Basic Questions on Catholicism

[Valke2]

Although another very good link was given, here is another source, Mary: Ever Virgin

Thanks.

 

[Rawb]

Good points. Does the bible say how Mary was born without sin?

How? No, it doesn’t even state it directly (but remember, Catholics don’t get our sole revalation of faith from the Bible). This is why most (any?) protestants don’t believe it.

catholic.com/library/Mary_Full_of_Grace.asp

That’s a good link that provides quotes from the ECF’s about it. Basically because the angel who announced to Mary that she would concieve called her “Full of Grace”, and because of the tenses and things that he used, we believe that she was singularly saved from the stain of original sin. She still required a saviour, she was just saved in a different way. The metaphor often used for this is say you fall in a hole and someone pulls you out. Then they notice someone else going to fall into the hole and they grab them and keep them from falling in. That person is both’s savior, he just did it in a different fashion.

For a good bit of reading on “Full of Grace” there’s this link:

catholic.com/library/Immaculate_Conception_and_Assum.asp

 

[zerinus]

I believe you have a misunderstanding of the immaculate conception. It is the belief that Mary was concieved without original sin, not that she was concieved without sex.

Thank you for correcting that. That was a bit of sloppy thinking by me. However, the principle still remains the same. How could Mary have been “immaculately conceived” if it had taken place through the natural process? It is through the natural process of conception that the “original sin” is supposed to be transmitted. How could she have been “immaculately conceived” if the “conception” had taken place in the same way as with everyone else? The implication is that it was not through the natural process.

Also, When the gospel is stating that Joseph did not have relations with Mary until she gave birth to a Child, what is the gospel writer trying to say. Is he talking about Mary and Joseph’s sex life, or is he emphasizing that Mary was a virgin, and it was not by Joseph that this child was born.

I think it is trying to do both. Firstly, it informs us that Mary was a virgin until she gave birth. Secondly, it implies that later on she wasn’t.

I would say that in that context, the author is not making any claims one way or another on MAry’s virginity after the birth of Christ, but before the birth of Christ.

I can’t agree, for the reasons that I have already explained.

A text should not be used to witness to something it was not meant to witness to.

I think it was meant to witness to it.

zerinus

 

[HailMary]

Thank you. The link was very helpful. So Jesus’ siblings were not blood relatives.

It occurs to me that the Christian Bible differs from the Hebrew Bible in that there is no competition between brothers, which is a recurring theme in the Hebrew Bible. Don’t know if it means anything. Just occured to me. Thanks again.

In classical Aramiac there is no word for cousin.

 

[rr1213]

In classical Aramiac there is no word for cousin.

Of course, most of the New Testament was written in Greek which, I am told, does have a word for cousin as distinguished from sibling.

 

[Aureole]

Thanks. Reading it now.

How do you like the Catholic Encyclopedia. I have the Encyclopedia of Judaism, but I’m not crazy about it.

The Catholic Encyclopædia is wonderful. One can use it for numerous references and it should be one of the first stops for a question concerning Catholicism.

I use the online Jewish Encyclopædia from time-to-time, whenever I want a quick answer. When I’m just browsing about Jewish practices I’ll go here.

 

[MariaG]

Thank you for correcting that. That was a bit of sloppy thinking by me. However, the principle still remains the same. How could Mary have been “immaculately conceived” if it had taken place through the natural process? It is through the natural process of conception that the “original sin” is supposed to be transmitted. How could she have been “immaculately conceived” if the “conception” had taken place in the same way as with everyone else? The implication is that it was not through the natural process.

Of course it was not through natural process. It was a miracle from God.

First of all, we know that God created man without original sin.

Mary was also created without original sin in anticipation of Christ’s redeeming sacrifice.

The whole concept of WHY Mary was without sin has little to do with Mary but much to do with Christ. Mary was created sinless because God is so holy. If the ARK that was used to carry the Word of God had to have priests who were sanctified to carry it, why do you not think that Mary who was carrying the God incarnate would not also need to be sanctified?

So much was done and instructions given about who and how could just carry the written word of God, outside of one’s body. How much more care would be given for the vessel that carried God incarnate.

Another interesting fact, it has not been until very recently, last 200 years that the manmade doctrine and unbelief about Mary has occured. The reformers had a much different belief about Mary than many Protestants today.

God Bless,
Maria

 

[apple72]

joseph and mary did not lose Jesus. and when they found Him He was preaching, teaching the Sadducees and they asked Him what happened and He said: “I am doing my Father’s will(business)” they did not lose Jesus rather Jesus was already in the age where He can convey the message of the Father. This was the time that Jesus was presented at the Temple. usually in the jewish traditions this means Jesus is in the stage becoming a young man.

 

[Eden]

Of course, most of the New Testament was written in Greek which, I am told, does have a word for cousin as distinguished from sibling.

Here are some more examples from Scriptures in which the same word “brothers” (adelphoi) is used in the Greek translation (the verse numbers are provided for you to look up in your Bible):

Jesus’ “Brothers” (adelphoi)) = Cousins or Kinsmen

Luke 1:36 - Elizabeth is Mary’s kinswoman. Some Bibles translate kinswoman as “cousin,” but this is an improper translation because in Hebrew and Aramaic, there is no word for “cousin.”

Luke 22:32 - Jesus tells Peter to strengthen his “brethren.” In this case, we clearly see Jesus using “brethren” to refer to the other apostles, not his biological brothers.

Acts 1:12-15 - the gathering of Jesus’ “brothers” amounts to about 120. That is a lot of “brothers.” Brother means kinsmen in Hebrew.

Acts 7:26; 11:1; 13:15,38; 15:3,23,32; 28:17,21 - these are some of many other examples where “brethren” does not mean blood relations.

Rom. 9:3 - Paul uses “brethren” and “kinsmen” interchangeably. “Brothers” of Jesus does not prove Mary had other children.

Gen. 11:26-28 - Lot is Abraham’s nephew (“anepsios”) / Gen.
13:8; 14:14,16 - Lot is still called Abraham’s brother (adelphos") . This proves that, although a Greek word for cousin is “anepsios,” Scripture also uses “adelphos” to describe a cousin.

Gen. 29:15 - Laban calls Jacob is “brother” even though Jacob is his nephew. Again, this proves that brother means kinsmen or cousin.

Deut. 23:7; 1 Chron. 15:5-18; Jer. 34:9; Neh. 5:7 -“brethren” means kinsmen. Hebrew and Aramaic have no word for “cousin.”

2 Sam. 1:26; 1 Kings 9:13, 20:32 - here we see that “brethren” can even be one who is unrelated (no bloodline), such as a friend.

2 Kings 10:13-14 - King Ahaziah’s 42 “brethren” were really his kinsmen.

1 Chron. 23:21-22 - Eleazar’s daughters married their “brethren” who were really their cousins.

Neh. 4:14; 5:1,5,8,10,14 - these are more examples of “brothers” meaning “cousins” or “kinsmen.”

Tobit 5:11 - Tobit asks Azarias to identify himself and his people, but still calls him “brother.”

Amos 1: 9 - brotherhood can also mean an ally (where there is no bloodline).

scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html#the_bvm-V

 

[Eden]

Misunderstanding about Matthew 1:25 (Joseph knew her “not until”)

Matt. 1:25 - this verse says Joseph knew her “not until (“heos”, in Greek)” she bore a son. Some Protestants argue that this proves Joseph had relations with Mary after she bore a son. This is an erroneous reading of the text because “not until” does not mean “did not…until after.”** “Heos” references the past, never the future**. Instead, “not until” she bore a son means “not up to the point that” she bore a son. This confirms that Mary was a virgin when she bore Jesus.

Here are other texts that prove “not until” means “not up to the point that” (in Greek, the same word “heos” as that used to refer to Mary above):

Matt. 28:29 - I am with you “until the end of the world.” This does not mean Jesus is not with us after the end of the world.

Luke 1:80 - John was in the desert “up to the point of his manifestation to Israel.” Not John “was in the desert until after” his manifestation.

Luke 2:37 - Anna was a widow “up to the point that” she was eighty-four years old. She was not a widow after eighty-four years old.

Luke 20:43 - Jesus says, “take your seat at my hand until I have made your enemies your footstool.” Jesus is not going to require the apostles to sit at His left hand after their enemies are their footstool.

1 Tim. 4:13 - “up to the point that I come,” attend to teaching and preaching. It does not mean do nothing “until after” I come.

Gen. 8:7 - the raven flew back and forth “up to the point that” [until] the waters dried from the earth. The raven did not start flying after the waters dried.

Gen. 28:15 - the Lord won’t leave Jacob “up to the point that” he does His promise. This does not mean the Lord will leave Jacob afterward.

Deut. 34:6 - but “up to the point of today” no one knows Moses’ burial place. This does not mean that “they did not know place until today.”

2 Sam. 6:23 - Saul’s daughter Micah was childless “up to the point” [until] her death. She was not with child after her death.

1 Macc. 5:54 - not one was slain “up to the point that” they returned in peace. They were not slain after they returned in peace.

scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html#the_bvm-V

 

[Eden]

That is not the only invention of Christianity after the church had apostatized.

So, how long ago did this apostasy occur? According to the earliest Christians, Mary was “Ever-Virgin”. So, if Christians in the Church were witnessing to her Perpetual Virginity since, let’s say, at least the 3rd century A.D., why did God wait 1500 years to correct this apostasy by contacting Joseph Smith in New York, U.S. of A in the late 1800s? What was going on in that interim of apostasy?

Here are early Christians on the Perpetual Virginity of Mary:

“For if Mary, as those declare who with sound mind extol her, had no other son but Jesus, and yet Jesus says to His mother, Woman, behold thy son,’ and not Behold you have this son also,’ then He virtually said to her, Lo, this is Jesus, whom thou didst bear.’ Is it not the case that every one who is perfect lives himself no longer, but Christ lives in him; and if Christ lives in him, then it is said of him to Mary, Behold thy son Christ.’ What a mind, then, must we have to enable us to interpret in a worthy manner this work, though it be committed to the earthly treasure-house of common speech, of writing which any passer-by can read, and which can be heard when read aloud by any one who lends to it his bodily ears?” *Origen, Commentary on John, I:6 (A.D. 232). *

“Therefore let those who deny that the Son is from the Father by nature and proper to His Essence, deny also that He took true human flesh of Mary Ever-Virgin; for in neither case had it been of profit to us men, whether the Word were not true and naturally Son of God, or the flesh not true which He assumed.” *Athanasius, Orations against the Arians, II:70 (A.D. 362). *

"And when he had taken her, he knew her not, till she had brought forth her first-born Son.’ He hath here used the word till,’ not that thou shouldest suspect that afterwards he did know her, but to inform thee that before the birth the Virgin was wholly untouched by man. But why then, it may be said, hath he used the word, till’? Because it is usual in Scripture often to do this, and to use this expression without reference to limited times. For so with respect to the ark likewise, it is said, The raven returned not till the earth was dried up.’ And yet it did not return even after that time. And when discoursing also of God, the Scripture saith, From age until age Thou art,’ not as fixing limits in this case. And again when it is preaching the Gospel beforehand, and saying, In his days shall righteousness flourish, and abundance of peace, till the moon be taken away,’ it doth not set a limit to this fair part of creation. So then here likewise, it uses the word “till,” to make certain what was before the birth, but as to what follows, it leaves thee to make the inference.” *John Chrysostom, Gospel of Matthew, V:5 (A.D. 370). *

More testimonies as to the Perpetual Virginity of Mary by early Christians can be read here:

scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html#the_bvm-V

 

[Valke2]

Here are some more examples from Scriptures in which the same word “brothers” (adelphoi) is used in the Greek translation (the verse numbers are provided for you to look up in your Bible):

Jesus’ “Brothers” (adelphoi)) = Cousins or Kinsmen

I did a google and it says there’s a the greek word adelphos is used for brother and anepsios is used for cousin. So you in your above example, the word used denotes brother (whether step-brother, half-brother, adopted brother, or brother), not cousins.

 

[Valke2]

If the NT was heavily influenced or at least in part originally in aramaic, then the aramaic word, aha, can mean brother or other close relations.

So if aha was used as a shorthand way of saying relation, rather than brother, and it was then copied by the Greeks, it is possible it would have been copied down as adelphos, meaning brother.

 

[Rawb]

Valke2, I don’t know if you’ve seen this but it gets fairly into the difference of the words (mentions adelphos and anepsios) a and the language (whether it was in aramaic or greek) of the NT. I’m not sure if it’s a dialogue, (I don’t think it is) but here it is.

catholic.com/thisrock/1990/9001fea2.asp

 

[Valke2]

Thanks. I actually did get a chance to review that link earlier. . I think its clear to me now that translational arguments and exegies (sp?)can be used to support the position that Jesus had not brother’s from Mary. And this is what Catholic’s believe. Other Christians may believe something else. I’m good on the Jesus family picnic issues.

Next Question. Communal prayer/services. I assume Sunday Mass is a requirement, under Church doctrine. What about other days?

 

[Rawb]

Catholics are required to participate in Mass every Sunday (A Saturday Vigil service counts) and Holy Day of Obligation

January 1, the Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God;
August 15, the Solemnity of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary;
November 1, the Solemnity of All Saints;
December 8, the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, patroness of the USA;
December 25, the Solemnity of the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ (Christmas).

There are three additional rules which apply:

Throughout the universal Church, when December 8, the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception, falls on the Second Sunday of Advent, the observance of the feast is transferred to Monday, December 9, but the obligation to attend Mass is dispensed. If December 8 falls on a Saturday or a Monday, however, it remains a day of obligation.

In the dioceses of the USA, whenever January 1, the Solemnity of Mary, Mother of God, or August 15, the Solemnity of the Assumption, or November 1, the Solemnity of All Saints, falls on a Saturday or on a Monday, the obligation to attend Mass is dispensed.

In the Metropolitan Province of New Orleans, which includes the Diocese of Baton Rouge, the Solemnity of the Ascension of Our Lord, which in some other places in the USA is celebrated on the Thursday of the Sixth Week of Easter, is celebrated on the Seventh Sunday of Easter.
There is no obligation for the faithful to participate at Mass on Ash Wednesday and on Holy Thursday, although this is certainly highly recommended.

I got the dates and info from diobr.org/news/holy_days.htm

 

[Eden]

I did a google and it says there’s a the greek word adelphos is used for brother and anepsios is used for cousin. So you in your above example, the word used denotes brother (whether step-brother, half-brother, adopted brother, or brother), not cousins.

Exactly. Yet in the Greek translations, the word “adelphos” was used in the Scripture examples that I gave you. I think you misunderstood the “headline” **Jesus’ “Brothers” (adelphoi)) = Cousins or Kinsmen. **What the headline is indicating is that in the list that follows it, the word “adelphoi” (brothers) was used to indicate “cousins or kinsmen” in the Bible. The passages cited just are more examples of the word “adelphoi” being used instead of “anepsios” when referring to cousins/kinsmen.

 

[Eden]

Thanks. I actually did get a chance to review that link earlier. . I think its clear to me now that translational arguments and exegies (sp?)can be used to support the position that Jesus had not brother’s from Mary. And this is what Catholic’s believe. Other Christians may believe something else. I’m good on the Jesus family picnic issues.

Next Question. Communal prayer/services. I assume Sunday Mass is a requirement, under Church doctrine. What about other days?

Sorry. I see you are moving on. My apologies for responding to the previous topic before seeing this segue.

 

[Saint_Michael]

Another argument for Jesus having no brothers or sisters is the fact that at His crucifixion Jesus gives Mary to john the disciple whom Jesus loved to look after. If Jesus had brothers and sisters naturally they would look after Mary, not John. There is no word of any brothers or sisters at Christ’s crucifixion either, which would be odd since their mother was there despairing.

 

[Aureole]

Thanks. I actually did get a chance to review that link earlier. . I think its clear to me now that translational arguments and exegies (sp?)can be used to support the position that Jesus had not brother’s from Mary. And this is what Catholic’s believe. Other Christians may believe something else. I’m good on the Jesus family picnic issues.

Next Question. Communal prayer/services. I assume Sunday Mass is a requirement, under Church doctrine. What about other days?

I don’t mean to complicate things much more, but being part of a religious community may require additional communal prayers/services other than Sunday Mass and Holy Days of Obligation. For instance, monastaries require the monks to pray the Divine Office communally.