B
bernardinelee
Guest
Thank you OldThom & GailMac for sharing. God bless you!
Bernardine Lee:
Bernardine Lee:
- Status
E
Eliza10
Guest
…http://www.spiritsite.com/gallery/art/medmar/BotticelliMadonna.JPG
Wow, what a great thread. I read through it all and see my thoughts were touched on.
Thom, I am a convert from Protestantism, and at the time I converted I was perfectly happy being a devoted longtime member of an independent Baptist Church, and had no inclination to change. But my peaceful contentment was seriously disturbed when I stumbled upon Scott and Kimberly Hahn’s Rome Sweet Home.
The main thought I had has been touched on, and I will add to it. Jesus is the new Adam, Mary the New Eve. The original Adam and Eve were conceived without sin. If the new Adam was conceived without sin, isn’t it only fair and right that the New Eve was conceived without sin, like the other three? Why should she be different? And as the New Adam then never sinned, and then isn’t it right that the New Eve never sinned?
See, its just all messed up if the New Eve is the only odd one out in the equation.
Thom, in your post #43 you said, “What a comfort to know that Mary attained a sinless state…” (A respectful statement, yet it foreshadows a statement you later made here - that what we Catholics say about Mary sometimes seems like wishful thinking. I am not criticizing your statement. Instead, I admire your candor as you struggle to know truth.)
Concerning that statement about Mary “achieving” a sinless state. Realize that we are all called to live a sinless life! We are supposed to strive for perfection, to run that good race, and never give up.
How can we achieve that ourselves? We cannot! We can only do it with grace. With God, all things are possible. Including our living a “sinless” life. From now on, that is. One of the older Prayers of contrition for confession says something like, “I am sorry for my sins and with the help of Your Grace I promise to sin no more.”
Remember, Mary is* full* of grace. The angel referred to her simply as “Full of Grace,” like that was her* name*. I suppose I read that, as a Protestant, as meaning, 'For this moment only, you are full of grace. Moments ago, or two weeks ago, or years ago, you only had a little grace because on that day you sinned. Also in 5 months or 5 years you will have only some grace because you will sin more." Instead, the angel who lives in state of eternity gave her a name full of truth for all eternity, in those first words spoken after he left his place by the Throne of the Most High God. I know now the great messenger of God meant: You are, you always have been and will be, in the fullest extent possible, full of grace.
It would take a* lot* of grace to never sin. That’s why her name is so wonderful.
During my discovery of the truth of Catholicism, I realized that the Catholic Church is God’s answer to a puzzling question raised by a member of y Baptist Church, a man I didn’t know well, but his statement struck my like a two-by-four. He mused, “I have been wondering, how do we grow in holiness?” I thought, “I wonder that too!” That was the question that had been nagging at me ever since I have been born-again. I tried everything I could. Church, radio preachers, Bible studies, Bible conferences, Ladies retreats, contemplation, changing my thought, praying and meditating on His word. memorizing scripture! everything. But it all seemed not-enough, like I just couldn’t “get there” to where ever it is He must wanted me to be. Yes, what that man said was the desire of my heart too. And the qustion of my heart. *How *do we grow in holiness??
Then I realized, that’s why Jesus founded a Church, not a book. That’s why the book of God’s Word came much later (and why it came through the Chruch;'s bishops and Pope). Because it was all about founding a Church, not a book. The Church gives us not only the great gift of the book, but the sacraments. Baptism, confirmation. And confession! And the Eucharist! That’s how we grow in holiness! We need to receive Him, to consume His Body and Blood - or we have no life in us! No holiness!
That was it! That was what was missing. The Church, with her sacraments - That’s how we grow in holiness! That is the ordinary way God imparts his extraordinary graces, the ones we need to grow in holiness.
In Mary, God poured his graces out in an extraordinary way, because of her extraordinary purpose.
So I have room, I am continuing in the next post.
Wow, what a great thread. I read through it all and see my thoughts were touched on.
Thom, I am a convert from Protestantism, and at the time I converted I was perfectly happy being a devoted longtime member of an independent Baptist Church, and had no inclination to change. But my peaceful contentment was seriously disturbed when I stumbled upon Scott and Kimberly Hahn’s Rome Sweet Home.
The main thought I had has been touched on, and I will add to it. Jesus is the new Adam, Mary the New Eve. The original Adam and Eve were conceived without sin. If the new Adam was conceived without sin, isn’t it only fair and right that the New Eve was conceived without sin, like the other three? Why should she be different? And as the New Adam then never sinned, and then isn’t it right that the New Eve never sinned?
See, its just all messed up if the New Eve is the only odd one out in the equation.
Thom, in your post #43 you said, “What a comfort to know that Mary attained a sinless state…” (A respectful statement, yet it foreshadows a statement you later made here - that what we Catholics say about Mary sometimes seems like wishful thinking. I am not criticizing your statement. Instead, I admire your candor as you struggle to know truth.)
Concerning that statement about Mary “achieving” a sinless state. Realize that we are all called to live a sinless life! We are supposed to strive for perfection, to run that good race, and never give up.
How can we achieve that ourselves? We cannot! We can only do it with grace. With God, all things are possible. Including our living a “sinless” life. From now on, that is. One of the older Prayers of contrition for confession says something like, “I am sorry for my sins and with the help of Your Grace I promise to sin no more.”
Remember, Mary is* full* of grace. The angel referred to her simply as “Full of Grace,” like that was her* name*. I suppose I read that, as a Protestant, as meaning, 'For this moment only, you are full of grace. Moments ago, or two weeks ago, or years ago, you only had a little grace because on that day you sinned. Also in 5 months or 5 years you will have only some grace because you will sin more." Instead, the angel who lives in state of eternity gave her a name full of truth for all eternity, in those first words spoken after he left his place by the Throne of the Most High God. I know now the great messenger of God meant: You are, you always have been and will be, in the fullest extent possible, full of grace.
It would take a* lot* of grace to never sin. That’s why her name is so wonderful.
During my discovery of the truth of Catholicism, I realized that the Catholic Church is God’s answer to a puzzling question raised by a member of y Baptist Church, a man I didn’t know well, but his statement struck my like a two-by-four. He mused, “I have been wondering, how do we grow in holiness?” I thought, “I wonder that too!” That was the question that had been nagging at me ever since I have been born-again. I tried everything I could. Church, radio preachers, Bible studies, Bible conferences, Ladies retreats, contemplation, changing my thought, praying and meditating on His word. memorizing scripture! everything. But it all seemed not-enough, like I just couldn’t “get there” to where ever it is He must wanted me to be. Yes, what that man said was the desire of my heart too. And the qustion of my heart. *How *do we grow in holiness??
Then I realized, that’s why Jesus founded a Church, not a book. That’s why the book of God’s Word came much later (and why it came through the Chruch;'s bishops and Pope). Because it was all about founding a Church, not a book. The Church gives us not only the great gift of the book, but the sacraments. Baptism, confirmation. And confession! And the Eucharist! That’s how we grow in holiness! We need to receive Him, to consume His Body and Blood - or we have no life in us! No holiness!
That was it! That was what was missing. The Church, with her sacraments - That’s how we grow in holiness! That is the ordinary way God imparts his extraordinary graces, the ones we need to grow in holiness.
In Mary, God poured his graces out in an extraordinary way, because of her extraordinary purpose.
So I have room, I am continuing in the next post.
E
Eliza10
Guest
…expo-shop.com
Finishing above post.
Thom, you mentioned seeking to understand this Mary matter better by reading and prayer. Its the latter that worked for me. Actually I took my cue from Scott Hahn, who in Rome Sweet Home wrote that even though he had exhaustively read the truths of Mary and they seemed true, somehow, perhaps because of his strong Protestant training, he would not get a grasp on it all the way convincingly to himself, so he prayed a rosary and that solved it for him.
So I found myself fin the same position as Hahn. I had learned so much and my mind told me that for plenty good reason I could trust the Church on this as it was right about everything else and the odds of it being wrong on this one thing were extremely remote. Yet my heart had cautions! I felt so unsettled over the Mary issue that I could not have any peace on it. Nor could I “table” the matter till some other time, like I desparately wanted too, as I was getting so uncomfortable tetering on that fence. Instead, the question of who is Mary kept nagging at me. I mean, really nagging! I wanted to forget it for now, but could not. I think my guardian angel just would not let me forget this one. (Nag!)
So I remembered Scott Hahn’s rosary, and chose a night to pray it for answer to the question of my heart, “Who is Mary?” I visited a Catholic friendand asked her to explain to me how. Then on the chosen night, I knelt by my bed and prayed to Jesus, with my heart wide open to Him, telling Him that if it was* not* His will that I pray that rosary, then let me know, even in the littlest tiniest way, and I would stop.
But Jesus did not tell me to stop. Instead, I felt greatly encouraged to go forward I felt as if He and a crowd were lovingly waiting with baited breath, and so I was compelled to go on. Oh, yes, I began with the Memorare. I prayed it, and I asked, “Mary, please answer this nagging question of who you are. Please give me peace about who you are. Mary, are you my Mother?”
And I broke into tears of joy and love, because at once I knew that she was. And I prayed my rosary. And when I was done, I had no questions about Mary. Any more, ever. I just knew. She had answered my prayer, my reqest to klnow who she was, and to have peace about it.
So I say to you, even the best answers and best reading may not be enough. But pray for help with this question, because prayer will be enough. She will help you to understand. She is the Mother of Wisdom.
Also Thom, another thing. You said in post 67 about how Protestants seem to stop and start at Mary being Mother of Jesus. Yes. It seemed to me as a Protestant that in fact we stopped and started with Christmas night! That was all she was good for. Like you said: it was as if she was just a vessel, that God* used*.
Can you imagine, God just using a person? Like, “I need to get my son born on earth, so I need to find a woman, and use her womb.” In no way. Mary was a whole person, not just a body part that God utilized. Mary was more than a womb! Mary was mother. Mother of* God*. She was a relationship to God, Who is love, and *is *relationship.
And a perfect mother at that. I relate also to the imperfectness of earthly mothers! In my tears of understanding of Mary being my mother, I felt in that moment also all the angst and the pain I had felt over the years concerning my own mother’s shortcomings. Most especially that she did not understand me. What relief to posses the* perfect* mother, with perfect understanding! Wow - to have had her all along, and not to have known it!
I have since received Jesus’ healing over childhood-induced wounds from my not-perfect parents, who loved me the best they knew how. That was a short few years ago, and it truly was His work because the change was instant and complete and has lasted. Also now I help care for my mother who is struggling to maintain her independence and is beginning to lean on me emotionally now that my father died. Its funny, because I always wanted to lean on her, but now I fully know that I can lean on God (after enough deprivations, I finally learned to lean on Him!) so I can be there for my mother to lean on. I have such peace knowing I have a perfect mother for myself.
In your readings you probably have read that praying the Hail Mary is so powerful because “prayer of a righteous man availeth much”. And who could be more righteous after the Holy Trinity than Mary? Oh, her prayers are so powerful! She has given me much.
And I pray that Mary keep beckoning you, as she is now. She wants to embrace you, she desires to mother you, because she wants to help lead you to know her Son better and better.
Finishing above post.
Thom, you mentioned seeking to understand this Mary matter better by reading and prayer. Its the latter that worked for me. Actually I took my cue from Scott Hahn, who in Rome Sweet Home wrote that even though he had exhaustively read the truths of Mary and they seemed true, somehow, perhaps because of his strong Protestant training, he would not get a grasp on it all the way convincingly to himself, so he prayed a rosary and that solved it for him.
So I found myself fin the same position as Hahn. I had learned so much and my mind told me that for plenty good reason I could trust the Church on this as it was right about everything else and the odds of it being wrong on this one thing were extremely remote. Yet my heart had cautions! I felt so unsettled over the Mary issue that I could not have any peace on it. Nor could I “table” the matter till some other time, like I desparately wanted too, as I was getting so uncomfortable tetering on that fence. Instead, the question of who is Mary kept nagging at me. I mean, really nagging! I wanted to forget it for now, but could not. I think my guardian angel just would not let me forget this one. (Nag!)
So I remembered Scott Hahn’s rosary, and chose a night to pray it for answer to the question of my heart, “Who is Mary?” I visited a Catholic friendand asked her to explain to me how. Then on the chosen night, I knelt by my bed and prayed to Jesus, with my heart wide open to Him, telling Him that if it was* not* His will that I pray that rosary, then let me know, even in the littlest tiniest way, and I would stop.
But Jesus did not tell me to stop. Instead, I felt greatly encouraged to go forward I felt as if He and a crowd were lovingly waiting with baited breath, and so I was compelled to go on. Oh, yes, I began with the Memorare. I prayed it, and I asked, “Mary, please answer this nagging question of who you are. Please give me peace about who you are. Mary, are you my Mother?”
And I broke into tears of joy and love, because at once I knew that she was. And I prayed my rosary. And when I was done, I had no questions about Mary. Any more, ever. I just knew. She had answered my prayer, my reqest to klnow who she was, and to have peace about it.
So I say to you, even the best answers and best reading may not be enough. But pray for help with this question, because prayer will be enough. She will help you to understand. She is the Mother of Wisdom.
Also Thom, another thing. You said in post 67 about how Protestants seem to stop and start at Mary being Mother of Jesus. Yes. It seemed to me as a Protestant that in fact we stopped and started with Christmas night! That was all she was good for. Like you said: it was as if she was just a vessel, that God* used*.
Can you imagine, God just using a person? Like, “I need to get my son born on earth, so I need to find a woman, and use her womb.” In no way. Mary was a whole person, not just a body part that God utilized. Mary was more than a womb! Mary was mother. Mother of* God*. She was a relationship to God, Who is love, and *is *relationship.
And a perfect mother at that. I relate also to the imperfectness of earthly mothers! In my tears of understanding of Mary being my mother, I felt in that moment also all the angst and the pain I had felt over the years concerning my own mother’s shortcomings. Most especially that she did not understand me. What relief to posses the* perfect* mother, with perfect understanding! Wow - to have had her all along, and not to have known it!
I have since received Jesus’ healing over childhood-induced wounds from my not-perfect parents, who loved me the best they knew how. That was a short few years ago, and it truly was His work because the change was instant and complete and has lasted. Also now I help care for my mother who is struggling to maintain her independence and is beginning to lean on me emotionally now that my father died. Its funny, because I always wanted to lean on her, but now I fully know that I can lean on God (after enough deprivations, I finally learned to lean on Him!) so I can be there for my mother to lean on. I have such peace knowing I have a perfect mother for myself.
In your readings you probably have read that praying the Hail Mary is so powerful because “prayer of a righteous man availeth much”. And who could be more righteous after the Holy Trinity than Mary? Oh, her prayers are so powerful! She has given me much.
And I pray that Mary keep beckoning you, as she is now. She wants to embrace you, she desires to mother you, because she wants to help lead you to know her Son better and better.
B
bernardinelee
Guest
Thanks for your beautiful sharing about Our Lady.
Take care.
Bernardine Lee
Take care.
Bernardine Lee
E
Eliza10
Guest
Thanks, Bernadine Lee. I enjoyed what you said aobut Our Lady, too.
O
OldeThom
Guest
Eliza10 - I had to print out your posts just to get a better understanding of what you were saying. 
I want to believe your words of passion and conviction are one in a million, but I know better, for they are surely one of millions.
Thank you with a great big hug!:hug3:
Even though I am on an extra-ordinary quest to find Truth and meaning in my life I am still mindful that I am an ordinary man. Just one, mixed up, screwed up, ordinary man. My quest to understand Mary’s role in the Kingdom of God and in the my own life parallels that quest. If you had asked me some two years ago if Mary would be such a focus on my quest, I would have responded with, “Which one?”. So you see how far I’ve come, I hope.
I do not for one moment think I could ever be sinless, that is not what drives me nor is it a goal in and of itself. I can not relate to “perfection” it is as simple as that. What drives me is knowing I want to be on the right path and doing what is pleasing to God and not satan, man or my self.
The experiences in your own past led you to the awareness that you were missing something in your life and you identified it as not growing in “holiness”. The protestant churches and their doctrines with which I am familiar do not think like that, they have no notion of “holiness.” They call “holiness” by different names, often breaking it down in small, bite-sized chunks, only capturing a small fragment of what “holiness” really means. Many call it the path of righteousness. As for me there are really two aspects of holiness missing (and you may argue there are more!) in my life, one is service (I’ve been running from God’s service since I was old enough to run). The other is authority (and that I have posted in another post).
Reading, writing, Mass, “good deeds”, even service in the name of our Lord pales in comparison to the power of prayer. So I welcome your prayers and I am pleading for their continuance.
Respectfully,
Thom
I want to believe your words of passion and conviction are one in a million, but I know better, for they are surely one of millions.
Thank you with a great big hug!:hug3:Even though I am on an extra-ordinary quest to find Truth and meaning in my life I am still mindful that I am an ordinary man. Just one, mixed up, screwed up, ordinary man. My quest to understand Mary’s role in the Kingdom of God and in the my own life parallels that quest. If you had asked me some two years ago if Mary would be such a focus on my quest, I would have responded with, “Which one?”. So you see how far I’ve come, I hope.
I do not for one moment think I could ever be sinless, that is not what drives me nor is it a goal in and of itself. I can not relate to “perfection” it is as simple as that. What drives me is knowing I want to be on the right path and doing what is pleasing to God and not satan, man or my self.
The experiences in your own past led you to the awareness that you were missing something in your life and you identified it as not growing in “holiness”. The protestant churches and their doctrines with which I am familiar do not think like that, they have no notion of “holiness.” They call “holiness” by different names, often breaking it down in small, bite-sized chunks, only capturing a small fragment of what “holiness” really means. Many call it the path of righteousness. As for me there are really two aspects of holiness missing (and you may argue there are more!) in my life, one is service (I’ve been running from God’s service since I was old enough to run). The other is authority (and that I have posted in another post).
Reading, writing, Mass, “good deeds”, even service in the name of our Lord pales in comparison to the power of prayer. So I welcome your prayers and I am pleading for their continuance.
Respectfully,
Thom
N
Nans
Guest
Because the bible says that ALL have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Mary was not immaculately conceived, so she inherited the sin nature that we all have
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/gifs/copyChkboxOff.gifRom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
http://cf.blueletterbible.org/gifs/copyChkboxOff.gif[Rom 5:12](http://cf.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Rom&c=5&v=12&t=KJV#12) Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed *upon all men*, for that *all *have sinned:
N
Nans
Guest
Hi Thom,Eliza10 - I had to print out your posts just to get a better understanding of what you were saying.
I want to believe your words of passion and conviction are one in a million, but I know better, for they are surely one of millions.
Even though I am on an extra-ordinary quest to find Truth and meaning in my life I am still mindful that I am an ordinary man. Just one, mixed up, screwed up, ordinary man. My quest to understand Mary’s role in the Kingdom of God and in the my own life parallels that quest. If you had asked me some two years ago if Mary would be such a focus on my quest, I would have responded with, “Which one?”. So you see how far I’ve come, I hope.
I do not for one moment think I could ever be sinless, that is not what drives me nor is it a goal in and of itself. I can not relate to “perfection” it is as simple as that. What drives me is knowing I want to be on the right path and doing what is pleasing to God and not satan, man or my self.
The experiences in your own past led you to the awareness that you were missing something in your life and you identified it as not growing in “holiness”. The protestant churches and their doctrines with which I am familiar do not think like that, they have no notion of “holiness.” They call “holiness” by different names, often breaking it down in small, bite-sized chunks, only capturing a small fragment of what “holiness” really means. Many call it the path of righteousness. As for me there are really two aspects of holiness missing (and you may argue there are more!) in my life, one is service (I’ve been running from God’s service since I was old enough to run). The other is authority (and that I have posted in another post).
Reading, writing, Mass, “good deeds”, even service in the name of our Lord pales in comparison to the power of prayer. So I welcome your prayers and I am pleading for their continuance.
Respectfully,
Thom
As a Protestant, I disagree with a couple of your statements. Indeed, all of us as followers of Christ should most definitely be seeking to grow in holiness, but this we cannot do apart from the power of the Holy Spirit and Christ living in us. The key to growing in holiness is to live in obedience to the word of God, and to seek His glory in your life. These are both choices. God does not impose His will on us, we must submit and be willing to live a life consecrated to Him.
We are righteous in the righteousness of Christ, not of ourselves. Righteousness and holiness are two different things. We cannot make ourselves righteous.
And I also believe that really we are not at odds with Catholics when it comes to works! I fully believe that works MUST be evidenced in the life of the believer. We are not saved by them, yet I question whether or not we are saved if they are not there! “You will know them by their fruit”
L
Lief_Erikson
Guest
Does not the scripture say all things are possible with God? I believe a miracle took place, just as she conceived Jesus by a miracle from the Spirit. In fact, I find it easiest to pray to Mary as a “living miracle,” when talking about her Immaculate Conception, because that is how my formerly Protestant mindset grasps the idea most easily.
Yes, and we believe that Mary was also saved through Christ, only through his saving power working backward through time rather than the normal forward through time pathway. It saved her before she ever felt sin, saving her from experiencing sin, whereas for us it normally saves us from sin we have already experienced.
You also refer to our being united with God bringing our salvation. That is a perfect view of it, I believe. Now, consider, if you will, that Mary experienced an unfathomable unity with God in a way that no one before or after her has ever experienced. Jesus was physically conceived within her, his flesh and blood one with her flesh and blood. Inside her womb, they were one. That’s what happens to every mother and child- they are biologically one united flesh. That is an absolutely phenomenal degree of unity, a kind of unity that none of us has experienced. The greatest that we experience is the Eucharist, long after our conception, which is saving unity with Christ. But Mary’s unity with the Incarnate Lord was of a kind that none of us has ever had. It’s a mystery, how the umbilical cord linked Jesus and Mary and her bodily fluids passed into the Divine and their flesh was perfectly united. That is something none of us has had. It is only natural that God should make the one whom he will receive so much from stainless before he receives from her. It is also beautiful.
Note that in the first scripture, angels are not included. Perfected saints are not included (they do not fall short of the glory of God). Jesus was not included, though he was fully man. It has exceptions. There is no reason to think Mary was not also one of those extremely rare exceptions, because of her crucial role as the “New Eve” in God’s plan of salvation for humanity.
The second scripture you referenced is much the same. It doesn’t include Jesus. So exceptions do exist within this general rule.
All that God has to offer is unobtainable in the sense that we can’t grab it for ourselves. God has to give it to us. All the good we have comes from the hand of God. So it is with our Holy Mother, as well. Her perfection and grace came to her from God, from the instant of her conception saving her in Christ’s grace from any taint of sin. So we are all blessed.
It comes from God. He is the author of all. All our blessings, including his Mother, are unobtainable by human striving yet spring from his grace. With it we become united.
P
PerryJ
Guest
As a former Protestant this is why Protestant do not understand the fullness of Bible teaching. Texts are taken out and inserted where needed. The Bible has to be read as one long story.
Adam and Eve were born without sin; therefore, it is possible for the Mary to be born without sin.
When God gives a person an important work to perform he gives that person the grace to do the work. For example Jeremiah. Mary is also shown to have been given special grace by her name change. The Bible states “Hail Full of Grace” not “Hail Mary Full of Grace”. Protestants Bible often mistranslate this verse because it shows that Mary was renamed. Whenever a person was renamed in the Bible they were given a special grace.
In 1 Cor 3:13:17 and John 3:3-9 verses show that one must be clean to be in the presence of God. In Revelartion it also shows that one can not enter heaven in an unclean state. This is also shown very clearly with regards to the Ark of the Covenant. A person that touched the Ark was killed on the spot. Men that looked into the ark were killed in Samuel. When God visited Mt Sinai no one, not even animals, were allowed on the mountian.
Mary has to be sinless as she was in direct contact with the Lord. One has to read the entire Bible in context to understand these thoughts. One can not pull out a verse here and there to make up ones own Theology. Mary is sinless and it is 100% Biblical. To think she wasn’t is to ignore the Bible and its teachings.
E
Eliza10
Guest
…http://www.marshplace.net/marshistory/images/redoute.jpg
Somehow we will get from here to there. And the process begins now, with the help of His graces.
Its the mark we have our eyes on. Believe me, though I turn my gaze there, I am far from the mark. And like you, I know I can never become sinless. But as I grasp bits of understanding of the greatness and the mercy of God, I know how powerful an effect a tiny bit of His grace can have in my life. Particularly when I say: “I can’t, but with You I can.”
A thought I have on service is that for most of us, God has us right where he wants us to serve.
Oh, my, I guess I rambled a bit. I think I had many thoughts when reading your thread and then tried to touch on them all.Eliza10 - I had to print out your posts just to get a better understanding of what you were saying.
Thanks! Yes, it is a mighty witness to see so many have devotion to Mary. The apostles adored her.I want to believe your words of passion and conviction are one in a million, but I know better, for they are surely one of millions.
Yes, its a fine quest! its God calling in your life. Its your guardian angel saying to you “I want you to know Our Lady! She will help you the most!”
Yet, we will *all *be in that state when we live in Heaven, in the preseence of God, and we will still be ourselves, not somebody else!
Somehow we will get from here to there. And the process begins now, with the help of His graces.Its the mark we have our eyes on. Believe me, though I turn my gaze there, I am far from the mark. And like you, I know I can never become sinless. But as I grasp bits of understanding of the greatness and the mercy of God, I know how powerful an effect a tiny bit of His grace can have in my life. Particularly when I say: “I can’t, but with You I can.”
Ah yes. The rigth path! Yes. I have here on my computer taped a quote that I endeavor always to remain the desire of my heart: “This is all I desire: to be where God wants me to be.” Also next to that quotation I penned, I placed a pretty rose sticker. I put that there to remind me of Mary, because with her prayer and guidance, I can keep that desire. I like to think of Mary everytime I see a rose. Or a Lily of the Valley. Or a Lily. The Lily also reminds me of dear St. Joseph, protector of families.
Yes. I knew something was missing in my faith, but did not know what it was. When this man said what he said, I thought, “Thats it! Thats what I need. And also I wonder how we get that.”
You are right. It is not a term I heard. It was new to me when this man said it. To grow in holiness was not somehting I had been taught. But to persue righteousness, that I knew of and endavored to follow.
Oh sure, there are many more layers! But it is like layers of an onion. Right now what God is showing you is that he wants you to resolve issues of service and authority. Those are the outermost peels of yor particular onion apparently. I admire that you are seeking the truth in this. If you seek it, you will find it.
A thought I have on service is that for most of us, God has us right where he wants us to serve.
I’ll pray!… I welcome your prayers and I am pleading for their continuance.
O
OldeThom
Guest
Nans … oh my, but as I post my reaction to your post, I hope you have read through all the posts of this thread. I can not help but think, that by jumping into the middle of a long list of posts like this, as you have, you simply are a soldier with a couple of bullets left in your gun ready to fire them at your enemy and run away. I hope you stick around and engage in a compassionate and understanding way, read the entire thread and gain an appreciation of the many thoughts and devotion expressed by so many. I have also found that prayer will open your heart in ways you never would have thought possible.
I am part of a tradition that states the virgin birth was the means and not the end or source of Jesus’ sinlessness. That Mary did not inherit God’s Glory, but that Jesus did. So I think I understand the thought behind your post. However, I flatly reject the argument that states if “all men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”, then this means Jesus sinned. Nonsense! Jesus by His own admission, by Tradition and Scripture, was both man and God. Therefore, being God He could not sin because He as God could not look upon sin, no matter what state Mary was in. Mary was not God. I also flatly reject the inverse argument, that if Mary was conceived sinless, through the Grace of Salvation, then so are all believers, i.e., if this is true for Mary then we are all sinless as a result of being forgiven in Christ. Wesley wrote volumes about this asserting, “We weren’t born that way, and neither was Mary”. Nonsense! Mary’s was a unique situation in human history and in the God’s plan for Salvation. She stands out as the one person to whom God entrusted the birth of His Only Begotten Son. The one person who said “yes” willingly and freely. What was done to her by God was a one-time, once and for all act of Love and Will by God the Father.
So now I hope you understand my dilemma as I have related my rejection to some of the primary pro and con arguments as to Mary’s earthly state.
Also, lest we all forget, many, many Church fathers before the 16th century, denied the immaculate conception and many argue the IC was not part of the Apostolic Tradition. Furthermore, I have had long discussions over the meaning of Kecharitomene “making favorable”. All the earliest translations agree and have the same word here, not plaras karitos “full of grace”. In my own limited understanding, I have come to know this as a “grace” bestowed upon Mary because God favored her - but does this mean mean she was sinless or just favored? Favored for what? To be the mother of Jesus. “Just” the mother of Jesus?! But my search for answers did not stop there, they now include questions like: Why was she so special? How does she relate to me? Does it matter in my Christian life?
OK, I have stated what I have known to be the truth about Mary, what I have always believed, maybe not always on a conscious level, often times taking such knowledge for granted, not challenging it. But there is much more to accepting Mary’s perpetual virginity, immaculate conception and assumption than just firing bullets from Scripture. Having said that many of the early church fathers did not ascribe to the IC, there are threads or strands of Mary’s earthly condition among some of the early church fathers, like Ambrose who believed Mary was more than just a virgin and in a condition of Salvation, he believed she was “inviolate”, free of sin in order to give birth to a sinless man who was both God and a man. There is a history of prayer, thought and reasoning that ultimately brought about these conclusions, these now doctrines, about Mary, not whim and not, as I am finding, by the many traditions, festivals, and devotions to Mary (as I have always been led to believe).
You see many of the early protestant reformers knew that if they were to challenge the authority of the Catholic Church they had to also tear down it’s institutions. Mary was a central institution. If you can’t bring down a government as a whole, then you start with the people’s most cherished assets, the pillars of their belief as supported by that government. Once the pillars begin to erode, then the government will begin to fall. Problem is, the Church is still standing. Why? because it is not ultimately led my men and women it is led by God, Blessed by the Father, Redeemed by the Son, Guided by the Holy Spirit and nurtured by the Saints, in whom Mary stands as principle among them, as both the Mother of God and Mother of the Church.
But all this, all this makes no sense in my opinion, unless you are willing to accept this in the tradition of the Church, that there is a belief and doctrine that defines Mary as ever virgin, sinless, and assumed into Heaven, that this is Sacred, and the Truth. That the Church, i.e., the Catholic Church, the Magisterium and the Pope, is the Keeper (Authority) of that Truth, this Sacred Tradition. Because clearly the Scripture does not support any of this about Mary directly.
For protestants it involves a willingness and the courage to challenge yourself and ask, “What if …” For those converted to Catholicism, in involves remembering your own path and the steps you took. For “cradle” Catholics it involves the will and compassion to try and understand that I am a stranger in a strange land and need your help. I don’t need your lectures, your ridicule, your boasting, your arrogance, your false modesty or piety, what I need is your witness of faith and belief, your love and compassion, but most all your prayers.
Respectfully,
Thom
I am part of a tradition that states the virgin birth was the means and not the end or source of Jesus’ sinlessness. That Mary did not inherit God’s Glory, but that Jesus did. So I think I understand the thought behind your post. However, I flatly reject the argument that states if “all men have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God”, then this means Jesus sinned. Nonsense! Jesus by His own admission, by Tradition and Scripture, was both man and God. Therefore, being God He could not sin because He as God could not look upon sin, no matter what state Mary was in. Mary was not God. I also flatly reject the inverse argument, that if Mary was conceived sinless, through the Grace of Salvation, then so are all believers, i.e., if this is true for Mary then we are all sinless as a result of being forgiven in Christ. Wesley wrote volumes about this asserting, “We weren’t born that way, and neither was Mary”. Nonsense! Mary’s was a unique situation in human history and in the God’s plan for Salvation. She stands out as the one person to whom God entrusted the birth of His Only Begotten Son. The one person who said “yes” willingly and freely. What was done to her by God was a one-time, once and for all act of Love and Will by God the Father.
So now I hope you understand my dilemma as I have related my rejection to some of the primary pro and con arguments as to Mary’s earthly state.
Also, lest we all forget, many, many Church fathers before the 16th century, denied the immaculate conception and many argue the IC was not part of the Apostolic Tradition. Furthermore, I have had long discussions over the meaning of Kecharitomene “making favorable”. All the earliest translations agree and have the same word here, not plaras karitos “full of grace”. In my own limited understanding, I have come to know this as a “grace” bestowed upon Mary because God favored her - but does this mean mean she was sinless or just favored? Favored for what? To be the mother of Jesus. “Just” the mother of Jesus?! But my search for answers did not stop there, they now include questions like: Why was she so special? How does she relate to me? Does it matter in my Christian life?
OK, I have stated what I have known to be the truth about Mary, what I have always believed, maybe not always on a conscious level, often times taking such knowledge for granted, not challenging it. But there is much more to accepting Mary’s perpetual virginity, immaculate conception and assumption than just firing bullets from Scripture. Having said that many of the early church fathers did not ascribe to the IC, there are threads or strands of Mary’s earthly condition among some of the early church fathers, like Ambrose who believed Mary was more than just a virgin and in a condition of Salvation, he believed she was “inviolate”, free of sin in order to give birth to a sinless man who was both God and a man. There is a history of prayer, thought and reasoning that ultimately brought about these conclusions, these now doctrines, about Mary, not whim and not, as I am finding, by the many traditions, festivals, and devotions to Mary (as I have always been led to believe).
You see many of the early protestant reformers knew that if they were to challenge the authority of the Catholic Church they had to also tear down it’s institutions. Mary was a central institution. If you can’t bring down a government as a whole, then you start with the people’s most cherished assets, the pillars of their belief as supported by that government. Once the pillars begin to erode, then the government will begin to fall. Problem is, the Church is still standing. Why? because it is not ultimately led my men and women it is led by God, Blessed by the Father, Redeemed by the Son, Guided by the Holy Spirit and nurtured by the Saints, in whom Mary stands as principle among them, as both the Mother of God and Mother of the Church.
But all this, all this makes no sense in my opinion, unless you are willing to accept this in the tradition of the Church, that there is a belief and doctrine that defines Mary as ever virgin, sinless, and assumed into Heaven, that this is Sacred, and the Truth. That the Church, i.e., the Catholic Church, the Magisterium and the Pope, is the Keeper (Authority) of that Truth, this Sacred Tradition. Because clearly the Scripture does not support any of this about Mary directly.
For protestants it involves a willingness and the courage to challenge yourself and ask, “What if …” For those converted to Catholicism, in involves remembering your own path and the steps you took. For “cradle” Catholics it involves the will and compassion to try and understand that I am a stranger in a strange land and need your help. I don’t need your lectures, your ridicule, your boasting, your arrogance, your false modesty or piety, what I need is your witness of faith and belief, your love and compassion, but most all your prayers.
Respectfully,
Thom
E
Eliza10
Guest
…http://www.blupete.com/Nature/PictureFlowers/TrilliumP.jpg
Hi Nan,
I disagree with your implied conclusion that the reason behind the Bible verses you quoted is to emphasise the word “ALL”. That Gods purpose to emphisize the word “all” would be for the purpose of instructing the faithful that there was NO human that ever walked the earth that is without sin. That NO single exception is EVER made. That is why he gave us those Bible verses, that we could contemplate scope of that word “all”. And know that *even *the powerful work of God Himself, yes, God infusing Himself in the Holy Spirit at conception or in a womb is an insufficient power that is too weak to prevent the muddy of sin. That the will of man is ever powerful even against the infusion of the Holy Spirit.
Yes, I disagree with you on that.
But what you said here I do agree with.
Hi Nan,
I disagree with your implied conclusion that the reason behind the Bible verses you quoted is to emphasise the word “ALL”. That Gods purpose to emphisize the word “all” would be for the purpose of instructing the faithful that there was NO human that ever walked the earth that is without sin. That NO single exception is EVER made. That is why he gave us those Bible verses, that we could contemplate scope of that word “all”. And know that *even *the powerful work of God Himself, yes, God infusing Himself in the Holy Spirit at conception or in a womb is an insufficient power that is too weak to prevent the muddy of sin. That the will of man is ever powerful even against the infusion of the Holy Spirit.
Yes, I disagree with you on that.
But what you said here I do agree with.
Amen!
I guess though on this I’d have to think. At least I know we can make individual righteous actions, which God is pleased with. But certainly you agree on that. But also the Bible does speak of righteous men.
Amen!
D
Della
Guest
Mary herself mentioned this when she declared: “All generations will call me blessed.” St. Elizabeth greeted Mary saying: “Blessed are you among women.” The Angel Gabriel addressed her: “Hail, full of grace.” Shouldn’t we do the same?
St. Louis Marie de Montfort explains the phenomena of Mary’s rise in importance after the Apostolic age as the time when the Church, in defending the teachings about the nature of Christ, was looking more deeply into the meaning of Mary’s life. As a result there was a surge of devotion to her, but the kernel of that devotion was always there from earliest times. And we have to remember that all the authors of the NT except John had written their gospels and letters while Mary was still alive. And while Mary was alive she quite rightly lived a life of humility and service. It was up to the Holy Spirit to exalt her once she was assumed into heaven by means of inspiring the Church to explore the depths of her life, which is ongoing, not over since we believe in the communion of saints.
Our saints are not dead but alive in Christ. They intercede for us. And Mary as the greatest of the saints is invoked the most. For the status of a saint is all about their virtues and not about what position they held in life, so popes and other religious have no more “pull” with God than any other saint, except with regards to the merits of grace they gained while on this earth. Mary is unique. She is no less than the Second Eve, the Mother of all believers. If that isn’t reason enough to honor her with praise and thanksgiving I don’t know what is.
E
Eliza10
Guest
Before we were all so widely read, for centuries, there was art to sustain and teach the faithful. Like these of the Annunciation (Perhaps the most widely painted scene of all time? Certainly one of them.)
…http://romancatholicblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/05/the_annunciation.jpg
http://www.santamariabronx.org/annunciation-mid.jpg
…http://romancatholicblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/05/the_annunciation.jpg
http://www.santamariabronx.org/annunciation-mid.jpg
E
Eliza10
Guest
And also here are some interpretations of the Visitation to contemplate. It is also much beloved and much contemplated over the centuries.
…
…http://italophiles.com/images/ghir_visitation.jpg
…’’’…http://www.annmscott.com/images/the_visitation_-_compressed.jpg
…
…http://italophiles.com/images/ghir_visitation.jpg
…’’’…http://www.annmscott.com/images/the_visitation_-_compressed.jpg
O
OldeThom
Guest
Ah Eliza10 - alas I am not an art revisionist, I am a realist; Mary was not white, “fluffy”, dressed in riches or had a halo over or around her head, she was simply a young Jewish girl: strong, thin, poor and simple. Although if I had to chose, I’d select Carucci’s Visitation (the second painting in last post).
I understand why you are presenting those images (and others), part of the Church’s rich tapestry of devotion and representation. I also understand why Mary is depicted as such, as she is being absorbed into that culture, making her relevant and contemporary. I am not at that point in my life where I can adore Mary or any saint for that matter, in this way … yet. Have you ever read a book and come to love it, then years later, see a film made from that book only to find it is nothing like you envisioned from the book? If you can understand that then maybe you can understand my feelings here.
Don’t worry, I am long past the premise in my own thinking that Catholics are a bunch of icon and idol worshipers - do not fear that of me. Catholics are no such thing!
The pictures are certainly a nice break from the long discourse to be sure.
Respectfully,
Thom
I understand why you are presenting those images (and others), part of the Church’s rich tapestry of devotion and representation. I also understand why Mary is depicted as such, as she is being absorbed into that culture, making her relevant and contemporary. I am not at that point in my life where I can adore Mary or any saint for that matter, in this way … yet. Have you ever read a book and come to love it, then years later, see a film made from that book only to find it is nothing like you envisioned from the book? If you can understand that then maybe you can understand my feelings here.
Don’t worry, I am long past the premise in my own thinking that Catholics are a bunch of icon and idol worshipers - do not fear that of me. Catholics are no such thing!
The pictures are certainly a nice break from the long discourse to be sure.
Respectfully,
Thom
C
chosensinner
Guest
Here are a few selcted quotes that the late Baptis Apologist Dr. Walter Martin brought forth in his debate against Father Mitch Pacwa on the John Ankerberg Show. I found them helpful, and would advise you to take a look at this debate before you swallow this anti-biblical tradition of Rome.
I am not being sarcastic- I am being very real- and I simply care enough to provide you with just a bit of encouragement. Please do not abandon Sola Scriptura- for not only is it biblical- logical- and theologically sound; IT IS HISTORICAL.
I will provide you with some quotations from Walter Martin’s research about Mary- then I will provide you with some quotations on Sola Scriptura that I have personally mined out of the writings of the early Church fathers myself- these will contain the source citations where the original writings may be found- you can google search them all! Please do so.
God bless you- and may He KEEP you free from the defilement of Idolatry- (1John 5:
Immaculate Conception:
Clement of Alexandrea- “The Word, Jesus Christ was alone born without sin.”
Augustine of Hippo- “He, Christ alone, being made a man but remaining God, never had any sin, nor did he take on flesh of sin, though he took flesh of the sin of his mother.”
St. Amobrose- “Of all that are born of women, the holy Lord Jesus was the only one who experienced not the contagion of earthly corruption.”
St. Bernard- “For this reason, our astonishment is not small in seeing that some of your are believed to be able to introduce a new feast that is unknown to the rite of the Church, that cannot be approved by reason, that it is condemned by the ancient traditions [scriptures], the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.”
St. Thomas Aquinas- “What honor shoud we believe in attributing to Mary that honor may be had for her conception, which was anterior to her birth? Because without this conception neither her birth should be honored. Then would you say if others, according to your own reasoning, were to mantain that it is necessary to hold feasts in honor of her parents, this is logical. Then it would be necessary to honer her grandparents, and her great-grandparents; and there would be no end at all. There would be feasts without number on the earth and it would be converted into a paradise.”
Peter Lombard- “But this is asked, on what account and whence is it that Mary was conceived without original sin? We say this was impossible.”
Melchior Cannas- “The dogma that holds the blessed Virgin was free from the original sin was nowhere delivered in Holy Scripture!”
St. Antoninus- “If the Scriptures are duly considered, and the sayings of the doctors ancient and modern who have been devoted to the glorious Virgin- it is plain from their word she was conceived in sin.”
Leo I- “The Lord Jesus Christ alone among the sons of men was born without sin.”
Pope Gallatus- “It belongs to the immaculate Lamb to have no sin.”
Gragory I- “Christ alone was truly born holy.”
Innocent III- “Eve was produced without sin, but she brought forth in sin. Mary was brought forth in sin, but she brought forth without sin.”
The Full and Final Authority of Holy Scripture:
Irenaeus (130- 202 AD)
“But as we follow for our teacher the one and only true God, and possess his words as the rule of truth, we will all speak alike with regard to the same things.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 4:35:4.)
“We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures to be the ground and pillar of our faith. For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed ‘perfect knowledge’ as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies, 3.1.1.)
“Such then, is their system, which neither the prophets announced, nor the Lord taught, nor the apostles delivered, but of which they boast that beyond all others, they have a perfect knowledge. They gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures, and to use a common proverb, they strive to weave ropes of sand.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 1.8.1.)
“So then, in the first place, we prove from the authoritative Scriptures that all the things which have been mentioned, visible and invisible, have been made by one God. For men are not more to be depended upon than the Scriptures; nor are we to give up the declarations of the Lord, Moses, and the rest of the prophets, who have proclaimed the truth, and give credit to them who do indeed utter nothing of a sensible nature, but rave about untenable opinions.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 2:30:6.)
“It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the Church is scattered throughout all the world, and the ‘pillar and ground’ of the Church is the Gospel and the Spirit of Life, it is therefore fitting that we should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 3.11.8.)
“But that all his Epistles are consonant to these declarations, I shall, when expounding the apostle, show from the Epistles themselves, in the right place. But while I bring out by these proofs, the truths of Scripture, and set forth briefly and compendiously, things which are stated in various ways, do also attend to them with patience, and not deem them prolix; taking this into account - that proofs of the things which are contained in the Scriptures cannot be shown except from the Scriptures themselves.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 3:12:9)
TO BE CONTINUED . . . please read the rest- I will post it right away.
I am not being sarcastic- I am being very real- and I simply care enough to provide you with just a bit of encouragement. Please do not abandon Sola Scriptura- for not only is it biblical- logical- and theologically sound; IT IS HISTORICAL.
I will provide you with some quotations from Walter Martin’s research about Mary- then I will provide you with some quotations on Sola Scriptura that I have personally mined out of the writings of the early Church fathers myself- these will contain the source citations where the original writings may be found- you can google search them all! Please do so.
God bless you- and may He KEEP you free from the defilement of Idolatry- (1John 5:
Immaculate Conception:
Clement of Alexandrea- “The Word, Jesus Christ was alone born without sin.”
Augustine of Hippo- “He, Christ alone, being made a man but remaining God, never had any sin, nor did he take on flesh of sin, though he took flesh of the sin of his mother.”
St. Amobrose- “Of all that are born of women, the holy Lord Jesus was the only one who experienced not the contagion of earthly corruption.”
St. Bernard- “For this reason, our astonishment is not small in seeing that some of your are believed to be able to introduce a new feast that is unknown to the rite of the Church, that cannot be approved by reason, that it is condemned by the ancient traditions [scriptures], the Feast of the Immaculate Conception.”
St. Thomas Aquinas- “What honor shoud we believe in attributing to Mary that honor may be had for her conception, which was anterior to her birth? Because without this conception neither her birth should be honored. Then would you say if others, according to your own reasoning, were to mantain that it is necessary to hold feasts in honor of her parents, this is logical. Then it would be necessary to honer her grandparents, and her great-grandparents; and there would be no end at all. There would be feasts without number on the earth and it would be converted into a paradise.”
Peter Lombard- “But this is asked, on what account and whence is it that Mary was conceived without original sin? We say this was impossible.”
Melchior Cannas- “The dogma that holds the blessed Virgin was free from the original sin was nowhere delivered in Holy Scripture!”
St. Antoninus- “If the Scriptures are duly considered, and the sayings of the doctors ancient and modern who have been devoted to the glorious Virgin- it is plain from their word she was conceived in sin.”
Leo I- “The Lord Jesus Christ alone among the sons of men was born without sin.”
Pope Gallatus- “It belongs to the immaculate Lamb to have no sin.”
Gragory I- “Christ alone was truly born holy.”
Innocent III- “Eve was produced without sin, but she brought forth in sin. Mary was brought forth in sin, but she brought forth without sin.”
The Full and Final Authority of Holy Scripture:
Irenaeus (130- 202 AD)
“But as we follow for our teacher the one and only true God, and possess his words as the rule of truth, we will all speak alike with regard to the same things.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 4:35:4.)
“We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures to be the ground and pillar of our faith. For it is unlawful to assert that they preached before they possessed ‘perfect knowledge’ as some do even venture to say, boasting themselves as improvers of the apostles.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies, 3.1.1.)
“Such then, is their system, which neither the prophets announced, nor the Lord taught, nor the apostles delivered, but of which they boast that beyond all others, they have a perfect knowledge. They gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures, and to use a common proverb, they strive to weave ropes of sand.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 1.8.1.)
“So then, in the first place, we prove from the authoritative Scriptures that all the things which have been mentioned, visible and invisible, have been made by one God. For men are not more to be depended upon than the Scriptures; nor are we to give up the declarations of the Lord, Moses, and the rest of the prophets, who have proclaimed the truth, and give credit to them who do indeed utter nothing of a sensible nature, but rave about untenable opinions.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 2:30:6.)
“It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the Church is scattered throughout all the world, and the ‘pillar and ground’ of the Church is the Gospel and the Spirit of Life, it is therefore fitting that we should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 3.11.8.)
“But that all his Epistles are consonant to these declarations, I shall, when expounding the apostle, show from the Epistles themselves, in the right place. But while I bring out by these proofs, the truths of Scripture, and set forth briefly and compendiously, things which are stated in various ways, do also attend to them with patience, and not deem them prolix; taking this into account - that proofs of the things which are contained in the Scriptures cannot be shown except from the Scriptures themselves.” (ANF, Vol. I, Against Heresies 3:12:9)
TO BE CONTINUED . . . please read the rest- I will post it right away.
C
chosensinner
Guest
. . . CONTINUED on the Full and Final Authority of Holy Scripture.
Clement of Alexandria (150 - 215 AD)
“He who believeth then, the divine Scriptures with sure judgment, receives the voice of God, who bestowed the Scripture, a demonstration that cannot be impugned.” (ANF, Vol. II, The Stromata, Book II, Chapter II)
“And is not the demonstration, which we possess, that alone which is true, as being supplied out of the divine Scriptures, the sacred writings, and out of the ‘God-taught wisdom’ according to the apostle?” (ANF. Vol II, The Stromata, Book II, Chapter XI)
“The demonstration, however, which rests on opinion is human, and is the result of the rhetorical arguments or dialectic syllogisms. For the highest demonstration, to which we have already alluded, produces intelligent faith by the adducing and opening up of the Scriptures to the souls of those who desire to learn; the result of which is knowledge (gnosis).” (ANF. Vol II, The Stromata, Book II, Chapter XI)
“But if from any creature they received in any way whatever, the seeds of the truth, and they did not nourish them; but committing them to a baren and rainless soil, they choked them with weeds, as the Pharisees revolted from the Law, by introducing human teachings, - the cause of these being not the teacher [the scriptures] but those who choose to disobey. But of those who beleived the Lord’s advent and the plain teaching of the Scriptures, attain to the knowledge of the law; as also those addicted to philosophy, by the teachings of the Lord, are introduced into the knowledge of the true philosophy: ‘For the oracles of the Lord are pure oracles, melted in the fire, tried in the earth, purified seven times.’ Just as silver often purified, so is the just man man brought to the test, becoming the Lord’s coin and receiving the royal image.” (ANF, Vol II, The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter VII)
"And after a little again he draws the inference that the Scriptures owed their origin to the divine providence, asserting as follows: ‘For we know that God enjoined these, and we say nothing apart from the Scriptures.’ (ANF, Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter XV)
“And this signified that the Scripture is clear to all, when taken according to the bare reading.” (ANF, Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter XV)
“The pretext is then, in the case of the Greeks, futile; for those who are willing may find the truth. But in the case of those who adduce unreasonable excuses, their condemnation is unanswerable. For whether do they deny or admit that there is such a thing as demonstration; I am of the opinion that all will make admission, except those who take away the senses. There being demonstration, then, it is necessary to condescend to questions, and to ascertain by way of demonstration by the Sciptures themselves.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XV)
“But those who are ready to toil in the most excellent persuits, will not desist from the search of the truth, till they get the demonstration rom the Scriptures themselves.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“For we may not give our adhesion to men on a bare statement by them, who might equally state the opposite. But if it is not enough merely to state the opinion, and if what is stated must be confirmed, we do not wait for the testimony of men, but we establish the matter that is in question by the voice of the Lord, which is the surest of all demonstrations, or rather is the only demonstration; in which knowledge, those who have merely tasted the Scriptures are believers; while those who, having advanced further, and become correct expounders of the truth, are Gnostics. Since also, in what pertains to life, craftsmen are superior to ordinary people, and model what is beyond common notions; so, consequently, we also, giving a complete exhibition of the Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, from faith persuade by demonstration.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
TO BE CONTINUED . . .
Clement of Alexandria (150 - 215 AD)
“He who believeth then, the divine Scriptures with sure judgment, receives the voice of God, who bestowed the Scripture, a demonstration that cannot be impugned.” (ANF, Vol. II, The Stromata, Book II, Chapter II)
“And is not the demonstration, which we possess, that alone which is true, as being supplied out of the divine Scriptures, the sacred writings, and out of the ‘God-taught wisdom’ according to the apostle?” (ANF. Vol II, The Stromata, Book II, Chapter XI)
“The demonstration, however, which rests on opinion is human, and is the result of the rhetorical arguments or dialectic syllogisms. For the highest demonstration, to which we have already alluded, produces intelligent faith by the adducing and opening up of the Scriptures to the souls of those who desire to learn; the result of which is knowledge (gnosis).” (ANF. Vol II, The Stromata, Book II, Chapter XI)
“But if from any creature they received in any way whatever, the seeds of the truth, and they did not nourish them; but committing them to a baren and rainless soil, they choked them with weeds, as the Pharisees revolted from the Law, by introducing human teachings, - the cause of these being not the teacher [the scriptures] but those who choose to disobey. But of those who beleived the Lord’s advent and the plain teaching of the Scriptures, attain to the knowledge of the law; as also those addicted to philosophy, by the teachings of the Lord, are introduced into the knowledge of the true philosophy: ‘For the oracles of the Lord are pure oracles, melted in the fire, tried in the earth, purified seven times.’ Just as silver often purified, so is the just man man brought to the test, becoming the Lord’s coin and receiving the royal image.” (ANF, Vol II, The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter VII)
"And after a little again he draws the inference that the Scriptures owed their origin to the divine providence, asserting as follows: ‘For we know that God enjoined these, and we say nothing apart from the Scriptures.’ (ANF, Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter XV)
“And this signified that the Scripture is clear to all, when taken according to the bare reading.” (ANF, Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VI, Chapter XV)
“The pretext is then, in the case of the Greeks, futile; for those who are willing may find the truth. But in the case of those who adduce unreasonable excuses, their condemnation is unanswerable. For whether do they deny or admit that there is such a thing as demonstration; I am of the opinion that all will make admission, except those who take away the senses. There being demonstration, then, it is necessary to condescend to questions, and to ascertain by way of demonstration by the Sciptures themselves.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XV)
“But those who are ready to toil in the most excellent persuits, will not desist from the search of the truth, till they get the demonstration rom the Scriptures themselves.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“For we may not give our adhesion to men on a bare statement by them, who might equally state the opposite. But if it is not enough merely to state the opinion, and if what is stated must be confirmed, we do not wait for the testimony of men, but we establish the matter that is in question by the voice of the Lord, which is the surest of all demonstrations, or rather is the only demonstration; in which knowledge, those who have merely tasted the Scriptures are believers; while those who, having advanced further, and become correct expounders of the truth, are Gnostics. Since also, in what pertains to life, craftsmen are superior to ordinary people, and model what is beyond common notions; so, consequently, we also, giving a complete exhibition of the Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, from faith persuade by demonstration.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
TO BE CONTINUED . . .
C
chosensinner
Guest
. . . CONTINUED on Clement of Alexandria-
“But the truth is not found by changing the meanings (for so people subvert all true teaching), but in the consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becomes the Sovereign God, and in establishing each one of the points demonstrated in the Scriptures again from similar Scriptures. Neither, then, do they want to turn to the truth, being ashamed to abandon the claims of self-love; nor are they able to manage their opinions, by doing violence to the Scriptures. But having first promulgated false dogmas to men; plainly fighting against almost the whole Scriptures, and constantly confuted by us who contradict them; for the rest, even now partly they hold out against admitting the prophetic Scriptures, and partly disparage us as of a different nature, and incapable of understanding what is peculiar to them. And sometimes even they deny their own dogmas, when these are confuted, being ashamed openly to own what in private they glory in teaching. For this may be seen in all the heresies, when you examine the iniquities of their dogmas. For when they are overturned by our clearly showing that they are opposed to the Scriptures, one of two things may be seen to have been done by those who defend the dogma. For they either despise the consistency of their own dogmas, or despise the prophecy itself, or rather their own hope. And they invariably prefer what seems to them to be more evident to what has been spoken by the Lord through the prophets and by the Gospel, and, besides, attested and confirmed by the apostles.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“Seeing, therefore, the danger that they are in (not in respect of one dogma, but in reference to the maintenance of the heresies) of not discovering the truth; for while reading the books we have ready at hand, they despise them as useless, but in their eagerness to surpass common faith, they have diverged from the truth. For, in consequence of not learning the mysteries of ecclesiastical knowledge, and not having capacity for the grandeur of the truth, too indolent to descend to the bottom of things, reading superficially, they have dismissed the Scriptures.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“Accordingly, those fall from this eminence who follow not God whither He leads. And He leads us in the inspired Scriptures.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“They push truth away, or through the desire of fame, endeavour to invent novelties. For those are slothful who, having it in their power to provide themselves with proper proofs for the divine Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, select only what contributes to their own pleasures. And those have a craving for glory who voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the blessed apostles and teachers, which are wedded to inspired words; opposing the divine tradition by human teachings, in order to establish the heresy.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
Tertullian (c. 160-c. 220)
“He will not be a Christian who shall deny this doctrine which is confessed by Christians; denying it, moreover, on grounds which are adopted by a man who is not a Christian. Take away, indeed, from the heretics the wisdom which they share with the heathen, and let them support their inquiries from the Scriptures alone: they will then be unable to keep their ground.” (ANF, Vol. III, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Chapter 3)
"But here is, as we have said, the same madness, in their allowing indeed that the apostles were ignorant of nothing, and preached not any (doctrines) which contradicted one another, but at the same time insisting that they did not reveal all to all men, for that they proclaimed some openly and to all the world, while they disclosed others (only) in secret and to a few, because Paul addressed even this expression to Timothy: “O Timothy, guard that which is entrusted to you;” [1 Timothy 6:20] and again: “That good thing which was committed unto you keep.” [2 Timothy 1:14] What is this deposit? Is it so secret as to be supposed to characterize a new doctrine? or is it a part of that charge of which he says, “This charge I commit unto you, son Timothy?” [1 Timothy 1:18] and also of that precept of which he says, “I charge you in the sight of God, who quickens all things, and before Jesus Christ who witnessed a good confession under Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment?” [1 Timothy 6:13] Now, what is (this) commandment and what is (this) charge? From the preceding and the succeeding contexts, it will be manifest that there is no mysterious hint darkly suggested in this expression about (some) far-fetched doctrine, but that a warning is rather given against receiving any other (doctrine) than that which Timothy had heard from himself, as I take it publicly: “Before many witnesses” is his phrase. [2 Timothy 2:2] Now, if they refuse to allow that the church is meant by these many witnesses, it matters nothing, since nothing could have been secret which was produced before many witnesses. Nor, again, must the circumstance of his having wished him to commit these things to faithful men, who should be able to teach others also, [2 Timothy 2:2] be construed into a proof of there being some occult gospel. For, when he says “these things” he refers to the things of which he is writing at the moment. In reference, however, to occult subjects, he would have called them, as being absent, those things, not these things, to one who had a joint knowledge of them with himself.” (ANF: Vol. III, The Prescription Against Heretics, Chapter 25)
“But the truth is not found by changing the meanings (for so people subvert all true teaching), but in the consideration of what perfectly belongs to and becomes the Sovereign God, and in establishing each one of the points demonstrated in the Scriptures again from similar Scriptures. Neither, then, do they want to turn to the truth, being ashamed to abandon the claims of self-love; nor are they able to manage their opinions, by doing violence to the Scriptures. But having first promulgated false dogmas to men; plainly fighting against almost the whole Scriptures, and constantly confuted by us who contradict them; for the rest, even now partly they hold out against admitting the prophetic Scriptures, and partly disparage us as of a different nature, and incapable of understanding what is peculiar to them. And sometimes even they deny their own dogmas, when these are confuted, being ashamed openly to own what in private they glory in teaching. For this may be seen in all the heresies, when you examine the iniquities of their dogmas. For when they are overturned by our clearly showing that they are opposed to the Scriptures, one of two things may be seen to have been done by those who defend the dogma. For they either despise the consistency of their own dogmas, or despise the prophecy itself, or rather their own hope. And they invariably prefer what seems to them to be more evident to what has been spoken by the Lord through the prophets and by the Gospel, and, besides, attested and confirmed by the apostles.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“Seeing, therefore, the danger that they are in (not in respect of one dogma, but in reference to the maintenance of the heresies) of not discovering the truth; for while reading the books we have ready at hand, they despise them as useless, but in their eagerness to surpass common faith, they have diverged from the truth. For, in consequence of not learning the mysteries of ecclesiastical knowledge, and not having capacity for the grandeur of the truth, too indolent to descend to the bottom of things, reading superficially, they have dismissed the Scriptures.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“Accordingly, those fall from this eminence who follow not God whither He leads. And He leads us in the inspired Scriptures.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
“They push truth away, or through the desire of fame, endeavour to invent novelties. For those are slothful who, having it in their power to provide themselves with proper proofs for the divine Scriptures from the Scriptures themselves, select only what contributes to their own pleasures. And those have a craving for glory who voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the blessed apostles and teachers, which are wedded to inspired words; opposing the divine tradition by human teachings, in order to establish the heresy.” (ANF Vol. II, The Stromata, Book VII, Chapter XVI)
Tertullian (c. 160-c. 220)
“He will not be a Christian who shall deny this doctrine which is confessed by Christians; denying it, moreover, on grounds which are adopted by a man who is not a Christian. Take away, indeed, from the heretics the wisdom which they share with the heathen, and let them support their inquiries from the Scriptures alone: they will then be unable to keep their ground.” (ANF, Vol. III, On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Chapter 3)
"But here is, as we have said, the same madness, in their allowing indeed that the apostles were ignorant of nothing, and preached not any (doctrines) which contradicted one another, but at the same time insisting that they did not reveal all to all men, for that they proclaimed some openly and to all the world, while they disclosed others (only) in secret and to a few, because Paul addressed even this expression to Timothy: “O Timothy, guard that which is entrusted to you;” [1 Timothy 6:20] and again: “That good thing which was committed unto you keep.” [2 Timothy 1:14] What is this deposit? Is it so secret as to be supposed to characterize a new doctrine? or is it a part of that charge of which he says, “This charge I commit unto you, son Timothy?” [1 Timothy 1:18] and also of that precept of which he says, “I charge you in the sight of God, who quickens all things, and before Jesus Christ who witnessed a good confession under Pontius Pilate, that you keep this commandment?” [1 Timothy 6:13] Now, what is (this) commandment and what is (this) charge? From the preceding and the succeeding contexts, it will be manifest that there is no mysterious hint darkly suggested in this expression about (some) far-fetched doctrine, but that a warning is rather given against receiving any other (doctrine) than that which Timothy had heard from himself, as I take it publicly: “Before many witnesses” is his phrase. [2 Timothy 2:2] Now, if they refuse to allow that the church is meant by these many witnesses, it matters nothing, since nothing could have been secret which was produced before many witnesses. Nor, again, must the circumstance of his having wished him to commit these things to faithful men, who should be able to teach others also, [2 Timothy 2:2] be construed into a proof of there being some occult gospel. For, when he says “these things” he refers to the things of which he is writing at the moment. In reference, however, to occult subjects, he would have called them, as being absent, those things, not these things, to one who had a joint knowledge of them with himself.” (ANF: Vol. III, The Prescription Against Heretics, Chapter 25)
- Status