|
作者
|
內容
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/8 下午 11:08:18
|
|
|
西滿兄：
有趣有趣。
個人信念為任何人而言，均是十分隱密的事情。因此就該幅度而言，亦是關乎個人良心的問題。
不過當個人信念（或春秋大夢）流溢於團體生活時，就湧現出各種問題了。
世間不相信「教宗不能錯」的人又豈止西滿兄？不過若按照閣下的思維，則任何教外人士甚至教內的大罪人，均大可基於不同「原因」，上前「冒領」聖體了。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/8 下午 11:15:24
|
|
|
根據美國主教團新近發表的、有關共融聖事的指引：
SHOULD WE EVER REFRAIN FROM RECEIVING HOLY COMMUNION?
Lack of Adherence to Church Teaching
As Catholics we believe what the Church authoritatively teaches on matters of faith and morals, for to hear the voice of the Church, on matters of faith and morals, is to hear the voice of Christ himself.[18] To give selective assent to the teachings of the Church not only deprives us of her lifegiving message, but also seriously endangers our communion with her.
Some Catholics may not fully understand the Church’s doctrinal and moral teaching on certain issues. They may have certain questions and even uncertainties. In these situations of honest doubt and confusion, they are welcome to partake of Holy Communion, as long as they are prayerfully and honestly striving to understand the truth of what the Church professes and are taking appropriate steps to resolve their confusion and doubt. Individuals who experience serious difficulties with or doubts about Church teaching should carefully study those Church teachings from authentic sources and seek advice from a confessor or pastor.
If a Catholic in his or her personal or professional life were knowingly and obstinately to reject the defined doctrines of the Church, or knowingly and obstinately to repudiate her definitive teaching on moral issues, however, he or she would seriously diminish his or her communion with the Church. Reception of Holy Communion in such a situation would not accord with the nature of the Eucharistic celebration, so that he or she should refrain.
_____________________________________
[18] Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (Lumen Gentium), no. 25: "Bishops who teach in communion with the Roman Pontiff are to be revered by all as witnesses of divine and Catholic truth; the faithful, for their part, are obliged to submit to their bishops’ decision, made in the name of Christ, in matters of faith and morals, and to adhere to it with a ready and respectful allegiance of mind. This loyal submission of the will and intellect must be given, in a special way, to the authentic teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra in such wise, indeed, that his supreme teaching authority be acknowledged with respect, and that one sincerely adhere to decisions made by him, conformably with his manifest mind and intention, which is made known principally either by the character of the documents in question, or by the frequency with which a certain doctrine is proposed, or by the manner in which the doctrine is formulated." See CIC, cc. 750, 752-54; CCEO, cc. 598-600.
Referring to the authority of the pope and bishops as authentic teachers of the faith, the declaration Mysterium Ecclesiae states that the faithful are not simply to listen to them as experts in Catholic doctrine, but "must accept their teaching given in Christ’s name, with an assent that is proportionate to the authority that they possess and that they mean to exercise" (Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Declaration in Defense of the Catholic Doctrine on the Church Against Certain Errors of the Present Day [Mysterium Ecclesiae], no. 2, in The Pope Speaks 18:2 [1973], 148).
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2007/3/8 下午 11:25:05
|
|
|
edward,
你的信念或許很隱密，但我的信念是光明的，正如我曾多次說過，信仰就是坦誠面對天地的時候，沒有需要隱藏。我說了出來，你可以指正，可以否定，我是不會隱藏的。
至於你說：「若有人只接受百分之九十九的當信道理而不接受餘下百分之一的當信道理，則他仍然和『沒有信德』沒有分別.........沒有天主教所說的信德，又怎可『真誠』地『成為』天主教徒？」
這令我想出一個好建議，希望普世教會會採用。如果你說的是正確，那麼普世教會應強制規定，所有成人候洗者必須讀《當信道理》一次，在每條當信道理旁的方格加個「剔」號，以示認同該條道理，所有當信道理都「剔」齊了，才准領洗和領堅振，少一個「剔」也不能入門。
至於已領洗的教友，也要再「剔」一次；如果有人持續地不「剔」齊所有當信道理，就給他們補課，補課後還是「剔」不齊全，即歸入「異端」。
這是否較妥當？
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/8 下午 11:33:06
|
|
|
至於兄所言的：
至於甚麼是「信」？我信聖經，我信天主，我信聖洗，也信復活，我信在祈禱中得到的啟示，我信人世間所能感受到的愛，也信天主埋在每個人心中的良知......
看上去固然似乎很漂亮，很悲壯。但想深一層，馬丁路德和Cranmer，不都是這樣想並如此表述嗎？將信仰的性質主觀化，最終只會使它的內容含糊不清。
就例如：「信聖經」的西滿兄為何「相信」聖經乃七十三卷而不是六十六卷？
當信仰的說辭缺乏它所必然要求的連貫性時，它們只能成為夢話而矣。
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2007/3/8 下午 11:33:15
|
|
|
「knowingly and obstinately to reject the defined doctrines」
有沒有較客觀的指引，說明怎樣才算「obstinately」？是一年、兩年還是十年？
「 Individuals who experience serious difficulties with or doubts about Church teaching should carefully study those Church teachings from authentic sources and seek advice from a confessor or pastor.」
這正是我現在努力做的事，若不，也毋須在這裡和大家討論此話題。
edward，
和你討論問題，我是有得益或「進步」的。記得我也曾告訴你，未在此網站和你討論問題前，我是否定「教宗有不能錯的神恩」；我現在的想法是我不能肯定也不能否定「教宗有不能錯的神恩」。這該算某程度的進步吧。
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2007/3/8 下午 11:42:03
|
|
|
edward,
原來我的信仰很「悲壯」嗎？我倒不覺得，我還以為那是很平靜的信仰。
至於馬丁路德，如果你要我猜，我猜他現在是和天主一起，將來你和我也會跟他相遇。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/8 下午 11:51:49
|
|
|
西滿兄：
小弟所說的隱密是指「intimate」，不一定解作「收埋」。我的意思是：儘管有人在此論壇把話如此如此說，但該人的心亦「可能」並非如此。
當今現代人，連婚姻的盟誓都不那麼看重時，剔格仔與舉起幾隻手指發誓，兩者可能分別不大。
其次，若按你所建議的，則該些剔格仔表格，只能針對過往教會發表過的明確訓導。但是信仰的性質亦要求我們認同教會在「將來」所要發表的所有明確訓導。
事實上，信理部亦針對所曾「檢察」過的不同教友特殊需要，制定各種「信德誓詞」供當事人宣誓或簽署，以表示（一）教會對個別教友在信德上的要求；（二）教友對上述要求的認同。
一九八九年的信德宣誓則可說是典型的（而「變奏」的例子則有這份）。你能真心地認同它的內容嗎？
________________________________________
我〔某某〕堅決相信並明認在信經中所包括的一切和每條信理，就是：
我信唯一的天主，全能的聖父，天地萬物，無論有形無形，都是祂所創造的。
我信唯一的主、耶穌基督、天主的獨生子。祂在萬世之前，由聖父所生。祂是出自天主的天主，出自光明的光明，出自真天主的真天主。祂是聖父所生，而非聖父所造，與聖父同性同體，萬物是藉著祂而造成的。祂為了我們人類，並為了我們的得教，從天降下。祂因聖神由童貞瑪利亞取得肉軀，而成為人。祂正如聖經所載，第三日復活了。祂升了天，坐在聖父的右邊。衪還要光榮地降來，審判生者死者，祂的神國萬世無疆。
我信聖神，祂是主及賦予生命者，由聖父聖子所共發。祂和聖父聖子，同受欽崇，同享光榮，祂曾藉先知們發言。
我信唯一、至聖、至公、從宗徒傳下來的教會。
我承認赦罪的聖洗，只有一個。
我期待死人的復活，及來世的生命。阿們。
我也堅決相信在書寫的天主聖言中或傳承中所包括的一切，以及由教會藉隆重的判斷，或藉慣常與普通的教導、所提出的那些被認為是天主啟示而應當相信的信理。
我並且堅決地維護並堅持、教會關於信德或倫理的教義、以確定方式所提出的一切與每條信理或規律。
此外，我以意志與理智上的虔敬，尊崇贊同羅馬教宗或世界主教團、在執行正式的訓導權時所宣布的教義，雖然他們並無意以決定性的行為予以宣布。
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 上午 09:56:01
|
|
|
龔神父既然仍是合法的神父,他當然仍有舉祭的責任和權力.
另一位出名的異議神父是查理斯嘉倫神父.最近剛買了他的回憶錄,"忠誠的異議",很有趣的一本書呢.
edward,是否"異端"就不可能領聖體,我有高度懷疑,首先如照edward所說不承認教宗的不能錯權就被視為異端,就不能領聖體,則在特定情況下準許正教會的信友在我們教會內領聖體的教律是沒意義和隱含矛盾的.
另外,我仍然認為對某些信理的懷疑,仍可能是該名信友嵌入一種"頑固的無知"當中而已,仍無損他對天主的信賴.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 上午 10:02:07
|
|
|
如我沒記錯,Fr. Tissa Balasuriya的事件已經解決,他的絕罰已經取消了很久,雖然事件的"過程"令人感到有很多"法律程序不公"的問題,但最終經各方努力而解決.
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 上午 10:50:59
|
|
|
FR TISSA BALASURIYA RECONCILED WITH THE CHURCH
The reconciliation of Fr Tissa Balasuriya, O.M.I. with the Catholic Church took place on 15 January 1998 in Colombo, Sri Lanka, in the presence of H.E. Nicholas Marcus Fernando, Archbishop of Colombo; H.E. Osvaldo Padilla, the Apostolic Nuncio in Sri Lanka; and Rev. Fr Marcello Zago, Superior General of the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statement of Reconciliation
I, Fr Tissa Balasuriya, 0,M.I., declare that my life commitment has always been to endeavour to be a true disciple of Jesus Christ, to serve the Church and to work for integral human liberation, including a more just society. In terms of that aim I have striven to promote theology in view of an inculturation of the faith in Asia.
My book Mary and Human Liberation was intended to be written from that perspective. After a long fraternal conversation with the Superior General and some members of the General Council of my Congregation, the Missionary Oblates of Mary Immaculate, I realize that serious ambiguities and doctrinal errors were perceived in my writings and therefore provoked negative reactions from other parties, affected relationships and led to an unfortunate polarization in the ecclesial community. I truly regret the harm this has caused. This entire episode has been very painful for me. It has caused pain to the Christian community and to many others who have been directly or indirectly involved in this situation.
In the presence of the Archbishop of Colombo and the Apostolic Nuncio, I have publicly professed my faith according to the Credo of the People of God, authored by Pope Paul VI, since it is a global expression of the Catholic faith to which I can spontaneously relate. I am conscious of the fact that the wording of this profession differs somewhat from that of the text prepared for me by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. However, I recognize that both express the same faith of the faith of the Church.
In particular, I profess with the Church:
- that the meaning of dogmatic formulas remains always true and unchangeable though capable of being expressed more clearly and better understood;
- that the revelation of Jesus Christ is supernatural and unique in character;
- that the Holy Scriptures, Old and New , are the Word of God;
- that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the universal Saviour;
- that Jesus Christ is the founder of the Church which is sign and sacrament salvation for all the world;
- moreover, I profess the dogma of original sin as taught by the Council of Trent (DS 1510-1516) and of one Baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
- I believe in and honour Mary, her divine her motherhood, her Immaculate Conception and virginity, as well as her bodily Assumption into heaven;
- I accept the Magisterium of the Roman Pontiff and of the College of Bishops in union with him;
- I value my communion with the Church and with its pastors;
- I recognize the rights and duties of the Bishops to exercise their pastoral care, to lead the Catholic community in the way of true faith and to take evaluative and directive positions regarding theological writings, even though I was expecting a more open dialogue for an objective scrutiny of my book.
- I assume that the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith intervened according to its regulations and I am aware that many letters were exchanged through the mediation of my Superior General, even though I was hoping for a more direct and personal dialogue.
My hope and prayer is that with time true healing will take place and that together we will be able to build up a Church that "grows to maturity and longs for the completed kingdom." (cf. Lumen Gentium, n. 5)
15 January 1998
Tissa Balasuriya, O.M.I.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decree of Reconciliation
I, Nicholas Marcus Fernando, Archbishop of Colombo, in the, presence of H.E. Most Rev. Osvaldo Padilla, Apostolic Nuncio in Sri Lanka, and Rt. Rev. Dr. Vianney Fernando, Bishop of Kandy and President of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of Sri Lanka, today, 15 January 1998 in the chapel of my residence, received the profession of Faith from Fr Tissa Balasuriya, O.M.I. He used the profession of faith authored by Pope Paul VI in place of the formula prepared for him by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, asserting that both express the same faith of the Church.
At the same ceremony, Fr Balasuriya presented me with a Statement of Reconciliation, dated and signed by him. This statement is to be published in the national Catholic newspaper. In this statement he regrets the harm caused by his book, Mary and Human Liberation, and by the subsequent events. He also expressed his Catholic faith and recognized the authority of the Magisterium exercised at both the local and universal levels in regard to his writings. 'S.
Concerning the future Fr Balasuriya agrees to submit his writing regarding faith and morals to the imprimatur of both the diocesan and religious Ordinaries. He also promises also to abstain from any declaration that is in contradiction to this reconciliation.
Since all the conditions indicated by the Congregation for Doctrine of the Faith for the reconciliation are now implemented, and with the authorization of the said Congregation, I hereby declare the remission of the excommunication which Fr Tissa Balasuriya incurred accorded to the Notification of the same Congregation issued in Rome on 2 January l997.
In view of this renewed communion with the Church we rejoice in the Lord and with our brother Tissa Balasuriya; we look forward to a fruitful ministry in the service the people of God.
15 January 1998.
Nicholas Marcus Fernando
Archbishop of Colombo
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 上午 11:21:00
|
|
|
Dear Handsome,
Some heretics and schismatics, under certain conditions as stated in the canon quoted below, may be admitted to the reception of the Sacraments. The essential requirement being the unity in faith concerning the very sacraments involved. It is not necessary for them to adhere to the dogma of Papal Infallibility in order to have communicatio in sacris.
Cf. Canon 844 -
Can. 844 §1. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments licitly to Catholic members of the Christian faithful alone, who likewise receive them licitly from Catholic ministers alone, without prejudice to the prescripts of §§2, 3, and 4 of this canon, and can. 861, §2.
§2. Whenever necessity requires it or true spiritual advantage suggests it, and provided that danger of error or of indifferentism is avoided, the Christian faithful for whom it is physically or morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister are permitted to receive the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick from non-
Catholic ministers in whose Churches these sacraments are valid.
§3. Catholic ministers administer the sacraments of penance, Eucharist, and anointing of the sick licitly to members of Eastern Churches which do not have full communion with the Catholic Church if they seek such on their own accord and are properly disposed. This is also valid for members of other Churches which in the judgment of the Apostolic See are in the same condition in regard to the sacraments as these Eastern Churches.
§4. If the danger of death is present or if, in the judgment of the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops, some other grave necessity urges it, Catholic ministers administer these same sacraments licitly also to other Christians not having full communion with the Catholic Church, who cannot approach a minister of their own community and who seek such on their own accord, provided that they manifest Catholic faith in respect to these sacraments and are properly disposed.
§5. For the cases mentioned in §§2, 3, and 4, the diocesan bishop or conference of bishops is not to issue general norms except after consultation at least with the local competent authority of the interested non-Catholic Church or community.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 上午 11:48:07
|
|
|
Dear Handsome,
In my view, the so-called "invincible error" presupposes a condition in which an individual Catholic is enclosed in one's own understanding of what it means to be a Catholic. It is a terrible kind of spiritual blindness.
I would say the term "invincible error / ignorance", when applied within the Church community, precludes "confrontation" by the pastor - in the belief that a revealing and then knowledge of the "truth" would induce an individual to formal heresy or schism.
If, after being confronted by a competent person with objective facts, and he/she still persists in that error and "thinks" of himself/herself as a Catholic - then the issue fits precisely with the classical psychiatric definition of "delusion".
A psychotic person is certainly not presumed to be "culpable" in the first place. Besides Holy Communion, he probably needs medications too ...
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 01:27:35
|
|
|
edward,
你的說話愈來愈深奧。你是指我有delusion嗎？
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 02:24:18
|
|
|
edward,
有趣的是fr. tissa 最後也是沒有按cdf的方式及要求去作他的信德宣言,他簡選了保祿六世的天主子民信經,而cdf也接受了.
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 02:36:31
|
|
|
Dear Handsome,
I will be most interested if you could provide me a copy of CDF's profession of faith to compare the differences.
For me, I have the original text of the CDF's Notificazione. Will supply it if you want.
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 03:49:47
|
|
|
前蘇聯常常把異見人士當作精神病人來監禁「醫治」，教人心寒。
|
|
靚仔
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 05:26:49
|
|
|
edward,
I had read the CDF Notification at that time. So no need to give me.
The CDF Profession of faith is base on Nicene-Constantinoplitan Creed.
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2007/3/9 下午 10:29:42
|
|
|
Edward,
這一條我現時不能接受：
「我並且堅決地維護並堅持、教會關於信德或倫理的教義、以確定方式所提出的『一切與每條』信理或規律。」
我不是不接受教會的倫理教導，我只是不能接受「每一條」教導。我估計，我現時只能接受百分之九十九左右。
正如我曾告訴你，有一次我在堂區的善會月會中問：「我經過深思熟慮後，仍不認同使用避孕套作避孕有錯，那我應該怎麼做？」
會中有近二十人，以成年和中年人居多，他們都沉默；沉默也是一種訊息。最後神父說了一些話，但意思不明確。
edward，
如果要百分百接受天主教會的每條教條才算是天主教徒，才可領聖體，我肯定世上的天主教徒寥寥可數。被「飛」出局的基督徒，大抵可組成「差點是天主教徒教會」。
|
|
edward
|
Posted -
2007/3/24 上午 08:45:16
|
|
|
US bishops denounce works by pro-abortion theologian
Washington, Mar. 23, 2007 (CWNews.com) - The US bishops have announced that two pamphlets circulated by a Marquette University theologian represent “false teaching” which cannot be reconciled with Catholic doctrine.
In a statement released on March 22, and approved by the administratative board of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), the bishops’ doctrinal committee said that the works by Daniel Maguire “do not present Catholic teaching.”
The doctrinal committee, chaired by Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, addressed two pamphlets circulated last year by Maguire, covering the issues of contraception, abortion, and same-sex marriage. The USCCB concluded that Maguire’s views on those topics, and his understanding of Church teaching authority, “cross the legitimate lines of theological reflection and simply enter into the area of false teaching.”
In the pamphlets, Maguire had argued that “the Roman Catholic position on abortion is pluralistic,” claiming that some Catholics have always endorsed the “pro-choice” stance. He writes that on abortion-- and on other issues such as contraception and same-sex marriage-- there are two opposing Catholic views. “Neither is official,” he says, “and neither is more Catholic than the other.”
The US bishops flatly reject that claim. “While there may be individuals who disagree with the teaching of the Church,” the USCCB statement observes, “such divergent views cannot be considered authentic Catholic teaching or the basis for reliable guidance regarding faithful Catholic moral life.” The bishops encourage reference to the Catechism of the Catholic Church for “correct and authentic teaching.”
Informed about the USCCB statement, Maguire did not budge from his position, saying that the bishops themselves are wrong. “They’re simply uninformed,” he told the New York Times, insisting that there are many different Catholic positions on controversial issues. Daniel Maguire, a former priest who has long been an active proponent of legal abortion and supporter of “Catholics for a Free Choice,” teaches moral theology at Marquette, a Jesuit-run university in Milwaukee, Wisconson. The USCCB statement noted that Milwaukee’s Archbishop Timothy Dolan “has made public statements affirming that the views expressed by Professor Maguire in his two pamphlets are erroneous and incompatible with the Church's teaching.”
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2007/3/24 下午 05:38:30
|
|
|
Daniel Maguire 是否仍是羅馬天主教徒？
如果是，那我可放心了。
|
|
superben2648
|
Posted -
2009/8/18 下午 06:16:49
|
|
|
聖公會己領洗及堅振，想轉天主教,是否需要上慕道班才可領洗，需時多久?
有人說只需堅振，需時多久?
那個是真?
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2009/8/19 下午 04:29:49
|
|
|
以我所知，在聖公會領了洗的人，加入羅馬天主教會不需要再洗。
要不要再領堅振，我不知道。
上慕道班當然好，就算天主教徒也有所謂「再慕道」。再者，聖公會的教義和天主教有分別；加入天主教，好應了解天主教的教義。
|
|
獨立思考
|
Posted -
2009/8/23 上午 02:19:55
|
|
|
如果在基督教會領了洗，加入天主教會又需不需要再洗一次？
|
|
simon
|
Posted -
2009/8/23 下午 12:22:04
|
|
|
獨立思考：
聖公會不算基督教嗎？
又是「以我所知」，天主教會不是承認所有基督教會的洗禮，因為基督教會眾多，教義各有不同。天主教會承認部份基督教會的洗禮，但「部份」是指大部份還是小份，我不知道。
講開又講，基督教有沒有一個公認的定義？是誰決定某一個信耶穌的團體是否屬於基督教？
|
|
獨立思考
|
Posted -
2009/9/2 上午 01:20:08
|
|
|
simon:
聽聞基督教是以「使徒信經」來作教義準則，如果有教會的信仰不合乎「使徒信經」，那就是異端。
近年有個基督教組職成立，是為了調查被疑為異端的教會和研究新興的宗教。這個組織叫做「新興宗教關注小組」。
http://www.cgner.org/modules/news/
|
|
