H
HailMary
Guest
sure, why don’t you quote it, or would you have us rely on your interpretative skills AND your memory?
- Status
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
Show me in the Catechism.
B
BrianH
Guest
Show you something thats not in there!
M
Mannyfit75
Guest
CHRIST - THE UNIQUE WORD OF SACRED SCRIPTURE
101 In order to reveal himself to men, in the condescension of his goodness God speaks to them in human words: "Indeed the words of God, expressed in the words of men, are in every way like human language, just as the Word of the eternal Father, when he took on himself the flesh of human weakness, became like men."63
102 Through all the words of Sacred Scripture, God speaks only one single Word, his one Utterance in whom he expresses himself completely:64
You recall that one and the same Word of God extends throughout Scripture, that it is one and the same Utterance that resounds in the mouths of all the sacred writers, since he who was in the beginning God with God has no need of separate syllables; for he is not subject to time.65
103 For this reason, the Church has always venerated the Scriptures as she venerates the Lord’s Body. She never ceases to present to the faithful the bread of life, taken from the one table of God’s Word and Christ’s Body.66
104 In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, “but as what it really is, the word of God”.67 "In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them."68
II. INSPIRATION AND TRUTH OF SACRED SCRIPTURE
105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."69
"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself."70
138 The Church accepts and venerates as inspired the 46 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New.
101 In order to reveal himself to men, in the condescension of his goodness God speaks to them in human words: "Indeed the words of God, expressed in the words of men, are in every way like human language, just as the Word of the eternal Father, when he took on himself the flesh of human weakness, became like men."63
102 Through all the words of Sacred Scripture, God speaks only one single Word, his one Utterance in whom he expresses himself completely:64
You recall that one and the same Word of God extends throughout Scripture, that it is one and the same Utterance that resounds in the mouths of all the sacred writers, since he who was in the beginning God with God has no need of separate syllables; for he is not subject to time.65
103 For this reason, the Church has always venerated the Scriptures as she venerates the Lord’s Body. She never ceases to present to the faithful the bread of life, taken from the one table of God’s Word and Christ’s Body.66
104 In Sacred Scripture, the Church constantly finds her nourishment and her strength, for she welcomes it not as a human word, “but as what it really is, the word of God”.67 "In the sacred books, the Father who is in heaven comes lovingly to meet his children, and talks with them."68
II. INSPIRATION AND TRUTH OF SACRED SCRIPTURE
105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."69
"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself."70
138 The Church accepts and venerates as inspired the 46 books of the Old Testament and the 27 books of the New.
H
HailMary
Guest
It is, but we don’t let arithmetic or polls determine the truth: we let the Church, which is One with Christ.its amazing how the polls consistently had a tally of 50/50 between the catholics who agree & disagree. incredible!
1 Tim 3:15
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God,** the pillar and ground of the truth**.
N
newbetx
Guest
Either they don’t want to believe it is true, or they are saying that someone that does not, MAY be still be saved. Your poll, while allowing several choices, doesn’t cover them all. I say: defective poll.its amazing how the polls consistently had a tally of 50/50 between the catholics who agree & disagree. incredible!
R
RebeccaJ
Guest
Well, speaking from a pure statistical standpoint, internet polls are self selecting…meaning only people who are interested in the topic take the poll, and often only those with really strong feelings one way or the other actually respond.
A statistical result based on a self selecting population cannot be generalized, ie, you can’t say anything about the entire Catholic population from such a poll.
In short, it is meaningless.
N
newbetx
Guest
I agree. Which in this case, also means nothing.
do you ever look at the bottom to see related threads?
I found this one. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=7861
It pretty much covers everything, even a couple of posts similar to what I made. (Not that I think anything I can come up with is new)
B
BrianH
Guest
I will start a thread on it
S
Singinbeauty
Guest
Funny thing is, death is a pretty absolute thing. There is no evidence of giving birth after we die so we can be pretty safe in saying that no, she did not have children after she died… BUT Mary didn’t die after she had Jesus, did she… In fact we know that she lived a pretty good long life, at least long enough for Jesus to grow into a man. So there is no absolute here. In the ancient jewish culture, to be married you had to consumate it. Otherwise the marriage didn’t exist. Since Joseph is called Mary’s husband in the bible (see Matthew 1:16) I would think this would be a clear point that they did consumate the marriage.2 Samuel 6:23 - “And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child till the day of her death.”
Surely this means Michal had children AFTER she died - if she didn’t, then why didn’t the author just say ‘she had no child’ PERIOD.
L
LilyM
Guest
Funny thing is bearing and raising the Son of God tends to be an absolute thing too. As in absolutely unique, for starters. Although Mary and Joseph were devout Jews steeped in the culture of their times, theirs was nothing like a normal marriage and was never going to be normal.
Certainly they may have been expecting such before the Annunciation, but even this much is doubtful. Firstly there is some evidence of ‘temple virgins’ in Jewish culture who, on reaching adulthoold, were married chastely to older male ‘protectors’. Such is the explanation given in the Protoevangelium of James, and while it may not be Gospel it IS evidence that such relationships were neither incredible or unheard of in Jewish culture of the time.
Mary’s question ‘how will this be, since I know not man’ sounds extremely odd coming from someone expecting a normal consummated marriage and resulting children.
It’s not like Gabriel said she was going to conceive straight away, and Mary would have been well aware of precedents such as Abraham and Sarah who waited years for God to fulfil his promise to give them a son.
A more understandable question from a betrothed woman, acquainted with the normal course of marriage, would have been something like ‘how is it that Joseph’s and my child will be the Son of God’.
K
Keikiolu
Guest
You’re right. There IS no absolute prohibition that would have prevented Mary from having had children after giving birth to Jesus.
She CHOSE to not have any further children.
Why? Because she knew that her Spouse, as “Spouse” relates to her child Jesus, was God, and that she must forever be chaste with her Spouse,… which prohibited her having “relations” with anyone other than her “Jesus-producing Spouse”.
Joseph was not this Spouse.
As far as “the law” was concerned, Joseph was her husband because of the “appearance” of Mary and Joseph’s offspring, Jesus.
The proof of legal “consumation” of a marriage is offspring, and not merely the sex-act.
Since the consumation was “proved” by the birth of Jesus, Joseph was legally Mary’s husband.
Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaika
i ia oe. Aloha nui.
S
Singinbeauty
Guest
BUT, they would have followed the traditions of their culture at the time. To be married a man would choose his bride, build a bridal suite in his father’s house, then at night would go through the town calling for her with his ‘grooms men’ in tow. He would then take her to his father’s house and the bridal party would wait outside the door until they emerged after consumating the marriage.
Why would a marriage not be valid in the catholic church’s eyes if the couple haven’t consumated the marriage but it is valid for Mary and Joseph?
But there is no evidence in the bible that Mary, specifically, was one of these women in any case. There may be evidence but not SOLID evidence. And since the book you mentioned is not inspired by God it could just be marked down to hearsay. The history books, as far as I know, that are known to be solid don’t say anything about this. Show me solid evidence and I will change my view. I have done a search on this and can’t find one document or writing that states this. Nothing. In everything I have researched regarding marriage and the ancient jewish culture you had to consumate the marriage for it to be legal. So, were Mary and Joseph not legally married?
SINCE is the operative word. She had not known a man at that point because, as we all know, she was a VIRGIN before she married. Hence why she said ‘Since I know not a man’… It is in the present tense. Of course she said that, she presently was a virgin so that makes total sense…
Considering that a few days after she was visited by the angel she went to visit Elizabeth and she was already pregnant. It didn’t take long. Yes, she knew of the length but Sarah and Abraham did not know of the baby until the time that they were to be pregnant. It wasn’t like they were told of the promise of it but weren’t actually pregnant until they were in their nineties. God told them and it happened, there wasn’t much of a wait.
Since Mary was a woman of God she would have known that the Son of God would be born of a virgin as the prophecy foretold. That is why her actual question makes so much sense…
L
LilyM
Guest
Point being Mary wasn’t told WHEN she would conceive by Gabriel. Of course she knew she had become pregnant WHEN it happened, since being overshadowed by God and conceiving His son is kind of an unmistakeable happening! But she didn’t know the timeframe when Gabriel was speaking to her.
And what are you saying with Abraham? Need I remind you Ishmael was born at least ten years before the birth of Isaac - Ishamel as a teenager was bullying the child Isaac). Isaac - Sarah’s son - was promised to Abraham by God at latest around the time of the birth of Ishmael, so at least ten years before Isaac’s own birth, then. It wasn’t instant or anything like.
Even that much is debatable - it’s unclear whether Isaiah used the word for virgin or simply for young girl, though of course AFTER the annunciation in hindsight it was clear whichSince Mary was a woman of God she would have known that the Son of God would be born of a virgin as the prophecy foretold. That is why her actual question makes so much sense…
Ask Jews today whether Isaiah says ‘virgin’ or not. Mary didn’t know more than they do.Now coming from a woman vowed to virginity, the statement that she ‘knows not man’ makes sense. She would know that she wasn’t going to be able to conceive a son in the normal sense, so she’d be wondering how Jesus would be conceived.
Coming from a woman who was EXPECTING to LOSE that virginity, in the course of the normal married life she was soon to begin, it absolutely doesn’t make sense any way you slice it.
Either she WAS expecting a virgin birth, in which case she’d be saying ‘I thought the messiah was to be born of a virgin - my child will also be Joseph’s, conceived of a consummated marriage, so how does that square?’.
On the other hand she maybe wasn’t expecting a virgin birth. In which case, if it was to be a normal marriage, she wouldn’t EVEN be asking HOW she would conceive - she’d KNOW where babies come from
L
look3467
Guest
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
Breath of God=Adam
Dust of the ground=Eve
Together a marriage=living soul=man
Breath of God in Mary=Adam
Mary=dust of the ground
Together a marriage=living soul=Jesus
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
What we can see from this is the whole workings of God.
He creates and saves what He creates.
Everything in between is given to us to experience.
Peace>>>AJ
Breath of God=Adam
Dust of the ground=Eve
Together a marriage=living soul=man
Breath of God in Mary=Adam
Mary=dust of the ground
Together a marriage=living soul=Jesus
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
What we can see from this is the whole workings of God.
He creates and saves what He creates.
Everything in between is given to us to experience.
Peace>>>AJ
P
paarsurrey
Guest
Hiaccording to half of the catholics here, it is the will of Allah that people must believe that Mary never had sex.
Jesus was born without Mary having been touched by a man. Salvation of man however does not depend on virginity of Mary, I mean it has no direct bearing on shedding sins of a man, for which one has to instill in one’s heart love of GodAllahYHWH by doing good deeds and abstaining from the bad deeds and in this process becoming one with GodAllahYHWH and with His approval one could win salvation, this is the natural process of salvation as I understand whether one is a Muslim or a Catholic. This in other words could be described leaving the sinful life and attaining total submission to the will of GodAllahYHWH.
It is my belief that there was a sign in Mary conceiving a seed of a child who when born was remembered as JesusYeshuaIssa but the significance of this sign is not understood by many Muslims or Catholics alike. This has been explained well be the PromisedMessiah 1835-1908 in many of his writing.
The conception to Mary as foretold by the angels was a sign while the birth or the delivery of the child to MaryMeriumMaryam was absolutely normal, everyone Muslim or Catholic would admit. This must be understood well to start with.
I think it is only a misconception and exaggeration of the half Catholics as polls indicate while it is no essential requirement of the faith of a Muslim or a Catholic that Mary should have perpetual virginity, a point stretched too far.
Thanks
S
swariffin
Guest
Dear Paarsurrey,
Respecting to what you believe no matter how different we are, can you first understand that there are differences between Catholics and Non-Catholic-Christians? It is very important for you to know that regarding Mary, the Catholics and non Catholics Christian are not “black and white” differ to one another. But, I agree with you that salvation does not require believe in Mary’s perpetual virginity. Those two are different issues. It does not mean, however, that I agree with you in other issue.
L
look3467
Guest
I
I believe Mary was a vessel used of God much as the dust of the earth was used by God to create a living soul.
The point is, that God loves us all, whether He goes by the name of Allah to you or Jesus to me.
I believe Jesus (A prophet to you) died for payment of our eternal separation from God regardless of what the world has to say about His being real.
My agreement with you is that despite our different views, we can both have fellowship as one in the spirit of love.
God is love, and if we as siblings would love one another, we would be honoring Him.
Peace>>>AJ
Now there…I see a person that I can work with based on what he or she said.
I believe Mary was a vessel used of God much as the dust of the earth was used by God to create a living soul.
The point is, that God loves us all, whether He goes by the name of Allah to you or Jesus to me.
I believe Jesus (A prophet to you) died for payment of our eternal separation from God regardless of what the world has to say about His being real.
My agreement with you is that despite our different views, we can both have fellowship as one in the spirit of love.
God is love, and if we as siblings would love one another, we would be honoring Him.
Peace>>>AJ
T
thiscatholickid
Guest
A Roman Catholic, who has been baptized in the Church, been taught accordingly, and still rejects Mary’s personal virginity is not only condemned, but has commited a great injustice to Our Lady.
Another thorn that pierces her heart.
A non-Catholic who rejects Mary’s perpetual virginity isnt condemned because he doesnt believe in that specific doctrine, rather, he is condemned because he has not found the truth that is the Catholic Church.
If that non-Catholic is a validly baptized Christian, than the situation is between God and himself. But it doesnt look very bright…
Another thorn that pierces her heart.
A non-Catholic who rejects Mary’s perpetual virginity isnt condemned because he doesnt believe in that specific doctrine, rather, he is condemned because he has not found the truth that is the Catholic Church.
If that non-Catholic is a validly baptized Christian, than the situation is between God and himself. But it doesnt look very bright…
- Status