would be in a position of rejecting a truth of Catholic doctrine and would therefore no longer be in full communion with the Catholic Church. The truths belonging to this second paragraph can be of various natures, thus giving different qualities to their relationship with revelation. There are truths which are necessarily connected with revelation by virtue of an historical relationship; while other truths evince a logical connection that expresses a stage in the maturation of understanding of revelation which the Church is called to undertake. The fact that these doctrines may not be proposed as formally revealed, insofar as they add to the data of faith elements that are not revealed or which are not yet expressly recognized as such, in no way diminishes their definitive character, which is required at least by their intrinsic connection with revealed truth. Moreover, it cannot be excluded that at a certain point in dogmatic development, the understanding of the realities and the words of the deposit of faith can progress in the life of the Church, and the Magisterium may proclaim some of these doctrines as also dogmas of divine and catholic faith.' (emphasis added)

**'With respect to the truths of the second paragraph, with reference to those connected with revelation by a logical necessity, one can consider, for example, the development in the understanding of the doctrine connected with the definition of papal infallibility, prior to the dogmatic definition of the First Vatican Council. The primacy of the Successor of Peter was always believed as a revealed fact, although until Vatican I the discussion remained open as to whether the conceptual elaboration of what is understood by the terms 'jurisdiction' and 'infallibility' was to be considered an intrinsic part of revelation or only a logical consequence. On the other hand, although its character as a divinely revealed truth was defined in the First Vatican Council, the doctrine on the infallibility and primacy of jurisdiction of the Roman Pontiff was already recognized as definitive in the period before the council. History clearly shows, therefore, that what was accepted into the consciousness of the Church was considered a true doctrine from the beginning, and was subsequently held to be definitive; however, only in the final stage - the definition of Vatican I - was it also accepted as a divinely revealed truth. A similar process can be observed in the more recent teaching regarding the doctrine that priestly ordination is reserved only to men. The Supreme Pontiff, while not wishing to proceed to a dogmatic definition, intended to reaffirm that this doctrine is to be held definitively,32 since, founded on the written Word of God, constantly preserved and applied in the Tradition of the Church, it has been set forth infallibly by the ordinary and universal Magisterium.33 As the prior example illustrates, this does not foreclose the possibility that, in the future, the consciousness of the Church might progress to the point where this teaching could be defined as a doctrine to be believed as divinely revealed. The doctrine on the illicitness of euthanasia, taught in the Encyclical Letter Evangelium Vitae, can also be recalled. Confirming that euthanasia is "a grave violation of the law of God," the Pope declares that "this doctrine is based upon the natural law and upon the written Word of God, is transmitted by the Church's Tradition and taught by the ordinary and universal Magisterium".34 It could seem that there is only a logical element in the doctrine on euthanasia, since Scripture does not seem to be aware of the concept. In this case, however, the interrelationship between the orders of faith and reason becomes apparent: Scripture, in fact, clearly excludes every form of the kind of self-determination of human existence that is presupposed in the theory and practice of euthanasia. Other examples of moral doctrines which are taught as definitive by the universal and ordinary Magisterium of the Church are: the teaching on the illicitness of prostitution35 and of fornication.36 With regard to those truths connected to revelation by historical necessity and which are to be held definitively, but are not able to be declared as divinely revealed, the following examples can be given: the legitimacy of the election of the Supreme Pontiff or of the celebration of an ecumenical council, [b]the canonizations of saints[/b] (dogmatic facts), the declaration of Pope Leo XIII in the Apostolic Letter Apostolicae Curae on the invalidity of Anglican ordinations' (emphasis added)

Edited January 4, 2010 by Resurrexi

[Resurrexi]

Additionally, the formula used for canonizations shows that the Pope intends the canonization to be infallible:

"For the honour of the Blessed Trinity, the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the fostering of the Christian life, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and our own, after due deliberation and frequent prayers for the divine assistance, and having sought the counsel of our Brother Bishops, we declare and define that Bl. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, Edith Stein, is a saint and we enrol her among the saints, decreeing that she is to be venerated in the whole Church as one of the saints. In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."

[Luigi]

I met a priest who had been stationed at a parish named St. Dismas - the good thief. The priest maintained that Dismas is the only person (second person of the Trinity excepted) we can be absolutely sure is in heaven, because Jesus said to Dismas, "This day you will be with me in heaven."

Canonization has never been considered infallible; where/how/from whom did you get the idea that it was?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Luigi' date='04 January 2010 - 12:52 AM' timestamp='1262584374' post='2029393']
Canonization has never been considered infallible; where/how/from whom did you get the idea that it was?
[/quote]

The CDF says that canonization is infallible. You obviously didn't read my syllogism above.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Luigi' date='04 January 2010 - 12:52 AM' timestamp='1262584374' post='2029393']
I met a priest who had been stationed at a parish named St. Dismas - the good thief. The priest maintained that Dismas is the only person (second person of the Trinity excepted) we can be absolutely sure is in heaven, because Jesus said to Dismas, "This day you will be with me in heaven."

Canonization has never been considered infallible; where/how/from whom did you get the idea that it was?
[/quote]

I think we can be absolutely sure that Mary is in Heaven.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='HisChildForever' date='04 January 2010 - 01:38 AM' timestamp='1262587087' post='2029415']
I think we can be absolutely sure that Mary is in Heaven.
[/quote]

We can be absolutely sure that all canonized saints are in heaven.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 January 2010 - 01:43 AM' timestamp='1262587380' post='2029417']
We can be absolutely sure that all canonized saints are in heaven.
[/quote]

Well yes. I was operating under the assumption that he would reject that statement; yet even if he would reject that statement it was just strange to me that he did not include Mary.

[kafka]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='03 January 2010 - 09:57 PM' timestamp='1262573848' post='2029248']
A truth belonging to the second paragraph of the [i]Professio Fidei[/i] ("I also firmly accept and hold each and everything definitively proposed by the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals") is a truth that has been taught infallibly. (CDF, Doctrinal Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Professio Fidei, no. 6)*

The the canonization of a saint is a truth belonging to the second paragraph of the [i]Professio Fidei[/i]. (CDF, Doctrinal Commentary on the Concluding Formula of the Professio Fidei, no. 11)**

Ergo, canonization of a saint is infallible.
[/quote]
dont quote things you have no fundamental understanding of.
Only the baby who hasnt been weaned cries when it is offered solid food.

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='03 January 2010 - 11:14 PM' timestamp='1262578494' post='2029297']
Additionally, the formula used for canonizations shows that the Pope intends the canonization to be infallible:

"For the honour of the Blessed Trinity, the exaltation of the Catholic faith and the fostering of the Christian life, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, of the holy Apostles Peter and Paul, and our own, after due deliberation and frequent prayers for the divine assistance, and having sought the counsel of our Brother Bishops, we declare and define that Bl. Teresa Benedicta of the Cross, Edith Stein, is a saint and we enrol her among the saints, decreeing that she is to be venerated in the whole Church as one of the saints. In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit."
[/quote]
Notice he says we decree and in other formulas it is "we decree and we decide"
A decree and/or a decision is not a teaching, rather it is a ruling and or a judgment and the Pope is not excercising his papal infallibility when canonizing a Saint, for he can only exercise his infallibility when he teaches matters of faith and morals drawn from Divine Revelation. I will explain below in a seperate post.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='kafka' date='04 January 2010 - 03:58 PM' timestamp='1262638704' post='2029593']
dont quote things you have no fundamental understanding of.[/quote]



[quote name='kafka' date='04 January 2010 - 03:58 PM' timestamp='1262638704' post='2029593']
Notice he says we decree and in other formulas it is "we decree and we decide"
A decree and/or a decision is not a teaching, rather it is a ruling and or a judgment and the Pope is not excercising his papal infallibility when canonizing a Saint, for he can only exercise his infallibility when he teaches matters of faith and morals drawn from Divine Revelation. I will explain below in a seperate post.
[/quote]

No, Kafka, he says says "We delcare and define," the same words used in the infallible definitions found in [i]Ineffabilis Deus[/i], [i]Pastor Aeternus[/i], and [i]Munificentissimus Deus[/i].

Dude, I'm not going to debate with you about this anymore. If you want to reject what the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith has decreed, that's your choice. It's your own salvation you're putting at stake by refusing to submit to the Holy See.

Edited January 4, 2010 by Resurrexi