Taylor Marshall's Twitter feed has disappeared

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracepoole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gracepoole said:
40.png
Emeraldlady:
‘Fertility’ is not a pagan concept. It underpins the Gospel so deeply and is infused into the majority of the parables. It’s much more pagan to make our bodies idols of infertility as is so rampant in western Catholics than to recognise the divine character of fertility in tribal culture.
Click to expand...
Catholics don’t worship Mother Earth and Catholics don’t worship fertility statues. Those concepts are patently pagan when compared with Church teaching.
Click to expand...
Catholics recognise Gods gifts in both nature and the mysterious process of fertility. That has got lost in the Catholic sensibility since contraception became so readily available. There is still a lot we can appreciate in tribal cultures that have not been infiltrated by modern solutions that are intrinsically selfish.
 
AlbertDerGrosse said:
40.png
Emeraldlady:
‘Fertility’ is not a pagan concept.
Click to expand...
Catholics do not pay dulia to concepts. We do so to God’s Saints who are real people, in Heaven, who are icons of Jesus Christ, who in turn is the very icon of divinity. We do not prostrate ourselves, burn incense to, or dance around “peace”, “love”, “fraternity”, “fertility”, “Mother Earth”, or any other concept because such behaviors are at the very least a form of dulia.

Those wood carvings were idols.
Click to expand...
We have doctrines that have the same divine authority over our behaviours that the idols had over ancient peoples behaviours.
 
Emeraldlady said:
We have doctrines that have the same divine authority over our behaviours that the idols had over ancient peoples behaviours.
Click to expand...
Could you flesh this out for me a bit, please? This sounds like you’re saying Catholic doctrine is an idol, but I honestly don’t believe that’s what you intend to say given your posting history (I enjoy your posts).
 
AlbertDerGrosse said:
40.png
Emeraldlady:
We have doctrines that have the same divine authority over our behaviours that the idols had over ancient peoples behaviours.
Click to expand...
Could you flesh this out for me a bit, please? This sounds like you’re saying Catholic doctrine is an idol, but I honestly don’t believe that’s what you intend to say given your posting history (I enjoy your posts).
Click to expand...
I’m saying that our veneration of the Saints is not via populist appeal but what their lives affirm as holy and virtuous behaviour. That is not so different from the ancient form of idol worship. The difference is that through Christ we can distinguish between what was good and virtuous and conforming to the Gospels and what was base and inhumane and in contradition to the Gospels in studying idol worship.

The difference between icon and idol is only the inconsistency with Jesus Good News.
 
Well I do wish he would’ve formally addressed his critics directly. I can only speculate as to why he did not. He has given a more generalized defense of his work but I don’t believe he has openly called out any opponents of his, with the exception of some comments made by Bishop Barron.

Maybe he doesn’t feel the need to respond to every opponent who has written an article. With the exception of Dave Armstrong, most only wrote a single response to his book and of those nearly all were just summaries of why they felt he was wrong, but never gave specific arguments to refute his research.
 
Emeraldlady said:
I’m saying that our veneration of the Saints is not via populist appeal but what their lives affirm as holy and virtuous behaviour.
Click to expand...
The veneration (dulia) we pay to the Saints is paid to their persons not to their behavior, their virtue, or to any other concept. Such things are fruits of their sanctity, which in turn is due to the grace given to them by Jesus Christ, who is God, who by being incarnated into our lowly being and taking upon himself our tainted nature elevated it. Every single bit of Catholic worship and/or veneration ultimately leads to God the creator. The worship or veneration of things, concepts, even virtues is the worship of creation. We have a word for that: idolatry.
That is not so different from the ancient form of idol worship. The difference is that through Christ we can distinguish between what was good and virtuous and conforming to the Gospels and what was base and inhumane and in contradition to the Gospels in studying idol worship.

The difference between icon and idol is only the inconsistency with Jesus Good News.
Click to expand...
I completely disagree. The difference between an icon and and idol is the ultimate object of veneration. All Christian icons lead to Christ who is God. The whole reason we are able to use human saints (not concepts, not virtues, but real humans) as icons is because God became incarnate as a human being in Christ Jesus and elevated our nature in the Hypostatic Union with his divine nature. The whole reason those Saints we venerate are in Heaven is ultimately due to that union for if God never became man man would forever perish. We do nothing apart from divine grace, and it’s by grace that the Saints have “done” anything virtuous; animated by the very Sacraments we proclaim as Catholics.

The creation should never be worshipped. The creation should only be venerated to the extent that it has been redeemed by sacramental grace.
 
I agree with you both. I much prefer the theology videos , especially NSTI videos. But in his defense in one episode w Tim he said (paraphrasing) : “I wish I didn’t have to do these videos. I’d much rather do something on theology or philosophy. I never saw myself doing ‘current events’ It’s not usually my thing. But our Church is in a crisis state so we have no choice but to cover this”
 
I don’t know the content of the book, but infiltrated is the exact term of what is happening to the Church today. I will not talk about wikileaks email content talking about a need of creating “a spring” in the Catgolic Church, ad that would be labeled as conspiracy or russian propaganda ( lol) , just wanted to remember about the smoke of Satan.
It seems to me that the ones denying reality are doing an awesome job at keeping this confusing and progressive trend in the Church. I also see the same ones are also denying or minimizing the blasphemy of idols worshipped in Vatican.
Remember that truth will make us free, no need to fear it
 
If we are using the Incarnation argument, we can use it both ways.

Just as God became human, he is also (eternally) Love (St. John says so), and Love can be understood as a virtue/concept. So, can we render dulia to virtues/concepts?

Just as God is in union with the Saints, all the virtues come directly from Him, as you said. So, can we render dulia to virtues/concepts?
 
I think this is when their videos work – when they confirm a viewer’s beliefs.
 
Yes that De Lubac argument was eye opening and Marshall is informed since he wrote his 500+ page dissertation on it. He only believes we have a supernatural end (which means natural and supernatural are equivocated), whereas Catholicism traditionally believes we have natural end (how we instinctively seek out God, look at stars and wonder about Universe, etc) and supernatural end (Heaven through Christ and Trinity…something we can’t reason on our own via natural end). Problem with De Lubac is once you believe everything we do fulfills our supernatural end? Then praying the Rosay or attending Yoga class is same. Attending Catholic mass or Pagan ceremony are same . Both equally fulfill the Supernatural end. Scary stuff. And from all of that you get Balthasar, hope all men be saved, etc.
 
Last edited:
AlbMagno said:
If we are using the Incarnation argument, we can use it both ways.

Just as God became human, he is also (eternally) Love (St. John says so), and Love can be understood as a virtue/concept. So, can we render dulia to virtues/concepts?

Just as God is in union with the Saints, all the virtues come directly from Him, as you said. So, can we render dulia to virtues/concepts?
Click to expand...
You just argued for Deist Solipsism. Well done!

Tell me again, you’re Catholic?
 
I am catholic. But arguments work based on logic, not on ones’ beliefs. So I wanted to know how you can use the argument you used without implying the one i wrote.

Also, sarcasm wasn’t necessary.
 
Last edited:
AlbMagno said:
I am catholic. But arguments work based on logic, not on ones’ beliefs. So I wanted to know how you can use the argument you used without implying the one i wrote.
Click to expand...
Then allow me to squash it!

God exists.

God exists.

God exists.

I know that the aformentioned three statements are true because reality necessitates it.

Just like I know the 1st Commandment is a necessary commandment because a singular deity who is by definition the “one true deity” must, by definition, be unipresent.

Why is this hard for you to understand?
 
I hope it isn’t lost on viewers that on a site called “Catholic Answers” there is a current argument whether the 1st Commandment is relevant.

I can’t believe I’m having this conversation.
 
I am going with the theory that this is a prelude to an alien invasion. It makes as much sense, as anything I am reading here, including the idea that any finds the First Commandment irrelevant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top