scardella Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 7 2005, 05:00 PM']You seem to be confusing ontological perfection with growth in moral perfection. [right][snapback]634818[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I don't see a difference in the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 8 2005, 07:02 AM']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. [right][snapback]635572[/snapback][/right] [/quote] You are asserting that the Council of Vienne taught the heresy that there are masculine souls and feminine souls? Now that is interesting. I do not see anything in the texts of the Council of Vienne where it teaches the heresy that the operations of the composite being are to be identified with the soul, which would actually mean that a man has many souls, i.e., as many as there are operations. As far as the canons from the Council of Lateran IV are concerned, they are available on the internet, but here is the text which shows that it is heresy to say that a man rises with a different body than he has now: "He [Christ] will come at the end of time to judge the living and the dead, to render to every man according to his works, both to the reprobate and to the elect. [i]All of them will rise with their own bodies, [b]which they now wear[/b][/i], so as to receive according to their deserts, whether these be good or bad; for the latter perpetual punishment with the devil, for the former eternal glory with Christ." [Fourth Lateran Council, no. 1] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 8 2005, 07:27 AM']I don't see a difference in the two. [right][snapback]635591[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Neither did Martin Luther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 8 2005, 07:02 AM']You're saying there's no continuity by saying that the human person is no longer when he dies.[right][snapback]635572[/snapback][/right] [/quote] No, I am distinguishing between act and potency, while you are basically reducing man to his soul alone, or worse, you are saying that the soul itself is the composite being. Both ideas are heretical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 8 2005, 07:02 AM']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. [right][snapback]635572[/snapback][/right] [/quote] The operations are the energies of the composite being. You still seem to want to identify the operations with the soul itself, and this is heretical, because it would mean that the soul itself is the composite being. In other words, man would simply be his soul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote]In other words, man would simply be his soul.[/quote] I've maintained that is not true. You're still misunderstanding me. [quote]"He [Christ] will come at the end of time to judge the living and the dead, to render to every man according to his works, both to the reprobate and to the elect. All of them will rise with their own bodies, which they now wear, so as to receive according to their deserts, whether these be good or bad; for the latter perpetual punishment with the devil, for the former eternal glory with Christ." [Fourth Lateran Council, no. 1][/quote] What I'm saying is not in conflict with this. If you have a car, and you change a part, it is still the same car, despite that one part is different. It's the same for the body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 7 2005, 05:05 PM']It is better to hold the faith of the Church than to speculation on how the mystery of the resurrection of the body occurs. [right][snapback]634823[/snapback][/right] [/quote] It's better still to both hold the faith and understand it. And understand is what I'm trying to do. Are you getting angry about this, because we can just stop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote name='scardella' date='Jul 8 2005, 09:53 AM']What I'm saying is not in conflict with this. If you have a car, and you change a part, it is still the same car, despite that one part is different. It's the same for the body. [right][snapback]635840[/snapback][/right] [/quote] The resurrected body is exactly the same one you have now, and this doctrine is [i]de fide[/i]. The change that occurs concerns the principle of life animating the body and the soul. Anything that says a different body, in whole or in part, is what is resurrected would be contrary to the doctrine of the Church. This is a supernatural miracle, and not a natural event; as such, it transcends reason. BTW your analogy of the body as a car is quite Platonic and that's why I don't think we agree on the nature of man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Huether Posted July 8, 2005 Share Posted July 8, 2005 [quote]The change that occurs concerns the principle of life animating the body and the soul.[/quote] Very very good discussion. I'm enjoying this so much. I do have a question though that might help to clarify things. Can you define the "principle of life" which animates, in particluar, the soul. I thought the soul was what animated the body. Is there something that animates the soul, which is a spirit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted July 9, 2005 Share Posted July 9, 2005 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='Jul 8 2005, 11:59 AM']BTW your analogy of the body as a car is quite Platonic and that's why I don't think we agree on the nature of man. [right][snapback]635849[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I have to argue like that, because our bodies are constantly changing, literally with every breath you and I take. You are taking in oxygen and breathing out carbon dioxide. When you eat, part of that food gets integrated into your body. Nobody's saying that the body I have now is a different body than the body I had at birth. It has changed quite a bit, but it's not someone else's or a replacement body. There's no reason it has to be any different in the glorified body. On a different note, I'm going to be without access to a computer for Hurricane Dennis. For right now, Apotheoun, I'm impressed with your knowledge, even though I disagree with you. Please remember that I'm trying to stay faithful to the Church. Please pray that we both can understand it truly and remember that we are human. Please pray to Our Lady of Prompt Succor for safety on the Gulf Coast. She's the Patroness of New Orleans. 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