The Catholic Message Board

Doom wrote: ↑Fri Nov 14, 2025 3:46 pm The bigger question is "Where does it say you can't use it"?

If something is "always inappropriate" then it shouldn't be done, this isn't hard to understand.

So you think John Paul II's use of the title was mentioned for the purpose of condemning him? And the long section giving the history of the theology behind the doctrine, mentioning several Church Fathers and canonized saints, was done to call them out as wrong?

That is quite far from the most natural interpretation.

Doom wrote: ↑Sat Nov 15, 2025 2:31 pm So you think John Paul II's use of the title was mentioned for the purpose of condemning him? And the long section giving the history of the theology behind the doctrine, mentioning several Church Fathers and canonized saints, was done to call them out as wrong?

That is quite far from the most natural interpretation.

I'm glad we're now talking about interpretation rather than what the document "literally says". In any case I'm definitely not the only person who understood the doctrinal note to mean that the title "Coredemptrix" ought not to be used, so if your interpretation is correct then it's incumbent on the DDF to offer clarification, and we see (again, after the Fiducia Supplicans fiasco) how completely unsuited Card. Fernandez is to the role to which Pope Francis appointed him.

A Dutch auxiliary criticizes Mater Populi Fidelis:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2025/ ... nt-on.html

peregrinator wrote: ↑Wed Nov 19, 2025 8:26 am A Dutch auxiliary criticizes Mater Populi Fidelis:
https://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2025/ ... nt-on.html

A number of quotable statements in that article!

Apparently the DDF didn't consult with any Mariologists on the "doctrinal" note:
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news ... xpert-says

Emphases mine below:

However, in the case of this doctrinal note on certain Marian titles, “no collaborating Mariologists could be found,” according to Gronchi.

The priest pointed out that neither those who teach at the Marianum Theological Faculty nor the members of the Pontifical International Marian Academy (PAMI by its Italian acronym) participated in the presentation of the document at the Jesuit Curia (administrative center), which in his opinion can be interpreted as a “silence” that “can be understood as dissent.”

I'm assuming that no Mariologist wanted his name associated with the document. Just embarrassing.

Doom wrote: ↑Sat Nov 15, 2025 2:31 pm So you think John Paul II's use of the title was mentioned for the purpose of condemning him? And the long section giving the history of the theology behind the doctrine, mentioning several Church Fathers and canonized saints, was done to call them out as wrong?

That is quite far from the most natural interpretation.

So how do you get around its phrase "always inappropriate", as opposed to "often inappropriate" or "inappropriate if XYZ". Your interpretation requires "always" to mean something other than "always".

peregrinator wrote: ↑Wed Nov 19, 2025 8:07 am and we see (again, after the Fiducia Supplicans fiasco) how completely unsuited Card. Fernandez is to the role to which Pope Francis appointed him.

Indeed, he is not capable of writing a coherent statement. His statement that "when a term needs repeated explanation to avoid being misunderstood" applies to pretty much everything he ever wrote. Certainly, no one has any idea what "synodality" means, despite repeated attempts to explain it.

I can point you to commentaries that I believe are informed and reach the opposite conclusion from your commentaries. The fact that two commentators can read the same document and come to opposite conclusions is itself proof that the "doctrinal note" is not as clear as such a "note" ought to be.