Did Jesus have siblings?

[PRmerger]

It sounds like you frame it as: your church has rules. So does mine. So we’re identical in that regard.

I would disagree. It’s a sense of scale. Again, stack the Cathechism and other written techings next to a single sheet of paper.

Also, the core principles (on our side) have a lot of subjectivity to how they are individually implemented. Yours does not. One example: you have a policy on being “open to life”. There is great specifity as to what EXACTLY that means, and what is allowed and not.

How did we get on the topic again…?

I can see your point. You have 7 doctrines. The CC has more. You find it better that there’s only 7.

An analogy that comes to mind is: one person creates the song, “Twinkle, Twinkle” using 7 notes on the piano. Another person creates “Liebestraum” using all the piano keys.

I’ll take Liebestraum over Twinkle, Twinkle any day!
(And yes, I know that Mozart wrote “Twinkle”. )

 

[Major_Tom]

Most likely his response would be something like: I do not judge. It is the Lord Who judges.

Hmm, not so sure. When my Dad died, we had several conversations with our parish priest. My sister alluded somehow to the subject of heaven, etc. Our priest said “Your Dad’s got nothing to worry about”. Why do I bring this up? Oh, I don’t know… I bet the Pope has his own share of frank talk. He’s human, right?

Too much here to respond to tonight…

I still haven’t seen an overall response to Roy’s post; you know, the invitation to come into the big tent. Will you go in? Or stay in your own tent? Not trying to box you into a corner or put words into your mouth. I’ll try and respond to your other questions of me tomorrow.

However, the lack of response to his post asking “Is there something we can agree on” has met with deafening silence.

 

[PRmerger]

Hmm, not picking up what you’re laying down… my ‘excommunication’ was a slight dig, didn’t mean to derail things.

Would you accept criminals into your fold? Not the kind that are wanted on felonies, but former criminals, drug users? Of course you would. You hope to show a path to God, don’t you, just like Jesus did with Mary Magdalene and the other ‘outcasts’.

Tom, believing that Whites are superior is not a criminal act. ** You** are categorizing them as criminals. As far as I know, the US govt has not criminalized beliefs. Not yet, anyway.

Certainly, White Supremacists’ beliefs are abhorrent, but as Catholics we can say, “Your belief is sinful.”

In your paradigm, you become a hypocrite when you won’t let them preach in your Big Tent.

 

[guanophore]

A I think I posted in an earlier thread, that was a poor choice of words. Please consider them rescinded.

Yes, I finally caught up with that. Thanks.

 

[Major_Tom]

Tom, believing that Whites are superior is not a criminal act. ** You** are categorizing them as criminals. As far as I know, the US govt has not criminalized beliefs. Not yet, anyway.

Certainly, White Supremacists’ beliefs are abhorrent, but as Catholics we can say, “Your belief is sinful.”

In your paradigm, you become a hypocrite when you won’t let them preach in your Big Tent.

Wrong. Believing that the white man is better than the black man because he’s white fundamentally undercuts the inherant worth and dignity of that black man. Case closed.

 

[PRmerger]

Hmm, not so sure. When my Dad died, we had several conversations with our parish priest. My sister alluded somehow to the subject of heaven, etc. Our priest said “Your Dad’s got nothing to worry about”.

Your priest was wrong to canonize your dad. He didn’t have that authority.

I still haven’t seen an overall response to Roy’s post; you know, the invitation to come into the big tent.

My response: his mini-encyclical waxed eloquent on nothing at all I was questioning.

As far as joining the big tent, I am in the Divine Marriage Feast each and every time I attend the Mass, so going to a carnival-ish big tent is not that appealing to me.

However, the lack of response to his post asking “Is there something we can agree on” has met with deafening silence.

Sorry, I missed that part. Of course there’s lots we can agree on… More than we disagree on, for certain!

 

[PRmerger]

Wrong. Believing that the white man is better than the black man because he’s white fundamentally undercuts the inherant worth and dignity of that black man. Case closed.

It is sinful, but not criminal.

You can call them Sinners, but not Criminals, Tom. Unless you know of a law that will put someone in jail for his thoughts?

 

[PRmerger]

Some people would thereby cut themselves out, frankly: those who hate, racial bigots, religious bigots, etc.

They may not cut themselves out, Roy. More likely, you wouldn’t invite them. That’s intolerant, is it not?

My question has not yet been answered: if they want to come and preach at your church, would you allow them? Why is a diversity of this opinion not allowed in this Big Tent?

But when it comes to complex matters of doctrine - e. g., transubstantiation, Immaculate Conception, papal infaillibility in faith and morals, dispensationalism, predestination, speaking in tongues, and assorted dogmae - well, discuss and even debate them in an atmosphere of amicability.

Of course we can discuss–because YOU’VE decided these topics are up for debate. Bigotry, however, you’ve declared is not up for debate. Gay marriage, yep. Women’s ordination, yep. Wife beating–nope.

Why must we acquiesce to your fallible determination of what’s debatable and what’s not? Why do you get to determine who can preach in the Big Tent and who you’ll exclude?

 

[PRmerger]

However, the lack of response to his post asking “Is there something we can agree on” has met with deafening silence.

BTW, where did Roy ask this? Perhaps that’s why there’s a deafening silence–no one has read nor seen his elusive question.

 

[Deacon_JAR]

Thank you for clarifying that

I’ll still take the INFALLIBLE ruling of MULTIPLE Popes on this matter …

Sir Knight, may the blessings of the Lord be with you always. How many Catholic Churches are there? As far as I know there is only one, under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome, known to all the world as the Pope. The Catholic Church is universal, and therefore, the teachings are also of universal character. After I provided you with a link from the Catholic Diocese of Rockford, IL, which answers the question about "Do Catholic only go to heaven?, you wrote, ‘Even if it did, I’d rather stick with official church teaching as found in the CCC rather than something on youtube.’

This is the link: youtube.com/watch?v=5cTr8OoGMA0. Please copy and paste the link.
This is a message from Rev. Msgr. Eric R. Barr, Episcopal Vicar for Clergy and Religious for the Diocese of Rockford, IL. Bishop Thomas G. Doran is the bishop of this diocese. The Rockford Diocese covers 11 counties in Northern Illinois. Msgr. Barr’s e-mail is : vicarforclergy@rockforddiocese.org and his telephone numbers are: (815) 399-4300 and Fax (815) 399-5266.

I still reafirm what I wrote to you. "I believe one of the main roles of this forum is to share and educate each other according with official teachings of the church, not to propagate our own interpretations or agenda. The message from Rev. Msgr. Eric Barr, who is an church official representing Bishop Thomas G. Doran, should be considered of great importance. If you have any concerns about the validity of the message of Msgr. Barr you are welcome to contact the Diocese of Rockford, IL @ www.rockforddiocese,org. I encourage all my friends to listen to his message using that link.

If you believe this message is erroneous or of heretical nature I challenge you to notify the office of your diocesan bishop and present to him the evidence contained in that link. I believe the staff of this forum should intervene and make public the official teaching of our Catholic Church concerning this issue. This way no personal interpretations may spread like weeds in the field, but only the truth, nothing else but truth, shall prevail.

 

[guanophore]

So I see my shortand has tripped me up again…! Yes, I know that God has manifested himself somehow to all peoples (the aforementioned grace). What I trying to refer to is the Catholic belief that, once exposed to the fullness of Catholic faith, there is no other very viable road to God, yes?

I think that the vast majority of persons “exposed to the fullness of the Catholic faith” still don’t “get” it. If they did, there would not be so many Catholics gravitating to the Protestant communities.

No, in order to fall from faith, one must first “have” it. One must have embraced the fullness of truth, then willfully and obstinantly refuse it. We are not condemned for ignorance, but for disbelief.

:) ). If I appear that way to you.... I suppose there ain't much I can do about it!

Yes, you were kinda giving that impression.

 

[guanophore]

Thanks for the response.

So if the Pope is unwilling to compromise on the truth, what, then, is his reason for outreach? Must be to convert? Just so I have the picture painted clearly, he enters the room, and is prepared to talk, but not listen to a thing. What would he have to learn, since he holds the truth?

Why would he be unwilling to listen? How else could he learn what separates the person he is with from the Truth unless he listen and learns from the one who is separated?

**

Do you think he would enjoy a conversation with Roy?**

Difficult to say. I don’t know him well enough to speculate. I would venture to guess that Roy’s watering down of the Truth in order to find unity would not be acceptable.

Major_Tom:

If you caught the Pope at the right moment, and asked him “With respect, I know you’re not SUPPOSED to do this… but if you had to handicap Roy’s odds of achieving the Kingdom compared to your average Catholic… what odds would you give?”

I don’t think any of us are qualified to make such an assessment, even of ourselves.

 

[Sir_Knight]

Sir Knight;6518599:

Thank you for clarifying that

I’ll still take the INFALLIBLE ruling of MULTIPLE Popes on this matter …

Sir Knight, may the blessings of the Lord be with you always. How many Catholic Churches are there? The Catholic faith is composed of 22 Churches spread across 6 Rites as follows:

• *]Alexandrean Rite
  1) Coptic Catholic Church
  2) Ethiopian (& Eritrean) Catholic Church
  
  *] Antiochene Rite
  3) Syriac Catholic Church
  4) Syro-Malabarese Catholic Church
  5) Syro-Malankarese Catholic Church
  
  *] Armenian Rite
  6) Armenian Catholic Church
  
  *] Byzantine Rite
  7) Albanian Catholic Church
  8) Belarusan Catholic Church
  9) Bulgarian Catholic Church
  10) Croatian Catholic Church
  11) Georgian Catholic Church
  12) Greek Catholic Church
  13) Hungarian Catholic Church
  14) Italo-Greco-Albanian Catholic Church
  15) Melkite Catholic Church
  16) Russian Catholic Church
  17) Romanian Catholic Church
  18) Ruthenian Catholic Church
  19) Slovakian Catholic Church
  20) Ukrainian Catholic Church
  
  *] Latin Rite
  21) Roman Catholic Church
  
  *] Maronite Rite
  22) Maronite Catholic Church
  

  As far as I know there is only one, under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome, known to all the world as the Pope. The Catholic Church is universal, and therefore, the teachings are also of universal character. After I provided you with a link from the Catholic Diocese of Rockford, IL, which answers the question about "Do Catholic only go to heaven?, you wrote, ‘Even if it did, I’d rather stick with official church teaching as found in the CCC rather than something on youtube.’

  I have provided you with quotes from official source of multiple Popes who have infallibly taught that those that reject the Catholic faith can not enter heaven. An infallible teaching of a Pope can not be changed, modified or contradicted.
  

  This is the link: youtube.com/watch?v=5cTr8OoGMA0

  . Please copy and paste the link.
  This is a message from Rev. Msgr. Eric R. Barr, Episcopal Vicar for Clergy and Religious for the Diocese of Rockford, IL. Bishop Thomas G. Doran is the bishop of this diocese. The Rockford Diocese covers 11 counties in Northern Illinois. Msgr. Barr’s e-mail is : vicarforclergy@rockforddiocese.org and his telephone numbers are: (815) 399-4300 and Fax (815) 399-5266. Did, you, yourself, listen to what he said. If you didn’t, I’ll sum it up for you. He said that non-Catholics MAY also be able to go to heaven. He didn’t say that they could or would but that they MAY go to heaven. Secondly, and this is most important, he said that those who through no fault of their own are not knowledgeable of the Catholic faith. That is NOT who were are talking about. I have said over and over again that those who REJECT the Catholic faith will not go to heaven and he says nothing about those who reject the faith. He is specifically talking about those who through no fault of their own are not knowledgeable of the Catholic faith.
  
  … Continued in NEXT Post ***

 

[Sir_Knight]

*** Continued from PREVIOUS Post …

I still reafirm what I wrote to you. "I believe one of the main roles of this forum is to share and educate each other according with official teachings of the church, not to propagate our own interpretations or agenda. The message from Rev. Msgr. Eric Barr, who is an church official representing Bishop Thomas G. Doran, should be considered of great importance. If you have any concerns about the validity of the message of Msgr. Barr you are welcome to contact the Diocese of Rockford, IL @ www.rockforddiocese,org. I encourage all my friends to listen to his message using that link.

1. While the opinions expressed by an official representative of a Bishop are certainly important, they pale in comparison to the official teachings of multiple Popes on this matter.
2. He says nothing to support the position that those who REJECT the Catholic might go to heaven. Again, he is saying that those who through no fault of their own are not knowledgeable of the Catholic faith MIGHT also go to heaven and I have no issue with that position.

If you believe this message is erroneous or of heretical nature I challenge you to notify the office of your diocesan bishop and present to him the evidence contained in that link.

As I said above, I have no issue with the comments that he made in that link.

I believe the staff of this forum should intervene and make public the official teaching of our Catholic Church concerning this issue. This way no personal interpretations may spread like weeds in the field, but only the truth, nothing else but truth, shall prevail.

I don’t understand what is this “personal interpretations” that you keep talking about. Please interpret for us what you think these official Church declarations mean:

1. *]“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.” (SOURCE: Denzinger’s Enchiridion Symbolorum; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 39)
   
   *]“If anyone, however, either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is condemned and also anathematized (means excommunicated) according to the opinion of the same Fathers… Consider (therefore) the fact that whoever has not been in the peace and unity of the Church, cannot have the Lord. [Gal. 3:7]” (SOURCE: Denzinger’s Enchiridion Symbolorum; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 246)
   
   *]“By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics but the Holy Roman, catholic, and Apostolic (Church) outside which we believe that no one is saved.” (SOURCE: D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 423)
   
   *]"…we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff." (SOURCE: D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 469)

 

[inkaneer]

Thanks for the response.

So if the Pope is unwilling to compromise on the truth, what, then, is his reason for outreach? Must be to convert? Just so I have the picture painted clearly, he enters the room, and is prepared to talk, but not listen to a thing. What would he have to learn, since he holds the truth?

Oh, he would certainly listen but he would be prevented from compromising the truth. You see it has to do with the two greatest commandments. Love God [who is Truth] above all and love thy neighbor as thyself. Social justice is an integral part of christianity but that doesn’t mean we have to give up Truth.
Major Tom;6527066:

Do you think he would enjoy a conversation with Roy? If you caught the Pope at the right moment, and asked him “With respect, I know you’re not SUPPOSED to do this… but if you had to handicap Roy’s odds of achieving the Kingdom compared to your average Catholic… what odds would you give?”

I think the Pope would rightly say that he would leave that up to the Lord. The church has never dogmatically said that any particular person is in hell and that includes Judas, Hitler, Stalin or any number of others whose earthy reputations leave something to be desired. The church has proclaimed some persons as saints only after an exhaustive investigation and the evidence of truly miraculous events such as healings as a result of prayers to the
saint. Yet there are probably many times more souls in heaven than just the few who are canonized.

 

[kelvinf]

It isn’t MY “interpretation” of scripture but what past multiple Popes have formally declared and they are certainly among those that can correctly interpret scripture, wouldn’t you agree?

I’m providing the exact quote and supporting references for those quotes (see above). It doesn’t take much “interpretation” to understand what they said. For instance, how would you interpret …“Whoever wishes to be saved, needs above all to hold the Catholic faith; unless each one preserves this whole and inviolate, he will without a doubt perish in eternity.” (SOURCE: Denzinger’s Enchiridion Symbolorum; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 39)
… or …“If anyone, however, either suggests or believes or presumes to teach contrary to this faith, let him know that he is condemned and also anathematized (means excommunicated) according to the opinion of the same Fathers… Consider (therefore) the fact that whoever has not been in the peace and unity of the Church, cannot have the Lord. [Gal. 3:7]” (SOURCE: Denzinger’s Enchiridion Symbolorum; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 246)
… and …“By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics but the Holy Roman, catholic, and Apostolic (Church) outside which we believe that no one is saved.” (SOURCE: D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 423)
… and …"…we declare, say, define, and proclaim to every human creature that they by necessity for salvation are entirely subject to the Roman Pontiff." (SOURCE: D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 469)
… I await to hear your “interpretation” is of those Papal declarations.

Oh, and I listened to the link that Deacon JAR provided and the good Monsignor says NOTHING to contradict what I have been saying. He talks about those, who through no fault of their own, do not come to the faith. I have repeatedly said that I was not making reference to them but to those that have REJECTED the faith and the Monsignor says nothing about them.

When I read the first Papal declaration, my first question was: what does it mean to hold the Catholic faith? The next was: what is the Catholic faith? In one of your last posts, you listed the 22 (I don’t know if there are actually 23) churches which fall under the Catholic faith, so more or less answering my question regarding the understanding of the term Catholic faith.

In a nutshell, those Papal declarations did not explicitly state that one must be a member of one of the rites of the Catholic Church to be saved.
Another poster suggested that those declarations were made before the reformation and I can hence only interpret the declarations as referring to those who REJECTED Jesus of Nazareth and the Church he instituted. You have already highlighted the word REJECTED in some of your posts.
Jesus of Nazareth gave authority to his disciples to preach the Good News and it was through their evangelisation that they formed the assembly of the faithful. People who heard the gospel either joined the assembly of the faithful or REJECTED the gospel. So it is through hearing the Gospel that people get to know about Jesus of Nazareth, through whom we are saved.
So the chain is: TheChurch_TheGospel_JesusofNazareth_Salvation.
So it was logical for the Popes at that time to say that there is no salvation outside the Church (brokenLink TheGospel_JesusofNazareth_Salvation).

The problem today with the above declarations is the definition of the Church. Who are those that make up the assembly of the faithful? So today, it’s one thing simply quoting those declarations and it’s another thing interpreting and explaining them.

If we all really agree that the teachings of the Catholic Church do not contradict scriptures, then we will stick with the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth about salvation.
In my Bible, the heading of Romans 10:5-21 is: Salvation Is for All. There are just so many passages in the Bible where Jesus of Nazareth said that all/everyone who believes in him will have eternal life.
If the teachings of the Catholic Church do not contradict scriptures then…

A child born in a Catholic family would grow up to become a Catholic
A child born in a Protestant family would grow up to become a Protestant. All through no fault of their own.

So to say in one area that non-catholics through no fault of their own will be saved and to say in another area that Protestants because of mortal sin will not be saved seems contradictory but again we will have to turn to the scriptures. And the reason why God sent his only begotten son is very clear and the teachings of this son is that All/Everyone who believes in him will be saved.

 

[Deacon_JAR]

Weeks ago I provided some info concerning this issue. This tradition comes from one of the books that was not included in the canon of the N.T. This book, which was used by some Christian communities in the early years of the church, is called “The Proto-Gospel of James.” It narrates events that took place prior to Jesus’ birth, although it includes an account of His birth as well. The author of this book claims to be James, the one known as Jesus’ brother (Mk 6; Gal. 1). This document is included in the book “Lost Scriptures” by Bart D. Ehrman. I read this document and contains very interesting information such as: the announcement of the angel of the Lord to Anna, a barren woman married to a man named Joachim, that she was going to conceive a child; the birth of Mary to Anna and Joachim; her presentation to the Temple; Mary’s life in the temple; her engagement to Joseph, a widower with children from Jerusalem; the announcement of the angel Gabriel to Mary; Mary’s visit to Elizabeth; message of the angel to Joseph; birth of Jesus; the visit of the wise men; Herod’s killing of the infants; God’s protection of the infant John (Baptist); the assasination of Zacharias. Our Catholic Church commemorates every year the “Presentation of Mary to the Temple”, event not included in our N.T. canon. This tradition is included in this document. After you read this document you wll have a more clear understanding.

 

[grndslm]

Weeks ago I provided some info concerning this issue. This tradition comes from one of the books that was not included in the canon of the N.T. This book, which was used by some Christian communities in the early years of the church, is called “The Proto-Gospel of James.” It narrates events that took place prior to Jesus’ birth, although it includes an account of His birth as well. The author of this book claims to be James, the one known as Jesus’ brother (Mk 6; Gal. 1). This document is included in the book “Lost Scriptures” by Bart D. Ehrman. I read this document and contains very interesting information such as: the announcement of the angel of the Lord to Anna, a barren woman married to a man named Joachim, that she was going to conceive a child; the birth of Mary to Anna and Joachim; her presentation to the Temple; Mary’s life in the temple; her engagement to Joseph, a widower with children from Jerusalem; the announcement of the angel Gabriel to Mary; Mary’s visit to Elizabeth; message of the angel to Joseph; birth of Jesus; the visit of the wise men; Herod’s killing of the infants; God’s protection of the infant John (Baptist); the assasination of Zacharias. Our Catholic Church commemorates every year the “Presentation of Mary to the Temple”, event not included in our N.T. canon. This tradition is included in this document. After you read this document you wll have a more clear understanding.

I thought someone earlier in this thread called that document “heretical” or something similar.

 

[Deacon_JAR]

Did, you, yourself, listen to what he said. If you didn’t, I’ll sum it up for you. He said that non-Catholics MAY also be able to go to heaven. He didn’t say that they could or would but that they MAY go to heaven. Secondly, and this is most important, he said that those who through no fault of their own are not knowledgeable of the Catholic faith. That is NOT who were are talking about. I have said over and over again that those who REJECT the Catholic faith will not go to heaven and he says nothing about those who reject the faith. He is specifically talking about those who through no fault of their own are not knowledgeable of the Catholic faith.

… Continued in NEXT Post ***

Sir Knight, this is what Msgr. Barr said, “We are not so insular that we may think that only Catholics go to heaven. Any person of good will, who tries to live by the light of their faith, who through not fault of their own, who do not know that CHRISTIANITY is the one true way to Jesus…I know that God will take mercy on them.”

He used the word “CHRISTIANITY” not Catholic. I’ll be back to you latter.

 

[inkaneer]

I thought someone earlier in this thread called that document “heretical” or something similar.

Maybe you can find the post and quote it so you can pin down what was said with more accuracy.