You are certainly free to believe whatever you wish, but your belief hardly means that what you believe is true, does it?
Upvote
0
Did the Virgin Mary remain a virgin?
- Thread starter rockytopva
- Start date
You are certainly free to believe whatever you wish, but your belief hardly means that what you believe is true, does it?
patricius79
Called to Jesus Through Mary
It is Christ speaking through his Bishops in Communion with His Vicar that define Christian doctrine, not me. I can only choose to receive the Word of reject it.
Someone in the authority has to be able to speak definitively for Christ, as Scripture says "whoever listens to you listens to me".
They say that Mary is Ever-Virgin. This makes sense in light of the fact that Mary is the New Eve, and Christ is the New Adam. They are both Virgins, completely intent on the will of God for the salvation of the human race.
Upvote
0
Standing Up
On and on
History states otherwise. It was Rome who identified herself as the Roman Church, in contrast to the Catholic Church. This began to happen during the question of validity of baptisms (Stephen vs Cyprian/Firmilian).
"1. To Father23322332 “Pope Cyprian.” Cyprian, the presbyters and deacons abiding at Rome, greeting. ... Far be it from the Roman Church to slacken her vigour with so profane a facility, ..."
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.iv.xxx.html
So, in many ways Rome broke away from the faith once delivered. One such way was that the early Catholic Church did not believe Mary was ever-virgin (see scripture 1 John, Tertulian, Cyril of Jerusalem, and others).
Upvote
0
patricius79
Called to Jesus Through Mary
You are claiming that the Roman Church did not see herself as at the head of the Catholic Church? That would be like saying that if someone says "the Parisian Church" they are not referring to the Catholic Church.
When Catholics today talk about being "Catholic" they accept the primacy of the Roman Church.
Both in the early church and today the true Church was called "the Catholic Church.
I know that the early Church was called "Catholic", just like today, and believed that Mary is Ever-Virgin.
You cite Cyprian. I know that Cyprian talks about how being in communion with Rome is being in communion with the Catholic Church. He also calls Rome the "Chair of Peter" and the "Place of Peter" and the "Source of Priestly Unity".
Because Mary is the New Eve (being the Mother of Life)--as the early Catholic Church taught and still does today--she would certainly be Ever-Virgin, just like the New Adam.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
What you "know" is, in fact, your personal belief and, as such, you are completely entitled to it. I "know" that Barrack Obama was not born in America. Does that actually mean that he is not an American and is not, therefore, legally entitled to be President of the United States?
Upvote
0
patricius79
Called to Jesus Through Mary
You say that what I know about Mary's Ever-Virginity is only my personal belief, comparable to your "knowledge" that Barrack Obama was not born in America. That is your belief.
Peace,
Pat
Upvote
0
Precisely. What we think we know, however sincerely we might think it to be absolutely true, hardly guarantees that it is actually true. You have chosen to put your faith in your church and what it tells you to be true.
Upvote
0
justinangel
Newbie
- Feb 19, 2011
- 1,301
- 197
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Well, yes it is.Lots of different denominations insist that the early church was theirs (of course), but the truth is that the early church was the parent church of most of today's denominations.
Most of the denominations in Protestantism have originated either as offshoots of pre-existing ones or out of a vacuum. The early Church was the Catholic Church. All the Protestant denominations reject something essential in the unanimous teachings of the Patristic Fathers which the Catholic Church has maintained to this day - including the Perpetual Virginity of Mary.
I don't deny that you have borrowed some capital from us.
PAX
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
So? Should I expect any other response from you?patricius79
Called to Jesus Through Mary
Good points. Also, Protestantism rejects the Perpetual Virginity of Mary, even though the Reformers embraced it, and Calvin said the arguments against it were ignorant.
Likewise, Augustine and many other fathers also insisted on Mary's Ever-Virginity, as I understand it.
Upvote
0
- Dec 20, 2009
- 28,369
- 7,745
- Country
- Canada
- Faith
- Christian Seeker
- Marital Status
- Married
yeah, the guys writing the gospel that implied Mary and Joseph had kids after Jesus was born didn't pay enough attention to the way they wrote it .. too much room for alternate interpretation
Upvote
0
patricius79
Called to Jesus Through Mary
yeah, the guys writing the gospel that implied Mary and Joseph had kids after Jesus was born didn't pay enough attention to the way they wrote it .. too much room for alternate interpretation
I don't think the Bible says that the guys writing the gospel implied Mary and Joseph had kids after Jesus. That is an opinion about the Bible, isn't it?
I think it is beautiful how Calvin and Luther and JB Lightfoot and the great early Biblical scholars like Augustine, Ambrose, Didymus, Cyril of Alex., Hilary, Athanasius, Leo, Jerome, and Epiphanius all affirmed the Ever-Virginity of Mary
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/mary-ever-virgin
Upvote
0
justinangel
Newbie
- Feb 19, 2011
- 1,301
- 197
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
An ancient MS. written in Arabic which was discovered by a Jesuit scholar in the 16th century and is kept in the Vatican library. It's authenticity is questionable, but it still provides much historical insight. There was a tradition in the Oriental Church soon after the time of the council that up to 40 canons were issued. The 20 canons that we go by today are the only ones that can be authenticated with certainty.
Read this and weep.
Canon III.
(Greek.)
Bishop Hosius said: This also it is necessary to add,-that no bishop pass from his own province to another province in which there are bishops, unless indeed he be called by his brethren, that we seem not to close the gates of charity.
And this case likewise is to be provided for, that if in any province a bishop has some matter against his brother and fellow-bishop, neither of the two should call in as arbiters bishops from another province.
But if perchance sentence be given against a bishop in any matter and he supposes his case to be not unsound but good, in order that the question may be reopened, let us, if it seem good to your charity, honour the memory of Peter the Apostle, and let those who gave judgment write to Julius, the bishop of Rome, so that, if necessary, the case may be retried by the bishops of the neighbouring provinces and let him appoint arbiters; but if it cannot be shown that his case is of such a sort as to need a new trial, let the judgment once given not be annulled, but stand good as before. (Latin.)
Bishop Hosius said: This also it is necessary to add,-that bishops shall not pass from their own province to another province in which there are bishops, unless perchance upon invitation from their brethren, that we seem not to close the door of charity.
But if in any province a bishop have a matter in dispute against his brother bishop, one of the two shall not call in as judge a bishop from another province.
But if judgment, have gone against a bishop in any cause, and he think that he has a good case, in order that the question may be reopened, let us, if it be your pleasure, honour the memory of St. Peter the Apostle, and let those who tried the case write to Julius, the bishop of Rome, and if he shall judge that the case should be retried, let that be done, and let him appoint judges; but if he shall find that the case is of such a sort that the former decision need not be disturbed, what he has decreed shall be confirmed. Is this the pleasure of all? The synod answered, It is our pleasure.
Council of Sardica (A.D. 343)
The judgment against Nestorius
The holy synod said: As, in addition to all else, the excellent Nestorius has declined to obey our summons and has not received the holy and God-fearing bishops we sent to him, we have of necessity started upon an investigation of his impieties. We have found him out thinking and speaking in an impious fashion, from his letters, from his writings that have been read out, and from the things that he has recently said in this metropolis which have been witnessed to by others; and as a result we have been compelled of necessity both by
- the canons and by
- the letter of our most holy father and fellow servant Celestine, bishop of the church of the Romans, to issue this sad condemnation against him, though we do so with many tears.
Our lord Jesus Christ, who has been blasphemed by him, has determined through this most holy synod that the same Nestorius should be stripped of his episcopal dignity and removed from the college of priests.
Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431)
We decree that ...
To these it has suitably added, against false believers and for the establishment of orthodox doctrines
the letter of the primate of greatest and older Rome,
the most blessed and most saintly Archbishop Leo, written to the sainted Archbishop Flavian to put down Eutyches's evil-mindedness, because it is in agreement with great Peter's confession and represents a support we have in common.
Council of Chalcedon (A.D. 451)
Exposition of Faith
This same holy and universal synod, here present, faithfully accepts and welcomes with open hands the report of Agatho, most holy and most blessed pope of elder Rome, that came to our most reverend and most faithful emperor Constantine, which rejected by name those who proclaimed and taught, as has been already explained, one will and one principle of action in the incarnate dispensation of Christ our true God; and likewise it approves as well the other synodal report to his God-taught serenity, from the synod of 125 bishops dear to God meeting under the same most holy pope, as according with the holy synod at Chalcedon and with the Tome of the all-holy and most blessed Leo, pope of the same elder Rome, which was sent to Flavian, who is among the saints, and which that synod called a pillar of right belief, and furthermore with the synodal letters written by the blessed Cyril against the impious Nestorius and to the bishops of the east.
Third Council of Constantinople (A.D. 680-681)
Canon 2
Obey your leaders and submit to them; for they are keeping watch over your souls, as persons who will have to give account, commands Paul, the great apostle. So, having both the most blessed pope Nicholas as the instrument of the holy Spirit and his successor, the most holy pope Hadrian, we declare and order that everything which has been expounded and promulgated by them in a synod at various times, both for the defence and well-being of the church of Constantinople and of its chief priest, namely Ignatius, its most holy patriarch, as well as for the expulsion and condemnation of Photius, the upstart and usurper, should be maintained and observed together with the canons there set forth, unchanged and unaltered, and no bishop, priest or deacon or anyone from the ranks of the clergy should dare to overturn or reject any of these things.
Whoever, then, shall be found, after these directives of ours, despising any of the articles or decrees which have been promulgated by these popes, must be stripped of his dignity and rank, if he is a priest or cleric; a monk or lay person, of whatever dignity, must be excommunicated until he repents and promises to observe all the decrees in question.
Fourth Council of Constantinople (A.D. 869-870)
PAX
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Albion
Facilitator
The early church was simply the Christian church. It is referred to as "Catholic" to the extent that it was the authentic faith of the Apostles--that's what the word means there--as opposed to the Gnostics and other mystery religions. It was not the Roman Catholic Church any more than it was the Orthodox Eastern churches, the church in Britain, the Thomasites in India, or any other branch of the faith.
Well, that's because they reject unscriptural additions to the faith made centuries after the Apostles were all dead. This is right of them to do, and that's why they're considered to be reformed denominations. That, however, doesn't have anything to do with their lineage, Apostolic Succession, or etc. which we had been discussing.
Upvote
0
justinangel
Newbie
- Feb 19, 2011
- 1,301
- 197
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
Upvote
0
justinangel
Newbie
- Feb 19, 2011
- 1,301
- 197
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- CA-Conservatives
The Church was visible, one, and hierarchical. The primacy of Peter rested with the Bishop of Rome. There were no different branches of faith, but heresies that had to be contended with and resolved. All Catholics had to assent to the decrees of the councils in which the Bishop of Rome had the final word so that there would be one faith. The Nestorian and Arian churches which exist to this day are not different branches of the Catholic Church. They were anathematised centuries ago by the Magisterium in the general councils. There are several rites in the Catholic Church, the Roman/Latin rite being one of them.
Twisting Scripture 1500 years later without having any authority in their arrogance is more like it. The so-called reformers did not succeed the apostles. Apostolic succession has a lot to do with this. The Apostolic teaching authority lies with the Magisterium, not academicians and misguided religious revolutionaries. See the Councils above, and that would include Trent.
PAX
Upvote
0
patricius79
Called to Jesus Through Mary
Then why does the early Catholic Church's writers--like Justin Irenaeus, Cyprian, Augustine, Athanasius, and many others--teach doctrines which are distinctively Catholic, such as Mary's role as the New Eve, and her Ever-Virginity?
And why didn't Protestantism really exist until the 1500s?
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Albion
Facilitator
Yes. What it was not was denominational.
This was not established until later and was based more on the importance of the city of Rome than upon Peter. In any case, "primacy" doesn't pose too many problems; claims of supremacy and infallibility--which came later--are the main problem areas.
There certainly were. Any historian can advise you on that.
I'm sorry, but that's purely myth. I'm sure you were taught that in some religion class or RCIA, but it's untrue.
Now at this point, I'd suggest you stop trying to convert me to your church. I, in turn, will not spend post after post lecturing you on the Anglican view of all things, complete with everything that is unrelated to our topic here.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
