This appeared in the Bay Times of Friday, 29 December:
It pains me to reveal this in such a public fashion, as I have won many a pub bet on this subject, but your front-page item (Bay Times, 21 December 2006) on the parthenogenesis of Flora, the komodo dragon, perpetuates the common error that the so-called immaculate conception has something to do with the incarnation of Jesus. In fact this could be said to be an immaculate misconception. The Catholic dogma of the immaculate conception teaches that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was conceived without original sin so that she could later bear the Son of God. In other words the immaculate conception refers to the conception of Mary not of Jesus. Of course, if anyone would like to bet me a pint of Guinness that I’m wrong …
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment