The Virgin Mary

[Mannyfit75]

Quote: “The teaching of the Catholic Church that I know does not have an extreme focus on Mary. How did you reach this conclusion?”

“I came out of the mouth of the Most High, the first-born before all creatures” (Ecclus. xxiv., 5).
The Bible says Jesus is “the firstborn of every creature:” - not Mary (Col 1:15)

The Catholic Church does not say that Mary is the firstborn of every creature. What Encyclical stated that?

“To this Divine Mother we have offered the flowers of the month of May;…” (Ecclus. xxiv., 23).

Douey Rheims say She will crush (Gen 3:15) This is a mistranslation.
In Rom.16:20 It states, “The God of peace will crush Satan.”

Catholic RSV-CE

“I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.”

Footnote:

3;15, he shall bruise your head:i.e., the seed of the woman, that is mankind, descended from Eve, will eventually gain the victory over the power of evil. This victory will, of course, be gained through the work of the Messiah who is par excellence the seed of the woman.

The Latin Vulgate has the reading ipsa conteret, “she shall bruise.” Some Old Latin manuscripts have this reading, and it occur also in St. Augustine De Genesi Manichaeos, II, which is earlier than Saint Jerome’s Latin Vulgate translation.

In the Old Testament we can also see how the women crushes Satan’s head. These are types of Mary who is identified as the “Women” in John 2:4 at the beginning of Jesus ministry and in John 19:26 at the time of Christ passion on the cross and also in Revelation 12: 1, 5. The special timing and context of these passages point to the significance of Christ identifying Mary as the “Women.”

The arch-type of the New Testament always surpasses the type in the Old Testament. Mary is even more blessed than Jael or Judith. Mary crushes Satan’s head through her Seed, Jesus Christ. By her yes to God our Savior comes into the world.

Genesis 3:14-15 "The Lord God said to the serpent ‘… I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head,
and you shall bruise his heel.’ " RSV

The Messiah is described as the seed of the woman. This phrase “her seed” is very unusual. In Biblical language it is normally only men whose offspring is described as their seed. This is a prophesy about the virgin birth of Jesus, therefore the “woman” it refers to is Jesus’s mother , that is Mary.

To be in enmity is to be in a spirit of enduring opposition towards another, to be a determined enemy of another. This is done in a most perfect and definitive way since it is God who is speaking here. This implies that Mary was never under the domain of Satan, that is in sin.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Please state your problem with the quote, and give us the sources of these quotes. I assume this is from Munificentissimus Deus, but I’d like to know for sure.

I read Munificentissimus Deus and it doesn’t have that quote.

 

[Ginger2]

Quote: “It is through both Jesus and Mary that Satan was crushed,”

The Pope has declared that Jerome’s Vulgate contained errors. Gen 3:15 should read “He” not she. Mary has no part in crushing satan.

This is another example of the extreme focus of Mary instead of Jesus.

You will want to varify these quotes below. I do not have reference in my notes as to where or not I varified them.

“the way of salvation is open to none otherwise than through Mary?” (“Nemini, nisi per eam, patet aditus ad salutem”—Paciucch. In Ps. lxxxvi. exc. 1)

Pope Innocent III said: “Eve was produced without sin but she brought forth in sin. Mary was produced in sin, but she brought forth without sin.” (De Festo Assump. Second sermon)

 

[Ginger2]

Quote: “Perhaps the pope was using “first-born,” not in the chronological sense…”

I am supposed to respond to this???

What do you want me to say - perhaps he wasn’t?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Manny, it’s from: AUGUSTISSIMAE VIRGINIS MARIAE

Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII
on the Confraternity of the Holy Rosary

And a beautiful document it is. I note that Ginger very carefully has NOT put into her ‘charges’ these words from further down. . .
We are taught by the Catholic faith that we may pray not only to God himself, but also to the Blessed in heaven (Conc. Trill. Sess. xxv.), though in different manner; because we ask from God as from the Source of all good, but from the Saints as from intercessors. “Prayer,” says St. Thomas, "is offered to a person in two ways-one as though to be granted by himself; another, as to be obtained through him. In the first way we pray to God alone, because all our prayers ought to be directed to obtaining grace and glory, which God alone gives, according to those words of Psalm lxxxiii., 12, “The Lord will give grace and glory.” But in the second way we pray to holy angels and men, not that God may learn our petition through them, but that by their prayers and merits our prayers may be efficacious. Wherefore, it is said in the Apocalypse (viii., 4): “The smoke of the incense of the prayers of the Saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel” (Summa Theol. 2a tae, q. lxxxiii. a. iv.)

 

[Mannyfit75]

Ginger2:

Quote: “It is through both Jesus and Mary that Satan was crushed,”

The Pope has declared that Jerome’s Vulgate contained errors. Gen 3:15 should read “He” not she. Mary has no part in crushing satan.

This is another example of the extreme focus of Mary instead of Jesus.

Is this your opinion? Because the last time I check Jesus is the source and summit of the Catholic faith.

You will want to varify these quotes below. I do not have reference in my notes as to where or not I varified them.

“the way of salvation is open to none otherwise than through Mary?” (“Nemini, nisi per eam, patet aditus ad salutem”—Paciucch. In Ps. lxxxvi. exc. 1)

Pope Innocent III said: “Eve was produced without sin but she brought forth in sin. Mary was produced in sin, but she brought forth without sin.” (De Festo Assump. Second sermon)

Well, you should. You can google them to find out. We Catholics want to read the entire context.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

So where ARE you getting these ‘quotes’ from, and why aren’t YOU bothering to verify them???

I am very sorry, but to ‘snip’ various ‘quotes’ out of context, which you haven’t even bothered to check out yourself, and present them to bolster your ‘case’ against the Church, is worse than bad manners (and bad manners it is indeed). It is bad research and bad scholarship and bad theology to boot.

 

[japhy]

The Pope has declared that Jerome’s Vulgate contained errors. Gen 3:15 should read “He” not she. Mary has no part in crushing satan.

Which Pope? PLEASE provide references!

 

[Mannyfit75]

Manny, it’s from: AUGUSTISSIMAE VIRGINIS MARIAE

Encyclical of Pope Leo XIII
on the Confraternity of the Holy Rosary

And a beautiful document it is. I note that Ginger very carefully has NOT put into her ‘charges’ these words from further down. . .
We are taught by the Catholic faith that we may pray not only to God himself, but also to the Blessed in heaven (Conc. Trill. Sess. xxv.), though in different manner; because we ask from God as from the Source of all good, but from the Saints as from intercessors. “Prayer,” says St. Thomas, "is offered to a person in two ways-one as though to be granted by himself; another, as to be obtained through him. In the first way we pray to God alone, because all our prayers ought to be directed to obtaining grace and glory, which God alone gives, according to those words of Psalm lxxxiii., 12, “The Lord will give grace and glory.” But in the second way we pray to holy angels and men, not that God may learn our petition through them, but that by their prayers and merits our prayers may be efficacious. Wherefore, it is said in the Apocalypse (viii., 4): “The smoke of the incense of the prayers of the Saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel” (Summa Theol. 2a tae, q. lxxxiii. a. iv.)

Thanks that is an eye opener. I like the last sentence.
*
“The smoke of the incense of the prayers of the Saints ascended up before God from the hand of the angel” *

 

[Mannyfit75]

Which Pope? PLEASE provide references!

I like to know also. They need to cite which Pope, what Encyclical, or Vatican Document.

 

[Ginger2]

I don’t care to spend hours researching something I already spent hours researching two years ago.

If you can’t see any similarity between Psalms of David and the psalters of Mary

16
Preserve me, O Lord, for I have put my trust in thee.
Preserve me, O Lady, for I have hoped in thee:

AND you think this sort of thing is fine, then there is really no point in discussing it.

This thread was originally about whether or not Mary may have sinned and what difference, if any, it would make.

The earliest church records indicate she was a sinner like everyone else.

BTW I have not been “careful” about anything here. I used old notes that made sense at the time, but now as I said earlier I don’t really remember the source - only the reference included.

But in another thread it has been proven that Jeromes Vulgate is in error. Here is the link given in the other thread: ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JPTHESAU.HTM
Apostolic Constitution SCRIPTURARUM THESAURUS
Pope John Paul II

Here is an excerpt: "In realizing this revision, “the old text of the Vulgate edition was taken into consideration word for word, namely, whenever the original texts are accurately rendered, such as they are found in modern critical editions; however the text was prudently improved, whenever it departs from them or interprets them less correctly.”

 

[japhy]

Quote: “Perhaps the pope was using “first-born,” not in the chronological sense…”

I am supposed to respond to this? What do you want me to say - perhaps he wasn’t?

Can you admit the spiritual sense explains why he would say something that sounds heretical when taken literally? Can you explain why the spiritual sense doesn’t work?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

You know, I’m fast reaching the point where I think we have extended our ‘pearls’ enough, if you get my drift.

Now that it has become very obvious that posters are doing the equivalent of ‘cut-and-pasting’ snippets of ‘quotes’ which they are not even taking the trouble to verify themselves, this has gone beyond a ‘question’ or an ‘asking’ and it has turned into an attack fest where all sorts of ‘charges’ are hurled, willy nilly, and we are expected to respond to every one, and of course WHEN we respond we are immediately told that we are in error, we are lying, or else we get another ‘question’ right away.

Further, OUR questions are unanswered, time after time after time.

If there is not an attempt by posters to follow the rules of this forum. . .and that includes no cut-and-pastes, no attacking of the Catholic faith, and should also include good manners in having our separated brethren answering OUR questions when asked instead of avoiding them. . .then I think the moderators should close this thread.

 

[Mannyfit75]

The earliest church records indicate she was a sinner like everyone else.

The Early Church record you claim differs in opinion.

“He was the ark formed of incorruptible wood. For by this is signified that His tabernacle was exempt from putridity and corruption.” Hippolytus, Orations Inillud, Dominus pascit me (ante A.D. 235).

“This Virgin Mother of the Only-begotten of God, is called Mary, worthy of God, immaculate of the immaculate, one of the one.” Origen, Homily 1(A.D. 244).

“Let woman praise Her, the pure Mary.” Ephraim, Hymns on the Nativity, 15:23 (A.D. 370).

“Thou alone and thy Mother are in all things fair,** there is no flaw in thee and no stain** in thy Mother.” Ephraem, Nisibene Hymns, 27:8 (A.D. 370).

“O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the Ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides.” Athanasius, Homily of the Papyrus of Turin, 71:216 (ante AD 373).

"Mary, a Virgin not only undefiled but a Virgin whom grace has made inviolate, free of every stain of sin." Ambrose, Sermon 22:30 (A.D. 388).

“We must except the Holy Virgin Mary, concerning whom I wish to raise no question when it touches the subject of sins, out of honour to the Lord; for from Him we know what abundance of grace for overcoming sin in every particular was conferred upon her who had the merit to conceive and bear Him who undoubtedly had no sin.” Augustine, Nature and Grace,4 2[36] (A.D.415).

“A virgin, innocent, spotless, free of all defect, untouched, unsullied, holy in soul and body, like a lily sprouting among thorns.” Theodotus of Ancrya, Homily VI:11(ante A.D. 446).

 

[japhy]

I don’t care to spend hours researching something I already spent hours researching two years ago.

Then we don’t care to answer your charges.

If you can’t see any similarity between Psalms of David and the psalters of Mary

I do see similarities, and I said that the Psalter of the Blessed Virgin was the private work and private devotion of a saint. It is not part of the Church’s liturgy or teaching, it is not part of her doctrines. I admitted it goes overboard at times. You should note, however, that each psalm ends with “Glory to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit : As it was in the beginning, is now, and will be forever, amen.”

 

[Ginger2]

“Then we don’t care to answer your charges”

It was not originally intended as “charges” but as an answer to a question I was asked.

I told you why I think Mary’s position is over-stated in the Catholic Church. You disagree that these “praises” are over the top so
I think it best we just end the dialogue.

Have a good evening.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Ginger2:

I told you why I think Mary’s position is over-stated in the Catholic Church. You disagree that these “praises” are over the top so
I think it best we just end the dialogue.

Have a good evening.

How are they any different than Elizabeth’s own praises to Mary.

And when Elizabeth heard the greeting of Mary, the child leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit and she exclaimed with a loud cry, “Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb! And why is this granted me, that the Mother of My Lord should come to me? For behold, when the voice of your greeting came to my ears, the child in my womb leaped for joy. And blessed is she who believed that there would be a fulfilmment of what was spoken to her from the Lord.”

Or Gabriel greeting, “Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you.”

 

[Good_Fella]

And the criterion for “oral tradition” is that it was taught by the Apostles from the beginning.

You have yet to prove any of the Apostles taught the IC and sinlessness of Mary.That’s why one must interpret according to its context and not read extra-biblical doctrines into the text.

.What you’re saying here, G., is that one is not to strive to allow the Scriptures to speak for themselves, but one must conform the Scriptures to the “right teachings” of the “teaching authority” of your church. In context Lk. 1:28 states absolutely nothing about Mary’s conception, but instead the One she is about to conceive through the power of the Holy Spirit. For this reason the angel Gabriel addressed her as “favored one” and explains his greeting in vss. 30-31.

“Oral tradition” by definition must be followed back to the oral teachings of the Apostles who got their teachings straight from Christ Himself. Your bishops quote you written opinions of various early writers, but unless they have proof that such expressed, extra-biblical opinions can be traced back to the Apostles, they remain nothing more than that: personal opinions.

Sacred Tradition is not an “oral” Tradition. It is an enbodiment of all the deeds wrought by Almighty God in the history of salvation, (comprising the Old and New Testament) especially the sacrifice of Christ. The Apostles of the New Testament do not need to have taught a particular doctrine for it to be present in Tradition. The false premise you start from in all your arguments is that there are no implicit truths in the Deposit of Faith: Scripture and Tradition. Well, Jesus promised that he would send his Church the Paraclete to lead her in the fullness of truth and to reveal much more at the proper time in the course of the historic Faith. God does reveal his Word in the scriptures, but the written Word is an intrinsic part of the Church and Tradition. God further discloses his mind to us by way of the Apostolic Community, which continues by succession: the Fathers, the Councils, the Creeds, and the authorized interpretation of Sacred Scripture - the “inerrant” interpretation of the “inerrant” Word of God. You reject the authoritative teachings of the Church Fathers, Popes, and Bishops throughout the 2000 year history of the Church, rejecting them and substituting them for your own opinions. Yet there is no “proof” in the Bible that the authority does not lie outside the Apostolic Magisterium. On the contrary, the scriptures are on the Church’s side. You conveniently dismiss our biblical grounds for our infallible doctrines by claiming that the Church has taken the scriptures “out of context” without being able to show how she has done so. The fact that Protestantism is relatively a recent historical phenomenon with no biblical justification for its emergence whatsoever, and that it is a “divided house”, clearly shows where fallible human opinion really lies: outside the Church, and by this we mean where there is no salvation. Concerning the essential doctrines of the Catholic Church, on the side of affirmation we have the historic Catholic Faith that can be traced back to the Apostles, and on the side of denial we have Protestantism, which has no direct link with the Apostolic College and represents a break from the historic Christian Faith, that in turn led to numerous, varying “human traditions”, blatant rejection of Church doctrines (i.e., the perpetual virginity of Mary, the Trinty, etc.), Liberalism, the cults, and thousands of different denominations and sects. I prefer to give heed to the joint wisdom and understanding of the Church Fathers, Popes, and Bishops since the time of the early Church than to accept the fallible opinions of individual renegade religious leaders and thinkers, who have been more of a nuisance with persons like Arius, Martin Luther, and John Calvin.

Because of space constraints, I have to respond to other items you have brought to our attention in other replies.

Pax vobiscum
Good Fella

 

[apophasis]

Sacred Tradition is not an “oral” Tradition. It is an enbodiment of all the deeds wrought by Almighty God in the history of salvation, (comprising the Old and New Testament) especially the sacrifice of Christ.

But Mary’s IC and sinlessness is said to be part of “oral tradition.” That which is said to be not written but “orally” handed down from the Apostles.

The Apostles of the New Testament do not need to have taught a particular doctrine for it to be present in Tradition.

By definition “oral” tradition is rooted in Apostolic teaching. Just as the written, N.T. Scriptures are.

The false premise you start from in all your arguments is that there are no implicit truths in the Deposit of Faith: Scripture and Tradition.

No. The challenge I’ve put fourth in all of my posts on this thread is for proof that any Apostle taught the IC conception or the sinlessness of Mary. No one has met that challenge yet - including you. You simply went off on another tangent (like the rest on this thread).

Well, Jesus promised that he would send his Church the Paraclete to lead her in the fullness of truth and to reveal much more at the proper time in the course of the historic Faith.

No He didn’t. He said to His Apostles that He (the Holy Spirit) would teach them all things and bring to their remembrance all that He had said to them (see Jn. 14:26). What Apostle (or Apostles) claim Jesus taught them the IC and sinlessness of Mary? What “tradition” of yours gives us the name (or names) of the Apostle through which Jesus disclosed (through the Paracletos) this otherwise impossible knowledge regarding Mary and her mother and father? So far I’ve only been quoted other men’s opinions, and you yourself dodged the challenge.

 

[Ginger2]

Tantum said: “Now that it has become very obvious that posters are doing the equivalent of ‘cut-and-pasting’ snippets of ‘quotes’ which they are not even taking the trouble to verify themselves”

I did a lot of research into this a couple years ago because someone I knew was being mislead by Caritas. I called Bishops and Priests asking them to intervene. While they agreed with my position, not one of them felt it was important enough to say anything. The priest at his parish had told him that he couldn’t put Caritas info with the other literature inside the church.

That being said, my statement about looking it up for yourself was not an indication that I was “cutting and pasting snippets” that support my view without care to their accuracy. I took all of these quotes from my notes. Altho my notes gave reference to where the quotes are found, it was not clear that I had verified them from the original writings.

It’s easy to “google” anything you want. That doesn’t mean the info is true and accurate. I start any research online because it is easy, but I always follow-up to ensure the info is accurate.
Pope Innocent was toward the end and I may have been satisfied and ended my studies without verifying the last couple of pages of quotes.

The internet should not be trusted. People can post edited versions of documents or totally make things up. Also, all information is NOT on the internet. Sometimes we need to go to the library or courthouse.

I often use the Catholic Encyclopedia. But even they don’t have every word ever written by every Catholic.

As for me checking these quotes, I ask why would you take my word for it? You don’t know me. And since you don’t agree with me it only makes sense for you to do the work yourself.

It is apparent that you want to take the easy way and google everything. But like I said, not everything can be found on the internet so if you choose to find all your answers thru google you are inevitably limited.