The Real Problem with Mary

[onetimeposter]

The only other option is that God would have somehow prevented Mary from passing on her sin. However, if we look to the Old Testament example of the Ark, it had to perfect, without blemish. And as we read in the Gospel of John, Jesus is the Word Incarnate. Therefore, Mary, the Ark(she carries Jesus as the Ark carries the Commandments), must be without blemish, the blemish of sin

It does sound very good, but you must admit that the Church has drawn these conclusions on her own over time.

No?

 

[SenorSalsa]

It does sound very good, but you must admit that the Church has drawn these conclusions on her own over time.

No?

They drew them on the basis of extensive study of Scripture and early Church Fathers.

Non-Catholics are often quick to rule out the early Church Fathers as a source, but lets not forget that they were alive to see all of it play out, and many more heard it directly from the lips of the Apostles and others that followed Jesus during his earthly ministry.

Just because it took time for it to be stated infallibly by the Church doesn’t mean it wasn’t believed from the beginning.

Much of Doctrine and Dogma gets stated or restated when a heresy pops up. It is then that Councils tend to state things that most have taken for granted.

A current example would be Mary as Co-redemptrix. There are many Catholics that believe it, and many Popes and Saints that have implied such throughout the ages. It hasn’t been stated by a Pope infallibly, but it has never really had to been, because nothing has ever arisen saying that she does not have such a role

 

[onetimeposter]

They drew them on the basis of extensive study of Scripture and early Church Fathers.

Non-Catholics are often quick to rule out the early Church Fathers as a source, but lets not forget that they were alive to see all of it play out, and many more heard it directly from the lips of the Apostles and others that followed Jesus during his earthly ministry.

Just because it took time for it to be stated infallibly by the Church doesn’t mean it wasn’t believed from the beginning.

Much of Doctrine and Dogma gets stated or restated when a heresy pops up. It is then that Councils tend to state things that most have taken for granted.

A current example would be Mary as Co-redemptrix. There are many Catholics that believe it, and many Popes and Saints that have implied such throughout the ages. It hasn’t been stated by a Pope infallibly, but it has never really had to been, because nothing has ever arisen saying that she does not have such a role

So then why do some Catholics give protestants flak for their own interpretation of the Bible?

This is an example of the Catholic Church making a conclusion…but at the end of the day, it is still men interpreting the Bible and drawing their own conclusions.

 

[COLOS]

A current example would be Mary as Co-redemptrix. There are many Catholics that believe it, and many Popes and Saints that have implied such throughout the ages. It hasn’t been stated by a Pope infallibly, but it has never really had to been, because nothing has ever arisen saying that she does not have such a role

Yup, after studying what Co-Redemptrix and Mediatrix mean, I believe 'em.

 

[SenorSalsa]

So then why do some Catholics give protestants flak for their own interpretation of the Bible?

This is an example of the Catholic Church making a conclusion…but at the end of the day, it is still men interpreting the Bible and drawing their own conclusions.

we give flak for personal interpretation, because it leads to relativism. You see it this way, I see it that way, and we can both be right.

However, it is still true that Catholic Biblical Scholars can and have made errors in interpretation. There is bound to be conflict when more than one person is doing something. Most of the time the scholars can just get together, review what they have come up with, and say, hey you got this right, but I think you could add this, or rephrase that.

And what comes about is one, generally accepted interpretation. However, nobody but the Pope is infallible, and he not even on everything. So could theoretically every Biblical Scholar be wrong about the Protoevangelium and how it relates to Mary, yes. is it likely, not really.

But if one holds on to “no, its my way or the highway” thats when heresy starts. It is generally when this happens that the Pope or Cardinals feel the need to “pick” which interpretation they agree with. However at this point it isnt just men, as Catholics, we hold that the Holy Spirit is active in such Councils and statements, so it isnt the men choosing, its God showing.