Mary

  • Thread starter Thread starter Singinbeauty
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
elvisman:
Hey - Baptists are people, too! http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon10.gif Don’t be so quick to judge Baptists and others.
Yes, I know. My wife is a Baptist.
40.png
elvisman:
There are PLENTY of rude remarks on this forum.
That doesn’t give you the right to compound the situation.
40.png
elvisman:
Get a life, RyanL. I was merely defending myself.
Like I said, perhaps a break from this particular thread might help you.

God Bless,
RyanL
 
Can we please return this thread to a productive elucidation of the Marian doctrines of the Faith. If I were Singinbeauty, I would be outta here!
 
Hi I am a protestant and have a few questions about the conception of Mary. First of all let me say I greatly respect and admire her, but have trouble with some of the Catholic teachings regardin her.
  1. I do not understand how it can be a scripturally consistant proposition to state that Mary never sinned.
Romans 3:23-24 “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”

Furthermore if Mary was without sin, why did Jesus say this of John the Baptist:

Matthew 11:11 “Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist.”

Obviously Jesus said this after Mary gave birth to him, and unless you contend that she was somehow not born…

Furthermore if you look at Matthew 12:46-50 Jesus seems to be saying that Mary’s status as his biological mother is not as important a connection as is the connection between himself and those who do the will of God (of course Mary falls into this category and is to be respected and seen as a profitable example for her obedience)
  1. I also have trouble with the notion that Mary was a perpetual Virgin. Even if you grant that brothers does not mean brothers, but instead cousin or close relation (which I find odd since I believe the Greek language is certainly capable of articulating these distinctions) how do you explain this:
Mathhew 24-25: “Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife, and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son.”

This states that Joseph knew (i.e. had relations with Mary after Jesus was born)
Furthermore, secular historians also back up Jesus having siblings. See Josephus Antiquities 20.9.1 which refers to the death of “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James…” due to stoning. Coincidentally this passage is one of the earliest and most undisputed extrabiblical proofs of Jesus’ historical existence.
  1. My third concern is that it seems to me that inorder for Mary to hear the simultaneous prayers of millions of Catholics (1.1 billion total) she would have to have traits that I believe are reserved for God namely a degree of omniprescence and omniscience.
 
40.png
Vincent1560:
Hi I am a protestant and have a few questions about the conception of Mary. First of all let me say I greatly respect and admire her, but have trouble with some of the Catholic teachings regardin her.
  1. I do not understand how it can be a scripturally consistant proposition to state that Mary never sinned.
Romans 3:23-24 “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”
Hi Vincent! Welcome to the forums! I hope we can provide you with some satisfactory answers to your questions.

To your first question (which is a common misunderstanding of that verse “all have sinned”) let me supply you with some additional biblical references: (please read them all, you will find them helpful.)
Rom. 3:23 - Some Protestants use this verse “all have sinned” in an attempt to prove that Mary was also with sin. But "all have sinned " only means that all are subject to original sin. Mary was spared from original sin by God, not herself. The popular analogy is God let us fall in the mud puddle, and cleaned us up afterward through baptism. In Mary’s case, God did not let her enter the mud puddle.

Rom. 3:23 - “all have sinned” also refers only to those able to commit sin. This is not everyone. For example, infants, the retarded, and the senile cannot sin.

Rom. 3:23 - finally, “all have sinned,” but Jesus must be an exception to this rule. This means that Mary can be an exception as well. Note that the Greek word for all is “pantes.”

1 Cor. 15:22 - in Adam all (“pantes”) have died, and in Christ all (“pantes”) shall live. This proves that “all” does not mean “every single one.” This is because not all have died (such as Enoch and Elijah who were taken up to heaven), and not all will go to heaven (because Jesus said so).

Rom. 5:12 - Paul says that death spread to all (“pantes”) men. Again, this proves that “all” does not mean “every single one” because death did not spread to all men (as we have seen with Enoch and Elijah).

Rom. 5:19 - here Paul says “many (not all) were made sinners.” Paul uses “polloi,” not “pantes.” Is Paul contradicting what he said in Rom. 3:23? Of course not. Paul means that all are subject to original sin, but not all reject God.

Rom. 3:10-11 - Protestants also use this verse to prove that all human beings are sinful and thus Mary must be sinful. But see Psalm 14 which is the basis of the verse.

Psalm 14 - this psalm does not teach that all humans are sinful. It only teaches that, among the wicked, all are sinful. The righteous continue to seek God.

Psalm 53:1-3 - “there is none that does good” expressly refers to those who have fallen away. Those who remain faithful do good, and Jesus calls such faithful people “good.”

Luke 18:19 - Jesus says, “No one is good but God alone.” But then in Matt. 12:35, Jesus also says “The good man out of his good treasure…” So Jesus says no one is good but God, and then calls another person good.

Rom. 9:11 - God distinguished between Jacob and Esau in the womb, before they sinned. Mary was also distinguished from the rest of humanity in the womb by being spared by God from original sin.

Luke 1:47 - Mary calls God her Savior. Some Protestants use this to denigrate Mary. Why? Of course God is Mary’s Savior! She was freed from original sin in the womb (unlike us who are freed from sin outside of the womb), but needed a Savior as much as the rest of humanity.

Luke 1:48 - Mary calls herself lowly. But any creature is lowly compared to God. For example, in Matt. 11:29, even Jesus says He is lowly in heart. Lowliness is a sign of humility, which is the greatest virtue of holiness, because it allows us to empty ourselves and receive the grace of God to change our sinful lives.
 
Good Morning everyone…

I am going to lay a bit low today. Not feeling my best. Please keep me in your thoughts as I continue down the road I am travelling because it’s going to get bumpier. 😦 But, I am the child of an awesome God who will see me through this. 🙂 I will post but it may not be as much today because I am mentally tired today. So if I seem to blabber… well, you know why! :eek:
 
Thank you for your response E.E.N.S. I will study the scriptual references you gave me. Do you have any analysis of the John the Baptist scripture and the other 2 questions concerning her perpetual virginity and the issue of ascribing divine attributes to her. I am also curious as to what Catholics believe concerning the powers (for lack of a better term) of Mary. Do you believe that she is solely an intercessor between God and man, or do you view her as being capable within herself to answer prayers?
 
40.png
Singinbeauty:
Good Morning everyone…

I am going to lay a bit low today. Not feeling my best. Please keep me in your thoughts as I continue down the road I am travelling because it’s going to get bumpier. 😦 But, I am the child of an awesome God who will see me through this. 🙂 I will post but it may not be as much today because I am mentally tired today. So if I seem to blabber… well, you know why! :eek:
Beloved, Beloved. For many of us, the road to Rome is a road of many, many tears. It can be like a second baptism in your own tears. But – is it WORTH it! I will pray the 4th joyful mystery of the rosary (The Presentation in the Temple) for you today . . .
 
40.png
Singinbeauty:
Good Morning everyone…

I am going to lay a bit low today. Not feeling my best. Please keep me in your thoughts as I continue down the road I am travelling because it’s going to get bumpier. 😦 But, I am the child of an awesome God who will see me through this. 🙂 I will post but it may not be as much today because I am mentally tired today. So if I seem to blabber… well, you know why! :eek:
May God bless you and comfort you on your path!
Your brother in Christ,
~Lee
 
40.png
Vincent1560:
Thank you for your response E.E.N.S. I will study the scriptual references you gave me. Do you have any analysis of the John the Baptist scripture and the other 2 questions concerning her perpetual virginity and the issue of ascribing divine attributes to her. I am also curious as to what Catholics believe concerning the powers (for lack of a better term) of Mary. Do you believe that she is solely an intercessor between God and man, or do you view her as being capable within herself to answer prayers?
You are more than welcome Vincent!
There are a lot of posts above that should answer most of your questions - please read them, and then feel free to ask me any remaining questions.

Quick question; when I answer you, would your prefer the majority of the answer based on Sacred Scripture? The early Church Fathers? Church Councils? The Catechism? or a mixture of them all? (There is a ton of material from each source, I just wanted to know from where you are seaking information so I can keep it as short and readable as possible. 😉 )
 
This thread has been a fine example of charitable discussion until yesterday. I have edited out several posts which were brought to my attention by a member as being rude. I urge all to maintain the highest level of charity so that this fine discussion can continue lest I be forced to close this thread.
 
Vincent,

WELCOME! I hope you enjoy your time here, and I look forward to dialoging with you.

Yours are common questions, believe it or not.

“ALL HAVE SINNED…”
This refers to personal sin, or sin that people commit (i.e., not inherritted sin or Original Sin).

Question: Did Jesus sin?

Question: Do S.I.D.S babies sin?

Question: Do the severely mentally impaired sin?

Question: Have all sinned?

“NONE GREATER THAN JOHN THE BAPTIST…”

Question: Was Jesus greater than John the Baptist?

Question: Could this be talking about prophets alone, judged by context?

Question: If Jesus is greater, is there in fact none greater than John?

“…DID NOT KNOW HER UNTIL…”
Question: Isaiah 46:4 says, “Even until your old age I am He (God).” Does God cease to be God after a person’s old age and death?

Question: Jesus in Matthew 28:20 says, “I am with you always, until the end of the age.” Will Jesus cease to be with us after this age is over?

Question: Does until necessarily imply change?

“Mary must be omnipotent / omnipresent…”

Question: Luke 15:7 says, “I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance.” How do those in heaven know? Are they omnipresent?

Question: Acts shows Peter read the hearts of Anninias and Saphira - was he omnipresent or omnipotent?

Question: Rev 5:8 says, “… the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.” This says that the “elders” in heaven bring to God the prayers of the saints (‘holy ones’, or us on earth). How do they know our prayers? Are they omnipotent / omnipresent?

Question: Would Mary have to be omnipotent / omnipresent to hear our prayers, or could God reveal them to her?

God Bless, and I look forward to a response,
RyanL
 
E.E.N.S.:
You are more than welcome Vincent!
There are a lot of posts above that should answer most of your questions - please read them, and then feel free to ask me any remaining questions.

Quick question; when I answer you, would your prefer the majority of the answer based on Sacred Scripture? The early Church Fathers? Church Councils? The Catechism? or a mixture of them all? (There is a ton of material from each source, I just wanted to know from where you are seaking information so I can keep it as short and readable as possible. 😉 )
On questions concerning what Catholics believe feel free to use whatever sources have led Catholics to the belief in question. On questions of objective truth (i.e. the nature of the eucharist or necessity of baptism, trinitarian conceptions etc.) I would prefer that proof or evidence come from the bible since while I consider many of the popes I have studied to be Godly men I do not believe in their infallibility or that their edicts are necessarily divinely inspired. Just as a little background, I have become interested in Catholism because my sister is a Catholic, but has not been a very observant one. She recently has come to have a desire to deepen her relationship with God and start reading and studying the bible (something I have prayed for). We have been doing bible studies together to further this goal and when we come to issues where Catholics and Protestants (my church is non-denominational/evangelical) disagree I want to be careful not to misrepresent the Catholic beliefs. Furthermore I have also been impressed with the theological understanding of many posters and see such discussions as a means of personal edification as well.
 
40.png
Vincent1560:
On questions concerning what Catholics believe feel free to use whatever sources have led Catholics to the belief in question.
That would be a total deposit of Faith - it is in all of the above - beautiful really how the Holy Spirit has protected the Truth for the last 2000 years!
40.png
Vincent1560:
On questions of objective truth (i.e. the nature of the eucharist or necessity of baptism, trinitarian conceptions etc.) I would prefer that proof or evidence come from the bible since while I consider many of the popes I have studied to be Godly men I do not believe in their infallibility or that their edicts are necessarily divinely inspired.
Fair enough, there is more than enough biblical evidence to discuss.
40.png
Vincent1560:
Just as little background, I have become interested in Catholism, because my sister is a Catholic, but has not been a practicing one. She recently has come to have a desire to deepen her relationship with God and start reading the bible (something I have prayed for). We have been doing bible studies together to further this goal and when we come to issues where Catholics and Protestants (my church is non-denominational/evangelical) disagree I want to be careful not to misrepresent the Catholic beliefs.
Praise God!

Just as a little background on myself; I am a Catholic convert…while studying with a Catholic friend of mine (back when I was going to a Baptist church) I started to study the Catholic Faith (mostly to be better at proving it wrong), well here I am! 😉 I am also doing a Bible study with my sister as well and she and her husband are well on their way! (Her husband is a Protestant Minister’s son…so it has been interesting! My goal is that their whole family come into the fullness of Truth as well!)

Your brother in Christ,
~Lee
 
I hope you don’t mind me switching the topic a bit, but since we are already dialoging on this thread it seems easier to continue on it. I have been reading through the forums and been trying to understand the Catholic conception of Salvation. From what I gather (please correct me if I am wrong) an individual goes to hell if he has not gone through the act of confessing a mortal sin. Is this true? Hypothetically if a person knowingly and willingly skipped mass to watch a football game and got killed before his next confession, do Catholics believe he will go to hell forever and ever? Thank you once again for helping me understand the Catholic postions, and if you like I would be happy to reciprocate by answering any questions you might have about conservative/evangelical protestants. But being a former baptist you probably know a lot. But the offer extends to all 🙂
 
40.png
Vincent1560:
I want to be careful not to misrepresent the Catholic beliefs.
Vincent,
Thank you!

I am continually impressed by non-Catholics on this forum who are intellectually honest and noble, and recognize that misrepresenting the Catholic Church would be very un-Christian. I commend you for being sensitive to this and for respecting your sister’s beliefs. What a good brother you must be!

After all, Christ is the TRUTH – and unless we pursue the TRUTH in TRUTH, no matter where it leads, we will never be able to find Him.

God Bless and welcome to the forums!
VC
 
40.png
Vincent1560:
On questions concerning what Catholics believe feel free to use whatever sources have led Catholics to the belief in question. On questions of objective truth (i.e. the nature of the eucharist or necessity of baptism, trinitarian conceptions etc.) I would prefer that proof or evidence come from the bible since while I consider many of the popes I have studied to be Godly men I do not believe in their infallibility or that their edicts are necessarily divinely inspired. Just as a little background, I have become interested in Catholism because my sister is a Catholic, but has not been a very observant one. She recently has come to have a desire to deepen her relationship with God and start reading and studying the bible (something I have prayed for). We have been doing bible studies together to further this goal and when we come to issues where Catholics and Protestants (my church is non-denominational/evangelical) disagree I want to be careful not to misrepresent the Catholic beliefs. Furthermore I have also been impressed with the theological understanding of many posters and see such discussions as a means of personal edification as well.
Hey, Vincent.

“23”: For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
“24”: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
“25”: After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament inmy blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
“26”: For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.
“27”: Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
“28”: But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
“29”: For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.
“30”: For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
“31”: For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
“32”: But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.
“33”: Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

1 Cor. 1:23-33.

After reading those passages, how can you continue deny what the Scripture says and noting that Corinthians was written after the resurrection of Christ, how can you deny the Eucharist’s true nature?

God bless,
 
40.png
Vincent1560:
On questions concerning what Catholics believe feel free to use whatever sources have led Catholics to the belief in question. On questions of objective truth (i.e. the nature of the eucharist or necessity of baptism, trinitarian conceptions etc.) I would prefer that proof or evidence come from the bible since while I consider many of the popes I have studied to be Godly men I do not believe in their infallibility or that their edicts are necessarily divinely inspired. Just as a little background, I have become interested in Catholism because my sister is a Catholic, but has not been a very observant one. She recently has come to have a desire to deepen her relationship with God and start reading and studying the bible (something I have prayed for). We have been doing bible studies together to further this goal and when we come to issues where Catholics and Protestants (my church is non-denominational/evangelical) disagree I want to be careful not to misrepresent the Catholic beliefs. Furthermore I have also been impressed with the theological understanding of many posters and see such discussions as a means of personal edification as well.
Hey, Vincent.

In Corinthians (which is after the ressurection of Jesus) Paul describes to us the true nature of Eucharist (and it is a Catholic understanding).

“23”: For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

“24”: And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

“25”: After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

“26”: For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.

“27”: Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

“28”: But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

“29”: For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

“30”: For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

“31”: For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

“32”: But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

“33”: Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

1 Cor. 1:1-34.

After reading those passages, how can you continue deny what the Scripture says? If you don’t accept that scripture, you won’t be Sola Scriptura…

God bless,
 
40.png
Vincent1560:
I hope you don’t mind me switching the topic a bit, but since we are already dialoging on this thread it seems easier to continue on it. I have been reading through the forums and been trying to understand the Catholic conception of Salvation. From what I gather (please correct me if I am wrong) an individual goes to hell if he has not gone through the act of confessing a mortal sin. Is this true? Hypothetically if a person knowingly and willingly skipped mass to watch a football game and got killed before his next confession, do Catholics believe he will go to hell forever and ever? Thank you once again for helping me understand the Catholic postions, and if you like I would be happy to reciprocate by answering any questions you might have about conservative/evangelical protestants. But being a former baptist you probably know a lot. But the offer extends to all 🙂
Well (as you may know) for a sin to be a mortal sin there are three conditions:
  1. Grave matter
  2. Full knowledge
  3. Full consent
So, to use the football/Mass hypothesis, it would depend if that person fully knew that missing Mass was a serious matter (mortal) and of his own free will chose to cut himself off from God’s grace by doing so. And furthermore, a confession would only be valid if the person were truly sorry (repentant) for their sins, and intends to never again sin in this matter (though they may fall in time of weakness - only God can judge the heart.)

The person described above has a serious problem if he would willingly miss Mass (and fully know the consequences therein) for a football game and therefore most likely didn’t have a strong relationship with God anyway. Of course there are dispensations for missing Mass, like being seriously sick for example.

The Catechism states:

**1855 **Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God, who is his ultimate end and his beatitude, by preferring an inferior good to him.
Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.

**1856 **Mortal sin, by attacking the vital principle within us - that is, charity - necessitates a new initiative of God’s mercy and a conversion of heart which is normally accomplished within the setting of the sacrament of reconciliation:

When the will sets itself upon something that is of its nature incompatible with the charity that orients man toward his ultimate end, then the sin is mortal by its very object . . . whether it contradicts the love of God, such as blasphemy or perjury, or the love of neighbor, such as homicide or adultery. . . . But when the sinner’s will is set upon something that of its nature involves a disorder, but is not opposed to the love of God and neighbor, such as thoughtless chatter or immoderate laughter and the like, such sins are venial.

**1859 **Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.
 
As the topic of salvation goes for Sacred Scripture, there is MUCH to cover, we can take it a little at a time. 🙂

Pax tecum!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top