The topic could be any level ~11 issue.

@curiousdannii It seems to me that Protestants actually have the same or fewer tools at their disposal to discourage non-scriptural talks. I have often mentioned my charismatic friend whom I truly have real concern and who is under the radar from pursuing non-Biblical spirituality taught from heretical books. Statistically, borderline heretical charismatics are mushrooming, and that's why John MacArthur had that Strange Fire conference.

@GratefulDisciple Charismatics who do that are not applying sola scriptura. Scripture must sit above any new personal revelations.

@curiousdannii To me that's equivalent with Catholics having the Magisterium to rule any personal revelations as well.

Some may disagree, but I think SS does do more than just delineate heresies from non-heresies. Inductive reasoning and debates over theological frameworks also sit under SS. So we exercise caution with prophecies, and we can say that something doesn't fit with the vibe of the scriptures. Of course when we do so our SS-judgement is less certain that it would be for a direct scriptural refutation. And it means humility for those who want to push something uncertain.

@GratefulDisciple So my question is how does the magisterium rule personal revelations, mystic visions, and level 11 pious ideas!

@curiousdannii I think the answer is the parish priest monitoring what's happening in the parish, and empowering and educating the parish council and lay leaders to be an extension of his eyes and ears "spying" on the congregation, just like a Protestant pastor does the same through the board of elders, deacons, and trusted volunteers.

@GratefulDisciple Not just observation, but the actual discussions. Does the discussion just end when one Catholic says "well I want to believe this tradition"?

I'm sure if what my friend is doing spreads her belief in her local church (at the point where she influences others), and a lay leader / deacon / elder catch wind of this practice, there would be some action done. So I can very well envision a similar thing can be done in the Catholic parish. Just because it's level 11 doesn't mean it the Catholic priest would simply do nothing.

@curiousdannii What I'm saying is that in a healthy Catholic parish, the priest cares for the spiritual health of each parishioner. That overzealous Marian devotion, in light of VC II focus on Christ, would certainly makes a parish priest concern and he would try to steer devotion more toward Christ.

Can a lay Catholic or priest try to persuade another to stop believing in a tradition, or are they meant to respect the freedom of each to believe the traditions as they wish?

@curiousdannii Freedom goes both ways. A healthy parishioner and a healthy priest can also influence an extreme traditionalist to go the VC II way. Just because the Magisterium doesn't rule doesn't mean that practice cannot be discouraged. It really depends on the leadership, just like in a typical Protestant local church.

Gotta go. Talk to you later.

@GratefulDisciple Yes I know the importance of relational authority. But when the time is right to make the persuasion, how does it operate? I'm asking questions of the Catholic epistemology and process of doing theology in community.

@GratefulDisciple Thanks for the chat, see you!

@curiousdannii The Assumption of Mary wasn't a fringe thing, it's a popular traditional belief everywhere except in Protestantism. And Mary as co-redemptrix is definitely not a heretical notion, it may not be necessary to be proclaimed as a dogma, but it doesn't harm us spiritally.

My wife was co-valedictorian of her school. That's not the same thing as being valedictorian. We love Mary because God made her "little less than a God" that's true of her, because it's true of Mankind - it says so in the psalms at least. But He had special consideration for her, that's for sure

And @GratefulDisciple I'm on the fence about my love for Vatican II. Obviously I'm not a fan of liturgical abuse, in a certain sense I'd like the Traditionalist movement to just get squashed because the people enamored by the Old Mass's spiritual bent is in and of itself divisive.

I go to a Traditional Latin Mass, nearly every Sunday - my son likes serving it a lot more than Novus Ordo. I like the fact that the people are there to pray and worship God; as evidenced by the quiet manner before and after Mass

I've never met a single person who was more zealous in his love for Mary than St. Maximillian Kolbe. I'd like to know if his contemporaries accused him of Mariolatry.

@PeterTurner Well if they didn't, don't worry, we can now ;)

@PeterTurner We have one mediator, one priest. There's no space for a co-redeemer in the Gospel.

Especially not a sinful one!

I wish that Catholics' love for Mary would be magnifying to Jesus instead of diminishing him. Like John the Baptist said, "He must become greater; I must become less." But it feels to me that every time Catholics lift up Mary is at the expense of Jesus. Co-redeemer isn't even a complementing role, it's literally saying that Jesus isn't enough to redeem by himself.

@PeterTurner I'm completely with you on this. I wish Novus Ordo celebration of mass is always performed as reverently by the priest, the cantor, and the altar servers as with TLM and that the congregations participate in the reverence because they follow what they see happening.

I have been to a few (usually smaller parishes) where the priest was (I think) reverent enough in his movement, facial expression, and words. There was one time, at a parish where the celebration is one of the most reverent I've seen (and the priest is a religious, not diocesan), a young altar server dropped something and was immediately given a stern look from the priest. I've also been to a large parish (always packed, more than 500 at a time) where the (diocesan) priest is less reverent.

I can sense a qualitative difference in the congregation's attitude. In the larger one it feels they go to mass for a routine business, but in the smaller one there are quite a lot who came before hand to pray.

@curiousdannii In the heat of discussion, I admit that I didn't read this question carefully. So the concern is how do the Catholic church exert some control so the growth of tradition doesn't take a life of its own into growing a large following which in turn become a factor for the Magisterium to declare a dogma due to petition from the masses (like what's happening with the movement for giving Mary the title of co-redemptrix)?

@curiousdannii To clarify the remaining question you have, are you asking the epistemology of the lay Catholic, the priests, the bishops, or the church theologians?

Implied from the little I read about the workings of VC II and the CDF, it seems latter (bishops and theologians) are listening to multiple sources: Scripture & exegetical research, continuity of worship practice, experience of the saints, doctors of the church (for precedent), needs and petitions of the Catholic faithful, other Christian groups, and philosophical development in the world (to tailor the language for evangelization). Largely in that order.

My sense of VC II is that they prioritize scripture more over other sources, a trend that seems to be consistent in the past decades, and the main reason behind the pushback of the co-redemptrix movement by Pope Benedict XVI & Pope Francis as well as ecumenical concern.

@curiousdannii Although I have a big reservation over this, it's the wrong understanding of co-redemptrix to say that "Jesus isn't enough to redeem by himself." Catholics also take 1 Tim 2:5 seriously (one mediator, sole redeemer). To have a meaningful dialogue, we have to understand the title by how Catholics define it, which is inseparable from the concept of Mary as "intercessor" and "maternal charity". I find this article very helpful.

@curiousdannii I'm used to see a personal computing solution as a whole (hardware + software + cloud services) so when comparing the 3 major branches, methodologically I don't impose evaluation criteria from one branch to the other, but see each branch as a package resulting from their own internal way of doing theology AND of teaching it to lay faithful. It's the fruit that I measure: which one result in a body of believers grow more Christlike and become better agents of God in the world?

@GratefulDisciple That article just confirmed to me how heretical it is. Mary is not an active participant in our salvation. She is not our intercessor, mediator, or advocate. She does not sustain Christ's redeeming work.

I haven't heard of Mary's sustaining role before reading that article, but I suspect that may get at the heart of the Protestant rejection of this Catholic doctrine. That's far beyond just Mary being the chief intercessor for the church (which we Protestants also reject - Solus Christus!)

@GratefulDisciple That's not really my main question, that's just an unfounded hypothesis that the lack of functional Catholic rules of theological debate leads to a Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell about non-dogmas, which in turn could mean that there's an unrecognition of theological disagreement over these issues.

@GratefulDisciple Everyone. Though less pure epistemology and more how theological disagreements should be discussed in ordinary church contexts.

@GratefulDisciple Hmm, that article seems to be mis-paraphrasing what Lumen Gentium actually said in regards to Mary sustaining. The only thing it actually says she sustained was her maternity.

@GratefulDisciple To some extent its fairest to evaluate them according to internal criteria first, but ultimately we all have our convictions by which we will evaluate the various groups.

For me, something like sola scriptura is a foundational principle of my theology. It's not impossible, but I don't foresee it being overturned.

But another principle I follow is Piper's "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Him." Piper's divisive, but the same basic idea is there in the Westminster Catechism: "What is the chief end of man? To glorify God, and to enjoy him for ever." We could also call it the exaltation of Christ. We are so far from this, and yet it is our goal. But the Marian dogmas stand in direct opposition to it, as far as I can see.

And so when I evaluate fruit, part of the fruit I'm looking for is the exaltation of Christ. Both Catholics and Pentecostals who over-emphasise the Spirit lack that the clear display of that fruit, from my perspective.

I realise I just did a little switch from God to Christ there. The exaltation of Christ being the main person to be glorified by us can I think be justified through verses like Phil 2:9-11. But if someone doesn't buy such a position, then that only excuses the Pentecostals...

In other news, I anticipate I'll be reading Eleonore Stump in the future, though I haven't started yet. She seems to be someone to read on the doctrine of Simplicity.

Along with Aquinas. And some modern theologians.

@Matthew They contradict a specific INTERPRETATION of the New Testament.

@LukeHill ...yes? You may notice I said "allegedly" in the original message.

@Matthew Fair. That being said I think he read those verses in the worst way possible.

@LukeHill By "he", you mean the author of that article? To also be fair, I've seen other interpretations, and I'd say your take is reasonable. Of course, the author is trying to make a point, so it's not surprising he'd try to make it as firmly as possible.

@Matthew Yes, I am referring to the author

I expect it's not entirely unreasonable to argue that there's an element of circular reasoning in Protestant rejection of the apocrypha on doctrinal grounds. OTOH, there are all the other reasons, and because of those, I'd still be dubious about any doctrine that needs the apocrypha to be supported. (Thinking of Purgatory, in particular.)

@Matthew Jesus talks about purgatory in His parables enough, I don't think anybody needs to look to the books of Maccabees as concrete proof that the Jews believed in purgatory.

Eccl 7:37, Matt 12:32, 1 Cor 3:13-15.