Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: solitary Man on January 07, 2024, 07:44:15 AM
-
Happy Sunday
Not even when I was new to Ordus did I like the series, I always found it strange, but after I researched it, my god, heresies, heresies and heresies!
It's worse to discover that Bishop Robert Barron worked on the series!:facepalm::facepalm:
-
Why watch any tv?
Most tv shows are garbage. There is far worse than the Chosen. How many Christians watch soap operas and tv shows like Charmed, Lucifer, Dark shadows etc
-
Never heard of The Chosen. What is it?
-
It’s a tv show about the apostles of Jesus.
-
I have never seen any movie about Christ's life in the English language where Christ mentions "hell" even once. That's why I avoid most movie's about Christ's life as a rule of thumb.
If The Chosen is anything like every other movie about Christ in the English language where Christ's teachings are absolutely watered-down, then I'd probably hate it. However, if it's the first movie in the English language that actually shows Christ mention "hell" (even if it's just once), then The Chosen is miles ahead of most movies of its kind.
-
Supposedly there was an episode a few months ago (I didn't see it, I only read about it) in which the script writers decided the thing to do was to have Mary Magdalene give the meal benediction... with both Our Lord and her brother Lazarus seated at the table. :facepalm:
Maybe most viewers, prot or not, are too un-catechized to notice the many heresies, but a scene like this, willfully or not, encourages the feminist dingbats who presume way too much about St. Paul's mention of Phebe in Romans 16:1. :smirk:
-
Why watch any tv?
Most tv shows are garbage.
This. We tend to watch old shows on DVD. I gave up on TV a long time ago.
-
What are some major heresies taught/promoted by the chosen? I've generally liked the show (again, I'm not watching for an education in theology) and other than Mary briefly mentioning that she experienced pain giving birth to Jesus, I haven't noticed, off the top of my head, anything I'd say is heretical. Historically/culturally inaccurate in some cases, sure.
After seeing the trailer for season 4, I am a little concerned based on one line but I'll just need to wait and see the context it's used in.
-
What are some major heresies taught/promoted by the chosen? I've generally liked the show (again, I'm not watching for an education in theology) and other than Mary briefly mentioning that she experienced pain giving birth to Jesus, I haven't noticed, off the top of my head, anything I'd say is heretical. Historically/culturally inaccurate in some cases, sure.
After seeing the trailer for season 4, I am a little concerned based on one line but I'll just need to wait and see the context it's used in.
Well, even pain during childbirth is possible if Our Lady offered to accept it. Without Original Sin, both Our Lord and Our Lady were also not subject to death and suffering in general, but both most certainly experienced both.
-
The False Christ of The Chosen (https://crisismagazine.com/opinion/the-false-christ-of-the-chosen)
Christology matters. Reject the false "Jesus" of The Chosen (https://www.leilamiller.net/blog/2023/8/19/christology-matters-reject-the-false-jesus-of-the-chosen)
Apparently these are by the same author. When I came across the later article, I initially assumed I was finding a different source with the same opinion.
Here's a different author:
The Chosen TV show does more harm than good for spread of Gospel message (https://theaugustapress.com/column-the-chosen-tv-show-does-more-harm-than-good-for-spread-of-gospel-message/)
-
Supposedly there was an episode a few months ago (I didn't see it, I only read about it) in which the script writers decided the thing to do was to have Mary Magdalene give the meal benediction... with both Our Lord and her brother Lazarus seated at the table. :facepalm:
Maybe most viewers, prot or not, are too un-catechized to notice the many heresies, but a scene like this, willfully or not, encourages the feminist dingbats who presume way too much about St. Paul's mention of Phebe in Romans 16:1. :smirk:
Mary Magdalene’s brother isn’t Lazarus. Lazarus is brother to Martha and a different Mary.
-
Most of the tv shows are far worse like murder, adultery, sodomy, orgies, violence etc.
-
Mary Magdalene’s brother isn’t Lazarus. Lazarus is brother to Martha and a different Mary.
Traditionally, in the West/Latin church those 3 Marys were considered the same person. The Greeks and Protestants consider her to be 3 or 2 different people.
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm
In 1969, when the Church changed the Calendar there were two feasts: Mary Magdalene was still on 22 July, while Mary of Bethany was is celebrated as a separate saint, along with her siblings Lazarus and Martha on 29 July.
The older idea as being the same Mary was held by Tertullian, Gregory the Great, Augustine of Hippo, Bede the Venerable, Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas, Catherine of Siena, Thomas More, John Fisher, Teresa of Ávila, John of the Cross, Francis de Sales, among others.
http://tinyurl.com/2k9sbaur
-
Most of the tv shows are far worse like murder, adultery, sodomy, orgies, violence etc.
Of course, there is a lot of rot on TV, so it's best avoided altogether. But I would say that, for example, murder on a murder mystery, which is seen as bad & punished in the end, is far less harmful than this false depiction of Our Lord & the Gospels on The Chosen.
-
Traditionally, in the West/Latin church those 3 Marys were considered the same person. The Greeks and Protestants consider her to be 3 or 2 different people.
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm
In 1969, when the Church changed the Calendar there were two feasts: Mary Magdalene was still on 22 July, while Mary of Bethany was is celebrated as a separate saint, along with her siblings Lazarus and Martha on 29 July.
The older idea as being the same Mary was held by Tertullian, Gregory the Great, Augustine of Hippo, Bede the Venerable, Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas, Catherine of Siena, Thomas More, John Fisher, Teresa of Ávila, John of the Cross, Francis de Sales, among others.
http://tinyurl.com/2k9sbaur
Thank you so much. Is Mary Magdalene the woman that was almost stoned?
-
Of course, there is a lot of rot on TV, so it's best avoided altogether. But I would say that, for example, murder on a murder mystery, which is seen as bad & punished in the end, is far less harmful than this false depiction of Our Lord & the Gospels on The Chosen.
I now understand what you are saying. Thank you.
One of my friends text me a meme about how tv is created to have electromagnetic ability to mess with our nervous systems.
Everything is controlled by satan’s buddies the free mason luciferians.
-
I’ve watched what has come out so far with the series except the new season that is out in theaters (I think).
My husband and I have really liked it. There were a few things I raised my eyebrow at. To be honest, I don’t remember what they were but would if I watched again. For the most part it is pretty accurate.
I guess what I have enjoyed about it is that it really brought the gospels to life. I obviously knew that the events in the gospels were true but sometimes it’s hard to picture events, you know? It helped me to contemplate the gospels more and it helped me to draw closer to Our Lord through that.
I’m looking forward to watching the next season. I’m not sure where my husband got them. I think they were free with our Prime subscription. We don’t have TV but do rent or buy movies off of Prime.
-
Yes. It’s free.
-
Our Lady's birth was not miraculous on the show. So, we stopped watching it.
-
Even with one heresy (indeed for far less) this show would have been prohibited to Catholics if the hierarchy were functioning properly. We are forbidden to read the King James Bible for instance, despite it being much closer to the true scriptures than this show is. I would say that traditional Catholics should hold themselves to the same standards of morality which they know the Church upheld prior to Vatican 2. This includes not reading or watching things which would clearly be on the index or forbidden via the Legion of Decency.
If we applied this also to reading online, far fewer people would be led into various errors which abound under the name of "Catholic" these days.
-
This is why I don’t own a TV. I don’t know anything about The Chosen except that it’s a TV show. I still don’t know who played whom in the Super Bowl or who won. I do know someone had a victory party and two people got shot and killed. Sometimes ignorance IS bliss!
-
Well, even pain during childbirth is possible if Our Lady offered to accept it. Without Original Sin, both Our Lord and Our Lady were also not subject to death and suffering in general, but both most certainly experienced both.
Absolutely not! Our Lady remained a Virgin before, during and after Our Lord's birth, therefore she gave birth miraculously, Our Lord came as the ray of sunshine goes through glass or a prism, it was a miraculous birth! To say that Our Lady gave birth normally, with or without pains, is a blasphemy...
Besides, the show has many other problems. It is paid for by Mormons and shows Our Lord with a human personality, which He didn't have. And I don't think it's respectful towards St Matthew either. Not to mention that the Romans never had an issue with Jesus! 🤦
-
Our Lady remained a Virgin before, during and after Our Lord's birth
De fide.
therefore she gave birth miraculously
De fide.
Our Lord came as the ray of sunshine goes through glass or a prism
Pious Opinion. The dogmatic definitions uphold the perpetual and perfect virginityof the BVM. The definitions do not lay out how this miracle occurred other than through the omnipotence of God in the working of the Holy Ghost.
-
Aren't labour pains a punishment placed on Eve? So Our Lady would be exempt from that because she doesn't have original sin?
-
Absolutely not! Our Lady remained a Virgin before, during and after Our Lord's birth, therefore she gave birth miraculously, Our Lord came as the ray of sunshine goes through glass or a prism, it was a miraculous birth! To say that Our Lady gave birth normally, with or without pains, is a blasphemy...
Besides, the show has many other problems. It is paid for by Mormons and shows Our Lord with a human personality, which He didn't have. And I don't think it's respectful towards St Matthew either. Not to mention that the Romans never had an issue with Jesus! 🤦
Help me out here. What do you mean, "a human personality, which He didn't have"? Please elaborate.
He wept. He begged to be spared the Cross. He rebuked people who needed rebuking (including Peter). He got thirsty. Sounds pretty human to me.
And the Scriptures are really very sparing in their description of Jesus as a Person, and what He was like to be around and to talk to. Of His life from roughly ages 12 through 30, we know nothing.
-
Thank you so much. Is Mary Magdalene the woman that was almost stoned?
The woman caught in adultery is not named.
-
Help me out here. What do you mean, "a human personality, which He didn't have"? Please elaborate.
He wept. He begged to be spared the Cross. He rebuked people who needed rebuking (including Peter). He got thirsty. Sounds pretty human to me.
And the Scriptures are really very sparing in their description of Jesus as a Person, and what He was like to be around and to talk to. Of His life from roughly ages 12 through 30, we know nothing.
Not me that posted it but Christ has 2 Natures (human and Divine) but is 1 Person (Divine, not human, the base word of personality is 'person,' which is what I'm guessing the poster was getting at.) To say he is 2 persons (human and Divine) is actually a heresy. There are many Christological heresies so I don't remember specifically which one it's called. The poster should elaborate to be sure though.
-
Help me out here. What do you mean, "a human personality, which He didn't have"? Please elaborate.
He wept. He begged to be spared the Cross. He rebuked people who needed rebuking (including Peter). He got thirsty. Sounds pretty human to me.
And the Scriptures are really very sparing in their description of Jesus as a Person, and what He was like to be around and to talk to. Of His life from roughly ages 12 through 30, we know nothing.
Yes, Our Lord had 2 natures, the divine nature and the human nature, definitely. But his personality was that of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, his personality was divine, not human. For instance, you never see Jesus laugh in the Gospels. He never said, like in The Chosen "The Son of man..... [...], that's me, by the way!" 🤦
-
Aren't labour pains a punishment placed on Eve? So Our Lady would be exempt from that because she doesn't have original sin?
No, Our Lady was exempt because the birth of Jesus was not a normal birth, it was miraculous. Our Lord came through our Lady like the rays of the sun through glass for instance. Not the normal way.
-
Yes, Our Lord had 2 natures, the divine nature and the human nature, definitely. But his personality was that of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, his personality was divine, not human. For instance, you never see Jesus laugh in the Gospels. He never said, like in The Chosen "The Son of man..... [...], that's me, by the way!" 🤦
"his [His] personality was divine, not human"
That statement is the heresy of the monophysites. Our Lord was just as human (excepting He did not sin) as He was divine.
And yes, I have no doubt that Our Lord laughed. All humans laugh.
-
Yes, Our Lord had 2 natures, the divine nature and the human nature, definitely. But his personality was that of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, his personality was divine, not human. For instance, you never see Jesus laugh in the Gospels. He never said, like in The Chosen "The Son of man..... [...], that's me, by the way!" 🤦
You are confusing the meanings of Persona (πόστασις, prostasis) and Natura (φύσεις, physis). Persona in theological Greek (and Latin) does not meaning what the word "person" means in English. What you have written of our Lord is at best heterodox or at worst heretical. Go back and read the Christological teaching of Council of Chalcedon. Our Lord is fully God and fully human (2 prostasis), without confusion or degradation of the two natures, grounded in a single physis.
And your explanation for the miracle of the Virgin birth is not Church teaching binding on anyone, but merely pious opinion -- which I happen to share but I know that it is not doctrine, just opinion.
-
You are confusing the meanings of Persona (πόστασις, prostasis) and Natura (φύσεις, physis). Persona in theological Greek (and Latin) does not meaning what the word "person" means in English. What you have written of our Lord is at best heterodox or at worst heretical. Go back and read the Christological teaching of Council of Chalcedon. Our Lord is fully God and fully human (2 prostasis), without confusion or degradation of the two natures, grounded in a single physis.
And your explanation for the miracle of the Virgin birth is not Church teaching binding on anyone, but merely pious opinion -- which I happen to share but I know that it is not doctrine, just opinion.
Oy veh! Even I present the Incarnate Word backwards here!
It should read:
Our Lord is fully God and fully human (2 physis), without confusion or degradation of the two natures, grounded in a single prostasis.
🤦♂️
-
This is why the world is with war and destruction: Because the world will not accept the Incarnation
-
"his [His] personality was divine, not human"
That statement is the heresy of the monophysites. Our Lord was just as human (excepting He did not sin) as He was divine.
And yes, I have no doubt that Our Lord laughed. All humans laugh.
If you look at the Baltimore Catechism, and the catechism of St Pius X, and the catechism of the Summa Theologica, they all say the same thing: "Christ is a divine Person having the nature of God and the nature of man" (Baltimore Catechism No 3, question 83). I repeat, Our Lord had the human nature and the divine nature and His Person was divine, the second person of the Blessed Trinity
Laughing can be argued. But it has been argued by many saints that laughing is somewhat of an imperfection, and that Our Lord didn't laugh. Furthermore, if it was important for us to know that Jesus laughed, it would have been in the Gospel.
-
I’ve never heard that laughing is an imperfection. Wouldn’t crying be as well? Yet Our Lord did weep.
-
I’ve never heard that laughing is an imperfection. Wouldn’t crying be as well? Yet Our Lord did weep.
Well, weeping for our sins is not an imperfection I guess. The laughing argument isn't of faith, it's just the opinion of certain saints. Laughing presupposes some surprise or the capacity to be amused by something you didn't know, so I guess that is the argument. St Thomas More and others were of that opinion, which remains an opinion only of course. ☺️
-
If you look at the Baltimore Catechism, and the catechism of St Pius X, and the catechism of the Summa Theologica, they all say the same thing: "Christ is a divine Person having the nature of God and the nature of man" (Baltimore Catechism No 3, question 83). I repeat, Our Lord had the human nature and the divine nature and His Person was divine, the second person of the Blessed Trinity
Laughing can be argued. But it has been argued by many saints that laughing is somewhat of an imperfection, and that Our Lord didn't laugh. Furthermore, if it was important for us to know that Jesus laughed, it would have been in the Gospel.
You persist in an erroneous notion of "person" that, rooted in Decartes and Kant, equates personhood with subjective behaviour characteristics as the word is used colloquially in English.
In theology, "Person" means an
individual substance, separate and distinct from all other substances of the same kind, possessing itself and all the parts, attributes, and energies which are in it. The Personhood of Jesus Christ is the divine substance shared equally and undivided with the Father and the Holy Ghost. It is not Jesus' incarnated behaviour which is grounded in His unfallen human nature.
The divine and human natures are united without confusion or subordination of one to the other in the one Person of Jesus Christ. He is fully divine and fully human. As St. Paul teaches, our Lord is like us in all things except sin.
At times you slide variously into monophysitism, miaphysitism, and monothelitism. You have been corrected, Dominique. If you persist in your erroneous claim regarding Christology, you will have to be regarded as a formal heretic.
-
I’ve never heard that laughing is an imperfection. Wouldn’t crying be as well? Yet Our Lord did weep.
Always fittingly. Never as a one marred by original sin. The Chosen blurs those lines and not out of ignorance either, I suspect.
-
You persist in an erroneous notion of "person" that, rooted in Decartes and Kant, equates personhood with subjective behaviour characteristics as the word is used colloquially in English.
In theology, "Person" means an
individual substance, separate and distinct from all other substances of the same kind, possessing itself and all the parts, attributes, and energies which are in it. The Personhood of Jesus Christ is the divine substance shared equally and undivided with the Father and the Holy Ghost. It is not Jesus' incarnated behaviour which is grounded in His unfallen human nature.
The divine and human natures are united without confusion or subordination of one to the other in the one Person of Jesus Christ. He is fully divine and fully human. As St. Paul teaches, our Lord is like us in all things except sin.
At times you slide variously into monophysitism, miaphysitism, and monothelitism. You have been corrected, Dominique. If you persist in your erroneous claim regarding Christology, you will have to be regarded as a formal heretic.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
-
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Quod est demonstrandum. ^ ^ ^
-
Laughing can be argued. But it has been argued by many saints that laughing is somewhat of an imperfection, and that Our Lord didn't laugh. Furthermore, if it was important for us to know that Jesus laughed, it would have been in the Gospel.
There is pure laughter in guileless delight at the goodness of Creation and Divine Providence. (See also, for a mortal example: Isaac, "he who laughs".) As to the last sentence, Saint John the Evangelist said (paraphrasing) that were all that Christ had done and said to be written down, it would take many more stacks of pages than are already in the Gospels.