Devotion To Mary

benedictus2 · May 16, 2009

narrow_path said:
You are so unfamiliar with Scripture, I am not sure whether to laugh or cry. But first let me say, my intentions here are not to insult, but rather to engage others in biblical dialogue so Truth can be revealed. I noticed you were insulted at me when I called Mary a dead sinner. Check out Luke 1:47 and Luke 2:22-24. In Luke 1, she expressed the God was her Savior—
and only sinners need a Savior.

Yes, she needed a redeemer but unlike you and me the graces from Christ’s salvific death was bestowed on her prior to her conception that is why she was saluted by the angel as “Full of Grace”

Now, every one knows we are saved by grace, right? We all know that grace comes only from Christ’s death. Well think about it, before Christ was even conceived the angel said she was already “FULL OF GRACE”. Can you even comprehend what it means to be full of grace. The grace necessary for our salvation, well, she was already FULL OF THAT GRACE.

There are two ways of being saved. A doctor saves a person from death by operating on cancer. Someone who knows how the cancer can form can save someone from death by preventing the cancer.

You and me Christ saved from the pit (after we have fallen) but with Mary, he saves her by stopping her from falling into the pit. Ever saw Superman with Christopher Reeves on it. Remember that scene when he dives down and scoopes Lois Lane mid air? Well it’s sort of like that.

Luke 2 presents Mary offering a sin offering to the Jewish priest arising out of her state of sin. Your problem does not lie with me—but with the Word of God.

No, Cinette’s problem lie with you because you fail to comprehend the Word of God.

Here is the passage:
Luke 2:28 When the days were completed for THEIR purification according to the law of Moses, they took him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord."

Who is referred to in the THEIR in this verse? It surely does not mean Mary alone? And why do they make an offering? Because according to the prescription in Lev 12 she is considerede unclean because she has shed blood. So the child is also considered unclean because it has been touched by the blood.

Further, when Christ calls His mother “woman”, this was a very uncustomary thing for a Jewish boy to do. Most Jewish scholars see this as an outright sign of disrespect—but not all. The point is clear: Jesus had a mission to carry out, and Mary was just a small piece of the puzzle who sometimes got in the way.

Nope. She is a big piece of the puzzle. She was chosen by God the Father to be the Mother of God. There is no getting away from that fact. You can twist and turn as you wish but that BIBLICAL FACT will not be rationalized away.

Yes, Christ told John, “behold, your mother” at the foot of the cross. But what does this mean? The answer is clear: Christ said, “While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” (Mat. 12:46-50)

Aahh, you are mixing your Biblical passages.

John at the foot of the cross is a totally different passage and not in the least bit related to Matthew.

John, the disciple Jesus loved stands for us, the people He loves.

This does not give me the impression that Christ gave special treatment to his mother….nor does it imply that Mary is the “mother of us all”……just the opposite is true.

Here is a simple answer. Jesus is a Jew. As a devout Jew He would have fulfilled all the commandments. One of the commandments was to Honor your father and your mother. Jesus would have “honored” His Father and His Mother.

In Jewish language the word for honor is “covoda” which means to give glory. In the same way He gave glory to His Father, He also gave glory to His mother.

When we honor Mary we are only immitating Jesus

. If you do not want to immitate Jesus that is okay. It is your choice

Cinette · May 16, 2009

Dear Benedictus -

You have shown patience and love and your explanation was so clear that I hope it was understood.

Insofar as calling a person Woman I really do not think that it is derogatory at all. I will check this out with a Rabbi.

Blessings
Cinette

Cinette · May 16, 2009

narrow_path said:
… But let me provide some substance to your Catholic indoctrination. After Mary tells the people, “Do what He tells you”, you take this to mean that “Mary was confident His Son will listen to her.” I let my 12-year old read this statement, and she laughed saying that it “made no sense.” I did not have to tell her anything. So, even a 12-year old can use a little common sense! (minus the Catholic indoctrination) Of course, Mary was being obedient as she normally was, but her statement does not say nor imply that because of the fact that she backed off when Jesus put her in checkCan you believe that?? that this now means it was because of HER backing off (or shutting up) that God now decided to perform His first miracle! God would have to be a moody person to react in this manner. When Mary asked Jesus he said no and because she “shut up and obeyed” he changed his mind? That would be a very childish reaction. So, we should all be thanking Mary for moving God in such a way that He turned water into wine because had she not done that, He would not have?? Yikes! The construction of this sentence does blur the meaning but I guess that you are repeating what you said earlier about God changing His mind because Mary “backed off” Then, you mention her ability for intercession—where is this ability found in Scripture? When does Jesus give this to her? Mary is part of the Communion of Saints and as the Blessed Mother (Full of Grace) she is the Queen and Mother. Further, you’re right—I don’t consider her my mother in any sense because, for starters, she does not even know I exist. That is your belief, your interpretation. She was an obedient, redeemed sinner who is more than likely in the presence of Christ this moment (just as all believers are). There is not a shred of biblical evidence that she has ANY of these abilities or characteristics that you speak of. I would say that there are many things that are implicit. For example Joseph was not at the Wedding at Cana and we can assume that he had already passed on by then. Once again, you have no Scripture with your reply. It is not necessary to keep quoting scripture if one has the understanding and formation which is gained through scripture. You must remember that as Catholics we hear the scriptures daily at Mass. A person attending daily Mass will cover the Bible in three years just by attending Mass. Catholics may not be able to quote the Bible (which is a good thing) but they know things because they have heard it so often. What else is new? In conclusion, there is no precedent to give thanks to someone who has died long ago and does not even know you exist. Sure, I appreciate what she did long ago, but praise and worship is over the top—and unbiblical.Narrow you have no idea what Oral Tradition is. That the written scriptures are, in effect, Written Tradition is also something that you have not grasped. The Bible emanated from Oral Tradition and it was the Catholic Church that canonized the Bible is also something of which you are ignorant!

I wish you would apologise for butting in on this thread “Devotion to Mary” and saying the offensive things you have said.

When you have done that then we can be friends!

Poor_Clare_tobe · May 16, 2009

SienaFriend said:
:blush:WHOOPS? I’m new at CA and I was posting to the question about our devotion to Mary and well…I told myself, don’t read all the post first just do yours then read…YIKES…I hope I posted on right thread…I barely scanned over and it seems different than I expected…so if I posted on wrong thread, well please excuse me. I’m just a flake flopping around here so well…you might just as well get used to it, I will likely do it alot

*no sienafriend…
you most likely came to this thread as most of us Catholics did. to discuss our devotion to Mary and how she has been important in our lives. Unfortunately some person has intruded into our discussion to attack us for our beliefs. what I would suggest is just pray for him… ignore his posts here and reply to those on thread that apply to you… blessings and welcome to the forums… most times they are civil and posted in the appropriate venues… unfortunately you just happened on one that got hijacked.

Blessings of peace and all good!*

Lief_Erikson · May 16, 2009

I have to agree with you, Clare.

There is no point in arguing with Narrow Path. He very much appears to only be here to fight, not to listen, think and discuss. This is NOT the Apologetics forum- but he seems to think he’s still there. I think we’re wasting time and effort, as well as permitting the thread to go off course, by responding to his arguments.

John_Russell_Jr · May 16, 2009

My dear friend Benedictus

I hope you can forgive me for correcting one point seeing as how you’ve gone to so much trouble to make an excellent post just above. You say Mary was full of grace prior to Her conception, but the dogma of the immaculate conception says that Her soul was filled with grace at the very moment of conception. No time passed. She had the ill effects of original sin but never experienced them because of this sigular privelege of the immaculate conception.

God bless you:thumbsup:

John

Sister_Helena · May 16, 2009

Dear Friends,
I appreciate the interest this thread has generated. It was intended as a medium to express thoughts and sentiments about Mary by Catholics or non-Catholics alike, however, it was not meant to be a platform for debates and apologetics. I do respect the opinions of non-believers but obviously, as a Carmelite Religious dedicated to the service of Jesus through Mary, my loyalty is obvious. Mary, among other things, has always been the “stumbling block” between Catholics and Protestants. This has been going on since the first century of CHurch history. I don’t think we will settle the arguments here in CAF. I always remember the words: For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not believe, no explanation is possible.
May I respectfully suggest that further debates be brought to the right place: Apologetics or Non-Catholic Religions.

Thank you.

Lief_Erikson · May 16, 2009

Cinette, I’m glad Narrow Path brought up the fact that Jesus calls Mary “Woman.” It’s very special that Jesus called her this- in fact, the fact that He did is one of the scriptural evidences supporting the Catholic perception of Mary’s magnificence and Heavenly roles.

Now, if we interpreted Jesus as insulting Mary when He addressed her as “Woman,” this would bring Him into contradiction of the requirement that He honor His father and mother. Furthermore, Elizabeth said, “Blessed art thou among women,” the angel said to her, “Hail, Full of Grace,” and Mary said of herself, “All generations shall call me blessed.” All generations . . . except her Son?

That would be nonsense. Mary’s Magnificat is also prophetically foreshadowed in Hannah’s song of praise (1 Samuel 2:1-10/Luke 1:46-55). So the idea that Jesus habitually insulted Mary is perfectly ludicrous.

On the other hand, it is very special that Jesus called her “Woman.” Not many sons would refer to their mothers that way, so it is right to look for meaning in it, and with Mary, there are some extremely significant Old Testament foreshadowings.

The first place in the Bible where this turns up is Genesis 3:15, which says, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.” The woman’s seed is Jesus; the woman herself is Mary. This passage also is linked to “the woman” of Rev. 12, who gives birth to Jesus, is clothed with the sun and crowned with twelve stars. Again, the words “the woman” are used, binding these people together.

We have another extremely important reference as well. Throughout the Old Testament, God refers to Israel by as “Woman.” Whether unfaithful harlot or other, she is always a she to Him, and He calls her “Woman.” This, when linked to Mary, who Jesus so elevates that He calls her “Woman,” making her one with all these other Scriptural ties, reveals her to be Mother of the Church. For she is “Woman,” as Israel is, as the Church is. These are profound links. God used the same term for all these different entities. The “Woman” in Rev. 12 represents the Church, and Israel, and also Mary, who also is called “Woman.” “The Woman” Israel is linked in Jesus’ words with his special use of the term “Woman” for Mary, for her Son sees in her the mistress of the New Israel, its great representative and Advocate.

There are glorious scriptural concepts that Jesus links together and calls us to perceive in Mary by using this word as if it was her name. Israel is “The Woman,” the Church in Rev. 12 is “the Woman,” the one whose coming is prophesied, whose seed will destroy Satan is “the Woman.” She is thus tied to Israel, the Church and the destruction of Satan in the most profound way in Jesus calling her by this word constantly as an amazing name.

It also perhaps may have still more deeply humbled her soul, for others in her time period may not have understood and might indeed have reckoned that Jesus was insulting her, so they could too. His calling her by this word is like a prism with many splendid colors of Scriptural light refracted through it.

Lief_Erikson · May 16, 2009

SienaFriend said:
Mary has followed me all my life I can see now. I really saw her (not a vision) in 2000 when I was sick and an oil cloth of my moms that had traveled with me since I was 18 when she past away packed in a trunk. My daughters came in and I was laying down and in living room, and they said, “Look She looks PERFECT there, the PERFECT place for her” They hung her up over the mantle firplace, and it all started for me then. Her school, I guess, all I knew was to try and pray the rosary. I am devoted to her in praying the rosary (alot),my kids call my car “The Rosary Roadster” She taught me to pray,pray,pray and in doing that…I looked at Jesus more and more, in contemplation I trusted myself to her. I felt safe with her. Then it just grew and grew and I guess The Holy Spirit and she led me to books,prayer group, oh and before all the mass. First I when I looked at Jesus, it would be the image of Him at the rock in the garden. It took me a long time to feel close to Him. I knew there was a God just from looking at nature etc.and as Father (cradle catholic) and The Holy Spirit by the mystical experiences and unexplainable events I believed that happened. Jesus was harder for me, couldn’t relate to Him as a brother he seemed more, not a father, and embarrased to have “personal conversations”, but I always believed in the real presence and his suffering for us and His resurection. I think I stood more in awe and wonder. It took me a little longer to have intimate conversations. I then liked to see Him laying down, relaxing and that helped me to realize He was listening to me. Now I see them both with me more and more. Still baby steps, but at least walking I guess. I just feel like she is my lawyer of sorts or representative, and I trust her more than anyone to that…
Sorry if I posted twice, I am having a hard time navagating, and it’s not funny, it makes me feel really old…and I’m only 50

“I just feel like she is my lawyer of sorts or representative, and I trust her more than anyone to that.”
Interesting you feel that way

. She is, in fact, according to Tradition the “Advocate for Humanity.”

Thanks for sharing. It’s so heartening to hear such lovely stories

.

narrow_path · May 16, 2009

Since so many believe I have “hijacked” this thread, I will make this my last post here and let the borderline blasphemous Marian worship continue. I did want to address the idea of her alleged Immaculate Conception and sinlessness first. Luke 1:28 has been appealed to several times by several people. So here we have the phrase, “Hail, full of grace!” This is assumed to be a characteristic quality of Mary—I beg to differ. First the translation “Hail, full of grace” which comes from the Latin Vulgate is best rendered “favored one” NOT “full of grace.” Thus, the favored one refers to the fact that Mary was indeed highly favored by God in having the wonderful privilege to bring into the word God-Incarnate. This very same point is made in verse 30 where the angel said to Mary, “You have found FAVOR with God.” This is no suggestion that God found any particular worthiness in Mary herself.

Benedictus2 also responded to the Luke 2:22-24 passages. It is important to remember that these verses would not make much sense if Mary were allegedly “sinless” or had been immaculately conceived. She presented an offering to the Jewish priest for her sinful condition she was in—so, yes you are correct to reference Lev. 12:2 because the OT law required it. But this strengthens my point immensely—it would not make any sense for her to do these things if she really was sinless or immaculately conceived.

Also, it is important to compare Scripture with Scripture. Look at Romans 5:12: “through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to ALL men, because ALL sinned.” Further, Paul in Romans 3:23 assures us that “ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” He said this right after saying, “There is NONE righteous, NOT EVEN ONE; there is NONE who understands, there is NONE who seeks for God; ALL have turned aside….there is NONE who does good, NOT EVEN ONE.” (Rom. 3:10-12) Where do we find that Mary has somehow eluded the inspired writings of the apostle Paul? If she had, wouldn’t Paul have mentioned this? Of course, he did not mention this because Mary is in the same sinful condition as ALL of us.

Luke 1:42 has Elizabeth telling Mary, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!” Now, if this was supposed to be Elizabeth’s way of saying that Mary was sinless, I am forced to ask how Elizabeth would have come to such knowledge in the first place. She was not an apostle or prophetess of any kind—she was not ANY kind of spokesperson for God ever at any time. Perhaps this is why the great Roman Catholic scholar, Thomas Aquinas adamantly declared that the doctrine of the immaculate conception was “impossible.” He went on to say, “Mary, like all other humans with the exception of Christ, inherited a sin nature from Adam.” Who says that I disagree with all Roman Catholic apologists? Aquinas was correct.

Finally, I have to make the point that there is not a single lexical source that gives the meaning of “sinless” or “holy” for the Greek eulogeo (blessed). Catholics are simply forced to read something into this word that is not there. Once again, the verse communicates quite simply that Mary is “blessed” and “favored” inasmuch as Messiah would be born through her womb. Any additional interpretations are FORCED onto the text that the text does not indicate. Much more could be said…….

Peace to all……and God bless

paul_c · May 16, 2009

Narrow Path,
Why is it that you think Catholics venerate Mary? Seriously, what could be our motivation and why is Mary such a stumbling block for you?

Well, let me help you a little with our motivation.

First of all, we have tradition going back to the Apostles. Those Apostles knew Mary well, John even took her into his home as his own mother as he describes in his Gospel. As his mother, Mary knew Jesus better than anyone and helped the Apostles understand him. It seems clear that the Infant Narratives in Luke came from Mary, since he quotes her as saying she kept all these things in her heart. These Apostles, particularly John, were close to Mary and the veneration started then. The immaculate conception is hinted at in the Angel Gabriel’s salutation, Hail Mary, Full of Grace (or most favored one if you like that better). The Assumption dogma dates from Apostolic Times. It is not shocking that this is not in scriptures, because where would it fit. Paul was’t around Mary at that time, so he wouldn’t have written about her. Its an event at least 10 years after the end of the Gospels, so it wouldn’t have fit there. From a timing perspective it could have been in Acts, perhaps, but the assumption doesn’t qualify as an act of an apostle. So there’s no place in scripture that would have been appropriate for it to be containted.

But veneration for Mary goes way beyond the veneration of the Apostles. Mary has been active in the world since her Assumption. When she appeared to Juan Diego at Guadaloupe, she was responsible for the wholesale conversion of Mexico. Her appearances at Lourdes healed many bodily but far more spiritually. Her visits to Fatima resulted in Many conversions. She has helped many, many people find her son through devotions like the miraculous Medal and the Rosary…

Some Protestants feel a need to denegrate Mary because they feel veneration of her reduces the worship of Jesus . There may also be some amount of Anti-Catholic bigotry involved as well. However, it just makes no sense to insult the Mother of Jesus. After all, she was in intimate contact with God for 9 months, how much more Grace can you get than that?

joe370 · May 16, 2009

**Narrow_path, you arrogantly said:
**

Since so many believe I have “hijacked” this thread, I will make this my last post here and let the borderline blasphemous Marian worship continue.

Big surprise…You enter a thread, utter lies that you have been brain washed to believe by a church that you are unwilling to identify, and leave. A tad cowardly if you ask me, but we all know you would never deign to ask a Catholic anything… I asked you to provide the official documentation that supports your claim that Christians belonging to the one church built by God, as opposed to a mere man, worship Jesus’ mother Mary, and you ignore the challenge. Choosing instead to shrinking away from the challenge; this is such a typical protestant move; I once employed the same tactic myself as a former Lutheran. Your posts reek of condescension for the most part followed by a god bless or peace to all of you, and your demeanor is always contentiously proud, with subtle hints of acrimony accompanied with a major superiority complex. You remind of my sister so much!!! I get it now, as with my sister; your word is final; you are your own authority; you are your own Bishop, overseeing your own church, through your fogged myopic glasses.

** I ask you: where can the pillar and foundation of truth be found and you simply ignore me, or say: the bible and that is very unbiblical! I ask you for the name of Jesus’ church for the first 1000 years of Christianity and you ignore me. That’s what I would do if I were in your hypocritical shoes. I tell you that I consider your church part of Jesus’ mystical body and you tell me that the church to which I belong is not of God, which implies that the anti-Christ prevailed upon the church to which I belong, and you offer nothing to countenance your parochial and prejudicial stance.
**

I did want to address the idea of her alleged Immaculate Conception and sinlessness first. Luke 1:28 has been appealed to several times by several people. So here we have the phrase, “Hail, full of grace!” This is assumed to be a characteristic quality of Mary—I beg to differ. First the translation “Hail, full of grace” which comes from the Latin Vulgate is best rendered “favored one” NOT “full of grace.” Thus, the favored one refers to the fact that Mary was indeed highly favored by God in having the wonderful privilege to bring into the word God-Incarnate. This very same point is made in verse 30 where the angel said to Mary, “You have found FAVOR with God.” This is no suggestion that God found any particular worthiness in Mary herself.

**Whether the angel said: hello full of grace or hello thou that art highly favored, the fact that the angel addressed her as such, and not Mary, speaks volumes. I could cite many examples where scholars say: “The perfect tense in Greek is a past tense with a special meaning: it is used to refer to a past action which has effects felt in the present.” But what’s the point. Common sense dictates that God would not become one with sinful flesh, as per the O.T. **

**So, you are saying that the mother of God is not worthy? God disagrees with you, otherwise HE would not have found favor with her, to bring HIS one and only Son into this evil world!!! She was found worthy because of her unique status! My spiritual mother Mary is the most singularly unique, and significant embodiment of love and humility, that ever lived, due to her participation in God’s plan of salvation for you and I, and you simply discard her as nothing more than the rest of the dregs of the human race. Quite shuddering! I wonder what my spiritual Brother and Savior Jesus would think about that? **

Benedictus2 also responded to the Luke 2:22-24 passages. It is important to remember that these verses would not make much sense if Mary were allegedly “sinless” or had been immaculately conceived. She presented an offering to the Jewish priest for her sinful condition she was in—so, yes you are correct to reference Lev. 12:2 because the OT law required it. But this strengthens my point immensely—it would not make any sense for her to do these things if she really was sinless or immaculately conceived.

When the days were completed for their purification according to the law of Moses, they took him up to Jerusalem to present him to the Lord, just as it is written in the law of the Lord, “Every male that opens the womb shall be consecrated to the Lord,” and to offer the sacrifice.

**Do you really think that Mary should have said: I am full of grace, ergo I am above the law? I doubt that Mary was fully aware of her unique status at this particular juncture.
**

Continued…

joe370 · May 16, 2009

Also, it is important to compare Scripture with Scripture. Look at Romans 5:12: “through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to ALL men, because ALL sinned.” Further, Paul in Romans 3:23 assures us that “ALL have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” He said this right after saying, “There is NONE righteous, NOT EVEN ONE; there is NONE who understands, there is NONE who seeks for God; ALL have turned aside….there is NONE who does good, NOT EVEN ONE.” (Rom. 3:10-12) Where do we find that Mary has somehow eluded the inspired writings of the apostle Paul? If she had, wouldn’t Paul have mentioned this? Of course, he did not mention this because Mary is in the same sinful condition as ALL of us.

**Yes, it is important to compare Scripture with Scripture; perhaps you could take your own advice regarding the man-made doctrine of sola scriptura. I wonder why the P.C. leaders, that spearheaded the reformation, believed in Mary’s Immaculate Conception, and why the C.C. for the first 300 years of Christianity believed? I guess they failed to check with you first for confirmation! Paul as with the Apostolic Church, took for granted that Jesus’ mother was sinless; that is why their successors believed. However her sinless state is not required for your salvation, therefore it does not have to be mentioned in your bible. Belief in the Trinity is necessary for your Salvation, and this word cannot be found in the bible anywhere, nor can the words: Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one. You believe this because the C.C. defined it for you.The Apostles, including St. Paul were preoccupied/obsessed with just one thing; can you guess what it was? Again, common sense speaks volumes concerning the unique relationship between God Who is the alpha and the omega, and the mother of God. Employ some won’t you!
**

telling Mary, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb!” Now, if this was supposed to be Elizabeth’s way of saying that Mary was sinless, I am forced to ask how Elizabeth would have come to such knowledge in the first place.

It’s not!!!

She was not an apostle or prophetess of any kind—she was not ANY kind of spokesperson for God ever at any time. Perhaps this is why the great Roman Catholic scholar, Thomas Aquinas adamantly declared that the doctrine of the immaculate conception was “impossible.” He went on to say, “Mary, like all other humans with the exception of Christ, inherited a sin nature from Adam.” Who says that I disagree with all Roman Catholic apologists? Aquinas was correct.

**Wow, if a Catholic scholar demeans the status of Jesus’ mother, only then are you willing to call him great.

St. Thomas Aquinas expressed questions about the subject, but said that he would accept the determination of the Church. How very Catholic of him. He took it to the church; why don’t you??? Thomas Aquinas believed that Mary was completely free from sin, but that she was not given this grace at the instant of her conception. When in doubt, he deferred to Jesus’ One church; when you are in doubt you decide for yourself; how very protestant of you!!!
**

Finally, I have to make the point that there is not a single lexical source that gives the meaning of “sinless” or “holy” for the Greek eulogeo (blessed). Catholics are simply forced to read something into this word that is not there.

**Finally, I have to make the point; there is not a single biblical source that supports the man-made tradition of the 16th century, sola scriptura. Protestants, who can only trace their man-made churches back to the 16th century, are simply forced to read something into their bibles, given to them by the C.C., that is not there. So sad really…

**
Once again, the verse communicates quite simply that Mary is “blessed” and “favored” inasmuch as Messiah would be born through her womb.

**If no one, upon their demise, can be one with God in His heavenly home, in a state of sin, then surely God would not allow the blood of a sinful woman to commingle with His, here on earth. God’s home was Mary’s uterus for 9 months. Think about it, or don’t, I don’t really care!!!
**

Any additional interpretations are FORCED onto the text that the text does not indicate. Much more could be said…….

The C.C. does not rely on the bible for this teaching; she relies on the authority of Jesus’ One church; you will never get it, for you are blinded by your biases.

Peace to all……and God bless

Peace to you too…and God bless and good luck on your protestant journey.

Lief_Erikson · May 16, 2009

paul_c said:
. . .] it just makes no sense to insult the Mother of Jesus. After all, she was in intimate contact with God for 9 months, how much more Grace can you get than that?

Your point just brought something to my mind. Jesus asked St. Margaret Mary to spread the devotion to His Sacred Heart. Part of that devotion is the 9 First Fridays- a period of 9 consecutive months. Is it coincidence that this period coincides exactly with the amount of time Mary bore Jesus in her womb? This was their most physically intimate time of all, and that is the amount of time Jesus asked His followers to be intimate with Him in the Eucharist, and with His Heart. At that time, Mary and Jesus’ Hearts were physically united through their connection of flesh, as well as spiritually. In the Eucharist, we participate in Jesus physically and spiritually, like Mary did in the womb, and the Eucharist punctuates at a specific time each month of the 9 months in the First Fridays devotion.

It’s certainly interesting. I suspect that Jesus did plan the Marian link in that way; just as she bore Jesus in the womb for that amount of time period, her Heart constantly one with His, our hearts are united totally with Jesus in this period. We are spiritually nurtured as a child is in the womb, as many of the promises involved in the devotion suggest:

I will give them all of the graces necessary for their state of life.

I will establish peace in their houses.

I will comfort them in all their afflictions.

I will be their strength during life and above all during death.

I will bestow a large blessing upon all their undertakings.

Sinners shall find in My Heart the source and the infinite ocean of mercy.

Tepid souls shall grow fervent.

Fervent souls shall quickly mount to high perfection.

I will bless every place where a picture of my heart shall be set up and honored.

I will give to priests the gift of touching the most hardened hearts.

Those who shall promote this devotion shall have their names written in My Heart, never to be blotted out.

I promise you in the excessive mercy of My Heart that My all-powerful love will grant all to those who communicate on the First Friday in nine consecutive months the grace of final penitence; they shall not die in My disgrace nor without receiving their sacraments; My Divine Heart shall be their safe refuge in this last moment.

I never thought of the Marian side of this devotion, but I think this devotion is quietly connected with the Incarnation of Jesus, and with His time in His Mother’s womb. We are blessed in Mary as we experience this devotion, in total unity with Jesus, experiencing the blessings He experienced in this womb, through the oneness we share with Him in the Eucharist on the Fridays.

Poor_Clare_tobe · May 16, 2009

Lief_Erikson said:
I have to agree with you, Clare.

There is no point in arguing with Narrow Path. He very much appears to only be here to fight, not to listen, think and discuss. This is NOT the Apologetics forum- but he seems to think he’s still there. I think we’re wasting time and effort, as well as permitting the thread to go off course, by responding to his arguments.

I do so agree lief,

*So that being said… I hope many others will quit feeding Narrowpaths ego and perhaps share their stories?

What has Mary meant to you?

What title is your favorite?

Do you have a favorite devotion?

Perhaps a story of how Mary has protected you or brought you back to church? or increased your faith??

Lets all jump in and reclaim the good sisters thread???

Blessings all!!!*

Lief_Erikson · May 16, 2009

joe370 said:
**Do you really think that Mary should have said: I am full of grace, ergo I am above the law? I doubt that Mary was fully aware of her unique status at this particular juncture.
**

Another possibility is she was teaching obedience in humility. Jesus also submitted to the Law at the Temple in the same scene Mary did, though His divine nature technically elevated Him above it.

In all fairness, with regard to some of Narrow Path’s post, we need to remember that we did tell him he’s hijacking the thread with his arguments, so his leaving is understandable and not necessarily cowardice. Also, very many people have responded to him thoroughly, so the fact that he didn’t get to all of our points in his answers is not too big a surprise. Responding thoroughly to all of us would have taken a LOT of time to do.

You made very sound rebuttals to his arguments in your posts, I think. It’s good to see people out there who know how to defend their faith.

Lief_Erikson · May 16, 2009

Poor_Clare_tobe said:
I do so agree lief,

*So that being said… I hope many others will quit feeding Narrowpaths ego and perhaps share their stories?

What has Mary meant to you?

What title is your favorite?

Do you have a favorite devotion?

Perhaps a story of how Mary has protected you or brought you back to church? or increased your faith??

Lets all jump in and reclaim the good sisters thread???

Blessings all!!!*

Devotion To Mary

benedictus2

Guest

Cinette

Guest

Cinette

Guest

Poor_Clare_tobe

Guest

Lief_Erikson

Guest

John_Russell_Jr

Guest

Sister_Helena

Guest

Lief_Erikson

Guest

Lief_Erikson

Guest

narrow_path

Guest

paul_c

Guest

joe370

Guest

joe370

Guest

Lief_Erikson

Guest

Poor_Clare_tobe

Guest

Lief_Erikson

Guest

Lief_Erikson

Guest

Cinette

Guest

Cinette

Guest

Cinette

Guest