Why the hostility toward Mary?

[GaryTaylor]

I am trying to tell you that it’s a poor argument to say that Mary HAD to be sinless in order to be Jesus’ mother. Rather, it was FITTING. Not required, but apt.

Nothing more, and nothing less.

GARYS ANSWER…

And I’m telling you its required Catholic Doctrine And an Infallible speech by the Pope. Which part of this statement are you not getting? And yes she HAD to be sinless in order to be GODs MOTHER. PERIOD

PPmerger Then YOU SAY…

If you continue to insist that Mary HAD to be sinless, because God could not enter into something sinful, then you’re going to have to believe that Mary’s mother was sinless also. And her mother; and her mother, and…:shrug

GARYS ANSWER…

WEAK WEAK thinking and NOT TRUE This foolishness is just that. GOD can do whatever he wants. Has NOTHING to do with Marys mother NOTHING. Your talking GOD here not humans. He could have had 1000’s of Immaculate Conceptions if he so desired and NONE would have had anything to do with parents. Did you even bother reading the post above about the Popes Infallible speech? MY my what is your problem with this. I get it that you don’t get it or don’t believe it or whatever. Its Catholic DOCTRINE! PERIOD. Should we now graduate this? MARYS MOTHER is NOT in the EQUATION with GODS Immaculate Conception of Mary]

 

[Reuben_J]

However, Catholics beleive that Mary was one of the very few people (if there was more than one, aside from her Son, that is) who was so born, and thus special because of it. I think the point is that God did this because He wanted to–because He may have wanted to give Mary something special, but not because He HAD to in order for Christ to be born of her.

This would be purely academic because your belief is different. Nevertheless, that’s exactly what happened. God wanted Mary to be sinless in order that she is the mother of His Son. The reason being has been explained and which I think you are quite familiar with (our position on this).

What I want to say is that man’s memory is short and after millennia of the incarnation, today Christians are quite cut off from history and from their roots. They do not know about the Immaculate Conception and why it should be. Today the Church has grown strong and very visibly stable, not to mention that we have the printing press and today, the internet.

In those days, anyone could just make a proposition and declare themselves the true church and we could never know the difference. There were various arguments about the divinity of Jesus. Dogmas were defined as a result to clarify certain heresy. Apparently, none about Mary - not until very much later after the reformation. In fact the reformers had no issues about Mary either. It is today, that modern Christians come out with the ideas that oppose to Marian Theology. In order to clarify that, the Church has to define, again, another doctrine.

God can do anything but one thing He would not compromise – and that is sin. It is not his nature. If he is a consistent God throughout the ages, it is unbecoming of him to be born into a sinful vessel. If Uzzah, in good intention reached out and took hold of the Covenant box because the oxen stumbled, and God became angry and killed him considering it is irreverence, how much more for the Covenant that holds his flesh and blood. Please consider that. God would not want sins to be a part of Him. If he is an unchanging God, then that should hold true. Jesus is all but a man but without sin.

 

[Reuben_J]

Or to put it another way, He was born to Mary because she was worthy of Him, not because He required her.

In a way it can be said that Mary was worthy of Jesus. But who made her worthy? It is not by her but by Him.

The majority of us Catholics may not agree with you when you say Jesus did not require her. God plan is that humans are involved to make that plan a reality. I often asked – if God is omnipotent and all-powerful why does he sent His Son to die for us; why does Jesus asked us to proclaim his words and be his witnesses? Surely he can do this all on his own and yet that’s not what actually happens. He wants our cooperation so that his plan and mission come to pass.

Thus in a way Jesus require Mary to be a part in his plan for salvation. If Mary had said no, it might not have happened. But that’s a useless supposition because God knows what he wants and it happens according to his word. So I say, Mary is required as we are required to be the workers in God’s vineyard.

 

[PRmerger]

GARYS ANSWER…

And I’m telling you its required Catholic Doctrine

Amen!

And an Infallible speech by the Pope.

Well, not a speech, but an encyclical, but ok.

Which part of this statement are you not getting? And yes she HAD to be sinless in order to be GODs MOTHER. PERIOD

No, Gary. You are incorrect. The teaching is not that she HAD to be sinless in order to be the *theotokos. *

GOD can do whatever he wants.

YES!!! That’s why God did not NEED Mary to be sinless. He was quite *capable *of coming to earth in a sinful vessel (but He did not, of course).

In fact, that’s what Mary did. She came to earth in a sinful vessel.

He could have had 1000’s of Immaculate Conceptions if he so desired and NONE would have had anything to do with parents.

Exactly.

Did you even bother reading the post above about the Popes Infallible speech? MY my what is your problem with this. I get it that you don’t get it or don’t believe it or whatever. Its Catholic DOCTRINE! PERIOD. Should we now graduate this? MARYS MOTHER is NOT in the EQUATION with GODS Immaculate Conception of Mary]

Then you have no response when a non-Catholic asks you: if you say Jesus could not come to earth in a sinful vessel, then how could Mary?

What is your response, Gary?

 

[PRmerger]

GARYS ANSWER…

WEAK WEAK thinking and NOT TRUE This foolishness is just that. GOD can do whatever he wants. Has NOTHING to do with Marys mother NOTHING. Your talking GOD here not humans. He could have had 1000’s of Immaculate Conceptions if he so desired and NONE would have had anything to do with parents. Did you even bother reading the post above about the Popes Infallible speech? MY my what is your problem with this. I get it that you don’t get it or don’t believe it or whatever. Its Catholic DOCTRINE! PERIOD. Should we now graduate this? MARYS MOTHER is NOT in the EQUATION with GODS Immaculate Conception of Mary]

And, Gary? I suggest you calm down a bit.

You just have to provide us with an answer as to how Mary, sinless, could enter into the world in a sinful vessel.

I am certain your answer is this: God could do it if He wanted to. (And He did, of course!)

So your bolded statement here makes no sense:

Originally posted by Gary:
Jesus Christ has no sin and couldn’t be born into the New Ark if Mary had sin. Impossible.

 

[PRmerger]

Full of Grace does not seem to imply room for nothing else. My barn can be full of hay, my brain full of mush, and my house full of kids, but that doesn’t imply there is nothing else.

You are correct with the barn, not with the brain, and again correct with the house metaphors.

That is, a barn can be said to be “full of hay” but it’s understood that there’s other things in it.

And a house that’s “full of kids”–everyone understands this to not mean a literal filling.

As for a brain “full of mush”, well, I think that’s a perfect example of how Mary was “full of grace”. If a brain is “full of mush”, then there’s really nothing else that could be there. Same with Mary–grace abounded and no room for sin there. Just like a glass “full of water”. Nothing else in there except hydrogen, oxygen and other components of water.

 

[GaryTaylor]

And, Gary? I suggest you calm down a bit.

You just have to provide us with an answer as to how Mary, sinless, could enter into the world in a sinful vessel.

I am certain your answer is this: God could do it if He wanted to. (And He did, of course!)

So your bolded statement here makes no sense:

Another wrong assumption. You do this often I see. Do you do fortune telling also? Its not God “could” do this. God “DID” do this . You have a real problem with this don’t ya?

.

 

[Ashurie]

Are you open-minded to the thought that there are many gods?

Honestly, it doesn’t bother me. I am content to think that they are kin to the Creator. God our creator, is the supreme being and his word is final and the other gods are his kin…and probably act like assistants.

And you’re ok with that? If you have a daughter are you going to tell her that it’s ok that some people find her inferior–and that this is their truth and to them, she really is inferior and we cannot judge that belief?

We technically we can’t…we can but with out proper understanding we can’t. I have just done a research paper on Hindu women, they embrace it, being a mother and a house-wife is the greatest role to them.

In the real world, women are treated inferior, voting for women in Australia was only established little over 100 years ago. And in the office, women have problems of getting CEO jobs - cos they all go to men.

As much as I hate the idea - I honestly do…but in reality…it’s very much a reality. ):

I *am *interested in your faith, Ashurie. That’s why I’m asking you what you believe.
Now, the fact that I believe your theology is a bit disjointed is my right, is it not?
But I am always polite in asking questions and dialoguing with others about their beliefs.

My theology is probably a bit all over the place, because it isn’t a cemented religion like Catholicism and Buddhism say. If that makes any sense.

To me there is God, our God, your God - the Creator. Then there is his kin - the gods of other religions. There are the Archangels and Ascended Masters (Saints etc) who help us in day to day life and help us be better people.

I have high respect and love for God, Mary and the Archangels…they have helped me so much since last May.

 

[Janet1983]

Well then I should have said faiths, but not all “religious beliefs” belong to official faiths. I am a very open minded person, and believe we are all one, and we all essentially believe in the supreme creator God.

Hindus believe in 33 million supernatural beings in various Hindu traditions.
Muslims believe in Allah (non-trinitarian).
Christians believe in the trinitarian God.
Jews believe in YHWH.
Buddhists don’t really have a god.

Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah and God incarnate.
Jews believe He was a teacher.
Muslims believe He was a prophet.

Muslims believe that salvation can be obtained by observing the pillars of faith or martyrdom.
“Salvation” in Buddhism is to attain liberation (nirvana), through enlightenment (via meditation).
Mormons have a detailed plan of salvation and the degree of happiness depends on the works here on earth (and partly on what others do after one’s death).

These statements are contradictory and therefore it is impossible that all of these claims are true at the same time…
Which one are you going to believe?

I am a Christian and I believe the words of my Lord:
“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)

 

[Ashurie]

These statements are contradictory and therefore it is impossible that all of these claims are true at the same time…
Which one are you going to believe?

My apologies but I can not just define my believe/faith under one title…that is why I call myself “Spiritual” As I am a spiritual person, who believes in God - the Creator…but doesn’t belong to any religious sector. I guess you can call me pagan if you must. But you can not deter me from my love for God and Mary So please do not tell me my beleifs are wrong, and you are right…cos I am not doing it. There are a few who are actually interested in what I believe, and I am telling them…I have no prejudice with different believes as we all entitled to believe in what we wish - I just pray it is for the greater good.

 

[Janet1983]

So in short you are telling me to believe in what I believe, I have to put it under a official title? I apologise but I can not just define my believe/faith under one title…that is why I call myself “Spiritual” As I am a spiritual person, who believes in God - the Creator…but doesn’t belong to any religious sector.

I guess you can call me pagan if you must. But you can not deter me from my love for God and Mary

I was just asking. You seem so open-minded, but what do you define as truth? They can’t all be true.
I am not trying to deter you from anything. I am just trying to understand where you are coming from.

 

[Ashurie]

I was just asking. You seem so open-minded, but what do you define as truth? They can’t all be true.
I am not trying to deter you from anything. I am just trying to understand where you are coming from.

LOL I guess I must surprise many people, I am actually very open minded. I love to learn about other cultures, religions and embrace them - studying Anthropology has enhanced this some what too.

I try to make it easy to understand, but it’s hard at the same time. Despite me being open minded, I am not very open with what I believe…because of what people tend to think. So the best way to call me would be “Spiritual”. I love to think there is one big family with God and his “kin” (other deities from other Religions) in harmony…would love to see that happen on Earth to.

Sorta back on topic:
I am curious…why would someone attack the Virgin Mary?
Wasn’t she picked by God to have Jesus because she was free of sin? and she was a virgin?
Sorry…lol I am not familiar with any of the bible…so yeah

I remember watching the film about Mary on Christmas Eve last year - a recent movie, the name escapes me.

 

[PRmerger]

Hindus believe in 33 million supernatural beings in various Hindu traditions.
Muslims believe in Allah (non-trinitarian).
Christians believe in the trinitarian God.
Jews believe in YHWH.
Buddhists don’t really have a god.

Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah and God incarnate.
Jews believe He was a teacher.
Muslims believe He was a prophet.

Muslims believe that salvation can be obtained by observing the pillars of faith or martyrdom.
“Salvation” in Buddhism is to attain liberation (nirvana), through enlightenment (via meditation).
Mormons have a detailed plan of salvation and the degree of happiness depends on the works here on earth (and partly on what others do after one’s death).

These statements are contradictory and therefore it is impossible that all of these claims are true at the same time…
Which one are you going to believe?

I am a Christian and I believe the words of my Lord:
“Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6)

Logical, insightful and well-written.
:clapping:

 

[PRmerger]

Another wrong assumption. You do this often I see.

:tsktsk:

Do you do fortune telling also?

Sarcasm is the protest of the weak, Gary.

Its not God “could” do this. God “DID” do this . You have a real problem with this don’t ya?

.

If you could dispense with the insults, Gary (and this is a friendly warning, before the Mods get to you, if they haven’t already) and let’s deal with this question you have not yet answered, *despite being asked a multitude of times:

The statement, validly posed by freerf
*

If Mary was sinless and was born of sinners, surly Christ could be sinless born of sinners.

provides the question: [SIGN1] If you believe that Christ could not be sinless born of sinners, then how could Mary be sinless born of sinners?[/SIGN1]

You have no answer except to say: God did it somehow.

So, of course, the Protestant will say, Mary did not have to be sinless either in order for Christ to be sinless.

Thus, your argument is a poor one and does disservice to Catholics.

My argument (and that of Catholic apologists) is that Mary was immaculately conceived as a FITTING honor to her son.

 

[PRmerger]

We technically we can’t…we can but with out proper understanding we can’t.

Why can’t we? Please elaborate on this, Ashurie.

*Why is it *that we can’t judge a belief as right or wrong? Who says that we can’t do this? And why?

I have just done a research paper on Hindu women, they embrace it, being a mother and a house-wife is the greatest role to them.

Yes, some of them do embrace being a mother and housewife. Nothing wrong with that!

In the real world, women are treated inferior, voting for women in Australia was only established little over 100 years ago. And in the office, women have problems of getting CEO jobs - cos they all go to men.

As much as I hate the idea - I honestly do…but in reality…it’s very much a reality. ):

Sad, yes, that this is a reality. But that’s a nonsequitor.

The question is: Is it true that women are inferior to men?

My theology is probably a bit all over the place, because it isn’t a cemented religion like Catholicism and Buddhism say. If that makes any sense.

It does. You are not alone in this theology.

To me there is God, our God, your God - the Creator. Then there is his kin - the gods of other religions. There are the Archangels and Ascended Masters (Saints etc) who help us in day to day life and help us be better people.

I have high respect and love for God, Mary and the Archangels…they have helped me so much since last May.

What happened last May?

 

[GaryTaylor]

Well, not a verbal statement but a encycle? Actually both…So being the good person I am, I will admit we were both half wrong and half right on this. But alas thats sorta beside the point, no?

Assumption of the Virgin,

(Basilica di Santa Maria Gloriosa, Venice)Munificentissimus Deus (Latin for “The most bountiful God”) is the name of an Apostolic constitution written by Pope Pius XII. It defines ex cathedra the dogma of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It is the second ex-cathedra infallible statement ever made by a Pope, the first since the official ruling on Papal Infallibility was made at the First Vatican Council (1869-1870).

Then

In 1854, Pope Pius IX made an infallible statement with Ineffabilis Deus on the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, which was a basis for this dogma. The decree was promulgated on November 1, 1950.

Ashurie

The hostility towards Mary in essence is a systematic denial of God. It goes something like this.

Deny each and every point of Christology right up to denial of God himself.

Here on this thread its a much of different story. Really we have debating “mostly” the Immaculate Conception.

Here, what we have is what Christians, who are all good people, come to believe either through Sola Scriptura or their own Faith in Christology.

As far as other religions in Christology, its a falling away at some point of the 8 Ecumenical Councils. For example the Catholic religion follows all 8, the debate of the Orthodox Church lies within the 8th Council and so on

Fatima has taken their calling on the road, and going worldwide with the message of the Blessed Mother. They are in Glens Fall NY this mth. Pope Benedict XVI made a rare statement in May13th 2010 at Fatima which inspired the calling even further of Fatima and its avid followers. His “Homily” concluded with…

“May the seven years which separate us from the centenary of the apparitions hasten the fulfillment of the prophecy of the triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, to the glory of the Most Holy Trinity.”

That Homily relates back to Pope Leo XIII vision of fatima in the late 1800’s and Gods Miracle of the Sun at Fatima in 1917. The hundred year period started in 1917. Christ gave satan a period of tempting which is 100 years. Pope Leo gave the same 100 years to the Holy Spirit, wrote 13 encycles to the Blessed Mother and a very vivid Pray to St MIchael to protect us from satan. And he concluded with these words. “The Rosary is the weapon which will defeat satan”

Are those who come to debate this or that about Mary bad people? On the most part its on the contrary, they are good people. Could evil spread it venom right hear, right now? Most definately.

The wanton acts of evil committed in our society today won’t allow me to remain silent. I have also noticed that many are “now” coming out of the woodwork. For many different reasons, the most noticable is the politics and constitution of the US. Yet by doing so they stumble upon other prevailing issues such as Islamic views, then by and through this it comes around to God and Our lady etc.

To conclude, yes I do feel the issues that revolve around the Blessed Mother are very important especially today and this decade. And by Free Will no one is commited to believe anything. I simply urge all to suspend judgement and follow the teaching of the Catholic Church on this matter nondogmatically. Allow this decade to pass without resistance to the Blessed Mother. Lets not allow our Free Will to interfere with the responsibliity and desires of Mary. Simply put if you can’t find it in yourself to help Her, then don’t hurt Her. God is much offended already, lets not bring a chastisement upon ourselves that avoidable.

Mary stated that if men do not mend their ways and stop offending God, she will no longer be able to hold back the arm of her Son, which is much to heavy already. The chastisement will be greater than the deluge, and in the end my Immaculate Heart will Triumph. And she specifically stated at fatima…Only I can help you now. In her instruction she wasn’t suggesting to us, she was instructing us. With a dire warning of consequence should we not follow her instructions.

This is often wrongly assumed as reverence to Mary instead of God, shes not God etc. But what Mary is saying, is God pretty much made up his mind on our society. And her intercession, and Gods love for Mary “is” whats holding off the Chastisement.

The truth of Fatima and what happened and Zeitoun is undeniable. Public not private revelations witnessed by 70 thousand and 250 thousand respectfully with Miracles by God predicted to the day by the Blessed Mother. How one concludes this isn’t to be believed but Joe Smiths “private vision in 1830” is believable for example, is beyond my scope of logic.

To deny the Immaculate Conception, in essence is to deny Gods own words. The Pope in ex-cathedra is God speaking through the Pope. And it is very rare. I believe it only happened twice in history though again don’t quote me here. It may be three times.

In my opinion to debate Marys Mother being sinless ect, really leave much to be desired. I find it borderline blasphemy of Bible and nonsense. To revert to statements “God can do anything” while true I also chose to avoid. It just feels to me that I must stoop to level below myself to reach that point. I think its childish and I avoid this which is clear throughout this thread. My belief lies squarely in the Popes words and Doctrine of the Church. To expand and delete from that, I avoid. To read and conclude from the Bible? Is fine, but dangerous when you depend on your own thinking which could be swayed by satan.

Go with Fatima or America needs Fatima? I applaud there calling and think its wonderful but we must follow the elect “first” always.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Note…

Is it common practice on this forum to go into ones posts, quote them and then alter their sentences?

I do believe its against forum rules here. Its in bad taste and should be stopped immediately. Please refrain from doing this on my posts. I can’t see this on any forum, never mind a religious forum. Specifically the Catholic.

It certainly gives the wrong impression and shows one in different light than intended. Its a poor act of deception and terrible practice. It invalidates the original thoughts through re-direction to altered points.

God Bless, Gary

 

[dianaiad]

Exactly.

Gary says “Yes” because he has no other explanation of how “God was Born into SIn without Sin”.

If this is his position,** then he has to explain how Mary** was born into sin in her mother, without sin. As of yet, he has not provided such an explanation.

(This is a valid question posed to Catholics by non-Catholic Christians who question why Mary “had” to be without sin)

However, the answer, as posited by Catholic apologists and me is: it was not a requirement, but rather it was FITTING.

'zactly!



Of course.

But it’s a fitting tabernacle for the Divine to be in an immaculate vessel, is it not?

Yup.

Whew! I’m glad I got that one right, PRmerger!

 

[dianaiad]

In a way it can be said that Mary was worthy of Jesus. But who made her worthy? It is not by her but by Him.

The majority of us Catholics may not agree with you when you say Jesus did not require her. God plan is that humans are involved to make that plan a reality. I often asked – if God is omnipotent and all-powerful why does he sent His Son to die for us; why does Jesus asked us to proclaim his words and be his witnesses? Surely he can do this all on his own and yet that’s not what actually happens. He wants our cooperation so that his plan and mission come to pass.

Thus in a way Jesus require Mary to be a part in his plan for salvation. If Mary had said no, it might not have happened. But that’s a useless supposition because God knows what he wants and it happens according to his word. So I say, Mary is required as we are required to be the workers in God’s vineyard.

It’s not a useless supposition…it really goes to the heart of the matter. Did Mary have a choice, or not? The scriptures stated that she agreed–but was that required? Did God force/create her without a say in the matter?

Not to put too fine a point on it, but that’s rape.

Before everybody gasps in horror, think about it; deciding that Mary accepted this calling…that it is a ‘useless supposition’ that Mary could have said ‘no,’ goes to the very heart of this side conversation of whether it was necessary that MARY, born immaculate, have given birth to Jesus in order for Him to be Who He was/is. If Mary did not, of her own will and faith, agree to this, then the Calvinists are right.

If Mary did not, or could not, have said ‘no’ in a very real choice, then the honor being paid to her is as a appropriate as the honor paid to a puppet put on a shelf at the end of a show.

…and if Mary had said ‘no, thank you,’ don’t you think God would have had an alternative plan–one that did not involve Mary? He would have to have, if Mary really did have free will.

If there was such a plan, then Mary was not, in and of herself, required. She became who she was by dint of her great obedience and faith; her very real, and unforced, acceptance of what happened to her.

So no, I don’t think it is a useless supposition. IT speaks to a very basic philosophical and religious belief–one that, I think, underpins all things.

 

[KathleenGee]

To be human, Mary had to have human parents. But the inclination to sin and the effects of sin are based on the state of the soul.

Mary’s sinless state is a work of God, not man.

And Christ had to have a sinless mother or else she would have to deal with the distractions and diversions of sin…she would not understand Him or guide Him in faith in his likewise sinless state. She would have missives…being some place else even if she were in the same room with Him.

There again is the other issue of having a single purpose in life. I think Mary’s sole purpose in life was to become the Mother of God, and for Christ to change time, to break the power of death by sin, to come as the savior and messiah for all mankind is enough work for Blessed Mother.

I think we are living in a culture that just can’t believe how anyone can get through this life without having sex.