Mary - sinner - Romans 3?

[Good_Fella]

So, if we have the written word that “confirms the truths that have been perceived by the faithful through the voice of the Spirit.” Why do we need tradition?

Although all public revelation from God came to an end with the death of the last apostle, the divine mysteries continue to unfold in their fullness as the Church matures in knowledge of the truth under the guidance of the Paraclete. The difference between Protestants and Catholics is that the former’s traditions (i.e., sola fide and sola Christo) result from gleaning the written word, whereas the latter’s traditions result in the written word. This means that the Catholic Church can exist on sacred Tradition alone, which it did for almost a century, and Scripture must be interpreted in light of it. Meanwhile Protestants must soley rely on forming their own suppositions by privately interpreting sacred Scripture for themselves apart from the Apostolic Tradition of the Church and without the promised guidance of the Holy Spirit, which explains the natural fragmentation and disunity of faith in Protestantism from the beginning.

I’m not familiar with the church fathers, but could you direct me to where scripture designates a central teaching authority?

Matthew 16:16-19 for starters.

*Many signs and wonders were done among the people at the hands of the apostles…None of the others dared to join them, but the people esteemed them.
Acts 5, 12-13

It is the decision of the Holy Spirit and of us not to place on you any burden beyond these necessities.
Acts 15, 28

We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit that is from God, so that we may understand the things freely given us by God. And we speak about them not with words taught by human wisdom, but with words taught by the Spirit, describing spiritual realities in spiritual terms.
1 Corinthians 2, 12-13

We belong to God, and anyone who knows God listens to us, while anyone who does not belong to God refuses to hear us. This is how we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of deceit.
1 John 4, 6 (cf. Lk 10:16)

This saying is trustworthy, whoever aspires to the office of bishop acquires a noble task.
1 Timothy 3, 1

For there are also many rebels…especially the Jewish Christians. It is imperative to silence them, as they are upsetting whole families by teaching for sordid gain what they should not.
Titus 1, 10-11*

Titus was ordained bishop by Paul through the laying on of hands as a successor in the divine office. In the NT Church, the presbyters (priests) and deacons served under the bishops as they do today in the Catholic Church and did in the early Church.

*“And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the firstfruits of their labours, having first proved them by the Spirit to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe…Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be strife on account of the office of the episcopate. For this reason…they appointed those ministers already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry.”
St. Clement, Bishop of Rome, Epistle to the Corinthians 42,44 (A.D. 98)

“For what is the bishop but one beyond all others possesses all power and authority, so far as it is possible for a man to possess it, who according to his ability has been made an imitator of the Christ of God? But what is the presbytery but a sacred assembly, the counselors and assessors of the bishop? And what are the deacons but imitators of the angelic powers, fulfilling a pure and blameless ministry unto him.”
St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, Letter to the Trallians 7 (c.A.D. 110)*

Perhaps you should include vs.13-17 (Mt 16).

Meaning?

The disciples were not Mary’s offspring and the church is the body of Christ, often depicted as a woman.

Eph.4 11-12; 5:23

True, the Church is depicted as a woman in Revelations 12 and by being described as the Bride of Christ. But it is never called “Woman” as Mary was by Jesus at the beginning and end of his ministry (Jn 2:3-5; 19:26-27) in allusion to her role as the new Eve and Mother of the new order of creation, which presupposes Mary’s holiness and justice before God. The imagery in the Apocalypse is polyvalent, meaning the woman represents Israel, the Church, and Mary in different aspects.

"He became man by the Virgin, in order that the disobedience which proceeded from the serpent might receive its destruction in the same manner in which it derived its origin. For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled, having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the holy Thing begotten of her is the Son of God; and she replied, 'Be it unto me according to thy word."
St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 100 (A.D. 155)

PAX
:heaven:

 

[pablope]

joe3370,

I

'm so sorry that you find the words of Ambrose, Augustine Gregory the Great and Pope Leo so offensive. It is their words, not mine, so if you are angry, please take it up with them.

 

[Marybeloved]

Gara3987,
You can’t possibly mean what you said here. It’s the ultimate blasphemy against our Savior. For now, let’s set aside the church’s teaching and just go with the Bible.

You’re right- It’s blasphemy! So no need to “put aside Catholic teaching” and then waste time preaching to the choir- Catholic teaching utterly rejects the idea that “All” in Romans 3 means every human for this very reason- This is a protestant problem, not a Catholic one. So please turn your attention to your protestant brothers and explain to them the serious implications of insisting that St. Paul in Romans 3 is speaking absolutely!

Scripture never tells us that Mary never sinned.

God the Father certainly tells us she’s full of Grace before the Angel even tells her the Father’s message- Where exactly was her sin situate in that soul filled to the brim with grace? Do you believe that grace saves? Takes away sin? What do you think took Christ to the cross if not to gain for us grace?

The scriptures definitely allude to Mary’s sinlessness in St. Luke’s Gospel and quite a few other places, just as they allude to The Blessed Trinity and the Hypostatic union of Christ without teaching them explicitly. If you’re going to insist that Mary’s sinlessness cannot be believed unless you find the sentence “Mary was sinless/without sin” plainly on the pages of scripture, then you’ve got waaaay bigger problems than Our Lady’s sinlessness to wrap your head around.

Peace!

 

[joe370]

Hey Pablope…

pablope;8519617]

joe370,

Really? I found nothing offensive in their writings or teachings…but I will let Joe speak if he found something offensive…

 

[KathleenGee]

We didn’t find anything offensive!!!

Again it is the projection that is coming out…that what you have been taught about the Catholic Church…Jesus Christ is Truth…and in the Church we do have the freedom to debate and search…However, the Holy Spirit works to bring about greater understanding.

Quoting a piece on Peter, as Richard said here…is not actually relevant to the existence of the Blessed Virgin and her work among the Apostles and early Church.

Our pastor was sharing with us in RCIA last year about Christian communities started here in the USA that have removed practically all sacraments from the life of faith among them. So it is very hard for them to go beyond the pages of the Bible to experience Church as we know it, very hard.

The reality so hard to grasp is that the Church is now the new dimension to salvation history. Prior, all was leading up to the coming of the Messiah. We cannot say everything in Christ ended in Revelation. We can say He was completely defined at the Council of Nicea regarding His nature.

But there is the new dimension, the new events that have come through believers in the Church…these faithful who are now living out the new life of Jesus Christ.

Christian sanctity is faith lived out that is nourished by the Eucharist…we are given Christ’s body, blood, soul, and divinity…as well as His Word at Mass…but union of Word and Eucharist brings us into new and sacred mysteries of the spiritual life.

Without the Eucharist, it is hard for anyone to believe that Mary was conceived without sin. You have to look to the Church in what it means to be a saint in practice.

And good points…MaryBeloved…that Mary a sinner is indeed a recent interpretation…as well as Joe’s (name removed by moderator)ut on St.Thomas only being contradicted in regards to the IC by his students. I knew he did not believe it…but another poster clariifed he did not want to take away from Christ…Thomas also considered women having defective genes as well…so with his personal issue, he would not be a likely theologian to expand on Mary any way.

 

[joe370]

ForeverGrace
I’m so sorry that you find the words of Ambrose, Augustine Gregory the Great and Pope Leo so offensive. It is their words, not mine, so if you are angry, please take it up with them.

No one here knows what the heck you are talking about my friend. What an odd thing to say. Show me where I said, “I find the words of Ambrose, Augustine Gregory the Great and Pope Leo offensive”? It didn’t look like you were the kind of person that would resort to such tactics, but I guess I was wrong.

Clearly, Augustine did not waiver:

Augustine:

"Moreover, when expounding the Gospel according to Luke, he * says: "It was no cohabitation with a husband which opened the secrets of the Virgin’s womb; rather was it the Holy Ghost which infused immaculate seed into her unviolated womb. *

…For the Lord Jesus alone of those who are born of woman is holy, inasmuch as He experienced not the contact of earthly corruption, by reason of the novelty of His immaculate birth; nay, He repelled it by His heavenly majesty."

The apostles and prophets were not holy?

Exactly. Jesus did not have contact of any earthly corruption which supports the fact that Mary was sinless.

Are you calling both Augustine and Ambrose hypocrites, because they both clearly believed that Mary was sinless as anyone can see by a simple google search.

…no where are we told that Mary was also without sin in any other area of her life. It’s completely contrary to scripture.

That’s your opinion and not all protestants share it; the reformers certainly didn’t but I do respect your right to believe it.

As to the cut/paste, yep, I did copy a good deal of it. However, I’m involved with the website that posted the information and know the character of the person and his academic skills.

I’m sure his academic skills are unquestionable; I just don’t happen to agree with him, but I could be wrong, which is why I defer to Jesus’ church as opposed to my own private discernment when faced with doctrinal differences, such as this one.

They are huge. And of course, the web makes it quite easy to access and verify any claims. I’ve done my homework.

I guess, if you know, with certainty, that you are right and that I am wrong then it really doesn’t matter what I say or think. I would never be so brazen as to make such a claim. To me it’s simply not a verifiable fact. All I have is my faith that the CC was guided by the HS to make such doctrinal claims.

With that said, the IC teaching, in my humble opinion, makes sense. I have faith, and believe according to said faith, that Jesus’ holiness would demand that He be born of a holy, consecrated woman. To each their own…

You posted this thread, so… you either want to create an argument or some other kind of dialogue.

Neither! Just a friendly exchange…

I am not the one doing the misquoting.

 

[Richard_Kastner]

Although all public revelation from God came to an end with the death of the last apostle,

Rev.12
17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

This text shows that God’s end time church has two characteristics.
1)They keep the commandments of God, that would be the ten commandments (all ten)and
2)They have the testimony of Jesus Christ which as Rev.19:10 says is the spirit of prophecy. So, I guess revelation from God did not come to an end with the last apostle.

the divine mysteries continue to unfold in their fullness as the Church matures in knowledge of the truth under the guidance of the Paraclete. The difference between Protestants and Catholics is that the former’s traditions (i.e., sola fide and sola Christo) result from gleaning the written word, whereas the latter’s traditions result in the written word. This means that the Catholic Church can exist on sacred Tradition alone, which it did for almost a century, and Scripture must be interpreted in light of it.

Are you saying that there is something in your sacred tradition that is not in the bible and is necessary for our salvation? If so what is it?

Matthew 16:16-19 for starters…

[Titus was ordained bishop by Paul through the laying on of hands as a successor in the divine office. In the NT Church, the presbyters (priests) and deacons served under the bishops as they do today in the Catholic Church and did in the early Church.

I see no central authority in any of these passages.

Meaning?

In Matt.16:13-17 Jesus establishes that He is talking about Himself when He tells Peter that He will establish His church upon “this rock.” The “keys to the kingdom of heaven” are the words that Jesus spoke and are written down in the bible, and Peter and the others and us are able to bind or loose people to the kingdom by either preaching Jesus words (binding) or not (loosing).

2Cor.5
17Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

18And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;

19To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

20Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.

21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

True, the Church is depicted as a woman in Revelations 12 and by being described as the Bride of Christ. But it is never called “Woman” as Mary was by Jesus at the beginning and end of his ministry (Jn 2:3-5; 19:26-27) in allusion to her role as the new Eve and Mother of the new order of creation, which presupposes Mary’s holiness and justice before God. The imagery in the Apocalypse is polyvalent, meaning the woman represents Israel, the Church, and Mary in different aspects.

Jer.6:2I have likened the daughter of Zion to a comely and delicate woman.
The daughter of Zion is God’s OT church (the Jews). The NT church is Spiritual Jews.
Rom9
4Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;
5Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.
6Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:
7Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

Mary is not associated with the church either OT or NT.

"He became man by the Virgin, in order that the disobedience which proceeded from the serpent might receive its destruction in the same manner in which it derived its origin. For Eve, who was a virgin and undefiled

, having conceived the word of the serpent, brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy, when the angel Gabriel announced the good tidings to her that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her, and the power of the Highest would overshadow her: wherefore also the holy Thing begotten of her is the Son of God; and she replied, 'Be it unto me according to thy word."
[/quote]

St. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 100 (A.D. 155)

PAX
:heaven:

Jesus became man because His Father loved the world and gave His Son for it’s Salvation.

Jn.3
16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

[PRmerger]

Are you saying that there is something in your sacred tradition that is not in the bible and is necessary for our salvation?

[SIGN]Indeed, there is. [/SIGN]

If so what is it?

How about the canon of Scripture? There is NOTHING in the Bible that says that the epistle to Titus is inspired but that the Odes of Solomon isn’t. There is NOTHING in the Bible that says that the Gospel of Mark is theopneustos but that the Gospel of Thomas isn’t.

That, my friend, is part of Sacred Tradition.

 

[KathleenGee]

What kind of bible are you using, Richard?

There was atleast one prophecy in the old testament implying the Messiah would come of a virgin birth…

And it is stated in Acts of Mary at Pentecost, Mary accompanying the apostles…other women did…but not Mary…of all people … who knew Christ her entire life…and then once he is resurrected, she goes on her own way?..incredulous…a woman full of grace finished…when the Church is now beginning…

The problem with the American Restorationist movement of the 1800’s is that there is no education in church history. Everything is looked solely at the pages…if one can read…of the Bible… people in the 1800’s who couldn’t read, – they as well were at the mercy of the local anti-Catholic preachers. Just like the caricature of the Catholic priests withholding the bible from people because of carnal power and control.

 

[Marybeloved]

In Matt.16:13-17 Jesus establishes that He is talking about Himself when He tells Peter that He will establish His church upon “this rock.” The “keys to the kingdom of heaven” are the words that Jesus spoke and are written down in the bible, and Peter and the others and us are able to bind or loose people to the kingdom by either preaching Jesus words (binding) or not (loosing).

You know Richard, for someone who insists on reading the scriptures and taking the truth as is (sola scriptura) you sure engage in a lot of serious intellectual somersaults to make scripture say what it does not say- this one here is one of the best. In what passage does Jesus establish that he’s talking about himself and not Peter? Certainly not in St. Mathew’s 16th Chapter verses 13-19. “Blessed are you Simon son of Jonah” Our Lord says “For flesh and Blood hath not revealed this to you but my father in heaven. And I say to you that You are Peter (meaning Rock) and on this Rock I will build my church” And we’re supposed to believe that Jesus did not say what he said

Mary is not associated with the church either OT or NT.

Ok, Ok! I was wrong- this one here takes the cake…what??? Are we now denying Mary’s Jewishness? What does that make Christ?- An Arab? And Mary’s Christianity? I suppose that whole business in Acts when God the Holy Ghost descended was just a fluke, eh?

 

[Good_Fella]

The church did not teach the immaculate concept or the sinlessness of Mary until Pope Pious IX, so if the early Christians believed that, they would have been in opposition to earlier Popes and their teachings, yes?

Nope. No earlier popes taught Mary was a sinner. :nope:

"He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle was exempt from putridity and corruption."
St. Hippolytus (ante A,D. 235)

Because into a soul that plots evil wisdom enters not, nor dwells she in a body under debt of sin.
Wisdom 1, 4

“Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair. There is no flaw in thee and no stain in thy mother.”
St. Ephraem of Edessa (A.D. 370)

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed.”
Genesis 3, 15

“Most blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.”
Luke 1, 42

“O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all, O Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the Ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides.”
St. Athanasius (A.D. 373)

“They shall make a sanctuary for me, so that I may dwell in their midst. This dwelling and all its furnishings you shall make exactly according to the pattern that I will show you. You shall make an ark of acacia wood…Plate it inside and outside with pure gold, and put a molding of gold around the top of it.”
Exo 25, 8-11

Then the cloud (anan) covered (episkiasei) the meeting tent, and the glory of the Lord filled the dwelling.
Exo 40, 34

And the angel said to her in reply, “The Holy Spirit (anan) will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow (episkiasei) you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.”
Luke 1, 35

“Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled, but a Virgin whom grace has made** inviolet, free of every stain of sin**.”
St. Ambrose (A.D. 388)

And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”
Luke 1, 28

In the Greek text “favoured one” is kecharitomene, literally meaning having been “perfectly, completely, and enduringly endowed with grace.” The angel addressed Mary by her state of grace when he greeted her. So the Aramaic Peshitta (4th century) accurately states in English: “Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with you.” Mary had already found favour with God before the angel arrived (Lk 1:30), having been made worthy to be the mother of the Lord. To be truly worthy of the divine maternity, Mary had to have been sinless and remained so.

"A Virgin, innocent, spotless, free of all defect, untouched, unsullied, holy in soul and body, like a lily sprouting among thorns."
St, Theodotus of Ancrya (ante A.D. 446)

You are all-beautiful my beloved,
and there is no blemish in you.
Songs 4, 7

The Feast of the Immaculate Conception was established by Pope Sixtus lV on 8 December 1476. Pope Pius lX defined this doctrine a dogma of the Church on the Feast Day in 1854.

Yes…scripture does tell us that Mary was a sinner, because she belongs to the human race and we have all sinned. The fact that she did bear Jesus without the stain of original sin was an intervention by the Holy Spirit so that the Messiah could come to grant us salvation.

God redeemed Mary by intervening. If the Holy Spirit had intervened to preserve Jesus from contracting original sin, then he too would have been implicated in the sin of Adam and in need of redemption. Do you honestly believe that?

She had other children after Jesus, and we don’t read anything about any other miraculous pregnancies.

We don’t read anything about any other natural pregnancies either.

A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring dried up, a fountain sealed.
Songs 4, 12

PAX
:heaven:

 

[Nicea325]

Richard Kastner:

Are you saying that there is something in your sacred tradition that is not in the bible and is necessary for our salvation? If so what is it?

Yes Richard and I have told you a million times,yet like most Bible-Only folks like to dodge it or ignore it. It is the CANON OF SCRIPTURE! Show me ONE VERSE where Scripture mentions it? You accept the canon,then you by default accept Tradition.

Posted by Richard Kastner
In Matt.16:13-17 Jesus establishes that He is talking about Himself when He tells Peter that He will establish His church upon “this rock.” The “keys to the kingdom of heaven” are the words that Jesus spoke and are written down in the bible, and Peter and the others and us are able to bind or loose people to the kingdom by either preaching Jesus words (binding) or not (loosing).

This has to be the one the worst interpretations I have ever heard. Richard…you cannot make scripture say what you want it to say.

 

[KathleenGee]

Richard…

As has been told you many times, we look at Scripture from the whole of context…you have to look at the times people lived in, see how they integrated Christianity…used symbols and practices that integrated the Word of God into society…that is the fruit of the Incarnation—Word Made Flesh…every step connected to the next…

Otherwise, if you have the Bible without Church, then, not only do you not have any history, any saints of the past 2,000 years…you have no history…only a literal reading of the Bible today…it is good…but it is limited and puts you in the position those who believe the institutional church has existed since Christ founded it.

Like…Christ is rather less than He is…Where is the effect of the Resurrection, then, on those who followed Him?

So you can only look at those in Scripture? Than anyone else following…is not identified as following Scripture? And then you are putting yourself of comparing a human being to the perfection of written words? Where is the humanity?

Why did Christ refer to Himself as the Son of Man more often than the Son of God?

Why is it in the history of the Church and believers of Christ that the more they draw to God…they subsequently disconnect from the humanity of other people and begin to condemn them in the name of God???

How much we can understand God more when people are most humane in the name of Christ!! …

 

[Nicea325]

Richard…

As has been told you many times, we look at Scripture from the whole of context…you have to look at the times people lived in, see how they integrated Christianity…used symbols and practices that integrated the Word of God into society…that is the fruit of the Incarnation—Word Made Flesh…every step connected to the next…

Otherwise, if you have the Bible without Church, then, not only do you not have any history, any saints of the past 2,000 years…you have no history…only a literal reading of the Bible today…it is good…but it is limited and puts you in the position those who believe the institutional church has existed since Christ founded it.

Like…Christ is rather less than He is…Where is the effect of the Resurrection, then, on those who followed Him?

So you can only look at those in Scripture? Than anyone else following…is not identified as following Scripture? And then you are putting yourself of comparing a human being to the perfection of written words? Where is the humanity?

Why did Christ refer to Himself as the Son of Man more often than the Son of God?

Why is it in the history of the Church and believers of Christ that the more they draw to God…they subsequently disconnect from the humanity of other people and begin to condemn them in the name of God???

How much we can understand God more when people are most humane in the name of Christ!! …

Problem is that many Protestants I have encounter simply slice and dice verses to prove an agenda. Unfortunately, such an approach is dangerous and has led to many diverse interpretations.

 

[Marybeloved]

Problem is that many Protestants I have encounter simply slice and dice verses to prove an agenda. Unfortunately, such an approach is dangerous and has led to many diverse interpretations.

Very true. Like a master chef mixing around ingredients in a new way to come up with a new dish.

 

[rinnie]

I think this issue of Mary’s sinless/sinful state has caused Christians to slide into Phariseeism. For Catholics, the doctrine of Mary never sinning has become a rule that must be believed in order to be in good standing with the Church. But then how did Mary escape original sin must be explained, so the Immaculate Conception becomes a rule that must be believed to be in good standing with the Church, neither of which has anything to do with salvation. Protestants (some of whom seem a little obsessed with this belief) point to Romans 3:23 and say all includes Mary. Then they have to contend with does all mean everyone, does it mean all those being addressed by the letter to Romans, or does all mean those who read this verse, does all mean the same in other verses (as a previous poster has pointed out)? Again, this has nothing to do with our salvation.
To clarify, in the third Chapter of Romans Paul is explaining that the Jewish Christians shouldn’t look down on their former-pagan brothers and sisters because everyone sins and must be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ.
Personally, I still think Mary was a sinner (I can’t think of a gentler way to say it). I won’t quote any Scripture, but God has always used fallen, broken, humble, obedient, sinful, beautiful people to do miraculous things. If you choose to believe the same, or different, God Bless you. Just don’t be a stumbling block to a fellow believer.

Mary was Blessed among Women, scripture tells us so. If the truth is a stumbling block among believers lets us be the biggest stumbling block in the world.

As Christ told us this is not his world, the world would not accept him, nor will the world accept his truth.

Christ promised us he would live through his Church and the truth would be told through his Church. That is the RCC. It was the Church that is still led by the successor of St Peter.

I am sorry but I see no where is written or oral scripture that states believe what you what to believe but do not be a stumbling block for others.

Christ will continue to live up to his promise and he will be with us and the gates of hell will not prevail over his Church. The RCC will continue to be a stumbling block for those who cannot accept the true word of Christ.

And People like us will continue to proclaim the truth until we have taken our last breath. SO call me the biggest stumbling block if you want, But I will stick up for my Lord and his truth that is proclaimed through his Church.

 

[KathleenGee]

To deny Mary is to deny the Incarnation…the Word Made Flesh…of which she is included.

Without the Incarnation, faith is reduced to what is written on a human made page.

Christ came, without texts, without books. The Lord Jesus came in the flesh, He chose human flesh to be His witnesses…not depending on people alone to remember Him and His works and teachings…He chose human witnesses…made of clay, to go out and pronounce the Good News, to heal, to forgive sin, to reconcile God to man.

If you depend on the book of the Bible alone without Church, then Christ is truly not the Redeemer, that he is less than what He is…incapable of working through human beings!..incapable of accepting the Holy Spirit working through those consecrated to Him in spirit and truth to begin His Church…incapable of choosing men who were not capable either of choosing successors and setting up an institution of faith, creed, worship, administration…because you believe in text, not Christ redeeming and saving power to renew and restore us.

Mary is the transmitter of grace…she is the link between Christ and us…she the human flesh…the principle agent that makes Christ Who called Himself, the Son of Man, the New Adam…Mary the New Eve.

If you deny the existence of Christ’s Church, then you are denying theology, and along with Martin Luther hold the implication that the Holy Spirit did not ensure the apostolic succession of faith.

If you look at the Bible only…written pages made available through the printing press…then you are denying the testimony of Christ Himself–the Oral Tradition.

The Oral Tradition is Christ coming to man, heart to heart, flesh to flesh, spirit to spirit…not literate people who can read and be able to get Bibles.

The Church existed without the Bible for several hundreds of years…the Oral Tradition in the Holy Spirit united with Sacred Scripture is how faith is transmitted.

And Mary is the framework…the flesh that was given to the Holy Spirit for the Incarnation…we can never give her enough due honor. She is God’s special creation…

The Lord created Mary sinless…that her great mission…to be the Mother of God and the support to the Apostles and the Church.

 

[Frankk]

Yes Richard and I have told you a million times,yet like most Bible-Only folks like to dodge it or ignore it. It is the CANON OF SCRIPTURE! Show me ONE VERSE where Scripture mentions it? You accept the canon,then you by default accept Tradition.

Very well put, Nicea. Unfortunately Richard is in complete denial and cannot recognize sheer logic when he reads it.

This has to be the one the worst interpretations I have ever heard. Richard…you cannot make scripture say what you want it to say.

Sadly he’s spent nearly 50 pages of posts doing precisely that - or, at least, trying to. It’s all very sad.

 

[Nicea325]

Very well put, Nicea. Unfortunately Richard is in complete denial and cannot recognize sheer logic when he reads it.

Sadly he’s spent nearly 50 pages of posts doing precisely that - or, at least, trying to. It’s all very sad.

Exactly! I remember the last time I mentioned to him the Tradition which includes the canon,he basically stated he was done discussing with me? Geeee…I wonder why?

 

[Nicea325]

Very true. Like a master chef mixing around ingredients in a new way to come up with a new dish.

Yes and unfortunately everyone today is also a theologian and scholar when it comes to scripture.