Why is it wrong to love Mary, the Mother of God?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have read many of the respones, but not all of the them, so this may have already been said…but to those who claim that Mary went on to have intercourse with Joseph, I have to ask this… If you were told by your future bride that she was pregnant with the Son of God and this was also reiterated to you in a very real dream, would you really feel worthy to even touch her body? She was the vessel in order to bring Christ into this world…as her husband, would you feel that you deserved to be with her sexually when she and Joseph had the task of rearing the son of man? I don’t have to find a passage in the scripture to make me see common sense when I see it.

(even my husband, who is non catholic/non practicing anything, got this.)
Luke 8:19 - “Then his mother and his brothers came to him, but they could not reach him because of the crowd.”
 
I haven’t finished reading through all the posts but this one really caught my eye Since I was child (and that was a long, long time ago) I have never ever heard of anybody in the church telling us to worship Mary as a deity. My grandmother, God rest her soul, would always tell us that we should never ever put Mary above God. And, she had a great devotion to Our Blessed Mother. Many confuse the word “pray”. They have the wrong definition of that word. Words can change meaning over the years. Just looking at the Christmas song that says in part: “Now we don our gay apparel, fa la la la laaaa, la la la la.” How is the underlined word defined now-a-days? Pray not only means to offer a petition, or praise, but it also means to ask. As in “I pray to pass me the salt”. When Catholics pray to Mary, they are in no way putting Mary above God. As a matter of fact, the Church forbids that and has always done so. Protestants see a person kneeling before a statue and lighting a candle and think that the person is worshiping an idol. We as Catholics know that the statue is just that, a statue, made out of plaster or some other material. We do not think that that statue is some form of a god. NEVER. :eek: !!!

Regretfully, many Protestants have been brainwashed into believing that the Catholic Church and Catholics are worshiping statues. This has been covered ad naseaum over and over and over thousands of times, but many Protestants cannot get over it and prefer to bring that up over and over again. No matter how many times its explained, they will turn around and say “Catholics worship Mary and worship statues and light candles and place Mary on par or above God”

NOTE THIS AND PLEASE UNDERSTAND IT. CATHOLICS DO NOT, I REPEAT DO NOT, WORSHIP MARY as a God, or Goddess. Is this understood?

From the CCC **2114 **Human life finds its unity in the adoration of the one God. The commandment to worship the Lord alone integrates man and saves him from an endless disintegration. Idolatry is a perversion of man’s innate religious sense. An idolater is someone who “transfers his indestructible notion of God to anything other than God.”
CCC **2132 **The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, “the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype,” and “whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it.” The honor paid to sacred images is a “respectful veneration,” not the adoration due to God alone:
Religious worship is not directed to images in themselves, considered as mere things, but under their distinctive aspect as images leading us on to God incarnate. The movement toward the image does not terminate in it as image, but tends toward that whose image it is.

Catholics know full well that The Blessed Virgin is NOT divine. She is not God, a god, nor a goddess. So please don’t tell us Catholics that we do something that we know we DON"T do.

If Jesus had been born from a sinful woman, he would have had to purify himself before, or after, or during his time in Mary’s womb, and THAT would have meant that Jesus had inherited sin, which we know he did not have in him. That’s why Mary had to be sinless as she was passing her genes to Jesus. God had to dwell in a sinless house.

The hypostatic union.:God the Son, Jesus Christ took on a human nature, but remain fully God. God was in Mary’s womb. Mary gave birth to God the Son Jesus. She did not give birth to a nature. You cannot separate Jesus Christ the divine and Jesus Christ the man. By saying that there is no way that Mary is the Mother of God, you are separating the two natures of Jesus and thus fall into the heresy of Nestorianism.

Mary is the daughter of God the Father, spouse of God the Holy Spirit and Mother of God the Son.
BUT yet there is only one God.

Impossible you say? But listen to the words of the Archangel Gabriel “…nothing is impossible with God”
Thank you for posting this. I would also add to this that Catholics do not pray to the Saints or the angels or Mary in any way that places them above God. When we pray to them we are asking them to intercede on our behalf with God. What is better, one person praying alone? Or many praying together? Catholics ask those who are already in heaven to help ensure our prayers reach the ear of God.

Consider God as a sheppherd with a large flock. When we, his sheep, are alone he does not hear us as easily as when we are in groups, and he cannot hear those of us far away as easily as those nearby.
 
Below (post# 2) is a letter / prayer that I wrote for Mary a while back. All of my comments in this letter are Biblically based. If you are not a Catholic and you do not love Mary, please explain why you don’t love Mary? Where is it written in the Bible that you cannot love Mary?

http://davenation.com/madonnas/found/La_Vierge_au_lys.jpg
Nice photo of Mary and baby Jesus. I love Mary. How can you not love the Mother of God the son, if you are a Christian? The perfect woman (no sin). All I would say, is that as long as it stays in the veneration aspect, it is fine. When or if it turns to worship or more devotion then to Christ Jesus or God the Father, then I have issues with it.

May God Bless!

Ed
 
I have read many of the respones, but not all of the them, so this may have already been said…but to those who claim that Mary went on to have intercourse with Joseph, I have to ask this… If you were told by your future bride that she was pregnant with the Son of God and this was also reiterated to you in a very real dream, would you really feel worthy to even touch her body? She was the vessel in order to bring Christ into this world…as her husband, would you feel that you deserved to be with her sexually when she and Joseph had the task of rearing the son of man? I don’t have to find a passage in the scripture to make me see common sense when I see it.

(even my husband, who is non catholic/non practicing anything, got this.)
Perfectly said, Mamanurse. 👍
 
“She conceived the Word in heart even before she conceived the Word in her womb.”- St. Augustine
 
“She conceived the Word in heart even before she conceived the Word in her womb.”- St. Augustine
I have been watching the debate on this thread with great interest. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception goes back much further than the actual doctrine, the belief in it that is. On the Miraculous metal it says, “I am the immaculate conception.” Those being the words of Mary. Before these words were revealed to the church in a vision they were debated for centuries much as they are here. To our Baptist friend who is looking for the scripture verses to back him up, you will be hard to find it outside of the early writings of the church. It is tradition, hate to burst bubbles here, that Mary remained a virgin. The Bible does say that she did not have relations with Joseph until after she brought forth her “FIRSTBORN son,” thus indicating there were relations. Those words alone indicate there were other siblings. NOW, church tradition says that these would have been Josephs by a former marriage, BUT, by Jewish culture of the time the eldest son had the responsibility of taking care of the mother and father in their old age, hence Jesus places John in the care of Mary, his earthly mother. This verse alone would contradict that Mary was ever virgin. as I say, church tradition and early church fathers dictated that the Biblical named siblings of James and Joses and the un-named sisters were half sisters or cousins by virtue that Jesus was of the Holy Spirit and they were not.
NOW the process of having a child would physically rip any virginity that Mary would have so to keep Mary as “immaculate” and “Holy” because she was labeled “full of grace” she had to have been prepared for this. Remember Gabriel’s own words to Mary, “with God nothing is impossible.” So Mary being immaculate and her immaculately conceiving was and is not a far stretch to believe.
 
I have been watching the debate on this thread with great interest. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception goes back much further than the actual doctrine, the belief in it that is. On the Miraculous metal it says, “I am the immaculate conception.” Those being the words of Mary. Before these words were revealed to the church in a vision they were debated for centuries much as they are here. To our Baptist friend who is looking for the scripture verses to back him up, you will be hard to find it outside of the early writings of the church. It is tradition, hate to burst bubbles here, that Mary remained a virgin. The Bible does say that she did not have relations with Joseph until after she brought forth her “FIRSTBORN son,” thus indicating there were relations. Those words alone indicate there were other siblings. NOW, church tradition says that these would have been Josephs by a former marriage, BUT, by Jewish culture of the time the eldest son had the responsibility of taking care of the mother and father in their old age, hence Jesus places John in the care of Mary, his earthly mother. This verse alone would contradict that Mary was ever virgin. as I say, church tradition and early church fathers dictated that the Biblical named siblings of James and Joses and the un-named sisters were half sisters or cousins by virtue that Jesus was of the Holy Spirit and they were not.
NOW the process of having a child would physically rip any virginity that Mary would have so to keep Mary as “immaculate” and “Holy” because she was labeled “full of grace” she had to have been prepared for this. Remember Gabriel’s own words to Mary, “with God nothing is impossible.” So Mary being immaculate and her immaculately conceiving was and is not a far stretch to believe.
Good grief Father John you almost sound like a Protestant theologian. I do not to what to make of you sometimes.
 
I have been watching the debate on this thread with great interest. The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception goes back much further than the actual doctrine, the belief in it that is. On the Miraculous metal it says, “I am the immaculate conception.” Those being the words of Mary. Before these words were revealed to the church in a vision they were debated for centuries much as they are here. To our Baptist friend who is looking for the scripture verses to back him up, you will be hard to find it outside of the early writings of the church. It is tradition, hate to burst bubbles here, that Mary remained a virgin. The Bible does say that she did not have relations with Joseph until after she brought forth her “FIRSTBORN son,” thus indicating there were relations. Those words alone indicate there were other siblings. NOW, church tradition says that these would have been Josephs by a former marriage, BUT, by Jewish culture of the time the eldest son had the responsibility of taking care of the mother and father in their old age, hence Jesus places John in the care of Mary, his earthly mother. This verse alone would contradict that Mary was ever virgin. as I say, church tradition and early church fathers dictated that the Biblical named siblings of James and Joses and the un-named sisters were half sisters or cousins by virtue that Jesus was of the Holy Spirit and they were not.
NOW the process of having a child would physically rip any virginity that Mary would have so to keep Mary as “immaculate” and “Holy” because she was labeled “full of grace” she had to have been prepared for this. Remember Gabriel’s own words to Mary, “with God nothing is impossible.” So Mary being immaculate and her immaculately conceiving was and is not a far stretch to believe.
I am very confused by this post. It does not appear to be Catholic in understanding and is fraught with inaccuracies.

The words on the Miraculous Medal say: “O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee”. This was shown in a vision to St. Catherine Labouré in 1830 prior to the dogma being confirmed by the Church in 1854. Our Lady pronounced the words, “I am the Immaculate Conception,” at Lourdes in 1858.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary is Dogma and we must accept it. Jesus did not have blood brothers.

Strange. :confused:
 
I am very confused by this post. It does not appear to be Catholic in understanding and is fraught with inaccuracies.

The words on the Miraculous Medal say: “O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee”. This was shown in a vision to St. Catherine Labouré in 1830 prior to the dogma being confirmed by the Church in 1854. Our Lady pronounced the words, “I am the Immaculate Conception,” at Lourdes in 1858.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary is Dogma and we must accept it. Jesus did not have blood brothers.

Strange. :confused:
So our Holy Mother Mary had no sin nature like all others living the human condition? Is this biblical knowledge found in the Holy Bible compiled by the Catholic Church (it seems very important and should have been included somewhere)? I thought that she chose not to sin, thus remained sin free in a imperfect human body that still had original sin nature (after the fall at the garden of Eden)? Also, the assumption of Mary bodily into Heaven. This also seems like a very significant event that should be in the Holy Bible, but isn’t (all other bodily assumptions into Heaven are in the Holy Bible, why not Mary’s story)? Any clarification on these two items? I can accept the perpetual virginity of the Holy Mother Mary (The most righteous woman that ever walked the earth). The center point of everything for me has always been my savior Jesus Christ. No one else gives me salvation as a sinner. Is Mary important, Yes very much so (brought the Christ of God the Father into this world). If it wasn’t for her Jesus the Christ would not have been born, and we would still be slaves to the perfection of the law (something we could never meet). However, the significance of Mary’s role (after Christ Jesus started his ministry), does not compare to the ultimate mission Christ Jesus fulfilled, redemption/salvation for sinful mankind. In closing, most of all, thank you Father for extending your grace to all of us. We didn’t deserve it, but you made us worthy thru our savior Jesus Christ!

May God Bless!🙂

Ed
 
I am very confused by this post. It does not appear to be Catholic in understanding and is fraught with inaccuracies.

The words on the Miraculous Medal say: “O Mary conceived without sin, pray for us who have recourse to thee”. This was shown in a vision to St. Catherine Labouré in 1830 prior to the dogma being confirmed by the Church in 1854. Our Lady pronounced the words, “I am the Immaculate Conception,” at Lourdes in 1858.

The Perpetual Virginity of Mary is Dogma and we must accept it. Jesus did not have blood brothers.

Strange. :confused:
Here is the problem with the Marian dogma according to scripture that we Catholics are asked to take on faith: Joachim and Anna who are believed to be Mary’s parents (again we have holy tradition) are believed to have conceived Mary without the stain of original sin. What happened to “In Sin was I born and in Sin did my Mother conceive me” from Psalm 51? I believe Ronin67 pointed out another point in Romans where we are all born into sin. Most Protestants have NO problem believing Jesus was immaculately conceived but when it comes to Mary the Bible tells us that we are all born into original sin. By tradition and dogma we Catholics are asked to believe otherwise in Mary’s case. Even most Eastern Orthodox do not believe Mary was immaculately conceived (which means to be conceived without sin) as that dogma is heresy to them. They call Mary Theotokos or God bearer or Mother of God as she was earthly mother to him. Now be filled with Grace of God that is 100% possible by scripture so that she could bear the Christ child.

As to Jesus having “blood brothers” not by the Holy Spirit, but of Mary the Bible mentions them by name, that is why the Catholic church does not call them Jesus’ brothers because Jesus was only begotten of the Father so he could not have any other brother. His earthly brothers, by name they are mentioned. Technically they would be only half brothers.
 
Here is the problem with the Marian dogma according to scripture that we Catholics are asked to take on faith: Joachim and Anna who are believed to be Mary’s parents (again we have holy tradition) are believed to have conceived Mary without the stain of original sin. What happened to “In Sin was I born and in Sin did my Mother conceive me” from Psalm 51? I believe Ronin67 pointed out another point in Romans where we are all born into sin. Most Protestants have NO problem believing Jesus was immaculately conceived but when it comes to Mary the Bible tells us that we are all born into original sin. By tradition and dogma we Catholics are asked to believe otherwise in Mary’s case. Even most Eastern Orthodox do not believe Mary was immaculately conceived (which means to be conceived without sin) as that dogma is heresy to them. They call Mary Theotokos or God bearer or Mother of God as she was earthly mother to him. Now be filled with Grace of God that is 100% possible by scripture so that she could bear the Christ child.

As to Jesus having “blood brothers” not by the Holy Spirit, but of Mary the Bible mentions them by name, that is why the Catholic church does not call them Jesus’ brothers because Jesus was only begotten of the Father so he could not have any other brother. His earthly brothers, by name they are mentioned. Technically they would be only half brothers.
I have met some Eastern Orthodox who have been very outspoken on the immaculate conception issue as being heresy. After reading up on the subject myself it seems it is a great deal that a Catholic must take on faith.
 
I was instructed by our priest director, who was correcting errors taught by lay people in parish leadership. He studied at the Vatican and was put in by former Archbishop Levada.

He instructed us in support that Mary is the Immaculate Conception and ever virgin. His instruction to us was that her whole being was created by the Heavenly Father through the Holy Spirit that proclaimed ‘Yes!’ to the will of God. Her assent to the Father erased her of original sin, and that she was ‘saved’ at her conception. Priests taught us that Mary has a different constitution than us, that we can ever be like her, but we can ask her to help us live closer to Christ, and that going to Christ through her will bring us closer to Him and through a shorter ladder.

People don’t need Mary to come to Christ. But she greatly facilitates our way to Him, and because she is His mother, she brings us that much closer to Him with her. She is our greatest advocate.

I do hospice and meet those who care for them who really want to learn more about Mary. She has helped several who in their words, lived a bad life, to have confidence that God will forgive them. Previously they were thrashing and trying to run a way, tormented by evil thoughts, and then with Mary come to God and go in peace. She is most powerful against the devil.

Mary is a garden of grace, beauty and love. We now have our Mother’s Day Luncheon annual title have the word of ‘garden’ in our changing themes…Last year, we had ‘Mary’s Flower Garden’, where each table was decorated with a particular flower theme or name theme, very beautiful. One table was called, “Mary’s Tulip Table”, another, ‘Mary’s Kitchen’ that was decorated with themes from Provence with garlands of lavendar, another, “Heart of Mary” decorated with hearts and roses, etc. This year it was "Mary’s Prayer Garden’, and the talk this year was by a mother who prayed for so many years for her addicted daughter who finally came to the Lord and was healed with the help of Mary’s prayers.

Mary is the Mother of Hope and she helps never to give up and keep praying to the Lord for our concerns.
 
Here is the problem with the Marian dogma according to scripture that we Catholics are asked to take on faith: Joachim and Anna who are believed to be Mary’s parents (again we have holy tradition) are believed to have conceived Mary without the stain of original sin. What happened to “In Sin was I born and in Sin did my Mother conceive me” from Psalm 51? I believe Ronin67 pointed out another point in Romans where we are all born into sin. Most Protestants have NO problem believing Jesus was immaculately conceived but when it comes to Mary the Bible tells us that we are all born into original sin. By tradition and dogma we Catholics are asked to believe otherwise in Mary’s case. Even most Eastern Orthodox do not believe Mary was immaculately conceived (which means to be conceived without sin) as that dogma is heresy to them. They call Mary Theotokos or God bearer or Mother of God as she was earthly mother to him. Now be filled with Grace of God that is 100% possible by scripture so that she could bear the Christ child.

As to Jesus having “blood brothers” not by the Holy Spirit, but of Mary the Bible mentions them by name, that is why the Catholic church does not call them Jesus’ brothers because Jesus was only begotten of the Father so he could not have any other brother. His earthly brothers, by name they are mentioned. Technically they would be only half brothers.
What I am finding odd is
  1. Your name (FatherJohnB) Are you a priest?
  2. Your demonination (Catholic) Nothing you say here is Catholic dogma.
 
SaintLucy,

I agree with your observation.

There is another post that is discussing the issue of non-Catholics coming here to do backwards proselytizing. Circular and repetitive debates and then pausing with a denial, let’s say, in spite of documents, etc., that the Eucharist is simply a symbol.

The cleric here is not Roman Catholic. He is trying to plant errors and confusion. A Roman Catholic priest would not do that.
 
So to make your long story short kecharitomene which also means favor or kindness as well as full of Grace any of these translations would apply. The CC picks it to mean full of grace which then Stephen in Acts would have been born without sin because he was full of Grace or kecharitomene also.
All this elaboration don’t impress.
*How insensitive and unworthy of you rev kevin! You could acknowledge our Blessed Mother without becoming Catholic rev kevin. All the reformers did!

You believe what you WANT to believe! That is really unworthy of you!

Shame

God love you
Cinette:)*
 
I think one of ‘Rev’ Kevin’s greatest pasttimes, is to take time away from his church he is supposed to be ministering to and do repeat protests of Catholic faith. We all covered Mary with him during Advent, then again a little in the winter, and now here we are again back…

We covered the Eucharist, he was shown early documents, made no comment except he told some one he already knew it…so he has a habit of defying earliest Christian Catholic practices…I dont think I am going to occupy his pasttime as he already knows our answers…don’t want to expend my energy.

Mary was conceived without sin. Her whole being was created by the Heavenly Father as a proclaimation of “Yes”, thy will be done…

Protestants do not want to know anything about Catholic spirituality and the walk in perfection, because if they did, they would begin to understand a little the truth of Mary, conceived without sin. She has a different constitution than us, we can never be like her. God’s gift to the Church is Mary and she is the one who brings the feminine aspect of God to us and makes us a family and is the model par excellence for women.

The first evangelist in the Church was Mary. Her prayers were far greater than all the angels and apostles combined. That is because she was conceived without sin.

We will never know how much sin itself separates us from God and that entering into the Kingdom of Christ is truly a treasure that must be hidden and guarded, because we can so easily backslide into sin.

Mary helps us to become closer to Christ, she enlightens God’s will so we can better recognize it, and is our greatest advocate at the time of our passing.
 
I believe Ronin67 pointed out another point in Romans where we are all born into sin.

Would we include Christ in this? He was born of Mary. How about infants? The metally challenged?

Most Protestants have NO problem believing Jesus was immaculately conceived but when it comes to Mary the Bible tells us that we are all born into original sin.

See above.

By tradition and dogma we Catholics are asked to believe otherwise in Mary’s case.

Would this be the same tradition that would define, say, the Trinity?

Now be filled with Grace of God that is 100% possible by scripture so that she could bear the Christ child.

The grammar does not make sense here. What are you trying to say?

As to Jesus having “blood brothers” not by the Holy Spirit, but of Mary the Bible mentions them by name, that is why the Catholic church does not call them Jesus’ brothers because Jesus was only begotten of the Father so he could not have any other brother. His earthly brothers, by name they are mentioned. Technically they would be only half brothers.

**This website addresses this very well.

catholic.com/library/Brethren_of_the_Lord.asp**
 
I am thankful that Mary said “yes” to the Incarnation; but I also believe that had she said “no,” God would have used another willing vessel. His plan of redemption for mankind–a plan that had been established before the foundation of the world–was not going to hinge on whether Mary agreed to become the Savior’s mother. With or without Mary’s cooperation, He would still have redeemed man.
👍
 
It was God’s will that the Savior be brought into the world through woman, Mary, the New Eve and to become the final revelation as the face of God to revealing God as Our Father.
 
I am thankful that Mary said “yes” to the Incarnation; but I also believe that had she said “no,” God would have used another willing vessel. His plan of redemption for mankind–a plan that had been established before the foundation of the world–was not going to hinge on whether Mary agreed to become the Savior’s mother. With or without Mary’s cooperation, He would still have redeemed man.

I am not opposed to Mary, and I think I can safely say that non-Catholic Christians are not anti-Mary either. She was a godly woman and role model, and she is worthy of respect! What I and many other non-Catholics are uncomfortable with is the degree to which she is exalted by Catholics in their theology and practice.

An example of what I consider to be excessive is in the the prayer, Morning Consecration to Mary:

My Queen, My Mother, I offer
myself entirely to thee
.
And to show my devotion to thee,
I offer thee this day, my eyes,
my ears, my mouth, my heart,
my whole being without reserve
.
Wherefore, good Mother, as I am thine own, keep me, guard me as thy property and possession.

Here’s another example: Prayer to Our Lady of Czestochowa

O Mother of God, Immaculate Mary, to thee do I dedicate my body and soul, all my prayers and deeds, my joys and sufferings, all that I am and all that I have. With a joyful heart I surrender myself to thy love. To thee will I devote my services of my own free will for the salvation of mankind, and for the help of the Holy Church whose Mother thou art.
From now on my only desire is to do all things with thee, through thee, and for thee. I know I can accomplish nothing by my own strength, whereas thou can do everything that is the will of thy Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ. Thou are always victorious. Grant, therefore, O Helper of the Faithful, that my family, my parish, and my country might become in truth the Kingdom where thou reignest in the glorious presence God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, forever and ever.
Amen.

And another: Most Lovable Lady

I love thee, most lovable Lady, By the love which I bear thee, I promise ever to serve thee,
and to do as much as I can, that thou be loved by others also. I put all my hopes in thee,
all my salvation.
Receive me as thy servant and cover me with the mantle of thy protection,
thou the Mother of mercy!
Amen.

The wording of these prayers, especially those phrases in bold, make me and other non-Catholic Christians cringe. The idea of consecrating/surrendering ourselves, dedicating our bodies and souls, to put all our hopes/salvation in her–it seems awfully close to giving to Mary what is reserved for the Lord alone: worship. That is what non-Catholic Christians have difficulty with.
This is exactly why I have been doubting the Marian dogmas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top