« first day (4416 days earlier)      last day (157 days later) » 

HNQ
2:08 AM
2
Q: Early Church Fathers' Commentary on Luke 10:16

Prosper des GaretsAccording to Wiki: The Church Fathers, Early Church Fathers, Christian Fathers, or Fathers of the Church were ancient and influential Christian theologians and writers who established the intellectual and doctrinal foundations of Christianity. The historical period in which they worked became kn...

 
 
2 hours later…
HNQ
3:48 AM
2
Q: Defintion(s) of Faith in the Bible?

Prosper des GaretsAccording to Heb. 11:1-5 (D-R): Now faith is the substance of things to be hoped for, the evidence of things that appear not. Does the Bible offer what may be considered to be a definition of faith elsewhere in either the New Testament or the Old Testament?

 
 
10 hours later…
1:59 PM
-3
Q: Holy Spirit, coincidence or divinely?

Wandering guide.Can the Holy Spirit be proven scientifically by the testimony of divine intervention, Be it by grace or by faith? Every month I get a spark of life from my Spirit. It guides me to events that affirm my souls wondering searches. I could see it delvinginto the realm of acute schizophrenic delusion....

 
2:43 PM
1
Q: Reconiciling Statements Rav Cook made about other Religions

BenyaminThe introduction to the book "Abraham Isaac Kook - The Lights of Penitence, Lights of Holiness, The Moral Principles, Essays, Letters, and Poems", states that Rav Cook was positive toward other religions, and includes direct quotes in support of this. These include: We must clarify the common el...

 
 
2 hours later…
5:07 PM
@PeterTurner While on Mary as Mother of the Church, have you heard of Hugo Rahner, SJ, who turns out to be Karl Rahner's brother ! Reading Wikipedia it turns out his 1944 re-discovery of how Ambrose of Milan interpreted Mary as Mother of the church is extremely influential for the framers of Second Vatican Council (including Cardinal Ratzinger) and the subsequent Catechism.
The Wikipedia section on Hugo Rahner's Mariology is a good summary of his thesis linking tightly ecclesiology and Mariology, which Ratzinger adopted and which seems to continue being reaffirmed in the Magisterium per Pope Francis's 2015 homily quote.
For this purpose I plan to read his only book translated to English: Our Lady and the church, republished 2004 with Ratzinger's endorsement in the cover: "This marvelous work is one of the most important theological rediscoveries of the twentieth century". A quote from the book's Foreword (the book was written in 1961 shortly after the 1950 dogmatic declaration of the Assumption of Mary by Pope Pius XII):
> The most important formative element in Catholic piety today is probably the newly-found understanding of the lifegiving power of our holy mother the Church in her sacraments and her liturgy. But at the same time there have been during the last hundred years such remarkable dogmatic developments, bring out ever more clearly the place of our Lady in the system of Catholic thought. ...
> It is the purpose of this book to collect and unite these ideas. We must learn to see the Church in our Lady, and in our Lady the Church. The two mysteries are most intimately connected, and a deeper understanding of both together will bring us to realize better the meaning of grace in our souls and proress in the spiritual life.
> ...
> ...The whole life of our Lady, from her Immaculate Conception to her glorious Assumption, thus appears as a symbol of the whole life of the Church and of our own spiritual lives. The history of the Church begins in the womb of the Virgin Mary, and within the Church is the fulfillment of our own and the world's eternal vocation, when the divine Redeemer lifted the curse from fallen nature. ...
> ... When therefore ... Pope Pius XII proclaims in the presence of the whole Church that the body of the virgin mother, from which God was born, was taken up to heaven, it is no more than a confirmation of the doctrine of the Church previously given in the encyclical on the Mystical Body of Christ. And we might here summarize the thought of the pages that follow in a single quotation from a medieval mystic who was still steeped in the spirit of Augustine and the early Church.
> > Christ is one, and one alone: head and body. He is one: Son of the one Father in heaven, son of the one Mother on earth: two sonships, but one son. The head and members are more than one, yet one son: so Mary and the Church are two, yet one single mother, two virgins and yet one. Each is mother, each is virgin.
> > Both conceived by the same Spirit, without human seed. Both bore to God the Father a child unblemished. The one, without sin, gave birth to Christ's body, the other restored His body through the power of the remission of sins. Both are the Mother of Christ, but neither can bring Him to brith without the other.
> > Thus it is that in the inspired Scriptures, what is said in the widest sense of the Virgin Mother the Church, is said in a special sense of the Virgin Mary. And what is spoken of the Virgin Mother Mary in a personal way, can rightly be applied in a general way to the Virgin Mother the Church.
> > But every faithful soul is in a sense the bride of the Word of God, the Mother of Christ, His daughter and His sister, virgin yet a mother. And moreoever whatever is said of God's eternal wisdom itself, can be applied in a wide sense to the Church, in a narrower sense to Mary, and in a particular way to every faithful soul.
> Quote source: Isaac of Stella, Sermo 51 on the Assumption (PL 194, 1863)
 
5:47 PM
A more complete excerpt of Isaac of Stella's Sermon 51 can be read here.
@PeterTurner I'm curious whether you have additional readings along the lines of Hugo's book. Skimming through the first few chapters gave me the key to understand the importance place that Catholics give to Mary's Immaculate Conception and Assumption since all believers are currently being purified to collectively become the spotless bride of Christ (aka the church). As member of the Church it makes sense that Mary becomes a model for us in how we carry the Trinitarian life within us.
 
6:04 PM
@GratefulDisciple A book I just got, which is a good help to me - and short - is a compilation excerpts of John Henry Newman's homilies and writings on Mary broken down by the different dogmas. From what I read, the most ancient feeling about Our Lady is that she is the "second Eve". This book has copious quotes linking Mary to Eve. The book is called "Mary: The Second Eve" from TAN books
Do Protestants generally accept her as the Mother of God and the Second Eve (simply on account of the Church fathers?)
 
@PeterTurner Thanks, but Cardinal Newman (d. 1890) wasn't privy to Hugo's finding in 1944 and his further elaboration in his 1961 book which parallels the Magisterial doctrinal development in 2nd half of 20th century. If you come across post mid 20th century books, please let me know. I think you will like Hugo's book; Avery Dulles has high praise for it too.
On second thoughts, I'll read "Mary: The Second Eve" too.
 
6:19 PM
@GratefulDisciple the only recent (post Vatican II) book I've read about Mary is one by the Grand Knight of the Knights of Columbus about Our Lady of Guadalupe. I think the thing that is bigger than reading, is the testimony of people who credit her intercession with their vocations. I honestly haven't heard of a lot of people crediting her with their conversions; unless it was a mother who prayed to her for her child's reversion.
BTW, have you ever read the Divine Comedy? (that's what I've been working through for the last 6 months or so)
 
@PeterTurner Thanks, that book seems useful to learn about how Marian devotion looks like on the ground. Hugo's book is more about theology and patristic support.
@PeterTurner I haven't, but of course I want to read it. I'm in the middle of finding the right translation for me and collecting secondary materials to orient me to the historical period, the literary elements, good commentaries, good synopsis, etc.
 
@GratefulDisciple yep, that's it - can't remember why I read it, maybe it was just the one Catholic book they had at the library
 
BTW I misread you. You're commenting that testimonies of people are bigger than reading :-).
 
John Ciardi's translation of the Divine Comedy is very good. I haven't read other ones, but there are some notes in the preface why the others aren't quite as good - especially the illustrated ones which kind of give people the wrong impression; at least not an impression that is as good as the poetry
 
6:37 PM
@PeterTurner Thanks, I'll look for that translation.
Searching around, I came across a textbook on Poetry by John Ciardi, which maybe very helpful for me (who are somewhat new to poetry): How Does a Poem Mean, 2nd Ed (1975). There are a lot of good stuff on archive.org !
 
7:00 PM
Here are the links to 3 archive.org scans of Dante's Divine Comedy translated by John Ciardi published as MENTOR books (New American Library) between 1954-1970: The Inferno, The Purgatorio, and The Paradiso.
 
7:59 PM
@PeterTurner It's about time I learn to appreciate Poetry and John Ciardi's textbook seems to be just the right ticket. As a classical musician who also knows theory at a quite high level, I can certainly relate to how he describes my feelings as a performer when the masterclass professor reacted this way:
> Suppose a violin virtuoso had performed for the class and teacher commented on his playing in something like the terms of "How beautiful, how deep, how lofty!" The violinist would be left to bow and to smile inanely. He would certainly wish he were somewhere else, ideally among musicians with whom he could discuss bowing, fingering, tempo, tone, and the thousand managements of the instrument that make a beautiful performance possible. Musicians, too, "appreciate" music.
> But their appreciation is likely to be an unspoken premise beyond which they have much more specific things to say about the music.
(Here's a real life example of how a world class pianist András Schiff helps a high level pianist to become even better at her performance of Mozart Sonata No. 12 with the input starts at minute 15:10 )
(quote from Introduction, page xix)
 
 
2 hours later…
10:38 PM
@GratefulDisciple Interesting. Many Protestants, especially Reformed, would say the Church begins in Israel. If not that then probably Pentecost.
@PeterTurner Mother of God, yes, though I prefer God-bearer as it is a more accurate translation. Second Eve, no, I've never heard a Protestant use that description of Mary.
 

« first day (4416 days earlier)      last day (157 days later) »