Does the Catholic Church Teach "Doctrines of Demons?"

Catholic Answers ^ | July 21, 2013 | Tim Staples

[JosephW]

Wow! Thanks. That is much more than I expected and I thought you were just too busy taking care of a few problems.

Have to confess and admit I’m going to be a bit lazy and not get to the articles right away. Would you know the Eastern Catholic view as I’m pretty sure I saw an Icon showing the Dormition of the Theotokos and I believe it was Eastern Catholic and not Orthodox.

Once again thanks in advance.

[CynicalBear]

What??????????????? Are you even capable of following the conversation? We were discussing the eating of blood pudding etc. NOT the blood of Christ. Sheeesh!

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

In 1950, "Mary, having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul to heavenly glory" became official doctrine in the Catholic Church. Before 1950 is was considered indisputable but was not a required belief.

Catholics believe in the assumption, vs. the Orthodox belief in the dormation, or falling asleep. In a nutshell, the assumption is Catholic dogma, while the dormation is more an Orthodox tradition rather than dogma. The Catholic Church doesn't go into details regarding the specifics of the assumption other than Mary's body and soul were assumed into heaven, while according to the Orthodox dormation Marry died, was dead for three days like Jesus was, resurrected, and then assumed into heaven.

[CynicalBear]

>> And the point is it was a universal Christian belief for centuries<<

Show from scripture that the Apostles or Jesus taught that. Book, chapter and verse please.

[ArrogantBustard]

No. I think your delusions are funny.

[CynicalBear]

>>Yes, and He was fully Divine too.<<

Which human flesh has ever consisted of literal bread?

[Wyrd bið ful aræd]

There is a critical difference between your understanding of Timothy 4:3 and mine. To me it appears, God is saying that ANYTHING, when taken with prayer and thanksgiving, can be eaten.

[ArrogantBustard]

May Our Lord forgive you.

[verga]

What??????????????? Are you even capable of following the conversation? We were discussing the eating of blood pudding etc. NOT the blood of Christ. Sheeesh!

See posts 136 and 141.

[CynicalBear]

>>It is dogma.<<

Dogma made from speculation. Teachings of man.

[Salvation]

The Dormition of the Virgin Mary

The "Dormition of the Virgin Mary" is her "falling asleep" at the end of her time on earth. It is not simply called the "Death of the Virgin" because of a tradition that soon after her soul left her body the two were reunited and taken up to Heaven in what is called the "Assumption."

A variety of accounts of the Dormition were written in Greek and other eastern languages during the fourth and fifth centuries, some of them with possible roots in the second. By the sixth century we find Latin texts dealing with this subject, and by the time of the 13th-century Golden Legend a large number of versions of the story were in circulation, often inconsistent with each other in matters of detail.

This variety explains the diversity of artistic treatments of the subject.

Extant Byzantine icons of the Dormition of the Virgin Mary go back to the ninth century. In one tenth-century example, we see the basic pattern for both East and West: Mary's body reclines on a bier attended by the apostles, while her soul is taken by Christ and angels; the soul is signified by a child-like figure that is either clothed or swaddled.

Western images, especially those influenced by Byzantine art, often emphasize the liturgical aspect of Mary's passing, with vestments, candles, hymn books, ointment jars, and/or censers (Bohemian and Byzantine examples). This emphasis is precedented in eastern homilies, which portrayed the Apostles' actions in terms of contemporary funeral customs.

In the image above left Christ is in a mandorla carrying his mother's soul on her shroud. This is a frequent pattern in images of the Dormition, but in some Christ hands the soul up to an angel, which is how the event is portrayed in Gregory of Tours' Glory of the Martyrs and John of Thessalonika's homily on the Dormition. (Both sources identify the angel as Michael.) A 13th-century example does not show Christ at all; the apostles are simply gathered around the recumbent Virgin.

There is also significant variation regarding the number and the disposition of figures around the deathbed.  In Vivarini's painting above left, we see just eleven apostles. The missing twelfth apostle would be St. Thomas, who according to The Passing of Mary and one version recounted by the Golden Legend did not arrive until later. Images with all twelve apostles may be following The Account of St. John on the Falling Asleep of the Mother of God (cached) or simply agreeing with St. Jerome's dismissal of the story of the absent Thomas. Finally, many images show a larger number of people in attendance, following the tradition expressed in St. Andrew of Crete's second homily on the Dormition (example).

Also note that Vivarini puts St. Peter (bald pate) and St. John (no beard) across from each other at approximately the middle of the deathbed. In many paintings the positions of these two apostles are determined by compositional demands, but a large number put Peter at the head of the bed and John at the foot, following the Golden Legend's account of the apostles' farewell hymn (example).

Narrative images of the Dormition are sometimes part of compositions that integrate the Assumption and Coronation of the Virgin (example) or the Coronation alone (example).

Feast day (of the Dormition in the East, of the Assumption in the West): August 15

At left, Vivarini's so-called Death of the Virgin

[verga]

Make that # 140

[CynicalBear]

But He was literally bread right?

[JosephW]

Many thanks to both you and Salvation. However I believe you’ve made a mistake on the Orthodox view. Mary wasn’t resurrected but is piously believed to have been assumed into heaven (in a glorified body).

As to the last supper it was agreed to for the Church as a whole for clearly a millennia and a half to be the physical body and blood of Christ. Columbus discovered America before the first Protestant discovered it might have been allegory.

As to Christ having “siblings”, these were either cousins or possibly other children from Joseph and a late wife. Please remember that Joseph was most likely 40-60 years older than Mary and was more her protector than a spouse in the modern sense.

These last few points aren’t directed towards you, but rather to supply hopefully more clarification to what you and Salvation have rightly stated in this discussion.

[Heart-Rest]

"Honestly, does this always have to be dealt with in every Catholic thread?

Jesus never held up a door and said, “This is my body.”

Jesus never held up a lamb and said, “This is my body.”

Ridiculous argument.

Jesus said, I am the door and I am the Lamb of God, I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. All of which He is. But he never claimed that a door was His body or that a lamb was His body."

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

Also, nobody ever left Jesus for saying those metaphors, but they did leave Him in droves when He spoke prophetically about how they would have to eat His flesh and drink His blood.

They were at least bright enough to clearly understand when Jesus was talking metaphorically and when He was not.

[Iscool]

John 6:58 - This is the bread which came down from heaven, not such as the fathers ate and died; he who eats this bread will live for ever.

” [That's when many scornfully turned away from Jesus, and left Him.]

After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him.

John 6:66

I gotta say you guys are a mystery to me...

Why did you leave out vs. 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64 and 65??? I posted the exact scripture...In order...Verse 66 does not show up right after verse 58...

Joh 6:65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
Joh 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

Iscool, I see that you have (accidently and inadvertantly, I'm sure) completely skipped these texts in your Biblical extract posted in post #68:

Doesn't matter...The disciples that left rejected ALL of it...Not JUST the eating of the flesh and blood...And the icing on the cake was verse 65...The bible says so...

[CynicalBear]

>> There is a critical difference between your understanding of Timothy 4:3 and mine.<<

Look up the Greek word used. It is interpreted “food”. Blood was never once considered food either in the Old Testament or the New Testament and surely not by Jews. It was forbidden by God in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Your understanding needs to be consistent with what the words mean.

>>To me it appears, God is saying that ANYTHING, when taken with prayer and thanksgiving, can be eaten.<<

What “appears” to you doesn’t count. It’s what the words say. Once again, the Holy Spirit does not contradict Himself. He inspired Luke to forbid the eating of blood as He did all of the writers of scripture.

[JosephW]

Thanks to both you and Wyrd.

[CynicalBear]

Are you drinking something alcoholic? 136 is a kindergarten picture and 141 has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation.

[Jvette]

Typical protestant trick.

Answer my question and then I’ll think about discussing that lunatic statement.