Can Mary convince God to save someone who doesn't deserve it?

[Roseeurekacross]

Just to add something to the discussion here:

• Mary always does God’s will
• God’s will is that He ultimately “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4)

So Mary participates with God’s will by helping to lead many souls to heaven.

• 100

 

[James248]

Spouse of The Holy Spirit? So since scripture mentions St Joseph as the husband of Mary, is she polyandric?

She did conceive by the Spirit.

 

[Wesrock]

Spouse of The Holy Spirit? So since scripture mentions St Joseph as the husband of Mary, is she polyandric?

Well, the Holy Spirit is not a man, and He’s not something she had relations with, and she never had relations with Joseph, so no!

By Spouse of the Holy Spirit, nothing conjugal is implied. However, it does highlight her special relationship with the Spirit (with God), not just in her conception, but in walking in the Spirit all her life.

 

[PluniaZ]

This short video on Youtube really helped me understand the Biblical passages on Mary better:

youtube.com/watch?v=kUdYeYy3NQA

 

[cstheriot]

This short video on Youtube really helped me understand the Biblical passages on Mary better:

youtube.com/watch?v=kUdYeYy3NQA

X1000

This is awesome! (the last part about the queen mother and interceding really points to this thread as an answer)

Also, if you want to read more about this, Brant Pitre has a great book called “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist”. He talks about this and more Jewish roots. He also has several talks regarding these same topics, and they are all great!

 

[Mammoths]

Well, the Holy Spirit is not a man, and He’s not something she had relations with, and she never had relations with Joseph, so no!

By Spouse of the Holy Spirit, nothing conjugal is implied. However, it does highlight her special relationship with the Spirit (with God), not just in her conception, but in walking in the Spirit all her life.

its a little confusing to call someone a spouse but exclude a definitive characteristic of the word. if I am not mistaken, a couple who do not consummate are eligible for annulment?

You can’t be married and never have sex. That would violate the definition given by God in Genesis. “For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh.”

So, if the Holy Spirit did not have sex with Mary, He is not her spouse–St Joseph likewise.

Before somebody offers that physical union is not definitive, might I point out that this scripture is used as a definition by the church to defend monogamy and heterosexual imperative in marriage.

it includes these elements in becoming spouses:
departure from parents
Sexual union
Heterosexual union
Lifelong union
Monogamous union

I do not understand why perpetual virginity is so important to immaculate conception. using typology, only the priests were allowed to touch or to carry the ark of the covenant. by analogy, Joseph, being the husband, would have had a unique position with respect to her. It would not defile her for him to commit the conjugal act after the Word was born because marriage and marital sex are holy. It could be implied by the fact that scripture calls him her husband that Joseph had some kind of grace which prevented his affections from transferring original sin to her–baptism?

 

[cstheriot]

its a little confusing to call someone a spouse but exclude a definitive characteristic of the word. if I am not mistaken, a couple who do not consummate are eligible for annulment?

You can’t be married and never have sex. That would violate the definition given by God in Genesis. “For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh.”

So, if the Holy Spirit did not have sex with Mary, He is not her spouse–St Joseph likewise.

Before somebody offers that physical union is not definitive, might I point out that this scripture is used as a definition by the church to defend monogamy and heterosexual imperative in marriage.

it includes these elements in becoming spouses:
departure from parents
Physical union
Heterosexual union
Lifelong union
Monogamous union

Yes, you are correct. Without consummating the marriage, then an annulment would be possible.

This is from the Canon, section 1142:

If a couple mutually agrees to not engage in sexual intercourse (or have what’s called a Josephite marriage), then that marriage is valid because they are able to consummate the marriage (which is not the case in impotent unions). But it is also dissoluble, since the two have not become “one flesh.”

so, the marriage would be valid. For a marriage to be valid a couple must only be able to have sexual intercourse – they don’t have to actually engage in sexual intercourse.

so, I would say that Joseph is the spouse of Mary. and Mary did conceive by the Holy Spirit, thus making her a “mystical” spouse of the Holy Spirit. “mystical” due to the fact that she wasn’t married to the Holy Spirit in the ordinary sense of the word, but she did have a baby though the Holy Spirit, which is a spousal relationship.

 

[cstheriot]

I do not understand why perpetual virginity is so important to immaculate conception. using typology, only the priests were allowed to touch or to carry the ark of the covenant. by analogy, Joseph, being the husband, would have had a unique position with respect to her. It would not defile her for him to commit the conjugal act after the Word was born because marriage and marital sex are holy. It could be implied by the fact that scripture calls him her husband that Joseph had some kind of grace which prevented his affections from transferring original sin to her–baptism?

Remember that Mary asks the Angel “How can this be since I have no relations with a man?” If she was planning on engaging in intercourse, wouldn’t she have just assumed that the angel was referring to the baby that she and Joseph would have? The fact remains, that she had consecrated herself to God and was always planning on remaining a virgin. That is why she asked the angel “How can this be?”.

So, in the old testament, nothing “unclean” could touch the ark. This was because the ark had been set aside as “holy”. meaning set aside and reserved for God. In the same way, Mary herself was holy. Set aside for a special purpose by God. So, Joseph did not “defile” her. In Leviticus 15:18, the ‘rules’ state that after intercourse, the couple must bath and they will be “unclean” til morning. So, Joseph remained the chaste husband of Mary and did not defile her as she was set aside as “holy”.

 

[Wesrock]

I do not understand why perpetual virginity is so important to immaculate conception. using typology, only the priests were allowed to touch or to carry the ark of the covenant. by analogy, Joseph, being the husband, would have had a unique position with respect to her. It would not defile her for him to commit the conjugal act after the Word was born because marriage and marital sex are holy. It could be implied by the fact that scripture calls him her husband that Joseph had some kind of grace which prevented his affections from transferring original sin to her–baptism?

Sex wouldn’t be a “defilement” in that sense, though it should be remembered that all men apart from Jesus and Mary were touched by sin. Intimate relations with Mary can’t be compared with the priestly ministry of tending to sacred spaces and objects and offerring right worship. Like the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy of Holies, Mary was set apart for God. She was entrusted to Joseph for her care, but she was for God, not for him. Let’s not miss the fact that the inconprehensible, infinite, all-holy invisible God assumed flesh within her. She was touched by the Divine Presence, a vessel for it, in a way no other man (excepting Jesus Christ, who was God Himself) was. I feel like that doesn’t easily sink in for those of us who grow up hearing the story. Look at the Jews who even today don’t walk over the area where the Temple once stood because of anxiety over being in the place the Holy of Holies once stood. That God touched something in the world in a local and more real and tangible way than anything else, that he dwelt within her womb as a vessel, taking his flesh from her flesh, that needs to be appreciated. She had been and became set apart for God for a divine purpose. Try telling a first century Jew to get “intimate” with the womb God had truly touched and entered the world in.

 

[cstheriot]

Sex wouldn’t be a “defilement” in that sense. Like the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy of Holies, Mary was set apart for God. She was entrusted to Joseph for her care, but she was for God, not for him. Let’s not miss the fact that the inconprehensible, infinite, all-holy invisible God assumed flesh within her. She was touched by the Divine Presence, a vessel for it, in a way no other man (excepting Jesus Christ, who was God Himself) was. I feel like that doesn’t easily sink in for those of us who grow up hearing the story. Look at the Jews who even today don’t walk over the area where the Temple once stood because of anxiety over being in the place the Holy of Holies once stood. That God touched something in the world in a local and more real and tangible way than anything else, that he dwelt within her womb as a vessel, taking his flesh from her flesh, that needs to be appreciated. She had been and became set apart from God for a divine purpose. Try telling a first century Jew to get “intimate” with the womb God had truly touched and entered the world in.

Well said! Much better than I did

 

[Mammoths]

Sex wouldn’t be a “defilement” in that sense, though it should be remembered that all men apart from Jesus and Mary were touched by sin. Intimate relations can’t be compared eith the priestly ministry of tending to sacred spaces and objects and offerring right worship. Like the Ark of the Covenant, the Holy of Holies, Mary was set apart for God. She was entrusted to Joseph for her care, but she was for God, not for him. Let’s not miss the fact that the inconprehensible, infinite, all-holy invisible God assumed flesh within her. She was touched by the Divine Presence, a vessel for it, in a way no other man (excepting Jesus Christ, who was God Himself) was. I feel like that doesn’t easily sink in for those of us who grow up hearing the story. Look at the Jews who even today don’t walk over the area where the Temple once stood because of anxiety over being in the place the Holy of Holies once stood. That God touched something in the world in a local and more real and tangible way than anything else, that he dwelt within her womb as a vessel, taking his flesh from her flesh, that needs to be appreciated. She had been and became set apart from God for a divine purpose. Try telling a first century Jew to get “intimate” with the womb God had truly touched and entered the world in.

For me this is the most reachable answer.

 

[LatinRight]

Sure, it could always start again if we repent.

But if we repent then we have not commited the unforgivable sin because our hearts did not harden to the point of no return, as we saw with the Pharisees.

Anyway, God’s mercy endures forever. He’s never lacking…it’s always us who are insufficient.

God bless Lanten ashes,

In my opinion, you have declared a very important truth.

For peace of mind, everyone should know it.

God bless.

LatinRight

 

[Memaw]

So the question originally posed was “Can Mary convince God to save someone who doesn’t deserve it?”

I would answer no, for a whole host of reasons.

The first thing that I would address is the premise in the question that a person deserves salvation. The very nature of salvation is that it is unmerited by the beneficiary. As the apostle Paul tells us:

“For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written: None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.”

So in that sense, grace and by extension salvation, is wholly unmerited by all. Paul makes very clear that justification is by grace through faith, not by works or merit. “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith.”

The next thing we should address is whether intervention is needed in order to precipitate God’s grace. The answer is no. All throughout the Bible we find that God’s redemptive plan was already manifest long before Mary. We see that in God’s promise to Abraham, that through his offspring all nations would be blessed, this continues with the Mosaic prophesy that one would arise after him, and see this continue through the prophets, especially in Isaiah where the coming of the Messiah and his work was already pre-ordained by God.

Finally, Paul sums this up for us in Ephesians: “For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this not of your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.”

God does not need to be convinced or persuaded to enact his redemptive plan, it was prepared beforehand.

Next, it is not Mary who is our intercessor, but Jesus. As Peter proclaims in Acts: “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

Hebrews makes this clear that Jesus is the high priest who makes intercession for us. Jesus is the high priest and mediator of the new covenant in his blood. “Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people.”

Not only is he the sole person to provide the atonement for our sins, but he is the perfect mediator, not needing someone to intercede on someone’s behalf, but perfectly able to understand and meet our need for redemption. “For because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted…For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.”

Lastly, we have to remember that Mary herself was the object of God’s grace and mercy. As Mary herself says, “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.”

Spoken like a true protestant. Have you ever asked anyone to pray for your??? God Bless, Memaw

 

[James248]

For me it’s a Yes and No answer. Yes, saints intercede for people. But, no, because it is God alone who saves.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Spoken like a true protestant. Have you ever asked anyone to pray for your??? God Bless, Memaw

What he wrote is quite correct, also from the perspective of Mariology. Perhaps you should study this specialisation in Catholic theology rather than attempting to gratuitously insult people.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Figured this question, that I raised in another topic, was best suited to be a separate topic.

I’ve read some claims from those who emphasize Marian devotion, that it’s actually possible for God to relent and agree to save a soul that deserves to be damned, if Mary asks for that favor.

This strikes me as almost blasphemous and attributing salvific powers to Mary that she does not have. Though this may be a misunderstanding on my part of what Mary’s role actually is.

I also find some takes on the Brown Scapular, that merely wearing it is a guarantee to go to Heaven, to be rather superstitious, though I understand there is actually much more to the devotion than that.

Regarding your second paragraph: decidedly no. This is an anthropomorphism that is completely unsound theologically. One encounters these effusions of piety in devotional literature of other eras that really have to be put into a proper historical context to be properly assessed by the contemporary reader; often enough, they require the context of theological commentary, lest the reader arrive at conclusions that are removed from the mind of the Church. As the Council Fathers said at Vatican II:
*Let them assiduously keep away from whatever, either by word or deed, could lead separated brethren or any other into error regarding the true doctrine of the Church. *
One of the best treatments of Mary is chapter 8 of Lumen Gentium, which was promulgated in place of the schemata De Beata Maria Virgine.

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19641121_lumen-gentium_en.html

The world’s bishops, gathered in ecumenical council, rightly discerned an urgent need for a renewal and purification of Mariology, that sub-specialisation in theology that focuses on the theology of Mary. This was especially true because of texts emerging from the High Scholastics and from the 18th and 19th centuries. We see correctives asserting themselves in the 20th century, but they were greatly helped by how the Council Fathers proceeded and then by subsequent developments.

As for your final paragraph…unquestionably there were theologically unsound elements in practices of popular piety, as they were being employed; these were not simply limited to Marian devotions, I must hasten to say.

Whole areas of the Church’s life and practice were in need of reform and renewal. That was why theological adjustment and correction was necessary. One can still come across pieces of unsound literature. Here, however, is the catechesis prepared and presented by the Carmelites regarding their scapular.

meditationsfromcarmel.com/content/scapular-catechesis

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Given that you were attacked by one of the Catholics posting in this thread, I decided to go back through your text and add passages from Lumen Gentium that parallel what you are saying, with reductions to both texts because of the 6000 character limit

So the question originally posed was “Can Mary convince God to save someone who doesn’t deserve it?” I would answer no, for a whole host of reasons.

/…/ Paul makes very clear that justification is by grace through faith, not by works or merit. “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith”

In paragraph 53, the Council Fathers remind all the faithful that Mary is “Redeemed by reason of the merits of her Son and united to Him by a close and indissoluble tie” and that “because she belongs to the offspring of Adam she is one with all those who are to be saved.”

The next thing we should address is whether intervention is needed in order to precipitate God’s grace. The answer is no. All throughout the Bible we find that God’s redemptive plan was already manifest long before Mary. We see that in God’s promise to Abraham, that through his offspring all nations would be blessed, this continues with the Mosaic prophesy that one would arise after him, and see this continue through the prophets, especially in Isaiah where the coming of the Messiah and his work was already pre-ordained by God.

/…/

God does not need to be convinced or persuaded to enact his redemptive plan, it was prepared beforehand

60 There is but one Mediator as we know from the words of the apostle, “for there is one God and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a redemption for all”. The maternal duty of Mary toward men in no wise obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows His power. For all the salvific influence of the Blessed Virgin on men originates, not from some inner necessity, but from the divine pleasure. It flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on His mediation, depends entirely on it and draws all its power from it

Next, it is not Mary who is our intercessor, but Jesus. As Peter proclaims in Acts: “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved”

Hebrews makes this clear that Jesus is the high priest who makes intercession for us. Jesus is the high priest and mediator of the new covenant in his blood. “Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect, so that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in the service of God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people”

Not only is he the sole person to provide the atonement for our sins, but he is the perfect mediator, not needing someone to intercede on someone’s behalf, but perfectly able to understand and meet our need for redemption. “For because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted…For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. /…/”

*[Par. 62] Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix. This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator. For no creature could ever be counted as equal with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer. Just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by the ministers and by the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is really communicated in different ways to His creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.

The Church does not hesitate to profess this subordinate role of Mary. It knows it through unfailing experience of it and commends it to the hearts of the faithful, so that encouraged by this maternal help they may the more intimately adhere to the Mediator and Redeemer*

Lastly, we have to remember that Mary herself was the object of God’s grace and mercy. As Mary herself says, “My soul magnifies the Lord, and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior”

55 The Sacred Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testament, as well as ancient Tradition show the role of the Mother of the Saviour in the economy of salvation in an ever clearer light and draw attention to it. The books of the Old Testament describe the history of salvation, by which the coming of Christ into the world was slowly prepared. These earliest documents, as they are read in the Church and are understood in the light of a further and full revelation, bring the figure of the woman, Mother of the Redeemer, into a gradually clearer light. When it is looked at in this way, she is already prophetically foreshadowed in the promise of victory over the serpent which was given to our first parents after their fall into sin. Likewise she is the Virgin who shall conceive and bear a son, whose name will be called Emmanuel. She stands out among the poor and humble of the Lord, who confidently hope for and receive salvation from Him. With her the exalted Daughter of Sion, and after a long expectation of the promise, the times are fulfilled and the new Economy established, when the Son of God took a human nature from her, that He might in the mysteries of His flesh free man from sin

 

[Church_Militant]

Sean doesn’t seem to know his Bible every well.

We plainly see in John 2:5 that Mary actually interceded for the couple with Jesus and in so doing convinced Him to begin His public ministry earlier than He had planned. Read the context…

As for the topic that Toe brought up…

Not in the way that you have expressed it, but read My Testimony and you will (hopefully) see that she did indeed intercede for me and gain me the grace of reversion to my faith. I do not doubt for a moment that it was a crucial point when I studied to show myself approved and spoke up in her defense and the defense of her Son’s church.

P.S. I am so glad to see Don Rugerro on board here!

 

[James248]

I mean, Moses did it for the Israelites so…

 

[Cathoholic]

ToeInTheWater. You asked . . . .

I’ve read some claims . . . . that it’s actually possible for God to relent and agree to save a soul that deserves to be damned, if Mary asks for that favor.

This strikes me as almost blasphemous and attributing salvific powers to Mary that she does not have.

There is a sense this is true and a sense this is false.

The false sense is someone thinking they or anyone else can get an unchanging God to “change His mind.”

But there is a true sense too.

When God has someone intervene, as Dr. Scott Hahn says, God is drawing that pleading out of that intercessor.

The intercession proceeds from the Divine initiative or as Vatican II says, the “Divine Pleasure”.

VATICAN II For all the salvific influence of the Blessed Virgin on men originates, not from some inner necessity, but from the divine pleasure.

Notice incidentally that there IS in some sense, “salvific influence”. Yet this “influence” is upon men (not upon God) and springs forth (“originates”) and is initiated by God (“from the divine pleasure.”).

God bless.

Cathoholic

---

If interested . . . .

JOHN 2:1-11 1 On the third day there was a marriage at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; 2 Jesus also was invited to the marriage, with his disciples. 3 When the wine failed, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” 6 Now six stone jars were standing there, for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. 7 Jesus said to them, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. 8 He said to them, “Now draw some out, and take it to the steward of the feast.” So they took it. 9 When the steward of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward of the feast called the bridegroom 10 and said to him, “Every man serves the good wine first; and when men have drunk freely, then the poor wine; but you have kept the good wine until now.” 11 This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

“What have you to do with me” is a Hebrew idiom acknowledging the relationship and yet an acquiescence of a given request.

GreenWhiteBlue has an excellent unpacking of that here.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=6189394&postcount=32

When Moses intercedes on behalf of the Israelites, saving their lives, it is not God versus Moses but rather this stems from the Divine initiative in cooperation with free will, or as Vatican II states, is from . . . “the divine pleasure”.

Let’s go to Exodus (emphasis mine) during the Golden Calf episode. Moses is up on Mount Sinai. God is going to destroy the Israelites and begin anew. Then watch Moses intercedes on behalf of his people and . . . . from the Divine pleasure . . . . saved them.

EXODUS 32:7-10 7 And the LORD said to Moses, “Go down; for YOUR people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves; 8 they have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them; they have made for themselves a molten calf, and have worshipped it and sacrificed to it, and said, ‘These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!’” 9 And the LORD said to Moses, “I have seen this people, and behold, it is a stiff-necked people; 10 now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them; but of you I will make a great nation.”

Now let’s look at the intercession . . . .

EXODUS 32:11-14 11 But Moses besought the LORD his God, and said, “O LORD, why does thy wrath burn hot against thy people, whom thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'With evil intent did he bring them forth, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people. 13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou didst swear by thine own self, and didst say to them, ‘I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have promised I will give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it for ever.’” 14 And the LORD repented of the evil which he thought to do to his people.

God drew this out of Moses. But Moses cooperated with these graces he was given!

There are other examples too but this will suffice for now.