I tried this question earlier and it was closed due to so many other similar questions but, having looked through I didn't find an answer. What, if any, is the **salvific benefit** of the perpetual virginity of Mary? In other words, having been born of a virgin according to prophesy and all other parts of the life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and coming again of Christ remaining the same, is our salvation in Christ lessened in some way if Mary has moral and lawful intercourse with her husband?

Text: > “At this time Moses was born, and was well pleasing to God; and he was > brought up in his father’s house for three months. > > But when he was set out, Pharaoh’s daughter took him away and brought > him up as her own son. > > And **Moses** *was learned in all the* **wisdom of the Egyptians**, and was > mighty in words and deeds. > > “Now when he was forty years old, it came into his heart to visit his > brethren, the children of Israel.” ‭‭**Acts‬ ‭7‬:‭20‬-‭23‬** ‭**Q: How did Moses speak to the children of Israel & write the Torah if he was learned in all the ways of the Egyptians?** See also: John 5:45-47

Today is the 13th day of the calendar month falling on a Friday. Many cultures consider the combination as something evil. The superstition seems to relate to various things, like the story of Jesus' last supper and crucifixion in which there were 13 individuals present in the Upper Room on the 13th of Nisan Maundy Thursday, the night before his death on Good Friday (Courtesy: [Wikipedia](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friday_the_13th#Christian_associations)) . Surely the Catholic Church is aware that many of her followers are victims of the superstition. One gets to hear priests speaking against superstitions like the one involving Friday the 13th. One also gets to read about them. **My question is**: Has the Catholic Church officially denounced the superstition involving Friday the 13th?

**Prior General Gilles Wach** is referred to as a **Monsignor**, meaning he must hold one of the three levels of papal honors. I'm not sure when he became a monsignor, but apparently it was before he founded the ICKSP (no confirmation though). His coat of arms has both the galero and tassels all in blue (consistent with his chapter's color scheme), so you can't tell from there what his papal honor is. He also wears a black cassock with a pellegrina and blue piping and fascia, while other canons from the ICKSP usually wear plain black cassocks on similar occasions. I've also seen him in one picture in a blue ferraiolo over the cassock I described above, which if I'm not mistaken is a privilege only granted to supernumerary protonotaries apostolic, but that's not conclusive evidence, so please help if someone knows!

I recall somewhere in Wayne Grudem's *Systematic Theology* he mentions that it is possible that animals died before the fall (I don't recall the exact page or quote but it's not directly relevant to my question; I believe it was in the discussion of evolution). Did any early church writers have anything to say on this topic? Just to be specific let's say "early" means up to and including Augustine.

According to Catholic theology, venial sin ruins one's friendship with God, but it does not sever it completely so that the sinner merits Hell. However, James seems to say that **all** sin produces death. What is the official harmonization of James with the existence of venial sin?

I am currently going through the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults in order to join the Catholic Church. Do I need to confess the sins I committed before becoming Catholic?

Here in Brazil, there are some Pentecostal preachers who claim that Satan (Lucifer) was the "Minister of Praise in heaven" or the "ruler of the Celestial Choir". According to a Pentecostal perspective, what the biblical basis for such an assertion?

Back in the 1980s, Archbishop Lefebvre of the Society of St. Pius X consecrated four priests as bishops without the Pope's approval. Does this action make the Society schismatic?

I understand how Daniel’s prophesy of 69 weeks until “Messiah the Prince” has been fulfilled (Daniel 9:25), but I have a question about the first seven weeks of his prophesy. Was Jerusalem rebuilt in exactly 49 years (7 weeks) from the decree? Or, was it “completed” in much less time, as most timelines seem to indicate? Thank you.

The visitor, who was to address many British school children on some of the things taught in the opening chapters of Genesis (and who I personally know, hearing this from him first-hand), had his talk vetted by the school head-teacher in advance. He was told he could not quote Genesis 1:27 which says: > “In the image of God he created him: male and female he created them.” I have now seen this quote from the Gnostic *“Gospel of Thomas”* - > “When you make the male and the female one and the same, so that the > male not be male nor the female female… then you will enter the > kingdom.” 15 > > 15 The Gospel of Thomas, Logion 114, in Meyer, M W, *The Gospel of > Thomas: The Hidden Sayings of Jesus*, Harper Collins, 1992, page 33. There’s no suggestion that the head-teacher knew of this quote, or believed it, but given the way British school children seem to be being encouraged to consider ‘transitioning’ sexually, might this be behind such social engineering attempts these days? I don’t have any access to this quote and wonder ***if it can be vouched for as authentic, and if there are any other similar ideas in The Gospel of Thomas?*** Please note, I am NOT looking for exposition of Genesis 1:27; this is not a hermeneutic question but one about possible attempts to control Christian discussion of God’s creation in the hearing of some British school children. EDIT: The possible connection I’m seeking information about is that the biblical quote clearly states that God created humanity with male and female distinctives, distinctly, whereas Gnosticism is diametrically opposed to that particular point and is an ancient religion. (Reminds me of “There is nothing new under the sun”. Ecclesiastes 1:9) I’m not wanting opinions about gender but I do wonder if there is an agenda behind the modern trend being promoted in many schools. Having had clarification in an answer re. the Gnostic quotes involved, my question may now be answered as far as it can go here. Unless someone knows more?

Not that I'm plotting anything heinous, but can one be excommunicated or have excommunication lifted during an interregnum? I think, but I'm not positive, that some offenses that carry excommunication can only be lifted by the Pope. So, in the absence of a Holy Father, who can lift excommunication or does someone just have to wait for a new Pope, even on the verge of death? On the flip side, it would seem to be an offense against charity to deliver [Latae Sententiae](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/14846/what-is-latae-sententiae/14847#14847) excommunication without a possibility of repentance.

The ASV Bible is viewed to be a Public Domain work in America (as is the KJV), but is the ASV also considered a public domain bible in England? I ask this question because the internet indicates that there were certain licensing provisions made with the Crown in the original production of ASV. So would I or anyone have any problems or issues with UK copyright or Crown issues in the UK by repeatedly quoting the ASV? Oxford and Cambridge apparently don't allow the KJV to be quoted for commercial usage, and other types of usage has limitations. Is that true for the ASV bible also?

In the Catholic Church, the clerical dress (cassock) of cardinals is scarlet red in color. Are there any other catholic prelates who may don red cassocks?

How can the excommunication of a schismatic group be lifted, for the purposes of reconciliation? If no reconciliation happens, does the excommunication resume?

I'm wondering what the Roman Catholic church stance is on this man and whether they will ever declare him a martyr? I'm guessing he is too protestant to ever have any recognition in the Catholic church. What has the stance of the Catholic church been in regards to other Nazi dissidents?

Until reading Dr. Peter Kreeft's [_Socratic Logic_](https://www.amazon.com/dp/1587318083) chapter on definitions, I had no idea that "God is Love" (1 John 4:16) is a metaphor. Quote from Section 4 (The limits of definition) page 129: > As far as God is concerned, we can only say (a) what God is not or (b) what God is like. But this is not to *define* God, for each of these two choices violates a rule of definition. (a) If we use literal, univocal language, we can only say what God is *not*, not what God *is*. (E.g. God is not a man, God is not a body, God is not in time.) But God is not a negative thing, like nonbeing or death or evil. So a negative definition of God would violate one of the rules of definition (rule #5). (b) If we use analogical or metaphorical language, we can speak positively, but only to say what God is *like*, not what God *is*, literally. (E.g. we can say that God is a Father, God is Love, God is a King. But God is not a human biological father or the changeable human passion of love, or an earthly political ruler.) And of course non-literal language violates another rule of definition (rule #3). I don't really know why this blew my mind, but I had always taken those words and thought of them as literal (I still think they can and should be taken literally as well). And I've read a number of answers on this site recently that also take only a literal interpretation. But according to the Catholic Catechism, there are four senses of scripture, so what have saints, popes, councils and other good exegetes, said about what does "God is love" means from a Metaphorical, Literal, Anagogical and Moral sense? I'd prefer answers that hit on all four senses bullet point style unless there's a very good reason for excluding one.

I found this quote of Origen condemning birthdays as the practice of the gentile sinners . > **...of all the holy people in the Scriptures, no one is recorded to have kept a feast or held a great banquet on his birthday. It is only sinners (like Pharaoh and Herod) who make great rejoicings over the day on which they were born into this world below** (Origen, in Levit., Hom. VIII, in Migne P.G., XII, 495) (Thurston H. Natal Day. Transcribed by Thomas M. Barrett. Dedicated to Margaret Johanna Albertina Behling Barrett. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York). The writings of the late third century Catholic theologian Arnobius show that, even that late, Catholics objected to the celebration of birthdays as he wrote: > ...you worship with couches, altars, temples, and other service, and by celebrating their games and birthdays, those whom it was fitting that you should assail with keenest hatred. (Arnobius. Against the Heathen (Book I), Chapter 64. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 6. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1886. Online Edition Copyright © 2005 by K. Knight). Can you quote the full context of Origen (and Arnobius) quotes, and any responses or discussion on this view by others, within the third century in English and Greek? I need to know the reasons for his views. Background: >- The Encyclopedia Judaica could not be more blunt: “The celebration of birthdays is unknown in traditional Jewish ritual.” In fact, it says, the only birthday party mentioned in the Bible is for Pharaoh! (Genesis 40:20). *Birthdays, Jewishly * > >- History of celebration of birthdays in the West: > >“It is thought that the large-scale celebration of birthdays in Europe began with the cult of Mithras, which originated in Persia but was spread by soldiers throughout the Roman Empire. Before this, such celebrations were not common; and, hence, practices from other contexts such as the Saturnalia were adapted for birthdays. Because many Roman soldiers took to Mithraism, it had a wide distribution and influence throughout the empire until it was supplanted by Christianity.” > >“Christmas is also relevant because December 25th was the day of celebration of the birthday of the sun-god Mithra. Perhaps it should also be mentioned that one of the key features of Mithraism was Sunday observance. The reason that this seems to be relevant is that the Roman Emperor Constantine, the first Roman Emperor to make a profession of Christ, was also the first Emperor to make Sunday laws–which he began to do on March 7, 321. Also, a few years later, the Council of Nicea that Constantine convened in 325 A.D. declared Sunday to be the “Christian day” of worship (for more information, please see the article Europa and the Book of Revelation).” *Pagan Origins of Birthdays *

I am here trying to find sources about Pope Benedictus XVI and his history with Nazism. I don't really have a question, but I thought this would be a great place to find resources on this subject from people who are catholics.

I just read this apparent quote from Pope Francis on faithreel.com *(accessed October, 2014)*: > Most churches agree with what Pope Francis has expressed in this > opinion, *“Many think Halloween is a simple carnival like celebration, > it is not innocent. It is a small room leading to a much more > dangerous one. There is always more evil rituals, sacrifices, > defilements of cemeteries and stealing of sacred bones on Halloween. > **Taking part in Halloween is like being ritually initiated into the > occult.**”* Pretty strong words coming from the pope. Is this quote genuine? and if so, do all catholics agree with this? Is there an official stance taken by the catholic church against Halloween?