V
Vincent1560
Guest
sorry NW should read NT for New Testament, for some reason I can’t edit original post.
- Status
V
Vincent1560
Guest
My question is as to how such a thing can be possible, not to mention scripturally supported. It raises huge theological and metaphysical issues. If God could do this for Mary, then he could have made all of us this way. This would be a huge support for the atheists’ argument from evil for the non-existence of God (in my opinion) just to name one potential ramification. One of the stronger rebuttals apologists use aghainst the argument from evil is that God cannot create man such that he will not sin without comrpomising free will. In essence it woul be like asking God to make a round square, a logical impossibility and thus not a power covered under omnipotence. The Catholic doctrine of Mary seems to compromise this.I’m guessing that if you were the Ark of the New Covenant; the Mother of the Word made Flesh; and if your womb was the temple of our Lord, you would have been immaculately conceived.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
It has more to due than just miracles. The Church looks at how the person lived their life, signs of heroic virtue, etc., etc. It’s quite arduous. Do I know the process exactly? No. Do I need to know? No.I have a quick question. Is this your opinion and the Catholic church’s or just yours? I was just curious because I thought that Catholics would regard Peter as the greatest Saint given their views on the level of authority Christ gave to him. But then again if you do regard Mary as never having sinned, I can see where you would come to that conclusion.
Vincent1560:
And on this line of thinking, how does the Catholic Church conclude someone is in heaven? I have heard that they check reports of miracles, but scripturaly the ability to perform miracles is not a sure sign of holiness i.e. the magicians Moses went up against, and the fact that the NW reveals that in the last days signs and wonders and false prophets will be used to deceive us. I am not saying that any of the Catholic saints are or were of course, just curious how the pope know for certain someone is in heaven and are such declarations considered infallible by the Catholic church.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
You misunderstand the importance of the Immaculate Conception…and salvation history as well (but withought understanding the Truth in its fullness here on earth that is not only understandable, but to be expected.)
Also I wanted (since you used St. Augustine) to use St. Augustine with his view directly on Mary (as opposed to infants):
“We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin.” *Augustine, Nature and Grace,4 2[36] (A.D.415). *
It’s important to understand what the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception is and what it is not. Some people think the term refers to Christ’s conception in Mary’s womb without the intervention of a human father; but that is the Virgin Birth. Others think the Immaculate Conception means Mary was conceived “by the power of the Holy Spirit,” in the way Jesus was, but that, too, is incorrect. The Immaculate Conception means that Mary, whose conception was brought about the normal way, was conceived without original sin or its stain—that’s what “immaculate” means: without stain. The essence of original sin consists in the deprivation of sanctifying grace, and its stain is a corrupt nature. Mary was preserved from these defects by God’s grace; from the first instant of her existence she was in the state of sanctifying grace and was free from the corrupt nature original sin brings.
When discussing the Immaculate Conception, an implicit reference may be found in the angel’s greeting to Mary. The angel Gabriel said, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you” (Luke 1:28). The phrase “full of grace” is a translation of the Greek word kecharitomene. It therefore expresses a characteristic quality of Mary.
The traditional translation, “full of grace,” is better than the one found in many recent versions of the New Testament, which give something along the lines of “highly favored daughter.” Mary was indeed a highly favored daughter of God, but the Greek implies more than that (and it never mentions the word for “daughter”). The grace given to Mary is at once permanent and of a unique kind. Kecharitomene is a perfect passive participle of charitoo, meaning “to fill or endow with grace.” Since this term is in the perfect tense, it indicates that Mary was graced in the past but with continuing effects in the present. So, the grace Mary enjoyed was not a result of the angel’s visit. In fact, Catholics hold, it extended over the whole of her life, from conception onward. She was in a state of sanctifying grace from the first moment of her existence.
V
Vincent1560
Guest
E.E.N.S.:
Thanks for your reply. I appreciate people willing to say when they don’t know. And I agree it is not a big issue by any means, just an interesting one. I am really interested in the history of the Catholic Church. I have studied most of the Eccumenical Councils, early church leaders, herecies etc. and am especially interested in doctrinal history. I have taken a course in college on the subject, but the professor loved to make fun of Catholics and Christians in general, particularly by only focusing on imperail political concerns as the driving force behind doctrinal development without taking into account that most of the early Christian leaders were pious and Godly men who cared about the truth. If you have any reading suggestions on more objective histories I would appreciate them
M
Mickey
Guest
E.E.N.S.:
You saved me a bunch of writing!
Thank you for that post E.E.N.S.
You saved me a bunch of writing!
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
You are welcome. I am just a guy who loves his Faith, and I want to do it the best justice that I can.
So am I!
Great! I suggest studying it with a prayerful mind and an open heart.
Most colleges will do that - it’s unfortunate really.
I suggest a book entitled The Christian Faith (I forget who it is by, but it has all the councils and stuff like that, about the size of the Catechism, white hard cover), and the three volume set entitled The Faith of the Early Church Fathers by Jergens, and of course the Catechism of the Catholic Church would be a must if you wish to understand more fully the Catholic Faith.
M
Mickey
Guest
** **St Ambrose of Milan
Come, then, and search out your sheep, not through your servants or hired men, but do it yourself. Lift me up bodily and in the flesh, which is fallen in Adam. Lift me up not from Sarah but from Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace had made inviolate, free of every stain of sin
(Commentary on Psalm 118:22-30 [A.D. 387]).
Come, then, and search out your sheep, not through your servants or hired men, but do it yourself. Lift me up bodily and in the flesh, which is fallen in Adam. Lift me up not from Sarah but from Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace had made inviolate, free of every stain of sin
(Commentary on Psalm 118:22-30 [A.D. 387]).
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
Stop it you guys - anymore “thank you’s” and I am just going to have a harder time trying to be humble!Thank you for that post E.E.N.S.
You saved me a bunch of writing!
V
Vincent1560
Guest
E.E.N.S.:
Luke 2: “46 Now so it was that after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard Him were astonished at His understanding and answers. 48 So when they saw Him, they were amazed; and His mother said to Him, “Son, why have You done this to us? Look, Your father and I have sought You anxiously.” 49 And He said to them, “Why did you seek Me? Did you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?” 50 But they did not understand the statement which He spoke to them. 51 Then He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was subject to them, but His mother kept all these things in her heart. 52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.”
Another example is the passage i quoted in our first discussion,
Luke 8 "19 Then His mother and brothers came to Him, and could not approach Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told Him by some, who said, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.” 21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”
At the least this seems to imply that Mary is not to be considered above other human beings, to the extent that Jesus is making her status with him attainable by others in the present life. According to a professor who I respect, a very objective man, many scholars interpret this passage as a rebuke of Mary and Jesus’ brothers given historical context and contemporary understanding. Admittadly I am unsure of this and would not expect you or anyone else to take it on his word alone.
I always have enjoyed St. Augustine, his works are very inspirational. I disagree with him about Mary, but among Christian writers he is one of my favorites. As for “full of grace” I do not interpret that as meaning without sin., but I do agree that Mary is one of the best examples of a Godly servant, and certainly has the unique quality of being the mother of God. But I do not believe that that makes her perfect. For example, while not necessarily a sin, Christ does tell her that she should have known something which she didn’t. And the possible sin I reference is that she did not trust fully in him in this case, a failure I make daily I might add.
Luke 2: “46 Now so it was that after three days they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions. 47 And all who heard Him were astonished at His understanding and answers. 48 So when they saw Him, they were amazed; and His mother said to Him, “Son, why have You done this to us? Look, Your father and I have sought You anxiously.” 49 And He said to them, “Why did you seek Me? Did you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?” 50 But they did not understand the statement which He spoke to them. 51 Then He went down with them and came to Nazareth, and was subject to them, but His mother kept all these things in her heart. 52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men.”
Another example is the passage i quoted in our first discussion,
Luke 8 "19 Then His mother and brothers came to Him, and could not approach Him because of the crowd. 20 And it was told Him by some, who said, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.” 21 But He answered and said to them, “My mother and My brothers are these who hear the word of God and do it.”
At the least this seems to imply that Mary is not to be considered above other human beings, to the extent that Jesus is making her status with him attainable by others in the present life. According to a professor who I respect, a very objective man, many scholars interpret this passage as a rebuke of Mary and Jesus’ brothers given historical context and contemporary understanding. Admittadly I am unsure of this and would not expect you or anyone else to take it on his word alone.
V
Vincent1560
Guest
E.E.N.S.:
*My list of virtues contain’d at first but twelve; but a Quaker friend having kindly informed me that I was generally thought proud; that my pride show’d itself frequently in conversation; that I was not content with being in the right when discussing any point, but was overbearing, and rather insolent, of which he convinc’d me by mentioning several instances; I determined endeavouring to cure myself, if I could, of this vice or folly among the rest, and I added Humility to my list.
In reality, there is, perhaps, no one of our natural passions so hard to subdue as pride. Disguise it, struggle with it, beat it down, stifle it, mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive, and will every now and then peep out and show itself; you will see it, perhaps, often in this history; for, even if I could conceive that I had compleatly overcome it, I should probably be proud of my humility.
*
I always catch myself doing the exact same thing he describes. It is such a vicious cycle.
Lol. Thought you might enjoy this, it is from Ben. Franklin’s 13 Vritues, it deals with why there are 13 instead of 12Stop it you guys - anymore “thank you’s” and I am just going to have a harder time trying to be humble!
*My list of virtues contain’d at first but twelve; but a Quaker friend having kindly informed me that I was generally thought proud; that my pride show’d itself frequently in conversation; that I was not content with being in the right when discussing any point, but was overbearing, and rather insolent, of which he convinc’d me by mentioning several instances; I determined endeavouring to cure myself, if I could, of this vice or folly among the rest, and I added Humility to my list.
In reality, there is, perhaps, no one of our natural passions so hard to subdue as pride. Disguise it, struggle with it, beat it down, stifle it, mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive, and will every now and then peep out and show itself; you will see it, perhaps, often in this history; for, even if I could conceive that I had compleatly overcome it, I should probably be proud of my humility.
*
I always catch myself doing the exact same thing he describes. It is such a vicious cycle.
E
E.E.N.S
Guest
LOL, we all must pray for humility.Lol. Thought you might enjoy this, it is from Ben. Franklin’s 13 Vritues, it deals with why there are 13 instead of 12
My list of virtues contain’d at first but twelve; but a Quaker friend having kindly informed me that I was generally thought proud; that my pride show’d itself frequently in conversation; that I was not content with being in the right when discussing any point, but was overbearing, and rather insolent, of which he convinc’d me by mentioning several instances; I determined endeavouring to cure myself, if I could, of this vice or folly among the rest, and I added Humility to my list.
In reality, there is, perhaps, no one of our natural passions so hard to subdue as pride. Disguise it, struggle with it, beat it down, stifle it, mortify it as much as one pleases, it is still alive, and will every now and then peep out and show itself; you will see it, perhaps, often in this history; for, even if I could conceive that I had compleatly overcome it, I should probably be proud of my humility.
I always catch myself doing the exact same thing he describes. It is such a vicious cycle.
S
scylla
Guest
Hello Vincent1560,
I made a comment on just that very passage a little while back, I have been searching through my posts but unfortunately I haven’t been able to find it. (I guess I am too much of a Catholic Answers Forum Junkie)
I once heard this comment on Calvary Chapel radio here about how Luke 8 19-21 was a rebuke. Here is the quote I heard “this is where those Catholics have it wrong about Mary, and this is where Jesus shows us”
Which caught me off guard as I was studying Catholicism at that time. So I looked into it a little, and here is a bit of an explanation from a now Catholic point of view.
We are supposed to honor our parents, and Jesus in being the perfect son would have honored his Mother. So was He publicly rebuking His Mother or making a point. I prefer to look at this as Jesus inviting any one of us to be His family . Anyone who hears His word, and does it is part of His family. This seems to be more in line with the Gospel message.
Which is really a major point of the Gospel itself. Not in rebuking the Blessed among women (His Mother), but rather the message of loving Jesus and doing His will.
God Bless
Scylla
I made a comment on just that very passage a little while back, I have been searching through my posts but unfortunately I haven’t been able to find it. (I guess I am too much of a Catholic Answers Forum Junkie)
I once heard this comment on Calvary Chapel radio here about how Luke 8 19-21 was a rebuke. Here is the quote I heard “this is where those Catholics have it wrong about Mary, and this is where Jesus shows us”
Which caught me off guard as I was studying Catholicism at that time. So I looked into it a little, and here is a bit of an explanation from a now Catholic point of view.
We are supposed to honor our parents, and Jesus in being the perfect son would have honored his Mother. So was He publicly rebuking His Mother or making a point. I prefer to look at this as Jesus inviting any one of us to be His family . Anyone who hears His word, and does it is part of His family. This seems to be more in line with the Gospel message.
Which is really a major point of the Gospel itself. Not in rebuking the Blessed among women (His Mother), but rather the message of loving Jesus and doing His will.
God Bless
Scylla
B
BibleReader
Guest
The Church teaches that Christ the Incarnation was in fact “FULLY God” as well as “fully man.” I don’t think that you can infer some kind of “filtering” of Christ’s God-ness from Mary’s non-destruction. I see no good reason to simply say, “Hey! She was immaculately conceived! That’s protection enough against Moses’ problem!”
V
Vincent1560
Guest
I wholeheartedly agree with your statement “Anyone who hears His word and does it is part of his family.” I interpret that, especially given the context of that part of the passage as Jesus asserting (at the very least) that Mary is not be regarded as superior to others who fit the aforementioned criteria. Also what do you think about the first passage I cited , the one dealing with Jesus teaching in the temple when he was 12?
V
Vincent1560
Guest
I completley agree that Christ was fully God and fully Man. That is the basis of my faith in the significance of his death and resurrection. I hope I didn’t lead anyone to conclude I thought otherwise. My argument was that he protected us from experiencing the full force of his divine holiness which would be deadly, and that what shielded us from this consequence was the fact that he became fully man without ceasing to be fully God. By becoming fully man he enabled himself to interact with his creations in a way that would not be harmful to them. And I am not basing this on merely Mary’s “non-destrucvtion” but the non-destruction of every human Christ interacted with while on Earth. My point was that if all of the sinful people Christ interacted with while on Earth, were able to do so without dieing in his perfect presence, it doesn’t follow that Mary needed any special protection such as the inherent perfection Catholics atribute to her.
M
Mickey
Guest
All others were not “Theotokos”.
V
Vincent1560
Guest
True, but they were in the direct presence of God even if they did not give birth to him. My point is that since his presence had no adverse effects on people after he was born, there is no reason to suggest that his existence in utero would have been any different. The fact that he humbled himself to come in the appearnce of man means that he was in all ways man, (while reatining his divinity) otherwise it would not have been such an act of humility. What I am asking is that since the new testament gives no evidence whatsoever that anyone ever had to hide themselves from Christ’s presence for reasons of personal safety during his incarnation, how does it follow that this would be different in utero. The reason Christ came was to tear the veil, break down the barriers between God and man, serve as the eternal link between them while maintaining his identity as the later. As he said in Luke 5:30-32,
** " 30 And their scribes and the Pharisees complained against His disciples, saying, ‘Why do You eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?’ 31 Jesus answered and said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” **
Given that purpose, it makes no sense for him at anypoint in his incarnation (including in the womb) to be in a form or manner that would be harmful to sinful creatures.
M
Mickey
Guest
Again, being in the presence of our Lord is not the same as being the Temple of the Lord, The Ark of the New Covenant, The Mother of God. I would refer you back to E.E.N.S post # 178. Scripture tells us that the Virgin Mary was full of grace, and we accept this.
V
Vincent1560
Guest
I recall the post, but in my response did not agree that full of grace implied inherent perfection. As for being a Temple of the Lord:
1 Corinthians 6: 18-19, “18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. 19 Or do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?”
Here Paul is asserting that all of our bodies are temples in which God dwells. None of us are inherently perfect, yet we are all capable of being temples of God.
I guess me may have to agree to disagree on this point. I respect your belief, but I am having a very difficult time understanding it particulary your belief that not only was Mary perfect, but that it was necessary she be perfect. I hope I did not come off as overly aggressive on this point, it is something I am trying to work on, balancing my passion with respect.
God Bless
- Status