Zippy's Allegation/ Mary Magdalen

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lorarose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Lorarose:
Thanks Jimmy!

When I get some time I’ll work through the epistles.
Deacon Ed stated in one post that none of Pope Gregory’s preserved epistles contained the alleged statement.

So…are there any OTHER preserved writings from him?
Or… are there any writings from others who claim to have heard this alleged sermon?

It would be interesting to find out where this comes from wouldn’t it?
It would be interesting. I also did a google search and found only articles that have been written just quoting it. They all quote Gregory and the 23 or 33 homily, which does not exist. I don’t think that there are any other preserved writings of his.
 
They all quote Gregory and the 23 or 33 homily, which does not exist. I don’t think that there are any other preserved writings of his.
Hmm…I noticed there was not “23” listed. Although there is an epistle 33 (which never addresses Mary Magdalen)

Is there any info on what happened to number 23?

I’m wondering if this is a catholic version of an urban legend.
Are the authors of these articles relying on EACH OTHER as sources?
Or are any of the sources claiming to have direct knowledge of this alleged sermon?
 
40.png
Lorarose:
This is something I haven’t heard of.
The infamous Cardinal Hosius quote was first mentioned in The Trail of Blood and has been repeated in other anti-Catholic texts. It is often thrown up as alleged proof that the Baptists (that did not exist at the time) were persecuted by the Catholic Church and that the Baptists were the first Church. Just ask any Baptist who believes that story and see if you can catch any who make the claim that John the Baptist started a church 🙂

MaggieOH
 
The infamous Cardinal Hosius quote was first mentioned in The Trail of Blood and has been repeated in other anti-Catholic texts. It is often thrown up as alleged proof that the Baptists (that did not exist at the time) were persecuted by the Catholic Church and that the Baptists were the first Church. Just ask any Baptist who believes that story and see if you can catch any who make the claim that John the Baptist started a church
Ahhh…is this the source that “proves” that the catholic church murdered 68 million baptists that didn’t exist at the time?
 
40.png
Lorarose:
Ahhh…is this the source that “proves” that the catholic church murdered 68 million baptists that didn’t exist at the time?
Depends upon what version you are reading, but the answer is yes. I even emailed Patrick Madrid as to whether anybody had turned up the quote and the answer is zilch.

Maggie
 
40.png
Lorarose:
Hmm…I noticed there was not “23” listed. Although there is an epistle 33 (which never addresses Mary Magdalen)

Is there any info on what happened to number 23?

I’m wondering if this is a catholic version of an urban legend.
Are the authors of these articles relying on EACH OTHER as sources?
Or are any of the sources claiming to have direct knowledge of this alleged sermon?
They all quote that it is a homily too though. There are no homilies of Gregory.

There are a few epistle 23s. It depends on which book you look at. There are like 15 books of epistles and some of them have a 23.
 
Here is an interesting site that makes the same statements…

witcombe.sbc.edu/davincicode/gregory-homily33.html

This site lists their source as Homiliarum in evangelia.
That took me to a site called Patrologia Latina - but they want a subscription in order to enter the site.
Too tired to deal with that right now.

Good night everyone and I look forward to picking up where we left off later!
 
40.png
Lorarose:
Here is an interesting site that makes the same statements…

witcombe.sbc.edu/davincicode/gregory-homily33.html

This site lists their source as Homiliarum in evangelia.
That took me to a site called Patrologia Latina - but they want a subscription in order to enter the site.
Too tired to deal with that right now.

Good night everyone and I look forward to picking up where we left off later!
I may be able to check that out at the library here at Penn State. The library is huge. I have looked at there religious section and it is quite extensive. They have alot of stuff that is in latin. I will check it out and we will see what the deal is.
 
I may be able to check that out at the library here at Penn State. The library is huge. I have looked at there religious section and it is quite extensive. They have alot of stuff that is in latin. I will check it out and we will see what the deal is.
Wow - thanks Jimmy!
Do you think that is what it is going to take?
Is it possible this collection has a writing of his that failed to get included with his other preserved writings?
 
Originally posted by Zippy:
I’ll not be participating in this thread any further…the FACTS speak for themselves
Why won’t you participate now Zip??
You don’t seem like the quitting type to me.

You asked me to brush up on my history and that is exactly what I’m trying to do.
I think if you look through the posts here you’ll see a genuine effort to get to the truth.

Besides, I was hoping you could help with one part of your proof that I don’t understand.
Exactly what section of the 1969 Roman Missal is being cited here as evidence?
Could you please post that so we could have a look-see?
 
Errr… is there any way to assert that Saint Mary Magdalene had or had not been a prostitute before she repented of her sins? And, even if she had not actually been a prostitute (the appellation “Magdelene” is said to have been made after a military camp), is repenting of prostitution so much different from repenting of immoral life? Unless you can assert that there actually was no immoral life in question.However, I seriously doubt any such statements could be positively proved. We just don’t know.
 
40.png
chevalier:
Errr… is there any way to assert that Saint Mary Magdalene had or had not been a prostitute before she repented of her sins? And, even if she had not actually been a prostitute (the appellation “Magdelene” is said to have been made after a military camp), is repenting of prostitution so much different from repenting of immoral life? Unless you can assert that there actually was no immoral life in question.However, I seriously doubt any such statements could be positively proved. We just don’t know.
The assertion itself is in the Scripture since the Scripture says that seven demons were cast out of her. I understand that to mean the 7 Capital sins, and yes that includes lust and an immoral life. I cannot substantiate that she took money for the favours she granted to the men, but that is certainly what the Scripture notes about her.

Also I was not aware of “Magdalene” meaning a camp follower. She had lived in the town of Magdala and I thought that this is where her appellation originated.

The real problem happens to be that many people attempt to twist the truth about Mary of Magdala. She was not the wife of Jesus as some imply. She did not have a child to Jesus as some have implied. She was a repentant sinner and she was “saved”. Also Mary of Magdala was not a priestess in the Church as some want to claim. After the ascension she disappears from sight and we do not know her particular fate. There are some who attempt to raise Mary of Magdala to the position of goddess (the feminists) and it is this group who are most intent upon trying to claim that Mary of Magdala was somehow impure.

All of this talk about Mary of Magdala confuses the issue about the BVM. It is like a diversionary tactic designed to take attention away from the BVM so that people become confused about the real Jesus and begin to see him as just a man who did not perform miracles and who is not divine.

Maggie
 
40.png
Lorarose:
Wow - thanks Jimmy!
Do you think that is what it is going to take?
Is it possible this collection has a writing of his that failed to get included with his other preserved writings?
I don’t know, but there are many volumes so it is possible that there are writings of Gregory in it that are not with the ones that have been published in English.
 
40.png
Lorarose:
Zippy also accuses the Church of twisting history and only invoking infallibility when it suits the church.
I just wanted to comment on this, since it points to a very common approach by those criticizing Catholicism. The way it works is that the person (a) claims that X is wrong (in this case, infallibility), and that furthermore, (b) if X were right, it wouldn’t work in the way the Church says it works. They believe X to be false, and at the same time they believe they know how it would actually work (which is always different than the way the Church says it works) if it were true.
 
40.png
VociMike:
… They believe X to be false, and at the same time they believe they know how it would actually work (which is always different than the way the Church says it works) if it were true.
I just love it when somebody tells **me what I **believe in; apparently they know my thoughts as intimately as God does in Psalm 139.🙂
 
Hello folks, I have got the book(Patrologia Latina vol. 76). There actually is a homily 33. Sorry to Zippy for saying there wasn’t. I will work on the translation and then post the latin with the english. It is a few pages, so I will need a little time to complete it.
 
The assertion itself is in the Scripture since the Scripture says that seven demons were cast out of her. I understand that to mean the 7 Capital sins, and yes that includes lust and an immoral life. I cannot substantiate that she took money for the favours she granted to the men, but that is certainly what the Scripture notes about her.
I wouldn’t bet my lunch money on it. The list of seven capital sins was compiled by Pope Gregory the Great in the sixth century, so far as I remember.
Also I was not aware of “Magdalene” meaning a camp follower. She had lived in the town of Magdala and I thought that this is where her appellation originated.
From what I’ve heard, it would be either the name of the camp or of the town where the camp was located. But I’m not sure how much truth is in this.
The real problem happens to be that many people attempt to twist the truth about Mary of Magdala. She was not the wife of Jesus as some imply. She did not have a child to Jesus as some have implied. She was a repentant sinner and she was “saved”. Also Mary of Magdala was not a priestess in the Church as some want to claim. After the ascension she disappears from sight and we do not know her particular fate. There are some who attempt to raise Mary of Magdala to the position of goddess (the feminists)
Agreed.
 
Osage Orange:
I just love it when somebody tells **me what I **believe in; apparently they know my thoughts as intimately as God does in Psalm 139.🙂
I said it was a common approach. I never suggested it applied to you in particular (especially since, unlike God, I have no idea who you are or what you think).

I just love it when somebody doesn’t read before they type. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top