Protestants, who have been around awhile, question about the Virgin Mary

[david_ruiz]

While the Fathers taught Mary’s sinlessness, there is no clearly evident teaching with regard to Mary and original sin in their writings…The Franciscans became the defenders of the Immaculate Conception while the Dominicans continued to assert Thomas’ reservations. In 1387, a Dominican, John Montson, was asked by a board of more than thirty theologians at the University of Paris to retract four propositions of his master’s thesis which denied the Immaculate Conception. When he concluded that Clement VII (the Avignon Pope at time of Schism), to whom he had appealed his case, was likely to decide against him, Montson left the areas adhering to the Avignon Pope for those of the Roman Pope. His actions were condemned in Avignon and in Paris. This was perceived as victory for those promoting the Immaculate Conception. campus.udayton.edu/mary/resources/kimmac.html Again ,the IC was greatly debated amongst good Catholics .You asked for references and I think this site and quotes from it provide ample referencing .Thank-you

 

[tqualey]

Hi, david Ruiz,

When the Angel greeted Mary with the statement, “Hail! Full of Grace…” what does that mean to you?

God bless

Tom

The difficulty that others had with celebrating Mary’s conception was the conviction that every person was conceived with original sin. Romans 5:12 states: “Therefore, as through one man sin entered into the world, and through sin death, so death passed to all men, inasmuch as all sinned.” One of the strong arguments for the universality of original sin was Augustine’s assertion that original sin is transmitted in the act of begetting the child by the parents’ concupiscence:The Church struggled with the tension between the growing liturgical celebration of the feast of the Conception(beginning around 850 AD) and the misgivings of theologians. Edward O’Connor has said that the Immaculate Conception “occasioned what was perhaps the most prolonged and passionate debate that has ever been carried on Catholic theology.”[8]http://campus.udayton.edu/mary/resources/kimmac.html This is the site I mentioned earlier .Seems like a fair presentation

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Jlhargus,

I don’t think you missed anything …

God bless

JL: Of course Mary needed a savior and her savior, Jesus, PRESERVED, sactified Mary from sin at conception. Her soul was indwelled by the Holy Spirit from conception. Just as John the Baptist was indwelled by the Holy Spirit in his mother’s womb and BORN without sin.

[Lk1:15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be FILLED WITH THE HOLY GHOST, even FROM HIS MOTHER’S WOMB.]

Lk1:41 And it came to pass, that, when Elizabeth HEARD THE SALUTATION OF MARY, THE BABE LEAPED IN HER WOMB; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: [The same God who filled and sanctified John the Baptist in the womb filled and sanctified Mary at conception, with God nothing is impossible.

JL: No the bible DOES NOT say Joseph knew Mary after she gave birth to our Lord and Savior. The bible confirms only that Joseph did not know Mary BEFORE she brought forth her Son. Till means here, that some action did not happen up to a certain point, it does not mean the action did happen later.

[1 COR 15:25 For he must reign **TILL

he hath put all enemies under his feet] Is Christ only to reign till all enemies are under His feet? I thought His kingdom would have no end.

[1 TIM 4:13 **TILL I come give attendance to reading to exhortation to doctrine] Is Timothy to stop reading scripture, to exhortation, to doctrine after Paul arrives?

Mary perpetual virgin;

[Ezek 44:1 Then THE MAN BROUGHT ME BACK TO THE OUTER GATE of the sanctuary, THE ONE FACING EAST, and IT WAS SHUT. 2 **THE LORD SAID to me, THIS GATE IS TO REMAIN SHUT. IT MUST NOT BE OPENED; NO ONE MAY ENTER THROUTH IT. It is to remain shut BECAUSE THE LORD, THE GOD OF ISRAEL, HAS ENTERED THROUGH IT.

This gate, Mary, is to remain shut. It must NOT BE OPENED, NO ONE may enter THROUGH IT. She is to remain ever virgin, NO ONE, no other children are to enter through it. Because The Lord God, Jesus, has entered through that gate.

NBRS 30:3 “WHEN A YOUNG WOMAN still living in her father’s house MAKES A VOW TO THE LORD or obligates herself by a pledge 4 AND HER FATHER HEARS about her vow or pledge BUT SAYS NOTHING TO HER, then all HER VOWS and every pledge by which she obligated herself WILL STAND. 5 But if her father forbids her when he hears about it, none of her vows or the pledges by which she obligated herself will stand; the LORD will release her because her father has forbidden her. 6 "IF SHE MARRIES AFTER SHE MAKES A VOW or after her lips utter a rash promise by which she obligates herself 7 AND HER HUSBAND HEARS about it BUT SAYS NOTHING to her, THEN HER VOWS or the pledges by which she obligated herself WILL STAND. 8 But if her husband forbids her when he hears about it, he nullifies the vow that obligates her or the rash promise by which she obligates herself, and the LORD will release her.

[Lk1:30 And THE ANGEL SAID unto her FEAR NOT MARY for thou hast found favour with God 31 And behold THOU SHALT CONCEIVE in thy womb AND BRING FORTH A SON and shalt CALL HIS NAME JESUS 32 He shall be great and shall be called THE SON OF THE HIGHEST and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever and of his kingdom there shall be no end 34 THEN SAID MARY unto the angel HOW SHALL THIS BE SEEING I KNOW NOT A MAN? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her THE HOLY GHOST SHALL COME UPON THEE and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God] Unless Mary had taken a vow of virginity, as early Church Fathers believed, why would she a betrothed woman ask, “HOW SHALL THIS BE, SEEING I KNOW NOT A MAN? Wouldn’t conceiving be the most natural and desired thing for a betrothed to expect, especially a Jewish woman in that time?

[The Lord God has entered through Mary the gate and no one else is to enter thru that gate. Just as no one was to enter into the OT Ark of the Covenant. So no one is to enter Mary the Ark of the NT. The fathers called Mary the gate of heaven and the ark of the covenant.

Hb9:4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ARK CONTAINED the gold jar of MANNA, AARON’S STAFF that had budded, and the stone TABLETS OF THE COVENANT.

Mary the living ark, not made by hands, would contain, in her womb. The real living Word of God, CHRIST. The real living Bread of Life, CHRIST, and the real living High Priest, CHRIST. Not just symbols as the ark, made by hands, contained but the actual realities. As our Lord says in Ex25:22 THERE, ABOVE THE COVER BETWEEN THE TWO CHERUBIM THAT ARE OVER THE ARK OF THE TESTIMONY, I WILL MEET WITH YOU AND GIVE YOU ALL MY COMMANDS FOR THE ISRAELITES.

2 MCABS 2:5 And when Jeremy came thither he found an hollow cave wherein he laid the tabernacle and the ark and the altar of incense and so stopped the door 6 And some of those that followed him came to mark the way but they could not find it 7 Which when Jeremy perceived he blamed them saying As for THAT PLACE IT SHALL BE UNKNOWN UNTILL THE TIME THAT GOD GATHER HIS PEOPLE again TOGETHER AND RECEIVE THEM UNTO MERCY. 8 THEN SHALL THE LORD SHEW THEM THESE THINGS AND THE GLORY OF THE LORD SHALL APPEAR AND THE CLOUD ALSO as it was shewed under Moses and as when Solomon desired that the place might be honourably sanctified

EX 40:34 Then** a cloud covered the tent of the congregation and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle 35 And Moses was not able to enter into the tent of the congregation because the cloud abode thereon and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle

LK 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her** The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee** therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God

2 SAM 6:2 And David arose and went with all the people that were with him from Baale of Judah to bring up from thence the ark of God whose name is called by the name of the LORD of hosts that dwelleth between the cherubims

LK 1:39 **And Mary arose **in those days **and went **into the hill country with haste **into a city of Juda **

2 SAM 6:9 **And David was afraid **of the LORD that day and said How shall the ark of the LORD come to me?

LK 1:30 And the angel said unto her **Fear not Mary **for thou hast found favour with God

2 SAM 6:9 And David was afraid of the LORD that day and said How shall the ark of the LORD come to me?

LK 1:43 And whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

2 SAM 6:16 And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David Michal Saul’s daughter looked through a window and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD and she despised him in her heart

LK 1:44 For lo as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears** the babe leaped in my womb for joy **

2 SAM 6:18 And as soon as David had made an end of offering burnt offerings and peace offerings** he blessed the people in the name of the LORD** of hosts

LK 1:45 And** blessed is she that believed **for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord

2 SAM 6:11 And the ark of the LORD continued in the house of Obededom the Gittite three months: and the LORD blessed Obededom and all his household

LK 1:56 **And Mary abode with her about three months **and returned to her own house

[Lk1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from **henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. 49 For he that is mighty hath done to me GREAT THINGS; and holy is his name.] What are some of those GREAT thingS God has done to Mary?

 

[david_ruiz]

So the New Eve, who was to share in undoing the harm of original sin, should have also an immaculate start. However, none of the Fathers actually followed this line of reasoning. (A few Fathers even tried to find sins she had committed, e.g. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on John 21. PG 59. 130ff).During the middle ages, authors such as St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Thomas Aquinas denied the doctrine… At this time, the data from Scripture and the Fathers was still not clear. After a while, however, the theological tide began to turn, and the objections which had long obscured the content of divine revelation began to be overcome. This was due especially to the work of the Franciscan, Venerable John Duns Scotus… The same Pope added further support in 1483 (DS 1425-26), condemning those who said it was sinful to preach and believe the Immaculate Conception.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya2.htm. I believe the condemming of IC was done not by protestants but by Catholics, hence the new papal decree… Thomas Aquinas is debateable as to his stand on IC.Some say he believed it late in life but …

 

[david_ruiz]

“Then Pope St. Pius V, in 1567 (DS 1973) condemned the error of Baius who said Our Lady was subject to original sin.” Baius was a Catholic theologian,never lost his teaching post.

 

[david_ruiz]

Hi, david Ruiz,

When the Angel greeted Mary with the statement, “Hail! Full of Grace…” what does that mean to you?

God bless

Tom

Whatever I think ,the scripture was not enough to bring about a speedy IC doctrine,a nd certainly doesn’t break the Augustinian teaching that through chilbearing original sin is pased on .But ,we know better today than earlier theologians/forefathers ? I have read the stuff that says it means IC ,and not any later puirification. I have also read others that say it is a stretch,to say from that greek word you get IC.

 

[david_ruiz]

JL: Of course Mary needed a savior and her savior, Jesus, PRESERVED, sactified Mary from sin at conception. Her soul was indwelled by the Holy Spirit from conception. Just as John the Baptist was indwelled by the Holy Spirit in his mother’s womb and BORN without sin.

[Lk1:15 For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be FILLED WITH THE HOLY GHOST, even FROM HIS MOTHER’S WOMB.]

Lk1:41 And it came to pass, that, when Elizabeth HEARD THE SALUTATION OF MARY, THE BABE LEAPED IN HER WOMB; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: [The same God who filled and sanctified John the Baptist in the womb filled and sanctified Mary at conception, with God nothing is impossible.

JL: No the bible DOES NOT say Joseph knew Mary after she gave birth to our Lord and Savior. The bible confirms only that Joseph did not know Mary BEFORE she brought forth her Son. Till means here, that some action did not happen up to a certain point, it does not mean the action did happen later.

[1 COR 15:25 For he must reign **TILL

he hath put all enemies under his feet] Is Christ only to reign till all enemies are under His feet? I thought His kingdom would have no end.

[1 TIM 4:13 **TILL I come give attendance to reading to exhortation to doctrine] Is Timothy to stop reading scripture, to exhortation, to doctrine after Paul arrives?

Mary perpetual virgin;

[Ezek 44:1 Then THE MAN BROUGHT ME BACK TO THE OUTER GATE of the sanctuary, THE ONE FACING EAST, and IT WAS SHUT. 2 **THE LORD SAID to me, THIS GATE IS TO REMAIN SHUT. IT MUST NOT BE OPENED; NO ONE MAY ENTER THROUTH IT. It is to remain shut BECAUSE THE LORD, THE GOD OF ISRAEL, HAS ENTERED THROUGH IT.

This gate, Mary, is to remain shut. It must NOT BE OPENED, NO ONE may enter THROUGH IT. She is to remain ever virgin, NO ONE, no other children are to enter through it. Because The Lord God, Jesus, has entered through that gate.

NBRS 30:3 “WHEN A YOUNG WOMAN still living in her father’s house MAKES A VOW TO THE LORD or obligates herself by a pledge 4 AND HER FATHER HEARS about her vow or pledge BUT SAYS NOTHING TO HER, then all HER VOWS and every pledge by which she obligated herself WILL STAND. 5 But if her father forbids her when he hears about it, none of her vows or the pledges by which she obligated herself will stand; the LORD will release her because her father has forbidden her. 6 "IF SHE MARRIES AFTER SHE MAKES A VOW or after her lips utter a rash promise by which she obligates herself 7 AND HER HUSBAND HEARS about it BUT SAYS NOTHING to her, THEN HER VOWS or the pledges by which she obligated herself WILL STAND. 8 But if her husband forbids her when he hears about it, he nullifies the vow that obligates her or the rash promise by which she obligates herself, and the LORD will release her.

[Lk1:30 And THE ANGEL SAID unto her FEAR NOT MARY for thou hast found favour with God 31 And behold THOU SHALT CONCEIVE in thy womb AND BRING FORTH A SON and shalt CALL HIS NAME JESUS 32 He shall be great and shall be called THE SON OF THE HIGHEST and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David 33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever and of his kingdom there shall be no end 34 THEN SAID MARY unto the angel HOW SHALL THIS BE SEEING I KNOW NOT A MAN? 35 And the angel answered and said unto her THE HOLY GHOST SHALL COME UPON THEE and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God] Unless Mary had taken a vow of virginity, as early Church Fathers believed, why would she a betrothed woman ask, “HOW SHALL THIS BE, SEEING I KNOW NOT A MAN? Wouldn’t conceiving be the most natural and desired thing for a betrothed to expect, especially a Jewish woman in that time?

[The Lord God has entered through Mary the gate and no one else is to enter thru that gate. Just as no one was to enter into the OT Ark of the Covenant. So no one is to enter Mary the Ark of the NT. The fathers called Mary the gate of heaven and the ark of the covenant.

Hb9:4 which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ARK CONTAINED the gold jar of MANNA, AARON’S STAFF that had budded, and the stone TABLETS OF THE COVENANT.

Mary the living ark, not made by hands, would contain, in her womb. The real living Word of God, CHRIST. The real living Bread of Life, CHRIST, and the real living High Priest, CHRIST. Not just symbols as the ark, made by hands, contained but the actual realities. As our Lord says in Ex25:22 THERE, ABOVE THE COVER BETWEEN THE TWO CHERUBIM THAT ARE OVER THE ARK OF THE TESTIMONY, I WILL MEET WITH YOU AND GIVE YOU ALL MY COMMANDS FOR THE ISRAELITES.

2 MCABS 2:5 And when Jeremy came thither he found an hollow cave wherein he laid the tabernacle and the ark and the altar of incense and so stopped the door 6 And some of those that followed him came to mark the way but they could not find it 7 Which when Jeremy perceived he blamed them saying As for THAT PLACE IT SHALL BE UNKNOWN UNTILL THE TIME THAT GOD GATHER HIS PEOPLE again TOGETHER AND RECEIVE THEM UNTO MERCY. 8 THEN SHALL THE LORD SHEW THEM THESE THINGS AND THE GLORY OF THE LORD SHALL APPEAR AND THE CLOUD ALSO as it was shewed under Moses and as when Solomon desired that the place might be honourably sanctified

EX 40:34 Then** a cloud covered the tent of the congregation and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle 35 And Moses was not able to enter into the tent of the congregation because the cloud abode thereon and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle

LK 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her** The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee** therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God

2 SAM 6:2 And David arose and went with all the people that were with him from Baale of Judah to bring up from thence the ark of God whose name is called by the name of the LORD of hosts that dwelleth between the cherubims

LK 1:39 **And Mary arose **in those days **and went **into the hill country with haste **into a city of Juda **

2 SAM 6:9 **And David was afraid **of the LORD that day and said How shall the ark of the LORD come to me?

LK 1:30 And the angel said unto her **Fear not Mary **for thou hast found favour with God

2 SAM 6:9 And David was afraid of the LORD that day and said How shall the ark of the LORD come to me?

LK 1:43 And whence is this to me that the mother of my Lord should come to me?

2 SAM 6:16 And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David Michal Saul’s daughter looked through a window and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD and she despised him in her heart

LK 1:44 For lo as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears** the babe leaped in my womb for joy **

2 SAM 6:18 And as soon as David had made an end of offering burnt offerings and peace offerings** he blessed the people in the name of the LORD** of hosts

LK 1:45 And** blessed is she that believed **for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord

2 SAM 6:11 And the ark of the LORD continued in the house of Obededom the Gittite three months: and the LORD blessed Obededom and all his household

LK 1:56 **And Mary abode with her about three months **and returned to her own house

[Lk1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from **henceforth all generations shall call me blessed. 49 For he that is mighty hath done to me GREAT THINGS; and holy is his name.] What are some of those GREAT thingS God has done to Mary?Psalm69 :8,9 “I am become a stranger to my brethren ,and an alien unto my mother’s children. For the zeal of thine house hath eaten me up,and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are upon me”… The gospels refernce this to jesus .It is quite succint.Beautiful double meaning to many. Remember His “brethren” did not believe Him till after the resurrection.

 

[BrunoMaria]

My disagreement with catholicism is with the belief that Mary is without sin. In Luke 1:47 Mary says, “And my spirit has rejoiced in God my savior.” If she is without sin, then from what is God saving her? The bible teaches in Romans 3:23 that, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Mary needed a savior like everyone else.

Her perpetual viginity is inaccurate. In Matthew 1:24-25 it says, “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 first born Son. And he called His name Jesus.” The emphasis on the word till is mine for the sake of making the point.

Jospeh knew Mary after she gave birth to our Lord and Savior because the bible says so.

Nobody could get into heaven - not even Abraham or Moses. Saints like them where in a kind of pre-heaven. Match Luke 16.22 (Not the Heaven the heaven where God is, but a place Abraham was).
Mary was aved as we all where. But She not off her sins, but to enter now Gods kingdom and to see God face to face.

Her perpetual viginity is NOT inaccurate, but fact. In Matthew 1:24-25 it says, “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 first born Son. And he called His name Jesus.” The emphasis on the word till is mine for the sake of making the point.

This till is often gladly misinterpretet und you fell into this trap too, as so many do. “Not know her” is not as we profaniously like to, to be interpretet with sexual togetherness, but rather with the fact, that Josef couldn’t quite grasp that he must stay with Holy Mary as protector for the Holy Family and Jesus Christ as a baby and juvenile - though Jesus is God. The Circumstances then let the also virgin Joseph then recognice Holy Mary as “his wife” according to God’s will - he now “knew her”.

Holy Mary and Holy Josef, are by no means and in now way to be matched with any pious couple. How by all means, could we ever compare this Holy Family in the here usual relativism of merely earthly views and experiences. Wouldn’t that be ever so narrow minded and very far of any divine comprehention? It really would!
They gave not birth to Jesus Christ who is God in God, Light from Light and true God from thrue God, “because the bible says so” - but it was God’s will, which is reported by the Holy Bible. It indeed does take quite a bit of divine comprehention and the will to comprehend, to grasp God’s truth. Let’S pray to the Holy spirit, that He grants us this comprehention.

Yours
Bruno

 

[tqualey]

Hi, David Ruz.

Wjhat you appear to enjoy is finding the zebra in the heard of horses and then claiming, “See this means they are all not horses! So no one can prove that there are any horses to begin with!!”

If you want to really examine the Early Chruch Fathers - you must really present a total picture and not just cherry-pick what you want to try and discredit the Catholic Faith that you are so obvioulsy delighted to have left. Check out these ECF who totally support the Immaculate Conception … oh, and don’t forget that ‘pesky’ Angel Gabriel who whas sent by God to Mary to deliver the most tremendous message ever: She was chosen by the Grace of God (and through no merit on her own) to be the Mother of the Most High.

Here’s the link: staycatholic.com/ecf_immaculate_conception.htm

By the way, the ECF give us excellent insights into many areas - but, please note - not one of them - or, even all of them put together - were infallible. The Pope, however IS in infallible when teaching about Faith or Morals. Mary’s Immaculate Conception is a defined dogma of the Catholic Church.

Oh, and by the way - I obviously do not have the library you have … so how about posting some links that actually back up statements … an approach used by just about everyone else when they quote someone. Thanks.

God bless

So the New Eve, who was to share in undoing the harm of original sin, should have also an immaculate start. However, none of the Fathers actually followed this line of reasoning. (A few Fathers even tried to find sins she had committed, e.g. St. John Chrysostom, Homilies on John 21. PG 59. 130ff).During the middle ages, authors such as St. Bernard of Clairvaux and St. Thomas Aquinas denied the doctrine… At this time, the data from Scripture and the Fathers was still not clear. After a while, however, the theological tide began to turn, and the objections which had long obscured the content of divine revelation began to be overcome. This was due especially to the work of the Franciscan, Venerable John Duns Scotus… The same Pope added further support in 1483 (DS 1425-26), condemning those who said it was sinful to preach and believe the Immaculate Conception.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/marya2.htm. I believe the condemming of IC was done not by protestants but by Catholics, hence the new papal decree… Thomas Aquinas is debateable as to his stand on IC.Some say he believed it late in life but …

 

[kellerk]

What you think is gained by a perfect womb in terms of His divinity, you lose in terms of his humanity

no so, sin is not what makes us human, it is but free will that gives us our humanity.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, David Ruiz,

“…the Scripture was not enough…” now that is a WOW from a SS fan! All this - and still no reference! You are certainly making a name for yourself in unsubstantiated objections.

Says who? You? Give me a break, David. Within 200 years of Christ’s death, we have ECFs writing about the Immaculate Conception (e.g., Justin Martyr and Ireneus - and I have already given you these links. )

Augustine was giving his opinion - he also said that sex was so pleasurable that it had to be sinful (and that would be in marriage!) And, this would be an example of an ECF opinion that was not carried forward. Besides - you will recall that after the Resurrection Christ passed through the walls of the room where the cowardly Apostles had gathered and spoke with them (Jhn 20:19). Well, he could have actually passed through Mary - and such a birth would have quite different from all other births - and maintained her virginity. Now, this is at least something to consider - and not dismiss out of hand as you have been doing with ideas you do not agree with.

Since you are showing signs of bashfulness when asked for your opinion of the Angel Garbiel’s greeting, possible you would like to read what others have written on this matter?

Here is a link that provides much documented information: newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm My guess is that the Protestant sites you are using are just deficient in references. What I have provided may actually provide you with a tool you can work with!

God bless.

Whatever I think ,the scripture was not enough to bring about a speedy IC doctrine,a nd certainly doesn’t break the Augustinian teaching that through chilbearing original sin is pased on .But ,we know better today than earlier theologians/forefathers ? I have read the stuff that says it means IC ,and not any later puirification. I have also read others that say it is a stretch,to say from that greek word you get IC.

 

[david_ruiz]

…the Scripture was not enough…" now that is a WOW from a SS fan! :

Ummmmm, Catholics here are the ones who say scripture is not enough to garner IC,you need father writings and tradition. Really ,it’s not me saying scripture is not enough .You twist my words

All this - and still no reference! You are certainly making a name for yourself in unsubstantiated objections.

Wrong again. given now at least 4 refernces/sources for my comments .You smokescreen my points very well though. Thank-you

Says who? You? Give me a break, David. Within 200 years of Christ’s death, we have ECFs writing about the Immaculate Conception (e.g., Justin Martyr and Ireneus

Pretty sure Martyr did not say Mary had no original sin .Have not read all Iraneus ,not sure He did either (no original sin)

and not dismiss out of hand as you have been doing with ideas you do not agree with… since you are showing signs of bashfulness when asked for your opinion of the Angel Garbiel’s greeting

It seems i did respond and you “dismiss out of hand” my answer.

God bless.

 

[david_ruiz]

Wjhat you appear to enjoy is finding the zebra in the heard of horses and then claiming, “See this means they are all not horses! So no one can prove that there are any horses to begin with!!”

 

[david_ruiz]

david ruiz;9481512:

What you think is gained by a perfect womb in terms of His divinity, you lose in terms of his humanity

no so, sin is not what makes us human, it is but free will that gives us our humanity.

Hi kellerk -happy july 4th to you all fellow bloggers.Of course you are right .I understand where the IC accentuates that indeed Jesus was divine also, if one feels that is how God could only indwell Mary. Again, this is stemming from the early church debate as to just how was Jesus both divine and human and the declaration that Mary was the theotokus-“God bearer”. We all agree that Mary was this .Don’t believe you need IC for this and am sure it was not part of the equation during the Theotokus declaration (but yes ,she was pure,) Adding IC makes Mary not “amongst” women but above women, not because she incarnated the Lord but because she herself was “immaculate” . In that regard she is “apart” from the rest of humanity. The idea behind Theotokus was that God became as one of us, but really only in perfection, unlike any of us if you believe in IC .I am sorry, I would seem to have less of a connection with a perfect human than with a flawed one .That I /we are close to a perfect Christ is different in that he did become sin and died on the cross for that frailty. Hope you follow my thought, even in disagreement

 

[tqualey]

Hi, David Ruiz,

My response is to how you have consistently attempted to twist and distort Catholic doctrine on the Immaculate Conception.

For further references on Justin Martyr and other ECF concerning the Immaculate Conception and Mary’s title as Ever Virgin - here is a link: philvaz.com/apologetics/a95.htm

Now, concerning your idea of ‘developing doctrine’… like this is something that God has not authorized and comes from the mind of men - as opposed to Holy Spirit guiding the Church of Christ toward Truth and away from error. Let me give you an example.

Jesus Christ is God - and God knows everything. God knew from all eternity that the Early Catholic Church would be shaken by the first heresy caused by the Judiazers as recorded in Acts 15. Note, at any time while Christ was on Earth - he could have told the Apostles that circumcision was not necessary to follow Him - but, he didn’t! He allowed the Chruch to develop under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit as the method He Chose for resolving issues. Further note that there is nothing in the Old Testament that would have really given a basis for NOT having circumcision as necessary - after all - this was the covenant God gave to Abraham. But, look at how this matter is resolved - the Judiazers are told that their requirements are not necessary and this comes from Christ’s Church and not Scripture.

God bless

I am sorry you react that way to my postings, for that is not at all what I put forth, that there are no “horses”. What I put forth with the quotes from those sites is that indeed IC doctrine developed and was debated for millennia by good catholics. I was criticized harshly for earlier proposing that and proof was demanded .Well , I finally got around to quote other catholic historians , who do NOT say there were no horses, but that indeed there were zebra and horse and it took millennia to sort it out . It IS my view that this is in opposition to those who wrongfully claim that IC was unmitigated from the beginning of church history, that it was a done deal from the beginning. It was not. I respect more those who admit it’s developement ,with opposition, yet finally coming to a “conclusion”/illumination, doctrinal decree, that would be considered true for all ages, past, present and future. Just don’t say it was understood or believed by all from the beginning. It was not.

 

[david_ruiz]

Hi, David Ruz.

Wjhat you appear to enjoy is finding the zebra in the heard of horses and then claiming, “See this means they are all not horses! So no one can prove that there are any horses to begin with!!”

If you want to really examine the Early Chruch Fathers - you must really present a total picture and not just cherry-pick what you want to try and discredit the Catholic Faith that you are so obvioulsy delighted to have left. Check out these ECF who totally support the Immaculate Conception … oh, and don’t forget that ‘pesky’ Angel Gabriel who whas sent by God to Mary to deliver the most tremendous message ever: She was chosen by the Grace of God (and through no merit on her own) to be the Mother of the Most High.

Here’s the link: staycatholic.com/ecf_immaculate_conception.htm

By the way, the ECF give us excellent insights into many areas - but, please note - not one of them - or, even all of them put together - were infallible. The Pope, however IS in infallible when teaching about Faith or Morals. Mary’s Immaculate Conception is a defined dogma of the Catholic Church.

Oh, and by the way - I obviously do not have the library you have … so how about posting some links that actually back up statements … an approach used by just about everyone else when they quote someone. Thanks.

God bless

This is from your sight also:".No direct or categorical and stringent proof of the dogma can be brought forward from Scripture".Most Catholics here have been honest enough to share this,but when I mention it you criticize and say I am evasive ,especially for a SS.
"In regard to the sinlessness of Mary the older Fathers are very cautious: some of them even seem to have been in error on this matter.

Origen, although he ascribed to Mary high spiritual prerogatives, thought that, at the time of Christ's passion, the sword of disbelief pierced Mary's soul; that she was struck by the poniard of doubt; and that for her sins also Christ died (Origen, "In Luc. hom. xvii").
In the same manner St. Basil writes in the fourth century: he sees in the sword, of which Simeon speaks, the doubt which pierced Mary's soul (Epistle 259).
St. Chrysostom accuses her of ambition, and of putting herself forward unduly when she sought to speak to Jesus at Capharnaum (Matthew 12:46; Chrysostom, Homily 44 on Matthew)."-above from your site-thank-you

Yes, I cherry pick . Not sure if anyone quoted anything"cautious" so I will here .The positive ones have been cherry picked and have all been mentioned. Again, this is just to show progression and at least "caution"from the beginning.

 

[david_ruiz]

Hi, David Ruiz,

 

[pablope]

To answer the original post question. The answer is no. My understanding of what Catholicism really teaches and what I though it teaches are pretty close.

I absolutely agree with catholics that Mary was a virgin when she was with our Lord Jesus. Absolutely she was blessed, because the bible says so. The reason for this is because it is what the bible says. It was the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah 7:14, and it is described as being the case in the first chapters of Matthew and Luke.

 

[rinnie]

Whatever I think ,the scripture was not enough to bring about a speedy IC doctrine,a nd certainly doesn’t break the Augustinian teaching that through chilbearing original sin is pased on .But ,we know better today than earlier theologians/forefathers ? I have read the stuff that says it means IC ,and not any later puirification. I have also read others that say it is a stretch,to say from that greek word you get IC.

david, where did anyone say scripture was ever clear about the I.C. That is why we have Tradition that goes along with S.S. to lead us to to the truth.

The bible ittself tells us the CHURCH is the pilar of all truth, not the bible. Also it tells us to stick to the teachings of the Early Fathers of the CHurch. That is what we do.

I have showed you proof that the I.C. was believed and taught by the Apostle John who lived with the Blessed Mother after the death of Jesus. Why is that not enough?

 

[rinnie]

Hey guys, thanks so much for your prayers. You will never know how they helped.

Sometimes a unexpected death throws us for a loop.

I am sure my friend is at peace with God and the Blessed Mother as we speak, and find great comfort in this.

Again thanks so much for all of your prayers and concern. I am truly blessed to have so many great friends out there. Thanks again for being there in my time of need.