Mary?

[avenger]

Avenger,

The fact that she remained a virgin is not directly mention is scripture. However, it is not mentioned that she had any other children either. I suggest that you do research on Catholic.com to understand the Catholic postion on this. Logically, using only Scripture, we can say that she had no other children before Jesus was 12. The “brothers of Jesus” who tried to talk him into leaving were not acting like younger siblings. Further, why would Jesus leave his mother in the hands of John if he had other siblings?

She is described in Scriptures as being full of Grace. Original sin, as the West understands it, is not directly mentioned in Scriptures, either.

The Assumption was not mentioned in Scripture, either. Want to know one reason that may be the case? Because she was not dead yet. She is alive at the beginning of Acts. In fact, her death is never recorded. Would it be that hard to accept that she lived another 15-20 years or more after the Ressurection?

In any event, all three of these things were held by the first century Christians as true. We see them in one form or another in the EO CHurch. No Christian doubted them until the second generation of Reformers. Who should I trust? Those from 110 AD or those from 1600 AD?

Now, your second post shows a grave misunderstanding of the Communion of Saints, and of that verse. No one can deny that Mary did the will of the Father perfectly. That is fact in scripture. That is also one reason we hold that she was without original sin. Anyway, she is a full member of the Communion of Saints as part of the Church Triumphant. As Jesus kept the law of Moses perfectly, why should we think that he does not honor his Father and Mother perfectly? Part of the understanding of the Communion of Saints is that those in the Church Triumphant have easier access to God. Their prayers are more effacacious than ours on earth.

I showed no misunderstanding, rather, I showed accurate Scriptural understanding.Christ alone is all the advocate we need with the Father, period. And do you really think I would do research on Catholic.com? I suspect that information would be a wee bit slanted.

 

[ralphinal]

I showed no misunderstanding, rather, I showed accurate Scriptural understanding.Christ alone is all the advocate we need with the Father, period. And do you really think I would do research on Catholic.com? I suspect that information would be a wee bit slanted.

At no point in time did I say that Mary replaces Christ. No Catholic should beleive that. Catholic.com accurately reflects Catholic teaching. Catholic teaching is what Christians beleived for 15 centuries. Why would that be problematic to you?

Do you ever pray for anyone else? WOuld you pray for someone if they asked you to?

 

[Peter_J]

Honestly, I do not know the doctrine on her queenship. I do know that it is a part of the Faith. I always took it as a default teaching, not defined as dogma but understood as there is a feast day for it.

Good point. I guess I sometimes get a little caught up in the rhetoric of “The Pope should define a fifth Marian dogma, which would talk about co-Redemptrix, and Mediatrix, and” etc. etc., and I forget that there are actually teaching which are more central to the faith than “co-Redemptrix”, but which haven’t been dogmatically defined.

So if the Pope were going to define a new dogma, it would be reasonable to suppose that he would define Mary’s queenship, rather than “co-Redemptrix”.

as there is a feast day for it.

Also the Fifth Glorious Mystery.

 

[avenger]

At no point in time did I say that Mary replaces Christ. No Catholic should beleive that. Catholic.com accurately reflects Catholic teaching. Catholic teaching is what Christians beleived for 15 centuries. Why would that be problematic to you?

Do you ever pray for anyone else? WOuld you pray for someone if they asked you to?

I dont agree with your assessment of Catholic teaching for Christians for 15 centuries. I do think that Catholic teaching developed over time and moved further and further away from true Christianity, in to a Pharisee like (in terms of legalism), Stoic movement.

 

[ralphinal]

I dont agree with your assessment of Catholic teaching for Christians for 15 centuries. I do think that Catholic teaching developed over time and moved further and further away from true Christianity, in to a Pharisee like (in terms of legalism), Stoic movement.

If this is true, why do the EO hold basically the same doctrines (Except the Immaculate Conception, but that it because of their understanding of Original Sin, not of Mary)? That would mean that whatever drifting was done, was done prior to the 11th century.

At some point, if you are honest historically, you get to the point where there is one Church. THese doctrines were held, in some form, by that early Church.

Can you show us one major writer who did not agree with me? Let’s say in the first 500 years of the Church?

 

[avenger]

If this is true, why do the EO hold basically the same doctrines (Except the Immaculate Conception, but that it because of their understanding of Original Sin, not of Mary)? That would mean that whatever drifting was done, was done prior to the 11th century.

At some point, if you are honest historically, you get to the point where there is one Church. THese doctrines were held, in some form, by that early Church.

Can you show us one major writer who did not agree with me? Let’s say in the first 500 years of the Church?

Such doctrines were NOT formulated by the ancient Church. Since the NT writings were many years after Christ, you would think these teachings would have been included if they were so widely held as you claim. Yet, they are not. Do you wonder why?

You might find this interesting:

twoedgedsword.blogspot.com/2007/02/rejecting-mariology.html

 

[ralphinal]

Such doctrines were NOT formulated by the ancient Church. Since the NT writings were many years after Christ, you would think these teachings would have been included if they were so widely held as you claim. Yet, they are not. Do you wonder why?

You might find this interesting:

twoedgedsword.blogspot.com/2007/02/rejecting-mariology.html

Again, it proves nothing. Why are scriptures silent about all of the followers of Jesus who went on to die unnamed? Can you name the 72 that he sent out?

Acts goes on to follow Paul. I have said before that she was alive when Paul left Jerusalem for the last time, meaning that he would not have been there when she died. In the epistles, very little private info is passed along. James had been killed before most of them was written, yet that is not mentioned. In fact, depending on the dating system that you use, most of the Apostles were killed before the NT was written, yet nothing was mentioned about that.

Mary, as the new Eve, was the basis for the Immaculate Conception. The assumption has been held for a long time. Now, since they are not scriptural, you cannot beleive them. None of the Apostles, or Jesus, for that matter, ever went to the bathroom in the Bible. Can we assume that they never needed to?

 

[RobinSebas]

Welcome to the Forums.

Well, we must beleive that she is the Mother of Jesus, and as Jesus is both God and Man, the mother of God. You can use the term Theotokos (God-Bearer)

We must beleive that she remained a virgin until death.

We must beleive that she was born without stain of original sin.

We must beleive that she was assumed into heaven.

We must beleive that she is a member of the Communion of Saints and part of the Church Triumphant.

 

[avenger]

Again, it proves nothing. Why are scriptures silent about all of the followers of Jesus who went on to die unnamed? Can you name the 72 that he sent out?

Acts goes on to follow Paul. I have said before that she was alive when Paul left Jerusalem for the last time, meaning that he would not have been there when she died. In the epistles, very little private info is passed along. James had been killed before most of them was written, yet that is not mentioned. In fact, depending on the dating system that you use, most of the Apostles were killed before the NT was written, yet nothing was mentioned about that.

Mary, as the new Eve, was the basis for the Immaculate Conception. The assumption has been held for a long time. Now, since they are not scriptural, you cannot beleive them. None of the Apostles, or Jesus, for that matter, ever went to the bathroom in the Bible. Can we assume that they never needed to?

Now you are reverting to circular argument, and have slid into ridiculousness. Again, logic would dictate that things of that enormity would have been mentioned after the fact, which is when the Scriptures were written, so you premise holds no water. As for me, I’ll rely on Scripture thanks.

 

[ralphinal]

Now you are reverting to circular argument, and have slid into ridiculousness. Again, logic would dictate that things of that enormity would have been mentioned after the fact, which is when the Scriptures were written, so you premise holds no water. As for me, I’ll rely on Scripture thanks.

Actually, “that enormity” is not really the issue. Do you know why the Marian dogmas are required as a matter of faith?

 

[avenger]

Actually, “that enormity” is not really the issue. Do you know why the Marian dogmas are required as a matter of faith?

Because man says so. Your rapid responses must mean you are online right now, so I wish you a good morning!

 

[ralphinal]

Because man says so. Your rapid responses must mean you are online right now, so I wish you a good morning!

And good morning to you! I hope you have had a wonderful week so far, and that your Sunday is even better.

Jesus founded a Church to which he gave authority. The authority of that Church has made pronouncements. As the Church made the pronouncements, then they carry Christ’s authority. We are to believe them because the Holy Catholic Church said to.

Are you willing to deny any dogmas pronounced by the Church?

 

[Mark77]

“But there are also many things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written.” Jn 21:25

If it was the Lord’s intention to give us only Sacred Scripture, Jesus would not have needed His Apostles and their successors to spread His Word.

If He could multiply the loaves and fishes then He surely could have produced unlimited copies of Sacred Scripture for all to read and completely understand without explanation or clarification.

Without an authoritative representative here on earth to continue His mission, the Word would be subject to each individual’s personal interpretation.

While the teachings of Jesus are perfect and complete, we can only understand a minuscule portion at any one time. As we grow and develop in the faith, He reveals more to us, like the Marian Dogmas.

Why would anyone doubt that Jesus loved and honored his mother? She was the only one who did not deny him, she was the first disciple, she prompted his public ministry by saying “Do whatever He tells you.” Jn 2:5.

We should all “do whatever He tells you”.

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus.

Mark

 

[avenger]

And good morning to you! I hope you have had a wonderful week so far, and that your Sunday is even better.

Jesus founded a Church to which he gave authority. The authority of that Church has made pronouncements. As the Church made the pronouncements, then they carry Christ’s authority. We are to believe them because the Holy Catholic Church said to.

Are you willing to deny any dogmas pronounced by the Church?

Since I do not think such authority was given, I am willing to deny ALL dogmas pronounced by your Church.

 

[Good_Fella]

Such doctrines were NOT formulated by the ancient Church. Since the NT writings were many years after Christ, you would think these teachings would have been included if they were so widely held as you claim. Yet, they are not. Do you wonder why?

1. Mary, Mother of God

They were overjoyed at seeing the star, and on entering the house they saw the child with Mary his mother. They prostrated themselves and did him homage.
Matthew 2, 10-11

“And how does this happen to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?”
Luke 1, 43

“There is ‘one’ Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first possible and then impossible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.”
Ignatius, To the Ephesians, 7 (A.D. 110)

1. The Perpetual Virginity of Mary

Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: ‘the’ virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Emmanuel.
Isaiah 7, 14

But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?”
Luke 1, 34

“For whereas the Word of God was without flesh, He took upon Himself the holy flesh by the holy Virgin, and prepared a robe which He wove for Himself, like a bridegroom, in the sufferings of the cross, in order that by uniting his own power with our moral body, and by mixing the incorruptible with the corruptible, and the strong with the weak, He might save perishing man.”
Hyppolytus, Treatise on Christ and antiChrist, 4 (A.D. 200)

1. The Immaculate Conception of Mary

I ‘will’ put enmity between you and the woman, ‘and’ between your offspring and hers. He (She) will strike at your head, while you strike at his (her) heel."
Genesis 3, 15

And coming to her he said, “Hail, full of grace. The Lord is with you.”
Luke 1, 28

And Elizabeth, filled with the Holy Spirit, cried out in a loud voice and said, “Most blessed are you among women, ‘and’ blessed is the fruit of your womb.”
Luke 1, 42

And Mary said,
“My soul proclaims the greatness of the Lord;
my spirit rejoices in God my saviour.
For he has looked upon his handmaid’s lowliness;
behold, from now all generations shall call me blessed.
The Mighty One has done great things for me,
and holy is his name.”
Luke 1, 46-49

“He was born of Mary the fair ewe.”
Melito de Sardo, Easter Homily (A.D. 177)

“This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one.”
Origen, Homily 1 (A.D. 244)

“Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair; there is flaw in Thee and no stain in thy Mother.”
Ephraem, Nisibene Hymns, 27:8 (A.D. 370)

To be continued.

 

[Good_Fella]

1. The Assumption of Mary

As the ark of the Lord was entering the City of David, Saul’s daughter Michal looked down through the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the Lord, and she despised him in her heart.
2 Samuel 6, 16

“And how does this happen, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? For at the moment the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the infant in my womb leaped for joy.”
Luke 1, 43-44

Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hail storm. A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars.
Revelation 11, 19; 12, 1

Arise, O Lord, come to your resting place,
you and your majestic ark.
Psalm 132, 8

“He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle (Mary) was exempt from putridity and corruption.”
Hyppolytus, Orations Inillud, Dominus Pascit me (ante A.D. 235)

“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.”
Athanasius, Homily of the Papyrus of Turin, 71: 216 (ante A.D. 373)

“As the most glorious Mother of Christ, our Saviour and God and the giver of life and immortality, has been endowed with life by him, she has received an eternal incorruptibilty of the body together with him who has raised her from the tomb and has taken her up to himself in a way known only to him.”
Modestus of Jerusalem (ante A.D. 634)

“It was fitting…that the most holy body of Mary, God bearing body, receptacle of God, divinised, incorruptible, illuminated by divine grace and full glory…should be entrusted to the earth for a little while and raised up to heaven in glory, with her soul pleasing to God.”
Theoteknos of Livias, Homily on the Assumption (ante A.D. 650)

“You are she, as it is written, appears in beauty, and your virginal body is all holy, all chaste, entirely the dwelling place of God, so that it is henceforth completely exempt from dissolution into dust. Though still human, it is changed into the heavenly life of incorruptibilty, truly living and glorious, undamaged and sharing in perfect life.”
Germanus of Constantinople, Sermon 1: PG 98, 346 (A.D. 733)

1. Mary, Mother of the Church

When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold your son.” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold your mother.” And from that hour the disciple took her into his home.
John 19, 26-27

Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus.
Revelation 12, 17

Mary said to the servers, “Do whatever he tells you.”
John 2, 5

“I love to call her the Church. This mother, when alone, had not milk, because alone she was not a woman. But she is once virgin and mother – pure as a virgin, loving as a mother. And calling her children to her, she nurses them with holy milk, viz., with the Word for childhood.”
Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor, 1:6 (A.D. 202)

:tiphat:

 

[paarsurrey]

H

In my opinion, Mary and his son Jesus both went on exile from Judea; and they both died a natural and peaceful death in India. Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim historical sources also confirm it. The Catholics should be, in my opinion, realistic and rational. No need to be mythical when one can give one’s faith eyes of research.

Kindly google for food to research.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna.

Thanks

 

[Good_Fella]

H

In my opinion, Mary and his son Jesus both went on exile from Judea; and they both died a natural and peaceful death in India. Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim historical sources also confirm it. The Catholics should be, in my opinion, realistic and rational. No need to be mythical when one can give one’s faith eyes of research.

Kindly google for food to research.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna.

Thanks

Why bother. Like you said - it’s just your opinion. :yawn:

 

[paarsurrey]

Originally Posted by paarsurrey
Hi

In my opinion, Mary and his son Jesus both went on exile from Judea; and they both died a natural and peaceful death in India. Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim historical sources also confirm it. The Catholics should be, in my opinion, realistic and rational. No need to be mythical when one can give one’s faith eyes of research.

Kindly google for food to research.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna.

Thanks

Why bother. Like you said - it’s just your opinion. :yawn:

Hi

Whatever one says is always one’s opinion. What you write is your opinion and what I say is my opinion. That is why we always discuss things and support our opinion with reasonable, rational and logical arguments. Sources of Revelation, Word from GodAllah is yet another means to make our opinion strog. This is but natural.

Thanks

 

[avenger]

very nice work, but it still does not disprove anything I have stated. You mention a few Scripture lines, but an Immaculate Conception and Assumption they do not make. Again, why wasnt this included in Scripture that was written after the fact, actually, at the time of a few of the other references you provided? The problem is, you confuse veneration and honor with dogma. I am not in any way trying to detract from Mary’s unique role in salvation history, but you need to keep it accurate. The Catholic church, in declaring its dogmas and in its out of balance emphasis on Mariology does not do this. They constantly skirt the edge of the envelope and fliort with co-Redemptrix status. Indeed, this is often implied, if not stated directly.