The Immaculate Conception

[Bilbo_Baggins_1]

I thought of titling this “Issues with Mary”, then imagined the volatility of the responses and reasoned against it. Still not sure of the title.

One of the “stumbling blocks” if you will, of the Catholic Church for me, is the concept of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. I have read and been told that to grow closer to Mary will bring you closer to her Son, however to me this is kind of a here and there statement. In a way I am not able to fully appreciate Mary’s actions because in my opinion her place in the Church has been in some ways distorted. I am not trying to open up an argument with this or rather a discussion, but mainly just trying to flesh out my understandings of the topic and hopefully get some feedback. I am by nature an empathetic person, so I can easily see both sides to the arguments for and against. I’ll try to break this up into slight topics of the potential differences (?) I see, if I can.

Fittingness of an Immaculate Mary
I definitely see how this conclusion can be reached when viewing Mary’s role in Christ’s birth. Jesus as the Son of God deserves a perfect, spotless, “ark” to reside in. It most assuredly is safe to assume that Jesus at the very least deserved this. However, here is where I always take a step back and question this statement. What in Christ’s circumstances on earth was fitting of Him? He deserved to be born and heralded as the ruler of the earth in the most powerful kingdom in the world, and yet was born to a young virgin in the small, unassuming town of Bethlehem. He deserved to be surrounded by the most brilliant and capable contemporaries of his day and age, and yet his closest companions were simply for all intents men of the common working class. He deserved to be recognized for the truth he brought and yet in scripture we are shown that as many as believed him, turned deaf ears toward him. He deserved to be worshipped and praised by the ten lepers whom he had healed, however only one returned to thank him. He deserved to be served and followed with unswerving loyalty by his closest friends and yet one of those friends betrayed him with a kiss. He deserved the crowns of every kingdom on the earth and yet received only a crown of thorns. He deserved his name praised and worshipped by all people and yet was ridiculed and spat upon. He deserved to never have to suffer and yet went willingly to endure the most painful death of the time as well as taking upon himself the sins of the world.

Again this is completely my own opinion, but, to me, practically nothing, if anything, in Jesus’ earthly life was equal to what he so rightly deserved. Were Mary’s being immaculate simply to be fitting, it would seemingly be the odd one out in his life. I realize that the fittingness argument is not the only one for the position, but it is one that strikes me as kind of odd.

Mary as the New Eve
In terms of Mary as the new eve, I’ve also never quite understood this either. I have always understood the church as the new eve and I believe my understanding is also that of the early church.

As Adam was a figure of Christ, Adam’s sleep shadowed out the death of Christ… that from the wound inflicted on His side might, in like manner (as Eve was formed), be typified the church, the true mother of the living. (Tertullian, Treatise on the Soul, ch. 43).

*The apostle directly referred to Christ the words which had been spoken of Adam. For thus will it be most certainly agreed that the Church is formed out of His bones and flesh; and it was for this cause that the Word, leaving His Father in heaven, came down to be “joined to His wife;” and slept in the trance of His passion, and willingly suffered death for her, that He might present the Church to Himself glorious and blameless, having cleansed her by the laver, for the receiving of the spiritual and blessed seed, which is sown by Him who with whispers implants it in the depths of the mind; and is conceived and formed by the Church, as by a woman. so as to give birth and nourishment to virtue….

[When Paul] was grown to a man, and was built up, then being molded to spiritual perfection, he was made the help-meet and bride of the Word; and receiving and conceiving the seeds of life, he who was before a child, becomes a church and a mother, himself laboring in birth of those who, through him, believed in the Lord, until Christ was formed and born in them also. For he says, “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until Christ be formed in you; “ and again, “In Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the Gospel.”

It is evident, then, that the statement respecting Eve and Adam is to be referred to the Church and Christ*. (St. Methodius, The Banquet of the Ten Virgins, Discourse 3, Ch. 8-9.)

Adam sleeps that Eve may be formed; Christ dies that the Church may be
formed. Eve is formed from the side of the sleeping Adam; the side of the dead
Christ is pierced by the lance, so that the Sacraments may flow out, of which the
Church is formed. Is there anyone to whom it is not obvious that future events
are represented by the things done then, since the Apostle says that Adam himself
was the figure of Him that was to come? (St. Augustine, In Ioannis evangelium tractatus 9, 10; translated by W. A. Jurgens, The Faith of the Early Fathers, vol. 3 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1979), 117.

The National Conference of Catholic Bishops (NCCB) in the pastoral on the Blessed Virgin Mary points out: ‘‘Even more anciently, the Church was regarded as the ‘New Eve.’ The Church is the bride of Christ, formed from his side in the sleep of death on the cross, as the first Eve was formed by God from the side of the sleeping Adam’’ (NCCB 41). (“Mariology”, edited by E. R. Carroll and F. M. Jelly, New Catholic Encyclopedia)

 

[Bilbo_Baggins_1]

Continued…

There is always the possibility that both are typified as the new eve, as is the case in Catholicism today, however, in my viewing of it, the Church fits the mold for the new eve closer than Mary does. The Church was created out of Christ as Eve was created out of Adam. The Church is Christ’s bride just as Eve was Adam’s. In my reading of the parallels between the testaments I see the parallel between sin entering humanity through Eve’s sin and righteousness entering humanity through the birth of the Church at Pentecost. I can also see the parallel between the reversal of sin entering through Eve’s sin and righteousness entering through Mary’s acceptance as well, so this point is not just tossed aside. I just think these other points of view are often not taken into consideration.

Concept of knowing Mary better = knowing Christ better
Every time I hear this statement, my reaction is “the same can be said of all creation if you go deep enough.” A deeper understanding of a creation will always bring about a deeper understanding of the Creator. Does the Blessed Virgin Mary have certain characteristics that differentiate her from other creations? Most definitely! She agreed to bear the Saviour of herself and all mankind! No one else in the world can say that! There is certainly a valid point to the statement, however I believe there is also a slight belittling almost of knowing God from His handiwork.

Another thing that came to my mind while typing. I am not disvaluing or depreciating Mary or her role in any way by this statement. When finding a model of acceptance and service to follow, I would personally (maybe almost, maybe truly) choose to look to the story of Abraham and Isaac. For Mary, her choice had (in a poor terms) a glimpse of a reward at the end. She would give birth to Christ who would save mankind. Abraham on the other hand offered his only son not expecting God to stop him, but expecting to murder the son that he loved. Of course we are shown the greater fulfillment of this with God sacrificing His Son for us, which is the ultimate model of sacrificial service. Again that’s just my opinion on it.

I also want to call to attention something that’s troubled me as I’ve read different topics on CAF. If I had to mention one thing that I have noticed over the past months of reading through these forums, it’s a severe lack of empathy. I don’t know if it’s a willful stubbornness not to try and see a topic from another’s point of view, or an inability to do so, however the problem exists. I feel the constant reminders from the moderators and other members asking for charity among discussions should be understood as an appeal for empathy. When you are able to empathize and see a conversation from the point of view of the other member, not meaning to say you have to agree with his or her view, true Christian love and charity can flow out of these instances.

Not quite sure that was coherent or cohesive, but I hoped I got most of my point across in the ramblings.

Cheers.

 

[lyrikal]

The Church is the new Eve, yes; however, the Church Fathers also understood Mary as the new Eve. We can dig into Scripture for this if you’d like, but for now, here are some Patristic quotes:

Justin Martyr

“[Jesus] became man by the Virgin so that the course which was taken by disobedience in the beginning through the agency of the serpent might be also the very course by which it would be put down. Eve, a virgin and undefiled, conceived the word of the serpent and bore disobedience and death. But the Virgin Mary received faith and joy when the angel Gabriel announced to her the glad tidings that the Spirit of the Lord would come upon her and the power of the Most High would overshadow her, for which reason the Holy One being born of her is the Son of God. And she replied ‘Be it done unto me according to your word’ [Luke 1:38]” (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew 100 [A.D. 155]).

Irenaeus

“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]).

“The Lord then was manifestly coming to his own things, and was sustaining them by means of that creation that is supported by himself. He was making a recapitulation of that disobedience that had occurred in connection with a tree, through the obedience that was upon a tree *. Furthermore, the original deception was to be done away with—the deception by which that virgin Eve (who was already espoused to a man) was unhappily misled. That this was to be overturned was happily announced through means of the truth by the angel to the Virgin Mary (who was also [espoused] to a man). . . . So if Eve disobeyed God, yet Mary was persuaded to be obedient to God. In this way, the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. And thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so it is rescued by a virgin. Virginal disobedience has been balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience. For in the same way, the sin of the first created man received amendment by the correction of the First-Begotten” (ibid., 5:19:1 [A.D. 189]).

Tertullian

“And again, lest I depart from my argumentation on the name of Adam: Why is Christ called Adam by the apostle [Paul], if as man he was not of that earthly origin? But even reason defends this conclusion, that God recovered his image and likeness by a procedure similar to that in which he had been robbed of it by the devil. It was while Eve was still a virgin that the word of the devil crept in to erect an edifice of death. Likewise through a virgin the Word of God was introduced to set up a structure of life. Thus what had been laid waste in ruin by this sex was by the same sex reestablished in salvation. Eve had believed the serpent; Mary believed Gabriel. That which the one destroyed by believing, the other, by believing, set straight” (The Flesh of Christ 17:4 [A.D. 210].

Source: catholic.com/library/Mary_Full_of_Grace.asp

Mary AND the Church are both the new Eve (both/and). In the Catholic Church, Mary is a type of the Church. Just as Mary bore Christ and gave us Christ so too does the Church give us Christ. St. Augustine talks about this a lot. I’ll have to dig deep for quotes from St. Augustine talking about Mary being the type of the Church but for now, here is St. Ambrose:

“Yes, she [Mary] is betrothed, but she is a virgin because she is a type of the Church which is immaculate but a bride: a virgin, she conceived us by the Spirit; a virgin, she gave birth to us without pain.”*

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

Ave Maria Bilbo, and welcome to CAF

Fittingness of an Immaculate Mary . . .

Your observation of the humility of our Lord is well founded. What you described is practically what I mediate during the first joyful mystery in the Rosary.

Have you read The Protoevangelium of James? It might give you more insight on the Immaculate Conception. Or perhaps the works of Bl. John Duns Scotus on the Immaculate Conception, On Fittingness of the Immaculate Conception? Since it was his works that put the final stroke into play to convince the Pope to declare Blessed Mary’s Immaculate Conception, recommended reading.

Two question to you, if I may. One, of your comment “Were Mary’s being immaculate simply to be fitting, it would seemingly be the odd one out in his life”, what is odd about it to you, in your opinion?

Two, if you had the chance to create your mother before your birth, how great would you make her?

There is always the possibility that both are typified as the new eve, as is the case in Catholicism today, however, in my viewing of it, the Church fits the mold for the new eve closer than Mary does. The Church was created out of Christ as Eve was created out of Adam. The Church is Christ’s bride just as Eve was Adam’s. In my reading of the parallels between the testaments I see the parallel between sin entering humanity through Eve’s sin and righteousness entering humanity through the birth of the Church at Pentecost. I can also see the parallel between the reversal of sin entering through Eve’s sin and righteousness entering through Mary’s acceptance as well, so this point is not just tossed aside. I just think these other points of view are often not taken into consideration.

Ah, remember Christ created Blessed Mary so your comment “The Church was created out of Christ as Eve was created out of Adam” can be applied to her.

Blessed Mary is the New Eve as she completely submitted to God through humility in juxtaposition to the Old Eve who completely disobeyed Him through pride. The Church is the Body of Christ and Bride of Christ and the Temple of the Holy Spirit, I advise reading this part of the Catechism to go more in depth about that subject.

But your point is well founded still, have you considered an and/both application to Blessed Mary and the Church?

Concept of knowing Mary better = knowing Christ better. . .

Your very right that the same can be said for all of creation. But all of creation did not carry, birth, nurse, raise, protect, and be mother to Christ for thirty three years. Who would know Him more then any being? But remember, we come to love God in every way possible, just because we have a devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary does not mean we also do not come closer to God by other means.

Another thing that came to my mind while typing. I am not disvaluing or depreciating Mary or her role in any way by this statement. When finding a model of acceptance and service to follow, I would personally (maybe almost, maybe truly) choose to look to the story of Abraham and Isaac. For Mary, her choice had (in a poor terms) a glimpse of a reward at the end. She would give birth to Christ who would save mankind. Abraham on the other hand offered his only son not expecting God to stop him, but expecting to murder the son that he loved. Of course we are shown the greater fulfillment of this with God sacrificing His Son for us, which is the ultimate model of sacrificial service. Again that’s just my opinion on it.

On the contrary about Abraham’s sacrifice, he knew in his heart that it would not happen. Observe: Gen 22:5 Then Abraham said to his servants, 'Stay here with the donkey. The boy and I are going over there; we shall worship and then come back to you.

But to the rest of this, I’m not following. Are you suggesting she was being a quasi-opportunist?

I also want to call to attention something that’s troubled me as I’ve read different topics on CAF. If I had to mention one thing that I have noticed over the past months of reading through these forums, it’s a severe lack of empathy. I don’t know if it’s a willful stubbornness not to try and see a topic from another’s point of view, or an inability to do so, however the problem exists. I feel the constant reminders from the moderators and other members asking for charity among discussions should be understood as an appeal for empathy. When you are able to empathize and see a conversation from the point of view of the other member, not meaning to say you have to agree with his or her view, true Christian love and charity can flow out of these instances.

Funny how the second law set forth by Christ is harder to practice then the first

Not quite sure that was coherent or cohesive, but I hoped I got most of my point across in the ramblings.

Cheers.

 

[Benadam]

I do see the Church as the Bride and in as much as Mary does what the Church does she is too. If you think how the human soul is called to be a bride of Christ it is the same mystical union between Jesus and the Church but realized in it’s most inner dimension. Between those two poles we have that same mystical union but realized in the dimension of human relationships, person to person. In a way that is the most like the matrimonial bond between a man and woman.

Mary is the New Earth from which God forms the New Man. The first Adam was formed of sinless earth. St Mary is much more in the likeness of the Earth Mother of the pagans.

 

[Evan]

Blessed Mary is the New Eve as she completely submitted to God through humility in juxtaposition to the Old Eve who completely disobeyed Him through pride. The Church is the Body of Christ and Bride of Christ and the Temple of the Holy Spirit, I advise reading this part of the Catechism to go more in depth about that subject.

I, personally, think this is the key point. If Eve, immaculately conceived, rejected God. Then another person, to restore the universal relationship with God, should also be free from concupiscence (the effect of original sin) in order to give a free and un-coerced answer. The freedom to say Yes to God, without the extra grace needed to overcome the effect of original sin.

This person is Mary,

• born as Eve-- immaculately
• responding to God like Eve-- Yes rather than No
• making possible our reconciliation with God, begun by Eve-- undone by Mary.

 

[Nicea325]

Continued…

There is always the possibility that both are typified as the new eve, as is the case in Catholicism today, however, in my viewing of it, the Church fits the mold for the new eve closer than Mary does. The Church was created out of Christ as Eve was created out of Adam. The Church is Christ’s bride just as Eve was Adam’s. In my reading of the parallels between the testaments I see the parallel between sin entering humanity through Eve’s sin and righteousness entering humanity through the birth of the Church at Pentecost. I can also see the parallel between the reversal of sin entering through Eve’s sin and righteousness entering through Mary’s acceptance as well, so this point is not just tossed aside. I just think these other points of view are often not taken into consideration.

Concept of knowing Mary better = knowing Christ better
Every time I hear this statement, my reaction is “the same can be said of all creation if you go deep enough.” A deeper understanding of a creation will always bring about a deeper understanding of the Creator. Does the Blessed Virgin Mary have certain characteristics that differentiate her from other creations? Most definitely! She agreed to bear the Saviour of herself and all mankind! No one else in the world can say that! There is certainly a valid point to the statement, however I believe there is also a slight belittling almost of knowing God from His handiwork.

Another thing that came to my mind while typing. I am not disvaluing or depreciating Mary or her role in any way by this statement. When finding a model of acceptance and service to follow, I would personally (maybe almost, maybe truly) choose to look to the story of Abraham and Isaac. For Mary, her choice had (in a poor terms) a glimpse of a reward at the end. She would give birth to Christ who would save mankind. Abraham on the other hand offered his only son not expecting God to stop him, but expecting to murder the son that he loved. Of course we are shown the greater fulfillment of this with God sacrificing His Son for us, which is the ultimate model of sacrificial service. Again that’s just my opinion on it.

I also want to call to attention something that’s troubled me as I’ve read different topics on CAF. If I had to mention one thing that I have noticed over the past months of reading through these forums, it’s a severe lack of empathy. I don’t know if it’s a willful stubbornness not to try and see a topic from another’s point of view, or an inability to do so, however the problem exists. I feel the constant reminders from the moderators and other members asking for charity among discussions should be understood as an appeal for empathy. When you are able to empathize and see a conversation from the point of view of the other member, not meaning to say you have to agree with his or her view, true Christian love and charity can flow out of these instances.

Not quite sure that was coherent or cohesive, but I hoped I got most of my point across in the ramblings.

Cheers.

Simply question for you.

1. Why would God allow or even want to have a woman stained with sin conceive the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity?

 

[Bilbo_Baggins_1]

Simply question for you.

1. Why would God allow or even want to have a woman stained with sin conceive the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity?

I’m pressed for time and will ruminate on your question and hopefully get back to your response (and the others) later this evening. However your question prompted a couple of questions that I want to, for the time being, question your question with.

1. Would this staining of sin in any way prevent the purity of Christ’s Person to remain incorrupt? (To me, to say yes would be to deny God that power.)
2. Why would God allow or even want any man or woman stained with sin to become co-heirs with His Beloved Son?

More to come later. Thanks for the responses guys!

 

[Nicea325]

I’m pressed for time and will ruminate on your question and hopefully get back to your response (and the others) later this evening. However your question prompted a couple of questions that I want to, for the time being, question your question with.

1. Would this staining of sin in any way prevent the purity of Christ’s Person to remain incorrupt? (To me, to say yes would be to deny God that power.)
2. Why would God allow or even want any man or woman stained with sin to become co-heirs with His Beloved Son?

More to come later. Thanks for the responses guys!

1. If this were the case, it is worth noting that 1 Chronicles 15:14 records that the persons who bore the ark of the OT were to be sanctified. There is no logical sense in sanctifying men who carried a box, and **not sanctifying the womb who carried God himself! **After all, wisdom will not dwell “in a body under debt of sin” (Wis. 1:4 NAB).
2. Then His death on the cross would be meaningless.Precisely why God Incarnated and lived among SINNERS to redeem all of humaity.

 

[Evan]

1. If this were the case, it is worth noting that 1 Chronicles 15:14 records that the persons who bore the ark of the OT were to be sanctified. There is no logical sense in sanctifying men who carried a box, and **not sanctifying the womb who carried God himself! **After all, wisdom will not dwell “in a body under debt of sin” (Wis. 1:4 NAB).

There men were not sanctified from all time, but only from the time they were prepared for bearing the ark.

It would certainly be easy enough for God to Sanctify BVM after her “Let it be done to me according to your will” statement. Similar to sanctifying us at baptism and not before.

 

[Nicea325]

There men were not sanctified from all time, but only from the time they were prepared for bearing the ark.

It would certainly be easy enough for God to Sanctify BVM after her “Let it be done to me according to your will” statement. Similar to sanctifying us at baptism and not before.

Precisely! So why would God sanctify men bearing a wooden box covered in gold,but not the woman who would carry His Son?

 

[Evan]

Precisely! So why would God sanctify men bearing a wooden box covered in gold,but not the woman who would carry His Son?

I guess I would have to respond that ‘sanctified’ is quite different from ‘immaculately conceived’.

I certainly think BVM, St John the Baptist, St Joseph, and a variety of other OT and NT folks are all sanctified. I also think there is a world of difference between one and the other.

That is why the word fitting may be appropriate following your justification from the Old Testament. But I think the stronger argument is the one I gave as Mary being the new Eve. Beginning just as Eve; so she would have the same compulsions, temptations, resistance to sin. But, through the free use of her will, to choose the Good, the True, and the Beautiful: submitting her will to God’s will.

 

[GaryTaylor]

I would suggest reading “Mary Through the Centuries” by Prof. Pelikan. He also wrote “Jesus through the centuries” Also a non bias opinion since he is not Catholic.

However he will take you through St Mary from Bible to the 2-AD century up till today. And in East/WEst and Protestant and Islam to boot. And show how Catholic Doctrine is developed with the IC being and excellent example.

First the IC isn’t new. It was appoved at the Council of Basil in the early 14th century them overturned by the Pope for lack of participation of Rome at the Council.

However the IC is most fitting when we consider the Incarnation. Jesus could not have been born into sin…Period.

So only one three concepts could have occured.

1] The Immaculate Conception of Mary

2] Mary preserved from sin at the moment of Christs conception.

3] Or somewhere inbetween!

Of the three through close observation of the lives of the Messiah and BVM the IC is the most fitting.

Of all women on earth God chose Mary, She found favor with God for a very good reason.

All generations will call Her Blessed.

Mary is Full of Grace.

Mary is the gate of Heaven

Mary is the neck of the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ w/Christ being the head.

Mary ushers in Christs Ministry and final hour of the Cross at Cana.

Mary states “My Soul does magnify the Lords”

Mary is called, “Mother of the Lord” in Luke.

Mary, is the “Handmaid of the Lord, be it done unto Me according to His Word”

Mary, states “For He that is Mighty and done Great things, and Holy is His name”

The Angel Gabriel to Mary. HAIL though art Highly favored, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art though among women’

The Angel, “Fear Not Mary though has found Favor with God”

FOR WITH GOD NOTHING SHALL BE IMPOSSIBLE!

The Dormition was already established in the eastern church by the 4th century. The Assumption in its context is very simliar. Mary is venerted in Art from the first century. No woman in world history has been more venerated. Be it the Arts. Literature or Biograpghys. Our Ladt has over 2500 Biographys to date and still counting.

This is aside from the very real converstions of entire countrys such as Mexico. Ten Million converstions in 9-years, Thats Baptisms day to night for ten-years straight. And this is but “one” country.

The Coptic Church is Zeitoun is spectacular a Blessing to the Copts from BVM whom also consider “Mary the Gate”. A sign of approval. Fatima another sign/warning with Pope Benedict stating… Read Fatima, Know Fatima and Live Fatima.

After the Popes Proclaimation of the Immaculate Conception, Our Lady appeared at Lourdes and in approval stated “I am the Immaculate Conception”

Of couse the Most Holy Rosary takes on another magnitude of realitys… Pope Leo XIII stated “The Rosary is the weapon which will defeat satan”

You might want read St Loius de Monfort “True Devotion” and “The Secret of Mary” Both could be read on-line and are fast reading. Inspirational to say the least.

Read the Litany or the Blessed Virgin Mother, thats is all and what Our lady is!

QUEEN OF HEAVEN–Coronation. Not maybe definate and through Gods will at that. How would one assume the King Christ. feels His most Holy Blessed Virgin Mother should be venerated???

Grace and Peace

 

[Nicea325]

I guess I would have to respond that ‘sanctified’ is quite different from ‘immaculately conceived’.

I certainly think BVM, St John the Baptist, St Joseph, and a variety of other OT and NT folks are all sanctified. I also think there is a world of difference between one and the other.

That is why the word fitting may be appropriate following your justification from the Old Testament. But I think the stronger argument is the one I gave as Mary being the new Eve. Beginning just as Eve; so she would have the same compulsions, temptations, resistance to sin. But, through the free use of her will, to choose the Good, the True, and the Beautiful: submitting her will to God’s will.

Indeed. Eve said no to God and in the end result was sinning;however, Mary said yes to God by being full of grace.

 

[Julia_Mae]

I thought of titling this “Issues with Mary”, then imagined the volatility of the responses and reasoned against it. Still not sure of the title.

One of the “stumbling blocks” if you will, of the Catholic Church for me, is the concept of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. .

I’m going to say something completely from the POV of a convert and how I came to think of this. Obviously, all the great theologians and thinkers cited here have better things to offer but - srsly - the whole Mary as the neck of Christ thing just leaves me cold. Might work for you, though, I’m sure it’s quite good.

Mary wasn’t born without sin because of what Jesus “deserved” IMO. Jesus had to come into the world. He had to come as a completely helpless infant. God didn’t take away Mary’s freewill, He just made her perfectly cognizant of His Will. This means she will say yes to the Angel even in the face of probably death in her culture. Her faith is total.

As the caretaker of God but also of a human, a helpless infant and growing child, she has to be perfect. I think we must, if we say Jesus was truly man, allow the possibility for Him to be affected by sin. Like all children, He had to grow into knowing Who He IS. He needed His parents to say, “No, you don’t go to the Temple yet and teach, you come home with us.” Then He needed that moment where Mary says, “Okay it’s time. Take care of the wine for these folks.”

I don’t know what Catholic official teaching is on any of what I just said. But I believe this responsibility of raising this child, well, I think it was the Second Person of the Trinity Who chose her before she was conceived to be Immaculate to fulfill His Plan and then *He placed Himself in her care. *

It boggles the mind.

Mary is our mom, yours and mine. Jesus gave her to us. I’m not sure knowing Mary is knowing Jesus, or whatever. But I think she loves us and He still listens to her.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Well spoken, I see the magnitude of this situation has been setting in on you. A geart respinsibility to br sure. Its one thing saying U hav a Son to Raise. I’ts vbry much another when God somes into real time to gain yoor approval, and yiu agree to participate.

The “daily” Catholic Teaching is Christ is the Head of the Mystical Body, Mary is he Neck, the Holy Sprit is the Heart, The body is the elect and laity. The Elect bears the responsibility of the burden of the laity. That “is” How the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ works and is taugt world-wide in Catholic Schools.

No-One is going to Christ but through Our Lady. And thats just not in the Catholic Faith but is "all Christianity. She is the “Gate of Heaven”

She’s only trying to hold the sky from falling, and doing a marvelous job at that. The numbers increase yeary with daily Rosary recitation. Many or the orders of Sisters wake specifically at midnight to recitate the Rosary to Mary when all world is sound asleep.

I suppose once ou realize you live in a supernatural world, it becomes apparect Our Lady has received great favor from God. No to be underestimated for sure.

Give the Rosary an honest effort, Pray it dialy for a year and tell me what you think about Our Ladys intercession.

There are no mistakes with Our lady, our only mistake was the human hesitation in reverence. Much was corrected by many of the Saints, St Padre-Pio, Saint Kolbe. Edith Stein, Blessed Johm Paul II and now Benedict. There is a very strong following of Bishops now who have also made some remarkable statements in the 2011 Consecration Now campaign.

Its not be chance the Pope is seeking Visa into Russia as I type. They want to reslove this issue. Facts indicate God came into real time through Our Lady with a specific warning which must be accomplished.

And yes if that was “your” mother you want her respected, not spoken of with indifference.

Its one thing to say. Well, I don’t know so I’m gonna leave ii alone. and not speak on it. Its very different to be so bold, you deny Gods Kingodm, blieveing your thinking to supercede Gods Will, with no concrete evidence but on a hunch. and a fad from learned behavior. To me it seems like a fools path in the Kindsom of GOd. Better to safe and overestimate the reality of St Mary to reduce Her to disrepesct than have to stand in from of God, for there is no good reason or explaination for that.

This is the woman of all on earth God chose to bear his Human Side, and she nutured Him till he was old enought to establish his ministry. No where does she fail.

So in fact Mary was His first Apsotle and I doubt any human knws God better than his own mother… And Her words are He is already much to offended, we must stop offending him.

The Rosary is a Christ centered contemplative/meditative prayer which invokes St Marys intercession. Unless you participate in the Divine Office and Holy Scarifice daily, than this is what is most fitting. For “In the the End My Immaculate Heart will Triumph” Our Lady of Fatima

So the push becomes greater by the years, in the church EWTN, here everywhere. Time is short. WE would like all Catholics and Christians to get on point with this. It cost you nothing , and the promise if GREAT, The Catholic question…is Why Not? it cost you nothing but a few minutes daily, and won’t hurt you a bit.

The negative sights are pure evil promoted in the name of God. Who in Gods Kingdom would blaspheme to Mother of God? Very telling isn’t it!

Peace

I’ve seen these soul for generations, and when I bring myself to partcipate. I humbly tipped my hat to them. It was far my be to judge these sould when I couldn’t do what they were doing!!!

Speak you mind or forever hold you peace.

 

[ComeHome2Rome]

Jesus as the Son of God deserves a perfect, spotless, “ark” to reside in.

I agree with you: Jesus did deserve a perfect, spotless “ark” and that is exactly what He had according to the Bible:

“Then God’s temple in heaven was opened, and the ark of his covenant could be seen in the temple. There were flashes of lightning, rumblings, and peals of thunder, an earthquake, and a violent hailstorm. A great sign appeared in the sky, a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars. She was with child and wailed aloud in pain as she labored to give birth. She gave birth to a son, a male child, destined to rule all the nations with an iron rod. Then the dragon became angry with the woman and went off to wage war against the rest of her offspring, those who keep God’s commandments and bear witness to Jesus.” Rev. 11:19 Rev. 12:1-3, 5a & 17

This Bible passage shows that not only is Mary the Ark of God’s Covenant, but the she is also the Mother of all Christians. As our mother, we have the obligation to obey and honor her - ref. Eph. 6:1-3 Mary tells us to: Do whatever Jesus tells you - ref. John 2:5 As children, it is completely natural for us to love and trust our Mother. We know that Jesus, who kept all the Commandments, obeyed and honored Mary and that He wants us to imitate Him in all things - ref. Eph. 5:1.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P12U.HTM vatican.va/archive/ENG0839/__P12V.HTM

 

[BenMasada]

As far as I am concerned, if by immaculate conception, you mean virgin birth, there is no such a thing but in Greek Mythology. Literal virgin birth is a figure of speech which must be
interpreted metaphorically. Literally, it is against the Hebrew Scriptures and natural laws.

 

[Trevor_Stamm]

As far as I am concerned, if by immaculate conception, you mean virgin birth, there is no such a thing but in Greek Mythology. Literal virgin birth is a figure of speech which must be
interpreted metaphorically. Literally, it is against the Hebrew Scriptures and natural laws.

Virgin birth is not what the Immaculate Conception is.

In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary “in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin.”

newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm