What month was Christ actually born?

[redrosetea]

Do you really think so? I wish it were so. RCIA teachers are not infallible. And unfortunately, its not unheard of for RCIA classes to be led by individuals who hold dogmatic opinions that what the Church teaches to be true on given matters to be* wrong*. And they use their position to propogate that, outright or other.

This stuff has to be approved by Rome and the Bishop…people can’t just teach anything they feel like teaching
This is in the printed material dispensed by the church…It carries an imprimatur…which means it is free from doctrinal error

 

[marietta]

No, life begins at conception

If the date of conception trumps the birth date of any individual, with regard to their actual existence as a human being, then why do we celebrate their birth rather than the date of their conception?

marietta

 

[redrosetea]

I guess because everyone knows the date they were born, but not the date they were conceived?

Also when you are born you are an independant life

 

[Eliza10]

I guess because everyone knows the date they were born, but not the date they were conceived?

LOL. Right. Its usually not public knowledge.

Also when you are born you are an independant life

Right. And your coming into the world for all to see is a pretty important day.

 

[Eliza10]

This stuff has to be approved by Rome and the Bishop…people can’t just teach anything they feel like teaching
This is in the printed material dispensed by the church…It carries an imprimatur…which means it is free from doctrinal error

I overheard the deacon of our Church telling some young women who were learning in order to be prepared to be received into the Church that you can take Communion either way but its better to take communion in the hand because thats how practically everyone does it now, and anyway its unsanitary (or gross - I forgot what disparaging term he used) to take it by mouth. He also told them that there is no point in paying any attention to the Church rule that we fast an hour before Communion because by the time you factor in the drive and park and the time it takes before the communion is received its a moot point anyway. Apparently he thought the Church was wasting its breath with the call to fast an hour before receiving and these soon-to-be Catholics ought to know that.

I was shocked and offended. But this is along the lines of what I had heard can go on in RCIA anyway. I happened to be able to avoid it by taking my RCIA directly from a holy priest as I was the only one in that small congregation being received that year.

But I hear of other people having very rewarding and informative expereinces in RCIA. I actually I have not heard of that around here, only the less-than-stellar, but, hopefully that’s just because I haven’t talked to the right people.

So things that are in the printed material may be good but everything the teachers impart may not be so.

And I say “may be good” because some of the literature about Catholicism for new Catholics that I have seen around here (locally, I mean, not this forum or site) is enough to make anyone fall off their chair dead asleep. Not worth the glossy paper its printed on.

But I am wondering, are you saying that in some RCIA printed material, that has an imprmiitaur, it says that the Incarnation date the Church has always celebrated was a decision that the Holy Spirit was disinterested in and kept out of, so thankfully we have modern scholarship to step in these 2000 years later to tell us that it was really a spring date?

 

[thistle]

This stuff has to be approved by Rome and the Bishop…people can’t just teach anything they feel like teaching
This is in the printed material dispensed by the church…It carries an imprimatur…which means it is free from doctrinal error

However, Imprimatur does not mean what is in the printed material is an official Church text and it does not mean that everything in the printed material is accurate. It simply means nothing in it contradicts Catholic dogma. As there is no dogma on the dates of Christ’s birth there is nothing to contradict so any dates can be in the printed material without them being accurate dates.

Also you should be aware such material does not get approved by Rome. It is done at local level by a bishop.

 

[redrosetea]

[So things that are in the printed material may be good but everything the teachers impart may not be so.

And I say “may be good” because some of the literature about Catholicism for new Catholics that I have seen around here (locally, I mean, not this forum or site) is enough to make anyone fall off their chair dead asleep. Not worth the glossy paper its printed on.

But I am wondering, are you saying that in some RCIA printed material, that has an imprmiitaur, it says that the Incarnation date the Church has always celebrated was a decision that the Holy Spirit was disinterested in and kept out of, so thankfully we have modern scholarship to step in these 2000 years later to tell us that it was really a spring date?
[/QUOTE]

According to New Advent there has always been speculation about the date…there is no eifinative proof that naming Dec 25 was inspired by the Holy Spirit…It is not a doctrine of the church

There is nothing definative about it in the gospels…It have read it was chosen to overshadow Satunalia…If that is so I think it was a good idea

It is a lengthy article and I would have to post a lot of things from it to say why other dates were considered as Christs birth

It goes into a lot of detail about weather and the census…It is quite interesting

I don’t see any point in getting all steamed up about Dec 25 one way or the other…Christ was born on some day of the year, but I think it is fun to look at alternatives

 

[Corki]

corki according to what I have read Jesus was crucified in March or April…

I was asking about the teaching that a prophet always dies on the day he was born. I never heard of that before and was curious as to where to find out more about that teaching.

 

[Nickkname]

Really?

I am not doubting you but have never heard this before. Where does this teaching come from?

From the Bible.

 

[Eliza10]

I was asking about the teaching that a prophet always dies on the day he was born. I never heard of that before and was curious as to where to find out more about that teaching.

Yes, it sounds fishy, doesn’t it. I also never heard of it before, and I am sure i would have it it were true. And it is not in the Bible.

 

[Eliza10]

According to New Advent there has always been speculation about the date…there is no eifinative proof that naming Dec 25 was inspired by the Holy Spirit…It is not a doctrine of the church…

Yes, and there has always been speculations about all kinds of things. Yes, its not a dotrine so a person is free to believe Jesus was actually born on one’s own birthday, as well. Or you can come up with scientific and historical theories that draw attention to your superior knowledge, because people are interested in this date, so you* will* get attention.

My cynicism is not towards you but towards the theorists.

There is nothing definative about it in the gospels…It have read it was chosen to overshadow Satunalia…If that is so I think it was a good idea

I don’t think thats a good reason myself. I heard it first from the Jehovah’s Witness’, when I was Evangelical, and I felt shame that my Christian ancestors would do such a stupid thing, and here we are still stuck with a date with that kind of past. But I justified that even if it probably was the wrong day of Jesus’ brithday, we had now made it into a special day by always celebrating it then.

But now I am Catholic and it amazes me the depth of reason Our Church has for everything that it decides. And I feel certain that my Holy Mother [the Catholic Church] would have something of true substance - like Christian tradition, or a Word from the Lord - to base the the date of our precious feast on, and I think She would NEVER base the feast day of the Incarnation on some transient pagan religion’s made-up, now obscure sun-god’s feast day.

It is a lengthy article and I would have to post a lot of things from it to say why other dates were considered as Christs birth

Believe me I’m sure its lengthy! If you have ever listened to the self-important theological “experts” PBS chooses when they want to have a show that gives “plausible” expert explanation for our deeply-help beliefs, then you’ll agree - they can go on and on!

Actually I have heard many of the explanations, not just on PBS but in print elsewhere. They usually come out of the woodwork every Christmastime with their latest theories, or to drag out the old ones. They have interestingness about them, but I do not find them edifying.

I don’t see any point in getting all steamed up about Dec 25 one way or the other…Christ was born on some day of the year, but I think it is fun to look at alternatives

Certainly let’s not get steamed up! If anyone wants to hang on their belief that the Church goofed on this, then whatever. They can.

It is fun to look at alternatives, though. That why I thought you might be interested in my alternative theory to the alternative theories.

 

[marietta]

Eliza10:

May I ask, what is your opinion of Joseph Campbell and his interpretations of religion, myth and lore? Would you consider him a “self-important theological ‘expert’”, and of the type you apparently feel are singularly presented by PBS and its bias, or would you consider him a scholar of such matters as Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism, Buddhism, the Upanishads?

marietta

 

[redrosetea]

This artice is from L’Osservatore Romano…I think it is the official Vatican Newspaper the article is by Lino Lozza…I found it at catholic culture

The choice of the date

The real date of Jesus’ birth, from the historical viewpoint, lies concealed beneath a veil of uncertainty as regards Roman history, the imperial census of that time and research in the subsequent centuries. The scholar Abbot Giuseppe Ricciotti, author of the voluminous Vita di Gesù Cristo (cf. Vatican Polyglot Press, 1940), after careful research on the events of the time concludes: “We know neither the day nor the year of Jesus’ birth with absolute certainty” (p. 182).

The date of 25 December, as is well known, was chosen by the Church of Rome in the fourth century. This date in pagan Rome was dedicated to the Sun god, because it is from this day that the days begin gradually to grow longer until summer.

This feast was also lively and joyful because it was combined with the Saturnalia (17-24 December) and the calends of January (1 January) that ushered in the new year. Although Christianity had already been affirmed in Rome by an Edict of Constantine, the myth of Mithras who venerated the Sun god was still widespread, especially among soldiers. The abovementioned festivities, centered on 25 December, were deeply rooted in popular tradition. This gave the Church of Rome the idea of impressing a Christian religious significance on the day by replacing the Sun god with the true Son of Justice, Jesus Christ, choosing it as the day on which to celebrate his birth. St John the Evangelist presents Jesus as “the true light that enlightens every man… the light [that] shines in the darkness” (cf. Jn 1:14).

Hence, the Church of Rome established 25 December as the day of the Nativity of Jesus. Today, only a few Eastern Orthodox Churches hold that 6 January should be celebrated as the date of Jesus’ birth, but throughout the world the Feast of the Nativity of Our Lord is celebrated on 25 December.

 

[redrosetea]

I for one am very careful about trusting sources like PBS or the History Channel for the truth as far as Catholicism

There are lots of things that are distortions and down right lies told as if they were the gospel truth…you find people that believe the lies of the DaVinci code because they saw it on some TV program

Unless you are listening to a Catholic theologian or apologist be very careful about believing what they are telling you

 

[jheii]

Yes, I believe I read this in Pope Benedict’s book The Spirit of the Liturgy. He said that the early Church only had one holiday, Easter, so an arbitrary date had to be chosen. I doubt that any of the apostles knew Jesus’ birthday, to be honest. I can’t imagine our Lord preaching and exorcising demons, and later in the night saying to his disciples “by the way, a very special day is coming up soon and I’ve got my eyes on these sandals…”

Also did you know that the Feast of St. John the Baptist is exactly six months before the Nativity, June 25th? Unlike the Nativity, the day when days get longer, from this point on the days get shorter. This goes along with what John said about our Lord “I must decrease so that he can increase.”

 

[marietta]

Do you believe that PBS is capable of telling the “truth” about anything? Are they driving a conspiracy against Catholicism?

marietta

 

[redrosetea]

I couldn’t tell you…If I want facts about my church I go to my church for them

 

[marietta]

redrosetea:

Are other beliefs of absolutely no interest to you whatever?

marietta

 

[redrosetea]

Yes, I believe I read this in Pope Benedict’s book The Spirit of the Liturgy. He said that the early Church only had one holiday, Easter, so an arbitrary date had to be chosen. I doubt that any of the apostles knew Jesus’ birthday, to be honest. I can’t imagine our Lord preaching and exorcising demons, and later in the night saying to his disciples “by the way, a very special day is coming up soon and I’ve got my eyes on these sandals…”

Also did you know that the Feast of St. John the Baptist is exactly six months before the Nativity, June 25th? Unlike the Nativity, the day when days get longer, from this point on the days get shorter. This goes along with what John said about our Lord “I must decrease so that he can increase.”

Yes I did and that makes complete sense doesn’t it? John did have to diminish and Christ increase

 

[redrosetea]

redrosetea:

Are other beliefs of absolutely no interest to you whatever?

marietta

No not as far as my salvation…I also don’t like lies that are wrapped up in a bit of truth and presented as fact