CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholic Continuing Education > Teaching Series - dogmatic theology
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #31  
Old 2nd April 2007, 08:14 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,620
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by js1975 View Post
Coming back to the point on the human nature of Jesus, oh, and forgive my ignorance and simple questions here.

When Jesus was born, was he fully aware of his divinity, or because he became a human, he had to learn? I have wondered this for a very long time. As he grew older, he had to learn carpentry and whatever else he knew, but his divinity he it was revealed to him? Is this correct?

thanks,
jay

The Magisterium has not answered this question.
I think that, since Jesus was truly human as well as truly divine, he had
to gradually learn about his own divinity. Otherwise, we would have to
suppose that even as a prenatal or infant he had state of mental
development which departs substantially from the teaching:
'like us in all things but sin.'

Ron
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 2nd April 2007, 08:27 PM
Nathan
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ron,

I agree wholeheartedly. Hence the gospels saying of the child Jesus that "he grew in wisdom, in favour with God and men."

Truly, the relationship of the two wills and natures in Christ is a profound mystery. We must hold both in tension. It is my opinion that among conservative Christians today we often emphasize his Divinity to the point of compromising the genuineness and completeness of his humanity... but again, we must strive to hold both in tension, prostrating ourselves before this ineffible mystery of God made Flesh.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 2nd April 2007, 08:27 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,620
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan View Post
Ron,

are there spiritual criteria that serve as pre-requisites before one engages in speculative theology? It is often said in the East that the true theologian is one who prays. Those who theologize from any other context other than experience are those who babble about which they know nothing. Thus, anyone who does not theologize from the Spirit, but out of vain curiosity, will fall into prelest (delusion), and heresy. That is how the Greek Fathers and Russian Startetzes approach this topic, and generally the East is very suspicious about theological speculation by all but a staretz because of the danger of heresy.

Thus, is there a level of spiritual maturity or ascesis that one must reach before one engages in speculative theology? How does one know that one is ready? Through one's spiritual guide? How does one gaurd against prelest (delusion) when one does so? What do you make of the above perspective?

There are some Catholic heretics who believe that the teachings of the Faith consist solely of the infallible. They think that all teachings of the Magisterium are infallible, and that there is no place at all in the Faith for pious opinion or theological speculation. Truly, they are severe heretics.

The truth is that the Faith must include:

1. the infallible teachings of Tradition, Scripture, Magisterium
2. the non-infallible teachings of the Magisterium
3. pious opinions and theological speculations of even ordinary Catholics

If the Magisterium were restricted to only infallible dogmas, the Pope and the Bishops would be severely restricted in what they could say. They would be able to say very little.

If the Pope and the Bishops were restricted to only infallible dogmas and
non-infallible doctrines, they would still be unreasonably restricted and unable to teach effectively. For in order to teach dogmas and doctrines, the Pope and the Bishops must delve into explanations which involve speculations, pious opinions, intellectual arguments based partly on reason (not solely based on Tradition and Scripture), and the like.

Read any document of the Magisterium which infallibly defines a teaching, and you will find not only the infallible, but the non-infallible and the speculative, and reason, and perhaps some examples from society and history. In order to teach, the Magisterium, which teaches only from Tradition and Scripture, must necessarily use reason and pious opinion and speculative theology in order to explain and expound upon these teachings.

So also, even among the least of the faithful, including all adults and children beyond the age of reason, the Faith cannot be retained and understood and lived unless all three levels:
infallible
non-infallible
speculative
are combined in each person's understanding of the Faith.

How do you know that you are ready to engage in some theological speculation? When you have reached the age of reason.

How do you guard against heresy?
Keeps these three
1. infallible (dogmas)
2. non-infallible (doctrines)
3. speculative (pious opinions)
in the correct order

How do you preserve yourself from ever believing or thinking something about the Faith which may turn out to be incorrect?
You are not able to do so. You must accept that you are a fallible sinner who might occasionally believe the wrong thing. But you will not go very far astray if you keep your priorities in order: Dogmas, doctrines, pious opinions.

Theologians should be those among the faithful who practice the Faith, who live according to Catholic teaching. Academics who engage in theology while rejecting the practice of the Faith should be rebuked and then ignored.

Ron
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 2nd April 2007, 08:48 PM
CRW
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
The Magisterium has not answered this question.
I think that, since Jesus was truly human as well as truly divine, he had
to gradually learn about his own divinity. Otherwise, we would have to
suppose that even as a prenatal or infant he had state of mental
development which departs substantially from the teaching:
'like us in all things but sin.'

Ron

Pope Pius XII, in the Encyclical “Mystici Corporis”: “Also that knowledge which is called vision, He processes in such fullness that in breath and clarity it far exceeds the Beatific Vision of all the saints in Heaven”…”in virtue of the Beatific Vision which He enjoyed from the time when He was received into the womb of the mother of God, He has forever and continuously had present to Him all the members of His mystical Body and embraced them with his saving love.”

St. Fulgentius wrote that Christ soul processes a full knowledge of its divinity.

Cecil
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 2nd April 2007, 08:55 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,620
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRW View Post
Pope Pius XII, in the Encyclical “Mystici Corporis”: “Also that knowledge which is called vision, He processes in such fullness that in breath and clarity it far exceeds the Beatific Vision of all the saints in Heaven”…”in virtue of the Beatific Vision which He enjoyed from the time when He was received into the womb of the mother of God, He has forever and continuously had present to Him all the members of His mystical Body and embraced them with his saving love.”

St. Fulgentius wrote that Christ soul processes a full knowledge of its divinity.

Cecil

I had not read that before. I'll have to modify my position on that point.
So the human soul of Jesus Christ had the Beatific Vision from His Incarnation. Thanks for the instruction.

There is still the issue, though, of what Christ's human brain was able to
understand from his early days. As a prenatal, he had the intellectual
capability of a prenatal in his human mind; similarly, as an infant and a child.


Ron
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 2nd April 2007, 09:20 PM
CRW
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mary49 View Post
Could someone explain to me what is the proper procedure to take Holy Communion is? I've been hearing that you can now chew the host. If this is correct when did it change? Because I have seen people coming back and chewing it. Being from the 60's I still dissolve the host in my mouth. Also is it still Okay to take the host in the hand and then in the mouth? Thanks for clearing this up for me. Mary49

One must be totally free from all grave, serious (mortal) sin, should express sincere adoration; by tongue, hand, chalice (precious Blood), or intinction. One may bow, genuflect, or kneel when receiving the Blessed Sacrament. Although chewing is not specifically addressed in Redemptionis Sacramentum, profound dignity on reception is assumed.

Cecil
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 2nd April 2007, 09:38 PM
CRW
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
I had not read that before. I'll have to modify my position on that point.
So the human soul of Jesus Christ had the Beatific Vision from His Incarnation. Thanks for the instruction.

There is still the issue, though, of what Christ's human brain was able to
understand from his early days. As a prenatal, he had the intellectual
capability of a prenatal in his human mind; similarly, as an infant and a child.


Ron

My understanding from source material is that Christ possessed infused knowledge (scienta infusa); directly from God. In His human knowledge progress (scientia acquisita) was possible (Luke 2, 52) in so far as the habit of knowledge acquired in a natural way could be increased step by step by his intellect.

Cecil
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 3rd April 2007, 10:35 AM
Rob Rob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sicily, Italy
Posts: 971
Default

Ron,

Jesus' human mind was limited but exceeded the understanding of every human being on earth. Angels have a more developed intellect than humans, but did Jesus' human mind exceed even angels' intellect?


Christ had the beatific vision from his human mind, correct? But that does not mean he knew everything at once (from his human mind). Still, why would he say that:

“No one knows, however, when that day and hour will come-neither the angels in heaven not the Son, the Father alone knows. " Matthew 24:36

If he had the beatific vision? So from this I presume that no one knows in heaven the day or hour of Jesus' coming (second?) Only God knows. Correct?

Peace to you

Roberto
__________________
For to me, to live is Christ; and to die is gain (Phil 1:21)
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 3rd April 2007, 11:18 AM
Love The Fisherman
 
Posts: n/a
Default Revelation Concerning Divinity/Humanity of Christ

There Is No Need To Speculate Concerning Our Divine Lord And His Blessed Mother. All These Questions Have Been Answered In The Revelations To Ven. Mary of Agreda Called MYSTICAL CITY OF GOD. Its Available From TAN At
http://www.tanbooks.com/index.php/pa...ywords/agreda/
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 3rd April 2007, 11:52 AM
St. Thomas More St. Thomas More is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York State
Posts: 367
Default Galileo

Quote:
Originally Posted by MARIAN View Post
In the case of Gallelio was he percieved to be challenging a Dogma of faith? The case of Gallelio was probably the most serious undermining of church authority on teaching ever. Its still being used to beat the church today.
What was the real view at the time on this and how did the church authorities get themselves into such a bind?
Mary

Mary:
Ron will correct me if I'm wrong, but the Church's claim that the earth was at the center of the universe is certainly not dogmatic. It would fall under the temporal, not spiritual, authority of the Church. Therefore, the Church was expressing its opinion about a fact in the world.

However, before Galileo, Copernicus had already posited that the Sun was at the center of the Universe. And the Papacy did not punish Copernicus. Moreover, Galileo was specifically given permission by the Pope to publish a book explicating the theories that the sun was at the center of the universe (heliocentric) and that the earth was at the center of the universe (geocentric). In this book, Galileo chose to portray the Pope as a fool who simplistically claimed that the earth was at the center of the universe and, it was for this portrayal, that he was chastised by the Church. It was his arrogance and tone that got him in trouble.

Most important, the Church has been at the forefront of science. The University system was basically invented by the Church (Oxford was chartered by the Pope), and the Vatican has a world class observatory. Catholics believe in the Natural Law, and that God has bestowed us with reason to discern God's Natural Law through science and the scientific method. Thus, the Church has advocated and supported science, though the mainstream media tries to portray it otherwise.

St. Thomas More
-- "The King's Good Servant, but God's First."
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.