Mary at Lourdes

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Indeed, she is also free to manifest a living representation/memory of her baby as well!
 
Last edited:
I was just teasing you about your quip at me in the other thread about the woman whose son is joining the Marines
 
Still trying to figure out what you meant there.

Anyway, the idea that Mary looked like a Northern European strikes me as pretty implausible. It’s far more likely that most of the images we have are the results of European painters naturally conceiving of her with a more European complexion
 
I think artists do paint Mary as they imagine her to be, but I’m talking about those who’ve had apparitions of her.
 
Last edited:
BoomBoomMancini said:
Still trying to figure out what you meant there.

Anyway, the idea that Mary looked like a Northern European strikes me as pretty implausible. It’s far more likely that most of the images we have are the results of European painters naturally conceiving of her with a more European complexion
Click to expand...
Did she look that way in 20 AD? No. But God has made it very clear that He wishes for people to have their savior reflect their physical appearance. This means that to a Sweede Mary would be pale, tall with blonde hair and blue eyes. To a Mexican she may have a big booty, deep brown eyes and olive skin. To Asians she may appear teensy tiny and slight. To an African she would be black like them.

This is clearly how God intends us to see Mary—as someone like us. What business do we have to tell God that we shouldn’t create images when He allows (or perhaps even perptuates) those images Himself?
 
I agree, I’m just talking about Mary as she appeared in 20 AD during her life on Earth.
 
BoomBoomMancini said:
I agree, I’m just talking about Mary as she appeared in 20 AD during her life on Earth.
Click to expand...
Perhaps there is a reason that God has not defined this for us. It means that He ensures it is a mystery with on one race getting to claim preference. Perhaps in some way an answer to the fact that He had previously allowed for salvation only through the Jewish religion.
 
Maybe. I also think that pianistclare hit it on the head earlier on: it really doesn’t matter which complexion Jesus and/or Mary had. I always assumed they had complexions typical of first century Palestine, but if I found out that they were especially light skinned or especially dark skinned it wouldn’t change anything in the slightest.
 
I mean, if you saw a genuine apparition (color me dubious, but whatever), it’s possible Mary appeared to you as a fair skinned, blue eyed woman for whatever reason. But it’s extremely unlikely that during her mortal life she was pale with blonde highlights and blue eyes.
 
Last edited:
Also, it just hit me: what did you mean when you said “Robby McCabe, Mary’s husband.” I hope your wife is named Mary and you just included that tidbit for some random reason and you aren’t claiming to be, like, the husband of Mary the mother of Jesus.

No offense, buddy, but you’re coming off a little crazypants in some of your posts.
 
What do you mean, “he had previously allowed for salvation only through the Jewish religion?”
 
Hope1960 said:
What do you mean, “he had previously allowed for salvation only through the Jewish religion?”
Click to expand...
Before Jesus, the chosen people aka the Jews were the only ones who could atone for sins…and through priests at that. The majority of other religions were polytheistic and most did not have an offer of…or even a concept of eternal salvation. The concept of salvation is one nearly exclusively Jewish(pre-Christianity) and they only had it because God had directly given it to them as His chosen people.
 
She appears in ways the culture can identify with.
I would say the most notable is Our Lady of Guadalupe. She is dressed in Native apparel and darker skin. Remember that in Heaven one is not based on race. I am not going to try to play God and know the answer but this is a very reasonable assumption.
 
Our Lady of Guadeloupe is probably the closest we have. In the Tilma.
 
Last edited:
BlackFriar said:
Indeed, she is also free to manifest a living representation/memory of her baby as well!
Click to expand...
I hope you don’t mind if I ask. . When she appears with the child Jesus,how is it understood that Jesus’ appearance is a representation a memory and living?
 
I said there is no theological reason why not, I did not say it was the case because who actually knows?

I do say it is congruent with private revelation. Mary appears with flowers, with clothes etc. They are surely within the power of her glorified body … and she appears in different outward forms. Is it significantly any harder to have a baby Jesus as an angel has wings. It is an essential projection of who she is.

The other reason is also from private revelation. The felt presence of an apparition of Jesus is quite different from that of anyone else. Some of those privileged to have Mary appear sometimes with baby Jesus or without noted no difference in the “feeling” of the apparition. Hence my hypothesis.

Its just my opinion, but it is based on good reasons.
 
Nicephorus Callistus (XIV century Byzantine historian of the Church) wrote down a description Mary:
“According to Tradition, that from the compiler of Church history Nicephorus Callistus (fourteenth century), the Mother of God “was of average stature, or as others suggest, slightly more than average; Her hair golden in appearance; Her eyes bright with pupils like shiny olives; Her eyebrows strong in character and moderately dark, Her nose pronounced and Her mouth vibrant bespeaking sweet speech; Her face was neither round nor angular, but somewhat oblong; the palm of Her hands and fingers were longish…”
Source:
https://oca.org/saints/lives/2016/0...r-most-holy-lady-the-mother-of-god-and-ever-v
 
BlackFriar said:
Its just my opinion, but it is based on good reasons.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think they are good reasons. That’s a WOW kinda thing that memory is able to be like that… A memory/representation of Jesus seems very supported by that evidence. But, to me, the evidence seems not to support a baby Jesus.that is living
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top