mortify ii Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 firefly was bestest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CountrySteve21 Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 Is it bad if I have no idea who these 8 and 6 doctors are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 (edited) firefly was bestest Im def a firefly fan, but I am now convinced they ripped off nearly the entire premise of the show from Cowboy Bebop. Edited July 1, 2014 by CrossCuT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo in Deum Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 Is it bad if I have no idea who these 8 and 6 doctors are? Not having to see the dr. is always a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted July 1, 2014 Share Posted July 1, 2014 Im def a firefly fan, but I am now convinced they ripped off nearly the entire premise of the show from Cowboy Bebop. I don't care if they did or not. It's a great show. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Asik Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 (edited) I'm not sure if it's still a good idea to try to post in this thread, but anyway: The Church recognizes that there are gray areas. But she defines what they are. The dogma of the Assumption is not one of them. Consider how strong the wording is here: This "outstanding agreement of the Catholic prelates and the faithful,"(5) affirming that the bodily Assumption of God's Mother into heaven can be defined as a dogma of faith, since it shows us the concordant teaching of the Church's ordinary doctrinal authority and the concordant faith of the Christian people which the same doctrinal authority sustains and directs, thus by itself and in an entirely certain and infallible way, manifests this privilege as a truth revealed by God and contained in that divine deposit which Christ has delivered to his Spouse to be guarded faithfully and to be taught infallibly.(6) Certainly this teaching authority of the Church, not by any merely human effort but under the protection of the Spirit of Truth,(7) and therefore absolutely without error, carries out the commission entrusted to it, that of preserving the revealed truths pure and entire throughout every age, in such a way that it presents them undefiled, adding nothing to them and taking nothing away from them. For, as the Vatican Council teaches, "the Holy Spirit was not promised to the successors of Peter in such a way that, by his revelation, they might manifest new doctrine, but so that, by his assistance, they might guard as sacred and might faithfully propose the revelation delivered through the apostles, or the deposit of faith."(8) Thus, from the universal agreement of the Church's ordinary teaching authority we have a certain and firm proof, demonstrating that the Blessed Virgin Mary's bodily Assumption into heaven- which surely no faculty of the human mind could know by its own natural powers, as far as the heavenly glorification of the virginal body of the loving Mother of God is concerned-is a truth that has been revealed by God and consequently something that must be firmly and faithfully believed by all children of the Church. For, as the Vatican Council asserts, "all those things are to be believed by divine and Catholic faith which are contained in the written Word of God or in Tradition, and which are proposed by the Church, either in solemn judgment or in its ordinary and universal teaching office, as divinely revealed truths which must be believed."(9) http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-xii_apc_19501101_munificentissimus-deus_en.html You are not merely not believing the dogma. You are responding to the Church saying "this is true and you must believe it" with "no, I will decide for myself what to believe." I didn't say that I reject the the dogma of the Assumption of Mary. Honestly, I don't know what to think about it. But I know it shouldn't be a dogma, because there are no grounds to make it a dogma. I don't think the Church has the authority to take any random statement and declare it revealed truth without solid proof that this is core Christian faith. It must be demonstrably part of uninterrupted Catholic Tradition and have necessary logical consistency with the rest of the doctrine. Anyway, perhaps the discussion about this specific point should be split off into its own thread. Edited July 3, 2014 by Dr_Asik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortify ii Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 I didn't say that I reject the the dogma of the Assumption of Mary. Honestly, I don't know what to think about it. But I know it shouldn't be a dogma, because there are no grounds to make it a dogma. I don't think the Church has the authority to take any random statement and declare it revealed truth without solid proof that this is core Christian faith. It must be demonstrably part of uninterrupted Catholic Tradition and have necessary logical consistency with the rest of the doctrine. Who are you again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Asik Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 Who are you again? What do you want to know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 (edited) I'm not sure if it's still a good idea to try to post in this thread, but anyway: I didn't say that I reject the the dogma of the Assumption of Mary. Honestly, I don't know what to think about it. But I know it shouldn't be a dogma, because there are no grounds to make it a dogma. I don't think the Church has the authority to take any random statement and declare it revealed truth without solid proof that this is core Christian faith. It must be demonstrably part of uninterrupted Catholic Tradition and have necessary logical consistency with the rest of the doctrine. Anyway, perhaps the discussion about this specific point should be split off into its own thread. You don't reject it as dogma but you know it should not be dogma and that the Church has no grounds in making it dogma? That's sounds like a rather obvious contradiction. And I fail to see what any of that has to do with Doctor Who. Edited July 3, 2014 by KnightofChrist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightofChrist Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 Wait, you think so too? Im not alone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr_Asik Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 (edited) You don't reject it as dogma but you know it should not be dogma and that the Church has no grounds in making it dogma? That's sounds like a rather obvious contradiction. And I fail to see what any of that has to do with Doctor Who. I didn't say that I don't reject it as dogma; I don't reject the proposition expressed by the dogma. In other words, I think Mary may very well have been carried with her body in Heaven, but this idea shouldn't be asserted as dogma. It's too speculative. Edited July 4, 2014 by Dr_Asik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter." Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church." - Catechism of the Catholic Church, 838 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now