What does this asterisk represent?
Comments
-
It means that the theological proposition linked to is a condemned proposition.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
It means that the theological proposition linked to is a condemned proposition.
I looked within the document to get a sense of it's purpose but couldn't determine one.
Elaborate on "condemned proposition", Please. Who? Why? Resources?
Thanks [:D]
EDIT: I thought I found it in the back of Council of Trent.
0 -
It means that the theological proposition linked to is a condemned proposition.
Is there a church document (or other) that uses scriptural references that argue why they are condemned?
0 -
It means that the theological proposition linked to is a condemned proposition.
I looked within the document to get a sense of it's purpose but couldn't determine one.
Elaborate on "condemned proposition", Please. Who? Why? Resources?
A condemned proposition is a theological statement that the Catholic Church has condemned, in any one of a number of ways. If you access a condemned proposition in Denzinger itself and scroll up, it will give you the name and date of the document that condemned it and a bit more information.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
It means that the theological proposition linked to is a condemned proposition.
Is there a church document (or other) that uses scriptural references that argue why they are condemned?
Yes, the arguments for condemning specific theological propositions are universally either derived directly from Scripture or use Scriptural references to support their arguments. However, for most condemned propositions, Denzinger does not include any argumentation (because that reference is meant to be a list of conclusions, not of arguments).
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Thanks. [:D]
0 -
Thanks.
You're most welcome!
Denzinger is one of my most consulted resources in my entire library, so I hope that you also have a good experience with it. [:)]
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Thanks.
You're most welcome!
Denzinger is one of my most consulted resources in my entire library, so I hope that you also have a good experience with it.
I endeavor to. Thanks. [:)]
0 -
It means that the theological proposition linked to is a condemned proposition.
Is this what you mean?
The section where DS 2457 is found has the 'title':Errors of Paschasius Quesnel 1
[Condemned in the dogmatic Constitution, “Unigenitus,” 2 Sept. 8, 1713] 31407 [DS 2457] 57. All fails a sinner, when hope fails him; and there is no hope in God, when there is no love of God.
1 DuPl III, II 462 ff.; coll. Viva II 1 ff.; CICRect II 140 ff.; BR(T) 21, 569 b ff.; MBR 8, 119 a ff. Variant, doubtful, and corrected readings are according to the first Gallic text which DuPl, l.c., presents—Paschasius Quesnel was born on July 14, 1634. After completing his studies in the Sorbonne in 1657, he entered the Congregation of the Oratory; but because of his zeal for the heresy of Jansenism, he was forced to leave the Congregation. His book, “Reflections morales,” was condemned, to which the Constitution, “Unigenitus,” is related. Shortly before his death on Dec. 2, 1719, he made a profession of faith publicly [Hrt, Sec. rec. II2 822 ff.].
2 This dogmatic constitution was confirmed by the same Clement XI in the Bull, “Pastoralis Officii” (Aug. 28, 1718) against the Appellantes, in which he declares that certain Catholics “who did not accept the Bull “Unigenitus” were clearly outside the bosom of the Roman Church; by Innocent XIII in a decree published on Jan. 8, 1722; by Benedict XIII and the Roman Synod in 1725; by Benedict XIV in the encyclical, “Ex omnibus Christiani orbis regionibus” on Oct. 16, 1756; it was accepted by the Gallic clergy in assemblies in 1723, 1726, 1730, by the councils of Avignon, 1725 and Ebred, 1727, and by the whole Catholic world.
3 Henry Denzinger and Karl Rahner, eds., The Sources of Catholic Dogma, trans. Roy J. Deferrari (St. Louis, MO: B. Herder Book Co., 1954), 347.
0 -
Yes, that is an example of a condemned proposition, which means that the Church holds it to be wrong.
PLEASE NOTE: My original explanation of which propositions in Denzinger, as listed the Catholic Topical Index and in Denzinger's own index was WRONG. I misremembered. All propositions that are italicized are condemned propositions, with or without asterisks. In the text itself, numbers with asterisks, e.g. 57*, denote notes subsequent to the principal text (marked, in my example, as 57).
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
PLEASE NOTE: My original explanation of which propositions in Denzinger, as listed the Catholic Topical Index and in Denzinger's own index was WRONG. I misremembered. All propositions that are italicized are condemned propositions, with or without asterisks. In the text itself, numbers with asterisks, e.g. 57*, denote notes subsequent to the principal text (marked, in my example, as 57).
To be clear, the asterisks in the Catholic Topical Index do, in fact, indicate a condemned proposition as you originally stated (if you open the resource, this is made clear by a popup), but as you say, the index of Sources of Catholic Dogma uses italics to represent this and uses asterisks differently as part of its numbering scheme.
(I'll admit this could be a bit confusing, even though the Topical Index mostly uses the DS numbering of the 34th edition of Denzinger, which does not use asterisks, so I might consider changing the symbol to a dagger "†" in a future build of the Index)
0 -
To be clear, the asterisks in the Catholic Topical Index do, in fact, indicate a condemned proposition as you originally stated (if you open the resource, this is made clear by a popup), but as you say, the index of Sources of Catholic Dogma uses italics to represent this and uses asterisks differently as part of its numbering scheme.
(I'll admit this could be a bit confusing, even though the Topical Index mostly uses the DS numbering of the 34th edition of Denzinger, which does not use asterisks, so I might consider changing the symbol to a dagger "†" in a future build of the Index)
I am not sure I understand your explanation. I don't see a popup saying that #2457 is condemned in the OP's original Guide of 1 Thess 1:3, and I don't see #2457 in italics. Sorry to be confused, would you mind elaborating? Thanks!
0 -
I am not sure I understand your explanation. I don't see a popup saying that #2457 is condemned in the OP's original Guide of 1 Thess 1:3, and I don't see #2457 in italics. Sorry to be confused, would you mind elaborating? Thanks!
In the Catholic Topical Index, an asterisk following a Denzinger number indicates a condemned or prohibited proposition.
If you open the Catholic Topical Index resource (LLS:CATHINDEX) from Library, you will see that these asterisks have an explanatory popup. For instance, if you navigate to the entry for "Hope", you'll see that the asterisk following DS 2457 has a popup. When the entry is pulled into the Guide section, the asterisk appears, but the popup does not get pulled in--so there's no clear explanation, from the Guide, of what the asterisk means. I will ask the developers about this.
Italics are used to indicate condemned propositions only in the index to Sources of Catholic Dogma. They're not used this way in the Catholic Topical Index.
0 -
I am not sure I understand your explanation. I don't see a popup saying that #2457 is condemned in the OP's original Guide of 1 Thess 1:3, and I don't see #2457 in italics. Sorry to be confused, would you mind elaborating? Thanks!
In the Catholic Topical Index, an asterisk following a Denzinger number indicates a condemned or prohibited proposition.
If you open the Catholic Topical Index resource (LLS:CATHINDEX) from Library, you will see that these asterisks have an explanatory popup. For instance, if you navigate to the entry for "Hope", you'll see that the asterisk following DS 2457 has a popup. When the entry is pulled into the Guide section, the asterisk appears, but the popup does not get pulled in--so there's no clear explanation, from the Guide, of what the asterisk means. I will ask the developers about this.
Italics are used to indicate condemned propositions only in the index to Sources of Catholic Dogma. They're not used this way in the Catholic Topical Index.
Thanks
0 -
In the Catholic Topical Index, an asterisk following a Denzinger number indicates a condemned or prohibited proposition.
If you open the Catholic Topical Index resource (LLS:CATHINDEX) from Library, you will see that these asterisks have an explanatory popup. For instance, if you navigate to the entry for "Hope", you'll see that the asterisk following DS 2457 has a popup. When the entry is pulled into the Guide section, the asterisk appears, but the popup does not get pulled in--so there's no clear explanation, from the Guide, of what the asterisk means. I will ask the developers about this.
Italics are used to indicate condemned propositions only in the index to Sources of Catholic Dogma. They're not used this way in the Catholic Topical Index.
Thanks Louis!
0 -
To be clear, the asterisks in the Catholic Topical Index do, in fact, indicate a condemned proposition as you originally stated (if you open the resource, this is made clear by a popup), but as you say, the index of Sources of Catholic Dogma uses italics to represent this and uses asterisks differently as part of its numbering scheme.
So that's what threw me. Thank you for the clarification. I was most confused!
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Is this what you mean?
The section where DS 2457 is found has the 'title':
Errors of Paschasius Quesnel 1
[Condemned in the dogmatic Constitution, “Unigenitus,” 2 Sept. 8, 1713] 31407 [DS 2457] 57. All fails a sinner, when hope fails him; and there is no hope in God, when there is no love of God.
I am not sure that the line DS 2457 is wrong in it self as in that God will not help a sinner that still loves his sin. [IMHO]
But as that line is included in a larger section that was condemned then it is seen as condemned because of its neighbors?
[[That is how should we see this? At this time I have no interest in examining that entire section to see why it was condemned.]]
0 -
DS is a short-cut summary to direct your research or to tweak your memory. It does not substitute for actually reading the passages and studying the possibilities. No, I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm trying to say that sometime the context shows the intended meaning of the sentence(s) so that one sees why it was condemned. But I don't believe that you will find a clearly true statement condemned because of its neighbors.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
DS is a short-cut summary to direct your research ....
One of my side projects that I'm trying to work through is a somewhat Topical/Scriptural interpretive study of the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
I've been utilizing the topical index without running into too many scenarios like this where, because of my unfamiliarity with these resources, I occasionally end up more confused on where the Catholic Body stands on a topic than when I came into the study. Nevertheless, I would be interested in some pointers on direction, especially on how or where one might clear up what's being obfuscated.
0 -
I've been utilizing the topical index without running into too many scenarios like this where, because of my unfamiliarity with these resources, I occasionally end up more confused on where the Catholic Body stands on a topic than when I came into the study.
Sounds to me like you are making real progress. I can tell you how a Dominican priest formerly assigned to our parish gave me a foundation.
- First read the Catechism
- Then read the supporting documentation - a book called The Companion to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: A Compendium of Texts Referred to in the Catechism of the Catholic Church Including an Addendum includes them as I didn't have the Logos and web access to the texts that I have now.
- Identify topics you wish to go further in in order to understand them and check out the entries in the following reading their supporting documentation when needed.:
- Ott - Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (pulled because of copyright issue) with warnings that the translation introduced some errors not in the German
- Denzinger - Enchiridion Symbolorum: A Compendium of Creeds, Definitions, and Declarations of the Catholic
- Jurgens - Faith of the Early Fathers (in prepub)
- Then check Aquinas
- If still lost, ask the priest for a better specific reference which from this priest tended to be Eastern rite material, from the pastor at the time it tended to be encyclicals.
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
I've been utilizing the topical index without running into too many scenarios like this where, because of my unfamiliarity with these resources, I occasionally end up more confused on where the Catholic Body stands on a topic than when I came into the study.
Sounds to me like you are making real.
Looks like I'll need to make some purchases since I only have the Verbum Catechism, Verbum crossgrade and a few other resources apart from my regular Logos package.
"Sounds to me like you are making real." - I'm not sure how this is meant.
Thanks MJ, I very much appreciate it. [:D] I'm going to make a pbb for reference.
0 -
"Sounds to me like you are making real." - I'm not sure how this is meant.
Just 'cuz I left out the word "progress" [:$]
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Is this what you mean?
The section where DS 2457 is found has the 'title':
Errors of Paschasius Quesnel 1
[Condemned in the dogmatic Constitution, “Unigenitus,” 2 Sept. 8, 1713] 31407 [DS 2457] 57. All fails a sinner, when hope fails him; and there is no hope in God, when there is no love of God.
I am not sure that the line DS 2457 is wrong in it self as in that God will not help a sinner that still loves his sin. [IMHO]
Whether you agree with it or not [a subject for ChristianDiscourse, of course], the proposition in Denzinger, within the context of Catholic theology, would mean, if true, that a person who is in such a state that if he died right now he would be damned has no hope of salvation in the future. In condemning this proposition, the Catholic Church supports the idea that someone not presently in what might be called in a non-Catholic context a 'saved' state may enter into that state (by the grace of God) in the future and thus might end up in Heaven.
“The trouble is that everyone talks about reforming others and no one thinks about reforming himself.” St. Peter of Alcántara
0 -
Thanks for the explanation of why that line might be condemned all by it self.
0
