Heresy In The Hearing of The Faithful

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xpi22
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Theo2 said:
Father, With all due respect, the statement is true, but there is a greater truth that Mary was sinless from conception.
Click to expand...
Yes, and if you read my responses in this thread, you will see that I have said as much…
 
You misunderstand temptation, concupiscence, the fact that Jesus IS God with two natures, human and divine United without confusion in one Divine Person, God the Son Who could not/cannot sin. A contrary assertion is heresy.
 
Xpi22 said:
Why would you mock me?
Click to expand...
Point me to one reference from the “constant teaching of the Church” which states that Christ was UNABLE to turn the stones into bread when He was tempted in the desert.

Don’t show me where it says He did not do it. Show me where it says he “could not” do it.
 
Thank you! One mom is currently writing the Archbishop (Military) and the local bishop as well. I think I will affirm her decision and offer supporting witness if asked. In the meantime, I will ask if she or other moms may want to join me in speaking to Father. I think one has already, but it may do good if it happens again. Never thought a day like this would occur in my life. It was just so odd that many of us were speechless! It was so unbelievable
 
No one dismisses the 40 days. I think where you err is in conflating temptations to humans with temptations presented to God the Son. While He was tempted as we are in all things, it was without sin and without concupiscence on His part. He had no propensity toward sin as we do because of are concupiscence. He was not eyeing the stones and desiring them to be bread!
 
Xpi22 said:
You are not serious, Father. If you are serious, you lack understanding of the Incarnation or are playing around.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am serious.

I assure you, I do not lack any understanding of the Incarnation (not in the way you mean it).

Again, point me to where the “constant teaching of the Church” says that Christ was unable to turn the stones into bread.

That Gospel event is quite popular and a wealth of writings have been produced about it. If it is, as you say, the “constant teaching of the Church” that Christ could not turn the stones into bread, then surely there will be examples of that from reliable sources.
 
They certainly can pray the first part of the Hail Mary which is Scripture 😌
 
Xpi22 said:
For God there is no option to sin. Jesus has two natures united in One Divine Person. His human will was united to His divine will in One Divine Person. Because of this Union the is no option to sin. He is Himself the Supreme Good. This is true Freedom. Sin is slavery. God can not be not-God. Freedom can not be conflated with the option to sin. God is absolutely free and can not sin.
Click to expand...
And I disagree with none of that.
 
Ok Father, no one says He could not change stones, after all, as He said, God is able to raise up sons of Abraham from stones! The issue here is not His creative ability to change stones into bread but rather His inability by nature to sin and in the case of the temptation in the desert it was the behest of the evil one that was put aside. Acquiescence to the evil behest would be sin and Christ can not sin. This truth is the constant teaching of the Church. Christ’s creative power is not the question. We both agree the Church holds to that revealed truth (John 1).
 
Last edited:
I am not advocating what you assert that I am advocating. Look at the Dogma carefully. We are discussing God the Son, Second Person of the Trinity. OK. Who is the person of Jesus? God the Second Person of the Trinity. As God He has a divine nature TO which He, God the 2nd Person, took His created human nature. One Divine Person, God, two natures, two wills United -United- without confusion, truly Man and truly God in natures united IN ONE DIVINE PERSON. Hence Jesus IS God. Jesus is not God in a man, but God with two natures, two will…never at odds with one another. I affirm His Sacred Humanity.
 
Theo2 said:
I guess I missed that.
Click to expand...
And that is the point.

People jump to conclusions and can’t wait to write a letter to the bishop or the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to report some priest for “preaching heresy” when it turns out that, in reality, the person just “missed that point” that Father said.

(I’m not saying that YOU are writing any such letters, I mean some persons think this way).
 
I am not disagreeing but turning the stones into bread had implications far exceeding fulfilling Jesus’s hunger. Jesus’ mission was to save the world. To get people to believe in Him. What the devil offered was a way to be very popular to be the “bread king” as Bishop Sheen put it. To solve the problem of hunger in the world.
 
FrDavid96 said:
(I’m not saying that YOU are writing any such letters, I mean some persons think this way).
Click to expand...
Well I am glad you added that. My point is to say Mary is sinless from birth leaves, or can leave the impression, that Mary’s Immaculate Conception is not a dogma of the church. It is clearly not heresy but unfortunate emphasis IMO.
I agree with you that sometimes people seem to jump to judgments. I don’t think I am one of those people.
 
I haven’t seen discussion this intense since a Star Trek panel on when exactly the Romulans split from the Vulcans.
 
Xpi22 said:
Have you ever heard a priest preach heresy in a Catholic Church and, if so, how did you handle it?
Click to expand...
No, but I’ve seen many on this forum preach heresy, presume to know more than the last few popes on a variety of issues, know better than their bishop, know better than their priests, know what councils really meant when the pope doesn’t, defy direct papal direction on charity towards other faiths and separated brethren, and so forth . . .

🤬 🤯 😡
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top