scardella Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 Well, you're claiming that the person is the same person (except perfected) in the Resurrection, a statement with which I agree. However, that person is not necessarily the same person that existed before, according to my understanding of what you've said about the soul, body and unified person. According to you, sexuality is not in the soul, not in the body, and not composed of elements from the soul and the body. Furthermore, the only thing that "survives" death is the soul. The body decomposes, and the bones can be burned or otherwise consumed. According to you, Jeff's body has no sexuality of its own, so, theoretically, it could be a man's body or a woman's body. Also according to you, the person ceases to be after death, since it only exists in the union of the soul and the body. Finally, according to you, the soul has no sexuality of its own. Therefore, from your statements, I see no reason that the person who is from Jeff's soul and Jeff's glorified body has to be Jeff and not a theoretical Jenny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 7 2005, 01:41 PM']It is called a supernatural miracle, and it is [i]de fide[/i]; thus, to deny it is to fall into heresy (cf. Fourth Lateran Ecumenical Council, no. 1). Moreover, the glorification of the body does not involve the destruction or alteration of physical matter; instead, it involves a change in the principle of life which animates the body. [right][snapback]634581[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I agree that part of the glorification of the body involves becoming a spiritual (ie infused with spirit) body. However, does it not also imply that the body is whole and healthy? Are you implying that people w/ (for instance) leprosy will continue to have it in their glorified body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 7 2005, 11:41 AM']Well, you're claiming that the person is the same person (except perfected) in the Resurrection, a statement with which I agree. However, that person is not necessarily the same person that existed before, according to my understanding of what you've said about the soul, body and unified person. [right][snapback]634582[/snapback][/right] [/quote] This comment is contrary to the teaching of the Church and as such it is heretical. The same soul and the same body are reunited in the resurrection, otherwise it would be a different person. It is the principle of life that is different, not the substance of the resurrected being. [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 7 2005, 11:41 AM']According to you, sexuality is not in the soul, not in the body, and not composed of elements from the soul and the body. Furthermore, the only thing that "survives" death is the soul. The body decomposes, and the bones can be burned or otherwise consumed. According to you, Jeff's body has no sexuality of its own, so, theoretically, it could be a man's body or a woman's body. Also according to you, the person ceases to be after death, since it only exists in the union of the soul and the body. Finally, according to you, the soul has no sexuality of its own. Therefore, from your statements, I see no reason that the person who is from Jeff's soul and Jeff's glorified body has to be Jeff and not a theoretical Jenny. [right][snapback]634582[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Sexuality is an operation of the composite being that is founded upon bodily existence. As an operation of the composite being it must be distinct from the substantial form (soul) or innumerable theological and philosophical problems result. The human person is by definition the union of body and soul, and he only exists in potency (i.e., as far as his proper composite existence is concerned) after death and prior to the resurrection. Once the resurrection occurs he is fully in act again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 7 2005, 11:47 AM']I agree that part of the glorification of the body involves becoming a spiritual (ie infused with spirit) body. However, does it not also imply that the body is whole and healthy? Are you implying that people w/ (for instance) leprosy will continue to have it in their glorified body? [right][snapback]634590[/snapback][/right] [/quote] As long as you don't mean that man becomes "spiritual" in the sense of a negation of his material existence, but that his spiritual life in Christ means that both his body and soul are animated by the divine Spirit unto everlasting life, then we agree. But if you mean that his body is changed into some kind of ethereal spiritual substance, that would be a form of the gnostic heresy, and as such it has been condemned by the Church. The resurrected body is the very same body that a man had in his earthly life, only it is glorified, i.e., it is animated by the divine Spirit and participates in the divine energies, and so it is perfect; in other words, it suffers none of the defects that are a consequence of the fall of Adam. That is why it is called "glorified." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 It is [i]de fide[/i] that man has a single spiritual soul (cf. the Eighth Ecumenical Council of Constantinople IV, canon 11), while it is also true that the operations of the composite being (i.e., man) are many. It follows from the unity and simplicity of the substantial form (i.e., the soul), that there is a distinction between it and the operations of the composite being, because otherwise there would be as many souls in man as there are operations, and that is clearly false. Consequently, the rational, sensitive, and generative operations (including masculinity and femininity) of the composite being cannot be identified with the soul, for to make that identification would be to fall under the anathema of the Eighth General Council (869-870 A.D.). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 7 2005, 01:56 PM']As long as you don't mean that man becomes "spiritual" in the sense of a negation of his material existence, but that his spiritual life in Christ means that both his body and soul are animated by the divine Spirit unto everlasting life, then we agree. But if you mean that his body is changed into some kind of ethereal spiritual substance, that would be a form of the gnostic heresy, and as such it has been condemned by the Church. The resurrected body is the very same body that a man had in his earthly life, only it is glorified, i.e., it is animated by the divine Spirit and participates in the divine energies, and so it is perfect; in other words, it suffers none of the defects that are a consequence of the fall of Adam. That is why it is called "glorified." [right][snapback]634606[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Agree w/ Paragraph 1; I still want to know how one or both people won't have holes in them. Are you saying that God adds (creates new matter) what would be missing? I'm not opposed to that, but then I wouldn't say that it's truly the "exact same body" in a strictly literal sense. I'm fairly sure that at least part of the matter used in one person's body gets reused in someone elses later on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 (edited) hold on, I'm jumping the gun... Edited July 7, 2005 by scardella Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 7 2005, 12:13 PM']Agree w/ Paragraph 1; I still want to know how one or both people won't have holes in them. Are you saying that God adds (creates new matter) what would be missing? I'm not opposed to that, but then I wouldn't say that it's truly the "exact same body" in a strictly literal sense. I'm fairly sure that at least part of the matter used in one person's body gets reused in someone elses later on. [right][snapback]634629[/snapback][/right] [/quote] The problem here is that you are thinking naturally, not supernaturally. The resurrection is not a natural event, it is a miracle brought about by divine power. In other words, you cannot simply reduce it to some kind of everyday natural occurrence. It is a revealed truth that man will rise from the dead with the exact same soul and body that he had in his earthly life. Now, can this miracle be proven by reason? No, because it is suprarational. I know you have a problem with this doctrine, but it was solemnly defined at the Fourth Lateran Council (1215 A.D.), and so to deny it is to fall into heresy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 (edited) According to what you're saying, because there is no continuity of the person, and that the characteristics of the person are not composed of characteristics of his body and soul interacting, you can't say that the person after the Resurrection is necessarily the same person as the person before his death. It's like you are implying that these characteristics appear out of nowhere, and that makes no sense. In your conception of it, God would have to re-imbue the person with those specific characteristics (aka his "Jeffiness") when He reunited his soul with his glorified body. Otherwise he'd be someone else. Edited July 7, 2005 by scardella Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 7 2005, 02:39 PM']The problem here is that you are thinking naturally, not supernaturally. The resurrection is not a natural event, it is a miracle brought about by divine power. In other words, you cannot simply reduce it to some kind of everyday natural occurrence. It is a revealed truth that man will rise from the dead with the exact same soul and body that he had in his earthly life. Now, can this miracle be proven by reason? No, because it is suprarational. I know you have a problem with this doctrine, but it was solemnly defined at the Fourth Lateran Council (1215 A.D.), and so to deny it is to fall into heresy. [right][snapback]634660[/snapback][/right] [/quote] The problem is that it's not something that I can't wrap my head around, like the Trinity. It seems [b]contradictory[/b] to say that they will be whole and separate, yet share some of the same matter. The only possible thing that I could think of is that the matter itself poly-locates in heaven, which God could make happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 (edited) Oh, and your explanation still doesn't seem to explain Purgatory. It would seem that a soul in Purgatory couldn't pray for others, as it is said, and be perfected, which is the whole point of Purgatory. Edited July 7, 2005 by scardella Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 7 2005, 02:33 PM']Oh, and your explanation still doesn't seem to explain Purgatory. It would seem that a soul in Purgatory couldn't pray for others, as it is said, and be perfected, which is the whole point of Purgatory. [right][snapback]634793[/snapback][/right] [/quote] The only way that my explanation fails is if you have a view of sin that is based on Luther's doctrine of depravity. Man's essential nature (body and soul) was not changed at all by the fall of Adam, because man lost nothing that was natural to his existence. You seem to be confusing ontological perfection with growth in moral perfection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 7 2005, 02:31 PM']The problem is that it's not something that I can't wrap my head around, like the Trinity. It seems [b]contradictory[/b] to say that they will be whole and separate, yet share some of the same matter. The only possible thing that I could think of is that the matter itself poly-locates in heaven, which God could make happen. [right][snapback]634791[/snapback][/right] [/quote] You can choose to be a heretic if you wish, but I will go with the [i]de fide[/i] teaching of the Fourth Lateran Council. The resurrection of the body exceeds the ability of man to comprehend through reason, and this is true of every single mystery of the faith, because none of them are reducible to human reason. It is better to hold the faith of the Church than to speculation on how the mystery of the resurrection of the body occurs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 7, 2005 Share Posted July 7, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 7 2005, 02:18 PM']According to what you're saying, because there is no continuity of the person, and that the characteristics of the person are not composed of characteristics of his body and soul interacting, you can't say that the person after the Resurrection is necessarily the same person as the person before his death. It's like you are implying that these characteristics appear out of nowhere, and that makes no sense. In your conception of it, God would have to re-imbue the person with those specific characteristics (aka his "Jeffiness") when He reunited his soul with his glorified body. Otherwise he'd be someone else. [right][snapback]634775[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Where have I said that there is "no continuity?" The soul, as one part of the human person, is in continuity with the man it informs. Just as the body, once the resurrection occurs, is in perfect continuity with the human person whose body it is. I think our discussion is at an impasse. Because it is a doctrine of the faith that one and the same person rises from the dead; since it is the same soul, and the same body, it is the same person. When the same body and the same soul are reunited in the resurrection all of the original operations of the hylomorphic being are there too. Finally, I cannot subscribe to your theological speculations because they are contrary to the teachings of two different ecumenical councils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 (edited) [quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 7 2005, 05:11 PM']Where have I said that there is "no continuity?" The soul, as one part of the human person, is in continuity with the man it informs. Just as the body, once the resurrection occurs, is in perfect continuity with the human person whose body it is.[/quote] You're saying there's no continuity by saying that the human person is no longer when he dies. [quote]I think our discussion is at an impasse. Because it is a doctrine of the faith that one and the same person rises from the dead; since it is the same soul, and the same body, it is the same person. When the same body and the same soul are reunited in the resurrection all of the original operations of the hylomorphic being are there too.[/quote] That is only necessarily true if the operations of a person arise necessarily from the particular soul and particular body, which is what I've been maintaining. [quote]Finally, I cannot subscribe to your theological speculations because they are contrary to the teachings of two different ecumenical councils. [right][snapback]634831[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I'm not holding anything contrary to the Vienne Council, and you haven't posted the relevant text of the Lateran council. I'd be happy to read it if you post it the text or provide a link, plus where to find the relevant text in the link. I can accept the poly-location idea, though. Edited July 8, 2005 by scardella 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