Saturday, October 13, 2007

Ott on "not explicit"

"The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary is not explicitly revealed in Scripture." (pg 200)

"The Bodily Assumption of and express scriptural proofs are not to be had." (pg 208)

"Mary is the Mediatrix of all graces by her intercession in Heaven...Express scriptural proofs are lacking." (pg 214)

"Holy Writ does not explicitly refer to the veneration and invocation of saints, but it asserts the principle out of which Church teaching and practice developed." (pg 318)

"Holy Writ does not mention the veneration of relics, but it affirms precedents, upon which the Christian veneration of relics is founded." (pg 319)

"Holy Writ teaches the existence of a cleansing fire [purgatory] indirectly, by admitting the possibility of a purification in the other world." (pg 483)

-Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma,

1 comment:

kmerian said...

Carrie, if it is your argument that a Christian should only hold as Dogma that which is explicitly stated in scripture, then:
Where is this statement explicitly stated in scripture?

Where is scripture defined in scripture?

Where is sola scriptura in scripture?

Remember "allusion" "implicit" or "precedent" does not count since you are arguing that it needs to be explicit apparently.