Need help with perpetual Virgin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jim_Baur
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, if you are catholic, you must believe that Mary’s perpetual virginity is necessary for complete salvation, right? If we, as noncatholics, say for instance that we believe that she was a perpetual virgin, but do not believe it is mandatory for salvation, we’re okay, right?
You can choose whether or not to believe any part of revealed truth. It’s your decision. As to salvation, take that up with our Lord in the judgment seat. I, for one, will not take a seat in it only to explain why I thought His mother was common or ordinary.
 
[You can choose whether or not to believe any part of revealed truth. It’s your decision. As to salvation, take that up with our Lord in the judgment seat. I, for one, will not take a seat in it only to explain why I thought His mother was common or ordinary.
So it sounds like you really believe that this is going to be a topic of discussion, on that day, rather than"So tell me po18guy, what things did you do for my Son, during your walk on Earth?"Don’t we all have to face the judgement seat(not purgatory)?
[/quote]
 
So it sounds like you really believe that this is going to be a topic of discussion, on that day, rather than"So tell me po18guy, what things did you do for my Son, during your walk on Earth?"Don’t we all have to face the judgement seat(not purgatory)?
Well, God chose Mary, an unknown teenager, from amongst all generations of women that would ever exist. What on earth could she possible have done in her short life to merit the carrying of God in Christ? Nothing is known about her whatsoever until the Angel Gabriel was sent from God’s presence to announce to her that she had found favor with God. This alone indicates a birthright of some sort. I choose to honor her, as I do with all of the Saints.

I worship God alone, but honor those whom He sends. As to what I do, you would be amazed at how similar our faith lives are. The difference between us is that I have opened myself to, and embraced Catholic teaching about the mother of God in Christ. I struggled with it for years, but the Holy Spirit mercifully revealed the truth to me. If I believe the bible, which is the teaching of the Church, I might as well believe the rest of what Christ’s Church teaches. It occurred to me that the Catholic Church just might be right about all of this. For dang near 2,000 years, Catholic and Orthodox have not had a problem with Church teaching. But, the past 500 years have caused a great rift amongst Christians. Who else but the evil one desires this?
 
po18guy: I have never indicated that Mary was common or ordinary; however, by the woeld’s standards, she would probably be considered as such! Mary was surely CHOSEN by God to bear the Saviour:thumbsup: No one can really say for certain, that anything was predestined from the dawn of time, but then"“all things are possible with God!” My contention, is that Our Saviour, yours and mine, along with all believers, did NOT command us to believe in His mother’s perpetual virginity, in order to see the Kingdom of God! All you have is the supposed teachings of the early church fathers! And I believe in Matthew 25:31-40, as far as doing good works in the Name of Jesus! Also, witnessing, evangelizing, feeding the poor; us, average Christians, me and you po18guy! So, Mary was very important in the plan of salvation(bearing and rearing the Saviour along with Joseph), but is not an element of salvation;)
 
po18guy: I have never indicated that Mary was common or ordinary; however, by the woeld’s standards, she would probably be considered as such! Mary was surely CHOSEN by God to bear the Saviour:thumbsup: No one can really say for certain, that anything was predestined from the dawn of time, but then"“all things are possible with God!” My contention, is that Our Saviour, yours and mine, along with all believers, did NOT command us to believe in His mother’s perpetual virginity, in order to see the Kingdom of God! All you have is the supposed teachings of the early church fathers! And I believe in Matthew 25:31-40, as far as doing good works in the Name of Jesus! Also, witnessing, evangelizing, feeding the poor; us, average Christians, me and you po18guy! So, Mary was very important in the plan of salvation(bearing and rearing the Saviour along with Joseph), but is not an element of salvation;)
Well, and this is where some non-Catholics can get a little touchy, Mary was required to give flesh to Christ. She had to say “yes” to Gabriel before we were ever to have a Christ in the flesh. So, she is a necessary part of salvation history. She does not save, but, through her, we have salvation. She was with Him His entire life and at His death. He gave her a new Son while He was dying, so she would not be alone (John 19:26-27). Mary’s entire purpose was to bring Jesus to us, and since His resurrection, her entire purpose has been to lead us to Jesus. Since salvation history is a seamless garment; since all truth is one, as Christ, the Father and the Holy Spirit are One, we cannot pick and choose which part of revealed truth to believe and to disbelieve. According to many Catholic converts (Marcus Grodi, Mark Shea and many others), Mary looks much bigger from outside the Church than she does from within. And, so it is. Where we might disagree is when someone separates Christ from His Church and its authority, and from the entire story of salvation history. I know that Church authority is a BIG DEAL for non-Catholics, but that is how the Church was founded by Christ and shall remain until He returns. Amen!
 
1beleevr
Believing in Marian Dogmas as elements of salvation is not the point. Believing that the Church teaches the truth is the point. Protestants can be saved inspite of the fact that they belong to churches and ecclesial communities that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church.

The Catechism states:
1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

**

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

So there you have it. There are a variety of factors for rejecting Catholic Marian dogmas. One is “off the hook” out of invincible ignorance, but not if one flatly rejects the truth when it has been patiently and charitably explained to you. It is impossible to reject the teachings about Mary and accept the truth about Jesus. Making Marian teachings “elements of salvation” is related to Catholics for salvation, but not for the invincibly ignorant. But God does not call people to sit in it. He calls people to seek the truth.
 
[Well, and this is where some non-Catholics can get a little touchy, Mary was required to give flesh to Christ. She had to say “yes” to Gabriel before we were ever to have a Christ in the flesh. So, she is a necessary part of salvation history. She does not save, but, through her, we have salvation. She was with Him His entire life and at His death. He gave her a new Son while He was dying, so she would not be alone (John 19:26-27). Mary’s entire purpose was to bring Jesus to us, and since His resurrection, her entire purpose has been to lead us to Jesus. Since salvation history is a seamless garment; since all truth is one, as Christ, the Father and the Holy Spirit are One, we cannot pick and choose which part of revealed truth to believe and to disbelieve. According to many Catholic converts (Marcus Grodi, Mark Shea and many others), Mary looks much bigger from outside the Church than she does from within. And, so it is. Where we might disagree is when someone separates Christ from His Church and its authority, and from the entire story of salvation history. I know that Church authority is a BIG DEAL for non-Catholics, but that is how the Church was founded by Christ and shall remain until He returns. Amen!]
Very poignant, very beautiful; very true. parts are, parts are debatable! In Christ, through God, we have salvation!👍 Throughout history, God has been setting His Plan in place, and Mary was a part of it; indeed! No mortal man can tell another that he is sepsrated from God, and that Christ can only be found in one church or another; but I have seen it in this forum, in my eight months here! The Ethiopian eunuch was out in the countryside, I guess, when he found Jesus, through Phillip! So, to tell people that if they don’t believe in Mary’s virginity, they are not going to Heaven, is wrong! God bless all my brothers in Christ:thumbsup:
 
1beleevr
[Believing in Marian Dogmas as elements of salvation is not the point. Believing that the Church teaches the truth is the point. Protestants can be saved inspite of the fact that they belong to churches and ecclesial communities that are not in full communion with the Catholic Church.]

The Catechism states:
1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

**

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

So there you have it. There are a variety of factors for rejecting Catholic Marian dogmas. One is “off the hook” out of invincible ignorance, but not if one flatly rejects the truth when it has been patiently and charitably explained to you. It is impossible to reject the teachings about Mary and accept the truth about Jesus. Making Marian teachings “elements of salvation” is related to Catholics for salvation, but not for the invincibly ignorant. But God does not call people to sit in it. He calls people to seek the truth.
Thank you for the "history lesson, and the mild admonishment:p Belief in Marian dogma has bled over into this thread from another similar thread. It started out trying to prove to hard-headed noncatholics, that Mary was indeed a perpetual virgin;) the, it morphed into a discussion about having to believe in it to be saved, when Jesus didn’t teach this, but man did, and does! And it is arrogant at best to tell people that not believing in Mary’s perpetual virginity, is rejection of the Gospel! Hate to break this to you, but you are not God, and neither are your priests, or your pope! You see, us lowly noncatholics serve the same B-I-G God that you do, and were saved by the same blood that you were! We just believe differently, and you have been separated from us:p
 
I had edited my original response, but the dreaded 20 minute edit window closed on me. So, here it is:
po18guy: I have never indicated that Mary was common or ordinary; however, by the woeld’s standards, she would probably be considered as such!
My bad. Catholics can react out of seemingly perpetual defense of the faith, and we get weary and weak. I did not mean to imply such.
Mary was surely CHOSEN by God to bear the Saviour:thumbsup: No one can really say for certain, that anything was predestined from the dawn of time, but then"“all things are possible with God!”
Is not God eternal and outside of time? Are not all things present to Him at once? Compare the idea of eternal plans to Jesus’ parable of the vineyard and the owner’s son (Luke 20:9-19). If even the human property owner had contingency plans, how much more does our Lord have them? If He does not have an eternal plan, does that not make Him a random God?
My contention, is that Our Saviour, yours and mine, along with all believers, did NOT command us to believe in His mother’s perpetual virginity, in order to see the Kingdom of God!
However, Jesus revealed the perpetual virginity as an irreplaceable part of the Gospel truth. He taught us to seek and follow the truth. He gave a son (John) to Mary as He was dying on the cross, so that she would not be alone (John 19:26-27 - compare this with Luke 7:11, where He restored a widow’s only son to her). The virgin birth was not only the fulfillment of prophecy - Mary’s perpetual virginity was required to validate it. The only physical proof of Jesus’ virgin birth was if Mary remained ever virgin! If she would have had other children, the scoffers would have had even more evidence to accuse Jesus.
All you have is the supposed teachings of the early church fathers!
First, consider that they are not supposed, but rather real. They exist. And, lest we forget, we have the Gospel of Luke, though which we know of God’s plan by Divine revelation. As a matter of fact, the entire Gospel of Luke is the product of the Apostolic Tradition, since Luke witnessed none of it. He went to sources that were not always Apostolic (Mary) for much of his Gospel.
And I believe in Matthew 25:31-40, as far as doing good works in the Name of Jesus! Also, witnessing, evangelizing, feeding the poor; us, average Christians, me and you po18guy!
Yes! But, you realize that each of these is a work :eek: However, it is faith, acting through love, which stands us in good stead before our Lord (Hebrews 10:24). That is the essence of Christianity - faith, hope and love, but the greatest is love! Greater than faith? Yes, says Jesus and Saint Paul (John 13:34-35 and 1 Corinthians 13:13).
(perpetual virginity)…is not an element of salvation;)
Well, getting back to God’s eternal plan for salvation, Mary was a crucial and required part of that plan. Her assent to Gabriel was absolutely needed so that we would ever see the Messiah in the flesh. Since all of salvation history is a seamless garment, Mary’s virginity remains part of it. Once we tear it out, the garment begins to unravel. Even reformer Jean Calvin said that those who doubted Mary’s perpetual virginity were “pigheaded”! And, as difficult as it is for us to believe in perpetual virginity, how much more difficult is belief in a virgin birth? The Holy Spirt, able to conceive Jesus in a virgin womb, certainly had the power to protect that womb for all time. We all know a maiden aunt. If that perpetual virginity can occur in this sex-soaked culture, how much more likely was it to Mary? Especially after a personal visit from Gabriel.

Many Catholic converts (Marcus Grodi, Mark Shea and others) tell us that Mary looks so much larger from outside the Church than from within. And, so it is. Mary was not just a readily available utensil, because God could raise up a savior from stones! But, He chose Mary.

Christ’s peace be with you.
 
So, to tell people that if they don’t believe in Mary’s virginity, they are not going to Heaven, is wrong! God bless all my brothers in Christ:thumbsup:
No one on earth has the authority to say that - and no one should. What we are saying is that Jesus founded a Church - that’s in scripture. He provided for His mother at His death - that’s in scripture. Jesus loved poor widows - that’s in scripture. Jesus would not leave the Apostles orphans - that’s in scripture. He promised the Holy Spirit to lead the Apostles into all truth - that’s in scripture. Just as the bible was revealed through members of the Church, the teachings on Mary’s virginity were revealed by members of the same church - via scripture and the Apostolic Tradition that produced both the Gospel of Luke as well as Acts. The Lord knew I was a doubter. In His mercy, has revealed this to me, and with His grace, He will reveal it also to you, who are more worthy than I.

Christ’s peace.
 
I had edited my original response, but the dreaded 20 minute edit window closed on me. So, here it is:My bad. Catholics can react out of seemingly perpetual defense of the faith, and we get weary and weak. I did not mean to imply such. Is not God eternal and outside of time? Are not all things present to Him at once? Compare the idea of eternal plans to Jesus’ parable of the vineyard and the owner’s son (Luke 20:9-19). If even the human property owner had contingency plans, how much more does our Lord have them? If He does not have an eternal plan, does that not make Him a random God?However, Jesus revealed the perpetual virginity as an irreplaceable part of the Gospel truth. He taught us to seek and follow the truth. He gave a son (John) to Mary as He was dying on the cross, so that she would not be alone (John 19:26-27 - compare this with Luke 7:11, where He restored a widow’s only son to her). The virgin birth was not only the fulfillment of prophecy - Mary’s perpetual virginity was required to validate it. The only physical proof of Jesus’ virgin birth was if Mary remained ever virgin! If she would have had other children, the scoffers would have had even more evidence to accuse Jesus. First, consider that they are not supposed, but rather real. They exist. And, lest we forget, we have the Gospel of Luke, though which we know of God’s plan by Divine revelation. As a matter of fact, the entire Gospel of Luke is the product of the Apostolic Tradition, since Luke witnessed none of it. He went to sources that were not always Apostolic (Mary) for much of his Gospel. [Yes! But, you realize that each of these is a work :eek: However, it is faith, acting through love, which stands us in good stead before our Lord (**Hebrews 10:24]/B]). That is the essence of Christianity - faith, hope and love, but the greatest is love! Greater than faith? Yes, says Jesus and Saint Paul (John 13:34-35 and 1 Corinthians 13:13). Well, getting back to God’s eternal plan for salvation, Mary was a crucial and required part of that plan. Her assent to Gabriel was absolutely needed so that we would ever see the Messiah in the flesh. Since all of salvation history is a seamless garment, Mary’s virginity remains part of it. Once we tear it out, the garment begins to unravel. Even reformer Jean Calvin said that those who doubted Mary’s perpetual virginity were “pigheaded”! And, as difficult as it is for us to believe in perpetual virginity, how much more difficult is belief in a virgin birth? The Holy Spirt, able to conceive Jesus in a virgin womb, certainly had the power to protect that womb for all time. We all know a maiden aunt. If that perpetual virginity can occur in this sex-soaked culture, how much more likely was it to Mary? Especially after a personal visit from Gabriel.

Many Catholic converts (Marcus Grodi, Mark Shea and others) tell us that Mary looks so much larger from outside the Church than from within. And, so it is. Mary was not just a readily available utensil, because God could raise up a savior from stones! But, He chose Mary.

Christ’s peace be with you.
“For as you have done for the least of these, you have done for me.”-Jesus, to His disciples. We are saved by God’s grace, through faith, to do those good works that He has pepared for us. We were made to worship(thank you Chris Tomlin), and we were made to serve(Mark 10:45). Mary was a beautiful woman, even though by those days standards, she was a peasant girl. Her place in Christian historywill be eternally remembered as one of God’s most faithful and willing servants! And, yes, love is the greatest of all, for without love, we are nothing!👍
 
“For as you have done for the least of these, you have done for me.”-Jesus, to His disciples. We are saved by God’s grace, through faith, to do those good works that He has pepared for us. We were made to worship(thank you Chris Tomlin), and we were made to serve(Mark 10:45). Mary was a beautiful woman, even though by those days standards, she was a peasant girl. Her place in Christian historywill be eternally remembered as one of God’s most faithful and willing servants! And, yes, love is the greatest of all, for without love, we are nothing!👍
Amen! And, if Mary was a beautiful woman, she still is - she is beautiful in Heaven. If any mere mortal is in Heaven, who more likely than the humble heart who was chosen by God to bear His Son? It has been a pleasure, and I understand your trepidation.
 
So, if you are catholic, you must believe that Mary’s perpetual virginity is necessary for complete salvation, right? If we, as noncatholics, say for instance that we believe that she was a perpetual virgin, but do not believe it is mandatory for salvation, we’re okay, right?
I would say that the situation is a little murkier than that.

You hang out in this forum, and you know that the Catholic Church makes certain claims concerning doctrines…the Perpetual Virginity is one…but the Church also claims to be the one, true Church.

Knowing this, you now have some responsibility for determining whether this is true or not…a responsibility that a person living in the jungle of South America does not have.

IOW, your claim to invincible ignorance has been diminished and your culpability for separation from that Church has increased because you now know of the possibility that Catholicism is true.
 
I would say that the situation is a little murkier than that.

You hang out in this forum, and you know that the Catholic Church makes certain claims concerning doctrines…the Perpetual Virginity is one…but the Church also claims to be the one, true Church.

Knowing this, you now have some responsibility for determining whether this is true or not…a responsibility that a person living in the jungle of South America does not have.

[IOW, your claim to invincible ignorance has been diminished and your culpability for separation from that Church has increased because you now know of the possibility that Catholicism is true.
]

I have never claimed invincible ignorance about anything, let alone the catholic church:p And how very true, that there is a POSSIBILITY that catholicism is true:cool:
[/QUOTE]
 
If Catholicism is not true, you might as well burn your bible.
Note to 1beleevr-

po18guy makes this statement because of the idea that you have your NT because the Catholic Church established the canon of scripture in the fourth century.

If the Church cannot be trusted, then your Bible is simply a collection of books that may or may not be the inspired Word of God…and you have no way of proving otherwise.
 
Note to 1beleevr-

po18guy makes this statement because of the idea that you have your NT because the Catholic Church established the canon of scripture in the fourth century.

If the Church cannot be trusted, then your Bible is simply a collection of books that may or may not be the inspired Word of God…and you have no way of proving otherwise.
Randy, sometimes my use of one liners gets the better of me! I am waiting for a bible Christian - any one at all, to show me the stone tablet which contains the Sacred Table of Contents.
 
Mary as the New Ark of the Covenant Proved from Scripture

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the words of God written on Stone. (Deut. 10:5, Hebrews 9:4)
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained the Word of God made flesh. (John 1:1)

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the jar of manna which came down from heaven. Those who ate of this bread still died. (Exodus 16:32, Hebrews 9:4)
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained Jesus, the bread of life which came down from heaven. Those who eat of this bread will live forever. (John 6:31-41)

The ark of the Old Covenant contained the staff of Aaron which had budded as proof as his priesthood. (Number 17:1-9)
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, contained Jesus, our high priest, Himself. (Hebrews 4:14)

The ark of the Old Covenant was overshadowed by the glory cloud. (Exodus 40:34-35)
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit. (Luke 1:35)

The ark traveled to the house of Obed-edom in the hill country of Judea. (2 Sam. 6:1–11)
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, traveled to the house of Elizabeth and Zechariah in the hill country of Judea. (Luke 1:39)

A man touched the ark of the Old Covenant to steady it without God’s permission and was struck dead on the spot. David was filled with awe and said, “Who am I that the Ark of the Lord should come unto me?” (2 Samuel 6:9)
Elizabeth is filled with the Holy Spirit and said, “Who am I that the mother of my Lord should come unto me?” (Luke 1:43)

The ark of the Old Covenant remained in the house of Obed-edom for three months. (2 Sam. 6:11)
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, remained in the house of Elizabeth for three months (Luke 1:56).

The house of Obed-edom was blessed by the presence of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:11)
In the account of Mary’s visit to Elizabeth, the word blessed is used three times; surely Elizabeth’s house was blessed by God. (Luke 1:39–45)

The ark of the Old Covenant returns home and ends up in Jerusalem, God’s presence and glory is revealed in the temple. (2 Sam. 6:12; 1 Kgs. 8:9–11)
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, returns home and eventually ends up in Jerusalem, where she presents God incarnate in the temple. (Luke 1:56; 2:21–22)

Dressed as a priest, David danced and leapt in front of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:14)
John the Baptist—of priestly lineage—leapt in his mother’s womb at the approach of Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant. (Luke 1:41)

David shouts in the presence of the ark of the Old Covenant. (2 Sam. 6:15)
Elizabeth “exclaimed with a loud cry” in the presence of the Mary, the Ark of the Old Covenant. (Luke 1:42)

The ark of the Old Covenant disappeared, and no trace of it can be found anywhere on earth.
Mary, the Ark of the New Covenant, was assumed bodily into heaven by God at the end of her earthly life, and no trace of her can be found anywhere on earth.
Ever notice that non-Catholics NEVER attempt to discredit this? 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top