S
sandusky
Guest
I have read what you think about prayer, Rich, and find that you are inconsistent. On this thread post #278, in response to this:
You replied:
When convenient for you, prayer is worship.
- Status
G
Good_Fella
Guest
Seriously, who is talking about Eve? Paul is mentioning Mary, the New Eve. And this is the only time he mentions her. He is presenting her as an active participant - a key player - in the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word and of the redemption of men, called to be adopted as sons. Mary is the woman who has made Jesus, the God-man. She is the woman foretold in Genesis 3:15, when God addresses Eve, from whom Jesus was “born” in the “fulness of time” appointed for our redemption. The original Eve put us under the law, but through the New Eve we are redeemed. Christ, the New Adam, is inextricably united to the secondary but vital role of His Mother in restoring fallen man.
Pax vobiscum
Good Fella
R
rwoehmke
Guest
I only got up to part 10 of this thread and while onthe one hand it might be considered foolish to try to prove everything just from Scripture to someone like Just asking, it has been a beautiful and edifying effort on the part of many participants who support the Church’s Marian teachings with both Scripture and Tradition which is the basis of all truth for our Church. The impact on my beliefs in these Marian teachings has been a positive one and I am sure reinforced and gave even more support to those of us who are less clever and knowledgable about such matters.
If I would make only one comment of a negative nature, it would be that other then shoring up the Faith of those who are already faithful these discussions demanding sola scriptura as a basis are often an exercise in futility for guys like Justasking, who do not have eyes to see all that the apostles left behind of what Jesus taught them.
Thanks all, for a wonderful defense of Marian teaching. Short of pounding a sharp stake through their hearts, some obstinate individuals never give in. Their minds are obscured as by a veil. Like those Jews who would not repent and be Baptized, they are obstinate and stiff necked people.
.
If I would make only one comment of a negative nature, it would be that other then shoring up the Faith of those who are already faithful these discussions demanding sola scriptura as a basis are often an exercise in futility for guys like Justasking, who do not have eyes to see all that the apostles left behind of what Jesus taught them.
Thanks all, for a wonderful defense of Marian teaching. Short of pounding a sharp stake through their hearts, some obstinate individuals never give in. Their minds are obscured as by a veil. Like those Jews who would not repent and be Baptized, they are obstinate and stiff necked people.
.
J
justasking4
Guest
I came across these quotes from some of the saints of the catholic church. Is this how you would also view her?
Mary is the key to the gates of Heaven.
St. Ephrem
Open to us, O Mary, the gate of Paradise, since you have its keys!
St. Ambrose
God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary.
St. Thomas Aquinas
No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, as entering through a gate.
St. Bonaventure
This is the House of God and the Gate of Heaven.
Genesis 28:17
Mary is called “The Gate of Heaven” because no one can enter Heaven but through her means.
St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori
Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary.
St. Bernard
Mary is the key to the gates of Heaven.
St. Ephrem
Open to us, O Mary, the gate of Paradise, since you have its keys!
St. Ambrose
God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary.
St. Thomas Aquinas
No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, as entering through a gate.
St. Bonaventure
This is the House of God and the Gate of Heaven.
Genesis 28:17
Mary is called “The Gate of Heaven” because no one can enter Heaven but through her means.
St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori
Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary.
St. Bernard
N
NotWorthy
Guest
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
L
LilyM
Guest
And the fact that these are saints (holy, albeit not necessarily perfect, or perfectly wise, humans) means we have to agree with every word of theirs because ??? …
It means they speak for the Church because ???..
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
Would not these be part of the “fullness of the truth” and Sacred Tradition?And the fact that these are saints (holy, albeit not necessarily perfect, or perfectly wise, humans) means we have to agree with every word of theirs because ??? …
It means they speak for the Church because ???..
J
justasking4
Guest
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Mary is the key to the gates of Heaven.
Read your Bible. Read Revelation. And the ‘key’ to the gates is not only not the ‘gates’ of Heaven, it certainly isn’t Heaven itself. Why would you have a problem considering the Woman who bore our Savior as ‘unlocking’ the gates of Heaven by producing our Savior?
St. Ephrem
Open to us, O Mary, the gate of Paradise, since you have its keys!
See above. Did Jesus grow in Mary’s womb? Did she not contain within her womb GOD–whom the heavens cannot contain? Was that not a great miracle? And again, considering she is neither considered a goddess, nor Heaven, what is wrong with considering her, the Woman who bore our Savior, as holding or unlocking the gate of Paradise to bring to the world that Savior??
St. Ambrose
God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary.
Again, has God made Mary a goddess? She is the Mother of the Son of God–she ‘unlocked’ Heaven’s gates by her fiat to bear the Savior–so God did entrust 'the treasures of Heaven" by making Mary Mother of the Savior.
St. Thomas Aquinas
No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, as entering through a gate.
I love the fact that you don’t put this one in context but then again, one can argue that it was through Mary’s unlocking of the gate of heaven by bearing the Savior of the world that opened up Heaven’s gates. It was only through Christ’s sacrifice that we are able to enter heaven. Ergo, because Mary ‘opened the gates’ and bore the Savior, we enter through His sacrifice which came about because she said YES to being His Mother. IOW, it is Christ’s sacrifice which opened heaven but Mary ‘cooperated’ with that. Supposing a copilot went out to unlock the plane door, and the pilot got in, and flew the plane to Tahiti. You got to Tahiti because the pilot flew the plane—but until the copilot opened the door, the pilot did not get in. So you got to Tahiti, in a sense, because the copilot first opened the door. Nobody is arguing that Mary was the sacrifice, but still, nobody should be denying that it was her YES which opened the way for the birth of the Savior.
St. Bonaventure
This is the House of God and the Gate of Heaven.
Genesis 28:17
Mary is called “The Gate of Heaven” because no one can enter Heaven but through her means.
See above. And you took it way out of context, too. The ‘means’ is that she bore the Savior of the World. Are you going to tell me that her bearing Jesus was ‘nothing’?
St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori
Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary.
Again, taken out of context. But then again, one could as easily say that Holy Scripture was written for myfavoritemartin or justasking, couldn’t one? For whom WAS Scripture written? And while Scripture doesn’t talk of martin or justasking --and it DOES talk about Mary–one could also say that Scripture is ‘about’ each of us as it is a tool and a guide for how we SHOULD LIVE. Correct? Finally, Scripture was indeed written on account of Mary (who said yes), and for Jesus, and for St. Peter, St. Paul, the apostles, and every single person on earth.
St. Bernard
Read your Bible. Read Revelation. And the ‘key’ to the gates is not only not the ‘gates’ of Heaven, it certainly isn’t Heaven itself. Why would you have a problem considering the Woman who bore our Savior as ‘unlocking’ the gates of Heaven by producing our Savior?
St. Ephrem
Open to us, O Mary, the gate of Paradise, since you have its keys!
See above. Did Jesus grow in Mary’s womb? Did she not contain within her womb GOD–whom the heavens cannot contain? Was that not a great miracle? And again, considering she is neither considered a goddess, nor Heaven, what is wrong with considering her, the Woman who bore our Savior, as holding or unlocking the gate of Paradise to bring to the world that Savior??
St. Ambrose
God has entrusted the keys and treasures of Heaven to Mary.
Again, has God made Mary a goddess? She is the Mother of the Son of God–she ‘unlocked’ Heaven’s gates by her fiat to bear the Savior–so God did entrust 'the treasures of Heaven" by making Mary Mother of the Savior.
St. Thomas Aquinas
No one can enter into Heaven except through Mary, as entering through a gate.
I love the fact that you don’t put this one in context but then again, one can argue that it was through Mary’s unlocking of the gate of heaven by bearing the Savior of the world that opened up Heaven’s gates. It was only through Christ’s sacrifice that we are able to enter heaven. Ergo, because Mary ‘opened the gates’ and bore the Savior, we enter through His sacrifice which came about because she said YES to being His Mother. IOW, it is Christ’s sacrifice which opened heaven but Mary ‘cooperated’ with that. Supposing a copilot went out to unlock the plane door, and the pilot got in, and flew the plane to Tahiti. You got to Tahiti because the pilot flew the plane—but until the copilot opened the door, the pilot did not get in. So you got to Tahiti, in a sense, because the copilot first opened the door. Nobody is arguing that Mary was the sacrifice, but still, nobody should be denying that it was her YES which opened the way for the birth of the Savior.
St. Bonaventure
This is the House of God and the Gate of Heaven.
Genesis 28:17
Mary is called “The Gate of Heaven” because no one can enter Heaven but through her means.
See above. And you took it way out of context, too. The ‘means’ is that she bore the Savior of the World. Are you going to tell me that her bearing Jesus was ‘nothing’?
St. Alphonsus Maria Liguori
Holy Scripture was written for Mary, about Mary, and on account of Mary.
Again, taken out of context. But then again, one could as easily say that Holy Scripture was written for myfavoritemartin or justasking, couldn’t one? For whom WAS Scripture written? And while Scripture doesn’t talk of martin or justasking --and it DOES talk about Mary–one could also say that Scripture is ‘about’ each of us as it is a tool and a guide for how we SHOULD LIVE. Correct? Finally, Scripture was indeed written on account of Mary (who said yes), and for Jesus, and for St. Peter, St. Paul, the apostles, and every single person on earth.
St. Bernard
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
No they would not be. They would be consider to be Catholic devotion.
Catholic devotions are prayer forms which are not part of the official public liturgy of the Church but are part of the popular spiritual practices of Catholics. Many are officially sanctioned by the Church as profitable for spiritual growth but not necessary for salvation.
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
I already gave you an answer. Look again.
You can find these quotes at---www.catholictradition.org/main-index.htm
Well, you do often put them out of context. Your posts betray you.
You provided the link but not the quote itself. Do you expect me to click each link to find it out? Come on.
L
LilyM
Guest
Umm, no. Closer to heck no. You mean you’ve been on these boards all this time and don’t know what Sacred Tradition actually is?
The truths and Tradition of the Catholic faith are taught first and foremost by its Magisterium - the Pope when speaking infallibly, and Church Councils likewise. Individual Bishops and priests only in as far as they are in accord with the Popes and Councils. Saints and theologians take an even lower rank in the pecking order!
Even those saints who are themselves Popes and Bishops, only ever speak infallibly and expound dogma, doctrine and Tradition, on limited occasions.
Pope Benedict, upon the publication of his latest book Jesus of Nazareth, explicitly invited discussion, comment and debate about its content precisely because that publication isn’t anything like infallible, nor a dogmatic pronounciation on anything by way of Sacred Tradition.
J
justasking4
Guest
I’m still having problems with exactly what “fullness of the truth” and Sacred Tradition" is. Is there a list of the “fullness of the truth” or Sacred Tradition?
Who determines what these are and by what criteria? For example, who says that these quotes are just Catholic devotions and not part of the fullness of the truth or Sacred Tradition?
S
savedsinner
Guest
J
justasking4
Guest
Here is your answer:“And to answer your question, I do have a problem with the quote. I must question though the source in which you pick this up. Do you happen to have the full context of the where the quote came from?”
This does not tell me you consider this to be false only that you have a problem.
Quote:
This is what is great about being on these catholic formumns. People make all kinds of accusations but never support them with facts. If you can back this up then show me.
Until you can show me where i have i take this as a false accusation on your part. To put things in context would require more space that these posts could handle. These forumns have limitations and don’t always come out the way people are thinking.
I gave you what i understood you wanted. Maybe at another time you can check them out if you want.
L
LilyM
Guest
You mean you’ve been on these boards all this time and don’t know what Sacred Tradition actually is? For starters private writings by saints and theologians are not dogmatic in any sense. Nor are they capital T Truth or Sacred Tradition.
The capital-T Truths and Tradition of the Catholic faith are taught first and foremost by its Magisterium - the Pope when speaking infallibly, and Church Councils likewise.
For infallibility to apply there are two conditions. Firstly the intent, express or implied by the context, must be for the Pope or Council to bind the whole church for all times. So disciplines such as large parts of the wording of the Mass, which has changed many times over the centuries, are not infallible Truth. Liturgy is not timeless or changeless for the most part, nor intended to be so.
Secondly the pronouncement must be on a matter of faith and morals. So no-one can infallibly or dogmatically say one football team is better than another for example. Galileo, for instance, didn’t get into trouble for his view that the sun was the centre of the solar system - Copernicus, supported by the church - said exactly the same thing with no problems.
What Galileo did was, if I remember correctly, make some erroneous theological speculations based upon his scientific ideas. That, and the fact that he presented his theories as if they were solidly proven when they weren’t, was what got him into trouble.
Now individual Bishops and priests are infallible only in as far as they are in accord with the Popes and Councils.
Saints and theologians rarely come into the picture at all, except in so far as their views may be used in supporting some infallible doctrine. Saints and theologians disagree with each other continually - if they were all expressing infallible Truth or Sacred Tradition we’d be in a right mess!
Even those saints and theologians who are themselves Popes and Bishops, only ever speak infallibly and expound dogma, doctrine and Tradition, on limited occasions when they meet the criteria outlined above.
Pope Benedict, upon the publication of his latest book Jesus of Nazareth, explicitly invited discussion, comment and debate about its content precisely because that publication isn’t anything like infallible, nor a dogmatic pronounciation on anything by way of Sacred Tradition.
Hope this clears things up a little.
- Status