Marian dogmas: important and essential for our salvation?

  • Thread starter Thread starter gurneyhalleck1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi gurneyhalleck1 🙂
gurneyhalleck1 said:
Let me start by saying that I DO AFFIRM the dogmas of the Blessed Virgin Mary–the immaculate conception, assumption, perpetual virginity, all of it. I have NO problems with it whatsoever.

However, in my discussions with people who do disagree with me on these issues, the usual concern is "why is belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity or her immaculate nature or her being assumed into heaven essential for my salvation? Why anathemize people over these issues that are not salvific at all?"
I’d really like to have a discussion that answers that exact question.

Plus I’d like to impose a rule if I may. Please do not say, “because Holy Mother Church tells me so” or anything about the Magisterium or papacy. Why does the Church feel this is a salvation issue?

I’d love to hear people’s points of view on this. As stated, this isn’t about me. I already believe the dogmas. I’d just like a good discussion answering the bold question.

Thanks and blessings to all who post
Click to expand...
Well, I was thinking about it, and it struck me. What if the Marian doctrines are ultimately not a requirement for the salvation of man, but a requirement for identifying the True Church?

I was reminded by Mary’s song: the Magnificat.

Luke Chapter 1:
[46] And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord,
[47] and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior,
[48] for he has regarded the low estate of his handmaiden.
For behold, henceforth all generations will call me blessed;
[49] for he who is mighty has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.
[50] And his mercy is on those who fear him
from generation to generation.
[51] He has shown strength with his arm,
he has scattered the proud in the conceit of their hearts,
[52] he has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree;
[53] he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent empty away.
[54] He has helped his servant Israel,
in remembrance of his mercy,
[55] as he spoke to our fathers,
to Abraham and to his posterity for ever."

Notice the verses after verse 48.

Those are prophecies.

“henceforth all generations will call me blessed…”

Of course, Mary has been called “blessed” by all generations since then.

And yet, how blessed is Mary? THAT is the main conundrum, isn’t it. Mary is blessed, but how much?

The Magnificat is a prophecy of what the True Church (“his servant Israel”) is: it must be the one that tries its utmost to know how much blessed the Blessed Virgin is. For how can you call someone “blessed” if you do not even know how blessed she is, right?

And how about those who would not listen to the True Church how blessed the Blessed Virgin is? Well…“He has scattered the proud in the conceit of their hearts.”

(EDIT) Wait…if the Marian Dogmas identify what the True Church is, then you should believe them to be part of the True Church…which IS a requirement for your own salvation.

…WHOA…

God bless us all through the Blessed Virgin.
 
Edwin78 said:
What if the Marian doctrines are ultimately not a requirement for the salvation of man, but a requirement for identifying the True Church?

And how about those who would not listen to the True Church how blessed the Blessed Virgin is? Well…“He has scattered the proud in the conceit of their hearts.”

(EDIT) Wait…if the Marian Dogmas identify what the True Church is, then you should believe them to be part of the True Church…which IS a requirement for your own salvation.

…WHOA…
Click to expand...
Interesting. I read a book by liberal theologians recently, who were very worried about what they saw as the rise of a dangerous, ‘apocalyptic’ Mary over the last 30 years:
–A Mary adopted as a patroness by anti-Communists;
–A Mary symbolizing opposition to ‘liberation theology’.
That’s the Mary I know! Queen of Heaven, who ‘overcomes all heresies’!
 
I have to say that this has gone totally outside the realm of Scripture. Jesus said, “I am the way the truth and the life”. Scripture says that there is but one name under which we are saved, that being Christ. I guess if these revealed truths came about sometime in the past 2000 years, someone forgot to include them even in abbreviation in Scripture.
 
KathleenGee said:
Schaick,

Universal Christians united by the Eucharist always believed in Mary unique among all women, held up her total devotion to God and consecrated virginity, her sinless conception, and the effects of her miraculous passing from this world.
…
Click to expand...
Do you have evidence showing this?
 
gurneyhalleck1 said:
"why is belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity or her immaculate nature or her being assumed into heaven essential for my salvation? Why anathemize people over these issues that are not salvific at all?"
Click to expand...
I would first ask those folks if they can produce any magisterial document which anathemizes anyone for denial of these teachings.

They won’t be able to, and that should end the debate.👍

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Pius XII, *Ad Apostolorum Principis *“No one can depart from the teaching of Catholic truth without loss of faith and salvation.”
 
zdon011 said:
Interesting. I read a book by liberal theologians recently, who were very worried about what they saw as the rise of a dangerous, ‘apocalyptic’ Mary over the last 30 years:
–A Mary adopted as a patroness by anti-Communists;
–A Mary symbolizing opposition to ‘liberation theology’.
That’s the Mary I know! Queen of Heaven, who ‘overcomes all heresies’!
Click to expand...


I’d like to read that book. May I know the title, please?

😃
 
mardukm said:
I would first ask those folks if they can produce any magisterial document which anathemizes anyone for denial of these teachings.

They won’t be able to, and that should end the debate.👍

Blessings,
Marduk
Click to expand...
Section 47 of “Munificentissimus deus”, the bull defining the doctrine.
  1. It is forbidden to any man to change this, our declaration, pronouncement, and definition or, by rash attempt, to oppose and counter it. If any man should presume to make such an attempt, let him know that he will incur the wrath of Almighty God and of the Blessed Apostles Peter and Paul.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t say anathema (in this translation), but it does say it will bring down the wrath of God on anyone who opposes it, which is essentially what anathema is.
 
AnneElliot said:
In a nutshell, because truth is essential for our salvation. A man who rejects what is true cannot be saved. We must believe in the truth, hold fast to it, live it, and share it with others.
Click to expand...
Simply knowing Truth is not salvific. I see you acknowledge that by saying we must live Truth, a fair declaration.

So then what about the Marian dogmas is to be lived?
 
Again, the more the Church has learned about Mary through the ages has taught us more about the spiritual life and sanctification of our souls, and the reward itself of just living more deeply in God’s will as Mary did…and all the more when we live His will with her companionship and help.

Mary is the short ladder we take to grow in perfection of our union with God and His love.
 
Nine_Two said:
Section 47 of “Munificentissimus deus”, the bull defining the doctrine.

It doesn’t say anathema (in this translation), but it does say it will bring down the wrath of God on anyone who opposes it, which is essentially what anathema is.
Click to expand...
I never noticed that before.

I am especially intrigued by the image of saints Peter and Paul filled with wrath.
 
Nine_Two said:
Section 47 of “Munificentissimus deus”, the bull defining the doctrine.

It doesn’t say anathema (in this translation), but it does say it will bring down the wrath of God on anyone who opposes it, which is essentially what anathema is.
Click to expand...
It is similar in Ineffabilis Deus.
Hence, if anyone shall dare – which God forbid! – to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church; and that, furthermore, by his own action he incurs the penalties established by law if he should are to express in words or writing or by any other outward means the errors he think in his heart.
Click to expand...
papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ineff.htm
 
Schaick,

You would have to study the life of Mary among the saints…many testimonies down through time of her intercession.

I just sent an email to my Muslim/Christian friend across the pond…that I think Mary is the great help to our country’s trevail.

Have you heard of the Battle of Lepanto? It happened after Mary appeared in Mexico…Mary of Guadalupe…and it is not certain if she said Guadalupe…a river in Spain or the Aztec Indian name…‘she who crushes the serpent’…anyway, her pictograph on the tilma converted the Indians to Christianity.

In the meantime, the Turks formed a massive army coming over the seas to enter Europe and overtake it. The pope had an image of Mary of Guadalupe and exhorted all the people to pray the rosary invoking Mary’s help and to do penance. There was a great battle at sea, and the Christian forces knew that there were thousands of Christian slaves on the Turkish ships powering them and tried to indirectly protect them as well. There were heavy casualties on both sides…finally a great storm came and blew the Turks away and they did not have the will to return.

So the Battle of Lepanto was made a feast day in Mary’s honor…Our Lady of the Rosary.

You talk of personal things…for me, It was the mark of my wedding day…so many years ago, my husband and family went to the Coast to renew our wedding vows…as the priest rang the church bells, a little rainbow appeared on the surf. I went to a reception a few years back and met a man from that parish. I told him of that wedding renewal and he said word of the rainbow went up and down the coast by the two priests there.

Anyway, Mary has come to help people in critical times down through the ages. And I liked this story the best…about an American pilot shot down over Austria during WWII. He knew the people were Catholic although they were Nazi sympathizers. They found him. So he showed them his crucifix. It made no difference. Then he recited his altar boy prayers in Latin. They didn’t care. Then when he showed them his Mary medal, they then disarmed and saw him as brother and protected him from the Naziis…

I think praying the rosary and doing penance and Mary help us in our present time with Islam and impurity can do great good for our country.

By the way, Schaick, did you know that Mary as the Immaculate Conception is the Patroness of America???
 
Ineffabilis Deus, which defines the Immaculate Conception has these lines.
Hence, if anyone shall dare – which God forbid! – to think otherwise than as has been defined by us, let him know and understand that he is condemned by his own judgment; that he has suffered shipwreck in the faith; that he has separated from the unity of the Church; and that, furthermore, by his own action he incurs the penalties established by law if he should are to express in words or writing or by any other outward means the errors he think in his heart.
Click to expand...
Somewhat less strong even then those written by Pius XII, it nonetheless says that those who do not believe have condemned themselves.
 
SyCarl said:
It is similar in Ineffabilis Deus.

papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9ineff.htm
Click to expand...
I had just posted that when I saw you also posted. 🙂

While I’m not going to look up the first two Marian Dogma’s, I’m pretty sure they also carry anathemas, however unlike these later two, they do reflect on Christ (the first affirms the prophecy of Isaiah that he would be born of a virgin, the second confirms that he is God).
 
  • Originally Posted by gurneyhalleck1 View Post
    Let me start by saying that I DO AFFIRM the dogmas of the Blessed Virgin Mary–the immaculate conception, assumption, perpetual virginity, all of it. I have NO problems with it whatsoever.
However, in my discussions with people who do disagree with me on these issues, the usual concern is "why is belief in Mary’s perpetual virginity or her immaculate nature or her being assumed into heaven essential for my salvation? Why anathemize people over these issues that are not salvific at all?"
I’d really like to have a discussion that answers that exact question.

Plus I’d like to impose a rule if I may. Please do not say, “because Holy Mother Church tells me so” or anything about the Magisterium or papacy. Why does the Church feel this is a salvation issue?

I’d love to hear people’s points of view on this. As stated, this isn’t about me. I already believe the dogmas. I’d just like a good discussion answering the bold question.

Thanks and blessings to all who post*

I will not attempt to address all the bolded above but will make a start. The Assumption of Blessed Mary is tied to the Immaculate Conception. I suspect the Church feels this: God cannot be ‘housed’ or contained in a vessel that is contaminated - i.e. blemished by sin.

From Divine Mercy in My Soul by St. Faustina we see an image presented of God’s Holiness, which has been know throughout the ages:
The first attribute which the Lord gave me to know is His holiness. His holiness is so great that all the Powers and Virtues tremble before Him. The pure spirits veil their faces and lose themselves in unending adoration, and with one single word they express the highest form of adoration; that is-Holy… The holiness of God is poured out upon the Church of God and upon every living soul in it, but not in the same degree. There are souls who are completely penetrated by God, and there are those who are barely alive.(Diary 180)

Once God became flesh within Mary’s womb, His nourishment, His sustenance, pased through her, so God would end up being sustained by a substance (food, nutrients etc) contaminated by her bodily processes - a body and soul contaminated by sin.

This presents a contradiction and in a way negates the possibility of God becoming True man (which means born of a woman) UNLESS He can be sustained and housed in a sinless, pure vessel, that matches His holiness. So to argue against the Immaculate Conception could argue against the incarnation.God was and is always perfect; His vessel needed to be ‘always perfect’ too (which precludes mary being purified once the angel spoke to her).

Next, from the Immaculate Conception principle above,Mary is sinless always from her conception. So, after Jesus rose from the dead, defeating death, and opening heaven, why should not Mary be assumed into heaven body and soul right away? She had no sin to preclude it. To deny it is in a way a back door approach of questioning our being able to go to heaven at all. The Bible says the wages of sin is death - the corruption or rotting of the flesh comes from sin - If Mary had none of these (Immaculate Conception says so) then why could she not go immediately yo Heaven, if the teachings of the Church on the Resurrection is true?

So to deny these two is a subtle denial of the truths of the nature God (His prefect Holiness forever) and the nature of how He saved us and holds a place for us in Heaven. And these then could lead to our doubts in our faith and then not following it, thus falling off the path.

So we are told to follow it, to help us stay on the path and not wander into error that leads to perdition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top