 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Prodigal Daughter
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 200 |
| First Name: | Deborah/PD | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptized Catholic, received First Communion, left during Confirmation year. ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 26th, 2006 10:36 am |
|
Last night we were listening to a sermon by my brother-in-law who is a pastor of an Evangelical church. This church puts sermons on their website making them available for anyone who desires to hear them. The sermon was about the virgin birth.
For the most part, the sermon was true however he did make a few statements which were definitely heretical. As my husband and I discussed it, we decided that it would not be prudent at this time to address the heresy considering the delicate nature of the relationship and the effect of our recent re-version. However, my brother-in-law did make a statement in his sermon which was untrue about the Catholic Church. He said that the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was “made up” by Pope Pius in 1854.
In regard to this statement, my husband has written an e-mail to his brother that he has not yet sent. I would appreciate hearing how those of you who have Evangelical family members respond in these kinds of situations. I know Marcus Grodi often says “Charity in all things,” but like Rick said about the chat a few weeks ago “When someone says false things about something I love, I will not keep silent.”
____________________
"Man should tremble, the world should vibrate, all Heaven should be deeply moved when the Son of God appears on the altar in the hands of the priest."
St. Francis of Assisi
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 2282 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 26th, 2006 11:35 am |
|
This is the perennial chicken-and-egg question: Do I respond best by speaking or by keeping silent?
The traditional answer, that given by St. Francis of Assisi, is to “preach the gospel always; when necessary, use words.” Yes, we say, but how do we know when to use words? St. Francis has told us, if we will listen. We are to use words “when necessary.” Until it becomes a necessity, then, words should not be used.
Clearly your brother-in-law misunderstands the function of the papacy and the process of defining dogma. If he understood these, he would see that what he said does not make sense.
The question is whether the truth about these things can be conveyed to an Evangelical. There is a clear danger that he will misunderstand the explanation as well due to his preconceived notions about the Catholic Church, or reject whatever you say out of hand, just because it is a Catholic speaking. So is it advisable to say anything? Basically, it depends on exactly what you intend to say and how you think he will take it.
You also quote Marcus and Rick with seemingly opposite viewpoints. Yet I know that both have applied (as I have, too) the verse from Ephesians that shows how to use words to achieve unity: “Speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love” (Eph. 4:15–16).
Again, you use the word “heresy” several times. What you say is literally true; after all, your brother-in-law is a clergyman in a “heretical sect,” so one could expect him to be “heretical.” But is this the best approach? The Decree Unitatis Redintegratio from Vatican II points the way (1.3): “The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.” The document goes on to speak of ecclesial unity and the ecumenical movement.
Might I suggest that, leaving aside the notion of “heresy,” you explain to your brother-in-law on a peer-to-peer basis the reason for your concern, allowing him to see that your beliefs are different than he has characterized them, even though he may continue to accept the idea that Catholicism is wrong.
In other words, lay out before him what you believe but do not try to tell him that you are right and he is wrong. Let him figure that out for himself. Yes, it will take some time for the truth to sink in, but at least there is the possibility that it will be assimilated. The other way — “I’m right and you’re wrong” — allows no possibility of acceptance. Does this make sense?
David
|
|
|
Prodigal Daughter
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 200 |
| First Name: | Deborah/PD | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptized Catholic, received First Communion, left during Confirmation year. ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 26th, 2006 12:25 pm |
|
“The children who are born into these Communities and who grow up believing in Christ cannot be accused of the sin involved in the separation, and the Catholic Church embraces upon them as brothers, with respect and affection. For men who believe in Christ and have been truly baptized are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect.”
My brother-in-law is an ex-Catholic as are the senior pastor most of the elders and almost 2/3 of their 500 member chruch. Does this statement apply to them?
Thank you for your comments about when to use words and when to keep silent. These are things which we should ponder before responding in haste.
____________________
"Man should tremble, the world should vibrate, all Heaven should be deeply moved when the Son of God appears on the altar in the hands of the priest."
St. Francis of Assisi
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 2282 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 26th, 2006 01:28 pm |
|
“Ex-Catholics” are a special problem, as you are discerning. I believe their inclusion among those “who are born into these Communities” can be asserted in some cases, where their previous Catholicism was so nominal and attenuated that for all practical purposes they were not Christians, even though baptized. Effectively, they met Christ for the first time outside the Catholic Church. Others, however, have been drawn into separated communities by prejudicial considerations. In some cases, this has to do with a refusal to recognize the sin in their own lives, instead denouncing the Catholic position as hypocritical; in others, it is more a case of Evangelical propaganda having an effect. Basically, then, I think we have to judge these matters on a case-by-case basis.
The fact that your brother-in-law is an ex-Catholic does not change the law of charity, and I still believe the idea of presenting your case without the implication that he is “wrong” in what he said is your best chance of success. Nor should he be urged to refrain from such talk on the ground of “civility.” He clearly believes Catholicism to be wrong. The way to prove him wrong is to live according to the truth, not just talk about it. If he is at all open to the truth, he will see it and respond accordingly; you are close enough to have an influence in this manner. If he is not open, your telling him will make no difference.
David
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 26th, 2006 01:36 pm |
|
Dear Prodigal Daughter,
I couldn't help but understand how you must have felt while your brother-in-law was teaching his sermon. I have felt very uneasy lately when the subject of "Mary" comes up in my church. Perhaps, beknownst or unbeknownst to your brother-in-law, he was preaching to you and your husband.
As I was looking up a verse regarding this matter, the Holy Spirit directed me to another verse first, that I think is very apropos. It is in I Peter 3:16: (beginning with the latter part of verse 15): Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is within you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence; and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame." I believe that we all need to be ready to defend our faith, yet the attitude with which we do it is of utmost importance. If we do it without love, without the Holy Spirit's guidance, without compassion, without the attributes of God, then our message will fall on deaf ears and result in being unproductive. I think our attitude should always be that we want our message to be planted in "good soil."
Now the verse I actually was looking for in the first place is in II Peter 3: 15 & 16: "So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures." Many people fall into this category of "ignorant." I think that I have been ignorant of Catholic teaching and only within the last several months have I begun to understand these teachings. It is as if scales have been falling from my eyes. In a similar way, your brother-in-law is unknowledgable regarding the Catholic teaching on Mary. I think, at the root of it all, is the spirit of the Reformation. The fruit of the Reformation is rebellion against the Catholic Church. And your brother-in-law, by refuting, disproving, and repudiating (in his own eyes) the teaching of the Catholic Church on Mary, bolsters his stance. He is justified in living in rebellion against the Catholic faith and therefore, emboldened and convinced that he can be a "little pope" so to speak. Now how much of this is conscious on his part, I do not know. Protestantism can be a tough cookie to crack. However, if he is a bitter ex-Catholic, he may be aware of his motive to dissuade others from being drawn to the Catholic faith.
Also, if your brother-in-law is like many Evangelicals, he probably accepts other Protestants within various denominations, even though they many not agree on several doctrines. However, the one thing they can unite in is their rebellion toward the Catholic Church. This is the fruit of the Reformation and it is central, especially in Fundamentalist and Evangelical circles. To speak against, disavow and shun Catholicism is almost a tenet in these circles. I say this with much sorrow, knowing I once belonged to this mindset. I think this is how I can understand it so well. To even consider that the Catholic Church might be right is bordering on denying your faith. It is a very serious matter. Jesus' desire is that "we would all be one, even as He and the Father are one." Isn't the spirit of the Reformation, with all its splits and doctrines, going against the very longing and desire of Jesus? And isn't the result of this rebellion against that unity, which could have been, had the Reformation never happened?
P.D., I will pray that the Holy Spirit guides you and your husband in this matter. Afterall, PRAYER is a vital and necessary component in this undertaking. I would dare say, that PRAYER is a pre-requisite to doing anything that is spiritual. I'm sure that you desire your message to fall upon "good soil." This can be accomplished if the Holy Spirit is guiding you, and your hearts are filled with love and compassion.
May God's blessing be with you and your husband.
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
Prodigal Daughter
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 200 |
| First Name: | Deborah/PD | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptized Catholic, received First Communion, left during Confirmation year. ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 26th, 2006 08:18 pm |
|
Thank you Darlene. You are very articulate and insightful when it comes to these issues and I appreciate that. I hope you Christmas was good. I tried to call. Did you get my message? I will be around this week if you want to give me a ring. God bless.
Deborah
____________________
"Man should tremble, the world should vibrate, all Heaven should be deeply moved when the Son of God appears on the altar in the hands of the priest."
St. Francis of Assisi
|
|
|
Darlene
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Pocono Mountains, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 868 |
| First Name: | Darlene | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Christian, trusting His love and forgiveness |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 26th, 2006 10:47 pm |
|
P.D.,
I didn't get your message. I will be around tomorrow and will give you a call at some point.
Darlene
____________________
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. II Corinthians 13:14
|
|
|
BettyBoopToo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Camas/Washougal, Washington USA |
| Posts: | 538 |
| First Name: | Betty | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Fist Baptist/Calvary Babtist/Secular Confusion/ Roman Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 12:33 am |
|
Dear PD: Hope you & your's had a very merry Christ-Mas
I was just reading an article the other day that I thought you may find interesting. It is written by a Catholic Source about Martin Luther so You may want to Look into the particular Serman at a web-site that is Lutheran or Protestant to use as your reference if you use the information in any dialogue with your brother in-law. Here's just a snippit from the article.
Probably the most astonishing Marian belief of Luther is his acceptance of Mary's Immaculate Conception, which wasn't even definitively proclaimed as dogma by the Catholic Church until 1854. Concerning this question there is some dispute, over the technical aspects of medieval theories of conception and the soul, and whether or not Luther later changed his mind. Even some eminent Lutheran scholars, however, such as Arthur Carl Piepkorn (1907-73) of Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, maintain his unswerving acceptance of the doctrine. Luther's words follow:
It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin" (Sermon: "On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God," 1527).
She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin—something exceedingly great. For God's grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil. (Personal {"Little"} Prayer Book, 1522).
http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=788
I'm sorry if I bore everyone with my constant ML resources, I've found that ML may have began the reformation but he most certainly would be horrified with the current situation in much of our protestant Brother's & Sister's theology. I'm afraid that many of the interpretations have been based on "The Catholic Church Teaches Black so we Teach White". I struggle with many of their posistions. If Luther was correct on his reformed theology then why are not all protestants Lutherans? For myself I felt it very illogical that the Christian Church was in complete heresy and error for the first 1,500 years. I've read in the ECF's and they all or many of them believed in the immaculate conception, Many issues that were not confirmed as a Dogma we're beliefs that were universally held by christians, Not until they were chanllenged did the church believe the needed to make a dogmatic ruleing on it.
Here is another site you may want to take a look at.http://www.scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html#tradition-II
I agree with the others on keeping your dialogue charitable and I also have found that some if approached in a careful manner, As in Sharing something that you've learned about the immaculate conception. "Did you know that ML believed in the immaculate conseption and many of the other reformers did too". Arming yourself with fair & accurate information and dates is very important, Doing some research as to when protestants started rejecting the doctrine, etc.
PD: I know how delicate these conversations can be, I'll be praying for you and your husband. If it is not time for the discussion than maybe God willing the perfect time will arise in the future.
God Bless
Betty
____________________
Patience
"Whenever anything disagreeable or displeasing happens to you, remember Christ crucified and be silent."
St. John of the Cross
|
|
|
Prodigal Daughter
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 200 |
| First Name: | Deborah/PD | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptized Catholic, received First Communion, left during Confirmation year. ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 10:45 am |
|
Thank you Betty. I always appreciate sources from ML. I think it is powerful to quote the "Prince of the Reformation" since he is considered a hero by most protestants and they are more likely to listen to his Catholic beliefs than to an actual Catholic source.
Just to keep y'all updated, Russ did e-mail his brother but took a more indirect approach. He decided to blog about the experience and then e-mailed his brother a copy of the blog. The blog post was not inflammatory at all and just basically addressed the idea of how doctrine becomes dogma.
Today he received a comment from a regular reader of hi blog who is a reformed friend from college. This gentleman asked, "What are the implications of the Immaculate Conception?" So I'm on my way to another area of the CHN forum where I will look for the answer to that question.
Thank you all for your prayers!
____________________
"Man should tremble, the world should vibrate, all Heaven should be deeply moved when the Son of God appears on the altar in the hands of the priest."
St. Francis of Assisi
|
|
|
BettyBoopToo
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Camas/Washougal, Washington USA |
| Posts: | 538 |
| First Name: | Betty | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Fist Baptist/Calvary Babtist/Secular Confusion/ Roman Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 07:22 pm |
|
Hello again PD
I was wondering if maybe an explanation of Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant would be something that our Separated Bros & Sisters could understand better.
I really was not a very good protestant I guess either, I was kind of a Cafateria Protestant. I picked and chose my own beliefs and stuck with them. Most were not attaced to any certain denomination.
When I read about Mary being the Ark of the new Covenant, I had just found it more understandable. I'm not sure if this belief would be outrages for a protestant to wrap their head around though.
I guess Nomatter what every conversation rolls around to Authority, Or atleast from my understanding of others it's so. I'm as guilty as the next, I rejected authority in my past too. I am so grateful to God that all the doubts and questioning are over. Submission of my own will has been one of the greatest Graces the Lord has given me. Once I commited myself to His Will and not my own, It was like the scales fell from my eyes and my heart. I just don't know how to help others do the same. It is one thing when our family & friends reject the truth and entirely another when they reject a distorted version or out & out untruth of what Holy Mother Church Teaches.
I just know it had to be very difficult for you & your husband to convert, especially with a protestant pastor as his brother.
God Bless you & keep you
Betty
____________________
Patience
"Whenever anything disagreeable or displeasing happens to you, remember Christ crucified and be silent."
St. John of the Cross
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 07:49 pm |
|
How far back can this belief be traced?
How can it be so important and still be never mentioned in the Bible?
Why are the only defenses of that doctrine which I've heard, sound gnostic?
|
|
|
CajunRick
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 07:54 pm |
|
Incognito wrote: How far back can this belief be traced?
If you're talking about the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, other than the references in scripture, the first written evidence that has survived that I could find is from 244 AD. Read the debate on Scripture Catholic titled "Anti-Catholic Attacks on Mary" for details. You can also read the Faith Fact from Catholics United for the Faith called "Mary Conceived Without Sin -- The Dogma of the Immaculate Conception," and tracts from Catholic Answers on the "Immaculate Conception and Assumption," and "Mary -- Full of Grace." The latter includes quotes from the Fathers dating to 70 AD. Although it does not specifically mention Mary's sinlessness from conception, it comments on Mary's lack of labor pains on delivery.
How can it be so important and still be never mentioned in the Bible?
Who ever said everything had to be in the bible? The bible certainly doesn't. Catholic Answers puts it like this:
Thus Paul tells the Corinthians, "I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I have delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2), and he commands the Thessalonians, "So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter" (2 Thess. 2:15). He even goes so far as to order, "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us" (2 Thess. 3:6).
You can read the entire tract on Apostolic Tradition, including quotes from scripture and the Fathers, here. You can also read a Faith Fact from CUF called "Sola Scriptura? Not According to the Bible" here.
You might also want to take a look at this tract from Catholic Answers called "Can Dogma Develop?"
Why are the only defenses of that doctrine which I've heard, sound gnostic?
Apparently because you haven't read good defenses.
Last edited on Wed Dec 27th, 2006 08:24 pm by
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 27th, 2006 08:12 pm |
|
I'm sorry, sure. The dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary.
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 01:14 am |
|
What is known about the Assension of Isaiah and the Odes of Solomon? I've never heard of them. What is their provenance? How good is the documentary evidence to suggest such early dates?
|
|
|
CajunRick
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 01:43 am |
|
Incognito wrote: What is known about the Assension of Isaiah and the Odes of Solomon? I've never heard of them. What is their provenance? How good is the documentary evidence to suggest such early dates?
That information is beyond my competance. I trust the source, so I'm willing to accept the authenticity of the dates and text.
You'll find the Odes of Solomon here, and the Ascension of Isaiah here. I believe they are both part of the Dead Sea Scrolls, the so-called "Lost Books of the Bible".
You'll find many other early writings at Early Christian Writings, and many more at Intratext.
|
|
|
Prodigal Daughter
Member
| Joined: | Wed Nov 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Lehigh Valley, Pennsylvania USA |
| Posts: | 200 |
| First Name: | Deborah/PD | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptized Catholic, received First Communion, left during Confirmation year. ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 11:17 am |
|
I was wondering if maybe an explanation of Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant would be something that our Separated Bros & Sisters could understand better.
Hi Betty,
Thank you for your Christmas blessings and good wishes. May God bless you and your family in the new year. Regarding the explanation of Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant, At first I thought it was a stretch, but as with other Catholic interpretations of scripture and explanations of doctrine, the concept has grown on me. In terms of offering this explanation to my brother-in-law, I don't know the conversation will go much further at this point. He hasn't written back to Russ since he sent his blog post. I do fear that my brother-in-law is becoming more and more anti-Catholic and that is disturbing to us especially when he uses his authority to espouse these views to so many others in his "flock." I didn't tell you all that was said in the sermon, but it was very disturbing and I do fear for the souls of the ex-Catholic leadership of that church. We covet all of your prayers for this intention.
God Bless,
PD(Deborah)
____________________
"Man should tremble, the world should vibrate, all Heaven should be deeply moved when the Son of God appears on the altar in the hands of the priest."
St. Francis of Assisi
|
|
|
Juan
Member
| Joined: | Tue Oct 17th, 2006 |
| Location: | Texas USA |
| Posts: | 247 |
| First Name: | unregister | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | unregister |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 01:15 pm |
|
How far back can this belief be traced?
Nearly to apostolic times.
How can it be so important and still be never mentioned in the Bible?
1. We are not a people of the Book. We are a people of the Word of God. For us, Divine Revelation comes in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture as interpreted by the Magisterium.
2. Jesus ascended in to heaven and left a fledging Church, His Body, with His authority on this earth. The first order of business was to get the Church up and going and to fulfill the mission of "making disciples of the World".
3. Although Jesus revealed everything, not everything was understood. He sent the Holy Spirit to remind us of what He had taught and lead us into all truth.
4. Mary was still alive long after Jesus ascended and no one had really focused on her role in Salvation History until after she passed to eternal life.
Why are the only defenses of that doctrine which I've heard, sound gnostic?
I have no idea. Provide what you call defenses and we can explain them to you in more detail.
Sincerely,
Juan
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 02:24 pm |
|
Juan wrote: How far back can this belief be traced?
Nearly to apostolic times.
Very interesting. I will want to examin the source documents for that claim.
Why are the only defenses of that doctrine which I've heard, sound gnostic?
I have no idea. Provide what you call defenses and we can explain them to you in more detail.
Ok, what I've heard was either that sin also is conveyed along the female line and not merely the male line like the Bible indicates, and that Jesus could never encounter anything stained by sin. It is this last one which seems gnostic.
Sincerely,
Juan
|
|
|
JillD
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Visalia, California USA |
| Posts: | 858 |
| First Name: | Jill | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | heathen, EvFree, Messianic, LC-MS, Catholic 2007 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 02:40 pm |
|
Incognito wrote: Why are the only defenses of that doctrine which I've heard, sound gnostic?
I've certainly heard the term "gnostic" before, and heard it defined, but in this conversation, what is meant by it? I'm following this conversation with interest, but am not sure how gnostic is being used. Thanks!
Jill
____________________
"I praise you, for I am wondrously made. Wonderful are our works! My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret." Ps 139
"Guard me, O Lord, from the hands of the wicked; preserve me from violent men." Ps 140
|
|
|
mg57
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 213 |
| First Name: | mg57 | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Infant Baptised Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 06:56 pm |
|
Yes, I'm wondering too Jill. It seems to mean different things according to who is using the term, and it's important to be as specific as possible when discussing these things.
Some fundamentalist Bible-only Christians might even apply that term to any sacramental church, as they misunderstand the development of doctrine - as Cardinal Newman wrote. Others who use the term may be thinking more in line with those who promote gnosticism like Elaine Pagels, who continually works to mainstream it's notions.
Both positions, in some measure, are attempting to re-construct, re-define and re-interpret what the early Church recognized as being authentically taught and passed on from Jesus to the Apostles in succession to us through the ages.
The unfortunate thing is, that they are doing all this going backwards, bereft of the historical experience of actually living in those times, plus (perhaps unwittingly) bringing along all the biases living in our time handicaps us with, and projecting those biases onto the data / historical record.
|
|
|
mg57
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 213 |
| First Name: | mg57 | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Infant Baptised Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 28th, 2006 07:08 pm |
|
P.S.
Understanding these things, ie., Apostolic Succession, early Church writings, will be crucial in light of carrying out the recommendations found in Vat II Unitatis Redintegratio Chapt. 2 & 3, and Gaudium Et Spes, and, Ut Unum Sint by Pope JP II.
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29th, 2006 01:12 am |
|
I might be using the term gnostic a little loosely in this case. But the idea that God the Son, incarnate in our Lady's womb, could never touch anything stained by sin, would prohibit his being born and lain in a manger, let alone touching lepers and walking the dusty, sheep and donkey manure-strewn trails of Galilee and Judea. In the Bible, the holy 'contaminates' the unclean, not the other way around.
|
|
|
Incognito
Member
| Joined: | Wed Dec 27th, 2006 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 19 |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Dec 29th, 2006 01:15 am |
|
Juan, we -are- a people of the Book.
Even in the liturgy of Word and Sacrament, God speaks, and we respond.
|
|
| | |
