Mary as Mediatrix?

[believers]

I disagree…he’s done nothing more than I’ve seen you and any number of other n-Cs do with the Bible.

Why is his scholarship less valid than yours?

Do you ever provide scriptural support for anything you say? You told me once that Jesus would do the rosary. It appears you and I have absolutely nothing more to discuss.

 

[Church_Militant]

OK
If you get no conviction from the Holy Spirit:
Make the Statues
Pray the Rosary
Bow before the Statues

And since we do not get that “conviction of the Holy Spirit.” No problem.

Make Her Co-redemtrix

Again…find me an official church document that says that this is dogma. You can’t because there isn’t one.

Queen of Heaven

Revelation 12:1

Mediatrix -]Mediator/-] of all graces

Again…show me a dogmatic declaration.

Assign all types of miraculous healing to her (fatima)

Lourdes, and others. The facts speak for themselves, under intense investigation by the church. Have you made such an intense investigation of these matters? No you have not, yet you pass judgment upon them.

I choose not to Practice these things. Because I can find NO support for them in the Bible.

So then you must not accept any miracles that you hear about at all today since you “can find NO support for them in the Bible”. In other words they aren’t recorded in the Bible and so they never happened. That is fallacious reasoning to say the least. Have you read the historic writings of the early Christian church?

No need for further debate.

If you say so. You fail to disprove it and so you parallel Martin Luther’s rant when he said, “I will have it so, and I order it to be so, and my will is reason enough.”

I spoke my truth.

As you understand it…

 

[Church_Militant]

Do you ever provide scriptural support for anything you say? You told me once that Jesus would do the rosary. It appears you and I have absolutely nothing more to discuss.

The point I made is not a scriptural one but an observation…not needs scripture but some need only God-given common sense.

I have posted tons of scripture in refutation of n-C/a-C rhetoric.
Examples:
The Eucharist IS Scriptural
I Find No Sacraments In the Bible, he said.
Biblical and Jewish Traditional Beliefs On Purgatory
Alfie’s Assertion that Confession id Optional
Xavier’s Contention That Priestly Celibacy is UnBiblical
And a great deal more.

You, on the other hand are here seeking to indict something that isn’t even a Catholic dogma.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Hey Manny,
Now you know that Rev 12 is Not refering to Mary. But it is refering to The Nation of Israel.

That is also correct. However, Protestants fail to realized that the Book of Revelation contains a lot of symbolism. The woman can be identified as:

1. Mary: Because the woman gave birth to a male child who will rule all nations. He is the Kings of Kings, and this child is Jesus Christ.
2. Israel: The woman is also Israel because it is from nation of Israel that the Messiah is to have come from.
3. The Church: The woman is the Church because dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring. These offsprings are believers of Jesus Christ. Believers make up the Church. None of either interpretation is incorrect.

Second, why do you Protestant don’t accept the Catholic Intrepretation of the Bible?

 

[Mannyfit75]

Why did you leave out Rev 12:6? The woman was taken into the wilderness for 1260 days.

Rev 12:6
And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred [and] threescore days.

Because I am trying to give you a Catholic interpretation of Revelations 12. Indeed, the woman in Rev is identified as Mary, the Church, and the Israel.

 

[NotWorthy]

Jer 44:18
But since we left off** to burn incense to the queen of heaven**, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, we have wanted all [things], and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

Jer 44:19
And when we burned incense to the queen of heaven, and poured out drink offerings unto her, did we make her cakes to worship her, and pour out drink offerings unto her, without our men?

Jer 44:20
Then Jeremiah said unto all the people, to the men, and to the women, and to all the people which had given him [that] answer, saying,

Jer 44:21
The incense that ye burned in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem, ye, and your fathers, your kings, and your princes, and the people of the land, did not the LORD remember them, and came it [not] into his mind?

Jer 44:22
So that the LORD could no longer bear, because of the evil of your doings, [and] because of the abominations which ye have committed; therefore is your land a desolation, and an astonishment, and a curse, without an inhabitant, as at this day.

Jer 44:23
Because ye have burned incense, AND because ye have sinned against the LORD, and have not obeyed the voice of the LORD, nor walked in his law, nor in his statutes, nor in his testimonies; therefore this evil is happened unto you, as at this day.

Good point, so since other nations worshipped something as their God, we shouldn’t worship God?!?

I’m just trying to follow your logic, for you seem to totally ignored mine.

The Old Testament CLEARLY showed that their was a queen of Israel and this queen was the mother of the king. Do you agree?

Jesus is the King of Heaven, the New Israel. Do you agree?

If you agree with these two points, then why shouldn’t Mary be the Queen of Heaven, as is clearly shown in Revelation?

 

[Ziggy]

Someone quoted* Lumen gentium*** 62** but only part of it… here’s the rest…

…This, however, is to be so understood that it neither takes away from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficaciousness of Christ the one Mediator.(17*)
For no creature could ever be counted as equal with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer. Just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by the ministers and by the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is really communicated in different ways to His creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source.
The Church does not hesitate to profess this subordinate role of Mary. It knows it through unfailing experience of it and commends it to the hearts of the faithful, so that encouraged by this maternal help they may the more intimately adhere to the Mediator and Redeemer.

 

[Mannyfit75]

OK
If you get no conviction from the Holy Spirit:
Make the Statues

The Jews made statues of an angel in the Ark. It does not make them guilty of idoltry. The Catholic Church uses statue to allow the faithful to mediate on a saint’s life, who died for their faith in Jesus. Statues are not worship period.

Pray the Rosary.

The Rosary is Bible base. Hail Mary is Archangel Gabriel greeting to Mary, “Hail, full of Grace.” Elizabeth said to Mary, blessed is the fruit of thy womb.

Holy Mary, Mother of God (title that professes that Jesus is God. Since Jesus is God, Mary can be called Mother of God. She is the Mother of the Second Person of the Trinity.

Bow before the Statues

Bowing does not always imply worship. Why don’t you get this. State an official Church document that we worship statues.

Make Her Co-redemtrix

Co-redemptrix is not officially taught in the Church’s Magisterium.

Queen of Heaven

Hebrew Kings have their mothers as their queen. Jesus is part of the Davidic lineage, and therefore, Mary is the Queen Mother. She is also the Woman in Rev 12. (This needs to go in a different discussion, we Catholics already made our point about Rev 12).

Mediatrix
Mediator of all graces

Not official taught. The only doctrines officially taught by the Catholic Church about Mary is the Assumption, Immaculate Conception, that she remain Ever-Virgin.

Assign al types of miraculous healing to her(fatima)
And whatever else.
I choose not to Practice these things. Because I can find NO support for them in the Bible.
No need for further debate.
I spoke my truth.

Your truth is partial true. Not all Truth are contain in the Bible. The Word Trinity itself is not in the Bible, nor does the Bible said that all sole authority is from Scripture Alone, but that is another discussion. Sola Scriptura is erroneous doctrine founded by Protestant Reformers in 1517 A.D.

 

[awalt]

Newbie, it’s as simple as this;

As a man, Jesus fulfilled God’s laws perfectly, including the commandment to honor thy father and mother. The Hebrew word for honor is kaboda, which literally means “to glorify”. So Jesus glorified his mother.

So then ask yourself, should we not imitate Christ in all that we do, isn’t that what we are taught? So not only should we glorify our father and mother, we should glorify those that Jesus glorifies - which includes Mary.

 

[newbie1234]

Newbie, it’s as simple as this;

As a man, Jesus fulfilled God’s laws perfectly, including the commandment to honor thy father and mother. The Hebrew word for honor is kaboda, which literally means “to glorify”. So Jesus glorified his mother.

So then ask yourself, should we not imitate Christ in all that we do, isn’t that what we are taught? So not only should we glorify our father and mother, we should glorify those that Jesus glorifies - which includes Mary.

If you feel secure trusting your salvation to Mary as Co redemptrix,
and you feel that you don’t dishonor Jesus by relying on Mary as mediatrix, then go right ahead, and good luck with that.
You can glorify Mary and all the saints and all the popes.
I will glorify my Savior Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and My Father in Heaven, Almighty God. AMEN?

 

[newbie1234]

Newbie, it’s as simple as this;

As a man, Jesus fulfilled God’s laws perfectly, including the commandment to honor thy father and mother. The Hebrew word for honor is kaboda, which literally means “to glorify”. So Jesus glorified his mother.

So then ask yourself, should we not imitate Christ in all that we do, isn’t that what we are taught? So not only should we glorify our father and mother, we should glorify those that Jesus glorifies - which includes Mary.

Read Jn 2:4. It doesn’t seem like Jesus is glorifying in that verse.
Then read Matt12:46-50 Again Jesus is not glorifying Mary.
Then again read luke11:27-28 Jesus says who is more blessed that His mother.
So I don’t think He glorified Mary, but He did justify her. He was her Savior. Read Luke 1:46-47

 

[Church_Militant]

If you feel secure trusting your salvation to Mary as Co redemptrix,
and you feel that you don’t dishonor Jesus by relying on Mary as mediatrix, then go right ahead, and good luck with that.
You can glorify Mary and all the saints and all the popes.

Rhetorical bunkum newbie…Just because you think something does not make it so. The facts have been explained to you in great detail. What part do not get?

Catholics do not trust Mary for their salvation and do not dishonor Our Lord with the Marian devotion that we do maintain.

This has all been explained to you and it appears that you are not reading our posts or are just too stubborn to accept the straightforward information that you have been given.
Which is it then?

Read Jn 2:4. I

Then read Matt12:46-50 Again Jesus is not glorifying Mary.
Then again read luke11:27-28 Jesus says who is more

blessed that His mother.

Read Luke 1:46-47You want to base all that upon a few verses…taken out of context.

The use of “woman” in John 2 is actually a term of respect and there is nothing else there that even implies your point. In fact, the truth is that because Our Lord did His first miracle at the behest of the Blessed Virgin points up that He does indeed give weight to her intercessions as well as her role as “Giberah” or intercessory Queen Mother of the Messiah.

The passage in Matthew 12 does not support your case in the least either since what Our Lord is plainly doing is refocusing the crowd’s attention on his message and in no way putting down the Blessed Virgin. He is driving home a point…but not the one that you wish to make with your errant interpretation.

Your interpretation of Luke 11:27-28 is also in error. Look at what the passage actually says.
27: As he said this, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you sucked!”
28: But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” (RSV) and also “27 And it came to pass, as he spoke these things, a certain woman from the crowd, lifting up her voice, said to him: Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. 28 But he said: Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.” (Douay-Rheims Version and KJV) Neither passage says, or even implies, “more blessed” and from the context that is not at all what Our Lord is saying. Note the use of “Yea rather” and “Blessed rather”…nowhere does that even imply that the people he is referring to are “more” blessed.

In fact…He may well be making a very important point here by actually saying that by her obedience to the Word of God that Mary heard she is already blessed and is an example of the kind of obedience that he is speaking of. After all, she heard the word form the angel Gabriel’s own lips and believed and obeyed it, making her in fact the very first Christian. There is no record anywhere in the New Testament of any wavering of Our Lady’s faith. Thanks for making me think this through so that I could see it and share it with you and all my Catholic brothers and sisters here. (Glory Be To God!)

And this brings us to your last errant citation and interpretation. Luke 1:46-47
46 And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Nowhere will you find any teaching of the Catholic Church that the Blessed Virgin did not need and have Christ as her savior, however, her grace was applied to her in a different way because of her most unique role as mother of Our Lord. Can you tell me who else in all of human history has ever had a closer personal relationship with Our Lord than the Blessed Virgin? No you cannot because aside from the other persons of the Holy Trinity, there is not one.

If a small child falls into deep water and I jump in and pull them out, I have saved them from drowning.

If, however, I see them begin to fall and catch them before they fall into the water, I have still saved them from drowning, but I have done so pre-emptively and more perfectly, have I not? The very same situation applies to the Blessed Virgin’s Immaculate Conception and is unique in that she lived right on the very cusp, (and in fact could be said to be that cusp) of both the Old and New Covenants and therefore the sacrifice of Christ was applied to her at her conception. That is why the unique Greek term is used in the angel Gabriel’s greeting calling “full of grace”.

I suggest that you stop trying to allege things that are not true against the Catholic faith, (if you expect to be considered honest) since this has all been plainly explained to you from scripture and Traditional Christian sources.

 

[believers]

Good point, so since other nations worshipped something as their God, we shouldn’t worship God?!?

I’m just trying to follow your logic, for you seem to totally ignored mine.

The Old Testament CLEARLY showed that their was a queen of Israel and this queen was the mother of the king. Do you agree?

Jesus is the King of Heaven, the New Israel. Do you agree?

If you agree with these two points, then why shouldn’t Mary be the Queen of Heaven, as is clearly shown in Revelation?

No, Mary is clearly NOT shown to be the queen of heaven. Why don’t you post your proof so I can refute your claim.

 

[newbie1234]

Rhetorical bunkum newbie…Just because you think something does not make it so. The facts have been explained to you in great detail. What part do not get?

Catholics do not trust Mary for their salvation and do not dishonor Our Lord with the Marian devotion that we do maintain.

This has all been explained to you and it appears that you are not reading our posts or are just too stubborn to accept the straightforward information that you have been given.
Which is it then?You want to base all that upon a few verses…taken out of context.

The use of “woman” in John 2 is actually a term of respect and there is nothing else there that even implies your point. In fact, the truth is that because Our Lord did His first miracle at the behest of the Blessed Virgin points up that He does indeed give weight to her intercessions as well as her role as “Giberah” or intercessory Queen Mother of the Messiah.

The passage in Matthew 12 does not support your case in the least either since what Our Lord is plainly doing is refocusing the crowd’s attention on his message and in no way putting down the Blessed Virgin. He is driving home a point…but not the one that you wish to make with your errant interpretation.

Your interpretation of Luke 11:27-28 is also in error. Look at what the passage actually says.
27: As he said this, a woman in the crowd raised her voice and said to him, “Blessed is the womb that bore you, and the breasts that you sucked!”
28: But he said, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!” (RSV) and also “27 And it came to pass, as he spoke these things, a certain woman from the crowd, lifting up her voice, said to him: Blessed is the womb that bore thee, and the paps that gave thee suck. 28 But he said: Yea rather, blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it.” (Douay-Rheims Version and KJV) Neither passage says, or even implies, “more blessed” and from the context that is not at all what Our Lord is saying. Note the use of “Yea rather” and “Blessed rather”…nowhere does that even imply that the people he is referring to are “more” blessed.

In fact…He may well be making a very important point here by actually saying that by her obedience to the Word of God that Mary heard she is already blessed and is an example of the kind of obedience that he is speaking of. After all, she heard the word form the angel Gabriel’s own lips and believed and obeyed it, making her in fact the very first Christian. There is no record anywhere in the New Testament of any wavering of Our Lady’s faith. Thanks for making me think this through so that I could see it and share it with you and all my Catholic brothers and sisters here. (Glory Be To God!)

And this brings us to your last errant citation and interpretation. Luke 1:46-47
46 And Mary said: My soul doth magnify the Lord. 47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. 48 Because he hath regarded the humility of his handmaid; for behold from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.

Nowhere will you find any teaching of the Catholic Church that the Blessed Virgin did not need and have Christ as her savior, however, her grace was applied to her in a different way because of her most unique role as mother of Our Lord. Can you tell me who else in all of human history has ever had a closer personal relationship with Our Lord than the Blessed Virgin? No you cannot because aside from the other persons of the Holy Trinity, there is not one.

If a small child falls into deep water and I jump in and pull them out, I have saved them from drowning.

If, however, I see them begin to fall and catch them before they fall into the water, I have still saved them from drowning, but I have done so pre-emptively and more perfectly, have I not? The very same situation applies to the Blessed Virgin’s Immaculate Conception and is unique in that she lived right on the very cusp, (and in fact could be said to be that cusp) of both the Old and New Covenants and therefore the sacrifice of Christ was applied to her at her conception. That is why the unique Greek term is used in the angel Gabriel’s greeting calling “full of grace”.

I suggest that you stop trying to allege things that are not true against the Catholic faith, (if you expect to be considered honest) since this has all been plainly explained to you from scripture and Traditional Christian sources.

So you’re saying Mary’s sin was forgiven at her conception. Even though the saving grace of salvation for the world came 50 or so years later with Jesus’ death on the cross.
And that makes sense to you. Mary’s sin was forgiven before Jesus was born.

 

[NotWorthy]

No, Mary is clearly NOT shown to be the queen of heaven. Why don’t you post your proof so I can refute your claim.

OK, maybe if I post it, like, the third time it just may be the charm.

It’s go’s much further than this, but simply agree with this or disagree, it’s your choice.

notworthy:

The Old Testament CLEARLY showed that their was a queen of Israel and this queen was the mother of the king. Do you agree?

Jesus is the King of Heaven, the New Israel. Do you agree?

 

[NotWorthy]

Maybe a couple more.

1st, even God recognized the mother of the king as the queen of Israel.

Jeremiah is speaking for the Lord in chapter 13:18-20,

“Say to the king and to the queen mother: come down from your throne; From your heads fall your magnificent crowns. The cities of the Negeb are besieged, with no one to relieve them; All Judah is banished in universal exile. Lift up your eyes and see men coming from the north. Where is the flock entrusted to you, the sheep that were your glory?”

Also in 2nd Kings, the King of Babylon is fixing to route Jerusalem.

“Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, himself arrived at the city while his servants were besieging it. Then Jehoiachin, king of Judah, together with his mother

, his ministers, officers, and functionaries, surrendered to the king of Babylon… (2nd Kings 24, 11-12). We know from Scriptures that groups of people were most often listed in order of importance.

 

[Sixtus]

So then ask yourself, should we not imitate Christ in all that we do, isn’t that what we are taught? So not only should we glorify our father and mother, we should glorify those that Jesus glorifies - which includes Mary.

AMEN

 

[Church_Militant]

So you’re saying Mary’s sin was forgiven at her conception. Even though the saving grace of salvation for the world came 50 or so years later with Jesus’ death on the cross.
And that makes sense to you. Mary’s sin was forgiven before Jesus was born.

Were the sins of the OT saints forgiven before the birth of Christ? In other words, is the sacrifice of Christ on the cross bound by time or is it timeless in both directions?

Mary came into being under the OT…Her graces were applied to her differently than the rest of mankind’s because of her unique purpose and destiny in God’s eyes.

Are you saying that Almighty God can’t do that?

 

[newbie1234]

Were the sins of the OT saints forgiven before the birth of Christ? In other words, is the sacrifice of Christ on the cross bound by time or is it timeless in both directions?

Mary came into being under the OT…Her graces were applied to her differently than the rest of mankind’s because of her unique purpose and destiny in God’s eyes.

Are you saying that Almighty God can’t do that?

I am not saying He can’t do that. I’m saying He DIDN’T do that.
There is no foundation for that theology in the bible. And you know it.

 

[Church_Militant]

I am not saying He can’t do that. I’m saying He DIDN’T do that.
There is no foundation for that theology in the bible. And you know it.

But again we are back to the errant idea that everything that God does and that we believe must come from the pages of the Bible and that doctrine is not biblical itself, so you come to a wrong conclusion based on a fallacious beginning premise.