How Do You Understand Church Teaching About Our Blessed Mother?

[patricius79]

Your perspective seems to be that of regurgitating quotes while lacking any theological synthesis or the cohesive context of any theological vision or paradigm.

One can do the same thing with the Sacred Scripture and weave together an elaborate tapestry…that is nothing but the heresy of Gnosticism…or Arianism…or Adoptionism…or Nestorianism…or Modalism, for that matter. And one can arrive to each of those destinations with relative ease…as any theologian can tell you.

The fundamental response here is that the Mary can be loved that is disordered, improper and that is not in according with the Church’s mind or with God’s will. That’s the problem of simply regurgitating a quote, when you have not internalised the theology needed to put the quote into its proper context.

Dear Father Ruggero,

Thank you for your concern.

What exactly is it that you believe I do not understand about the theological context of Mary’s union with Jesus Christ in the work of our salvation?

I’d love it if anyone would guide me into a deeper understanding of God and the Mother of God.

Peace of Jesus Christ,

Pat

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Dear Father Ruggero

Oh, and one more thing, actually.

Do you remember the thread you started, when you went to the members of the forum because you could not figure out what the Council Fathers meant in paragraph 67 of Lumen Gentium because you could not figure out what they meant and their references were too oblique for you…but you were hoping that someone could help you, so that you could confront me?

You might have done better to have simply asked me. Since I worked with various of the Council Fathers in my younger days. There are fewer and fewer possibilities of saying that, as the years pass.

:nope:

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Dear Father Ruggero,

Thank you for your concern.

What exactly is it that you believe I do not understand about the theological context of Mary’s union with Jesus Christ in the work of our salvation?

I’d love it if anyone would guide me into a deeper understanding of God and the Mother of God.

Peace of Jesus Christ,

Pat

I do not believe that you want this.
The good Father has tried many times to show you how to find out what the Church teaches and how & where you can find it.

It seems to be that you are content in your own misunderstanding and want no correction, which is fine. However, you should consider the scandal you are causing to the faith and to anyone who comes to this forum and reads what you have written.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Dear Father Ruggero,

Thank you for your concern.

What exactly is it that you believe I do not understand about the theological context of Mary’s union with Jesus Christ in the work of our salvation?

I’d love it if anyone would guide me into a deeper understanding of God and the Mother of God.

Peace of Jesus Christ,

Pat

Well, relative to eliciting my help, you should have considered that 5 threads ago.

I have a lot of demands upon my time.

I find I am happier when I am using my time in a manner that people actually appreciate…and who value it…and who don’t abuse it…or me.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

I do not believe that you want this.
The good Father has tried many times to show you how to find out what the Church teaches and how & where you can find it.

It seems to be that you are content in your own misunderstanding and want no correction, which is fine. However, you should consider the scandal you are causing to the faith and to anyone who comes to this forum and reads what you have written.

:yup:

 

[patricius79]

Well, relative to eliciting my help, you should have considered that 5 threads ago.

I have a lot of demands upon my time.

I find I am happier when I am using my time in a manner that people actually appreciate…and who value it…and who don’t abuse it…or me.

Dear Father Ruggero,

I understand that you have your perspective. My goal is simply to discuss Church teaching about Mary’s role in our relationship with Jesus Christ in a very civil way as members of the Family of God.

I’d be happy if anyone could answer my questions and the points I raise, so that I can deeper my knowledge of these mysteries.

I’ve been doing what I can to study Redemptoris Mater (JPII) and other Church documents about Mary’s role.

They are very wonderful!

For example, in Ineffabils Deus, Pope Pius 9th states that our Mother is an almost-infinite, inexhaustible abyss of the gifts of the Holy Spirit!

When the Fathers and writers of the Church meditated on the fact that the most Blessed Virgin was, in the name and by order of God himself, proclaimed full of grace[22] by the Angel Gabriel when he announced her most sublime dignity of Mother of God, they thought that this singular and solemn salutation, never heard before, showed that the Mother of God is the seat of all divine graces and is adorned with all gifts of the Holy Spirit. To them Mary is an almost infinite treasury, an inexhaustible abyss of these gifts, to such an extent that she was never subject to the curse and was, together with her Son, the only partaker of perpetual benediction. Hence she was worthy to hear Elizabeth, inspired by the Holy Spirit, exclaim: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.”[23]
papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ineff.htm

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Thank you, Deacon.

I greatly appreciate your vote of affirmation for my conclusion.

I also appreciate your using an image I had resisted using…but that seems so very apt.

 

[LightBound]

patricious79

STOP

Leave the thread and get some help. You are spreading falsehoods about the Faith- do you think the Blessed Virgin Mary is pleased with your doing this?

 

[Oneofthewomen]

Dear Father Ruggero,

I understand that you have your perspective. My goal is simply to discuss Church teaching about Mary’s role in our relationship with Jesus Christ in a very civil way as members of the Family of God.

I’d be happy if anyone could answer my questions and the points I raise, so that I can deeper my knowledge of these mysteries.

I’ve been doing what I can to study Redemptoris Mater (JPII) and other Church documents about Mary’s role.

They are very wonderful!

For example, in Ineffabils Deus, Pope Pius 9th states that our Mother is an almost-infinite, inexhaustible abyss of the gifts of the Holy Spirit!

When the Fathers and writers of the Church meditated on the fact that the most Blessed Virgin was, in the name and by order of God himself, proclaimed full of grace[22] by the Angel Gabriel when he announced her most sublime dignity of Mother of God, they thought that this singular and solemn salutation, never heard before, showed that the Mother of God is the seat of all divine graces and is adorned with all gifts of the Holy Spirit. To them Mary is an almost infinite treasury, an inexhaustible abyss of these gifts, to such an extent that she was never subject to the curse and was, together with her Son, the only partaker of perpetual benediction. Hence she was worthy to hear Elizabeth, inspired by the Holy Spirit, exclaim: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.”[23]
papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ineff.htm

Yes, but this still does not mean that anyone needs to have any type of special devotion to her. This is where you are wrong, and it has been pointed out too many times to count.

You must read these documents in light of what the Church teaches, not what YOU THINK it teaches.
Not every single thing written by a Pope or Saint, no matter how well intentioned, is part of the deposit of faith.
If you are truly trying to understand, you need to stop cherry picking quotes and read the actual documents- ALL OF THEM!

I also recommend that you speak to your priest, show him what you have written here and ask him for his help with your misunderstanding.

Sadly, I don’t think you will and that you will continue to persist in your passive-aggressive posting. I can only hope that the Mods finally do something about your agenda posting.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Dear Father Ruggero,

I understand that you have your perspective. My goal is simply to discuss Church teaching about Mary’s role in our relationship with Jesus Christ in a very civil way as members of the Family of God.

I’d be happy if anyone could answer my questions and the points I raise, so that I can deeper my knowledge of these mysteries.

I’ve been doing what I can to study Redemptoris Mater (JPII) and other Church documents about Mary’s role.

They are very wonderful!

For example, in Ineffabils Deus, Pope Pius 9th states that our Mother is an almost-infinite, inexhaustible abyss of the gifts of the Holy Spirit!

When the Fathers and writers of the Church meditated on the fact that the most Blessed Virgin was, in the name and by order of God himself, proclaimed full of grace[22] by the Angel Gabriel when he announced her most sublime dignity of Mother of God, they thought that this singular and solemn salutation, never heard before, showed that the Mother of God is the seat of all divine graces and is adorned with all gifts of the Holy Spirit. To them Mary is an almost infinite treasury, an inexhaustible abyss of these gifts, to such an extent that she was never subject to the curse and was, together with her Son, the only partaker of perpetual benediction. Hence she was worthy to hear Elizabeth, inspired by the Holy Spirit, exclaim: “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.”[23]
papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ineff.htm

You may use this methodology to post every quote you wish…even multiple times, if you wish.

You will get exactly the same answer from me:

• You have grossly misrepresented the Church’s teaching
• You have demonstrated not even a fundamental understanding of theology, which underpins Marian devotion and practice, when it is authentic and sound.
• You have horribly dishonoured the Mother of Jesus by your erroneous concepts that you are propagating here, in place of the truth taught by the Church.
• This behaviour does not represent at all the mind or the heart of the Church but rather disobeys the Council Fathers…and since you quote the documents, I will let you analyse yourself and figure out how you have disobeyed the Council Fathers.

 

[patricius79]

I do not believe that you want this.
The good Father has tried many times to show you how to find out what the Church teaches and how & where you can find it.

It seems to be that you are content in your own misunderstanding and want no correction, which is fine. However, you should consider the scandal you are causing to the faith and to anyone who comes to this forum and reads what you have written.

Dear Oneofthewomen,

I think the scandal today is not excessive love for Mary–which, strictly speaking, is impossible–but the decline in devotion to Jesus through Mary.

I want to pray that we understand how important it is to love Mary, whose role as Mother of God is the source of her role as our maternal mediatrix.

In Redemptoris Mater, Pope JPII specifically singles out St. Louis DeMontfort’s spirituality as being worthy of practice.

This book changed my life, along with the Glories of Mary. Now I’m getting more into the Papal documents and reflecting more deeply on the words of Vatican II.

I used to have no peace, but now I have peace in Jesus Christ through my Mother, who is “the dwelling place of all the graces of God the Holy Spirit” (Ineffabilis Deus, Pius 9th)

Peace of Jesus Christ.

Pat

 

[patricius79]

*]You have demonstrated not even a fundamental understanding of theology, which underpins Marian devotion and practice, when it is authentic and sound.

Dear Father Ruggero,

What is it that you think I most need to understand about theology, which, as you rightly say, underpins Marian devotion?

I know St. John–who took Mary to his home as his Mother–begins his Gospel with the theology of the Word of God who became flesh through Mary.

Peace of Jesus Christ,

Pat

 

[James248]

Dear Father Ruggero,

What is it that you think I most need to understand about theology, which, as you rightly say, underpins Marian devotion?

I know St. John–who took Mary to his home as his Mother–begins his Gospel with the theology of the Word of God who became flesh through Mary.

Peace of Jesus Christ,

Pat

10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to what was his own,[c] and his own people did not accept him. 12 But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.

14 And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son,[d] full of grace and truth. 15 (John testified to him and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’”) 16 From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son,[e] who is close to the Father’s heart,[f] who has made him known.

If anything John emphasized Jesus and made little mention, if any, of Mary.

 

[patricius79]

10 He was in the world, and the world came into being through him; yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to what was his own,[c] and his own people did not accept him. 12 But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God.

14 And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son,[d] full of grace and truth. 15 (John testified to him and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks ahead of me because he was before me.’”) 16 From his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace. 17 The law indeed was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God. It is God the only Son,[e] who is close to the Father’s heart,[f] who has made him known.

If anything John emphasized Jesus and made little mention, if any, of Mary.

Dear James,

Thanks for your post. Yes, praise be to God that the Word of God–that is, God the Son–became flesh in and through the Mother of God, the Coredemptrix.

Scripture and Tradition are to be given equal reverence as the Word of God.

The Church sees Mary’s role as Maternal Mediatrix at Cana (in John’s Gospel) and St. John also talks about how Jesus gave His Mother on the Cross.

According to the Church, this inexpressible gift of Mary’s Motherhood is made to each person.

Let’s keep praying for each other in Jesus Christ,

Pat

 

[James248]

Dear James,

Thanks for your post. Yes, praise be to God that the Word of God–that is, God the Son–became flesh in and through the Mother of God, the Coredemptrix.

Scripture and Tradition are to be given equal reverence as the Word of God.

The Church sees Mary’s role as Maternal Mediatrix at Cana (in John’s Gospel) and St. John also talks about how Jesus gave His Mother on the Cross.

According to the Church, this inexpressible gift of Mary’s Motherhood is made to each person.

Let’s keep praying for each other in Jesus Christ,

Pat

Yes.

And neither Scripture nor Tradtion support what you are doing.

Mary’s role of mediation is SUBORDINATE. Meaning “Mary is not the boss.”

 

[setarcos]

Greetings loved ones of the church.
Don’t mean to interrupt the flow of this thread. I hope I am not intruding too much.
I still have many unanswered questions about Mary’s status within the Catholic perspective.
Here are a few that confuse me;
1: If she is so central to salvation why the utter silence about her in the early Church?
It seems to me the concept of Mary has evolved over the centuries after Christ.
Didn’t Christ’s revelations end with the crucifixion? Yet he gave no revelations concerning Mary or her central role in mans salvation. The apostles never even acknowledge her after Christ’s passing. She had no part in their message according to the bible.

2: What is this emphasis on Mary saying yes as if this were some miracle in and of itself?
Mary was a girl, with a preteens mentality experiences an extraordinary event. She wasn’t asked if she would bare the Christ child, she was told she would. It seems after this fact that her saying “yes” were superfluous and not unique at best. Her behavior in essence was exactly the same as Zacharias when he was confronted with a divine message.

3: Mary was without original sin, yet she showed fear at the Angels appearance. Fear is a consequence of original sin. Someone pure of heart and innocent of all sin should be incapable of experiencing fear. Incidentally if Mary was necessarily made pure, without original sin in order to birth “God” then what of her parents? And their parents…ad infinitum? Wouldn’t such a pure soul be tainted by such impure souls as you apparently consider Christ’s to be without being born into a pure vessel? Consider that Christ was born into the womb of a fallen world anyway. His purity was to be subjected to impurity. To merely once remove it from this eventual subjection would be arbitrary. For if he was in some way infinitely separate from it, how would he save it? If God cut off the precession of blameless births with Mary then Mary was born from impure parents into an impure world while retaining her purity for no reason other than God decided it to be that way which brings us back to being arbitrary. In other words, God being what God is has no need of purity beyond himself in order that he remain pure.

4: Why did Jesus not call Mary his mother when addressing her? Only woman. This seems to me an act of disrespect or perhaps not disrespect but a clue to their relationship?
It seems from a biblical perspective one has to really reach to find the kind of close familial relationship between them that Catholics seem to emphasize.

5: Didn’t Jesus, perhaps in anticipation of all the misunderstanding about her with later generations, tell us unambiguously who his mother and brethren were and Mary was not made unique in this respect?
It seems to me that Marian adoration simply bloomed for unknown reasons centuries after Christ…perhaps for political reasons, perhaps someone’s, who was influential, personal preference? The theology definitely wasn’t developed until much much later.

Thank you and blessings to anyone with time enough on their hands to help me see a different perspective of Mary any mistakes in reasoning of course are mine alone.

 

[pianistclare]

Greetings loved ones of the church.
Don’t mean to interrupt the flow of this thread. I hope I am not intruding too much.
I still have many unanswered questions about Mary’s status within the Catholic perspective.
Here are a few that confuse me;
1: If she is so central to salvation why the utter silence about her in the early Church?
It seems to me the concept of Mary has evolved over the centuries after Christ.
Didn’t Christ’s revelations end with the crucifixion?
**This is the real danger of these threads…people become MORE confused over something that is understood by most in the church. Christ GAVE His mother to all of us at the Crucifixion when He asked St. John to care for her. What you are encountering here is an over-the-top, disordered viewpoint by the OP.**Yet he gave no revelations concerning Mary or her central role in mans salvation. The apostles never even acknowledge her after Christ’s passing. [BOh but they did. She was with them in the Upper Room, and they mourned her passing. Greatly. **She had no part in their message according to the bible. **She did. Mary is indeed in the New Testament. Also, notably in Revelation. **

2: What is this emphasis on Mary saying yes as if this were some miracle in and of itself? **Because many would have said NO WAY. It would have been considered that she was hallucinating. An angel appeared to her. Of course she was frightened. **
Mary was a girl, with a preteens mentality experiences an extraordinary event. She wasn’t asked if she would bare the Christ child, she was told she would. **NO NO NO, she WAS asked. She could have said NO, but displays perfect obedience to the Will of God. We call it her “fiat”. ** It seems after this fact that her saying “yes” were superfluous and not unique at best. Her behavior in essence was exactly the same as Zacharias when he was confronted with a divine message. **Except she actually bore the Christ Child in her womb. Pretty big deal. Without her, there is not Incarnation. **

3: Mary was without original sin, yet she showed fear at the Angels appearance. Fear is a consequence of original sin. **Not necessarily. ** Someone pure of heart and innocent of all sin should be incapable of experiencing fear. Incidentally if Mary was necessarily made pure, without original sin in order to birth “God” then what of her parents? And their parents…ad infinitum? Wouldn’t such a pure soul be tainted by such impure souls as you apparently consider Christ’s to be without being born into a pure vessel? Consider that Christ was born into the womb of a fallen world anyway. His purity was to be subjected to impurity. To merely once remove it from this eventual subjection would be arbitrary. For if he was in some way infinitely separate from it, how would he save it? If God cut off the precession of blameless births with Mary then Mary was born from impure parents into an impure world while retaining her purity for no reason other than God decided it to be that way which brings us back to being arbitrary. In other words, God being what God is has no need of purity beyond himself in order that he remain pure. **All of this previous assumes she was impure. She was not. She was devoid of Original sin. **

4: Why did Jesus not call Mary his mother when addressing her? Only woman. This seems to me an act of disrespect or perhaps not disrespect but a clue to their relationship? Where did you get this idea? Did He not address her at Cana?
It seems from a biblical perspective one has to really reach to find the kind of close familial relationship between them that Catholics seem to emphasize.
Christ was fully human AND fully Divine. They certainly were a family. Or else why were His parents so distraught when He disappeared for a few days and they found Him in the Temple?

5: Didn’t Jesus, perhaps in anticipation of all the misunderstanding about her with later generations, tell us unambiguously who his mother and brethren were and Mary was not made unique in this respect? **no. **
It seems to me that Marian adoration simply bloomed for unknown reasons centuries after Christ…perhaps for political reasons, perhaps someone’s, who was influential, personal preference? The theology definitely wasn’t developed until much much later.
**There is nothing political about Our Lady. She is the MOther of the REdeemer. We love her. In proper perspective, that is. She takes nothing for herself. SHe always, always, ALWAYS points us to her Divine Son. **

Thank you and blessings to anyone with time enough on their hands to help me see a different perspective of Mary any mistakes in reasoning of course are mine alone.

God bless. Don’t take this disturbed thread of emblematic of what the Church says about Our Lady. There are many good books, which I sure someone can post up for you to read.

 

[Magdalena59]

Pope Leo III died in 816. This quote does not conform to anything that comes to us through history concerning this pope…what document of Leo III are you taking this from?

Don Ruggero

I am very sorry. That was a typographical error. I meant to put Pope Leo XIII, not Pope Leo III.

You will find it in Divinum Illud Munus
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE HOLY SPIRIT
MAY 9, 1897

“she is justly called His Spouse”

Thank you.
Have a good day.

 

[patricius79]

Yes.

And neither Scripture nor Tradtion support what you are doing.

Mary’s role of mediation is SUBORDINATE. Meaning “Mary is not the boss.”

Dear James,

Yes, Mary’s role as our Mother is subordinate to Jesus Christ. As Vatican II puts it, her saving office shows our Lord’s power.

As Vatican II says, our adoration of the the Most-Holy Trinity is greatly fostered by our love for our Blessed Mother.

When defining the dogma of the Assumption, Pope Pius 12th notes that the New Adam assumed the New Eve into Heaven to honor her who is inseparable from Him

So I can’t imagine why anyone would not love this heavenly Mother who has been so exalted by Jesus Christ and constantly intercedes for us with complete tenderness

Pope Pius 12th says this, also, when defining the dogma of the Assumption:

*42. We, who have placed our pontificate under the special patronage of the most holy Virgin, to whom we have had recourse so often in times of grave trouble, we who have consecrated the entire human race to her Immaculate Heart *in public ceremonies, and who have time and time again experienced her powerful protection, are confident that this solemn proclamation and definition of the Assumption will contribute in no small way to the advantage of human society, since it redounds to the glory of the Most Blessed Trinity, to which the Blessed Mother of God is bound by such singular bonds.
w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-xii_apc_19501101_munificentissimus-deus.html

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Don Ruggero

I am very sorry. That was a typographical error. I meant to put Pope Leo XIII, not Pope Leo III.

You will find it in Divinum Illud Munus
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO XIII ON THE HOLY SPIRIT
MAY 9, 1897

“she is justly called His Spouse”

Thank you.
Have a good day.

Leo III I know well, not least because of the Church history teaching rotation. It was he, after all, who crowned Charlemagne. Your quote, however, does not fit him at all.