Find What You're Looking For:
Navigation
The Categories
- Art (3)
- Cartoons (3)
- John Wauck (4)
- Life of Jesus Christ (4)
- Mortification (7)
- On Opus Dei (13)
- Recommended Posts (17)
- The Church (5)
- The Da Vinci Code (121)
- What others said (4)
The Archives
- March 2011
- November 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- April 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- September 2007
- June 2007
Posts By Date
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Mar | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
Registered Users
Subscribe
The Da Vinci Code is only a novel. It is not a source of serious information, but it does raise some serious questions.
1. Was Jesus Christ really married?
Yes. Jesus was married to the Church. In the New Testament, Jesus is frequently referred to as the Bridegroom, and St. Paul tells us: A man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall be one flesh. This is a tremendous mystery. I am applying it to Christ and the Church. (Ephesians 5:31-32) In fact, the Christian vocation is nothing less than an invitation to the eternal wedding supper (Rev. 19:9) of Christ and His Bride, the Church.
2. Did the Church really create the New Testament?
Yes. Without the Church, we wouldn’t know which of the many ancient texts that talk about Jesus were inspired by God; we wouldn’t have the New Testament. Jesus Christ directly gave His divine authority not to a group of texts which didn‚Äôt exist in His time, but rather to a group of men, the twelve apostles and their successors (bishops), who teach in His name and with His authority.
3. Is sex really meant to be holy?
Yes. That‚Äôs why one of the seven Christian sacraments is called Holy Matrimony (the literal meaning of “hieros gamos”). Christian marriage and the priesthood are holy and sanctifying vocations approached through special sacraments (Holy Matrimony and Holy Orders respectively). All the sacraments like Baptism or the Eucharist, for instance – are outward signs instituted by Christ to give grace, and, in fact, the ministers of this sacrament are the bride and groom themselves.
4. Did Jesus Christ really leave descendents?
Yes. Jesus is God, and He gave all who believe in Him the power to be God’s children. In short, we are His descendents: See what love the Father has given us so that we might be called children of God and so we are! Beloved, we‚ are now God’s children‚ (1 John 3:1-2). So forget about the Merovingians. We are the royal bloodline of Jesus Christ: You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation‚ (1 Peter 2:9).
5. Is our culture really missing a figure of female sanctity?
Yes, in today’s world there is such a missing woman. Her name is Mary, and she should be venerated not as the wife of a mortal man but rather as the Mother of God. Happily, she is not hard to find. Hers is the most familiar female face in history, represented in countless works of art. The best place in the world to find grown men and women praying on their knees to a woman, perhaps saying the Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary, is in a Christian church.
6. Should we really pray over the bones of Mary Magdalen?
Yes. Saint Mary Magdalen is honored by the countless churches and women named after her and by a special Mass on her feast day (July 22). In fact, for more than a millennium, Christians have made pilgrimages to pray in the Basilica of St. Maximin in southern France, where a tradition says that Saint Mary Magdalen was buried.
7. Does a Holy Grail really exist?
Yes. The popular story of the Holy Grail is a medieval legend, but a non-fictional Holy Grail can be found on the altar during every Mass. What made the chalice of the Last Supper so holy was the blood of Jesus Christ that it contained, and in the Holy Mass, that blood is once again present. This means that every chalice in every Mass is truly a Holy Grail.
8. Did a woman’s womb really carry the blood of Jesus Christ, the Son of God?
Yes. The uterus of the Blessed Virgin Mary contained not only the blood but also the entire body of Jesus Christ for nine months. That’s why, when they pray the Hail Mary, Christians refer to Jesus as the fruit of her womb and praise Mary as a most honorable Vessel.
||
Print This Post
||
Email This Post
||
Other Recent Posts
Fr. John Wauck Blogs again!
- Filed under John Wauck. Created on March 20th.
Don’t Skip This Ad: A Brand New Book!
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on November 28th.
The Catholic Choice
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on November 2nd.
Just When You Thought It Was Safe
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on September 24th.
Juno/Juneau
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on September 2nd.
Read It and Weep… with Laughter
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on August 23rd.
The New Yorker: “Catholicism has everything else beat”
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on August 14th.
Don’t Give Up on Europe
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on July 11th.
B. in the U.S. A.: The Sheep Confirm the Shepherd’s Hope
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on April 27th.
Catholicism’s Cultural Glass: Half Empty or Half Full?
- Filed under The Da Vinci Code. Created on April 13th.
This is an excellent Q&A. I think it would be useful to your readers if you were to address the question of whether it would have made a difference theologically if Jesus had been married in the ordinary sense (either during His ministry or as a widower). Isn’t His marriage to the Church a metaphor that wouldn’t preclude a real one?
Thanks. Glad you like it, arn. There is more to come, so I won’t get into the theological question now, but I’d say that Jesus’s marriage to the Church is most definitely a real one – not a metpahor. In fact, I think that what St. Paul is getting at in Ephesians is, in a sense, almost the reverse. We need to see real Christian marriage through the lens of Christ’s very real marriage to the Church. In general, what God does can never be less real than what we do.
Thanks for the catechism…This should be helpful for me if I ever get around to reading TDVC…
regarding Jesus marriage to the church precluding a physical marriage: This is conceiveable (a physical marraige) when we consider His physical trials and temptations were endured so we could have a Great High Priest Who has been tested, as we are yet without sin. So in regards a physical marriage, why not if God felt Jesus is to bear the sins of all and needed to learn the woes of married life so He could understand our weaknesses and intercede with the Father in our behalf. I look at Hebrews 4 verses 14-16 and reading on through chapter 5 and especially verse 8. It is with this scripture in mind that I can possibly relate to a physical marriage of Jesus and Mary Magdalene. If it were so it does NOT bother my faith in the slightest…However, we must remember, that we are where we are today because of a great cloud of witnesses that SAW things we have not seen and heard things that we have not heard. Consequently, their life’s work counts with me because they culled through historical accounts and stories and as interpretors of what was said and done gave us the written account of the churches position on Jesus The Christ. That this account does not mention a physical marriage for Jesus is sufficient for me. It is most reasonable to assume if it were so then it would have been important to have mentioned it in some of the authorized canon of scripture. But there is no mention of it…So in this TDVC we can only say, hummmm.
Very very good! Thank you! I’ll translate to german…
WHAT YOU SAID IN THE BEGINNING WAS VERY CORRECT. BUT TOWARDS THE END YOU WENT INTO YOUR OWN IDEAS THUS MAKING IT FALSE.
IT IS THE CATHOLICS WHO SAY THAT NOT THE CHRISTIAN .
AS THE CATHOLIC BELIEVE A LOT IN THE BIBLE THAT IS FORBIDDEN GOD SAID WE MUST NOT CONTACT THE DEAD.
LOVE IS THE KEY IN ALL THAT IS WHY HE DIED FOR LOVE.
In Spanish on http://sensusfidelium.blogspot.com/2006/05/el-catecismo-del-cdigo-da-vinci.html
Very good Cathecism. I’d made a free translation about your article, thanks!
Wow… if the Catholic Church had even put HALF of the energy they’re putting into bashing some guy’s silly book, towards the problem of priests raping little kids, I might care about what they have to say on this. Until then, to me, catholicism is just organized and sanctioned child molestation.
I’ll check back in with you guys when you get your priorities straight.
Good luck.
Hello Daniel,
I´m surprised you find The Da Vinci Code a silly book.
Daniel, the Catholic Church is putting much energy into the problem of priests ‘raping little kids’, teen boys actually. The first steps in 1993, $1,000,000,000 plus in compensation (how much have the Boy Scouts and Public School system given) and making it harder for chicken queens to become priests.
Wow, Father, you’re the Hank Aaron of the Da Vinci debunkers! (or whoever has the home run record nowadays
I’d say that Jesus’s marriage to the Church is most definitely a real one Рnot a metpahor
Could it be that DVC, like many of the ancient heresies, will help us understand better certain mysteries of the Faith by provoking more research and thought in the areas needed to debunk it? As the culture of contraception and death called forth JP2′s “theology of the body” talks, perhaps this will foster a better understanding of the marriage of Christ and the Church.
Anyways, thanks for the good work.
bw
“IN THE BIBLE GOD SAID WE MUST NOT CONTACT THE DEAD.”
In the Bible (Wisdom 3:2), God’s Word says, “They seemed, in the view of the foolish, to be dead.”
But the departed faithful aren’t dead. Theyare more alive than we are, for they are with God. There they praise God and pray for us; and their prayers are one with ours, as it says in the Bible (Revelation 5:8): “…the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb. Along with their harps, the elders were holding vessels of gold filled with aromatic spices, which were the prayers of God’s holy people.” For we are not two bodies of Christ — the Church living and the Church dead. We are one Church, and one Body of Christ.
Re: marriage with Mary Magdalene
Peter said, “I begin to see how true it is that God has no partiality” (Acts 10:34). Paul also points out that God plays no favorites: “With God there is no partiality” (Romans 2:11).
But as one blogger’s little daughter pointed out recently, if Jesus had married an individual woman, He would sure as heck have been showing partiality. You can have friends in a spirit of Godlike love for all, and you can have parents and fosterparents and relatives in that spirit. But you can’t have a wife in that spirit, or it’s no true marriage. Moreover, if Jesus had married Mary Magdalene… well, it would be kinda mean for Him purposefully to ditch her through death so that He could marry the Church. Doesn’t exactly scream “faithful”, and Faithful is one of God’s middle names!
Besides, God had always told His people that He loved them not only as individual members of His chosen clan, but also collectively like a woman who kept straying, but kept being taken back. So not only is the Church His Bride, she also had been betrothed to Him for a looooooong time. Cheating on your covenanted betrothed is the same as cheating on your wife, according to the Law. Which God wrote. So again, it wouldn’t have been very faithful.
Christ loves the Church with the passionate exclusivity of a man for his wife and the mother of his children. He died and lives for her, and she loves Him for it. Her spotless wedding dress was washed white in the Blood of the Lamb.
But Christ loves individual members of the Church as parts of His own Body, adopted children of His Father, and children of His Bride the Church. Each person is loved infinitely, but not exclusively. This is why there is no marriage or giving in marriage in Heaven; we are all body parts of Christ and of His Church at once, so we’re going to be a tad bit occupied.
“The Spirit and the Bride say, ‘Come!’ Let him who hears answer, ‘Come!’” Come to the wedding feast, come to the marriage of Jesus and His Bride, which lasts forever. For God is faithful to the Bride of His youth.
It cannot be otherwise. It wouldn’t be fair if it were.
But what if instead Jesus had been a childless widower prior to embarking on His ministry and so free from such obligations and partiality. Would THAT have changed things?
Wonderful job, Father. God bless your work.
I am amazed and disgusted to see all attention given a work of fiction when real transgressions plague the Catholic Church from within.
For those of you that think that throwing money at victims of child abuse is an acceptable response, shame on you!
Nice to see that you have your priority in order!
F. De Moraes, how did you find this site? I bet searching for “Catholic” responses, right? I¬¥m amazed many non-Catholics are curious to see if Catholics would react…and then get incensed when they do.
“It cannot be otherwise. It wouldn‚Äôt be fair if it were.”
There are many things in the mystery of faith that would seem not only unfair by rational logic, but humanly impossible. How are you so certain that you understand the mystery of faith so well that it allows you to make a judgment on the fairness of such a mystery as the possibility of Christ’s marriage to both a woman of his day (a very human thing which we celebrate as sacramental in Holy Matrimony) and as Christ’s marriage to His Church. In the mystery that is God, I think it would be quite possible AND fair for Christ to be married in the very ordinary way as well as in the very metaphysical way. Who are we to say otherwise?
That said, there is nothing in the historical record to indicate that Christ was married in the ordinary way, and I’m perfectly willing and happy to accept that as Truth. But, I don’t think your theology explaining the impossibility of it makes much sense, given all the other mysteries of faith we embrace. For is it not true that, with God, nothing is impossible.
I am bookmarking, subbing, and forwarding. My husband will be doing a debunking talk on DVC in our area shortly after the movie opens. God bless! Thanks for the information!
What Daniel and F. De Moraes and similar posters really want is a stick with which to beat the Church. Any stick at hand will do. Their motives are hidden and personal, who can guess why they hate the Church so much. But they are not seriously driven by the scandals or by the DaVinci Code. but by their hatred.
To this end they sift through news accounts for ammunition, not understanding. No informed or unbiased person could seriously think that more attention and effort was given to the DVC than to the problem of priests having sex with minors. The canard about the Catholic Church’s prioties being wrong is only intended to silence faithful Catholics. The logic seems to be that a Church of a billion people can not possible do more than one thing at one time.
The tragic scandals involving some priests in moral failure and the harm they have done is not being ignored. The bishops and other Church heirarchy, some of whom misjudged and mishandled this terrible situation, are the necessary and appropriate body to deal directly with the results of this terrible series of events, I say “series of events” because they are varied and multitudinous, but to typify them as “the problem of priests raping little kids” as Daniel does only reveals a person more interested in emotionally charged language than actual fact.
Yes, the Church responds and yes it involves a great deal of money. But the response is not to “throw money at victims of child abuse.” The large settlements are driven by lawyers and a revenge mentality. In most cases of which I’m aware, arrangements for counseling and the payment of said counseling have been included in the terms of cash settlements.
While the Church heirarchy responds carefully, compassionately and appropriately, we Lay Catholics, the faithful in the pew, the one’s who carry shoulder the financial burden of “throwing money at victims” nevertheless are subject to continued attacks on our Faith. They come from millionaire authors and, yes, internet Trolls.
Response to the calumny of the DVC madness has largely fallen to the faithful laity and clergy as individuals. It has been positive, forceful and very well research. May God bless, strengthen, encourage and grant peace to those who ahve taken up this challenge.
May God, in his wisdom, love and mercy, grant peace also to Trolls.
Wow, first Catholics should be open minded and read a book that attempts to change 2000 years of accepted history, then after we read it we shouldnt spend anytime responding to it!
Then if anyone dares to question or discuss the book, the subject gets changed to the child abuse scandal!
Now have any of the books defenders tried looking up independant facts regarding the book? No. If they had they would also realize how ridiculous it is.
Have any of the folks who are so angry at the church looked at any independant statistics regarding child abuse in other insitutions? No becuase they would see that the abuse rates are higher or similar in many other instituions.
1 child abused is 1 too many, The church has responded to the crises very poorly in some areas and very well in others.
Making blanket accusations and generalizations about the Catholic church only shows your ignorance. This blog is an excellent place to discuss these ideas but lets keep our brains engaged can we?
Individual church members need to engage in dialogue on many fronts. One aspect of waging a battle against the sexual abuse of minors is to argue for rigourous theology and philosophy and accurate history. When these things become sloppy, an excuse can be found for just about any kind of behaviour. As a lay Catholic, there are not many practical things I can personally do to make up for such terrible things. But I can, along with millions of others, pray for the victims. I can offer up sacrifices and charitable works and contributions in reparation. I can make sure my own children are well catechised and raise them to be good ctizens who will make a positive contribution to the world. I can educate myself to address these issues intelligently in conversation with others. And I can even drop in with my 2 cents on this blog when I have a minute or two, because TDVC is so historically, theologically and philisophically sloppy.
Fr. John– can I format this up nicely and hand it out at the next DVC talk I have to give?? It would be very helpful.
You got a problem with the format??
Just kidding. Yes, by all means, fix it up and pass it out. Thanks. That’s really what it’s designed for: it’s a hand-out.
Sex abuses aren’t the only issue facing the Church, and it would be quite silly to fight on only one front. Arguing against the DVC doesn’t mean we aren’t concerned with other issues.
[...] The Da Vinci Code has left a lot of people asking important questions, and Fr. John Wauck has all the elegantly simple answers in his Da Vinci Code Catechism. Note especially his answer to the question “Does a Holy Grail really exist?” His must certainly be the right answer, since he agrees with Mike and me completely. [...]
I don’t understand the big deal on Da Vinci Code. To the theists, no novel, fiction or non-fiction, can sway their faith. To the atheists, no refutation of the novel can convince their disbelief. To the agnostics, they don’t want to believe anything. Da Vinci Code is no big deal, it’s just good entertainment.
By the way, I don’t find the book threatening to Catholicism. Only the gullible would fall for that kind of crap. If you like a good dose of atheism and agnosticism, read Nietzsche, Hume or Carl Sagan. If Dan Brown is heretic, these guys are infidels. Brown is unimaginative and a sloppy scholar. These guys are at least moderately compelling (but not necessarily correct).
Agreed. As an attck on Catholicism, the Da Vinci Code is a joke. This site is designed to point that out (that’s why I call the book a comedy of errors) and provide answers for those who are looking for the truth behind the fiction.
By the way, I would not be so sure that theists and atheists can’t be swayed … even by a work of fiction. Stranger things have happened.
You’re right Father. Strange things do happen all the time. As Hitler once said the bigger the lie, the easier it is to sell. Think big, talk bigger, lie biggest. And yes, thinking people are easier to sway than either fanatics or anti-Christs. Emotion is more powerful than reason.
Bravo!
Nokia, for the record I found it researching Opus Dei, thank you Goggle.
Maybe I have grown to be a callous person but I am not an uninformed one.
Also for the record, I was baptized Catholic; however I have not been a practicing Catholic since the late 70’s and my LEGAL immigration to the US. The US Catholic Church is definitely different when compared to the Spanish version that I was accustomed to.
Back to topic, I’ll say it again, I find it amusing and pathetic that any religion would devote this much time and effort being spent to debunk a work of FICTION!
The Church has more pressing REAL problems!
And no, the pedophilia problem will not go away by paying off victims. Here is a thought, CONFESSION!
Or is that only good for the parishners?
PS, knock yourselves out debunking a work of fiction but if you really want to sway, convert or impress people, try living the lifestyle that you preach. Start by showing us that you are truly good ________, your deeds will always speak much louder than your words! You could also demand that your clergy make a better attempt to abide by the rules and laws of man while on this Earth!
I agree that in one sense the book/movie poses no real threat to the faith, at least not in comparison to the more subtle temptations in our society. I would argue that the force driving the book’s popularity consists in the people who already have ditched their faith and want a new, slick fantasy to go with their other sad fantasies about the meaning of life without God where the Catholic Church is just a corrupt organization built on lies.
To me, all the responses should be like Father’s here – a 100% positive affirmation of the teachings of the church about the identities of Jesus, his mother Mary and Mary Magdalene the repentant sinner to whom we should all be able to relate.
I agree with F. De Moraes about the importance of confession, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the decline in its practice tracks pretty closely with the rise in sex abuse cases.
Just for the record, researching Opus Dei you will discover that all members of Opus Dei – priests and laity – ordinarily go to confession once a week.
Father,
I just wanted to write note that even though I label myself a “progressive” or “liberal” American Roman Catholic, I thought your eight simple, yet not simplisitic answers to common questions raised by Dan Brown’s novel was wonderfully done. I posted a link to my blog.
To defenders of Brown, I read the novel and found it great fun. Like some commentors above, my faith would not be shaken if Jesus turned out to have been married.
However, any serious examination of the evidence would lead to a celibate Jesus as a matter of our best educated analysis of the historical data – as even Elain Pagels admits, who is not known as any sort of defender of orthodoxy.
Further, from a theological or faith point of view, there is something to be said for the notion that it might be meaningful to people to consider a celibate Jesus whose love was not preferential for any one person, as pointed out above. Even if our faith in Christ would ultimately not be shaken had he married, were he celibate, there might be something meaningful to us in his choice to remain unmarried.
The efforts of some commentors to shift the subject to the sex abuse scandals is ultimately a red herring.
I’ll take the bait anyway.
Don’t get me wrong – the scandals deserve the attention of everyone alive, Catholic and non-Catholic. The clergy better get it into their heads that the rest of us will not tolerate any cover up or protection of those who would abuse a child. Structural reform that proactively prevents abuse, or swiftly brings justice and healing to survivors and stops the abuser from abusing again must be made.
I am not saying we have no room for being mercifully compassionate to an abuser, but that mercy and compassion must never, ever, mean that we risk the abuser harming another child. A priest who abuses must be removed from any contact with vulnerable populations. If incarceration is the only means to do this, we must do it, even if the incarceration is in a sort of monastery of sorts where he might be well treated and continue to pray and minister in a way that poses no risk of harm to others.
The accused also do have a right to due process, because as rare as it is, and knowing every allegation must be taken very seriously, false accusations do occassionally occur.
This issue must be a priority to the Church as a whole – and a higher priority than Dan Brown’s novel.
Yet, saying that this issue is a priority does not imply that Catholics do not have other interests and concerns.
As a liberal, I’m also concerned about the unjust and immoral invasion of Iraq.
All Catholics are concerned about how to grow closer to God in prayer. Many Catholics are also rightly concerned about sanctity of life issues such as abortion, euthansia, and embryonic stem cell research. Our faith also comples us to works of private charity and work to support the common good through efforts to promote economic justice with a preferential option for the poor. Many of us Catholics are concerned about the environment. Whether liberal or conservative, a lively and healthy debate is occurring in the Church as a whole over the role of faith in politics and the meaning of doctrinal positions distinguishing the proper roles and autonomy of Church and state. Promoting healthy families is a major concern of almost all Catholics. Our local parishes and the schools, nursing homes, hospitals, soup kitchens, bereavment ministries, and so forth that the Church runs on a daily baisis are a concern of all of us. Many of us seek a deeper understanding of doctrine and its relevance to our lives, and are even willing to question exactly what belongs to the deposit of faith and what does not with an open mind – but that doesn’t mean that the historically prevelant position is automatically false.
My point: All of these things are of concern to Catholics the world over, and the sex abuse scandals do not place everything else on hold. Another reader made this point more succinctly above. The sex abuse scandals are a very important issue, and I’ll be kicking and screaming and praying and diverting my charitable contributions or whatever else it takes to get the clergy to wake up to just how serious these scandals are.
But life does go on, and faith does go on, and we can read and even enjoy a Dan Brown novel or a movie based on the novel, and form some opinions about it and discuss our opinions – and my opinion is that while the novel is a lot of fun, it is based on some pretty questionable interpretations of historical data, and promotes a theology that this liberal advocate of women’s ordination finds largely irrelvant to my life.
Abn though I don’t forsee myself joining Opus Dei anytime soon, I think the eight simple answers to eight commonly asked questions presented above by an Opus Dei priest pretty much sum up my own way of wanting to respond to all the hoopla.
Peace!
Possibly Jesus could have chosen to be a childless widower. (He was already both God and man before He began His public ministry, though. So His responsibility to the entire universe was always there.) And possibly Jesus could have found a way to be married to a woman and to the Church. (Sounds like polygamy, though.) And possibly Jesus could have traveled back in time, rescued Judas, and substituted a cloned body, just as God could very easily have created 12 apostles from 12 mice and a pumpkin.
But the records show He didn’t.
And if you don’t believe the records, then there’s pretty much no point talking about what Jesus did or may have done at all. In which case you’re stuck with talking about what Christians believe He did and how it’s influenced the world. In which case you’re stuck with talking about the Gospels, anyway.
So why don’t we look for the theological significance of what He chose to do, instead of what it would have meant if He’d chosen to incarnate Himself today and suffer the Passion of being run over while crossing the highway to the local mall?
Thank you for this, Fr. Wauck. Helpful and to the point–I’m happily forwarding the link.
This is an excellent post, Father and I will print it up to give to my parishioners. I have been giving talks on the DVC for some time now and this is a novel approach which will be very helpful.
I am a secular priest and very grateful for the support of Opus Dei here in England. They are great chaps and I always love to go for a Day of Recollection at their house when I can.
God bless you and all your work
Hey Daniel:
Check back back after you get your facts straight and you have guts enough to stand your ground.
Maureen – Agreed. Let’s look for the theological significance of what Jesus chose to do. That has nothing to do with what’s fair, and everything to do with what’s truth. The two are not always and necessarily compatible. Stick with the truth and we are good to go. That’s good theology. The fairness line is just feel-good rationalization.
Good Job on the 8. About a big deal on the DVC, it may be just fiction but when a novel does shake the faith of young minds, someone has to claim responsibility. I have no problem in the “comedy of errors” but having experienced the love and mercy of The Lord, I think it is blasphemy that some authors just take the liberty in writing about someone so divine (and I speak through experience and not just through religious garb). It is worth knowing The Lord to be able to experience his love for us. Then lets talk.
German version is ready!
http://davinci-ssakrileg.blogspirit.com/archive/2006/05/10/fragen-und-antworten-zu-„-sakrileg-“-von-john-wauck.html
Maria Magdalena, I don’t know a word of German but your translation looks okay (at least there are 8 points as well
)
And with the help of Google translate, Gl?ºckw?ºnsche ! Let’s get some more languages for this wonderful post.
For those brainless people who keep parroting, “It¬¥s only fiction, it¬¥s only a novel, bla, bla, bla”, please take a look at this brilliant commentary, made by someone who saw through Dan Brown:
http://www.tfp.org/davincicode/meet_the_real_dan_brown.htm
It is titled “Meet the real Dan Brown: A couple of things you should know about the author of the Da Vinci Code, in his own words”.
Like me, the author of this commentary has listened to Dan Brown speak on several occasions and his agenda is as clear as daylight, and has nothing whatsoever to do with fiction. Here´s a quote from the above link:
“After hearing the real Dan Brown in his own words, I saw clearly something that the media are not telling us. Dan Brown is not an innocent fiction writer with an overactive imagination. He is a man with an agenda. He is committed to harm the Church and promote his Gnostic and neo-pagan religious beliefs. He wants to persuade others to accept his false view of history”
The author ends by giving some links to interviews on the web granted by Dan Brown.
Very nice work here on the DVC catechism. Thank you, Father.
Just to put my two cents in,
- no, we can’t just sit quietly while the Church is attacked; at the very least we cannot appear to confirm the fictions of Dan Brown — some people will be undecided and the silence of the Church and of Catholics might be mistaken as confirmation
- yes, it is mostly those who do not even consider doing their homework that will be swayed by DVC, but they’re our brethren too, and we want them to be informed Christians; it would be lacking in charity to abandon them as fodder for every heresy that comes along
- no, we are not devoting too much into speaking the truth when the truth is attacked
- yes, the sex abuse scandals are horrible tragedies that *are* receiving much greater attention from the Church than the DVC novel and film and will continue to receive great attention in order to prevent such abuses again
Once again, great post here, Father.
[...] Most excellent. PermaLink | | Trackback/Pingback (0) [...]
Thank you Magdalene for sharing this infornation. Willful attempt to destroy one’s good name wether a person or any organization is a crime punishable by existing laws. It may be libel, malicious mischief, or others depending on the laws of the state or country. If the accusation has solid basis and if I were the Catholic Church or Opus Dei, I would file appropriate charges in the court. Expressing one’s (false) opinions is forgivable. Slander or libel must be dealth with justice.
Without a doubt…we live in the times where it is impossible to think “in the spirit” with the Spirit. We are so “sexualized” that even “Christ” the owner of Heaven and Earth is placed at the same level with all of us. And, to read that “I’m okay with Jesus taking a wife and it wouldn’t change my faith” is a lot of bull. Yes, Jesus became man in the flesh but not like us in the sin for He REMAINED GOD. We read about his 3 temptations and was in accord with HIS Divinity. The devil tempted him to “convert” the stones into bread…that’s definitely NOT one of OUR temptations! We have not power to do it. Christ temptation was to give up on His Mission as Savior by filling up his belly! And to think that most of us fall into that temptation so that working, eating..etc,..much more important than feeding the spirit with GOD for He is the Bread of Life. He did not make bread ..He became the BREAD. Therefore, we NEED priests and through their hands we can receive the BREAD OF LIFE. I don’t care if the priest is holy or not..Only GOD has the rigth to jugde him. Every one is obsessed with this sexal abuse in the church and may be ignoring the fact that it may be happining to their children by their own fathers, step fathers, boyfriends, uncles, brothers..for sexual abuse is most common within the family period.
And, what about the mother’s that are killing their own children and feeding them to the garbage can? Where is the outrage?!!! Where is the outrage for more than 60 million Americans killed over the past decades since ABORTION became legal??!!..yet, everyone is upset about the war..and so am I ..but at least the soldiers are well trained and armed to fight for their lives…not the innocent unborn child who depends on his/her mother’s mercy. What about all these missionaries throughout the world?? that day in and day out give their lives for Christ serving the poorest of the poor ..I know a few…you have not heard about them ..why??
But, I tell you what …I can understand God’s Love for us…What I can not understand is His Mercy..for if I had just a little bit of His power… I would have given up on us already and would have put an end to all this nonsense…[yes, I'm very thankful for Jesus Mercy...I don't think I would fare well if He wasn't merciful!]
marisela
A couple of obeservations from a non-Catholic Christian. The Church–the Bride of Christ in no way can be harmed by the dreadful inaccuracies and falsehoods of the DaVinci Codes. It was a smashing thriller of a read, but as one critic has said, if Dan Brown had used the same accuracy to write the history of WWII, the Nazi’s would have won and we would all be speaking German! The real danger with this book and film is it’s purported historical accuracy. No one today knows secular history, much less religious history. Dan Brown has turned authentic historical information on its head with inaccuracy and there are enough dummies or innocent people who will believe it as fact.
It behooves all Christians to follow Pauls advice to Timothy, “You should be able to give any and all for the hope that lies within you, i.e. the hope of salvation through Jesus Christ.
errata
You should be able to give any and all the reason for the hope that lies within you, i.e. the hope of salvation through Jesus Christ.
Marisela, marisela… you gotta load of points there! Yes, I also agree with you on what I’d do with a bit of power If I were God, alas! Better though cos I’m not.
On another note, can we give a thought to Dan Brown’s soul? Imagine (just imagine) that God exists and imagine that there is a Hell and there is a Heaven…And while we are ‘imagining’… imagine that Dan Brown is wrong and being wrong, he has confused (at least) 40 million people and many more millions who borrowed his book to read. Then imagine that Dan Brown dies (as I’m sure he will one day, like you and I) and then goes before God for judgement…
Oh my God! I would not want to be in Dan Brown’s shoes at that moment … terrible moment it would be not only on account of his blasphemy, but also of his 40 million + scandal and further blasphemies by all those who parrot his errors…
And also imagine that the punishment for all this is eternal hell (I’m not judging Dan Brown, only the blasphemy), and continuing to imagine, then imagine that there are degrees of pain and suffering in hell, in function of the gravity and nature of one’s evil life… 40 million times millions, is a very grave matter indeed.
I’m scared and I think we should each spare a prayer for the soul of Dan Brown. I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.
Dan Brown’s statements in the interview may be blasphemous but in my opinion they weren’t libelous. He was quite polite in expressing his opinions no matter how absurd they were. The problem with blasphemy is that it is dependent on religious belief. And our democracy guarantees freedom of religion and freedom of speech. We can’t just punish people for expressing a different view. The antidote to a bad idea is a better idea. Some Catholic scholar should challenge Mr. Brown to a debate and let the people decide who is telling the truth.
[...] Some simple DaVinci responses, from an Opus Dei prelate. (HT: Shrine of the Holy Whapping). [...]
ABOUT REPRINTING ‘THE DVC CATECHISM’
There have been quite a few requests to reprint and translate this “catechism,” so I thought I’d just say here that everyone should feel free to copy it and publish it and generally use it as they see fit. You don’t need to ask permission. I’m just happy that people find it useful. The more the merrier!
Enough of this “it is only a book.” If some slick author were to re-write the “Turner Diaries” into a fast-paced and fun book, and it sold 40 million copies, would that just be a book too? What of “The Foundations of the Nineteenth Century?” If it were to be retold as a “factual work of fiction” should anyone deny it? If you don’t know what those books have to say, lucky you. These books are isolated to the lunatic fringe, were Brown’s book belongs. If and when such books sell millions, then they will not be dormant lies on a shelf, but dangerous lies that may corrupt those who read them if they don’t have the other side of the story. If and when that happens the real truth must be told and told with much vigor.
I’m not a Roman Catholic, but I am a student of history. Attacking the Church for the abuse scandal reveals an ignorance of history. Until the Church came along, in Roman times, the abuse of young boys was an intuition; not the rare exception but the common rule. At best one is condemning the Church for not living up to its own standards, standards that it made the norm. If I’m not mistaken, as well, such abuse is not systemic of the world wide Roman Catholic Church and not systemic of the Roman Catholic Church at all times, but rather a problem fairly unique to America in the later part of the twentieth century. In other words, the ultimate source of this is our own bankrupt culture. That culture came, not from St. Augustine or from St. Aquinas, but from the secular saints Kinsey, NAMBLA, Flint, and Heffner. All Churches are to stand against the current culture, and obviously had some grievous failings. But because the Roman Church failed to stand effectively against the culture on that issue, it should not stand against the culture on any other issue? Is one suggesting a surrender to the culture? If not then what is the issue? If a Roman Catholic saw a priest abusing a boy, no doubt they would do something about it. If they, or anyone who values the truth, sees the history of Christianity being abused then they should do something about it as well.
ANDREW KING:
If you think talking to the dead is forbidden, then please explain why Jesus, under the Law of Moses, talked with ELijah and Moses at the Transfiguration. (cf. Luke 9:30).
Hi.
I’m catholic and in my free time I spread the Good News through Internet: God is Love. Jesus is alive. That’s the two greatest news we should spread all over the world. If people hear us, Da Vinci Code will be fiction for everybody and nobody see criminals on any Opus Dei member. All of this effort to boycott Da Vinci Code is good for Dan Brown and his revenue.
Don’t lose focus.
I am a former Roman Catholic, most of what was said is true, but you can not show me anywhere biblically that we are supposed to “Glorify” Mary. Yes, she bore the Christ chld, but that doesn’t justify exhalting her. Legalism like this is what distorts the true word of God, and make people question the religon. Most of what the Catholic church is teaching has no biblical basis. Teach the Word from the Bible, and don’t deviate from it’s words. Anythign else is misleading and the Lord said those who tamper or mislead people with his Word would not be saved.
David writes: “…I am a former Roman Catholic, most of what was said is true, but you can not show me anywhere biblically that we are supposed to ‚ÄúGlorify‚Äù Mary. …”
=======
Luke 1:28 — And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, [thou that art] highly favoured, the Lord [is] with thee: blessed [art] thou among women.
Luke 1:42 — And she [Elizabeth] spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed [art] thou among women, and blessed [is] the fruit of thy womb.
Luke 1:43 (Mother of God reference) — And whence [is] this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
========
That’s good enough for me.
–Guy Power
A lot of effort debunking a fiction novel?
What are you afraid of?
By the way, I am Jewish! I find that all of you christians are quite foolish! That guy died for his ideals. Is it nos enough for you? Jesus gave a message of love to all his followers, a message that still exists today. Is it still noe enough?
You take away all the supernatural elements from the guy and he is worthless to you, your faith just flies away? If that is the case, you christians deffinitely have problems with faith. If the guy was married or not should be as trivial as knowledge of his eating habits.
Who cares about his message? Who cares about his ideals? The guy has to have alien and supernatural powers for you to believe in him.
Get real!
Our jewish prophets were mortal men, inspired by Yahweh himself, but only men. We honour them for their deeds, not for their personal life.
PS By the way, we were NOT the ones who killed him, it was the Roman Empire! Ohh, I mean, the “Holy Roman Empire”, or shall I say, the Vatican.
Assaf, your kind of language is not welcome here. Needless to say that none of your rantings merit a response. Please buzz off!
Thanks, David, for your appreciative and critical comments on the “catechism”.
Regarding the Blessed Virgin Mary, it should also be recalled, as Scott Hahn has pointed out, that Jesus surely fulfilled the commandment to honor one’s father and mother, and that means that He honored Mary. Should Christians refuse to honor the woman that God Himself honors? Moreover, in Revelation 12, those who maintain faith in Jesus are called children of the same woman who bore Him, and, in the words recorded by St. Luke, Mary herself says “all generations will call me blessed.” And the words which the angel Gabriel addresses to Mary, calling her “blessed” and which most Christians repeat in the “Hail Mary,” are words that he was sent by God to say. It is an honor for us to be able to repeat them.
The reason that Christians know what the Bible is, what it means, and how seriously to take it is because of what the Church has taught and teaches regarding it. Without realizing it, those who deny the authority of the Church are undermining the authority of the Bible, as the history of Protestant biblical interpretation has made abundantly clear. There is nothing in the text itself that guarantees its status as divine revelation or its proper interpretation.
Father Wauck,
I recommend you add a ninth question – “Has the Church always known things like the Da Vinci Code would occur?”
You could then use 2 Peter 2 to craft the reponse.
How is it that that the “gay community” escapes sanction over the abuse of teenage boys by some priests? These men were of a gay orientation before they were ever priests and the Church is also their victim. If the Catholic Church is an evil organisation because some of its members commit evil acts then, following that logic, the USA is an evil nation because some American citizens murder, rape, molest, steal and lie etc. The same is true of every country in the world, and, I venture to say, every organisation.
Aloha Father Wauck:
I am so happy I stumbled across your site. I think it will be very helpful to everyone, but especially, teens who may have questions about the movie/book. I have posted this entry in my blog.
Thank you,
Esther in Hawaii
I’ve taught CCD for the Catholic Church and have an unshakeable belief in God and his son Jesus Christ. I recognize His movements in my life, good or bad. I do recognize a novel for what it is. There is a question I have though. Why would it have made Christ’s divinity impossible for him to have engaged in the most normal and healthy of human endeavors, that of building a family with a female. On one hand the church shrieks that marriage must be holy and between a man and woman, but if Jesus did it, He could have never been divine? The admission that Mary Magdeline was not a prostitute as the Church has claimed for centuries makes me wondre why the vilification of femininity exsisted and persists today in God’s Church. And being female, it separates me from that Church. And don’t offer the Virgin Mary to refute, because that sort of supports my confusion about sexual bonding with a woman being unclean and sinful. She naturally had to be a Virgin. Any bonding with the female must be bad. I don’t think women truly have a place in the Catholic church and I cannot teach it anymore. Incidently, I have a very close and personal relationship with the Virgin, as well, so don’t rant that I’m non-Christian.
Joanne,
A couple of points… originally, Mary Magdalene was not seen as a prostitute (see Amy Welborn on Mary Magdalene). Also, throughout her history, the Roman Catholic Church has honored women saints, many of whom were married women. We begin with Perpetua and Felicity, who were very early martyrs, and also both mothers. We honor Monica and Helena, both married and mothers. We continue up through medieval times with saints such as Elizabeth of Hungary and Margaret of Scotland, married, mothers. And into modern times, with Elizabeth Ann Seton of the United States. And even within my own lifetime, with Gianna Beretta Molla, who died to give birth safely to her fourth child. Oh, yes, and St. Gianna was a working mom (a doctor), St. Elizabeth Ann Seton was a teacher, St. Helena was divorced by her husband, and St. Dymphna was abused by her father. St. Edith Stein was a philosopher, and St. Teresa of Avila, St. Therese of Liseiux, and St. Catherine of Sienna are honored as Doctors of the Church. I could go on at greater length, but you can do the research yourself. Please, please do not tell us that women have no place in the Catholic Church. Whatever your excuse may be for leaving the Catholic Church, don’t make it the alleged status of women.
I think that we can question why Down Brown thinks that by marrying Maria Magdalene with Jesus it makes women more powerful. As a matter of fact she would then be a wife, probably more submitted that a disciple which is what she really was. Do you think it is an intersting road to take in discussions around the notion of the Church putting dowmn women
“And don‚Äôt offer the Virgin Mary to refute, because that sort of supports my confusion about sexual bonding with a woman being unclean and sinful. She naturally had to be a Virgin. Any bonding with the female must be bad.”
Nobody can be blamed for interpreting her Perpetual Virginity that way. The virgin birth could be seen as a sign that something special was taking place. Pay attention! But why was it seen as necessary that she remain one for life? Was it a way of achieving transcendence? Getting beyond normal life and expectations i.e. being sexually active without at the same time putting sexuality down? If so it’s equally applicable to men and in church history has been treated that way- witness clerical celibacy-and so is not a condemnation.
Having said all that it;’s undeniable that in the past sexuality was treated with contempt–just look at St. Jerome’s and Tertullian’s writing. I’m sure our host would have to agree. Not so sure that this is the case nowadays. We do have the negative heritage of this past though and some of it shows up in the Blessed Mother’s veneration. Just what are women to make of this insistence on her purity and spotlessness as well as her submissiveness in the prayers about her? Are we to be sexually inert? Are we to sit down and shut up? Because that is sure what it looks like. OTOH this could be all about insecure male egos projecting these traits onto the Blessed Mother, in which case they can be safely dismissed. This is what I hold on to and which enable me to be a Catholic.
“…and Margaret of Scotland, married, mothers.”
But didn’t she talk her husband into abstaining from sexual relations with her after… what,.. the tenth kid? Probably not a bad idea given her exhaustion, but she did it for religious reasons. Some of those others you cited did something similar I believe. There was a beatified modern Italian married couple whose names escape me who also stopped living as such after 4 children you didn’t mention. So what does this tell us about the attitude to sexuality in even the most legitimate of situations?
Sorry to be so grouchy on this Mother’s Day after a glass of wine (where I ask no gifts of my kids except to be spared their otherwise neverending demands) , but it has to be said.
Hello Father Wauck,
Great Website and thankyou for your work!
I am a loyal Catholic to the Holy See and a beginning Apologist. (emphasis on beginning)
From my personal experience I know TDVC has questioned the faith of some cafeteria catholics (& Orthodox) not so strong in there faith. For those well grounded in there faith the novel and movie pose no problem, but for the weak, it can (and has) mislead. We need more clergy (like yourself) and laity to speak up and inform all our Catholic & Non-Catholic brothers and sisters of the facts and seperate them from fiction.
I havnt read through everyones comments, but some of them reminded me of an Apologist – John Martignoni, who said there is a shortage of priests, but no shortage for the office of papacy.
Peace & Blessings,
Rob
To Anonymous:
You refered to an Italian couple who stopped marital relations after their fourth child. The couple are Mr. & Mrs. Molla, and the reason that they stopped marital relations is that, in 1962, Dr. Gianna Beretta-Molla died of an illness – ovarian cancer; she postponed treatment of this illness because she was pregnant with her fourth child, and the medical procedure would have killed her unborn child. Dr. Gianna Beretta-Molla, who often served the poorest of patients without charging any fees, gave birth to healthy gir; unfortunatley Dr. Gianna Beretta-Molla died a week after the birth of her fourth child. Dr. Gianna Beretta-Molla, an avid skier and swimmer who reportedly loved driving her car really fast, was declared a saint, after years of the canonization process, in May, 2004. Her feast day is April 28. Truly she epitomized the words of our Lord:
“Greater love hath no one than to lay down one’s life for friends” John 15:13.
http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintgaq.htm
Let this movie be the beginning of the downfall of this corrupt institution.
May Gold bless Dan Brown, great book, great job. It was about time that someone had the guts to speak freely about these topics.But this time, there will be no inquisition, no one shall be burned at the stake. From this day forward, everyone will doubt everytime a religious authority tells us something. Oh yes, doubts and more doubts. The age of reasoning and awakening has finally come.
Welcome to the NEW WORLD ORDER.
New World — Huh!
If people had such an intellect, why did, even the Jews who thought they were Germans, go along with
Hitler? Spurious knowledge can bite one on the behind, too. What does come into all of this is the
emergence of two separate and idiotic notions — Da Vinci Code and the Gospel of Judas, which both
happened to originate from Egyptian monastaries of decades past. One excommunicated group of monks
from the Eastern Rite, as told in the Philokalia about the Judas stuff, and the other argument which
DVC centers around with the error filled story about a human marriage between Christ and a woman.
I agree with you New Worl Order on one point – when you said God Bless Dan Brown, I pray that God DOES bless him and give him a new heart. All Catholics SHOULD also be doing the same. Bless your enemies.
New World Order – the movie and all its “hype” so to speak it is causing is nothing new and actually quite small on the scale of what Catholicism had to endure through history with all the heresies that were arising.
Guess what – the Catholic Church is still here. Jesus isnt a liar – and when he said the Gates of Hell will not avail he was talking about the Catholic Church. When we are gone, the Catholic Church will still be here, and forever and ever, Amen.
Peace,
Rob
Not only the Jews went along with Hitler. Also the ‘smart’ christian people. From Pius XII (also nicknamed “Hitler’s Pope”) to the average catholic and protestant.
Hitler’s hate for the jews was inspired by a strong anti-semitic book called “On The Jews and Their Lies”, written by Martin Luther himself.
Isn’t it ironic. Hitler is considered the ‘anti-christ’ by many, yet he received support from the Catholic Church. His hateful view of the jews was inspired by the founder of the protestant movement.
Did the church opposed Hitler?
“Gott Mit Uns”, huh?
In conclusion : I was not Dan Brown nor his book who orchestrated your downfall. It’s your shameful past catching up with you.
New World Order, I thought the age of awakening came and gone in the 16th century with the Renaissance and the Reformation. The age of reason also came and gone in the 18th century with the blooming of atheistic philosophies in France and England. Guess what? The Church is still here and Catholics are more now than anytime in history. The fact speaks for itself. Either people are becoming more stupid or the Church is for real. God bless you.
Assaf, I respect your religion please respect other religions too. Intolerance of differing religious belief is a step back to the Dark Ages when Christians and Muslims kill each other in the name of righteousness. That’s silly and tragic. We call it by different names but we all believe in one God. Yahweh bless you.
Hey, New World — Old ideas.
Yes, the Catholic Church did oppose Hitler. Look up the Church in Holland’s war record. Research the
movie, if you’re a Gregory Peck fan you’ll enjoy this one, ‘ The Black and the Scarlet ‘. If those
are too strenous, try Chardin’s classic work of how one priest toppled the scientific community with
his Jesuit work, ‘ The Phenonmenon of Man ‘ and his best seller, ‘ Pit-down Man ‘. A critic’s note:
The monkey hoax was intentional. The Catholic Church was the only institution to debunk it.
The Church is still here indeed, frightened to death because of a fiction novel.
You want to know why? Because this stime, no one will be burned on a stake. There is no easy way to force us into silence.
Through music, literature, cinema, we’re shouting the truth. Your infamy is no longer a secret. You will never force us into silence again, this time we’re here to stay.
Ohhh, this is nice!
A bunch of pictures from the catholic church opposing Hitler:
http://www.herenciacristiana.com/christianhorror/nazis.html
New World guy, if the church disappears because of DVC, I will be gladly embrace your religion if any. That’s my bet. I bet you the church will remain long after we’re all dead. That Hitler thing isn’t impressive. The church has done greater evils in its history – inquisition, crusade, etc. You would think it can never survive all that scandals. To see is to believe. Incredible!
Scandals?? That’s history Leonardo, not a simple scandal, the catholic church foundations are tinted in blood, don’t forget that.
The only reason for the catholic church to exist is because they killed everything and everyone different, not because of faith.
Unfortunately, people always forgets history.
Well, so long New World.
Enjoy your music, because God created all to become enjoyed.
Yours ism’t a time to waste on reading. Listen to the local news, radio stations, and cartoons.
Leave the whole matter in the hands of people you’ve never met. We’ll get on somehow.
You do not deny than, that this church is built upon the blood of innocents?
Are you proud?
What does it feel to belong in an institution responsible for so many murders and so many treachery?
You really thought all this crimes will remain unpunished? Do you really think that the screams of innocents will just go away by pretending that all this never happened?
Was this Jesus’ idea of his church? An instrument of torture, deceit and murder?
It was very nice talking to all of you, but I must leave. We have work to do.
By the way, the nice and reasoning people at http://www.odan.org send you their best wishes.
Cheers
New World, Galileo, we cannot deny history and we’re not proud of it. Catholicism does not have a monopoly of evils. Other religions also have bloody histories. The evils of men (Christian, Muslim, Jew, whatever) should not be blamed on God or their religion or their lack of it. It’s like saying I don’t want to be American because some Americans are murderers. I said enough. My apology for touching your sensitivities.
If New World is still out there — and most likely you are.
I once visited that website. My question is: Why didn’t you make that website known earlier on?
I am rather intriqued by such an informed belief, on your part, about people who have made a giant
decision with regards to their Faith, and yet find nothing in your arguments to suggest the same
pattern of behavior, or soul searching on your part. How come?
You must’ve had such an occasion, at least once. Something seriously troubles you. What particular
teaching of the Church bothers you enough to keep you from wanting to advance toward Truth? Surely,
you must know that everyone seeks to find the Truth.
Der Da Vinci Code ist eine UCHRONIE.
Diese Uchronie ist nicht unwahrscheinlicher als die Fabeln der Kirche.
Die “Templiers” sind nicht wegen Blasphemie von Philippe Le Bel und vom Papst erledigt worden.
Sie waren einfach zu m?§chtig und zu reich f?ºr die Karolinger geworden.
Den “Templiers” das Geheimnis der Tochter Jesus: Sarah anh?§ngen zu wollen,
ist eine sch??ne kontrafaktische Geschichte.
Warum sollten wir aber nicht daran glauben ?
M?ºssen wir nur den eidesstaatlichen Versicherungen
vom Opus Dei und ihrer Benedikten glauben ?
[...] Fr. Wauk has a great Catechism on the claims in the DaVinci Code. Visit, bookmark and forward his blog. [...]
New World Order, Galileo and related bloggers… Thanks for the good laugh!!! Why not say what you really think instead of hiding behind pseudo-historical balderdash. You hate the Church. So be it. You happen to hate a caricature of the Church, not the real thing. Now go channel all that negative energy in some way! Good luck.
We do not hate the church just for being a church. We hate the church for all the crimes it has committed against mankind.
As with any other criminal, it must receive punishment.
If you are indeed faithful christians, please try to give a minute’s prayer to :
1) The Albigensians
2) The muslims during the crusades
3) The Knights Templar
4) Indians in the Americas
You say you pray for your enemies. Well, pray for your victims also.
Okay, can we please agree to ignore this annonymous guy signing as “New World Order”? Right, that’s better. As he won’t let up on the bomfoolery, better wish him away. Now go, “NWO”, thank you!
But if you insist on hanging around, as I’ve seen you do (staying just close by to see how many people get ticked off by you), then please make a superhuman effort to make some sense. That way, we can join you in CON-versation. Afterall, this blog is all about reasonable people having some discussion, right?
Have you actually read the book?
It is a great book. It will be a great movie. I can’t wait to see it.
Why don’t all of you just relax and try to enjoy a good-quality-thriller movie instead of fighting against each other.
Instead of boycotting movies and fighting each other, why don’t you focus your attention on George W Bush and his meaningless war on Iraq. Make a website criticizing war, hunger, poverty, the REAL problems of this century.
Shouldn’t Mary be venerated as the wife of a mortal man also? I think so because of how she provides an example to wives and husbands.
Dan Brown and Leonardo Da Vinci are geniuses.
Since I read the book everyday I pray for Mary Madgalene the wife of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Good joke, Charlie. I especially like the part about reading the book every day… but praying FOR the wife of our Lord is pretty funny too.
Brent, you’re right. Mary should be venerated for all that she was, and that includes being Joseph’s spouse. I meant that there are many wives of mortal men, but only one Mother of God.
Previous post demanded “[m]ake a website criticizing war, hunger, poverty, the REAL problems of this century.”
Yes, there are other world problems out there (the DVC is more of a joke than a serious ‘problem’ by the way–refresh your memory and look at the VERY FIRST POST of this blog). I’ve seen those ‘world problems’, I’m an attorney who has worked at the U.N..
Well, it’s easy to go and “make a website”… here’s more than a website. Here are people who are actually making a huge difference. Catholic Charities is the single, largest social service provider in the world. “Egad, it’s part of the Catholic Church! I can’t believe anything good could come out of Rome!” We always learn something new each day.
Look here for the national stats: http://www.catholiccharitiesinfo.org/news/statistics.htm
For international stats, you’ll have to plug into each country’s Catholic Charities reports.
Also, of course, look here if you dare (Oh, no! It’s the Opus Dei webpage!)…for starters, look at the African projects. http://www.opusdei.us/sec.php?s=35
Did you know that Strathmore was the FIRST INTER-RACIAL educational institution in Kenya? Yes, it’s true.
Actions speak louder than words.
It is easy to play the armchair-philosopher. What have you done? That is a question to be pondered and prayed about. We speak so lightly of “pray for this” and “pray for your enemies.” Prayer is to speak with God. Well, let’s try to do that without mud-splashing his Church. It would only be good manners, you know.
If Jesus is married to the church, he should file for divorce.
The church has not been faithful to his teachings.
What I meant to say is that everyday I pray for Mary Magdalene the wife of our LORD JESUS. If you insist on denying her marriage it’s your problem. You will be so embarassed when you finally meet her in heaven.
LOL! That will be a day full of surprises, I promise you!
St. Mary Magdalene’s probably beside herself for all the hoopla we’re making over a wanna-be quasi-historical novel…
I actually do pray for her to intercede for me for things, I love her a lot. I have a double-loyalty, of course, because I spent a glorious time at Magdalen College, Oxford, named for her in fact.
But I don’t pray for her since I know she’s already there (and, er, she wouldn’t exactly need praying for if she’s Christ’s wife, don’t you think? Just a thought).
Jeanne, I think you wore a cilice over your head and too tight.
I admire your intelect, making fun of arguments that go against your beliefs. Everything is a joke to you. Tell you what, all this stuff is a sick joke! The church and the book are a joke. Opus Dei is a joke, a VERY SICK JOKE!
I completely apologize if you think I’d meant ‘everything’ is a joke. Certainly not. Could we please keep things at the level of a polite conversation? Much as I thank you for the compliment on my intellect, I’d rather do without it and the personal attacks. The realm of mirth and “making fun” is absolutely different from that of “sick jokes.”
I beg to differ. The Church and Opus Dei are not sick jokes.
If New World has a problem with Christology, maybe, he ought to learn from the Desert Fathers rather than
play Mazes and Monsters as a religion. Of course, first New Order would have to deny itself, and
lock itself into his cell before allowing its cell to teach it anything.
Many there are who preach, but very few who are called by a sacred love in a sacrament to do so for his
neighbor, his brother and friend — Christ.
Two observations:
Number 1: Read William Shrier’s “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich”. This is the undisputed history of Nazi Germany (well, maybe disputed on the lunatic fringe, but let us leave that alone). Of note: in the 1930 elections, the Catholic Center Party backed President Hindenberg for re-election against Hitler, who claimed to be a Catholic. Once in power, Hitler put some pretty goofy people in charge of German religous affiars, for example, Dr. Kerrl, the Nazi Minister of Church Affairs, verbatim from Shrier‚Äôs work (pg 239):
“The party [Kerrl said] stands on the basis of Positive Christianity, and Positive Christianity is National Socialism‚ĶNational Socialism is the doing of God‚Äôs will‚ĶGod‚Äôs will reveals itself in German blood‚ĶDr. Zoellner and Count Galen [the Catholic Bishop of Muenster] have tried to make it clear to me that Christianity consists in faith in Christ as the Son of God. That makes me laugh‚ĶNo, Christianity is not dependent upon the Apostle‚Äôs Creed‚ĶTrue Christianity is represented by the party, and the German people are now called by the party and especially by the Fuehrer to a real Christianity‚ĶThe Fuehrer is the herald of a new revelation.”
If that were not bad enough, the final refinement of just what ‘Christianity’ was for the Nazis was pronounced, during the war, by Rosenberg, “an outspoken pagan, who among his other offices held that of ‘the Fuerher’s Delegate for the Entire Intellectual and Philosophical Education and Instruction for the National Socialist Party,’ put together a thirty point program for the ‘National Reich Church.’” It is represented below, verbatim from Shrier’s work (pg 240):
“1. The National Reich Church of Germany categorically claims the exclusive right and the exclusive power to control all churches within the borders of the Reich: it declares these to be national churches of the German Reich.
5. The National Church is determined to exterminate irrevocably…the strange and foreign Christian faiths imported into Germany in the ill-omened year 800.
7. The National Church has no scribes, pastors, chaplains or priests, but National Reich orators are to speak in them.
13. The National Church demands immediate cessation of the publishing and dissemination of the Bible in Germany…
14. The National Church declares that to it, and therefore to the German nation, it has been declared that the Fuehrer’s Mein Kampf is the greatest of all documents. It…not only contains the greatest but it embodies the purest and truest ethics for the present and future life of our nation.
18. The National Church will clear away from its altars all crucifixes, Bibles and pictures of saints.
19. On the altars there must be nothing but Mein Kampf (to the German nation and therefore to God the most sacred book) and to the left of the altar a sword.
30. On the day of its foundation the Christian Cross must be removed from all churches, cathedrals and chapels‚Ķand it must be superseded by the only unconquerable symbol, the swastika.”
The footnote in Shrier’s work references two sources for the above (he had since fled for his life from Germany), one of them The New York Times.
Shrier summed it up on page 240 of his work by writing the following:
“Not many Germans lost much sleep over the arrests of a few thousand pastors and priests or over the quarreling of the various Protestant sects. And even fewer paused to reflect that under the leadership of Rosenberg, Bormann and Himmler, who were backed by Hitler, the Nazi regime intended eventually to destroy Christianity in Germany, if it could, and substitute the old paganism of the early tribal Germanic gods and the new paganism of the Nazi extremists. As Bormann, one of the men closest to Hitler, said publicly in 1941, ‚ÄúNational Socialism and Christianity are irreconcilable.‚Äù”
One can hit the spin cycle all they want, but the plain fact is that Hitler did what he could to pervert Catholicisim and Protestantisim once he was in charge.
Number 2: In regards to Catholisicim or Christianity in general being bad as bad things happened under them, or at least near them, there is a huge difference in an error being incidental to something and an error being caused by something. The French Revolution was an ugly bit of history, so anti-Monarchists are to blame and we need to bring back kings and queens? The American Civil War killed hundreds of thousands, so it was wrong to free the slaves? Those were all good things that caused some suffering in their wake. But the larger point overlooked is that prior to the Church, the concept of human rights was that it was the right of the ruler to do whatever with humans that he wanted to. Before the Church, a just war was a war was any war that one could win. Before the Church (in ancient Roman times), young boys were routinely made sex objects for older men. At best, one is (unwittingly perhaps) adopting the Church’s morality while condeming the Church for not always living up to that morality perfectly, or for not always being to make other live up to it.
New World Order:
I agree that the Church must seek forgiveness for the treatment of the Native Americans, the Albigensians, the Muslims, Jews, and Orthodox Christians murdered in the Crusades, not to mention the 130,000 victims of the Witch Hunt, (the vast majority in Protestant Germany, lesser in Protestant England) and the 300,000 killed in the Spanish Inquistion.
Now, let’s examine the record of the Enligtenment:
1. 40,000 innocents killed in the Reign of Terror, the aftermath of the French Revolution – so much for liberte, egalite et fraternete. How many more thousands were killed as Napolean, the dictator born of the Revolution, and his armies swept across Europe?
2. 3,000,000 million Cambodians murdered in the Killing Fields by Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.
3. 40,000,000 million or so who were killed in the forced famines by Stalin and the Soviet Communists
4. 80,000,000 million or so killed in the Cultural Revolution by Mao Tse Tung and the Red Chinese
Pretty impressive numbers put up by these athiestic philosphical movements. Let’s not forget that there
were innoncent Christians (Catholics) murdered in the Crusades by Muslims. Let’s not forget that Muslims invaded Spain, Portugal, Greece, Yugoslavia and nearly overan France and Austria. How many innocent Christians died in those wars? How many innocent Catholics were murdered by the Goths, Visigoths, the Huns, the Celts, the Picts, the Vikings? How many Armenian Christians were murdered by the Turkish (Muslim) Army in the early 20th Century? 2 to 3 million. How many Chinese Catholics were murdered by the Boxers between 1898-1901? 10,000 or more perhaps. How about the number of Christians martyred during the Days of the Roman Empire – Perhaps in the thousands.
So, what’s the point of all of this, New World Order? Yes, the Catholic Church, under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome, had sanctioned terrible crimes against innocent people, sometimes even fellow Catholics. The Late, Great Pope John Paul II, in the year 2000, made an effort to publically apologize for these crimes, and beg for forgiveness from the victims. Can the same be said of these other movements or organizations who committed crimes of equal, or greater, veracity? Look, the USA dropped an atom bomb on two cities of Tokyo- how many innocent people, even children, were killed during those times? Japan was the victim. Yet, Japan suffered 4 millions deaths in WWII, but caused the death of 15 million people during the same time. My point?
No race nor religion has a monopoly on virtue, nor a monopoly on vice. Each race and religion, at different points in their respective histories, has been both the victim and perpetrator of terrible crimes. That’s the state of affairs caused by original sin. That’s why humanity needs a saviour – Jesus Christ! Yes, we who claim the title ‘Christian’ must do a much greater job at proclaiming and, more importantantly, living the message of Jesus, which includes seeking forgiveness for our sins, individual and collective, and doing penance for these sins, so as to restore God’s Justice and Peace to the world.
Now, New World Order, please forgive me for my incessant rambling.
This is preposterous!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You’re spending a lot of VALUABLE time researching this stupid statistics about who mudered who just to continue this meaningless debate!!! What do you want to prove? Who is more murderous, the catholics or the atheists?
Come on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Get a life!
Let’s all go to the movies on Friday, let’s enjoy the movie and continue with our daily lives!
If you don’t like the book or the movie, don’t watch it!!! Stay in your damn house playing with your cilice! If you hate the damn church, don’t go to church! Stay in your house up all night looking up anti-catholic websites and posting on every forum you can imagine!
GET A LIFE, ALL OF YOU, SERIOUSLY!!!
Have you tried dating someone?
Phillipe does introduce an entirely new question to this DEBATE: The notion of a free space in which any
person participates without the threat of harm from ideologies adopted by tyrannical body politics. Since
Phillipe wants to envision a society which favors life, I am more than willing to suggest that the Church
has always had the teaching of Respect for Life. As a trained crisis counselor for pro – life, I can
appreciate Phillipe’s concern that so much of it is wasted.
Let’s ignore the waste that pulp fiction, but author – declared non-fictional stylings stimulate a
secular humanistic society into defending, promoting, and boasting of active compliance of free-will.
It’s that same compliance which, one could justify as transfer of responsibility, support Seneca’s claim,
‘ Never to regret anything ‘. Like Homer, who wasn’t a philosopher because he attributed evil to the
gods, there are those who wish to direct these discussions into Rhetoric rather than like Geothe, where
‘ Beauty is not so much fulfillment as rather a promise ‘. This is the reason why Christ would never
divorce his Church, due to the fact that by absorbing Beauty with the right disposition, we experience,
not gratification, satisfaction, and enjoyment but the arousal of an expectation; we are orientated
toward something ‘ not – yet – here ‘.
I rest my case!
GET A LIFE!!!!!!
Phillipe:
I watch plenty of movies, in the theatre, with my tub of popcorn, soda, and candy bar too. Oh,as an aside, I have dated some pretty gorgeous women along the way. I gotta a life, Funny Phil, and I thank God for every great minute of it. So, if I choose to spend my valuable free time defending something which I hold dearly, that’s my choice. By the way, if you ‘have a life’ why are you reading up on this ‘religion vs. athiesm’ website in the first place?
Phillipe.
I am surprised that you seek rest when a predictable movie supposedly inspires you.
Man is constituted in such a way that, on the one hand, he needs to be forced,
through inspiration, out of the self – sufficiency of his thinking — through an
event, therefore, that lies beyond his disposing power, an event that comes to him
only in the form of something unpredictable.
Maybe, this is why Catholics aren’t interested in viewing this movie. Forget the
rest of mediocre films when through baptism we’ve experienced the Best!
However, if the mediocre attempt at drama / entertain preferences instills errors
about other people, or ridicules the marginalized, but lavishes pomps upon
materialistic morality, which is human secularism, you should defend the character
of those who lack inspiation on Oprah.
Phillipe asks “Have you tried dating someone?”
What kind of question is this, and what has it got to do with the issue at hand?
Ah, I see, it does show the direction of your thoughts and the location of your brain … down below!
Well, I have my brain up here and it works alright and my priorities are quite different indeed. Besides my intellect does not require sensual arousal to awaken it, as both you and Dan Brown seem to imply.
But to answer your question, yes, I am in love with the most beautiful woman that ever walked this earth!
Brain down below,huh!
What an imagination. Seek help, you sick pervert!
What do I have to do with Dan Brown???? Why do you say that about ‘our intellect’?? Do you know us? Man, you’re twisted!!! Sorry pal, wrong movie. We’re talking about “The Da Vinci Code”, not “Brokeback Mountain” or other movie which will appeal to your sick desires and preferences.
Well the most beautiful woman that walked the earth is dating a cell phone who has a way of thinking most likely found in the 4th century and who ingeniously associates a brain with a phallus. This is worthy of an applause.
No wonder why is there a circus flying around “The Da Vinci Code” with all this clowns fooling around.
As I said before, if you don’t agree with the movie, DO NOT WATCH IT! Rent another movie with the most beautiful woman that ever walked this earth and enjoy!!
This is a blog with a theme. The theme happens to be the DVC and Opus Dei.
Don’t like the blog?
Fine. You’re FREE to look at the hundreds of others whirling about in cyber-space.
Perhaps freedom of speech is a new concept for you. Sorry for ya.
“Phillipe”, I doubt you would get much help from Dan Brown because the position you are desperately denying, is the one he has taken in his unfortunate book. The brains involved in all these thought processes now making waves (and movies, and money) are anywhere but up.
I have seen your posts in other parts of this blog and I then wonder who is a “sick !” No offense meant, but please may I suggest you tone down your language because it does not advance your position. It rather makes you look worse off. I doubt that Nokia meant what you concluded: your mind’s too far made up to see other possibilities.
I just don’t get it!
I stumbled upon this lame website looking for information regarding the upcoming movie. I read the book and I liked it a lot. I am WELL AWARE that is FICTION!!! It never happened, ok! Silas does not exist, ok! Robert Landgon DOES NOT EXIST!!! Leigh Teabing does not exist!!! Shall I continue?
What I just said was that the church was not loyal to the teaching of Jesus! I DID NOT SAID that the marriage between Jesus and Madgalene was true! It is possible, but not necessarily true! I mean, a loser like Nokia dates the most beautiful woman that walked the earth, everything is possible!!!
I AM NOT a Dan Brown admirer. I just enjoyed a good read and I will enjoy a good movie, along with many other millions of persons, while you all suffer from your own stomach ulcers.
Freedom of speech, right? A guy comes up with different ideas and you destroy him.
I will leave now, I will not waste one single more minute quarreling with medieval minded morrons!
See you later? Where? In another website criticizing Superman because no one can fly and saying that there is life in outer space is blasphemous!!!!
PS When I said “go date someone”, I did NOT MEANT for all you wannabe-priests to go date young boys! Just for the record.
?
“You shall now the truth, and the truth shall set you free” – John 8:32
“YOU shall now the TRUTH, and the TRUTH shall set you FREE” – John 8:32
Do not conclude the meaning of this, just read it and keep it in mind. Keep your conclusions to yourselves, please.
I do not bring a sword, I bring peace.
More food for thought on the ‚Äútruth‚Äù theme. (And don‚Äôt you worry, “New World Order”, I won‚Äôt do anything so rash as to share my ‚Äòconclusions‚Äô‚Äîwouldn‚Äôt dream of it, sir!‚Ķ or madam..)
Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth—in a word, to know himself—so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves (cf. Ex 33:18; Ps 27:8-9; 63:2-3; Jn 14:8; 1 Jn 3:2).
~ Faith and Reason, John Paul II
Although each individual has a right to be respected in his own journey in search of the truth, there exists a prior moral obligation, and a grave one at that, to seek the truth and to adhere to it once it is known.
~ The Splendor of Truth, John Paul II
The human person is, inherently, a seeker of the truth.
And, as pointed out by John Paul II, the truth is not a ‚Äòthing‚Äô, but a Person. At the core of all this is that age-old question: What is Truth? In other words, who is Jesus Christ? And isn’t he what all this is really about? (Not a strictly rhetorical question, so yes, comment away!)
Thanks, those are good passages. I never read either of those books–where would I find them?
Okay, Mr/Mr/Mrs New World — Truth, Peace, and Forget?
Let’s talk then about ‘ What is Sacred? ‘, and pretend the past never can bring about reconciliation, eh?
Does either you or Phillipe have a philosophy which you live by? Since the concept about a ‘ Free Space ‘
presumes that everyone in the room has a philosophy, or at least a favorite philosopher — not Homer who
was never a ‘ lover ‘, what do you hold sacred, and whose ideas do you cherish. And, please, no
strangulated passio amoris.
Alot of you (both non-catholics and catholics alike) need to show a little more respect to each other and this website. You are on a Catholic Website, so please show some charity – stop with all the name calling, ad hominem attacks and Church bashing. You all should be lucky that its not thoroughly moderated and your replies are not deleted. You do get to have your say – but remember where you are!
Peace & Blessings
Rob
DVC is just fiction let’s not take it too seriously and personally. Dan Brown is a self-professed Christian who must be doubting his faith. Let us pray for his enlightenment. Our parish priest said go watch the movie it’s good entertainment. Let’s all do and get a good laugh. God bless you all!
Father John, is it sinful to watch the movie? I’m really excited to see it. Our parish priest said it’s okay to watch DVC as long as we don’t entertain impure thoughts. This is a great website, can I share it with my friends in our prayer group? God bless.
Hello, Robbie.
I was re-familiarizing myself with your first comment — especially when you wrote, ‘ I’m a loyal
Catholic to the Holy See and a beginning apologist ‘. I mentioned somewhere about myself being
in the pro – life counseling.
It is strange that the term ‘ Free Space ‘ wouldn’t bring to mind any sort of yelling, even to the
point of the use of profanity, or bickering, or even demonstrative behavior. However, sometimes
it does happen; not out of disrespect or even a lack of charity, it’s human.
Now, of course, there are some people who’ve got a desacralized, or a pseudosacredness background,
but one has to set a imaginary bar in which what may become explained as human doesn’t
degenerate into an illusory idealization of ‘ Free Space ‘.
But, let me ask you. With your desire to become an apologist, have you gone to any clinics that
offer abortion, and spent time learning from the sidewalk counselors? The books aren’t going to
teach practical reasoning, or dare I say consider the idea of having three minutes to convince
a woman — background unknown — whose only mind set is a tunnel-vision reality of ‘ How do I
get myself out of this pregnancy catastrophe? ‘ And, I dare say, that ‘ Free Space ‘, which
happens to become Catholic — as Christ said ‘ Where two or three are gathered in my Name, I am
there. ‘, isn’t a fireside chat with G. K. Chesterton, either. Like to know your thoughts!
Jesus is Lord! Praise Him forevermore! Halleluia! Halleluia! Hail Mary mother of God! Pray for Dan Brown and us sinners. Amen.
The Catholic Church is perfect. It’s the people within the Church who are imperfect. It’s called Original Sin. We ALL SIN. Whether we’re Catholics or not, we sin. That’s why there’s forgive and forget. That’s why there’s confession. We are too hard on ourselves, condemning each other. I hope we come to our senses to redeem each other instead. The Catholic Church is the ark salvation as Noah’s ark was saved those who were on board. There’s references to the Catholic Church being the Jesus Christ’s holy chosen church, with him telling Peter the apostle that he would be the founder of it. It’s stated in the bible that Peter would found the church and he did. It’s teachings and the foundations of it are solid and divine. Those who become Catholics will be saved. The Heaven that people go to is called Catholic Triumphant, not protestant or evangelical. Satan has corrupted society and the Roman Catholic Church is the true ark of salvation. It’s up to us to choose to accept or reject this fact.
The Da Vinci Code is a work of evil. It is definitely a comedy of errors as Father Wauck said. Good will come out of this book, with people seeing that Christianity isn’t evil, they’ll see because the Truth is told by the Church. God won’t be defeated by a ridiculous work of fiction.God who is good always wins. Good always prevails. God bless everyone.
Mary wrote “Our parish priest said go watch the movie it‚Äôs good entertainment. Let‚Äôs all do and get a good laugh. God bless you all!”
Well, it may not even have much of an ‘entertainment’ value in the end…
“Variety” gave it a pretty dull review this morning (http://www.variety.com/VE1117930534.html).
I for one am not particularly attracted in seeing my Chuch bomblasted for entertainment’s sake
Cannes….
http://www.variety.com/VE1117930534.html
Hello, all. Well, more about the entertainment we’ve all been holding our breath to behold. (Sorry, don’t mean to be sarcastic or any such thing…). Got these links emailed to me from my room-mate so thought I’d share & share a like.
BW (and no, I am NOT Bertie Wooster of Jeeves-fame…just in case you’re wondering. I’m actually Brian.)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060516/film_nm/leisure_cannes_davinci_dc_7
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060517.wsimoncanblog/BNStory/Entertainment
There Friends;
I am writing from the land of Israel, where religions began and blood ran.
But after thousand of years of fight to suppress the believe of someone just because he think different has caused suffer, pain, anguish, agony, and all kind of human feelings.
My Proposal is simple but complex at the same time, involve to leave the cloths of religions, any religion (Christian, Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Communism, Capitalism; I include also the economical religions) and believe just in one Power and One Soul, The Power of something besides human and The Soul of Human Kind.
Just Humans can save Humans, and Just The Power brings hope. But that hope shouldn’t be follow by ideas of how to pray, in what to believe or having a building for exercise our hope.
Religion is just a tool to control Humans although Religions are built by humans, produced a cycle that the only purpose is to disable the true essence in human kind, and the creators are absorb to this hole.
I don’t believe in any religion, but I believe in the Power that come from Human Souls and that is so powerful to believe that have entity.
Brothers around the world, please, don’t fight in order to make your faith true, FIGHT for the TRUE to be your faith. But in this fight NO BLOOD should be throw in the ground.
My will as Person who live in this world is to UNITE people and taking out the cloths of religions, just to be the Human KInd ONE, ONE NATION, ONE SOUL.
And about the movie, I feel all opinion are valid, and if it’s give some message should be heard.
I agree with you, “From Israel” there should be no violence based on religion. Freedom of religion is one of the core human rights.
If you abandon one set of beliefs, there’s no choice but to live by another. “Just Humans can save Humans”: I’m afraid history reveals that is not possible. And that, in itself, would be another religion. We can’t be entirely ‘religion-free’ because we must believe in something.
What I’m trying to say, Is to believe in the Power of Humans, the Souls Of the Humans, Just Believing in the true ESSENCE, that include the bad and the good, the two sides.
For that concept is no necessary religion or a structure of believes, or system of power.
Only a feeling of belonging to the UNITY of Humankind, the Simplicity of Human race, including the complexity of the Nature of Humans.
Build a placebo is not necessary, a religion to replace another religion isn’t the solution, but the problem itself.
Believing that the Human race is mature enough to realize that we only need the love of the people around the world to understand, that nothing but Humans can save “the minds and souls” of Humans. No redemption is necessary to go to heaven, no killing is necessary to be a martyr, no war is worthy in order to change life.
Punishing the people for feeling is not redemption, Letting Humans free of a structured system to suppress the human soul, wouldn’t bring another system, If and only IF the Humankind is evolve enough to understand this premise and leaving the past hates and angers where the past belong, in the past.
Love and Free Mind to all the people in this world, I wish…..
Greetings to ‘ From Israel ‘.
Welcome, to the group. Just note of interest — I appreciate that you came here, and are willing
to exchange ideas and BELIEF. I stress belief because everyone with an intellect deserves a place,
without a threat of harm, to discuss the most dear, and share the most crucial dialog with others.
With that said, I understand that you have a firm belief in the concept of a soul. I applaud
your progress. However, as you probably will admit, the soul and the fresh are two in one. If
you’ll accept this, shall we proceed further, and suggest that a nation could become the flesh
while the Church is its soul? Just as Moses spent so many years with that people, who left
Egypt, and prior to his death, that same prophet, the most sacredly held prophet by the
religions of Jews and Catholics, had appointed Aaron as his successor. Would G-d leave or
abandon his people forever, as the prophet David asked retorically?
Congratulations for your comment, Mr ‘From Israel’.
I am a christian who sins but prays for forgiveness. I am not a Catholic beater but would like to point out that the catholic church twists much of the true christian faith…I will point out just a few.
1. “Sunday declared day of rest” – Saturday is the true day of rest and to change it is to break one of the ten commandments. The catholic church changed the day from Saturday to Sunday.
2. Excommunicate – has no meaning in christianity. (NONE WHAT SO EVER!) It is said in the bible “Only through him can you come to me”. Meaning that Jesus is the gate keeper of heaven not the catholic church nor the pope
3. Idols – No where in the bible does Jesus tell us to pray to Mary. He only tells us to pray to God.
4. The word vicar is taken from the latin word vicarious which can translate to “serving in place of someone”. Why does the pope have the words “vicar of Christ” above the his doorway? This would translate to “serving in place of Christ”. No-one can serve “in place of” Christ. It can also have the meaning “Entrusted to another” which would translate to “Entrusted to Christ”. Which meaning does the Catholic church want to use?
I would like to ask the following question toward the pope?
Do you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?
This is taken from (John Book 1) 4 ( verse 2 – 4)
Would the pope reply to this on television for all to see? Probably not but it would settle alot of arguments.
What are we arguing about? What did Jesus mean when he said to “lOVE ONE ANOTHER”? Does he mean to love only those who believe the way I do? Does he mean to slander those you don’t understand? Bashing each others belief systems is that the way we show love to the world and each other? We all want to be heard and some are prone to yelling and throwing put downs. I can say that I do not believe everything the Catholic church teaches, but then again I don’t believe 75% of what the world religions teaches, but that doesn’t make them wrong. We all should be working to better ourselves and to learn what life has to teach. Alot of the comments here make really good points and some just want to argue for the sake of argument. I am not a zealot in my beliefs, I like to keep things in the middle in all aspects of my life. I hope you all find the truth you are searching for.
“And I will spew you out of my mouth, for you are neither hot nor cold but lukewarm.” (Revelation) Middle ground works sometimes, but it can also be synonymous with mediocre.
Being strong in one’s faith doesn’t automatically pigeon-hole one as a ‘zealot.’ Sorry the quote’s so strong, but in these times of mediocrity, there has to be some conviction, some lion-hearted conviction to the truth.
Welcome Colin Saxton.
Please continue your participation because you do some arguments which indicate an informed
plus a philosopical ‘ lover ‘ for truth. With that, I’d have to offer for your consideration,
1.) Sunday is the holy day due to two reasons:
a.) To prove that Christ died — finitely on the cross. If you’ll recall surely that
many of those at His death on the cross — throughout the tragic human response to their
Lord and Savior’s call to mankind — there were some who challenge Him, on His divinity,
to ‘ Come down off from the Cross, and we’ll believe you. ‘. He did not.
b.) It was the Passover. Being buried in a tomb was Israel’s crossing of the Red Sea.
Sunday is the eighth day, the new covenent fulfilled. As Catholics we consider the
observance of Sunday as Christ had brought perfect, through His death and resurrection,
the Law and the covenents of the Old Testament. Take a look as Saint Paul explains
about a wife who is under obedience to her husband for as long as her husband is alive–
regarding testament and covenents.
2.) Wouldn’t you also think of the significance of Judas. Judas is a bishop, a
betrayer in the worst possible way, and an unrepentant sinner who refused to follow
Christ in His teaching on seeking forgiveness. The offfice of bishop is filled by
another in Acts, but still Judas was excommunicated. Saint Paul also had his troubles
with those who, after seeking life in the community, reversed their intention by
following erroneous ideologies. Important note: Excommunication is to remind formerly
Catholic participants of the seriousness for rejecting that Teaching which they once
affirmed, in body, soul and mind — as Deuteronomy 6:4 – 7 demands of the faithful.
If you were never welcomed, by both you to the Church, into the community of the
faithful, excommunication doesn’t apply to you. The doctrine of ‘ there is no
salvation outside of the Catholic Church ‘ is the fullness of what you are quoting
partially from.
3.) Communion of the Saints: as Goethe wrote, ‘ Unreal to us the rose appears. ‘,
God Himself becomes man, and — in the New Testament language of nomadic shepherds–
‘ pitches His tent among us ‘. I remember a Saint and Doctor of our Church who
‘ wishes to shower the world with roses. ‘, known as Saint Therese, ‘ I’ll spend
my time in Heaven doing good on earth. ‘
4.) Finally, although this is not the Pope writing, I’ll let him decide his own
course of action, since everyone is guaranteed to have free-will. However, for
your review, I’d like to propose the following: The term persona ( mask ), to
stem originally from the world of the theater, but it is also regularly used
in legal contexts. In both instances it means a particular manner of
identification, of representation as Saint Paul, 2 Cor 2:10, teaches, ‘ I
have forgiven you in persona Christi. ‘. Also, I appreciate your usage of
the Lutheran text of ‘ in the place of Christ ‘ due to the fact that the
rendering of the Greek original, en prosopo Christou ( I can’t apply the
accents — sorry) in the face of Christ, would be ‘ in the presence of
Christ. ‘. Please, pray on this manner, with an open heart which you
have already demonstrated in your initial statement, and please let me
know what you understand upon, agree or disagree with plus why. I’ll
will comment in a brotherly way to my brother.
That’s the spirit! Thank you, Robert.
Colin, may I share the way Catholics understand Mary, the Mother of God? We don’t worship her (God forbid, and she would be the first to stop us from giving to God what is his alone). Prayer to her is not worship, it is asking her to intercede for us, be our gentle advocate. More like asking a mom to put in a good word for us with her son. I’m not sure if this helps, but you may like to read this bibliography. ( http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15459a.htm )
Cheers.
Fr. John,
I love your list. Great approach. Can I copy some of these for our parish bulletin?
Thank you and God bless you for doing this.
Let me extend a belated ‘ Hello ‘ to Cryingwind.
What is the difference in Love? Can it become measured? One could cite the parable of the
Seed, which lends no accounting as to Our Lord’s preference. However, that parable of
the talents suggest not only reward and reproach, but this also signifies how Christ
INQUIRED of that wicked servant, who hid the talent given him, about the intention
behind the action! Therefore, let’s look at the truth for belief rather than a system
of belief. The Church holds the deposit of Faith; it isn’t a system — a philosophical
method of functionality — that would fall under the category of Rhetoric.
I assume that you think of the bible as the one and only TRUTH.
Nevermind all those years of translations and editions. Nevermind the personal interests of emperors, bishops and priest, who manipulated the writings.
It is still absolute truth.
Nevermind if the gospels are incoherent among themselves. Nevermind the contradictions. It is still truth.
Truth, truth, truth, truth, only the truth!
Really?
Mr. Israel, is religion unnecessary? Can man live in a world devoid of meaning? If there is no God then why are we here? Our existence would be absurd and meaningless.
“If God did not exist, man would be obliged to invent him.” – Voltaire
“God is subtle not malicious.” – Albert Einstein
Yes, even a New World.
Once, a long time ago, in a time even before the incarnation of Christ, truth was sought
by the gentiles. Believe it, or not — mankind, who unlike the Chosen People, rejected
God’ first call, and thought out things with and without a system of ‘ Usage ‘. The
difference consists in this: the true philosopher, thoroughly oblivious to his own
importance, and ‘ totally discarding all pretentiousness ‘, approaches his
unfathomable object unselfishly and with an open mind.
The contemplation of this object transports the person beyond mere self-centered
satisfaction and releases him from the fixation on selfish needs, no matter how
‘ intellectual ‘ or sublime.
The Sophist, on the otherhand, despite his emancipation from the norms of
‘ objective ‘ truth — called ‘ practical philosophy ‘ — and the resulting
claims to be ‘ free ‘, remains nevertheless imprisoned within the narrow
scope of what is ‘ usable ‘.
This tendency to regard reason as though it had no ‘ object of its own ‘
is common to modern idealism and pragmatism due to the fact that it gives
birth for chasing after novelty, and tries to effect surprise by thought and
expression.
Ergo, Christ did say that Narrow is the Way, but that concept followed
objective truth as that which will set you Free.
I hope this allows you to understand the ‘ Truth ‘ which differentiates
between itself and something else. Much like Christ who separates
the wheat and the chaff, the sheep and the goats, the Herods – Pilates -
and his friends. Please, don’t hesitate to respond.
New World, this Truth business is dangerous. I saw a comedy in HBO where two PR guys were going to call a press conference. The veteran guy told his novice partner this is what we’re going to tell the reporters. The young guy asked but is that the truth? The veteran guy replied in our business there is no truth, there are only stories and that’s our story. Very funny!
Thanks for reading the book. Hope you liked it. Here’s my favorite book. It’s non-fiction.
My next book will be the English translation of the Gospel of Judas. It will be entitled “The New Testament, Dan Brown Version.”
http://www.fns.org.uk/ac.htm
Heads Up, Dan!
What does Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey have to do with your book?
For everyone’s information, my round-about inquiry — without treading down the slipperly
slope, came up with two meanings for F. R. I. S.: the other, THE SURPRISE turns out as,
Foundation For Rape Information And Services.
That is all.
Do you accept than, that the Bible should not be regarded as absolute truth?
If 4 different writers disagree about the same events, how could everyone of them speak the truth.
Welcome, Dan.
Excuse me, Dan, answeriong for ” Robert Said “,
but Prior Robert is currently at Matins.
signed, P. D. James.
Neww World — if you there, Ellis Peters just relayed your message.
My staff is as efficient as is humanly possible, I hope that P. D.
sent you something of notification about my absence — which was
wholly unavoidable.
I thought, a little levity might be in order here.
I take my bible as I take objective truth — Russian — Absolut!
Seriously,
Because, three of the four knew Him as He is. The one, Saint Luke, knew Him through the stories
that Jesus’ mother told.
Let’s keep it at that for now, and we’ll discuss more later. TRUST is something learned.
Judas knew him too, yet his gospel was also trashed by the modern holy inquisition, renamed “Opus Dei, and many others.
The synoptic gospels, as well as John’s gospels, tell us different stories regarding the same person. Which one tells the truth? All four of them?? That would be weird because they do not always agree. Which one lies then?
The Da Vinci Code book and movie is doing more good here in Australia than bad in some ways. It cotinues to open up dialogue concerning Catholicism and the Christian Faith. People are learning that Christianity is not evil and that Dan Brown’s novel is nothing but mere fiction. Churches across the country are answering people’s questions about Christianity and are being informed about the truth of it. That it’s religion of peace and salvation, not murder, scandal and lies.
I must repeat that God always brings good even out of the bad. No work of falsities will defeat the One True God. Good always prevails.
God bless everyone and rejoice.
Dan Brown’s Da Vinci code mainly targets the Catholic Church because Satan wants to destroy it because it is truly the Church of Christ. People who attach the Church are doing me a favour of making it obvious that this is the right Church because I’ve been warned about this happening, people condemning the Church and strengthens my faith as a Catholic because I’m now positive I’m on the right track with religion as a result of other people’s accusations held against the Church.
I pray for those who condemn Catholcism, that they will one day realize the truth and become Catholics.
God bless.
Mr. Dan, don’t you just love Nietzsche? That self-proclaimed anti-Christ. Witty, hard hitting, and totally insane! He was literally at the brink of insanity when he wrote that book. And it still is a classic in philosophy.
I bet the gospel of Judas would be a bigger bestseller. Same formula: bigger lies, bigger sales, bigger bucks. Good luck.
To Robert and B.Wooster
Do not be misled by the Catholic church teaching that Sunday is the holy day…it is not…to say so would be a direct contradiction of the 4th commandment given by God alone to Moses. The Catholic church has not power to change commandments and to say otherwise is blasphemy. Robert, why would you say that Sunday is the holy day when the commandments cleary tell us the holy day. Saturday is the seventh day and the day that God rested from all his work it is this day that is to be kepy holy as is said in the 4 commandment…why do you go against this commandment?
Exodus 20: 8-11,
(8) Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. (9) Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work: (10) But the Seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: (11) For in six days the Lord made the heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the Seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it.
Colossians 2:8 warns us to:
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Robert you also state something else which troubles me….
“If you were never welcomed, by both you to the Church, into the community of the
faithful, excommunication doesn’t apply to you. The doctrine of ‘ there is no
salvation outside of the Catholic Church ‘ is the fullness of what you are quoting
partially from.”
Jesus says “knock and the door will be opened to you” nowhere does he say “Knock only on the doors of the catholic church!”. Excommunication has no power because the pope cannot stop anyone from entering heaven, only Jesus Christ has that power to do that, which is told to us in the book of Revelations (besides other books in the bible)
B. Wooster
You have no need to ask Mary to put in a good word for you. If you have sinned and not asked forgiveness from God then Mary has no power to put in a good word. Jesus told us how to pray. The lords prayer is all you need to say daily, on your own, in your own house. When I pray I do the following since I find it humbling.
1. I kneel towards Jerusalem for this city is the holiest of all cities. Revelations tells us of the new Jerusalem which is part of a new earth and a new heaven. (Rome is not the center of this new world, that is made very clear in the bible)
2. I do not speek allowed. I only say the lords pray in my mind, and hopefully it comes from the heart but I am a sinner and I admit that, which is why I ask for forgiveness.
3. I perform the sign of the cross before finishing.
What I don’t do is pray to Mary? Jesus tells to pray to God and God only.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Matt.6
[1] Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
[2] Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
[3] But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:
[4] That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
[5] And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
[6] But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
[7] But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
[8] Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
[9] After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
[10] Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
[11] Give us this day our daily bread.
[12] And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
[13] And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
[14] For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
[15] But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Mark.11
24] Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.
[25] And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses.
[26] But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
——————————————————————————————————————-
And that is how we should pray
Please don’t mistake me as a “Catholic basher” I am not trying to bash anything I am just speaking the truth as was told by Jesus. Let me state once more (for the record). Let us not be confused about the sabbath day because it is the seventh day (Saturday). There is no other and it has not been changed or ordained to be changed by Jesus or God. Saturday is the Sabbath day because it is the seventh day
To Robert and B.Wooster
And on another note can you both answer the following question in any response you give
Do you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?
Just yes or no before any other words are written in your response (Don’t use political language to shadow what you say just Yes or No is all I am asking). If you don’t answer the question then I will take that as a No because all true christians will answer Yes. You should have no problems saying Yes to this question.
YES. A thousand times yes.
(And don’t worry, I detest smoke-screening behind political language as well. Unhealthy, unscholarly. I like the good, true blue straightforward approach. Thanks for being equally blunt. Sorry if I can’t kept you waiting, my poor man, but this post is a bit old so doesn’t show up on the front of the blog. A pity, but I’m afraid Robert probably missed your question as well.)
Okay,
Lets take it a step further. Do you agree that Saturday is the Sabbath day? Responses like
“it is the Jewish sabbath day”
…will be deemed a silly response because we all know that the sabbath day in the 4th commandment is one and the same.
Do you also agree that Jesus did not say that we should pray to someone else to ask forgiveness on our behalf? If you donot ask for forgiveness yourslef then how can you be forgiven?
In light of the commandments, from which stems the direct truth of God, in particular the 4th commandment do you actually believe that the Pope of his time had the authority to change the sabbath day from Saturday to Sunday?
You won’t be disagreeing with just me if you do disagree because I am only quoting from the true scriptures and from the teachings of Jesus and the commandments…I have not added or taken away anything that was not already said by Jesus.
Being a Christian means that you should question those who contradict the true faith and the belief by some catholics that Sunday is the holy day (the sabbath day) is wrong and goes against the 4th commandment.
I would like to say just a few things about myself.
I am not perfect
I am a sinner
I do not go to any church but humble myself in my own house and pray to God daily
I am a Christian
I believe in the teachings of Jesus and the 10 commandments.
Call yourself a catholic christian or whatever you want to as long as you keep to scripture and the truth. Some of the teachings of the catholic church are questionable and if I followed them I know, from Jesus and from what the 10 commandments teach me, that I will end up in eternal hell and damnation. If you are true christians you cannot say publically on a public website that the first day of the week is the Sabbath day it is just wrong and teaching this to children is even worse. I can pull out numerous instances of wrong teachings from many faiths not just the catholic faith and Jesus warned us about them.
Remember that it is not for you to please the Catholic Church, it is for you to please Jesus and for him to see goodness in your heart. Don’t follow anyone, even the Pope, if they contradict the truth and the teachings of Jesus. This is my warning to myself and to all others.
Hello, just a link to further reading on the Sabbath day. He says it a million times better than most people, so here it is. It’s a good read whether or not you agree. Cheers!
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_letters/documents/hf_jp-ii_apl_05071998_dies-domini_en.html
Read the following taken from that link.
This is from the Popes Letter.
(14. In the first place, therefore, Sunday is the day of rest because it is the day “blessed” by God and “made holy” by him, set apart from the other days to be, among all of them, “the Lord’s Day”.)
Are you telling me that the seventh day is Sunday?
That is from the bible … The teachings of Jesus.
Matt 5.0
[17] Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
[18] For verily I say unto you, >>> Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Hello Collin,
Is the New Testament from the regeneration of nature? Did the incarnation of Christ bring the
authority of the prophets into fullfillment? Converesely, was Christ death, burial, and
resurrection that Fulfillment which Saint Paul expounds as the New Covenent — remember
the wife who was married is bond to the husband until that time, a fulfillment of the
marriage bond of love, of the husband’s death, and she is free of the Law of marriage–
found through Baptism?
I have to say, though, that your arguments are rather intuitive, constructive, and
very internalized. I wait on your response.
Jeanne, thanks.
Hey, New World.
About the scriptures, I assess that you believe of their origin as Divinely Inspired,
but is Solascriptura the authentic spiritual approach to something which you claim as
containing several contradictions?
If you asked me to read this bible, I would probably take a step back and away from
you. However, in my mind, I would become focused on the Church’s teaching on that
the bible isn’t compatible to private interpretation.
If you’ll read Colin’s response, he discusses forgiveness. Now, I could, through
private interpretation, assume ( Remember, Benny Hill’s declension ) that someone
must seek forgiveness — from someone else who refuses to forgive; or is the
person who should is left with seeking forgiveness from someone who’s deceased;
or any other limitations. However, Reconciliation suffices the intention and
action — whereby neither is satisfied without the completion of both — of
course, this is protected under canon and civil laws – for the protection of
the confessor, penitent, and the reputation of anyone discussed in the
action of the sacrament.
Colin, my friend,
Another part of ‘ there is no salvation outside of the Catholic Church ‘ states that,
those who through no fault of the own — implying that if their conscience leads but
there is no one to preach about Christ ( Recall the apstoles’ complaint about some
who were baptizing in Christ’s name, and we told them to stop ), live by their
unregenerated conscience in purity of heart, and never are baptised — then your
theory of Knock and it shall become open to you becomes rudimentary. However, if
they refuse ( Please recall the fact that before Christ was born 100 % human and
100 % divine, the jews in community had the oracles, promises, and covenents but
the greeks – especially the philosophers though unregenerated, both jew and greek,
the jews were called but the greeks refused. Thereby, the greek refusal answers
Christ’s teaching that many are called, but few are chosen. To your other
question: Yes.
Pro Multis!
Hello, Colin.
Just looked over your two yes / no questions ( both from May 18th at 10:22 am and 3:20 pm ):
My answers comes directly from a former Jew, a convert to the Catholic Church ( Jewish
Panorama by David Goldstein, L.L.D., copyright 1940. ):
” The Catholic answer to ‘ The Epistle to the Jews ‘ was effectively given by Rev.
Edmund A. Walsh, S.J.,..( Atlantic Monthly , Feb. 1938 ). His statement, which we present,
in part, is an answer to those modern Jews who want the Christ of the Sermon on the Mount,
minus all that it rightly entails. He said to this ‘ grieving son of the Dispersion ‘:
” The spirit manifested in the Epistle is welcomed, but the dialectical reservation,
if maintained, will kill the spirit. The proposal means much, or it means nothing. To
accept Christ means to accept the whole Christ, not to dissect Him arbitrarily into
CALCULATED percentages of acceptable sections, labeling some dogmatic, others cultural.
If I were a Jew convinced intellectually of the nonfulfillment to date of the Old
Testament prophecies respecting the Messiah, and bekieving, as then I must, that the
Anointed is yet to come, I would stand fast and reject Christ’s claim in toto. The
logic of my position would compel me to regard Him as a monstrous imposter. If He
could proclaim Himself the Son of God before the Sanhedrin, if He could impersonate
the promised Messiah before the Roman governor, if He could deliberately disturb
the Holy City even to riots that ended in bloodshed and take steps to perpetuate
the fraud for ever by the agency of a universal Church; if, in a word, He could
be a rogue in the major premise, I would not COMPROMISE with Him on minor issues
of high culture, moral beauty, or social enlightenment. He must in the hypothesis
forever remain a scandal to the Jews and a stumbling block to the Gentiles. If
the divinity of its Founder be excluded, Christianity inherently would be no
more salvific than Confusianism or Buddhism. ”
Pro Multis!
WHERE HAVE ALL THE MODERNISTS GONE … LONG TIME, PASsing?
Did you missed us?
I’m right here, Robert.
You know, Robert, we need each other. We need balance.
What would a government be if it controls all the media, as many we know. That kind of government would perform every kind of abuse, but it would still have a nice face on television.
But what if there is freedom of speech. People actually criticizing the government every time it screws up. The government then, should behave properly.
The same with the church, Robert. Pedophile priests screw up, and the church receives heavy beating. The church is forced then to take inmediate actions. In early days, a few burnings on stakes and no more problems, may the abuses continue. Not anymore.
We are here to make sure there is a balance. In order to attack us or defend from us, the church must behave properly, according to it’s own principles.
We know that our work has been fruitful. More and more persons are abandoning their churches. How do you bring them back, Robert? The church needs to straighten up to bring them back. The church needs to behave, because if the church screws up again, the hammer will fall with all it’s might.
This is a chess game, Robert. One bad move on your behalf, and we are likely to succeed. As long as you are playing chess with us, you will not make mistakes, and that is good for you.
I like you Robert, you make a good conversation and your make very strong arguments. You are indeed a powerful chess piece.
It’s May 19th already, the day that everyone in this blog has been waiting for, but of course, for different reasons.
Cheers,
New World Order says:
“Did you missed us?
I’m right here, Robert.
You know, Robert, we need each other. We need balance.
(…)This is a chess game, Robert. One bad move on your behalf, and we are likely to succeed. As long as you are playing chess with us, you will not make mistakes, and that is good for you.
I like you Robert, you make a good conversation and your make very strong arguments. You are indeed a powerful chess piece.”
What is this? Gasping for breath?
This is fascinating, it’s very rare to see passionate yet intelligent thought going into this debate. I have an unusual perspective, coming from a Catholic background yet being unable to continue as either a Catholic or a Christian. I have no view on the Da Vinci Code; it is a work of fiction, but it has thrown up some interesting ideas that many people, whatever creed they stick by, would not have considered before. It has both drawn People together in an attempt to promote understanding and thrown a spotlight on the Catholic church, which is currently reacting in the best possible way.
at the same time, i feel that some are going to too great lengths to force their argument. is it really nessesary to bring in old complaints to win support? where has that lead us in the past, except to a lack of understanding.
My own personnel view –
Jesus tells us that it is not riches on earth but riches in heaven that are eternal. He also tells us that if we really want to please God then give all that we have to those of need and preach the word…not to worry of material well being for God will provide. This, to me, is the true faith of a christian.
Now that said put this in direct view of the catholic church, the arts that it owns…the wealth that it has…how it touches ALL political leaders. Call it a feeling or Jesus telling me in my ear that I must watch this church (closely).
To serve God you do not need money. Churches do not need buildings. People make the church and a field or place of meeting is all that is needed to share the teachings of the faith. Now that said I am not saying the the catholic church is evil because there are good people who a practising catholics but I can’t help but think that something is moving across and through the Vatican that is not holy!
Let me explain. The Da Vinci Code has been said by many to actually help the catholic faith. How can this be. The book is blasphemus beyond all the teachings that christ ever preached. What the book has done is intensify those which WANT more worship of the virgin mary and also to pray over the bones of Mary Magdalen.
The following paragraphs are misleading. I have added what I find misleading
———————————————-
5. Is our culture really missing a figure of female sanctity?
Yes, in today’s world there is such a missing woman. Her name is Mary, and she should be venerated not as the wife of a mortal man but rather as the Mother of God. Happily, she is not hard to find. Hers is the most familiar female face in history, represented in countless works of art. The best place in the world to find grown men and women praying on their knees to a woman [Jesus tells us to pray to God NEVER TO MARY, NEVER...this IS (IS) blasphemus], perhaps saying the Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary, is in a Christian [CATHOLIC] church.
———————————————-
For those who haven’t read the “Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary” then let me give you an extract
“HAIL, [HOLY QUEEN], Mother of Mercy, [our life], our sweetness and [our hope]! [To thee do we cry], poor banished children of Eve; to thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us, and after this our exile, show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus. O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary!”
Where does the bible teach us that Mary is the holy queen and why do Catholics cry to mary the mother of Jesus. It is to God that we must ask forgiveness not Mary. Jesus does not tell us to ask Mary for forgiveness this is blasphemus and the wrong teachings. Jesus told us about these very teachings and to be on our guard against them
———————————————-
6. Should we really pray over the bones of Mary Magdalen?
Yes. [NO, it will not help your faith, Jesus tells us how to pray and that is in secret to God, this goes against the teachings of Christ. Who can tell me that it does not when Jesus gave his very own instruction on how to pray] Saint Mary Magdalen is honored by the countless churches and women named after her and by a special Mass on her feast day (July 22). In fact, for more than a millennium, Christians have made pilgrimages to pray in the Basilica of St. Maximin in southern France, where a tradition says that Saint Mary Magdalen was buried.
———————————————-
I would also like to say that the Catholic canon has no authority over the bible [NONE whatsoever]. If it contradicts against the bible then you need to read the warnings at the end of the book of revelation, do catholics choose to forget these warnings?
The Catholic church teaches some of the faith of a christian but at the same time slips in , here and there, wrong teachings that go against the words of Jesus. Because of this some catholics are actually unaware that they are wrong because they take the words of the Pope as the true words of Jesus when in fact not all of the teachings that come from the Pope and the heads of the Catholic church are correct. Those little slips, here and there, come directly from the Devil and the Anti-christ for they are against the teachings of Jesus. Jesus warns us about this.
As I have stated before the whole of the catholic church is not evil but the devil is working within it as he is in most of the churches through out the earth (NOT JUST THE CATHOLIC CHURCH) until the second coming of Jesus. Jesus speaks of the troubles within the Church (that are happening now) in the book of revelations.
Robert,
Can you please ask the following question directly because you havn’t *directly* answered this question.
Do you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh?
A response of
“Yes, [I] do confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” would be good because a response of
“To your other
question: Yes.
Pro Multis!”
….can mean a Yes to any of my questions.
Robert,
Also I will set you a task, point me to a document that has been sanctioned by the Catholic faith and the pope with the following confession.
I [POPE] do confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh
This would be easy for the Vatican to sanction and commit to the Internet for all to see if he can not say this live on Television.
For those who are not accustomed with this confession then please see the following
(John Book 1) 4 ( verse 2 – 4) Here John tells us to test those who claim to speak the truth of Jesus Christ.
Robert,
Could you also not place the words “Pro Multis” at the end of your answer since the question is to you and not the other members of the catholic church, “Pro Multis” is misleading on the end of an answer and it serves no purpose but to “muddy the waters!” so to speak! I know I am being particular but it is a serious question that deserves and answer (in fact a confession) from yourself, which is why I would like you not just to supply a yes or no but the entire confession from yourself.
Hi Colin Saxton, it would help to follow your argument if you take the time to organize your train of thought, then make a single long post. The four disjointed posts above make it difficult to catch your drift, if you know what I mean. Thanks.
Nokia,
My responses are plain and for all to see, but I if you want to follow my posts clearly then
1. Search for the first occurrence of “Colin Saxton” on this webpage. This is my first post
2. The follow from there the posts from Rober and B.Wooster as well as my replies.
My posts are clear and plain for all to see. I am just pointing out false teachings of the Catholic Church which claim to be the teachings of Jesus Christ but are not. I have asked some questions which seem very basic but have received answers which move around the question and do not actually answer any of my questions so I felt the need to test the 2 people that are answering the questions. My last post is seeking a direct answer from Robert which I am now waiting for. Will he confess? If he does not then you can read the quote from John by following all of the links that are plain to find within the bible
Everything that I state on this webpage comes from the teachings of Jesus not myself which is why I am having a hard time with people who are also claiming to be christians but wish to argue with the teachings of Jesus. Jesus told us that anyone who is against me is not for me therefore, from this very simple deduction, it is from the antichrist that these people source their arguments! I am a sinner but I do agree with Jesus and his teachings and I pray to God for forgiveness of my sins.
Matt 12.
[30] He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
I hear you brother, I hear you! Thanks for trying to condense your thoughts in one post. Where is Robert? Colin Saxton is looking for you, to answer some direct questions. As for me, I¬¥m moving on…
Dear all,
We’ve been touching on an entire array of points, which makes for an interesting, intelligent discussion. Thank you for providing that springboard, Mr. Colin Saxton. Rather than jump into an entire exegesis of all points at once (which is, of course, impossible), here is one comment on one point. Also for the record, I am not a theologian or canon lawyer so any theologians among you, I beg pardon if I over-simplify things. I am a merely a lawyer with a philosophy background (Catholic University–”Deus mea lux est”).
Point made:
“I would also like to say that the Catholic canon has no authority over the bible [NONE whatsoever]. If it contradicts against the bible then you need to read the warnings at the end of the book of revelation, do catholics choose to forget these warnings?”
My comment:
The compilation of texts we now call “the Bible”, composed of the Old and New Testament, was gathered together by the Catholic Church herself. The irony is that we would not have had the “Bible” as we know it today if the Church had not given it to us. The texts themselves were in existence (if you take the widest shot of time, the Apostle John died between 99-100 AD) but had not yet been compiled into one book.
Helpful bibliography for those interested: Introductions to the Navarre Bible series (provides thorough, scholarly explanations about the unity of Scripture and Tradition as the Christian foundation, neither one nor the other alone, etc.).
On-line (rather simplistic but complete all the same): http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13635b.htm
Here is an excerpt:
It is a fact of history that in the time of Christ the Jews were in possession of sacred books, which differed widely from one another in subject, style, origin and scope, and it is also a fact that they regarded all such writings as invested with a character which distinguished them from all other books. This was the Divine authority of every one of these books and of every part of each book. This belief of the Jews was confirmed by Our Lord and His Apostles; for they supposed its truth in their teaching, used it as a foundation of their doctrine, and intimately connected with it the religious system of which they were the founders. The books thus approved were handed down to the Christian Church as the written record of Divine revelation before the coming of Christ. The truths of Christian revelation were made known to the Apostles either by Christ Himself or by the Holy Ghost. They constitute what is called the Deposit of Faith, to which nothing has been added since the Apostolic Age. Some of the truths were committed to writing under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost and have been handed down to us in the books of the New Testament. Written originally to individual Churches or persons, to meet particular necessities, and accommodated as they all were to particular and existing circumstances, these books were gradually received by the universal Church as inspired, and with the sacred books of the Jews constitute the Bible.
In one respect, therefore, the Bible is a twofold literature, made up of two distinct collections which correspond with two successive and unequal periods of time in the history of man. The older of these collection, mostly written in Hebrew, corresponds with the many centuries during which the Jewish people enjoyed a national existence, and forms the Hebrew, or Old Testament, literature; the more recent collection, begun not long after Our Lord’s ascension, and made up of Greek writings, is the Early Christian, or New Testament, literature. Yet, in another and deeper respect, the Biblical literature is pre-eminently one. Its two sets of writings are most closely connected with regard to doctrines revealed, facts recorded, customs described, and even expressions used. Above all, both collection have one and the same religious purpose, one and the same inspired character. They form the two parts of a great organic whole the centre of which is the person and mission of Christ. The same Spirit exercised His mysterious hidden influence on the writings of both Testaments, and made of the works of those who lived before Our Lord an active and steady preparation for the New Testament dispensation which he was to introduce, and of the works of those who wrote after Him a real continuation and striking fulfilment of the old Covenant.
But let us not forget that the books of the new testament existed long before the Roman Catholic Church. My argument is with catholics who use “Canon Law” *above and over* the teachings of Jesus. That was my intended meaning. For someone to quote teachings in direct contradiction to the teaching of Jesus is not of Jesus but is anti-jesus / anti-christ
(let us not be mistaken about this!)
The catholic church did help put together the books of the bible but also it is fair to say that they would have had no choice in the matter for they are the words of God given to the apostles confirmed by Christ who told them that they would be witness.
Dear Colin,
“But let us not forget that the books of the new testament existed long before the Roman Catholic Church.”
I actully believe it’s the other way round so we disagree on the timing then. I will define my terms so we can find common ground from which to begin. Also, since you are intellectually honest and back up your points with scripture (which is rare–thank you), I will try to do the same.
At this point, Christ chooses Peter (Cephas, now called Peter) to be the foundation of his Church. The Church ‘begins.’ “You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18).
Here, the universality of the Church is shown in all its richness. Traditionally, Pentecost has been called the “birth of the Church.”
“When the time for Pentecost was fulfilled, they were all in one place together. And suddenly there came from the sky a noise like a strong driving wind, 2 and it filled the entire house in which they were. Then there appeared to them tongues as of fire, 3 which parted and came to rest on each one of them. And they were all filled with the holy Spirit and began to speak in different tongues, 4 as the Spirit enabled them to proclaim. Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven staying in Jerusalem. At this sound, they gathered in a large crowd, but they were confused because each one heard them speaking in his own language. They were astounded, and in amazement they asked, “Are not all these people who are speaking Galileans? Then how does each of us hear them in his own native language? We are Parthians, Medes, and Elamites, inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the districts of Libya near Cyrene, as well as travelers from Rome, both Jews and converts to Judaism, Cretans and Arabs, yet we hear them speaking in our own tongues of the mighty acts of God.” (Acts 2:1-11)
Lived tradition came before the writing of it. We can’t write down our travel diaries until we’ve gone on our trip. If we consider the New Testament as Matthew – John’s Revelation, the Acts of the Apostles could NOT have been written down until the events happened. And what transpired in the “Acts”? The apostolic journeys of Peter and Paul. The Church was very much alive, well and ever expanding east and west while this history was being recorded.
So you see, in the lives of those early Christians, the Faith was spreading like wildfire through Asia Minor and even to the reaches of Rome, and thence throughout the empire. The need to record things in writing came about naturally and quickly. If we believe that John died around 110 AD (in exile, being the only apostle who was not martyred), and the Book of Revelation is written by him, it means that by the year 110, the New Testament was written as it now stands. The Church had already had two councils by that time, local churches primarily begun by St. Paul and St. Peter were flourishing and the Roman persecutions had begun (at various times under different emperors and in different degrees for the next hundred years or so).
Or do you think the Church began later?
Jeanne (the Real Jeanne)
Are you saying that when Jesus said to Peter…
“You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it” (Matt. 16:18).
…that Jesus was talking only of the catholic church? There are seven churches of this Earth which can be confirmed in the book of revelations. Jesus was not speeking only of the catholic church he was speeking of the churches of the Earth. Also note the word “build” for the church had not been built at this point so hence there was no catholic church…the verse you have quoted prooves this!
The catholic church, as well as other churches of this Earth, have helped to “preserve” the new testament but they did not “create” the new testament. It was God through the apostles that created the new testament not the catholic church. You are attributing the actual material writings of the new testament to actually be the new testament but they are a reflection of the new testament given by God…The thoughts and actions of God came first and then the reflection of those acts came after (the bible). The catholic church cannot say that the new testment would not have been introduced to the world if it was not for its intervention for God alone had commanded it to happen…the catholic church had no choice in the matter.
God created the testment and the writings of the profits through his thought alone
Jesus is an extension of those thoughts the reflection of (as is everything past, you can see, touch, feel and sense and is yet to come!)
The apostles were given the power of the testament and the truth through Jesus.
(Note – none of the apostles were catholics they were the first christians the actual body of the “Roman Catholic Christian Church” did not exist at this time this is fact. However the apostles were witness to Christ and his testament it is them alone who then wrote the books that build up the new testament and the catholic church over the centuries has helped to preserve those teachings).
More importantly, though, we have moved away from the original discussion. (I have yet to hear from Robert).
Lets ask each other single questions and lets give each other single answers.
Does Jesus give instruction to ask for mercy from Mary or does he give instruction to pray to God?
Remember the first commandment.
Dear fr. John Wauck,
If I may interrupt this dialog for a moment, but I’d like to know:
1.) Do you have a letter of credentials which you supplied Rome?
2.) You do post a lot of information on Da Vinci Code Catechism;
why not something showing that word, ‘ Catholic ‘, in the name of
your website– thereby this site is approved by Rome?
3.) How about posting, on this website, some official correspondence
from Opus Dei Prelate which declares that they know you?
Greet Website though. If it’s legitmate, keep it up.
Pro Multis!
Dear Fr. Wauck,
This is the firs time I ever heard someone demanding credentials to start up a PERSONAL BLOG. There are dozens of “Da Vinci Code” blogs out there talking about the SAME THINGS and no one would dream of demanding a “letter of credentials.”
Robert, I would like to vouch that Fr. Wauck is Catholic, a priest, and part of Opus Dei. Perhaps I don’t understand the gist of your questions. If you’re asking those things because you think this is some sort of ‘official’ statement of Opus Dei or something, this is a PERSONAL BLOG, nothing else.
Here, courtesy of a quick Google search:
http://www.usc.urbe.it/csi/docenti.html
http://www.frinstitute.org/rome2004.html (he’s been in Rome for several years already, you see)
http://www.ewtn.com/series/2005/mirror_soul.htm
http://insightscoop.typepad.com/2004/2006/02/fr_richard_john.html
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:BhFYvnJigR4J:www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/%3Fp%3D176+Fr.+John+Wauck&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=14
I don’t think you need credentials to set up a personal blog, correct?
Colin,
“Jesus was talking only of the catholic church? There are seven churches of this Earth which can be confirmed in the book of revelations. Jesus was not speeking only of the catholic church he was speeking of the churches of the Earth. Also note the word ‚Äúbuild‚Äù for the church had not been built at this point so hence there was no catholic church‚Ķthe verse you have quoted prooves this!”
When he said “on this Rock I will build my Church”, he did not mean “my Churches”, plural. Why would he purposefully splinter his apostles? Anyway, a long story short (since there are entire courses on this subject and very technical, layer upon layer exegesis researched by scholars more knowledgeable than myself), Catholics believe that Christ established his Church and it spread. Of course, as history progressed, groups splintered off here and there (the Reformers, Henry VIII, Calvin, etc.), but only the Church could trace back its origin directly to the Apostle Peter. This is what we call the “Apostolic Succession.” In the Catholic creed, recited in the Mass every day, we say we believe in “one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church.” Apostolic refers to this unbroken line. Actually, if you have seen it in Rome, there is a large sculpture in St. Peter’s (sorry I can’t scan in my photo of it) which is amazing. Beneath it is a huge marble slab engraved with the names of every pope from Peter to John Paul II.
You may not agree with me on this, of course. I only wish to convey what Catholics understand when they read the passage above, when Christ gives Peter the keys to the kingdom. In St. Peter’s as well there is a powerful image in stone and gold of Christ symbollically giving Peter the ‘keys’ (in many pieces of art, this scene is depicted with actual keys painted/sculpted in).
Okay Dan — GAME OVER!
You lose. Sorry.
Your C M O S Clock tells me that your website and its computer system
chimes in the United Kingdom. Thanks for the fun, though!
to jeanne(the real jeanne)
In times of Peter and Paul there was no Catholic Church The “Church” in queston was and still is The belive in Jesus and his teachings.The message was to be carried by the apostels all over the world no mention of a pope or of a Vatican ect….
To New World Order
very interessting!!
maybe you would be interessed in a book by Uta Ranke-Heinemann Eunuchen F?ºr Das Himmelreich
(Eunuchs For Heaven) The auther is the first woman to hold a seat for Catholic Theologie
although after writing thart book it was taken away from her
Another thought !!
It was quite probable that Jesus was married (to Mary M or anyother) as in his times it was usual for a Jewish
Man to be married before he was 20Years old and as he was also caled a Rabbi he would have to be married because it was a must for ALL Rabbi to be married .so as for it not being mentioned in the Gospels wont mean anything but would have been so if he wasnt because that would have been out of the NORM…
Where is every body??
All gone to bed!!!
hi.. I am italian…my name’s is antonella…i am going to see the da vinci code… but the true code is THE BIBLE!!!!!!W OPUS DEI!!!!
BRAWN IS ONLY UMAN LIKE US!!!!
Jeanne (the Real Jeanne),
Jesus *specifically* addresses seven churches of the Earth in the book of revelations received by John. Could I also point out that you do not have to be a scholar to understand that Jesus speaks to seven churches. Are you saying that the book of Revelations is wrong?
These seven make up the *ONE* church like the multitude of christians who *together* make the one church of Jesus Christ. What you are stating goes against what is said in the bible.
However, how clear can I be to all on this site when I ask a question. Can those involved please respond to my questions. Jeanne could you answer my last question:
Does Jesus give instruction to ask for mercy from Mary or does he give instruction to pray to God?
…and to Robert…you have dodged responding to my request which was for you to respond with the following confession.
“Yes, [I] do confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh”
Well, do you Robert? Do you confess that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh? You are taking your time responding to this and I notice that from when you addressed this blog you was happy to point out the many teachings of the Catholic church but you fail (twice) to confess directly that “Jesus Christ is come in the flesh” but have embalked on and tried to distance yourself from this blog ever since you have been confronted with asking to confess. Can you please confess one way or the other or is your clever dodging so that you don’t have to confess?
One thing that I have noticed while responding with scripture is that I back up my answers with direct scripture given by Jesus but those of the catholic faith cloudy their response with references to catholic doctrines and art which I find to be empty in substance. I repeat a passage that I gave earlier
Colossians 2:8 warns us to:
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Answer my question and give your confession.
Dear Colin,
“One thing that I have noticed while responding with scripture is that I back up my answers with direct scripture given by Jesus but those of the catholic faith cloudy their response with references to catholic doctrines and art which I find to be empty in substance. I repeat a passage that I gave earlier.”
I think the way we answer questions will tend to differ. While you lean on Scripture, which is perfectly acceptable, Catholics have two reservoirs as it were, from which to draw answers. And while one shoe is enough to walk in, if you’ve got two, well, I’d rather walk with two. Do you understand my point?
Cheers,
Jeanne
Jeanne (the real Jeanne)
I draw from 64 books and if your 2 sources include extra books that are not part of the main bible but are still true scripture then that is fine but don’t fool yourself and others with false scripture.
Now finally, Let me tell you why you cannot answer my question asked in the last post.
If you was to answer with the truth, that is that Jesus did not tell us to pray to Mary but to God, then you would be denouncing the “Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary” which is part of the catholic faith but…if you was to say that Jesus tells us to pray to ask for mercy from Mary then that would be against scripture and what Jesus taught and you do not want to be seen directly moving against the scripture of Jesus.
There are two reasons for this (and two only)
1. You believe in the teachings of Christ and you donot want to go against him and at the same time you do not want to go against the catholic “Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary” because that would be also going against the Catholic Church…If this is so then you have to ask who you serve since you can only serve one Lord.
2. You know that Jesus only said to pray to God but choose not to follow this teaching because you believe that the Catholic Church is above Jesus Christ (the christian lord).
Number 1 is a misunderstanding of the truth but number 2 is ignorance of the truth and a choice made by yourself to be against Jesus which means (whether you realise it or not) that you are serving the antichrist!
The basis for these very simple facts are scripture because Jesus tells us how to pray (see my previous posts) and he also tells us that if you are not for me then you are against me so if you are not for Jesus you are for Anti-Jesus, this is simple and Jesus made it this way so that we could understand.
Does this mean that I am without blemish…no…I will suffer on this Earth for I am a sinner and I ask for forgiveness but without a shadow of a doubt I am a sinner with blemish and imperfection and only pray that the lord will forgive me for all my sins BUT I do know that truth, life and love come from God through Jesus our Lord and it him who I serve and feel no shame in saying this to all who I meet.
To my other point, Robert has still not confessed?? Can you confess Jeanne to what I asked of Robert or will you dodge the answering those questions again. You see I am answering your questions but you are not answering my questions…why is this so?
“Can you confess Jeanne to what I asked of Robert or will you dodge the answering those questions again.”
Sorry, I can’t speak for Robert. Perhaps he’ll reappear later.
Dear Colin,
I never dodge, not in my genes. which is why I seem to be attacked in other places around this wonderfully friendly blog.
Just so I’m not keeping you waiting, I’ll have to finish reading and responding to your long post a bit later as I’m working right now. Don’t worry, I won’t ‘dodge’ your questions.
Cheers,
Jeanne
Dear Colin,
“Number 1 is a misunderstanding of the truth but number 2 is ignorance of the truth and a choice made by yourself to be against Jesus which means (whether you realise it or not) that you are serving the antichrist!”
Ah, in that case, we’re not really dialogueing. I thought we were, but since it’s not a conversation of equals (since you consider me confused, ignorant and serving Satan…what a burden that would be), I’m off to other things. For instance, running my law practice. I don’t discuss religion as a profession like yourself, so don’t have that enviable leisure.
Cheers and kind regards,
Jeanne
For Colin. As scholar to scholar, here’s a bibliographic source. It can pick up where our discussion ends.
http://books.google.com/books?id=M8kjqryq8dIC&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=a+short+history+of+the+catholic+church&sig=4de0JzZMvuBa2IQ-oIfdSZCp0SQ
Cheers,
Jeanne
Dear Jeanne (the Real Jeanne)
Please forgive me if I offended you. I only quoted from scripture teachings and it was not my intention to offend you. All I said, through deduction and logic of the teachings of Jesus, is that you can only serve one master not two. I proove my point with the fact that you have yet to answer my question which was simple enough…
I am going to be human now and be straight to the point (forgive me Lord).
All I have done is brought home to you the real truth from scripture. But let me be blunt. You have been ignorant because you have ignored my simple question and choose, instead, to offer links to books and catholic teachings.
When presented with a simple question from scripture you choose the following response.
‘…..I don‚Äôt discuss religion as a profession like yourself, so don‚Äôt have that enviable leisure.’
I am not accusing you of being a Satanist I am asking you, to ask yourself, “Who do I serve”. Do you not accept that Jesus told us to pray to God (not Mary). Is this not simple enough for you to grasp. I say to you…if you want to serve Jesus and God then forget your vain teachings and read the simple teachings of Jesus who gives to us simple instruction to follow. You are my brother and I pray for you when I pray for myself.
Now to some simple points.
1. Christianity isn’t leisure and
2. I have my own I.T. company
[...] Other writers have spent a lot of time refuting the novel’s fictional history point by point. (Once again, let me point out Fr. John Wauck’s admirable “Da Vinci Code Catechism,” which does the job quickly and charitably.) It has to be done, I suppose, but it’s not very entertaining. Those fish are too easy to shoot. I want a bigger barrel. [...]
Apology accepted, Colin. Don’t worry about it.
“I am asking you, to ask yourself, ‚ÄúWho do I serve‚Äù. Well, I have asked myself that and the answer’s clear as crystal in my mind, as it has been from the beginning. As far as individual consciences are at issue, I really am touched about your concerns. You pray for me, I’ll pray for you. It’s a win-win situation for both of us.
Jeanne
“You have been ignorant because you have ignored my simple question and choose, instead, to offer links to books and catholic teachings.”
Education consists in reading, as well as blogging. I for one appreciate a good, solid bibliography and I thought you would as well. Sorry if you didn’t want further reading, my mistake. You see, sola scriptura can only get you as far as your own individual interpretation can go. If you ‘stand on the shoulders of giants’ by reading what others have thought, then you’ve moved forward all the more. Enjoy the rest of your weekend.
Jeanne
If you have confidance in the catholic faith then dispute my claim with reference to scripture, dispute my logic and reasoning from the teachings of Jesus.
Simple question
Do we pray to God or do we pray to Mary?
According to the catholic faith…Mary is the “The HOLY queen” …point me to scripture where Jesus talks of the “Holy Queen”. We can show this “Holy Queen”, also, to be false. All christians know that Jesus is the King of the new world yet to come. How can we have a queen….where would that leave the church for is not the church the bride of the bridegroom which is spoken of at the end times in the book of revelation. Again, through scripture, I can show a false teaching of the catholic church. Let me re-iterate…it is not me but scripture through my hands that is showing you that some things within the catholic faith are against the teachings of Jesus. Show me where the scripture is wrong?
Now then. The link that you sent to me was a link to the history of the catholic church but if I can show now by choosing only a few teachings of the catholic church, that they are false, then why would I want to read the rest?
To put it another way.
If I opened a bottle of wine and the first taste was bitter would I drink the rest of the bottle?
Hello, Colin.
Your question: “Do we pray to God or do we pray to Mary?”
Answer: God. Mt 22:37; cf. Lk 10:27
Perhaps you missed my other post (maybe somewhere else on the blog). Catholics do not and have never worshipped Mary, they venerate her.
It’s rather difficult to condense 2000 years of teaching (Mariology, Church History, the writings of the Fathers of the Church, Ecclesiology, Scripture studies) into a Q&A sort of thing, you know what I mean? I take a 3 week course in an aspect of Catholic teaching every summer and I am still amazed at the abundant richness of it all.
To pick up on your colorful metaphor, I guess it’s an acquired taste. One man’s treasure is..well, you know the rest. I can’t do anything about that.
Kind regards,
Jeanne
Jeanne
“Your question: ‚ÄúDo we pray to God or do we pray to Mary?‚Äù
Answer: God. Mt 22:37; cf. Lk 10:27
Perhaps you missed my other post (maybe somewhere else on the blog). Catholics do not and have never worshipped Mary, they venerate her. ”
To venerate means to revere and ro revere means to worship! Anyone can search the internet and find pictures of the Pope knealing down in front of a statue of Mary.
I rest my case.
Catholic teachings are flawed, to say the least. How can you close your eyes to the teachings of Jesus yet hold with revere those of the catholic faith which can be shown to be false through the teachings of Jesus? I am not without blemish Jeanne but at the moment your feet are bathing in the fires of hell, can you not see with your own eyes where you are being taken? Beware of Satan and the anti-christ, Jeanne, because he will show you wonders and vain things and tell you they are the truth. God bless you brother I will pray for us both.
Thank you, Colin, I do appreciate your prayers.
And don’t forget, we were worship the same God so at least we have common ground on that score. (Atheists abound).
Yours truly,
Jeanne
You got me Robert! I’m really Robert Langdon and this is a hoax. But what the heck, Dan is a joke anyway. Copying the works of others and passing sloppy scholarship as historical facts. Can’t he be more original and more thoughtful? I mean even the nonbelievers won’t believe him. Ironically, the Christians seem more interested in his books.
As a lay minister many have recommended the Da Vinci Code, but I refuse to read a prostitution of the truth.
However, the question of Christ’s diety and the role of Constantine is still argued today, except by true believers in the Trinity. As a former Jew, now a Christian-Jew, I never accepted the Trinity and had problems with the Catholic Church. The Dark Ages, political intrigue, banning of ownership of the bible, and the celibate priesthood all seemed antithetical.
As a young man growing up in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania area I was ingtrigued with the Protestant Reformation and the origins of America and freedom of religion.
Therefore, I tend to disagree with Catholic interpretation of history and the bible. For instance, if Emperor Constantine had only a minor role in the re-organization of the church at Nicaea, why did Arius write a letter directly to Constantine appealing being excommunicated? It appears the Emperor was the de facto leader of the church with a strong influence via proxy.
Also, if the pagan Constantine had not interfered and the Athanasius:Arius argument continued amongst Christians, Mohammad would not have interpreted Christianity to be idolatry and not a true monotheism . . . and we would not have had 1400 years of slavery, slaughter, and be at a terrible point in history today.
In retrospect, we today have an enormous advantage to those who adhere to missinterpretations of the past. Looking back we can see what decisions and influences changed history. In this case, the Apostasy of Athanasius and Constantine came first before the Man of Lawlessness/Anihilation. 2 Thessalonians 2:3. See also who claims himself as divine, a prophet, and stands in the place of the temple . . . could it be the Dome of the Rock?
Catholic theology requires Jesus to be both God and a Man to cover Adamic sin. But that is an overweighted justice. If God’s justice is perfect, then only a perfect man equal to Adam had to be obedient in order to cover the sin. Therefore, Jesus was an obedient man with divine origin . . . the first born of creation, but subordinant, not equal, to God the Creator.
“If God‚Äôs justice is perfect, then only a perfect man equal to Adam had to be obedient in order to cover the sin.” However, the ‘offended party’ so to speak, was God, not a man. This may oversimplify the concept, but here’s an analogy that may be helpful. Imagine that Chirac comes to visit the U.K. In the course of his stay, a member of Parliament with not enough tact, and even less French, says something unfortunate (accidentally of course) at a dinner party, one would expect him to apologize, yes, but it would also be appropriate for a diplomatic equal to extend an apology as well.
Only God could render God the reparation due to him. And here is where the mysteries of God’s mercy plays into his Justice. In his mercy, God’s Son came to offer his life for humanity. This is the essence of Easter, which we just celebrated a little while ago.
If Jesus was just another man like ourselves, and did not die and rise again… well, St. Paul’s answer is direct enough: “then our faith is in vain” (1 Co 15:12).
As Thomas More puts it in Robert Bolt’s “A Man for all seasons”: “God made the angels to show him splendor.. .animals for innocence and plants for their simplicity. But Man he made to serve him wittily in the tangle of his mind.”
Catholic theology does not ‘require’ this, it explains a fact already existing. “Veritas sequitur esse rerunt”: the truth follows upon the being of things. It is there for us to discover; whether we discover it or not depends on our reason and our faith.
For background info on the future religion of mankind see the following websites:
http://www.al-sunnah.com/muhammad_in_the_bible.htm (MUHAMMAD IN THE BIBLE)
http://www.witness-pioneer.org/vil/Books/MB_BQS/default.htm (Quran and Science)
http://www.harunyahya.com/
http://www.barnabas.net/
http://www.answering-christianity.com/ac.htm
http://www.islamicity.com/
http://www.islamonline.net/english/index.shtml
There are definite disparities between all religions, however some are more harmful. For example, the scriptures admonish us to adhere to the grace of GOD, in christ Jesus, making supplications and repenting to him alone through his grace and mercy. Yet the Catholic church still practices confessionals to a priest (another man). He came to fulfill the law under Moses. For the Grace of Jesus is, was, and will always be above the law. Remember when the Pharisees and Scribes tell Jesus by what authority is spreading the gospel and asks them,”By what authority did John the Baptist, baptize”? Was it of God or man? They could not say.
“Yet the Catholic church still practices confessionals to a priest (another man).”
The Sacrament of Penance is an entire subject in itself and could take pages, but just for a quick answer, here’s a shot. For Catholics, the priest acts ‘in persona Christi’, in the person of Christ. When Christ told the apostles, whatever you declare bound on earth, will be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earch, will be loosed in heaven”, he’s speaking of the forgiveness of sins.
From the Catholic Encylopedia “No Catholic believes that a priest simply as an individual man, however pious or learned, has power to forgive sins. This power belongs to God alone; but He can and does exercise it through the ministration of men. Since He has seen fit to exercise it by means of this sacrament, it cannot be said that the Church or the priest interferes between the soul and God; on the contrary, penance is the removal of the one obstacle that keeps the soul away from God.”
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church (Pt 1465): When he celebrates the sacrament of Penance, the priest is fulfilling the ministry of the Good Shepherd who seeks the lost sheep, of the Good Samaritan who binds up wounds, of the Father who awaits the prodigal son and welcomes him on his return, and of the just and impartial judge whose judgment is both just and merciful. The priest is the sign and the instrument of God’s merciful love for the sinner.
Hi All.
I have read all the comments posted with interest. Some are rational some are not…in my opinion.
Can I add a couple of questions to the debate?…If the theory of DVC is correct, would that make Joseph Jesus’s natural father? and if not did Mary commit adultery by giving birth to anothers mortal son?
It is interesting to see that already Clemens of Alexandria (about 150-215) advances several arguments why Jesus was not married (Stromateis, III book, nr. 49). But still more interesting is to see that he advances these arguments against gnostics like Tatian, who claimed that marriage comes from the devil and they were proud to imitate Jesus, who didn’t marry.
Clemens declares that marriage comes from God. Jesus didnt’ marry not because marriage is bad but for other reasons. So for instance, he had no need to generate children since he was the Son of God and lives for ever. Had Jesus been married, had Clemens surely advanced this to refute Tatian.
The problem with DVC is not primarily the statement that Jesus was marry, but the suggestion that he was not God, and didn’t died on the cross to save us. Dan Brown proposes actually a new religion: a “Christianity” without cross, and without necessity of pardon of the sins and penance. In this sense he meets the feelings of many people today, who would like to reach eternal life through a confortable way, and not through the narrow door (Lk 13:24). “Lord Dan Brown” is meanwhile a reach man; let us see now what he does to help his sheeps to go into heaven.
Antoine writes: “The problem with DVC is not primarily the statement that Jesus was marry, but the suggestion that he was not God, and didn‚Äôt died on the cross to save us.”
I agree with you there. Christ’s divinity is far and away the central issue. As many have pointed out, the Council of Nicea’s ‘close vote’ to ‘make Christ divine’ was hardly a vote and hardly ‘close.’ About 300 to 8. And the issue wasn’t to make Christ divine, but to put an end to the Arian confusion (that Christ was a demi-god, not completely God). The Arians did not deny Christ’s divinity. They did believe he was ‘pseudo-God’, which was the problem.
“When Christ told the apostles, whatever you declare bound on earth, will be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earch, will be loosed in heaven‚Äù, he‚Äôs speaking of the forgiveness of sins.”
I also take this to mean what you do to others will be done unto you. Which goes in hand with “do unto others that which you would do unto yourself.” – translation – Love your brothers and sisters and the same will be given to you in heaven. Don’t love your brothers and sisters (basically be a nasty guy or gal) and receive in heaven that which you did on Earth.
I would like to point out that confessing to anyone of your sins should be a pre-cursor to asking for forgiveness from God. There are good people from all walks of life but we must remember that there is only one God and he sent his son Jesus Christ to help us and show us the true way. Don’t be blinded by the complication of false teachings. Jesus gave a very simple message that all can follow, and lets face it you know when you are doing wrong because you “feel” it. There are no excuses. The Davinci code, and similiar works which cast doubt on scripture need to be put where they belong. Saying that Jesus was married goes completely against all of the new testament teachings because the church is the bride of Jesus.
This film is against the teachings of Jesus that you can almost feel Satan and the anti christ breathing down your neck. That said all christians know that these things will happen before the end times so expect more stuff to be given the show lights that go against the teachings of Jesus and try to put the world of true christians in the dark! But to those who are against Jesus then all I can say is that “remember who” will bow on their knees at the end of all things whether they like it or not!
“The Davinci code, and similiar works which cast doubt on scripture need to be put where they belong.”
I agree with you, Mr. Saxton. Hopefully people will be discerning enough to realize it or at least will ask a knowledgeable source for advice if they have those doubts.
Father John
I entered this website out of curiosity about the Da Vinci Code but would like to ask you something else please. I`m not Catholic so I don`t understand. Catholics believe that when a good person dies they go straight to Heaven or somewhere in between. How come we are waiting for Christ`s return to raise good people from the dead to be taken to Heaven if they have already gone. I`m confused. Is he only coming back to take the living to Heaven? Back to the Da Vinci Code, Jesus was such a wonderful example for us all according to the Bible, would the fact that he fell in love and married make his teachings any less important? Personally I don`t think his focused dedication to his cause would allow him to marry.
DVC has somewhat the merit to lead us to the question:
Does the divinity of Jesus require that he couldn’t marry?
As far as I know, this question has not been discussed so far, neither before nor after DVC.
Hi Stephanie, about the second coming of Christ. Here’s the Catholic belief. People who die in grace (good people) go to Heaven and if their souls needed further purifying, they’ll pass through Purgatory (a place of Temporal punishment) … all of these before the second coming.
Now the second coming will be the DEFINITIVE end of the world. Beyond that, the world as we know it will be no more. As such there would be no more dead people as we now know it, because each one would then have achieved his definitive fate: the good, with glorious bodies in heaven; the bad, with damned souls in hell. Therefore, Christ’s second coming will be both to confirm the personal judgements they had previously received, and to judge all those still living.
Sorry, I hope my convoluted explanation helps.
why is everyone so strong on trying to prove one way or another who jesus was and how he lived. i will be honest im not strong on the bible just things i pick up or remember from school. now 1st jesus was the king of the jews right? so why arnt jews shining members of the christian community? because their holy men are rabbi`s. and as such it is their purpose to take and support a wife. jesus was probably not as the church portrays him. in the rembnants of the gnostics bibles he is just like any other young boys. even prone to violent outrages and once beat a boy to death. now as much as i dont like islam even they acknowledge jesus as a prophet not the sun of god. you have to remember that in those days there was a lot of different religions. a lot of them pagen as worshipped by the romans. the sabbath day or sunday actually derives from the sun god helios. the emporer knew that he had to bring all the factions together and to make the transition easier he incorporated a lot of the pagan religion.i havnt made this up, it is there in the history books if you look hard enough. also mans understanding of science was limited in those days, meaning all sorts of occurances may have been classed as miracles that these days would be more understood. i mean a pregnacy without sex? wow cant see the child support agency going for that one. hundreds of yaers ago galilao said the world was round and not the center of the universe. so the roman catholic church put him under house arrest vis the inquisition until he said it was flat. science looks for answers to questions that havnt been asked. the church only gives answers to questions it wants you to know. hmmmm loks like im an aetheist! nope i beleive in some sort of creator for the universe not a god. of all the billions of stars, millions of galaxies we are not unique. if anything christ may have given us a set of rules to live by, but he was just a gifted man, who was ahead of his time.a lot of the code is just a good riveting read, but it does raise questions the roman catholic church doesnt want answering.god is all forgiving, so why do catholics kill protestants due to what they beleive. the church has an amazing amount of power, and absolute power corrupts absolutly.
phew think im finished. for now.
“if anything christ may have given us a set of rules to live by, but he was just a gifted man, who was ahead of his time.”
Ah, if it was only that simple. As it is, the Christian’s core belief is that he is perfect God, perfect man. This changes the perspective radically. More later, just interjecting in between things.
Cheers all.
Thank You Nokia,
I think I understand. Nice to know he will be coming. Even though I`m pretty sure I`ll be going down and not up, I hope I`m still around long enough just to look on his face. No need to tell him sorry for not haveing the fortitude to live by his teachings……he knows that already. Best Wishes
Hey Stephanie, why do´you say that? I don´t think you´ll be going down, no way! What´s up? Wanna talk about it? If not here, perhaps you might want to send a private mail to Fr. John Wauck (jpw@davincicode-opusdei.com). He´ll be kind and patient, I assure you.
Nokia thank you,
I just don`t like being a hypocrit. He has been like the long suffering friend to me. Always there when I need him, always loved for the sacrifice he made for so many. When you call on a mortal friend over and over and give nothing in return, they eventually turn away. Although I know he never gives up on us it seems so very wrong to keep expecting forgiveness. If we can let friends go because we don`t deserve their loyalty and support, then how can I go on hurting my most loving, tolerant friend. He will always be in my heart but I don`t want anything in return. Really was just hanging onto the hope of his return to see the face of a dear friend. Now everyone can get back to the debate on whether he was married or not. Married or not makes no difference to me. Bless you Nokia for being kind hearted.
Stephanie, your current comments are more important than getting ‘back into the debate.’ You said, “really was just hanging onto the hope of his return to see the face of a dear friend.” But you CAN see his face, here and now… .and for every reason not to, there are a million to go for it. Nokia gives some good advice in his post, you know. I’d go for it, girl.
The catholic church is guilty of crimes against humanity, it destroyed the orthodox church, ran the kings of europe, made deals with the moslems to stop inromania, made deals with hitler these people of the vatican should not be the law, priests should be married, but hten the vatican wouldnt get their assets upon death!
Christianiaty is the goodness of man Catholicism is its adversary, da vinci was right!
Why does the church fear this inquisition and not claim it heracy like they did with the Templars , follow the money and the answers will follow
Sincerely Peter P
Peter,
You wrote ‘Christianiaty is the goodness of man Catholicism is its adversary, da vinci was right!”
Wait a moment. Perhaps you mean that’s what Dan Brown presents in his work of fiction, the Da Vinci Code. As far as I know, Leonardo said no such thing. Also, Catholics are Christian… or do you think otherwise?
Although I am a Lutheran Christian and only celebrate the basic two sacrements, you have stated the basic truths of Christian teaching here. we are all brothers and sisters in Christ and children of the same heavenly Father. The truth is that Jesus really did get married, but not in an eathly sense to Mary Magdeline or any particular woman. The bride of Christ is the Holy Church and we get to go to the wedding feast. His body and blood are present in Holy Communion.
Andrew, you’ve said everything in a nutshell. Thank you for that!
Do catholics think.
That only the catholic church can save you?
I have been studying the “Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary” and would just like to share a passage I stated earlier.
“HAIL, [HOLY QUEEN], Mother of Mercy, [our life], our sweetness and [our hope]! [To thee do we cry], poor banished children of Eve; to thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this valley of tears. Turn then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us, and after this our exile, show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus. O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary!”
This is supposed catholic christians calling out to Mary for forgiveness and help! But I would also like to share with you something that I found on the internet. Someone has gone through the “Rosary of the blessed Mary” and applied a simple counting of prayers to God, Christ and mary (http://www.sxws.com/charis/mary31.htm) and his simple counting speaks more than words:
In this breakdown, prayers and percentages in the new Rosary are shown as normal. Those in the earlier 15-decade version are surrounded by brackets.
Of the 254 (202) prayers:
16 (15), or 6.29% (7.42%), are directed to Jesus;
34 (33), or 13.39% (16.34%), are directed to God; and
204 (154), or 80.32% (76.24%), are directed to Mary.
Oh and before I forget…look at one of the promises made to those who pray “The Rosary of the blessed virgin mary”
“I shall deliver from purgatory those who have been devoted to the rosary.” And who as the power to do that…Jesus only and nowhere does Jesus tell us to pray using “The Rosary of the blessed Virgin Mary”. No more am I convinced now that the catholic teachings are bent towards the teachings of the Anti-christ to undermine and trick christians.
And if you want to see catholic brainwash in action then go here…http://www.heavensweapon.com/index.html. This site teaches us to thank and pray to the Madonna. This is blasphemy on tap! The thing is when you apply just a little scripture(the teachings of Jesus Christ) to most of the “Mary” teachings of catholics then you can soon throw it on the fire where it belongs…It just does not stand up to what Jesus taught us in the new testament. The Catholic teachings are flawed.
Some simple instructions.
1. When a catholic priest gives you “the truth” then ask him to back it up with scripture (The true scripture)…The best way is to ask him to point to the bit in the bible where Jesus tells us to do that.
2. Don’t leave it there because what I find is that they tend to mingle and obfuscate true scripture with down right lies so study what they say and make sure that the guts of what they are saying are backed up with scripture.
To be safe *Don’t follow what a catholic priest tells you to do in order to enter into heaven…read the teachings of Jesus and follow what he says (which contradicts the teachings of catholic priests!)*
Something else that shines a light on the false hood of the catholic church. When Jesus walked the earth did he adorn himself with gold and pray in front of images of his mother? Did he collect vast works of art and hord them in a supposed holy city?
Or…
did he say to sell all that you have and give to the poor and walk the earth and teach the scripture?
Re:your ‘instructions’ above, do you feel an obligation to give orders to people because you don’t understand their Faith? A bit much, I think. Perhaps someone will have the patience and time to answer your array of questions.
Well, as it’s still the month of May (traditionally a month dedicated to Mary, the Mother of God), perhaps I’ll pass this on. Mr. Saxton can take it as he may but hopefully others can also benefit from it. Interesting that I found it in my email Inbox right after I read Saxton’s post.
(Message of the day, today, May 30, 2006, http://www.opusdei.org)
“Do whatever he tells you”
In the middle of the rejoicing at the feast in Cana, only Mary notices that they are short of wine. A soul will notice even the smallest details of service if, like her, it is alive with a passion for helping its neighbour, for God. (Furrow, 631)
Our Lady was a guest at one of those noisy country weddings attended by people from many different villages. Mary was the only one who noticed the wine was running out. Don’t these scenes from Christ’s life seem familiar to us? The greatness of God lives at the level of ordinary things. It is natural for a woman, a homemaker, to notice an oversight, to look after the little things that make life pleasant. And this is how Mary acted.
—Do whatever he tells you.
Implete hydrias (John 2:7), fill the jars. And the miracle takes place. Everything is so simple and ordinary. The servants carry out their job. The water is easy to find. And this is the first manifestation of our Lord’s divinity. What is commonplace becomes something extraordinary, something supernatural, when we have the good will to heed what God is asking of us.
Lord, I want to abandon all my concerns into your generous hands. Our Mother‚Äîyour Mother‚Äîwill by now have said to you, as at Cana: ‚ÄúThey have no wine!…‚Äù
If our faith is weak, we should turn to Mary. Because of the miracle at the marriage feast at Cana, which Christ performed at his Mother’s request, his disciples learned to believe in him (John 2:11). Our Mother is always interceding with her Son so that he may attend to our needs and show himself to us, so that we can cry out, “You are the Son of God.”
—Grant me, dear Jesus, the faith I truly desire. My Mother, sweet Lady, Mary most holy, make me really believe! (Holy Rosary, Second Luminous Mystery)
Saxton wrote: “When Jesus walked the earth did he adorn himself with gold and pray in front of images of his mother? Did he collect vast works of art and hord them in a supposed holy city? Or…did he say to sell all that you have and give to the poor and walk the earth and teach the scripture?”
Well, the Gospel address this exact point when Judas grumbled against Mary (the sister of Lazarus and Martha) anointing him with costly ointment, saying “why was this not sold for 3oo days wages and the money given to the poor?” Christ answered him saying “the poor you will always have with you, you will not always have me” (Jn 12:4-8).
We believe God is present in the tabernacle in a Catholic Church. God simply deserves the best we can give him. If we have gold and incense, as well as art (the fruit of man’s creative power and desire to beautify this world), why should we hold back? After all, he deserves nothing less.
Thank you Michelle! I´d actually thought that for once you´d lost your cool
To support your patient effort at explaining the truth, here´s a contribution to Saxton´s question:
“Or‚Ķdid he say to sell all that you have and give to the poor and walk the earth and teach the scripture? ”
Matthew 19:21 Jesus saith to him: If thou wilt be perfect, go sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come follow me.
Mark 10:21 And Jesus looking on him, loved him, and said to him: One thing is wanting unto thee: go, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.
Luke 18:22 Which when Jesus had heard, he said to him: Yet one thing is wanting to thee: sell all whatever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.
Source: http://www.drbo.org/
I’m glad you had the patience and time to give more scriptural ‘back-up’–many thanks, Nokia!
(Haven’t lost my cool yet…but when you hit the ‘near and dear’, well…there she blows! Just kidding.
Saxton, where does it say to “walk the earth and teach scripture”? As Nokia’s quoted passages relate, after speaking of selling what you own, Christ repeatedly extends the invitation: “Come, follow me.” Living a Christian life is more than just quoting Scripture. No matter how worthy that may be in itself, it is an incomplete plan for Christian life.
Hello everyone!!
I am a devout Catholic and I love Jesus Christ! I’ve read the Dan Brown’s book, The Da Vinci Code, I know that it is only a work of fiction however the author has presented his story in a rather disturbing way… I don’t mind if Jesus Christ our Lord is Married, coz He is the Son of God and He can do anything He wants, besides ther’s nothig wrong with marriage because it is also a sacred thing… What’s bugging me was the the pagan roman emperor Constantine… Dan Brown is somehow using the history to back up his claim/accusation that the Bible is fake and that Christianity is the product of Constantine (for his political advantage)… I have also come accros with this site, nayahushua.org, also claiming that Christianity is indeed designed after the pagan rites, symbols and etc during the constantine era… My Question Father is, HOw true or how false is the story of Constantine the roman emperor? Please shed some light on this?
Welcome, Mithras!
(Seems we’ve lost Saxton…)
First, I’m not taking sides here.
When we want to be precise, we’ve got to be scientific. And when we want to be scientific, we’ve got to be pragmatic.
Father, some of your arguments are not based on facts. Others are based on the bible. However, one of the major arguments of those inclined for the Da Vinci theory is that the bible was made in a way to fulfill someone’s interests. In consequence, it’s not necessarily precise. Therefore, no bible based arguments are (in a scientific manner) sufficient to contradict the ‘Da Vinci’ theory. Yes, this is very disturbing, but it is a correct and pragmatic scientific way of analysis.
Unfortunatelly, as old as history is the much imprecise it gets.
“Therefore, no bible based arguments are (in a scientific manner) sufficient to contradict the ‚ÄòDa Vinci‚Äô theory.”
It would be helpful, just so we’re all on the same page as it were, if you’d describe your ‘scientific method’ as relates to Scripture. That way everyone can logically follow each other’s comments. (Assumptions can cause unnecessary detours). Science, by the way, is not limited to the so-called ‘hard sciences’ (e.g. chemistry, biology, physics–I did pre-med so I do understand the tendency of people in those fields to prefer their way of ‘doing science’). Again, it’s important to define our terms…so we don’t end up confusing each other.
Thanks.
Fr., I have not read the book nor seen the movie. I am engaging in the good old fahsioned American Capitalsim tradition of voting with my feet and not giving money to those who are out to hurt the Church. I may borrow the book from someone in the near future. But, from what I have read, could not the author himself be trying to create a unwitting gnostic experience for the readers in the very act of reading the book?
But you guys still didn’t get back to me about the ‚ÄúRosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary‚Äù
Its very plain to see that the passages within this prayer are contradictary to the teachings of Jesus and also the promises that have been give (by catholic priests) that you can escape the wrath of God if you pray using the ‚ÄúRosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary‚Äù. This is just an out right lie in the face of any christian and is completely against any teachings of Jesus. Where in the bible is the ‚ÄúRosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary‚Äù quoted…it isn’t because it was created by some crazy catholic priest who feels that they have the power to change what the bible teaches you.
Jesus only teaches the lords prayer and nowhere, ABSOLUTELY NOWHERE, does Jesus teach us to worship Mary…In the name of Jesus…one of the 10 commandments specifically tells us not to worhip Idols and I can pull off thousands (THOUSANDS) of photographs from the internet specifically showing the pope praying to wooden statues of Mary, Crosses (and some strange demonic looking Mary figures also).
God says that there is only one God yet the pope, now and past, has specifically said that he wants to combine all religions…you can’t do this because it breaks the commandments (You know the commandments that God gave us that catholics like to forget every now and again when they are trying to proove some point which flys in the face of true christian teachings)
WITHOUT A DOUBT, CATHOLIC TEACHINGS ARE CONTRADICTORY TO THE TEACHINGS OF JESUS!!!
That said I have to accept, as a christian, that this will happen before Jesus returns. But I can guarantee with hand on heart that the pope, most of the time, talks hogwash while Jesus speaks the truth! I know who I will follow…
in responce to colin saxon, Catholics dont worship Mary. We pray through her as an intersessor to the Lord. Who else to get a message to the Lord than through his own mother. The same is said for statues of saints and crosses. We do not pray to them, but use them as a reminder or as an intersessor. The strange looking statues of Mary, like Our Lady Of Guadeloupe, are different countries portrayals of the Blessed Virgin. Also is it not true that by simply praying you can avoid the wrath of God, more specifically less time in pergatory. And as said above why not appeal to the Lords mother to help you.
Ryan,
Colin’s been repeating the same message for a while now…thanks for helping with your commentary. Several people have already tried but he’s sold on sola scriptura. Hard to dialogue when he doesn’t realize that the New Testament was written down AFTER the events occurred (like recording your impressions in your travel diary AFTER you actually did the traveling), the living Church actually coming before the writing…
Colin, please realize Catholics are not pantheists. We worship only one God. “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is One, and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength” (Deut 6:4-5).
And about your comment about the pope (rather in poor taste, I’m afraid), have you read his writings? Because if you have and think they are ‘hogwash’, I can’t imagine what you’re writing would be. Sorry, but Benedict XVI is brilliant, holy and humble. Maybe you missed his moving words in Poland. Here’s a sample that I’d put in earlier. Perhaps you’ll grasp the role of Mary in our lives–including your own, you may not realize it now, but someday you will.
“Whoever believes and loves in this way becomes a builder of the true ‚Äúcivilization of love‚Äù, of which Christ is the centre. Twenty-seven years ago, in this place, Pope John Paul II said: ‚ÄúPoland has become nowadays the land of a particularly responsible witness‚Äù (Warsaw, 2 June 1979). I ask you now, cultivate this rich heritage of faith transmitted to you by earlier generations, the heritage of the thought and the service of that great Pole who was Pope John Paul II. Stand firm in your faith, hand it down to your children, bear witness to the grace which you have experienced so abundantly through the Holy Spirit in the course of your history. May Mary, Queen of Poland, show you the way to her Son, and may she accompany you on your journey towards a happy, peace-filled future. May your hearts never be wanting in love for Christ and for his Church.”
Colin, I have no idea where you’re getting this from:
“God says that there is only one God yet the pope, now and past, has specifically said that he wants to combine all religions”
Are you referring to ecuminism by any chance? Read about it here–the unity of Christians is not the same thing as ‘combining all religions.’ Maybe you’re reading into things too quickly and that’s why you’re confusing yourself? May want to slow down.
Here’s a good over-view so you understand what the pope’s referring to…definitely not morphiing all religions into one (that would be impossible).
http://sammons.gemstream.com/papers/ecumenism.html
“Where in the bible is the ‚ÄúRosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary‚Äù quoted‚Ķ”
The Rosary is mostly composed of the prayer “Hail, Mary”, as Colin rightly mentioned earlier (thanks for the percentaged statistics). That prayer is based on lines from the New Testament. As you are clearly focused on Scripture, that should ring true to you.
“Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee, blessed art thou among women” (Lk 1:28).
“Behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus.” (Lk 1:31)
Jesus didn’t tell us to repeat the angel’s words, you’re absolutely correct there…but why shouldn’t we say them anyway? Sometimes the spirit of the law supercedes the letter of the law.
[...] Naughty,naughty Opus Dei. [...]
? And….?
Hey “Someone with scientific,” the debate between science and religion is as old as Copernicus and Galileo. Copernicus did not publish his heliocentric theory during his lifetime for fear of punishment from the Church. (wise guy). Galileo supported Copernicus’ theory and was imprisoned by the Church. (poor guy).
That the bible is ‘unscientific’ is old news. As Carl Sagan put it, whether or not God exists is debatable but it would be madness to deny that gravity exists. A word of caution though, as Stephen Hawking said, scientific theories exist only in our minds. It may be not be easy to distinguish reality from illusion. Besides, the creation account in Genesis had striking similarity with the ‘scientific’ Big Bang theory. Coincidence?
My queation still stands….was Mary an adulterer???????
Eh, what?
Les, Fortune, when did you ask your question? It’s a little hard to keep track of comments. Do you want to repeat?
f
that arguement was a nonsense and not to be argued at all .. . if you believe that there is god then stand your point same with those who dont and dont cross each others way ….. besides the bottom line of it all even ifwe are believing or not …. we will die and then after that then each of us can discover that big question marks on our heads … if what awaits us after death .. is there really heaven and hell?.. does god really exists or not ? .. and all other questions we try to answer by putting our humanic knowledge toeach full limitation…juicing every bit of knowhow in giving explanations to all the phenomena happening all around the world………. all i can say to all .. thiest and atheist … live your life the way you want it to… that in the end of it all you can stand tall and say i had done all what i want …AND IM CONTENTED AND HAPPY …… MABUHAY PILIPINAS……….
Marley: “we will die and then after that then each of us can discover that big question marks on our heads ‚Ķ if what awaits us after death .. ”
So it’s ‘eat, drink and be merry’ then, and leave the important things for later (as in when)?
A bit sad when you say ‘mabuhay pilipinas’ in the same breath. The Philippines has long been a mainstay of Catholicism in Asia… and speaking as a filipina-american, all I can say is, I hope you return to your roots, Marley, in order to go forward… your string of questions above are already answered, you know. When you say “you can stand tall and say I had done all what I want”, well, is that the ‘be all & end all’”? Just to do what you wanted?
Come on, man. You can do better than that. “To whom much has been given, much will be demanded.”
Cheers and good luck–I really mean that.
NYC Michelle
Yeah– how about being able to say,
“I tried my very best to do all that I should have done out of love for others” !
I pray that we can all say that when we meet our Lord at the end.
oops– and also for love of God!
Well,Well;Well
Where have, I landed??
Hi Michelle (NYCMichell?)
I am a bit too tired this Morning(02.45)so,if any body is here tomorow I´ll have a look in
Bye for now… (very `interessting¬¥)
sandra
Good Morning Sandra,
I think this is the place to answer your question. Leave it for me here.
Brenda&PTT:
Hope you both had a 8″Love)ly” day.
see ya later!!
I will get this “typing” right some day:-(“Love)ly”)day
Hi! Brenda
I may be a little “fuddled” to day(aren¬¥t I always?)
Could you please ask my question again for me???
Hi Sandra,
You were going to comment on the Piano post I left in “lost in Translation”.
Aha! Gotcha!!
Would you like me to post here?
I will have to make the evening meal for,very prominent “sock wearer” first.
He has just Phoned to say that he is on his way home!!
Ok? I would like to try a new “Smiley” O:-)
Hi!brenda will get to you directly.(S.W.) wants 5minutes on,:-as he puts it(Our) comp.
bis bald
Dear Brenda
As you have most definately noticed.5minutes can be very long!
Well,answer to post “Lost in Translation”June 16th.3.05am…
Donn´t know if still `akuelle´?
But will try.:- 1.Tradition? They (Natives)according to “Tradition” still shrink the heads of thier enemies).
Or (according to “Tradition” we put up a “Christmas Tree” every Year)
So for me (us) `Tradition¬¥ is not a `Binding¬¥ Christian Faith nor a from Jesus as you say “personally” vocaly
given “Truth”.
2.Evangeelium Matthaeum.Pars Secunda.Jesu Christi Vita Publica.(Biblia Sacra)I will first give you the Translation in German (easier for me ):-
Du bist gl?ºcklich Simon,Sohn Jona,weil das Fleish und das Blut dir nicht verh?ºllt ist sondern mein Vater im Himmel.
Und also sage ich dir,du bist Petrus und ?ºber diesen Felsen werde ich bauen mein Heiligtum und die Tore der Unterwelt werden nicht gegen es strak sein.
Und ich werde dir geben die Schl?ºssel der Herrschaft der Himmlischen.
Und was immer du gestritten haben wirst ?ºber der Erde,wird auch im Himmel gestritten werden,und was auch immer du ?ºber der Erde gel??st haben wirst,wird auch im Himmel gel??st sein.
I´ll try to explain in next Post (Straight follow up)
Sorry Brenda I lost the Web site had to fix!!
Explaination:-1.Beethoven was a Genius Without doubt.As were many.Liszt,Chopin,(also Da Vinci).
Liszt and Chopin were bitter Adversaries about how to interpretate a given Piece of Music.Fast,faster fastest.
but none,gave The command that if we (the later world) did not think as they ,do as they,we would lose (our) “Eternal life”..I had a very Good Tennis Teacher but I did (could)not Hit as hard as he did nor, did I have the same Technique, try as I may.Dosn¬¥t make me any better nor worse for it.(different is not nec.Better or Worse ,just Different(
As you say the Bible is Gods(jesus¬¥s)Inspierd Word, In the “Music World” there have been many Words(people)they say some are also “Inspierd” but by What?
On this Rock (Petra)Not on this (rock)but over this rock.(Seems the same but isn¬¥t.)I will erect my Holliness “Over” as in Above Earth. Earth (still Ruled by Satan.)
Keys of Kingdom…The keys to the “Rule of My Heavenly Kingdom.”
The Gates of Hell..Not Hell But Gates of the under world (Earth,under heaven.)Shall not be Strong against IT
Binding:-Not to bind But to `win over´as in convince.Whom ever you shall win over on Earth they shall be won over in the kingdom of Heaven.
Loosing.-Not to loosen but(gel??st)meaning Solve (could also mean Dissolve but not so likely)What so ever you may solve on Earth shall be solved in Heaven.(as in,`Proven to be´)
I hope I have not Bored you too much? Sorry if its the case.Hard to try to explain in English..
May be Fa.Wauck would give You my E-mail Ad.and you could (If you want to) Mail me,wont bore so many People that way. >:D
To All :-h
Hope it works
can i translate this in italian and have it spread out as much as i can? People believe such crazy lies and unfortunately here in Italy they go on buying the book, and using it to struggle against Catholic Church…More than a year is passed from its first publication, and it’s still a best seller.
by the way, sorry for my bad english!!
Sabina,
See #23, June 8, 6:07 above. He told Margaret that this was designed as a handout.
Sandra,
I hope you are long ago asleep. You’ll see this later. My music reference was a pitiful attemp at a sort of “parable.” It was in reference to #2 in the Catechism above. Father John was extremely clear . It did seem to me that you might not be getting the word “tradition” quite right in this context. Maybe I’m wrong. I’m thinking of two ways of using this word. The one you illustrated with the “Christmas Tree” at some point is one use of the word. There is another. Let me give it one more try, then I will let it go.
Forget the piano or the tennis. Think instead of a baby. When he is born he can neither speak nor read. As he grows, he aquires language skills. He learns to talk and later, he learns to read. I think you can agree with me that if the baby were to somehow find himself in isolation, without human contact for the first 10 years or so of his life that he would not have been able to acquire the language skills he needs to be able to communicate with others. Now assuming our baby is reasonably intelligent he can still learn language skills but he will need to learn them from people, not from a book he picks up in the library. Having been isolated, he would have no concept of what for example the German language sounds like, much less be able to learn to read on his own. He would not even know what the alphabet looked like.
People are important in this example and these people learned their language skills from other people and they in turn from others, and back and back until we get to the origins of the German language. When they were ready to read, they were taught the symbols that represent the sounds they make when speaking.
This human succession is what I am calling Tradition. Of course this baby would most likely learn traditions such as putting up a Christman tree at Christmas, coloring eggs at Easter, etc. We have two words here, both different.
Without the Tradition in the sense that I am speaking of here, any of us could read whatever we want into the scriptural passages. During the first 20 or so years of my life, I lived without Tradition and I would get several different opinions on what certain passages in the Bible stood for. As I said before, when I found the people who had come down directly from for example St. Paul, I found that the Bible made much more sense.
To go back to the baby, or babies. Differences of course don’t make us better or less than others, just different. If we somehow had several babies around the would in different countries, the outcome would still be the same. The difference would be in the different languages but they would still be human, still saying the same things to each other, only with different words. I love you in German, French, Spanish, Italian, Englishm, Gaelic, would still mean I love you.
Dear Brenda.
I must thank you for taking so much time with me.
I hope you can bare with me for a while! I have just had very uppseting news.
My Daughter 39years has been told that she has breast Cancer.
I hope you all will join me in praying for Her thank you.
I will be with you every day but only for short periods.
Love and God Bless
Sandra
Dear Sandra,
Be sure that I will be praying for your daughter and for you… throughout the day, but especially when I am celebrating the Holy Mass.
Fr. John W.
Sabina,
Certo. Mi piacerebbe molto vederlo in italiano!
Tante grazie.
Fr. John W.
Hi Sandra, I too will pray for your daughter. Hey, an interesting thought. Why don´t we all on this blog ask the intercession of Saint Josemaria Escriva for a complete cure of Sandra´s daughter? With his feast day just around the corner, no better time than now. Once a day would do, but if one can be more generous with more, better. Sandra, you might want to give out this prayer to friends and relatives as well, so they can join us. Believe me, it works! Here´s a web link to the prayer:
http://www.opusdei.us/sec.php?s=557
and the complete text:
—–
Prayer for Saint Josemar??a’s intercession.
O God, through the mediation of Mary our Mother, you granted your priest St. Josemar??a countless graces, choosing him as a most faithful instrument to found Opus Dei, a way of sanctification in daily work and in the fulfillment of the Christian’s ordinary duties. Grant that I too may learn to turn all the circumstances and events of my life into occasions of loving You and serving the Church, the Pope and all souls with joy and simplicity, lighting up the pathways of this earth with faith and love. Deign to grant me, through the intercession of St. Josemar??a, the favor of … (make your request). Amen.
Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory be to the Father.
—–
Hi Sandra,
I offered my Mass this morning for your daughter. Just as you asked us all here to pray for her, I am asking everybody I know up in heaven to pray as well. As some of the old folks might say, “they are right up next to the throne”. I’m asking Don Alvaro especially to pray for her and I will pray and offer things throughout to day.
.http://www.opusdei.us/art.php?p=7547
Oops, let me try that again:
http://www.opusdei.us/art.php?p=7547
That’s better.
Sandra– left you a note on the other post but wanted to make sure you got it. I am certainly praying for your daughter and will continue to do so. God Bless, dear, remember we’re all behind you 100%.
Thank you ALL!!
sandra
thanks guys! John i’m quite impressed, how did you learn italian? :O
Abito a Roma da quasi undici anni… Sarebbe un peccato non imparare un po’ d’italiano dopo tanti anni, no?
Sandra– thought of you and your “multi-culti-Catholic” phrase the other day. Went to the Italian Mass, sometimes it’s the only weekday Mass I can make. I’ve learned to understand a lot over the years and can actually participate. However, what made me think of you was the priest who said Mass for the Italian community the other day– he was Japanese, but had studied in Rome, said Mass wonderfully and even gave a homily in Italian! Talk about the univeral Church!
My Mass first thing Monday will be offered for your daughter.
Would you all REALLY be bothered if christ were married and had a child? Lets say hypothetically that real evidence was found to state concretely that he was married with children. Would it REALLY change things for you?
It’s very hard to answer such a question in the abstract.
It’s not a matter of being “bothered” by it.
What one say say is that such a discovery would raise all sorts of very serious questions about the nature of God and Christian revelation. So, yes, it is a big deal.
The Da Vinci Code couples the idea of Jesus’s marriage with the idea that He is not God, which certainly does change things completely, at the same time that it simplifies matters a lot. The complicated case would be if Jesus, being God, were to have children. Obviously, you’d want to know exactly what the status of those kids would be, and it is not immediately clear. And as others have pointed out, the idea that Christ, who came to give his flesh for the life of the world and to be the Spouse of the Church, should become one flesh with a particular woman in marriage also raises serious questions.
In the end, if one takes seriously the idea that Jesus is not simply a wise teacher but rather Incarnate God, then His marriage and fatherhood matter a great deal.
So would you disown him and the bible if that were the case?
I don´t believe that this book could be seriously affecting people´s values as devout catholics obviously seem to fear. I am not religious, but I read this book and interpreted it in the same way as Indiana Jones, Pirates of the Caribbean and The Mummy Рan adventure story of a treasure hunt using settings that we are all familiar with, instead of some fantasy place and situation. These books/films are so enjoyable because they hold the fictional promise of finding a great treasure, and I think anyone with intelligence would not allow one storybook to sway their beliefs. I actually feel that if the church is so worried about this book altering people, then it does not credit its followers with much intelligence, seeing them truly as sheep, following whatever they are told. Now, I don´t mean this as an insult to the church, but does it have so little faith in its followers?
debstar– it isn’t so much a problem with what the CHurch’s followers think of Davinci Code. Well-informed faithful aren’t in any danger from it. Some of the danger lies in gullible non-Christians or non- Catholics falling for the historical inaccuracies in the book that Dan Brown presents as facts– many errors and negative stereotypes about Christianity, the CHurch and Opus Dei may be taken up by ignorant people, although a great deal has been done to conteract this, with some degree of success. This website is an excellent way to try and “accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative”; i.e., to have a little fun with the Davinci Code nonsense, point out its historical and doctrinal errors, discuss and argue about them, and even enjoy art and literature– check out Fr. John’s post “More on Holbein, Holbein on More”. Read some of the conversations and you’ll see they aren’t limited to TDVC, and even include our prayers and good wishes for each other– including those who disagree. I would say this evident sense of genuine community that has evolved among people who have many disagreements has been one of the most positive things about this blog.
Debstar,
Do you have any beliefs? Where do you find your “center”. With what yardstick do you measure your life, your actions, your thoughts, your dealings with people, etc?
As my catholic friends tell me, I live my life by morals and standards which are in essence, the ten commandments. I believe the most important thing is being a good considerate person, and always treating others as I would wish to be treated myself. (Hmmm, this would explain why I persist in being nice to the people who continue to treat me apallingly, but it¬¥s not in my nature to be rude to them). A very good catholic friend has told me that my continued “putting other people first” would make me an excellent catholic and that the only thing lacking in my life is God. Fair enough. But I don¬¥t feel the need to have religion as part of my life. In fact, I don¬¥t believe in organised religion. I believe religion (whether it exists for you or not) is a deeply private thing, and no one else¬¥s business. Therefore, if you CHOOSE to go to church and share it, fair enough, but I don¬¥t appreciate the door-knockers trying to convince me of what I should do. As long as I am treating my fellow planet-dwellers well (I am a major animal-lover) then I am doing the right thing.
I personally could´n´t care less if Jesus were married and had ten kids (don´t mean that to sound disrespectful, just proving a point) Рit wouldn´t change the fact that I would still prefer to suffer discomfort if it meant that someone else is happier. However, this website is not about me.
Which is why I don´t see the big fuss over a story book. Right now I am reading another Dan Brown РDigital Fortress, and I don´t see the US government going all out to prove the facts in the book wrong. Another excellent book by the way, Dan Brown has quite a head on his shoulders, to be able to create stories with so many twists. If it makes you feel better, try to read the books with an open mind to his great storytelling skills, not to hidden agendas. It certainly makes the books more enjoyable.
Interesting……..
“I believe the most important thing is being a good considerate person, and always treating others as I would wish to be treated myself.”
This is a very fine thins to believe, and a very fine yardstick to use for your actions. Where did you learn to behave like this? I’m a bit curious here. I’m not being sarcastic. This is a real question. Children do not enter a vacuum when they come into this world. They are taught either directly or by observance. How did you learn this very fine way of behaving?
Debstar– do you consider Catholics to be, as you put it, “door -knockers?” COuld you kindly explain the term?
Kind regards.
Usually when I am in Australia the door-knockers are Jehovah´s Witnesses, but here in South America where I live now, the ones that come around are definitely catholics. What do I need to explain? Рthey turn up at any given moment (here in SA Рin Australia they reserve it for weekends) brandishing magazines and talking about how god loves me and how their magazines will teach me so much about christ and faith. I know that most people just brush them off, but because of the way I was raised, it would be rude to interrupt, speak badly or close the door on someone.
My sister and I learned this behaviour from our mother Рa lovely kind non-religious person who taught us self-sacrifice. Often I feel frustrated about it, as we are often taken advantage of by less scrupulous people. But I can´t change it. In fact, through no fault of my own I now have a physical handicap and disfigurement and because of this self-sacrificing attitude the man who caused me this continues to live his life normally, working right outside my house, and laughing as I limp past him. But I can´t bring myself to feel vengeful or angry. Just frustrated and sad that his negligence has affected my life and the life of my partner so much. Well, at least I have plenty of time to read now. Which is how I came to read the Da Vinci Code.
The whole point of me writing here in this forum is not to insult anyone, nor to talk about myself. I am truly curious to know how life would change for religious people IF facts from the DVC were found to be true? If your faith is unswayable, and then you found out that JC was in fact married with children, which is a thing to be praised in this day and age, then would it really “turn you off”? Surely married with children is better than unmarried with children. Why is celibacy so important? Why can one not be married to the church AND to a partner? It almost makes the church sound like a jealous lover that blocks out the existence of its rival. Again, I am not meaning to insult, I am just stating how it sounds, and then looking for the answers of people with more knowledge of this than me.
Wow, Debstar– in my experience (North America) it isn’t Catholics who are ‘door knockers’ which is why I was momentarily confused by the term in the context of comments you seemed to be making about the Catholic church.
I am Catholic myself, and was always taught that we don’t bang on doors; rather, we become friends with people and invite them gently if they seem interested, and if not, then we still remain loyal friends.
It sounds like you have much more patience with “door knockers” than I’ve got– I am usually much more abrupt!
I am sorry that you have suffered a great deal. I will definitely pray for you– and I do think your attitude is wonderful and quite an example to us all. I don’t have time right now to address all the questions you have about celibacy but stick with the blog and I am sure others will.
Hi Debstar,
Thanks for answering my questions. I didn’t mean to have you talk about yourself. I meant to try and get more of an understanding of “where you are coming from”. If you were raised and instructed in a certain religion, even perhaps Catholic, but decided to no longer practice your faith, this would put your questions in a different light from one who has lived as you have. Answering the questions you ask require a bit of knowledge concerning your knowledge of religion.
These questions have been covered in some form elsewhere on this blog, but I will try and do two things: 1. Point you to the previously answered questions and 2. Try and answer for you in particular as best I can. Bear with me. At the moment I have a house full of children (including neighbors whose parents are working) who are out of school for the summer.
However, I personally have a passion for answering questions such as yours, as I myself was not born Catholic, in fact early in my life, I thought the Catholice church was to be avoided. Fortunately I went looking on my own, and was not harassed into it, so I arrived at what I believe to be the truth fairly easily.
In any event, your mother seems like a wonderful person and I would say you are blessed to have her.
Debstar and all you who “lurk” curiously,
In order for you to be able to understand the answer to your questions, you need to first understand the most important truth for Christians – the fact that God exists. Note: You don’t need to believe in his existence in order to at least be able to follow the Christian argument – but you do need to intelligently understand where we are coming from. Before I point you to what I think will answer your questions, you need a little foundational understanding. Try reading this first: These are proofs of God’s existence:
http://members.aol.com/plweiss1/aquinas.htm
Good Night – see you tomorrow I hope!
Brenda, thankyou for the web addy. I find this all so interesting, and my intent is not to prove or disprove, but rather to understand.
I had a look, but it struck me as a mistake for Aquinas to say that things cannot move themselves. Things are constantly moving themselves – atoms, molecules, etc, are always moving, picking up energies from surrounding atoms, controlled by magnetic fields. The best example I can give is of Free Radicals. Essentially a molecule of oxygen which has been split, usually due to the effect of the sun. Instead of being O2, it is simply 0. The magnetic energies in the simple 0 cause it to move around, looking for a partner – another molecule which has been left as a simple 0. However, it will collide with many other molecules first, in its search for its partner, causing damage to these molecules and leaving a trail of destruction. Which is why they say that Free Radicals are bad.
Ok, so I realise that my example is probably way off track with the Da Vinci Code, but I give it as just one of the reasons why I cannot agree with Aquinas. Plus, his are theories, not proofs. If I handed a paper like that in at university, I would fail for providing theories without back-up. My point here being that if people are accepting one mans theories as truths, is that why the church is so afraid of the Da Vinci Code? That lesser-educated people will accept it as truth?
Hello debstar, but you confirm yourself what Aquinas says! You write, “…picking up energies from surrounding atoms, controlled by magnetic fields”, … precisely. Aquinas’ point is that in all these movements, none of these objects is the originator of the initial force that moved it. It was moved either by a previous object, a force (magnetic field), etc. The molecule of oxygen as you say was split by … the Sun (not on its own). So, according to Aquinas, if you keep going back in time, you would have to reach an initial MOVER who began all the movement, but was itself never moved … that is God! Do you see it?
Debstar, I’m glad to hear you thinking. As I pointed out before, I can’t “make” belief, but I do hope to at least have you understand where Catholics are “coming from. My husband, PTT, wanted me to point out to you that the link I provided was a simplified version of sections of the “Summa Theologica” of Aquinas. If and when you’re up for more in debth reading, you can find it here:
As I stated before, the questions you asked are complex and cannot be answered without background….and so….onward and forward with the next step towards undersanding it all:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p7.htm
Hope to hear from you soon! Good night and good day, etc.
Oops, the link for additional Aquinas should you desire to read it is here:
http://www.ccel.org/a/aquinas/summa/FP/FP002.html#FPQ2A3THEP1
Actually, I left it off on purpose, as Father John W.’s program would hold my post for moderation with more than one web link.
Hi Debstar,
I haven’t forgotten you. The summer deays have been full of activity and preparation. I’m leaving today for a biennial family reunion. I’ll continue with links for you to explore when I return, and hopefully I will have time to write something up that will finally answer your question. In the meantime, I wanted to leave you with a thought and a suggestion.
If you’ve read any of the second link, you’lll have noticed that the “unmoved mover” is loving Father. You will also have noticed that at the beginning of human history, “man” cut himself of from that loving Father. Look at it this way, when that early rebellion took place, we were plunged into a darkened room, unable to see. We can now each of us have the switch turned on so that we can see, but only if we choose. I have firsthand experience of this and I know others who have as well. It required two things: 1. That you simply ask to see and 2. That you keep your “eye” only so that you can see.
For me, one night I asked God to send me answers and withing the fortnight I had them. With one of my friends, he found himself drowning. Since he was an atheist, he spoke to God in this way. “I know I don’t believe in you, but if you are there, I could use your help about now.” According to him, he was then deposited into shallow water by two large strong fellows who had appeared from nowhere.
If you take even one little step towards Him, He’s going to pick you up and carry you the final way. You have to be sincere, though, and you have to keep your eyes and mind open. My experience also is that you won’t ever be sorry and that more peace and joy than you can ever imagine will follow.
There is one catch, however – He won’t ever force himself on you. Freedom for his creatures is essential, so essential, that He does allow us to even walk away if we choose. I hope you don’t choose that in the end.
Take care, I hope to hear from you again.at some point. I’m gone for one week.
Sorry about all the misspelled words and other erros! A 5:00 a.m. post followed by a late night of packing combined with the small space here to type have rendered me illliterate.
Hope you’re still around, Debstar– I will pray for you at Mass today.
Hi, yes I´m still here. A little sidetracked with the floods sweeping this country right now, and craving some sun. I feel that this will be the last week of screening of the Da Vinci Code at the cinema here, as it is only on at 11pm each day. A pity, as I wouldn´t have minded seeing it again, to go over how the film dealt with the religious issues, as compared to the book. But I can´t go out in the heavy rain due to my bad leg, especially at night. I´d love to get hold of a copy of Angels and Demons Рapparently the Da Vinci Code is its sequel. Has anyone read it?
Oh, my, debstar– I hope your house hasn’t suffered any water damage?
We’re having a lot of rain here, too. Had a little flooding in our basement (nothing to speak of, no damage).
Good night, then.
Debstar– I don’t know about Angels and Demons– I’ve not read it. Maybe someone else here has?
You mentioned being interested in how Davinci Code deals with religious issues– you may be interested in reading a backgrounder that points out many of its mistakes in theology, history, art, etc. in order to understand why many people strongly dislike the book, even though it seems to be a good “page turner”. It’s on the website http://www.mercatornet.com . On the left there is a link to this backgrounder.
The sun has finally come out here (after 3 days). Has it stopped raining for you?
Well, I can’t help saying it, but I’m glad you were able to save your money for a better movie than DVC. I don’t say this in a negative tone, but as a movie-buff. Also, if you take a little ‘stroll’ through earlier posts on the blog, you may find them quite interesting. Happy browsing!
(So Sandra, how’s Germany recovering from post-World Cup withdrawal? It amazes me I still have to convince these guys at work that soccer is actually fun to watch. They thought soccer will take a long time to become popular (well, at least as popular as American football) because it’s too ‘slow’ to watch, the goal should be wider bc “why are there so few goals!?”, etc., etc., etc. Mind-boggling.)
Hi Debstar,
The kids are asleep, I’m watching the late news and thinking of you. It’s been a busy summer, but you have been on my mind every day. My computer was sick and needed a new hardrive. Today’s news is difficult to understand. Consider the following: Just yesterday a child brought up the fact that God gives faith to all so that they can believe. How can this be right, she wanted to know. There are people who don’t believe in God. Freedom, I told her, capacity and freedom. I noted that she has two hands and so has the capacity to learn a musical instrument – if she so chooses – freedom. So it is with faith – freedom.
Today many must be wondering how God can let people treat each other so badly. The answer is still the same – freedom. We are not little puppets, dangling on the ends of strings controlled by God. Innocent people get hurt, it’s so unfair, you might think. Not really, unless you don’t believe in eternity.
Yesterday also, I was in a Day of Recollection given by a priest who had lived with Saint Josemaria. He was speaking about time. One thing he noted is that compared with eternity, the small amount of time we have here on earth is so small. It’s something like a few inches, maybe when measured on the vast timeline of eternity. God, he noted has an eternity to compensate each of us.
When you think of this, you can know that a loving father has so many wonderful things prepared for those who have suffered here, whether voluntarily or innocently – marvelous experiences that will never, ever end.
I’ll try to fulfill my promise to you before the weekend is over. Take care.
Hi Debstar – maybe you are no longer watching. In any event, this is part I. I looked up the posts related to your questions and they are as follows: 1. Above – #219 (May 25 – 12:15), also 287 – 289 & 292, 295. 2. follow this link : http://davincicode-opusdei.com/?p=115
# 149 (6/5 at 7:16) #178 &178, #251 – 266
I’ll write up something later to try and tie it all together. Also keep in mind that the Mary spoken about here is the Mother of Jesus, not Mary Magdalene.
Good Night.
Debstar – Part II
You wanted to know how things would change for “religious” people if the events in the Davinci Code were found to be true. The short answer is that there would be no Church if the events in the DaVinci Code were found to be true. Usually I have an analogy, but today I don’t have one – there just isn’t one to be had for so important a subject. I’ll just try to explain as best I can and pray to be understood. If I make any errors, Fr. John will correct me, I hope! Fr. John answered your question in #288 (July 5 at 9:03 a.m.) My guess is that without a background in Catholicism, his answer would be meaningless. He spoke about 1) The Nature of Christ and 2) Christian Revelation.
1) The Nature of Christ:
There is only one God. We speak of God’s Nature as being Divine. There is only one Divine Nature, God’s. There are however, three persons in that one Divine nature – this is what we refer to as the Holy Trinity, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is the second person of the Trinity – the Son. There is only one God and they have all existed from all eternity. Saint Patrick of Ireland is famous for illustrating the Trinity with a Shamrock (three leafed clover).
2) Christian Revelation: We know about the Trinity and most things about God because He revealed them to us. There are some things that are written on our hearts, but certain things were revealed by God over the ages. Christ did a lot of the revealing for us and of course the Father helped out a bit – all three did of course. I think particularly of certain miracles surrounding Christ during his first years on this planet. This “revealing” is where the term “Christian Revelation” comes from.
Note: There are many persons with a human nature. As I mentioned above – there is however only one divine nature with three persons therein – The Holy Trinity.
What does this all have to do with the Davinci Code? That answer is coming up next.
Forl reference, this is a betler link than #301(July 9th – 1:39 a.m.)
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc/index.htm
You can choose your own language and there is now a Compendeum – a quicker read. the full version is also there for more in debth study.
During the readings of the Holy Mass today – the Feast of the Assumption – it was hard not to be struck by a couple of questions that I probably should have included in this Da Vinci Code Catechism.
9. Are Christians really the children of some sacred feminine figure?
Yes. “Then a great sign was seen in the sky – a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon beneath her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. She was pregnant and was crying out in the pangs of childbirth… She gave birth to a son, a male child who will rule all the nations with an iron rod, but the child was snatched up to God and His throne…. The dragon was enraged with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring – those who keep God’s commandments and accept the testimony of Jesus.” (Rev. 12:1-2, 5, 17)
10. Is that sacred feminine figure Mary or the Church?
Yes.