B
brb3
Guest
2 Timothy 2:15 comes to mind, and applies!!
Our recent Popes have emphasized that our understandings are supported by twin pillars of FAITH & REASON.
- Status
Our recent Popes have emphasized that our understandings are supported by twin pillars of FAITH & REASON.
A
Aelred_Minor
Guest
This is beautiful.It is a specific spirituality. It should not be a stumbling block for anyone.
[snip…incidentally I would not endorse a completely subjective attitude towards monastic vs. non-monastic vocations]
Personally, I am consecrated to Mary. I offer all my prayers to Jesus through Mary. I pray with Mary whenever I pray. I have given all my merits over to Mary who knows better how to apply them for the salvation of souls and for her son’s glory than I do. That way is best for me. I believe that it would be good for the majority of Christians in the world, but it is wrong for me to force anyone into my spirituality. As long as it is not counter to what the Church teaches then it is what is best for me.
Marian spirituality should not be a stumbling block to anyone. Mary is happy to step aside and allow her son to recieve all the glory.
-Tim-
When I first learned about this kind of Marian spirituality, I was confused and concerned. I had already converted from Methodist to Catholic, but to me Mary still occupied a relatively small corner of my spirituality, to the side rather than at the center so to speak, and I could not see how she could be placed more or less at the center without displacing the centrality of Christ. About five years after my conversion I made the intuitive leap, realizing that Mary does not compete with Christ but rather leads one to him and keeps one in him, so that no focus on on Mary (properly conceived), not even the total dedication of our lives to her, can distract us from Christ.
But many people, both converts and cradle-Catholics, have never made this leap and perhaps never will, and so will be unable to conceive of an authentic Marian devotion that does not place Mary off to the side somewhere. For them the spirituality of St. Louis de Montfort and of the great Marians who came before him (like St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Bernardine) or after him (like Bl. John Paul II) will remain incomprehensible.
Edit: Oops, I clicked on the link to this thread and was taken to what I assumed was the last page, but I realize now it was in the middle of the very large thread. Still, I guess I’ll let the post stay.
A
Aelred_Minor
Guest
Yet the two, if they are authentic, are never in real contradiction with each other, as both lead us to the Truth. If we come to what appears to be a contradiction between what we learn from faith and what we learn from reason, it is obvious that we have either misunderstood the doctrine in question or erred in our reasoning. We then must determine which has occurred (I’ve made both mistakes in my past, personally) and adjust our convictions accordingly.
F
fbl9
Guest
If you have been paying attention ctstar nobody said that they go to the Father through Mary but to Jesus through Mary.
A
Aelred_Minor
Guest
Of course we do not need Mary to intercede for us before God will be merciful. Mary indeed is herself a recipient of God’s saving grace, albeit in a different way than for the rest of us.
Don’t let Mary be a barrier between yourself and the Catholic Church. We do not substitute her for Christ, nor does an authentic Catholic devotion to Mary in any way rival or take away from our devotion to Christ. If God made her necessary for our salvation, in the sense that she had to bear, give birth to, and raise Jesus before He could be crucified for us, that importance in the plan of salvation in turn came from God and was an extraordinary way in which God freely allowed a creature to serve him.
C
Cranch
Guest
I could not have said it better—in fact probably not nearly as well!
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Don’t worry, brb. If you’ve learned over the years that 98% of what you thought was errant was correct, you will in coming years learn that the remaining 2% is correct as well.
P
PJM
Guest
Hey John,
Great post:thumbsup: But it’s going to cover more ground than we have available here.
Let’s start by sharing the One "INFALLIBLE RULE FOR RIGHT UNDERSTANDING of the bible
Never-ever, can. may, or does one teaching make void; invalidate; override or comprimise another teaching. This would invalidate the bible as a tool to Faith.
The passage you quote:Mt. 12:48-49 is an excellent example why the bible tells us:
2 Peter 1:20 “Understanding this first, that no prophecy of scripture is made by private interpretation.” AND Rom.10: 17 " So faith comes from what is heard,[taught] and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ."
The meaning from Mt. 12 is not in any way a degradtion of Mary; in fact it’s dealing with Mary is secondary; and only a “tool” for this lesson which is: One’s belief in God and ALL that God teaches must always be more important to us than "family, friends, job, hobbies Ect.’
God alway First
Family second
Work Third
everything esle below this line.
What parts do you understand to be unbiblical John? Remeber things like the “bible”; “catholism”; “Protestants”, and “Transubstanuation” and “Purgatory” are terms not found in the bible. Yet there teaching and meaning is there nonetheless.
Start another thread with specifics and we’ll be happy to explain the Why’s and Hows of our Marain Doctrine and Dogma’s.
The Mary and her DNA is a WOPPER
Mary was “Assumed” … “taken up to heaven body and soul.” So where did the DNA come from some 2,000 years later? And no doubt this is one of the issues you likely struggle with?
MAry can and NEVER will eclipise Christ. WHY?
Because 1. That is a Theological Impossibility and 2. That is the direct OPPOSITE of her actual role within the CC which is to lead souls to Christ! Amen!:angel1:
God Bless my friend!,
pat /PJM
B
brb3
Guest
Perhaps. …
But, I made steady progress on the 98% …its that final 2% that become the rub !! It just doesn’t meet the ‘high hurdle’ proof standards that Sacred Scripture demands !
Luckily, some of the 2% is optional …& appears for our edification or inspiration …& not essential to salvation.
I will testify that Catholicism is far & away superior in its understanding of scripture to the various Protestant interps. So, I keep researching the 2% …hoping to resolve the final conundrum I face.
B
brb3
Guest
I could not disagree more ! The Trinitarian idea is so SELF-EVIDENT, such a common thread in John’s Gospel. It was a reality in want of a name from Genesis onwards.
R
R_C
Guest
Psalm 45 (excerpts)
The prophet sees the wedding feast of the Lamb. He sees the Christ and receives awareness of His kingdom without end. Then he sees the Queen, and most astonished by the glory that God had given to her, addresses her and in doing so is granted knowledge of the things to come and of the role of the Queen in God’s mercy.
The psalm is so rich in mystical symbols that they are almost self-evident. Especially the last lines are worth much meditation: for clearly the queen is a mere creature, and yet to her the prophet says: “you shall make your sons princes over all the earth”.
And the prophet confirms what Mary herself was given to understand the day she visited Elizabeth: that all generations would remember her and praise her, because she had found favor with the King, her Lord, the God of the everlasting Kingdom, who had chosen her above all others.
As for how do we know that Christ never refuses her, we know this from 1 Kings 2:19-20. As we know, many things that took place in the Old Testament were images of what was to happen at the coming of Christ. The innocent son Isaac carries the wood for his own sacrifice. Moses leads the people to be saved through the waters. Noah builds the Ark, outside of which there was no salvation. Melchizedek offered bread and wine as a sacrifice of thanksgiving. The Lord Himself compared His resurrection to the sign of Jonah. We could go on for a very long time. The point being: this story leads us to understand the behavior of Christ with Mary, for His behavior must necessarily be even more kind and excellent than that of this human king in 1 Kings 2:19.
R
R_C
Guest
The Canticle of Canticles, 6
Now let us jump centuries ahead, to Revelation 12 to the beloved disciple St. John.
At this point let us quickly quote the Lord:
We return to the Revelation:
This passage of the Scripture, written by him to whom Our Lady was entrusted as a mother for the rest of her life on earth, clearly shows just how and why had God spoken these words in Genesis, when addressing Satan:
The dragon, who lost the fight against God, attacks her and her offspring because of who she is with respect to God, and specifically because who she is with respect to the Christ. And she and her children (whom the prophet specifies as all “those who obey God’s commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus”) become indeed “the ‘exemplary realization’ (typus) of the Church”, the New Jerusalem, as well as “the mother in grace of all Christians”. In the words of St. Paul:
And it is now proper to recall what the prophet Ezra wrote in his 4th book, a biblical apocrypha nevertheless “frequently quoted by the Fathers of the Church”.
I
inkaneer
Guest
Then quote me the verse that says Jesus is consubstantial with the Father. Show me where the scriptures speak of God as persons. The fact is that unitarians can use the very same verses in the Bible to support their modalist beliefs as trinitarians can to support their beliefs…
I
inkaneer
Guest
So does Mary sit at the right hand of Jesus? How do we knpow Jesus will not refuse her request? Here is what [and how] I found in the scriptures.
There are two incidents in the Gospels that seem insignificant or at most, nice little human interest stories that have no relationship to the gospel message. They seem to be little sidebars to the main story line. The two incidents are James and John asking Jesus to allow them to sit on his right and left and the story of the wedding feast at Cana. Here are the passages:
“35 And James and John, the sons of Zeb’edee, came forward to him, and said to him, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.” 36 And he said to them, “What do you want me to do for you?” 37 And they said to him, “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.” 38 But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” 39 And they said to him, “We are able.” And Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized; 40 but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”
[Mark 10:37-40] [RSV]
Matthew’s gospel has the mother of James and John making the request. [See Mt 20:20-23] The wedding feast at Cana is recorded in John‘s Gospel:
“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.” [John 2:1] [RSV]
Now what do these events have to do with the gospel? Apparently nothing other than in the first either the mother of two of the Apostles or the two apostles themselves make a rather selfish request whereas in the second a request is apparently made but it is not a selfish request. So is that it? On the surface it seems so. But I was intrigued by the first one. Who does sit at Jesus left and right? In recalling the creed I know it states that Jesus sits at the right hand of the Father. That is also stated in Mark 16:19:
“So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God.” [Mark 16:19][RSV]
So if Jesus sits at the Father’s right then the Father sits at Jesus left. No wonder neither James nor John could sit there. But who sits at Jesus right? The seemimngly obvious answer would be the Holy Spirit. But I could not find anything in scripture that stated that. So the question of who sits at Jesus’ right went unanswered.
Then there is the story of the wedding feast of Cana. Two things here I pondered. First, why is this in the scripture and second there seems to be parts of the conversation missing. The conversation as recorded by John is as follows: [NOTE: I added missing parts. They are in brackets}
Mary: “They have no wine.” [Can you do something?]
Jesus: “O woman, what have you to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” [but for
you I will.]
Mary: (to the servants) “Do whatever he tells you.”
Again a nice human interest story but so what? What does that have to do with the gospel message? Again outside of one request being selfishly and the other unselfishly there appears to be nothing.
Continued next post…
I
inkaneer
Guest
Continuing…
Then one day while reading the Old Testament the old proverbial light bulb came on. The passage I was reading was :
“12 So Solomon sat upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was firmly established. 13 Then Adoni’jah the son of Haggith came to Bathshe’ba the mother of Solomon. And she said, “Do you come peaceably?” He said, “Peaceably.” 14 Then he said, “I have something to say to you.” She said, “Say on.” 15 He said, “You know that the kingdom was mine, and that all Israel fully expected me to reign; however the kingdom has turned about and become my brother’s, for it was his from the LORD. 16 And now I have one request to make of you; do not refuse me.” She said to him, “Say on.” 17 And he said, “Pray ask King Solomon–he will not refuse you–to give me Ab’ishag the Shu’nammite as my wife.” 18 Bathshe’ba said, “Very well; I will speak for you to the king.” 19 So Bathshe’ba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adoni’jah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right. 20 Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother; for I will not refuse you.” [1 Kings 2:12-25] [RSV]
The part that intrigued me was verse 19 -20:
“19So Bathshe’ba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adoni’jah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right. 20 Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother; for I will not refuse you.”
Here King Solomon, a king of the line of David has his mother sitting at his right hand. But there is something else. Solomon says to his mother that he would not refuse her request. When I looked elsewhere in the OT I found that the queen in the Davidic kingdom was not the king’s wife but rather the king’s mother. Suddenly a lot of things that protestants object to in Catholicism made sense. Mary sits at Jesus right hand just as Bathsheeba did with Solomon and the other Davidic queens did with their sons. Jesus is of the line of David and has a kingdom which is heaven. Therefore his mother, following the Davidic tradition is the queen of the kingdom and thus when Catholics call her Queen of Heaven it does have biblical support. Intercessary prayers and devotions to Mary make a lot of sense, especially if the requests of the queen [Mary] will not be refused by the king [Jesus].
That is what is missing in the story of the wedding feast. It is not any spoken words but the unspoken knowledge shared by Jesus and Mary that, as queen of the kingdom, her request will not be refused. That is why she tells the servants to do as Jesus tells them. But let’s not fool ourselves. It is not as easy as it seems. It is not just pray to Mary and you will get what you want. Mary’s words to the servants are for us too. “Do whatever He tells you” has far reaching implications. Maybe if your prayers are not answered, it may very well be that you are not doing what Jesus is telling you.
Then one day while reading the Old Testament the old proverbial light bulb came on. The passage I was reading was :
“12 So Solomon sat upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was firmly established. 13 Then Adoni’jah the son of Haggith came to Bathshe’ba the mother of Solomon. And she said, “Do you come peaceably?” He said, “Peaceably.” 14 Then he said, “I have something to say to you.” She said, “Say on.” 15 He said, “You know that the kingdom was mine, and that all Israel fully expected me to reign; however the kingdom has turned about and become my brother’s, for it was his from the LORD. 16 And now I have one request to make of you; do not refuse me.” She said to him, “Say on.” 17 And he said, “Pray ask King Solomon–he will not refuse you–to give me Ab’ishag the Shu’nammite as my wife.” 18 Bathshe’ba said, “Very well; I will speak for you to the king.” 19 So Bathshe’ba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adoni’jah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right. 20 Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother; for I will not refuse you.” [1 Kings 2:12-25] [RSV]
The part that intrigued me was verse 19 -20:
“19So Bathshe’ba went to King Solomon, to speak to him on behalf of Adoni’jah. And the king rose to meet her, and bowed down to her; then he sat on his throne, and had a seat brought for the king’s mother; and she sat on his right. 20 Then she said, “I have one small request to make of you; do not refuse me.” And the king said to her, “Make your request, my mother; for I will not refuse you.”
Here King Solomon, a king of the line of David has his mother sitting at his right hand. But there is something else. Solomon says to his mother that he would not refuse her request. When I looked elsewhere in the OT I found that the queen in the Davidic kingdom was not the king’s wife but rather the king’s mother. Suddenly a lot of things that protestants object to in Catholicism made sense. Mary sits at Jesus right hand just as Bathsheeba did with Solomon and the other Davidic queens did with their sons. Jesus is of the line of David and has a kingdom which is heaven. Therefore his mother, following the Davidic tradition is the queen of the kingdom and thus when Catholics call her Queen of Heaven it does have biblical support. Intercessary prayers and devotions to Mary make a lot of sense, especially if the requests of the queen [Mary] will not be refused by the king [Jesus].
That is what is missing in the story of the wedding feast. It is not any spoken words but the unspoken knowledge shared by Jesus and Mary that, as queen of the kingdom, her request will not be refused. That is why she tells the servants to do as Jesus tells them. But let’s not fool ourselves. It is not as easy as it seems. It is not just pray to Mary and you will get what you want. Mary’s words to the servants are for us too. “Do whatever He tells you” has far reaching implications. Maybe if your prayers are not answered, it may very well be that you are not doing what Jesus is telling you.
B
brb3
Guest
At the very beginning, Genesis… God says " Let US make man in our image"
Then, in New Testament, Christ says He and the Father are ONE…and later he says “I will pray the Father, and. HE WILL send you the Holy Spirit” …
And Christ taught he was returning to the Father, to sit at the Right hand, and John in Revelation depicts Christ and God the Father…as different Persons.
These examples are a small# of all that offered in Scripture.
B
brb3
Guest
Guys …
Me thinks u are reading way too much into this OT scripture !!
Mary said “Do whatever he tells you”. So, did Christ teach us to go thru Mary … to reach him?
Rather, he gave us the Lords Prayer …where we are taught to pray directly to the Father…no Meditrix or Queen mentioned.
St Paul knew the OT Scriptures much better than we…and he never taught this Queen Mary idea or Mediatrix of All Graces gospel !! To the contrary, Paul taught the early Christians to test & reject any message not c/w that early First Century one.
F
fbl9
Guest
And how is this going to the Father through Jesus? Remember the only way to the Father is through Jesus.
R
R_C
Guest
“Liturgical Institutions”, by Fr. Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., includes a study of the protestant liturgical practices from the XIVth to the XVIIIth century. In it we find:
R
RobbyS
Guest
That is a modern usage and one reflecting the flat tone that modern translators use. Jerome used Gratia Plenus, and since the Greek and Latin were to him both living languages, I tend to trust his translation before theirs. The term used is unique to the situation, being applied only to Mary.
- Status