The Universal Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter lanman87
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m in the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Archeparchy of Philadelphia (not in the city per se, though).
 
Cool, @Margaret_Ann.

I read about the Virgin of the Passion, I have a copy of her on my wall; last night and I looked up the DL link that you or another Easterner provided. I’d love to worship in a DL someday.

By the way: I taught my 9 year old son who’s discerning the Faith what you told me about the iconography of the Virgin of the Passion and how I daily renew my consecration to the Immaculate Heart every morning to her; he immediately prayed the Morning Offering to the Sacred Heart on his prayer card.
 
Last edited:
Margaret_Ann said:
St. Alphonsus beat everyone to it 😉:
Click to expand...
Wow! I spend a day away from a computer and come back to find a bombardment 🙂 I’ll try and start at the top and work my way down.
Margaret_Ann said:
St. Alphonsus beat everyone to it 😉:
Click to expand...
His quote fits precisely as someone who is letting their scriptural interpretation come from their Theology instead of letting their theology come from Scripture. It is like he had to think of a way “she found grace” and just made one up that would make since to his theology. I
 
Slow down your roll, please @lanman87. Please talk nice to the lady and the Saint.
 
Agathon77 said:
As for full of grace: That statement, past tense/already completed; attests that Our Lady already was in a state of grace before Saint Gabriel the Archangel’s visit in the Annunciation.
Click to expand...
It means that she had already found favor before Gabriel visited Mary. Some would say she found favor because of the faithfulness of heart, others way say she found favor because she was simply chosen by God to be the instrument in which Christ was to come to mankind. But what we do know is she was shown favor.
Agathon77 said:
Her perplexity, this goes to prove her Ever Virgin status; was because she was a consecrated virgin of the Lord who was understandably perplexed as to how she’d conceive a son without violating her vow.
Click to expand...
Most respected Historians I’ve read say there was no such thing as consecrated virgins in Judaism. The Old Testament certainly makes no provision for “consecrated virgins” at the Temple, it was never commanded by God.

As a matter of fact I saw this answer from a Jewish Rabbi when asked if there have ever been consecrated virgin in Judaism.

“Nope- in Judaism being celibate is actually seen as being a sin as the very first commandment given in the Torah is “p’ru u’revu” “be fruitful and multiply”. As such, since refraining from marriage and having children is against a law in the Torah, being celibate is the opposite of achieving righteousness and thus there would be no point to consecrated virginity as consecration is for the purpose of making things holy, and celibacy is NOT a way to do that in Judaism.”

I’ve seen some Catholic apologist try and use some creative license to show that there were consecrated virgins at the Temple but the fact that Jews disagree is enough for me.
 
🤔 @lanman87,

As I said earlier: The burden of proof is on you.

Point 1: You still have to disprove the Immaculate Conception.

Point 2: Why would Our Lady be perplexed at conceiving a son when she was betrothed? I’d assume Our Lady knows the facts of life.
 
lanman87 said:
simply chosen by God to be the instrument in which Christ was to come to mankind
Click to expand...
This and similar descriptions are so offensive. I am sure you don’t mean to be but don’t you see that it goes against the concept of the personal relationship God means to have with each one of His created children? Sounds like she is used, like a container. The relationship God has with the Virgin Mary is like no other.
 
Last edited:
Lenten_ashes said:
Do you think the apostles taught and practiced Sola Scriptura, Ian?
Click to expand...
I think they understood the Old Testament to be the Word of God and was the way to prove that Christ was the Messiah was show this in Scripture. We see this happening in several places.

They, the apostles, were the ones in whom the Gospel was entrusted. The apostles believed in “The Gospel alone” and they taught it both orally and in writing. I do believe that they understood that their writings were inspired by God and would become Scripture. (There is at least a couple of places they call contemporary writings scripture).

The question is, In which way is the Gospel maintained. By Scripture alone or by Scripture and Tradition?
 
Crocus said:
This and similar descriptions are so offensive.
Click to expand...
I don’t mean to offend anyone. Sometimes it is hard to find a word that has the full meaning of intent. There is no doubt that Mary was a special girl or else God would not have chosen her.
 
@Crocus has a good point, @lanman87. Our Lady has a crucial role to play in the economy of salvation.
 
Agathon77 said:
You’ve gone from dismissing and trying to disprove these three dogmas to allowing their possibility and respecting that we hold them.
Click to expand...
It is not either/or, but dismissing and respecting another position is possible.
Agathon77 said:
But, still: Since He can; you claim He wouldn’t?
Click to expand...
No, the early father quote is,
" Let us not suppose that because God can, that He did", or something to that affect. While I do not recall the context of the quote, it can be applied to some our discussion. For example, God can by His Holy Spirit impregnate a Jewish virgin, and His Word says He did, and we believe it. God can also make someone immaculate beyond any covenant grace, but did God explicitly say say He did ? Some say yes, some say no, but no one justifies their position by inferring or denying God’s ability to do either.
 
The interpretations of three 16th century men are the traditions of men. Please tell me where I’m wrong.
 
Last edited:
@mcq72,

Please go find the quote you’re referencing and we’ll discuss it.

As for your second point: I’m sorry. It seems like you’re dancing back and forth; trying to say where is it explicitly said, while you can’t find a verse that denies IC; while trying to deny logical deduction with it all boils down to interpretation.
 
Agathon77 said:
Point 1: You still have to disprove the Immaculate Conception.
Click to expand...
It is almost impossible to prove something didn’t happen. I would say I don’t have to prove it didn’t happen but that you need to prove it did by showing it was part of the Gospel message of the Apostles.
Agathon77 said:
Point 2: Why would Our Lady be perplexed at conceiving a son when she was betrothed? I’d assume Our Lady knows the facts of life.
Click to expand...
Because she was a virgin.

34 And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?” Luke 1:34 ESV

I believe the context of the conversation with Gabriel shows this to be an imminent happening, not something years into the future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top