Re: [mythsoc] Re: Landscape With Dragons revisited
Thanks for the clarification! My mistake for using
"revelation" in an imprecise manner. Mea culpa!
--- "Carl F. Hostetter" <Aelfwine@...> wrote:
> On Sep 5, 2006, at 1:54 PM, jef.murray wrote:
> > This is simply because Catholicism, unlike
> Christian fundamentalism,
> > does not insist that all truth is contained in
> This much is true, after a fashion. More
> specifically, the Church
> does not (as the Apostles and the Church Fathers did
> not) treat
> Scripture and Tradition as two separate things, but
> rather as one
> whole deposit of Faith, with the latter guiding the
> interpretation of the former.
> > In Catholicism, there is ongoing revelation
> through the teachings
> > of the
> > church (e.g., encyclicals and other documents
> approved by the church
> > Magesterium) and through the writings and teaching
> of saints
> > throughout the ages.
> This is false. The Church has always taught that
> Revelation was
> completed with the death of the last Apostle:
> From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
> "There will be no further Revelation
> 66 "The Christian economy, therefore, since it is
> the new and
> definitive Covenant, will never pass away; and no
> new public
> revelation is to be expected before the glorious
> manifestation of our
> Lord Jesus Christ."
> What DOES continue through the Church, as guided by
> the Holy Spirit,
> is the discernment and interpretation of deposit of
> Faith with which
> Christ entrusted His Church. Again from the CCC:
> "Yet even if Revelation is already complete, it has
> not been made
> completely explicit; it remains for Christian faith
> gradually to
> grasp its full significance over the course of the
> The Church does recognize the validity of SOME
> private revelations,
> e.g. validated Marian apparitions, but the key word
> is PRIVATE: they
> are not binding in any way on the faithful. CCC:
> "67 Throughout the ages, there have been so-called
> revelations, some of which have been recognized by
> the authority of
> the Church. They do not belong, however, to the
> deposit of faith. It
> is not their role to improve or complete Christ's
> Revelation, but to help live more fully by it in a
> certain period of
> history. Guided by the Magisterium of the Church,
> the sensus fidelium
> knows how to discern and welcome in these
> revelations whatever
> constitutes an authentic call of Christ or his
> saints to the Church.
> Christian faith cannot accept "revelations" that
> claim to surpass or
> correct the Revelation of which Christ is the
> > The Catholic world looks for understanding of
> > complex situations through prayer and discernment.
> And its
> > understanding of God's revelations to man can and
> does change over
> > time, albeit generally in nuance, not in the basic
> tenets of the
> > church.
> True. The Church refers to this as development
> (i.e., of
> understanding, and so of doctrine). The classical
> analogy is of a oak
> growing from an acorn, but being at all times an
> oak; it does not
> suddenly become a beech, and thus change.
> Off topic, I know, but I don't want a fairly serious
> error to stand
...exploring the boundaries between worlds...
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
- Hello fellows:
I've been off-list for some time. One reason is that
I've been looking after an early Mythopoeic personage,
Jon Lackey. He was the producer of the "Greater
Trumps" masque that was mounted at
the second Mythcon in 1971. He had been in ill health
for much of this previous year.
I'm sorry to report that he passed away on February
26th of cancer.
He was an enormous influence on my life, as well as
many others. He was involved with the very
first campaign to produce a film of "Rings" in 1957.
A major contributor to the SCA, LASFS, a tutor and
mentor to many, RenFair performer, artist, sculptor,
costumer, composer, and so much more.
Please pass this information on to anyone who might
have known him, and have them contact me
as regards a planned memorial.
Bonnie S. Callahan