Mary: Ark of the New Covenant (Biblical Evidences)
Dec 11, 2018 10:47:32 #
Rose42,
This is what we know on the Assumption of our Blessed Mother to Heaven.
08/15/2013What is the Historical Date for the Assumption of Mary?
Dr Taylor Marshall
https://taylormarshall.com/2013/08/what-is-historical-date-for-assumption-of-mary.html
For Catholics, the bodily assumption of Mary is a historical event.
The falling asleep of Blessed Mary and her assumption are just as historical as, say, the fact that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated or the fact that the St. Louis Cardinals won the 2006 World Series.
a. One day Mary’s body lay in a tomb.
b. The next day it did not.
c. When did this happen?
d. Which year?
The Tomb of Mary, assumption of Mary, Jerusalem, historical date, ?
The Tomb of Mary in Jerusalem at Mount Zion ?
In the fifth century, St Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem, told the holy Byzantine Empress Pulcheria:
“Although there is no account of the circumstances of Her death in Holy Scripture, we know about them from the most ancient and credible tradition.”
He sent to the empress the grave wrappings of the Theotokos from her tomb.
St Pulcheria then placed these grave-wrappings within the Blachernae church in Constantinople.
What is the Assumption of Mary?
The “ancient and credible tradition” of St Juvenal regarding the dormition and assumption of Mary recounts that when she came to the end of her life, she was translated body and soul to Heaven.
In this way she received the eschatological promise of the resurrection of the body.
This is fitting because she is an icon of the Church and Christ’s redemption of his mother prefigures the hope of all Christians.
That Mary was honored in this was is proper to love of Christ who fulfilled the commandment “Honor thy father and thy mother.”
The Eastern Orthodox refer to this day as the Dormition or the (“Falling Asleep, first fruits”) of the Blessed Mother.
Some have wrongly concluded that this means that the Orthodox Church does not teach the bodily assumption of Mary.
It is the first fruits of the eschatological fulfillment that will bring all of God’s creative and redeeming work to a close.
She is the vessel in which the Second Person of the Holy Trinity “took flesh” and became (a) man, in order to bestow salvation on the human race.
Her womb, “more spacious than the heavens,” contained the uncontainable One.
He drew his human existence from her, and she accompanied Him with love and prayer throughout the time of His earthly ministry, even to the foot of the Cross.
She shared His suffering to the full, bearing His crucifixion and death in the depths of her soul.
Accordingly, she is the perfect image of the Church, the eternal communion of all those who live and die in Christ.
Traditional Orthodox icons.
Of her “falling asleep,” therefore, focu's especially on her death and entombment.
The disciples, “gathered together from all the ends of the earth,” surround her in an attitude of grief and lament.
Behind the bier on which she is laid there stands her glorified Son, holding in His arms a child clothed in radiant white garments, an image of His Mother’s soul.
This is a theme of reversal.
On every Orthodox iconastasis there is found a sacred image of the Mother of God, holding in her arms her newborn child, the God-Man who “took flesh” in order to save and sanctify a fallen, sinful, broken world.
Here, in the icon of the Dormition ('falling asleep"), the Son embraces and offers to that world His Holy Mother, as she did Him at the time of His birth.
At her falling asleep He receives her soul, her life, in order to exalt it in Himself and with Himself, to the glory, beauty and joy of eternal life.
However, the Kontakion.
The kontakion is a form of hymn performed in the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholic liturgical traditions. The kontakion originated in the Byzantine Empire
For the feast of the Blessed Mother’s Dormtition ( "falling asleep ") Prayer reads:
Neither the tomb, nor death could hold the Theotokos,
From antiquity, Mary has been called "Theotokos", or "God-Bearer" (Mother of God)
Who is constant in prayer and our firm hope in her intercessions.
For being the Mother of Life,
She was translated to life by the One who dwelt in her virginal womb.
Note that the Eastern Church confesses that “neither the tomb, nor death” could hold the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ.
If Eastern and Western Church agree on the historical event of the assumption of Mary, has there been an attempt to discover the date at which it happened?
The Date of the Assumption
Let’s look a few clues pertaining to the life and death of Mary.
We know that she was alive at the death of Christ, because she stood at the foot of the cross.
At this point she was placed under the care of St. John, when Christ said, “Behold your mother.”
She was also present at Pentecost.
After that, there is only St. John’s biblical description of the “woman” in Rev 12 – more on this later.
Why is there little mention of Mary in Acts or the Epistles?
I believe that the New Testament speaks of the mysteries of the faith in clouded language on account of the fierce persecution that Christians received from both the Jews and the Romans.
Cases have been made that Galatians and 1 Peter,
Are basically tracts on baptism, despite the fact that baptism is only alluded to in the most minimal way.
The Gospel of John in particular is reluctant to spell out baptismal theology.
(John 3) or Eucharistic theology
(John 6), although it does so in a way that only an insider would “get it”.
Think also of John’s language about the “blood and the water”.
He’s making points for “insiders”.
Mary would have been revered, but to speak of her openly would have placed her danger.
The martyrdom of St. James the Greater is recorded in.
Acts 12:1-2 and the date of this event is safely placed at A.D. 43 or 44.
This was a Jewish persecution of the Christians.
It seems that this martyrdom further widened the growing separation between the incipient Jewish community of Christians within the synagogues of Palestine and the establishment of a separate “Way” that began to gain Gentile adherents.
The unique nature of the Church as distinct from Judaism would finally be ecclesiastically recognized at the Council Jerusalem in.
A.D. 49 or 50 (Acts 15).
Acts 12 shows the Jews in a fierce attempt to destroy those closest to Christ.
They kill James and imprison Peter (apparently with the intent to kill Peter, as well).
Here is where we turn to Church Tradition.
St. John had seen his brother St. James martyred, and St. Peter imprisoned.
Everyone knew that Christ’s inner circle consisted of Peter, James, and John.
They had killed James and captured Peter.
Obviously John was next on the hit list.
Tradition also indicates that the Jews sought to kill or disgrace the Mother of Christ.
So John took Mary and relocated to Ephesus sometime shortly after the martyrdom of his brother James. (A.D. 43 or 44).
Assumption of Mary in the AD 40s?
Thus Mary was still alive in AD 43 and so the falling asleep and assumption of Mary occurred sometime after this date.
The tradition is almost universal that her death and resurrection occurred in Jerusalem.
An alternate version has arisen from the visions of the Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich that Mary’s death, funeral, and assumption occurred in Ephesus.
Interestingly enough, Emmerich places the date of the assumption at A.D. 43 or 44.
One argument against dating the Assumption to the AD 40s is that St Luke interviewed Mary for his Gospel and it does not seem that St Luke was active within the Church in the early 40s.
Assumption of Mary in the AD 50s or 60s?
One tradition places the falling asleep of Mary after the conversion of St. Dionysius the Areopagite (a member of the council of the Areopagus) which occurred in.
Acts 17:34.
This kicks the date back into the 50s.
All the traditions place her Dormition “falling asleep' sometime after the other Apostles have gone out into the world, but before the death of the other Apostles (ca. A.D. 63).
I think Mary fell asleep at this time.
It fits the historical setting of most of the apocryphal legends retelling the Dormition “falling asleep' of Mary with the eleven living Apostles present and Peter celebrating her funeral.
Here is my list of reasons for placing the Dormition “falling asleep' at AD 63:
1. The Apostles (but not James “the Greater” Zebedee) are all still alive.
2. The great miracle of the Dormition and Assumption are not mentioned in Acts, something we might expect if it happened before the composition of Acts (A.D. 63).
3. The Book of Revelation seems to describe some sort of miraculous intervention of God meant to preserve the “the woman”.
4. I believe Revelation explains the seven year Jerusalem-tribulation leading up to the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Thus, A.D. 63 fits perfectly.
Her dormition “falling asleep' in AD 63 also allows for St Luke to interview her for his Gospel.
That is, Luke was able to gain the details of the Annunciation, Nativity, and Magnificat, etc. directly from the Blessed Virgin.
So I’m suggesting that Mary was assumed about A.D. 63 when Herod’s temple was finally finished.
This temple did not have the true Ark of the Covenant –
Because Mary was the true Ark of the Covenant enshrined not in the Herodian Temple, but in the Temple of the Catholic Church.
So the Assumption of Mary is a sort of “pre-tribulation” sign occurring before the seven years of (Roman-Jerusalem) gridlock culminating in the end of the Mosaic age –
The destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70.
This is what we know on the Assumption of our Blessed Mother to Heaven.
08/15/2013What is the Historical Date for the Assumption of Mary?
Dr Taylor Marshall
https://taylormarshall.com/2013/08/what-is-historical-date-for-assumption-of-mary.html
For Catholics, the bodily assumption of Mary is a historical event.
The falling asleep of Blessed Mary and her assumption are just as historical as, say, the fact that Abraham Lincoln was assassinated or the fact that the St. Louis Cardinals won the 2006 World Series.
a. One day Mary’s body lay in a tomb.
b. The next day it did not.
c. When did this happen?
d. Which year?
The Tomb of Mary, assumption of Mary, Jerusalem, historical date, ?
The Tomb of Mary in Jerusalem at Mount Zion ?
In the fifth century, St Juvenal, Patriarch of Jerusalem, told the holy Byzantine Empress Pulcheria:
“Although there is no account of the circumstances of Her death in Holy Scripture, we know about them from the most ancient and credible tradition.”
He sent to the empress the grave wrappings of the Theotokos from her tomb.
St Pulcheria then placed these grave-wrappings within the Blachernae church in Constantinople.
What is the Assumption of Mary?
The “ancient and credible tradition” of St Juvenal regarding the dormition and assumption of Mary recounts that when she came to the end of her life, she was translated body and soul to Heaven.
In this way she received the eschatological promise of the resurrection of the body.
This is fitting because she is an icon of the Church and Christ’s redemption of his mother prefigures the hope of all Christians.
That Mary was honored in this was is proper to love of Christ who fulfilled the commandment “Honor thy father and thy mother.”
The Eastern Orthodox refer to this day as the Dormition or the (“Falling Asleep, first fruits”) of the Blessed Mother.
Some have wrongly concluded that this means that the Orthodox Church does not teach the bodily assumption of Mary.
It is the first fruits of the eschatological fulfillment that will bring all of God’s creative and redeeming work to a close.
She is the vessel in which the Second Person of the Holy Trinity “took flesh” and became (a) man, in order to bestow salvation on the human race.
Her womb, “more spacious than the heavens,” contained the uncontainable One.
He drew his human existence from her, and she accompanied Him with love and prayer throughout the time of His earthly ministry, even to the foot of the Cross.
She shared His suffering to the full, bearing His crucifixion and death in the depths of her soul.
Accordingly, she is the perfect image of the Church, the eternal communion of all those who live and die in Christ.
Traditional Orthodox icons.
Of her “falling asleep,” therefore, focu's especially on her death and entombment.
The disciples, “gathered together from all the ends of the earth,” surround her in an attitude of grief and lament.
Behind the bier on which she is laid there stands her glorified Son, holding in His arms a child clothed in radiant white garments, an image of His Mother’s soul.
This is a theme of reversal.
On every Orthodox iconastasis there is found a sacred image of the Mother of God, holding in her arms her newborn child, the God-Man who “took flesh” in order to save and sanctify a fallen, sinful, broken world.
Here, in the icon of the Dormition ('falling asleep"), the Son embraces and offers to that world His Holy Mother, as she did Him at the time of His birth.
At her falling asleep He receives her soul, her life, in order to exalt it in Himself and with Himself, to the glory, beauty and joy of eternal life.
However, the Kontakion.
The kontakion is a form of hymn performed in the Orthodox and the Eastern Catholic liturgical traditions. The kontakion originated in the Byzantine Empire
For the feast of the Blessed Mother’s Dormtition ( "falling asleep ") Prayer reads:
Neither the tomb, nor death could hold the Theotokos,
From antiquity, Mary has been called "Theotokos", or "God-Bearer" (Mother of God)
Who is constant in prayer and our firm hope in her intercessions.
For being the Mother of Life,
She was translated to life by the One who dwelt in her virginal womb.
Note that the Eastern Church confesses that “neither the tomb, nor death” could hold the Mother of our Lord Jesus Christ.
If Eastern and Western Church agree on the historical event of the assumption of Mary, has there been an attempt to discover the date at which it happened?
The Date of the Assumption
Let’s look a few clues pertaining to the life and death of Mary.
We know that she was alive at the death of Christ, because she stood at the foot of the cross.
At this point she was placed under the care of St. John, when Christ said, “Behold your mother.”
She was also present at Pentecost.
After that, there is only St. John’s biblical description of the “woman” in Rev 12 – more on this later.
Why is there little mention of Mary in Acts or the Epistles?
I believe that the New Testament speaks of the mysteries of the faith in clouded language on account of the fierce persecution that Christians received from both the Jews and the Romans.
Cases have been made that Galatians and 1 Peter,
Are basically tracts on baptism, despite the fact that baptism is only alluded to in the most minimal way.
The Gospel of John in particular is reluctant to spell out baptismal theology.
(John 3) or Eucharistic theology
(John 6), although it does so in a way that only an insider would “get it”.
Think also of John’s language about the “blood and the water”.
He’s making points for “insiders”.
Mary would have been revered, but to speak of her openly would have placed her danger.
The martyrdom of St. James the Greater is recorded in.
Acts 12:1-2 and the date of this event is safely placed at A.D. 43 or 44.
This was a Jewish persecution of the Christians.
It seems that this martyrdom further widened the growing separation between the incipient Jewish community of Christians within the synagogues of Palestine and the establishment of a separate “Way” that began to gain Gentile adherents.
The unique nature of the Church as distinct from Judaism would finally be ecclesiastically recognized at the Council Jerusalem in.
A.D. 49 or 50 (Acts 15).
Acts 12 shows the Jews in a fierce attempt to destroy those closest to Christ.
They kill James and imprison Peter (apparently with the intent to kill Peter, as well).
Here is where we turn to Church Tradition.
St. John had seen his brother St. James martyred, and St. Peter imprisoned.
Everyone knew that Christ’s inner circle consisted of Peter, James, and John.
They had killed James and captured Peter.
Obviously John was next on the hit list.
Tradition also indicates that the Jews sought to kill or disgrace the Mother of Christ.
So John took Mary and relocated to Ephesus sometime shortly after the martyrdom of his brother James. (A.D. 43 or 44).
Assumption of Mary in the AD 40s?
Thus Mary was still alive in AD 43 and so the falling asleep and assumption of Mary occurred sometime after this date.
The tradition is almost universal that her death and resurrection occurred in Jerusalem.
An alternate version has arisen from the visions of the Venerable Anne Catherine Emmerich that Mary’s death, funeral, and assumption occurred in Ephesus.
Interestingly enough, Emmerich places the date of the assumption at A.D. 43 or 44.
One argument against dating the Assumption to the AD 40s is that St Luke interviewed Mary for his Gospel and it does not seem that St Luke was active within the Church in the early 40s.
Assumption of Mary in the AD 50s or 60s?
One tradition places the falling asleep of Mary after the conversion of St. Dionysius the Areopagite (a member of the council of the Areopagus) which occurred in.
Acts 17:34.
This kicks the date back into the 50s.
All the traditions place her Dormition “falling asleep' sometime after the other Apostles have gone out into the world, but before the death of the other Apostles (ca. A.D. 63).
I think Mary fell asleep at this time.
It fits the historical setting of most of the apocryphal legends retelling the Dormition “falling asleep' of Mary with the eleven living Apostles present and Peter celebrating her funeral.
Here is my list of reasons for placing the Dormition “falling asleep' at AD 63:
1. The Apostles (but not James “the Greater” Zebedee) are all still alive.
2. The great miracle of the Dormition and Assumption are not mentioned in Acts, something we might expect if it happened before the composition of Acts (A.D. 63).
3. The Book of Revelation seems to describe some sort of miraculous intervention of God meant to preserve the “the woman”.
4. I believe Revelation explains the seven year Jerusalem-tribulation leading up to the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Thus, A.D. 63 fits perfectly.
Her dormition “falling asleep' in AD 63 also allows for St Luke to interview her for his Gospel.
That is, Luke was able to gain the details of the Annunciation, Nativity, and Magnificat, etc. directly from the Blessed Virgin.
So I’m suggesting that Mary was assumed about A.D. 63 when Herod’s temple was finally finished.
This temple did not have the true Ark of the Covenant –
Because Mary was the true Ark of the Covenant enshrined not in the Herodian Temple, but in the Temple of the Catholic Church.
So the Assumption of Mary is a sort of “pre-tribulation” sign occurring before the seven years of (Roman-Jerusalem) gridlock culminating in the end of the Mosaic age –
The destruction of the Temple in A.D. 70.
Rose42 wrote:
Proof biblically?
It's been shown and proven so many times -biblically - how and why praying to Mary is idol worship. Read.
Proof biblically?
It's been shown and proven so many times -biblically - how and why praying to Mary is idol worship. Read.
Dec 11, 2018 10:57:16 #
jack sequim wa wrote:
Another soul lost in the satanic Roman Catholic church. Eternal separation from God.
Amen and Amen
Dec 11, 2018 10:59:07 #
Rose42 wrote:
The lies of Catholic doctrine on Mary have been exposed numerous times. When I think of how you and padre react to truth I think of these verses -
1 Peter 2:7-8
7 So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,
“The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,”
8 and
“A stone of stumbling,
and a rock of offense.”
1 Peter 2:7-8
7 So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe,
“The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone,”
8 and
“A stone of stumbling,
and a rock of offense.”
Amen and Amen
Dec 11, 2018 11:04:49 #
Rose42 wrote:
More evidence showing Mary is no ark of the new co... (show quote)
Thank you for that Rose42 I see that you having come out of the Roman Catholic Church and their lies have investigated fully and are well armed against their lies and half truths.
Dec 11, 2018 11:09:34 #
Doc110 wrote:
balmer, br br Your nothing but a Protestant yes-b... (show quote)
You can write or copy and post all that you want but the difference is I know the truth and you my friend are still blind. Even though you post page after page of your Roman Catholic Church diatribe you are as a blind man trying to lead others to safety while you are the one that is in the pit and unable to save anyone even yourself. Best that you read the scriptures and pray for understanding than to read all of the Roman Catholic Literature and be blind to the truth there Doc110.
Dec 11, 2018 11:22:36 #
bahmer wrote:
Thank you for that Rose42 I see that you having come out of the Roman Catholic Church and their lies have investigated fully and are well armed against their lies and half truths.
That info was from a link Zemirah put up. She's a wealth of information!
Dec 11, 2018 13:40:41 #
Rose42
She is a Protestant ditz just as you are.
Just providing lies and scriptural blind passages that don't amount to a hill of beans, they are totally taken out of context.
These articles have been posted for your benefit to understand the Bible better
1. What is Wrong With the Allegorical or Figuratively Interpretation Method ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147671-1.html
2. Does the Bible Contain Allegory ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147669-1.html
3. What is the law of first mention ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147665-1.html
4. What is Good Biblical Exegesis ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147659-1.html
5. What is Biblical Typology ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147655-1.html
6. What is Biblical Textualism?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147654-1.html
7. What is the difference between a Christocentric and a Christotelic hermeneutic ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147653-1.html
8. What does it mean that a biblical passage is descriptive rather than prescriptive ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147651-1.html
9. Why is it important to study the Bible in context ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147650-1.html
10 The Two Conflicting Approaches of Interrupting Hermeneutics; The Bible Exegesis and Eisegesis Viewpoints.
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147604-1.html
St. Vincent de Lerins: How to Distinguish the True Faith from Heresy
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n026rp_Lerins_PreserveFaith.htm
At the moment when many Catholics are making, or considering making, compromises with Progressivism regarding the New Mass and Vatican II, it seems to us opportune to remember the criteria to maintain the true Catholic Faith given by St. Vincent de Lerins.
Facing these compromises, Catholics are taking sides – “I will take the position of my team, not your team.”
This is a superficial approach.
Each one of us is individually responsible before God for the right or wrong position he takes.
St. Vincent de Lerins
In the 5th century, St. Vincent of Lerins saw that the people were faced with various errors and heresies of Donatus, Arius, Photinus, Pelagius and others, and gave them this good advice on how they could know with security the true Catholic Faith.
Even if it is taught by distinguished men or Prelates, the bad doctrine should not be accepted by Catholics, who should cling to Tradition and what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all [quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est].
“What (is) always, what (is) everywhere, what (is) by everybody (believed).”
Actually, he stated:
"I have continually given the greatest pains and diligence to inquiring, from the greatest possible number of men outstanding in holiness and in doctrine.
How I can secure a type of fixed and, as it were, general, guiding principle for distinguishing the true Catholic Faith from the degraded falsehoods of heresy.
"And the answer that I receive is always to this effect:
That if I wish, or indeed if anyone wishes, to detect the deceits of heretics that arise and to avoid their snares and to keep healthy and sound in a robust faith, we ought, with the Lord's help, to fortify our faith in a twofold manner.
First, that is, by the authority of God's Law,
Then, by the tradition of the Catholic Church.
"Here, it may be, someone will ask:
‘Since the canon of Scripture (The Bible) is complete, and is in itself abundantly sufficient, what need is there to join to it the interpretation of the Church?’
The answer is that because of the profundity itself of Scripture, all men do not place the same interpretation upon it.
The statements of the same writer are explained by different men in different ways, so much so that it seems almost possible to extract from it as many opinions as there are men.
Novatian expounds in one way,
Sabellius in another,
Donatus in another, Arius, Eunomius and Macedonius in another, Photinus, Apollinaris and Priscillian in another, Jovinian, Pelagius and Caelestius in another, and latterly Nestorius in another.
Therefore, because of the intricacies of error, which is so multiform, there is great need for the laying down of a rule for the exposition of Prophets and Apostles, in accordance with the standard of the interpretation of the Catholic Church.
"Now in the Catholic Church itself we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all.
That is truly and properly 'Catholic,' as is shown by the very force and meaning of the word, which comprehends everything almost universally.
We shall hold to this rule if we follow universality, antiquity, and consent.
We shall follow universality if we acknowledge that one Faith to be true which the whole Church throughout the world confesses;
Antiquity if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is clear that our ancestors and fathers proclaimed;
Consent, if in antiquity itself, we keep following the definitions and opinions of all, or certainly nearly all, Bishops and Doctors alike.
"What then will the Catholic Christian do ?
If a small part of the Church has cut itself off from the communion of the universal Faith?
The answer is sure.
He will prefer the healthiness of the whole body to the morbid and corrupt limb.
"But what if some novel contagions try to infect the whole Church, and not merely a tiny part of it?
Then he will take care to cleave to antiquity, which cannot now be led astray by any deceit of novelty.
"What if in antiquity itself two or three men, or it may be a city, or even a whole province be detected in error?
Then he will take the greatest care to prefer the decrees of the ancient General Councils, if there are such, to the irresponsible ignorance of a few men.
"But what if some error arises regarding which nothing of this sort is to be found?
Then he must do his best to compare the opinions of the Fathers and inquire their meaning, provided always that, though they belonged to diverse times and places.
They yet continued in the faith and communion of the one Catholic Church; and let them be teachers approved and outstanding.
And whatever he shall find to have been held, approved and taught, not by one or two only but by all equally and with one consent.
Openly, frequently, and persistently, let him take this as to be held by him without the slightest hesitation."
(The Vincentian Canon, in Commonitorium, chap IV, 434,
ed. Moxon, Cambridge Patristic Texts)
Posted July 21, 2007
Related Topics of Interest
The Motu Proprio, after the Emotions
https://www.traditioninaction.org/bev/088bev07-18-2007.htm
Pius IX: Ecumenism Is Synonymous with Religious Indifferentism
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n005rp_Indifferentism.htm
She is a Protestant ditz just as you are.
Just providing lies and scriptural blind passages that don't amount to a hill of beans, they are totally taken out of context.
These articles have been posted for your benefit to understand the Bible better
1. What is Wrong With the Allegorical or Figuratively Interpretation Method ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147671-1.html
2. Does the Bible Contain Allegory ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147669-1.html
3. What is the law of first mention ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147665-1.html
4. What is Good Biblical Exegesis ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147659-1.html
5. What is Biblical Typology ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147655-1.html
6. What is Biblical Textualism?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147654-1.html
7. What is the difference between a Christocentric and a Christotelic hermeneutic ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147653-1.html
8. What does it mean that a biblical passage is descriptive rather than prescriptive ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147651-1.html
9. Why is it important to study the Bible in context ?
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147650-1.html
10 The Two Conflicting Approaches of Interrupting Hermeneutics; The Bible Exegesis and Eisegesis Viewpoints.
https://www.onepoliticalplaza.com/t-147604-1.html
St. Vincent de Lerins: How to Distinguish the True Faith from Heresy
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n026rp_Lerins_PreserveFaith.htm
At the moment when many Catholics are making, or considering making, compromises with Progressivism regarding the New Mass and Vatican II, it seems to us opportune to remember the criteria to maintain the true Catholic Faith given by St. Vincent de Lerins.
Facing these compromises, Catholics are taking sides – “I will take the position of my team, not your team.”
This is a superficial approach.
Each one of us is individually responsible before God for the right or wrong position he takes.
St. Vincent de Lerins
In the 5th century, St. Vincent of Lerins saw that the people were faced with various errors and heresies of Donatus, Arius, Photinus, Pelagius and others, and gave them this good advice on how they could know with security the true Catholic Faith.
Even if it is taught by distinguished men or Prelates, the bad doctrine should not be accepted by Catholics, who should cling to Tradition and what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all [quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est].
“What (is) always, what (is) everywhere, what (is) by everybody (believed).”
Actually, he stated:
"I have continually given the greatest pains and diligence to inquiring, from the greatest possible number of men outstanding in holiness and in doctrine.
How I can secure a type of fixed and, as it were, general, guiding principle for distinguishing the true Catholic Faith from the degraded falsehoods of heresy.
"And the answer that I receive is always to this effect:
That if I wish, or indeed if anyone wishes, to detect the deceits of heretics that arise and to avoid their snares and to keep healthy and sound in a robust faith, we ought, with the Lord's help, to fortify our faith in a twofold manner.
First, that is, by the authority of God's Law,
Then, by the tradition of the Catholic Church.
"Here, it may be, someone will ask:
‘Since the canon of Scripture (The Bible) is complete, and is in itself abundantly sufficient, what need is there to join to it the interpretation of the Church?’
The answer is that because of the profundity itself of Scripture, all men do not place the same interpretation upon it.
The statements of the same writer are explained by different men in different ways, so much so that it seems almost possible to extract from it as many opinions as there are men.
Novatian expounds in one way,
Sabellius in another,
Donatus in another, Arius, Eunomius and Macedonius in another, Photinus, Apollinaris and Priscillian in another, Jovinian, Pelagius and Caelestius in another, and latterly Nestorius in another.
Therefore, because of the intricacies of error, which is so multiform, there is great need for the laying down of a rule for the exposition of Prophets and Apostles, in accordance with the standard of the interpretation of the Catholic Church.
"Now in the Catholic Church itself we take the greatest care to hold that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all.
That is truly and properly 'Catholic,' as is shown by the very force and meaning of the word, which comprehends everything almost universally.
We shall hold to this rule if we follow universality, antiquity, and consent.
We shall follow universality if we acknowledge that one Faith to be true which the whole Church throughout the world confesses;
Antiquity if we in no wise depart from those interpretations which it is clear that our ancestors and fathers proclaimed;
Consent, if in antiquity itself, we keep following the definitions and opinions of all, or certainly nearly all, Bishops and Doctors alike.
"What then will the Catholic Christian do ?
If a small part of the Church has cut itself off from the communion of the universal Faith?
The answer is sure.
He will prefer the healthiness of the whole body to the morbid and corrupt limb.
"But what if some novel contagions try to infect the whole Church, and not merely a tiny part of it?
Then he will take care to cleave to antiquity, which cannot now be led astray by any deceit of novelty.
"What if in antiquity itself two or three men, or it may be a city, or even a whole province be detected in error?
Then he will take the greatest care to prefer the decrees of the ancient General Councils, if there are such, to the irresponsible ignorance of a few men.
"But what if some error arises regarding which nothing of this sort is to be found?
Then he must do his best to compare the opinions of the Fathers and inquire their meaning, provided always that, though they belonged to diverse times and places.
They yet continued in the faith and communion of the one Catholic Church; and let them be teachers approved and outstanding.
And whatever he shall find to have been held, approved and taught, not by one or two only but by all equally and with one consent.
Openly, frequently, and persistently, let him take this as to be held by him without the slightest hesitation."
(The Vincentian Canon, in Commonitorium, chap IV, 434,
ed. Moxon, Cambridge Patristic Texts)
Posted July 21, 2007
Related Topics of Interest
The Motu Proprio, after the Emotions
https://www.traditioninaction.org/bev/088bev07-18-2007.htm
Pius IX: Ecumenism Is Synonymous with Religious Indifferentism
https://www.traditioninaction.org/religious/n005rp_Indifferentism.htm
Rose42 wrote:
That info was from a link Zemirah put up. She's a wealth of information!
That info was from a link Zemirah put up. She's a wealth of information!
Dec 18, 2018 20:53:39 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.