Paul used non-canonical sources from Greek poetry both in his sermon on Mars hill in Acts 17 and in his letter to Titus. Jude referred to the non-canonical Assumption of Moses in his short letter. When non-canonical sources support good theology, they should be used.That doesn’t mean that writings other than the bible should not be read–it just means that good theology doesn’t need to be buttressed by them.
A work not admitted into the canon of scripture is not necessarily worthless, and it may well be inspired by God. For awhile the deuterocanonical books were not officially part of the canon - that didn’t mean that at that time they were worthless. Although our canon of scripture has been authoritatively defined, you will find that the wording of these declarations does not exclude the possibility that e.g. some of the books embraced by the Orthodox could be accepted as scripture (3 & 4 Maccabees, etc).I don’t understand how a document so WORTHLESS that it wasn’t admitted into the Canon of scripture…
Wow! I find this amazing! Even the theologically unlettered and untutored like I am are aware of a large number of books other than the Bible that are used to buttress good theology. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Pre Nicene and Post Nicene writings of the Church Fathers, the Catholic Encyclopedia and the vast array of Catholic Missals (I’m old enough to have a Maryknoll Missal) Papal encyclicals and a host of others come immediately to mind.That doesn’t mean that writings other than the bible should not be read–it just means that good theology doesn’t need to be buttressed by them.
I’m not catholic so if this is a stupid question, I apologize. But why is it important that Mary remain a virgin after she gives birth?How can we interpret and defend Mary’s virginity when someone points out this verse as her not be a virgin? I am trying to explain this to a Bible only person.
Matthew1:25But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son.
This article may help you with your question:I’m not catholic so if this is a stupid question, I apologize. But why is it important that Mary remain a virgin after she gives birth?
Yes, this is essential church doctrine.I know someone who is training to be a Maryknoll lay missionary. In one of the theolgy classes this person was taught that the “virgin birth story” was a common type story in Jewish tradition. So, it was explained, it’s not shocking that the story of Jesus was told in this same tradition. The implication was made that bits and pieces of the story could be true but not all of it including the part about the virgin birth!! I was shocked and told this person this is possibly heresy to teach this within the guise of a catholic organization. Isn’t this essential church doctrine??? Really confused by some of the things I’m hearing that Maryknoll is teaching. Help!
I don’t see any heresy being taught…Yes, this is essential church doctrine.
Quote from Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma:
"Also after the Birth of Jesus Mary remained a Virgin. (De fide.)
… 'The Fifth General Council (553 AD) gives Mary the title of honour “perpetual virgin”.
(“De fide” means it has the highest level of theological certainty; it’s an infallible teaching of the Church.)
Maryknoll isn’t the only one teaching heresy. That’s why it’s so important to learn the truths of our faith - so we can recognize heresy and not be led astray.
Nita
*Yes, that is true.“the “virgin birth story” was a common type story in Jewish tradition.”
*Yes, that is true.“So, it was explained, it’s not shocking that the story of Jesus was told in this same tradition.”
*"The implication…" Thinking something you hear may imply something is hardly the same as being taught heresy!!! That sounds like someone looking for a fight when there is no reason for one. The extra information that was provided here sounds like exactly what should be discussed in a course for thinking adults.“The implication was made that bits and pieces of the story could be true but not all of it including the part about the virgin birth!!”