Robert F. Smith writes online book

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
_madeleine
_Emeritus
Posts: 2476
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _madeleine »

CaliforniaKid wrote:
Our Lady of Fatima wrote:“You saw hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them God wishes to establish in the world the devotion to My Immaculate Heart. If they do what I will tell you, many souls will be saved, and there will be peace. The war is going to end. But if they don't stop offending God, another and worse one will begin in the reign of Pius XI. When you shall see a night illuminated by an unknown light (the night of the 25th to 26th of January, 1938), know that this is the great sign God will give you that He is going to punish the world by means of war, hunger, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father. To prevent this, I come to ask for the consecration of Russia to My Immaculate Heart, and the Communion of reparation on the first Saturdays. If they listen to My requests, Russia will be converted, and there will be peace. If not, she will scatter her errors throughout the world, provoking wars and persecutions of the Church. The good will be martyred, the Holy Father will have much to suffer, and various nations will be annihilated.
“In the end, My Immaculate Heart will triumph. The Holy Father will consecrate Russia to Me, and she will be converted, and a certain period of peace will be granted to the world.”


To say that the above is non-public, non-binding, and wholly unoriginal seems like a real stretch. Maybe it is those things in the eyes of the institutional Church. But surely not in the eyes of a devotee.


It is a prophecy, which, is not required to be believed by any Catholic. But as I said, it most certainly is believed by millions, but not by church decree.

I think in regards to your topic of charismatics, there is in the Catholic church the teaching/belief of sensus fidelium. I would say this is the charismatic defintion in a Catholic framework. In relationship to Fatima, the sense of the faithful influences very greatly the devotions that are practiced.

From wikipedia:

While most Catholic doctrines and theological teachings either originate in scripture or are established by the higher levels of the Church hierarchy, sensus fidelium works from the ground up, from the beliefs of the masses of the faithful, not only as understood through the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Bible, but also as inspired by the Holy Spirit, which guides the faithful at large within the framework of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _Darth J »

MCB wrote:
hodgepodge of heresies...It is therefore not internally consistent.
non Sequitur?


The conclusion: "It is therefore not internally consistent."

Does not follow from the premise: "Mormonism is a hodgepodge of heresies that have been previously rejected by the Catholic Church."

Whether an idea is a heresy rejected by the Catholic Church is not relevant to the internal consistency of another belief system.

The mere fact that something is a hodgepodge of miscellaneous ideas from various sources does not mean it lacks internal consistency, either. The internal consistency of something depends on how the ideas from different sources are blended together. The United States Constitution is a hodgepodge of various ideas from ancient Greece, ancient Rome, English jurisprudence, and principles that became in vogue during the Enlightenment. Star Wars is a hodgepodge of The Seven Samurai, Joseph Campbell's writings on mythology, Taoism, space opera, and high fantasy. The MMA is a hodgepodge of boxing, kickboxing, grappling, and wrestling. The English language is a hodgepodge of various dialects and foreign phrases. And so on. Whether or not Mormonism has internal consistency does not depend on whether Joseph Smith et al. borrowed various ideas from various sources, but on the gestalt that came out of all those sources.

Wait, let me guess: these people are not true Scotsmen.
In a conversation with Lulu and Samantha, we distinguished Gnosticism from Christian Gnosticism by keeping the label on the first, but calling the second "Christian Mysticism," defined as that which stays within the confines of traditionally defined Christianity. I guess you missed that.


That's not what you said in this thread. Your lack of any qualifier means that Christianity categorically rejected Gnosticism. That is not true. Otherwise, it would not be possible for anyone to self-identify as a Christian Gnostic. There are many, many different Christologies out there, so even the phrase "traditional Christian" begs the question, since there were many and sundry different Christologies in circulation before a bunch of people with no apparent authority to speak for Christ got together and decided what "real Christianity" is. "Heresy" and "orthodoxy" are relative terms, not absolute terms.

You would be okay with that, right?
Contrary to US Constitution. Other than that, so long as they did not try to force other governments and people to become subject to them, I wouldn't fight such an enclave.


Wouldn't that make them cease to be Christians? "My kingdom is not of this world" and all that? And the way you fix the constitutional problem is by the federal government ceding the land to the LDS Church. Real estate transactions between the government and a religious organization do not per se violate the Establishment Clause. (Remember how the 10th Circuit upheld the Main Street Plaza deal?)

And what about praying to statues of Joseph Smith so he can interceded with Elohim? Is praying to a statue a practice we can find a lot of recommendation for in the Bible? What about praying to a statue of someone other than God?

Because, see, when you say you are a sola sciptura church, and that scriptura says not to make any graven image and not to prostrate one's self in front of any graven image, but it just so happens that the pagans in the information environment in which your church was founded prayed to statues of various divine beings, and your church advocates the intercession of saints, then it looks a whole lot like a hodgepodge of heresies that had been previously rejected by the authors of the Bible, and therefore has no internal consistency.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Darth J
_Emeritus
Posts: 13392
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 12:16 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _Darth J »

madeleine wrote:
From wikipedia:

While most Catholic doctrines and theological teachings either originate in scripture or are established by the higher levels of the Church hierarchy, sensus fidelium works from the ground up, from the beliefs of the masses of the faithful, not only as understood through the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Bible, but also as inspired by the Holy Spirit, which guides the faithful at large within the framework of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.


I think that's kind of CK's point, regardless of the nuances of how it works. Whether or not it's binding on the Catholic Church, Catholics do believe in some form of what a Mormon would understand as "continuing revelation" and "receiving a testimony." And many other religions, Christian or not, believe similarly in "continuing revelation" in at least a broad sense of what a Mormon would mean by that phrase. I think CK is exactly right. Contrary to the received wisdom among many LDS people, "continuing revelation" and "getting a testimony" is the rule rather than the exception in religious traditions and human experience in general. The oft-repeated assertion that Moroni's Promise is some unique experience that nobody outside of Mormonism purports to have is simply not accurate. Or, less charitably, the assertion is spectacularly uninformed.
_MCB
_Emeritus
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _MCB »

I respect your style, but your attitude leaves something to be desired. Of course, I have noted this all along, but never before engaged in debate with you, because of this. Call it an ad hominem, if you want.

Catholics do not pray to statues, and you know this. The statue only serves as a visual reminder of whatever saint we are asking to intercede for us-- a prayer multiplier, if you will.

We are getting into semantics, here.

I am obviously not sola scriptura. Catholicism is internally consistent. Catholicism rejected those heresies, which are not consistent with the corpus of Catholic doctrine. They are inconsistent with Catholicism. Many are inconsistent with each other. Now, if another religion wants to revive them, and run with them, have at it. However, the consequences can be dire, such as a theocratic Kingdom of God on Earth. I am reading "The Rise and Fall of the [Munster] Anabaptists" by E. Balfort Bax [public domain, Google Books] right now. WOW!! That is an acute example of sola scriptura run amok.

Done. You may rage and shake the dolly between your sharp teeth, but it is only an inaccurate image of that which you hate.

The oft-repeated assertion that Moroni's Promise is some unique experience that nobody outside of Mormonism purports to have is simply not accurate.
Moroni's Promise was answered for me, and the answer is that the best of the Book of Mormon condemns Mormonism.
Last edited by Guest on Sun Aug 12, 2012 9:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Huckelberry said:
I see the order and harmony to be the very image of God which smiles upon us each morning as we awake.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... cc_toc.htm
_hans castorp
_Emeritus
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:26 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _hans castorp »

madeleine wrote:
hans castorp wrote:
But there are ambiguities here; for example, the church has established liturgical celebrations based on private revelations: the Solemnity of the Sacred Heart and Divine Mercy Sunday among others. And Karl Rahner, in discussing the revelations at Fatima, which are addressed to the whole church and ask for specific actions, has questioned whether the distinction really makes any sense in such cases.


Fatima's message was to the whole church but it doesn't reveal new doctrine. The first was a vision of hell, the second and third are prophecies. The Roman Curia approves visions such as these, which gives them a sort of certification the indicates they are free from doctrinal and moral errors. Approval does not mean a requirement to accept them personally. Fatima has very strong reasons for Catholics to believe them, which is why so many (millions) have personally accepted them.

Divine Mercy also doesn't contain any new doctrines. It is a devotion to the Divine Mercy of Jesus, which, would compare to other devotions such as the rosary. No one is required to adhere to either devotion. Divine Mercy Sunday doesn't require that anyone is practicing the devotion. A liturgy focused on the Divine Mercy of Jesus is very Catholic already.


The issue here, which I don't think is contradicted by anything you've said above, is that the public/private dichotomy is a bit slippery. Do you really think there would be a Divine Mercy Sunday without the revelations of St. Faustina?

Dogma--a proposition to be believed with divine and Catholic faith--is another matter. Nothing not already present in the tradition may be so defined. But the Immaculate Conception as such is not explicit in much of the tradition, and its antiquity must be deduced from patristic references to Mary as the second Eve, and so forth. Other dogmas have emerged from a dialectical process. As Newman points out, it would be very hard to show that many of the Ante-Nicene fathers held the Nicene faith. You point out, quite rightly, that thesensus fidelium plays an important part here.

The question of the status of private revelation is acute for me in the case of the apparition of La Salette. The visionaries talk of our Lady restraining her Son from punishing the world and complaining that her arms grow tired. The motif of Jesus=Justice, Mary=Mercy, which I'm sure has a longer pedigree, has set a template for many other Marian apparitions, with the notable exception of Lourdes. To me it seems seriously at odds with the gospel. I am grateful that I'm not required to believe in it.

But this is supposed to be Mormon, not Catholic, Discussions.

hc
Blog: The Use of Talking

"Found him to be the village explainer. Very useful if you happen to be a village; if not, not." --Gertrude Stein
_hans castorp
_Emeritus
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:26 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _hans castorp »

Darth J wrote:
madeleine wrote:
From wikipedia:

While most Catholic doctrines and theological teachings either originate in scripture or are established by the higher levels of the Church hierarchy, sensus fidelium works from the ground up, from the beliefs of the masses of the faithful, not only as understood through the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Bible, but also as inspired by the Holy Spirit, which guides the faithful at large within the framework of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.


I think that's kind of CK's point, regardless of the nuances of how it works. Whether or not it's binding on the Catholic Church, Catholics do believe in some form of what a Mormon would understand as "continuing revelation" and "receiving a testimony." And many other religions, Christian or not, believe similarly in "continuing revelation" in at least a broad sense of what a Mormon would mean by that phrase. I think CK is exactly right. Contrary to the received wisdom among many LDS people, "continuing revelation" and "getting a testimony" is the rule rather than the exception in religious traditions and human experience in general. The oft-repeated assertion that Moroni's Promise is some unique experience that nobody outside of Mormonism purports to have is simply not accurate. Or, less charitably, the assertion is spectacularly uninformed.


Bingo!
Blog: The Use of Talking

"Found him to be the village explainer. Very useful if you happen to be a village; if not, not." --Gertrude Stein
_madeleine
_Emeritus
Posts: 2476
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 6:03 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _madeleine »

Darth J wrote:
madeleine wrote:
From wikipedia:

While most Catholic doctrines and theological teachings either originate in scripture or are established by the higher levels of the Church hierarchy, sensus fidelium works from the ground up, from the beliefs of the masses of the faithful, not only as understood through the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Bible, but also as inspired by the Holy Spirit, which guides the faithful at large within the framework of the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.


I think that's kind of CK's point, regardless of the nuances of how it works. Whether or not it's binding on the Catholic Church, Catholics do believe in some form of what a Mormon would understand as "continuing revelation" and "receiving a testimony." And many other religions, Christian or not, believe similarly in "continuing revelation" in at least a broad sense of what a Mormon would mean by that phrase. I think CK is exactly right. Contrary to the received wisdom among many LDS people, "continuing revelation" and "getting a testimony" is the rule rather than the exception in religious traditions and human experience in general. The oft-repeated assertion that Moroni's Promise is some unique experience that nobody outside of Mormonism purports to have is simply not accurate. Or, less charitably, the assertion is spectacularly uninformed.

Yeah, I know.

Testimony bearing ala Mormon style is foreign to most Catholics. People will relate their experiences to close friends and family but our personal experiences aren't used to convince others. sort of ironic, we leave the convincing up to the Holy Spirit.
Being a Christian is not the result of an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person, which gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction -Pope Benedict XVI
_CaliforniaKid
_Emeritus
Posts: 4247
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:47 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _CaliforniaKid »

Darth J wrote:I think that's kind of CK's point, regardless of the nuances of how it works. Whether or not it's binding on the Catholic Church, Catholics do believe in some form of what a Mormon would understand as "continuing revelation" and "receiving a testimony." And many other religions, Christian or not, believe similarly in "continuing revelation" in at least a broad sense of what a Mormon would mean by that phrase.

Thanks, Darth. That's exactly right. This all started as my response to Nomad's assertion that other groups don't have continuing revelation, but that has sort of gotten lost in the subsequent discussion.

Madeleine's objection seems to be that there is a difference of degree, since most Protestants and Catholics wouldn't call any of their continuing revelations "scripture." I don't entirely disagree, though I would still say that some revelations, for some Protestant and Catholic groups, do take on an authority approaching canonicity. We find even better examples of "open canons" outside the Christian mainstream. But as DarthJ has correctly pointed out, this whole discussion is getting pretty far afield of my original point.
_hans castorp
_Emeritus
Posts: 130
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2011 7:26 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _hans castorp »

CaliforniaKid wrote:To say that the above is non-public, non-binding, and wholly unoriginal seems like a real stretch. Maybe it is those things in the eyes of the institutional Church. But surely not in the eyes of a devotee.
[/quote]

Well, I'll give you one out of three. It is public, but it isn't very different from a number of other apparitions (Encountering Mary by Sandra Zimdars-Swartz is very good on this), and if it's binding on anybody, it's binding on the Pope. It is certainly not necessary for me as a Catholic to believe it, even though it would be temerarious for me to publicly belittle it.

hc
Blog: The Use of Talking

"Found him to be the village explainer. Very useful if you happen to be a village; if not, not." --Gertrude Stein
_lulu
_Emeritus
Posts: 2310
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2012 12:08 am

Re: Robert F. Smith writes online book

Post by _lulu »

Darth J wrote:a hodgepodge of miscellaneous ideas from various sources


That's what religion is.

The theologian's job is to create a plausable consistancy from it for his/her current audience. Some hodgepodges are easier to deal with. Some theologians are brighter and more pursausive.

But in the end, that's all it is.
"And the human knew the source of life, the woman of him, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, 'I have procreated a man with Yahweh.'" Gen. 4:1, interior quote translated by D. Bokovoy.
Post Reply