Sinless Mary

[guanophore]

Still a blinded response to the truth I see. The truth surrounding the Blessed Mother was carried on through Sacred Tradition, and when I say Sacred Tradition I mean the true “rule of faith”—as expressed in the Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition, as manifested in the living teaching authority of the Catholic Church, to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly. There is the relationship between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, Hence there exists a close connection and communication between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles, Sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. These successors can in their preaching preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known. It is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore, both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same devotion and reverence. Therefore, when it comes to the Blessed Mother and what you are having trouble with was not an issue with the Church for more than 1800 years. This was and is facts handed down by the Apostles to their successors (Sacred Tradition), and was never disputed because there never was any reason to dispute the facts surrounding the Blessed Mother. As a matter of fact, Martin Luther at the time of the reformation did not have an issue with it. It was not until later in his life when he grew bitter towards the CC that he started to denounce some of the Catholic views and teachings. So no assumption here, just understanding that the CC has preserved the truth for over 2000 years, and that same truth will prevail against assumptions like yours for thousands of years from now. This is why we have one teaching authority (Magisterium) and one interpretation of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, not 30K+ personal interpretations. Today is the second day that I pray to the Blessed Mother to ask our Lord to pray for all that are blinded to the truth, including you.

A great summary! Pleasure to read.

 

[wmscott]

A great summary! Pleasure to read.

Thanks, I have enjoyed reading the posts you have provided in trying to open the eyes of the blind to the truth.

 

[Good_Fella]

Still a blinded response to the truth I see. The truth surrounding the Blessed Mother was carried on through Sacred Tradition, and when I say Sacred Tradition I mean the true “rule of faith”—as expressed in the Bible itself—is Scripture plus apostolic tradition, as manifested in the living teaching authority of the Catholic Church, to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly. There is the relationship between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, Hence there exists a close connection and communication between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles, Sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. These successors can in their preaching preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known. It is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore, both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same devotion and reverence. Therefore, when it comes to the Blessed Mother and what you are having trouble with was not an issue with the Church for more than 1800 years. This was and is facts handed down by the Apostles to their successors (Sacred Tradition), and was never disputed because there never was any reason to dispute the facts surrounding the Blessed Mother. As a matter of fact, Martin Luther at the time of the reformation did not have an issue with it. It was not until later in his life when he grew bitter towards the CC that he started to denounce some of the Catholic views and teachings. So no assumption here, just understanding that the CC has preserved the truth for over 2000 years, and that same truth will prevail against assumptions like yours for thousands of years from now. This is why we have one teaching authority (Magisterium) and one interpretation of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, not 30K+ personal interpretations. Today is the second day that I pray to the Blessed Mother to ask our Lord to pray for all that are blinded to the truth, including you.

Well articulated, and so true. Your profile shows you are a fisherman. As with Peter, flesh and blood has not revealed to you what you understand is the divine truth. Thanks for the labour.

PAX :harp:

 

[Good_Fella]

Scripture is the only place that records anything we know of Mary and it never makes this kind of claim for her. Keep in mind also that the writers of Scripture knew her best and they never make such claims as you are doing here. It never makes any exception for her in regards to sin.

“And so I say to you, you are Peter and upon this rock I will dictate my Bible.”
Justasking4 16:18

PAX

 

[wmscott]

Well articulated, and so true. Your profile shows you are a fisherman. As with Peter, flesh and blood has not revealed to you what you understand is the divine truth. Thanks for the labour.

PAX :harp:

Thanks and so true, I had to ask the Holy Spirit to guide me in answering justasking4, the truth will prevail.

 

[Good_Fella]

John wrote:

**
1 John 1

This preservation you are speaking of makes no sense, it is not mentioned anywhere in Scripture.

Genesis 3, 15**

Judges 13, 7

Wisdom 1, 4

Exodus 3, 4-5

Luke 1, 28

Luke 1, 42

Luke 1, 46-47

Ephesians 1, 4-6

Luke 11, 27-28

PAX

None of these verses discusses the point at hand. None of them point to this special way of Mary being saved. The fact that God chose who is written in the Book of Life before the foundation of the world does not negate man’s responsibility for repent from his/her sin and put their total trust in Christ Jesus.

Obedience will be the result (because of repentance and grace), not the cause of salvation.

You fail to see the point. I cited Ephesians 1: 4-6 to correct you in what you imply, that God intends every one of us to be a sinner so that Christ would not have died in vain. If God desires that we should be holy and blameless in his sight, then there is no reason for him to deny Mary his sanctifying grace upon her conception and his helping actual graces during the course of her life in virtue of her Divine Maternity. Mary would have been obligated to repent if she had in fact sinned, but she didn’t sin. And she did put her entire trust in God. Elizabeth declares: “Blessed are you who believed that what was spoken to you by the Lord would be fulfilled.”

John the evangelist did not have Mary in mind when he wrote that verse. He was aware that Mary was without sin and had no confessing to do. And he knew that Mary was redeemed at the precise moment God fashioned her soul and infused it with his sanctifying grace. Luke has Mary say: “My spirit rejoices in God my saviour.” The evangelist has Mary speak in the indicative mood, reflecting the traditional belief of the church in Palestine, that Mary was sinless: “I am saved.” A person who can make such a confident declaration about her salvation cannot be a sinner in need of repentance. Mary does not speak in the imperative mood unlike the psalmist David who was a sinner and in need of repentance: “Have mercy on me, God, in your kindness, In your compassion blot out my offence. O wash me more and more from my guilt and cleanse me from my sin.” In contrast with Mary, David is acknowledging that he is a sinner who is in need of repentance. So the psalmist speaks in the imperative mood: “You save save me.” Luke does not have Mary speak in the imperative mood. :nope: There was never any need for Mary to repent of any sins though she was not redeemed at her conception by any merits of her own other than being the Mother of God. Her preservation from original sin and concupiscence does make sense in light of her Divine Maternity.

Her preservation from sin is revealed in Scripture, but only implicitly. The Protoevangelium reveals that Mary shared no common ground with Satan and his offspring: sin and evil; Judges foreshadows the birth of a holy child whose mother had to be pure and spotless before God; Jesus is the Word (Wisdom) made flesh who could not possibly be contained in and fashioned by a body under debt of sin and inclined toward evil, the offspring of the serpent; Mary’s flesh was holy ground for the God-Man. Holiness is incompatible with sin and fallen creation; Mary was addressed, not described, as full of grace. The angel identified her by her spiritual condition. Grace is the antidote to sin, Paul tells us, unless you dispute the power and effect of God’s grace; Mary was blessed together with her Son apart from humanity by being sinless; Mary’s soul praised God for the “glory of his grace”. Mary was blessed for having borne God’s Only-begotten Son, but she was blessed even more for hearing the word of God and observing it. She was highly favoured and in God’s grace. By keeping the word of God throughout her life, she was sinless.

Obedience (good works done in grace) is the secondary cause of our salvation. If obedience were the result of our salvation, merely a demonstration of being saved, then our Lord would not have commanded us to love God and neighbour in order to be saved. Still God had already known that Mary would constantly keep his word when he chose her. God is omniscient, and what he wills cannot be otherwise. Meanwhile grace prompts us to repent, but we are free to resist God’s grace. Our salvation ultimately depends on what we decide. God wants us to love him and choose him, so he gave us a free will. Jesus and Mary have shown us how.

PAX

 

[Nickkname]

“And so I say to you, you are Peter and upon this rock I will dictate my Bible.”
Justasking4 16:18

PAX

ROFL. That was great.

I’ve left this thread because I see Justasking is stubbornly against the Immaculate Conception, and, I assume, won’t accept it until God Himself says it is true…even though He already has in His Word, and in the Dogma, and in the apparitions of Lourdes.

 

[Good_Fella]

ROFL. That was great.

I’ve left this thread because I see Justasking is stubbornly against the Immaculate Conception, and, I assume, won’t accept it until God Himself says it is true…even though He already has in His Word, and in the Dogma, and in the apparitions of Lourdes.

“I went every day for a fortnight, and each day I asked her who she was - and this petition always made her smile. After a fortnight I asked her three times consecutively. She always smiled. At last I tried for a fourth time. She stopped smiling. With her arms down, she raised her eyes to heaven and then, folding her hands over her breast she said, “I am the Immaculate Conception.” Then I went back to Monsignor le Cure to tell him that she had said she was the Immaculate Conception, and he asked was I absolutely certain. I was absolutely certain. I said yes, and so as not to forget the words, I had repeated them all the way home.”
St. Bernadette Soubrious

 

[justasking4]

wmscott;4219767]
Originally Posted by justasking4
What you are doing is assuming God did in some manner create Mary to be sinless or was kept from sin. Either way there is no evidence for this. An assumption about about something is not proof. Its still speculation.

wmscott
Still a blinded response to the truth I see.

Not blinded but truly seeing. What you don’t see in Scripture is a sinless Mary.

The truth surrounding the Blessed Mother was carried on through Sacred Tradition, and when I say Sacred Tradition I mean the true “rule of faith”—as expressed in the Bible itself—
If this “rule of faith” is expressed in the Bible then you have another problem and that is its not in the Bible at all what you claim. is Scripture plus apostolic tradition,

The only apostolic tradition that exist is found only in the NT itself. as manifested in the living teaching authority of the Catholic Church, to which were entrusted the oral teachings of Jesus and the apostles, along with the authority to interpret Scripture correctly.

Here again you have another problem. Where has the church infallibly interpreted verses to mean Mary was sinless or kept from sin? Where is this “book” of interpretations to be found?

There is the relationship between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, Hence there exists a close connection and communication between Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture.

I’m still trying to see exactly what Sacred Tradition is and 4-5 examples of what it is. Is there some kind of book or list somewhere in the church that shows what all these Sacred Traditions are?
Unless you can show specifically what Sacred Tradition is with examples then there is no weight to this term.

For both of them, flowing from the same divine wellspring, in a certain way merge into a unity and tend toward the same end. Sacred Scripture is the word of God inasmuch as it is consigned to writing under the inspiration of the divine Spirit. To the successors of the apostles, Sacred Tradition hands on in its full purity God’s word, which was entrusted to the apostles by Christ the Lord and the Holy Spirit. These successors can in their preaching preserve this word of God faithfully, explain it, and make it more widely known. It is not from Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about everything which has been revealed. Therefore, both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same devotion and reverence.

How do you venerate Sacred Tradition when there is no “book” of Sacred Traditions to read from? What does the church officially call something has all the Sacred Traditions in it?

Therefore, when it comes to the Blessed Mother and what you are having trouble with was not an issue with the Church for more than 1800 years. This was and is facts handed down by the Apostles to their successors (Sacred Tradition), and was never disputed because there never was any reason to dispute the facts surrounding the Blessed Mother.

The NT is all we have of what the apostles wrote. There is not one verse that comes even close to saying Mary was sinless.

As a matter of fact, Martin Luther at the time of the reformation did not have an issue with it. It was not until later in his life when he grew bitter towards the CC that he started to denounce some of the Catholic views and teachings. So no assumption here, just understanding that the CC has preserved the truth for over 2000 years, and that same truth will prevail against assumptions like yours for thousands of years from now. This is why we have one teaching authority (Magisterium) and one interpretation of Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, not 30K+ personal interpretations

.

Again I ask, where can it be found that the Catholic church has infallibly interpreted any verse of Scripture to mean Mary was sinless?

Today is the second day that I pray to the Blessed Mother to ask our Lord to pray for all that are blinded to the truth, including you.

Please pray directly to Christ instead. That’s what the Scriptures exhort us to do. Never do they exhort anyone to pray to Mary.

 

[justasking4]

“And so I say to you, you are Peter and upon this rock I will dictate my Bible.”
Justasking4 16:18

PAX

View attachment 4181

 

[justasking4]

ROFL. That was great.

I’ve left this thread because I see Justasking is stubbornly against the Immaculate Conception, and, I assume, won’t accept it until God Himself says it is true…even though He already has in His Word, and in the Dogma, and in the apparitions of Lourdes.

There is not one word, verse or passage in the entire Scripture that says Mary was sinless. Not one. God never said such a thing.

 

[justasking4]

“I went every day for a fortnight, and each day I asked her who she was - and this petition always made her smile. After a fortnight I asked her three times consecutively. She always smiled. At last I tried for a fourth time. She stopped smiling. With her arms down, she raised her eyes to heaven and then, folding her hands over her breast she said, “I am the Immaculate Conception.” Then I went back to Monsignor le Cure to tell him that she had said she was the Immaculate Conception, and he asked was I absolutely certain. I was absolutely certain. I said yes, and so as not to forget the words, I had repeated them all the way home.”
St. Bernadette Soubrious

And this is supposed to proof?

 

[guanophore]

Not blinded but truly seeing. What you don’t see in Scripture is a sinless Mary.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

But please take responsibility for yourself, ja4. Instead of putting it off on others, and least have the courage to say “I don’t see”.

Those of us that are reading the Scriptures in context can see it.

Here again you have another problem. Where has the church infallibly interpreted verses to mean Mary was sinless or kept from sin? Where is this “book” of interpretations to be found?

ja4, this is method of reading scripture originated by heretics. It is not used by Jesus and the Apostles, and therefore, is not part of the Divine Deposit of faith that has been handed down to us from them.

I’m still trying to see exactly what Sacred Tradition is and 4-5 examples of what it is. Is there some kind of book or list somewhere in the church that shows what all these Sacred Traditions are?

One of the sacred traditions is that Mary was sinless. However I think it would be much more useful for you to focus on the basics, instead of sidetracking into such sublime areas.

Unless you can show specifically what Sacred Tradition is with examples then there is no weight to this term.

This is your choice, of course. The biggest “weight to this term” that you have is what you hold in your hand, and thump us over the head with, your Holy Bible, produced entirely from Sacred Tradition, and faithfully preserved and passed on to the faithful along with the rest.

How do you venerate Sacred Tradition when there is no “book” of Sacred Traditions to read from? What does the church officially call something has all the Sacred Traditions in it?

The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

The NT is all we have of what the apostles wrote. There is not one verse that comes even close to saying Mary was sinless.

Repeating this will not make it true for anyone except yourself. Dorothy clicked her heels together, and said “there is no place like home”, then she woke up. Maybe that will work someday?

Again I ask, where can it be found that the Catholic church has infallibly interpreted any verse of Scripture to mean Mary was sinless?

No need. All the verses were infallibly recorded by the Catholic Church, and they all reflect 100% of what the Church believes and teaches.

 Please pray directly to Christ instead. That's what the Scriptures exhort us to do. Never do they exhort anyone to pray to Mary.

Nevertheless, many of us are asking the intercession of the Sinless Mary on your behalf.

 

[rbarcia]

“And so I say to you, you are Peter and upon this rock I will dictate my Bible.”
Justasking4 16:18

PAX

The Rock is Christ, Peter himself would agree.
**

1 Peter 2

4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture,

  “ Behold, I lay in Zion
  A chief cornerstone, elect, precious,
  And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.”**

7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient,[c]

  “ The stone which the builders rejected
  Has become the chief cornerstone,”[d]

8 and

  “ A stone of stumbling
  And a rock of offense.”[e]

They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed.
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.

**

It was upon the confession by Peter the Jesus is the Christ that Jesus replied to the comment of the rock.**

 

[cfrancis]

There is not one word, verse or passage in the entire Scripture that says Mary was sinless. Not one. God never said such a thing.

Surely you see the logical fallacy to the above statement and this one:

The NT is all we have of what the apostles wrote. There is not one verse that comes even close to saying Mary was sinless.

There is not one word, verse, or passage in the entire Scripture that says what books are to be in the Bible, or, for example, that Matthew, Luke or Mark wrote the gospels attributed to them; or, John wrote 1, 2 or 3 John.

 

[guanophore]

There is not one word, verse or passage in the entire Scripture that says Mary was sinless. Not one. God never said such a thing.

Well, we read it differently.

Fortunately, we have the Sacred Deposit of Faith from the Apostles by which to understand what is written!

And this is supposed to proof?

No, just confirmation for those who already believe what has been revealed.

 

[Leeann]

When I see these types of arguments against the Blessed Mother it is truly amazing and sad how spiritually blinded to the Truth people can be. These people will never know and experience the fullness of Gods graces because of closed minds and stubborn perceptions of what they think is truth. It’s like going through life with blinders on, having no ability to view the vastness of Gods Truth. So much of Gods wonderful world and graces are missed out on. Pray for them, I am sure that the Blessed Mother will pray for them also. That is one of my requests to Her as I pray today, “open the eyes of the spiritually blind”.

That’s so strange isn’t it wmscott…while I don’t hold the same beliefs as you do with regards to Mary, my life has been blessed tremendously and my relationship with God has flourished over the years…the fullness of His Love and Grace and Truth has saturated my life and has been abundantly evident through all the trials that myself and my family have faced. His peace and comfort and wisdom and strength has always be sufficient to say the least and at times has been completely overwhelming!!! What a great God we have…how diminished is our grace and wisdom and understanding as compared to His!

Peace and God Bless

 

[justasking4]

guanophore;4221659]
Originally Posted by justasking4
Not blinded but truly seeing. What you don’t see in Scripture is a sinless Mary.

guanophore
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

This is not about beauty but truth.

But please take responsibility for yourself, ja4. Instead of putting it off on others, and least have the courage to say “I don’t see”.

Those of us that are reading the Scriptures in context can see it.

Hopefully you don’t engage the cults. They use the same kind of reasoning you do here and they would tell you the samething. What would you do then? View attachment 4183

 

[Good_Fella]

And this is supposed to proof?

The Apostolic Constitution ‘Ineffabilis Deus’ issued by Pope Pius lX on December 8 1854 confirms with absolute certainty that Mary was immaculately conceived. There is nothing to prove to nominal Christians like yourself who are outside the Church founded by Christ and steeped in gnosticism, what American Fundamentalism essentially amounts to.

 

[Good_Fella]

The Rock is Christ, Peter himself would agree.
**

1 Peter 2

4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture,

  “ Behold, I lay in Zion
  A chief cornerstone, elect, precious,
  And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.”**

7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient,[c]

  “ The stone which the builders rejected
  Has become the chief cornerstone,”[d]

8 and

  “ A stone of stumbling
  And a rock of offense.”[e]

They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed.
9 But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; 10 who once were not a people but are now the people of God, who had not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy.

---

It was upon the confession by Peter the Jesus is the Christ that Jesus replied to the comment of the rock.

You’re pulling my leg, right?

Haven’t you noticed that the apostle’s name was Simon before Jesus changed it to Peter? The name is derived from the Greek word ‘Petros’ meaning “stone”. The Aramaic form ‘Cephas’ also means stone or rock. So obviously Jesus is referring to the apostle as the “rock”. Jesus builds the Church on Peter alone with Christ as the head and the other apostles as the foundation. But this is off-topic.

PAX