John the Baptist Free From Personal Sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Metaron
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Metaron

Guest
  1. the Virginity of Jesus and Mary - “God desired that the Virginity of Mary, the Mother of Jesus Christ, be so perfect, complete, and all-encompassing that even the manner of her Immaculate Conception was required by God to be entirely Virginal, occurring solely and entirely by a miracle of God and not in the usual way. Therefore, solely by means of a most wonderful and singular miracle of God, the Virgin Mary was conceived of both her parents, Saint Joachim and Saint Ann, without sexual union and within their complete purity of body, heart, mind, and soul.”
Click to expand...
  1. Original Sin and the Immaculate Conception - “The Immaculate Conception is the preservation of the Virgin Mary from all three aspects of original sin. Original sin is like a negative image of the Trinity. The Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary is like a negative image of original sin. Therefore, the Immaculate Conception is a reflection of the Most Holy Trinity, and must be three-fold. The Immaculate Conception is usually explained as an absence of original sin, but original sin is itself a kind of negative or absence. The Immaculate Conception can also be explained in positive terms, as one gift with three aspects,-a reflection of the Three Persons of the One Holy Trinity. Original sin is one defect with three aspects. The Immaculate Conception is one gift with three aspects. Each of the aspects of the Immaculate Conception is opposed to a corresponding defect of original sin.”
Click to expand...
  1. John the Baptist Never Sinned - “John the Baptist remained completely free from all personal sin, throughout his whole life, by means of the grace and redemption which came to him from Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Of all those persons with original sin, none is, nor ever will be, greater than John the Baptist, not even the holiest of canonized Saints, because, by grace of the Holy Spirit, John never committed the least personal sin whatsoever.”
Click to expand...
  1. Saint Joseph Never Sinned - “Saint Joseph, though he is one of the holiest of the Saints, and though he committed no personal sins at all throughout his entire life, still he had the weaknesses and imperfections which accompany those who are conceived and afflicted with original sin. Even after his sanctification within the womb, the remnant of original sin remained with Joseph, just as it remains with us, after our sanctification in baptism. Mary had no personal sin, no original sin, and no imperfection. Joseph had no personal sin, but he did have original sin and imperfection.”
Click to expand...
Red highlights are mine. Is this really what our Church teaches? I found it on a Catholic site.
 
Althought the thread ask about John the Baptist, it sounds like you are curious about Mary also. I just want to clarify so that others can give you good answers.
 
Mary carried God in her womb. Yes, God was in human form, but you can’t seperate out his diety from his humanity. That is why we say that Jesus was the incarnate.

In Old Testament times The Ark could only be touched by certain chosen individuals.

Mary was the living ark. She carried the incarnate form of God in her womb. So she had to be perfect and free from sin.It isn’t about Mary but about Jesus, and how serious Catholics take the fact that he was God.

Jesus saved Mary before her birth. He is God, he can do that. Mary is called the Immaculate Conception because she was free from original sin.

Shew! I hope that helps or at least doesn’t cause a lot of confusion. I am a convert and am learning all this still and how to explain it to others.
 
The Church does not teach **any **of what you quoted, in red or not.

I don’t know what website you found this on, but the Church doens’t teach any of these things.
 
I googled some of your quotes and found the site.

This has no imprimateur or nihil obstat, and the person who runs the site has no Catholic credentials for teaching.

The particular quotes you posted appear to be based on the mystical writings of Bl. Anne Catherine Emmerich-- however this is the website host’s **interpretation **of her writings and they are seriously flawed.

Frankly, you should not go to this site for Catholic teaching at all, it is full of error.
 
I can’t seem to find the site from google, is it still up? Would be interesting to what else this “Catholic” site has to say 🙂

Joe
 
Yes, although I am not comfortable sharing the link because it’s just THAT bad. This particular site is run by a person who also posts here frequently and has some very disturbing views.

This is, sadly, the product of the internet society and the explosion of publishing options that bypass the procedure that should be followed by ANY Catholic wanting to publically teach: receiving **permission ** to publish from their bishop and nihil obstat and the imprimatur.

Unfortunately right now, anyone who can buy a domain name can claim they are posting Catholic teaching.

One must be very wary and always look for the credentials that ensure freedom from error.
 
See what happens when you just skim a person’s post. I read number one in the response as Mary lived with Joseph without sexual union, so at first Ike confused me. Now I see that it states that Mary was concieved without any sex on the part of her parents!:eek: Am I understanding that correctly? I had to read number one twice to understand and I am still confused if that is actually what is being said.:confused: Of course, I know that isn’t true but it surprises me that anyone would think that.
 
The bit that says Mary’s parents conceived her without sexual union is heresy. The other parts are not doctrine, though I do not know if it is heretical to believe that John the Baptist and St Joseph are without sin, it is on dodgy ground
 
jwashu said:
I can’t seem to find the site from google, is it still up? Would be interesting to what else this “Catholic” site has to say 🙂

Joe
Click to expand...
The website, (name withheld) contains many Catholic interpretations about prophesies, and the end-times timeline seems to make sense… he even predicted Pope Benedict’s name, although he thought he would be black. It’s refreshing to see a Catholic view of eschatology. Other than that he does seem to be treading dangerous ground.
 
JMBNH said:
The bit that says Mary’s parents conceived her without sexual union is heresy. The other parts are not doctrine, though I do not know if it is heretical to believe that John the Baptist and St Joseph are without sin, it is on dodgy ground
Click to expand...
It’s seems conpletely strange and odd that Mary could be conceived by BOTH her parents, St.Anne & St.Joachim, without them having physical contact! It’s wierd almost… however, Jmbnh, why do you differentiate this from the other views of Saint Joseph and Saint John the Baptizer, and single this one out as heresy?
 
1ke said:
Yes, although I am not comfortable sharing the link because it’s just THAT bad. This particular site is run by a person who also posts here frequently and has some very disturbing views.

This is, sadly, the product of the internet society and the explosion of publishing options that bypass the procedure that should be followed by ANY Catholic wanting to publically teach: receiving **permission ** to publish from their bishop and nihil obstat and the imprimatur.

Unfortunately right now, anyone who can buy a domain name can claim they are posting Catholic teaching.

One must be very wary and always look for the credentials that ensure freedom from error.
Click to expand...
1-Ke is right about the **nihil obstat **and imprimatur. He really should have that permission if he wants to teach doctrine.
 
Ron_Conte said:
The site in question also has a good pro-life section:
catholicplanet.com/prolife.htm
as well as Catholic poetry, music, and articles.
Click to expand...
You are promoting your **own **website, which DOES NOT have a Nihil Obstat or Imprimatur and does contain many questionable statements.

It does not matter what else it has on it, this website should NOT be promoted here IMHO.
 
no 1 is certainly false, Mary was conceived in the normal way in the womb of her mother (the names of her parents are passed on through Sacred Tradition, not scripture) immaculately, that is, without original sin. To misstate the “immaculate” part as meaning without sexual activity is to misstate the doctrine of the immaculate conception and of original sin, a grave error.

the Church is silent on the sinlessless of John the Baptist or Joseph.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top