Before I begin I must make this disclosure. I am not a Catholic, but I believe that true Catholics are my brothers and sisters in Christ. I would say the same for all true Christians. The following is only an intellectual discussion on Cannon Law. Since it is law I have an interest in it.
I was told that Vatican II did not alter the dogma of the Church. That statement comes into question by some quick research that I did on the subject. I would naturally defer to your experience in this area since apparently you are a Catholic and I presume that as such you have a wealth of information that I lack. Nevertheless, if the following information was taken from the Columbia Encyclopedia and I assume it is authoritative, accurate and reliable
“Dogma (the plural is either dogmata or dogmas) is belief or doctrine held by a religion or any kind of organization to be authoritative.”
“The voice of the pope, either alone or in conjunction with his bishops in council, is regarded as infallible when speaking on matters of faith and morals taught in common with the bishops (see infallibility). Many features of the traditional teaching (dogma) have been analyzed and restated, by the councils and by great theologians (see council, ecumenical; creed; Thomas Aquinas, Saint; Trent, Council of; Vatican Council, First; Vatican Council, Second).”
It would appear then if the above reference is correct that Vatican II did restate to some extent the dogma of the Church.
Cannon law is defined as “the body of law based on the legislation of the councils (both ecumenical and local) and the popes, as well as the bishops (for diocesan matters). It is the law of the church courts and is formally distinguished from other parts of ecclesiastical law, such as liturgical law. However, when liturgical law overlaps with canon law, canon law normally prevails.”
It would also appear from the forgoing reference that Cannon Law arises out of the works of ecumenical councils such as Vatican II.
“The Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church, which became effective in 1983, is a revision of the Codex juris canonici [code of canon law], promulgated in 1917.”
“In 1959, Pope John XXIII convoked the Second Vatican Council and announced a revision of the code of 1917. In 1963 he appointed a pontifical commission for the revision; the revised code became effective in 1983.”
“One of the announced aims of the conference was to consider reform of the liturgy, primarily to bring the layman into closer participation in the church services and therefore to encourage some diversity in language and practice.”
“By the time of its adjournment the council had issued four constitutions, nine decrees, and three declarations.”
“Out of Session III (Sept.–Nov., 1964) came the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (which espoused the principle of episcopal collegiality with the pope), the decrees on ecumenism and on the Eastern Catholic churches, and the proclamation of the Blessed Virgin Mary as the “Mother of the Church.”
The preface to the Dei Verbum {Divine Revelation} reads as follows:
“1. Hearing the word of God with reverence and proclaiming it with faith, the sacred synod takes its direction from these words of St. John: "We announce to you the eternal life which dwelt with the Father and was made visible to us. What we have seen and heard we announce to you, so that you may have fellowship with us and our common fellowship be with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ" (1 John 1:2-3). Therefore, following in the footsteps of the Council of Trent and of the First Vatican Council, this present council wishes to set forth authentic doctrine on divine revelation and how it is handed on, so that by hearing the message of salvation the whole world may believe, by believing it may hope, and by hoping it may love.”
Before I begin I must make this disclosure. I am not a CatholicKinda figured. Cannon Law? 1. They are incredibly loud.
I believe that true Catholics are my brothers and sisters in Christ. I would say the same for all true Christians.
One Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all...Most of us would agree with St. Paul on that principle. Maybe even really crappy Christians, too. The ones just barely hanging on by their fingernails?
The following is only an intellectual discussion
Great. I've probably got more questions than you do. And the encyclopedia entries look pretty accurate to me.
I was told that Vatican II did not alter the dogma of the Church. That statement comes into question by some quick research...
It would appear then if the above reference is correct that Vatican II did restate to some extent the dogma
The question then becomes 'What do they mean by restate?'(if it means the same thing as alter, I'm gonna be disappointed).
My understanding has always been, and maybe I can even find it in writing somewhere (probably an address by John XXIII or Paul VI), the intent of the council was to state the teaching of the Church in language the modern world could understand.
Much like one of my favorite lines that you quoted:following in the footsteps of the Council of Trent and of the First Vatican Council,(Nothing new here, folks. Following the footsteps.) this present council wishes to set forth authentic doctrine on divine revelation and how it is handed on, so that by hearing the message of salvation the whole world may believe, by believing it may hope, and by hoping it may love.Gee, just by quoting that you probably know more about what Vatican II actually says than 90% of Catholics.
Now, did the council achieve what it set out to do? Maybe in a few generations we'll have a better idea on that. I read an article recently that said not every council is a success. They didn't always achieve their stated goals.
As to your interest in canon law, how it is derived and how it relates to councils; that's beyond me. But if run into anything that looks interesting along those lines, I'll try to remember you.
Canon law? Yeah, keep talking. I'm just resting my eyes.
I knew this was around somewhere on the web. A paragraph from John XXIII's opening address at the council:
"The salient point of this council is not, therefore, a discussion of one article or another of the fundamental doctrine of the Church which has repeatedly been taught by the Fathers and by ancient and modern theologians, and which is presumed to be well known and familiar to all. For this a council was not necessary. But from the renewed, serene and tranquil adherence to all the teaching of the Church in its entirety and preciseness, as it still shines forth in the acts of the Council of Trent and First Vatican Council, the Christian, Catholic and apostolic spirit of the whole world expects a step forward toward a doctrinal penetration and a formation of consciences in faithful and perfect conformity to the authentic doctrine which, however, should be studied and expounded through the methods of research and through the literary forms of modern thought. The substance of the ancient doctrine of the Deposit of Faith is one thing, and the way in which it is presented is another. And it is the latter that must be taken into great consideration with patience if necessary, everything being measured in the forms and proportions of a magisterium which is predominantly pastoral in character."