Page 5 of 6

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Sat Dec 10, 2016 10:22 pm
by Homer
Homer, I think you will find that few if any proponents of original sin hold that babies are born guilty of sin. Rather they hold that babies are born with a tendency to sin, with a sinful nature, this nature being inherited biologically from our original ancestors—Adam and Eve.
Then why the necessity of the "immaculate conception?

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2016 3:49 pm
by Paidion
My guess is that Catholic theology requires that in order for Jesus to have been born without the sinful nature inherited from Adam and Eve, both his parents (Mary and God) had to be without that nature.

I have been unable to find any sites that say that original sin refers to people being born guilty of sin. You may want to check out the following sites:

The Catholic Encyclopedia

Wikipedia

Matt Slick

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 1:12 am
by Homer
Paidion,

From Wikipedia doesn't this indicate that every child is born bearing the guilt of Adam's sin?
Original sin, also called ancestral sin, is the Christian doctrine of humanity's state of sin resulting from the fall of man, stemming from Adam and Eve's rebellion in Eden, namely the sin of disobedience in consuming from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This condition has been characterized in many ways, ranging from something as insignificant as a slight deficiency, or a tendency toward sin yet without collective guilt, referred to as a "sin nature", to something as drastic as total depravity or automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt.
There may be some Protestants with a harsher view than the Roman church. I do know the RC maintains that an unbaptized infant, though the infant may not go to hell, never the less will never see God.

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:36 pm
by Homer
Paidion,

Additional info from "The Teaching of the Catholic Church" by Josef Neuner, S.J., and Heinrich Roos, S.J., Chapter Five, Original Sin:
The original sin of the first man became the inherited sin of all men. Because of it man needs redemption, for he is guilty before God and needs a redeemer to make the atonement man owes to God.
Original sin does not consist of a weakening or corruption, of human nature as such, but is primarily 'sin' - that is, participation by every man in the state of guilt before God into which Adam entered by the first sin.
(My underlining)

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2016 3:29 pm
by dizerner
.

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:29 pm
by Paidion
Yes, Homer, the Wikipedia article does include "automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt" in the "drastic" end of the spectrum of understanding.

And yes, the quotes you made from Neuner and Roos's book, clearly teach inherited sin. Thank you for these references. I hadn't encountered that teaching before. As long as I remember, I have understood "original sin" as referring to inherited sinful natures, that is, natures with a tendency to sin, but not the inheritance of sin itself.

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2017 5:26 am
by Jim
TK wrote:I meant to add that the "hellishness" of the mass is the idea of the repeated sacrifice on Calvary. I thought He died once for all (Rom 6:10). Of course I don't think anything of the sort is really happening at the mass; but that fact that millions believe this is pretty morbid.
Wow, talk about a miss understanding of the Eucharist. You do understand that the sacrifice on Calvary is NOT repeated. What is received in the Eucharist is the feast after the sacrifice. See the OT were the Priest (all of us now) eat the lamb after the sacrifice was offered up to God. This OT shadow is now realized in the Eucharist, which Christ Jesus Himself gives to us. We, as Christians, always give back, offer back up to God in thanksgiving and praise, what He has given.

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Sat Jan 14, 2017 5:42 am
by Jim
TK wrote:Alan-

What about the idea that Mary was born w/o original sin (Immaculate conception?) and that she was sinless during her lifetime? I have heard this is a doctrine held by Catholics but perhaps not. I also think there is a belief that she was taken up to heaven bodily (the Assumption, I believe).
I agree that the Immaculate conception is wrong and unnecessary doctrine for those who hold to the view of ancestral sin instead of the western concept of Original Sin. She suffered the consequences of the fall just as all of us (death and corruption), but I also believe that she of all of the women in history, was able to choose not to sin through her obedience and purification that took place as she lived at the Temple. It is believed the purpose of Israel was to raise a woman that would say yes or could say yes and be the new Eve. Christ Jesus took from the Theotokos a body and healed human nature in Himself. If, as St Athanasius said is true, that which is not assumed is not redeemed, then Christ had to take on our fallen nature and heal it (by our stripes he heals us), which if the Catholic dogma is true then human nature is not redeemed because Christ has not taken on our nature.

My main beef with the immaculate conception is it harms the incarnation.

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Sun Dec 09, 2018 8:00 am
by BrotherAlan
The recent discussion on prayer to the saints (under "Roman Catholicism") reminded me of this thread that we had last year...went back and looked at this and saw that there were some issues still 'hanging' out there...

The great American bishop, Fulton Sheen, who, back in the 1950's, had a prime-time TV show in the United States to teach the Catholic Faith (think of that! Regardless of whether one is Catholic or not, the fact that ANY religious figure back in the 1950's had a PRIME-TIME TV show demonstrates how VERY different our culture is TODAY! Can you IMAGINE any pastor or bishop from ANY denomination trying to do the same today!? I digress...) As I was saying, Fulton Sheen once said, "There are not 100 persons in the United States who hate the Catholic Faith; there are, however, millions of persons who hate what they have MISTAKENLY believed to be the Catholic Faith!" Well, perhaps the good bishop was exaggerating a little bit; but, the point he is making is well-taken (by me, anyway), namely, that there is a *LOT* of ignorance, even, today, among Catholics themselves, about what the Catholic Church ACTUALLY teaches and what Catholics ACTUALLY believe. Without intending any offense to the intelligence and education of anyone who was currently participating in this thread last year, looking back at it now, I am reminded of Fulton' Sheen's statement: for, this thread is filled with common, but, still, wrong, misconceptions and mistakes about Catholic teaching and practice.

First, with regard to the last statement about the Catholic Church's teaching on the Immaculate Conception denigrating against the Incarnation: as the Catholic Church just celebrated the feast of Mary's Immaculate Conception yesterday (Dec. 8), I thought I would say a word on this. First, any concern I, personally, have heard from a non-Catholic about the teaching about Mary's Immaculate Conception was dealt with long ago by Catholic theologians (and, by "long ago", I mean CENTURIES ago, i.e., in the 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th centuries). In the development and formulation of this dogma, Catholic theologians, being well aware of the teaching of the Scriptures on the sinfulness of man and on the unique role that Christ, the sole Redeemer, plays in redeeming man, all men (including Mary), had to grapple with the question, "How can Mary be Immaculately Conceived if she was also, at the same time, one of the redeemed (as she herself declared when she praised God as being her very own Savior)?" Without going into all that took place over several centuries to work that out (Catholic theologians, back then, basically bringing up the same objections that I hear from non-Catholics TODAY-- showing that the Catholic theologians who helped towards the development of this doctrine were not stupid and, again without intending any offense, the bringing up of the exact questions on this matter by non-Catholics today is a form of "re-inventing the wheel", for Catholic theologians have, like I said, long ago considered all of these potential objections to the teaching that Mary was conceived without any sin, personal or original), the Catholic Church's teaching on the Immaculate Conception is simply this (the following quote is the exact definition given by Pope Pius IX in 1854 to define what the Catholic Church believes about the Immaculate Conception of Mary):
"We declare, pronounce, and define that the doctrine which holds that the most Blessed Virgin Mary, in the first instance of her conception, by a singular grace and privilege granted by Almighty God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, is a doctrine revealed by God and therefore to be believed firmly and constantly by all the faithful."
Now, a few comments on this. First, the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception states that Mary, by a special privilege, was preserved free from all stain of original sin, i.e., she was conceived with grace (and, earlier on, the Pope teaches that the reason for this special privilege was that Mary was called by God to be the mother of Christ, Who is God; thus, to make her a fitting mother for Christ, it was fitting that she herself be conceived in grace and, thus, preserved from all sin, including original, which is to say simply that she was conceived with God's grace; this privilege of hers, like all her privileges, given to her solely due to her special relationship to Christ and the dignity that belongs to CHRIST; all "Marian dogmas" of the Catholic Church have, at heart, a concern to PRESERVE, not take away from, the infinite dignity of CHRIST, the God-Man). The Pope is also stating that this doctrine is revealed by God (if you are asking, "Where is it revealed by God?", the Pope gives a summary of the Scriptural teachings on this matter here: http://www.piustheninth.com/apps/app12.htm)

Secondly, and very importantly, in response to the concern that the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception takes away from the Incarnation (again, a concern that Catholic theologians themselves had prior to the formal definition of the dogma), the Pope, Pius IX, teaches that this special privilege of Mary to have been conceived in God's grace (unlike the rest of us who are conceived without God's grace), was given to her-- very important to note!-- "in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race". Let me repeat that, as it is of paramount importance in order to understand properly this teaching (and to see how this teaching does NOT take away from the importance of the Incarnation but, actually, manifests the great POWER of the Incarnation of Christ, the Son of God): the Pope taught that Mary's special privilege of being conceived in grace, i.e., immaculately conceived, was given to her "in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Savior of the human race."

This is so important to understand, for, like I said, it not only preserves the indescribable importance of the Incarnation, but, even more than that, it EMPHASIZES the Incarnation's importance EVEN MORE, and this in at least two ways. First, this teaching shows that Mary being Immaculately Conceived was a privilege given to her by the INCARNATE Christ; for, the Pope, Pius IX, taught that God granted this privilege to Mary because of the merits of Christ (the Savior of the human race, as the Pope reminds us here in this very definition of Mary's Immaculate Conception). In other words, God, foreseeing the merits of Christ, in His human nature, which were won for the human race on Calvary, takes those merits, which were won, in time, after Mary's Conception but which, by God's power, can be applied back in time to Mary's Conception, and God does just that-- He applies the merits of the Incarnate Christ back in time to Mary at her Conception, God, again, having the power to do so for He is eternal, and outside of time. Thus it is that the POWER of the Incarnation is preserved in this dogma.

More than that, the dignity of the Incarnate Christ is emphasized in this teaching for, again, according to Catholic theology, the reason why God granted this privilege to Mary was precisely because of the infinite dignity of Christ, the God-Man, the Incarnate God. On this point, I will quote Pope Pius IX again, from the same document, as he wrote: "It was quite fitting that, as the Only-Begotten has a Father in heaven, whom the Seraphim extol as thrice holy, so he should have a Mother on earth who would never be without the splendor of holiness." Thus it is that, in defining the Immaculate Conception, the Pope's concern was to HIGHLIGHT, not take away from, the importance of the Incarnation. The Immaculate Conception of Mary was fitting PRECISELY because of the infinite dignity that is due to the Incarnate Christ: only a mother who had NO contact with ANY sin whatsoever (whether personal or original) could be a FITTING Mother for such as One as the Incarnate God, Jesus Christ, the Savior of the race.

I hope that makes sense. At the very least, I hope it spurs some on to consider and study more deeply the teachings of the Catholic Church (on this, and other, matters) for, at one point or another in the long history of the Catholic Church, Catholic theologians have PROBABLY considered, and responded to, any objections or concerns you may have with respect to Catholic teaching.

Lastly, and quickly, with regard to the oft-repeated charge of "Mariolotry" (so often repeated, it has become, quite frankly, rather tedious to hear), I will simply repeat Christ's words, "Do not judge by appearance, but judge with just judgment," and the Holy Spirit's words, "Man sees the appearance, but the Lord looks into the heart." That is, to commit the sin of idolatry, one must worship a creature as if he/she were God, which is to say that one believes, IN ONE'S MIND and HEART, that such a one is equal to, or superior to, the true God. This NO true Catholic does (for, if one WERE to do that, one would, by the very act of doing that, CEASE to be a true Catholic, for a true Catholic worships only one God, the Triune God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit; and there is absolutely NO confusion in the minds and hearts of true Catholics on this point, and it is, again, quite offensive that those who are, currently, OUTSIDE of this family of the Catholic Church and, thus, obviously ignorant of the authentic teachings of the Church, not to mention being ignorant of what is going on in the minds and hearts of Catholics when they pray, feel the authority to pass judgment on Catholics in their love and honor offered to the Mother of Christ, contrary to the Lord's very serious command to "Judge not"!) So, whatever a Catholic may do EXTERNALLY to show love of Mary-- eg., praying vocal prayers to her, kissing her statues, etc.-- is done with the INTERNAL recognition that she is NOT God (the only God being, again, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and EVERY "cradle Catholic" knows this fundamental truth from pretty much before he/she learns how to walk!), but, rather, she is the *creature* most blessed by God, having been filled with God's grace for the sake of being the Mother of the Son of God (He Who IS God). Religion, we must remember, involves BOTH external acts AND internal acts-- but, it's PRIMARY acts are *internal*. I suggest that those who persist in accusing Catholics of so-called "Mariolotry", DESPITE the repeated explanations by CATHOLICS themselves that they do NOT believe Mary is God (and, thus, the honor we offer to her is NOT the same honor we would give to God, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, but, rather, is far, far, FAR beneath that honor due to the Triune God alone), as evidenced by these repeatedly expressed accusations against Catholics, may be falling into the error (and, perhaps, sin) of the Pharisees, who, though being men themselves, and not God, felt it their duty to judge the hearts of men, despite Christ telling us to not judge the hearts of others. Further, those who accuse Catholics of worshipping Mary as God based on some external actions may be, like the Pharisees, reducing religion to mere EXTERNAL practices, while failing to recognize the primacy of the INTERIOR acts of the mind and heart (in knowing and loving God, and all things/persons related to God) in the practice of the virtue of religion. If those outside the Catholic Church would simply, in charity, not to mention justice, BELIEVE Catholics when we say that we, from the day we were taught the Catholic Faith (sometimes from our very mothers' wombs!), are taught that there is only One God (Father, Son, and Spirit), and that Mary, the Mother of the Son of God, is the most exalted creature (and Daughter) of God, but, nevertheless, is still a creature, infinitely below God, and that we, ALL true Catholics, have these fundamental truths FIRMLY planted in our minds and hearts WHENEVER we render external honor of ANY kind to the Virgin Mary, if, I say, those outside the Catholic Church simply keep these things in mind when observing Catholics rendering honor to the Mother of Christ, He Who is God, then such non-Catholics will not fall into the error, condemned by Christ Himself, of "condemning the guiltless", i.e., those Catholics who, without guilt, but, rather, with much merit in the eyes of God, render love and honor to His most beloved creature and daughter, indeed, the very Mother of His Son, the Immaculate Virgin Mary. Amen.

In Christ, the Savior of the World and Son of the Immaculate Virgin Mary,
BrotherAlan

Re: ‘Together 2016’ Organizer Meets With ‘Pope Francis’ to U

Posted: Mon Dec 10, 2018 12:33 am
by Homer
BrotherAlan,

You provided a link regarding the Pope's "summary of the Scriptural teachings":
The Pope is also stating that this doctrine is revealed by God (if you are asking, "Where is it revealed by God?", the Pope gives a summary of the Scriptural teachings on this matter here:
I went to the link but I'm having difficulty finding scriptures in the Pope's statement that support the Pope's dogma. Perhaps you can indicate where in the bible I could find anything that would teach what the Pope says. I did find the following statement:
Hence, if anyone shall dare -- which God forbid! -- to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church; and that, furthermore, by his own action he incurs the penalties established by law if he should dare to express in words or writing or by any other outward means the errors he think in his heart.
This is a pretty serious threat. Again, I find nothing in the scriptures that would remotely support condemnation for not believing the Pope's dogma about Mary.