This ties in with the previous post. There’s an interesting post at Joe Missionary, with equally interesting comments, about the fate of infants that die prior to baptism. Since, when I just point to interesting stuff, most people don’t seem to bother to click through, I’ll post some excerpts to whet your appetites. I encourage you to head on over and join the conversation. This kind of dialogue is part of the New Evangelization John Paull II has called for.
The following were posted to a Yahoo! group I belong to. Issues discussed include infant baptism and assurance of salvation, so I’m sure at least the Catholic apologists’ ears will be pricked. 😉
Please respond with comments. I’ll pass them along to the group.
Why/how are post-schism councils valid? I thought all the sees had to be represented in order for councils to make infallible statements. Since the Orthodox still have valid orders, there are apostolic sees that have not participated in councils with the West for nearly a millennium. What am I missing?
[A small addition has been made to this post to clarify a point. – Funky]
I have a question for my fellow Catholics on this the Feast of the Immaculate Conception
Why did the Church find it necessary to define the Marian dogmas as such? Shouldn’t dogma be limited to those articles of faith which are absolutely required for salvation? As far as I know, no authentic orthodox Christian church requires belief in the Marian dogmas for salvation. Though Tradition can supplement and even interpret Scripture, it cannot contradict Scripture. Scripture states quite clearly that faith in Jesus Christ is what’s needed for salvation. One could also argue that participation in the sacraments is needed, too, but that’s another post. Put succinctly, if it’s not in the accepted creeds, it’s not, strictly speaking, necessary, though it may be appropriate or even laudable.
My faith is not affected, for good or ill, by whether or not Mary was conceived without sin. Nor is it affected by her bodily assumption into Heaven. I accept these dogmas as a faithful and obedient Catholic, but I do not understand why they are important.
Could someone please explain why they were defined? In particular, why couldn’t they remain at the level of doctrine rather than be promoted to dogma? I’ve heard that the Orthodox agree that Mary was conceived without sin, but were uncomfortable about declaring as dogma. Since the Orthodox Church is the only other Church we recognize as maintaining the Deposit of Faith, their discomfort gives me pause.
On a related note, where does the tradition of Mary’s perpetual virginity come from? I know the words for "brother" and "sister" in Scripture can mean "cousin" or other relatives, but what evidential support do we have for this interpretation?
Open Book reminded me about an article I read quite a while ago. It’s written by a woman who went to Fr. Bill Hausen‘s heretical church but came back to the True Church.