Could Mary Be the Thrice Holy Divine Will Incarnate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mrsdizzyd said:
Was it Pius XII or VatII that declined to define co-redemptix as doctrine?
Click to expand...
IIRC, there was a proposal to include “co-Redemptrix” among the titles of the BVM in the discourse on her that eventually became Chapter VIII in Lumen Gentium, but it was not adopted. Here is the list, in article 62: “Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked by the Church under the titles of Advocate, Auxiliatrix, Adjutrix, and Mediatrix.”
 
So the idea behind it is that Mary and the Holy Spirit currently experience a similar relationship as Christ will with the Church at the end of time?
 
No, because the Church is part of Christ. The Body of Christ.

Mary is the mirror of Justice, the reflecting Moon to God’s shining Sun, and Jesus’ mom.

Except insofar as she is a member of the Church, she is not part of God. She is a human being separate from God, but responding to Him as fully as possible.

So yeah, I think “quasi-incarnation” is just a hip new 1940’s version of Mirror of Justice.
 
It’s just that reading this
Tis_Bearself said:
“Quasi-incarnation” is the word used, and it’s by virtue of her being the spouse of the Holy Spirit and two became one flesh.
Click to expand...
made me start thinking of Ephesians 5, specifically where it talks about Christ marrying the church and does make the “two will become one flesh” reference. I certainly didn’t mean to suggest Mary was actually part of God.
 
Last edited:
catholicray said:
40.png
runningdude:
Prior to that, her soul did not exist.
Click to expand...
Question from ignorance here but aren’t our souls eternal?
Click to expand...
Immortal. They had a beginning in time and did not pre-exist our bodies.
 
The answer is no. She is human not divine despite having carried Divinity (Jesus) in her womb.
 
With that being said , would that also mean that melchizidek was not an incarnation of Christ?
 
Once concieved the soul is immoral. It is not eternal, however, because it was created by God. Only God is eternal.
 
There is only one incarnation of Christ, which refers to God the Son taking a human nature within Mary’s womb. Melchizedek lived 2000 years before Mary, and thus could not be the incarnation of Christ.

It is possible that God the Son took the appearance of a human prior to the incarnation to deliver a message, however this would be a mere illusion. The incarnation specifically allowed Christ to die for our sins. A mere illusion of humanity would still be invincible, and thus distinct from Christ’s ministry on Earth following the incarnation.
 
People like Shem, Melchizedek, Enoch, etc., are associated with Christ, and foreshadow Christ in certain ways. But they were their own people, and they were not incarnations of Jesus in disguise.

Melchizedek is listed as a saint by all the ancient churches. His Western feast day is August 26, and his Eastern one is coming up on May 22. He was an ancestor of Jesus.

That said, Jesus did have non-incarnate apparitions (usually called “theophany” or “Christophany”) in Old Testament times (such as the “one like a son of man” in the Book of Daniel), and there were times when the angels who appeared to give messages from God have been closely associated with revelations pointing to Jesus. There are some.people.who believe that when Abraham met up with Melchizedek, he may have actually met a Christophany of Jesus, taking Melchizedek’s place. That is an allowable ancient opinion.

Angels sometimes take on the appearance of a particular human, or pretend to be human (although not directly lying). But they are not incarnate or reincarnating when they do this; they are spirits.
 
Last edited:
Thanks! Oddly enough i discovered melchizedek through Jungian psychotherapy and eventually reverted back to the faith . The meaning of his name got me all curious about Jesus .
 
Would the virgin mary bearing resemblance to the burning bush fit under “theophany” as well ? If anyone were to ask where i got this from , it would st john of Damascene.
 
I know that the burning bush was a theophany, and I’ve also heard that it can be considered a type of the Virgin Mary, if that’s what you mean.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top