Heaven

[fhansen]

I understand that, but does the CC allow us to believe heaven is a glorified place, like that one priest- blogger suggested or it it incompatible with Church teaching? After emailing my pastor, I’m unsure, though he did say believing that isn’t heresay.

Heresay? I daresay your Kindle has some spell check issues worse than my iPad! Anyway, I can’t imagine why it would be heresy to believe heaven is a glorified place.

 

[Faith1960]

The Holographic Principle was most notably expounded by the Dutch Nobel-Laurite (1999 Nobel Prize) physicist Gerard 't Hooft

The idea was later expanded upon by the physicist Leonard Susskind.

While parts of this idea are accepted as settled science, the logical conclusions of the idea are not. The conclusion of the idea is basically that all of three-dimensional space which we occupy (which is often expressed as 3+1 dimensional space, where time is the “+1” dimension, but is not properly a “fourth” dimension) is REALLY a two-dimensional (plus 1 dimension) “hologram.”

Just as a 3D hologram is described by a combination of two-dimensional definitions, all of space and reality that we know is just a “hologram” described by definitions that could be simply be equated as “words” (“bits” of information, circumscribed about a “boundary layer” of data that describes us, but which we can never quite reach because our efforts to reach that boundary contribute to our own self-knowledge, meaning the boundary is ever expanding as our knowledge of it increases).

Where have I heard this before? Long before Nobel-laureate physicists? Oh, yeah, now I remember:

I don’t know what religion Gerard T’hooft was (he was Dutch, and probably not Catholic). I DO know that his most famous disciple, the physicist Lenny Susskind, was an atheist of Jewish descent. I don’t know if either of them ever realized that, if I were to try to explain humanity to ancient peoples, I could hardly come up with a better explanation that they would understand.

Heaven IS a glorified place. But it is a place beyond our comprehension.

Can you shows where it’s described as ‘glorified’ somewhere besides The New Theological Movement? I can’t find it

 

[DavidFilmer]

Can you shows where it’s described as ‘glorified’ somewhere besides The New Theological Movement? I can’t find it

Hmmm. I have given you a considered response to your question about quantium physics. Now you ask me about the New Theological Movement. I admit to no such knowledge. Maybe you can repay me the courtesy of my reply about quantum physics with your knowledge of the New Theological Movement.

According to the first definition of “glorified” per dictionary.com, the word means,

to cause to be or treat as being more splendid, excellent, etc., than would normally be considered.

I would say that ANY religion that recognizes anything that even resembles heaven in the Catholic sense would agree that heaven is “glorified” according to this definition.

But, I’m always interested in learning something new. What definition does the “New Theological Movement” (whatever that is) have for “glorified” that would differ from this plainly obvious definition which is shared by Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, and just about any other Faith I could name?

 

[Nita]

But, I’m always interested in learning something new. What definition does the “New Theological Movement” (whatever that is) have for “glorified” that would differ from this plainly obvious definition which is shared by Catholics, Orthodox, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, and just about any other Faith I could name?

Hi David. Faith1960 gave a link to the New Theological Movement blog that prompted this thread. In my post #13, I quoted the paragraph by Fr. Erlenbush where he uses the expression “glorified place”.

 

[Nita]

I understand that, but does the CC allow us to believe heaven is a glorified place, like that one priest- blogger suggested or it it incompatible with Church teaching? After emailing my pastor, I’m unsure, though he did say believing that isn’t heresay.

Assuming you do not have some really offbeat idea of what “glorified” means, then yes, the CC does allow one to believe heaven is a glorified place. That is what your pastor means when he told you it wouldn’t be heresy to believe it.

It would be heresy only if the Catholic Church explicitly forbade us to believe it, or if it in some way contradicted any existing doctrine of the CC. But it does neither, and so your pastor said you could believe it without committing heresy. That is what all of us here have been trying to tell you.

 

[Faith1960]

Heresay? I daresay your Kindle has some spell check issues worse than my iPad! Anyway, I can’t imagine why it would be heresy to believe heaven is a glorified place.

Ooops. That mistake wasn’t my Kindle, it was all mine.

 

[Faith1960]

Assuming you do not have some really offbeat idea of what “glorified” means, then yes, the CC does allow one to believe heaven is a glorified place. That is what your pastor means when he told you it wouldn’t be heresy to believe it.

It would be heresy only if the Catholic Church explicitly forbade us to believe it, or if it in some way contradicted any existing doctrine of the CC. But it does neither, and so your pastor said you could believe it without committing heresy. That is what all of us here have been trying to tell you.

By glorified place, I mean a place transfigured into something spiritual and metaphysical. A place befitting transformed glorified bodies, but it would have to be a real place, which contradicts what another priest I asked last night said.
He said that “I can only tell you what Pope Benedict siad: Heaven is not a geographical place, it is a new state of conciousness.” I don’t know what that means, and anyway, Jesus and Mary went SOMEWHERE.

Is my idea of a glorified place acceptable to the Church?

 

[Faith1960]

The Church does not teach that ANYTHING that we can even IMAGINE is comparable to heaven. It is NOT an all-night pizza buffet with free beer.

A multimeter? Do you mean a micrometer (a device to measure distance?) Or a multi-meter (a device to measure voltage and resistance?)

Or, do you mean a “multiverse” - a hypothetical physics model that supposes that EVERY quantum possibility (which numbers in the billions of billions (etc) per second) spawns an entire alternate universe). Such a physical model has been called “ontologically extravagant,” but we have no math to completely discredit it. But it is far less likely than the full adaption of the holographic principle (which seems far more mathematically compatible, as, indeed, major parts of it are considered settled fact within the scientific community).

Please define your terms. And, realize that some of us who participate on this Forum are educated and informed about the latest developments in quantum theory.

Ok. TOTALLY over my head.

 

[Faith1960]

The New Theological Movement

newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/

 

[Nita]

By glorified place, I mean a place transfigured into something spiritual and metaphysical. A place befitting transformed glorified bodies, but it would have to be a real place, which contradicts what another priest I asked last night said.
He said that “I can only tell you what Pope Benedict siad: Heaven is not a geographical place, it is a new state of conciousness.” I don’t know what that means, and anyway, Jesus and Mary went SOMEWHERE.

Is my idea of a glorified place acceptable to the Church?

A spiritual, metaphysical place is not the same as a geographical place. If you believe in a “spirital and metaphysical place” you are not believing in a geographical place.

Thus what you believe agrees perfectly with what Pope Benedict said - that “Heaven is not a geographical place…” - you believe in something that is NOT a geographical place.

It is a “place”, but not in the sense that we understand “place” in the physical, unglorified world that we live in prior to our physical death.

 

[Faith1960]

I sent that priest another email, saying I don’t understand what Pope B. meant. He answered “It’s a lot like saying Jesus as a glorified body we don’t know the details of heaven, only that we share in the consciousness of God, perhaps seeing as God sees. We don’t travel from.one place to another place when we die, but our Baptism into Jesus as resurrected allows us to share in an existence that differs from our life here that is limited to what our physical body, eyes, ears can hear.” Etc.
He didn’t say if it’s okay to des tribe Heaven as a “glorified” or.“uncontained place” like the priest from.the blog said.

 

[Faith1960]

A spiritual, metaphysical place is not the same as a geographical place. When you believe in a “spirital and metaphysical place” you are not believing in a geographical place.

Thus what you believe agrees perfectly with what Pope Benedict said - that “Heaven is not a geographical place…” - you believe in something that is NOT a geographical place.

But Jesus ans Mary’s bodies are there so it has to be a geographical place too, right?
How did their bodies ascend and assume upward if Heaven is a “state of consciousness?”

 

[Faith1960]

Just got another email from my pastor who told me to look heaven up in the catechism, his usual recommendation. And as usual, it doesn’t really answer my particular question.
It DOES refer to Heaven as a “celestial paradise,” which the dictionary has one definition as “ethereal”. The dictionary also defines ethereal as “unworldly, spiritual.”

 

[Nita]

But Jesus ans Mary’s bodies are there so it has to be a geographical place too, right?
How did their bodies ascend and assume upward if Heaven is a “state of consciousness?”

Not “geographical” in the same way that we use that term now. As a matter of face, I don’t think “geographical” would apply at all in the realm of heaven, which is what we’re talking about.

Part of the problem may be that there is a tendency to think of resurrected bodies in the same way that we think of our bodies now (only nicer ). In other words, we think of then as having many of the same “physical” properties as our unglorified bodies.

For example, we may think of resurrected bodies as somehow having to occupy physical, geographical space/place in the same way as they do prior to resurrection. (Dimensive property of physical objects.) This would be a mistake. Resurrected bodies are different from unglorified bodies - we know this from Scripture. Jesus could pass through a solid door after His resurrection. (Jesus could be present in the same geographical place as the door!) Obviously, our conception of “place” for unglorified bodies does not hold true for glorified bodies. We don’t know how to mentally grasp or explain this difference in “space” occupation – we just know that it is true and it is different from what we experience now. Fr. Ryan (New Theological Movement) refers to this difference in the property of “space” as “glorified space” - to distinguish it from “unglorified space”.

 

[Faith1960]

Part of the problem may be that there is a tendency to think of resurrected bodies in the same way that we think of our bodies now (only nicer . In other words, we think of then as having many of the same “physical” properties as our unglorified bodies.

For example, we may think of resurrected bodies as somehow having to occupy physical, geographical space/place in the same way as they do prior to resurrection. (Dimensive property of physical objects.) This would be a mistake. Resurrected bodies are different from unglorified bodies - we know this from Scripture. Jesus could pass through a solid door after His resurrection. (Jesus could be present in the same geographical place as the door!) Obviously, our conception of “place” for unglorified bodies does not hold true for unglorified bodies. We don’t know how to mentally grasp or explain this difference in “space” occupation – we just know that it is true and it is different from what we experience now. Fr. Ryan (New Theological Movement) refers to this difference in the property of “space” as “glorified space” - to distinguish it from “unglorified space”.

And are you sure his using the words “glorified space” is acceptable to the CC, even though neither priest I personally corresponded with agreed with or used the word “glorified” during this discussion ((unless you count my pastor’s comment that using that description isn’t heresy?)

 

[Nita]

And are you sure his using the words “glorified space” is acceptable to the CC, even though neither priest I personally specifically corresponded with agreed with or used the word “glorified” during this discussion ((unless you count my pastor’s comment that using that description isn’t heresy?)

Yes.
The priest who wrote the column, and the priest (your pastor) who told you it wasn’t heresy should be enough to reassure you. They have far more knowledge and authority than I do. Listen to them and accept their word.

 

[Faith1960]

Yes.
The priest who wrote the column, and the priest (your pastor) who told you it wasn’t heresy should be enough to reassure you. They have far more knowledge and authority than I do. Listen to them and accept their word.

Ok, thanks for you patience.

 

[Nita]

Ok, thanks for you patience.

You’re very welcome.

Just a few Catechism quotes. They don’t use the specific word “glorified”, but they do speak of the “glory of heaven”.

CCC 769 "The Church . . . will receive its perfection only in the glory of heaven

**CCC 1029 **In the glory of heaven the blessed continue joyfully to fulfill God’s will in relation to other men and to all creation. Already they reign with Christ; with him “they shall reign for ever and ever.”

CCC 1715 He who believes in Christ has new life in the Holy Spirit. the moral life, increased and brought to maturity in grace, is to reach its fulfillment in the glory of heaven.

**CCC 1821 **,In hope, the Church prays for “all men to be saved.” She longs to be united with Christ, her Bridegroom, in the glory of heaven:
Looking forward to meeting you in the “glory of heaven”.

 

[Faith1960]

You’re very welcome.

Just a few Catechism quotes. They don’t use the specific word “glorified”, but they do speak of the “glory of heaven”.

CCC 769 "The Church . . . will receive its perfection only in the glory of heaven

**CCC 1029 **In the glory of heaven the blessed continue joyfully to fulfill God’s will in relation to other men and to all creation. Already they reign with Christ; with him “they shall reign for ever and ever.”

CCC 1715 He who believes in Christ has new life in the Holy Spirit. the moral life, increased and brought to maturity in grace, is to reach its fulfillment in the glory of heaven.

**CCC 1821 **,In hope, the Church prays for “all men to be saved.” She longs to be united with Christ, her Bridegroom, in the glory of heaven:
Looking forward to meeting you in the “glory of heaven”.

Yeah, their lack of using the word “glorified” in my 2 priests way of describing heaven is what was troubling me because the priest in my link used the word and it made sense to me. Like you were talking about glorified bodies being different from our own, his describing heaven as being glorified made me better able to understand it in my limited human mind. Not that I can totally understand it now, we never will until we (hopefully) get there, but saying heaven is glorified makes it easier to envision something far different from our own reality.

 

[Faith1960]

Is St.Thomas, St Thomas Aquinas or a different saint? Father first told me that he’d say the part of the article I c&pd for him, under “Is Heaven a Place?” "Reflects Church teaching " but among other things told me I should stick with the writings of “experts such as St. Thomas and Blessed John Paul.”

In his next email he told me that he “isn’t a theologian but that the priest (in the article) is attempting to explain heaven, which is impossible. His terms are not heretical but only another attempt to explain the inexplicable.”

I asked him if what the author said doesn’t reflect what Church teaching says after all? And he said that he’s “not saying anything about the priest (bloggers) theology, he’s proposing an explanation of heaven” and for me “to read the CCC.”

I’m.not sure if he views heaven as being a glorified place or not.