Góp ý

Thân ái chào bạn đã đến thăm trang web của Ủy Ban Giáo Lý Việt Nam tại Hoa Kỳ. Ủy Ban Giáo Lý Việt Nam tại Hoa Kỳ hoạt động với tôn chỉ giúp người Công Giáo Việt Nam tại Hoa Kỳ phát triển đời sống đức tin trong tinh thần Việt Nam, như lời Đức Giáo Hoàng Gioan Phaolô II nhắn nhủ chúng ta trong thông điệp “Giáo Hội tại Á Châu,” là trung thành với giáo lý Tin Mừng, đồng thời duy trì và phát huy nét đẹp của nền văn hóa Việt Nam. Để thực hiện mục đích này

Mời bạn góp ý… Mời bạn góp ý… Mời bạn góp ý…

Comments

  1. Trinh Hoàng says:

    Chào quý anh chị,
    Xin cảm ơn tất cả những tấm lòng của quý anh chị đã đóng góp cho trang web http://www.giaoly.org để việc học hỏi Lời Chúa và giáo huấn của giáo hội dễ dàng va chính xác, và việc sống đạo luôn triển nở
    TH

  2. Hoang Trinh says:

    Kính thưa cha và ban tổ chức Đại Hội Giáo lý,

    Con cần biết địa chỉ của nơi tổ chức DHGL để có thể làm bản đồ đi cho dễ dàng.
    Xin chân thành cám ơn.

    Con
    HT

    • Thưa anh,
      Địa chỉ là 2305 Choctow Dr., Baton Rouge, Louisiana, LA 70805.
      Đồng thời cũng tin cho anh biết là ở đó không bị lụt.

  3. Trieu Pham says:

    Xin quy vi chi giup cho cach nao tien va do ton kem nhat de dat mua khoang 150 cuon Giao Ly Cong Giao va 150 cuon Ban Toat Yieu Giao Ly Cong Giao va gui ve San Jose, CA, USA.

    Xin cam on nhieu.

  4. Hoang Thuy says:

    Chào “giaoly.org”,
    Hiện đang theo dõi loạt bài “Tài liệu Chúa Nhật Giáo lý” và thấy loạt bài này khá hay.
    Trong bài 1 : “O Sacrum Convivium”, có lời cầu nguyện Thánh Thể của thánh Thomas Aquino bằng tiếng Latin. Ở Việt Nam đã có bản dịch kinh này từ lâu, xin ghi lại trong mục góp ý này để các bạn tham khảo thêm như sau :
    Ôi yến tiệc Mình và Máu thánh
    Chúa Kitô thành lương thực nuôi ta.
    Tiệc nhắc nhớ Người đã chịu khổ hình
    và đổ đầy ân sủng xuống cõi lòng nhân thế
    Tiệc bảo đảm cho ta một ngày mai huy hoàng rực rỡ.

    Xin cảm ơn.

  5. NGuyen Hai Ly says:

    Kinh thua quy vi,
    Trong trang web rai rac co dang nhung bai giao ly cua Duc Thanh Cha, theo thien y cua toi, chung ta co the tong hop lai thanh mot muc de nguoi doc co the su dung nhu mot nguon tu lieu lien tuc, va cung de lam giau cho kho tai lieu ve giao ly cua chung ta, vi do la nhung bai giao ly rat dac sac.
    Cam on quy vi.
    Hai Ly

    • Cám ơn Anh Nguyễn Hải Lý,
      Chúng tôi đang sửa sonn sắp xếp lại các tiết mục của các bài trong mùa hè này.

  6. Kinh thua Uy ban Giao ly,
    Toi moi nghe duoc vai lan lop hoc thank kinh on line cua Duc Cha Kham thoi. Nhung cam thay rat la thich va hoc hoi duoc rat la nhieu du chi co hoc on line.
    Xin hoi la toi co the order bo CD hoc Thank Kinh 100 tuan hay khong; de co the nghe di nghe lai tren duong di lam. Toi rat uoc mong chong toi cung co the nghe duoc nua.
    Neu duoc xin cho biet cach thuc de order tron bo CD Thank Kinh 100 tuan nay.
    Xin cam on quy vi va xin Chua ve Me Maria ban nhieu on lanh xuong tren quy vi.
    Hannah Van
    Texas-USA

    • Thưa Anh,
      Chúng tôi không có CD và cũng không biết là ở đâu bán CD này. Đề nghị anh tải xuống computer rồi chuyển sang CD.
      Khôi

  7. Toi muon nhan nhung tai lieu giao ly bang Anh ngu de gui cho cac con toi o Viet Nam.
    Cam on nhieu !!!

    • Xin lỗi vì thiếu nhân sự nên phần tiếng Anh bị tạm ngưng. Chúng tôi đang tìm cách để tiếp tục phần tiếng Anh. Chúng tôi sẽ để anh chị vào danh sách email thường xuyên trong đó thỉnh thoảng có tiếng Anh.
      Khôi

  8. Xin cho biet them ve ngay gio va don ghi danh cho Dai Hoi Giao Ly vao thang 6/2012 cung nhu cac khoa tinh tam Ephata cho cac em Them Suc trong nam 2012 va 2013.

  9. KINH CHUC QUY CHA , QUY SO , QUY THAY SAU VA TOAN THE ANH CHI EM PHUC VU CHO CHUA MOT MUA LE TA ON HANH PHUC , VUI VE VA DUOC TRAN DAY ON PHUC CHUA BAN .
    XIN THANH TAM TRI AN CHO SU GIANG DAY CUA QUY VI TREN RADIO , TREN ONLINE .
    KINH LAY THIEN CHUA UY NGHI VINH HIEN , CON TIN CHUA CO THAT TREN DOI .
    Mot nguoi da cai dao .

  10. Em rat can mot so tai lieu giao ly bang tieng Anh, Dac biet ve lich su giao hoi. Xin vui long chi giup em nhung website, neu co tai lieu xin gui giup em.

    Chan thanh cam on,

  11. Kính thưa cha Việt Hưng và Ban Tổ Chức ĐHGL:

    Sau kỳ dự ĐHGL XI về, con để ý thấy những bàn tròn trong phòng ăn thật tiện nghi và hữu ích: mỗi người nhích một chút xíu là có thể đủ chỗ cho thêm một hay hai ghế ngồi khi cần; và chỉ cần quay trái, quay phải một tị là có thể nhìn thấy được mọi người ngồi cùng bàn, chuyện trò nhờ thế cũng gần gũi và thân mật hơn

    Có thể nào Cha cho thay thế các bàn dài hình chữ nhật trong phòng hội thảo bằng các bàn tròn giống như trong phòng ăn, để mọi người trong nhóm dễ dàng nghe & theo dõi trưởng nhóm, và chuyện bàn thảo tiện lợi và hữu hiệu hơn không thưa Cha? Nhất là khi mọi người ngồi quanh tâm điểm của bàn tròn, ai cũng ngang hàng như nhau.

    kính thư
    nguyệt

    • Chúng tôi xin ghi nhận và sẽ bàn thảo trong buổi họp của Ban Tổ Chức.
      Phaolô Phạm Xuân Khôi

  12. Theres Tran says:

    xin cho con hoi la neu muon order sach Giao Ly (lop xung toi ruoc le lan dau) bilingual- Viet-Anh thi phai lam sao?

  13. joseph tran says:

    kinh trinh ban To Chuc
    qua thong bao ve viec tiep don ACE Giao Ly Vien tai Phi Truong.
    toi xin de nghi ban to Chuc cho ban tiep tan don tai moi phi truong.
    ban tiep tan se dieu phoi va goi anh chi em trong ban van chuyen
    toi pick up tai dia diem da hen truoc.
    lam nhu vay se giam bot tinh trang bi lac va mat thoi gian tim kiem nhau
    cung nhu tao dieu kien thuan loi cho cac bac tai xe va khong bi ticket oan.

  14. Kính gởi anh Phaolô Khôi

    Tôi đọc những bài Ðồng Hành với Chúa Giêsu trên Đường Thập Giá của linh muc Nouwen do anh dịch, và có 1 tưởng trong đầu là sẽ chuyển những bài này thành MP3 audio files để load vào computer, Ipad, Iphone & smart phone. Việc này răt tiện lơi vì hiện nay hâu như ai cũng co những thứ high tech toys này và họ có thể nghe những bài suy niệm này bất cứ lúc nào thí dụ như trong lúc lái xe di làm, đi bộ, v.v… Do đó tôi xin phép anh cho tôi làm việc này. Tôi dự định sẽ hoàn tất những MP3 files vào mùa chay năm 2014 và sẽ gởi cho anh 1 vài files để anh nghe thử và góp ý. Rất mong nhận được hồi báo của anh.

    Trong Thầy

    Nguyễn Xuân Văn

    • Cám ơn anh, xin anh cứ tự nhiên. Nếu anh làm MP3 được bài nào mà tôi là tác giả hay dịch giả, xin anh cứ làm. Từ nay anh không cần phải xin phép nữa. Miễn là gửi cho tôi để chia sẻ với mọi người trên website.
      Kính Anh.
      Khôi

  15. Đỗ ánh Tuyết says:

    Xin Ủy ban Giáo Lý Việt Nam tại Hoa Kỳ vui lòng gởi bài cho tôi qua địa chỉ email trên
    Cám ơn các bạn.

    • Xin lỗi Cji5 Tuyết,
      Tất cả các email chúng tôi gửi về yahoo.com.vn đều bị chặn và không đến người nhận. Xin dùng
      gmail.com hay yahoo.com nhưng không có.vn thùi may ra mới nhận được.
      KHôi

  16. Kính gửi Quý Cô-Chú phụ trách giaoly.org,
    Con xem trong link này http://giaoly.org/glcgvn/Ph%E1%BA%A7n%20II%20doan%20II%20chuong%202%20muc%204.htm ở điều 1459 và con thấy phần chú thích là (x. CIC, khoản 914), tuy nhiên khi con xem lại trong bản văn Latin thì chỗ này phải là (x CÐ Tren-te : DS 1712)
    http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism_lt/p2s2c2a4_lt.htm#V. Multiplices poenitentiae formae in vita christiana (chú thích 57)
    Mong Quý Cô-Chú kiểm tra giúp con. Con xin cảm ơn nhiều và chúc Quý Cô-Chú nhiều sức khoẻ.

    • Cám ơn Bạn.
      Chúng tôi chỉ đăng nguyên văn bản dịch của TGP Sàigon. Bản này đã lỗi thời và chúng tôi đang chờ để dăng bản dịch mới của Ủy Ban Giáo Lý Đức Tin.
      Khôi.

  17. Việt Hà says:

    Cho con hỏi 1 câu: Thiên Chúa biết hết mọi sự, Ngài biết trước cả việc các thần xấu không tuân phục và phản bội Ngài, nhưng Ngài để cho họ tự do lựa chọn. Con lại được biết Thiên Chúa nhân lành vô cùng tha hết mọi tội lỗi cho mọi tạo vật nếu họ biết ăn năn hối cải và xin ơn tha thứ từ Lòng Thương Xót Chúa. Câu hỏi đặt ra là: Ngài biết trước họ sẽ như thế sao Ngài không chận trước hoặc như là vá lỗi cho họ vì với lòng nhân từ và quyền năng của Ngài thì nào có khó gì, vì Ngài biết với lòng tự cao của họ thì họ sẽ không phục vụ loài người theo thánh ý Ngài. Xin cho con được hiểu rõ thêm về điểm này. Con cám ơn và GOD LUCK.

    • TRước hết xin lỗi anh vì cho lên mạng trễ. Phần gi1p ý nawy bị SPAM nhiều quá nên hôm nay mới đọc đến câu hỏi của anh. Cám ơn anh Hà. Xin để các độc giả khác góp ý một thời gian rồi sẽ xin các Cha trả lời cho anh.
      Kính Anh.
      Khôi

  18. Chào quý anh chị,
    Xin quy anh chi giup em dich TEACHING ON MISSION:
    Ad Gentes, Evangelii Nuntiandi, Redemptoris Missio and Dialogue and Proclamatio Stephen Bevans,SVD
    Em xin het long cam on quy anh chi truoc. Neu duoc thi goi qua mail em nha.
    chao quy anh chi, Men chuc quy anh chi luon vui-khoe.

    Introduction

    This paper will summarize the church’s official teaching in the Roman Magisterium on
    the theology and conduct of its evangelizing mission. Rather than summarize each document ,
    however, which would be quite tedious and repetitious, I will rather present the several aspects
    of each document that present new aspects to the Magisterium’s teaching on mission. The
    original request for this paper suggested that I look only at Evangelii Nuntiandi (EN) and
    Redemptoris Missio (RM). It seems to me, however, that a more rounded picture of
    contemporary church teaching on mission needs to start with Vatican II’s Decree on Missionary
    Activity, Ad Gentes and needs also to include the document issued shortly after RM by the
    Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples and the Pontifical Council for Dialogue,
    Dialogue and Proclamation (DP). This last document, issued in 1991, is now eighteen years old.
    Since then two other documents have been issued by the Roman Magisterium that are important
    for the church’s mission– Dominus Iesus in 2000 and Doctrinal Notes on Some Aspects of
    Evangelization in 2007,both issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. These,
    however, are more cautionary in tone and do not present any new or constructive teaching as
    such. I will refer to them towards the end of the paper, but only briefly.

    It might be helpful to read or refer to the major documents I am reflecting on here. They
    are all available in Latin, English, Spanish, German and Italian on the Vatican Website
    (vatican.va). I will be referring to the English text on that website, with slight modifications to
    make the language more inclusive.

    Ad Gentes (1965)

    Ad Gentes , Vatican II’s Decree on Missionary Activity is a document that almost didn’t
    get written. Before the Council began the Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith under
    the leadership of Cardinal Gregorio Agagianian was given the task to draft a document on the
    church’s mission, but the result was more a summary and some revision of Canon Law as it
    applied to the missions rather than a theological reflection on the basis and conduct of mission.
    This first draft never got to the Council floor. It was a casualty of the virtual revolt of many
    bishops at the council against, in the famous words of Bishop Emil de Smedt of Bruges, Belgium,
    the “hierarchical, clerical and juridical” tone of the drafts that had been presented at the first
    session. A second draft was made, but it too was sidelined because of a ruling that called for
    many of the schemata to be reduced to a number of propositions. When the fifteen or so
    propositions were presented on the Council floor, however, they were virtually shouted down
    by the bishops, who called for a “full schema” that was theologically grounded. Under the
    leadership of SVD Superior General Johannes Schütte and with the main authorship of
    theologians of the caliber of Yves Congar, Joseph Ratzinger and Karl Rahner, a draft of the
    present document was presented at the last session and, after a number of last minute
    ________________________________________
    Page 2

    revisions, was unanimously approved by the Council Fathers on the last day of the Council.
    1

    Ad Gentes , if not the “magna charta” of mission as it was described by Fr. Schütte, is
    nevertheless a remarkable document. I will focus here on only a few of its many important
    teachings, but these few are where the document has contributed most to the Magisterium’s
    teaching on mission in the last half century.

    The Church Rooted in the Missio Dei

    The first aspect of Ad Gentes’ teaching that I would like to highlight is in paragraph 2.
    Here the text speaks of the ultimate foundation for the church’s missionary activity: its
    participation in the mission of the Son and the Holy Spirit. Such participation through Baptism
    in the very life of the Trinity, therefore, makes the church “missionary by its very nature.” Here
    is this most important text in full: “The pilgrim Church is missionary by her very nature, since it
    is from the mission of the Son and the mission of the Holy Spirit that she draws her origin, in
    accordance with the decree of God the Father.”

    This is a radical statement on several accounts. First, it emphasizes the fact that mission
    is not just one thing the church does. It is rather constitutive of its very being. To be a Christian,
    in other words, is to be caught up in the very life of God, which is a life of reaching out and
    saving presence in the world. The entire church is missionary. Mission is not just something that
    specialists–missionaries–do. It is something that all Christians are called to. This theology,
    ultimately written by Congar and quite strongly fought over by the drafting commission, moves
    mission away from something just directed by the Roman Congregation of the Propagation of
    the Faith, and places it squarely in the daily life of the church as such, and so the responsibility
    of every local bishop (something the Decree emphasized again and again). In his important
    commentary in the Unam Sanctam series Congar points to the Catholic roots of this theological
    foundation in the scholastics and the seventeenth century French School of Spirituality. He also
    acknowledges the influence of contemporary Protestant thinking on mission as participation in
    God’s mission, the Missio Dei .
    2
    Mission, ultimately, is not something done because of a
    command, even the “great commission” of Mt 28:19‐20. Mission is, in its deepest identity, a
    privilege and a grace. The Decree is not always consistent on this, but it is the logical conclusion
    from the church’s essential missionary identity.

    A second rather radical implication of AG 2 follows from the first. This is that mission has
    now been defined not as a territorial concept, but as a basic attitude of the church wherever it
    is. Crossing boundaries, moving beyond itself is at the center of the church’s identity. While
    pastoral care is certainly central as well to the church’s life, it must not eclipse the church’s
    reaching out, making a difference in the world around it. Mission, then, is not about going
    places, but serving people–down the street or across oceans, in other cultures or one’s own.
    While, again, the document is not totally consistent in this regard, and gradually speaks more of
    1
    For a more detailed account of Ad Gentes’ remarkable history, see Part I, Section I of Stephen Bevans,
    SVD and Jeffrey Gros, FSC, Evangelization and Human Freedom: Ad Gentes and Dignitatis Humanae (New York:
    Paulist Press, 2009).
    2
    Yves Congar, “Principes doctrinaux,” in Johannes Schütte, ed., Vatican II: L’activité Missionnaire de
    L’Église . Unam Sanctam 67 (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1967), 186.
    ________________________________________
    Page 3

    3
    “younger churches” or “mission churches” implying that “missions” are in “mission countries,”
    the seeds had been sown. This tension in the document represents the great tension in the
    drafting committee. Yves Congar wrote in his journal about the opposition of the
    “missiologists” (experts in mission law) to the “theologians.”
    3

    Towards Inculturation

    Ad Gentes does not use the word “inculturation.” This is a word that only begins to
    appear regularly in theological and missiological literature in the 1970s, and is only first used in
    a Roman magisterial document in John Paul II’s apostolic exhortation Catechesi Tradendi in
    1979. Nevertheless, the document contains passages which certainly anticipate the discussion
    on inculturation in the next decade. Perhaps the most powerful expression of the need to
    appreciate culture and employ it in evangelization appears in paragraph 11:

    In order that they may be able to bear more fruitful witness to
    Christ, let them be joined to those peoples by esteem and love;
    let them acknowledge themselves to be members of the group of
    people among whom they live; let them share in cultural and
    social life by the various undertakings and enterprises of human
    living; let them be familiar with their national and religious
    traditions; let them gladly and reverently lay bare the seeds of the
    Word which lie hidden among their fellows. At the same time,
    however, let them look to the: profound changes which are taking
    place among nations, and let them exert themselves to keep
    modern persons, intent as they are on the science and technology
    of today’s world from becoming a stranger to things divine;
    rather, let them awaken in them a yearning for that truth and
    charity which God has revealed. Even as Christ Himself searched
    the hearts of women and men, and led them to divine light, so
    also His disciples, profoundly penetrated by the Spirit of Christ,
    should show the people among whom they live, and should
    converse with them, that they themselves may learn by sincere
    and patient dialogue what treasures a generous God has
    distributed among the nations of the earth. But at the same time,
    let them try to furbish these treasures, set them free, and bring
    them under the dominion of God their Savior.

    This is truly a remarkable passage, and one that has hardly been improved upon in
    teachings on inculturation in subsequent documents. The “they” at the beginning of the
    3
    Yves Congar, Mon Journal du Concile (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 2002), March 24, 1965 (Volume II, 348).
    ________________________________________
    Page 4

    passage refers to either people indigenous to a particular place or to missionaries sent to
    witness to the gospel. Christians are called to be real participants in the cultural and political life
    of the nations in which they live, and are called to be people of “sincere and patient dialogue”
    in order to discover the treasures that God has so generously lavished on the world’s cultures.
    But, as papal documents had pointed out even before this one, Christians are to integrate such
    treasures into Christian expression with a critical sense. Still, the document is completely
    positive, calling for cultures to be “furbished” by setting them free to be fully what they are–
    which will happen as they come under the rule of Christ and of God.

    A similar passage anticipating inculturation appears in paragraph 22. The passage is too
    long to quote, but I will try to summarize it here, with ample quotations from the text. Once
    again, it is a remarkable teaching, particularly in the light of the disparagement of culture that
    so often (but not always) took place in the exercise of Christian mission. As late as 1960, a
    response to a paper that tried to propose the development of an “African Theology” was
    responded to by a paper by a Belgian missionary entitled “First, A Real Theology” (meaning, of
    course, a European theology!).
    4

    The passage appears in the context of Chapter III of the Decree, entitled “Particular
    Churches.” This chapter contains another breakthrough teaching of AG, which is that no matter
    how “young” or fragile a church is, it is still a church in the proper sense, and must be treated as
    such. Specifically, the passage deals with the importance of developing a philosophy and
    especially a theology in each particular church which, though connected with the wider
    Christian tradition, nevertheless is a product of a borrowing “from the customs and traditions
    of their people, from their wisdom and their learning, from their arts and disciplines, all those
    things which can contribute to the glory of their Creator, or enhance the grace of their Savior,
    or dispose Christian life the way it should be.” By submitting God’s revelation to a “new
    scrutiny,” a new understanding of Christianity can be developed, relevant for that culture or
    context. “Thus it will be more clearly seen in what ways faith may seek for understanding, with
    due regard for the philosophy and wisdom of these peoples; it will be seen in what ways their
    customs, views on life, and social order, can be reconciled with the manner of living taught by
    divine revelation.”

    If this is done carefully, the passage continues, there will be no danger of “selling out”
    the gospel or falling into a “false particularism.” Rather, there will be a new richness added to
    the unity of the church throughout the world.

    Missionary Qualities

    Chapter IV, entitled simply “Missionaries,” is hailed by many commentators as the best
    chapter in the entire Decree.
    5
    The chapter is clear that being a missionary is a vocation, a
    particular calling from God to people who have “a suitable natural temperament,” and are “fit
    as regards talent and other qualities.” As suitable as these women and men are, however, the
    chapter lays out the kind of training and formation that missionaries need. The list of qualities
    4
    The story is related in Benezet Bujo, Christianity in Its Social Setting (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, —), —.
    5
    See for example the commentary of William R. Burrows in Timothy E. O’Connell, Vatican II and Its
    Documents: An American Reappraisal (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1986) 180‐196.

    ________________________________________
    Page 5

    5
    and skills in which they are to be trained is a long one. They are to be people of perseverance,
    generosity and courage–even willing to lay down their lives for the faith if necessary. They
    should be adaptable, prayerful, and have a knowledge of the history of the peoples to whom
    they are sent as well as an understanding of current issues in those particular situations. Every
    effort should be made to learn the local language or languages. They should be trained both in
    theology and missiology. Significantly, the training they receive should be given in the lands
    where they will work, and such training is recommended not only for foreign missionaries, but
    for indigenous members of particular countries and cultures who will work there as well. Simply
    because one is a native of a particular context, in other words, does not insure that one already
    has the skills to work effectively in that context.

    All of this, of course, is very ideal. It may even paint an overly romantic picture of the
    missionary life. It does, however, provide a standard to which missionary congregations and
    agencies should try to measure up. Certainly in the past there have been horror stories of
    women and men who have been placed in cross‐cultural situations with no training
    whatsoever, not even in language. Such situations were certainly more common in the days
    before the Council, and it is particularly to these that the Decree addresses. From my own
    experience and knowledge, much more can always be done, especially in the area of language
    study and ministerial supervision in the first months and years of a person’s ministry.

    Evangelii Nuntiandi (1975)

    As we will see in the paper that follows this one–on the history of the church’s mission–
    Paul VI’s apostolic exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi was written at a time when the very idea of
    mission was being seriously questioned. AG and Vatican II in general had opened up fresh
    perspectives on mission (in fact, I think it can be appreciated more today than in the troubled
    times in which it was written). But some of these fresh perspectives also raised profound
    questions. If, as the document on the church had taught, women and men could be saved
    outside the church and without any explicit faith in Christ (see Lumen Gentium (LG) 16), and if
    every church does mission in the context in which it exists, why should missionaries be sent
    abroad to convert people to Christ? If cultures are already good and holy, why should
    missionaries disturb them with western ideas and western religious forms? It was in this
    context that Paul VI convoked the 1974 Synod of Bishops with the theme “Evangelization in the
    Modern World.” It was from the deliberations of the Synod and Paul VI’s careful listening to the
    bishops of the Two Thirds World that Paul developed his ideas for his apostolic exhortation.
    6

    Interestingly, perhaps as a reflection of the rather strong aversion for the word
    “mission” that had emerged in the churches and in theology ad (ironically!) missi ology, the
    pope uses the word “evangelization.” However, the meaning of the terms is the same, and I
    believe that they can be used interchangeably. As we will see below, the pope does widen the
    idea of mission to include aspects other than simply witnessing to the faith in word and deed,
    6
    For a fuller explanation of the background of the apostolic exhortation, see Stephen Bevans, “Witnessing
    to the Gospel in Modern Australia,” The Australian E‐Journal of Theology , 6 (2006).

    ________________________________________
    Page 6

    but he still understands such witness to be at the heart of the evangelizing process.

    The Church’s Mission Continues the Mission of Jesus

    The first significant teaching of EN comes in the very first chapter. Like AG, the apostolic
    exhortation will emphasize the essential missionary nature of the church. Unlike the Council
    document, however, he does not begin with the grand doctrine of the Trinity. Instead, the pope
    begins with Jesus’ mission of preaching and witnessing to the Reign of God. “As an evangelizer,
    Christ first of all proclaims a kingdom, the kingdom of God; and this is so important that, by
    comparison, everything else becomes ‘the rest,’ which is ‘given in addition.’ Only the kingdom
    therefore is absolute and it makes everything else relative” (EN 8). Jesus both taught about
    God’s Reign in parables and words of wisdom, and demonstrated its reality by his works of
    healing and exorcism (EN 11‐12), and those who accepted his message as good news formed “a
    community which is in its turn evangelizing” (EN 13). This is why “evangelizing is in fact the
    grace and vocation proper to the Church, her deepest identity. She exists in order to evangelize
    . . .”

    This section of EN is very rich and very dense–it is certainly my own favorite chapter in
    the document. Almost everything is worth quoting. Rather than that, however, let me highlight
    three things Paul VI insists on in talking about the fact that the church “is linked to
    evangelization in her very being (EN 15).

    First, the pope insists that the church needs to be evangelized itself before it takes on
    the task of evangelization. It must constantly listen to the Word of God; it must constantly be
    on the road of conversion (Ibid.). This does not mean that the church must wait before it “gets
    its act together” before it moves out on mission. If this were the case it would never go! But it
    does mean, to use the great phrase of South African missiologist David J. Bosch, that its work of
    evangelization needs always to be carried out in a kind of “bold humility”
    7
    –bold in preaching
    the gospel, but humble in its realization that it too needs the repentance to which the gospel
    calls humanity.

    Second, Paul VI insists on the strong link between Jesus’ witness to the Reign of God and
    the church. There is real continuity between Jesus’ mission and the mission of the church, “the
    normal, desired, most immediate and most visible fruit” (Ibid.) of Jesus’ work. In a time when
    the watchword was often “Jesus yes, the church no,” the pope insists on the fact that
    evangelization is an ecclesial task through and through. Evangelization is “not accomplished
    without her, and still less against her” (EN 16).

    Third, the fact that the church is so essentially missionary means that everyone in the
    church is called to participate in the church’s mission: “the work of each individual member is
    important for the whole” (EN 15). Like AG, EN does not want to reduce missionary work to only
    certain people in the church–members of missionary congregations or the hierarchy. This is a
    call especially to lay involvement in mission.

    Evangelization a Multi‐faceted Reality
    7
    David J. Bosch, Transforming Mission: Paradigm Shifts in Theology of Mission (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis
    Books, 1991), 489.
    ________________________________________
    Page 7

    7

    One of the most important teachings of the apostolic exhortation is the expansion of the
    church’s understanding of mission to include a variety of activities other than direct
    proclamation of the gospel, working for conversion and planting the church. AG certainly hints
    at this richness in the meaning of mission, but EN moves a step farther. There had been a
    tendency in the past to reduce evangelization to direct proclamation of Christ to those who do
    not yet know him. However, says the pope, “any partial and fragmentary definition which
    attempts to render the reality of evangelization in all its richness, complexity and dynamism
    does so only at the risk of impoverishing it and even of distorting it. It is impossible to grasp the
    concept of evangelization unless one tries to keep in view all its essential elements.”

    The pope then goes on to emphasize that while preaching Christ is important–indeed,
    there is no evangelization at all if this does not happen (EN 22)–there are several other
    “essential elements.” First, there is the witness of a vibrant Christian community, without which
    the church can have no credibility. In a famous line, the pope quotes a speech he had recently
    delivered: today people listen “more willingly to witnesses than to teachers, and if [they do]
    listen to teachers, it is because they are witnesses (see EN 41). Second, the pope stresses the
    importance of the evangelization of cultures, “not in a purely decorative way, as it were, by
    applying a thin veneer, but in a vital way, in depth and right to their very roots” (EN 20).

    Evangelization and Liberation

    Evangelization includes a commitment to full human development and especially to
    social justice. Only four years before, the Synod of Bishops spoke about working for justice as a
    “constitutive dimension of the preaching of the gospel,” and Paul VI includes this in his
    expanded vision of evangelization (see EN 29). But the pope–although somewhat cautiously–
    carries this further, in the light of contemporary discussions of justice, particularly in Latin
    America. In paragraph 29, the word “liberation” (in the sense of the “theology of liberation” is
    used for the first time in a Roman magisterial document: “evangelization involves an explicit
    message, adapted to the different situations constantly being realized, about the rights and
    duties of every human being, about family life without which personal growth and
    development is hardly possible, about life in society, about international life, peace, justice and
    development‐ a message especially energetic today about liberation” (Ibid.).

    EN’s teaching on liberation and evangelization is quite balanced, and there are two
    things in which it insists. First, evangelization is not to be reduced to political or economic well
    being. The spiritual dimension of the gospel is actually the source of humanity’s deepest
    liberation. Second, violence is never to be sanctioned, because it knows that knows that
    “violence always provokes violence and irresistibly engenders new forms of oppression and
    enslavement which are often harder to bear than those from which they claimed to bring
    freedom” (EN 37).

    One could say much more about this “magna carta” of mission documents, but these
    three points will suffice. EN’s program is continued and expanded in the document that
    commemorates AG’s twenty‐fifth anniversary and its own fifteenth: John Paul II’s massive 1990
    ________________________________________
    Page 8

    encyclical Redemptoris Missio .

    Redemptoris Missio (1990)

    Although it was not officially published until January, 1991, Pope John Paul’s encyclical
    Redemptoris Missio is dated December 7, 1990, on the eve of the twenty‐fifth anniversary of
    AG and the fifteenth anniversary of EN. The encyclical returns to the use of “mission,” although
    he use “evangelization” interchangeably with it, and speaks of it in a very broad and
    multifaceted way. Redemptoris Missio is the closest the Roman Magisterium has ever gotten to
    articulating a comprehensive and systematic reflection on mission, and while it may not be
    quite as inspiring as EN it represents a major step forward in the church’s official teaching on
    what has come to be called its “evangelizing mission.” A summary of the entire document
    would far exceed our purposes here, and so we will focus on three important aspects of RM’s
    teaching: its Christocentric focus, its expansion of the understanding of mission, and its
    inclusion of interreligious dialogue as constitutive of the church’s mission.

    Christocentric Focus

    At a press conference given soon after the publication of the encyclical, Josef Cardinal
    Tomko, then the Prefect of the Congregation of the Evangelization of Peoples, explained that
    one of the chief reasons for the pope’s writing RM was to correct a Christology being developed
    by some theologians that tended to obscure Christian belief that Jesus was indeed the unique
    and universal savior of humanity.
    8
    Although he didn’t mention names, it is pretty clear that he
    had in mind a number of Indian and other Asian theologians, and probably also the U. S.
    American theologian Paul Knitter.

    While the pope holds fast to the church’s traditional teaching, clearly articulated at
    Vatican II, that people have the possibility to be saved outside of explicit faith in Christ (see RM
    10), his position also reflects the Council’s teaching that, nevertheless, all grace comes through
    Christ, and Christ alone. “No one, therefore, can enter into communion with God except
    through Christ, by the working of the Holy Spirit. Christ’s one, universal mediation, far from
    being an obstacle on the journey toward God, is the way established by God himself, a fact of
    which Christ is fully aware. Although participated forms of mediation of different kinds and
    degrees are not excluded, they acquire meaning and value only from Christ’s own mediation,
    and they cannot be understood as parallel or complementary to his” (RM 5).

    The pope’s insistence on the centrality of Christ runs through every section of RM, and is
    definitely the major theological theme of the encyclical. The first chapter deals with this
    teaching directly, emphasizing the fact that explicit faith in Christ is what gives women and men
    the fullness of life. All people have a right to the truth and life that the gospel offers, although
    the gospel is always addressed to human beings in their freedom, never imposed upon them
    (RM 7‐8). Chapter II reflects on the centrality of the Reign of God in Jesus ministry, and says
    clearly that the church is not an end in itself–perhaps the clearest statement of this fact in a
    8
    Josef Cardinal Tomko, “Proclaiming Christ the World’s Only Savior,” L’Osservatore Romano (April 15,
    1991): 4.
    ________________________________________
    Page 9

    9
    magisterial document up to this time (see RM 18), but that does not mean that the Reign of
    God is separate from Jesus or the church. In fact, the pope insists, the Reign of God is not a
    concept, a doctrine or a program; it is a person , the person of Jesus of Nazareth (Ibid.). Chapter
    III is on the Holy Spirit, and again, while the Spirit is understood as the “principal agent of
    evangelization” (see the title of the chapter), the pope insists that the Spirit is the Spirit of
    Jesus, and not some vague, general form of God’s presence (see RM 29). Each of these three
    chapters oppose any generalizing or watering down of the specificity of Christ: mission is about
    proclaiming the person and work of Christ, not helping people recognize God’s mysterious
    presence as Logos, or in “Kingdom values,” or in the pervasive presence of the Spirit.

    “’ Why mission?’” the pope asks. “Because to us, as to St. Paul, ‘this grace was given, to
    preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ’ (Eph 3:8). . . .” (RM 11).

    Expanding the Idea of Mission

    There are two ways in which John Paul expands the notion of mission in the encyclical.
    The first way is to distinguish three “situations” of the church’s missionary activity. The second
    is to speak of mission as a “single but complex reality,” composed of several elements.

    The first “situation” of the church’s missionary activity is mission ad gentes , or the direct
    witnessing and proclamation of Christ in situations where he is not known, or where the church
    is not strong enough to proclaim the gospel in a fully inculturated way (RM 33). This is mission,
    the pope says, in the proper sense of the word. However, the pope also speaks about pastoral
    work among the established churches and what he had been calling the “new evangelization” in
    churches “where entire groups of the baptized have lost a living sense of the faith, or even no
    longer consider themselves members of the Church, and live a life far removed from Christ and
    his Gospel” (Ibid.). These latter are churches where the gospel has been established for a long
    time–like the churches of Europe or North and South America–or even churches who have only
    recently received the gospel–churches, for example, in urban areas of Africa or Asia.

    Even though mission ad gentes does retain its validity as mission in the proper sense,
    the pope expands the notion to include particular areas like the rapidly growing urban areas of
    the world, particularly those in Asia, Africa and Latin America. He also points to the world’s
    youth, which in many countries make up half the population, and to large numbers of the
    world’s migrants and the conditions of poverty which often makes migration necessary (RM
    37). Referring to Paul’s speech on Athens’s Areopagus, where Paul dared to present the gospel
    in terms that Greeks would understand, the pope also speaks about the world’s new Areopagi
    which call for a creative way of presenting the gospel. He singles out areas like the world of
    communications, the need to develop the rights of women and children, the culture of science,
    the situations that need liberation from any and all oppression, ecological responsibility, and
    the need for peacemaking (Ibid.). This is clearly an expansion of mission ad gentes far beyond
    how even the pope defined it earlier in the encyclical.

    The encyclical expands the idea of mission even further, or perhaps to align it with the
    expanded areas mentioned in paragraph 37. Although John Paul does not quite a good
    summary of a wider sense of mission that appears in a 1984 document entitled “Dialogue and
    ________________________________________
    Page 10

    Mission” (the document speaks of five aspects or elements of mission),
    9
    he does acknowledge
    that mission is indeed a multifaceted reality. In Chapter V, the pope writes about mission as
    witness, as explicit proclamation of the name of Christ and of the gospel, as the task of forming
    new communities, as inculturation, interreligious dialogue, working for development, and as
    works of charity.

    In sum, one gets the distinct impression that mission is understood in the encyclical in a
    way that embraces the entire life of the church. It confirms AG’s contention that the church is
    indeed “missionary by its very nature,” or EN’s statement that evangelization is the church’s
    “deepest identity.”

    Interreligious Dialogue

    We have already mentioned that interreligious dialogue is included in the encyclical as
    part of its expanded understanding of mission. It will be important, however, to single this
    aspect out, both because it is something that is relatively new in the church’s teaching on
    mission because in later years the idea of interreligious dialogue might seemed to be called into
    question.

    EN does not really deal with the question of interreligious dialogue. It does speak of the
    respect that Christians have for other religions, but it does not seem to understand dialogue as
    part of the evangelization process itself (see EN 53). Nine years later, in 1984, the Pontifical
    Council for Dialogue did issue an important statement entitled “Mission and Dialogue” in which
    dialogue was seen as integral to the church’s evangelization efforts. This is the first time,
    however, that the activity of interreligious dialogue appears as part of mission in a papal
    encyclical. “Inter‐religious dialogue,” the pope writes, “is part of the church’s evangelizing
    mission” (RM 55).

    The pope insists that dialogue with other faiths is perfectly consistent with the church’s
    obligation to proclaim Christ as universal savior to all peoples. While the aim of dialogue is to
    discover in other religions that ray of truth that enlightens all peoples (see NA 2), each dialogue
    partner needs to be a person of full conviction in her or his faith. Even though Christians are
    called to dialogue, they must always keep in mind the uniqueness of Christ and that “the
    Church is the ordinary means of salvation and that she alone possesses the fullness of the
    means of salvation” (Ibid.).

    Nevertheless, the pope says, dialogue is not some kind of tactic for eventual conversion
    (RM 56). It is born out of respect for the other religions, and is done out of a sincere desire to
    get to know and to learn from other religious ways. Even when dialogue is difficult–say, in some
    Muslim areas–Christians should be open to it, despite its difficulties and despite its risks (RM
    57). Dialogue, finally, is not something just for experts or official religious leaders. The pope
    notes that dialogue is the task of every Christian, and he especially encourages the laity to
    engage in it (Ibid.).
    9
    Secretariat for Non‐Christian Religions, The Attitude of the Church Towards the Followers of Other
    Religions: Reflections and Orientations on Dialogue and Mission (DM), AAS 75 (1984, 816‐828; see also Bulletin
    Secretariatus pro non Christianis 56 (1984/2), No. 13. The five elements are presence and witness; commitment to
    social development and human liberation; liturgical life, prayer and contemplation; interreligious dialogue; and
    proclamation and catechesis.
    ________________________________________
    Page 11

    11

    Like EN, one could say much more about this virtual summa of mission and missiology.
    However, given the constraints of this paper, the three areas highlighted certainly provide an
    adequate overview of what the encyclical teaches.

    Dialogue and Proclamation

    Reference has already been made to the Secretariat for Non‐Christians’ 1984 document
    on dialogue and mission. A few months after the publication of RM, a follow up document to
    the one issued in 1984 was published by the Pontifical Council for Dialogue (the name of the
    Secretariat since 1988) and the Congregation for the Evangelization of Peoples. The document’s
    title, Dialogue and Proclamation (DP), points to the issue which it addresses: the relationship
    between direct proclamation of the gospel and the imperative, as an integral part of the
    church’s mission, of interreligious dialogue. As Pope John Paul II indicated in RM, there is a
    mutual relationship between the two aspects of mission, but that relationship had been in
    danger of being reduced to one or the other in the years immediately preceding RM’s
    publication. Mission, he insisted over and over again in his encyclical, cannot be reduced to
    dialogue, as if all religions are of equal value. But he also subtly argued that dialogue is not
    something we can dispense with when we preach the riches of Christ. DP tries to address the
    vital connection between the two in greater detail.

    The document is developed in three parts. There is a first section reflection on dialogue,
    then a second on proclamation, and finally a third on the relationship between them. The point
    is made, however, that, if dialogue is treated first, this does not mean that it has priority over
    proclamation in the document. It is treated first only because the document was first initiated
    by the Pontifical Council for Dialogue (DP 3). The two, rather, need to be dynamically related to
    one another, and always exist in tension. The root of this is in God’s life and saving activity
    itself: God offers and works for salvation in the world, and yet God works in dialogue, never
    forcing, but always persuading (see DP 38).

    DP presents a rather extensive theology of religions in the first part of the document. It
    also lays out nicely the various forms that interreligious dialogue can take: the dialogue of life
    where people simply live together and appreciate each other on a human level; the dialogue of
    action where members of different religions unite around some particular cause for the
    betterment of humanity; the dialogue of theological exchange where, especially, experts and
    church leaders share perspectives and study one another’s traditions; and the dialogue of
    religious experience in which members share the richness of one another’s spiritual traditions
    and personal spirituality and perhaps–as in Assisi in 1986 and 2002–pray in one another’s
    presence (see DP 42). Another interesting reflection about dialogue is the naming of a number
    of factors that impede dialogue, among which are insufficient grounding in one’s own faith, a
    wrong understanding of notions like conversion, and the political climate in which one lives (see
    DP 52). Nevertheless, as the document says, “despite the difficulties, the Church’s commitment
    to dialogue remains firm and irreversible” (DP 54).

    Focusing on the act of proclamation, DP emphasizes the fact that any proclamation of
    the gospel is not done in a void. Rather, the Holy Spirit has gone before the one who proclaims.
    ________________________________________
    Page 12

    In fact, people “ may have already been touched by the Spirit and in some way associated
    unknowingly to the paschal mystery of Jesus Christ (cf. GS 22)” (DP 68). Because of this,
    Christians need to learn how to present the gospel in ways that truly communicate it, illumine
    people’s experience, and challenge them to respond. They should model themselves on Jesus
    (see DP 69). Any announcement of the gospel should be confident, and yet respectful and
    humble, dialogical and inculturated (DP 70). In the same way that it presented obstacles to
    dialogue, the documents cites certain obstacles to a worthy gospel proclamation. There may be
    a gap between what one says and what one truly believes and lives out in one’s life; Christians
    may lack respect for the religious traditions among which they proclaim the gospel; or there
    might exist “external difficulties,” such as strong historical prejudices of a particular people
    against Christianity (see DP 73‐74).

    Paragraph 77 sums up well the close connection between two activities that the third
    section of the document seeks to explain. For our purposes it is enough to cite the paragraph as
    a whole:

    Interreligious dialogue and proclamation, though not on the same
    level, are both authentic elements of the Church’s evangelizing
    mission. Both are legitimate and necessary. They are intimately
    related, but not interchangeable: true interreligious dialogue on
    the part of the Christian supposes the desire to make Jesus Christ
    better known, recognized and loved; proclaiming Jesus Christ is to
    be carried out in the Gospel spirit of dialogue. The two activities
    remain distinct but, as experience shows, one and the same local
    Church, one and the same person, can be diversely engaged in
    both.

    Conclusion: From DP to the Present

    This paper has presented a survey of the main teachings on mission that the church has
    presented in official Roman documents in the last half century. What has been the main
    missiological concern of the Roman Magisterium in the two decades since the publication of DP
    has been the question of interreligious dialogue in relation to the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as
    universal savior. On two occasions, in 2000 with the declaration Dominus Iesus and in 2007 with
    a document entitled “Doctrinal Note on Some Aspects of Evangelization,” the Congregation for
    the Doctrine of the Faith emphasized the centrality of Jesus in terms that, at least for some,
    seemed to neglect the equal centrality of the doctrines of grace outside Christian boundaries
    and the practice of interreligious dialogue (although, to be fair, these were acknowledged in
    both documents). Sanctions leveled against prominent theologians like Jacques Dupuis (a
    principal author of DP) and Roger Haight, and investigations of equally prominent theologians
    Peter Phan and Michael Amaladoss have only underlined the fact that Rome is nervous about
    the correct interpretation of its own teachings.

    Theologians and missiologists have suggested that the Christological issue underlying
    the publication of these documents and the initiation of these investigations is the most crucial
    theological issue of our day. Others point to issues of inculturation as the most significant
    ________________________________________
    Page 13

    13
    theological discussion in contemporary theology, one that is the foundation for these other
    Christological questions. Still others argue that much more urgent are issues of justice,
    peacemaking and the care of creation. Whatever one may think, one cannot but be struck by
    the fact that these are all missiological issues, and that church teaching has dealt–at least in
    some sense–with every one of them in the last five decades. And whatever one may think, one
    cannot deny that mission is at the center of theological thought and Christian life today.

  19. Phan Huy Thach says:

    Chào các cha, các anh chị

    Mình đang tìm tài liệu tiếng Việt để cữ hành nghi thức Scrutinies trong RCIA Process.( vào Chúa Nhật mùa Chay thứ 3, thứ 4 và thứ 5)

    http://www.crookston.org/doc_worship_and_liturgy/index_htm_files/rciascrutinies1-3.pdf

    Mong các cha và các anh chị giúp cho.

    Mình xin cám ơn trước

    Thạch

    TakPhan@yahoo.com

  20. Dao van Nhan says:

    Kính chào quý Cha cùng ban Giáo Lý , biên tập…

    Con là thành viên đồng hành trong ban giáo lý tân tòng khóa 2013-2014 GX CTTDVN Houston. Môt dự tòng có nêu câu hỏi mà con chỉ hứa khi nào tìm được câu trả lời chính xác sẽ bổ túc sau : Câu hỏi như sau
    Đức Mẹ Maria đi theo Thánh Gioan tông đồ từ sau khi Chúa Giêsu chết . Đức mẹ sống tới bao nhiêu tuổi và chết ở đâu ?
    Nếu có thể được Xin Cha cho con câu giải đáp phù hợp cho một chị dự tòng trong lớp .

    Hiệp nhất trong Chúa Giêsu Kitô .

    Kính chào.

    Con Phaolo Đào văn Nhàn. Houston. TX.

    • Thưa Anh,
      Chúng ta chỉ biết một điều chắc chắn là Đức Mẹ được Thiên Chúa cất về trời cả hồn lẫn xác và không ai tìm thấy xác Đức Mẹ đâu cả. Đó là Tín Điều mà ĐGH Piô XII công bố trong Tông Hiến Munificentissimus Deus ngày 11/1/1950. Theo truyền thống thì Đức Mẹ ở với Thánh Gioan cho đến cuối đời của Mẹ, nhưng không nói rằng cuối đời ấy là vào năm nào. Còn Thánh Gioan thì cư ngụ ở Giêrusalem rồi sau đó về Êphêxô. Nếu Đức Mẹ “chết” ở Giêrusalem thì phải có mộ của Mẹ ở Giêrusalem và nếu Mẹ “chết” ỡ Êphêxxô thì phải có mồ của Mẹ ở Êphêxô. Nhưng vào thời vua Constantin, Hoàng hậu Helena cho thu góp các “Xương Thánh” và các “di tích thánh” để đem về Constantinople cho bà thì bà được cho biết rằng theo truyền thống thì Mẹ an nghỉ ở Giêrusalem và được cất trong một ngôi mộ. Nhưng ngôi mộ đó cũng trống như Mộ Chúa, nên dân chúng tin rằng Mẹ được đưa về Trời cả hồn lẫn xác. Anh có thể tìm thấy nhiều truyện về việc Mẹ an nghỉ trên mạng Internet và các sách vở, nhưng Hội Thánh không chứng thực những điều viết trong các sách vở hay các bài trên mạng ấy. Từ những truyền thống này, nhiều Đền Thờ và hình ảnh của cả Công Giáo lẫn Chính Thống đã được xây cất và vẽ ra ngay từ thời ban đầu để mừng Mẹ Lên Trời rất lâu trước khi ĐTC Piô XII công bố Tín Điều Đức Mẹ Hồn Xác Lên Trời.

      Cám ơn Anh.
      Phaolô Phạm Xuân Khôi

  21. Trong phúc âm thánh Matthew chapter 26 cau 38 của HDGMHK bằng tiếng Anh Chúa trong vườn Gietsimani nói:” My soul is sorrowful even to death…”Câu này trước năm 1975 các sách tại Nam VN DỊCH LÀ:”LINH HỒN tHẦY BUỒN ĐẾN CHẾT ĐƯỢC..”Trong cuốn Thanh kinh Cưu và Tân ước do TGPSaigon phát hành năm1998 do hồng y Pham Minh MẪN IMPRIMATYRE đã đổi câu trên thành ra như sau:
    ‘ TÂM HỒN THẦY BUỒN ĐẾN CHẾT ĐƯỢC…”
    Xin giải thích sự khác biệt giưã hai chữ : LINH HỒN và TÂM HỒN trong câu trên chủa Chúa theo Thần học.Khi bên VN thay đổi hai chữ này là họ có mục đích nuốn biến Chúa từ người có linh hồn sang người chỉ có tâm hồn mà thôi,nghĩa là Chúa không phải là Thiên Chúa.Xin nghiên cưú và giải thích ngay thẳng với sự hiểu biết có trách nhiệm.Xin cám ơn.
    Ông Gioan P.

    • Câu hỏi này cần phải giải thích chi tiết theo Kitô học. Xin phép cho chúng tôi trả lời bằng một bài viết dài trong tương lai.

Speak Your Mind