Prayer of Pope to Mary: To Whom Would the Apostles have pointed him ..Mary or Jesus?

[Stephen_C]

Absolutely. But according to the bible, God never instructs us to ask for prayers from anyone in heaven. He says that we (His children) are to hold one another up in prayer. Saints are not our intercessors, Jesus in our only mediator, according to God. Mary and the saints are not omniscient. Even glorified in Heaven, they are still finite beings with limitations. Whenever the Bible mentions praying to or speaking with the dead, it is in the context of sorcery, witchcraft, necromancy, and divination. There simply is no basis for praying to anyone other than God. Christians can and should conduct intercessory prayers for one another, but the bible does not tell us to ask anyone in heaven to do this.

catholic.com/library/Praying_to_the_Saints.asp

 

[Leeann]

Thanks Bellus and Stephen C for posting.

 

[Leeann]

Originally Posted by Leeann

You fail to appreciate that it is the Holy Spirit who communicates the fullness of divine revelation mediated through Scripture…… if….for whatever reason, anyone’s use of typology changes the meaning of Scripture…it is apparent that they weren’t being guided by the Holy Spirit, but by their own exuberance or motives.

Response Good fella:

Jerome didn’t change the meaning of the Scriptures. You just fail to see that what you read means a lot more than what’s on the surface. Luke typified Mary as the ark of the Covenant without changing the meaning of the Scriptures. The ark can also refer to our Lord from a given perspective. Was the evangelist being “exuberant”?

Not at all – the obvious difference being that Luke didn’t take actual Scripture itself and change its meaning. He “typified” Mary. There is a difference.

Good fella:

Typology is a literary form of expression which God has utilized to reveal the fullness of his truth in his plan of salvation.You’ll never fully understand what the Holy Spirit communicates to us as long as you read the Bible purely in a literal sense. The spiritual and analogical senses are just as important.

Already discussed in Post # 632

But a shoot shall spout from the stump of Jesse,
and from his roots a bud shall blossom.
Isaiah 11, 1 [NAB]

Originally Posted by Leeann

And by doing so, Jerome has changed the meaning of this scripture verse.
Anyone can figuratively apply the symbols in scripture to mean anything they want. But to use a quote of his as you did,(…meaning here, Jerome quotes scripture, applies his meaning to it and then you mix it in with pure scripture verses…) as if it somehow had “God’s truth” to it in supporting how Jerome himself viewed Mary…is simply misleading.

Response Good fella

Not anything they want, since they are guided by the Holy Spirit. You fail to appreciate typology which serves to communicate the fullness of divine revelation mediated through Scripture and Tradition.

Leeann:
You fail to appreciate that it is the Holy Spirit who communicates the fullness of divine revelation mediated through Scripture…… if….for whatever reason, anyone’s use of typology changes the meaning of Scripture…it is apparent that they weren’t being guided by the Holy Spirit, but by their own exuberance or motives.

continued…

 

[Leeann]

Leeann:
I disagree.
As I stated above, Jerome changed the primary meaning of the scripture verse itself.

*“There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a flower shall grow out of his roots.’ **The rod is the mother of the Lord ***-- simple, pure, unsullied; drawing no germ of life from without but fruitful in singleness like God himself…Set before you the blessed Mary, whose surpassing purity made her meet to be the mother of our Lord.”**St. Jerome (A.D. 384) **

Response: Good fella:

Jerome accurately drew an analogy between Jesus and Mary.
Apparently you’ve ignored the scriptural passages I provided above to show you how it’s possible in light of Jerome’s words.

Yes Jerome did draw an analogy….*after *he changed the primary meaning of the scripture verse itself and I always read any scriptural passages that are posted here….and all the quotes that you post from the ECF’s.

As in this particular instance – Post # 543 - where you grouped together Scripture verses and quotes from some of the ECF’s –(Justin Martyr/Irenaeus/Paul the Deacon/Origen/Basil of Selecucia…etc.) and Jerome in an attempt to substantiate your viewpoint below:

Good fella:
The Church glorifies God and honours the Saints who are reflections of God’s glory, for they have been sanctified by the grace of God whose image they have perfectly conformed to for the glory of God and thereby have a share in God’s glory. The Church does indeed glory in no other person than our Lord. Yet it is our Lord who glories in us: we who perfectly conform to his will and likeness so that we are glorified by him, having glorified God with our lives to be worthy of salvation.

I’ve said this before…and I’ll say it again…I find your postings duplicitous in nature, which is further exemplified by the way you interspersed Scripture verses and quotes from the ECF’s…as if they were of equal authority and value.

All the ECF’s quotes, except for Jerome’s, were simply just their understanding and viewpoint with regards to Mary – they didn’t take scripture and “change it’s meaning” as Jerome did, before describing their understanding of Mary.

It is also interesting to note that all the actual Scripture verses you posted were in reference to Jesus/God or to ALL believers, Mary is never specifically mentioned with any special acknowledgement in any of them.

However all the quotes from the ECF’s – mention Mary, some not as “exuberantly” as others, nevertheless it quite clear where their “focus” is.

Good fella:

This is why I have no wish to discuss anything further with you. You’re here just to bicker. If you don’t agree with what I say, that’s fine. But refrain from making further comments if you’re going to ignore things I’ve presented to show you what I mean. You have a tendency to ignore and twist what people reply because you refuse to see what they mean.

As I’ve shown above, I don’t “ignore” people’s replies, I read them very carefully.
As for “twisting” their responses…I sincerely haven’t done this intentionally.
But I do understand your frustration.
I myself have spent a lot time having to go back and re-post quotes or segments of postings as they were originally posted, in an attempt to address comments made that were posted by others and how they either chose to present them, or had simply misunderstood them…by doing so, it appeared to me that they were either ignoring or twisting the context of what the original posting was in reference too.

 

[Deconi]

Personally, if I were to make a list of posters who ought to be ignored, people who make uncharitable statements would go at the top of the list.

After 600plus posts on the subject of the OP, and some are EXTENSIVELY detailed and complete with Scriptural basis and support, “Leanne” has not conceded an inch of ground!..nor even admit to considering the remotest possibility that she may be in error!

‘She’ probably doesn’t even concede that s/he is using a deficient version of Scriptures.

That tells me plenty. Mind you, you clearly have superior patience to mine.

 

[Good_Fella]

Yes Jerome did draw an analogy….*after *he changed the primary meaning of the scripture verse itself and I always read any scriptural passages that are posted here….and all the quotes that you post from the ECF’s.

I’ve said this before…and I’ll say it again…I find your postings duplicitous in nature, which is further exemplified by the way you interspersed Scripture verses and quotes from the ECF’s…as if they were of equal authority and value.

All the ECF’s quotes, except for Jerome’s, were simply just their understanding and viewpoint with regards to Mary – they didn’t take scripture and “change it’s meaning” as Jerome did, before describing their understanding of Mary.

It is also interesting to note that all the actual Scripture verses you posted were in reference to Jesus/God or to ALL believers, Mary is never specifically mentioned with any special acknowledgement in any of them.

However all the quotes from the ECF’s – mention Mary, some not as “exuberantly” as others, nevertheless it quite clear where their “focus” is.

Don’t you even pay attention? Jerome drew an analogy between Jesus and Mary in their simplicity and purity of human nature. This analogy embraces the primary meaning of the symbol which in a secondary context prophetically points to Christ the Messiah. As long as you excessively focus on Christ’s divinity, which is equally significant with his humanity in the divine order of redemption, you’ll fail to appreciate what Jerome means by drawing an analogy between the new Adam and the new Eve. As human beings created in the divine image, we share in the dignity of our Lord’s humanity by conforming ourselves to his image as a man with the help of God’s grace. Elizabeth regarded Mary as more blessed for having contributed to our salvation in “faith working in love.”

I doubt you’ll ever appreciate Mary’s active free participation in the economy of salvation as long as you hold the unbiblical Protestant concept Sola Fide. Still Mary was most blessed among all women for having been chosen to bear God’s only begotten Son. For this reason God sanctified her soul at the first instant of her conception and made her pure and undefiled as the Ark of the New Covenant in conformity with the spotless human nature of Christ. The evangelist Luke makes it implicitly clear notwithstanding Paul’s silence in his occasional few letters. And Mary had to be as spotless and unblemished as her divine Son - made pure as he is pure in his humanity - because of her intimate collaboration with God in his plan of salvation which calls for human mediation starting with Christ who initiated our redemption by his death on the cross.

The ECFs had legitimate apostolic authority to teach. Neither history nor theology is on your side. Nuff said. :takeoff:

PAX :harp:

 

[Peter_J]

Mind you, you clearly have superior patience to mine.

Are you referring to the fact that I haven’t put you on my ignore list?

 

[guanophore]

Above you stated “It does not matter what the Apostles would say.” However, you claim to espouse a faith that is founded upon them, so if it does not matter to you what they would say, why do you call yourself a Christian?

Further, you base your erroneous ideas on the scripture that was compiled and canonized upon the authority of the successors of those Apostles, so if you don’t care what they have to say, then you have no Scriptures either.

Absolutely. But according to the bible, God never instructs us to ask for prayers from anyone in heaven. He says that we (His children) are to hold one another up in prayer.

Christians make no distinction between the saints who are here on earth,and those who have already gone on to their heavenly reward. We are all members of the same body,and we all need one another. You might want to take another look at Corinthians on that point. The Apostles believed in the Communion of Saints, that is why it is found in the Apostles Creed. You might also consider another look at the book of Revelation, and notice what the saints and angels are doing there. You will see that they are not “dead”.


Those who have died in Christ are “alive forevermore”.

Saints are not our intercessors, Jesus in our only mediator, according to God.

You have been given a very deficient understanding of the Christian faith. All of use have the privilege to intercede for one another BECAUSE Christ as mediated this privilege for us. You are confusing the two with one another.

Mary and the saints are not omniscient. Even glorified in Heaven, they are still finite beings with limitations.

This is true, yet, the Saints can do whatever God allows them to do. Moses parting the Red sea did not make him omnipotent. Peter’s shadow healing the sick did not make him omnipotent either.

Whenever the Bible mentions praying to or speaking with the dead, it is in the context of sorcery, witchcraft, necromancy, and divination.

You are right. I recommend you avoid the practice,though.

Jesus taught that those who die in Christ live forever, and that we are united with them into His One Body, and therefore, since we cannot be separated from His love, neither are we separated from theirs.

There simply is no basis for praying to anyone other than God. Christians can and should conduct intercessory prayers for one another, but the bible does not tell us to ask anyone in heaven to do this.

I am curious, why do you think God allowed Samuel to visit and converse with Saul before the battle?

Why do you think Jesus went to such trouble to take the Apostles’ with him to the Transfiguration? Why did he not go alone, as he often did? why was it so important for them to witness the conversation he was having with the Saints?

 

[guanophore]

After 600plus posts on the subject of the OP, and some are EXTENSIVELY detailed and complete with Scriptural basis and support, “Leanne” has not conceded an inch of ground!..nor even admit to considering the remotest possibility that she may be in error!

‘She’ probably doesn’t even concede that s/he is using a deficient version of Scriptures.

That tells me plenty. Mind you, you clearly have superior patience to mine.

We can always hope and pray that the lurkers reading the thread may be more open to the Apostolic Teaching.

 

[ferdie]

We can always hope and pray that the lurkers reading the thread may be more open to the Apostolic Teaching.

Don’t be sad, you should have put the smiley face instead, coz you are right, it is the lurkers who benefit with this kind of exposition. So keep it going!!! I admire you guys for having the patience!!!

 

[Leeann]

After 600plus posts on the subject of the OP, and some are EXTENSIVELY detailed and complete with Scriptural basis and support, “Leanne” has not conceded an inch of ground!..nor even admit to considering the remotest possibility that she may be in error!

‘She’ probably doesn’t even concede that s/he is using a deficient version of Scriptures.

That tells me plenty. Mind you, you clearly have superior patience to mine.

Hi Deconi –

“She” refers and posts from the Duoay Rheims (online translation)…if that is not acceptable, please advise what is.

“She” also refers to the NAB (New American translation) if another poster responds with scripture given from there…is that not acceptable?

Thanks for taking the time to post.

 

[Graubo3]

In response to the OP, I believe that the Apostles have pointed, are pointing, and will always point to Jesus. Why would anyone claiming to be a part of the Christian religion think or do otherwise? Would they be a Christian if they recognized another as their Saviour? Are you here to learn about something that you do not believe in? Or what exactly do you want to accuse Catholics of by threads such as these? That we are idolaters or are we even Christian? Would it be fair to say non-Catholic Christians are ‘worshippers of the Book’ as some of my non-Christian friends believe? That would not be fair. I find it hilariously sad (not sure which) reading posts by non-Catholics, explaining Catholic theology, spirituality, or devotion.

What I find most interesting in regards to the article the OP linked to is the amazing conversion to Christ that Blessed Bartolo Longo experienced. The article says that Longo was once a Satanic priest and militantly anti-clerical for those that have not read it. I personally do not know how one could be more anti-Catholic. I wonder if Longo ever desecrated the Consecrated Host at a Black Mass as a priest of Satan. I would be very shocked if he didn’t. Please note that the bolded words do not mean a cube of Wonder Bread or an Ol’ Fashion Tent Revival. Satan knows where Jesus is!

Great Post Thing!

From Acts of the Apostles;

14 And the multitude of men and women who believed in the Lord, was more increased: 15 Insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that when Peter came, his shadow at the least, might overshadow any of them, and they might be delivered from their infirmities.

Why did the people not just pray to Jesus and be cured from their infirmities, why did they go through St. Peter when they wanted to be cured. Did their faith and prayer to St. Peter have its effect, were they cured? Yes.

and Leeann’s response:

They didn’t “go through Peter” to be cured.
Read the verse again above – they “believed in the Lord”.

There is no indication that they placed their faith in Peter, they placed their faith in the Lord and believed in the Lord….there is also no indication that they prayed to Peter.

Yes they were healed – by the power of God.

Amen Leeann! The people did believe in the Lord. They also believe in His instruments that lead them to Him, whether it is a leper, Peter’s shadow, or Sacred Scripture. Did not Jesus instruct His Apostles to heal? Why not just do it Himself with a wave of His mighty hand from above? How do you know the people had no faith in Jesus’ servant Peter? There is also no indication to the contrary as you suppose. I think your response (really a non-response via a Texas Two Step) to Thing sums up this whole thread for what it is and Deconi says with greater charity than I:

After 600plus posts on the subject of the OP, and some are EXTENSIVELY detailed and complete with Scriptural basis and support, “Leanne” has not conceded an inch of ground!..nor even admit to considering the remotest possibility that she may be in error!

‘She’ probably doesn’t even concede that s/he is using a deficient version of Scriptures.

That tells me plenty. Mind you, you clearly have superior patience to mine.

Maybe your next thread on this topic should use more sensational journalism in its title like: Shocking things everyone should know about the Theotokos from a non-believers mind (on sale now in DVD widescreen, Beta available upon request).
Think of me a “Mary Worshipper” all you like, but I still won’t think of you as a Book worshipper. It was the Theotokos that took me from the muck and brought me to her Son. Have a nice weekend.

Peace, Graubo

 

[ron77nyc]

I’ve just finished listening to Dr. Mark Miravalle professor of Theology and Mariology at Franciscan University of Steubenville at motherofallpeoples.com/.
**He has written the following: **
Mariology: A Guide for Priests, Deacons, Seminarians, and Consecrated Persons
Meet Mary: Getting to Know the Mother of God
The Seven Sorrows of China
Private Revelation: Discerning with the Church
It Is Time to Meet St. Philomena
Introduction To Mary, Medjugorje and the Family,
Introduction to Medjugorje
With Jesus: The Story of Mary Co-redemptrix
Mary Co-redemptrix: Doctrinal Issues Today
Contemporary Insights on a Fifth Marian Dogma: Theological Foundations III
Dogma and the Triumph
Mary: Theological Foundations II
Mary Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate: Theological Foundations: Towards a Papal Definition?
Mary: Coredemptrix, Mediatrix, Advocate.

He is encouraging Catholics to petition the pope for the 5th Marian Dogma.
He says it has always been a precedent in the Catholic Church and he sites 2 other Marian dogmas as an example.

Here is what the catechism says:

“To preach… the unsearchable riches of Christ” [Eph 3:8]

425 The transmission of the Christian faith consists primarily in proclaiming Jesus Christ in order to lead others to faith in him.
At the heart of catechesis: Christ

426 “At the heart of catechesis we find, in essence, a Person, the Person of Jesus of Nazareth, the only Son from the Father… who suffered and died for us and who now, after rising, is living with us forever.” [CT 5] To catechize is “to reveal in the Person of Christ the whole of God’s eternal design reaching fulfilment in that Person. It is to seek to understand the meaning of Christ’s actions and words and of the signs worked by him.” [CT 5] Catechesis aims at putting “people… in communion… with Jesus Christ: only he can lead us to the love of the Father in the Spirit and make us share in the life of the Holy Trinity.” [CT 5] [1698, 513, 260]

Do you see a contradiction here? I hardly ever hear anyone preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ or writing books about it.

 

[Leeann]

In response to the OP, I believe that the Apostles have pointed, are pointing, and will always point to Jesus. Why would anyone claiming to be a part of the Christian religion think or do otherwise? Would they be a Christian if they recognized another as their Saviour? Are you here to learn about something that you do not believe in? Or what exactly do you want to accuse Catholics of by threads such as these? That we are idolaters or are we even Christian? Would it be fair to say non-Catholic Christians are ‘worshippers of the Book’ as some of my non-Christian friends believe? That would not be fair. I find it hilariously sad (not sure which) reading posts by non-Catholics, explaining Catholic theology, spirituality, or devotion.

Thank you for posting more fully.

Graubo

Maybe your next thread on this topic should use more sensational journalism in its title like: Shocking things everyone should know about the Theotokos from a non-believers mind (on sale now in DVD widescreen, Beta available upon request).
Think of me a “Mary Worshipper” all you like, but I still won’t think of you as a Book worshipper. It was the Theotokos that took me from the muck and brought me to her Son. Have a nice weekend.

Peace, Graubo

I try not to label or namecall other posters…it really serves no purpose…and to do so to oneself, as you have done above…really makes no sense.

Thank you Graubo, I will enjoy the weekend and hope you have a good one too.

 

[Leeann]

Good fella

I doubt you’ll ever appreciate Mary’s active free participation in the economy of salvation as long as you hold the unbiblical Protestant concept Sola Fide. Still Mary was most blessed among all women for having been chosen to bear God’s only begotten Son. For this reason God sanctified her soul at the first instant of her conception and made her pure and undefiled as the Ark of the New Covenant in conformity with the spotless human nature of Christ. The evangelist Luke makes it implicitly clear notwithstanding Paul’s silence in his occasional few letters.

Good fella

And Mary had to be as spotless and unblemished as her divine Son - made pure as he is pure in his humanity - because of her intimate collaboration with God in his plan of salvation which calls for human mediation starting with Christ who initiated our redemption by his death on the cross.

Thank you for your viewpoint, which understandably is the Catholic Church’s teaching, about Mary being sanctified “at the first instant of her conception”.
As you are aware, many Christians do not believe this to be true and do not support the necessity of having to believe this dogma - the ‘Immaculate Conception’, in order to be considered a part of HIS Church, something you will never appreciate, as long as you continue to hold to the Catholic Church’s concept of developing unbiblical dogmas.

Good fella
The ECFs had legitimate apostolic authority to teach. Neither history nor theology is on your side. Nuff said. :takeoff:

Thankfully I don’t place my explicit faith in history or theology…both man-made and fallible.

Safe flight!

 

[Peter_J]

I hardly ever hear anyone preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ or writing books about it.

What about that guy Benedict somebody-or-other? (Granted, he may not be at quite the same level as Dr. Miravalle.)

 

[ron77nyc]

What about that guy Benedict somebody-or-other? (Granted, he may not be at quite the same level as Dr. Miravalle.)

Oh yeah…he’s good. I can see him going places and having a big influence in the church. :yup:

 

[Always_For_Him]

Thank you for your viewpoint, which understandably is the Catholic Church’s teaching, about Mary being sanctified “at the first instant of her conception”.
As you are aware, many Christians do not believe this to be true and do not support the necessity of having to believe this dogma - the ‘Immaculate Conception’, in order to be considered a part of HIS Church, something you will never appreciate, as long as you continue to hold to the Catholic Church’s concept of developing unbiblical dogmas.:

LeAnn,
Luther and the Reformers believed in Marian Dogma. It was brought through the Reformation. Over the last 500 years, MAN has changed interpretations and their teachings do not reflect the Apostolic teachings that were in place and believed by all Christians for over 1,500 years before these men put their teachings out there as the truth. You are espousing new, less than 500 years-old, doctrine and teachings of man. You just don’t know it. You know what you have been taught your whole life. Generation after generation of errant teaching will never be Truth.

It is the protestant reformation that ushered in the development of unbiblical dogma/teaching/interpretation/doctrine, not the Catholic Church. Catholic teaching IS what was written down as the Bible. So, please, quit wrongly interpreting OUR writings, to then tell US what they mean. The Catholic Church has NEVER created unbiblical dogma. Just as the understanding of the OT grew over time, so does the understanding and fullness of the NT. Jesus didn’t say you have all knowledge NOW, He said, “I will guide you to all Truth.” He said that to the men HE chose to found His Church on earth, not each and every single one of us to decide for ourselves what the Truth is. The only way you are going to be able to see what we are trying to teach you is if you open your heart to the Truth as it has always been taught by Christ’s Church. You can’t do that with a closed heart and loyalty to teachings of a Church by man that is NOT Christ’s Apostolic Church.

You ARE placing your faith in man-made, fallible teaching of men that founded Churches that are not in unity with the Apostolic Church. You are really never going to be able to take our Bible, written by Catholics for Catholics, interpret it for yourself, then use your interpretation to prove the 2,000 year-old Catholic Church in error. You are preaching errant false teaching/heresy against THE Church that Christ founded. Every piece of information you have came from the Catholic Church. Yours is just one of many interpretations whether it be 3, 5, 50, 100, 500, 5,000 or 33,000. The ONLY Truth is the ONE that Jesus left with His Church that HE promised to guide and protect until the end of time. Either Jesus founded the Church, ONE CHURCH, as it shows in Scripture and IS protecting it, or He didn’t protect His Church and is a liar. You are choosing to believe in the errant teachings of man because that is all you know. You might as well throw your Bible away, because you or your pastor, or generations of men since the reformation, DO NOT have ANY authority at all to interpret ANYTHING that is written in the Catholic Church’s Bible. Everything you are arguing with us about is ERRANT teaching of MAN and has NEVER been part of Apostolic teaching. It is heresy whether you believe it or not.

It is interesting that you try to use Jerome to prove your point. Jerome came to understand HIS errors and ultimately submitted to the Authority of Christ’s Church. It is sad to see you cherry picking something Jerome said apart from everything else he said that proves that to be in error.

 

[guanophore]

Here is what the catechism says:

“To preach… the unsearchable riches of Christ” [Eph 3:8]

425 The transmission of the Christian faith consists primarily in proclaiming Jesus Christ in order to lead others to faith in him.
At the heart of catechesis: Christ

426 “At the heart of catechesis we find, in essence, a Person, the Person of Jesus of Nazareth, the only Son from the Father… who suffered and died for us and who now, after rising, is living with us forever.” [CT 5] To catechize is “to reveal in the Person of Christ the whole of God’s eternal design reaching fulfilment in that Person. It is to seek to understand the meaning of Christ’s actions and words and of the signs worked by him.” [CT 5] Catechesis aims at putting “people… in communion… with Jesus Christ: only he can lead us to the love of the Father in the Spirit and make us share in the life of the Holy Trinity.” [CT 5] [1698, 513, 260]

Do you see a contradiction here? I hardly ever hear anyone preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ or writing books about it.

No, there is no contradiction between Mary and Christ. Mary was the first Christian, and completely passionate and sold out on her devotion to the Lord before, during,a nd after his earthly life. No one can come to know Mary without coming to know the Lord. It is just the kind of person she is. May we all be likewise!

However, I would like there to be a whole lot of Fr. Corapi types preaching Christ. I think there is always a need for more good preachers. As far as books, I am kinda partial to the Bible as my favorite book about Christ. I do read other books, but I like that one best.

Have you considered preaching Christ yourself, ron, instead of focusing on the shortcomings of others?

 

[Leeann]

Hi Always for Him.

Thank you for posting.
All of your comments have been addressed previously throughout this thread by various posters, but I sincerely appreciate your viewpoint and the time you took to express it.

Always for Him
**
It is interesting that you try to use Jerome to prove your point. Jerome came to understand HIS errors and ultimately submitted to the Authority of Christ’s Church. It is sad to see you cherry picking something Jerome said apart from everything else he said that proves that to be in error**.

I believe I made it quite clear as to why the quote by Jerome, (originally posted by Good fella) stood out from the other ECF’s references and the Scripture verses that were posted. See below.
As you state above, God’s Truth is extremely important.

Post # 643

But a shoot shall spout from the stump of Jesse,
and from his roots a bud shall blossom.
Isaiah 11, 1 [NAB] (posted by Good fella)

Originally Posted by Leeann

And by doing so, Jerome has changed the meaning of this scripture verse.
Anyone can figuratively apply the symbols in scripture to mean anything they want. But to use a quote of his as you did,(…meaning here, Jerome quotes scripture, applies his meaning to it and then you mix it in with pure scripture verses…) as if it somehow had “God’s truth” to it in supporting how Jerome himself viewed Mary…is simply misleading.

Response Good fella

Not anything they want, since they are guided by the Holy Spirit. You fail to appreciate typology which serves to communicate the fullness of divine revelation mediated through Scripture and Tradition.

Leeann:
You fail to appreciate that it is the Holy Spirit who communicates the fullness of divine revelation mediated through Scripture…… if….for whatever reason, anyone’s use of typology changes the meaning of Scripture…it is apparent that they weren’t being guided by the Holy Spirit, but by their own exuberance or motives.