Immaculate Conception. — THE DOCTRINE.
— In the Constitution "Ineffabilis Deus" of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin" (Denzinger, "Enchiridion", 10th ed., n. 1641).
The subject of this immunity from original sin is the person of Mary at the moment of the creation of her soul and its infusion into her body. The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.
The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin, the state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam — from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death. The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin by baptism. Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ's redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor (Ullathorne, "Immac. Conception", p. 89). Such is the meaning of the term "Immaculate Conception"
Four Marian Dogmas
1) Divine Motherhood - Council of Ephesus (431)
2) Mary's Virginity
a) Virginal Conception through the Spirit
b) Perpetual Virginity (virginal birth and no other children)
3) Immaculate Conception (Mary's freedom from original sin) - Pius IX, 1854
4) Mary's Assumption (body and soul) into heaven - Pius XII, 1950
#dogma #mary
— In the Constitution "Ineffabilis Deus" of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin" (Denzinger, "Enchiridion", 10th ed., n. 1641).
The subject of this immunity from original sin is the person of Mary at the moment of the creation of her soul and its infusion into her body. The term conception does not mean the active or generative conception by her parents. Her body was formed in the womb of the mother, and the father had the usual share in its formation. The question does not concern the immaculateness of the generative activity of her parents. Neither does it concern the passive conception absolutely and simply (conceptio seminis carnis, inchoata), which, according to the order of nature, precedes the infusion of the rational soul. The person is truly conceived when the soul is created and infused into the body. Mary was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin at the first moment of her animation, and sanctifying grace was given to her before sin could have taken effect in her soul.
The formal active essence of original sin was not removed from her soul, as it is removed from others by baptism; it was excluded, it never was in her soul. Simultaneously with the exclusion of sin, the state of original sanctity, innocence, and justice, as opposed to original sin, was conferred upon her, by which gift every stain and fault, all depraved emotions, passions, and debilities, essentially pertaining to original sin original sin, were excluded. But she was not made exempt from the temporal penalties of Adam — from sorrow, bodily infirmities, and death. The immunity from original sin was given to Mary by a singular exemption from a universal law through the same merits of Christ, by which other men are cleansed from sin by baptism. Mary needed the redeeming Saviour to obtain this exemption, and to be delivered from the universal necessity and debt (debitum) of being subject to original sin. The person of Mary, in consequence of her origin from Adam, should have been subject to sin, but, being the new Eve who was to be the mother of the new Adam, she was, by the eternal counsel of God and by the merits of Christ, withdrawn from the general law of original sin. Her redemption was the very masterpiece of Christ's redeeming wisdom. He is a greater redeemer who pays the debt that it may not be incurred than he who pays after it has fallen on the debtor (Ullathorne, "Immac. Conception", p. 89). Such is the meaning of the term "Immaculate Conception"
Four Marian Dogmas
1) Divine Motherhood - Council of Ephesus (431)
2) Mary's Virginity
a) Virginal Conception through the Spirit
b) Perpetual Virginity (virginal birth and no other children)
3) Immaculate Conception (Mary's freedom from original sin) - Pius IX, 1854
4) Mary's Assumption (body and soul) into heaven - Pius XII, 1950
#dogma #mary
What is Dogma?
an overview, p.1
by William Edward Addis, 1893
Dogma, in its theological sense, is a truth contained in the Word of God, written or unwritten--i.e. in Scripture or Tradition--and proposed by the Church for the belief of the faithful. Thus dogma is a revealed truth, since Scripture is inspired by the Holy Ghost, while tradition signifies the truths which the Apostles received from Christ and the Holy Spirit, and handed down to the Church.
From this definition, it follows that the Church has no power to make new dogmas. It is her office to contend for the faith once delivered, and to hand down the sacred deposit which she has received without adding to it or taking from it. At the same time, the Church may enunciate fully and impose dogmas or articles of faith contained in the Word of God, or at least deduced from principles so contained, but as yet not fully declared and imposed. Hence with regard to a new definition--such, e.g., as that of Transubstantiation, Christians have a twofold duty. They are obliged to believe, first, that the doctrine so defined is true, and next that it is part of the Christian revelation received by the Apostles. Again, no Christian is at liberty to refuse assent to any dogma which the Church proposes. To do so involves nothing less than shipwreck of the faith, and no Catholic can accept the Protestant distinction between "fundamental and non-fundamental articles of faith." It is a matter of fundamental importance to accept the whole of the Church's teaching. True, a Catholic is not bound to know all the definitions of the Church--but, if he knowingly and wilfully contradicts or doubts the truth of any one among them, he ceases to be a Catholic.
This arbitrary distinction between essential and non-essential articles has led by natural consequence to the opinion that dogmatic belief, as such, matters little provided a man's life is virtuous and his feelings are devout. A religion of this kind is on the very face of it different from the religion of the Apostles and their successors. St. Paul anathematises false teachers, and bids his disciples shun heretics; St. John denounces the denial of the Incarnation as a mark of Antichrist. If God has made a revelation, then both duty and devotional feeling must depend on the dogmas of that revelation, and be regulated by them.
#ccc #tradition #dogma
an overview, p.1
by William Edward Addis, 1893
Dogma, in its theological sense, is a truth contained in the Word of God, written or unwritten--i.e. in Scripture or Tradition--and proposed by the Church for the belief of the faithful. Thus dogma is a revealed truth, since Scripture is inspired by the Holy Ghost, while tradition signifies the truths which the Apostles received from Christ and the Holy Spirit, and handed down to the Church.
From this definition, it follows that the Church has no power to make new dogmas. It is her office to contend for the faith once delivered, and to hand down the sacred deposit which she has received without adding to it or taking from it. At the same time, the Church may enunciate fully and impose dogmas or articles of faith contained in the Word of God, or at least deduced from principles so contained, but as yet not fully declared and imposed. Hence with regard to a new definition--such, e.g., as that of Transubstantiation, Christians have a twofold duty. They are obliged to believe, first, that the doctrine so defined is true, and next that it is part of the Christian revelation received by the Apostles. Again, no Christian is at liberty to refuse assent to any dogma which the Church proposes. To do so involves nothing less than shipwreck of the faith, and no Catholic can accept the Protestant distinction between "fundamental and non-fundamental articles of faith." It is a matter of fundamental importance to accept the whole of the Church's teaching. True, a Catholic is not bound to know all the definitions of the Church--but, if he knowingly and wilfully contradicts or doubts the truth of any one among them, he ceases to be a Catholic.
This arbitrary distinction between essential and non-essential articles has led by natural consequence to the opinion that dogmatic belief, as such, matters little provided a man's life is virtuous and his feelings are devout. A religion of this kind is on the very face of it different from the religion of the Apostles and their successors. St. Paul anathematises false teachers, and bids his disciples shun heretics; St. John denounces the denial of the Incarnation as a mark of Antichrist. If God has made a revelation, then both duty and devotional feeling must depend on the dogmas of that revelation, and be regulated by them.
#ccc #tradition #dogma
There Can be No New Dogmas
or Progress in Church Teachings
"The Church of Christ, zealous and cautious guardian of the dogmas deposited with it, never changes any phase of them. It does not diminish them or add to them; it neither trims what seems necessary nor grafts things superfluous; it neither gives up its own or usurps what does not belong to it. But it devotes all its diligence to one aim: to treat tradition faithfully and wisely; to nurse and polish what from old times may have remain unshaped and unfinished; to consolidate and strengthen what already was clear and plain; and to guard what already was confirmed and defined."
St. Vincent of Lerins, 5th century A.D.
"'Guard.' he says, 'what has been committed.' What does it mean, 'what has been committed'? It is what has been faithfully entrusted to you, not what has been discovered by you; what you have received, not what you have thought up; a matter not of ingenuity, but of doctrine; not of private acquisition, but of public Tradition; a matter brought to you, not put forth by you, in which you must not be the author but the guardian, not the founder but the sharer, not the leader, but the follower. 'Guard,' he says, 'what has been committed.' Keep the talent [see Mt. 25:14-30] of the Catholic Faith inviolate and unimpaired. What has been faithfully entrusted, let it remain in your possession, let it be handed on by you. You have received gold, so give gold. For my part, I do not want you to substitute on thing for another; I do not want you imprudently to put lead in place of gold, or fraudulently, brass. I do not want the appearance of gold, but the real thing. O Timothy, O priest, O interpreter, O teacher, if a divine gift has made you suitable in genius, in experience, in doctrine to be the Bezalel [i.e. skilled craftsman] of the spiritual tabernacle, cut out the precious gems of divine dogma, shape them faithfully, ornament them wisely, add splendor, grace and beauty to them! By your expounding it, may that now be understood more clearly which formerly was believed even in its obscurity. May posterity, be means of you, rejoice in understanding what in times past was venerated without understanding. Nevertheless, teach the same that you have learned, so that if you say something anew, it is not something new that you say."
St. Vincent of Lerins, c. 434 A.D.
"Hold firmly that your faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this, and you dissolve the unity of the Church."
St. Thomas Aquinas
"What then should a Catholic do if some part of the Church were to separate itself from communion with the universal Faith? What other choice can he make but to prefer to the gangrenous and corrupted member the whole of the body that is sound. And if some new contagion were to try to poison no longer a small part of the Church, but all of the Church at the same time, then he will take the greatest care to attach himself to antiquity which, obviously, can no longer be seduced by any lying novelty."
St. Vincent of Lerins, c. 434 A.D.
#tradition #dogma
or Progress in Church Teachings
"The Church of Christ, zealous and cautious guardian of the dogmas deposited with it, never changes any phase of them. It does not diminish them or add to them; it neither trims what seems necessary nor grafts things superfluous; it neither gives up its own or usurps what does not belong to it. But it devotes all its diligence to one aim: to treat tradition faithfully and wisely; to nurse and polish what from old times may have remain unshaped and unfinished; to consolidate and strengthen what already was clear and plain; and to guard what already was confirmed and defined."
St. Vincent of Lerins, 5th century A.D.
"'Guard.' he says, 'what has been committed.' What does it mean, 'what has been committed'? It is what has been faithfully entrusted to you, not what has been discovered by you; what you have received, not what you have thought up; a matter not of ingenuity, but of doctrine; not of private acquisition, but of public Tradition; a matter brought to you, not put forth by you, in which you must not be the author but the guardian, not the founder but the sharer, not the leader, but the follower. 'Guard,' he says, 'what has been committed.' Keep the talent [see Mt. 25:14-30] of the Catholic Faith inviolate and unimpaired. What has been faithfully entrusted, let it remain in your possession, let it be handed on by you. You have received gold, so give gold. For my part, I do not want you to substitute on thing for another; I do not want you imprudently to put lead in place of gold, or fraudulently, brass. I do not want the appearance of gold, but the real thing. O Timothy, O priest, O interpreter, O teacher, if a divine gift has made you suitable in genius, in experience, in doctrine to be the Bezalel [i.e. skilled craftsman] of the spiritual tabernacle, cut out the precious gems of divine dogma, shape them faithfully, ornament them wisely, add splendor, grace and beauty to them! By your expounding it, may that now be understood more clearly which formerly was believed even in its obscurity. May posterity, be means of you, rejoice in understanding what in times past was venerated without understanding. Nevertheless, teach the same that you have learned, so that if you say something anew, it is not something new that you say."
St. Vincent of Lerins, c. 434 A.D.
"Hold firmly that your faith is identical with that of the ancients. Deny this, and you dissolve the unity of the Church."
St. Thomas Aquinas
"What then should a Catholic do if some part of the Church were to separate itself from communion with the universal Faith? What other choice can he make but to prefer to the gangrenous and corrupted member the whole of the body that is sound. And if some new contagion were to try to poison no longer a small part of the Church, but all of the Church at the same time, then he will take the greatest care to attach himself to antiquity which, obviously, can no longer be seduced by any lying novelty."
St. Vincent of Lerins, c. 434 A.D.
#tradition #dogma
Rev. F.X. Schouppe, S.J. - Hell.pdf
232.4 KB
Hell
"The Dogma of Hell, Illustrated by Facts Taken from Profane and Sacred History."
by Rev. Father Francois Xavier Schouppe, S.J.
Table of Contents
Chapter I. The Dogma of Hell
Chapter II. Manifestations of Hell
Chapter III. Apparitions of Damned Souls
Chapter IV. The Denial of Hell is Only Foolish Bravado
Chapter V. Awaking of the Ungodly Soul in Hell
Chapter VI. Truth of Hell
Chapter VII. The Pains of Hell
Chapter VIII. A Saluatory Fear of Hell
Chapter IX. The Thought of Hell
#dogma
"The Dogma of Hell, Illustrated by Facts Taken from Profane and Sacred History."
by Rev. Father Francois Xavier Schouppe, S.J.
Table of Contents
Chapter I. The Dogma of Hell
Chapter II. Manifestations of Hell
Chapter III. Apparitions of Damned Souls
Chapter IV. The Denial of Hell is Only Foolish Bravado
Chapter V. Awaking of the Ungodly Soul in Hell
Chapter VI. Truth of Hell
Chapter VII. The Pains of Hell
Chapter VIII. A Saluatory Fear of Hell
Chapter IX. The Thought of Hell
#dogma
The attributes of God
1.God is just
The Catholic religion attributes many qualities to God, but it must be admitted that justice, which has been attributed to God for centuries, has become misunderstood or, worse, denied in modern times. What, then, is God's justice?
God's righteousness, just like truthfulness, faithfulness or mercy, stems from the fact that God is holy. Holiness is one of the fundamental attributes of God and, in an ontological sense, means that He is worthy of special honour and respect.
However, we can also consider holiness in a moral sense, and it then falls to the person whose will (and actions) are in accordance with the supreme rule of conduct (God's eternal law), or in other words, it is freedom from all sin and possession of all virtue.
God is holy in this way: free from all sin, not only actually free, but it is metaphysically impossible for God to sin, and He positively possesses all virtues and moral perfections to the highest degree and loves Himself as the highest good.
Obviously, God's virtues are not ontological accidents, as in creatures, but are identical with the very ontological substance of God. It is from God's moral holiness that His justice arises (the virtue consisting in a constant and enduring willingness to give to everyone what is rightfully theirs).
The thesis that God is just is considered 'de fide' - a truth of the Catholic faith (dogma). This is because Revelation in many places explicitly and frequently speaks of God's justice, which was understood by the Church Fathers as rewarding and punishing.
Justice in reward and punishment or so-called distributive justice, which is in God, differs, however, from the analogous justice in human authority. For God owes it to His wisdom, not to creatures, to act justly towards creatures.
Since He has given existence to creatures and destined them for a certain purpose, He should give them what is necessary according to their nature, so that they may exist and reach their appointed goal. Also, being truthful and faithful, He should keep His promises to give the promised reward and the due punishment.
Furthermore, reward and punishment must be just, i.e. the reward must not be less than the merit and the punishment must not be greater than the fault. However, it was not the creation that bound God, but He bound himself, because it pleased His wisdom and goodness to do so.
Just as God's justice in rewarding merit remains unchallenged, so justice in punishment presents greater difficulties. Some theologians have erred in claiming that punishment serves only to correct the sinner, or that punishment is incompatible with love.
It is a truth of faith that there is a hell, that is, an eternal punishment, and this, after all, excludes the possibility of improvement. Nor can it be said that hell is the exclusive consequence of the free choice of sin, since in addition to suffering deprivation from God, the damned suffer sensual punishment.
Nor does punishment contradict the love of God, since He is perfect love and therefore loves reasonably and in the right order, thus first Himself as the first and necessary object and then creatures as the second and subordinate object to the first.
God does not seek His benefit of creatures, but seeks glory from them. Vatican I affirms that the primary end of creation is God's glory. The happiness of creatures is a contingent goal, dependent on giving glory to Him - the primary goal.
Thus, if creatures refuse to give glory to God, then punishment, not happiness, is due to them. However, this is not due to God's vindictiveness, but to a perfect love that respects the proper order. Otherwise, God would have to continually violate this order and sin against Himself.
Accepting God's justice can be difficult, especially in times of sentimentalism, but this one attribute does not exhaust the whole idea of God. We must not overlook other attributes as well, such as mercy.
source: Fr dr M. Sieniatycki, Outline of Catholic Dogmatics
#dogma
1.God is just
The Catholic religion attributes many qualities to God, but it must be admitted that justice, which has been attributed to God for centuries, has become misunderstood or, worse, denied in modern times. What, then, is God's justice?
God's righteousness, just like truthfulness, faithfulness or mercy, stems from the fact that God is holy. Holiness is one of the fundamental attributes of God and, in an ontological sense, means that He is worthy of special honour and respect.
However, we can also consider holiness in a moral sense, and it then falls to the person whose will (and actions) are in accordance with the supreme rule of conduct (God's eternal law), or in other words, it is freedom from all sin and possession of all virtue.
God is holy in this way: free from all sin, not only actually free, but it is metaphysically impossible for God to sin, and He positively possesses all virtues and moral perfections to the highest degree and loves Himself as the highest good.
Obviously, God's virtues are not ontological accidents, as in creatures, but are identical with the very ontological substance of God. It is from God's moral holiness that His justice arises (the virtue consisting in a constant and enduring willingness to give to everyone what is rightfully theirs).
The thesis that God is just is considered 'de fide' - a truth of the Catholic faith (dogma). This is because Revelation in many places explicitly and frequently speaks of God's justice, which was understood by the Church Fathers as rewarding and punishing.
Justice in reward and punishment or so-called distributive justice, which is in God, differs, however, from the analogous justice in human authority. For God owes it to His wisdom, not to creatures, to act justly towards creatures.
Since He has given existence to creatures and destined them for a certain purpose, He should give them what is necessary according to their nature, so that they may exist and reach their appointed goal. Also, being truthful and faithful, He should keep His promises to give the promised reward and the due punishment.
Furthermore, reward and punishment must be just, i.e. the reward must not be less than the merit and the punishment must not be greater than the fault. However, it was not the creation that bound God, but He bound himself, because it pleased His wisdom and goodness to do so.
Just as God's justice in rewarding merit remains unchallenged, so justice in punishment presents greater difficulties. Some theologians have erred in claiming that punishment serves only to correct the sinner, or that punishment is incompatible with love.
It is a truth of faith that there is a hell, that is, an eternal punishment, and this, after all, excludes the possibility of improvement. Nor can it be said that hell is the exclusive consequence of the free choice of sin, since in addition to suffering deprivation from God, the damned suffer sensual punishment.
Nor does punishment contradict the love of God, since He is perfect love and therefore loves reasonably and in the right order, thus first Himself as the first and necessary object and then creatures as the second and subordinate object to the first.
God does not seek His benefit of creatures, but seeks glory from them. Vatican I affirms that the primary end of creation is God's glory. The happiness of creatures is a contingent goal, dependent on giving glory to Him - the primary goal.
Thus, if creatures refuse to give glory to God, then punishment, not happiness, is due to them. However, this is not due to God's vindictiveness, but to a perfect love that respects the proper order. Otherwise, God would have to continually violate this order and sin against Himself.
Accepting God's justice can be difficult, especially in times of sentimentalism, but this one attribute does not exhaust the whole idea of God. We must not overlook other attributes as well, such as mercy.
source: Fr dr M. Sieniatycki, Outline of Catholic Dogmatics
#dogma
Ecce Verbum
The attributes of God 1.God is just The Catholic religion attributes many qualities to God, but it must be admitted that justice, which has been attributed to God for centuries, has become misunderstood or, worse, denied in modern times. What, then, is God's…
The attributes of God
2. God is good and merciful
It follows from the holiness of God that He is infinitely good and merciful. What exactly do the qualities of goodness and mercy mean in relation to God?
It is not about being morally good (holiness), but about giving good to others. St Thomas explains: "Just as it is the nature of the sun to send out its rays, to warm and enlighten, so it is the nature of goodness to cause and spread goodness around."
The first expression of God's goodness is the act of creation: "out of His goodness, not to increase His happiness ... but for the sake of manifesting His perfection by the good things which he bestows on creatures...He freely made creatures, spiritual and corporeal, out of nothingness" (Vat. Council I).
As is clear from Revelation, God gratuitously demonstrates His goodness primarily by calling creatures into being, sustaining them in existence and surrounding them with His paternal care. Moreover, He has no benefit from this for Himself.
St Thomas teaches thus that: "God, therefore, is most generous, and it may be said that He alone is selfless, for everyone else derives some benefit from their helpfulness to others".
However, the mere creation of the world and the sustaining of it in existence is not the only expression of God's goodness, which can manifest itself through many different activities. For goodness can also consist in the removal of physical or moral evil, in which case it is called mercy.
God's mercy, however, differs from human mercy. For in mercy a distinction must be made between the feeling of sorrow and pain at the sight of another's misery and the will to remove it. Since there are no feelings in God, mercy in God is only the will to remove misery.
This is why St Thomas teaches about God's mercy in this way: "To grieve at the misery of another does not accrue to God, but to remove the misery of another is most in accord with God's nature."
Similarly, St. Augustine defines God's mercy as follows: "You will have a certain knowledge of God's mercy if you remove compassion so that only the tranquil goodness of coming to one's aid, and of deliverance from misery, remains."
It is worth mentioning that God's mercy is manifested in both the natural and supernatural order. In the natural order, God shows his mercy by removing or reducing people's temporal miseries.
The immensity of mercy, however, is visible only in the supernatural order, when, in an infinite way, through the passion and death of the Son of God, God's readiness to forgive the sinner of all trespasses is manifested whenever the sinner, with sincere contrition, turns to Him
God, in his infinite mercy, is ready to forgive even the gravest sins to the repentant sinner: "though your sins be as scarlet, as snow they shall whiten" [Is 1:18].
Sometimes it seems that God's mercy is at odds with God's justice. It seems that justice and mercy, both qualities infinite in God, are incompatible, for as the just must punish and as the merciful must forgive.
However, this is only an apparent contradiction. For sin is an offence against God, so God may demand reparation from the sinner because it is His good right, but He may just as well not demand reparation, i.e. not exercise His right.
St Thomas explains: "When God acts mercifully, He does not do anything against His justice, but acts beyond it; just as one who gives 200 denarii to one who owes him 100 denarii does not act against justice, but acts generously."
Although mercy and justice are necessary and infinite attributes of God, in their outward manifestations they are voluntary, and God, according to His wisdom and holiness, may at one time reveal Himself to be just, at another time to be merciful.
Mercy with God, however, is never a manifestation of injustice or contempt for the moral order that He loves, but is merely a display of pity. Forgiving presupposes recognition of one's guilt and expression of regret, and this presupposes the existence of justice.
source: Fr M. Sieniatycki, Outline of Catholic Dogmatics
#dogma
2. God is good and merciful
It follows from the holiness of God that He is infinitely good and merciful. What exactly do the qualities of goodness and mercy mean in relation to God?
It is not about being morally good (holiness), but about giving good to others. St Thomas explains: "Just as it is the nature of the sun to send out its rays, to warm and enlighten, so it is the nature of goodness to cause and spread goodness around."
The first expression of God's goodness is the act of creation: "out of His goodness, not to increase His happiness ... but for the sake of manifesting His perfection by the good things which he bestows on creatures...He freely made creatures, spiritual and corporeal, out of nothingness" (Vat. Council I).
As is clear from Revelation, God gratuitously demonstrates His goodness primarily by calling creatures into being, sustaining them in existence and surrounding them with His paternal care. Moreover, He has no benefit from this for Himself.
St Thomas teaches thus that: "God, therefore, is most generous, and it may be said that He alone is selfless, for everyone else derives some benefit from their helpfulness to others".
However, the mere creation of the world and the sustaining of it in existence is not the only expression of God's goodness, which can manifest itself through many different activities. For goodness can also consist in the removal of physical or moral evil, in which case it is called mercy.
God's mercy, however, differs from human mercy. For in mercy a distinction must be made between the feeling of sorrow and pain at the sight of another's misery and the will to remove it. Since there are no feelings in God, mercy in God is only the will to remove misery.
This is why St Thomas teaches about God's mercy in this way: "To grieve at the misery of another does not accrue to God, but to remove the misery of another is most in accord with God's nature."
Similarly, St. Augustine defines God's mercy as follows: "You will have a certain knowledge of God's mercy if you remove compassion so that only the tranquil goodness of coming to one's aid, and of deliverance from misery, remains."
It is worth mentioning that God's mercy is manifested in both the natural and supernatural order. In the natural order, God shows his mercy by removing or reducing people's temporal miseries.
The immensity of mercy, however, is visible only in the supernatural order, when, in an infinite way, through the passion and death of the Son of God, God's readiness to forgive the sinner of all trespasses is manifested whenever the sinner, with sincere contrition, turns to Him
God, in his infinite mercy, is ready to forgive even the gravest sins to the repentant sinner: "though your sins be as scarlet, as snow they shall whiten" [Is 1:18].
Sometimes it seems that God's mercy is at odds with God's justice. It seems that justice and mercy, both qualities infinite in God, are incompatible, for as the just must punish and as the merciful must forgive.
However, this is only an apparent contradiction. For sin is an offence against God, so God may demand reparation from the sinner because it is His good right, but He may just as well not demand reparation, i.e. not exercise His right.
St Thomas explains: "When God acts mercifully, He does not do anything against His justice, but acts beyond it; just as one who gives 200 denarii to one who owes him 100 denarii does not act against justice, but acts generously."
Although mercy and justice are necessary and infinite attributes of God, in their outward manifestations they are voluntary, and God, according to His wisdom and holiness, may at one time reveal Himself to be just, at another time to be merciful.
Mercy with God, however, is never a manifestation of injustice or contempt for the moral order that He loves, but is merely a display of pity. Forgiving presupposes recognition of one's guilt and expression of regret, and this presupposes the existence of justice.
source: Fr M. Sieniatycki, Outline of Catholic Dogmatics
#dogma
Ecce Verbum
The attributes of God 2. God is good and merciful It follows from the holiness of God that He is infinitely good and merciful. What exactly do the qualities of goodness and mercy mean in relation to God? It is not about being morally good (holiness), but…
The attributes of God
3.God is immutable
Vatican I described God as an 'immutable substance', while Nicea, in defence of the deity of the Son of God, condemned those who attribute mutability to him. It is therefore worth reflecting on what exactly God's immutability is.
Change is the transition of a thing from one state to another. Changeability therefore presupposes a change in the state of being in the thing itself. On the other hand, it is not a change of a thing if nothing new has happened in it, but changes have occurred outside of it, even if the thing in question has influenced the change.
An (ontological) accidental change is when a thing receives a new accidentality, e.g. cold water becomes warm. Accidental change happens to corporeal substances as well as to spiritual substances. Spiritual change is when the soul learns a new thing or changes its intention (will).
Substantive change, on the other hand, is when one substance changes into another, e.g. a tree into ash. Immutability excludes change of any kind. Absolute immutability not only means that change does not occur, it even presupposes the impossibility of change.
God is absolutely immutable. Not only do no changes of any kind occur in Him, but they cannot occur. This was denied by the pantheists, who believed that God is subject to constant development, and by the Socinians, who attributed to Him the immutability of essence but the mutability of will.
God does not change in thoughts, for by a single act He knows all that can be known. Nor does He change in resolutions, for a rational being changes resolutions when he comes to know new motives, and God has known all motives for centuries, so His will remains unchanged.
Immutability, however, is not inaction, but on the contrary is supreme activity. God is pure act, and present knowledge and love are pure activity in Him. God currently (i.e. continuously) knows and loves Himself and all creatures.
God rules the world and keeps it alive. He does all this in one eternal act: in God, supreme life is associated with supreme peace. This flows from the very nature of God. He is a necessary being (ontologically speaking), and so everything in Him is always in the same way.
God gives the most profound proof of His immutability in the pages of Scripture, where He calls Himself "Yahweh" meaning "I am who I am". In this name God expresses that He is pure existence and is still Him, still the same: "I, Yahweh, do not change" [Mal 3:6].
Similarly, the Church Fathers taught about the immutability of God. St Augustine wrote: "Unchanging and changing all things, never new, never old, and renewing all things" and "You, O Lord, are not once this, once another, but the same, the same and the same".
St Thomas also defends the immutability of God: "Possibility vis-à-vis reality passes for something secondary or inferior. Everything that is subject to change in any way conceals in itself a potentiality. Thus, as we have seen, it is impossible for God to be subject to change".
Only God is immutable (perfect). All creatures, on the other hand, are complex, limited and potential beings and thus are subject to change. Thus, bodies are subject to change, e.g. through death, and the soul is subject to change through change in thought and in resolution.
Immutability can make it difficult to understand God's action, which is outwardly voluntary and expressed in time. Theology explains here that God acts in time, but not by a new act of will, but by an act by which he has decided to do something at a certain time from eternity.
Changes brought about by action in time occur in things, but not in God, and therefore do not cause His changeability. In creating the world, in punishing sinners, in taking on human nature, God undergoes no change in thought or will, but continues in His original state.
🔗p.2 and sources
#dogma
3.God is immutable
Vatican I described God as an 'immutable substance', while Nicea, in defence of the deity of the Son of God, condemned those who attribute mutability to him. It is therefore worth reflecting on what exactly God's immutability is.
Change is the transition of a thing from one state to another. Changeability therefore presupposes a change in the state of being in the thing itself. On the other hand, it is not a change of a thing if nothing new has happened in it, but changes have occurred outside of it, even if the thing in question has influenced the change.
An (ontological) accidental change is when a thing receives a new accidentality, e.g. cold water becomes warm. Accidental change happens to corporeal substances as well as to spiritual substances. Spiritual change is when the soul learns a new thing or changes its intention (will).
Substantive change, on the other hand, is when one substance changes into another, e.g. a tree into ash. Immutability excludes change of any kind. Absolute immutability not only means that change does not occur, it even presupposes the impossibility of change.
God is absolutely immutable. Not only do no changes of any kind occur in Him, but they cannot occur. This was denied by the pantheists, who believed that God is subject to constant development, and by the Socinians, who attributed to Him the immutability of essence but the mutability of will.
God does not change in thoughts, for by a single act He knows all that can be known. Nor does He change in resolutions, for a rational being changes resolutions when he comes to know new motives, and God has known all motives for centuries, so His will remains unchanged.
Immutability, however, is not inaction, but on the contrary is supreme activity. God is pure act, and present knowledge and love are pure activity in Him. God currently (i.e. continuously) knows and loves Himself and all creatures.
God rules the world and keeps it alive. He does all this in one eternal act: in God, supreme life is associated with supreme peace. This flows from the very nature of God. He is a necessary being (ontologically speaking), and so everything in Him is always in the same way.
God gives the most profound proof of His immutability in the pages of Scripture, where He calls Himself "Yahweh" meaning "I am who I am". In this name God expresses that He is pure existence and is still Him, still the same: "I, Yahweh, do not change" [Mal 3:6].
Similarly, the Church Fathers taught about the immutability of God. St Augustine wrote: "Unchanging and changing all things, never new, never old, and renewing all things" and "You, O Lord, are not once this, once another, but the same, the same and the same".
St Thomas also defends the immutability of God: "Possibility vis-à-vis reality passes for something secondary or inferior. Everything that is subject to change in any way conceals in itself a potentiality. Thus, as we have seen, it is impossible for God to be subject to change".
Only God is immutable (perfect). All creatures, on the other hand, are complex, limited and potential beings and thus are subject to change. Thus, bodies are subject to change, e.g. through death, and the soul is subject to change through change in thought and in resolution.
Immutability can make it difficult to understand God's action, which is outwardly voluntary and expressed in time. Theology explains here that God acts in time, but not by a new act of will, but by an act by which he has decided to do something at a certain time from eternity.
Changes brought about by action in time occur in things, but not in God, and therefore do not cause His changeability. In creating the world, in punishing sinners, in taking on human nature, God undergoes no change in thought or will, but continues in His original state.
🔗p.2 and sources
#dogma
Ecce Verbum
The attributes of God 3.God is immutable Vatican I described God as an 'immutable substance', while Nicea, in defence of the deity of the Son of God, condemned those who attribute mutability to him. It is therefore worth reflecting on what exactly God's immutability…
The attributes of God
4.The will of God
The power by which rational nature relates to good is called the will, therefore every rational being has a will, including God, hence Vatican Council I refers to Him as 'the will of the Infinite'. How does God's will work and how does it differ from human will?
Every being relates to the good corresponding to its nature in such a way that when it does not have it, it strives to possess it, and when it has it, it enjoys it in peace. In God, of course, the will does not strive to possess the good, since God possesses within Himself the fullness of the good, which can no longer be magnified.
Thus, in God, the will simply loves the good it possesses and enjoys it, which is why God's will is nothing other than an eternal act of love and enjoyment of the good it has possessed from eternity (amor complacentiae).
Moreover, since God is the most singular being (ontologically simple being), in whom there is no real difference between nature, powers and acts (he is pure act, without potentiality), we can even say that "God is love" [1 Jn 4:8].
Although God's will is in itself a single act, God reaches the most diverse objects by means of this act, for which the complex will of creatures would need many different acts. For this reason, we can divide God's will virtually, although realistically it remains indivisible.
The will of God is thus virtually divided into the will in itself and the will of the sign, i.e. the externally revealed will. The will in itself is the proper will of God, which is externally unrevealed, whereas the will of the sign, for example, the commandments of God, which externally express the proper will of God.
We distinguish 5 signs by which God reveals the will: command, prohibition, permission, counsel and action. It should be noted that in a permissions, the object of the sign does not necessarily coincide with the will in itself, e.g. God permits sin but does not will the sin but wants the free will of the sinner.
In the case of an action, the sign is identical to the will in itself. By contrast, in the case of command, prohibition and counsel, the will of the sign may equate to the will in itself, but need not so, e.g. the command to kill Isaac given to Abraham was not the will to kill Isaac, but the will to show obedience by Abraham.
We can also divide the will of God into antecedent (antecedens) and consequent (consequente). With the antecedent will, He wants the object as it is in itself, without taking into account the circumstances. The consequent will, on the other hand, wills the object after taking all circumstances into account.
As St Thomas teaches, God by antecedent will wants the salvation of all men, because he created them for salvation, but by a subsequent will he wants to condemn some according to his justice. In the same way, God's will for the salvation and condemnation of men was explained by St John of Damascus.
We also divide the will of God into absolute and conditional. Thus, for example, God wants to save all people on condition that His will is fulfilled, while He absolutely wants to save those who actually fulfil His will. The absolute will is effective and is always fulfilled.
source: fr M. Sieniatycki, Outline of Catholic Dogmatics
#dogma
4.The will of God
The power by which rational nature relates to good is called the will, therefore every rational being has a will, including God, hence Vatican Council I refers to Him as 'the will of the Infinite'. How does God's will work and how does it differ from human will?
Every being relates to the good corresponding to its nature in such a way that when it does not have it, it strives to possess it, and when it has it, it enjoys it in peace. In God, of course, the will does not strive to possess the good, since God possesses within Himself the fullness of the good, which can no longer be magnified.
Thus, in God, the will simply loves the good it possesses and enjoys it, which is why God's will is nothing other than an eternal act of love and enjoyment of the good it has possessed from eternity (amor complacentiae).
Moreover, since God is the most singular being (ontologically simple being), in whom there is no real difference between nature, powers and acts (he is pure act, without potentiality), we can even say that "God is love" [1 Jn 4:8].
Although God's will is in itself a single act, God reaches the most diverse objects by means of this act, for which the complex will of creatures would need many different acts. For this reason, we can divide God's will virtually, although realistically it remains indivisible.
The will of God is thus virtually divided into the will in itself and the will of the sign, i.e. the externally revealed will. The will in itself is the proper will of God, which is externally unrevealed, whereas the will of the sign, for example, the commandments of God, which externally express the proper will of God.
We distinguish 5 signs by which God reveals the will: command, prohibition, permission, counsel and action. It should be noted that in a permissions, the object of the sign does not necessarily coincide with the will in itself, e.g. God permits sin but does not will the sin but wants the free will of the sinner.
In the case of an action, the sign is identical to the will in itself. By contrast, in the case of command, prohibition and counsel, the will of the sign may equate to the will in itself, but need not so, e.g. the command to kill Isaac given to Abraham was not the will to kill Isaac, but the will to show obedience by Abraham.
We can also divide the will of God into antecedent (antecedens) and consequent (consequente). With the antecedent will, He wants the object as it is in itself, without taking into account the circumstances. The consequent will, on the other hand, wills the object after taking all circumstances into account.
As St Thomas teaches, God by antecedent will wants the salvation of all men, because he created them for salvation, but by a subsequent will he wants to condemn some according to his justice. In the same way, God's will for the salvation and condemnation of men was explained by St John of Damascus.
We also divide the will of God into absolute and conditional. Thus, for example, God wants to save all people on condition that His will is fulfilled, while He absolutely wants to save those who actually fulfil His will. The absolute will is effective and is always fulfilled.
source: fr M. Sieniatycki, Outline of Catholic Dogmatics
#dogma
Ecce Verbum
The attributes of God 4.The will of God The power by which rational nature relates to good is called the will, therefore every rational being has a will, including God, hence Vatican Council I refers to Him as 'the will of the Infinite'. How does God's will…
Various aspects of Redemption
Christ is the only mediator between men and God in the strict sense, and as this mediator He redeemed us. He is a moral mediator (like prophets, apostles, priests, Mary and saints) and a natural mediator, because he combined the divine and human natures.
All other mediators are such only by grace, not by nature, therefore all their effectiveness comes from the mediation of Christ. Christ's mediation included the priestly, teaching and royal offices. The most important was the priestly office - making a sacrifice.
Christ redeemed us through his passion and death. It includes: substitutionary atonement, strict redemption, reconciliation with God and merit. He made satisfaction vicariously, i.e. He did not formally take upon Himself our guilt or punishment, but the suffering that compensated for the punishment due to us.
Christ, as a priest, made a true and voluntary sacrifice on the cross, which was accepted by God. The one making the sacrifice and the sacrifice itself was Christ, not through His divine nature, but by His human nature. It was in human nature that He suffered a voluntary death. (the divine nature is immortal, and the divine nature did not suffer during the death of Christ. However, we can say that God died on the cross for our sins when we mean the person, not the nature itself. The validity or truthfulness of a statement depends on the context in which it occurs.)
Redemption in the strict sense is the act by which someone is restored to freedom. Christ, having paid God what was due to Him, redeemed us from the slavery of sin, Satan and death. He provided us with supernatural means (grace) through which we can rise from sin and not fall again.
Christ freed us from death in the sense that He merited resurrection for us. Resurrection does not happen immediately, because in this respect we must become like Christ, who first died, rested in the grave, and only then rose from the dead.
Redemption, in addition to satisfaction and strict redemption, also included merit. Atonement is the repair of an offense done, and merit is a good deed worthy of reward. Through his sacrifice, Christ atoned for sins and honored God, meriting grace for us.
Christ merited for people all the graces that are given to them. Eternal reward for our works comes only through the merits of Jesus, and all the merits that a justified man collects during his life are gained through the grace of God and the merit of Christ.
We must distinguish Christ's atonement according to its sufficiency and according to its effectiveness. Christ died for all in terms of sufficiency, i.e. He gave sufficient remuneration for all to be saved and prepared to receive all the means necessary for salvation.
Man must apply the merits of Christ to himself in order to be saved, otherwise he will not experience the effectiveness of Christ's atonement. The application takes place by receiving the Sacraments, by faith and perfect contrition for sins, by cooperation with the received grace, etc.
The atonement and merits of Christ are like a universal cause which, in order to have an effective impact on individual people, must be applied to them through their cooperation. The spring contains water for everyone, but only those who draw it from the spring will drink it.
People living before Christ's coming also had sufficient graces in view of Christ's future death. Even the damned had sufficient means of salvation while they lived, because of the merits of Christ, but they did not use them and therefore condemned themselves.
It does not detract from the merits of Christ, nor does it prove their insufficiency, that everyone must make reparation and deserve heaven, because our merits are born from the merits of Christ and are based on them. It is not a disgrace to the vine that its branches bear abundant fruit.
Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#dogma #christology
Christ is the only mediator between men and God in the strict sense, and as this mediator He redeemed us. He is a moral mediator (like prophets, apostles, priests, Mary and saints) and a natural mediator, because he combined the divine and human natures.
All other mediators are such only by grace, not by nature, therefore all their effectiveness comes from the mediation of Christ. Christ's mediation included the priestly, teaching and royal offices. The most important was the priestly office - making a sacrifice.
Christ redeemed us through his passion and death. It includes: substitutionary atonement, strict redemption, reconciliation with God and merit. He made satisfaction vicariously, i.e. He did not formally take upon Himself our guilt or punishment, but the suffering that compensated for the punishment due to us.
Christ, as a priest, made a true and voluntary sacrifice on the cross, which was accepted by God. The one making the sacrifice and the sacrifice itself was Christ, not through His divine nature, but by His human nature. It was in human nature that He suffered a voluntary death. (the divine nature is immortal, and the divine nature did not suffer during the death of Christ. However, we can say that God died on the cross for our sins when we mean the person, not the nature itself. The validity or truthfulness of a statement depends on the context in which it occurs.)
Redemption in the strict sense is the act by which someone is restored to freedom. Christ, having paid God what was due to Him, redeemed us from the slavery of sin, Satan and death. He provided us with supernatural means (grace) through which we can rise from sin and not fall again.
Christ freed us from death in the sense that He merited resurrection for us. Resurrection does not happen immediately, because in this respect we must become like Christ, who first died, rested in the grave, and only then rose from the dead.
Redemption, in addition to satisfaction and strict redemption, also included merit. Atonement is the repair of an offense done, and merit is a good deed worthy of reward. Through his sacrifice, Christ atoned for sins and honored God, meriting grace for us.
Christ merited for people all the graces that are given to them. Eternal reward for our works comes only through the merits of Jesus, and all the merits that a justified man collects during his life are gained through the grace of God and the merit of Christ.
We must distinguish Christ's atonement according to its sufficiency and according to its effectiveness. Christ died for all in terms of sufficiency, i.e. He gave sufficient remuneration for all to be saved and prepared to receive all the means necessary for salvation.
Man must apply the merits of Christ to himself in order to be saved, otherwise he will not experience the effectiveness of Christ's atonement. The application takes place by receiving the Sacraments, by faith and perfect contrition for sins, by cooperation with the received grace, etc.
The atonement and merits of Christ are like a universal cause which, in order to have an effective impact on individual people, must be applied to them through their cooperation. The spring contains water for everyone, but only those who draw it from the spring will drink it.
People living before Christ's coming also had sufficient graces in view of Christ's future death. Even the damned had sufficient means of salvation while they lived, because of the merits of Christ, but they did not use them and therefore condemned themselves.
It does not detract from the merits of Christ, nor does it prove their insufficiency, that everyone must make reparation and deserve heaven, because our merits are born from the merits of Christ and are based on them. It is not a disgrace to the vine that its branches bear abundant fruit.
Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#dogma #christology
Ecce Verbum
Various aspects of Redemption Christ is the only mediator between men and God in the strict sense, and as this mediator He redeemed us. He is a moral mediator (like prophets, apostles, priests, Mary and saints) and a natural mediator, because he combined…
Redemption through the Incarnation
The human race was absolutely incapable of recovering from the fall. Therefore, on the part of man, redemption was necessary. The ultimate goal to which man is destined and which he lost through sin is supernatural, so it transcends his nature and powers.
The first goal that God absolutely wants from creation, i.e. glory, would be achieved even if all people condemned themselves. Human happiness is a secondary goal, achieved conditionally. Therefore, the Redemption of the human race is a voluntary act of pure love and mercy of God. This should make us realize how great God's love is for each of us, that even though He does not need our salvation, He willingly decided to redeem us in the most humble way to enable us to receive eternal happiness.
Atonement means "returning to God the honor that sin has deprived". If the moral value of an act is as great as the insult caused, it is complete. If it does not counterbalance the insult, but the insulted accepts it, it is incomplete.
Redemption by the Son of God was necessary to fulfill the full atonement. The offense increases in proportion to the dignity of the offended person. For this reason, the offense against God through sin is infinite. So only satisfaction of infinite value can offset the offense against God.
The value of reparation is measured by the dignity of the person making reparation, and no human being's dignity is infinite. For infinite satisfaction it was necessary that the dignity of the atoner be equal to God, and therefore the Son of God had to make satisfaction in human nature.
Redemption corresponds to justice and mercy. Justice, because the Son of God made ample satisfaction in human nature, and mercy, because the Son of God, by willingly suffering, showed his infinite mercy towards people who could not make reparation.
Redemption through the Incarnation reveals: 1) goodness, because God did not despise His creation; 2) justice, because when man fell, God raised him up through God-man; 3) wisdom, because God found a way to make the most difficult payment; 4) power, because the Incarnation is the most powerful work.
Although Redemption was not necessary on God's part, it was appropriate, because: "It belongs to the nature of the highest good to communicate itself in the most perfect way to creation" (St. Thomas). The culmination of God's communication of himself to human nature is its acceptance by the Son of God.
Redemption through the Incarnation aims to strengthen faith in supernatural truths. Therefore, the one who teaches about them must have infallible authority to be sure that he is not misleading. Therefore, God personally taught these truths in human form.
Redemption through the Incarnation raises hope that despite our distance from God, we can achieve eternal happiness in heaven. This is what the Incarnation is for, as it proves that God has raised our nature to the highest dignity, and therefore we can also achieve eternal happiness in heaven.
Redemption through the Incarnation moves us to love. Through the Incarnation, God as if embodied for us His attributes worthy of infinite love and drew our souls to love Him: "If it was difficult to love, now at least it won't be difficult to love in return".
Redemption through the Incarnation gives us an example to follow: A man is drawn to virtue by word and example, and he is drawn all the more effectively the greater he is certain of the infallibility and holiness of the one giving the example. So God became man, taught and gave us an example to follow.
Redemption through the Incarnation removed evil from man. Man was liberated from sin by the complete atonement of God-man: "If he were not true God, he would not give medicine, if he were not true man, he would not set an example" (St. Leo).
Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#christology #dogma
The human race was absolutely incapable of recovering from the fall. Therefore, on the part of man, redemption was necessary. The ultimate goal to which man is destined and which he lost through sin is supernatural, so it transcends his nature and powers.
The first goal that God absolutely wants from creation, i.e. glory, would be achieved even if all people condemned themselves. Human happiness is a secondary goal, achieved conditionally. Therefore, the Redemption of the human race is a voluntary act of pure love and mercy of God. This should make us realize how great God's love is for each of us, that even though He does not need our salvation, He willingly decided to redeem us in the most humble way to enable us to receive eternal happiness.
Atonement means "returning to God the honor that sin has deprived". If the moral value of an act is as great as the insult caused, it is complete. If it does not counterbalance the insult, but the insulted accepts it, it is incomplete.
Redemption by the Son of God was necessary to fulfill the full atonement. The offense increases in proportion to the dignity of the offended person. For this reason, the offense against God through sin is infinite. So only satisfaction of infinite value can offset the offense against God.
The value of reparation is measured by the dignity of the person making reparation, and no human being's dignity is infinite. For infinite satisfaction it was necessary that the dignity of the atoner be equal to God, and therefore the Son of God had to make satisfaction in human nature.
Redemption corresponds to justice and mercy. Justice, because the Son of God made ample satisfaction in human nature, and mercy, because the Son of God, by willingly suffering, showed his infinite mercy towards people who could not make reparation.
Redemption through the Incarnation reveals: 1) goodness, because God did not despise His creation; 2) justice, because when man fell, God raised him up through God-man; 3) wisdom, because God found a way to make the most difficult payment; 4) power, because the Incarnation is the most powerful work.
Although Redemption was not necessary on God's part, it was appropriate, because: "It belongs to the nature of the highest good to communicate itself in the most perfect way to creation" (St. Thomas). The culmination of God's communication of himself to human nature is its acceptance by the Son of God.
Redemption through the Incarnation aims to strengthen faith in supernatural truths. Therefore, the one who teaches about them must have infallible authority to be sure that he is not misleading. Therefore, God personally taught these truths in human form.
Redemption through the Incarnation raises hope that despite our distance from God, we can achieve eternal happiness in heaven. This is what the Incarnation is for, as it proves that God has raised our nature to the highest dignity, and therefore we can also achieve eternal happiness in heaven.
Redemption through the Incarnation moves us to love. Through the Incarnation, God as if embodied for us His attributes worthy of infinite love and drew our souls to love Him: "If it was difficult to love, now at least it won't be difficult to love in return".
Redemption through the Incarnation gives us an example to follow: A man is drawn to virtue by word and example, and he is drawn all the more effectively the greater he is certain of the infallibility and holiness of the one giving the example. So God became man, taught and gave us an example to follow.
Redemption through the Incarnation removed evil from man. Man was liberated from sin by the complete atonement of God-man: "If he were not true God, he would not give medicine, if he were not true man, he would not set an example" (St. Leo).
Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#christology #dogma
What is an act of Faith
According to Catholic teaching, the act of faith is an act of reason, because it is the recognition of the truth revealed by God, and the recognition of truth is a matter of reason. Reason is therefore important in the act of faith. According to the profession of faith prescribed by St. Pius X: "faith is the true consent of reason".
According to Protestants*, the act of faith is not an act of reason, but of will, because it consists in trusting in the forgiveness of sins (this trust is justifying).*(This is only a generalization, as we have many different Protestant factions that may understand faith slightly differently). Protestantism reduces the essence of faith to trust in the salvation obtained by Christ ("only effective if..."), and this is a matter of will, not reason. (However, Fr. Sieniatycki does not claim that, according to Protestants, the awakening of this trust is not preceded by any acts of reason). However, this can be seen more clearly in the words of Martin Luther.
According to modernists, the act of faith is an act of will and feeling, because by feeling the presence of God within oneself, a person comes into contact with Him and has childlike trust and love for Him.
Reason also precedes the act of faith itself, because in order to awaken rational faith, a person must first know whether God is credible and be sure that a given truth has been revealed by God. God's trustworthiness and the fact of revealing a given truth are premises that must precede the act of faith
The will also influences the act of faith, because it prompts the mind to examine religious matters. Since revealed truth may pose difficulties on the part of reason, reason itself, without the influence of the will, cannot agree to a given truth, because reason necessarily agrees only to visible truths.
The Church clearly teaches that the act of faith is a voluntary act. It comes from reason, but at the command of the will, because the freedom of an act flows from the will. The Holy Scripture promises believers a reward and threatens unbelievers with punishment, and a person can only be rewarded or punished for voluntary deeds.
Grace is necessary for divine faith. The act of faith requires many sacrifices and efforts from the mind and will. This cannot be done without God's grace. For the will to cope with all this, it must have a strong desire to believe, and it is a dogma of faith that this kind of affect of faith is impossible without grace.
Reason needs grace when examining the premises of faith. Also, in the act of faith itself, grace is needed for the act to be supernatural and for the will, which voluntarily commands consent to reason, to be willing to give this order, despite the heavy consequences for it.
Divine faith is necessarily connected with truth, so it is absolutely impossible to have theological faith in a false proposition or in an unrevealed truth. Belief in heresy or unrevealed truth is a purely human act and cannot be supported by grace. So it is not a theological faith.
Confidence is the strong adherence of the mind to a certain proposition as true, without fear of making mistakes. The act of faith excludes voluntary doubt, but does not exclude involuntary doubt. Since reason has no evidence of the truth to which it clings, involuntary doubts may arise in it.
Faith is certainty and has the highest certainty because it is based on the highest motive of certainty, which is the truthful and infallible God. Therefore, it is a mistake to call faith an accumulation of probabilities or to treat it as something uncertain.
Faith is the firm acceptance of a statement as truth because of someone else's testimony. Therefore, it differs from an opinion, which is an acceptance of a statement as true, but combined with the possibility of error. It differs from knowledge, which is the acceptance of a proposition as truth for its visibility, not for its testimony.
🔗 continued
Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#dogma #fidesetratio
According to Catholic teaching, the act of faith is an act of reason, because it is the recognition of the truth revealed by God, and the recognition of truth is a matter of reason. Reason is therefore important in the act of faith. According to the profession of faith prescribed by St. Pius X: "faith is the true consent of reason".
According to Protestants*, the act of faith is not an act of reason, but of will, because it consists in trusting in the forgiveness of sins (this trust is justifying).*(This is only a generalization, as we have many different Protestant factions that may understand faith slightly differently). Protestantism reduces the essence of faith to trust in the salvation obtained by Christ ("only effective if..."), and this is a matter of will, not reason. (However, Fr. Sieniatycki does not claim that, according to Protestants, the awakening of this trust is not preceded by any acts of reason). However, this can be seen more clearly in the words of Martin Luther.
According to modernists, the act of faith is an act of will and feeling, because by feeling the presence of God within oneself, a person comes into contact with Him and has childlike trust and love for Him.
Reason also precedes the act of faith itself, because in order to awaken rational faith, a person must first know whether God is credible and be sure that a given truth has been revealed by God. God's trustworthiness and the fact of revealing a given truth are premises that must precede the act of faith
The will also influences the act of faith, because it prompts the mind to examine religious matters. Since revealed truth may pose difficulties on the part of reason, reason itself, without the influence of the will, cannot agree to a given truth, because reason necessarily agrees only to visible truths.
The Church clearly teaches that the act of faith is a voluntary act. It comes from reason, but at the command of the will, because the freedom of an act flows from the will. The Holy Scripture promises believers a reward and threatens unbelievers with punishment, and a person can only be rewarded or punished for voluntary deeds.
Grace is necessary for divine faith. The act of faith requires many sacrifices and efforts from the mind and will. This cannot be done without God's grace. For the will to cope with all this, it must have a strong desire to believe, and it is a dogma of faith that this kind of affect of faith is impossible without grace.
Reason needs grace when examining the premises of faith. Also, in the act of faith itself, grace is needed for the act to be supernatural and for the will, which voluntarily commands consent to reason, to be willing to give this order, despite the heavy consequences for it.
Divine faith is necessarily connected with truth, so it is absolutely impossible to have theological faith in a false proposition or in an unrevealed truth. Belief in heresy or unrevealed truth is a purely human act and cannot be supported by grace. So it is not a theological faith.
Confidence is the strong adherence of the mind to a certain proposition as true, without fear of making mistakes. The act of faith excludes voluntary doubt, but does not exclude involuntary doubt. Since reason has no evidence of the truth to which it clings, involuntary doubts may arise in it.
Faith is certainty and has the highest certainty because it is based on the highest motive of certainty, which is the truthful and infallible God. Therefore, it is a mistake to call faith an accumulation of probabilities or to treat it as something uncertain.
Faith is the firm acceptance of a statement as truth because of someone else's testimony. Therefore, it differs from an opinion, which is an acceptance of a statement as true, but combined with the possibility of error. It differs from knowledge, which is the acceptance of a proposition as truth for its visibility, not for its testimony.
🔗 continued
Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#dogma #fidesetratio
Classification of theological statements
Theology is a scientific reflection on the entire doctrine revealed by God and transmitted by the Church. Not all theological statements have the same importance, hence we distinguish the so-called theological degrees.
Since theology, supervised by the Magisterium of the Church, not only collects and explains the truths revealed directly by God, but also draws further conclusions from them, we distinguish several degrees of theological certainty (notae theologicae).
The first and most important category includes truths of faith (De fide statements): 1. De fide divina (the truth of divine faith) 2. De fide divina et catholica definita (the truth of the divine and Catholic faith) - the so-called dogmas 3. De fide ecclesiastica (the truth of the church faith).
The first type (de fide divina) includes all truths of faith formally revealed by God, which are found in the sources of Revelation (Holy Scripture and Tradition). We believe in them for the sole authority of the infallible God who revealed them.
In the scope of the second type (de fide divina et catholica definita) there are truths of faith that come from the scope of the first type, but are also presented to believers by the Church. We believe in them for the sake of the authority of God and the authority of the Church.
All truths of faith that are revealed by God and as such are given by the Church to believers are called dogmas. Due to the fact that the Church gives them through solemn or ordinary teaching, we distinguish solemn and ordinary dogmas.
A solemn dogma is any truth of faith presented to believers through a solemn dogmatic definition, which may be given by the Council or by the Pope speaking ex cathedra.
Ordinary dogma is any truth of faith presented to believers through ordinary teaching, i.e. other documents of the Magisterium and legal church authorities implementing universal teaching. The Church is infallible in administering solemn and ordinary dogmas.
The infallibility of the Church in defining these truths is necessary because they are statements that require divine faith to accept them as certain, and this would not be prudent if there was a risk of error on the part of those who define them. God's assistance ensures infallibility.
The third category (de fide ecclesiastica) are truths that are not directly revealed by God, but are closely related to Revelation, and in order to ensure the consistency of faith, the Church also remains infallible when stating them. We believe in them with ecclesiastical faith.
These truths include all dogmatic facts and theological conclusions (conclusion from two truths: the truth revealed by God and the truth available by the natural light of reason), which are definitively given by the Church.
Denying all types of truths from this first category is the so-called heresy, the conscious and persistent confession of which excludes from the Church and constitutes the matter of a grave sin against the Holy Spirit.
The second category are theological statements (sententia), which are not truths of faith, but contain a high degree of certainty: 1. Proxima fidei (close to faith) 2. Certa (certain) 3. Communis (universal) 4. Probabilis (probable).
Statements close to faith (proxima fidei) are those that are almost unanimously recognized by theologians as truths of faith, but have not been finally confirmed by the Magisterium (Teaching Office of the Catholic Church). Denying them is an attitude close to heresy and constitutes sin.
Certain statements (certa) are those that have not been yet confirmed by the Magisterium, but their truthfulness (as strictly resulting from Revelation) is based on scientific (rational) certainty provided by theology under the supervision of the Church. Denying them is called error.
Common opinions (communis) are those statements that belong to the set of voluntary religious views, but their certainty is based on the consent of the majority of Catholic theologians in harmony with the Church.
🔗part 2, sources
🔗BVI's commentary
#dogma
Theology is a scientific reflection on the entire doctrine revealed by God and transmitted by the Church. Not all theological statements have the same importance, hence we distinguish the so-called theological degrees.
Since theology, supervised by the Magisterium of the Church, not only collects and explains the truths revealed directly by God, but also draws further conclusions from them, we distinguish several degrees of theological certainty (notae theologicae).
The first and most important category includes truths of faith (De fide statements): 1. De fide divina (the truth of divine faith) 2. De fide divina et catholica definita (the truth of the divine and Catholic faith) - the so-called dogmas 3. De fide ecclesiastica (the truth of the church faith).
The first type (de fide divina) includes all truths of faith formally revealed by God, which are found in the sources of Revelation (Holy Scripture and Tradition). We believe in them for the sole authority of the infallible God who revealed them.
In the scope of the second type (de fide divina et catholica definita) there are truths of faith that come from the scope of the first type, but are also presented to believers by the Church. We believe in them for the sake of the authority of God and the authority of the Church.
All truths of faith that are revealed by God and as such are given by the Church to believers are called dogmas. Due to the fact that the Church gives them through solemn or ordinary teaching, we distinguish solemn and ordinary dogmas.
A solemn dogma is any truth of faith presented to believers through a solemn dogmatic definition, which may be given by the Council or by the Pope speaking ex cathedra.
Ordinary dogma is any truth of faith presented to believers through ordinary teaching, i.e. other documents of the Magisterium and legal church authorities implementing universal teaching. The Church is infallible in administering solemn and ordinary dogmas.
The infallibility of the Church in defining these truths is necessary because they are statements that require divine faith to accept them as certain, and this would not be prudent if there was a risk of error on the part of those who define them. God's assistance ensures infallibility.
The third category (de fide ecclesiastica) are truths that are not directly revealed by God, but are closely related to Revelation, and in order to ensure the consistency of faith, the Church also remains infallible when stating them. We believe in them with ecclesiastical faith.
These truths include all dogmatic facts and theological conclusions (conclusion from two truths: the truth revealed by God and the truth available by the natural light of reason), which are definitively given by the Church.
Denying all types of truths from this first category is the so-called heresy, the conscious and persistent confession of which excludes from the Church and constitutes the matter of a grave sin against the Holy Spirit.
The second category are theological statements (sententia), which are not truths of faith, but contain a high degree of certainty: 1. Proxima fidei (close to faith) 2. Certa (certain) 3. Communis (universal) 4. Probabilis (probable).
Statements close to faith (proxima fidei) are those that are almost unanimously recognized by theologians as truths of faith, but have not been finally confirmed by the Magisterium (Teaching Office of the Catholic Church). Denying them is an attitude close to heresy and constitutes sin.
Certain statements (certa) are those that have not been yet confirmed by the Magisterium, but their truthfulness (as strictly resulting from Revelation) is based on scientific (rational) certainty provided by theology under the supervision of the Church. Denying them is called error.
Common opinions (communis) are those statements that belong to the set of voluntary religious views, but their certainty is based on the consent of the majority of Catholic theologians in harmony with the Church.
🔗part 2, sources
🔗BVI's commentary
#dogma
Ecce Verbum
What is Dogma? an overview, p.1 by William Edward Addis, 1893 Dogma, in its theological sense, is a truth contained in the Word of God, written or unwritten--i.e. in Scripture or Tradition--and proposed by the Church for the belief of the faithful. Thus dogma…
What is Dogma?
an overview, p.2
The Church was not established by Christ so that God would reveal through her new truths that he had not yet revealed. The Church is only supposed to guard the truths already revealed and infallibly instruct about them, so it is not true that God reveals a new truth through the definition of the Church.
Dogma is truth revealed by God and given as such for belief by the Church, either through the Church's solemn definition or through daily teaching. They are not dogmas of truth strictly connected with the revealed ones, such as dogmatic facts or theological conclusions.
Dogmatic facts and conclusions are not dogmas. Although they may be infallibly defined by the Church, they are not revealed by God. Other teachings proclaimed by the Church are not dogmas: religious teachings of popes in encyclicals, decisions of Roman congregations, etc.
Dogmas speak about God in imperfect human concepts, but what corresponds to them is actually in God, although in a far more perfect way than these concepts express. Dogmas are not symbols of any feelings, nor metaphors, nor guidelines for life, but they are objective truth about God.
Modernists claim that dogmas are not free from errors and contradictions. According to them, there are also visible scientific and historical errors in the holy books. Pope Pius X states that the above sentences are tantamount to attributing a lie to God himself.
After the death of the Apostles, there were and will be no new revelations. These truths, which the Church has declared as revealed, cannot undergo any significant change in content and meaning. New formulas or names may be created to better express revealed truths, but these formulas cannot change the meaning.
Christ, when sending the Apostles to teach the world, defined for them and his successors what they were to teach until the end of the world. Christ (personally and through the Holy Spirit) revealed to all the Apostles everything that God decided to reveal to people, so after their death there is no new revelation.
The apostles clearly order their successors to preach not their ideas, but the teaching deposited with them by the Holy Spirit. This is explained by St. Vincent: "What is a deposit? What has been entrusted, not what has been invented. What you received, not what you made up.”
The Church proclaims the immutability of dogmas, but allows their development. The stability and development of dogmas is explained by St. Vincent: “Let it be more clearly understood what was previously believed, although it was darker. Let posterity be glad that they have understood what ancient times worshiped.”
The new dogma does not differ in content from the previously proclaimed one. The same truth is presented in greater detail in the new one, emphasizing certain points. This is because throughout history new heresies attack again the same truth, but in a different way.
Often, truths are not revealed 'explicite', but 'implicite', and these truths need to be analyzed for them to come to light. This analysis was often left undone for a long time because they were not directly attacked by heretics, and the implicit belief in these truths was sufficient in a given era in the Church.
source: Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#dogma
an overview, p.2
The Church was not established by Christ so that God would reveal through her new truths that he had not yet revealed. The Church is only supposed to guard the truths already revealed and infallibly instruct about them, so it is not true that God reveals a new truth through the definition of the Church.
Dogma is truth revealed by God and given as such for belief by the Church, either through the Church's solemn definition or through daily teaching. They are not dogmas of truth strictly connected with the revealed ones, such as dogmatic facts or theological conclusions.
Dogmatic facts and conclusions are not dogmas. Although they may be infallibly defined by the Church, they are not revealed by God. Other teachings proclaimed by the Church are not dogmas: religious teachings of popes in encyclicals, decisions of Roman congregations, etc.
Dogmas speak about God in imperfect human concepts, but what corresponds to them is actually in God, although in a far more perfect way than these concepts express. Dogmas are not symbols of any feelings, nor metaphors, nor guidelines for life, but they are objective truth about God.
Modernists claim that dogmas are not free from errors and contradictions. According to them, there are also visible scientific and historical errors in the holy books. Pope Pius X states that the above sentences are tantamount to attributing a lie to God himself.
After the death of the Apostles, there were and will be no new revelations. These truths, which the Church has declared as revealed, cannot undergo any significant change in content and meaning. New formulas or names may be created to better express revealed truths, but these formulas cannot change the meaning.
Christ, when sending the Apostles to teach the world, defined for them and his successors what they were to teach until the end of the world. Christ (personally and through the Holy Spirit) revealed to all the Apostles everything that God decided to reveal to people, so after their death there is no new revelation.
The apostles clearly order their successors to preach not their ideas, but the teaching deposited with them by the Holy Spirit. This is explained by St. Vincent: "What is a deposit? What has been entrusted, not what has been invented. What you received, not what you made up.”
The Church proclaims the immutability of dogmas, but allows their development. The stability and development of dogmas is explained by St. Vincent: “Let it be more clearly understood what was previously believed, although it was darker. Let posterity be glad that they have understood what ancient times worshiped.”
The new dogma does not differ in content from the previously proclaimed one. The same truth is presented in greater detail in the new one, emphasizing certain points. This is because throughout history new heresies attack again the same truth, but in a different way.
Often, truths are not revealed 'explicite', but 'implicite', and these truths need to be analyzed for them to come to light. This analysis was often left undone for a long time because they were not directly attacked by heretics, and the implicit belief in these truths was sufficient in a given era in the Church.
source: Outline of Catholic Dogmatics, fr. dr. M. Sieniatycki
#dogma