Rebecca question about revelation

  • Thread starter Thread starter falisrm
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
falisrm said:
Ok, lets start over, this is one of the hardest things to comprehend so far. So Catholics believe that revelation for the church or revealed doctrine ended with the apostles. So its just a matter of figuring it out through inspiration with the Holy Ghost as they develop traditions and customs based on the doctrines and principles of the gospel that was already revealed.

That i understand. So the part where they receive revelation or inspiration from the Holy Ghost for their traditions, what do they call that? They also call it revelation? That’s basically what we believe too. Why didn’t anyone say so.
Click to expand...
But note the distinction between Public Revelation and private revelation. The first was given by Christ to the Apostles and ended with the death of the last Apostle. Private revelation, otoh, may be given to a person for his or her own spiritual benefit, but nothing received by the individual is incumbent on the Church as a whole to accept as true and for belief by the whole Body.

You may have heard of the apparitions of the Blessed Mother at Fatima or at Lourdes. These are private revelations that have been acknowledged by the magisterial authority of the Church as compatible with Public Revelation (i.e., nothing in the revelations received by the visionaries contradict anything already received either by Sacred Scripture or Sacred Tradition); thus these private revelations may be believed - or not - by the faithful. It is the duty of the Church to discern such private revelations when they come to its notice and judge whether or not they are fit for “public consumption”. A particular sign that a private revelation is not, in fact, from God, is when the one who claims such a revelation is not willing to submit to the Church’s ruling in its regard.
 
falisrm said:
So if the pope receives revelation, its no different then saying the leader of the LDS church receives revelation. Its the same concept
Click to expand...
We do not believe the Pope is a prophet.

“Bishops, as successors of the apostles, receive from the Lord, to whom was given all power in heaven and on earth, the mission to teach all nations and to preach the Gospel to every creature, so that all men may attain to salvation by faith, baptism and the fulfillment of the commandments. To fulfill this mission, Christ the Lord promised the Holy Spirit to the Apostles, and on Pentecost day sent the Spirit from heaven, by whose power they would be witnesses to Him before the nations and peoples and kings even to the ends of the earth. And that duty, which the Lord committed to the shepherds of His people, is a true service, which in sacred literature is significantly called “diakonia” or ministry.” (Lumen Gentium, 24)
 
are you serious. That means we are back to square one again with this discussion.
 
BDawg said:
Hi falisrm,

Fellow Mormon here, so maybe I can translate if I have it right.

Catholics believe that all Public Revelation ceased with the Apostles. Private Revelation continued–i.e., God still reveals Himself to individual people, but the content of these revelations is either a) nothing new, or b) meant only for the individual, and is not binding on the general church.

That part is pretty easy to understand, I think, but here’s the hard part for Mormons to get a handle on. Catholic doctrine has not been static since the Apostles–they acknowledge freely that there has been quite a bit of “doctrinal development.” (Google John Henry Newman for some background on this.) Mormons just don’t get it–how can there be “doctrinal development” if there is no new public revelation? We believe in “doctrinal development,” too, but attribute it to new revelations that shed new light on old subjects. To make matters worse, Catholics will often talk about how the Holy Spirit guided various Ecumenical Councils, etc., to formalize various doctrinal developments. Well, if the Holy Spirit guides it, how can it not be a revelation? From the Catholic point of view, however, nothing new has been revealed–the Holy Spirit has just led the Church to a better understanding of what was already revealed.

So if you ask me, there really isn’t as much difference between Mormons and Catholics on this issue as you might think. My only problem with the Catholic point of view is that I think it is ridiculous to say that something the Church never understood before was already “revealed.” The word “revealed” necessarily implies understanding, IMHO.

Hope that helps, and that I didn’t botch my description of Catholic beliefs.
Click to expand...
Well said … I would only add this … what you might call development of doctrine … take defining the Trinity for example does not mean the ‘doctrine’ is new … however, when challenges to the common understanding of the One God - and the concept of Father, Son and Holy Spirit entered into the community …

The Church looks to what was revealed and how that was understood and then answers the challenge - this at times results in ‘cementing’ as it were what a term is or creating a term to define the concept - as in Transubstanciation …

Language - of course has its limitaitons - and over time can change its meanings [Care to consider the various definitions of the word ‘gay’ over time … from happy - playful to a sexual orientation] … this is something that the Chruch has to deal with because the revelation does not change, God does not change and Truth does not change … what was instrinsically eveil 2000 years ago is still evil …

Anothe rexample: Mary as the God Bearer - Theotokos - Mother of God … this was not a new doctrine exactly but was a fact that came out of the heresies - one denying thehumanity of Christ and the other denying His Divinity … if Jesus is both fully God and fully human ergo, Mary is the Theotokos …

You see development [new] we see development [a fuller understanding - tht eliminates incorrect understanding regarding Christ - and something that was always true]

Your other point about understanding being part of revelation … this is true but only to a point …

But lets take calculus [just as an example]… Calculus is revealed to students [to the best ability of the instructor] but ow they understand that revelation is no way impacts the ‘truths’ behind calculus … the same is tru of the mathematical community … the same principals come to play but new and deeper understandings take the study of mathematics further and further … Newton did not create gravity, nor discover it … what he did was understand it and develop a method of exploring it and a language to discuss it …
 
No, we are saying the exact same thing you are saying. The leaders receive inspiration according to their position.
We receive personal inspiration for ourselves or our families according to the holy ghost.

This is the biggest round a bout i have ever seen in my life. BDawg, do you have any comments about this?
 
falisrm said:
So if the pope receives revelation, its no different then saying the leader of the LDS church receives revelation. Its the same concept
Click to expand...
No; if the Holy Father receives a revelation it may be for him alone and not for the rest of the Church. If he does receive a revelation, he knows that to be a true one it must not conflict what the Church already teaches. And whatever revelation he may receive will not change what is already believed as received through the Public Revelation of Christ to the Apostles. IOW, if Pope Benedict receives a “revelation” that the Eucharist must now be given under the signs of Pepsi and bananas, he knows that it is a false revelation because it conflicts with what already has been received from Christ and thus cannot be accepted by the Church as a whole.
 
You catholics were just saying the leaders receive inspiration from the holy ghost about your doctrine and how you develop your traditions, based on the revelations that was already established from the apostles and christ. So now your saying there is no such thing?
 
falisrm said:
You catholics were just saying the leaders receive inspiration from the holy ghost about your doctrine and how you develop your traditions, based on the revelations that was already established from the apostles and christ. So now your saying there is no such thing?
Click to expand...
no one ever said there is no such thing
 
falisrm, perhaps we view the purpose of revelation as for different purposes. What is the purpose of revelation in Mormonism?
 
falisrm said:
are you serious. That means we are back to square one again with this discussion.
Click to expand...
It’s really not as complex as you are making it out to be.

Public revelation resulted in the deposit of faith given to us in apostolic times. That information was immense and complex, and two thousand years later we are still digesting it. The Holy Spirit guides the Magisterium in the constant process of understanding and teaching the faith. This guidance does NOT include leading the Pope or anyone in the leadership to proclaim brand-spanking-new dogmas out of thin air nor does the oly Spirit guide the Magisterium to invalidate old teachings. On the rare occasions that new dogmas have had to be defined, it has been on an issue which has been present within the Church for a long time, but which had reached a point that an official ruling had to be made.

Private revelation can happen to anyone, anywhere, but it cannot contradict the ancient teachings of the church nor can it supplant older teachings. Claims of private revelation are investigated thoroughly by the Church to determine if the message is compatible with Church teaching. If the revelation passes the tests that the Church puts it to, it may be given the stamp of approval for the faithful to believe. But no Catholic is bound to believe in any private revelation.
 
falisrm said:
No, we are saying the exact same thing you are saying. The leaders receive inspiration according to their position.
Click to expand...
Your leaders, however, claim the ability to receive new revelation that must be accepted by all faithful LDS members, e.g., the priesthood open to men of black African descent. Such ability to receive new revelation that will change the original Deposit of the Faith (Public Revelation) is not possible for the Catholic Church - or the Orthodox.
 
You guys were just talking about how the revelation was given to the apostles and christ in the scriptures. oops, hold on. i’m still typing.

And then what the leaders of the catholic church does is get inspiration or revelation from the holy ghost and develop the traditions of the mass or what ever is in the catholic church. Its just not adding onto or changing the origional revelations received by the apostles. That is exactly what we believe too.

But now your saying that’s not the case?
 
falisrm said:
You guys were just talking about how the revelation was given to the apostles and christ in the scriptures. oops, hold on. i’m still typing.
Click to expand...
Christ did not receive the Holy Spirit, he SENT it.
And then what the leaders of the catholic church does is get inspiration or revelation from the holy ghost and develop the traditions of the mass or what ever is in the catholic church. Its just not adding onto or changing the origional revelations received by the apostles. That is exactly what we believe too.
Click to expand...
But now your saying that’s not the case?
Click to expand...
falisrm, we see your changing doctrines as more than coming to an understanding of existing doctrines. Mormonism has gone completely out of the deposit of faith, into something “other”.

The most defining revelation that you accept, that of a “restoration”, we flat out view as a private revelation, given to JS, that is binding on no one but him. This, and his other claimed private revelations completely contradict Christian doctrines in many ways.

This is mainly what your church objects to, that we do not accept that God will contradict known doctrines so radically. This is what your church calls “not believing in revelation”.
 
so ibkc and FCEGM are saying that there is no inspiration given to the leaders or the pope or if there is then it has to jive with doctrine or revelation already given with the apostles
 
falisrm said:
You guys were just talking about how the revelation was given to the apostles and christ in the scriptures.
Click to expand...
So far, so good.
And then what the leaders of the catholic church does is get inspiration or revelation from the holy ghost and develop the traditions of the mass or what ever in the catholic church. Its just not adding onto or changing the origional revelations received by the apostles.
Click to expand...
The Holy Ghost does not reveal anything new, He only enlightens the Mind of the Church to see what was already there in the original Deposit of the Faith. So, for example, the deepening understanding of the role of the Blessed Virgin Mary in the life of the Church contributes to the development of doctrine in her regard and this contributes to the liturgical life of the Church in the feast days named in her honor on which our Masses thank God for the glories He accomplished in her as a foreshadowing of what He can accomplish in us. All this is done in the light of the Holy Spirit opening the minds of the theologians of the Church to expound on the depths already received in the Original and Public Revelation. As this is going on through the centuries, the Magisterial Authority of the Church ensures that nothing will be taught that is incongruent with Public Revelation.
That is exactly what we believe too.
Click to expand...
Not if you believe that new revelations can be received by your Prophet that will change what must be believed and practiced by faithful Mormons - especially if they contradict previous Prophets (as with the priesthood I just mentioned).
 
falisrm said:
so ibkc and FCEGM are saying that there is no inspiration given to the leaders or the pope or if there is then it has to jive with doctrine or revelation already given with the apostles
Click to expand...
That’s close enough. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top