Church Mariology making me nuts!

[fbl9]

fbl9;10076219:

U will need to do better than that … to propose a convincing argument for Marian Devotion/Praying … as the Normative way to reach God.

Nobody has ever stated it was the Normative way. Rather it is a way.

U will need a better arguement yourself.

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

Whats that got to do with prayer ?

Didn’t Christ tell us how to pray ? Didn’t the Apostles show us the way via scripture in NT?
I’d beware of later, new-age ideas / revelations after 100 AD.

So are you still Catholic then?

 

[brb3]

To whom did Christ give the Keys to Heaven ? Who was the Rock …Mary, or Peter ?

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

To whom did Christ give the Keys to Heaven ? Who was the Rock …Mary, or Peter ?

Peter.

Well, let me ask you then if you still believe that Peter is the Rock: do you believe in the Immaculate Conception?

 

[brb3]

+JMJ+

So are you still Catholic then?

Absolutely !!! But, one with 1st century AD biblical understandings/roots !! Same as Apostles knew …& taught us !!

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

Absolutely !!! But, one with 1st century AD biblical understandings/roots !! Same as Apostles knew …& taught us !!

You can’t define what being a Catholic is, only the Catholic Church can.

So let me ask again, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception or not?

Also, do you believe in the Assumption of Mary or not?

 

[brb3]

Mary is the spiritual mother of all Christians. And, we honor her for her blessed excellency, and greatest lady who ever lived. We should tell her every day how much we appreciate and love her.

But, we need to stick to the OT/ NT standard on prayer to God ! Christianity has no Goddess in first century or now.
The Apostles & Christ covered this topic very well for us.

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

Mary is the spiritual mother of all Christians. And, we honor her for her blessed excellency, and greatest lady who ever lived. We should tell her every day how much we appreciate and love her.

But, we need to stick to the OT/ NT standard on prayer to God ! Christianity has no Goddess in first century or now.
The Apostles & Christ covered this topic very well for us.

Again, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary? Because if not you are not fooling anyone: you are in great danger of being a formal heretic.

 

[brumano]

I would suggest for those who seem to be so critical of Our Lady to reread the shaded areas of RC’s excellent post #150 from Saint Louis-Marie Grignion de Montfort, and see if you might see a little bit of yourselves in this Saints’ observations.

I only see parts of myself in De Monfort’s writings I wonder what he would think of the fact that I do not believe in what the church officially teaches as to Mary Immaculate by way of pre redemption or pre salvation. I should say it’s not that I say the doctrine is false, it’s that I believe the truth about the Immaculate Conception of Mary is a truth above the formulated pre saved by the (then) future merits of Christ, teaching. My gut feeling about that particular teaching is that it has been advanced more recently to explain and apollogize to the separated and non separated brethren who either have difficulty understanding or faith based objections to the core Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The Doctrine is not essentially false, as I say, it’s just that for me it’s not the highest truth, about the truth about Mary.
I believe Mary was born perfect and that she is and always will be perfect herself ; and that sin or flaw never in any way enters into the equation of her being. The Scriptures speak clearly of her uniqueness, purity and her holiness, they say nothing at all specifically about her being so through presalvation. Mary, to me never had any need whatsoever of being atoned for either in her nature or in her actual life.

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

I only see parts of myself in De Monfort’s writings I wonder what he would think of the fact that I do not believe in what the church officially teaches as to Mary Immaculate by way of pre redemption or pre salvation. I should say it’s not that I say the doctrine is false, it’s that I believe the truth about the Immaculate Conception of Mary is a truth above the formulated pre saved by the (then) future merits of Christ, teaching. My gut feeling about that particular teaching is that it has been advanced more recently to explain and apollogize to the separated and non separated brethren who either have difficulty understanding or faith based objections to the core Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. The Doctrine is not essentially false, as I say, it’s just that for me it’s not the highest truth, about the truth about Mary.
I believe Mary was born perfect and that she is and always will be perfect herself ; and that sin or flaw never in any way enters into the equation of her being. The Scriptures speak clearly of her uniqueness, purity and her holiness, they say nothing at all specifically about her being so through presalvation. Mary, to me never had any need whatsoever of being atoned for either in her nature or in her actual life.

Actually, Mary did need to be atoned or saved by Christ’s sacrifice, in that she was saved before she could even be touched by the stain of Original Sin.

But everything else is about right as far as I can see

 

[brb3]

Did not Paul teach the early Christians that …" if ANYONE, were to preach another Gospel…let them be anathema !! "
Even if were preached to them by Angels !!

The Gold Standard forevermore was that early Catholic Church Apostolic message in Scripture.

 

[nuntym]

Did not Paul teach the early Christians that …" if ANYONE, were to preach another Gospel…let them be anathema !! "
Even if were preached to them by Angels !!

The Gold Standard forevermore was that early Catholic Church Apostolic message in Scripture.

AGAIN, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary? Because, as I posted, if not you are not fooling anyone: you are in great danger of being a formal heretic. And also a hypocrite, since those two doctrines are based also on Peter being the Rock.

 

[brb3]

Could not Satan (or his angels) cloak themselves in some vision… to young girls/children to get out a message counterfeit to scriptural teachings of Christ & Apostles ?

Please heed the words of Christ & Paul !!

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

Could not Satan (or his angels) cloak themselves in some vision… to young girls/children to get out a message counterfeit to scriptural teachings of Christ & Apostles ?

Please heed the words of Christ & Paul !!

AGAIN, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary? Because, as I posted, if not you are not fooling anyone: you are in great danger of being a formal heretic. And also a hypocrite, since those two doctrines are based also on Peter being the Rock.

A simple couple of yes’s or no’s will suffice, you know.

 

[brb3]

I find good biblical support for Mary being a chosen vessel of God. Scripture says the HS ENTERED her & Christ was conceived in her by the Holy Spirit. So, scripture supports her as being sinless, at the moment Christ was conceived within.

Where do we find in scripture that she was sinless BEFORE the HS came to her ? If she were already sinless from birth, there would be no need for the HS to ENTER and cleanse her before Christ’s conception.

Am I wrong ?

 

[nuntym]

I find good biblical support for Mary being a chosen vessel of God. Scripture says the HS ENTERED her & Christ was conceived in her by the Holy Spirit. So, scripture supports her as being sinless, at the moment Christ was conceived within.

Where do we find in scripture that she was sinless BEFORE the HS came to her ? If she were already sinless from birth, there would be no need for the HS to ENTER and cleanse her before Christ’s conception.

Am I wrong ?

AGAIN, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary? Because, as I posted, if not you are not fooling anyone: you are in great danger of being a formal heretic. And also a hypocrite, since those two doctrines are based also on Peter being the Rock.

Where are the yes’s and the no’s?

 

[brb3]

AGAIN, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary? Because, as I posted, if not you are not fooling anyone: you are in great danger of being a formal heretic. And also a hypocrite, since those two doctrines are based also on Peter being the Rock.

Where are the yes’s and the no’s?

What a dodge answer …

u are living in Middle-ages … wanting to find & set @ trial all perceived heretics.

Asking their Yes / No questions … as if that is all thats needed.

ha !

 

[brb3]

Now, correct my error by using scripture !

That would convince me …and get u
a recant.

 

[brb3]

By the way, I’ve more posts than u … so show respect for those with more seniority !

 

[nuntym]

+JMJ+

What a dodge answer …

u are living in Middle-ages … wanting to find & set @ trial all perceived heretics.

Asking their Yes / No questions … as if that is all thats needed.

ha !

Because these are non negotiable articles of faith. Don’t believe them and then you are in grave danger of formal heresy. If you are a formal heretic, then you are automatically excommunicated and cannot receive the benefits of the Holy Sacraments.

I am asking you these out of concern for you.

Now, do you believe in the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary, or not?