 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Ali
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 660 |
| First Name: | Ali | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | JW, finally fully Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10th, 2007 10:16 am |
|
At a recent Mass Father mentioned the Gospel of John, and how one of the ways this Gospel* differs from the others is that John was not an Apostle, one of the original 12.
Excuse me, but after that I kind of spaced out because I thought John was one of the 12 and I was wracking my brain trying to name them all so I didn't catch what came next. I didn't get very far in naming them, but the jingle for Big Mac entered my brain  Anyway, he said how John was written about 50 years after Jesus was taken to heaven, and he was a physisian, etc.
So this morning I check out Wikipedia, font of all knowledge, and correct on all things, too. LOL. And John is listed as an Apostle. I really though he was, how could I be wrong?  And Wiki does agree with me.
Is the writer of the book of John a different man than the Apostle John? Or you thinking that I totally misunderstood what Father was saying?
*Does that need capitalized?
|
|
|
NanaR
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jun 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Kentucky USA |
| Posts: | 149 |
| First Name: | Ruth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Born JW, born-again Catholic (Tiber Swim Team 2008) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10th, 2007 10:52 am |
|
Ali,
Are you sure he was talking about John?
Luke was a physician and was not an apostle. Sounds like Father might have been talking about him. And I think the gospel reading this past Sunday was from Luke (?).
Just a thought.
Ruth
____________________
When you bend down to help someone up, that is the best exercise for your heart. -- Fr. Noe, 2007
http://nanaruthann.blogspot.com
|
|
|
Ali
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 660 |
| First Name: | Ali | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | JW, finally fully Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10th, 2007 10:58 am |
|
No!?!?
Did you read the part about where I spaced out? ROFLOL Ok, so just think Luke in my entire post where I have John typed.
{crawls under a rock} OMG, talk about embarrassed! LOL
|
|
|
Annie
Banned
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | Columbus, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 734 |
| First Name: | Annie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | nothing, Quaker, Mennonite, Presbyterian, Methodist, Anglican, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10th, 2007 11:38 am |
|
Boy, I've done that before too. I feel for ya.  
____________________
Annie
Ora et labora
|
|
|
NanaR
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jun 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Kentucky USA |
| Posts: | 149 |
| First Name: | Ruth | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Born JW, born-again Catholic (Tiber Swim Team 2008) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10th, 2007 11:51 am |
|
Ali:
No need for embarassment.
It's happened to all of us at one time or another.
Love ya!
Ruth
____________________
When you bend down to help someone up, that is the best exercise for your heart. -- Fr. Noe, 2007
http://nanaruthann.blogspot.com
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5080 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10th, 2007 11:15 pm |
|
Ali wrote: No!?!?
Did you read the part about where I spaced out? ROFLOL Ok, so just think Luke in my entire post where I have John typed.
{crawls under a rock} OMG, talk about embarrassed! LOL
No, what you do is edit your original message, then reply "What are you talking about?"
Legend is that Luke was Mary's physician and a disciple of Paul and follower of Jesus. He presents more of the "human" side of Jesus (meaning more personal, loving and compassionate, not less divine), and of course provides more details about the Nativity and Jesus' private life than the other gospels. Luke also records such events as Mary's visit with Elizabeth and the marriage feast at Cana.
He was intimately involved with the apostles, possibly through Mary and Paul, as witnessed by his writing the Acts of the Apostles.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Kayla
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | Emmitsburg, Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 364 |
| First Name: | Kayla | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Atheist, kind-of Mormon, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 02:42 am |
|
CajunRick wrote:
No, what you do is edit your original message, then reply "What are you talking about?"
Legend is that Luke was Mary's physician and a disciple of Paul and follower of Jesus. He presents more of the "human" side of Jesus (meaning more personal, loving and compassionate, not less divine), and of course provides more details about the Nativity and Jesus' private life than the other gospels. Luke also records such events as Mary's visit with Elizabeth and the marriage feast at Cana.
He was intimately involved with the apostles, possibly through Mary and Paul, as witnessed by his writing the Acts of the Apostles.
I just love how this is coming up so much lately! (Just yesterday I attended an RC Challenge practice that had a question about Luke and his relationship to the Blessed Mother..)
This is something that my 'crazy nun' professor tried to teach us against. She told us (which I suppose is theological opinion, although I wonder how she founds this claim) that Luke never spoke to Mary and had no first person accounts of what happened, therefore his infancy narratives are merely speculation (which helps support her claim that the Annunciation never happened). Now, I did not know before hand the tradition held of Luke having known our Blessed Virgin, that he had supposedly been her physician or had perhaps painted a portrait of her. I didn't know there was so much tradition about this, otherwise I would have asked her the basis for such claim- because now I'm interested; why would one dispute such a widely held tradition?
____________________
I believe, Lord, help my unbelief.
Jesus, I trust in You!
There's not a lot of job security for us after death. I suppose that's one advantage of being a philosopher. - Peter Kreeft
http://kayla23mount.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5080 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 09:30 am |
|
Kayla wrote: She told us (which I suppose is theological opinion, although I wonder how she founds this claim) that Luke never spoke to Mary and had no first person accounts of what happened, therefore his infancy narratives are merely speculation (which helps support her claim that the Annunciation never happened).
Frankly, I doubt there was anyone in the early Christian community at Jerusalem and Ephasus, and possibly cities in between, who did not know Mary. She would have been the "rock star" of Christianity!
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Annie
Banned
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | Columbus, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 734 |
| First Name: | Annie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | nothing, Quaker, Mennonite, Presbyterian, Methodist, Anglican, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 09:48 am |
|
Here is the icon Luke made, according to tradition:
http://www.finnvalley.ie/kilteevogue/images/olps.jpg
____________________
Annie
Ora et labora
|
|
|
Credo Catholic
Member
| Joined: | Sat May 5th, 2007 |
| Location: | Greenville, South Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 1268 |
| First Name: | Marsha | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 10:39 am |
|
| That's amazing, that Luke would have painted an icon of the Blessed Virgin as well as describing all the events surrounding her. She must have been well known in that area. We had a class last night at RCIA regarding the writing of the gospels, the timing of them, and how important word of mouth was. Father Longenecker does an excellent job of explaining how the time frame immediately after the death and resurrection of Jesus would have been full of people who knew Him and the family, who knew firsthand the apostles and their family and neighbors. The first gospels were written about 30 years after the death and resurrection. Do you remember what you were doing 30 years ago? Who were your family, neighbors and acquaintances? Could you write an account of it if you were inspired by God to do so? It was a very enlightening class.
|
|
|
Ali
Member
| Joined: | Sat Jan 6th, 2007 |
| Location: | Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 660 |
| First Name: | Ali | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | JW, finally fully Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 05:29 pm |
|
CajunRick wrote: Ali wrote: No!?!?
Did you read the part about where I spaced out? ROFLOL Ok, so just think Luke in my entire post where I have John typed.
{crawls under a rock} OMG, talk about embarrassed! LOL
No, what you do is edit your original message, then reply "What are you talking about?"
Thanks, Rick -- and everyone else -- who tried lessen my extreme red face. Why, yes, I teach your children. {laughs evilly}
Learn something new every day
Ali
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1792 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 09:56 pm |
|
Kayla wrote:This is something that my 'crazy nun' professor tried to teach us against. She told us (which I suppose is theological opinion, although I wonder how she founds this claim) that Luke never spoke to Mary and had no first person accounts of what happened, therefore his infancy narratives are merely speculation (which helps support her claim that the Annunciation never happened).
Sounds like she is working hard to seal up all the leaks in her conspiracy theory. I wouldn’t go so far as to call it “theology,” because it is a denial of faith, not an explanation of it. Basically, she is calling St. Luke a liar, because he says straight out that he consulted “eyewitnesses and ministers of the word,” whom he “followed closely” (cf. Luke 1:1–4).
David
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5080 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 10:50 pm |
|
David W. Emery wrote: Basically, she is calling St. Luke a liar, because he says straight out that he consulted “eyewitnesses and ministers of the word,” whom he “followed closely” (cf. Luke 1:1–4).
And in the process denying the legitimacy of the Church which affirms the accuracy of Scripture.
I admit to being torn on this matter. She might very well be challenging the authority of Scripture and the Church in order to see who is the first to stand up against her in defense of the Church. I've done the same thing from time to time in classes and in talks, and I would frequently take the opposing side in radio interviews when I was in broadcasting.
On the other hand, she might actually believe what she is saying. If so, she should be run off the campus on a rail. Professors of theology at Catholic universities make a promise to remain faithful to the Magisterium, or they are not to teach. They may hold their own opinions, of course, but they can't teach what is contrary to the teachings of the Church.
The following is from John Paul II's Apostolic Exortation Catechesi Tradendae, the culmination of an effort begun by the Synod of Bishops, and reflecting the efforts of Paul VI, John Paul I, and John Paul II:
Content of the Message
26. Since catechesis is a moment or aspect of evangelization, its content cannot be anything else but the content of evangelization as a whole. The one message - the Good News of salvation - that has been heard once or hundreds of times and has been accepted with the heart, is in catechesis probed unceasingly by reflection and systematic study, by awareness of its repercussions on one's personal life - an awareness calling for ever greater commitment - and by inserting it into an organic and harmonious whole, namely, Christian living in society and the world.
The Source
27. Catechesis will always draw its content from the living source of the Word of God transmitted in Tradition and the Scriptures, for "sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture make up a single sacred deposit of the Word of God, which is entrusted to the Church," as was recalled by the Second Vatican Council, which desired that "the ministry of the word - pastoral preaching, catechetics and all forms of Christian instruction . . . - (should be) healthily nourished and (should) thrive in holiness through the word of Scripture."
To speak of Tradition and Scripture as the source of catechesis is to draw attention to the fact that catechesis must be impregnated and penetrated by the thought, the spirit and the outlook of the Bible and the Gospels through assiduous contact with the texts themselves; but it is also a reminder that catechesis will be all the richer and more effective for reading the texts with the intelligence and the heart of the Church and for drawing inspiration from the 2,000 years of the Church's reflection and life.
The Church's teaching, liturgy and life spring from this source and lead back to it, under the guidance of the pastors and, in particular, of the doctrinal magisterium entrusted to them by the Lord.
And further:
Integrity of Content
30. With regard to the content of catechesis, three important points deserve special attention today.
The first point concerns the integrity of the content. In order that the sacrificial offering of his or her faith should be perfect, the person who becomes a disciple of Christ has the right to receive "the word of faith" not in mutilated, falsified or diminished form but whole and entire, in all its rigor and vigor. Unfaithfulness on some point to the integrity of the message means a dangerous weakening of catechesis and putting at risk the results that Christ and the ecclesial community have a right to expect from it. It is certainly not by chance that the final command of Jesus in Matthew's Gospel bears the mark of a certain entireness: "All authority...has been given to me...make disciples of all nations...teaching them to observe all...I am with you always." This is why, when a person first becomes aware of "the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus," whom he has encountered by faith, and has the perhaps unconscious desire to know Him more extensively and better," hearing about Him and being taught in Him, as the truth is in Jesus. there is no valid pretext for refusing Him any part whatever of that knowledge. What kind of catechesis would it be that failed to give their full place to man's creation and sin; to God's plan of redemption and its long, loving preparation and realization; to the incarnation of the Son of God; to Mary, the Immaculate One, the Mother of God, ever Virgin, raised body and soul to the glory of heaven, and to her role in the mystery of salvation; to the mystery of lawlessness at work in our lives and the power of God freeing us from it; to the need for penance and asceticism; to the sacramental and liturgical actions; to the reality of the Eucharistic Presence; to participation in divine life here and hereafter, and so on? Thus, no true catechist can lawfully, on his own initiative, make a selection of what he considers important in the deposit of faith as opposed to what he considers unimportant, so as to teach the one and reject the other.
Maybe this nun needs to be given a printed copy of this document.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 1792 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11th, 2007 11:12 pm |
|
CajunRick wrote:Maybe this nun needs to be given a printed copy of this document [Catechesi Tradendae].
To which she would perhaps reply, “But I’m not teaching catechism.”
David
|
|
|
Kayla
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | Emmitsburg, Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 364 |
| First Name: | Kayla | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Atheist, kind-of Mormon, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 12th, 2007 08:42 pm |
|
David W. Emery wrote: CajunRick wrote:Maybe this nun needs to be given a printed copy of this document [Catechesi Tradendae].
To which she would perhaps reply, “But I’m not teaching catechism.”
David
Haha, I could imagine this being her exact response.
I think I am simply going to bring my catechism with me to class from now on and should she begin teach anything so clearly against Church teaching, I will quote the catechism and then quietly listen to what she has to say in response.
____________________
I believe, Lord, help my unbelief.
Jesus, I trust in You!
There's not a lot of job security for us after death. I suppose that's one advantage of being a philosopher. - Peter Kreeft
http://kayla23mount.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
TotusTuus
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 31st, 2006 |
| Location: | Alabama USA |
| Posts: | 118 |
| First Name: | Mark | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic (thanks Mom and Dad!) |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 16th, 2007 11:21 am |
|
I'm a little skeptical of the idea that Luke was Mary's "personal physician" (although I find no reason to doubt he had direct access to her recollections: "But Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart" Lk 2). Is there some historical basis for this?
After all, Our Lady was preserved from Original Sin and it's effects. She was, then, in the same state of Original Justice which Adam and Eve were before the Fall. She would not have been subject to sickness.
It is possible that, like her Son, she suffered some external wound or attack but I think that is unlikely, due to divine providence.
Just a thought ...
____________________
TTM!
|
|
|
Current time is 09:10 pm | |
|
|
|
|
|
