B
- Status
B
brb3
Guest
Ask yourself … who had the greater role in Christian history…but, who gets all the praise/attention ??
1.Being mother of Christ
2. Being the one who ANNOUNCED THE COMING OF CHRIST, POINTED HIM OUT TO THE APOSTLES, BAPTIZED CHRIST, AND SUFFERED MARTYRS DEATH BY Herod’s sword
…or perhaps-- 3. Being Father of Christ
…poor St Joseph gets practically no mention anymore!!
1.Being mother of Christ
2. Being the one who ANNOUNCED THE COMING OF CHRIST, POINTED HIM OUT TO THE APOSTLES, BAPTIZED CHRIST, AND SUFFERED MARTYRS DEATH BY Herod’s sword
…or perhaps-- 3. Being Father of Christ
…poor St Joseph gets practically no mention anymore!!
H
hazcompat
Guest
Chapter II-II. Morning Prayer and Evening Prayer
37. “By the venerable tradition of the universal Church, lauds as morning prayer and vespers as evening prayer are the two hinges on which the daily office turns; hence they are to be considered as the chief hours and celebrated as such.” [2]
40. Morning prayer and evening prayer are therefore to be accorded the highest importance as the prayer of the Christian community. Their public or communal celebration should be encouraged, especially in the case of those who live in community. Indeed, the recitation of these hours should be recommended also to individual members of the faithful unable to take part in a celebration in common.
50. Next is the solemn recitation of the gospel canticle with its antiphon, that is, the Canticle of Zechariah at morning prayer and the Canticle of Mary at evening prayer. Sanctioned by age-old popular usage in the Roman Church, these canticles are expressions of praise and thanksgiving for our redemption. The antiphon for each canticle is indicated, according to the character of the day, the season, or the feast.
37. “By the venerable tradition of the universal Church, lauds as morning prayer and vespers as evening prayer are the two hinges on which the daily office turns; hence they are to be considered as the chief hours and celebrated as such.” [2]
40. Morning prayer and evening prayer are therefore to be accorded the highest importance as the prayer of the Christian community. Their public or communal celebration should be encouraged, especially in the case of those who live in community. Indeed, the recitation of these hours should be recommended also to individual members of the faithful unable to take part in a celebration in common.
50. Next is the solemn recitation of the gospel canticle with its antiphon, that is, the Canticle of Zechariah at morning prayer and the Canticle of Mary at evening prayer. Sanctioned by age-old popular usage in the Roman Church, these canticles are expressions of praise and thanksgiving for our redemption. The antiphon for each canticle is indicated, according to the character of the day, the season, or the feast.
Mark121359
Well-known member
You seem to be stuck on this notion that John the Baptist is greater than Mary because of Mt. 11:11. Here is something I found that may help you get past it…
So you can see that if you take Mt. 11:11 to the extreme, it appears that Jesus is saying that the Baptist is even greater than He, since Jesus himself was born of woman. And we all know that He is not saying that at all! Here is another link that explains this as well. I hope this helps!.. scripturecatholic.com/mary_qa.html#scripture-II
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Actually, the Immaculate Conception was declared doctrinally (and that doesn’t mean it didn’t ‘exist’ until then) before the vision of Mary to St. Bernadette at Lourdes, and WELL before the vision of Mary to the children at Fatima.
Also, forgive me, but didn’t Scripture declare that Scripture was NOT our ‘authority’ but that the Church was and that the Holy Spirit would 'guide us to all truth?"
**It seems to me that you don’t want to accept any truth we’re guided to unless it is ‘already there’. **
**Mary’s conception without Sin is implicitly foreshadowed in the Old Testament. So there is no way it ‘contradicts’ Scripture. **
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
I
inkaneer
Guest
I
inkaneer
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by inkaneer
So while John was maybe born without sin, he was not concieved without sin.
How would u know he was conceived IN SIN ?
His parents were beyond age for sexual IC. He was filled with HS in the womb. Clearly he had a unique lineage !!!
Originally Posted by inkaneer
So while John was maybe born without sin, he was not concieved without sin.
How would u know he was conceived IN SIN ?
His parents were beyond age for sexual IC. He was filled with HS in the womb. Clearly he had a unique lineage !!!
R
R_C
Guest
Have you thought for a minute there that what you are doing, that is, crafting your own understanding of Sacred Tradition and negating based on your arbitrary thoughts the Sacred Tradition after the year 100 AD (?) in mysterious ways, is not in accordance with the will of the Lord, who told the apostles: “the one who hears you hears me, and the one who rejects you rejects me”? If those who by virtue of the apostolic succession throughout the centuries - including the Vicars of Christ - have taught what they have about Our Lady and approved the cult that the Church offers her, who are we to condemn this Sacred Tradition? What authority do we have to say that something approved by Holy Church is wrong?
Indeed the Angel greeted her as “full of grace” before the Holy Spirit covered Her. It is obvious that to be in a state of grace implies the presence of the Holy Spirit in our soul, so much more being full of grace (something that, perhaps, has been granted only to Our Lady throughout history, exception made, of course, for Christ, who Himself was grace incarnate).
I do not need to quote Scripture to correct you, because I am not a follower of erroneous doctrines that rely solely on the Scripture. As a member of Holy Church, I believe the following divinely inspired teaching:
Therefore, if I want to willfully call myself a member of the Church, I must profess and believe at least in these teachings on Our Lady, and especially on the infallible teachings of the Immaculate Conception and of the Assumption. If I do not follow at least these, I risk incurring into a latae sententiae excommunication, for the following teaching on the sins against faith is very clear:
If you do not want to develop a strong devotion to Our Lady, that is your choice. But there is a major difference between seeking the truth and impugning the truth. As Catholics, we listen to our Teacher, the Church, and even if we disagree, we humbly bow our head in obedience. To do otherwise is to move little by little away, and this is very sad, especially when we love God very much.
The same applies, of course, to those who take devotion to Our Lady beyond the official cult legitimated by the Church. But again, I have met very few, very very few of these.
R
R_C
Guest
And, by the way, there is no point in discussing the infallible teaching of the Immaculate Conception: it simply cannot be mistaken, and any idea or interpretation against it is simply erroneous. Furthermore, the more subtle and seemingly truthful the objection is, the greater the chance that it is a suggestion of the adversary.
F
fbl9
Guest
How is it you claim Mary is ‘bragging’ and Zechariah isn’t? When comparing the two, both are about what? Not themselves, but about God.
P
panevino
Guest
I understand that the Enmity in gen3:15 is relevant
Mary as the new eve
Eve was without sin prior the fall
The new adam did/will not fail, either did the new eve.
Matthew 2:13
And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word:** for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.**
Revelation 12:4
And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: **and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child **as soon as it was born.
Mary as the new eve
Eve was without sin prior the fall
The new adam did/will not fail, either did the new eve.
Matthew 2:13
And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thee word:** for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him.**
Revelation 12:4
And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: **and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child **as soon as it was born.
R
R_C
Guest
There is an excellent reason for which the Divine Office (now known as Liturgy of the Hours or Christian Prayer) has its two most important prayer, the Morning and the Evening, include the Song of Zechariah and the Magnificat.
However, it would be gravely erroneous to compare the Forerunner with Our Lady. He was never “full of grace”, for as far as we know, when Our Lady visited her cousin Elizabeth (which explains just why she was chosen to be the mother of the Baptist) and Elizabeth heard her voice, her unborn child leaped of joy and *she *was filled with the presence of the Holy Spirit, meaning she received an extraordinary gift to acknowledge Our Lady as the Mother of God - indeed, the first human to do so.
John the Baptist was indeed the greatest among all prophets, for such was the word spoken by Christ, but was infinitely less that His mother. The Baptist himself was well aware of his humbleness before the Lord, for having received in mysterious ways divine knowledge of his mission as the Forerunner of the Christ, he endured a life of strict penance and mortification, and upon beginning his ministry, he openly manifested:
Our Lady, on the other hand, was found fit to give birth to Him, to be the true mother of the Christ.
Of her speaks the Sacred Scripture from Genesis to Revelation, of her speak the prophets and all the Church Fathers, and to her the Church looks as her image.
And much reflection is worth giving to the words of St. Paul:
He who has ears, let him hear.
For those who insist on negating the teachings of the Church for mysterious and erroneous reasons, especially for those who, following the trend of gravely erroneous doctrines, insist in asserting that any teaching successive to the Gospels is not worth of equal reverence, I remind the words of the Lord:
The Lord, head of the Church, speaks to Her through the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is the Spirit, the same Spirit that came unto Mary, that filled Elizabeth, that confirmed and guided the Apostles, it is the very same Spirit that teaches us how greatly pleasing it is to the Father our prayers of thanksgiving, our prayers for the Poor Souls in Purgatory, our prayers through the intercession of the Church Triumphant, and above all else, our prayers through the intercession of Our Lady who is - great mystery - daughter of the Father, mother of the Son, spouse of the Spirit. Such great honor for a creature!
Indeed, kind Mother, the Lord has done great things for you, and all generations shall call you blessed, although not all will: for many throughout history have affirmed to love the Father, yet they have despised the Son, the Spirit, the Church, and you. The reasons that move them I ignore and cannot understand: for, having met people from each, I know they (or at least some of them) firmly believe that in such a gravely erroneous behavior they truly honor God. I am only sad that they, as the apostle wrote, see the light but fail to recognize it, whether it is shining through the Church, the saints, or you. They insist that they seek the light alone, yet they despise that which God has chosen as source of His light, that through which the Light came into the world and through which the Light chose to remain into the world.
I
inkaneer
Guest
F
fbl9
Guest
my mistake, i forgot okay and brb3 already settled this one .
it seems the quote function is wacky on this thread when posting check the top of the post quoted for your own name, If it is there delete it and the post with quote should be right.
I
inkaneer
Guest
I would disagree with you. Scripture says John the Baptist was filled with the spirit “…from the womb”. But conception does not occur in the womb. It occurs before the ovum enters the womb and attaches to the lining of the womb. Therefore taking the scripture into account John would have already been concieved before the Spirit entered him in his mother’s womb. Now whether this occurred in the sixth month at the time of Mary’s visit or before is not clear. But what is clear is that John was already concieved before he was graced by the Holy Spirit.
Again I would disagree with you. The angel addresses Mary, not by name, but by a quality she possesses. That being “full of grace”. That indicates Mary is already in that state of grace before the angel appearred. The Greek word kecharitomene that is used is, as I alluded to in a prior post very unique both in scripture as well as in the Greek language. There is one other time where Luke writes of someone being "full of grace and that is referring to Stephen’s martyrdom in Acts 6:8:
“And Stephen, full of grace and power, did great wonders and signs among the people.”
But Luke does not use kecharitomeneKecharitomene means “having been” or “have already been” graced. It is a perfect passive participle. In Luke 1:28 the writer uses a special conjugated form of *charitoo * kecharitomene]. Kecharitomene, being a perfect passive participle, shows a completeness with a permanent result. Now if it is permanent and complete then how could there be any instance of when Mary was not “filled with grace”? That would mean that the grace she enjoyed was not permanent; was not complete, or was neither complete nor permanent. Thus to be complete it had to span her entire existence.
I would disagree with you on two counts. First the Oral tradition of the church goes back to the Apostolic times wherein Mary is described with terms such as “without stain”, “purest one”, without blemish". Secondly, the immaculate Conception has been formally defined by the Pope, as successor to Peter, as dogma. It is binding on all Catholics. This is the same Peter that Jesus said had the power to bind on earth as well as in Heaven [Mt 16:18-19]. Protestants like to point out that that passage actually says that Peter could bind on earth what was already bound in heaven. But then if the pope bound it on earth then it must have already been bound in heaven before. So where is the problem?
Mark121359
Well-known member
B
brb3
Guest
No so quick on draw with your response …
If John had been filled while inside the womb, lets say at month # 6 as you propose …
then scripture would of recorded … IN THE WOMB, not FROM the womb [as it says].
By saying FROM THE WOMB … this should suggest to you that John was filled FROM HIS CONCEPTION, from his FIRST MOMENT in Elizabeth.
C
Cat_Herder
Guest
This flows from the Immaculate Conception. Mary, being without sin, is most attuned to the will of God in a way that everyone else is not. What She has said in private revelations like Fatima is that WE need to pray the Rosary every day in order to avoid the wrath of God–despite the power of Her own intercession, God wants for us to pray ourselves because WE are the ones who need to change. We need to repent and do penance and by praying, we are opening ourselves up to the Holy Spirit so that He can change our hearts.
What is so wrong with this?
B
brb3
Guest
Nope … that’s not what Gabriel said ! Quote him correctly.
It was “HAIL O favored one”
- Status