Mary, the Immaculate Conception etc

[Roman_Army]

justcatholic:

Nope, I am Catholic Sarah. When 15 other bible translations cite the verse “highly favored” instead of “Full of Grace”, it is obvious the Douay version is biased. Just like the NWT translates John 1:1 "the Word was “a god”, while all others translate the verse “the Word was God”. It’s called religious bias.

**Hmmm… The Catholic NAB says: **And coming to her, he said, “Hail, favored one! The Lord is with you.”

Religious bias? No, the changing of the translation means nothing and doesn’t prove anything. The angel said “Hail” and “favored one” and “The Lord is with you.” Why was she favored above all the women? She was favored since her birth. Also, “The Lord is with you” as in the Lord is with her and was with her before the Angel’s visit. Also, why say “Hail”? “Hail” is used to greet royalty. If she is royalty of God, she is needed to be sinless.

 

[E.E.N.S]

justcatholic:

Nope, I am Catholic Sarah…

Question, (since you are “Catholic” and all) why don’t you follow the Church’s teachings? She [the Church] surely does hold the Immaculate Conception to be true, it’s dogma in fact, it must be believed.
I take it then by this assessment that you neither believe in Papal Infallibility? (…or the Church being the Mystical Body of Christ, or, what else? - and you call yourself Catholic?) I don’t mean to bash, but you shouldn’t be falsely representing the Catholic Faith by calling yourself a Catholic if you do not believe what the Catholic Church teaches.

 

[Roman_Army]

**Javelin: **

I deleted that assertion in my previous post about the Bible translations, since, even the Catholic NAB says “favored one.” Sorry.

 

[justcatholic]

E.E.N.S

             Sure I believe in the Catholic church, but the whole Catholic church from start to finish. I examine the development of doctrine, from it's beginning to our day. If the Catholic church contradicts what the early church and the bible clearly taught, then I hold to the early church view. 

              Do I believe the Pope speaks infallibly? No, I believe church history, the fathers and the bible do. I don't believe one man does. What if the Pope suddenly arises some morning and declares we are now brothers with the extra terrestrials on other worlds? Should I swallow it, because I'm suppose to or should I consult the testimony of church tradition and the bible? One can choose to walk blindly in the dark, whistling a happy tune of "I will follow him", But that is closing your mind to all that the church in the past has established as truth.

 

[linus]

RyanL:

As you are clearly familiar with God’s word, could you please tell me the names of the people who God changes their name or calls them by a specific title (please include “Immanuel”)? There aren’t many, so it should be a short list. Also, could you please tell me if their new names had anything to do with their identities? And finally, could you please tell me if kacharitomene is used as a title in this text (and if not, why not)?

Let me answer your second question since that’s the crux of your post. No, I do not see “kacharitomene,” “favored one” as a title nor a moniker of Mary. And to make the angelic salutation an evidence of her sinless conception is torturing the Scriptural text. “Hail Mary highly favored one” states no more about her being immaculately conceived than "Noah found grace (favor) *in the eyes of the Lord" * (Gen. 6:8) states Noah was conceived without sin.

In fact Mary herself was troubled by the angel’s statement, obviously knowing that she was no different than any other Jewish woman. But Gabriel explained to her the reason for his visit and unique salutation. She, amongst all the Jewish women throughout the centuries, “found favor with God” (Lk. 1:30, i.e., preferred above all others), having been chosen to give birth to the Messiah (vs. 31). Hence, from that moment on all generations count her blessed (Lk. 1:48b).

Even if you want to translate *“kacharitomene” * as a moniker of Mary, the Greek word and the text could not possibly mean “sinless one since conception.” But “one highly favored” by the Lord based on the glorious blessing about to be bestowed on her - i.e., giving birth to the long awaited Messiah.

The Lord bless and keep you as well.

 

[Lucania]

justcatholic:

Nope, I am Catholic Sarah. When 15 other bible translations cite the verse “highly favored” instead of “Full of Grace”, it is obvious the Douay version is biased. Just like the NWT translates John 1:1 "the Word was “a god”, while all others translate the verse “the Word was God”. It’s called religious bias.

I also read somewhere where some fathers believe Mary became sinless at her annunciation, rather than at her birth. So the issue was varied to say the least, before the Pope in 1950 made it law.

That would be 1854 NOT 1950.

 

[E.E.N.S]

justcatholic:

E.E.N.S

Sure I believe in the Catholic church, but the whole Catholic church from start to finish. I examine the development of doctrine, from it’s beginning to our day. If the Catholic church contradicts what the early church and the bible clearly taught, then I hold to the early church view.

Do I believe the Pope speaks infallibly? No, I believe church history, the fathers and the bible do. I don’t believe one man does. What if the Pope suddenly arises some morning and declares we are now brothers with the extra terrestrials on other worlds? Should I swallow it, because I’m suppose to or should I consult the testimony of church tradition and the bible? One can choose to walk blindly in the dark, whistling a happy tune of “I will follow him”, But that is closing your mind to all that the church in the past has established as truth.

You response if full of contradiction…you say that you believe in the Catholic Church (what do you mean by this?), yet you do not believe in many of Her major teachings/dogmas!!!
You say that you listen to the ECF, but they even believe in these very things that you disagree with (papal infallibility, Mary’s immaculate conception, etc.)…also, the ECF aren’t infallible, the successor to Peter is!
You ask “What if the Pope suddenly declares…” - this shows that you obviously don’t understand papal infallibility, (the Holy Spirit would not allow this to happen - as history shows) perhaps you should spend sometime in prayer, and RE-study the Church, the ECF, our Faith, etc, and try to get over your preconceived ideas about this - and if you are going to call yourself a Catholic, then please, my brother, know what it means to be one!

 

[E.E.N.S]

“Hail Mary highly favored one” states no more about her being immaculately conceived than "Noah found grace (favor) *in the eyes of the Lord" *(Gen. 6:8)

There is a difference between “full of grace” and “found grace”…

 

[Roman_Army]

justcatholic:

E.E.N.S

Sure I believe in the Catholic church, but the whole Catholic church from start to finish. I examine the development of doctrine, from it’s beginning to our day. If the Catholic church contradicts what the early church and the bible clearly taught, then I hold to the early church view.

Do I believe the Pope speaks infallibly? No, I believe church history, the fathers and the bible do. I don’t believe one man does. What if the Pope suddenly arises some morning and declares we are now brothers with the extra terrestrials on other worlds? Should I swallow it, because I’m suppose to or should I consult the testimony of church tradition and the bible? One can choose to walk blindly in the dark, whistling a happy tune of “I will follow him”, But that is closing your mind to all that the church in the past has established as truth.

If you do not believe in the primacy and infallibility of the successor of Peter, you are not Catholic, you are anathema and a heretic. The Early Church Fathers were not all infallible. Only the Popes were infallibile. The Bishops are infallible only in ecumenical council and the dogma of the infallibility of the Pope was infallibly proclaimed in the Vatican I and Vatican II ecumenical councils. Prior to that the Pope’s primacy and teachings of faith and morals were never doubted by Catholics. That is another reason why the dogma was proclaimed. Unless you recant you are not in communion with Rome and thus outside the Church. There is a Liberal Catholic Church in heresy and schism that you would do well in. You shall be in my prayers. I hope you come to the truth.

 

[RyanL]

linus:

Let me answer your second question since that’s the crux of your post. No, I do not see “kacharitomene,” “favored one” as a title nor a moniker of Mary. And to make the angelic salutation an evidence of her sinless conception is torturing the Scriptural text. “Hail Mary highly favored one” states no more about her being immaculately conceived than "Noah found grace (favor) *in the eyes of the Lord" * (Gen. 6:8) states Noah was conceived without sin.

In fact Mary herself was troubled by the angel’s statement, obviously knowing that she was no different than any other Jewish woman. But Gabriel explained to her the reason for his visit and unique salutation. She, amongst all the Jewish women throughout the centuries, “found favor with God” (Lk. 1:30, i.e., preferred above all others), having been chosen to give birth to the Messiah (vs. 31). Hence, from that moment on all generations count her blessed (Lk. 1:48b).

Even if you want to translate *“kacharitomene” * as a moniker of Mary, the Greek word and the text could not possibly mean “sinless one since conception.” But “one highly favored” by the Lord based on the glorious blessing about to be bestowed on her - i.e., giving birth to the long awaited Messiah.

The Lord bless and keep you as well.

1. You’re misquoting scripture. Mary’s name isn’t mentioned in the salutation.
2. You didn’t answer my first question.
3. You are unfamiliar with the Greek. Read the following:
   bringyou.to/apologetics/a116.htm
   If you want to talk about what forms of “grace” are used in the original languages, I highly encourage you to do so.
4. Could it be that Mary was troubled because the angel just greeted her with a divine title, fit only for the Queen of Heaven?
5. Do *you *refer to her as the Blessed Virgin Mary?

God bless,
RyanL

 

[E.E.N.S]

E.E.N.S.:

RE-study the Church, the ECF, our Faith, etc, and try to get over your preconceived ideas about this - and if you are going to call yourself a Catholic, then please, my brother, know what it means to be one!

About the Early Church Fathers** **
ECF Purgatory
ECF The Church
ECF Intercession of the Saints
ECF The Primacy of Peter/Rome
ECF Mary Ever-Virgin
ECF Peter’s Presence in Rome
ECF The Immaculate Conception
ECF Apostolic Succession http://www.staycatholic.com/anim_NewFlag.gif** **
ECF The Assumption
ECF Tradition** **
ECF Contraception
ECF Justification
ECF Divorce and Remarriage
ECF Baptism** **
ECF Salvation Outside the Church
ECF The Mass
ECF The Divinity of Christ
ECF The Real Presence
ECF Hell** **
ECF Confession
ECF Sabbath or Sunday

 

[javelin]

**Javelin: **

I deleted that assertion in my previous post about the Bible translations, since, even the Catholic NAB says “favored one.” Sorry.

Sorry, but I ran out of time to edit my post and remove the quote.

I certainly didn’t mean to criticise you, just point out that I think some of the implications some catholics seem to make that protestant translators knowingly and willfully mis-translated the Bible so that it would fit their doctrine is a bit harsh and presumptuous.

As I implied earlier, I’m quite sure it has happened more than once (I have a hard time thinking the NWT’s errors in translation were innocent, for example), but to lump every non-Catholic translator in with those willful deceivers is unfair, IMHO.

I do believe whole-heartedly in the Immaculate Conception, though.

I also think the Biblical arguments that link the doctrine of the IC to Mary as the perfected Ark of the Covenant, using the Old Testament and an understanding of Biblical types, is the clearest and most convincing evidence of the doctrine. Perhaps the discussion should move in that direction.

Peace,
javelin

 

[quasimodo]

’ tis clear that while there may be a shortage of vocations to the priesthood, there is no lack of them for the papacy … even among those who deny his charism.

 

[Lucania]

justcatholic:

E.E.N.S

Sure I believe in the Catholic church, but the whole Catholic church from start to finish. I examine the development of doctrine, from it’s beginning to our day. If the Catholic church contradicts what the early church and the bible clearly taught, then I hold to the early church view.

Do I believe the Pope speaks infallibly? No, I believe church history, the fathers and the bible do. I don’t believe one man does. What if the Pope suddenly arises some morning and declares we are now brothers with the extra terrestrials on other worlds? Should I swallow it, because I’m suppose to or should I consult the testimony of church tradition and the bible? One can choose to walk blindly in the dark, whistling a happy tune of “I will follow him”, But that is closing your mind to all that the church in the past has established as truth.

Justcatholic, Papal Infallibity means that the Pope is infallible on matters of FAITH. It does not mean that if he says the Moon is made of Cream Cheese that it is so. He is infallible when it comes to matters of the FAITH. That MUST be believed to call yourself a Catholic. Go to Ask an Apologist with this if you are still in doubt. The beauty of this forum is that we all have learned something at some time while here.

 

[Roman_Army]

justcatholic:

I dont believe one man does.

**So, it seems you also don’t believe that the Apostles were infallible and that Jesus was infallible. **

What if the Pope suddenly arises some morning and declares we are now brothers with the extra terrestrials on other worlds? Should I swallow it, because I’m suppose to or should I consult the testimony of church tradition and the bible?

Again you’re attempting to foretell the future. The same thing could be said: "What if Jesus or St. Paul said that people should have sex with anyone they want at anytime?"

Also, the above shows prejudice. The Church does not condemn the possibility of extra terrestrials. If they are capable of reason, they can be converted, and be our brothers.

One can choose to walk blindly in the dark, whistling a happy tune of “I will follow him”, But that is closing your mind to all that the church in the past has established as truth.

As the CA tracts prove Dogma and Doctrine can continue to develop: catholic.com/library/Can_Dogma_Develop.asp

**Rejecting further revelation of truth is walking in the dark. It’s the same as the disciples rejecting to follow Jesus and rejecting everything he taught and said. **

 

[E.E.N.S]

E.E.N.S.:

You response if full of contradiction…you say that you believe in the Catholic Church (what do you mean by this?), yet you do not believe in many of Her major teachings/dogmas!!!
You say that you listen to the ECF, but they even believe in these very things that you disagree with (papal infallibility, Mary’s immaculate conception, etc.)…also, the ECF aren’t infallible, the successor to Peter is!
You ask “What if the Pope suddenly declares…” - this shows that you obviously don’t understand papal infallibility, (the Holy Spirit would not allow this to happen - as history shows) perhaps you should spend sometime in prayer, and RE-study the Church, the ECF, our Faith, etc, and try to get over your preconceived ideas about this - and if you are going to call yourself a Catholic, then please, my brother, know what it means to be one!

JustCatholic, I posted the ECF links a few posts up, but here is an online version of the Catechism as well…

disciplesnow.com/catholic/catechism.cfm

 

[Roman_Army]

E.E.N.S.:

JustCatholic, I posted the ECF links a few posts up, but here is an online version of the Catechism as well…

disciplesnow.com/catholic/catechism.cfm

There is also a searchable one that I enjoy using a lot: scborromeo.org/index2.htm

**891 **“The Roman Pontiff, head of the college of bishops, enjoys this infallibility in virtue of his office, when, as supreme pastor and teacher of all the faithful - who confirms his brethren in the faith he proclaims by a definitive act a doctrine pertaining to faith or morals. . . . The infallibility promised to the Church is also present in the body of bishops when, together with Peter’s successor, they exercise the supreme Magisterium,” above all in an Ecumenical Council. When the Church through its supreme Magisterium proposes a doctrine “for belief as being divinely revealed,” and as the teaching of Christ, the definitions “must be adhered to with the obedience of faith.” This infallibility extends as far as the deposit of divine Revelation itself.

**890 **The mission of the Magisterium is linked to the definitive nature of the covenant established by God with his people in Christ. It is this Magisterium’s task to preserve God’s people from deviations and defections and to guarantee them the objective possibility of professing the true faith without error. Thus, the pastoral duty of the Magisterium is aimed at seeing to it that the People of God abides in the truth that liberates. To fulfill this service, Christ endowed the Church’s shepherds with the charism of infallibility in matters of faith and morals.

**889 **In order to preserve the Church in the purity of the faith handed on by the apostles, Christ who is the Truth willed to confer on her a share in his own infallibility. By a “supernatural sense of faith” the People of God, under the guidance of the Church’s living Magisterium, “unfailingly adheres to this faith.”

-Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

[MonicaC]

justcatholic:

Nope, I am Catholic Sarah. When 15 other bible translations cite the verse “highly favored” instead of “Full of Grace”, it is obvious the Douay version is biased. Just like the NWT translates John 1:1 "the Word was “a god”, while all others translate the verse “the Word was God”. It’s called religious bias.

I also read somewhere where some fathers believe Mary became sinless at her annunciation, rather than at her birth. So the issue was varied to say the least, before the Pope in 1950 made it law.

That is so funny! I hope you don’t try use this excuse, you must know that the protestants do tend to reword verse (or even drop books all together) to help support their view.

 

[Wildgraywolf]

Here’s something I was taught as a child and re-discovered here on CA:

Consider an analogy: Suppose a man falls into a deep pit, and someone reaches down to pull him out. The man has been “saved” from the pit. Now imagine a woman walking along, and she too is about to topple into the pit, but at the very moment that she is to fall in, someone holds her back and prevents her. She too has been saved from the pit, but in an even better way: She was not simply taken out of the pit, she was prevented from getting stained by the mud in the first place. This is the illustration Christians have used for a thousand years to explain how Mary was saved by Christ. By receiving Christ’s grace at her conception, she had his grace applied to her before she was able to become mired in original sin and its stain.

Simple and sweet without all the heavy theology.

 

[Cathoholic]

Dear JustCatholic,
You stated: “Do I believe the Pope speaks infallibly? No, I believe church history, the fathers and the bible do. I don’t believe one man does. . . .”

This sounds like myself a few years ago. Then a Priest said to me “If one doctrine of the Church falls, all doctrine falls. You must believe ALL of the Catholic Church or you are not believing in it at all.” I pondered that for days (and still am pondering it years later).

At the time I thought of myself as a committed Catholic although “pick and choose” was on the menu for me. Through study and a lot a prayer and fasting I came to see the Church as the spotless “Bride of Christ.” Indefectible and sure. The Church doesn’t teach we must believe men are brothers with extra-terrestrials. Nor can She. She doesn’t teach that 2+2 = 5 (I didn’t use the one about extra-terrestrials - I used this one). But EVEN if she did claim that 2+2=5, She doesn’t claim infallibility in mathematics so you don’t have to worry about that either.

I found that when I disagreed with the voice of the Church, I disagreed with Jesus Himself. All the dissentions I used to have (and I had many) were washed away by prayerful study and fasting. These types of things are battles of the flesh (you NEED to study), but they are not MERELY battles of the flesh. These are spiritual battles as well, which is why there are so many intelligent people that post in these forums, coming to many different conclusions on one teaching (i.e. the Immaculate Conception doctrine), despite being intelligent and despite reading the same data. This ALONE should suggest to us that we NEED a teaching Magisterium.

God bless you on your faith journey. Pray for me and I will pray for you too.