Defending the Virgin Birth

[Gorgias]

You didn’t answer the question. Do you mean that you don’t take literally that the “child to be born is of the Holy Spirit”? Yes or no.

Your attempts to administer ‘loyalty oaths’ are not endearing. I believe what the Church teaches, and do not castigate others for not holding to what the Church does not teach. Oh, if only we all held to this standard…

Apples and oranges. “The child is of the Holy Spirit” =/= “Mary is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit”.

Yes, it does.

Nah. But keep working on those reading skills…

I’m just highlighting your misunderstanding of the Word of God in Catholic Doctrine and Scripture.

Again: reading skills. They can be your friend.

The Catholic Church has always taught that the Virgin Mary is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit because she was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and because the Holy Spirit engendered Jesus Christ in her womb. That’s all in Scripture.

The Church has taught the Scriptural elements you note, but does not teach the ‘spouse’ assertion as doctrine.

I’ll call your Fr. Grodin and raise you a Saint and a Pope:

Let’s give it a go…

De_Maria:

But Kolbe sees the union between Mary and the Holy Spirit being even more intimate than that of spouses in marriage:

Among creatures made in God’s image, the union brought about by married love is the most intimate of all. In a much more precise, more interior, more essential manner, the Holy Spirit lives in the soul of the Immaculata, in the depths of her very being.

Here’s where reading is fundamental, DM: to say that “the Holy Spirit lives in the soul of the Immaculata” – even to say “in the depths of her very being” – is distinct from saying that she’s literally the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Strike one…

De_Maria:

http://www.xt3.com/askapriest/view.php?id=15966

Let’s look at the link you provided. Have you read it? Then hopefully you saw that, right at the very beginning, the priest who authored the response writes, “This devotional title of our Lady…”

Devotional. Not literal, mind you, but devotional. Strike two…

De_Maria:

Pope Leo XIII

"You know well the intimate and wonderful relationship existing between [the Blessed Virgin] and the Holy Spirit, so that she is justly called His Spouse.

Wow. Quote-mine much? I mean, literally: you found a simple instance of a reference to Mary as “spouse of the Holy Spirit” – in the concluding paragraph of an encyclical that does not discuss this topic in the least – and you think you’ve proved your case? Strike three.

How about the words, Our Father? Do you consider them a pious custom? a symbolic expression? a fiction?

They’re Scripture. If you have Scripture calling Mary the spouse of the Holy Spirit, then cite it. Otherwise, stop trying to make it seem like that’s the case. That’s just intellectually dishonest.

 

[De_Maria]

De_Maria:

You didn’t answer the question. Do you mean that you don’t take literally that the “child to be born is of the Holy Spirit”? Yes or no.

Your attempts to administer ‘loyalty oaths’ are not endearing.

Just answer the question.

I believe what the Church teaches, and do not castigate others for not holding to what the Church does not teach. Oh, if only we all held to this standard…

You objected to my post and suggested that I hold to some heresy.

Nah. But keep working on those reading skills…

I see that you’re upholding some type of standard. But it isn’t very high.

Again: reading skills. They can be your friend.

The Church has taught the Scriptural elements you note, but does not teach the ‘spouse’ assertion as doctrine.

I’ll call your Fr. Grodin and raise you a Saint and a Pope:

Let’s give it a go…

De_Maria:

But Kolbe sees the union between Mary and the Holy Spirit being even more intimate than that of spouses in marriage:

Among creatures made in God’s image, the union brought about by married love is the most intimate of all. In a much more precise, more interior, more essential manner, the Holy Spirit lives in the soul of the Immaculata, in the depths of her very being.

Here’s where reading is fundamental, DM: to say that “the Holy Spirit lives in the soul of the Immaculata” – even to say “in the depths of her very being” – is distinct from saying that she’s literally the spouse of the Holy Spirit. Strike one…

[/QUOTE]
I thought you were familiar with St. Max Kolbe. I guess I was wrong.

In the unsurpassable words of St. Maximilian Maria Kolbe, Martyr of Charity:
She is God’s. She belongs to God in a perfect way to the extent that she is as if a part of the most Holy Trinity, although she is a finite creature. …The Immaculate is a Spouse of the Holy Spirit in an unspeakable way… … What a lovely mystery!20
Who Are You, O Immaculate Conception? - St. Maximilian Kolbe

cont’d

 

[De_Maria]

cont’d

De_Maria:

http://www.xt3.com/askapriest/view.php?id=15966

Let’s look at the link you provided. Have you read it? Then hopefully you saw that, right at the very beginning, the priest who authored the response writes, “This devotional title of our Lady…”

[/QUOTE]
How do you define “devotional”? Do you think that we have devotions based upon fictions?

Devotional. Not literal, mind you, but devotional. Strike two…

Learn to read.

De_Maria:

Pope Leo XIII

"You know well the intimate and wonderful relationship existing between [the Blessed Virgin] and the Holy Spirit, so that she is justly called His Spouse.

Wow. Quote-mine much? I mean, literally: you found a simple instance of a reference to Mary as “spouse of the Holy Spirit” – in the concluding paragraph of an encyclical that does not discuss this topic in the least – and you think you’ve proved your case? Strike three.

That actually adds strength to the mention. Since it is assumed that we all know why she is the Spouse of the Holy Spirit.

They’re Scripture.

So, if the words are not in Scripture, we shouldn’t believe them. Like the Blessed Trinity.

If you have Scripture calling Mary the spouse of the Holy Spirit, then cite it. Otherwise, stop trying to make it seem like that’s the case. That’s just intellectually dishonest.

First, you cite the Catholic Doctrine that says everything must be mentioned explicitly in Scripture in order to be believed. Remember that you’ve admitted that all the elements are there.

 

[Gorgias]

Just answer the question.

I already have:

I believe what the Church teaches

Have a lovely evening rooting out heresy and defining your own doctrine, @De_Maria…

 

[De_Maria]

I already have:

Neh…

 

[Cathoholic]

I just need help defending her against the Roman soldier accusation . . .

Just wondering fatimite.

WHO are you defending the Blessed Virgin Mary against the “Roman soldier accusation” from?

Is it from a Protestant (this would be unlikely)? If it is, I will give some verses to share (for example in St. Matthew’s Gospel it talks of being found “with Child of the Holy Spirit”).

Is it from an atheist? (I would save my pearls unless the atheist really seems to be seeking to learn instead of seeking to harm. This is hard with an atheist as they affirm no teachings above reason. Mere human intellect is their highest form of reason so revealed truths get rejected out of hand frequently).

Is it from Jewish people?

Jewish persons represent a mixed bag on this.

Some Jewish people say the Talmud has no mention of Jesus or Mary, and that what SEEMS like Jesus and/or Mary is REALLY another Jesus and or Mary.

Others think maybe a few things in the Talmud refer to THE Jesus and Mary, nothing too wild usually.

But other Jewish people take the Talmud and use its teachings to harpoon THE Jesus and Mary.

I read “Jesus and the Talmud” by Peter Schäfer (here) cover to cover and was heartbroken to see this kind of “interpretation” by some Jewish people.

Even the “Editorial Reviews” and the “From the Inside Flap” (on the Amazon page I linked to above) saddened me.

Why? Because it means that at least some Jewish people are taking this anti-Jesus and anti-Mary trash seriously.

These false and scurrilous rumors against the Blessed Virgin Mary MAY have been started by some of the Pharisees in Jesus’ day (I just can’t tell for sure).

The tone of Jesus’ arguing with the Pharisees gets pretty intense AFTER the Pharisees (seem to) imply a DENIAL of the Virginal Conception and Birth.

.

. . . “WEEE are not products of fornication!”–Some of the Pharisees

.

This MAY suggest these Pharisees are (falsely) implying Jesus WAS conceived of fornication.

The above is a paraphrase but I’ll give the actual quote but you will have to draw your own conclusions.

1/2

 

[Cathoholic]

2/2

The tone of Jesus’ arguing with the Pharisees gets pretty intense AFTER the Pharisees (seem to) imply a DENIAL of the Virginal Conception and Birth.

.

. . . “WEEE are not products of fornication!”–Some of the Pharisees

.

This MAY suggest these Pharisees are (falsely) implying Jesus WAS conceived of fornication.

The above is a paraphrase but I’ll give the actual quote below, but you will have to draw your own conclusions.

Initially Jesus referred to these Pharisees as “descendants of Abraham”.

But . . . .

. . . . AFTER the “born of fornication” crack by these Pharisees, Jesus NOW refers to them as proverbial children of the devil.

.

• BEFORE these Pharisees implication that Jesus was not of Virginal Conception = These Pharisees described by Jesus as "Descendants of Abraham."
• AFTER these Pharisees implication that Jesus was not of Virginal Conception = These Pharisees described by Jesus as Descendants of "The Devil!"

.

Things get VERY INTENSE in this exchange saying . . .

JOHN 8:34-44 34 Jesus answered them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, every one who commits sin is a slave to sin. 35 The slave does not continue in the house for ever; the son continues for ever. 36 So if the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed. 37 I know that you are descendants of Abraham; yet you seek to kill me, because my word finds no place in you. 38 I speak of what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have heard from your father.” 39 They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do what Abraham did, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God; this is not what Abraham did. 41 You do what your father did.” They said to him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.” 42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. 43 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

.

If these Pharisees were suggesting what it sounds like they were suggesting . . . . Jesus proceeds to rip them publicly.

I sense Jesus was very unhappy with these Pharisees here.

Make no mistake. Whatever the charge (or lack thereof here) against our Blessed Virginal Mother, Jesus INCREASED the heat of the conversation (they brought this upon themselves).

The late Fr. Stanley Jaki ALSO talks about the “panthera objection” in his book The Virgin Birth and the Birth of Science (which I have also read cover-to-cover). This is a very succinct and quick read and it is worth obtaining.

Does any of this help fatimite13?

 

[Cathoholic]

Just something to ponder . . . .

Fatima;

The 5 Sins Against the Immaculate Heart of Mary

Guido Del Rose

Mr. Guido Del Rose was the official escort for the U. S. National Pilgrim Virgin Statue of Our Lady of Fatima, touring the United States and promoting the message of Fatima. He gave many talks on topics such as, “The Message of Fatima” and “The Five First Saturdays Devotion,” and the “Last Times Apostasy.” He was called to his eternal reward on November 22, 2004.

Mr. Del Rose points out an often ignored aspect of the Fatima message: That Our Lady asked for the conversion of sinners and reparation made for sins that offend HER Immaculate Heart, along with the consecration of Russia.

"My daughter, the motive is simple: there are five ways in which people offend and blaspheme against the Immaculate Heart of Mary:

• (1) Blasphemies against the Immaculate Conception.
• (2) Blasphemies against her Perpetual Virginity.
• (3) Blasphemies against her Divine Maternity and at the same time the refusal to recognize her as the Mother of all mankind,
• (4) Blasphemies of those who seek openly to foster in the hearts of children indifference or contempt and even hatred for this Immaculate Mother.
• (5) The offenses of those who directly outrage Her in her holy images.

“Here then, My Daughter, is the reason why the Immaculate Heart of Mary [My Mother] causes Me to ask for this little act of reparation and by means of it, moves My mercy to forgive those souls who had the misfortune of offending her. As for you, try without ceasing, with all your prayers and sacrifices, to move Me to mercy toward those poor souls.” 1

Spoken by Our Savior in 1930 to Sister Lucia, these words and others given afterwards reveal to the world a most surprising truth, one replete with imperative significance for mankind. However, despite their importance, they have had little impact upon the faithful, remaining virtually unnoticed for over a half-century, a hidden gem in the vast spiritual treasure now known as Fatima. . . . .

http://www.catholicapologetics.info/catholicteaching/privaterevelation/fatima.htm

.
Bolding of “Blasphemies against her Perpetual Virginity.” above is mine.

 

[Cathoholic]

WHO are you defending the Blessed Virgin Mary against the “Roman soldier accusation” from fatimite13?

 

[fatimite13]

I’ve just,wondered about it

 

[fatimite13]

Reading this reminded me Our Lady spoke this, thank you so much

 

[Cathoholic]

fatimite13:

I’ve just,wondered about it

.

Fair enough fatimite13.

.

Reading this reminded me Our Lady spoke this, thank you so much

.

You are welcome.