Marian Dogma .... required or emotional attachment?

[Penitent]

Writer:

In my own humble opinion, Penitent, I think your priest is in error. Having said that, though, I would encourage you to ask for the advice of another priest or someone else within the Church in a position of authority. I wouldn’t do this in the mindset that you are searching for the answer you want to hear, but be open and mindful of their response, if it differs from you and I hold to be true. Furthermore, I would be very grateful for you to pass on their words to me, if I am proven to be in error. I am a new Catholic, and I don’t want to encourage you in the wrong direction.

Hi Writer, thankfully, it wasn’t my priest–it was at a community event and it was the only time I’ve ever seen this young priest, from Ireland, who has a tremendous devotion to Mary…had it been my priest, I would’ve definitely spoken to him by now about it. I will, though, bring this up to my priest at our next appointment…it’s something I’ve wanted to tackle for a bit, but with everything else, this kind of took a back burner. I will relay his words to you as best I can.

Penitent

 

[Writer]

Penitent:

Hi Writer, thankfully, it wasn’t my priest–it was at a community event and it was the only time I’ve ever seen this young priest, from Ireland, who has a tremendous devotion to Mary…had it been my priest, I would’ve definitely spoken to him by now about it. I will, though, bring this up to my priest at our next appointment…it’s something I’ve wanted to tackle for a bit, but with everything else, this kind of took a back burner. I will relay his words to you as best I can.

Penitent

That’s good to hear… I’m glad it wasn’t your priest!

 

[delorean_boy]

Writer:

I guess I would add only three additional observations here. First, the *Catechism of the Catholic Church (971, Devotion to the Blessed Virgin) *reminds us that devotion towards Mary is to be encouraged, but it should not cross that line to become like the adoration we extend only to our God and creator. Second, the CCC teaches us (817, Words to Unity) that our seperated bretheren “have a right to be called Christians”. I can guarantee that Protestants do not have a close relationship or understanding of Mary. This being the case, can’t we take from this that Mary is an important element of our salvation, but not a required element. Of course, one might also argue that, since they don’t have the whole truth, they are not accountable in the same we that we are. In this particular case, however, I think the observation is valid. Third, not every word uttered by a saint is necessarily worthy of blind acceptance today. Their lives were deemed extraordinary and worthy of contemplation, but not every word they spoke was necessarily absolutely correct. I recall that Saint Augustine, for example, made small comments or personal observations which were later proven incorrect by Church teaching. In his book on St. Francis, G.K. Chesterton also points out that the Church would have a great difficulty functioning in a practical sense if it adopted and implemented all of this saint’s teachings–e.g. complete non-ownership of property, etc.

In my own humble opinion, Penitent, I think your priest is in error. Having said that, though, I would encourage you to ask for the advice of another priest or someone else within the Church in a position of authority. I wouldn’t do this in the mindset that you are searching for the answer you want to hear, but be open and mindful of their response, if it differs from you and I hold to be true. Furthermore, I would be very grateful for you to pass on their words to me, if I am proven to be in error. I am a new Catholic, and I don’t want to encourage you in the wrong direction.

Whats the deal with the CCC quote? No one hear is saying that we should worship mary as God, in fact both Saints that I quoted discuss Mary’s subordinate role and specifically warn against worshiping her as a deity. So im at a loss to see what point you are trying to make with this. Also I dont think that devotion to the Blessed Mother is a requirement to be called a Christian. Heck look how few Catholics are devoted to her, yet no one would argue they are not Christians.

I dont understand some peoples fascination with doing the minimum requirements. You can do the bare minimum to keep your job, but if thats all you did would you be considered a good employee worthy of promotion? No, of course not. The Church requires very little of us, Confession once a year, Eucharist once a year, fast two day a year, Mass once a week and a few holy days. I dont see any dogmas that force people to pray at all, whether to God or the Communion of Saints. I think though that everyone knows that if you didnt pray at all your chances of salvation are nil.

 

[delorean_boy]

Writer:

I guess I would add only three additional observations here. First, the *Catechism of the Catholic Church (971, Devotion to the Blessed Virgin) *reminds us that devotion towards Mary is to be encouraged, but it should not cross that line to become like the adoration we extend only to our God and creator. Second, the CCC teaches us (817, Words to Unity) that our seperated bretheren “have a right to be called Christians”. I can guarantee that Protestants do not have a close relationship or understanding of Mary. This being the case, can’t we take from this that Mary is an important element of our salvation, but not a required element. Of course, one might also argue that, since they don’t have the whole truth, they are not accountable in the same we that we are. In this particular case, however, I think the observation is valid. Third, not every word uttered by a saint is necessarily worthy of blind acceptance today. Their lives were deemed extraordinary and worthy of contemplation, but not every word they spoke was necessarily absolutely correct. I recall that Saint Augustine, for example, made small comments or personal observations which were later proven incorrect by Church teaching. In his book on St. Francis, G.K. Chesterton also points out that the Church would have a great difficulty functioning in a practical sense if it adopted and implemented all of this saint’s teachings–e.g. complete non-ownership of property, etc.

In my own humble opinion, Penitent, I think your priest is in error. Having said that, though, I would encourage you to ask for the advice of another priest or someone else within the Church in a position of authority. I wouldn’t do this in the mindset that you are searching for the answer you want to hear, but be open and mindful of their response, if it differs from you and I hold to be true. Furthermore, I would be very grateful for you to pass on their words to me, if I am proven to be in error. I am a new Catholic, and I don’t want to encourage you in the wrong direction.

Next, I realize that the Saints are not infallible (non-popes anywho), but dont you think that some of them might have a better grasp on the Christian life than we do? It amazes me how neglected they are. Often people quote them when they can use there words to win an argument, but as soon as their words call us to reform our life or way of thinking, then its “whoa wait a minute! hes not infallible!!!”

Have you ever even read either Montfort or Ligouri??? If not why are you so quick to right there views off as no more than an uninformed opinion?
St Alphonsus was one of 33 Doctors of the Church.
Also all their works carry imprimaturs, not that big of a deal anymore I know, but I have noticed how when a book makes some uncomfortable this issue always comes up.
Also many of the Popes have endorsed these Marian views.
Maybe something to look into eh?
Montforts true devotion to mary has been recommended
by
Pope Pius IX
Pope Leo XIII (In fact granted a plenary Indulgence to those who consecrate themsleves to Mary as in True Devotion)
Pope St Pius X
Pope Benedict XV
Pope Pius XI
Pope Pius XII
Pope Paul VI
Pope John Paul II
I can provide exact quotes if you like.

 

[MysticRose]

The problem with Marian devotion is only that sometimes it crosses the line and distracts us from Christ, from whom alone Mary receives her unique status in history. It also can lead to false teachings such as references being made to her as the “Co-Redemptrix”, which I addressed in an article at the link below.

It is a Doctrine of the Church although not Dogmatic, that she is already Co-redemptrix … The push you see is not to have her declared Doctrinally Co-redemptrix as this is already done but Dogmatically so that the doctrine itself can no longer be contested by the faithful in any manner.

The Blessed Virgin Mary: Co-Redemptrix, Mediatrix of All Graces, Advocate

FR Vince Bork
Fr. Bork is a priest in the diocese of Arlington, VA.

The author wholeheartedly submits all content to the teaching authority of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

MARY: Co-Redemptrix

What do we mean when we say that MARY is “co-redemptrix”? We call MARY “co-redemptrix” because her whole life was a sharing in the redemptive mission of her Son, which reached its climax at the foot of the Cross at Calvary.

Does not this seem to imply that JESUS did not redeem MARY? No, MARY was redeemed by JESUS in a prevenient and most perfect manner when she was conceived without original sin. Being free from any taint of sin, she had the full freedom to say “yes” to GOD’s request that she be the Mother of JESUS.

But doesn’t the prefix “co” seem to put MARY on the same level as JESUS? “Co-redemptrix” is a Latin word; the Latin prefix “co” comes from “cum”, which does not mean “equal to” but “with.” Mary’s sufferings are efficacious towards the redemption of man because they are wholly rooted in the redemptive graces of Christ and are perfectly united to His redeeming will.

How could JESUS be the sole source of our redemption if MARY had a share in GOD’s plan of redemption? GOD chooses to give man a share in His attributes and His works. Since GOD is infinite, His sharing of Himself does not reduce His glory, but rather lets it shine forth more resplendently.

So we can say that Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix does not take away from the glory of her Son, the Redeemer? Yes. MARY magnifies her Son’s glory by letting it shine forth resplendently through her. In God’s mysterious and merciful providence, He willed not only that man would be redeemed by the Blood of Christ, but that man would also be given a share in Jesus’ redemptive mission. As our “goodness” does not make GOD less good, neither does MARY’s share in GOD’s redemptive plan take away from JESUS’ unique role as Redeemer.

Are other people besides MARY called to share in the redemptive mission of JESUS? We, who are redeemed by Christ, are also called offer our sufferings to the Father in union with the sufferings of JESUS for the salvation of souls.

So then human suffering has meaning? In suffering we are most closely conformed with Christ insofar as we unite our will to His Will by which He accepted the Cross in perfect union with the will of our heavenly Father. GOD so inflates our love beyond our natural capacity with His own love that it is truly “not I who live, but Christ who lives in me.” We are co-Redeemers as we “make up for what is lacking in the Cross of Christ”.

If we are all co-redeemers, why should we give MARY special honor as Co-redemptrix? We, who are brethren of Christ, share in His suffering as members of His mystical body. MARY shared in His suffering in a special and singular way because of her own unique relationship within the mystical body of Christ as the Mother of JESUS Christ. Through her motherhood, the Son of GOD obtained His flesh and blood which He offered to the Father for our redemption. MARY cooperated with JESUS in a singular manner when she lovingly offered her maternal rights to the Father has JESUS offered Himself to the Father. She did not make this offering with resentment, but out of love for her Son and the sinners for whom He died.
catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=349

 

[MysticRose]

MARY: Mediatrix of All Graces
Why do we say that MARY is “Mediatrix of All Grace”? We say that MARY is “Mediatrix of All Grace” because all graces come from JESUS to us through MARY.

Doesn’t this seem to contradict the fact that JESUS Christ is the One Mediator between God and man? Not at all: Imagine water from a reservoir reaching the people through a system of aqueducts or channels. By analogy, JESUS is the infinite “reservoir” of all grace, which is distributed to us through MARY. GOD wills that not only MARY, but all men, have a share in both receiving and distributing His graces. When we carry out our normal duties with charity (e.g. as parent, worker, student, etc.), we mediate GOD’s gifts to help sustain our fellow man.

Does MARY differ from us as instruments in the mediation of grace? God often wills to distribute particular gifts or graces through us. However, God wills to distribute all graces through MARY in accord with her vocation to be the Mother of JESUS Christ. Since all graces are mediated through the sacred humanity of JESUS Christ, they must also be mysteriously and profoundly associated with the Woman through whom He received His humanity.

Did MARY in any way merit her role as “Mediatrix of All Graces”? Yes, by her perfect and constant cooperation with GOD which is most evident at the conception and death of her Son. At the Incarnation, she consented to be the Mother of JESUS; at Calvary she consented ot be the Mother of the children of GOD, for whom her Son was suffering and dying.

Does Mary’s mediation continue after her death? Souls in heaven mediate more perfectly than when on earth since in heaven they enjoy perfect union with GOD. MARY’s union with GOD exceeds that of all creatures, consequently her mediation from heaven is most powerful.

MARY: Advocate What do we mean when we say that MARY is “Advocate?” We say that MARY is advocate because she always intercedes for us by praying to JESUS Christ her Son on our behalf.

Does this imply that we cannot pray directly to God? Of course not! JESUS Himself taught us to pray to Our Father in Heaven. Rather, it means that MARY unites her prayer with those of all the children of GOD.

How does MARY’s intercessary prayer differ from our intercessory prayer? MARY’s advocacy is singularly unique because She, who is Mother of the only-begotten Son of GOD, accepted her Son’s request that she be the spiritual Mother of us, the adopted children of GOD. Her prayers are most powerful to GOD because they arise from her sacrificial love of GOD and her motherly love for her spiritual children for whom her Son died.

Does praying to MARY take away from the glory of God? No, any true devotion to MARY leads us to JESUS. MARY in her perfect humility, seeks no glory for herself, but directs all prayer to GOD. We share in both her merits and her humility when we seek her intercession before the heavenly throne.
catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=349

 

[MysticRose]

By the titles of Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate, the Roman Catholic Church means that salvation for everyone would be obtained through Mary, and not directly from Jesus Christ. While this is in fact already taught by the Catholic Church, and has been for many years, it is not yet formally defined as binding dogma, though some Catholics feel it has already achieved that status. Here are examples of this teaching, the first two are papal encyclicals:

1. If in all this series of Mysteries, Venerable Brethren, are developed the counsels of God in regard to us – “counsels of wisdom and of tenderness” (St. Bernard) – not less apparent is the greatness of the benefits for which we are debtors to the Virgin Mother. No man can meditate upon these without feeling a new awakening in his heart of confidence that he will certainly obtain through Mary the fullness of the mercies of God. And to this end vocal prayer chimes well with the Mysteries. First, as is meet and right, comes the Lord’s Prayer, addressed to Our Father in Heaven: and having, with the elect petitions dictated by Our Divine Master, called upon the Father, from the throne of His Majesty we turn our prayerful voices to Mary. Thus is confirmed that law of merciful meditation of which We have spoken, and which St. Bernardine of Siena thus expresses: “Every grace granted to man has three degrees in order; for by God it is communicated to Christ, from Christ it passes to the Virgin, and from the Virgin it descends to us.”

Source: IUCUNDA SEMPER EXPECTATIONE (ON THE ROSARY) Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII promulgated on September 8, 1894.

---

1. … At Cana in Galilee there is shown only one concrete aspect of human need, apparently a small one of little importance (“They have no wine”). But it has a symbolic value: this coming to the aid of human needs means, at the same time, bringing those needs within the radius of Christ’s messianic mission and salvific power. Thus there is a mediation: Mary places herself between her Son and mankind in the reality of their wants, needs and sufferings. She puts herself “in the middle,” that is to say she acts as a mediatrix not as an outsider, but in her position as mother. She knows that as such she can point out to her Son the needs of mankind, and in fact, she “has the right” to do so. Her mediation is thus in the nature of intercession: Mary “intercedes” for mankind.

Source: REDEMPTORIS MATER (ON THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY IN THE LIFE OF THE PILGRIM CHURCH), Encyclical of Pope John Paul II promulgated on March 25, 1987.

---

Mary’s work was to be our co-redemptress, and to mediate for us together with Christ, but of course in subordination to Him. He is the one principle Mediator to whom we owe all. Do not be disturbed by this association of Mary with the redemptive work of Christ. If all Christians are members of Christ, and are called upon, as St. Paul says, to fill up what is wanting to the suffering of Christ, then you can be sure that as Mary, His Mother, was more closely associated with Christ than we are, so she is more closely associated with His redemptive work. By a special title, therefore, we call her co-redemptress. We call her “Our life, or sweetness, and our hope.” For, in bringing forth Christ she brought forth us to life, she is the model of every virtue, and above all should be the glory of all women; and she is our hope as Eve was our despair. All this tells us what she is for. She is our spiritual Mother in heaven, and she fulfills the duties of a Mother, winning for us by her intercession that grace of Christ which is life to our souls and which, please God, will mean eternal life in the end.

Source: Radio Replies, Second Volume, by Rev. Dr. Leslie Rumble, M.S.C. and Rev. Charles Mortimer Carty, Copyright 1940, printed by Radio Replies Press, St. Paul 1, Minn., U.S.A., #674, page 162.

---

Cardinal Pacelli (later Pope Pius XII) said that:

“our souls were redeemed by the blood and sorrows of the Redeemer and by those of His Virgin Mother”, − “… anime redente dal sangue e dai dolori del Redentore e della sua Vergine Madre.”

Source: American Ecclesiastical Review, volume CXXI, number 5, Nov. 1949, 360.

---

 

[MysticRose]

Subsequent to the article in Newsweek, and the denial by the Vatican spokesman, in the September 24th, 1997 Vatican Information Services (VIS) press release, Pope John Paul is quoted as saying the following at his general audience in Vatican Square (emphasis is mine):

The heavenly Father has wished to unite “to the priestly intercession of the Redeemer the maternal intercession of the Virgin. It is a function that she exercises to the benefit of those who are in danger and need temporal favors, and above all, eternal salvation.”

The titles with which the Christian people addresses the Mother of the Lord “help in understanding better the nature of her intervention in the life of the Church and of each of the faithful.”

As “‘Advocate,’ she defends her children and protects them from the damage caused by their own faults. Christians invoke Mary as ‘Help of Christians,’ recognizing her motherly love that sees the needs of her children, and that she is prepared to intervene to help them, especially when eternal salvation is at stake.”

She receives the title of “Helper” because “she is near all those who suffer or find themselves in situations of grave danger.” Finally, “as maternal Mediator, Mary presents Christ with our wishes, our supplications and transmit to us our divine gifts, interceding continually in our favor.”

---

Also, according to VIS, at his October 1st general audience held in St. Peter’s Square, Pope John Paul II " … recalled that Vatican Council II gave Mary the title of “Mediatrix,” affirming that “with her multiple intercession she continues to obtain for us the gifts of eternal salvation.” He is also quoted as saying:

“Despite the fact that some council fathers did not fully (agree with)” the attribution of this title to Mary, “it was nonetheless included in the dogmatic constitution on the Church to confirm the value of the truth that it expresses. However, they avoided joining it to any particular theology of mediation, and it was only included among the other titles recognized as Mary’s.”

“In proclaiming Christ the one mediator, the text of the Letter of Saint Paul to Timothy excludes any parallel mediation, but not a subordinate mediation. … It is possible to participate in Christ’s mediation in different spheres of the work of salvation. … In this will to stir participation in the unique mediation of Christ, the free love of God, who wants to share what he possesses, is manifested.”

Pope John Paul II is quoted in the 27 May 1998 edition of L’OSSERVATORE ROMANO as saying the following during the previous Sunday’s mass held in Turin, Italy:

Mary is our Mother and a true help for every Christian. …
Trusting in her motherly love, we now ask her to intercede for us, for our families, for the sick and the suffering, for the Church and for the city of Turin, for Italy and for the whole world. …
With her help, may the plan of divine salvation be fulfilled in each one of us, …

The Priest, Pastor and Leader of the Parish Community by Pope John Paul II, 25 March 2001, online a the Vatican:

1. In the Church, the priest, alter Christus [another Christ], is the minister of the essential salvific actions. … With Mary, Mother of the Eternal High Priest, the priest is aware that, with her, he is “an instrument of salvific communication between God and man”, …

c). The specific journey to holiness
13. … the Blessed Virgin Mary, united with the Redeemer, comes to our assistance because ‘‘when we celebrate the Holy Mass, the Mother of the Son of God is in our midst and introduces us to the mystery of His redemptive sacrifice. Thus, she is the mediatrix of all the grace flowing from this sacrifice to the Church and to all the faithful.’’

While not ex-cathedra declarations in themselves, these clearly show that Pope John Paul II presents Mary as a Co-redemptrix or Mediatrix who allegedly assists in everyone’s salvation.

aloha.net/~mikesch/medtrix.htm

 

[MysticRose]

Papal Theologian Affirms Mary To Be Co-redeemer! (May 29th, 2002)

There is a movement underway in the Catholic Church to have Pope John Paul II declare Mary the Co-redemptrix, Mediatrix and Advocate of humanity as the fifth official Marian dogma (article of faith) for Catholics. Dr. Mark Miravalle of the Franciscan University of Steubenville, organizer of the “Vox Populi Mariae Mediatrici” movement, has promoted May 31st as the appropriate date for the promulgation of the dogma, which was formerly the liturgical feast of Mediatrix of All Graces, **established by Pope Benedict XV. **
If proclaimed, the five Marian dogmas would then be:

1. that Mary is the “Mother of God”
2. that Mary was “Ever-Virgin”
3. that Mary was herself “immaculately conceived” (without sin)
4. that Mary was assumed into Heaven and crowned “Queen of Heaven and Earth”
5. that Mary is “Mediatrix of all Graces, Co-redemptrix and Advocate”

The August 25, 1997 edition of Newsweek magazine has a feature article on the petition drive to have the Pope make the formal definition of the fifth dogma. Apparently in response to the Newsweek article, a papal spokesman on the 19th of August said the Pope has no plans to proclaim or even to consider a new Marian dogma, and he stated that this was “crystal clear.”

As an article of faith, the Catholic would be bound to believe an ex-cathedra declaration, and would risk loss of their salvation should they choose to reject the dogma. This would be because by doubting or rejecting the ex-cathedra pronouncements of the Pope, they would according to Catholic teaching, be rejecting the infallibly declared word of God, that has the same authority as if God himself had declared it in person.

Please note whom this was established byand then whom it was later then although, he would not establish it as Dogmatic still publically declared it several times? That would be Pope JPII…

What are the reasons that he used too? Not that it is NOT already taught by the Church, because it is already taught by the Church, but that to declare it Dogmatic he thought at htis point and time would be harmful to the Catholic Church because he believed that some could not understand the Teaching well enough to except it.

By the way the petition that was sent to Rome had a great many signatures on it and among them was that of Mother Teresa of Calcutta,voxpopuli.org/letter_from_mother_teresa.php (click here to see apersonal letter hand signed by her …

Supporters include Cardinal John O’Connor of New York, the late Mother Teresa of Calcutta; the late Cardinal Luigi Ciappi, OP, papal theologian emeritus; Cardinal Jaime Sin of Manila, the Philippines; Cardinal Edouard Gagnon, president of the Pontifical Committee for International Eucharistic Congresses; over 480 bishops including 40 cardinals; prominent lay leaders and ordinary faithful from all parts of the world. Hardly a fringe group!

catholicsource.net/articles/coredemptrix.html
(click here for a detailed explanation of the word co- and meaning of co-redemtrix and it’s usage in the Catholic Church … remembering that we use words differently at times. As well as to see part of the original petition to the Papal office on the issue.)

 

[AlanFromWichita]

MysticRose:

The Doctrines of Mary are Dogmatic in the Church and we are required to Assent to Dogma without question, so how is it then you need emotional attachment to do as we are required by Dogma?

We don’t we assent because it is Dogma… It would be nice if you also had an emotional attachment to Our Mother but that is not required.

There are some people that believe in God and Worship God too, but do not have an emotional attachment to Him, are we then to say to them that because of this you do not have to Worship God because you do not feel any emotional attachment to God?

We assent to the Doctrines, Dogmas, Traditions and traditions of the Church because Assention is required of us, not emotional attachment…

Pax Christi
Debi

Sorry I didn’t read the whole thread before answering, so I hope this isn’t a rehash.

The whole idea of “required assent” is problematic.

If by “assent” you mean that I do not teach in opposition of something, then fine. If by “assent” it means we are required to believe something, then I have a problem with it.

I do not consider “believing” as an act of the will, and I don’t believe that I can honestly say I believe something if the only reason I “believe” it is that I have been threatened into it.

To me it doesn’t make sense to say that I “must” believe something under penalty of sin. If I were to sign a worldly agreement under threat, its validity could easily be challenged. Similarly I believe that “requiring” certain beliefs or attitudes that are only meaningful if done of free will is destructive. It could easily cause many people to fool themselves into believing something they really don’t.

In fact, I think that most Christians, Catholics and otherwise, must not really believe what they profess deep down in their hearts, or they would be hell-bent-for-leather trying to evangelize 24/7 with every other concern a distant second. At least the Jehovah’s Witnesses come to my door, but even then they are fairly polite. “Gee, I’m wondering if you want to avoid eternal torment and suffering.” “No thanks, I’m not interested.” “OK Thank you for your time.”

You gotta be kidding me if people really believe in Christ and His teachings, but then to go around killing and condemning each other in their hearts just because the other doesn’t spontaneously believe a “required” belief and not a convincing enough hypocrite to get away with pretending they do. Maybe they believe in Him, but are so confused as to what they are that what they believe in is a faulty graven image (characature if you will) of Christ, and not Christ himself.

Alan

 

[MysticRose]

IMHO, some here need to obtain a more objective opinion as to what our beliefs and thoughts are on the Mother of God and why we do Pray and ask for her intercession to begin with. It is necessary, although it is not an obligation yet declared by the Church as in Dogmatic, it most certainly is Doctrinal in it’s foundation that it is through both Christ and her that we obtain Salvation. That she although playing a subordinate part does in fact play a part, just as we also play a part.

No one has denied that we cannot pray directly to the Lord, because we can. What has been brought forth here is the fact that as Catholics we do in fact have a higher understanding and Verneration of our Mother. We do not simply see her as some woman that simply bore Jesus as many others do and that she was Immaculate or that she herself was not given Special Grace because we know that she was.

We as Catholics do not simply rely on the Bible but also on Tradition to tell us these things and it is therefore backed up and confirmed in the Bible …
scripturecatholic.com/blessed_virgin_mary.html
( this is if anyone wishes to take the time to confirm the hundreds of Scriptures sited here, as well as the ECF’s and their quotations under the subjects …
Scripture
The Uniqueness of Mary as the Mother of God
Mary - the Immaculate Ark of the New Covenant
Mary is Our Mother and Queen of the New Covenant Kingdom
Mary is Ever Virgin
Jesus’ “Brothers”= Cousins or Kinsmen
Mary’s Assumption into Heaven
Mary’s Coronation in Heaven
Misunderstanding about Matthew 1:25 (Joseph knew her “not until”)
Misunderstanding about Romans 3:23 (“All have sinned”)
Misunderstanding about Jesus “rebuking” Mary

Tradition / Church Fathers
Mary is the Mother of God
Mary’s Immaculate Conception
Mary is Ever-virgin
Mary’s Assumption into Heaven
Mary is the New Eve and Most Blessed Among Women
Mary is our Powerful Intercessor )

We as Catholics can most certainly both Traditionally and Scripturally back up our teachings…

 

[AlanFromWichita]

MysticRose:

As an article of faith, the Catholic would be bound to believe an ex-cathedra declaration, and would risk loss of their salvation should they choose to reject the dogma.

Then is the Good Samaritan in trouble?

Alan

Note: I’m not doubting your accuracy in saying what the Church says. I’m just doubting the idea that what I think intellectually about esoteric matter that has zero impact on my ability and desire to love God and love and serve one another, is more important to God than what I do in a practical sense in terms of, well, loving and serving one another.

 

[MysticRose]

AlanFromWichita:

Sorry I didn’t read the whole thread before answering, so I hope this isn’t a rehash.

The whole idea of “required assent” is problematic.

If by “assent” you mean that I do not teach in opposition of something, then fine. If by “assent” it means we are required to believe something, then I have a problem with it.

I do not consider “believing” as an act of the will, and I don’t believe that I can honestly say I believe something if the only reason I “believe” it is that I have been threatened into it.

To me it doesn’t make sense to say that I “must” believe something under penalty of sin. If I were to sign a worldly agreement under threat, its validity could easily be challenged. Similarly I believe that “requiring” certain beliefs or attitudes that are only meaningful if done of free will is destructive. It could easily cause many people to fool themselves into believing something they really don’t.

In fact, I think that most Christians, Catholics and otherwise, must not really believe what they profess deep down in their hearts, or they would be hell-bent-for-leather trying to evangelize 24/7 with every other concern a distant second. At least the Jehovah’s Witnesses come to my door, but even then they are fairly polite. “Gee, I’m wondering if you want to avoid eternal torment and suffering.” “No thanks, I’m not interested.” “OK Thank you for your time.”

You gotta be kidding me if people really believe in Christ and His teachings, but then to go around killing and condemning each other in their hearts just because the other doesn’t spontaneously believe a “required” belief and not a convincing enough hypocrite to get away with pretending they do. Maybe they believe in Him, but are so confused as to what they are that what they believe in is a faulty graven image (characature if you will) of Christ, and not Christ himself.

Alan

I am talking first of all about the assent of a Teaching not idolatry, as Catholics you should know we do practice idolatry to begin with and if any of us does then that is forbidden even to us…

I believe in the Lord not his characture, even if I did not have one I would still believe in Him and our Mother as well … I do not need these things… They are beautiful to look at and yes they do help with visualization but they are not necessary for me to Assent to the Church and therefore Christ …

Christ is the Head of the Church and in this we have a earthly head in the Pope by which he is used as the Vehicle which the Lord works through to guide His congregation in UNITY … Otherwise then we are subject to personal interpretation which leads us all into serious error. We trust and rely, and have FAITH that what the Lord said is true in Matthew 16
Mat 16:18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
Mat 16:19 And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

 

[MysticRose]

AlanFromWichita:

Then is the Good Samaritan in trouble?

Alan

Was the good Samaritan Catholic and what is more as a Catholic why are you arguing against the teachings of the Catholic Church … Yes I looked at your profile … I ask because NOW you really have me baffled

 

[MysticRose]

You are also derailing this thread off of it’s original topic and that I find confusing as well … I would appreciate that if you wish to discuss this subject with me, which by the way I have no problem discussing you start another thread to discuss assention in general and the reasons why we as Catholics assent to the Teachings of the Magesterium and what is stated Ex Cathedra without question

 

[AlanFromWichita]

MysticRose:

I am talking first of all about the assent of a Teaching not idolatry, as Catholics you should know we do practice idolatry to begin with and if any of us does then that is forbidden even to us…

I believe in the Lord not his characture, even if I did not have one I would still believe in Him and our Mother as well … I do not need these things… They are beautiful to look at and yes they do help with visualization but they are not necessary for me to Assent to the Church and therefore Christ …

That’s all very good.

My problem is that if I am “required” to believe something, then my free will to do so can be tainted by peer coercion, and I am likely to put on, even to the extent of fooling myself, a show that I really do believe something. When that faith is put to the test then I act in un-Christlike ways such as condemning another in my heart, while having convinced myself that as a Full Assent Christian, I have not only the right but obligation to do so.

I bet for every Catholic who says the Creed, believes it, and lives as if they really do believe it, I can find you 10 who say the Creed, say they believe it, but show by their lives and their endless justifications for doing evil in the name of God that they don’t understand it.

I am less afraid of an atheist than an ill-formed Christian. The atheist does evil out of pure motives, selfishness. That I can understand and maybe even predict and counter. The ill-formed Christian does evil in the name of God, thus becoming a monster which cannot be contained because the motivations are coming from “out there” somewhere and not subject to punishment because they are too righteous for that. There is no way to predict what they are going to do, because their false and incomplete belief systems are so important to them that they follow no earthly or heavenly rules.

Alan

 

[MysticRose]

AlanFromWichita:

That’s all very good.

My problem is that if I am “required” to believe something, then my free will to do so can be tainted by peer coercion, and I am likely to put on, even to the extent of fooling myself, a show that I really do believe something. When that faith is put to the test then I act in un-Christlike ways such as condemning another in my heart, while having convinced myself that as a Full Assent Christian, I have not only the right but obligation to do so.

I bet for every Catholic who says the Creed, believes it, and lives as if they really do believe it, I can find you 10 who say the Creed, say they believe it, but show by their lives and their endless justifications for doing evil in the name of God that they don’t understand it.

I am less afraid of an atheist than an ill-formed Christian. The atheist does evil out of pure motives, selfishness. That I can understand and maybe even predict and counter. The ill-formed Christian does evil in the name of God, thus becoming a monster which cannot be contained because the motivations are coming from “out there” somewhere and not subject to punishment because they are too righteous for that. There is no way to predict what they are going to do, because their false and incomplete belief systems are so important to them that they follow no earthly or heavenly rules.

Alan

Do you understand that what comes down form the Church as Doctrinal and as, especially Dogmatic, is (name removed by moderator)sired by the Holy Spirit and therefore comes from God and that by rights it is the Lord Himself that is asking this of you, not the Church? So therefore you are in essence questioning the Lord’s Authority, and the Authority that HE gave to the Church and the Church alone to make such decisions for us because we as the LAITY Do need such guidance and they are not matters of our CONSCIENCE, they are in fact matters of Doctrinal Teaching.

The Lord requires Obediance and there are times that we will not like being obedient to the Lord that is part of being tainted with the Stain of sin

 

[AlanFromWichita]

MysticRose:

Was the good Samaritan Catholic and what is more as a Catholic why are you arguing against the teachings of the Catholic Church … Yes I looked at your profile … I ask because NOW you really have me baffled

I assume from the context of the story that the Good Samaritan was not, in fact, whatever was an acceptable religion at the time. THerefore, by analogy, he was not Catholic whereas the priest, being Fully Assenting I’m sure and knowing it was a sin to touch a naked man’s body, did not help the man.

What baffles you? The fact that I have “Catholic” listed in my profile? I am Catholic in fact, as the Church has baptized me into her. I am not ashamed to be Catholic, and I’m not even ashamed to share a pew with sinners and self-righteous hypocrites. What confuses you about me, and how can I help? I am as honest as I know how to be, which is part of the reason I get into trouble. If I was like most of my peers I would just slug along, saying I’m Catholic, smiling and nodding whenever someone asks if I believe this or that.

None of this has to do with what I actually believe, but with the idea that I can somehow cause myself to believe something on purpose or be punished. I strive for truth, at least I think I do, and I believe the Holy Spirit will reveal it on His time scale. Until then, the harder I try to “force” myself to believe something the more I honestly don’t know my own motives for having done so.

Alan

 

[MysticRose]

I am Catholic in fact, as the Church has baptized me into her. I am not ashamed to be Catholic, and I’m not even ashamed to share a pew with sinners and self-righteous hypocrites.

Sir I personally find this offensive, I will tell you that right now. I will tell you why as well, It is not my job, as it is the Lord’s, to judge another… It is simply my job to make sure that I am doing what needs to be done for the Lord and for the Church as She tells me. That is my job.

When I can look into that mirror and say to myself that I am no longer tianted with sin, and that I am perfect then I will have the right maybe to give up my humility and judge another and call them hypocrites. I cannot judge another’s heart …

 

[AlanFromWichita]

MysticRose:

You are also derailing this thread off of it’s original topic and that I find confusing as well … I would appreciate that if you wish to discuss this subject with me, which by the way I have no problem discussing you start another thread to discuss assention in general and the reasons why we as Catholics assent to the Teachings of the Magesterium and what is stated Ex Cathedra without question

I’m sorry you feel I am derailing the thread. I guess I tend to do that.

Please do not think I am doing it on purpose. I honestly thought that whether a requirement for mental assent is even a valid concept, was fundamental to the issue of whether mental assent on a particular topic was to be taken seriously by Catholics.

I don’t know what your point was, then, for sure. Was it that mental assent is presumed a good thing while you are questioning emotional assent?

Gee pretty soon we will have to all look the same, too. That may be a cheap shot but that’s how I feel.

I’ll quit polluting your thread now, and put you on ignore so I’m not tempted to hijack your comments again. I’ve never tried that before (ignore), so now I’ll know what it’s like. I do not wish to risk offending you again by responding to what I thought was a foundational issue to your question.

Plus just for you I will change my profile so that it no longer claim that I am Catholic.

Thank you for the interesting discussion, and if I offend you again please send me a PM and I promise I will not answer in any way except to tell you that I agree with you.

Alan