 |
 |
Dear Jerome, There is a lot to be said for faith as it is lived that legalistic theology omits. My original point, before this turned into a Jesuitical exercise, was that Mary is a more powerful presence in the Catholic church than in Protestant religions, whether she is venerated or worshipped. Diana Sent from my iPod On Mar 9, 2010, at 4:02 PM, Jerome Walsh <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Diana, > > It is precisely my training in theology that enables me to know that > your claim is inaccurate, no matter how often it is parroted by both > well-meaning "defenders of orthodoxy" and by less well-meaning > detractors. Roman Catholic dogma is MUCH more conditioned than > that. When I was studying theology, the formulation was that the > Pope spoke infallibly when he taught (1) ex cathedra (2) on a matter > of faith and morals (3) that was contained in revelation and (4) was > to be held by all believers. (1) A statement at a general audience > is not "ex cathedra." (2) A noun phrase like "devotione > mariale" (or whatever his original text was) is not a teaching; it's > a noun phrase. (3) There's no basis in scripture (and little in > tradition) that supports "worship" of Mary in the technical sense. > (4) The Pope's remarks were not presented as "teaching to be > accepted by all believers." So, in no way whatsoever does this > remark qualify as "infallible." > > Please give theology the respect it deserves as a careful, nuanced > system of thought. I try to do that for literary criticism and > learn from those whose understanding of the subject is deeper than > my own. > > Jerry > From: Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Tue, March 9, 2010 2:22:32 PM > Subject: Re: Christian Belief in Eliot's Pre-conversion Poetry > > Jerome, since you profess theological expertise perhaps it is > unnecessary to remind you that all Catholics are required by the > catechism to accept that "the Pope cannot err in matters of faith > and morals." So that when a Pope establishes Mary worship there is > no arguing with it. > > I don't think it's I who have missed the point. Marian WORSHIP is > what Pope Paul II established, not veneration. > > Diana > > Diana, > > Really, Diana, you miss the point sometimes. Worship of Mary is > worship. Veneration of Mary is not. > > "Worship," in theology, is a technical term (just as "progressive > present tense" is in grammatical discourse). No Christian communion > I am aware of (including the Catholic, in which I have some > theological expertise) "worships" Mary. Some Christian communions > "venerate" (another technical term) her, as your source says. Some > individual Christians no doubt venerate her in ways that are > virtually indistinguishable from their worship of God, but to > attribute their idiosyncratic (and theologically untenable) practice > to a Church as a whole is simply wrong. > > If, on the other hand, it is not your intention to use "worship" as > it is used in theology, then please define the term so that we > understand what you are claiming. > > Jerry Walsh > > > From: DIana Manister <[log in to unmask]> > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Tue, March 9, 2010 10:43:54 AM > Subject: Re: Christian Belief in Eliot's Pre-conversion Poetry > > Really Peter you are tiresome sometimes. Worship of Mary is worship. > > See below. > > Diana > > A mother figure is a central object of worship in several religions > (for example, images of the Virgin and Child call to mind Egyptian > representations of Isis nursing her son Horus). The history of the > Virgin Mary, mother of Jesus Christ, depends on the texts of the > Gospels. Embellishments to her legend seem to have taken form in the > fifth century in Syria. The life of the mother of Christ was > exceptional: she was born free of original sin (21.168), through the > Immaculate Conception; she was taken to heaven after her death (17.190.132 > ); and, just as Saint Thomas doubted Christ's Resurrection, so he > doubted Mary's Assumption. Theologians established a parallel > between Christ's Passion and the Virgin's compassion: while he > suffered physically on the cross, she was crucified in spirit. The > Council of Ephesus in 431 sanctioned the cult of the Virgin as > Mother of God; the dissemination of images of the Virgin and Child, > which came to embody church doctrine, soon followed. > > http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/virg/hd_virg.htm > > Since the first century, devotion to the Virgin Mary has been a > major element of the spiritual life of a vast number of Christians, > primarily in Catholicism. From the Council of Ephesus in 431 to > Vatican II and Pope John Paul II's encyclical Redemptoris Mater, the > Virgin Mary has come to be seen not only as the Mother of God but > also as the Mother of the Church, a Mediatrix who intercedes to > Jesus Christ and even a proposed Co-Redemptrix. > > The key role of the Virgin Mary in the beliefs of many Christians, > her veneration, and the growth of Mariology have not only come about > by the Marian writings of the saints or official statements but have > often been driven from the ground up, from the masses of believers, > and at times via reported Marian apparitions, miracles and healings. > http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blessed_Virgin_Mary?wasRedirected=true > > > > Sent from my iPod > > On Mar 9, 2010, at 3:53 AM, Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > > The Catholic Church does not worship Mary, nor does it consider her as > having anything of a divine nature. One of the very early councils > of the > Church, I think the one in Nicea, defined Jesus Christ as both God and > man in an inseparable union, and to affirm that, indicated that Mary > gave > birth to the entire person of Jesus, both divine and human, so the > calling > of her to be the Mopther of God is a singular assertion of Christ's > nature. > Mary is honoured or venerated in a very special way, but to say she is > worshipped would be to assert a heresy. > > As I understand it, the Anglicans do subscribe to the same doctrines > of that early council. > > Your highschool religious education is singularly lacking, it would > seem, > Diana. > > Peter > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Diana Manister > To: [log in to unmask] > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 6:16 AM > Subject: Re: Christian Belief in Eliot's Pre-conversion Poetry > > Dear David, > > Worship of the Virgin Mary as nearly the fourth person of the > Blessed Trinity is absent from Anglicanism. There are many other > differences, such as confession made to a priest, but the Mother of > God is a biggie. The Catholic church decided to incorporate Mary > when efforts to ban Mary-worship failed. > > Diana > > Sent from my iPod > > On Mar 8, 2010, at 2:45 AM, David Boyd <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > CR > > At risk of being pedantic, don't think TSE ever converted to > 'catholicism' > > He converted to the established Church of England, to the 'High > Church / Anglo-Catholic' faction within it, but still to Protestant > Anglicanism, as opposed to Roman Catholicism. > > Theology isn't my interest, but believe there are fundamental > cultural and theological differences here, not least Papal > authority / infallibility. > > Not to mention female priests ! > > In reality, it's all the spectrum of the very 'broad' Anglican > Church - at one end, the Pope has sought to entice the Anglo- > Catholics back to the Vatican fold, but at the other 'Low Church' > end, this notion would be unthinkable. > > And culturally, this does still matter a lot - just look at Northern > Ireland and its troubles, for example. > > > > > > On 7 March 2010 17:18, Nancy Gish <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > He grew up in a religious Christian home. That is known. No one > has said otherwise. That is not the issue. It is a fact that at > Harvard he attended Buddhist meetings and studied Eastern > philosophy, but he did not become a Buddhist. What is there to > demonstrate about his early Christian milieu that anyone denies? > Nancy > > >>> Chokh Raj 03/07/10 11:32 AM >>> > > Dear Listers, > > In the posts that follow, I intend taking up Eliot's preoccupation > with Christian thought and imagery in the poetry he chose to publish > before his formal conversion to Catholicism. What fascinates is the > fervence, ardor and earnestness that he brings to bear upon his > treatment of them. To me it is here, more than anywhere else, that > one can trace the poet's essential rootedness in Christian belief. > > Regards, > CR > > > > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. Get it now.