Petition The Holy Father For The 5th Marian Dogma

[saintwannabe 777]

[quote name='kafka' post='1793802' date='Feb 28 2009, 07:59 PM']In my opinion private revelation does not add anything at all to the Deposit of Faith, rather what it often does is help clarify what is found implicitly in the Deposit, or perhaps what is found explicitly yet the weakness of our minds cannot see these truths, because of the remnants of original sin. So private revelations often act like a crutch or a pair of eye-glasses. God is Love so he cant help but be generous and continue to give us even more gifts even though the Canon of Revelation is closed.

The problem with false private revelations which are often under the influence of fallen angels is that they often distorts truths in subtle ways, so as to possibly lead those weaker in the Faith astray. These subtle distortions run throughout Ida Peerdman's messages, such as not calling Mary Our Lady, but 'the Lady', that the Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix doctrine is the Fifth and Final Marian Dogma and will supposedly usher an era of peace, that 'The Lady of Nations apparitions are the last and final apparitions of our Mother to the nations of this world." There are other bizarre and absurd claims in her messages, including predictions which have never come true, etc. Even the image of "The Lady of the Nations" looks weird, and is in contradiction to the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe. There is no sign of humility, there are wounds on her hands, she is in front of a cross. It is as if she is supplanting her Divine Son instead of assisting Him.

It is interesting how false private revelations/apparitions there are in the world today. Its a true sign that we live in severely evil times that God would permit the fallen angels to have so much influence.

On the other hand there are more than a few true private revelations/apparitions, which have greatly benefited the Faithful. We truly live in interesting times.[/quote]

First Off, Kafka, yes you are right that there are definitely false PRs like Bayside and the like. But hold on a sec, Dr. Mark Miraveille is behind this movement. He is one of the best marian scholars in the world. And yes, people can be decieved, but with the amount of prayer that he does and other solid figures that support this movement, it makes me think that we have to wait out to see just how these apparitions play out. We must be like Gamaliel in Acts and say if a movement is of God then it will remain, but if it is not, then it will dissipate. I mean look at Bayside, yes people are being led astray, but at the same time, it is a little threat now. And also, just to tell you there are many theologians and PR revelation people such as Catherine Anne Emerich the Venerable Sr. Maria Agreda who believed that the Virgin Mary had the hidden Stigmata. The Virgin Mary suffered, in a mystical way, every single wound that Christ suffered. Also, it can be said that Mary carried th Cross with her Son because her Immaculate heart suffered with His Sacred one as one heart,

Edited February 28, 2009 by saintwannabe 777

[kafka]

[quote name='saintwannabe 777' post='1793830' date='Feb 28 2009, 06:46 PM']But hold on a sec, Dr. Mark Miraveille is behind this movement. He is one of the best marian scholars in the world. And yes, people can be decieved, but with the amount of prayer that he does and other solid figures that support this movement, it makes me think that we have to wait out to see just how these apparitions play out.[/quote]
Saint Peter the first Pope speaking in Act 10:34
"Then, Peter opening his mouth, said: “I have concluded in truth that God is not a respecter of persons."

He is teaching us that we also should not be a respecter of persons. We should not judge based on reputation, or on appearance, or fame, but we should judge based on justice and truth.

I have no need to wait. The supposed apparitions to Ida Peerdeman are finished, therefore judgment should be passed on them. I suppose I could evaluate them message by message and point out what I think is erroneous, in order to build up my case, but I'm not sure if the time I spend doing that will be well spent when I have other things to study for now. For now, my opinion is that the Ida Peerdeman 'The Lady of the Nations' apparitions are false private revelations.

[saintwannabe 777]

[quote name='kafka' post='1793838' date='Feb 28 2009, 08:04 PM']Saint Peter the first Pope speaking in Act 10:34
"Then, Peter opening his mouth, said: “I have concluded in truth that God is not a respecter of persons."

He is teaching us that we also should not be a respecter of persons. We should not judge based on reputation, or on appearance, or fame, but we should judge based on justice and truth.

I have no need to wait. The supposed apparitions to Ida Peerdeman are finished, therefore judgment should be passed on them. I suppose I could evaluate them message by message and point out what I think is erroneous, in order to build up my case, but I'm not sure if the time I spend doing that will be well spent when I have other things to study for now. For now, my opinion is that the Ida Peerdeman 'The Lady of the Nations' apparitions are false private revelations.[/quote]

But by what authority can you pass judgement? You are not a priest, bishop, nor a cardinal. If the Bishop approved it, how can you say this is wrong. What does Ida have to gain by passing these messages? Nothing, she's dead. Therefore, the Lord has given authority to his bishops to pass judgement, we only have the power to accept or ignore this judgement because since this does not apply to the Deposit of Faith, it is not a binding belief.

Edited March 1, 2009 by saintwannabe 777

[kafka]

[quote name='saintwannabe 777' post='1793842' date='Feb 28 2009, 07:09 PM']But by what authority can you pass judgement? You are not a priest, bishop, nor a cardinal. If the Bishop approved it, how can you say this is wrong. What does Ida have to gain by passing these messages? Nothing, she's dead. Therefore, the Lord has given authority to his bishops to pass judgement, we only have the power to accept or ignore this judgement because since this does not apply to the Deposit of Faith, it is not a binding belief.[/quote]
I'm not going to comment about that Bishop's judgment since I dont know what the rules for making comments about Bishops are here.

The judgment of this kind is one of temporal authority and not spiritual authority. The temporal authority of the Church involves decisions, not teachings, and rules, not moral law. Temporal authority of the Church gives the Bishops and the Pope the authority to rule over the Church, to make decisions and rules concerning practical matters, and to govern the people of God. It is fallible, never infallible. Any given bishop may err in his temporal authority. And not all bishops of all times and places are immune from error, and there will always be a small percentage of bishops who are unfaithful even heretics and schizmatics (not to imply that the Bishop of Amersterdam is). Judas was a foreshadowing of bishops who are unfaithful.

I can pass judgment by comparing her private revelations against the Public Divine Revelation (Deposit of Faith). God gave me the gift of personal freedom in knowing and loving and judging, etc. He didnt launch me into this world with the command to go following people blindly or placing to much weight on what people say. The laity have an implicit share in the duties of the clergy, bishops, and pope to explain, interpret and expound Divine Revelation (Tradition and Scripture and teachings of the Magisterium), and to uphold Truth and condemn error and falsehood. That is where I am coming from.

You are right Ida Peerdeman has nothing to gain anymore. The only ones who have anything to gain in this movement are men or fallen angels.

[saintwannabe 777]

Your right, but at the same time, I think that just because some of the messages haven't happened, doesn't mean that the apparition isn't true. It could be fulfilled later on. But I see your concerns.

[Slappo]

[quote name='saintwannabe 777' post='1793877' date='Feb 28 2009, 05:51 PM']Your right, but at the same time, I think that just because some of the messages haven't happened, doesn't mean that the apparition isn't true. It could be fulfilled later on. But I see your concerns.[/quote]

Kafka finds much more untrue with the apparitions then just that the messages haven't happened. The errors he talks about he sees as theological.

I haven't taken an opinion on the apparitions myself. I think I hesitate towards no, and I definitely disagree with medjugorie. Dr. Miravalle is just a man, and although he is very studied, he can be in error as well. Miravalle holds that Medjugorie is true too, I don't agree with him on everything mariological.

[kafka]

[quote name='Slappo' post='1793922' date='Feb 28 2009, 09:00 PM']Kafka finds much more untrue with the apparitions then just that the messages haven't happened. The errors he talks about he sees as theological.

I haven't taken an opinion on the apparitions myself. I think I hesitate towards no, and I definitely disagree with medjugorie. Dr. Miravalle is just a man, and although he is very studied, he can be in error as well. Miravalle holds that Medjugorie is true too, I don't agree with him on everything mariological.[/quote]
I think you are taking a good and balanced approach.

Btw the thread took a bit of a different direction, so I didnt take the chance to explain why I hold there are currently more than five Marian dogmas. Also I didnt get to explain my understanding of the spiritual and temporal authority of the Church. I have a whole schematic drawn up which outlines the theological views I hold and follow concerning Tradition-Scripture-Magisterium.

Maybe tommorrow or some other time.

Edited March 1, 2009 by kafka

[StColette]

[quote name='kafka' post='1794019' date='Feb 28 2009, 10:04 PM']I think you are taking a good and balanced approach.

Btw the thread took a bit of a different direction, so I didnt take the chance to explain why I hold there are currently more than five Marian dogmas. Also I didnt get to explain my understanding of the spiritual and temporal authority of the Church. I have a whole schematic drawn up which outlines the theological views I hold and follow concerning Tradition-Scripture-Magisterium.[/quote]

I'd be interested in understanding why you hold the position that there are currently more than five Marian dogmas, when the Church teaches that there are only four.

[kafka]

[quote name='StColette' post='1794262' date='Mar 1 2009, 11:13 AM']I'd be interested in understanding why you hold the position that there are currently more than five Marian dogmas, when the Church teaches that there are only four.[/quote]
the spiritual authority of the Church (Magisterium) has not taught that there are only four. The idea that there are only four is a theological speculation or pious opinion. It isnt an infallible or non-infallible teaching of the Magisterium. Numbering dogmas and doctrines is not found in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. The Magisterium could not possibly infallibly declare that there are only a specific number of Marian dogmas or a certain number which could be known or declared in the future, because the whole truth about the mysteries of faith is beyond human comprehension.
Numbering dogmas is mere speculation.

In my theological opinion several truths about Mary are infallible teachings of the Magisterium. Besides Papal Infallibility, and the Infallibility of Ecumenical Councils, there is a third way in which the Magisterium teaches infallibly which is called the Universal Magisterium (Also known as the Ordinary and Universal Magisterium). The CCC goes into this a little bit:

88 The Church's Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes in a definitive way truths having a necessary connection with them.”


The Universal Magisterium could be loosely defined as exercised when the Bishops throughout the world and the Pope teach one and the same doctrine, from the Deposit of Faith, as definitively to be believed by the faithful. Such an exercise occurs in the daily preaching and witness of the Bishops and the Pope, and it may include various written expressions of doctrine. It cannot be exercised apart from the Pope.

The problem it is difficult to know when a teaching falls under the Universal Magisterium. There is no clear criteria (at least not yet) as there is for Papal Infallibility. What happens is such teachings generally begin under the Ordinary Magisterium as doctrines taught by Bishops. Once they have been taught by at least several Popes and at least several generations of Bishops, then perhaps they fall under the Sacred Magisterium as dogmas. However, the number of Popes and Bishops, and the amount of time required to bring a teaching under the Universal Magisterium is uncertain.

A good example would be the Queenship of Mary. It is a definitive teaching. It is a dogma, yet it falls under the Universal Magisterium. The truth has been taught by several Popes and several generations of Bishops. The Holy Spirit guiding the teaching of Popes and Bishops guarantees that this truth about Mary is entirely without error.

An example a non-infallible teaching which falls under the Ordinary Magisterium and would be called a doctrine is the salvation of prenatals, infants, and young children who die before they recognize right from wrong. For a long time this was a theological speculation/pious opinion, yet recently the Bishops are teaching it in their daily witness. This doctrine needs to be developed by the Faithful and taught by more Bishops in union with the Pope until it could become a definitive teaching of the Universal Magisterium.


Here is a possible speculative list of Marian dogmas:
1. Mary's Immaculate Conception
2. Mary's Perpetual Virginity
3. Mary's Perpetual Sinlessness
4. Mary as Mother of God
5. Mary as Spouse of the Holy Spirit
6. Mary's participation in the sufferings of Christ
7. Mary as Mother of the Church
8. Mary's Assumption to Heaven
9. Mary's Queenship in Heaven

Perhaps there are a few more. There are certainly more doctrines and theological speculations concerning Mary either explicitly or implicitly found in the Deposit of Faith which could someday be taught infallibly by the Magisterium in one of the three ways it teaches infallibly such as Mary's Dormition, her perfect discipleship, details about her life, whether or not she will return with Jesus Christ, etc.

Edited March 1, 2009 by kafka

[StColette]

[quote name='kafka' post='1794351' date='Mar 1 2009, 03:41 PM']A good example would be the Queenship of Mary. It is a definitive teaching. It is a dogma, yet it falls under the Universal Magisterium. The truth has been taught by several Popes and several generations of Bishops. The Holy Spirit guiding the teaching of Popes and Bishops guarantees that this truth about Mary is entirely without error.[/quote]

Please provide proof/citations as to where the Church teaches that the Queenship of Mary is a dogma.


I can provide you with proof of where the Church only teaches that there are four Marian dogmas proclaimed thus far.

[KnightofChrist]

[quote name='StColette' post='1795030' date='Mar 2 2009, 10:46 AM']I can provide you with proof of where the Church only teaches that there are four Marian dogmas proclaimed thus far.[/quote]

I'd like to see what church document outright says that.

[StColette]

[quote name='KnightofChrist' post='1795036' date='Mar 2 2009, 09:55 AM']I'd like to see what church document outright says that.[/quote]

Not a single document states all four combined at least not that I'm familiar with. But I can provide the documents which say that which Assumption, Perpetual Virginity, Immaculate Conception, and the Divine Motherhood are the four Marian dogmas thus far proclaimed.

Btw, I'm not saying that there could not possibly be more proclaimed at a later date, but as it stands the Church has only proclaimed four.

[Ziggamafu]

What seems odd to me is that Kafka has in the past presented various saintly visions / apparitions / prophecies as fact (at least implicitly, by matter-of-fact wording) and argued with those who disagreed. However, I certainly agree with Kafka that it would be erroneous (or at least presumptuous) to claim a potential fifth dogma as the final one. There are several titles and aspects of Mary's life that are believed but have not (yet) been elevated to the level of dogma.

But anyway, I see nothing wrong with a petition for any dogma. If enough people back it, it may represent the infallible authority exercised by the universal laity in the "sense of the faithful". As has been said, such was the case with the past two Marian dogmas.

[StColette]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' post='1795043' date='Mar 2 2009, 10:16 AM']However, I certainly agree with Kafka that it would be erroneous (or at least presumptuous) to claim a potential fifth dogma as the final one.[/quote]

I agree with him in on that matter. We could never be certain what may be the final Marian dogma. For all we know the four we have proclaimed currently might be all that are ever elevated to the status of Dogma. Only God knows.

[StColette]

[b]Divine Motherhood[/b]

The Council of Ephesus (431)

Lux Veritatis: on the Council of Ephesus, Encyclical of Pope Pius XI promulgated on December 25, 1931

www.ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P11VERIT.HTM

[b]Immaculate Conception[/b]

Pius IX, December 8, 1854

Apostolic Constitution issued by Pope Pius IX on December 8, 1854:
www.newadvent.org/docs/pi09id.htm

[b]Assumption[/b]

Pius XII, November 1, 1950

Encyclical Munificentissimus Deus by Pope Pius XII
www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P12MUNIF.HTM

[b]Perpetual Virginity[/b]

This dogma comes to use through the Universal Magisterium. At the Lateran Council on 649, Pope Martin I made the following statement:

“If anyone does not, according to the Holy Fathers, confess truly and properly that holy Mary, ever virgin and immaculate, is Mother of God, since in this latter age she conceived in true reality without human seed from the Holy Spirit, God the Word Himself, who before the ages was born of God the Father, and gave birth to Him without corruption, her virginity remaining equally inviolate after the birth, let him be condemned.”

[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DURBIRTH.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/DURBIRTH.HTM[/url]

I believe it was after the Second Council of Constantinople that this title was universally accepted by the Church. Because of its universal acceptance, it was not necessary to go through a formal dogmatic definition.