 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
BodRod
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 2nd, 2006 |
| Location: | Apple Valley, California USA |
| Posts: | 840 |
| First Name: | Cliff | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Raised an SDA, then Generic Christian, finally at home with ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 12:25 am |
|
| Did anyone else watch The Abundant Life the other night where the fellow who is taking a picture of Our Lady of Guadalupe around the world said that the picture showed the Lady as a certain number of days before childbirth and that matched up with Jesus being born on Dec. 25? Considering that Dec. 25 is a day designated for the recognition of the birth of Jesus and not the actual day of His birth, (Shepherds don't run their sheep out in the open in mid-winter.) how can the picture be used as a proof for the day of birth? OR, did I mis-hear him?
____________________
Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro.
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 2427 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 01:47 am |
|
Well, Criff, stigmatists usually have their stigmata in the palm of the hand, but the majority of scientists are convinced that the nails actually pierced Jesus’ wrists so they would be able to bear the weight without the nails ripping out. It may be that Mary, knowing that December 25th was already the established traditional date for the birth of her Son, decided to appear in that form, even though scientists are pretty sure the Christ child was not born on the winter solstice.
David
|
|
|
CajunRick
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| First Name: | | | Gender: | | | Faith History: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 02:05 am |
|
Maybe, like the stigmata, Mary's purpose in her apparitions is to affirm our faith, not fact. Which is more important?
|
|
|
BodRod
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 2nd, 2006 |
| Location: | Apple Valley, California USA |
| Posts: | 840 |
| First Name: | Cliff | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Raised an SDA, then Generic Christian, finally at home with ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 02:29 am |
|
| Facts develop and support faith, not the other way around.
____________________
Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro.
|
|
|
BodRod
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 2nd, 2006 |
| Location: | Apple Valley, California USA |
| Posts: | 840 |
| First Name: | Cliff | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Raised an SDA, then Generic Christian, finally at home with ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 02:33 am |
|
| David, do you suppose the stigmata is a psychological problem leading to a physical problem; sort of a religious post-partum?
____________________
Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro.
|
|
|
David W. Emery
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Brownsville, Texas USA |
| Posts: | 2427 |
| First Name: | David | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 03:01 am |
|
Are you asking whether the manifestation of the wounds of Christ is a “problem,” Criff? I certainly don’t see it as a problem. Rather, it points to the truth of our redemption.
Yes, there are those who have proposed that the stigmata are the result of some psychosomatic disorder. There is no evidence to support this; it is just speculation on the part of some people who do not accept stigmata as a sign of faith and so are looking for a naturalistic explanation on which to hang their ideological hat.
To take this inquiry a little further, what is the purpose of an apparition like that of Guadalupe? The Catechism states:
67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called “private” revelations, some of which have been recognized by the authority of the Church. They do not belong, however, to the deposit of faith. It is not their role to improve or complete Christ’s definitive Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a certain period of history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church, the sensus fidelium knows how to discern and welcome in these revelations whatever constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his saints to the Church.
So to denigrate a stigmatist’s wounds as being psychosomatic does not disturb the Christian faith but, on the contrary, merely shows the critic to be ignorant of what Christianity is about.
David
|
|
|
BodRod
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 2nd, 2006 |
| Location: | Apple Valley, California USA |
| Posts: | 840 |
| First Name: | Cliff | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Raised an SDA, then Generic Christian, finally at home with ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 10:42 am |
|
| I think we are looking at and interpreting my original question from different positions and, at the moment, I don't know how to bring our perceptions together. So, ..... I think I will just let it ride.
____________________
Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro.
|
|
|
Tina in Ashburn
Member
| Joined: | Mon May 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | Ashburn, Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 282 |
| First Name: | Tina | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Roman Catholic, Ukranian Catholic, presently practicing as Roman Latin ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 11:41 am |
|
I caught a bit of the program awhile ago, its a re-run right?
I'm familiar with the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe and its many significant details, such as the composition of the stars on her dress that match the winter sky's constellations, and the apparent pregnancy of Mary.
Cliff, your interesting question is why Our Lady would support December 25 as the date of Jesus' birth when there is speculation that is the true date. I think the point here is not precisely what date Jesus was born. The point is that Jesus WAS born, and born of Mary. This Guadeloupe image is a description of this.
Rick and David make the same point. Its not the physical specificities of stigmata and their placement that is important, but that Christ suffered physical wounds on our behalf.
So in a way, the precise details aren't as important always as the mysteries these details represent.
Facts support Faith, if the facts are true, yes. But the truths of the Faith are more important than certain details. The revelations of Mary of Agreda and those of Anna Catherine Emmerich do not agree in some of the details of the life of Christ etc. Yet these revelations have been deemed safe to read because neither deny any truths of the Faith. Its the truths of the Faith that are most important.
Also, throughout history, heaven "submits" to the earthly Church. This sounds weird... but when you consider that Jesus gave power to Peter to loose and bind [what you loose/bind on earth, will be loosed/bound in heaven], in effect, the Authority of the Church really comes from heaven after all. Jesus said that the decisions by the Church on earth will be followed in heaven!
Just as Jesus told the 10 lepers to show themselves to high priest first, Mary told Juan to go to the bishop - she could have easily ordered the angels to build the church she was requesting, but heaven honors the Authority of the Church. There are numerous examples of how heaven relates in this way to the earthly Church throughout apparitions and appearances. For instance Mary would not appear with a rosary of 19 decades when the Church has decreed that it is 20 today. The Authority of the Church is inspired by the Holy Spirit, and this relationship of heaven and earth is closely intertwined.
So if The Church has a Feast Day that honors the birth of Jesus on December 25, then Heaven also honors The Birth on that day.
...also, in regard to stigmata, I believe there are examples that stigmata can be psychosomatic and not proof of sanctity. This is why, just like being incorruptible after death, these signs are not PROOF of sanctity, but may be supporting evidence. However when a canonized person has the stigmata, the faithful may take lessons from this physical evidence of God's love for us. Consider St. Padre Pio's life and stigmata.
____________________
Tina
Arlington Diocese
|
|
|
paulr
Member
| Joined: | Mon Sep 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | Maple Falls, Washington USA |
| Posts: | 17 |
| First Name: | Paul | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifelong Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 12:21 pm |
|
On a side note, I can understand shepherds not pasturing their sheep during the winter in the greater part of North America and Europe, but in Israel, the 10-day forecast on the Weather Channel over Christmas has highs in the low 50's and lows in the high 30's. I suspect that most wolly sheep along with their well-prepared shepherds could put up with those conditions.
paul
____________________
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam
|
|
|
Annie
Banned
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | Columbus, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 731 |
| First Name: | Annie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | nothing, Quaker, Mennonite, Presbyterian, Methodist, Anglican, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 12:30 pm |
|
The shepherds don't stay with their sheep at night unless they are lambing, which would be in the spring. I think that's what people mean.
Countrily, redneckily,
Annie
____________________
Annie
Ora et labora
|
|
|
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: Wed Dec 19th, 2007 12:56 pm |
|
Tina in Ashburn wrote:
Also, throughout history, heaven "submits" to the earthly Church. This sounds weird... but when you consider that Jesus gave power to Peter to loose and bind [what you loose/bind on earth, will be loosed/bound in heaven], in effect, the Authority of the Church really comes from heaven after all. Jesus said that the decisions by the Church on earth will be followed in heaven!
I understand your point here Tina. But, one could misconstrue your statement. Afterall, the word/faith movement believes so much in this concept that they think Christians are "little gods" who can go around acting as though they have the same power and authority of Christ Himself. They believe they can just "speak God's word" and that will have the exact same result as if God spoke it Himself, resulting in God submitting to man.
Recently, I read a comment here in our forum that said Teresa of Calcutta said, "No Mary, no Jesus." I take it a step back further, no Jesus, no Mary. And, in response to your statement above, no God, no Church. The authority, first and foremost always lies with our Heavenly Father through Christ our Lord and the blessed Holy Spirit. "All things were made through Jesus Christ, and without Him was not anything made that was made."
While it is also true that God uses us for His purposes, He is not so dependent upon one particular person, so that if that person rejects Him, or is faithless, then His plans have failed. God will always accomplish what He intends to accomplish, regardless of the fallibility of human beings. Should one person called by God, begin a work in His name, and then turn back, God can and has been able to raise up another. When King Saul was faithless, God took the kingdom from him and gave it to another, namely David. So He was not so dependent upon Saul, that when Saul failed, His purposes would fail. He raised up another in Saul's place and God's purposes were fulfilled. And such is the testimony of history.
Authority begins and ends with God alone and we mere humans and all that He has created are subject to Him.
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
|
|
|
brian
Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Chicago South Burbs, Illinois USA |
| Posts: | 893 |
| First Name: | brian | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | methodist, evangelical, anglican, catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 20th, 2007 02:17 am |
|
Darlene, good to hear from you again!
I can not say I have anything to disagree with about your post, only to say that I agree about the authority and things always beginning with and ending in the authority and supremacy of God. However, from a Catholic perspective we certainly believe that God gave certain authority to the church that we are to submit to, and if we deny this it is not the humans we are failing to submit to, but God. This is what Paul probably means when he suggests we obey civil authorities as if put in place by God, or that slaves obey their masters. Of course, if anyone ever feels that they are being asked something immoral then they must obey their conscience I suppose and what they believe God is wanting them to do as Acts says 'we must obey God rather than man.' However, we think that through Divinely inspired scripture we see a clear mandate that while God is in authority over all including popes, Mary and whoever, the lay person is still called to live in peace and obedience to those God has called to shepherd over him/her. We see that God has entrusted authority to men to fotgive sins and to bind and loose and to lead us into truth. So, the authority lies in God to be sure, but that does not mean that we can simply jump over the hierarchy and simply obey God without obediently clinging to the unity of the apostolic flock. To seek to do so, I would argue is to disobey God.
Anyway, this I suppose is true for all, but moreso perhaps for those who are Catholic and convicted that the church is accurate and authoritative. If that does not describe you or others who are not yet fully convicted that the church is truth or are not Catholic, then I am not able to say what the case is or is not, only that you must do the best you can to live by your conscience until you discern what church authority you belong to if any.
Anyway, while I agree from you that theologically it is important to start and finish with God, from our perspective I believe it is wise to receive our direction from what the church prescribes or else be forever under the authority of our personal nterpretations.
Brian
|
|
|
Tina in Ashburn
Member
| Joined: | Mon May 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | Ashburn, Virginia USA |
| Posts: | 282 |
| First Name: | Tina | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Roman Catholic, Ukranian Catholic, presently practicing as Roman Latin ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Dec 20th, 2007 02:18 am |
|
Hey Darlene,
Darlene wrote:
I understand your point here Tina. But, one could misconstrue your statement.
you don't think that my saying "Jesus gave power to Peter " would give a hint to readers that God gave this power to the Church? 
"they think Christians are "little gods" who can go around acting as though they have the same power and authority of Christ Himself. "
how true... And Christians aren't the only ones. I know some bosses like this too. gaak.
Teresa of Calcutta said, "No Mary, no Jesus." I take it a step back further, no Jesus, no Mary.
Wouldn't you agree the reason St Teresa of Calcutta said this, was to point out the obvious that people already knew, which is 'no Jesus, no Mary'? Her point is that we would not have Jesus if Mary had not agreed to bear Jesus. Or said another way, Mary makes it easier for us to approach Jesus.
"authority, first and foremost always lies with our Heavenly Father through Christ our Lord and the blessed Holy Spirit. " Darlene you are stating the obvious again.
But I do want to make it very clear that God's Authority and the Church's Authority are so enter-twined as to be nearly indistinguishable. Obviously God is our Creator, and is "in charge". But God gives His power to the Church. So to us, the concrete touch-feel-hear that we humans need, is provided by the visible Church when she exerts her Authority. You know the concept of 'In Persona Christi" - that the priest speaks in the Person of Christ. This Authority is so enter-twined, that Jesus speaks through his priests. When a priest confects the Eucharist, he doesn't say "This is Jesus' body", he says "This is MY body". When we go to confession, the priest doesn't say "Jesus absolves you" but he says "I absolve you".
"Should one person called by God, begin a work in His name, and then turn back, God can and has been able to raise up another. When King Saul was faithless, God took the kingdom from him and gave it to another, namely David. So He was not so dependent upon Saul, that when Saul failed, His purposes would fail. He raised up another in Saul's place and God's purposes were fulfilled. "
Good one Darlene. This also brings to mind the terrible gap in the purpose of God when abortion occurs. When the person that was supposed to find the cure for AIDS for instance is aborted, how is this gap filled? Somehow, God writes straight with crooked lines and works good from evil.
And equally, where Eve failed us, God put Mary. It took awhile, but He came through for us with another person to fill that gap! And again, when the Jewish religion reached its fulfillment, Christ then gave us the Church.
One added point here. Since God gives Authority to the Church, and the Church is our visible Authority here on earth, God honors the chain of command. Compare this to the job - ever had upper management tell you to start with your own boss and work up the chain? When management puts in a chain of authority, it would be folly to allow employees to ignore the very authority they've put in place. What would be the point of putting the chain of command in if management plans to allow ignoring it? The same goes for the Church. Jesus instituted the Church and He honors its Authority, because He put it in place. God expects us to honor His Church and its Authority.
____________________
Tina
Arlington Diocese
|
|
|
Current time is 12:13 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
