tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post1754925133504274235..comments2023-10-22T09:35:50.702-05:00Comments on Spes mea Christus!: Objection: Begging the Question!Paul Hofferhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-57776426571298154232008-11-20T13:44:00.000-05:002008-11-20T13:44:00.000-05:00I more or less agree with your claim. Simply becau...I more or less agree with your claim. Simply because both have a concept of the same God, doesn't mean both express to the same degree of reality, this Being's nature. That the God of Islam is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, does not mean that they understand him the same way, and does not mean that such an understanding is redemptive.<BR/><BR/>Let me know if TurretinFan takes you up and offers a correction for the misinformation his blog spreads regarding Catholicism?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-7976111708941412302008-09-30T13:49:00.000-05:002008-09-30T13:49:00.000-05:00Hi RDP, thank you for your kind words. I hope you...Hi RDP, thank you for your kind words. I hope you will like the expanded version I am posting now.Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-20198908380372926682008-09-26T16:50:00.000-05:002008-09-26T16:50:00.000-05:00Paul, this post is fantastic. It's a simply fabulo...Paul, this post is <STRONG>fantastic</STRONG>. It's a simply fabulous demolition of this canard. Thank you!<BR/><BR/>I'll be saving this and bookmarking it for future reference :-)<BR/><BR/>-- RdPFred Noltiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10203885485191808284noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-3285833088098302612008-09-05T11:25:00.000-05:002008-09-05T11:25:00.000-05:00BJ,I admit that I am not well read as regards to L...BJ,<BR/><BR/>I admit that I am not well read as regards to LG. When time permits, I will remedy that deficiency. However, having re-read (several times) the section which Paul places in his blog, I do not see a different meaning from context than I find in the CCC. Furthermore, since the CCC draws from the whole of Tradition, it places the quote squarely into the context of the whole of Church teaching. So, hoping you do not object, I will attempt to answer primarily from the CCC.<BR/><BR/><I>...[M]ost interpretations of LG and CCC <B>seem</B> to imply that faithful Muslims, etc. are by default headed towards heaven, since they are included in the plan of salvation AND/OR since they are ignorant of the Truth of Christ.</I> This seems to be a specious argument. "Most" is not readily defined. Most Protestant interpretations? Most Catholic? Most coming from the Bedrock Water Buffalo Lodge? I pointed out earlier that my own personal experience has been that few, if any, non Catholics take CCC 841 in the context of the many paragraphs which surround it. You agreed that context is important and did not disagree with the concept that few take this passage in concert with the larger context. So "most" interpretations would be inaccurate or incorrect (and you do not dispute this).<BR/><BR/>I would also say that at my own first reading of this section of the CCC, I did <B>not</B> come to the conclusion that those of other faiths were "by default" saved based on their adherence to their own nonchristian religions. Since I come from a different background than you do, with different experiences, it's not too surprising that my own first reading of this passage would render an interpretation different than yours. However, this would mean that I would disagree with your assertion that LG and the CCC "at face value" teach salvation of nonchristians as an automatic.<BR/><BR/>When I read CCC 842 & 843, I see the Church teaching that God calls all humans toward him. Some, when answering this call, answer it imperfectly and incompletely, introducing error. However, they also express some truth. Some of these truths include that God does exist. In the specific case of Muslims, that the true God is the God of Abraham. And Truth must be acknowledged as Truth where ever it is found.<BR/><BR/>But the CCC does not stop at acknowledging whatever amount of Truth they may possess. In paragraph 844, the Church tells us that they also possess errors, and that these errors comd from the Evil One himself. In CCC 845 we see that one of the purposes and missions of the Church is to seek out these people and evangelize to correct these errors. By implication, not doing so leaves them subject to the Evil One (844) and their souls at risk.<BR/><BR/>Paragraphs 849-856 go into detail on this mission of evangelization. CCC 856 re-presents the concept that Truth must be acknowledged as Truth and seems complement, without echoing, CCC 843 when it quotes LG as saying that whatever truth is found in another religion is a preparation or a foundation for the introduction of the full Gospel.<BR/><BR/>So I would most likely arrive at the same conclusion as our host, Paul, and say that the Muslim part in God's plan of salvation is their truth brings them somewhat closer to the full Truth of the Gospel. However, like Paul, I do not see any teaching that a Muslim (or anyone else for that matter) is saved simply by being a good Muslim (or other religion).<BR/><BR/>I sincerely hope this better puts CCC 841 into a better context. And as I said at the beginning, I do not see a different meaing in the CCC from what I see in my (limited) read of LG.<BR/><BR/>In His Name,<BR/>Jamie DonaldAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-32516109329866402092008-09-03T14:52:00.000-05:002008-09-03T14:52:00.000-05:00Paul and Jamie,Thanks for the kind words. Indeed,...Paul and Jamie,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the kind words. Indeed, I am sincerely interested in your answer(s). <BR/><BR/>Paul, I'd love for you to let me know about the Latin. I'm surprised that TF didn't incorporate that into his post, since he reads Latin. Oh well...<BR/><BR/>Jamie, I agree about context, but the context for this still doesn't define, "Plan of salvation." Plus, the original context is the section in LG. Plus, most interpretations of LG and CCC <I>seem</I> to imply that faithful Muslims, etc. are by default headed towards heaven, since they are included in the plan of salvation AND/OR since they are ignorant of the Truth of Christ.<BR/><BR/>Regardless, the language is very confusing, and it appears at face level that the Church teaches salvation for Muslims, although I think Paul has done a good job at showing that such is not the case.<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/><BR/>BJ<BR/><A HREF="http://stupidscholar.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">Stupid Scholar</A>BJ Burackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16613575838269069020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-12066352598789922032008-09-02T16:14:00.000-05:002008-09-02T16:14:00.000-05:00A short comment. Most who take issue with, "The p...A short comment. Most who take issue with, "The plan of salvation includes ..." will only cite CCC 841. It is good that BJ asks in a congenial tone and I have always read his comments to be as an honest truth-seeker (albeit one who may disagree on several points) rather than as one who asks questions in order to accuse.<BR/><BR/>However, equally important to the issue are the several paragraphs which surround CCC841. These paragraphs put that particular one into context. They also state that one who is not of the Christian faith are in grave danger and that we have the task to evangelize and preach the Gospel to them. 841 is not meant to be taken on its own as a stand-alone doctrine. Rather it is one paragraph which must be taking in context of the greater whole. <BR/><BR/>I am at work right now on a break. So I do not have the CCC available to me at the moment. I will try to post at a later time the paragraphs which I feel put 841 into a better context.<BR/><BR/>In His Name,<BR/><BR/>Jamie DonaldAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-88286880559759731392008-09-02T15:18:00.000-05:002008-09-02T15:18:00.000-05:00Hi Mike and Dave, I appreciate the favorable comm...Hi Mike and Dave, I appreciate the favorable comments. <BR/><BR/>In regards to the name-calling engaged in by certain Protestant e-apologists, you have to give them some credit for these kind of statements-they are imaginative, if not actionable in a defamation suit. Accusing someone of being a serial murderer is "mala in se" defamation. I have sued people and won for less defamatory comments.<BR/><BR/>Calling you a fuzz-brain could be seen a some sort of a compliment, I guess. At least he acknowledged that you have some kind of a brain which is something some apologists have denied I have. One fellow 11 or 12 years ago wanted to know if my brain was good for anything other than to keep my ears apart.<BR/><BR/>Professor White has been more congenial to me at least. He only accused me of practicing "Taqiyya," the Moslem practice of dissimulation, while serving Rome. <BR/><BR/>Personally, I think that there is some sort of mail-order/internet college that these guys go to that teaches them that sticks-and-stones apologetics is a proper methodology to address arguments raised by Catholics. But, in all fairness, I have been called names just as noxious by some liberal and cafeteria-Catholic types. <BR/><BR/>I take great comfort in the fact that most Protestants that I interact with do treat me with courtesy and respect. As for the others, the best way to deal with the less-than-kind folks is to say a prayer for them. Mary's Stuart's Prayer is one of my favorites. <BR/><BR/>BJ, thank you for your kind words. Addressing your questions in order:<BR/><BR/>You asked: "From my understanding of your post, you are claiming that, "The plan of salvation includes..." religion/philosophy 'x' simply means that there are aspects of grace/knowledge of some aspect of the Gospel within in religion/philosophy 'x'. Is that correct?<BR/><BR/>Answer: Yes. St. Paul, himself, notes this in Rom. 1 and Acts 17 where he even quotes a pagan philosopher in support of his argument for the Gospel. <BR/><BR/>You asked: "[W]hy did Vatican II use language that can so easily be read as, "Adherence to religion/philosophy 'x' leads to salvation?"<BR/><BR/>My thought is that this is some poor translation. I have read the Latin original (as best as my grade school, altar boy, and legal mumbo-jumbo Latin will allow me) and I am not convinced that English version of Lumen Gentium actually says the exactly same thing that the Latin says. I intend to explore this point much further to try to satisfy my own curiosity. <BR/><BR/>You asked: "Why then does, "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims" not imply that salvation will come to Muslims, even before others (non-Christian religions)?" <BR/><BR/>Answer: The political science major in me says this is an example of being diplomatic. One must remember that Vatican II was an exercise of "Aggiornamento," that is trying to make the Church open and more inviting to Protestants as well as non-Christians. If they had said something as blunt as G.K. Chesterton had said about Islam, the Church in the Middle East would be persecuted far worse than it is now. I will try to find out if my thoughts are close to the mark or not.<BR/><BR/>You asked: "Can you provide any official or at least episcopal interpretations of these statements?"<BR/><BR/>I will try to provide some meat and potatoes to satisfy your very reasonable request~sooner as opposed to later, too. I do have some commentaries on Lumen Gentium and some of the other texts pertaining to Vatican II. I will see how well they fit the bill. <BR/><BR/>God bless!Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-74885717547175575082008-09-01T07:08:00.000-05:002008-09-01T07:08:00.000-05:00Paul, thanks for this. Interesting read, and quit...Paul, thanks for this. Interesting read, and quite informative.<BR/><BR/>From my understanding of your post, you are claiming that, "The plan of salvation includes..." religion/philosophy 'x' simply means that there are aspects of grace/knowledge of some aspect of the Gospel within in religion/philosophy 'x'. Is that correct?<BR/><BR/>If so, then why did Vatican II use language that can so easily be read as, "Adherence to religion/philosophy 'x' leads to salvation?"<BR/><BR/>For instance, if I said that my family's plan of vacation included the Bahamas, most everyone would understand that I mean that my family plans to go to the Bahamas on vacation (among other places).<BR/><BR/>Why then does, "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the <B>first place</B> amongst whom are the Muslims" not imply that salvation will come to Muslims, even before others (non-Christian religions).<BR/><BR/>I understand what you are saying, and it seems consistent with much Catholic teaching that I have read. However, <I>Lumen Gentium</I>'s and the CCC's statements (841) are <I>very</I> confusing and do not easily lead to your interpretation. <BR/><BR/>Can you provide any official or at least episcopal interpretations of these statements? I would enjoy reading them and find them helpful.<BR/><BR/>Blessings in Christ our Lord,<BR/><BR/>BJ<BR/><A HREF="http://stupidscholar.blogspot.com" REL="nofollow">Stupid Scholar</A>BJ Burackerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16613575838269069020noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-11412869182803984582008-08-29T12:44:00.000-05:002008-08-29T12:44:00.000-05:00Hi Paul, I concur with Mike…well done!Concerning M...Hi Paul, <BR/><BR/>I concur with Mike…well done!<BR/><BR/>Concerning Mr. White’s label: “I have been annointed as an apologist in the service of Rome”, be thankful—James’ fellow Reformed polemists at the Triablogue blog have recently informed me that I am a “liar”, <A HREF="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/08/fuzz-brain.html" REL="nofollow">”fuzz-brain”</A>, and <A HREF="http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2008/08/catholic-serial-killers.html" REL="nofollow">Catholic serial killer</A> !!!<BR/><BR/><BR/>Keep up the good work…<BR/><BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29837133.post-68068441971184401312008-08-28T19:24:00.000-05:002008-08-28T19:24:00.000-05:00Paul,I'm glad you addressed this, and I hope TF is...Paul,<BR/>I'm glad you addressed this, and I hope TF is or has been made aware of it. I'm sure you know he doesn't <I>necessarily</I> consider you and I "brothers in Christ" (he's been somewhat coy in that regard when I've pushed the issue).<BR/><BR/>Anyway, well done. Really enjoying the blog!<BR/><BR/>MikeMike Burgesshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00854620298988801571noreply@blogger.com