We all argue with God in some manner whether it is a matter of internal argument within our conscience or publicly in regards to what He said, meant or omitted. At the least this is our fallback position when confronted with those Truths that are etched upon our souls; for they are not unreadable and yet we tend to make them decipherable in accordance to our desires and temperament.
These truths are often covered with the dust of our neglect and the grime of our sins. Yet at a deeper level, we all know they exist and we all know that we are fighting against an objective reality that is unbending though it remains but a gentle, nagging, lingering doubt pushed aside and thrust downward; but it seems always able to emerge in some small annoying way to disturb the soul’s tranquility.
Sin is said to be a turning of…
View original post 1,070 more words
Servus Fidelis ~ The Faithful Servant 
Servus, I have a question, so I have been discussing Thomas Aquinas with an Evangelical. Catherine of Siena was then brought up when I was able to counter why Aquinas denied the Immaculate Conception. The evangelical claims that Mary appeared to her and denied the immaculate conception. I’m unaware of the event, I’m sure there is an explanation m, I didn’t know If you anything on the topic?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Never heard any such things in regard to Catherine of Siena and had it happened I would be very surprised if we didn’t hear this constantly. This is the first I have ever heard of this argument.
Secondly, although Aquinas did argue against those who at the time said that either before she was conceived or sometime after Mary was born she was given a speceal grace which took away original sin. He was never involved with evaluating the theological idea of the immaculate conception other than to say that the present notions were incorrect and in a way his objections led indirectly to the theological answer that was determined later; that Mary was immaculately conceived at the precises moment of conception . . . not before and not after. Aquinas was right though he only opposed the wrong theology which led to the answer.
LikeLike
Apparently there was a vision by Catherine of Siena that seemed to deny this. But saints are often confused or wrong in their understanding of what is being given to them in revelation. The incident is mentioned in this article by Fr. Most:
https://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/DISSPR.TXT
LikeLike
I was reading on Catholc.com forum and apparently this vision wasn’t recorded by Raymund of Capua, which indicates it was a creation of a later date.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. I can find no primary for source for this statement. It seems to be an “it is said” type of idea. Not even a quote is cited anywhere that I’ve looked.
LikeLike
Interesting enough, I was commenting on Transubstantiation and Thomas Aquinas on that blog that pops up Excatholic4Christ. The evangelical instead of debating Aquinas on the grounds of the Eucharist decided to pull the red herring to claim that since the Church has decided that Aquinas was wrong on the Immaculate Conception all of his theology has been called into question.
When articulated that the theology of Original Sin wasn’t fully formulated during Aquinas’ time; therefore, he is still in good standing with the Church, the Evangelical pulled out the Catherine of Siena alleged comment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed the most favored theology at the time was that of Duns Scotus but Aquinas said that it was a faulty idea; and indeed it turned out to be.
LikeLike
I should have said that since Duns Scotus did not write about this until after the death of Thomas that Thomas was fighting the thought that influenced Scotus.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honestly, Evangelicals frustrate me more than Atheist.
LikeLiked by 1 person
After going by memory let me lead you to this: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm
Apparently, Scotus was able to get past the Aquinas objections and led to the eventual dogma.
LikeLike
Thanks for the source, I forgot about Luke’s use of the word kecharitomene. Is this the only time he uses the world? I remember the tense being past, present, and future.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Servus, so remember I am working on my certification as a Catechist. Now in my class, they are teaching there was no such event as the sermon of the mount. Matthew mostly likely made it up from a collection of sayings and for typological references. Books written by Fulton Sheen are wrong attempting to write a biographical account–even though Benedict XVI rejected these ideas by his books. I even quoted Benedict’s book claiming that he believes that there was a historical event on a mount.
Most–wait, no, all of the students– so far are agreeing with this Theologian named Brennan R. Hill Ph.D. that it wasn’t a likely event that the only things that matters is the spiritualism of the message. I said wait a minute, how is what we’re teaching different from previous Christological heresies, for example, Docetism? Of course, more support comes in for the feel-good image of Christ the Guru. I said historical events of God (Sacred) becoming man (profane) do matter for our salvation. The other students just don’t get it. The moderator hasn’t even attempted to clarify or correct.
What are your thoughts? I am deeply concerned…
LikeLike
Philip, my friend, it looks like you are in the care of the progressive elites that were trained and educated by the IAF in the manipulation of groups into their own way of thinking; by use of the Delphi Technique especially. Bernardin’s boys, especially Msgr. Jack Egan was instrumental. They gave us Call to Action, We Are Church and and Small Faith Communities. They own many liberal Catholic courses in theology etc. It may be worth finishing the course as it is more of education of them than it is of being a Catechist. Then when you are one, you might actually have to teach the True Faith rather than their garbage. Your faith will be tried, my friend, but stay alert and ask God for fortitude. I am going out to walk my dog. I will write you at your email and include a few pdf books for your edification on who the groups are that spawned all of this mess and how they are alive and well and actually thriving . . . even after all the work of JPII and BXVI.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you, very much.
It must have been the Holy Spirit’s work that before I took the class I felt a call to read many of the works of Pope Benedict XVI, as I am quoting his works right and left to dispel this rhetoric. I only wait for when someone stands openly against Father Benedict.
LikeLiked by 1 person
More likely, they will make you think that you are a fundamentalist kook and need to understand the new Church. They sound much like the type that thinks the Jesus Seminar folk were the brightest bunch that ever gathered together.
LikeLike
Man, this is irony to me! I think of myself a moderate really, but to these folks will think I’m a fundamentalist.
I suppose if they want to give me a nickname, they might as well just choose Inquisitor! haha.
Am I to suppose that Daniel J. Harrington was liberal? It appears he was a Jesuit and wrote for America Magazine.
LikeLiked by 1 person
. . . and as I say was the president of Call to Action or ACTA as they are known in the UK.
LikeLike
Wait, Harrington was also a president?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Indeed so. 🙂
LikeLike
Thanks for the advice in the email.
Wow, honestly, I feel so very alone that I’m the only one who has questioned the material. My academic education just kicked in and when I saw the patterns contradict BXVI, I went to investigate the authors biases, I never thought I’d take a Catechist course that was so very not Catholic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Welcome to the real world; the battle between good and evil is very real and amongst us. It is not simply passive . . . it is quite active if you have the eyes to see and the ears to hear. That’s the battle we wage everyday even when we don’t want to. But God put us each here for a reason and you need to decide if you accept the battles your given. Spiritual warfare is not glamorous and it becomes more internal than external. Keep the faith, my friend.
LikeLike