![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Why is the initial D in the article title capital? Would anyone object to moving this to Roman Catholic dogma, with a lower-case initial d? Michael Hardy ( talk) 22:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
I've moved it. Michael Hardy ( talk) 18:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a clean up tag, but no rationale for what is needed. I do not see a discussion or a need. If reasons are given will add it back. History2007 ( talk) 23:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I suggest that the example of Dogma be removed: as USCCB's review states, the plot is 'based on a false understanding of an indulgence as effecting the forgiveness of sins' and, rather than delving into the whys of dogma, the film is more a showcase for playing with stereotypes. [1] Nahbios ( talk) 17:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)nahbios
References
The citations are improperly formatted. I'm especially curious about "Heinrich." Please work to fix them if you can. Sitbunnynow ( talk) 06:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Dulles, 147does not seem to cite from a work in the Sources section. I think some content is a translation from another language but not attributed. The article would be greatly improved by adding basic information, for example, from
Could someone please add some clear examples of dogmata? A short list would be very illustrating. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.114.122.28 ( talk) 10:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
"The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the basic truth from which salvation and life is derived for Christians." Unless you put an overly generous interpretation on "for Christians", this sentence sounds like it is claiming the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a basic truth. I added "believed" to qualify this, but that is clunky and I welcome a smoother qualification. 173.172.95.186 ( talk) 22:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved as consensus has been established. ( non-admin closure) — Music1201 talk 20:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Roman Catholic dogma → Dogma in the Catholic Church – Eliminates the pesky issue of the "Roman" in the title, and is more in line with other articles on things "in" the Catholic Church. E.g., Exorcism in the Catholic Church, Saint Michael in the Catholic Church (note that like this one, it's not about "Saint Michael" per se, but about his role in the Church; this article is not about the dogmata of the Church per se, but rather about the role of dogma in the Church), Vocational discernment in the Catholic Church, etc.. Deus vult! Crusadestudent ( talk) 21:55, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
I made a slight change in the heading, which had some inaccurate wording in the statement that read:
The wording "revealed to the pope" is inaccurate. According to church teaching, no person coming after the apostles can receive public revelation, including the pope. Private revelations can be received, (like the predictions to the children at Fatima), but they are not binding on the faithful. In crafting doctrine, the pope and councils can only explicate that which they have determined to be contained in the original deposit of faith--the faith apparently given to the apostles to be passed on to future generations. This does not mean that the all aspects of the faith or its implications were perfectly clear in the day of the apostles--that some things they believed needed further clarification and explication in time. When a dogma is defined, it is making something that was there before (that was not clearly or adequatley defined) now clear and explicit. For instance the church has always contended that the doctrine of the Trinity was present in the New Testament and believed by members of the early church, but that it had not been put into precise language (there was no word "Trinity"), and that later led to misunderstandings, so theologians, such as Origin, came up with precise terminology (influenced by the precise kind of wording used in Greek philosophy, i.e. Aristotle) explicating the doctrine with greater detail and precision, to avoid further confusion on a matter that was contended to have been believed by the apostles. The Doctrine of the Trinity was then solemnly promulgated in the early ecumenical councils of the church. The church contends that all dogmas are contained in the deposit of faith, not directly "received" to those coming after the apostles, including the pope. The only two places a dogma can be promulgated is at an ecumenical council or by the pope when he is speaking ex cathedra. So the wording "other church members" was too vague--not just any church members can proclaim a dogma. Also "if one freely chooses to be a Catholic" was problematic, because a person can be excommunicated and not "freely choose" to remain Catholic. So I tidied it up a bit. I also put the ecumenical councils in front of the pope in the statement, because most dogmas have been defined by the councils--I believe only two have ever been promulgated by popes, and the thinking since Vatican II is that while the pope still has the ability to pronounce a dogma, that a council is preferable. I also changed the wording from "Roman Catholic" to "Catholic", since that is the official name of the church, as it calls itself. There are other rites in the church other than the Roman rite--there are the various Eastern rites, which are similar the Eastern Orthodox, but in communion with Rome.The new more accurate wording reads:
"'revealed to the pope" is inaccurate."I think
"Not all theological truths have been promulgated as dogmas"is good clarification too. – BoBoMisiu ( talk) 15:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dogma in the Catholic Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:10, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Assent of faith and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 13#Assent of faith until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
21:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Assent of Faith and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 13#Assent of Faith until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
21:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Full assent of faith and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 13#Full assent of faith until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
21:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Why is the initial D in the article title capital? Would anyone object to moving this to Roman Catholic dogma, with a lower-case initial d? Michael Hardy ( talk) 22:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
I've moved it. Michael Hardy ( talk) 18:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a clean up tag, but no rationale for what is needed. I do not see a discussion or a need. If reasons are given will add it back. History2007 ( talk) 23:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I suggest that the example of Dogma be removed: as USCCB's review states, the plot is 'based on a false understanding of an indulgence as effecting the forgiveness of sins' and, rather than delving into the whys of dogma, the film is more a showcase for playing with stereotypes. [1] Nahbios ( talk) 17:24, 28 April 2012 (UTC)nahbios
References
The citations are improperly formatted. I'm especially curious about "Heinrich." Please work to fix them if you can. Sitbunnynow ( talk) 06:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Dulles, 147does not seem to cite from a work in the Sources section. I think some content is a translation from another language but not attributed. The article would be greatly improved by adding basic information, for example, from
Could someone please add some clear examples of dogmata? A short list would be very illustrating. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.114.122.28 ( talk) 10:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
"The resurrection of Jesus Christ is the basic truth from which salvation and life is derived for Christians." Unless you put an overly generous interpretation on "for Christians", this sentence sounds like it is claiming the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a basic truth. I added "believed" to qualify this, but that is clunky and I welcome a smoother qualification. 173.172.95.186 ( talk) 22:12, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved as consensus has been established. ( non-admin closure) — Music1201 talk 20:16, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Roman Catholic dogma → Dogma in the Catholic Church – Eliminates the pesky issue of the "Roman" in the title, and is more in line with other articles on things "in" the Catholic Church. E.g., Exorcism in the Catholic Church, Saint Michael in the Catholic Church (note that like this one, it's not about "Saint Michael" per se, but about his role in the Church; this article is not about the dogmata of the Church per se, but rather about the role of dogma in the Church), Vocational discernment in the Catholic Church, etc.. Deus vult! Crusadestudent ( talk) 21:55, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
I made a slight change in the heading, which had some inaccurate wording in the statement that read:
The wording "revealed to the pope" is inaccurate. According to church teaching, no person coming after the apostles can receive public revelation, including the pope. Private revelations can be received, (like the predictions to the children at Fatima), but they are not binding on the faithful. In crafting doctrine, the pope and councils can only explicate that which they have determined to be contained in the original deposit of faith--the faith apparently given to the apostles to be passed on to future generations. This does not mean that the all aspects of the faith or its implications were perfectly clear in the day of the apostles--that some things they believed needed further clarification and explication in time. When a dogma is defined, it is making something that was there before (that was not clearly or adequatley defined) now clear and explicit. For instance the church has always contended that the doctrine of the Trinity was present in the New Testament and believed by members of the early church, but that it had not been put into precise language (there was no word "Trinity"), and that later led to misunderstandings, so theologians, such as Origin, came up with precise terminology (influenced by the precise kind of wording used in Greek philosophy, i.e. Aristotle) explicating the doctrine with greater detail and precision, to avoid further confusion on a matter that was contended to have been believed by the apostles. The Doctrine of the Trinity was then solemnly promulgated in the early ecumenical councils of the church. The church contends that all dogmas are contained in the deposit of faith, not directly "received" to those coming after the apostles, including the pope. The only two places a dogma can be promulgated is at an ecumenical council or by the pope when he is speaking ex cathedra. So the wording "other church members" was too vague--not just any church members can proclaim a dogma. Also "if one freely chooses to be a Catholic" was problematic, because a person can be excommunicated and not "freely choose" to remain Catholic. So I tidied it up a bit. I also put the ecumenical councils in front of the pope in the statement, because most dogmas have been defined by the councils--I believe only two have ever been promulgated by popes, and the thinking since Vatican II is that while the pope still has the ability to pronounce a dogma, that a council is preferable. I also changed the wording from "Roman Catholic" to "Catholic", since that is the official name of the church, as it calls itself. There are other rites in the church other than the Roman rite--there are the various Eastern rites, which are similar the Eastern Orthodox, but in communion with Rome.The new more accurate wording reads:
"'revealed to the pope" is inaccurate."I think
"Not all theological truths have been promulgated as dogmas"is good clarification too. – BoBoMisiu ( talk) 15:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Dogma in the Catholic Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:10, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Assent of faith and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 13#Assent of faith until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
21:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Assent of Faith and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 13#Assent of Faith until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
21:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
Full assent of faith and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 13#Full assent of faith until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
Veverve (
talk)
21:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)