Posted on 03/16/2005 5:22:29 AM PST by JFK_Lib
ROME, Italy (Reuters) -- A top Catholic cardinal has blasted "The Da Vinci Code" as a "gross and absurd" distortion of history and said Catholic bookstores should take the bestseller off their shelves because it is full of "cheap lies." Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, in an interview with the Milan newspaper Il Giornale, became the highest ranking Italian Churchman to speak out against the book, an international blockbuster that has sold millions of copies. "(It) aims to discredit the Church and its history through gross and absurd manipulations," Bertone, the archbishop of the northern Italian city of Genoa and a close friend of Pope John Paul II told the paper in its Monday edition. "This seems like a throwback to the old anti-clerical pamphlets of the 1800s," he said. The central claim of the book, written by U.S. author Dan Brown, is that Jesus married Mary Magdalene and had children. The Bible says Jesus never married, was crucified and rose from the dead.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
And yet, like the Global Warming hysteria, the facts dont matter one bit. Dan Brown's fictitious work is being touted as the latest factual presentation of the early church and is even being made into a movie.
This is simply the early stage of a large gnostic world religion that will drive Bikblikcal, Orthodox Christian theology underground and set the stage for persecution of Biblical Christianity as a cult.
The daylight grows short, and you can feel the night coming on, can you not?
Prepare for the catacombs, friends, if you really believe in the Bible and try to live your life by it.
Maybe people should try and read the Bible, it is far more profitable, not to mention more accurate.
Yeah, try telling that to Newsweek.
Nod...there's a reason they call it News-weAk!
LOL!
That used to be a half-way decent mag decades ago, but it got bought out and turned into a leftwing rag.
US Snooze and Weird Report seems headed the same way, but who knows.
Leftwing ideologues are always willing to by media organs to sell the impression that they are the main stream voice, 'cause they know it works on the lower IQ half of the population.
And rightwing ideologues are always willing to sell as a sign of success of their message, lol.
Look what happened to National Review - its all neocons now.
Whats remains of the old cultural conservative movement?
"It's dead Jim" (no pic this time :-)
|
|
l
0
*tear for America*
I am still surprised by the incredible success of the DaVinci Code...it was a good read, but not a great one to justify the time spent on all of the best seller books. It is a work of fiction. A much, much better book (fiction as well) is Umberto Eco's 'Foucault's Pendulum.' It was written in italian and translated by William Weaver. As a fictional, mystery, FP puts the DaVinci Code to shame. Just my opinion...
JFK_Lib is right about the gnosticism. It comes from the so-called scholarship that seeks to undermine the traditional canon.
The Catholic Church deserves everything it's getting from the Da Vinci book and the "J*sus Seminar." Let them know what corrosive modernism feels like when applied to their own sacred cows!
Wow, what a rant! At least you managed to properly spell and capitalize "Catholic Church", which is more than some who's antipathy outpaces their decency and reason are able to muster. Kudos.
But as to the documentary hypothesis the church has always begin against it, and only recent modernist liberals have had any success in slipping it into Catholic publications and study Bibles.
....
http://www.catholicintl.com/catholicissues/nab4.htm
....
One need not delve deeply into the NAB proper to discover teachings which are contrary to the Tradition of the Church, for in the introduction to the first book of the Bible, Genesis, the translators unequivocally endorse the documentary hypothesis. This is the theory of Julius Wellhausen, a 19th century liberal German Protestant, which holds that the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible, are the product of redaction and editing and did not take their final form until the sixth century B.C.
As opposed to the traditional teaching, confirmed by the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1906, that Moses wrote the Pentateuch (save his obituary which is appended to Deuteronomy), the documentary hypothesis maintains that four principal sources (Yahwist, Elohist, Priestly, and Deuteronomic), the earliest of which was composed around the time of King David, were weaved together to produce the document which has come down to us today. According to those who hold this theory, the various sources (termed J, E, D, and P (Yahweh starts with a J in German)) are contradictory, and the redactor left many of these contradictions in the text. Thus, the Biblical scholar has no need to treat the Bible with the reverence of St. Augustine [24]; if something looks like a contradiction at first glance that is because it is a contradiction. Moreover, when the Bible narrates that "the LORD says to Moses," it does not actually mean that the LORD said to Moses whatever follows.
This theory, so inimical to Christian Orthodoxy, is the main guiding force behind the hermeneutic and methodology of the scholars who created the NAB. Time after time they charge the text with error and contradiction, ascribing this to discrepancies between the various sources. Time after time they claim that bits and pieces of text have been moved around, and that verse 20 really belongs after verse 24, etc. In fact, these scholars have so little reverence for the Sacred Scriptures, they even go so far as to reverse what they believe to be the machinations of their sixth century redactor, inserting contradictions into the text which they reckon him to have edited out! That this book which directly contradicts defined Catholic dogma boasts imprimaturs and nihil obstats is truly sad.
Hope this helps you out of your ignorance on matters related to that subject, but I doubt that a little ole thing like facts will slow you down.
Now, I tend to actively oppose such things and have noted that there are Jews and Jewish organization on the opposite side of many of the issues I am against or support?
Question: Does the Jewish faith have an established authority and or deposit of faith as such as the Holy See functions or do Jews just do as they feel?
Only if you assume the uniformity of natural law as we know it today, which would rule out the resurrection of J*sus, his miracles, and transubstantiation. But never you mind, go right ahead and insist on the uniformity of nature during the creation process and miracles afterward. Then you may continue to wonder why your clergy are so liberal and your seminaries so filled with perverts.
BTW, you realize that the authority you quote is on record as rejecting both evolution and Copernicanism? That's a strange authority for an evolutionist to endorse.
Hope this helps you out of your ignorance on matters related to that subject, but I doubt that a little ole thing like facts will slow you down.
What good does it do to have some condenmnation lying forgotten in the dust of some archive somewhere (forgotten by everyone but your source, who rejects your evolutionism) when every Catholic Bible, seminary, scripture class, and clergyman is devoted to Wellhausen's blasphemy? And again, as one who subjects creation to unalterable natural law and then dispenses with it for the Nazarene, you are quite the hypocrite here. I wouldn't refer to these prejudices of yours as "evidence."
You assume wrong, Nudnik. If I were Jewish I probably wouldn't give a rat's tachat how much you desecrated the Holy Torah so long as you were nice and "tolerant" and believed that all religions and "gxds" are equally correct. That's the way most Jews act, unfortunately. Have you ever heard any Jew objecting to theological liberalism of any form in any branch of chr*stianity?
I have a question that recently has surfaced in my studies. As a Catholic I recognize the Holy See as authority on matters of doctrine. Also, as a Catholic I am obedient as best I can be to what the Church teaches -I may not understand why such thing are but I clearly know what is taught e.g. euthanasia, divorce, contraception, adultery, abortion, homosexual activity etcetera are wrong.
Too freaking bad you don't recognize the same about evolution, the documentary hypothesis, and the idea the Bible was adapted from pagan mythology.
Now, I tend to actively oppose such things and have noted that there are Jews and Jewish organization on the opposite side of many of the issues I am against or support?
Don't worry. Your beloved Church and the ACLU both sued to keep creationism out of the schools in Arkansas. So what are you complaining about? At least liberal Jews aren't freaking hypocrites who tear the Bible to shreds and then start to get wobbly feet about drawing the ultimate conclusions.
Question: Does the Jewish faith have an established authority and or deposit of faith as such as the Holy See functions or do Jews just do as they feel?
They have an authoritative oral interpretive tradition, which you and your Church condemn as the inauthentic fiction of priests (for which G-d punished you by raising up Protestantism to make the identical same charge against you), but most Jews are not Orthodox and don't recognize its authority or that of the Orthodox Rabbinate. Other than that, Orthodox Jews don't have a "pope" in this day and time to compel them to believe in evolution, like you do. Which means that they're much better off.
Thank you. The Catholic Church also possesses an authoritative oral interpretive tradition which is evidenced in Apostolic succession and embodied authoritatively and authentically within the Holy See.
As to evolution, the Church has never officially condemned evolution or accepted the evolving theory as ultimately true. The Church teaches that some tenets of the evolving theory of evolution in general do not conflict with creation etcetera and where there are conflicts they are summarily rejected...
LOL, the site I gave you also believes the Earth is still the center of the Universe!
I was only showing you that not all Catholics, in fact a great many today still reject the documentarian hyupothesis and he had quotes to accompany it. He also clarifies it is a Protestant theory, not Catholic.
I personally also reject that hypothesis as lacking sufficient proff in the face of long tradition that asserts otherwise.
Anyhow, the evidence for evolution, IMO, is overwhelming. Speciation is a fact and only transition between genus is unproven, but still on solid ground, I think.
Anywho, I just wanted to correct your initial implication regarding Catholic origins to DH.
'Taint so.
That's what I told you. It also believes that evolution, Copernicanism, Biblical criticism, and every other bad thing in the past two thousand years is the result of a diabolical Zionist Conspiracy. I actually used to correspond with Mr. Sungenis (whose site that is), but he's gone stark raving crazy.
I was only showing you that not all Catholics, in fact a great many today still reject the documentarian hyupothesis and he had quotes to accompany it. He also clarifies it is a Protestant theory, not Catholic.
True, but at least liberal Protestants are counterbalanced by Fundamentalist Protestants (whom Catholics despise and to whom they prefer the liberals). The Catholic Church is a "seamless garment" of bland liberalism, with the exception of people like Sungenis who believe the UN is a "Zionist" institution. Strange, though, that you invoke Sungenis' site on the documentary hypothesis while disassociating yourself from the same source's positions on evolution and the solar system.
I personally also reject that hypothesis as lacking sufficient proff in the face of long tradition that asserts otherwise.
How refreshing that you actually admit that your dedication to Biblical integrity is so shallow that only the absence of "proof" prevents you from jumping on board the bandwagon.
Anyhow, the evidence for evolution, IMO, is overwhelming. Speciation is a fact and only transition between genus is unproven, but still on solid ground, I think.
Just what is speciating? Is the human race speciating? Are we all in the process of branching out into different species? My my. I'm sure the KKK trembles in its sheets at the prospect of such "progressive" theories of human kinship. Oh well. It's nice to know that the tiny, frail little restraining condemnation of polygenism (which, so far as I know, is still "official") has no authority for you whenever your great mind tells you that Adam and Eve simply could not have really existed and that the human race is descended from multiple ancestors rather than from the mythical ones who committed the mythical "original sin" from which your Nazarene (according to you) literally redeemed us. And btw, again--people don't rise from the dead. Some devotee of science you are.
Anywho, I just wanted to correct your initial implication regarding Catholic origins to DH.
Since I at no time contributed Catholic "origins" to the DH you could have saved yourself the effort.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.