Taking care of Jewish widows

[dianaiad]

Korban rule has already been stated. It didn’t happen that way. Do you pray about discernment or are you just shooting from the cuff? God Bless, come home!!

I dunno, I think Todd has a point. Mary was there…John was there…nobody else was. While not having His brothers there may be evidence that there were no brothers to BE there, we do also have the very clear statement that none of His other followers or brethren ( in the sense that Catholics use the word in relation to Him) were there either; He was pretty much abandoned by everybody BUT His mother, a few women—and John. That would include Mary’s other children, if she had any…those brethren to which the bible refers.

Never mind the laws of the time…would you commend your mother to the care of siblings who would allow her to see you crucified without their support, or would you ask the one who DID support both you and her to see to her care? If you were God, and considerably above the Law you came to fulfill, would you allow the letter of the law to overwhelm the obvious–that only John showed up?

Were I in His place, it wouldn’t matter how many siblings I had; I would ask the person who was actually doing the job to continue doing it. Children who would allow their mother to witness this atrocity alone certainly aren’t to be trusted to take care of her.

Therefore, this incident of having Him consign Mary to John’s care doesn’t prove the matter either way, without other evidence.

 

[maryj]

I dunno, I think Todd has a point. Mary was there…John was there…nobody else was. While not having His brothers there may be evidence that there were no brothers to BE there, we do also have the very clear statement that none of His other followers or brethren ( in the sense that Catholics use the word in relation to Him) were there either; He was pretty much abandoned by everybody BUT His mother, a few women—and John. That would include Mary’s other children, if she had any…those brethren to which the bible refers.

Never mind the laws of the time…would you commend your mother to the care of siblings who would allow her to see you crucified without their support, or would you ask the one who DID support both you and her to see to her care? If you were God, and considerably above the Law you came to fulfill, would you allow the letter of the law to overwhelm the obvious–that only John showed up?

Were I in His place, it wouldn’t matter how many siblings I had; I would ask the person who was actually doing the job to continue doing it. Children who would allow their mother to witness this atrocity alone certainly aren’t to be trusted to take care of her.

Therefore, this incident of having Him consign Mary to John’s care doesn’t prove the matter either way, without other evidence.

Jesus vehemently condemns the Pharisees for trying to avoid taking care of their parents…( But He says do as I say not as I do?). Honor thy Mother and Father…( yeah that’s for everyone but for Him who is the truth).Never mind the laws of the time?(completely baffled by that one!!) Do you think our Blessed Mother would have been anywhere but at the feet of her Savior and Son as He brought about our Salvation? Let me ask you an honest to goodness question…do you know Jesus Christ?

 

[dianaiad]

Jesus vehemently condemns the Pharisees for trying to avoid taking care of their parents…( But He says do as I say not as I do?). Honor thy Mother and Father…( yeah that’s for everyone but for Him who is the truth).Never mind the laws of the time?(completely baffled by that one!!) Do you think our Blessed Mother would have been anywhere but at the feet of her Savior and Son as He brought about our Salvation? Let me ask you an honest to goodness question…do you know Jesus Christ?

Yes, He did condemn them.

However, are you saying that, if his brethren refused to support Mary in her hour of need, that He would consider their claims to be more important than HER safety and well being? This isn’t about whether his brethren SHOULD care for her; that’s obvious. However, if He had brethren, they weren’t caring for her. If they would allow her to go through this without them, how likely is it that they would provide for her physically in other ways?

This isn’t about them. It’s about Mary…and there is one thing that Jesus did do…and talked about in at least one parable; remember the parable of the talents? The worker who used his got more, and the one who buried/misused his had it taken from him? Well, what more treasure can there be than the care of Mary, His mother? If He had brethren, then they were like the worker who misused his talent–and deserved to lose her. I can’t think of a more fitting punishment.

Therefore, HIs consigning Mary to John’s care would have been a very natural thing to do, brethern or no brethren. Therefore His doing so is not evidence of their existance either way.

 

[RebeccaJ]

Somehow I don’t think Jesus, Who died for the sins of all, was going through all this uncharitable contemplation of non-existent siblings while He suffered and died. And somehow I don’t think that He would never forgive them for not being at His Cross, and end His life with actions that condemned his own family.

This doesn’t sound like the Jesus Christ I know.

 

[maryj]

Somehow I don’t think Jesus, Who died for the sins of all, was going through all this uncharitable contemplation of non-existent siblings while He suffered and died. And somehow I don’t think that He would never forgive them for not being at His Cross, and end His life with actions that condemned his own family.

This doesn’t sound like the Jesus Christ I know.

spot on!! Amen

 

[Todd520]

I’ll say it again, this thread has no relevancy on defining the size of Mary’s family

John was the only male disciple at the foot of the cross ergo, John was the only person Jesus could bind to care for his mother.
It was a profound act of love and caring for Jesus to think first of his mother while dying on the cross.

It was a loving act but not required - who could not love Mary as their own mother?
Since Mary had cousins or step children if not full chilren, even her extended family would have a close and loving relagtionship with Mary and care for her as their own mother.

No, this was an act of love by Jesus and proves nothing else.

 

[StrawberryJam]

I’ll say it again, this thread has no relevancy on defining the size of Mary’s family

John was the only male disciple at the foot of the cross ergo, John was the only person Jesus could bind to care for his mother.
It was a profound act of love and caring for Jesus to think first of his mother while dying on the cross.

It was a loving act but not required - who could not love Mary as their own mother?
Since Mary had cousins or step children if not full chilren, even her extended family would have a close and loving relagtionship with Mary and care for her as their own mother.

No, this was an act of love by Jesus and proves nothing else.

Todd, I am so busy and so very distracted at this time. I do know you reply kindly to questions.
Can I please at some point ask you about this position you have? I may be able to do so after I come back from Wisconsin in a few days. If not here, perhaps PM? I see some problems with what you are presenting here.

 

[Todd520]

Todd, I am so busy and so very distracted at this time. I do know you reply kindly to questions.
Can I please at some point ask you about this position you have? I may be able to do so after I come back from Wisconsin in a few days. If not here, perhaps PM? I see some problems with what you are presenting here.

Yes, feel free to PM me after your trip. FYI, your mailbox is full - I could not PM you.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Yes, feel free to PM me after your trip. FYI, your mailbox is full - I could not PM you.

Thank you Todd,

Clearing it out as I can. I had read this only hours ago and wondered if it meant anything in regard to the topic.

“Even my close friend whom I trusted, he who has shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me” (Psalm 41:9).

Why were these so-called brothers not present? What was more important to them at the time?
Why would they let their mother be in a place like that without their protection?

Sorry to bombard you with questions, but I have so many and you have been so kind to answer many of them.

 

[Todd520]

Thank you Todd,
Clearing it out as I can. I had read this only hours ago and wondered if it meant anything in regard to the topic.

“Even my close friend whom I trusted, he who has shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me” (Psalm 41:9).

Why were these so-called brothers not present? What was more important to them at the time?
Why would they let their mother be in a place like that without their protection?.

SJ,
I can only answer this with more questions
Why were none of the apostles present?
Why was John the only male disciple with the cajones to stay with Jesus?
I can only assume they were too afraid, even his cousins/brothers,
to act with love and concern during Christ’s time of need.

 

[StrawberryJam]

SJ,
I can only answer this with more questions
Why were none of the apostles present?
Why was John the only male disciple with the cajones to stay with Jesus?
I can only assume they were too afraid, even his cousins/brothers,
to act with love and concern during Christ’s time of need.

Who taught John to be this open to God then?