Who else in the Body of Christ would be more worthy of holding this position? Mary is queen based on being the mother of the King. Why wouldn’t she be the closest thing to the head?
But God doesn’t decide whether He should do this or that. Mary wasn’t an option for God, though Joseph had the option to either divorce Mary quietly or have her stoned to death.in keeping with Mosaic Law. Unlike God, he was constrained by an external necessity that imposed itself on his will. Nor did he know how it actually was that Mary became pregnant. Meanwhile, it wasn’t up to Joseph, but up to God to ordain that Mary should conceive and bear Jesus. God sent His angel to Joseph knowing that he would comply, just as He knew Mary would freely consent to conceive and bear Jesus when He sent the angel Gabriel to her. God is always in full control of things, even without violating our liberty of will, since He is omniscient and depends on nothing. It’s a faulty analogy to compare God with Joseph or any other human creature.
As a physical channel of Divine grace that flows from the Head (Christ) to the body (Church). Mary unites the Head and members of the Church by transmitting the vital influence of divine grace. She acts in collaboration with the Holy Spirit. We couldn’t wiggle our toes unless we had a neck that supports our spinal cord by which all the members of our body receive the impulses to actively function as prompted by the head (brain/mind). I think of the Rosary as being part of our spinal cord in the Mystical Body.
We have a free will and can create consequences for ourselves by our own choosing because God has willed this with necessity.
What makes you say that?
God willed that Mary should have the freedom to choose. It was necessary that she should have this freedom in all righteousness. God desired (antecedent will) that she say Yes. What God ‘desired’ would not have been accomplished if Mary had said No. If God decreed (consequent will) that everyone be saved, not one soul would end up in hell. In Catholic dispensationalism, there is a marked distinction between what God desires and decrees. The antecedent will of God is what He desires; His consequent will is what He decrees. God did not decree with necessity that Mary say Yes. This decree applies only to the reprobate who is predestined to hell for having chosen to say No to God. But God does not desire that any soul be lost. Thus, God’s will (decree) that Mary ought to have the freedom to choose would have been fulfilled whether she said Yes or No. If she had said No, God’s antecedent will (desire) would not have been fulfilled, but His consequent will (Mary’s freedom to choose) would have been. Calvinists reject the concept of God’s antecedent will. Both the chosen elect are saved and the reprobate are damned by God’s infallible decree (consequent will) which denies the human liberty of will.What you have typed is a possibility, but in order for you to have typed it, freedom of will is necessary. God has allowed you to type such nonsense, if that is what you have wished to do. It is part of God’s perfect plan that you have the freedom to type such nonsense, if it pleases you. But He desires that you be a little more sensible. In His sovereignty, God has granted you the freedom to do as you please. You are fully responsible for your own actions, whether they are sensible or not. Whatever you choose to do is a possibility (saying Yes, No, or Maybe to God), but the freedom to choose among options necessarily exists because of your free will, which God has willed with necessity to grant you so that you can decide for yourself. So God’s will is accomplished either way, notwithstanding what He ‘desires’ of you.
Yes, but I’m having trouble reconciling your above statement with the original claim you made that,
So do we “create consequences” or are they part of what God has willed with absolute necessity?
To be honest, It will take quite some time for me to review this abbreviated paragraph in its original entirety. However, it seems to support what I suggested initially in the conversation. Let me review: You stated
I responded with
It’s one thing to say that Mary had free will to choose and God knew what she would choose and therefore God knew that the Christ would be born of her. It’s quite another to say,
Is it not possible that Mary could have said no and that God could have used another woman for his saving plan? If not, why not? And while I recognize the inherent limitations in the use of the term “possible” above (ie it’s an historical event), it is no less so for you to say, “If Mary had said No”.
Correct I am free to choose and to actually type it or to not type it.
Exactly. Was Mary’s “Yes” choice any less free? Y or N please. If it was no less free, then the possibility of her actually giving birth to Christ may have been altered by a different exercise of that freedom. Correct? Y or N please. BUT, as you say, “God’s will is accomplished either way…” and in this case the accomplishment of becoming Savior to mankind may have been accomplished another way, through another mother. No?
Finally someone gets what I’m saying.
I find this a bit inaccurate. Perhaps what you were TRYING to say was honor Mary but give the glory (ie worship) to God but in reality you’ve said quite a bit more. A disproportionate amount of your efforts have been on clarifying that “So am I wrong in saying what is Jesus’ shouldn’t be given to Mary? A simple question. Yes or no.”
In that case, there were many necks.
It is also faulty to compare God with Mary.
There are many go’s to God that did not include the Blessed Mother. Andrew and Peter received grace from their encounters with Jesus. Through the intercession of Moses, the Israelites received multiple graces to repent, as with Abraham. And God used the prophets
**
Obviously you fail to comprehend what I wrote. If we say No to God, the negative consequence (being separated from Him) is something we bring on ourselves. God has willed with absolute necessity that we have the freedom to say No, if that is what we want to do. But God does not desire that we say No, but Yes, because He wants everyone to be saved, God desired that Mary say Yes to Him, but God did not determine that she say Yes. God willed with absolute necessity that she should be at liberty to say Yes or No. As I pointed out, there is a difference between God’s antecedent will (desire) and His consequent will (decree). Or do you suppose God actually did determine Mary’s fiat, as a Calvinist does? Thus God has willed with absolute necessity that we have the freedom to choose. This freedom which God has decreed that we should possess entails consequences for ourselves. Do you suppose we have no moral responsibility in being saved?
What God knows cannot be otherwise, by the fact that He knows it. When God created Mary, He knew that she would say Yes (scientia media). But His infallible knowledge of what comes in advance did not determine her Yes. She was still free to say No, albeit what God knows. The only reason why she couldn’t have freely said No to God was because God knew from all eternity that she would freely say Yes. And what God knows cannot be otherwise, or else God couldn’t be infallible. God knows all things in the immediate present outside of real time. He doesn’t have to rely on other means as we do in our fallibility. Therefore, even though Mary had been granted the freedom to choose, God did not have to depend on her, because He knew, in the eternal present, she would say Yes. What God determined with necessity was that He send the angel Gabriel to Mary and that she give her free response whatever the consequences that entailed from her own decision.
God’s **CO****NSEQUENT WILL **(decree) is accomplished either way: that Mary has LIBERTY OF HUMAN WILL. But if Mary had said No, God’s ANTECEDENT WILL (desire) that she SAY YES would not have been met if she had said No. Thus, by default, the Incarnation would not have happened. Blessed was she who believed that what was spoken to her by the Lord would be fulfilled. (cf. Luke 1:45). Do you think God has to save us? No! God desires to save us. To live with Him in Heaven, we must freely choose Him. Calvinists argue that it is God who chooses the elect who have absolutely no choice in the matter because of their “sin nature”. We mustn’t speak of God willing anything, as you do, by failing to draw the distinction between His antecedent will (desire) and consequent will (decree).
It is faulty to equate God with Mary. But since we have been created in the Divine image, we can make comparisons between God and man. To deny that Mary had any vital moral contribution to make for our salvation is to deny that she had any moral freedom at all. Thus, she couldn’t have been created in the image of God no more than we couldn’t.
I don’t follow… Are you saying Jesus had multiple mothers and there are multiple Queens of Heaven? Can you really not picture Mary as having any higher position in the Body of Christ than others?
Jesus is a Davidic King. Mary is the queen.