Tuesday, October 3, 2017

Quoran Medley on Catholicism : Five Questions

Will all Catholic people before Martin Luther go to hell?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
History buff since childhood. CSL & Eco added to Medieval lore. + Classics.
Answered just now
Reformers generally admitted this was not the case - when academic enough to be answering this kind of question.

When Beza admitted it, St Francis of Sales asked “if so, why did you not remain in the Catholic Church?”

What was the role of the Pope in the Middle Ages?

3 Answers
numbered i, ij, iij

JoAn Karkos
Answered May 9
Since Peter was the rock upon which Christ founded His Church, the role of the papacy is to defend, lead and guide all souls who are the Church Militant on earth towards Church Triumphant - to everlasting bliss in heaven to be with God, Our Blessed Mother, and all the angels and saints. Do not confuse this mandate with Jorge Bergoglio/claimaint as Francis I. He follows a different drummer, and is leading souls towards eternal pain and damnation forever separated from God.

TRADCAST EXPRESS -- Our Mini Podcasts

Hans-Georg Lundahl
28m ago
Not quite the point.

The question was not “what is the office of the Pope” (as far as I can see), but “what was the role of the Pope in the Middle Ages?”

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Middle Ages fan + Latin student in Lund (where Medieval Latin rules).
Answered 10m ago
First of all, the Pope was, as always among Catholics, the vicar of Christ, the vicar of God. JoAn Karkos has explicitated what that means.

Second, the Pope had also come to fill a power vacuum left empty by the fall of Romulus Augustulus in the West part of Roman Empire - not alone, in the Völkerwandering this happened more than once, but in and around Rome, several times over or for prolonged uninterrupted periods.

Imagine the Catholic Bishop of Armagh were to become head of Northern Ireland politically, like a Stormont which cannot take the pro-abortion stance of England and has a historical grudge to Ireland (“30 counties”, “Republic of”) or even a principled one (if Enda Kenny succeeds in making Éire abortion liberal), that kind of thing happened over and over again in the Early Middle Ages.

Clergy was better at electing bishops and abbots than Roman Emperors in Byzantium at sending troops and commanders.

So, after Justinian failed to get Italy back under Constantinople, central Italy was fairly much under the Pope (and remained so to 1870), a bit like the Archbishop of Armagh scenario I just outlined. This got formalised in the time of Pepin the short, who helped defend a thitherto informal Papal States against Lombards.

This function along with the first came to give an impression, perhaps based on an already existing Donation of Constantine, perhaps instead inspiring a forgery of this document, that the role of the Pope as Vicar of God “did not stop at politics.” In a very broad sense of this phrase. I make this clear, because the position that it positively does “stop at politics” is a modern heresy. So, it was not just a question of simply denying this heresy. It was a feeling that Papacy had a rather non-casual and normal role in politics, even if different from that of Emperor and of Kings. Hence, when Pope Leo III crowned Charlemagne Emperor, no one was surprised by “intrusion” of Church into politics - at least not in the Latin West.

Third, both kings and clergy appealed right and left between Papacy and Secular overlords (a king could chose if he considered Pope or Emperor his overlord, and a bishop was having a king or an emperor as secular overlord for the territory he controlled along with the souls for which he was responsible). This lead to a conflict between Popes and Emperors. This conflict led to Emperors amassing a guilt burden, not just in their conscience, but even inpublic opinion. Innocent II was as persecuted by an Emperor as Innocent III was enjoying the compensations for the imperial overstepping of good relations to God and Church. This meant that Papacy was not just religiously preeminent in the Church, but politically preeminent, a bit like Sweden with Olof Palme, if you recall that period.

So, the full role of Papacy under the Middle Ages started out with first and essential role, came to include an “Archbishop of Armagh replaces Stormont” role, came to include a definite and non-casual say in politics, and came to include the moral preeminence over Empire. One can compare the failing of Emperors to subdue Papacy with the failure of a later German ruler in 1945.

Sam Dero
Answered May 30
A ruler. In actuality the church ruled a kingdom as much as a king. The church had a HUGE ifluence on the people and thier soldiers

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Just now
Yes, as much as scientists have now.

And sometimes a bit more.

Q III (my own)
Did Luther ever read Lucretius or know about him?

Luther on evolution
by Paul Bartz

1 Answer

Elizabeth Penrose
I've read a little
Answered 1h ago
Do we have the record of anyone who read Lucretius before the 17th century?

What did the readers then think of the book?

It is important how people perceive what is written — including the people at the time in which it is written. It isn’t just important to say, “So and so was written then,” but “What was its effect on the people at the time of its publication?” For example, Walt Whitman’s contemporaries banned Leaves of Grass for what was seen then as heterosexual licentiousness, not homosexuality. Nathaniel Hawthorne was seen as supremely moral and Christian, and The House of the Seven Gables was praised as such. It wasn’t until the 1940’s, and the attempt to build an American canon separate from European thought, that The Scarlet Letter became his signal work, and hatred of formal Christianity his main thought.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
1h ago
“Im Mittelalter war Lukrez in nahezu völlige Vergessenheit geraten, bis der Humanist Poggio Bracciolini 1417 in einem nicht näher benannten deutschen Kloster die womöglich letzte erhaltene Abschrift von De rerum natura entdeckte.”

Lukrez – Wikipedia

So, Lucretius was known since 100 years before “Reformation”.

The problem I am after is whether a certain Luther quote could have been directed at “Evolutionism” or “cultural developmentalism” of Epicure and Lucretius, or whether it is directed at some other Greek philosopher or Roman one, or a general refusal to even look at Pagan philosophy.

Luther is in this link quoted as:

“ ‘Among the Hebrews, the Latins or the Greeks, there is no guide whom we can follow with any safety in this area’.”

Reference given to:

J.P. Pelikan and H. Lehmann, ed., ‘Luther’s Works’ American Edition, 55 Volumes, Volume 1, ‘Lectures on Genesis, Chapters 1-5’ St. Louis, Concordia Publishing House; Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1955, p.1, hereafter abbreviated as L.W.

The author of the paper is interpreting this as:

I [think, I presume, that] Luther was referring to such men as Lucretius (1st century B.C.) who in his writings on, ‘the Nature of the Universe’ attacked concepts central to the biblical story of creation as ‘sheer nonsense’. Lucretius stated, ‘Nothing can ever be created by divine power out of nothing’ ... ‘the theory that they (the gods) deliberately created the world in all its natural splendour for the sake of man .... This theory ... with all its attendant fictions is sheer nonsense!’

I for my part am less optimistic of Luther going for Lucretius here. It could have been simply his general antischolasticism.

But I am willing to give the question a try, hence : is there any indication Luther ever knew of Lucretius?

Do Christians believe in a God that reads your mind?

David McKay
upvoted this

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Studied religions as curious parallels and contrasts to Xtian faith since 9, 10?
Answered 2h ago
God knows E V E R Y T H I N G, and that includes content of my mind and of yours.

Yes, we do.

Are there any Catholics who really believe that on a Sunday morning the wine and biscuit (bread) become the blood and body of Jesus?

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Converted to Roman Catholic Church, Novus Ordo version, then to Trad.
Answered Sat
Depends on what priest (validly ordained or not), expressing what intention (to sacrifice Mass and transsubstantiate or not) in what rite (a traditional apostolic rite traditionally recognised or preferred by the Roman Church or not).

Does not depend on which morning it is, Catholic priests usually celebrate every day, except Good Friday and the day of Easter Saturday.

However, Sunday mornings, faithful are required to assist one Mass, though by dispensation the obligation can be fulfilled also after Noon. On Maundy Thursday a Mass in the evening is required, and Easter and Christmas masses around midnight.

No comments: