Tag Archives: theology

Signs and Ceremonies: The Incarnation

2 Replies

The following is from Teaching Truths by Signs and Ceremonies or The Church, Its Rites and Services Explained for the People by Rev. Jas. L. Meagher (1882, New York: Russel Brothers).

"Let us understand well and clearly the mystery of the Incarnation. If you say that he united himself to man in such as way that his Divinity took the place and fulfilled the duties of the soul in the body, you have only a shell inhabited by the Lord and you have not perfect man, but only a body without a soul. That would be an error of many modern writers.

If you say that the spirit of God dwelt within the body born of Mary, you would have a great prophet of God, and a creature not different from the prophets of old; but he would not be God, he would only come in the spirit of God, and that was the error of the Cerinthians of the first century [and the Arians in the fourth century, if I understand properly – Funky].

If you say that he had no body born of Mary, but that his body was formed of thin atmosphere like a vision, you fall into the erros of the Phantasiasts and Docetists of the early ages.

If you say that he was only a man born of Mary and of Joseph, you fall into the errors of the Ebionites and the Protenites.

If you say that his two natures, the nature of God and the nature of man, were combined in him so as to make two persons, different from one another, you are wrong, you are following the false teachings of the Nestorians.

If you say that his whole human will was absorbed into the Godhead, you fall into the error of the Monothelites.

If you say that he had only one nature, you fall into the errors of the Eutychians.

Now the true doctrine is this: That there was a human nature void without a human person, but, in place of his human person, there was placed the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, and there was God and man united in the Person, and there was in him two natures, the one of God and the other of man, but there was in him only one person, the Person of the Holy Trinity. And, as all the action of a man and all things that he does are referred to him, uniting both the body and soul, so all the works on God and everything that he did were referred to his Person. And the one who is responsible for all these things is is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity; and, therefore, the acts of his soul, and the actions of his body, and the actions of his mind, and his sufferings, and his privations, and all the things that he did, are the actions, and the works, and the operations, not of a human being, but the Second Person of the Trinity. Therefore, these are the actions of God." (Ch. 7, pp. 108-109)

Signs and Ceremonies

9 Replies

I just finished reading Teaching Truths by Signs and Ceremonies or The
Church, Its Rites and Services Explained for the People by Rev. Jas. L. Meagher
(1882, New York: Russel Brothers). I acquired a second edition copy from my grandfather’s
estate in 1998. He was one of the very few Catholics in my family. It’s too bad
I didn’t convert until two years after his death. I’d love to have a family member
to fully share my faith with.

This book is full of nuggets of wisdom and I’ll be posting some of them for the
next few days. Some of them are eternal Truths, others are sad reminders of the
damage done by “progress”.

“In this Ritual [of the Mass], every sign recalls a doctrine, every movement has its meaning,
and every action breathes of mystery.” (Preface)

“Thus all in the Church, the plan, the foundation, the music, the ornaments,
the style, all point to the altar, telling of the unchanging faith, the belief of
past ages in the Real Presence, of God in the Sacrament of the altar.” (Ch.
1, p. 9)

“[S]how me a religion without rites and ceremonies, and I will show you a people
drifting rapidly toward infidelity and the denial of all religion.” (Ch. 1,
p.14)

“Sometimes you will see the Church as a great building on a rock in the sea.
That is the true Church built by Christ on the rock, that is on the Papacy, in the
sea, in the midst of the changing governments and institutions and peoples of this
world, who are ever fluctuating like the waves of the sea, but the Church is on
an impregnable rock, for the Church never changes. You see the waves dashing against
the rock-bound shores, but beaten back. Thus the Church built on Peter and his successors
stands alone in the world; it never changes; it remains the same; it is attacked
on all sides by the waves of error, the storms of persecution, the roar of the elements
of passion, of governments, of politics around it; it is attacked by these, but
they are driven back; they go down. Governments may change, nations may rise and
fall, people may change their forms of laws, their idea, their manners, but the
Church alone, as an institution founded by Jesus Christ, stands to-day and ever
will, a thing that can never be destroyed. “And the gates of hell shall not
prevail against it.” (Ch. 3, p. 51, quote from Matthew
16:18)

Sacrilege and Medical Science

2 Replies

Fabian of Report from Greater Tokyo has responded to Jerry's stem cell primer.

"On the medical science issue, once upon a time, it was considered sacriligious to cut open a human corpse. Early doctors' methods were notoriously unreliable, and early post-mortems were unlikely to either find the exact cause of death or provide immediately useful data for medical research.

However, although no one knew exactly how that research might be beneficial in the future, we know now that it was invaluable to almost every modern surgical technique.

Similarly, although we don't yet know which way stem cell research may take medical science, and we don't even know of any specific benefits, but it seems reasonable to believe that there will be some tangible medical benefit in the future. If the anti-stem cell research people had won back then, modern medical surgery would still be at the amputate and cauterize stage. Stuff as basic as resetting a broken bone would be life-threatening, and almost certainly result in long term problems.

Comments? Criticisms? My gut reaction is to say that cutting open a corpse is not the same as destroying a living creature. Whether killing that creature is killing a person or not is a matter for debate, but that a living thing is killed is not."

Thoughts? 

Can Anybody Hear Me?

9 Replies

I’ve been debating with a Protestant (we’ll call him Joe) on the issue of praying to the Mary and the Saints. He posed an interesting question that I’m not sure how to answer. Here’s the whole exchange.

Me: "…the praying to Mary bit is not worship, so it is not idolatry. It’s like asking a very holy friend to pray for you."

Joe: "I suggest you read 1 Timothy 2:5. (I don’t believe that God wants us praying to anyone besides Him.)

"For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" – 1 Timothy 2:5

Me: "I suggest you read Romans 15:30, Philemon 1:4, 1 Timothy 2:1-4 and this Catholic Enclopedia article.� I’m not looking to refight the Reformation.� I just want you to know that no true Catholic gives latria (worship) to anyone but God.� Take a look at the Catechism if you won’t take my word for it. :)"

"I appeal to you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf" – Romans 15:30

"I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers" – Philemon 1:4

"First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." – 1 Timothy 2:1-4

Me: "The point is that nearly all Christians believe that asking fellow members of the Body to pray for you or others is not only acceptable, but laudable.� Catholics and Orthodox believe that death is not a barrier between the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant. We ask the dead (the saints, small ‘s’) to pray for us as we would the living. We generally limit our prayers (really just requests for prayers on our behalf) to those whose lives were so holy we feel assured they are in Heaven (the Saints, big ‘S’). Among these is Christ’s mother. We see Mary as the perfect example of Christian discipleship. We don’t worship her or the Saints. To do that would be heretical and a very grave sin."

Joe: "Here’s a hypothetical situation: The pope, you, and two hundred Catholics in different cities all around the world pray to Mary at the same time. Who does she hear? If you say everyone, you are saying she is omnipresent. That is essentially saying that she is God. Actually, I don’t believe that she hears anyone on this planet who prays to her."

So I ask my St. Blog’s brethren, what’s wrong with the logic behind this question (aside from the fact he probably meant omniscient, rather than omnipresent)?

I suppose, at the very least, he should read this Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Communion of Saints.

Scripture Askew

Leave a reply

I, and several other St. Blog’s parishioners, blogged
about the “Good As New” translation (or should I say, bastardization)
of the Bible. Here’s another
article that provides more examples of the atrocities held within. It’s not just about bad philology.

“Henson even cuts out eight entire New Testament books that don’t
suit him: 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and Revelation.

There’s addition as well as subtraction. Following one scholarly sect, he puts the
Gospel of Thomas alongside
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, though Christianity discarded Thomas. Henson makes
the debatable claim that it’s “probably” among the earliest Christian
writings and “possibly” as early as the other four.”