Ever Virgin

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,202
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Holy tradition is evidence as sound and as reliable as holy scripture.
 

psalms 91

Well-known member
Moderator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
15,283
Age
75
Location
Pa
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Charismatic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Holy tradition is evidence as sound and as reliable as holy scripture.
Interesting, and who decides that? I am sure that many would be interested to know that the bible isnt the only book by God in fact I am sure it would amaze many to hear it. I am also sure that most would reject that line of reasoning just as i do
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,202
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
God decides, the Holy Catholic Church proclaims what God has decided.
 

PezGirl73

Active member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
43
Age
51
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Then why is the evidence presented in arguments against Blessed Mary being ever virgin a set of claims that this verse or that means Blessed Mary had intercourse with saint Joseph and had numerous children by him.

Because evidence of children generally means evidence of intercourse. Notice that I say GENERALLY. I'm sure Joseph and Mary didn't go out and adopt a bunch of kids.

Holy tradition preserves apostolic teaching (in word and deed) so when the apostles teach that Blessed Mary is ever virgin it is worthy of belief.

Oooooookay. Why are the apostles so keen on her being an ever virgin?

It is interesting that you started by asserting that no one was "keen" on Blessed Mary having many children and here you are asserting that Blessed Mary had sexual intercourse with saint Joseph even after you previously said speculation is the only evidence for such a claim.

What? That is a bizarre sentence. Let me clarify for you since you clearly don't understand...

I've maintained that Mary and Joseph having sex is in my opinion based on what scripture says. I believe they had sex, and I believe they had children, based on what the scripture says. I'm not "keen" on any portion of the argument - that was YOUR word. Frankly, I don't care if she had sex or not, but all evidence in the scriptures points to the fact that she and Joseph would've enjoyed the benefit of sex in their marriage.

Holy tradition is evidence as sound and as reliable as holy scripture.

Insofar as it agrees with the scriptures.

God decides, the Holy Catholic Church proclaims what God has decided.

Meh. I'm Lutheran, I don't give your church any weight when it comes to the scriptures. The disciples and the apostles were not Catholic, much as you wish they were. Sometimes the Pope's decrees remind me of Muhammed's decrees when he didn't get what he wanted, so...yeah, grain of salt and all that.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,202
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Because evidence of children generally means evidence of intercourse. Notice that I say GENERALLY. I'm sure Joseph and Mary didn't go out and adopt a bunch of kids.
Blessed Mary is never called the mother of any person except for Jesus Christ her son. Your statement assumes that Jesus' brothers and sisters are children born of the Blessed Virgin Mary yet that assumption is denied in holy tradition and no word of holy scripture ever contradicts the teaching of holy tradition regarding Blessed Mary in this matter.
Oooooookay. Why are the apostles so keen on her being an ever virgin?
The apostles testify to Blessed Mary as ever virgin because it is true and because (in part at least) it is a miracle of God - insofar as having given birth to the Lord Jesus Blessed Mary remained a virgin.
What? That is a bizarre sentence. Let me clarify for you since you clearly don't understand...

I've maintained that Mary and Joseph having sex is in my opinion based on what scripture says. I believe they had sex, and I believe they had children, based on what the scripture says. I'm not "keen" on any portion of the argument - that was YOUR word. Frankly, I don't care if she had sex or not, but all evidence in the scriptures points to the fact that she and Joseph would've enjoyed the benefit of sex in their marriage.
Your stated opinion is not drawn directly from any teaching in holy scripture and hence it is not an assertion contained within holy scripture furthermore your stated opinion is not well founded on any passage or passages of holy scripture but is derived mainly from interpretations that the early Church Fathers explicitly rejected. Given the choice between accepting your stated opinions as divinely revealed truth or as good and necessary consequences drawn from the teaching of Christ and the apostles in the holy scriptures and doing something similar with respect to the teaching of the Early Church Fathers I will choose the early Church Fathers.
Insofar as it agrees with the scriptures.
Holy tradition always agrees with holy scripture when the holy scriptures speak to the matter addressed by holy tradition.
Meh. I'm Lutheran, I don't give your church any weight when it comes to the scriptures. The disciples and the apostles were not Catholic, much as you wish they were. Sometimes the Pope's decrees remind me of Muhammed's decrees when he didn't get what he wanted, so...yeah, grain of salt and all that.

If you truly give no weight to the teaching of the Catholic Church then why does this topic draw your attention? The first post in this thread came from the hand of George, who is a faithful Orthodox Christian, and whose Church teaches that Blessed Mary is ever virgin.
 

psalms 91

Well-known member
Moderator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
15,283
Age
75
Location
Pa
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Charismatic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
God decides, the Holy Catholic Church proclaims what God has decided.
Wow, an institution that is run by men and yet infallible? Not
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,202
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Wow, an institution that is run by men and yet infallible? Not

Wow! A post that contains a set of claims that are completely inaccurate. Not surprising given past posts making similarly inaccurate claims.
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
MoreCoffee said:
Josiah said:
So, quote any Apostle even speculating that Mary was a PERPETUAL virgin. Just verbatim quote Andrew , Bartholomew or Nathanael, James ben Zebedee, James the Lesser, John, Judas, Jude or Thaddeus, Matthew or Levi, Peter or Simon Peter, Philip, Simon the Zealot and/or Thomas. Can't? Can't find even one of them speculating about this normally supremely private, personal, intimate detail of marital intimacy - thus proving yourself wrong? All you can find is respectful SILENCE - thus proving my point?



See posts 130, 132, 154, 157, 164, 166, 206. All you've evaded
.




.

Saint James the apostle says (in the Protoevangelium of James) that Blessed Mary is ever virgin


WRONG on both counts.


NO ONE - not even your individual denomination - believes that either James wrote that REJECTED, NONCANONICAL, NONINSPIRED, FALSE book. And as you yourself earlier proved, that false rejected book NOWHERE states that Mary was a perpetual virgin.


So, you can't find one Apostle ever even remotely speculating about this normally supremely private, personal matter of martial intimacy - proving yourself wrong.



You speak of "Tradition" since you've had to abandon your point that LUKE states so. But what Tradition?Which Tradition? That of the Apostles - which is respectful SILENCE? That of everyone who ever even could have spoken with Mary and thus theoretically at least (but EXTREMELY unlikely) would have been told this supremely private, personal matter of marriage intimacy - which is respectful SILENCE? That of the Second Century - lost past the time when anyone could have known this tidbit of marriage bed info and permission from Mary to make it public - which is SILENCE? Or are you talking about the personal speculations that developed in the 4th and 5th century - some speculated that She DID have sex, some individuals speculating that She did NOT have sex, none having ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to remotely indicate their personal speculations were true or that they had permission from Mary to spread it around? WHICH of these "Traditions" do you speak?



See posts 130, 132, 154, 157, 164, 166, 206. All you've evaded.



- Josiah




.


So..... NOW you admit Scripture does NOT say Mary was a PERPETUAL virgin...... NOW you admit NO Apostle EVER said Mary was a PERPETUAL virgin.... both are respectfully, understandably SILENT on that very, very, supremely private matter of marital intimacy.

Hum.



- Josiah
 

PezGirl73

Active member
Joined
Aug 27, 2016
Messages
43
Age
51
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Blessed Mary is never called the mother of any person except for Jesus Christ her son. Your statement assumes that Jesus' brothers and sisters are children born of the Blessed Virgin Mary yet that assumption is denied in holy tradition and no word of holy scripture ever contradicts the teaching of holy tradition regarding Blessed Mary in this matter.

It's not denied in the scriptures, either, friend. MY church doesn't have a doctrine regarding her remaining a virgin. Yours does. The burden of proof then lays on you, not me. And...your proof is lacking.

The apostles testify to Blessed Mary as ever virgin because it is true and because (in part at least) it is a miracle of God - insofar as having given birth to the Lord Jesus Blessed Mary remained a virgin.

That has got to be the world's best circular argument. Or worst. Take your pick.

Sure, the virgin birth is a miracle. No one disputes that. There's just ZERO reason for her to have to remain a virgin after the birth. None. Zilch. Nada.

Your stated opinion is not drawn directly from any teaching in holy scripture and hence it is not an assertion contained within holy scripture furthermore your stated opinion is not well founded on any passage or passages of holy scripture but is derived mainly from interpretations that the early Church Fathers explicitly rejected.

My opinion comes from the texts themselves, not the ECFs (who were definitely not infallible). I have a husband who is learned in greek and hebrew.

Given the choice between accepting your stated opinions as divinely revealed truth or as good and necessary consequences drawn from the teaching of Christ and the apostles in the holy scriptures and doing something similar with respect to the teaching of the Early Church Fathers I will choose the early Church Fathers. Holy tradition always agrees with holy scripture when the holy scriptures speak to the matter addressed by holy tradition.

Ha, there's more of that circular argument. Do they teach you how to do that in Catechism? Your Holy Tradition put out something that completely flies in the face of what scripture tells us about marriage, so yeah...not buying the whole "doesn't contradict scripture".

If you truly give no weight to the teaching of the Catholic Church then why does this topic draw your attention? The first post in this thread came from the hand of George, who is a faithful Orthodox Christian, and whose Church teaches that Blessed Mary is ever virgin.

Because I'm on a discussions board where, gasp, people discuss things!
 

George

Tis Theos Megas
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Messages
910
Age
29
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes

George

Tis Theos Megas
Joined
Jun 15, 2015
Messages
910
Age
29
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Eastern Orthodox
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
*disclaimer* I'm only throwing this in just to supplement the discussion, please don't eat me for popping in :p *end disclaimer*

I found this on Wikipedia, which although can be edited by others, this information can be found on other websites as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_virginity_of_Mary
Some early Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther supported the doctrine, and founding figures of Anglicanism such as Hugh Latimer and Thomas Cranmer "followed the tradition that they had inherited by accepting Mary as 'ever virgin'".[15] Reformed teaching, however, largely abandoned it.[16][17] The doctrine of perpetual virginity is currently maintained by some Anglican and Lutheran theologians.[9][18][19][20] In addition, John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church, affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary.[21]
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
*disclaimer* I'm only throwing this in just to supplement the discussion, please don't eat me for popping in :p *end disclaimer*

I found this on Wikipedia, which although can be edited by others, this information can be found on other websites as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_virginity_of_Mary


[MENTION=33]George[/MENTION]


George, don't be chicken to weigh in... it's your thread! LOL




George said:
Some early Protestant reformers such as Martin Luther supported the doctrine, and founding figures of Anglicanism such as Hugh Latimer and Thomas Cranmer "followed the tradition that they had inherited by accepting Mary as 'ever virgin'".[15] Reformed teaching, however, largely abandoned it.[16][17] The doctrine of perpetual virginity is currently maintained by some Anglican and Lutheran theologians. In addition, John Wesley, the founder of the Methodist Church, affirmed the perpetual virginity of Mary.



Luther (indeed, virtually all the Lutheran Chruch Fathers) personally embraced this pov. Luther himself largely abandoned Mariology later in life, but early on he did express support for this pov. HOWEVER, it was NEVER embraced as doctrine - much less dogma, much less de fide dogma. It was what at times in Protestantism is called "pious opinion" - a PERMITTED but not REQUIRED opinion. In Lutheranism, "pious opinion" is a view that is NEITHER supported nor rejected in Scripture but has ancient, wide-spread support (in other words, has "Tradition" but not Scripture in support). NEVER has Lutheranism declared this tidbit about Mary to be DOCTRINE or DOGMA or DE FIDE DOGMA; in fact, it's never even been official teaching in Lutheranism. Today, you will find Lutherans who - AS PIOUS OPINION - accept this pov. My own Lutheran pastor is one of them, who accepts it PURELY and SOLELY because of the Ecumenical Council that around 700 AD used the TITLE (but never proclaimed any doctrine) of "Ever Virgin." But he states that most LUtheran pastors do not accept this pov.... and that's okay. What is not okay is for a Lutheran to call this "heresy" or "dogma" - which means condemning some. It is a PERMITTED view..... it's not a REQUIRED view.


It is revealing to see our Catholic brother entirely, completely evade and avoid the issue of whether this tidbit of normally very, very, very private, personal marriage bed information is true..... And to see to what enormous lengths he goes to to evade and avoid the entire issue of this juicy detail's STATUS in his singular, individual denomination - de fide dogma, a matter of highest importance, certainty and necessity possible. In apologetics and debate, a point must be defended TO THE LEVEL CLAIMED but notice how he so craftfully dodges that entirely, completely. Thus, he's not defending Catholicism at all.... and not addressing the issue at all - just parroting over and over and over and over the OPINION - without any substantiation of its truthfulnessi, and without anything whatsoever as to why this matter of the supremely private, personal marital intimacies of this couple is a point of highest importance possible, greatest certainly possible, greatest necessity possible.




Now, back to the issue of whether this speculation is TRUE..... and the defense of it as a matter of highest importance possible, greatest certainty possible, highest necessity possible. Not just endlessly parroting the pov (as if all speculations become de fide Dogma if it is repeated X number of times).



- Josiah




.
 
Last edited:

Pedrito

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
1,032
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Post 263 on Page 27, MoreCoffee stated:
God decides, the Holy Catholic Church proclaims what God has decided.
The “Holy Catholic Church” keeps changing its doctrines.

“The Holy Catholic Church proclaims what God has decided.”

So God keeps changing His mind about what people should believe and practice?

Hmmm…..

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, in Post #256 on Page 26, MoreCoffee stated [emphasis added]:
The canonical gospels also testify to this by observing that Holy Mary is a virgin - the virgin predicted in Isaiah's prophecy which says a virgin shall conceive and give birth thus indicating that the virgin remained a virgin after giving birth.

We might call that a leap of faith. The prophecy merely states that a woman would be a virgin when she first conceived. It implies nothing about her life or status thereafter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yet again in Post #123 on Page 13, MoreCoffee, with reference to the idea of Mary being married to both God and Joseph, stated:
God allowed polygamy. Your post is confusing God's laws with USA laws.
Actually, a woman being married to two spouses is polyandry. God never allowed that. However, He did permit, and in some cases mandated, male polygamy. (This post is an expansion of psalms 91’s post #131 on Page 14.)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yet again in Post #265 on Page 27, MoreCoffee stated:
Holy tradition always agrees with holy scripture when the holy scriptures speak to the matter addressed by holy tradition.
An interesting circular statement.

In fact, “Holy Tradition” is called “tradition” because it holds to ideas that are at odds with God’s Holy Scripture. Otherwise the term “tradition” would not need to be used.

And therefore, adherence to tradition has serious implications for not just the Roman Catholic Church.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,202
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The one holy catholic and apostolic church never changes her doctrine she develops and matures it.
 

psalms 91

Well-known member
Moderator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
15,283
Age
75
Location
Pa
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Charismatic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
In other words it changes
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The one holy catholic and apostolic church never changes her doctrine she develops and matures it.


[MENTION=60]MoreCoffee[/MENTION]


...when you make up your mind, let us know.


But enough of the diversions, evasions, dodges...... submit the substantiation of TRUTH to the level claimed.... that at the microsecond of Mary's death (or undeath, depending on what Catholic teacher you are mindlessly, docilicly submitting to as unto God) that she was a virgin..... as a matter of highest importance, certainty and necessity possible. Not "but those saying this say this".... not "but those who say it's true claim it's true"..... but substantiation that it is TRUE - to the highest level possible of importance, certainty and necessity.



See posts 130, 132, 154, 157, 164, 166, 206. All you've persistently evaded.




- Josiah



.
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
[MENTION=60]MoreCoffee[/MENTION]


Blessed Mary is never called the mother of any person except for Jesus Christ her son.


Please explain how that proves that Mary was a PERPETUAL virgin - as a matter of highest importance, certainty and necessity possible.



Your statement assumes that Jesus' brothers and sisters are children born of the Blessed Virgin Mary


.... as you ASSUME they were not.


Friend, you can't accuse others of ASSUMING something not stated in Scripture when your entire argument is nothing but ASSUMING.... and you refuse, persistently refuse, to present ANYTHING - anything at all - that subtantiates that at the microsecond of her death, Mary was a virgin. NOTHING. You claimed Luke stated so but you had to abandon that when you yourself proved Luke stated no such thing.... You claimed the Apostles stated so but you had to abandon that when you yourself proved no Apostle ever said any such thing.... You claimed a false, rejected, noncanonical and noninspired book written long after Mary died stated so but you yourself proved this false book stated so such thing..... All you have is ASSUMING..... that SOME people...... long, long, long after any of them could have receieved this normally supremely private, personal tidbit of marriage bed info from Mary and permission from Mary to make it public... their speculation (at ones who speculate she was a perpetual virgin) you ASSUME is correct - to the highest possible level of certainty. But you haven't even tried to show these speculators (such as Origin) got this information and permission from Mary and that it's TRUE. Why haven't you even tried to show your ASSUMING is true? Because you know you have nothing..... absolutely nothing whatsoever.




contradicts the teaching of holy tradition regarding Blessed Mary in this matter.


You persistently, stubbornly REFUSE to say WHAT "tradition".

The original tradition of SILENCE that is the tradition of Scripture, of Mary, of Joseph, of Jesus, of all 13-14 Apostles, of all who even theoretically could have met Mary and learned this supremely private, personal matter of marital intimacy and most for centuries after that? The ancient, biblical, Apostles, Holy Family tradition of respectful, honoring SILENCE?

OR ...

Some speculations and assumptions of a very few men far, far, far too late to have learned it from Mary or gotten permission from Mary to make it public but who offered NOTHING at all to indicate that this speculation is true?

Which of these traditions?





The apostles testify to Blessed Mary as ever virgin


You know this is wrong.
You could not present even one Apostle ever remotely stating that Mary was a perpetual virgin, always a virgin. You just made that up. You have NOTHING to show it's true... and you already proved it.



It's troubling to me how truth (as well as respect) just seems - irrelevant - when it comes to Mary and the RC Denomination..... gossip is allowed, assuming is the rubric, truth is tossed out the window... truth just doesn't matter in the RC Denomination when it comes to Mary.... You'd likely be offended if some denomination went on and on and on and on and on and on about the sex life of your mother or sister or wife, you'd say even the mention of such is rude, offensive, and none of anyone's business - but it's a matter of HIGHEST IMPORTANCE POSSIBLE for the RC Denomination (at least for this married woman).

Again, if you had ANYTHING from the Bible .... ANYTHING from ANY Apostle..... ANYTHING from ANYONE who met Mary.... you would have quoted it. You have nothing. Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Just very, very late personal, inconsistent (and normally very RUDE) speculations and assumptions.... yet your denomination insists this is all a matter of highest importance, certainty and necessity - while having NOTHING WHATSOEVER to indicate this (normally rude) highly personal speculation is true. Or even show that it cares, that the RC Denomination gives a rip as to whether this is true (again, doesn't seem to matter when it comes to Mary - very shocking).





the teaching of Christ and the apostles in the holy scriptures


The teaching of Christ and the apostles in holy scripture is SILENCE. Not, "it is a dogmatic fact of highest importance, greatest certainty and highest necessity possible that at the microsecond of her death (or was it undeath - I teach both) Mary was a virgin.... Mary having had no sex ever."


There is a reason why you don't quote Scripture or Jesus or Mary or any Apostle stating Mary was a perpetual virgin. There is NO EVIDENCE any of them REMOTELY said this. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Zip. This is speculation..... personal speculation..... pure speculation of a FEW individuals...... much, much, much too late for them to have learned this from Mary and gotten permission to make it public.... speculators who offering NOTHING AT ALL to remotely indicate such is true (they didn't seem to care).... going on and on about this normally very, very private, personal, intimate detail of the marriage bed that none of them would allow any to say about their mother or wife or sister.... Pure speculation.




See posts 130, 132, 154, 157, 164, 166, 206. All you've evaded.





- Josiah





.
 
Last edited:

visionary

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 15, 2015
Messages
2,824
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Messianic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Pope Francis, speaking to mark the occasion of the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows in Casa Santa Marta, said the following: “And this is our hope. We are not orphans, we have Mothers: Mother Mary. But the Church is Mother and the Mother Church is anointed when it takes the same path of Jesus and Mary: the path of obedience, the path of suffering, and when she has that attitude of continually learning the path of the Lord. These two women – Mary and the Church – carry on the hope that is Christ, they give us Christ, they bring forth Christ in us. Without Mary, there would be no Jesus Christ; without the Church, we cannot go forward“. Source https://w2.vatican.va/content/franc...a-francesco-cotidie_20140915_three-women.html
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,202
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
This video clip is relevant to this thread. Move to position 10 minutes 29 seconds if the clip does not start at that time. I tried to embed the time as 629 seconds (that's 10 minutes 29 seconds) but I am not sure that I got it right.

 
Last edited:
Top Bottom