Does the Catholic Church recognize the story of Noah and the flood as being literally true?

[adriancombe]

No – I was not taught by dualists, which one would have to be to accept your definition of death. Dualists carry the pre-Christian Greek baggage of imaging the essential person as a spiritual soul temporarily trapped within a physical body. My doctoral training focused more on the Hebraic psychosomatic unity of the human person.

StAnastasia

You have a doctorate in Catholic theology and they never even covered basic Thomism?

(Remarks re dualism are not applicable here - you totally came out of left field with that one.)

 

[edwest2]

The Catholic Encyclopedia shows the waters covered the earth, just as I was taught:

newadvent.org/cathen/11088a.htm

Peace,
Ed

 

[adriancombe]

I have not been ignoring the historical teachings of the Church.

You seem to be ignoring what the Church teaches today. Dei Verbum IS promulgated, so you can’t ignore it (nor the Catechism). The Church may have taught “Biblical Inerrancy” in the past, but the way it may have been taught in the past is not what the Church…today…in continuity with its whole history and Tradition…teaches.

This has already been shown as the opposite of the truth. Dei Verbum is consistent with the prior 2000 years of Catholic teaching, as the Council Fathers made clear through their use of footnotes.

 

[CWBetts]

I have not been ignoring the historical teachings of the Church.

You seem to be ignoring what the Church teaches today. Dei Verbum IS promulgated, so you can’t ignore it (nor the Catechism). The Church may have taught “Biblical Inerrancy” in the past, but the way it may have been taught in the past is not what the Church…today…in continuity with its whole history and Tradition…teaches.

Dei Verbum upholds those teachings. You just refuse to see it.

 

[diggerdomer]

Dei Verbum upholds those teachings. You just refuse to see it.

That is not correct. I completely believe what Dei Verbum taught, in continuity with what the Church has always taught. What’s your point?

 

[StAnastasia]

Do you take the Oath? If not, I hesitate to call it Catholic

The mandatum? Of course.

 

[StAnastasia]

The Catholic Encyclopedia shows the waters covered the earth, just as I was taught: newadvent.org/cathen/11088a.htm
Peace,
Ed

Cutting edge geological research from 100 years ago?

 

[StAnastasia]

You have a doctorate in Catholic theology and they never even covered basic Thomism?

(Remarks re dualism are not applicable here - you totally came out of left field with that one.)

Yes, Thomas is one of the theologians we studied. And dualism certainly is relevant to the discussion of models of the human person.

 

[grannymh]

Granny,

You seem to be saying that you actually think what I’ve been writing about has credibility in your mind. Is that correct? If not, where do you disagree?

MonFrere

To be fair, I need to reread your posts. This is what is in my mind. The modern “scientific” view on ramifications of a global flood does not mean that Noah’s flood is fiction. I will pull my thoughts together and get back to you. I believe your question is important because some people like to use the “flood” as a claim that Adam & Eve are not possible.

Blessings,
granny

 

[adriancombe]

No – I was not taught by dualists, which one would have to be to accept your definition of death. Dualists carry the pre-Christian Greek baggage of imaging the essential person as a spiritual soul temporarily trapped within a physical body. My doctoral training focused more on the Hebraic psychosomatic unity of the human person.

StAnastasia

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1016 By death the soul is separated from the body, but in the resurrection God will give incorruptible life to our body, transformed by reunion with our soul. Just as Christ is risen and lives for ever, so all of us will rise at the last day.

I am not saying this for your sake, but that of others who may be scandalized or confused.

Brothers and Sisters, it is beyond unimaginable that a Doctor of Theology in the Catholic Church not only does not know the Catholic definition of death but tries to dismiss it when presented by labelling it ‘dualism’. I find the claim that ‘StAnastasia’ is a professor of Theology at a Catholic University highly dubious. The unwillingness to disclose the identity of her institution of higher learning does not lend any credibilty to the claim.

 

[grannymh]

Granny, to say that the story is symbolic is not to say it is “just figurative.”

Which story are you referring to? In my opinion, Noah’s flood was written as being in a local area. There is room to interpret these flood waters as symbols.

When writing about the devil as a tempter, one has to use a symbol for an immaterial being. On the other hand, Adam & Eve are not portrayed as symbols because they are real flesh and blood. They are rational and corporeal, spirit and matter, soul and body in the same unique unification as our human nature. They are the parental founders of the human species. Because Adam is real as we are real, the state of original sin is transmitted from his human nature through his descendents to our human nature.

One of the benefits of studying the way Noah and the flood are described in Scripture is to understand the difference between the possibility of a local flood spreading beyond the known Hebrew world and the reality of Adam who had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. (CCC 404)

Blessings,
granny

 

[StAnastasia]

Which story are you referring to? In my opinion, Noah’s flood was written as being in a local area. There is room to interpret these flood waters as symbols.
When writing about the devil as a tempter, one has to use a symbol for an immaterial being. On the other hand, Adam & Eve are not portrayed as symbols because they are real flesh and blood. They are rational and corporeal, spirit and matter, soul and body in the same unique unification as our human nature. They are the parental founders of the human species. Because Adam is real as we are real, the state of original sin is transmitted from his human nature through his descendents to our human nature.

Granny, by what hermeneutical principle do you interpret some aspects of a book as symbolic, and other aspects of the same book as literally historical? How do you manage this?

 

[StAnastasia]

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church: 1016 By death the soul is separated from the body, but in the resurrection God will give incorruptible life to our body, transformed by reunion with our soul. Just as Christ is risen and lives for ever, so all of us will rise at the last day. I am not saying this for your sake, but that of others who may be scandalized or confused.

Brothers and Sisters, it is beyond unimaginable that a Doctor of Theology in the Catholic Church not only does not know the Catholic definition of death but tries to dismiss it when presented by labeling it ‘dualism’. .

Do you deny that the Catechism is dualist in its metaphysics?

 

[grannymh]

Granny, by what hermeneutical principle do you interpret some aspects of a book as symbolic, and other aspects of the same book as literally historical? How do you manage this?

I use the principle of common sense when reading Scripture. For example, when reading Genesis, I read the introduction to the book and the footnotes. When there is a question about Divine Revelation, I check the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Listening to homilies as well as the prayers within the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are beneficial. Also, I had excellent religion teachers so much so that when I read Scripture itself, I recognize its meaning. Meditating on Scripture is a blessing. I prefer the both / and principle. For example, the flood can be both historical in that it was real and symbolic as the water of Baptism. I manage all this with love.

Blessings,
granny

 

[grannymh]

Do you deny that the Catechism is dualist in its metaphysics?

Cartesian dualism is not part of Catholicism.

 

[CWBetts]

That is not correct. I completely believe what Dei Verbum taught, in continuity with what the Church has always taught. What’s your point?

Then why reject Inerreancy, which is clear in Dei Verbum?

 

[Thecapz]

You forget the bible was written long ago, when people weren’t educated enough to figure out the ark story was impossible.

So yes, it was recognized as true/fact. Now some are taking a back peddle, some are taking the ‘God can do anything’ card.

It doesn’t take much to realize it’s just one bad fairy tale which has consumed too many lives.

 

[itinerant1]

No – I was not taught by dualists, which one would have to be to accept your definition of death. Dualists carry the pre-Christian Greek baggage of imaging the essential person as a spiritual soul temporarily trapped within a physical body. My doctoral training focused more on the Hebraic psychosomatic unity of the human person.

StAnastasia

Death a involving the separation of body and soul does not necessarily entail the type of dualism of which your speak, i.e. “the essential person as a spiritual soul.” The view that the soul is the essential person, or to put it another way, that the individual is a soul, is an extreme dualism held by Plato and Descartes.

However, there is the moderate dualism of the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition, which the Church accepts as the best explanation of the human being as a composite of body and soul. The soul is, in this view, the principle of life and organization of the body.

The soul is not man, and the body is not man. Man is a composite being. The soul is a spiritual substance and therefore capable of subsisting without the body. However, the soul is not man since it is an incomplete spiritual substance, one whose nature it is to be united to a physical body which it animates.

Thus, within the moderate dualism if the Aristotelian-Thomistic tradition, death involves the separation of the soul from the physical body of which it was the principle of life.

The hylomorphic doctrine applied to philosophical psychology explains the ontological nature of man better than any other theory. So far, there is no better and fuller explanation of the psychosomatic unity of the individual than the moderate dualism of the Thomistic tradition.

 

[CWBetts]

You forget the bible was written long ago, when people weren’t educated enough to figure out the ark story was impossible.

So yes, it was recognized as true/fact. Now some are taking a back peddle, some are taking the ‘God can do anything’ card.

It doesn’t take much to realize it’s just one bad fairy tale which has consumed too many lives.

Not a very strong argument. “Back in the day people were stupid”

 

[itinerant1]

You forget the bible was written long ago, when people weren’t educated enough to figure out the ark story was impossible.

So yes, it was recognized as true/fact. Now some are taking a back peddle, some are taking the ‘God can do anything’ card.

It doesn’t take much to realize it’s just one bad fairy tale which has consumed too many lives.

It may not be possible for the Noah story to be historical in many points. You say it does not take much thinking “to realize it’s just one bad fairy tale.” I will go you one better – to take the Noah story as a “fairly tale” does not take any thinking at all because it is a thoughtless position.

A thoughtful position can involve inquiring into what the purpose of the story was, given that it is not an historical account.