tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post1013393504462586857..comments2023-08-10T05:32:21.163-04:00Comments on An Examined Life: JUST SAY IT LOUDERVitae Scrutatorhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12808120163472036743noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-11446279446445040142006-10-21T11:22:00.000-04:002006-10-21T11:22:00.000-04:00Shawn
Thanks for your comment. I agree that Mark ...Shawn<br /><br />Thanks for your comment. I agree that Mark is very good when it comes to certain sorts of issues, and he often has very valuable insights. It might be time for him to take a step back from this one.<br /><br />I love your blog, by the way.Vitae Scrutatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12808120163472036743noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-9819459042545916432006-10-20T14:50:00.000-04:002006-10-20T14:50:00.000-04:00Scott,
I wish Mark could approach this subject as...Scott,<br /><br />I wish Mark could approach this subject as you have -and I say that as someone who probably does not agree with you (at least in part). The problem I suspect stems from the mentality of the apologist having to speak on any issue out there as if they know what they are speaking of. Mark is good on a lot of subjects (and superb on some as well) but this is an area he would do better to not make one of his crusading issues for reasons which (thus far) are obvious.<br /><br />~Shawn<br /><br /><a href="http://rerum-novarum.blogspot.com/2006_10_08_rerum-novarum_archive.html#116078507972343337">On Torture and General Norms of Theological Interpretation Contra Certain "Apologist" Fundamentalist Hermeneutics--Parts I-III </a>Shawnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750131692705468773noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-26117544770781772102006-10-20T03:03:00.000-04:002006-10-20T03:03:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Adminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05388825741740253444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-84624314783244254142006-10-18T11:45:00.000-04:002006-10-18T11:45:00.000-04:00This is pretty much why I've found myself not read...This is pretty much why I've found myself not reading Shea's blog for the last 3+ months. It's not necessarily that I disagree with him substantively on that many issues, but that he seems to spend so much time shouting the same thing over and over with only slight variation.<br /><br />Sort of like talk radio in print...<br /><br />Which is a shame, because every so often (as with his post on Dreher's conversion) he puts something up which makes it clear how intelligent, thoughtful and sensitive to human foibles he can be.Darwinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08572976822786862149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-83609759516359682272006-10-18T10:55:00.000-04:002006-10-18T10:55:00.000-04:00Well I thought that was what I was saying too, but...Well I <i>thought</i> that was what I was saying too, but it would come as no surprise to me to discover that I didn't actually know what I was talking about after all, since that happens to me all the time. I certainly agree with you that the question at issue is how, precisely, we are to regard the various documents in the "pile of paper".Vitae Scrutatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12808120163472036743noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-29255707726734762972006-10-18T10:17:00.000-04:002006-10-18T10:17:00.000-04:00My point is merely that the term "Magisterium," al...My point is merely that the term "Magisterium," all by itself, doesn't mean "the indefectible teaching of the Universal Church." It means "the teaching office of the Church."<br /><br />So the claim "this is a teaching of the Magisterium" is relatively weak, and should be the beginning of a discussion about how the teaching is to be received, not its culmination.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09534284662785499386noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-29869961225388299082006-10-18T09:44:00.000-04:002006-10-18T09:44:00.000-04:00Tom
It's possible that you're right--I confess I'...Tom<br /><br />It's possible that you're right--I confess I'm not absolutely certain. But I don't see how you could be. The "encyclical", as <i>we</i> know it, is a relatively recent invention; taken more generally, "letters to the whole world" cannot be regarded as <i>automatically</i> a part of the Magisterium if what you mean here by "Magisterium" is something along the lines of "the indefectible teaching of the Universal Church". If all you mean by "Magisterium" is that the letter is one of the things written by one of the teachers in the church, then sure, it's a part of the magisterium. That makes the question of <i>how much</i> authority we are to regard it as having a lot more complex, however. Certainly we are bound to take it very seriously, simply by virtue of it being a teaching of a pope. But history, not we individual particular members of some particular point in history, will be the ultimate judge of whether any particular encyclical in our sense becomes a rock solid deposit in the treasury of infallible teachings of the Magisterium.Vitae Scrutatorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12808120163472036743noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14247942.post-31780349687614390722006-10-18T08:50:00.000-04:002006-10-18T08:50:00.000-04:00But aside from all of that, it seriously begs the ...<i>But aside from all of that, it seriously begs the question to suggest, as Mark does here without warrant, that a papal encyclical is to be automatically identified with a teaching of the Magisterium.</i><br /><br />Well, but a papal encyclical <i>is</i> a teaching of the Magisterium. Automatically.<br /><br />What it is not automatically, as you wrote, is of equal authority as every other teaching of the Magisterium.Tomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14850575419673561383noreply@blogger.com