Apparitions of Mary

[1234]

I’d say our friend Roy hasn’t actually looked at the words of the ‘Hail Mary’. Every single Hail Mary mentions God THREE times - ‘The Lord’, who is with Mary, ‘Jesus’, whose mother she is, ‘God’ (in the person of Jesus), again referring to her as His mother. And it names Mary only twice! So if it’s just a numbers game, God comes out on top.

Even if it isn’t a numbers game - the Rosary is really about those episodes from the Gospels that we think about while we pray it, that we call ‘mysteries’ - you know, the the incarnation, birth and childhood of Jesus, His passion and death, His resurrection, ascension and sending of the Holy Spirit. To say that meditating on God’s word in the Gospels in this way, as we do, puts Mary ahead of God is plain wrong.

And there are some very simple reasons Paul doesn’t mention Mary. She was still alive while He was writing, remember. Even you, I don’t doubt, would’ve been fine asking her prayers while she was on Earth, so it’s beyond doubt that Paul was too.

As to why he didn’t mention her? Firstly she would have been mobbed by Christians who would doubtless be keen to meet her - remember the woman in the Gospels who was praising Mary loudly because of her connection to Christ? She would’ve been hounded unreasonably by the idle curious.

Secondly, she certainly would’ve been a very particular target for persecution, and it would’ve been a real coup for the Romans to be rid of her, so it is understandable if Paul may’ve been reticent to mention her out of unwillingness to expose her.

We don’t know when Mary died. Judging by what she had just gone through, she may not have lived very long. Interesting that no one recorded her passing, if it was so important. The gospels were all written long after Jesus dies, the earliest, Mark, at least 30 years after Jesus’ death, according to the most conservative estimates. Mary was probably dead by then. Yet her death isn’t considered important enough to mention in any of the gospels–she the co-mediatrix?! Mary’s legend gradually grew as Christianity took over the pagan empire; eventually the legend grew that she died in Ephesus, where the virgin goddess Artemis-Diana was worshiped, who replaced another ancient goddess, Cybele. Mary replaced Diana.

 

[LilyM]

Why doesn’t Jesus appear to men? Why only women and virgin nuns at that? Why doesn’t Mary appear to grown men? Did she ever? Why doesn’t Mary appear in Boston, or Manhattan or Los Angeles or Paris, Rome or London these days? On the metro in Paris or in the tube in London? Why only in out-of-the-way places?

None of the tens of thousands at Fatima were grown men, of course. By the way, some of the 15 seers of Knock were grown men. And if you want to look at unapproved apparitions, the male seers of Medjugorje are grown men and she hasn’t stopped allegedly appearing to them.

Why the seeming predilection for women and children and obscure places? Because this has always been His way. Remember He was incarnated and dwelt and did most of His preaching in the backwoods of the backwoods in Galilee, and didn’t make Himself publicly known in Jerusalem, really, until shortly before His death. Men treated Him awfully in general. Even the men who He chose as followers let Him down badly.

Traditionally John was about 15 - not much older than Lucia at Fatima, so it can with a lot of truth be said that it was only women and children there for Him at the end - not to mention women to whom He appeared first after His resurrection. So why not women and children when men have proven so untrustworthy?

 

[LilyM]

We don’t know when Mary died. Judging by what she had just gone through, she may not have lived very long. Interesting that no one recorded her passing, if it was so important. The gospels were all written long after Jesus dies, the earliest, Mark, at least 30 years after Jesus’ death, according to the most conservative estimates. Mary was probably dead by then. Yet her death isn’t considered important enough to mention in any of the gospels–she the co-mediatrix?! Mary’s legend gradually grew as Christianity took over the pagan empire; eventually the legend grew that she died in Ephesus, where the virgin goddess Artemis-Diana was worshiped, who replaced another ancient goddess, Cybele. Mary replaced Diana.

And how many of the Apostles have had THEIR passing recorded in Scripture, or indeed much at all about themselves? Some of them had far far less recorded about themselves in scripture than Mary did. They to whom Christ entrusted entirely His message and mission! Are we to surmise that they are of less than utmost importance as a result of lack of ‘column inches’ of publicity?

And our good buddy Roy wasn’t discussing the Gospels. He was discussing Paul’s letters. Which were written significantly earlier than the Gospels - the earliest was probably in the 50s AD. So there’s every chance Mary was still alive THEN.

 

[peary]

We don’t know when Mary died. Judging by what she had just gone through, she may not have lived very long. Interesting that no one recorded her passing, if it was so important. The gospels were all written long after Jesus dies, the earliest, Mark, at least 30 years after Jesus’ death, according to the most conservative estimates. Mary was probably dead by then. Yet her death isn’t considered important enough to mention in any of the gospels–she the co-mediatrix?! Mary’s legend gradually grew as Christianity took over the pagan empire; eventually the legend grew that she died in Ephesus, where the virgin goddess Artemis-Diana was worshiped, who replaced another ancient goddess, Cybele. Mary replaced Diana.

**That is inaccurate. Mary’s living in Ephesus had nothing to do with Artemis-Diana, and to make such a comparison shows a lack of historical development in the Church’s understanding of Mary’s role in salvation history. The Church has never proclaimed her a ‘goddess’ whatsoever; that is protestant propaganda. Her house is located in Ephesus, where she and John went after the Ascension. John founded several churches in that area and was also bishop.

The reason there is historical evidence of this is 1. the tomb of St. John in Ephesus; 2. the building of the first basilica in the Christian world at Ephesus in honor of the Virgin Mary because of her living there.**

 

[Lev23]

Are you suggesting that Our Lord Jesus Christ was foolish?

No…come on now. To the unbelieving world though, he is foolishness.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

…Too bad the apparition didn’t invite some amputees to the last ‘vision’ and then grow back their missing arms and legs. Now that would have been a miracle!

Sheesh… that’s asking for a bit much. What’s next? Will you ask for somebody who is dead to be resurrected? What makes you think people will believe when an amputee grows back their limb when people “will not believe even if someone were to rise from the dead” (Luke 16:31)

No one is accusing Bernadette of lying. She was just mistaken…

That’s a cheap shot, because you could be mistaken too.

Why doesn’t Jesus appear to men? Why only women and virgin nuns at that? Why doesn’t Mary appear to grown men? Did she ever? Why doesn’t Mary appear in Boston, or Manhattan or Los Angeles or Paris, Rome or London these days? On the metro in Paris or in the tube in London? Why only in out-of-the-way places?

I can understand if you don’t believe, but I hope you’re not being jealous because you haven’t seen an apparition.

… Yet her death isn’t considered important enough to mention in any of the gospels…

Don’t worry about it. The gospels are about Jesus, not Mary.

 

[Lilyflower]

Why doesn’t Jesus appear to men? Why only women and virgin nuns at that? Why doesn’t Mary appear to grown men? Did she ever? Why doesn’t Mary appear in Boston, or Manhattan or Los Angeles or Paris, Rome or London these days? On the metro in Paris or in the tube in London? Why only in out-of-the-way places?

I suggest you ask her and Him!

In faith through the Holy Spirit, they will surely answer.

Blessings and peace

 

[Des]

The existence of oxygen has been proven experimentally using verified and approved scientific techniques.

Love can’t be proven either. Sure, a scientist may say a heart rate increases or brain waves and chemicals jump within the body but that really doesn’t prove a thing does it. It can’t prove the feeling unless one actually can experience it which is the point. Not all things that exist can be scientifically proven.

The ‘visions’ of the 3 children of Fatima before a large charged up crowd could be easily reproduced by anyone staring at the sun—in which one sees a dimmed disc with whirling colors. Half saw something, half didn’t.

It could easily be produced using the sun as an example? Then by all means prove it without having a single soul have damage to their retinas. Unless they all have a problem finding the sun at once. Then you’d have to produce clothes soaked to the bone drying up in a matter of minutes. School children who had no idea a sun miracle was taken place likewise saw the same thing so you can rule out word of mouth or mass hallucination there as well.

The 3 Fatima children heard exactly the same thing the Virgin Mary was saying unless you want to convince us they were communicating with their thoughts while under some kind of self induced hallucination. And if they heard contradicting things, then it surely would have been brought up amongst them.

 

[Lilyflower]

Why doesn’t Jesus appear to men? Why only women and virgin nuns at that? Why doesn’t Mary appear to grown men? Did she ever? Why doesn’t Mary appear in Boston, or Manhattan or Los Angeles or Paris, Rome or London these days? On the metro in Paris or in the tube in London? Why only in out-of-the-way places?

Perhaps this speaks volumes and is shouting about the materialist lifestlyes and pomulgation of the self found in metropolitan Western societies

Blessings and peace

 

[Lilyflower]

We don’t know when Mary died. Judging by what she had just gone through, she may not have lived very long. Interesting that no one recorded her passing, if it was so important. The gospels were all written long after Jesus dies, the earliest, Mark, at least 30 years after Jesus’ death, according to the most conservative estimates. Mary was probably dead by then. Yet her death isn’t considered important enough to mention in any of the gospels–she the co-mediatrix?! Mary’s legend gradually grew as Christianity took over the pagan empire; eventually the legend grew that she died in Ephesus, where the virgin goddess Artemis-Diana was worshiped, who replaced another ancient goddess, Cybele. Mary replaced Diana.

St Paul was writing much much sooner than you suggest. His earliest writings were very close to the GREAT events, that without doubt Mary was STILL ALIVE.

Where in history is there evidence of obituaries written when a person is still alive? I don’t think even the BVM would have thought too much of that.

Apart from which, in her great humility she always stood aside to emphasise the importance of her Divine Son. No doubt Paul respected that.

As a sign-post Mary only ever points the way to her Divine Son.

I have a large statue in my hall of the BVM and other icons both Catholic and Orthodox. Whenever I see them, I am moved in humility to ‘go down on my knees and praise the Holy Triune God’.

I go down on my knees and praise God when I might not have done so and outside from my daily prayer. As Catholic, that is how devotion to the BVM moves me.

How does she move you?

Blessings and peace

 

[Lilyflower]

As 1234 likes scientific experiments, I put forward an experiment:

Take yourself to your private room. Set time aside without disturbance. Confess your sin to Almighty God in an act of sincere and heartily sorrow with a firm purpose of ammendment then in all humility meditate the Rosary for yourself as it should be meditated, then come back and tell me the outcome.

I can tell you now what you will say, but I would rather hear it from yourself!

Blessings and peace.

 

[1234]

**That is inaccurate. Mary’s living in Ephesus had nothing to do with Artemis-Diana, and to make such a comparison shows a lack of historical development in the Church’s understanding of Mary’s role in salvation history. The Church has never proclaimed her a ‘goddess’ whatsoever; that is protestant propaganda. Her house is located in Ephesus, where she and John went after the Ascension. John founded several churches in that area and was also bishop.

The reason there is historical evidence of this is 1. the tomb of St. John in Ephesus; 2. the building of the first basilica in the Christian world at Ephesus in honor of the Virgin Mary because of her living there.**

The church doesn’t have to proclaim her a goddess–but that’s what she is. She is just short of co-mediatrix. Mediator of all graces. etc. etc. There is no evidence that she ever lived there, but she did replace the worship of the virgin goddess, Diana.

It’s just odd that she, not other saints, just she–appears to women and children, not men. Other saints don’t bother to appear.

Men at Fatima didn’t see the apparition, they–half of the populace- saw the dimmed whirling sun, which is what you see if you’re so foolish to stare at the sun.

 

[1234]

Perhaps this speaks volumes and is shouting about the materialist lifestyles and promulgation of the self found in metropolitan Western societies

Blessings and peace

All the more reason for saints to appear and set them straight!

Jesus and the saints worked miracles and raised the dead, as Jesus was alleged to have done then and not since, to make people believe. and lend credence to his sayings.

I think that working an hallucination is a pretty shabby miracle. If Jesus could raise from the dead, he could grow an arm or leg back. So why didn’t Mary do this?

 

[redrosetea]

Yes, and I think it happens a lot more often than gets reported. But one thing I’m really curious about, why does Mary only appear to Catholics?

Mary has appeared to Protestants, Jews, and Muslims…Google Our Lady of Zeitoun

There was huge investigations. she was seen by Abdel Nasser , himself

She was seen by the millions in Egypt during the 1960’s

 

[peary]

The church doesn’t have to proclaim her a goddess–but that’s what she is. She is just short of co-mediatrix. Mediator of all graces. etc. etc. There is no evidence that she ever lived there, but she did replace the worship of the virgin goddess, Diana.

**That’s your warped propaganda on it. We who are Catholic Christians know better. There is no Catholic who thinks of her as a ‘goddess’ but as “Mother of the Church” in the sense that the Church is the Body of Christ on earth; hence she is our “spiritual mother” as well, always leading us to her Son, Jesus Christ.

Second, again, you have no concept of what co-Redemptrix or Mediatrix means because of language deficiency. These are LATIN terms. The “co-” prefix in co-Redemptrix refers to Mary’s cooperation with us; it does not mean that Mary is co-Redeemer, not even with and under Christ. (The “co-” prefix should not be capitalized, since it refers to our mere human efforts towards our salvation; the “R” in co-Redemptrix should be capitalized since it refers to Divine efforts towards our salvation.)

Mary is not a co-Redeemer and is not able to save anyone, not even with and under Christ. Christ alone redeems; Mary merely immerses herself in all that Christ does toward our redemption. Her role is not co-redemptive.

Mary is Mediatrix of Grace, but not of all graces. She is not Mediatrix of the graces that flows from Christ’s Divine nature to His human nature; there is no mediation within the hypostatic union of the Divine and human natures of Christ. She is not the Mediatrix of the graces that she herself receives from Christ; in that case, she is the recipient, not the Mediatrix. In all other cases, Mary is the Mediatrix of Grace.

Mary is also Mediatrix of Divine Providence and of mercy and of all that God does within Creation, except with respect to Christ and herself.

Mary is Advocatrix. The term “Advocate,” when applied to the Virgin Mary, is theologically deficient because it lacks the feminine form, which would distinguish Mary’s different and subordinate role from Christ’s role as Advocate. Use of the Latin form of the word allows a clear theological definition to be attached to the term, unfettered by the various connotations which the word “advocate” has when translated into various languages.

The expression “Advocate of the People of God” can only be used to refer to Jesus Christ, or the Holy Spirit. The Virgin Mary has no role of advocacy herself; instead, her role as Advocatrix is to immerse herself in Christ’s role as our Advocate. Mary is not “Advocate of the People of God,” but rather she is a humble assistant to Christ, the Advocate of the People of God.

Mary does not stand before God as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix. In truth, only Christ stands before God to redeem, mediate, and advocate. The Virgin Mary humbly kneels before Christ, in worship of Him, as she assists Christ fully in His work of redemption, mediation, advocacy.

Mary’s role as co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocatrix is not properly described as a role “with and under” Christ. The term “with and under” does indicate that her role is subordinate, but it also improperly describes that role as if it were a separate role. In truth, Mary completely immerses herself in all that Christ does for our salvation. She has no role of redemption, mediation, or advocacy of her own; all her acts toward our salvation occur in Christ, not “with and under” Christ.**

It’s just odd that she, not other saints, just she–appears to women and children, not men. Other saints don’t bother to appear.

Other saints have appeared to the faithful thousands of times, not just Mary, and not just to women and children. You need to read the lives of the saints to get a proper perspective. You are sorely lacking in this area of understranding.

Men at Fatima didn’t see the apparition, they–half of the populace-saw the dimmed whirling sun, which is what you see if you’re so foolish to stare at the sun.

You are not the end all or be all of what happened at Fatima. There is quite a lot more that happened at Fatima than just the whirling of the sun. Maybe you ought to do some research on it.

 

[1234]

So you are asking me to believe that 'nothing begets something?

Please show me one iota of scientific proof that anywhere in nature non-existence gives birth to existence? That which does not exist creates that which does

No, that is what you are asking folk to do. I am not asking them to do anything much less praying to ‘various gods’ since the Bible forbids it.

What you believe matters to me not, but I would suggest that as you like experiments, you open your heart and mind to Almighty God and find out the truth for yourself.

I do not know of any practicing Catholics who use birth control. I am not saying they don’t only that I am not aware of any.

Dish out money on the basis of miracles and visions?

Where on earth did you get such a preposterous idea from? I suggest it is the product of your world not mine.

Visions cannot by definition be varified. They are unique gifts to whom they are given.

My mystical encounter with the Holy Spirit was between Him and I. It matters me not one iota whether or not you believe me. In fact your belief/disbelief means absolutly nothing to my encounter.

My encounter could not have been observed by you even if you had been present as I was not alone but the only potential witness present was cast into a deep sleep and did not see/witness anything. So cannot verify what happened.

quote ‘some recent miracles’ please quote your evidence seeings evidence is fundamental to your criteria

Then let us wait for your evidence

Too bad your world has not one shred of evidence of a miracle. I suggest that is because there is something fundamentally wrong with your world not with the reality and experience of mysticism.

You are waiting for a sign but Christ Himself told you that this Godless generation would not be given a sign except for the sign of Jonah. 'It is a wicked, godless generation that asks for a sign, and the only sign that will be given it is the sign of the prophet Jonah. … Mat 16:4

AT the end of the day, you cannot hide behind science and scentific experiment, you have to decide for yourself, whether or not you are going to take Jesus Christ seriously or not. It is your choice. If you do, you will find no scientific evidence to support you.

Likewise if you do not, it will be no good on judgment day appealing to a scientific criteria. Either you accept Christ as your Lord and Saviour or you are lost. It is YOUR choice. Good luck
Blessings and peace.

Mysticism is no argument. You can’t persuade anyone by alleging that something is true because YOU feel it. Why don’t you take the Buddha seriously–I do and hundreds of millions of others do also. Why not Krishna? Lots of mystics directly experience many gods bot don’t convert anyone beyond their own believers. Why should you with your experience of Jesus?

If you don’t know any Catholics who practice birth control, you a) aren’t discussing their sexual practices with them or b) don’t know many Catholics.

Most rational people, with brains, like to have evidence before being asked to believe something. You look at a doctor’s credentials and ask around for the testimony of others, check online, before you let that person touch you. Ditto for car performance, reliability of any kind. When you come to Christianity you find documents written in GREEK about a JEW who spoke ARAMAIC and didn’t write anything down in any language (in the dirt doesn’t count) about whose life *nothing *was written down for at least 30 years, and that narrated by a Jew to someone who wrote it down in Greek. And it gets worse after that. Earliest copies of the gospels from the late 4th century. That’s evidence?

As for Peace and Blessings, I don’t think so. You hope I go to Hell.

I corrected your misspellings.

 

[LilyM]

The church doesn’t have to proclaim her a goddess–but that’s what she is. She is just short of co-mediatrix. Mediator of all graces. etc. etc. There is no evidence that she ever lived there, but she did replace the worship of the virgin goddess, Diana.

It’s just odd that she, not other saints, just she–appears to women and children, not men. Other saints don’t bother to appear.

Men at Fatima didn’t see the apparition, they–half of the populace- saw the dimmed whirling sun, which is what you see if you’re so foolish to stare at the sun.

And you’ve totally ignored the examples I gave you of where St Michael, St Margaret, St Catherine, St Joseph and St John the Evangelist HAVE appeared, and the cases of Knock and Medjugorje (although that’s not an officially approved one) where the apparitions WERE/ARE to adult men, among others.

 

[peary]

Mysticism is no argument. You can’t persuade anyone by alleging that something is true because YOU feel it. Why don’t you take the Buddha seriously–I do and hundreds of millions of others do also. Why not Krishna? Lots of mystics directly experience many gods bot don’t convert anyone beyond their own believers. Why should you with your experience of Jesus?

If you don’t know any Catholics who practice birth control, you a) aren’t discussing their sexual practices with them or b) don’t know many Catholics.

Most rational people, with brains, like to have evidence before being asked to believe something. You look at a doctor’s credentials and ask around for the testimony of others, check online, before you let that person touch you. Ditto for car performance, reliability of any kind. When you come to Christianity you find documents written in GREEK about a JEW who spoke ARAMAIC and didn’t write anything down in any language (in the dirt doesn’t count) about whose life *nothing *was written down for at least 30 years, and that narrated by a Jew to someone who wrote it down in Greek. And it gets worse after that. Earliest copies of the gospels from the late 4th century. That’s evidence?

As for Peace and Blessings, I don’t think so. You hope I go to Hell.

I corrected your misspellings.

:shrug:

You have a very odd perception of life, it seems.

 

[Lilyflower]

All the more reason for saints to appear and set them straight!

Jesus and the saints worked miracles and raised the dead, as Jesus was alleged to have done then and not since, to make people believe. and lend credence to his sayings.

I think that working an hallucination is a pretty shabby miracle. If Jesus could raise from the dead, he could grow an arm or leg back. So why didn’t Mary do this?

For what purpose?

Do you think that Mary’s secondary role was to produce an international relief organisation for the reduction of handicap?

Why didn’t Mary help the alchohol industry by making drinks more alcoholic? Why didn’t she help the Crusaders discover machine-guns?

So according to your view, Mary could have dedicated the rest of her life helping the limbless to grow back arms and legs!

Very benevolent but I think proclamation of the Gospel was of greater importance.

I feel this arguement has gone from the bizare to the ridiculous. Mary only ever points the way to her Son. You simply do not understand the nature of humility and submission to the Divine purpose, much less so the role in history of His Mother.

Blessings and peace.

 

[ibkc]

When you come to Christianity you find documents written in GREEK about a JEW who spoke ARAMAIC

I thought there was a decent amount of evidence that the gospels were originally written in Aramaic and translated into Greek later. Aramaic versions of the Bible certainly exist and have so for many centuries. Some Eastern churches actually use Aramaic in their liturgy.