Teaching of the Catholic Church I am having trouble with...that make me doubt others

[NonDenom]

I hope I am not hijacking this thread but I did not want to start a new thread for a very simple question. It is direct to NonDenom. Why do you call yourself non denominational when a non denominational church is really just another denomination?

Hi
This is very simple, you need to understand what denomination means.

1 A large group of religious congregations united under a common faith and name and organized under a single administrative and legal hierarchy.
2 One of a series of kinds, values, or sizes, as in a system of currency or weights: Cash registers have compartments for bills of different denominations. The stamps come in 25¢ and 45¢ denominations.
3 A name or designation, especially for a class or group.

We are “Autonomous” in the fact that we don’t follow a large group, or organization.

1 Not controlled by others or by outside forces; independent: an autonomous judiciary; an autonomous division of a corporate conglomerate.
Independent in mind or judgment; self-directed.

2 Independent of the laws of another state or government; self-governing.
3 Of or relating to a self-governing entity: an autonomous legislature.
4 Self-governing with respect to local or internal affairs: an autonomous region of a country.

We believe that God gave everything we need in the scriptures.
I know that you would be amazed at how close our beliefs really are.
Thanks.

 

[VociMike]

NonDenom:

Hi
I don’t know why Mary’s being ever virgin is such a big deal to Catholics.

It’s only a “big deal” to the extent that God’s revelation to us is a “big deal”. Catholicism didn’t ask for Mary to be ever-virgin. It was revealed that she was ever-virgin.

Why would it spoil or hurt Mary to have sex with her Husband after the birth of Christ. Making love to your Wife is a wonderful gift from God, as is having Children. Why would God deny Mary that satisfaction of having other Children? especialy when he knew she would lose Jesus on the cross. This is just one of many things that is not in scripture, but believed by the church.
Thanks

When is it permissible for a woman to bear the children of two different fathers? When the first father dies? When the first father abandons mother and child? Did God the Father die? Did He abandon Mary and Jesus?

 

[VociMike]

Kendy:

Oh, perhaps, you should have quit while you were ahead

Ok, so, she is born in a pre-fall state. I am sorry, but I am back to why not just create all of humanity in a pre-fall state. Maybe, you can’t answer this, and that’s fine. But I find it all very unsettling.

Kendy

“O felix culpa quae talem et tantum meruit habere redemptorem.”

“O happy fault which which received as its reward so great and so good a redeemer.”

If humanity were not fallen, we would have no need of Jesus. We would never have been united to God through God incarnate. God would never have taken our very nature and sanctified it so…

 

[VociMike]

Kendy:

Well, I don’t find it inconsistent…mysterious and consistent are not the same thing. In the case of the incarnation, I think it glorifies the love and power of God, but in the case of Mary, if she is without sin, a second Eve, after the fall, then it opens up a bunch of questions, which to me seem inconsistent with God’s revelation and purpose. Perhaps, it’s why I refered to her as the catholic church’s demi-goddess earlier. I have no trouble with a sinless divine being, but I find a post-fall human one very unsettling for the reasons previously stated.

Anyway, we are obviously talking past each other at this point.

I’m curious, do you think aborted babies have sinned, or are they sinless?

 

[VociMike]

Kendy:

Well, I don’t find it inconsistent…mysterious and consistent are not the same thing. In the case of the incarnation, I think it glorifies the love and power of God, but in the case of Mary, if she is without sin, a second Eve, after the fall, then it opens up a bunch of questions, which to me seem inconsistent with God’s revelation and purpose. Perhaps, it’s why I refered to her as the catholic church’s demi-goddess earlier. I have no trouble with a sinless divine being, but I find a post-fall human one very unsettling for the reasons previously stated.

Anyway, we are obviously talking past each other at this point.

What is the purpose of miracles? One purpose is to give evidence of the truth of His words. Mary’s sinlessness is the miracle which gives evidence of the true nature and destiny of all humanity. God does not just tell us what we are and what we are intended to be, but He gives us a miracle to show us.

 

[Kendy]

VociMike:

I’m curious, do you think aborted babies have sinned, or are they sinless?

I think they are fallen, but they have not committed any sins.

Kendy

 

[VociMike]

Kendy:

I think they are fallen, but they have not committed any sins.

Kendy

What does that mean, that they are fallen but sinless?

 

[Kendy]

VociMike:

What does that mean, that they are fallen but sinless?

Well, I mean they are corrupted in the way that all of humanity is after the fall, but they have not actually broken any commandments.

Kendy

 

[Della]

Kendy:

Now, as for her relationship with the Holy Spirit. I have a hard time calling it a marriage in the traditional sense. I think the Holy Spirit caused her to bear Jesus, but calling her the spouse of the spirit raises, for me at least, that demi-goddess issue I brought up earlier.

Kendy

It is apparent that you don’t understand what we will all become because of our union with God through Christ’s redemption and the life-giving power of the Holy Spirit. We are all to become “gods” because we all, including Mary, are spouses of God as the Bride of Christ. Mary’s relationship with the Holy Spirit is special because we aren’t all of us going to bear in our flesh the very Son of God. But, we do bear him in our flesh when we partake of his divine life. Our humanity will be caught up into his divinity, allowing us to live with him forever sharing his divine life.

I think the main problem you are having isn’t theological, since you have no theological arguments to bring against Marian doctrines and dogmas. Rather, your reservations are all based in personal distaste and a lack of understanding of the nature of the divine life of Christ. God has become Man. That says it all. All our likes and dislikes mean nothing in the light of that revelation.

As to the sex thing. I believe you are allowing yourself to be influenced by our sex-soaked society that equates sex with love and is constantly telling us we are losers if we aren’t “getting any”–a crude expression that says it all, doesn’t it? It’s a BIG FAT LIE! WE are in charge of our bodies, not th e other way around. Marital sex is a gift and a privilege not a right nor the end all and be all of life. It’s the best thing for most people but there are people who give it up for the sake of the Gospel, as Paul did and Jesus did and Mary and Joseph, to accomplish a higher goal within the will of God.

God may call you or me to celibacy or not. But, no matter what he decides is right for each of us within his will for our lives, believe me it will satisfy us completely as we submit our wills, our likes and dislikes, our hearts and minds, to him. Just because you wouldn’t care to live the celibate life doesn’t at all mean others wouldn’t or couldn’t or that it couldn’t possibly be God’s will for them.

 

[reen12]

quote: CARose

…would God have had his Son born into a disfunctional family that wouldn’t care for their own mother, I think not…

Oh, well said!

This is one of the reasons I like the forums. Those posting
often say things I never thought of or considered,
giving new meaning to: Live and Learn.

Best,

reen

 

[Kendy]

]It is apparent that you don’t understand what we will all become because of our union with God through Christ’s redemption and the life-giving power of the Holy Spirit. We are all to become “gods” because we all, including Mary, are spouses of God as the Bride of Christ. Mary’s relationship with the Holy Spirit is special because we aren’t all of us going to bear in our flesh the very Son of God. But, we do bear him in our flesh when we partake of his divine life. Our humanity will be caught up into his divinity, allowing us to live with him forever sharing his divine life.
**
Kendy: I think I might, possibly, despite my lack of catholicism have a vague understanding of the church as the bride of Christ…just maybe, but I would not describe it as becoming gods.**

I think the main problem you are having isn’t theological, since you have no theological arguments to bring against Marian doctrines and dogmas. Rather, your reservations are all based in personal distaste and a lack of understanding of the nature of the divine life of Christ. God has become Man. That says it all. All our likes and dislikes mean nothing in the light of that revelation.

Kendy: I don’ t think have a distaste for God becoming man; I have a distate for woman becoming godess.

As to the sex thing. I believe you are allowing yourself to be influenced by our sex-soaked society that equates sex with love and is constantly telling us we are losers if we aren’t “getting any”–a crude expression that says it all, doesn’t it? It’s a BIG FAT LIE! WE are in charge of our bodies, not th e other way around. Marital sex is a gift and a privilege not a right nor the end all and be all of life. It’s the best thing for most people but there are people who give it up for the sake of the Gospel, as Paul did and Jesus did and Mary and Joseph, to accomplish a higher goal within the will of God.

Kendy: You are presuming to know way too much about me from this comment, and I would appreciate it if you would refrain from drawing such conclusions about my view of sex. I have never suggested that Mary would be a loser if she didn’t have sex and I resent you suggesting that I did or that it has anything to do with my being "influenced by our sex-soaked society."

God may call you or me to celibacy or not. But, no matter what he decides is right for each of us within his will for our lives, believe me it will satisfy us completely as we submit our wills, our likes and dislikes, our hearts and minds, to him. Just because you wouldn’t care to live the celibate life doesn’t at all mean others wouldn’t or couldn’t or that it couldn’t possibly be God’s will for them.

Kendy: Again, you don’t know anything about the life I would or would not care to live. Nor do you know anything about my willingness to submit to God’s will. The only thing you can know about me is that I am wondering why I should be expected to believe that a married woman did not have sex with her husband? (BTW, I have gotten several good responses to that question) So, please restrict your responses to that question.

Kendy

 

[RCCDefender]

SydLake:

The whole Temple virgin thing has a few holes. first they were from the elite and so being betrothed to a commoner like Jos. would be taboo. Also she must ahve broken her vows to travel around with jos before they were married. And then she broke them to follow her son etc. etc.

It may have been a “nice” explanation for her status as a virgin, but there is no evidence for it anywhere.

Peace

Hmmm… I think there are not as many holes as you suppose. A temple virgin could no longer stay in the temple once she hit puberty, since her monthly cycle would defile the temple. Therefore the rabbis chose a “husband” for her who they knew would protect her and respect her vow of virginity.

Also, Mary was of the House of David. So, even though Jesus wasn’t Joseph’s biological son, He was still of the House David biologically speaking.

Right now I have a child underfoot, so it’s a little hard to gather my thoughts in a clear, concise manner. I do apologize…

Sherlock:

Also, please use the term “CC” here: the Eastern Catholic churches also honor… not just the Roman Rite.

Yeah, I wasn’t thinking very clearly when I chose my handle was I??

 

[Al_Masetti]

shop.catholic.com/cgi-local/SoftCart.exe/online-store/scstore/p-CB012.html?E+scstore

Catholic Answers has published a ton of stuff on this topic.

Please visit the URL above which will take you to the catalog item on CA.

The questions raised are not new questions. People have been asking them for centuries and the Church has gone through great lengths to answer them in various ways so people would understand.

Catholic Answers has a huge array of publications on the Blessed Mother. Please make use of them.

 

[Della]

]
It is apparent that you don’t understand what we will all become because of our union with God through Christ’s redemption and the life-giving power of the Holy Spirit. We are all to become “gods” because we all, including Mary, are spouses of God as the Bride of Christ.

Mary’s relationship with the Holy Spirit is special because we aren’t all of us going to bear in our flesh the very Son of God. But, we do bear him in our flesh when we partake of his divine life. Our humanity will be caught up into his divinity, allowing us to live with him forever sharing his divine life.
**
Kendy: I think I might, possibly, despite my lack of catholicism have a vague understanding of the church as the bride of Christ…just maybe, but I would not describe it as becoming gods.**

But C. S. Lewis, who was certainly not a Catholic, did understand and believe that we are to become like gods. Read his “The Weight of Glory” talk.

Kendy: I don’ t think have a distaste for God becoming man; I have a distate for woman becoming godess.

But all of us who are fully partaking in the divine life will become what Mary is now–a perfected human being recreated in Christ and living the god-life for all eternity. That is what this all about, not about Mary per se, as an individual.

Kendy: You are presuming to know way too much about me from this comment, and I would appreciate it if you would refrain from drawing such conclusions about my view of sex. I have never suggested that Mary would be a loser if she didn’t have sex and I resent you suggesting that I did or that it has anything to do with my being "influenced by our sex-soaked society."

But we are all influenced by our corrupted society whether we admit it or not. I do apologize for poorly phrasing my statement to make it seem like it’s just you that have this influence on our unconscience minds. Truly, it’s something all Christians have to be countercultural about not only in our personal lives but in the way we think theologically. The world sees Mary and Joseph as “losers” because they refrained from sex, which is my point. Sorry for the confusion.

Kendy: Again, you don’t know anything about the life I would or would not care to live. Nor do you know anything about my willingness to submit to God’s will. The only thing you can know about me is that I am wondering why I should be expected to believe that a married woman did not have sex with her husband? (BTW, I have gotten several good responses to that question) So, please restrict your responses to that question.

Kendy

I did not meant to suggest I do know what life is best for you. Again I apologize for my poor words. And we have answered your objections to a married woman not having sex–and Joseph, as well. Married people do not need to have sex in order to be married or to have a quite intimate relationship with each other. Joseph was the guardian of both Mary and Jesus. He truly was a husband to Mary and father to Jesus. Their lives reflected a higher order of grace that not everyone would be expected to live. It says nothing about the holiness of sex or the rightness of it at all. It is a good they sacrificed in order to fulfill God’s will for them as the parents of the very Son of God.

Mary was consecrated to the Lord because it was her flesh that became the flesh of Jesus, but she needed a guardian in the times and culture in which she lived. Joseph willing took on that role in order to safeguard the Son of God whom he held in his arms, taught his profession, and loved as both son and Lord. That is what we are talking about–a full commitment to God’s will in each of our lives no matter what it might be.

 

[FCEGM]

Kendy:

**Kendy: I say it that it not necessary for her to have children, but since she was married to Joseph, one might think that they did…unless you accept all the other things you mention. That’s what married people do. If she had children, it would not in anyway diminish her in anyway not does it seem obvious to me that this would be an insult to Jesus. Growing up, I always wondered about the passages in the bible where it was said Jesus’s brothers wanted to speak to Him since I was taught that she was always a virgin. While I have heard your explanations for this, I think they avoid the most obvious conclusion— that his bothers were indeed that.

Lastly, I am not particularly invested in her virginity or the lack thereof since I don’t think the absence of virginity would make her unholy in anyway. Nor do I think her virginity makes her more Holy.**

The Perpetual Virginity of the Holy Virgin is in no way an implication that sex and marriage are anything less than what God designed them to be. Contrary to the usual either-or thinking found in Protestantism, Catholicism has always said that it’s both/and, and this is seen in the Church’s teaching re the Virgin Mary.

In her person she mirrors the two truths of the sacredness of marriage and the goodness of virginity for the sake of the Kingdom; and St. Joseph, too, was part of this equation. He with Mary reflects these truths. The self-sacrifice of rightful joys for the furtherance of the Kingdom of God - especially with God’s own Son in their midst! - is a theme found in both Testaments.

St. Paul himself speaks with encouragement for wives and husbands to practice periods of continence in order for their prayer to flourish (1 Cor. 6:17). He also wishes that some would be as he and live a celibate life for the sake of the Kingdom. And, of course, there is the life of the Savior Who is the Exemplar of the celibate life

In considering the life of Mary we often find among non-Catholics (and some Catholics) a judging of higher things - indeed Divine Mystery - by lower things, the ordinary working of humanity, rather than the reverse. God is Holy, and anything else that is holy is such by a special relation to God making that holy. Thus creation is not holy although it is good; it is made out of nothing and not out of the substance of God. Marriage is made holy by the Sacrament of Matrimony; otherwise it is very good and special. By Mary’s womb being physically touched by the Body of God the Son, there is a special relation of her womb to God far beyond the goodness of married love, which is intended by God for intimate love of spouses and the creation of new life.

To use the now holy womb which contained the God-Man for another lower but very good purpose would be totally inappropriate, just as to use the chalice at Mass for drinking one’s soda at lunch. Why? Because it would profane what is sacred and what has only a Divine use.

Now the plan for the Blessed Mother in marrying St. Joseph was holy and not just natural and therefore not just naturally good. The holiness of Mary’s body having this special relationship to God the Son was to be respected by her husband, as her vocation was not to become anyone’s wife and mother, but to become the Mother of God. Marriage is good and special; Christian Marriage is sacred by the grace of Christ, but its purpose in being sacred is to elevate Marriage to the level of being able to sanctify the participants. Mary was sanctified from conception in order to be a fitting dwelling place for God the Son Incarnate. Her special vocation thus precludes the good but lesser vocation of natural marriage and even the sanctified Christian marriage which is to provide a means of sanctifying the spouses. Mary, already sanctified, did not need this lesser means of sanctification, lesser, that is, in comparison with the graces of sanctification given at her Conception and subsequent pregnancy. St. Joseph, however, was sanctified by the marriage to Mary, especially in sacrificing his personal needs in order to safeguard and support his Most Holy Wife. One does not profane (treat as ordinary) such holiness.

continued. . .

 

[FCEGM]

continuing. . .

The virginal birth of Christ points to a miraculous conception (that His Father by Nature is God, not a man) by the Holy Spirit (indicating the Trinity of Divine Persons); that Mary had no more children indicates Christ is different in some essential way from all other humans. If she had had other children, there would be absolutely no reason to think Jesus was any different from those siblings in His origin, i.e, that He was God the Son become Man. Thus the Perpetual Virginity safeguards the specialness of Jesus as born miraculously, which safeguards His special conception, which manifests His Eternal Pre-Existence. So there is a “logic” to the Incarnation of God as Man.

We need to understand more fully this “logic” of the Divine Incarnation. The Man Jesus is claimed to be a Divine Person, always having existed eternally with His Father, Who descended to become a man. His conception must manifest this (He can not have a human father); thus the miraculous conception by the Holy Spirit overshadowing Mary and making from the flesh of Mary a Conceptus. Mary’s Virginity guarantees that He has no human father (St. Joseph being a foster father and guardian) but only a Divine Father.

Also, we must consider prayerfully the religious distinction between the sacred and the profane or ordinary. Something sacred is set apart from the ordinary only for Divine use or purpose. Mary’s womb is the sacred “chalice” containing the Divine Humanity of God the Son; her womb is to be used only for that special purpose - because of the HOLINESS of God. (Remember God in the Judeo-Christian understanding is different from His creation; and holiness is the attribute of this difference.) So there is a religious “logic” of the sacred as different from the profane, i.e., the creaturely element set apart only for divine use or purpose; therefore never for ordinary use. (Another example: the cloths used as Mass separated from ordinary use as table cloths or napkins.) It does not mean the ordinary is dirty or evil; the ordinary is good but not Divine. The sacred is taking something away from ordinary use and consecrating it for the Divine. That is why God would change the order of things for the unique Incarnation of His Divine Son.

Thus there are at least two sets of reasons for the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. The first is the One just mentioned: the Holiness of Mary’s womb to be used for no other purpose but a thoroughly Divine one, never to be desecrated by ordinary use or purpose. The Second is the manifesting of the Special Divine origin of her Child. If she had other children the ordinary way, of course, then why wouldn’t her first be just a human with a human father like His brothers and sisters?! He must be a unique son of Mary to manifest being a unique Son of God the Father, having no human biological father. Thus the miraculous Virginal Birth (like the Risen Body passing through the walls He will have at the Resurrection).

The doctrine of the Perpetual Virginity of Mary is impossible to establish by reason or logic alone. But IF God became a man called Jesus Christ having brothers and sisters would be so unsuitable to His holiness shaped by His Mother, and so unsuitable to manifesting His Divine origin as to be practically unrealizable. The Scriptures do not teach she had other children, nor does Sacred Tradition. The reference to Christ’s brothers is therefore to be taken another way, as the linguistic analysis (with the Greek used as it was in the Septuagint) supports anyway: his extended family members, the clan members

 

[Redbandito]

Kendy:

Oh, perhaps, you should have quit while you were ahead

Ok, so, she is born in a pre-fall state. I am sorry, but I am back to why not just create all of humanity in a pre-fall state. Maybe, you can’t answer this, and that’s fine. But I find it all very unsettling.

Kendy

Kendy, I like how Ireneaus explained it in the 2nd century. He stated, “Consequently, then, Mary the Virgin is found to be obedient, saying, ‘Behold, O Lord, your handmaid; be it done to me according to your word.’ Eve, however, was disobedient, and, when yet a virgin, she did not obey. Just as she, who was then still a virgin although she had Adam for a husband—for in paradise they were both naked but were not ashamed; for, having been created only a short time, they had no understanding of the procreation of children, and it was necessary that they first come to maturity before beginning to multiply—having become disobedient, was made the cause of death for herself and for the whole human race; so also Mary, betrothed to a man but nevertheless still a virgin, being obedient, was made the cause of salvation for herself and for the whole human race. . . . Thus, the knot of Eve’s disobedience was loosed by the obedience of Mary. What the virgin Eve had bound in unbelief, the Virgin Mary loosed through faith” (*Against Heresies *3:22:24 [A.D. 189]).

 

[Kendy]

FCEGM:

The Perpetual Virginity of the Holy Virgin is in no way an implication that sex and marriage are anything less than what God designed them to be. Contrary to the usual either-or thinking found in Protestantism, Catholicism has always said that it’s both/and, and this is seen in the Church’s teaching re the Virgin Mary.

I object that either or thinking is endemic to protestantism in any way. And I agree that her virginity does not in anyway take away from the sacred of marriage. However, there were so many people who seemed so offended at the thought Mary had sex with her husband that I could not help but wonder if they thought that sex took away from someone’s holiness.

Anyway, I have heard all of your arguments about Mary, her virginity and her role in the covenant, loud and clear. And I now understand the cc’s position better than I did before.

So thank you all,

Kendy

 

[Kendy]

Quick question about Mary’s being full of grace. Does this mean that she never got sick since she exists in a pre-fall state?

Kendy

 

[Della]

Kendy:

Quick question about Mary’s being full of grace. Does this mean that she never got sick since she exists in a pre-fall state?

Kendy

Actually, that’s a point that has been debated for centuries. The general belief is that she didn’t. Especially in giving birth to Jesus–that she felt no birth pains but delivered him as Eve would have before the fall–with no pain or suffering. For example, in the dogma about her assumption at the end of her life, the Church has not declared that she died or that she didn’t die because it’s one of those things not revealed to us. Neither her death (or “dormition”) or her pain-free giving birth is a declared teaching of the Church but rather pious beliefs which are not contradicted by any declared teaching of Christ and his Church.

There are many things which the Church has never defined as doctrine or dogma because it wasn’t and hasn’t been found necessary in order to support any teaching about Christ and his Gospel, which is the only reason any doctrine or dogma is ever defined.