caleb wrote:
Matthew,
Rosmini was not condemned. In fact, Rosmini is the premier Italian theologian of the nineteenth century, a friend of Pius IX, and a primary voice of the Church against the Enlightenment. Rosmini himself submitted his works to the Holy See and abided by the Church's judgments during his lifetime. Before his death, the Holy See removed the few works of his that had been on the Index.
I understand that he was not condemned; his works were initially investigated and eventually dismissed. The Holy Office stated that this dismissal did
not mean that a dismissed work contained absolutely nothing contrary to the faith.
Quote:
After he died, forty propositions from writings that were published posthumously (and obviously without his knowledge) were condemned, but without recourse to the traditional theological censures.
An author need not be notified or have any knowledge that particular works are examined and/or condemned.
Quote:
The question arises: If during Rosmini's lifetime, he submitted his works, abided by the judgment of the Inquisition, and eventually found his works exonerated and removed from the Index, why is it suspicious that the very weak, posthumous decree of the Holy Office would also be re-evaluated by the CDF later?
I wouldn't say he was 'exonerated' at all. He was a bright star at first indeed, much like Maritain, but after some time, he was merely tolerated, silenced, and eventually some of his ideas were condemned as erroneous. These things can take some time to work out and Leo XIII clearly supported the decree. Whether it was 'weak' (whatever that means) or had no degrees of censure is beside the point. What is true then must be true now, otherwise the Magisterium is a mockery. The condemned propositions had ontologistic and fideistic leanings. Oddly enough, it is precisely those trends in thought that are prevelant today in the Church.