Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Of Medicine, Magic and Original Sin
The Wanderer National Catholic Weekly/ The Diocese Report ^ | Brian J. Kopp, DPM

Posted on 10/05/2001 9:24:14 PM PDT by Brian Kopp DPM

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last
To: US admirer
I refer to their absurdity.

Can you be more specific?

41 posted on 10/24/2001 5:46:50 AM PDT by Aquinasfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: RnMomof7
When I worked with the dying those that knew Christ went "home" in peace. Those that were not sure cried out in fear..

That's as should be. What concerns me is the mass of people, and the pep-talks which enable them, who boldly proclaim that they do not fear death — when they should!

Dan
How Can I Know God?

42 posted on 10/24/2001 7:04:35 AM PDT by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: riley1992
You took what I said out of context. I said that the Church no longer teaches that an infant will not go to Heaven if it were to die without being baptised first, in lieu of original sin. And yes, I am Roman Catholic and this is exactly what we were told when we had both of our children baptised.


No, actually I didn't. Just because you were told that by someone, does not mean that it is true. Some Roman Catholics do not believe in "Limbo" any more, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it does not exist. Limbo is still thought to be where the unbaptised babies go. They do not see the face of God but, are not unhappy.

Please the Catholic Catechism #1257.61 and 1261 for further information.

43 posted on 10/24/2001 3:27:12 PM PDT by It's me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: proud2bRC; RnMomof7
Brian, nice post.

Although I think you over emphasize the accomplishments of Thomist thought I will agree that Thomism contributed quite significantly to the development of western culture. Aquinas, as most of the early church fathers did, relied heavily on Greek thought. Aquinas in particular relied on Aristotelian cause and effect theory. Thomist thought mimics Greek thought in it's dualist nature of reality (nature/grace), with nature as a lower form and grace as a higher order. Nature, despite sin, was viewed as still basically good; but grace was better. This viewpoint allowed for rational thought(nature) as the starting point in man's understanding of God. Many Theologians consider Thomism as advocating an "incomplete fall". Within the arsenal of Thomist thought, therefore, philosophy engage in theoretical reflection on natural things. The effect was a theology supported by a form of natural theology and not reliant on God's revelations. The result was a meaningful contact with the down to earth life of God's people in his world was severed.

The enlightment era further exacerbated the dualist structure and pushed God further away especially in the context of the Kantian dilemma. (Either God is in our world of experience, but then he is not God; or he is God, but not in our world of experience.) The result was that either God did not exist or God could not be quantified; in which in either circumstance God was irrelevant.

Now, let us try and tie up the philosophy with your post. On the one hand you admit to the shortfalls of modern medicine's lack of understanding the revelation of God concerning judgement.

The failure of Western medicine today is that in its absolute pursuit of human knowledge, it has forgotten the fact of the immortal soul and the effects of Original Sin. It has so formalized itself that the patient has become a case number to be "objectively" evaluated, probed, prodded, sliced, medicated, and placated. Killing unborn babies, to use their cells to cure the current living case number, is the perfect example of the pit into which western medicine has fallen.

Yet a few paragraphs later you criticize the pagan religons for taking a spiritualistic view.

For all its failings, western medicine attempts to treat the body using rational scientific concepts. Alternative medicine largely refrains from making any such claims. Instead, remedies are couched in terms of balancing the "powers" within the body, or opening energy channels, or bringing "harmony" within.

While I do not agree with the pagan religons vehicles or emphasis on strictly a spiritual healing; your criticism shows a tension laden dialectic. Your Thomist rational approach only touches on the grace aspect of healing and is heavily inbalanced on the nature aspect of healing.

As we come out of our enlightment "hang-over" our civilization is realizing that healing is not merely a rational scientific humanist solution. As Christians it is our responsibility to emphasize a holistic approach to healing; spirit, mind, and body. The pagan religons approach is partially correct in that we must be bringing "harmony" within. The problem, of course, is that they seek the wrong god. Christian scientists and doctors must also take a holistic approach to their work incorporating not only the rational but also the bringing "harmony" within revelational aspects to their studies. The point of origin is the Word of God.

44 posted on 10/24/2001 3:53:16 PM PDT by lockeliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: It's me
Limbo is still thought to be where the unbaptised babies go. They do not see the face of God but, are not unhappy.

And God told you this over pancakes at IHOP?

45 posted on 10/24/2001 5:21:05 PM PDT by riley1992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: riley1992; It's me
Religion and IHOP. It's Possible.
46 posted on 10/24/2001 5:36:28 PM PDT by Cagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Cagey
Actually, I know I saw the face of God on my pancake there as a child. They tried to tell me it was just whipped cream and chocolate chips, but I knew better.
47 posted on 10/24/2001 5:42:18 PM PDT by riley1992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: riley1992
Riley, as usual, you're on to something here.
48 posted on 10/24/2001 5:43:46 PM PDT by Cagey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Cagey

49 posted on 10/24/2001 6:00:11 PM PDT by riley1992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: riley1992
You mock. What makes you so sure that you are correct?
50 posted on 10/27/2001 5:51:38 PM PDT by It's me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: It's me
Yes, I was mocking because I find your assumptions on God's behalf to be humorous at best, arrogant at worst. You ask what makes me so sure I am right? None of us know for sure. However, the God I love and believe in would never turn away an infant from His graces. You and I are evidentally worshipping two different versions of God.
51 posted on 10/29/2001 1:33:38 AM PST by riley1992
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-51 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson