J
justasking4
Guest
Radical??? If this work is approved by the Catholic church or its not condemned would that make it radical?
- Status
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Is it completely impossible for God to save Mary from sin before she committed any?
Maybe not for “ye of little faith.” There is no proof that she committed any sins, either.
J
justasking4
Guest
I don’t know. However the issue is: did He and what is the evidence? There is none.
There is in Luke 1:47. Also there are all kinds of people in the Scriptures where it is not mentioned they sinned. Should we assume they did not since there is no proof they did?
A
Angels_Unaware
Guest
Utterly untrue in every conceivable way. First, no one, even Mary, fully grasped the divine plan at the Annunciation or even during the ministry of Jesus.
When Mary “rejoices in her Savior”, she understands the Messiah to be the Liberator from Jewish oppression. Everyone understood the Messiah in this very basic way at the time of Christ. No one yet grasped that the Messiah would save from the internal oppression of sin before He saved from external oppression.
So, no JA4, by no stretch of imagination did Mary understand the Baptist concept of “I am a sinner who has been saved” when she spoke those words. This was not what she was expressing.
Second, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception fully explains that Mary was saved from original sin by a singular grace of God at her conception, which does not make her divine, but makes her the first person to partake of the New Covenant, and the first woman since Eve to be born without sin.
Mary was saved; that does not mean she sinned during her lifetime. She is as Adam and Eve would have been had they not accepted the fruit of Satan. Mary gives us the fruit of God.
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Genesis 3:14-15 And the LORD said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, cursed art thou above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: 15 and** I will put enmity between thee and the woman**, and between thy seed and her seed: **he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. **
This is a clear reference to Christ - proto-evangelium - this is the only place in Scripture where it is HER seed, not HIS seed. When we sin, we are NOT at enmity with Satan. If there is enmity placed by God between Satan and Mary, how can you say that Mary sinned?
Angels Unaware did a fine job of answering this. I do believe it is possible for a person to be free from sin in their life, otherwise the Lord was wasting his breath when He told people to “go and sin no more” and telling us to be Holy as He is Holy.
R
rikkk1958
Guest
This kind of thread seems not to go away. Without pasting scriptural passages Roman Catholics believe that the Virgin Mary can intercede for anyone who prays to God. It is just natural for mothers to be caring for their children and Mary showed that many times during the life and death of our Lord. Did she not intercede even when Jesus said “the time has not yet come”? And because the servants of the groom were worried that they ran out of wine, did she not tell them to follow what Jesus tells them to do? This is just because of her faith what her Son can do and as a record to be Jesus’ first miracle. Mary is the mother of our Lord and no matter how you call it she still is the Mother because she conceived God in her womb. And the Word become flesh so that God can reach out and interact with His creation and to let them know how much He loves them. As Jesus was dying He said to all of them “Behold your Mother”. Jesus had to remind them to behold Mary as the mother of God, the mother of the Church.
J
justasking4
Guest
Do you believe this statements said by various Catholics about Mary?
"“How shall we overcome the Spirit of Satan except by the power of that woman to whom Almighty God has given the mandate to crush the head of the serpent.”
Bishop Fulton Sheen
“Oh, how fearful is Mary to the Devils!”
St. Bonaventure"
H
hays1122
Guest
It does have this:
“Approved by the most Rev. Archbishop of New York,1856”
“First published in 1856 by Edward Dunigan & Brother,
Catholic Publishing House,NY,NY”.
J
justasking4
Guest
What conclusions can we draw from this? Would you take this as an endorsement by the Catholic church?
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
Without a Nihil Obstat and an Imprimitur, it’s not officially sanctioned/approved by the Church.
J
justasking4
Guest
Then what does this mean?
P
Pixie_Dust
Guest
It means that the Archbishop of NY in 1856 thought it was a nice book. We are all entitled to our own opinions, even when we’re Archbishops. Still doesn’t mean the Church endorses it.
G
guanophore
Guest
She knows that she has been saved from sin.
Indeed not. There is no “proof” for the vast majority of our beliefs. That is why they are called articles of faith. There is no “proof” for most of the contents of the Apostles’ creed.
There is no “proof” for most of the contents of the Bible.
If you are looking for “proof” you need to google a science forum.
It is for me. I don’t assume it is approved.
That is your issue, ja4, not ours. If you don’t believe that Mary can hear your requests, then don’t present them to her.
There may be no evidence that you will accept, but that does not mean it does not exist.
If you wish.
I know that this concept is very difficult for you to comprehend, so I will type very slowly.
“various Catholics” do not define Catholic doctrine. Catholic doctrine is defined by the Church, specifically the teaching authority appointed by Christ. Individuals may not understand it correctly, which is why it is not a good idea to rely on them. If you want to pick a fight about what the Church teaches, then do so. Please stop this spurious casting forth of some people’s private devotions and use them to incrimminate others.
Our mama wears combat boots. If you want to fight your own spiritual battles without her powerful assistance then go for it. Why do you try to malign those who appreciate her help?
Would that somehow damage your salvation, if you believed some people did not live a life of sin?
No one is 'assuming" anything, we accept the teachings of the Church, as revealed by God.
“In the days of King Herod of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly order of Abijah. His wife was a descendant of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 **Both of them were righteous before God, living blamelessly **according to all the commandments and regulations of the Lord. 7 But they had no children, because Elizabeth was barren, and both were getting on in years.” Luke 1:5-7
What kind of sins do you assume Zechariah and Elizabeth were committing?
H
hays1122
Guest
I found this informaton:
Religious Superior’s stamp:
IMPRIMI POTEST
“it can be printed”
Censor’s stamp:
NIHIL OBSTAT
“nothing stands in the way”
Bishop’s stamp:
MPRIMATUR
“let it be printed”
This is very interesting. I will certainly look for these stamps when buying a religious book. I guess only the Catholic church uses this system to show approval.
G
guanophore
Guest
No.
It means the Archbishop did not find anything in it that would interfere with the faith of the flock in his archdiocese.
Honestly ja4, your incessant badgering is despicable. It means the same thing it meant when we explained it last week! Search justasking4 and imprimatur, or just go to New Advent and look it up in the encyclopedia! I swear sometimes I think you delight in running Catholics around in circles for your own entertainment!
Good for you hays. You are miles ahead of ja4, and started later!
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
But…this implies some kind of spatial thinking, as though He were arranged in series with her - see picture:
Almost, in fact, as though we could not come to Him, because she is in the way. Which surely isn’t meant
How we speak about her can very easily give the impression that she is an obstacle to to be negotiated - or even an obstacle protecting Him from us & us from Him. This is the problem with de Montfort’s “True Devotion” - there is no communion between Christ & the Christian, because the BVM is in between, as we are unfit to have any dealings with Him. 
H
hays1122
Guest
What about this verse:
John 14:6,
“Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by me.”
It seems that Jesus would have said,“No one comes to the Father except through my blessed mother Mary.”
Then when Jesus gave instructions on how to pray.
He gave us the Lord’s Prayer. Which we know doesn’t mention Mary.
John 14:6,
“Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man comes to the Father, but by me.”
It seems that Jesus would have said,“No one comes to the Father except through my blessed mother Mary.”
Then when Jesus gave instructions on how to pray.
He gave us the Lord’s Prayer. Which we know doesn’t mention Mary.
P
petite_foireuse
Guest
You mean there is no scriptural proof. Ok, I’ll admit the proof (Genesis, which has been mentioned above, is not overwhelming).
More proof is to be found in the Church Fathers, meaning it has been believed from the first centuries on. As far as I know, that’s one of the requirements for “Rome” (in the sense of the Church authorities, first of all the Pope) to define a new dogma: There must be proof that it was believed by early Christian. Nothing new gets added, only defined more precisely.
Another proof still: Given the veneration early Christians already had for relicts of the saints, don’t you think we’d know where Mary tomb is, if there had been one? The reason is the Assumption. But why would God grant such an unusual favor to any human, if she had not been “special” in some way, particularly faithful to him?
So I guess now we get to discuss relict veneration and papal authority? But only after re-reading past threads on those topics, of course, and starting separate topics for each discussion
As I said, you can’t take one article of the Catholic Faith and prove it all by itself. That is one thing that still amazes me after twelve years in the Church: how consistent it all is. If you don’t understand something, or something seems contradictory, try waiting a while, it’ll become clear at some point. But don’t assume you know it all better than the groups of bishops and cardinals who poured over the sources for many years before defining a new dogma. They’re the specialists, not we. We all have domains in which we’re the specialists, but its usually not theology.
P
petite_foireuse
Guest
Let me follow up on that analogy. Notice how in your picture, the BVM block is not as large as the others? You can get to Jesus by passing to the side of the “BVM” block. That’s what people who don’t rely on Mary do. Mary’s not in the way, you can get to Jesus without going through her, but the way is more long-winded.
A
Angels_Unaware
Guest
And whatexactly is it about the intercession of Mary that you think interferes with Jesus as the Mediator and Redeemer of man with God?
Hays:
Nothing in Catholic teaching ever makes this argument. That is your own distortion and twisting of teaching. Mary leads to Jesus (as do teachers and preachers of the Word, and as does Scripture). Jesus mediates between God and man.
Hays:
Upon what absurd assumption should the Lord’s prayer mention Mary? You are very confused if you believe our worship and prayers centers on Mary more than Jesus or to the exclusion of Jesus.
Are you not aware that our weekly Mass never centers on Mary?
- Status