The Gospels

[Hassan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1855716' date='May 2 2009, 05:22 PM']Neither [i]Divino Afflante[/i] or [i]Dei Verbum[/i] (two magisterial documents of which I am very fond and which think to be very important) contradicted the previous decisions of the Holy Office, nor did they permit the contradicting of the Holy Office's decisions.[/quote]

well why don't you share which Gospel you believe was written first?

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1855717' date='May 2 2009, 05:24 PM']well why don't you share which Gospel you believe was written first?[/quote]

I give my religious assent to the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the Holy Office:

"Whether the opinion should be considered as sufficiently supported by the assent of tradition, which holds that Matthew preceded the other evangelists in his writing, and that he composed the first Gospel in the native language then employed by the Jews of Palestine, to whom that work was directed?--Reply: In the affirmative to both parts." (Denzinger-Schönmetzer 3562)

"Whether, with respect to the chronological order of the Gospels, it is right to withdraw from that opinion which, strengthened equally by the most ancient and continued testimony of tradition, testifies that Mark was the second in order to write and Luke the third, after Matthew, who was the first of all to write his Gospel in his native tongue; or, whether their opinion, which asserts that the Gospel was composed second and third before the Greek version of the first Gospel, is to be regarded in turn as in opposition to this idea?--Reply: In the negative to both parts." (Denzinger-Schönmetzer 3572)

Pope St. Pius X, in his motu proprio [i]Praestantia Scripturae[/i] decreed the following about the Biblical Commission:

"Therefore, we see that it must be declared and ordered as We do now declare and expressly order, that all are bound by the duty of conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Pontifical Commission, both those which have thus far been published and those which will hereafter be proclaimed, just as to the decrees of the Sacred Congregations which pertain to doctrine and have been approved by the Pontiff; and that all who impugn such decisions as these by word or in writing cannot avoid the charge of disobedience, or on this account be free of grave sin; and this besides the scandal by which they offend, and the other matters for which they can be responsible before God, especially because of other pronouncements in these matters made rashly and erroneously." (Denzinger-Schönmetzer 3503)

Edited May 2, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Hassan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1855723' date='May 2 2009, 05:45 PM']I give my religious assent to the decisions of the Biblical Commission of the Holy Office:

"Whether the opinion should be considered as sufficiently supported by the assent of tradition, which holds that Matthew preceded the other evangelists in his writing, and that he composed the first Gospel in the native language then employed by the Jews of Palestine, to whom that work was directed?--Reply: In the affirmative to both parts." (Denzinger-Schönmetzer 3562)

"Whether, with respect to the chronological order of the Gospels, it is right to withdraw from that opinion which, strengthened equally by the most ancient and continued testimony of tradition, testifies that Mark was the second in order to write and Luke the third, after Matthew, who was the first of all to write his Gospel in his native tongue; or, whether their opinion, which asserts that the Gospel was composed second and third before the Greek version of the first Gospel, is to be regarded in turn as in opposition to this idea?--Reply: In the negative to both parts." (Denzinger-Schönmetzer 3572)

Pope St. Pius X, in his motu proprio [i]Praestantia Scripturae[/i] decreed the following about the Biblical Commission:

"Therefore, we see that it must be declared and ordered as We do now declare and expressly order, that all are bound by the duty of conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Pontifical Commission, both those which have thus far been published and those which will hereafter be proclaimed, just as to the decrees of the Sacred Congregations which pertain to doctrine and have been approved by the Pontiff; and that all who impugn such decisions as these by word or in writing cannot avoid the charge of disobedience, or on this account be free of grave sin; and this besides the scandal by which they offend, and the other matters for which they can be responsible before God, especially because of other pronouncements in these matters made rashly and erroneously." (Denzinger-Schönmetzer 3503)[/quote]


Are those infallible statments?

[Resurrexi]

No, the decisions by the Biblical Commission in my post above are not infallible, and cannot be infallible since there were not declarations of the Pope himself (or of an Ecumenical Council). Nevertheless, religious assent is owed to them.

Edited May 2, 2009 by Resurrexi

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1855725' date='May 2 2009, 03:47 PM']Are those infallible statments?[/quote]
No.

But there are a few people out there who think that the entire faith is contained in the [i]Enchiridion Symbolorum[/i].

[Hassan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1855727' date='May 2 2009, 05:54 PM']No, the decisions by the Biblical Commission in my post above are not infallible, and cannot infallible since there were not declarations of the Pope himself. Nevertheless, religious assent is owed to them.[/quote]


Why? The whole of Biblical scholarship I am aware of says Mark was written first.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1855731' date='May 2 2009, 05:57 PM']Why? The whole of Biblical scholarship I am aware of says Mark was written first.[/quote]

The decisions were approved by the Pope and and, if you recall from my previous post, Pope St. Pius X did "declare and expressly order, that all are bound by the duty of conscience to submit to the decisions of the Biblical Pontifical Commission."

Edited May 2, 2009 by Resurrexi

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1855727' date='May 2 2009, 06:54 PM']No, the decisions by the Biblical Commission in my post above are not infallible, and cannot infallible since there were not declarations of the Pope himself. Nevertheless, religious assent is owed to them.[/quote]

The decisions of ecumenical councils can also be infallible.

[Resurrexi]

I was pretty sure that no-one thought that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is an ecumenical council.

Edited May 2, 2009 by Resurrexi

[CatherineM]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1855731' date='May 2 2009, 04:57 PM']Why? The whole of Biblical scholarship I am aware of says Mark was written first.[/quote]

That's because you believe stuff after 1910 can have theological value.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1855663' date='May 2 2009, 05:10 PM']I wouldn't go to Wikipeida for information on the Bible, it's articles are often tainted with the heresy of modernism.[/quote]

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospels#Dating"]Wikipedia[/url] says Mark was first, referencing Raymond E. Brown and Stephen L. Harris, and the dates given there look about right. I think Mark is the shortest, so makes sense it would be written earlier than the others. Estimating the date of historical documents is a relatively simple and common-sense process... how is modernism affecting it?

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1855668' date='May 2 2009, 05:14 PM']He wants one of us to disagree with him, so that he can accuse us of being heretics.[/quote]

This thread is posted in the Debate Table, and while I'm well aware that the dating of the Gospels is open to debate, I thought there might be a more pointed question or thought on the topic. An original thought might be nice.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1855739' date='May 2 2009, 06:05 PM']That's because you believe stuff after 1910 can have theological value.[/quote]

And I don't? If the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith came out with a document that said that it is permissible for one to hold that St. Mark wrote his Gospel first, I would say that it is allowable for a Catholic to think that. However, as far as I'm aware, the Magisterium has, to this point, not given permission for anyone to hold an opinion contrary to what the Biblical Commission decreed on the matter.

If the Magisterium [i]has[/i] said that one does not have to hold that St. Matthew was written before the other three Gospels, I'd really like to see it

Edited May 2, 2009 by Resurrexi

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Resurrexi' post='1855735' date='May 2 2009, 07:01 PM']I was pretty sure that no-one thought that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is an ecumenical council.[/quote]

Well, never mind... guess it was corrected.

Edited May 2, 2009 by LouisvilleFan

[Apotheoun]

Which Gospel was written first is not all that important, but what is important is that a person accept the inspired and canonical nature of the Church's fourfold Gospel tradition.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1855749' date='May 2 2009, 06:16 PM']Which Gospel was written first is not all that important, but what is important is that a person accept the inspired and canonical nature of the Church's fourfold Gospel tradition.[/quote]

Not to mentions the Gospels the Vatican is hiding






No joke, read The Da Vinci Code, it's all there