vendredi 1 juillet 2011

I was wrong: "singulari prorsus privilegio" revisited

Confer the Latin quote in previous message. I had taken "singulari" in the sense "belonging to a particular person alone" or "relating only to a particular person, none other".

The privilege of assumption into Heaven belongs to the Blessed Virgin in a special way, but she shares the grace with others, at least saint John, her adoptive son, who laid down in his grave, there was a light and in the grave was only mannah, not his body, or with the both witnesses after their three and a half day of death, which will happen before the end of the world.

Singularis also means "individual, separate", or "in a class of its own", "sui generis". Taken that way the orthodoxy of the text is restored. She was not assumed as her son lifted himself, by his own divine power. She was not assumed through the merits of an even greater virgin, as her adoptive son and every one else at least after her assumption who was or shall be assumed has that grace from her merits and prayers.

I am consulting Liddell Scott.

Sorry, Munificentissimus Deus, I slandered through lack of linguistic attention.

...

I was not going to publish this before I had double checked the Vatican Internet version with a printed Latin text from Vatican issued back then, i e AAS 1950. So, not waiting, I take back what I said, unless there come a shock discovery that it was after all "privilegio prorsus unico" or that "singulari prorsus privilegio" was intended to exclude either Dormition of Our Lady or Assumptions and non-corruptions of others, like St John or the two witnesses of Apocalypse 11. Which I find not likely at all.

...

Easter day or Easter monday 2009, I had one short doubt, not about fact or Resurrection, but about complete inerrant truthfulness of Gospellers - the detail when the Holy Myrrhbearers bought the myrrh, obviously not in the morning before sunrise, it would seem (as it happens, energetic persons might have got that through too with a very accomodating merchant), but discovered linguistic reason way before drifting from faith - "having bought" does not mean bought just the minute before they started walking - because I had a trust in the authority of the Gospel. If I had had same trust in Papacy that day nearly ten years ago, I might have spared myself a lot of trouble, including before God.

I am thankful the Orthodox to which I came did NOT demand I abjure Catholicism. Which I did not. Going back in 2009 broke no oath. I am thankful I got no further away from Rome than to Iassi. I am thankful excommunications from 1054 were officially lifted before I did this.

I thank the most Sacred Heart of Jesus for keeping me safe from my childhood before baptism and youth, and the Immaculate Heart of Mary for keeping some purity left in me these last times.

Hans-Georg Lundahl
Bibl. Georges Pompidou
completed Day after Feast of
Sacred Heart, 2-VII-2011

PS: As the example shows, I am a scholar, not a prophet. I made a similar mistake about Byzantine Emperors and Albigensian Crusade, by conflating the Emperor called Bulgaroctonos with the one dealing with Bogumils into one emperor making a proto-Montfort by making a killing war campaign against Bogumilic Bulgarians, which was not the exact case. It is the kind of mistake one makes as a scholar, not as a true prophet (they don't make such mistakes) nor as a false one (their mistakes have ghastlier origins).

I am also a scholar not a bishop. Bishops are not supposed to pay attention to myth or to defend themselves when slapped on the cheek (Epistle to Timothy about myths to be avoided - I think - and Matthew chs 5 - 7 about cheeks to be turned are adressed to leaders of Christianity, not as strictly to everyone else)./HGL

2 commentaires:

Hans-Georg Lundahl a dit…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzBT39gx-TE&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

CSL and JRRT in debate about Myth.

Hans-Georg Lundahl a dit…

The theatrical rendering of the debate could have been better. In real life JRRT and CSL were approx same age, and socially they were equally set out to teach each other, though CSL admitted having learnt more from JRRT than the reverse. And in real life JRRT hardly had any period about which he could refer as of a past darkness (?).

So much on Christians (CSL became a Christian after that debate) who, not being bishops, could handle myths without breaking the words in Epistle to Timothy.

Now the link to the main thing, the Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius XII:

Munificentissimus Deus, Latin text

Munificentissimus Deus, English text.