You must think I'm foolish. Your first post between 1230-1294 is at #1285. So are you banking on others like BoL to provide your evidence?
It was you who wrote:
I've seen lots of bickering, people not understanding what a primary source and a secondary source is, people making rediculously (sic) illogical claims, people thinking posts are directed to them when they aren't and everyone is going crazy in accusing everyone else of red herring fallacy.
You have made these claims, now provide the specific evidence, instead of passing the buck and inviting others and me to check 1230-1294 for that evidence.
Is the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) a primary or secondary source? This seems a reasonable accurate response:
The Catechism is not a primary source. It is rather a secondary source. If you look at the footnotes in the CCC, those are mostly primary sources.
Ratzinger, in Introduction to the Universal Catechism page 25 says specifically that the Catechism is not a super dogma and has no authority above what was previously said in the documents that it cites (
source).
You claim: 'everyone is going crazy in accusing everyone else of red herring fallacy'. That's a humongous hyperbole!
Oz
The thread title: It is not in the bible.....sola scripture
has nothing to do with the OP: "so why is it believed and accepted that Mary had children other than Jesus."
It has been answered with post #4, 6, 8, and 9 on the first page, with some posts weightier than others.
The thread has degenerated into a bar room brawl and should be closed.
All the dictionaries on line give the same or similar definitions for a primary source.
Primary Sources. A primary source provides direct or firsthand evidence about an event, object, person, or work of art. Primary sources include historical and legal documents, eyewitness accounts, results of experiments, statistical data, pieces of creative writing, audio and video recordings, speeches, and art objects ...
The footnotes of the CCC are not add-ons. The CCC is in condensed form of the footnotes. It includes numerous scripture references and a wealth of authentic history of doctrine and practice. It is a primary source.
Yahoo answers is not a reliable source of information on Catholic teaching.
Here is what the then Cardinal Ratzinger (Pope B16) actually said:
This brings us to the question already mentioned before, regarding the authority of the Catechism. In order to find the answer, let us first consider a bit more closely its juridical character. We could express it in this way: analogously to the new Code of Canon Law, the Catechism is de facto a collegial work; canonically, it falls under the special jurisdiction of the Pope, inasmuch as it was authorized for the whole Christian world by the Holy Father in virtue of the supreme teaching authority invested in him. . .
This does not mean that the catechism is a sort of super-dogma, as its opponents would like to insinuate in order to cast suspicion on its as a danger to the liberty of theology. What significance the Catechism really holds for the common exercise of teaching in the Church may be learned by reading the Apostolic Constitution
Fidei depositum, with which the Pope promulgated it on October 11, 1992–exactly thirty years after the opening of the Second Vatican Council: "I acknowledge it [the Catechism] as a valid and legitimate tool in the service of ecclesiastical communion, as a sure norm for instruction in the faith."
The individual doctrine which the Catechism presents receive no other weight than that which they already possess. The weight of the Catechism itself lies in the whole. Since it transmits what the Church teaches, whoever rejects it
as a whole separates himself beyond question from the faith and teaching of the Church...
Thus the Catechism presents the teaching of the Church without elevating the doctrinal status of those teachings beyond what they otherwise have. Consequently, one must look to other documents and to the tradition of the Church to establish the doctrinal weight of any particular point in the Catechism. Since the Catechism treats many things that not only have not been taught infallibly but which also have been proposed in the most tentative of fashions (esp. in the area of social teaching), there remains due liberty for theologians (and others) when they encounter something that has been proposed only tentatively.
This was what allowed Cardinal Ratzinger to say, in
his 2004 memorandum, that "There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia."
This brings us to the question already mentioned before, regarding the authority of the Catechism. In order to find the answer, let us first consider a bit more closely its juridical character. We could express it in this way: analogously to the new Code of Canon Law, the Catechism is de facto a collegial work; canonically, it falls under the special jurisdiction of the Pope, inasmuch as it was authorized for the whole Christian world by the Holy Father in virtue of the supreme teaching authority invested in him. . .
This does not mean that the catechism is a sort of super-dogma, as its opponents would like to insinuate in order to cast suspicion on its as a danger to the liberty of theology. What significance the Catechism really holds for the common exercise of teaching in the Church may be learned by reading the Apostolic Constitution
Fidei depositum, with which the Pope promulgated it on October 11, 1992–exactly thirty years after the opening of the Second Vatican Council: "I acknowledge it [the Catechism] as a valid and legitimate tool in the service of ecclesiastical communion, as a sure norm for instruction in the faith."
The individual doctrine which the Catechism presents receive no other weight than that which they already possess. The weight of the Catechism itself lies in the whole. Since it transmits what the Church teaches, whoever rejects it
as a whole separates himself beyond question from the faith and teaching of the Church [pp. 25-27. NOTE: The paragraph breaks above are mine. While the catechism may not be a super-dogma, Ratzinger said all this (and more) in a single super-paragraph].
Thus the Catechism presents the teaching of the Church without elevating the doctrinal status of those teachings beyond what they otherwise have. Consequently, one must look to other documents and to the tradition of the Church to establish the doctrinal weight of any particular point in the Catechism. Since the Catechism treats many things that not only have not been taught infallibly but which also have been proposed in the most tentative of fashions (esp. in the area of social teaching), there remains due liberty for theologians (and others) when they encounter something that has been proposed only tentatively.
This was what allowed Cardinal Ratzinger to say, in
his 2004 memorandum, that "There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia."
http://jimmyakin.com/2005/02/ratzinger_on_th.html
So somebody takes one line out of context and pastes it into Yahoo answers and they win first place. Typical.
