| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Theologians | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Sunday, 17. January 2010, 01:59 (633 Views) | |
| Gerard | Sunday, 28. March 2010, 20:38 Post #61 |
|
PJD, Having just said it all seems the same to me I will have ago at answering. But i am using everyday meanings of these words and everyday understanding of how we describe these thing - not technical language. Actually, I had a little difficulty even recognising the involvement of the senses. What is involved is a loss in concentration - an aspect of mind. But if I take that as a sense (enjoyment in reading, or functioning of an ability) I still think it will be governed by will. The will wanted to be spiritual and allowed itself to be self deluded. What we would now describe as happening at the sub concious level. Another way I read the statements was that there was a genuine hightening of interest in things spiritual and fall of in interest in things secular which he was allowing to be exaggerated. I still think the will is in control perhaps at a sub concious level or even just by allowing the emotions to take the mind in the direction it wants it to go. Gerry |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Sunday, 28. March 2010, 20:58 Post #62 |
|
Actually, I spent too long on the differences and not enough time on the similarity - which is important. catholics tend to be very aware of the institutional but not the mystical or charismatic. particularly so in this age of reason. But then I am reminded that the inquisition was always nervous of the mystical so perhaps its not so much to do with reason as with the antipathy held by the institution to the charismatic/mystical. Wasnt a problem for Paul (or Peter) so I wonder when the tension set in? Probably early on. Gnostics? I wonder was Von Hugel saying something controversial? Pope JPII was saying something unusual in that statement - the statement is obious (I think) but it was unusual for a Pope to affirm the charismatic dimension. Gerry |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| PJD | Sunday, 28. March 2010, 21:10 Post #63 |
|
"antipathy held by the institution to the charismatic/mystical." Yes Gerry I will agree with that. PJD [St. John of The Cross was put into prison.] [St. Teresa of Avila had a hard time of it in relation to Church authorities.] |
![]() |
|
| tomais | Wednesday, 31. March 2010, 15:27 Post #64 |
|
It's a job. |
![]() |
|
| PJD | Wednesday, 31. March 2010, 16:58 Post #65 |
|
Unpaid here Tomais, and for you also PJD |
![]() |
|
| Anne-Marie | Wednesday, 23. February 2011, 16:25 Post #66 |
|
As you are aware, I have occasionally expressed less than adulatory remarks about theologians telling God what He thought and did - or, at any rate, what they think He should have thought and done! At the weekend, I just couldn't stop myself being amused when we were told from the Second Reading: The wisdom of this world is foolishness to God. The Lord knows wise men's thoughts: He knows how useless they are. God is not convinced by the arguments of the wise. (1 Corinthians, chapter 3) Rather put things in perspective, I thought! |
|
Anne-Marie FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Wednesday, 23. February 2011, 17:13 Post #67 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Anne-Marie, by the same logic, if we have no need to take notice of theologians, why accept that what St Paul writes is correct? Do you acknowledge that theologians had the wisdom to decide which writings were inspired by God? |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| CARLO | Wednesday, 23. February 2011, 18:12 Post #68 |
|
I think there are theologians and theologians. The great Doctors of the Church e.g. St Gregory the Great and St Theresa of Avila are of great standing and to be taken seriously. We can learn so much from them. However just because somebody has a Certificate in Theology today seems to qualify them to use the term 'Theologian' and to hold forth on all sorts of subjects. Many if not most Priests hold some certificate or other in theology, so do many laypeople. Personally I take with a great pinch of salt what modern day 'theologians' say - often they are doing little more than following the liturgical fashions of the day, or indeed of yesterday! Pax CARLO |
| Judica me Deus | |
![]() |
|
| PJD | Wednesday, 23. February 2011, 18:55 Post #69 |
|
"As you are aware, I have occasionally expressed less than adulatory remarks about theologians telling God what He thought and did - or, at any rate, what they think He should have thought and done!" Anne-Marie: I had to back-track a couple of pages because you resurrected this topic. Reading your remark above, for myself I became aware that the topic itself mixes up what one might call philosophy/metaphysics with theology. Myself being one of such. PJD [edit. I noticed e.g. Carlo kept strictly to theology] Edited by PJD, Wednesday, 23. February 2011, 18:56.
|
![]() |
|
| Anne-Marie | Wednesday, 23. February 2011, 19:27 Post #70 |
|
Quite possibly, Rose. It was just the Reading text combined with my thoughts that amused me. As you all know, I tend to avoid theology (theory) and focus on a relationship with God Reality), whom I do not pretend to be capable of understanding! |
|
Anne-Marie FIAT VOLUNTAS DEI | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Wednesday, 23. February 2011, 19:59 Post #71 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Were the epistles personal theories of the writers, or inspired the Word of God? |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Ned | Wednesday, 19. October 2011, 01:58 Post #72 |
|
I went along to Heythrop College on Friday and listened to the three theologians - Paul Knitter, Gavin D'Costa and Dan Strange - debate "Only One Way In ?" - http://www.heythrop.ac.uk/research/centre-for-christianity-and-interreligious-dialogue/events/past-events.html It was thought-provoking but somewhat depressing. I keep on thinking of Paul Knitter - have a look at http://vimeo.com/21158614 He's a very modest and humble man. He was a Divine Word Missionary, but with the demeanour of a Jesuit (He'd been a student at a Jesuit establishment, and had also taught for many years at a Jesuit institution.). He's very approachable and I had a little chat with him in the lunch hour. There's no doubting his strong personal integrity. He's a buddhist, and he sees himself as a Christian Buddhist. But what I want to know is this: How can it be that people can be accepted for seminaries, and then for ordination, and then be assigned as theologians, who does not believe with every fibre of their being that really, actually, and uniquely - rather than figuretively and metaphorically - Jesus was the Son of God? |
![]() |
|
| The Searcher | Thursday, 20. October 2011, 02:29 Post #73 |
|
Hi Ned Thank you for the link to Miceal Ledwith, L.Ph., L.D., D.D., LL.D I not only watched the first 10 minutes of this video i took notice of the credits, and i was at first amazed at his tolerance for the obscure and the esoteric,; but theologians absolutetly must tread the boundaries of belief in an independant study similar to scientific study because their workplace like the scientists is IDEAS, a sure and certain GIFT of God. I feel sad that a man of obvious intellectual talent should be thrown into an environment which is beneath his intellectual stature but at the same time i realise these are the cards that are dealt to him and as a player he must improvise what else can he do and what else does he know. If my understanding of Micael is right his decision to endorse his intellectual studies his underlying impetus is that he will be true to himself. In the competition of ecclesiastical promotion i believe he was a target of unbridled ambition, and i believe he has stood his ground, but that ground is not the ground of the boundaries of faith it is the ground scientific faith and the knowledge of the influence of faith movements which have influenced the people and the fathers of our faith, none of which is esssential for the salvation of the believer. I really am sorry to see an educated man in such a predicament but i will declare him bettter in Gods eyes than his contemporaries. Hope you read this Miceal The Searcher |
![]() |
|
| tomais | Thursday, 20. October 2011, 09:10 Post #74 |
|
55 theologians-55 bases for disputation. They speak amongst themselves and talk to each other;a closed shop to the 99% of others. Their books are in the £ 30.00 plus bracket. Finnigans Wake can often be better understood. Think of a world with half a dozen of them; yes, only six a side! Great! And less university etc., funding. |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Thursday, 20. October 2011, 10:06 Post #75 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Accepted for seminary by a bishop on the recommendation of the parish priest and diocesan vocations director, observed by lecturers and seminary rector, then by other priests after ordination, possibly some complaints made by laity. It does make one wonder about the selection of the people I list. Pals in a clique? |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic » |







3:43 PM Jul 11