Replies

1. What is the basis for your assurance of truth?

< Jesus Christ, Who can neither deceive nor be deceived.

I think that is such a given as to seem like an avoidance of the question. How about "What is your instrumental basis for assurance of truth?"

2. Is an assuredly (if conditionally) infallible magisterium essential for determination of Truth (including which writings and men are of God) and preservation of faith?

I take it you're asking here about the determination of the Canon of Scripture,

If that is all i meant then i would have said Scripture, not "including which writings and men are of God." But i mean, "Is an assuredly infallible magisterium essential for determination of Truth, both oral and written, and including which men are of God?"

there can be no confidence in the the authority of Scripture unless we know confidently what Scripture comprises.

So one must have a complete canon in order to have confidence in the the authority of Scripture?

It was by the apostolic Tradition that the Church discerned...

That simply describes the process, not how even such a medium as apostolic tradition was established as being of God. But would you say the infallible magisterium essential to determine what writings are of God?

Cardinal Dulles states, "People cannot discover the contents of revelation by their unaided powers of reason and observation. They have to be told by people who have received in from on high." - Cardinal Avery Dulles, SJ, “Magisterium: Teacher and Guardian of the Faith,” p. 72;

3. Does being the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation mean that such is that assuredly infallible magisterium?

The local Churches (meaning, in Catholic parlance, dioceses) were...

But this presumes a centralized magisterium, and so your answer is that being the magisterium over the body which was the historical instruments and stewards of Divine revelation means or requires assured (if conditional) infallibility?

4. Are those who knowingly dissent from the latter in rebellion to God?

I'm not sure what you mean by "the latter." Those who dissent from this Revelation are dissenting from God.

"Latter" refers to the assuredly infallible magisterium just mentioned, since it determines what the Revelation is. Is that a yes or a no? As Pope Boniface VIII in his infallible Unam Sanctam states, "Whoever, therefore, resists this authority [the pope], resists the command of God Himself."

Whether this imputable as a subjective, morally deliberate "rebellion" depends on the extent to which the individual knows and intends rebellion against Our Lord the Holy Spirit. Sacred Scripture must be read and interpreted in the light of the same Spirit by whom it was written.

I said "knowingly" for that reason. But as per your answer, it seems you must mean that those who see obedience to God as requiring dissent from Rome in any dogma is rebellion against God, under the premise that being the historical instruments and stewards of Scripture, and inheritors of Divine promises of guidance and preservation, "the same God is the author both of the Sacred Books and of the doctrine committed to the Church" and thus "all interpretation is foolish and false which... is opposed to the doctrine of the Church.(Providentissimus Deus)

Could you answer these more clearly? Thanks.

Obedient to your request, I'll do as well as I can. Your terminology is a little ambiguous to me, probably because we're drawing from different background reading and therefore different lexical fields; but if I have misunderstood or only partly understood any of your questions, you can sometimes move the discussion along if you'll restate them in different terms. You have already done that to some extent --- which shows insight on your part --- so thank you, that helps me.

"What is your instrumental basis for assurance of truth?"

Since we already agreed upon Jesus Christ as the ultimate basis for assurance of the truth, I suppose you're asking "What does Jesus Christ use as His instrument?" That would be the Church, as it is the Body of Christ.

That term ("Body of Christ") entails that the Church is living; is united under one Head; is animated by the Holy Spirit; is composed of different parts which work together; that not all have the same gifts or to the same extent ("1 Corinthians 12:29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?"); that they are all "members" of each other, that they all need each other, etc.

"Is an assuredly infallible magisterium essential for determination of Truth, both oral and written, and including which men are of God?"

Not sure what you mean by "an assuredly infallible magisterium". Not every level of teaching is infallible. In the Catholic Church, infallibility in the first instance would be an attribute of what has been handed down from the Apostles, since public revelation closed with the death of the last Apostle.

"What was handed down" would be the Apostles' written teachings, their oral teachings (which show up in their disciples' writings), and their teaching by example (which shows up in their disciples' rule of prayer, particularly liturgical; and their moral rules, shown by their way of life.)

On this view, the term "Sacred Tradition" (as contrasted to "any-old-human tradition") consists of what has been passed on to us by the Apostles:

first, their oral preaching;
decades or even a generation later, the written records (which weren't complete until nearly 100 AD);
then the practice (liturgical, moral, etc.) of those formed by this oral and written Tradition ---the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th generation disciples/successors of the Apostles, --- this we know mostly via the Ante-Nicene Fathers.

This is what the authentic Magisterium has to draw from: also called the "Deposit of Faith."

I'd have to go through something like John Henry Newman's "Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine" to show how further understanding of this "deposit of faith" comes from reason working on the original revealed truth to draw out consequences that were not obvious at first.

In other words, there are understandings which are the fruit of study, prayer, and the workings of the Holy Spirit which become manifest over a period of time; they are logically required by, or reasonably inferred from, the solid evidence of Scripture and Sacred Tradition; and they cannot contradict this evidence.

This process of legitimate development (as contrasted to innovation or corruption) gets pushed along as new events raise new questions, and that stimulates new thinking, often under the spur of controversy and crisis. So bishops and theologians and the Christifideles laici (lay people faithful to Christ) discuss, reason, pray, think, and struggle. Finally a way to answer the new questions, conformable with the Deposit of Faith, is found through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and confirmed. (Peter's appointed office and duty is to confirm the brethren.)

At this point, I must break off unfinished because I have to get out and water and weed before it gets totally dark. I may get back to this later; but meanwhile, it gives you something to work on.

Good evening, daniel1212!