Mary as Mediatrix?

[fuzzylogix]

Basically… We can pray to Mary for her intercession, and God can work through her to reach and help us if He chooses. Just as He can use any one of us to reach and help others.

I see this type of thing stated often.

How do you reconcile the idea of Mary’s intercession for you with what Paul said:

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

This verse seems to indicate that Christ alone has the divine right of intercession for us, and no other. To assign this right to Mary as well…would that not in effect infringe upon the divine right afforded Christ?

I read somewhere that Catholics call Mary by the title “mediatrix” sometimes. I can’t help but feel that this appears to be a form of usurpation of Christ’s role?

I apologise if this has already been dealt with somewhere else; I have looked around the forum and searched, but usually they post this link to answer:

catholic.com/library/Intercession_of_the_Saints.asp

I must respectfully decline the reasons presented in the above document, as they do not make sense to me, as follows:

"Thus, in Psalm 103 we pray, “Bless the Lord, O you his angels, you mighty ones who do his word, hearkening to the voice of his word! Bless the Lord, all his hosts, his ministers that do his will!” (Ps. 103:20–21). And in the opening verses of Psalms 148 we pray, “Praise the Lord! Praise the Lord from the heavens, praise him in the heights! Praise him, all his angels, praise him, all his host!”

Not only do those in heaven pray with us, they also pray for us."

These verses, although very nice, do not in any way substantiate the claim that human entities can pray or mediate from within heaven. It simply speaks as to angels, which, I’m sure is common knowledge, are fundamentally and radically different from humans. Humans and angels are not even remotely governed by the same laws, hence I must reject this portion of the argument.

“In the book of Revelation, John sees that “the twenty-four elders [the leaders of the people of God in heaven] fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints” (Rev. 5:8). Thus the saints in heaven offer to God the prayers of the saints on earth.”

First off, there is no scriptural basis to assume that these 24 elders are not simply an abstract part of John’s vision instead of being actual human souls. Even if they were human souls that went through the usual channels (i.e. birth, life, death), there is no way to tell in which time frame John actually saw these elders perform these actions! It does not appear from the scripture alone that these actions go on all the time; it rather appears to be a one-time thing that is depicted in the vision to convey a particular message.

"Angels do the same thing: “[An] angel came and stood at the altar [in heaven] with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God” (Rev. 8:3–4). "

Once again I must point out that angels are fundamentally different beings from humans, not governed by the same laws. And besides, if an angel has the task of bringing the prayers of Christians to God, there would be even less reason to assume that human saints (such as Mary) are needed to perform this task.

"Because he is the only God-man and the Mediator of the New Covenant, Jesus is the only mediator between man and God (1 Tim. 2:5), but this in no way means we cannot or should not ask our fellow Christians to pray with us and for us (1 Tim. 2:1–4). In particular, we should ask the intercession of those Christians in heaven, who have already had their sanctification completed, for “[t]he prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects” (Jas. 5:16). "

And lastly, while they admit that Christ is the One Mediator, they immediately diverge again, following a nice type of slippery slope by reasoning that if we may ask living Christians for help in prayer (which is correct), we may also ask this of the deceased (which I’m not so sure about). This logic is not really consistent or coherent. It is natural to assume that different laws govern the living and the dead.

I’d thus like to counter their last argument from that document with a quote from Ecclesiastes:

Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

This seems to show that once a person dies, they pretty much become unconcious, “knowing nothing”, until such time as God sees fit to resurrect them (on predestined days of resurrection, when all of mankind is brought to life together). Indeed, if Mary or any of the other saints are alive and interceding in heaven, what need could they have of resurrection?

Would this make the Bible verses that deal with the resurrection invalid or flawed? Or are certain people exempt from having to be unconcious in death? I really know almost nothing of Catholic doctrine, so I’m asking sincerely.

Thanks in advance

 

[VociMike]

Your opening post is so long that I fear this thread will quickly become unwieldy. I also see a lot of confusion in your comments, such as conflating “mediator” with “intercessor”, assuming that all intercession is Christ’s “divine right”, assuming that mediation can only occur between men and God (the Father), and looking to the Old Testament (before Christ had come and offered himself) to understand what happens to people after Christ has opened heaven for us.

So I think for now I’ll just ask one question: what are “the prayers of the saints” in heaven?

 

[SingleMomMonica]

I see this type of thing stated often.

How do you reconcile the idea of Mary’s intercession for you with what Paul said:

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

This verse seems to indicate that Christ alone has the divine right of intercession for us, and no other. To assign this right to Mary as well…would that not in effect infringe upon the divine right afforded Christ?

You’ve written alot, due to time, I can’t respond to everything, so I’ll take a stab at the first issue you raised.

The Bible is clear that only Jesus can mediate between God and men. Jesus, in fact, is the second person of the Holy Trinity aka God. Jesus is God and yet He is also our mediator.

Now Jesus is both 100% Human and 100% God. So let’s look at His Humanity for a moment. He has a Mother, her name is Mary. According to the Holy Spirit through the Gospel of Luke, Mary is Blessed and should be called such by every generation and Mary is full of Grace. Mary is definately something special, because of what God has done through her with her permission. God related to Moses that children are to obey and honor their parents on pain of death - just read the Old Testament. Jesus came not to abolish the law, but to fullfill it. He was circumsized, not because he was unclean, but because that was the law and He obeyed it. He also obeyed His Mother because of the law and because, first and foremost, His love for her. You’ll notice in the Bible when it mentions the very first miracle that Jesus did…He did it because His Mom, Mary, interceded. The passage is clear, He didn’t want to saying it wasn’t His time and saying that it wasn’t very important “what is it to Me and thee?”, but she asked Him to and He obeyed. Naturally, Mary’s Son Who has a perfect love for His Mother, answers her requests. So why wouldn’t someone feel confident in asking Mary to ask Jesus? Certainly if it is within the Will of God, He will grant His mother’s request now just as He did back when they were both alive on earth and He really didn’t want to. As you can see Mary certainly “interceded” for people then just as she does now.

But the verse you quoted says nothing of interession, it speaks of Mediation, two different things entirely. You quoted that there is only one Mediator between humanity and God. This is absolutely true!

Think about what it means to be a mediator…people go to mediators instead of going before a Judge as a way to resolve their differences outside of the Court of Law. This is exactly what Jesus is for us. He assumed Humanity so that He could redeem us, to save us, from Eternal Judgement to damnation. He mediated for us and obtained the possibility of our salvation without having to face the Judge, instead we are able to throw ourselves into the ocean of His Mercy. Now that He has Mediated for us, in living and dying for our sins, all we need to do is accept His Love and Mercy by being obedient to Him and the Church He left for us. By loving and obeying Him, our Mediator, our Saviour, we can avoid the Court Room and the Just Judge and live eternally in His Great Mercy.

Yet even in this sense of Christ being Humanity’s Great Mediator, Mary still held a huge role in the matter. When the ArchAngel Gabriel appeared to her and told her of God’s plan, she could have just as easily said, “Nope, not interested. That you anyway.” as she said what she did, “May it be done to me as you have said”. She said, “Yes” and it was through soley through her intercession of saying “Yes” that Jesus came into the Human Race to save it. She first interceded for us and then Jesus came and Mediated for us before God the Father.

The natural order of intercession is us to Mary, Mary to Jesus, Jesus to God the Father after all God the Father sent Jesus to us to Mary accepted Jesus first (literally into her womb!) and Mary brought Jesus to us (literally through giving birth to Him!).

Love your Mother, you can never love her as much as Jesus loves her. Pray to her and thank her for giving you her Son Jesus. As the Holy Spirit said through her as recorded in the Gospel of Luke, call her Blessed. As the last sentence of the 12th Chapter of Revelation says, she is the Mother of all Christians; therefore, she is your own Mother. Don’t be afraid to turn to her, to take her into your home and your heart.

 

[SingleMomMonica]

I’d thus like to counter their last argument from that document with a quote from Ecclesiastes:

Ecc 9:5 For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten.

This seems to show that once a person dies, they pretty much become unconcious, “knowing nothing”, until such time as God sees fit to resurrect them (on predestined days of resurrection, when all of mankind is brought to life together). Indeed, if Mary or any of the other saints are alive and interceding in heaven, what need could they have of resurrection?

You selected a verse in Ecclesiastes which it doesn’t appear you have read in context. Go back, open up the Bible and read Chapter 9 in full. The Holy Spirit through the author of this book clearly is speaking of what evil and crazy people think and believe in their hearts.

Just to quote a little more fully 9:3-7 “This is an evil in all that happens under the sun, that the same fate comes to everyone. Moreover, the hearts of all are full of evil; madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. But whoever is joined with all the living has hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion. The living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing; they have no reward, and even the memory of them is lost. Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished; never again will they have any share in all that happens under the sun. Go, eat your bread with enjoyment, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God has long ago approved what you do.”

Anyone who mistakes this passage, after reading it in context, for something that is NOT an example of the thoughts of those who are evil or mad aka crazy is gravely mistaken. Because both Jews of the times who read this as well as Christians all believe in the Resurrection and in the reward of those who die in God’s Grace, that reward is Heaven. Someone misunderstanding this passage would have to by pure logic would have to also deny all of the New Testament since Christ gives us Hope in this life and after our death.

To that small group of Jews of Jesus’ time that did not believe in the Resurrection, Jesus said to them that they were mistaken because God is the God of the Living making it clear that Abraham and Moses were still alive! Now we know that they were not alive physically on earth at that time, but they were and still are alive in the spiritual realm which we call death…namely the separation of the soul from the body, at separation, the body dies and the soul continues and awaits in joyful hope of the resurrection of their bodies and full union with God in Heaven the eternal reward!

 

[CentralFLJames]

I don’t know that I can explain it all to you but maybe I can get you started.

I see this type of thing stated often.

How do you reconcile the idea of Mary’s intercession for you with what Paul said:

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

This verse seems to indicate that Christ alone has the divine right of intercession for us, and no other. To assign this right to Mary as well…would that not in effect infringe upon the divine right afforded Christ?

Rather than just take that one verse alone as a proof text against praying back up and read the whole section of text.
" 1 Tim 2:1-5:

First of all, then, I ask that supplications, prayers, petitions, and thanksgivings be offered for everyone, 2 for kings and for all in authority, that we may lead a quiet and tranquil life in all devotion and dignity. 3 This is good and pleasing to God our savior, 4 who wills everyone to be saved and to come to knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God. There is also one mediator between God and the human race, Christ Jesus, himself human,

Note here that Paul urges supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all people. Paul is thus appealing for mediation from others besides Christ, the one mediator. Why?

Because from 1 Tim 2:3 we see that this subordinate mediation is good and acceptable to God our Savior. Because God is our Father and we are His children, God invites us to participate in Christ’s role as mediator.

Therefore, although Jesus Christ is the sole mediator between God and man (1 Tim 2:5) , there are many intercessors (subordinate mediators).

I recommend you read this site since it has a lot of scripture to back up the progression of thought:
scripturecatholic.com/saints.html#saints-II

I read somewhere that Catholics call Mary by the title “mediatrix” sometimes. I can’t help but feel that this appears to be a form of usurpation of Christ’s role?

I apologise if this has already been dealt with …

I must respectfully decline the reasons presented in the above document, as they do not make sense to me, as follows:
…

These verses, although very nice, do not in any way substantiate the claim that human entities can pray or mediate from within heaven. It simply speaks as to angels, which, I’m sure is common knowledge, are fundamentally and radically different from humans. Humans and angels are not even remotely governed by the same laws, hence I must reject this portion of the argument.

…

Once again I must point out that angels are fundamentally different beings from humans, not governed by the same laws. And besides, if an angel has the task of bringing the prayers of Christians to God, there would be even less reason to assume that human saints (such as Mary) are needed to perform this task.

Do you not recollect Jesus’ statement that in heaven we are like the angels?

Mark 12:24 Jesus said to them, "Are you not misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God? 25 When they rise from the dead, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but they are like the angels in heaven.

And lastly, while they admit that Christ is the One Mediator, they immediately diverge again, following a nice type of slippery slope by reasoning that if we may ask living Christians for help in prayer (which is correct), we may also ask this of the deceased (which I’m not so sure about). This logic is not really consistent or coherent. It is natural to assume that different laws govern the living and the dead.

I’d thus like to counter their last argument from that document with a quote from Ecclesiastes:

Ecc 9:5 …

This seems to show that once a person dies, they pretty much become unconcious, “knowing nothing”, until such time as God sees fit to resurrect them (on predestined days of resurrection, when all of mankind is brought to life together). Indeed, if Mary…

Would this make the Bible verses that deal with the resurrection invalid or flawed? Or are certain people exempt from having to be unconcious in death? I really know almost nothing of Catholic doctrine, so I’m asking sincerely.

Thanks in advance

I recommend you ignore completely Ecclesiastes 9:5 in this discussion since this OT passage reflects an incomplete revelation on the afterlife. In these times the Jews all though we die and that’s it - no more life no afterlife nothing. The wisdom literature took centuries for the Jewish prophets to develop through progressive revelation and this is only an intermediate and incomplete revelation. We don’t get all the original Jewish questions answered about life after death until Jesus comes to tell us that the Sadducees are completely wrong and lo’ there is really an afterlife afterall - “in my father’s house are many rooms”.

So let’s ignore your counter point here.

We do in fact see from scripture that the dead may intercede for us:

Matt. 22:32; Mark 12:27; Luke 20:38 - God is the God of the living not the dead. The living on earth and in heaven are one family.

Matt. 17:3; Mark 9:4; Luke 9:30 - Jesus converses with “deceased” Moses and Elijah. They are more alive than the saints on earth.

1 Sam. 28:7-20 – the deceased prophet Samuel appears and converses with Saul, which is confirmed by Sirach 46:13,20).

Baruch 3:4 - Baruch asks the Lord to hear the prayers of the dead of Israel. They can intercede on behalf of the people of God.

2 Macc. 15:12-16 – the high priest Onias and the prophet Jeremiah were deceased for centuries, and yet interact with the living Judas Maccabeas and pray for the holy people on earth.

Hope this helps,
James

 

[BRB1]

I1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

This verse seems to indicate that Christ alone has the divine right of intercession for us, and no other. To assign this right to Mary as well…would that not in effect infringe upon the divine right afforded Christ?

Paul is talking here of Christ being the sole paschal sacrifice for man, the only person who can bridge us to the Father.

Mary needed Christ as savior, just as we. Christ mediates for Mary, to the Father.

We all have roles. Mary’s role appears to be intercessory. Between us and Christ. Not between us and the Father.

 

[fuzzylogix]

I also see a lot of confusion in your comments, such as conflating “mediator” with “intercessor”, assuming that all intercession is Christ’s “divine right”, assuming that mediation can only occur between men and God (the Father), and looking to the Old Testament (before Christ had come and offered himself) to understand what happens to people after Christ has opened heaven for us.

So I think for now I’ll just ask one question: what are “the prayers of the saints” in heaven?

Firstly, I hate to be too technical, but “mediation” and “intercession” cannot be conflated. They mean one and the same thing.

Intercede, from Latin intercedere, inter- between, cedere go, i.e, a go-between, a communication channel, an intervener.

Mediate, from late Latin mediatus or mediare, place in the middle, i.e to intervence on behalf of s.o, (technical) be a medium for a process or communication, involving an intermediate agency, that is, a go-between.
[Oxford 11th Edition]

So sorry, I honestly do not see the difference between the two. And seeing as these are the same, the verse in Titus might as well have read “there is but one Mediator and Intercessor between men and God”; to me this verse has always meant exactly this:

There is but one interface between men and God, there is but one link in the chain linking man to God. This is the central plan of Christ’s coming, no? To link man to God. When the old Prophets spoke of Immanuel that would come to deliver the nation from their sins and rehabilitate them to their God, the Eternal never inspired them to mention Immanuel’s mother in any special way. Yet God knew the Plan from the beginning. Why no mention of what Catholic doctrine claims to be a vital part of the intercessory process?

Out of space. Plz read next post to fill in here

As to the question of what prayers of the saints are in heaven, I must not be understanding correctly, but I’ll answer anyway. Prayers are petitions and gratitude expressed with voice or simply with thought. In heaven they need not have physical form as is shown in the visions in Revelation; after all, prayers are simply communications; data, if you will. And with an Eternal that knows our thoughts and our needs before even we realise them, even before our birth, I’d wonder at the physical need to have anybody offer them to God.

As for Monica’s first post, I agree with most of what you say about Jesus and the Law’s fulfillment, as well as Mary’s role, even though I would view anybody other than the Savious Himself as simply a vessel; a tool for God to use as He sees fit. OT history is full of sinful people used as vessels to do God’s work: Whores and sinful men could just as easily be used by God to do His work. But the following:

She said, “Yes” and it was through soley through her intercession of saying “Yes” that Jesus came into the Human Race to save it.

makes no sense at all. By saying “yes”, Mary was indicating her willingness to be used by the Eternal. This has nothing to do with intercession, as I defined above. If she had refused instead, God would have found somebody else to do it. The fact that she accepted the Saviour, the “hope of all women”, was an honour bestowed upon her. To venerate her for this reason is like offering a beggar a million dollars, and then when he accepts, you praise him for it. (Excuse the crude analogy). Any other woman would have been desperate to be the mother of the Saviour! (Israelite women mostly, of course). Mary realised the huge honour that befell her, but as I see it, she did not do something huge beyond the call of duty. She accepted a gift, that is all.

And as to what you said about the Ecclesiastes passage:

Someone misunderstanding this passage would have to by pure logic would have to also deny all of the New Testament since Christ gives us Hope in this life and after our death.

I believe that Christ does indeed give us hope of life after death. I just wonder whether the timing that most people believe in is correct (i.e heaven directly after death). As another verse from the NT will show:

**
1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. **

If the dead in Christ (i.e. all the saints that ever lived, including Mary) need a resurrection on the day that Christ descends to earth quite visibly, a day which has not yet happened, how can they already be alive and interceding?

And I would guess somebody would quickly point out that the immortal soul is in heaven interceding, and the mortal body is dead and rotting, and needs resurrection, but this makes no sense. If a saint can be in heaven as we speak, fulfilling duties etc, then they certainly do not need their sinful, corrupted bodies to be resurrected. So I cannot accept that argument. When this above quote is taken together with the Ecclesiastes verse, it makes quite a powerful argument for the fact that the dead “know nothing”, and remain utterly dead until such time as Christ resurrects them to rule with Him in His Kingdom.

In fact, in the creation account in Genesis, the same word, nephesh, is used to describe the living souls of the animals and the humans that were created. This would suggest that, like animals die and is no more, in that same way humans die and is no more. It is only through the Eternal’s power that we may be resurrected for judgment, and it is only through Christ’s gift of salvation that we may remain alive after judgment to enjoy eternal life with Him.

I can answer the other replies in my next post. BTW, thanks for all the replies!

 

[fuzzylogix]

To be inserted in the above post where indicated

Secondly, about my other “assumptions”, if Christ is the One, singular, unique mediator and intercessor, then this is indeed His divine right and no one else’s. Also, I did not speak as to other kinds of mediation, hence I do not assume that there is only mediation between God and men. Yet the verse I quoted deals specifically with this kind of mediation (between God and me), and places a solid restriction upon any such mediation/communication: It can only be done through the man Christ Jesus, as the SINGULAR, UNIQUE and ONLY mediator/intercessor. This echoes Christ’s own words: “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life…”

As for my usage of the OT, I see no problem with that. I believe that even the OT is God’s Word, and that He would not give incomplete revelations to His prophets. In fact, as far as I know, the OT is the only type of education that Christ Himself got; this tells me that what the OT contains is both necessary and sufficient for understanding God’s plan of salvation; Christ did. He certainly never once claimed to change one little bit of the Scriptures of the time. He did not call them incomplete revelations. The Eternal knew His plan from the beginning, from the foundation of the world, so there really is no reason to have made incomplete revelations to the prophets.

 

[fuzzylogix]

Erk, just realised my horrible language error up there…

This would suggest that, like animals die and is no more, in that same way humans die and is no more.

Of course, “are no more” on both counts!

(In my mind the “is no more” fragments were in quotes, like in this sentence)

 

[VociMike]

fuzzy,

I’d like to explore your questions methodically, so to start I’d like to ask you three simple questions. I hope my fellow Catholics here will join us in a methodical examination of the issues.

1. Should people on earth pray for one another? Why or why not?
2. If it were possible, should those in heaven pray for those on earth? Why or why not?
3. Is it possible for those in heaven to pray for those on earth? Why or why not?

 

[BRB1]

FuzzyL …

What if Christ desired to have his/your mother serve in role of mediator between him and you ? Would you reject this idea out of hand ?

Clearly Christ chose Mary for her role as second Eve. As man had once encompassed the 1st woman … now God allowed the 2nd woman to encompass the New Adam. Mary clearly is depicted in scriptures as the New Ark of Covenant.

If the first Ark was holy, certainly the second Ark was created in perfection — since all New Testament fulfillments are superior to the O.T. ones that prefigured them. John recognized and taught this in his Gospel and the Revelations.

So, if Christ wishes Mary to be John’s & your Spiritual Mother, able to aid and bring graces to you, … accept it, embrace Christ’s grace that can flow thru her. Don’t kick against the goads.

 

[fuzzylogix]

fuzzy,

I’d like to explore your questions methodically, so to start I’d like to ask you three simple questions. I hope my fellow Catholics here will join us in a methodical examination of the issues.

1. Should people on earth pray for one another? Why or why not?
2. If it were possible, should those in heaven pray for those on earth? Why or why not?
3. Is it possible for those in heaven to pray for those on earth? Why or why not?

Okay, good idea.

1. Indeed true. Praying for another shows compassion and the very spirit in which Christ did everything. It may nonetheless not be in God’s plan to do exactly what you ask, so your prayers may seem to go unanswered, but your reward will still be in the fact that you prayed.
2. If it were possible, I would not see any problem with having saints in heaven pray for their loved ones on earth. Having entered heaven already, one’s obviously Christ-like nature would practically compel you to ask for the well-being of those on earth. Except one would not call it praying; if deceased saints really are like angels, then they are in the presence of God Himself. Simple conversation would suffice.
3. Here is where the problem comes in. For many years I have operated on the implicit assumption that heaven exists now and that the dead go there immediately, depending on their salvation status. This is why I can easily understand what you mean. Indeed, if we may pray for other living saints, and if saints in heaven may pray for us, then Catholic doctrine would be pretty spot-on for me.

Yet, I find myself wondering then about the purpose of the resurrection? Why do our bodies need to be resurrected at Christ’s second coming? All the deceased saints will literally be at His side as He descends from the heavens to wage war on the armies of the earth (ref. all of Revelation). Why the need to have their sinful, corrupted bodies raised from the dust of the earth, if they are already war-capable alongside Christ?

 

[VociMike]

Okay, good idea.

1. Indeed true. Praying for another shows compassion and the very spirit in which Christ did everything. It may nonetheless not be in God’s plan to do exactly what you ask, so your prayers may seem to go unanswered, but your reward will still be in the fact that you prayed.
2. If it were possible, I would not see any problem with having saints in heaven pray for their loved ones on earth. Having entered heaven already, one’s obviously Christ-like nature would practically compel you to ask for the well-being of those on earth. Except one would not call it praying; if deceased saints really are like angels, then they are in the presence of God Himself. Simple conversation would suffice.
3. Here is where the problem comes in. For many years I have operated on the implicit assumption that heaven exists now and that the dead go there immediately, depending on their salvation status. This is why I can easily understand what you mean. Indeed, if we may pray for other living saints, and if saints in heaven may pray for us, then Catholic doctrine would be pretty spot-on for me.

Yet, I find myself wondering then about the purpose of the resurrection? Why do our bodies need to be resurrected at Christ’s second coming? All the deceased saints will literally be at His side as He descends from the heavens to wage war on the armies of the earth (ref. all of Revelation). Why the need to have their sinful, corrupted bodies raised from the dust of the earth, if they are already war-capable alongside Christ?

Excellent progress!

So we agree on the first two points, that it’s good for those on earth to pray for each other, and that it would be good for those in heaven to “pray” for those on earth, if possible.

That just leaves the third point, which is whether it is indeed possible for those in heaven to pray (whatever that might entail) for us. It sounds as though you’re not convinced that those in heaven are now “war-capable” ( ). So maybe you could tell us what you think the state of one who dies as a saved person is.

 

[fuzzylogix]

FuzzyL …

What if Christ desired to have his/your mother serve in role of mediator between him and you ? Would you reject this idea out of hand ?

Clearly Christ chose Mary for her role as second Eve. As man had once encompassed the 1st woman … now God allowed the 2nd woman to encompass the New Adam. Mary clearly is depicted in scriptures as the New Ark of Covenant.

If the first Ark was holy, certainly the second Ark was created in perfection — since all New Testament fulfillments are superior to the O.T. ones that prefigured them. John recognized and taught this in his Gospel and the Revelations.

So, if Christ wishes Mary to be John’s & your Spiritual Mother, able to aid and bring graces to you, … accept it, embrace Christ’s grace that can flow thru her. Don’t kick against the goads.

If Christ chose anything, I would abide by that choice. He (in the form of the Eternal) did indeed choose Mary as the vessel in which to be manifest and born from. I could never deny that, and I realise how blessed she was at that point in time, and through the ages.

The problem is to determine whether Christ did indeed choose Mary as mediator. I do not see this explicitly stated in the Bible, nor even implied. In contrast, as I have stated, Paul’s inspired words to Titus seem to indicate exactly the opposite: No mediation can occur between God and men, in any way, shape or form, except through Christ, and only Him. I cannot help but see this intention in Paul’s words.

Indeed, if Mary were so important to the early church, why is she scarcely mentioned anywhere in the NT outside of the gospels? (I may be wrong here, but I do not recall ever seeing her mentioned).

Another problem with the “Mary as the Ark of the New Covenant” metaphor (although exceptionally beautiful as it may be…I write prose ), is that I don’t think the Scriptures clearly depict Mary as such an Ark.

Firstly, the Ark was made to house the Law of God, the Mosaic Law. Not temporarily, like Mary housed Christ, but permanently. Uzzah died when he touched the Ark to steady it, but this was not for the sake of the vessel, but for what it carried inside it! The stone tablets were what was holy unto God, not the vessel.

Secondly, the analogy comparing Mary to the Ark is flawed also in the way that it ignores the fact that it is in Christ, through His work, through His sacrifice, that salvation eventually came to us. I would rather see Christ as the Ark of the New Covenant. In His flesh, in His human form, He contained the perfect nature of the Lamb led to the slaughter, a sacrifice for all of us.

This nature contained in the flesh of His body is exactly that which we must all aspire to, just as the ancient Israelites had to aspire to the nature described on the stone tablets, held inside the Ark.

 

[fuzzylogix]

Excellent progress!
That just leaves the third point, which is whether it is indeed possible for those in heaven to pray (whatever that might entail) for us. It sounds as though you’re not convinced that those in heaven are now “war-capable” ( ). So maybe you could tell us what you think the state of one who dies as a saved person is.

Ah, but see, I do believe that those saints coming with Christ ARE war-capable. Paul and John both said so. My point was directed in saying that, if the saints that intercede for us daily come with Christ at the second coming, and they are already war-capable as spirit-beings, what then would be the need of the resurrection that Paul spoke of? Thus, the idea that the saints are already alive today in heaven seems to contradict Paul’s statement that there will be a resurrection of the saints.

But, to answer your question directly: I believe that when God created everything, He breathed life into Adam and Eve (called nephesh in Hebrew). This same life He breathed into the animals as well. Gen 3:19 states the well-known “to dust you shall return”. Hence, and seen together with the Ecclesiastes verse I quoted way up on this thread, this seems to indicate solidly that when one dies, your body decomposes and rots. Nothing is said of an immortal soul anywhere in the Bible; I think that may be a Catholic construct.
While one is then dead, you “know nothing”, and are oblivious, sleeping soundly.
Then, when Christ returns with the trumpets blaring, to battle the armies of the earth, Paul says in 1Th4:16 that the dead in Christ shall rise first (i.e be resurrected). The dead who died without Christ are left dead.

Then, when all is over and the kingdom of God is established, the Millenium will pass, whereafter Satan will be forever defeated. At this point, I believe, a second resurrection occurs, raising all the dead who ever lived. This is in order for them to receive judgment.

That’s pretty much it. Are there glaring faults in this set of beliefs?

 

[SingleMomMonica]

Mr. Fuzzylogic,

It seems that you have somehow missed the entire point of Christianity and misunderstand the most basic of Christian beliefs and teachings. This makes me very sad for you, but certainly it is not your fault, but the fault of those who failed to teach you.

**The Christian definition of death has not changed over the centuries: it is the separation of soul and body. **

At the time of the separation, **the body turns back to dust **just as God said it would in the book of Genesis and the soul, just as described in multiple places in the New Testament, goes somewhere else.

Prior to Christ’s death, the Bible tells us that those souls were in “prison” or “Abraham’s bosom” and were fully aware of their state of being, just as the New Testament says.

After Christ’s death, as the Bible teaches us in the New Testament, He Himself decended into “prison” and remained there for 3 days teaching them of God’s Plan for their salvation at which time they and every single other** human being who died after that time were able to enter into either: Hell, Purgatory or Heaven **depending on their state at the time of death while awaiting the Resurrection of their bodies. At the end of time, those who do not already have their bodies will have their body’s resurrected and rejoined to their soul.

(Those, according to Tradition who already have their bodies are: Enoch (Written Tradition - Genesis, Hebrews 11:5 & Jude), Elijah (Written Tradition - 2 Kings 2), Jesus (Written Tradition - end of each Gospel) and Mary (Oral Tradition - 2 Thess 2:15).)

Once every human being has been physically resurrected (their bodies and rejoined their souls), then the Final Judgement takes place and everyone enters body and soul for all eternity that which they chose by their life: Hell or Heaven.

You prior posts seems to indicate that the false Christianity you’ve been taught has been heavily influenced by Jehovah’s Witness understanding of the human person and what happens to the human person at the time of death which is the result of Original Sin. I’ve heard that their is another sect of Protestant Christianity who like the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe the same false teachings on this issue which was also created in the 1800’s. If you ever began to study Church history it would be very apparent to you very quickly that these false ideas are not found anywhere in Christianity prior to the 1800’s.

I’m glad you are here on Catholic Answers, because you truly do need answers since you have been taught terrible errors.

May God through your efforts bring you to a full understanding of the Christianity which He came to earth to establish so that we could truly know Him.

 

[CentralFLJames]

Yet, I find myself wondering then about the purpose of the resurrection? Why do our bodies need to be resurrected at Christ’s second coming? All the deceased saints will literally be at His side as He descends from the heavens to wage war on the armies of the earth (ref. all of Revelation). Why the need to have their sinful, corrupted bodies raised from the dust of the earth, if they are already war-capable alongside Christ?

I think we almost have you home. Let me hit this one area real fast.

Jesus demonstrated in the transfiguration and in his appearing in the upper room - passing through locked doors and bearing that wounds of glory that we get a special new incorruptible body after the 2nd coming. The soul is not meant to be seperated from the body. “We” are incomplete without both - the body was made for the soul and the body gives an ability to “be” in a place (time and space) rather than only in a spiritual state.

Then Cardinal Ratzinger had some contributions in this area. He believes we are to be given glorified bodies that are perfect in every way - but are not exactly the same biologically - since clearly a biological body is subject to decay and nothing in heaven can be subject to decay. The form of our bodies will be similar to what we have now in our fallen nature - but perfected, and improved on from pre-fall Adam’s and Eve’s. Not only improved on - but radically elevated in nature too. Essentially we will be divine-human since we will be formed on the new Adam and Eve prototype of Christ’s divinity (as new Adam) and on Mary as perfect human without the fallen nature of Eve (as new Eve).

Our nature is different than the pure spiritual-intellectual nature of angels. So we humans are suited to having bodies. But to have the ability to have an abode in heaven and to participate in the 2nd creation God wants us to have a glorified body - something that is more suitable for heaven and will be able to stand in His presence as His child. That all implies to me an ability to step into and out of time or in heaven at will and have similar abilities as Christ has (walking through solid substances, eating if we choose to, being able to traverse great distances in an instant at will, touching, holding, feeling, etc.).

James

 

[fuzzylogix]

The Christian definition of death has not changed over the centuries: it is the separation of soul and body.

Odd that you mention the definition of death since The Inter-
national Standard Bible Encyclopaedia says: “. . . We are influ-
enced always more or less by the Greek, Platonic idea that the body
dies, yet the soul is immortal. Such an idea is utterly contrary to the
Israelite consciousness and is nowhere found in the Old Testament”
(1960, Vol. 2, p. 812, “Death”).

This appears to be very much true, since any and all references I can find to the soul from the OT (as Hebrew nephesh) indicates its mortal nature:

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

So also Eze18:20, and others. God even stated this directly to Adam and Eve, in His warning about the forbidden fruit. Note: He did not say “You shall die (and by implication your body shall die but your immortal soul shall return to Me, intact and concious)”, but rather He explicitly said “Your soul shall die”. This implies that the word “soul” as the Bible uses it refers not to some immaterial thing that exists independently of its physical host, but rather the soul seems to be a physical thing itself. This is consistent with the soul being able to die, as is mentioned many times.

In reference to Abrahan’s bosom, I believe that these words may be an obvious expression used by the Jews at the time(I will check sometime to make sure). It is used in a parable by Jesus, and parables are notoriously known not to be taken literally. They illustrate some point, but do not pertain to physical arrangements and events.

But let us not forget, Christ Himself was an Israelite, and His only education was the OT. He certainly then would have believed in the Hebrew conciousness, as revealed by God in many places in the OT.

 

[fuzzylogix]

But Monica’s mention of the parable of Lazarus brings with it an interesting idea of how saints in heaven are actually barred from helping those left behind.

When the rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus to warn his family of what awaits them if they don’t repent, Abraham denied the request bluntly, saying in effect “All people on earth already know what to do. They have the Mosaic Law, hence know exactly how to please God and avoid hellfire. It is now their choice whether to follow the Law of God.”

This seems a strong indication that my answer to the above Question 2 from VociMike was actually WRONG:

Should saints in heaven pray for those on earth? Using this parable in Luk16:29, Jesus in effect says “No, why should saints in heaven pray for those on earth? The earthbound people have the Scriptures; they know exactly what to do and how to live their lives, and need no extra help.”

Is this interpretation inaccurate?

 

[BRB1]

The problem is to determine whether Christ did indeed choose Mary as mediator. I do not see this explicitly stated in the Bible, nor even implied. In contrast, as I have stated, Paul’s inspired words to Titus seem to indicate exactly the opposite: No mediation can occur between God and men, in any way, shape or form, except through Christ, and only Him. I cannot help but see this intention in Paul’s words.

.

Christ is the ONLY mediator between the man and the Father. Mary was the Mother of Christ, not the Father. But, within the Church structure … Mary is believed to serve as a mediator between man and Christ. They worked perfectly as a team here on earth.

Christ gave her to John as his Spiritual Mother, and John teaches she belongs to all Christians. John had his own biologic mother at the time of Cross … so Christ was not asking John to adopt her as his natural mother … the adoption was primarily for Spiritual purposes.

Since you believe Mary to be in heaven … and functioning in a saintly role … what would prevent her from mediating (serving as Spiritual mother) between Christ and ALL Christians ?

Again, no one is suggesting Mary can forgive original or even venial sins. But, she may very well have been given the primacy role of intervention on the behalf of the saved, at our hour of death, at our times of weakness, etc. Not to forgive us … but, to present our concerns/needs to Christ.

This is not to say we can’t communicate with Christ w/o Mary. Indeed, a Christian should have the H.S. within them … being counseled by the 3rd person of Trinity. But, if/when we greave the H.S. … Mary may well be instrumental for us with her Son.