Sunday, August 18, 2013

Q&A

Let's have a short Q&A, based on comments from my post this week about the Assumption.

Q: Was Mary's preservation from original sin a requirement for birthing Jesus, or a 'reward' for it?
A: Neither. It was not necessary for the Virgin Mary to be immaculately conceived, as St. Thomas Aquinas teaches us.  And it can't be a reward for birthing Jesus, because it took place before Jesus' birth.  In a sense, you could say it is a reward, but it's less like God actively rewarding her for doing what he wanted, and more like God, taking care of his mother.

Q: What's the Catholic view on infant baptism? Why does infant baptism matter?
A: Babies must be baptised as soon as possible, preferably within a month of the child's birth. Baptism cleanses a person from original sin and marks them as a member of Christ's Church.

Q: If death is punishment for sin please explain to me why animals die????
A: The teaching I mentioned is from St. Paul, in Romans 5.  He says that death is a result of sin.  Other Christians (not Catholics) take this idea an extra step, and they believe that death is a direct punishment for sin. For example, they would say something like "God takes a minute off of your lifespan, every time you sin".  This is not a Catholic teaching, and I don't know much about it besides for the fact that Mark Twain loved making fun of it.
 
I could explain that particular Biblical passage in more detail, but the fact of the matter is that St. Paul only talks about humans, not animals.  You can say this passage indicates that animals did not die, prior to humans sinning, but this is never explicitly stated.
 
Q: Also, wouldn't perfect mean that you never made a mistake? It says in Luke 2 that when Jesus stayed behind in the temple, his Parents thought he was with them. But they later found out they were wrong. I believe if she was perfect, she would have known he stayed behind.
A: The joke answer is that the entire situation was Joseph's fault, so we can't blame Mary for what happened.  The more serious answer is that, yes, Mary was mistaken in believing her son was with the group.  This is not the same thing as saying she sinned.
 
Q: Also, where in the Bible does it talk about Mary's death?
A: The death of Mary is not contained in the Bible, just like how the death of her husband Jospeh is not in the Bible.

30 comments:

GameOverTown said...

It's been a while since your last q&a session with us

Anonymous said...

I don't understand why this is such a topic of discussion? Not trying to troll or anything, but why are the stories of the Bible so important to some people today? I don't get it. They're just stories.

William D said...

-.- Keep your opinions to yourself and I'll keep mine to me XD
I kind of figured that her death wasn't in the Bible. Thank you for clearing some of the details up for me, I tried to explain as best as I could but you are a grown man who studied to be a priest(?) so you would know way more XD Could you do Q&A's more often?!

Anonymous said...

Well, I kind of am asking for an opinion? I don't really get it, no need to -.- me.

Anonymous said...

To the anon. that says the bible is full of just plain old stories that you can't understand the reason why they are so important. They are not just stories. A person didn't just sit down and make them all up. They are true, where do you think we all came from??? Monkeys!? No, that theory is just down right insane and messed up, i'm not saying that you believe this, because I don't know. If you do, then where did the monkeys come from, they and we didn't just magically appear. It's people like you that I feel the most sorry for, these are not just stories they are real. Think a little, open up your mind and get your head out of the sand people. God is coming back and if you're not ready to met him, well then....

Anonymous said...

To the anon at 11:00 AM, this theory of humans evoloving from monkeys is actually a scientific one. In fact, since I'm a life science student, there is always this question of science vs. religion on how humans came about.

From a scientific point of view, there were already living organisms present in the world millions of years ago and due to evolution and "natural selection", humans came about much later in time.

However, according to the bible, Jesus created Adam and Eve and that's how humans came about right? Please correct me if I'm wrong. I have not completely read the bible.

You can see from these viewpoints that these 2 concepts of how mankind came about are completely different. Personally, I believe in the scientific viewpoint as scientific evidence was present to support the point. However, this doesn't mean I don't believe in Jesus.

Well, I have strayed off Michael's discussion but thank you for enlightening me Michael since I'm not that well versed in the bible.

Peter said...

@ anon 11:00AM

... when is God coming back?

Also, have you never studied evolution? Are you young or just an idiot?

James said...

Wow. You feel sorry for someone because they support science over a 6,000 year old creation story, based on only one culture's guess of origin, out of thousands of cultures at the time that tried doing the exact same thing? I highly doubt you understand human evolution, or have even taken an objective study of it. Anybody who has actually studied it would know that it does not teach we evolved from monkeys.

Anonymous said...

You guys are freaking retarded. You all need to get off this blog go outside and make some friends, (If you can)!!! I'm just laughing so hard at your scientific blah blah blah what freaking ever! Hahahaha!!! Get a life you bunch of down on life no life sideshow freak morons!!! So you came from monkeys. *Thinking to my self* HAHA I'd hate to see a picture of you!!! Do you have to shave your face??? What about your arms!!! *Freaking laughing my head off!!!*

Anonymous said...

I'd hate to see the looks on all of your faces when god does come back!

(Poor pathetic people)!!!

Sammy said...

Thank you for answering my questions. Although I am a Christian, I am very interested in learning about different religions, and what they believe. ~Samantha

William D said...

OK WOW. I am very sorry about starting this. (did I?) Let's just all come down o-o

Katie Nelson said...

1. Thank You Michael, for sharing what you know about this concept to us. 2. We all have different beliefs and opinions and should cherish what we believe instead of insulting the beliefs we don't take a part of. 3. The Anon at 9:28 and the Anon at 11:00 technically both started it because the Anon at 9:28 could have looked up the answer, but the Anon at 11:00 was being rude (and I don't mean the good rude in ND Danger by Design :D) to the one at 9:28 by saying that "It's people like you that I feel the most sorry for, these are not just stories they are real. Think a little, open up your mind and get your head out of the sand people. God is coming back and if you're not ready to met him, well then...." So technically it was both your faults. If you were asking, my opinion is that the Anon at 11:00 started it, but you don't have to listen to what my opinion is if you weren't asking.

William D said...

Thank you for reassuring me XD Also you are SO Rude!!!!!!!!!! (The good kind XD )

William D said...

Also, I REALLY don't want to start an argument, but there was one project done by one of the best scientists in the world. He discover there was 0.0000001 out of 1000000000 of a chance that actually happened. As soon as that was discovered by this man, funding was immediately cut o-o again I am NOT trying to start another argument. Ok?

Anonymous said...

I don't understand your comment william. Could you please explain to me what project was this scientist conducting?

To the anon at 1.10pm, please don't make judgements about other people. Just because i'm into science doesn't mean that i don't have a social life and no friends. ITS THE COMPLETE OPPOSITE. In fact, i can also say the same about you that you don't have a social life due to your rude attitude.

From the anon @12.05pm

William D said...

Well, what I'm trying to say is that life formed without God. Say ok sure we came from monkeys, but how did the monkeys come to be? That is how small of a chance that living cells created the monkeys without divine help. I don't know the exact name of the project, sorry. Again NOT trying to start a roaring wildfire argument.

Anonymous said...

AWESOME!!!:):):) God Bless you.:)

William D said...

Whoops, didn't explain what you wanted to know -facepalm-
This scientist was funded by certain organizations, to prove that creation happened without God. He proved just the opposite, proving basically Impossible for that to have happened. Funding to his project was immediately cut o-o

William D said...

Bless who? Michael?

Anonymous said...

As James pointed out, the theory of human evolution does NOT teach we evolved from monkeys. Can we please stop spreading that false dichotomy?

Kuhna said...

To elaborate, it states that humans, apes, and monkeys are descended from a common ancestral species which was not a human, an ape, or a monkey.

And to the Anon at 12:15, just one small correction - it is not "evolution and natural selection", it is evolution via natural selection.

... wait how did this even come up anyway?

Don't answer that, I don't want to know.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Kuhna for the clarification. I actually wanted to mention what you said but i misreprsented my point about humans evolving from monkeys when in actual fact evolution started from much simpler organisms.

From the anon @12.05

C said...

Well obviously it took place before Jesus' birth - but God being omniscient and above our sense of past and present makes that irrelevant, which is why it can still be considered a reward, and why I put it in quotes. But thank you for answering.

And thanks for answering about infant baptism, though I was looking for more of an explanation of infant baptism vs confirmation.

If baptism cleanses an infant from original sin - which I understand as the propensity for mankind to sin thanks to a certain couple - then why do we all keep sinning afterwards? Why does it matter, since a baby is not conscious of the morality and consequences of its actions?

In my denomination, it's less about the baby sinning and more about we as a congregation sinning. A baptism is a promise to raise the child in the best Christian way and to do all we can to help them grow in a way that would please God - at the same time causing us to remember how to do that and reaffirm our faith. The burden rests on us, not the baby, until it can confirm itself when it's 11 or 12.

Miriam said...

Thanks for explaining infant baptism. Learning about other religions is interesting to me.
In my church (I'm LDS / Mormon), we aren't baptized until we're eight years old. We believe that until a child is eight, s/he isn't really responsible for their sins because they aren't old enough to really understand. When they reach the age of accountability (eight), they can choose for themselves to be baptized and they're responsible for their decisions.
Children who die before they're old enough to be baptized aren't condemned or anything, though. They're still innocent, so they kind of get a free pass, if you will. Baptism is for the remission of sins, and if the child doesn't fully understand right and wrong, their sins aren't held against them. Does that make sense? :)

C said...

If baptism cleanses an infant from original sin - which I understand as the propensity for mankind to sin thanks to a certain couple - then why do we all keep sinning afterwards

I wish to clarify this. The way I worded it makes it sound like a dumb question. Obviously we still have free will to deviate from God's will if we so choose.

But if we are cleansed from original sin at birth - then why does literally no one remain sinless afterwards? I mean ... even saints are sinners, right? And they're the best of us, apparently.

And if none of us has the will to remain sinless even after we've been cleansed of original sin - then is original sin really all that significant?

William D said...

Well, you guys are right in a sense.
@C Original sin counts the most (from what I know about my faith) because Adam and Eve were completely perfect. They had no needs, they felt no pain, and they would die but again they would feel no pain. When they sinned, that offended God to the utmost, because they had a WAY higher intellect and will than we do now. Original Sin was the very first sin, thus the most offensive to God, (in our higher state of intelligence) and so we need it removed by Baptism, so that we can receive Confession later on in our life after 7 (the age of reason) so that we are able to cleanse our soul of the small sins we commit. We have a much MUCH smaller intellect because we are all born with Original Sin. That is another reason why Mary never sinned. She was born without Original Sin, thus retaining the original gifts God have given us. (well she did feel pain so, I don't know : / )
Ok, I'm sorry if I bored you or made you angry, because I was just trying to answer a question with my belief, not shove it down anyone's throat Ok?!

Justice said...

Some questions raised by your response to the last question, Michael: Why do Catholics believe all these things about Mary, without Scriptural evidence? How can members of the faith know that those teachings are true and not simply a holy-sounding story that somebody made up (or became more fiction than fact as it was passed down through the ages)?

William D said...

Because Catholics have faith in the teachings of the Church

GameOverTowm said...

Why does everyone hate William!?!?!?