Mary's immaculate conception and history

[susanlo]

Anybody can ‘know’ what Sacred Tradition is, not simply Catholics.

Where does one go to know about Tradition? Isn’t the Catholic Church and its authorities and writings the only accepted source to teach Sacred Tradition?

All Christians were aware of it for centuries just as they are today.

Is Mary’s immaculate conception a teaching from Tradition? When did Christians become aware of this Tradition? That’s what I am interested in learning about.

Why do you base your belief on what the Bible reveals when the Bible as you know it did not exist for the first 350 years of Christendom? Depending on who you were, where you lived, when you lived, and who was preaching, your “Scripture” might have included a few letters of St. Paul, the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and THOMAS, the Didache, several letters from St. Peter, letters from St. Clement and St. Ignatius, and the Shepherd of Hermes, as well as stories from the book of Genesis and Exodus, perhaps the book of Ruth, passages from Isaiah and some of the psalms and Wisdom.

Were those early Christians not sufficiently taught even though they lacked the KJV?

The KJV is an English Bible. The English language had not yet developed by 350AD. There wouldn’t have been a point to having a KJV Bible. However there were Greek versions of the Scriptures at that time. Actually the Greek Scriptures were written in the 1st century (not 350 AD) and were known to and used by the Christians from the late 1st century. By at least the late 2nd century all of the 27 books were well known in all of the major churches. All of the early writings are saturated in quotations from the Scriptures. The Gospel of Thomas was Gnostic or heretical. Which early church accepted this as Scripture? There was some slight variances on what books were Scripture, but there wasn’t nearly as much confusion and disagreement as some Catholic apologists claim.

 

[mcq72]

Mary might have been free from actual sin, but that she clearly was affected by original sin.

pretty fair statement, what I call 50/50, or half right and half wrong for our St. Augustine. It can get sticky when you delve into murky waters, waters that have have force of tradition and popularity, where appeasement may even seem harmless. I mean he cites Writ as saying “all have sinned”, but the sentiment of tradition says “not Mary” and goes along with both, like he is vested in that “tradition” /church (tough to stop the tiniest bit of leaven…not that we would do any better ?)

You know you haven’t got it quite right when the terms seem contradictory ( having original sin but never sinning).

 

[guanophore]

not suggesting pope did not say he prayed and received divine revelation via HS on matter

Of course the Pope prays to receive Divine revelation on whether certain apparitions of the Blessed Virgin are authentic. There is a long and involved process to authenticate any apparitions are True.

Some claims of deeper understanding are in fact new beliefs.

While this is true, the understanding of Mary as “all Holy” goes back to the beginning of the faith. Mary was understood to be the Ark of the Covenant, which is Holy and cannot be touched or handled by those who are not consecrated.

that it was fitting that His mother would be like you and me , fallen flesh

The understanding of Mary as immaculate was derived from the fact that Jesus took His flesh from hers, and could not be fully human otherwise. If her flesh was defiled, then He was not “born of woman, under the Law”.

The central figure in the bible, both new and old, foreshadow and fulfilled, is Jesus Christ. Jesus is the New Ark, God’s full presence in the flesh, we begotten of Him , the New Adam…no new Eve is needed for this, but yes a woman who carries and helps fulfil the promise, the last in a chain of seed, from Adam and Eve, Abel, Noah, Abraham, David etc.

Yes, the central figure is Christ, but He is not the Ark (His mother was) but the New Covenant Himself. Jesus was begotten of Mary

 

[guanophore]

no new Eve is needed for this

Apparently God thought differently, as He created His Mother as one who “heard the Word of God and obeyed it” unlike the first Eve. He referred to her as Woman, a title that signifies her life of obedience replaced that of the first Eve, who disobeyed God’s word.

Jesus is true end for all men and women.

Yes. He is our Sabbath Rest.!

An idol does NOT need to be worshipped to be an idol.

I guess this is technically true. But it is irrelevant in any case, as we do not worship Mary as God.

I keep hearing it preached all the time that anything that gets in the way of full communion with God is an idol/false god, that is we should be able to converse with God , one on one , as did Adam and Eve in the garden.

Yes, I think this is valid. Jesus has paid the price for our sins such that we need no longer be separated from Him as Adam and Eve were.

Petitioning is one thing , but “guidance” (beyond example), “protection” sure goes beyond petitioning, and sounds like the Job of the Comforter.

Yes, it is true that God only enables the saints to do what He has ordained they should do. Do you think no Christian has ever used their position to help another Christian? I think the difference is that Catholics believe that those who are “in Christ never die”, whereas, our non-Catholic siblings have been misled that they are in some kind of “soul sleep”. We believe that “the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.” James 5:16 .

There are none so righteous as those who are hidden with Christ in God, and have been forever separated form the sins of the flesh.

Again, that may not be worship, but misplaces what is due to God only, which some may see as idolatry.

You know, I do agree with you. I think that there is worship that is due to God only, and that those who have been contaminated by Calvanism do not understand the role of he Saints, or even God’s plan for humankind. He desires that His glory be made manifest through HUMANS.

Mary indeed seems to be the number four person in the universe, next to the Triune Godhead.

This is actually not an uncommon heresy. It tends to be fomented by those who do not understand God’s plan for humanity.

Though Mariology is very well defined and layed out, even quite beautiful, can anyone see how it is quite unprecedented in biblical history ?

Although it is true that there could only be one mother of Jesus, there are many types of Mary, especially the Ark of the Covenant. The gebirah is another.

 

[mcq72]

While this is true, the understanding of Mary as “all Holy” goes back to the beginning of the faith. Mary was understood to be the Ark of the Covenant, which is Holy and cannot be touched or handled by those who are not consecrated.

Yet Christ came to break this barrier, so that all can touch this Ark(Christ) , and not die…the new man in all of us is “immaculately conceived”

 

[susanlo]

I think you are confused, susanlo. The Catholic Church does not extract doctrines from the pages of scripture, so the ability to interpret the Scripture infallibly is not the source or basis for the infallible doctrines. On the contrary, the fulness of the faith was committed to the Church whole and entire before any word of the NT was ever written. The source of the infallible doctrine is Jesus.

Doesn’t the Catholic Church claim that it alone can interpret scripture without error? Their version of Tradition as well as an ability to interpret Scripture without error allows the Catholic Church to teach without error. Is that not what the claim is? If not, what other sources do they use for their doctrines?

 

[mcq72]

The understanding of Mary as immaculate was derived from the fact that Jesus took His flesh from hers, and could not be fully human otherwise. If her flesh was defiled, then He was not “born of woman, under the Law

"though born (Jesus) of a maternal flesh of sin.’…Augustine

 

[guanophore]

Though Mariology is very well defined and layed out, even quite beautiful, can anyone see how it is quite unprecedented in biblical history ? yes , there were queen mothers in history, some good , some bad, but to then place the her above a David or Moses or Abraham…we here many times that God will do something for David’s sake, or Abraham’s sake but where are they in this picture ? Does this sharpen or dull the Decree that we now also sit in heavenly places, and can boldly go before the throne (much like a few OT queens , no ?).

“When Bathsheba went to King Solomon to speak to him for Adonijah, the king stood up to meet her, bowed down to her and sat down on his throne. He had a throne brought for the king’s mother, and she sat down at his right hand.” I Kings 2:19

Do you honestly believe that Jesus would show less respect to His Mother than Solomon did to Bathsheba?

I and others probably are no better in truly seeking God first or at all when a trial hits, or when guidance and or protection is needed, or when fear needs dispelling…we all have our idols, our comfort "foods’’ while the Bread of Life can be personally, directly supped with, even eaten (and He is jealous, often of good things, that are not the best things, and He waits for us).

The difference is that we do not give to Mary that which belongs only to God. Have you never known a holy disciple that you would ask for prayer? If not, I am sorry for you, if yes, then you understand that we recognize that the effectual fervent prayer of she who is righteous before God avails much.

Well , the Ark is God’s presence in OT,an earthly object containing Him, just as an earthly body, flesh, made of earthly elements like the Ark , containing Him.

No, actually, the Ark, like Mary, contained that which was symbolic of God. The Ark held the Word of God, just as Mary carried Jesus in her Womb.

Well , the Ark is God’s presence in OT,an earthly object containing Him, just as an earthly body, flesh, made of earthly elements like the Ark , containing Him.

"that I may dwell in their midst”

Yes, you got it! Mary is the one who is earthly, yet contains HIm, she carries His earthly body, made flesh.

There I will meet with you … on the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you” …Ex 25

the ark served as the place of the presence of God…tell me again how Jesus is not this New Ark ?

Mary is the one who changed His diapers, cleaned His scraped knees, and rocked Him to sleep at night. She had more intimate years with Jesus than any other single human being that ever lived, or will live. She is the one where the Presence of God was incarnate. She delivered for us the Life of the World!

 

[mcq72]

Yes, the central figure is Christ, but He is not the Ark (His mother was) but the New Covenant Himself. Jesus was begotten of Mary

Well, it is "poetic’’ for a mother/ child to call mother an ark, but it is more biblical for Christ to embody “God’s presence” with us, I mean what else is it but "Emanuel’, God with us ?..both are true , but one is primary, the other secondary…Christ is the ultimate Ark, the ultimate presence of God, in flesh…but you have made your point quite well, as have all C’s here…just agree with something else more

 

[kainosktisis]

It’s not the Ark that is His Presence, but rather, it is His throne - the mercy seat. Yes, He will meet ON the Ark - not that He IS the Ark…There is a difference.

“She delivered for us the Life of the World”…& that’s why Catholics revere her. She was chosen for that purpose. It was through her fiat that the Messiah entered our humanity to save us. He could’ve done it other ways, but He chose to condescend to become one of us through her, so in that way, she cooperated in our salvation. What an honor…The exaltation of the humble…

Romans 8:

17 Now if we are children, then we are heirs–heirs of God and co-heirs with Christ, if indeed we share in his sufferings in order that we may also share in his glory.

From Ephesians 2 (Bible Hub):

6 And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus,
7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus.

Well, she’s definitely sharing in His glory & demonstrating the riches of His grace…

 

[mcq72]

Do you honestly believe that Jesus would show less respect to His Mother than Solomon did to Bathsheba?

mcq72:

He is not a respecter of persons, but is also the best at determining and giving honor where honor is due. Jesus demonstrated this when she came seeking Jesus and Jesus did not leave with her, but said, “my mother and brother and sister is he who does the will of the Father”.

A possible point in Kings story is that perhaps it would have been better if Adijonah went to the king directly (a king likes to be treated like a king ), that going to intercessor showed weakness in relationship with King, …nothing like integrity of one on one, if indeed your cause be just

 

[susanlo]

It seems like you are moving the bar around, up and down. No one expects a believer, especially a neophyte, to be able to “accurately articulate the terms related to the Trinity”. In fact, such a task would be beyond human ability, despite the efforts of many brilliant theologians. We do expect, however, that a person embrace the Apostles’ Creed. This is a very different bar!

That is why I said that being able to accurately articulate all of the terms related to the Trinity is not essential to salvation. What bar am I moving?

Yes, but in some cases it took centuries to develop these concepts and apply them. The need to implement the word Trinity was a response to heresies. The same is true of the hypostatic union.

Yes. The Scriptures teach all of these concepts, but the terminology is different. If one reads the Bible and knows that Jesus was human and God (yet there is one God) then there is no need to use other terms. These are terms humans use to explain what is contained in Scripture.

Unfortunately there are a great many truths that should be believed by all Catholics that are not!

Does the Catholic Church teach that one must accept this teaching in order to be saved?

 

[mcq72]

The difference is that we do not give to Mary that which belongs only to God. Have you never known a holy disciple that you would ask for prayer? If not, I am sorry for you, if yes, then you understand that we recognize that the effectual fervent prayer of she who is righteous before God avails much.

yes , thank. Am aware of interceding of saints but I personally restrict that to those on this side of eternity, especially when I need to hear from them for any guidance (apart for “petition”)…for sure two way communication at times is best…still my point is that sometimes it is only the Lord that can be touched and heard and sought after, and that going to others could be wrong at times, though it could be cloaked in peity.

It is my feeling that the papal decree i posted went far beyond, at least in practice for some , maybe many, than praying for “intercession”.

But yes, agree that it would be sad for one to not see and avail of the community of saints, just as it would be sad for one not to see and avail of the truth that we can go directly to the King himself, that we are seated with HIm …now, and yes , even to petition for others !

Peace

PS…"why didn’t you come and see me directly about this? ’ is even an earthly statement.

 

[mcq72]

No, actually, the Ark, like Mary, contained that which was symbolic of God. The Ark held the Word of God,

"There I will meet with you … on the ark of the testimony, I will speak with you” (Ex. 25:22; emphasis added).

More than a symbol, but a presence…sound familiar ?

 

[mcq72]

Yes, you got it! Mary is the one who is earthly, yet contains HIm, she carries His earthly body, made flesh.

Well maybe for 9 months the ark in an ark,she was more like the priests who carried the ark, not the ark itself

 

[mcq72]

Mary is the one who changed His diapers, cleaned His scraped knees, and rocked Him to sleep at night. She had more intimate years with Jesus than any other single human being that ever lived, or will live. She is the one where the Presence of God was incarnate. She delivered for us the Life of the World!

This is good sentiment, based on truth. I simply put forth a higher sentiment, which in my opinion is also based on truth.

What is more gracious , perfection dwelling amongst sin, or perfection amongst like simultude?

 

[guanophore]

Yet Christ came to break this barrier, so that all can touch this Ark(Christ) , and not die…the new man in all of us is “immaculately conceived”

On the contrary, there was never any “barrier” between the Ark of the covenant and the people. The Ark accompanied them, and travelled with them, and among them, as did the NT fulfillment of the Arkn(Mary).

Rather, the “barrier” that was torn in two was the curtain in the Temple.

Yes, all can now be One in Christ when we eat His Body, and drink HIs blood.

Doesn’t the Catholic Church claim that it alone can interpret scripture without error?

The teaching authority called “the seat of Moses” was transferred from the Sanhedrin to the Apostles. However, a broken clock is right at least two times a day, so I would say that even those who have not the authority given to the Church by Christ can sometimes get it right!

Their (Catholic) version of Tradition as well as an ability to interpret Scripture without error allows the Catholic Church to teach without error. Is that not what the claim is? If not, what other sources do they use for their doctrines?

No. What enables the Church to teach without error is the promise of Christ that He will not allow the gates of hell to prevail. He promised that the HS would lead the Church into "all Truth. The divine deposit of faith is found in the Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

The doctrines of the CC come from Christ, through the Apostles.

"though born (Jesus) of a maternal flesh of sin.’…Augustine

I think you will agree with me that Augustine is not on the level of Sacred Scripture, who calls the Virgin kecharitomene. The angel greets Mary with the Title of "she who has been previously filled with grace’.

Well, it is "poetic’’ for a mother/ child to call mother an ark,

I do not know that Jesus ever referred to His mother as “ark”. He referred to her as “Woman”, the new Eve.

but it is more biblical for Christ to embody “God’s presence” with us, I mean what else is it but "Emanuel’, God with us ?.

Indeed, Jesus is God with us! He is that which inhabits the Ark, the Shekiniah!

 

[mcq72]

On the contrary, there was never any “barrier” between the Ark of the covenant and the people. The Ark accompanied them, and travelled with them, and among the

Could u touch the ark, sit on it, like a child,without an inter essor or high priest?

 

[kainosktisis]

Like I said, anyone not authorized to touch it or even look upon it died.

 

[guanophore]

both are true , but one is primary, the other secondary…

This is a very astute observation. All the doctrines of Mary were developed “secondarily” to those of Christ. When Mary was given the title of Theotokos, it was in response to heresey.

Christ is the ultimate Ark, the ultimate presence of God, in flesh…but you have made your point quite well, as have all C’s here…just agree with something else more

On the contrary, Christ is Himself the New Covenant. He is symbolized by the CONTENTS of the Ark! He is the Word Made flesh, the root from the stump of Jesse (Aarons’ branch that budded) and the Manna. He Is the Bread that came down from Heaven. The whole contents of the Ark is a prefigurement of Christ.

Jesus demonstrated this when she came seeking Jesus and Jesus did not leave with her, but said, “my mother and brother and sister is he who does the will of the Father”.

Actually, Scripture does not say he did not come out to her. He finished teaching, and then went out to her. His half siblings could not retrieve Him, even if they thought He lost His mind. James might well have been with them.

but said, “my mother and brother and sister is he who does the will of the Father”.

This is the greatest complement He could give to Mary, His mother, who “heard the word of God, and did it”. She always responded “do unto me according to Thy Will” and thus is our example.

A possible point in Kings story is that perhaps it would have been better if Adijonah went to the king directly (a king likes to be treated like a king ), that going to intercessor showed weakness in relationship with King, …nothing like integrity of one on one, if indeed your cause be just

Perhaps, but as it is, what we have in Scripture is the Queen Mother asking favor from her Son, just as Mary asks favor from Him at the Wedding in Cana.

it is only the Lord that can be touched and heard and sought after, and that going to others could be wrong at times, though it could be cloaked in peity.

Such a postition seems odd, since scripture is clear that the effectual fervent prayers of the righteous are of much avail. Do you not believe that those who are in Christ live forever?