5 ms·

Catholicism has no concept of the elect, at least not in the way you describe it.

by iammisc 5y ago

52-6F-62 5y ago
Of course they do: the priesthood. The Vatican itself restricts access to its own archives.
- iammisc 5y ago
  That's not the elect as you described. Priests are no more deserving of heaven than any other baptised catholic. The 'knowledge' in the archives is not religious in nature. You don't need to have access to it to know God or achieve the ultimate goals of catholicism.
  - anigbrowl 5y ago
    You are not even replying to the same person. I think you're being a little over-literal here.
    - Natsu 5y ago
      The 'elect' as a Christian concept is a bit different from ordinary uses of the word. In context, the concept from Calvinism seemed to be under discussion until someone came into the discussion using 'elect' in the normal meaning. So I think it's important to keep track of which definition of 'elect' is in use here or you'll just be talking past each other without realizing that you're not talking about the same concept at all: https://www.learnreligions.com/five-point-calvinism-700356 https://www.learnreligions.com/five-point-calvinism-700356
      - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
        I mentioned elect in the context of classical times and the Old Testament. I wasn’t referring to whatever Christians consider the elect, but a more general term describing insiders with the secret teachings that aren’t to be mentioned in front of the masses because they might be led astray. This was certainly not an unknown idea throughout the Greek speaking philosophical world, including the early Christian church. There are no doubt Christians today who still adhere to such an idea. I don’t want to be misunderstood here: I think the mushroom idea is hogwash. Also it appears that I may have touched a nerve here, I certainly wasn’t intending to call anybody’s religion into question.
        Natsu 5y ago
        Fair enough, I agree that the mushroom thing is quite a stretch. The word 'elect' has a bit of a history in Christianity, though. There certainly were gnostics of all stripes (not only Christian gnostics, but various other purveyors of secret knowledge, etc.). And while the canonical Bible contains an invective against 'so-called knowledge' which seems to be a dig at gnosticism, there were other gnostic sects and works early on persisting for some time even after it was declared heretical.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  Non-priests view the archives frequently and there is a slow process of digitizing them now. It just so happens that the Vatican has some of the oldest documents still in existence and don't want them damaged by people or light.
amanaplanacanal 5y ago
It’s entirely possible for people who call themselves Catholic to have beliefs that are not in accordance with official dogma. And Catholic dogma is not a static thing, either, though some pretend it is.
- iammisc 5y ago
  It absolutely is, but the idea he put forth... that the elect (presumably meaning those who are getting into heaven) are deserving of secret knowledge is not really something that anyone can say ever existed in the church. They had a whole separation and heresy to address that.
  - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
    Which “he” do you mean here?
    - Natsu 5y ago
      I believe they're referring to amanaplanacanal who appears to be describing Gnosticism, which was rejected as a heresy early in the Church's history.

Catholicism has no concept of the elect, at least not in the way you describe it.

52-6F-62 5y ago

Of course they do: the priesthood. The Vatican itself restricts access to its own archives.

iammisc 5y ago
That's not the elect as you described. Priests are no more deserving of heaven than any other baptised catholic. The 'knowledge' in the archives is not religious in nature. You don't need to have access to it to know God or achieve the ultimate goals of catholicism.
- anigbrowl 5y ago
  You are not even replying to the same person. I think you're being a little over-literal here.
  - Natsu 5y ago
    The 'elect' as a Christian concept is a bit different from ordinary uses of the word. In context, the concept from Calvinism seemed to be under discussion until someone came into the discussion using 'elect' in the normal meaning. So I think it's important to keep track of which definition of 'elect' is in use here or you'll just be talking past each other without realizing that you're not talking about the same concept at all: https://www.learnreligions.com/five-point-calvinism-700356 https://www.learnreligions.com/five-point-calvinism-700356
    - amanaplanacanal 5y ago
      I mentioned elect in the context of classical times and the Old Testament. I wasn’t referring to whatever Christians consider the elect, but a more general term describing insiders with the secret teachings that aren’t to be mentioned in front of the masses because they might be led astray. This was certainly not an unknown idea throughout the Greek speaking philosophical world, including the early Christian church. There are no doubt Christians today who still adhere to such an idea. I don’t want to be misunderstood here: I think the mushroom idea is hogwash. Also it appears that I may have touched a nerve here, I certainly wasn’t intending to call anybody’s religion into question.
      - Natsu 5y ago
        Fair enough, I agree that the mushroom thing is quite a stretch. The word 'elect' has a bit of a history in Christianity, though. There certainly were gnostics of all stripes (not only Christian gnostics, but various other purveyors of secret knowledge, etc.). And while the canonical Bible contains an invective against 'so-called knowledge' which seems to be a dig at gnosticism, there were other gnostic sects and works early on persisting for some time even after it was declared heretical.
_-david-_ 5y ago
Non-priests view the archives frequently and there is a slow process of digitizing them now. It just so happens that the Vatican has some of the oldest documents still in existence and don't want them damaged by people or light.

amanaplanacanal 5y ago

It’s entirely possible for people who call themselves Catholic to have beliefs that are not in accordance with official dogma. And Catholic dogma is not a static thing, either, though some pretend it is.

iammisc 5y ago
It absolutely is, but the idea he put forth... that the elect (presumably meaning those who are getting into heaven) are deserving of secret knowledge is not really something that anyone can say ever existed in the church. They had a whole separation and heresy to address that.
- amanaplanacanal 5y ago
  Which “he” do you mean here?
  - Natsu 5y ago
    I believe they're referring to amanaplanacanal who appears to be describing Gnosticism, which was rejected as a heresy early in the Church's history.