What is the mystery in the Third Joyful Mystery?

  • Thread starter Thread starter BlackFriar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kei said:
I am not so much that I think about what value something has for me to believe it like that.
It seems worthy of belief for many good, holy people have believed it, and it doesn’t in any way seem detrimental to our sanctification, but by their witness daresay if there is any effect it would be positive.
I suppose it shows that the entire ordeal of Christ’s birth was miraculous. She had no pain most likely since she was kept from original sin. I just see no reason for the hymen to break. She is a perpetual Virgin and so it simply makes sense for her body as well as soul to demonstrate that, the same body that was assumed into Heaven.
Now, although this is separate from birth pains, I believe breaking the hymen would hurt. Is your position that this happened when Christ was born?
Let me ask you also, what value do you get out of believing that Mary’s hymen broke despite being a virgin and giving a miraculous birth?
Click to expand...
Virginity is not based on the state of hymen.
 
Last edited:
Hmm. What is the problem here? We all believe in Our Lady’s Perpetkal Virginity; so why are we arguing over details. If I was in the room with you all; I’d shut up and listen to what Father is saying.
 
If I may: I think the point of the Nativity is the miraculous birth of Our Lord.
 
Now, if anyone is still there tonight…

First, this entire lengthy conversation goes back a few threads, to a question posted much earlier. That is the WHY behind the conversation in the first place.

No one. Repeat no one, not one single person, is disputing the article of Christian faith that Our Savior’s Blessed Mother Mary is Ever-Virgin. She is Ever-Virgin before, during, and after giving Birth to Christ.

Sorry to disappoint the internet pharisees out there. Put down your e-stones. Go back to your shops. No one here denies or doubts the perpetual Virginity of Mary.

The question is this: is it necessary for anyone to believe that the perpetual Virginity of Mary must necessarily include the additional belief that Her body did not behave in the usual way that female human bodies behave while giving birth. This is a polite way of phrasing the issue, and it is done on purpose. It is not to be childish, but to be respectful. Adults know what we mean when we say these things, so let us not be crass and type them out. No need for that.

That is the issue. THAT is the question being posed by the OP. Not a question of virginity, but a question of how to define the word virginity.

Now, is that clear to everyone?
 
Last edited:
My apology Fr. I tried to be objective and I have a medical background. It is as objective as I could say it but I understand it can be offensive. Just want to make a point and to be sure what we are talking about. I will delete the post but was I in topic or out of it?
 
Reuben_J said:
My apology Fr. I tried to be objective and I have a medical background. It is as objective as I could say it but I understand it can be offensive. Just want to make a point and to be sure what we are talking about. I will delete the post but was I in topic or out of it?
Click to expand...
Perfectly on-topic. Just a little too descriptive, given the person we’re discussing.

Thank you for understanding.
 
Succinctly put, my position here (and I mean that as a debate term, not a matter of faith as such) is that it is not necessary to define the word “virginity” in such a way as to necessarily and absolutely require that word to also include the biological fact that her human body did not change at the birth of Christ. I will use the Latin in an attempt to be discreet. Rephrase the earlier as: it is not absolutely necessary as a condition for a woman to be a true virgin that it is also the case that she is virgo intacta.

Others here hold a contrary view.

That is what we are either debating or attempting to debate, depending on how one sees things.
 
The topic here is about the time of the BIRTH of Christ.

To be clear, this is not about the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, which we commemorate on December 8; nor is it about the Conception of Christ, which we commemorate as the Annunciation on March 25; nor is it about the Immaculate Reception which we commemorate on December 23.

Many people confuse these different commemorations.

At the visit from the Angel Gabriel, the Virgin Mary upon her “let it be done unto me according to your word” conceived and bore in her womb the Son of God, Jesus the Christ. This happened entirely by the spiritual working of the Holy Spirit and involved NO PHYSICAL act whatsoever. This happened entirely with no loss to her virginity and with no change to her body, save that from that moment, she would be carrying the Incarnate Word.

OK. I hope we can leave all that behind and move forward.
 
Here’s my question, Father: I read that the fruit of the Nativity, in the Rosary; is poverty of spirit. What does that mean, Father?
 
For what it is worth, I answered this long ago in post 60.
And a warning to all new visitors, Fr. has continued a subject from another thread which involves the physical properties of what is defined as Virgin, and this thread is not about the mystery in the Third Joyful Mystery?

I have no interest in details in the properties of what implicates, violates the status of a Virgin.

I will bow out of this Mystery in the Third Joyful mystery? And leave you with Luke the Physician who records the Annunciation and Nativity.

"How that physical birth is transpired remains suspended in Faith as being a miracle on both physical attributes, when Mary immediately got up on a beast for a long journey into Egypt and spiritual attributes of the divine, when the Holy Spirit overshadows the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Here we can say when Luke records Simeon say, when the infant Jesus was brought to temple; “He will be a sign of contradiction”.

Jesus being born of a Virgin begins His sign of Contradiction when the divine Word of God became flesh.

Yes, we the Church are free to believe in the physical birth of Jesus which can stand to reason, so long as it never denies the miracle of the Word of God becoming flesh in and through the blessed Virgin Mary or reject that the Blessed Virgin Mary remained a Virgin before. during and after giving physical birth to the Incarnate Word of God.

This physical virgin birth takes place, which proves Jesus is fully God and fully human. But Luke our physician at the time does not give us scientific language and is silent. We do well to follow Luke the physician and apply our faith in the virgin birth, when science is silent by a scientific mind who forgoes the path of faith in the miracle of divine revelation."
 
Last edited:
Michael16 said:
Here’s my question, Father: I read that the fruit of the Nativity, in the Rosary; is poverty of spirit. What does that mean, Father?
Click to expand...
Like the fruits of the Holy Spirit in Confirmation. It’s a parallel way of speaking.

The fruits are our reaction to the gifts. We receive the “fruit” of embracing the virtues of true poverty; detachment from the things of this world. This is inspired by meditating on the poverty of the humble birth of Christ.
 
If anyone cares to know what is being discussed here—and I can speak only for myself, naturally, I suggest starting at the top and reading what I posted. Not what someone replied or my replies to other replies. I suggest reading the long posts which I address to everyone. That is what I have to say in this discussion. Others can and do speak for themselves.

For now, I wish all a good night.
 
wait a second ; the Annuciation (traditionally celebrated on 3/25) that is when Mary (virgin) conceived of Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit; i learned this is in 1st grade catholic school. is this now breaking news?
 
brian_custer said:
wait a second ; the Annuciation (traditionally celebrated on 3/25) that is when Mary (virgin) conceived of Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit; i learned this is in 1st grade catholic school. is this now breaking news?
Click to expand...
No.

It is what we are NOT talking about. If you read what I wrote, you will see that I was very clearly saying that we are NOT talking about that event in this discussion.

Since it is easy to confuse the events, I wanted to make clear what we ARE discussing and what we ARE NOT discussing.
 
Reuben_J said:
Virginity is not based on the state of hymen.
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church’s understanding of the term, is based on that condition, exactly. That is why it is a miraculous birth.
Unfortunately, there has been some recent confusion about the dogmatic teaching of Mary’s Virginity during the birth of Jesus, one of the three essential aspects of Our Lady’s Virginity, which was defined by Pope St. Martin I in 649 at the First Lateran Council. This second Marian Dogma, Our Lady’s Virginity before, during , and after the birth of Jesus, has always included the traditional patristic and magisterial understanding that Mary gave “miraculous birth” to Jesus (in the words of Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, 1943), without any violation to her physical, external virginity. As the Fathers of the Church explained, as “light passes through glass without harming the glass”, so Jesus was born with Mary’s Virginity “in tact”, that is with the preservation of her physical virginity, so that the Perfect Virgin would be an example of Christian virginity, in heart and in body, for all later Christians called to the special vocation of Christian virginity.
http://www.motherofallpeoples.com/2...sus-the-catholic-churchs-perennial-tradition/
Click to expand...
During Jesus’ Birth, His Mother Mary Remained A Virgin

by Monsignor Charles M. Mangan

Before time began God decreed that the Mother of the Son would continue in her virginity. Therefore, Mary’s virginal state was never altered even while giving birth to the Savior. The term “Virgin Birth” signifies Mary’s virginity during the Birth. (Often, “Virgin Birth” is inaccurately used when discussing Jesus’ conception in the womb of Mary by the Holy Spirit.)

What the Baby Jesus left His chaste Mother’s womb, He did so miraculously without opening it or any part of her body. There were no lesions or ruptures. As light goes through a windowpane without shattering it, so the Messiah departed from Our Lady’s body without changing her virginal state.
http://www.catholic.org/featured/headline.php?ID=611
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
BlackFriar said:
You seem unable to grasp what the three of us are fairly united on attempting to communicate you.
Click to expand...
It is you who seem unwilling to accept the Teaching of the Magisterium. Otherwise, why would you deride it as an ancient legend.

I don’t accept any teachings of any people who contradict the Teaching of the Magisterium.
I am fairly confident other readers without axes to grind can.
Click to expand...
I’m not the one deriding the ancient Teachings of the Church as legends. If anyone has proven he has an axe to grind, it is you.
God bless.
Click to expand...
And you, as well.
 
Last edited:
God became man…belief, requiring no proof is what makes things a mystery.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top