T
thistle
Guest
Except is is NOT supported by Scared Scripture, Sacred Tradition or The Magesterium!Yes, and a very sound one, being held by by Popes, Saints and Doctors of the Church.
Except is is NOT supported by Scared Scripture, Sacred Tradition or The Magesterium!Yes, and a very sound one, being held by by Popes, Saints and Doctors of the Church.
Oops. Typo. I meant Sacred Scripture and not Scared Scripture!!Except is is NOT supported by Scared Scripture, Sacred Tradition or The Magesterium!
The mystery of Christianity has been unfolding since the Apostles left us with the Deposit of Faith. Just because something has not been articulated in a doctrinal manner up to our own time, doesn’t mean that it won’t be someday, as the kernel exists even now. The kernel exists in the form of Pope’s, Saint’s and Theological writings, as well as what is held or believed by the Universal Church in her prayers and liturgy. The fact that there is a tradition of sound teaching in this regard by authorities in a position to teach within the Church, should not be dismissed as “unsupported.”Except is is NOT supported by Scared Scripture, Sacred Tradition or The Magesterium!
The Church does not know where St Joseph was entombed.The mystery of Christianity has been unfolding since the Apostles left us with the Deposit of Faith. Just because something has not been articulated in a doctrinal manner up to our own time, doesn’t mean that it won’t be someday, as the kernel exists even now. The kernel exists in the form of Pope’s, Saint’s and Theological writings, as well as what is held or believed by the Universal Church in her prayers and liturgy. The fact that there is a tradition of sound teaching in this regard by authorities in a position to teach within the Church, should not be dismissed as “unsupported.”
Which writings are these? I’m especially interested in the Papal ones since these would form such a “kernel”.The mystery of Christianity has been unfolding since the Apostles left us with the Deposit of Faith. Just because something has not been articulated in a doctrinal manner up to our own time, doesn’t mean that it won’t be someday, as the kernel exists even now. The kernel exists in the form of Pope’s, Saint’s and Theological writings, as well as what is held or believed by the Universal Church in her prayers and liturgy. The fact that there is a tradition of sound teaching in this regard by authorities in a position to teach within the Church, should not be dismissed as “unsupported.”
It has nothing to do with what offends or not.Check out these links:
Redemptoris Custos
St. Joseph in the Liturgy
St. Joseph in the Magisterium
Regarding the OP’s question, we have sound theological writings which premise that since Jeremiah and St. John the Baptist are believed to have been sanctified in their mother’s womb, based on the interpretation placed on Scripture, and because of their high calling, and the grace required to fulfill such a ministry; and because St. Joseph was called into the highest order of grace in existence, meaning the order of the Hypostatic Union, with Jesus at the head, His Virgin Mother and St. Joseph completing this earthly trinitarian Order, it is thought only fitting, and proper that St. Joseph too, would be sanctified in the womb (but after his conception -unlike the Immaculate Conception-- but comparable to St. John the Baptist.) This belief is repeated often by writers and Saints down through the ages, and confirmed by several visionaries. But is this belief actually taught by Popes: no, at least not yet. But it wouldn’t surprise me if in the future such a statement would eventually be made by Popes.
Does that idea offend? If so why?
From: St. Joseph in Liturgy (emphasis mine):Check out these links:
No, it’s not wild and it’s not unsupported. It has everything to do with what offends, as people that are offended by these ideas are very vehement in their opposition to any evidence whatsoever that may support this view.It has nothing to do with what offends or not.
Its simply that your speculation that St Joseph was born free from original sin is absolutely baseless. Wild unsupported speculation.
It is sheer speculation and not supported by the Church or Scripture.No, it’s not wild and it’s not unsupported. It has everything to do with what offends, as people that are offended by these ideas are very vehement in their opposition to any evidence whatsoever that may support this view.
That also could have been said about the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary in the early Church.It is sheer speculation and not supported by the Church or Scripture.
NO. The Fathers had opinions on these. Nobody had an opinion on St Joseph being born free from original sin.That also could have been said about the Immaculate Conception and Assumption of Mary in the early Church.![]()
No, theologians and Saints (such as St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Francis De Sales, Jean Gerson, and many theologians down through the centuries have had such opinions.NO. The Fathers had opinions on these. Nobody had an opinion on St Joseph being born free from original sin.