R
RyanL
Guest
This is off-topic, but I just wanted to set something straight. The Assumption of the Blessed Virgin is dogma.
From Munificentissimus Deus:
God Bless,
RyanL
- Status
From Munificentissimus Deus:
RyanL
B
BrownR
Guest
I reviewed Ludwig Ott’s statement from “Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma” which was written after Pope Pius XII wrote “Munificentissimus Deus” and on further scrutiny I think he’s simply referring to the fact that Pope Pius XII doesn’t specifically refer to whether Mary’s physical body died or not, meaning it could have died here on earth and then been assumed or she could have been assumed before physically dying.
Thanks for the clarification.
F
Faith1960
Guest
I’ve been looking at lots of blogs over the past few days and over and over I read comments about James being Jesus’ brother. Not step-brother or cousin. Brother. it seems like everyone except for Catholics believe that Jesus had siblings. Why is that? Why would seemingly most non-Catholic scholars insist he had siblings if he didn’t?
F
Faith1960
Guest
I think that my initial reaction to the discovery of the James ossuary was excitement, until, of course, I kept being told that Jesus couldn’t possibly had any brothers.
N
Nullasalus
Guest
Well, a half-brother is still a brother, and from what I’ve read the words get tricky in this specific context. I think Catholics in general are largely reluctant to drop the cousins idea even for half-brother - despite being compatible - just because it’s pointless to do so unless the facts come in strongly.I think that my initial reaction to the discovery of the James ossuary was excitement, until, of course, I kept being told that Jesus couldn’t possibly had any brothers.
From what I’ve read, the Eastern Orthodox tend to view Jesus’ brothers as half-brothers, and the protestants largely view the brothers as full brothers, though that depends on specific faith. I’d say the reason protestants tend to just called Jesus’ brothers ‘brothers’ is because it’s a non-issue for them - if they’re brothers, half-brothers, or cousins, their beliefs and traditions aren’t really affected for the most part. Primary evidence of Christ is consideration enough.
A
Anuarite
Guest
May the peace of our Lord be with all here.
I have been reading this thread and some of the comments on this topic. Sometimes I am amazed at what I see. In this day and age we should have a little bit more understanding of cultural differences around the world.
Just watch TV when they show the Middle East and see how many people live under the same roof. Watch a documentary on Palestine or Iraq and see how the poor live over there. And this is the 21st century. Most of the people in the world have stronger family ties than in the western civilization, and more relatives live in the same household.
I come from Africa and I grew up in the same house as my cousins males and females and we all are sisters and brothers. And they are all referred to as children of my parents. I used to have an uncle and it’s only at age 26 that I found out that his grand father was just neighbor to my grand father. All this time I thought he was a blood relative. One day I questioned the ties to a “cousin” and my grand-mother went on a hunger strike for 2 days saying I insulted the honor of the family with my “western” ways of acting.
One should just take a plane to one third world country and see how people live there. The cousin interpretation is only difficult to understand for someone who does not take in account how people lived where they lived. I would advise us to try to learn more about other cultures and how they live and how family members interact, read history books about the Jewish traditions and culture of today and back history line. Maybe things will not seem so difficult to accept.
I trust the Church which is almost 2000 years old, which has the magisterium made up of bishops from all over the world, each with their different cultural backgrounds. When they come to a consensus on something. it is not hard for me to take their teaching over an interpretation of some smart guys or girls, who think they understand it all. Just because some one has a PhD in something and has an opinion on something is not an assurance that they know what they are talking about. Especially those arm chair scholars who have never set foot outside of North America.
Lovingly in Christ
I have been reading this thread and some of the comments on this topic. Sometimes I am amazed at what I see. In this day and age we should have a little bit more understanding of cultural differences around the world.
Just watch TV when they show the Middle East and see how many people live under the same roof. Watch a documentary on Palestine or Iraq and see how the poor live over there. And this is the 21st century. Most of the people in the world have stronger family ties than in the western civilization, and more relatives live in the same household.
I come from Africa and I grew up in the same house as my cousins males and females and we all are sisters and brothers. And they are all referred to as children of my parents. I used to have an uncle and it’s only at age 26 that I found out that his grand father was just neighbor to my grand father. All this time I thought he was a blood relative. One day I questioned the ties to a “cousin” and my grand-mother went on a hunger strike for 2 days saying I insulted the honor of the family with my “western” ways of acting.
One should just take a plane to one third world country and see how people live there. The cousin interpretation is only difficult to understand for someone who does not take in account how people lived where they lived. I would advise us to try to learn more about other cultures and how they live and how family members interact, read history books about the Jewish traditions and culture of today and back history line. Maybe things will not seem so difficult to accept.
I trust the Church which is almost 2000 years old, which has the magisterium made up of bishops from all over the world, each with their different cultural backgrounds. When they come to a consensus on something. it is not hard for me to take their teaching over an interpretation of some smart guys or girls, who think they understand it all. Just because some one has a PhD in something and has an opinion on something is not an assurance that they know what they are talking about. Especially those arm chair scholars who have never set foot outside of North America.
Lovingly in Christ
P
Pater_Familias
Guest
Well said. Another disconcerting aspect is that comments were made on this thread that maybe the perpetual virginity was declared a bit early and that any subsequent archeological discoveries such as this find might disprove it. Such comments are indicative of faulty catholic formation and thought. The perpetual virginity was infallibly declared by the holy father and as such i a catholic know that our lord had no biological siblings. To even make such a comment ,it is submitted,calls the teaching of infallibility into doubt and although diplomatically couched comes perilously close to a descent into heresy. The half brother theory is idiotic since it presuppouses a biological connection which could only exist via the blessed Mary ever virgin.May the peace of our Lord be with all here.
I have been reading this thread and some of the comments on this topic. Sometimes I am amazed at what I see. In this day and age we should have a little bit more understanding of cultural differences around the world.
Just watch TV when they show the Middle East and see how many people live under the same roof. Watch a documentary on Palestine or Iraq and see how the poor live over there. And this is the 21st century. Most of the people in the world have stronger family ties than in the western civilization, and more relatives live in the same household.
I come from Africa and I grew up in the same house as my cousins males and females and we all are sisters and brothers. And they are all referred to as children of my parents. I used to have an uncle and it s only at age 26 that I found out that his grand father was just neighbor to my grand father. All this time I thought he was a blood relative. One day I questioned the ties to a cousin and my grand-mother went on a hunger strike for 2 days saying I insulted the honor of the family with my western ways of acting.
One should just take a plane to one third world country and see how people live there. The cousin interpretation is only difficult to understand for someone who does not take in account how people lived where they lived. I would advise us to try to learn more about other cultures and how they live and how family members interact, read history books about the Jewish traditions and culture of today and back history line. Maybe things will not seem so difficult to accept.
I trust the Church which is almost 2000 years old, which has the magisterium made up of bishops from all over the world, each with their different cultural backgrounds. When they come to a consensus on something. it is not hard for me to take their teaching over an interpretation of some smart guys or girls, who think they understand it all. Just because some one has a PhD in something and has an opinion on something is not an assurance that they know what they are talking about. Especially those arm chair scholars who have never set foot outside of North America.
Lovingly in Christ
Oh and can we please stop being overawed by what an expert has said,they are a dime a dozen and for one who supports a position,ten can be found supporting opposite position. The expert i choose to rely on is 2000 years of tradition and witness that is what makes me catholic
God bless
Arthur
Ad Jesu per Mariam
N
Nullasalus
Guest
For my part, I’m not questioning the faith. But, the faith does interact with the archaeology and discoveries - so, it’s natural to wonder a little bit on dogma and discovery impact.
F
Faith1960
Guest
That’s nice for you. Truly.Well said. Another disconcerting aspect is that comments were made on this thread that maybe the perpetual virginity was declared a bit early and that any subsequent archeological discoveries such as this find might disprove it. Such comments are indicative of faulty catholic formation and thought. The perpetual virginity was infallibly declared by the holy father and as such i a catholic know that our lord had no biological siblings. To even make such a comment ,it is submitted,calls the teaching of infallibility into doubt and although diplomatically couched comes perilously close to a descent into heresy. The half brother theory is idiotic since it presuppouses a biological connection which could only exist via the blessed Mary ever virgin.
Oh and can we please stop being overawed by what an expert has said,they are a dime a dozen and for one who supports a position,ten can be found supporting opposite position. The expert i choose to rely on is 2000 years of tradition and witness that is what makes me catholic
God bless
Arthur
Ad Jesu per Mariam
Nevertheless, I’m a little more open minded about all sorts of things, my faith included. I’ve read right here, on this very message board at one time or another, that the Church is very open to people questioning and looking at all the available information themselves because Catholicism is the one true Church and if they seek, they will find the answers with the Church. Our Church isn’t some cult, which I’ve actually heard it being accused of being. Remember: Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. for everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. Matthew 7:7-8 
J
JimG
Guest
Matthew 10-3 says that James is the son of Alphaeus. Do these people think that Mary had an affair with Alphaeus?
F
Faith1960
Guest
I have no idea.
B
BrianH
Guest
No there are people who contend Mary married Alphaeus after the death of Joseph. James Tabor comes to mind.
N
Nicene
Guest
You mean the same James Tabor who wrote about the “Jesus Dynasty” being an earthly reign of Christ which was carried out by his siblings?
James being the successor to Jesus in the “Royal Kingdom” and the messianic movement that Paul changed really wasn’t a religious movement but rather a political and social movement?
That James Tabor?
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
B
BrianH
Guest
Yep.
Did you read his book or do you watch Oprah?
Just clarifying the post not advocating all the man’s views.
Did you read his book or do you watch Oprah?
Just clarifying the post not advocating all the man’s views.
N
Nicene
Guest
No, but you did depend on the ignorance of others to promote that view.Yep.
Did you read his book or do you watch Oprah?
Just clarifying the post not advocating all the man’s views.
Nice Oprah slam by the way; insinuating national enquirer theology.
And yet I’m not the one who elevated and attempted to use a national enquirer equivelant theologic source to promote my argument.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
J
JimG
Guest
So that would make James the son of Mary and blood brother of Jesus. Of course, the new testament nowhere refers to him as her son. And if that were the case, it would have made sense for Jesus to entrust Mary to James’ care–(not only a son but an apostle!). Instead, he entrusts her care to John.
The fact is, such an idea is simply idle speculation with no basis in scripture, history, or tradition.
B
BrianH
Guest
Slam?
J
Jaypeeto4
Guest
So because of a disputed ossuary, and a documentary by the erudite James Cameron, we Catholics are supposed to jettison our belief in the infallibly defined dogma of Mary’s perpetual virginity? Whoa there !!
Let’s consider a few things.
WOULD Joseph had had sex with Mary after Jesus was born?
Scripture calls Joseph “a righteous man.” Now both the Angel Gabriel, and his betrothed Mary, had told him that Mary’s child was a) conceived by the power of the Spirit of God, and b) was the eternal Son of God and that the Holy Spirit had “overshadowed” Mary. Would a righteous Jewish man then continue to regard Mary as just another nice gal ??
She was, in her person, the Tent of Meeting between God and humanity, a new ark of the covenant, and we are to believe that Joseph would regard her as ordinary after that, and have sex with her ?? Somehow I doubt that very seriously.
SUPPOSEDLY Mary had a BEVY of other kids after Jesus, at least four “brothers” and at least two or more “sisters,” all of whom were apparently born AFTER the incident of the Finding of Jesus in the Temple when Jesus was twelve years old.
SO, at the beginning of Jesus ministry, his oldest brother would have been about 18, with at least five younger brothers and sisters. And Joseph was apparently dead by this time.
Well, it is my understanding that in the Jewish culture of ancient Israel, the younger kids treated the Firstborn (Jesus) with great deference and respect. Yet Jesus’ much younger brothers sarcastically try to boss him into hurrying up and going to Jerusalem. Somehow, I don’t buy it, that these were his younger brothers. He was the Firstborn, and Mary and Joseph would have raised them better than THAT, even if they did NOT believe in Jesus’ mission at the time.
Next, the evangelists name who was at the foot of the Cross with Mary. Salome was there. Mary’s sister Mary the wife of Clopas (sister in law??) was there. Mary Magdalene was there. The Beloved Disciple was there (John). Yet not ONE of Mary’s younger sons or daughters was there at the Cross to comfort their grieving mother. What dastardly disrespect !!
Moreover, at this time, some of the brothers/sisters would still be in their teens, so they should have been WITH THEIR MOTHER, IN JERUSALEM, at Passover-time. They WEREN’T. That is REALLY, REALLY ODD. That is, IF they were Mary’s natural children.
The belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity could NEVER have gotten off the ground in the early Church if there were six or seven sons of the Virgin Mary (with kids of their own) alive at the time. Yet the belief is attested to in popular Christian literature, such as the uninspired ProtoEvangelium of James, very early on.
No folks, our Church’s teaching of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is based on solid foundations. Let’s not let a controversial ossuary and a James Cameron documentary shake our Faith in the Truth.
God bless,
Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)
Let’s consider a few things.
WOULD Joseph had had sex with Mary after Jesus was born?
Scripture calls Joseph “a righteous man.” Now both the Angel Gabriel, and his betrothed Mary, had told him that Mary’s child was a) conceived by the power of the Spirit of God, and b) was the eternal Son of God and that the Holy Spirit had “overshadowed” Mary. Would a righteous Jewish man then continue to regard Mary as just another nice gal ??
She was, in her person, the Tent of Meeting between God and humanity, a new ark of the covenant, and we are to believe that Joseph would regard her as ordinary after that, and have sex with her ?? Somehow I doubt that very seriously.
SUPPOSEDLY Mary had a BEVY of other kids after Jesus, at least four “brothers” and at least two or more “sisters,” all of whom were apparently born AFTER the incident of the Finding of Jesus in the Temple when Jesus was twelve years old.
SO, at the beginning of Jesus ministry, his oldest brother would have been about 18, with at least five younger brothers and sisters. And Joseph was apparently dead by this time.
Well, it is my understanding that in the Jewish culture of ancient Israel, the younger kids treated the Firstborn (Jesus) with great deference and respect. Yet Jesus’ much younger brothers sarcastically try to boss him into hurrying up and going to Jerusalem. Somehow, I don’t buy it, that these were his younger brothers. He was the Firstborn, and Mary and Joseph would have raised them better than THAT, even if they did NOT believe in Jesus’ mission at the time.
Next, the evangelists name who was at the foot of the Cross with Mary. Salome was there. Mary’s sister Mary the wife of Clopas (sister in law??) was there. Mary Magdalene was there. The Beloved Disciple was there (John). Yet not ONE of Mary’s younger sons or daughters was there at the Cross to comfort their grieving mother. What dastardly disrespect !!
Moreover, at this time, some of the brothers/sisters would still be in their teens, so they should have been WITH THEIR MOTHER, IN JERUSALEM, at Passover-time. They WEREN’T. That is REALLY, REALLY ODD. That is, IF they were Mary’s natural children.
The belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity could NEVER have gotten off the ground in the early Church if there were six or seven sons of the Virgin Mary (with kids of their own) alive at the time. Yet the belief is attested to in popular Christian literature, such as the uninspired ProtoEvangelium of James, very early on.
No folks, our Church’s teaching of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is based on solid foundations. Let’s not let a controversial ossuary and a James Cameron documentary shake our Faith in the Truth.
God bless,
Jaypeeto4 (aka Jaypeeto3)
B
BrownR
Guest
The putative authenticity of the James Ossuary doesn’t fundamentally attack the dogma of Mary’s perpetual virginity. It would simply imply that these “brothers and sisters” were possible step-siblings born of Joseph through another wife.
The Protoevangelium of James actually says that Jesus’ brothers and sisters were children born of Joseph by a previous wife.
Edit: Actually, after reading your last statement, I think you’re actually using the Gospel of James to defend the dogma because it was allowed to flourish with no contradiction by any living relatives. I wasn’t paying attention and thought you might have been confused, but I don’t think that’s the case. Anyway, that’s a good point you have.
P
Pater_Familias
Guest
I agree no one says an intellectual straitjacket is a prerequisite for the exercise of ones faith.However there is a fine line between open minded argument and heresy. The questioning of an infallible pronouncement is not faithful to the magisterium of the church and brings one easily into a heretical position.That’s nice for you. Truly.
- Status